morris108’s posterous

posts are going directly to: http://108morris.wordpress.com/

Having a few problems with Posterous forwarding posts to http://108morris.wordpress.com/

So until further notice, posts are going directly to:

http://108morris.wordpress.com/

Comments [0]

Pakistan media declare war on Indian counterparts - By Nirupama Subramanian - The Hindu, Chennai, India

Pakistan media declare war on Indian counterparts - By Nirupama Subramanian - The Hindu, Chennai, India

December 1, 2008 by ghulammuhammed

http://www.thehindu.com/2008/12/01/stories/2008120155891300.htm

Pakistan media declare war on Indian counterparts

Nirupama Subramanian

Indian media accused of not demanding for evidence

"They are overcommitted to projecting India as a success story"

ISLAMABAD: The escalating tensions between India and Pakistan over the Mumbai attacks have led to the declaration of hostilities in unexpected quarters – Pakistani media has declared a virtual war on Indian media for its "knee-jerk" finger-pointing across the border, and its unquestioning acceptance of the Indian government's "Pakistan-link" theory.

Most Pakistanis are angry and upset about the Indian allegations, which they believe are "unsubstantiated". Even the Indian government, whose highest officials have made the allegation in unambiguous terms, have not come in for as much flak as the messenger, the assumption being that governments will say what they have to, but it is the duty of the media to question.

Leading the charge against the India media are the Pakistani television channels, with panel discussions shows devoted exclusively to the coverage of the Mumbai attacks by the Indian media.

Even on talk shows about the impact of the attacks on the relations between the two countries, among the first questions that anchors are shooting off are: "Do you think the India media should have pointed a finger at Pakistan within such a short time, and without any evidence? Why do we see this knee-jerk response every time some terrorist incident takes place in India?"

Overshadowed
One of the big successes of the peace process since 2004 was the greater understanding and camaraderie between the media of the two countries, thanks to frequent interactions. But the smoke and gunfire of Mumbai has overshadowed even that.

Top Pakistani journalists are asking why the Indian media, more specifically the electronic media, have been so willing to accept the government theory that the attackers came from Pakistan. Top Pakistani journalists are asking why the Indian media, more specifically the electronic media, have been so willing to accept the government theory that the attackers came from Pakistan.

They are dismissive of reports in the Indian press that the terrorists had links with Lashkar-e-Taiba, or that they landed in Mumbai in a boat from Karachi. Instead, they are asking why these reports are not demanding the government for evidence of these allegations.

"Too nationalistic"
On Dawn News, three top guns of the Pakistani media – anchors Hamid Mir, Talat Hussain and Nasim Zehra – dissected the coverage in an hour-long programme that was aired both on Saturday and Sunday.

Their scathing conclusion – Indian media are "too nationalistic", "smug", they told "lies" or at best "half-truths", "did not ask questions", resorted to "clichés" and have perfected the art of projecting Pakistan as the enemy.

A similar programme aired on Geo TV on Sunday. The feeling is widespread in the Pakistan journalistic community that the Indian media are responsible for the current tensions between the two countries and for pushing the Indian government to take on its neighbour even if it means launching a military strike. The India media have been accused of not even looking at other possibilities, such as the involvement of an Indian group in the attacks.

The new evidence in the Samjhauta Express firebombings pointing a finger at a Hindutva militant group has come up repeatedly as one reason why the Indian media should have been less "hasty" in arriving at its conclusions.

On the whole, Pakistanis — as evident from public phone-ins to talk shows — are even questioning if the entire ghastly episode was not all engineered by Indian intelligence agencies working in connivance with the U.S. to "defame" Pakistan with the intention of dismembering it.

"[The] Indian media is overcommitted to projecting India as a success story. They are not used to reporting state failures. They are used to reporting India as a country where nothing bad happens, its Army as the best thing in the world. It projects its heroes as supermen, taller than the Himlayas…So the gap between what the Indian media are committed to reporting, and the crass state failure they had to do report [in Mumbai], they ended up filling it with lies," Mr. Hussain, a top-rated anchor with Aaj TV, told Dawn News.

On the same programme, Mr. Mir, who anchors Geo's flagship show Capital Talk, asked why the Indian media were not asking hard questions of the Indian government.

"When Pakistani forces say they have killed five Al-Qaeda, when they say Rashid Rauf has been killed in a drone attack, Pakistani media are asking them questions — show us the bodies. But Indian media are not asking important questions.

"There are 500 nautical miles between Karachi and Gujarat, and the Indian media are saying the terrorists came in boats from Karachi. Why are they not questioning the failure of their intelligence agencies?"

Mr. Mir said the Indian media had to take responsibility of the sharp downslide in the relations between the two countries.

At a press conference, Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi too accused the Indian media of "irresponsible" conduct.

Giving himself credit for having stayed on in India for three days after the Mumbai incidents began, he said he had "engaged with their political leadership, engaged their intelligentsia, faced their media," to explain Pakistan's point of view.

In response to his appeal for "national unity" and his declaration that the country must "hope for the best and plan for the worst", at least one Punjabi television channel started playing national songs from the 1965 and 1971 wars, including Noorjehan's famous song dedicated to soldiers, "Merey watan key sajheeley jawanon".


From: http://ghulammuhammed.wordpress.com/2008/12/01/pakistan-media-declare-war-on-indian-counterparts-by-nirupama-subramanian-the-hindu-chennai-india/

Comments [0]

MUMBAI TERROR ATTACKS terrorists live footage of shooting with faces exposed - 2 days ago


Mumbai attack terrorists face exposed and caught on live cam. 125 people have been killed till now and 327 people injured in the Mumbai terror attack where terrorists captured Taj Hotel Mumbai, Oberoi Hotel Mumbai, Nariman House and killed hundreds of people. There are many foreign visitors also trapped including Israelis and all these are some of the best five star hotels in India.


Comments [0]

Iran Govt. to set up marriage bureaux BBC

Iranian women complain of a shortage of suitable marriage prospects
The Iranian government is to set up a network of marriage bureaux to help young Iranians find a husband or wife. The centres aim to advise people on the traditional way of finding a spouse. Finding a suitable partner is a tricky business as men and women are limited in how much they can meet socially, BBC Tehran correspondent Jon Leyne says. Most Iranian marriages are not exactly arranged, but relatives often take it on themselves to introduce suitable candidates. There are even reported to be private matchmaking organisations, effectively dating agencies, some of them run by clerics. 'Unsuitable boys' The government used the anniversary of the marriage of Ali, the first Shia Iman, to Fatima, the daughter of the Prophet Muhammad, to announce a series of measures to boost the institution. Centres will be established to give advice to young people on how to find a spouse. And banks will issue more loans to pay for weddings. Sermons in a number of Friday prayers across Iran marked the anniversary by echoing the message of the government and calling for marriage to be made easier. It seems the government is worried that some young Iranians might be getting into unsuitable relationships, our correspondent says. And, now that more than 60% percent of university students are female, many Iranian women are complaining they can't find a husband to match their level of education. But even in the Islamic Republic, young men and women still do manage to exchange phone numbers and even to arrange the occasional illicit rendezvous, our correspondent adds
 
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7758719.stm
 
http://morris108.wordpress.com

Comments [0]

Brasstacks TV (Pakistani ?) saying Mumbai was a false flag

Comments [0]

September 18, 2008 Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: The Zionists are crooks.


Following are excerpts from statements made by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, which aired on IRINN, the Iranian News Channel, on September 18 and 23, 2008:

September 18, 2008

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad: The Zionists are crooks. A small handful of Zionists, with a very intricate organization, have taken over the power centers of the world. According to our estimates, the main cadre of the Zionists consists of 2,000 individuals at most, and they have another 8,000 activists. In addition, they have several informants, who spy and provide them with intelligence information. But because of their control of power centers in the U.S. and Europe, and their control of the financial centers and the news and propaganda agencies, they spread propaganda as if they were the entire world, as if all the peoples supported them, and as if they were the majority ruling the world. That is a great lie – just like their Jewishness is a great lie. They have no religion whatsoever. They are a handful of lying, power-greedy people who have no religion, who only want to take over all the peoples and countries, and to trample the rights of the peoples.

[...]  More: http://www.memritv.org/clip_transcript/en/1868.htm

Comments [0]

Pakistan President Zardari appeals to India not to punish Pakistan



ISLAMABAD: Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari, made an urgent appeal to India yesterday not to punish his country for the terror unleashed on Mumbai last week, as Indian officials blamed a Pakistani militant group for the three-day rampage.

As the government in New Delhi faced mounting domestic pressure to respond forcefully to the attacks, Mr Zardari urged Manmohan Singh, India's prime minister, to resist striking out at his government should investigations show that Pakistani militant groups were responsible.

His appeal came as tensions rose between the two countries. A day after the security forces finally regained control of Mumbai, Indian officials blamed Lashkar-i-tayyaba, a prominent militant group linked to previous attacks against India. Its name translates as Army of the Pure.

Speaking to the Financial Times, President Zardari warned that provocation by rogue "non-state actors" posed the danger of a return to war between the nuclear-armed neighbours.

"Even if the militants are linked to Lashkar-i-tayyaba, who do you think we are fighting?" asked Mr Zardari, whose country is battling al-Qaeda and Taliban militants on its border with Afghanistan.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-state elements could bring on regional war: President Zardari


ISLAMABAD: President Asif Ali Zardari has appealed to India not to punish his country for last week's attacks in Mumbai, saying militants have the power to precipitate a war in the region.

In an interview with a British newspaper, President Zardari warned that provocation by rogue "non-state actors" posed the danger of a return to war between the nuclear-armed neighbours.

"Even if the militants are linked to Lashkar-e-Taiba, who do you think we are fighting?" asked Zardari. 

"We live in troubled times where non-state actors have taken us to war before, whether it is the case of those who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks on the United States or contributed to the escalation of the situation in Iraq," said Zardari.

"Now, events in Mumbai tell us that there are ongoing efforts to carry out copycat attacks by militants. We must all stand together to fight out this menace," he said.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Pakistan, India deny troops build-up 

NEW DELHI, RAWALPINDI: Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR) Director-General and Pakistan Army spokesman Maj-Gen Athar Abbas said on Sunday that the Army had not found any solid evidence of unusual military movement by India on the international border.


Talking to newsmen, he said the Pakistan Army was ready for national defence and to tackle any untoward situation on the western border. He said the Army was closely monitoring Indian military movement on the international border, but no unusual activity was found. He advised the nation not to worry about India's reported ambitions.

"Our intelligence sources have also told us that no such directives were issued by the Indian government to increase the number of Indian troops on the Pak-India border," he said.

Meanwhile, the Indian external affairs ministry, rejecting the news telecast by some Indian TV channels, said India was neither considering suspending the ceasefire agreement with Pakistan nor were any directives for the movement of the Indian Army to the Pak-India border issued. An Indian Army official said, "We have not received any orders from the government for moving our troops to the border and there will be no Operation Parakram-like mobilisation," Press Trust of India quoted the official as saying. He was referring to the previous Indian Army build-up in 2002.

Earlier, some Indian TV channels had said the Indian government had ordered the build-up of troops on the border with Pakistan besides mulling over suspending the ceasefire pact with it. Also on Sunday, Pakistan's military said the country's ceasefire with India was holding and there was no military build-up on the border in the wake of the Mumbai attacks. The military was responding to Indian media reports that India has cancelled a five-year-old ceasefire on the border of the disputed Kashmir region, as tensions grow over accusations that the attackers came from Pakistan.

"We have seen reports in the media suggesting suspension of the ceasefire (in Kashmir) and movement of troops on the Indian side of the border," Athar Abbas told AFP. "As far as the official authenticated reports are concerned, there is no such movement or mobilisation of troops. The ceasefire is holding."

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani phoned all the major political leaders of the country, who offered their complete support to the government in the wake of heightened tensions with India. The politicians who were contacted on Sunday included former Prime Minister Zafarullah Khan Jamali, AJK Prime Minister Atiq Ahmed Khan, Allama Sajid Naqvi, Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi, Dr Abdul Malik, Israrullah Zehri, Munir Khan Orakzai and Senators Shahid Bugti, Ismail Baladi and Haji Hanif Tayyab.

They appreciated the prime minister for consulting all the democratic forces in the country. The prime minister lauded the unity among all the political forces. He said Pakistan would explore all possibilities to normalise its relations with neighbouring countries as it believed in peace and harmony.

Prime Minister Gilani also called a national security conference for Tuesday at 2:30pm in the PM's House to discuss the prevailing situation and evolve a joint policy. Prime Minister's Press Secretary Zahid Bashir told a TV channel the meeting would be attended by all politicians.

Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi said good relations with India were in the interest of Pakistan. In an interview with CNN, he said, "The government feels good neighbourly relations with India are in the interest of Pakistan. Pakistan has said its premier intelligence agency will cooperate with India in probing the Mumbai incident as our hands are clean and we have nothing to hide and nothing to be ashamed of."

Qureshi said Pakistan itself was a victim of terrorism and both countries could jointly defeat the menace. To a question, he said the Indian government had not yet provided any evidence to Pakistan on its alleged involvement in the terror attacks. He said Pakistan would take action against groups or individuals if the Indian government provided proof or evidence against them.

In the meantime, Turkish Foreign Minister Ali Babacan phoned Qureshi on Sunday to discuss bilateral relations and views on the regional and global situation. Qureshi briefed his Turkish counterpart about Pakistan's relations with India after the terrorist attacks in Mumbai. He said, "Pakistan strongly condemned the terrorist attacks and offered all possible assistance to India. Pakistan itself is a victim of terrorism and considers it a menace to humanity."



More: http://www.geo.tv/important_events/pak_india_tension/pages/english_news.asp

Comments [0]

Mumbai attacks: Pakistan PM says no evidence provided against Pakistan



  Updated at: 2100 PST, Monday, December 01, 2008  
  ISLAMABAD: Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani Monday said Pakistan will act responsibly in the wake of Mumbai attacks and demanded India to provide evidence, before leveling any allegations.

He said he has talked to world leaders to diffuse the situation. "We have talked to all our friends that they use their good offices to diffuse the situation," he said.

He was hopeful that there will no escalation between the two countries in the aftermath of the Mumbai tragedy.

"I think it will be the other way round. It will not escalate because some responsible people have owned the responsibility of the intelligence failure," he said in an apparent reference to the resignation of Indian home minister.

Gilani said India should provide some proof about Pakistan's involvement in the Mumbai attacks.

"We have yet to see evidence," he added.

He said the Mumbai attacks were "something unusual" and people in India were in a state of anger.

"They were in a state of mind which one can expect at that time. They said in anger something but now the dust has settled down," he added.

Comments [0]

Pakistan Army official calls Baitullah Mehsud, Fazlullah ‘patriots’, Pakistan News

 Army official calls Baitullah Mehsud, Fazlullah 'patriots'

Monday, December 01, 2008

By Hamid Mir

ISLAMABAD: All main militant groups fighting in Fata, from South Waziristan to Bajaur and from Mohmand to the Khyber Agency, have contacted the government through different sources after the Mumbai bombings and have offered a ceasefire if the Pakistan Army also stops its operations.

And as a positive sign that this ceasefire offer may be accepted, the Pakistan Army has, as a first step, declared before the media some notorious militant commanders, including Baitullah Mehsud and Maulvi Fazlullah, as "patriotic" Pakistanis.

These two militant commanders are fighting the Army for the last four years and have invariably been accused of terrorism against Pakistan but the aftermath of the Mumbai carnage has suddenly turned terrorists into patriots.

A top security official told a group of senior journalists on Saturday: "We have no big issues with the militants in Fata. We have only some misunderstandings with Baitullah Mehsud and Fazlullah. These misunderstandings could be removed through dialogue."

The Indian allegations against Pakistan have suddenly forced the military establishment in Pakistan to finally accept that they are not fighting an American war inside the Pakistani territory.

On another level, the parliamentary leader of the 12 Fata members in the National Assembly, Munir Orakzai, has expressed optimism in this regard, saying: "I see a bright ray of peace in the tribal areas and if we come out of the American pressure, I can guarantee that there will be peace in the tribal areas in a few days and we will be ready to fight against India on the eastern border along with the Pakistan Army."

The change in the attitude of the Pakistani military establishment is remarkable. Thanks to India, the security officials, who used to criticise the Pakistani media, are now praising its role in the recent days, saying: "You have proven that you are patriotic Pakistanis."

Last year, the same officials were part of a decision to impose a ban on many Pakistani TV channels because of their alleged anti-state behaviour. Meanwhile, Army Chief Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani has made it clear to President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani that if India escalates tensions, then Pakistan has to move its troops from the tribal areas to the eastern borders and it would not be possible to continue the war against terrorism.

Top military officials conveyed the same message to the media representatives on Saturday. It was learnt that Washington and London were very concerned over the rise of tension between the two nuclear powers.

The Pakistan Army officials have been describing 48 hours as very important. These sources claimed on Sunday that the situation was now stabilising. A very responsible government official in Islamabad told this scribe on Sunday that nothing would happen in the next 24 hours. Some late night telephone calls made from Washington and London helped to cool down the temperature in New Delhi and Islamabad.

Despite the assurances made by President Asif Zardari on sending a director of ISI to India for helping the Mumbai carnage investigations, it has also been decided by Islamabad that no ISI official will visit India, at least, in the next one week.

On the domestic level, thanks to the uncalled for Indian allegations, some ministers of the Yousuf Raza Gilani cabinet got an opportunity to criticise their prime minister on his face for giving an assurance to India that the ISI chief will go to New Delhi without consulting even his cabinet colleagues.

Angry ministers told Gilani clearly in Saturday's cabinet meeting that his decision was not good and he should concentrate on "institutionalised decision-making" rather than going for solo flights in the future. Gilani was forced to change his decision. The cabinet, after discussing the Mumbai carnage and the Indian allegations in detail, also advised the prime minister that no ISI official should be sent to India in the near future.

It was discussed in the meeting as to why the militants made a ridiculous demand of liberating the Hyderabad Deccan (Andhra Pradesh). This issue was never raised by any hardline Muslim militant in India or Pakistan in the past. Why did they not demand the liberation of Kashmir, which was the prime objective of banned Lashkar-e-Taiba in Pakistan?

The Indian government claimed that these militants reached Gujarat from Karachi by boat through a 500-km sea route. Why did the Indian Navy fail to stop this boat? The cabinet unanimously agreed that Pakistan will not come under any Indian pressure but efforts will also be made to decrease tensions without annoying the public opinion.

One minister was of the view that the Indian media war against Pakistan had helped Islamabad indirectly as the local media ignored all the domestic political issues and got involved in the tension created by India.

National Assembly Speaker Dr Fehmida Mirza was the most disturbed soul in Islamabad because of the media war between India and Pakistan. She talked to some journalists and advised them not to instigate the public opinion against India because this tension could hurt economies of both countries.

She fears a big conspiracy behind the Mumbai tragedy. She thinks that another attack like Mumbai will definitely create a war-like situation between the two neighbours. She is planning to call the Congress leader Sonia Gandhi and Indian President Pratibha Patel to remove doubts and misgivings between the two nations. She told me: "As a mother, I am thinking to make a mothers' alliance between India and Pakistan. Let the mothers come out and stop their sons from fighting each other."

Comments [0]

Obama’s First Problem is US War Crimes - Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.

The president-elect has to take a stand on Bush's dark legacy

By Andrew Sullivan

November 30, 2008 "

The Times" — - A small and largely unnoticed spat among the transition planners for the president-elect, Barack Obama, broke out last week. It was the first genuinely passionate debate among the Obamaites and it centres on a terribly difficult and terribly important decision that will be among the first that Obama has to make.

How does he deal with the legacy of criminal actions of his predecessor's administration when it comes to detention, interrogation, abuse and torture of terror suspects? That has long hovered in the back of the minds of those of us who supported Obama, in large part because he alone had the moral authority to draw a line underneath the criminality of the George Bush-Dick Cheney years and restore credibility and hon-our to America's antiterror policies.

And so when it emerged Obama was planning to appoint one John Brennan as CIA director, alarm bells went off. Brennan had been close to George Tenet at the time Tenet devised what he called "enhanced interrogation techniques".

Brennan, a CIA company man who had left the agency for private employment, had made statements in the past couple of years suggesting some sympathy for the Bush-Cheney policy. "When it comes to individuals who are determined to destroy our nation, though, we have to make sure that we take every possible measure," he said elliptically. Including torture?

When pressed, he kept emphasising the need for a "debate" without tipping his own hand about what he personally believed. Take this Brennan statement looking forward to a change in administration from Bush: "I'm hoping there will be a number of professionals coming in who have an understanding of the evolution of the capabilities in the community over the past six years, because there is a method to how things have changed and adapted."

This plea for understanding for the Bush-Cheney era did not go down well with the Obamasphere – the network of bloggers who helped build momentum for Obama's victory. The influential blogger Glenn Greenwald exploded in anger; the centrist Democratic blogger Scott Horton urged Brennan to clarify, and then urged Obama to reject him.

On my own blog The Daily Dish, I wrote that if Brennan were picked, Obama supporters "will, in fact, have to go to war with Obama before he even takes office. And if Obama doubts our seriousness, I have three words for him. Yes we can".

Brennan, facing more protests, withdrew his name from consideration last week. In the first skirmish over the issue in the Obama era, the antitorture forces won.

But the question remains: what is to be done? It is not Obama's style to launch into a prosecutorial investigation of intelligence officials or to open new partisan wounds by subjecting Bush, Cheney, Tenet, Donald Rumsfeld and others to war crime charges. He is intent on unifying the country, not further dividing it. He needs the professionals running the antiterror effort and, after eight years of Bush-Cheney, it is hard to find people not tainted by torture.

There is also the possibility that Bush himself might make a preemptive strike and, upon his departure from Washington, issue a blanket pardon for all his aides and underlings who aided and abetted war crimes in the past seven years. Leaving those pardons in place while prosecuting low-level officials or CIA agents would be deeply unfair.

That was the rationale behind the 2006 Military Commissions Act, which gave retroactive immunity for war crimes to civilians in the administration, but not to the military grunts who enforced the policy, and which carved out a continuing exception for torture to CIA agents.

So perhaps the sanest way forward is a truth commission, modelled on those in Chile and South Africa that maintained governmental continuity for a while but set up a process that allowed for a maximal gathering of the relevant facts and names. The president could appoint a powerful and respected prosecutor to begin the process. The commission would focus not just on the military and CIA but also on the Bush justice department and Office of Legal Counsel, and the abuse of the law and its interpretation that gave Bush and Cheney transparently phoney legal cover for war crimes.

At the end of the second world war, US officials prosecuted Nazi lawyers and civilians who tortured no one themselves but came up with legal flimflam to turn war crimes into legal policy. Why not apply the same logic to Bush's legal architects – the men who declared the president was bound by no law and no treaty in subjecting prisoners to torture up to the very edge of death?

The commission would need strong subpoena powers and the full backing of the president. Only once the commission has reported, the decision on whether to prosecute or not could be made, with much wider public awareness, and much deeper examination of the facts and documents now hidden. There is much, after all, we still do not know – and that information may make the war crimes seem less or more defensible.

There are some limits on transparency, of course, because of the sensitive intelligence matters that are involved. But when war crimes are at issue, it is more important for a democracy to seek transparency from its highest officials than to engage in anything but the most pressing concealment of the most vital secrets. In international law, there are no pardons for war crimes. And if America is going to regain moral authority in the world, it has to demonstrate it lives by the same standards it expects from everyone else.

Bush has even signalled that he will pardon no one because he does not believe they have committed any crimes. But the transparent way in which laughably sourced legal "cover" was provided by Bush's own legal counsel proves the Bush administration knew full well it was breaking the law, and was willing to force the justice department to put its imprimatur on such illegality.

And the evidence we now have, undisputed evidence, proves already that war crimes were indeed committed – by the president and vice-president on down. I mean: why else Guantanamo Bay and secret black sites if the president believed he was obeying domestic American law?

There is, in the end, a simple and sobering truth: these people have to be brought to justice if the rule of law is to survive in America. In his constitutional soul, Obama knows this. He also knows, however, the political exigencies of taking over a national security apparatus where continuity and lawful vigilance against terrorism remain vital.

How he bridges the demands of the law with the pressures of politics will tell us much about him. And because every act performed by the CIA will soon become his responsibility as much as President Bush's, he has no time to dither.

The constitutional crisis is in some ways deeper than the financial one. We will find out soon enough if this really is change we can believe in rather than merely hope for.

Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.

Comments [0]