[usa] cold comfort for the russians …

Continued:

In the dark days of the Cold War, as the world stood poised on the brink of nuclear conflict, one thing above all stood in the way of catastrophe: the secret eight-digit access number required to launch the US arsenal of intercontinental ballistic missiles.

Without that vital obstacle, anybody – a terrorist or even a crazed military commander - might be able to spark a conflict that would have killed millions. Most people from the 60s are familiar with the movie Dr. Strangelove, in which such a scenario does occur.

So it has been good for our sanity then that an expert closely involved in the process has only now revealed that the eight digits in question were 0000-0000. That’s right!

"The codes were the only real impediment to the crews launching missiles," said Bruce Blair, launch officer at a nuclear missile silo in Montana. "They were all set to zero. The safeguard was essentially non-functional."

Mr. Blair, now president of the Centre for Defence Information, said he recently revealed this information to Robert McNamara, Secretary of Defense during the Kennedy and Johnson administrations. Mr. McNamara responded with shock and outrage and asked: "Who the hell authorised that?"

The codes were set to zero because they were so deeply disliked by the military. Mr. Blair says that Mr. McNamara "basically forced" the system of fail-safe codes onto senior commanders, who were far more concerned with eliminating any obstacles to a lightning-fast response to a Soviet attack.

Mr. Blair and one other friend were therefore in a position, at the time, to fire up to 50 Minuteman missiles at the Soviet Union, had they wished. The Russians, themselves, must be delighted to know this.

On the other hand, Steven Bellovin, a researcher for AT&T who has studied launch codes, has suggested Mr. Blair was confusing two sets of codes - one to launch the missile containing the bomb and one to actually detonate it.

Mr. Blair says there was no confusion. It was as he said.

Oliver Burkeman, Washington, June 18th, 2004

[senate] 4 key mid-term races

Tennessee

Canada has already become ensnared in the Tennessee race, thanks to a Republican attack ad that took a shot at Ottawa, triggering the demand for an official apology.

The 30-second ad was actually aimed at Democratic Senate candidate Harold Ford Jr., who hopes to become the first black man elected to the Senate from the South in more than a century.

But the ad also took aim at Canada's supposed lack of initiative on the world stage, using an actor who said it didn't matter if Ford was unconcerned by nuclear threats.

"Canada can take care of North Korea. They're not busy," he says.

The severe attack ad came as Republican candidate Bob Corker found himself unable to overcome a near tie with Ford in the polls. But political analysts argued that in the end, some voters may cast their vote based on the ethnicity of the candidates.

The same ad also shows a white woman with bare shoulders, who says she met Ford at a "Playboy party" and seductively whispers to him: "Call me."

While that would seem completely innocuous to most people, mixed-ethnic relationships can still cause controversy in Tennessee. Democrats angrily responded to the ad, saying it was designed to spark anger among racists, who would then vote Republican.

"In a Southern state like Tennessee, some stereotypes still exist," Hilary Shelton of the NAACP told AP.

Missouri

The tough race in neighbouring Missouri has been marked by another controversial ad, in which Edmonton-born Michael J. Fox appeals to Democratic voters.

In the commercial, Fox asks residents to support Democrat Claire McCaskill, because she supports stem cell research. The actor has Parkinson's disease, which he said could one day be cured by advances in the scientific field.

Republican Sen. Jim Talent, who hopes to win a second term, stands against any more federal funding for such research.

In Missouri, the political aspect of the stem cell controversy is heightened by a ballot issue -- Amendment 2: Missouri Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative. Advocates of the initiative say it would protect the right of Missouri patients to have their injuries or illnesses treated by any stem cell therapy approved by federal law.

In Fox's ad appearance, the effects of Parkinson's are clearly visible on his body, which constantly shakes as he tells viewers: "They say all politics is local, but it's not always the case. What you do in Missouri matters to millions of Americans -- Americans like me."

While born in Canada, Fox is a U.S. citizen.

A response ad has been made using other celebrities, who dismiss the Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative as dangerous and a waste of money. Jim Caviezel, who played Jesus in Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ, simply tells Missouri residents to "vote no on 2."

Virginia

Just a few months ago, Virginia Sen. George Allen was looking at possible support for a 2008 run at the presidency. Now, the Republican is just trying to hold on to his seat, after he called someone a "macaca."

The comment was made months ago, when he used the term to describe a volunteer for Democratic rival Jim Webb.

The volunteer is of Indian descent. Macaca is a little-known racist slur originating in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, used against people of African descent. The term is believed to come from the word macaque.

Allen also seemed to become uncomfortable when asked by a reporter about the recent revelation his grandfather was Jewish. In an awkward response, he said: "I still had a ham sandwich for lunch. And my mother made great pork chops."

Republicans have now spent US$1.4 million in television ads to help Allen recover from those blunders. But his most troublesome comments may revolve around his support for the Iraq war.

Allen is now softening his stance, allowing that the U.S. strategy in Iraq needs to change. He told AP: "The situation there is one that needs adjustments, that needs changes in tactics. We need to adapt to the situation on the ground."

His rival, former U.S. marine Jim Webb, has always been against the war -- a stance that an increasing number of voters in the state seem to lean towards. And he has had big-name support: both former President Bill Clinton and his wife, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, have helped in his campaign.

With Allen and Webb now in a tight race, Allen has attacked his rival for once saying women were unfit for military combat.

He also disparaged Webb's literary merits -- the Democrat has been writing novels for the past 30 years, with titles like A Sense of Honor and Something to Die For.

Allen said there are sexually explicit passages in some of Webb's work that are obscene and insulting to women.

New Jersey

America's Garden State has been staunchly Democratic for the past 34 years, but that could change when voters head to the polls on Nov. 7.

Republican strategists hope to unseat Sen. Bob Menendez, and their efforts seem to be working: polls now show the Democrat almost tied with Republican Sen. Tom Kean Jr., a state senator -- sort of the American equivalent to a Canadian provincial parliament member.

Part of Kean's political ammunition against Menendez is allegations of corruption, which he has repeated endlessly to reporters. Kean, however, has not been convicted of any such charges.

"We need to clean up corruption at every level of government. I am tired of seeing politicians of both parties run out of county courthouses with raincoats over their heads," Kean told CBS News. "I am tired of our state and our leaders being made fun of on Jay Leno and David Letterman."

In one attack ad, a campaign worker for Menendez can be heard allegedly taking part in a kick-back scheme. But the audio is of such poor quality it's difficult to match with the accompanying subtitles.

Meanwhile, Menendez has shot back at Kean, challenging him for supporting the Bush administration's handling of the Iraq war. Menendez has claimed he would never have voted for the U.S.-led invasion.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20061027/key_races_061027/20061028?hub=TopStories

[north america] foi request puts 1,000 new pages online

Continued … Bureaucrats from agencies throughout the Bush administration are meeting regularly with their counterpart bureaucrats in the Canadian and Mexican governments to engage in a broad rewriting of U.S. administrative law and regulations into a new trilateral North American configuration, Corsi contends.

"We have hundreds of pages of e-mails from U.S. executive branch administrators who are copying the e-mail to somewhere between 25 to 100 people, a third of whom are in the U.S. bureaucracy, a third of whom are in the Mexican bureaucracy and a third of whom are in the Canadian bureaucracy," said Corsi.

"They are sharing their laws and regulations so we can 'harmonize' and 'integrate' our laws into a North American structure, not a USA structure." Corsi claims the process is well along the way. "This is totally outside the U.S. Constitution, virtually an executive branch coup d'etat," he said. "SPP is creating new trilateral memoranda of understanding and mutual agreements which should be submitted to Senate for two-thirds votes as international treaties."

Corsi said the documentation he received is missing key pieces. "We received very few actual agreements, though many are referenced," he said. "Many of the work plans described lack the work products which the groups say they produced."

So once again – this is anything but mainstream, hardline info, the tone of the piece above is too full of colour for me but a check of the documents themselves will help.

[britain] people, we're in trouble

People, we are in trouble and the next post after this on the US and Canada merely underscores it. This whole business was allowed to occur. The purpose? To exacerbate the old tribal differences and to rub salt in the wounds. No effective leader, either Labour or Tory - result chaos.

Into this steps a wonderboy sometime down the track - I think around 2012 [before the Olympics, which will be in trouble] and he reunites Britain, die-hards cheer, a great Olympics is held and the militarized society begins.

It started in the US with the Patriot Act, continued with FEMA and now the screws tighten with the summary detention laws, where they do these things less surreptitiously and look how hard Blair's pushing just now as well - the J1000 fines was an example. He sees his time running out to make his mark with those who wish such to be the scenario. Who? The European Finance - who else can it be? As it has always been.

Let me be shunned and ignored now, as no mainstream blogger would say things like this and no pollie would admit them.

In Yes Prime Minister, Hacker was asked a series of questions by the expert they brought in - don't remember the details. Something along the lines of what if the Russkies took Prague? British counter-attack? No. What if they then took Luxembourg? No. And so on. Now they're on the shore near Calais. Launch an attack?

The old boy then said, 'Salami tactics - slice by slice.' It's divide and rule. Little dissidents like myself are snuffed out early, anyone more important raising his voice in protest is 'suspected' and 'questioned', dissent is quashed. Belarus. Sudan. Britain. Terry Gilliam's Brazil.

Go back over the major security, educational and transport infrastructure issues since Blair assumed office and if you can't see intent there, then you have different eyes indeed.

What to do? What we've ever done. The blogosphere can help but it can also be shut down with a switch. But people's hearts and minds can't be shut down. Think more widely, more globally, go beyond English-Scottish squabbles and see there is a far greater issue at stake which they'd love us to ignore: we're about to lose it all - all the freedoms - all.

The Brits will never act in time - they never have, ever. But when they do finally wake up, I personally believe collective resolve will win out, Jimmy, Hugh, Taffy and Paddy et al.

[house of lords] modest proposals for the restoration

Composition

# The Lords Spiritual comprise the Church of England's archbishops and all diocesan bishops and one representative each of the Churches of Scotland Ireland and Wales.

# The Lords Temporal include all hereditary peers of the realm but are limited to half the seating capacity of the Chamber on any particular sitting day, sorted by notice of ‘intention to sit’ delivered to the Clerk within two days of visit. Only natural-born subjects are qualified.

# Life Peers include ten each of the three major parties plus ten each of the military, academic, medical and legal professions [may include Commonwealth citizens and citizens of the Republic of Ireland] plus minimum ten representatives each of Home Country parliaments and assemblies.

# The Lord Chancellor presides, wearing the black and gold.

# 20% of all Cabinet ministers are to come from the House of Lords.

# All appointments, irrespective, are by appointment of the Sovereign on the advice of both the Lord Chancellor [and Prime Minister].

Law Lords

# The Lords of Appeal in Ordinary form an Appelate Committee of 12 members with experience of high judicial office, known as "Law Lords". This Committee is the court of last resort in the United Kingdom, members appointed by the Sovereign.

# The Curia Regis is a body of 12 Committees of 12 Lords which address the petitions of the Sovereign's subjects. This is intended to redress the abuses of the lower house, as in the past few years and to restore democracy to Britain.

Bills

# All bills may be delayed one month. Most bills lapse after the 2nd rejection. Money Bills are null and void after the 3rd rejection.

# The Salisbury Convention is abandoned henceforth as the Lords are not subject to the Lower House, though by definition, the reverse is true. In practice, some form of compromise will prevail.

# The House of Lords may originate a bill concerning taxation or supply and also amend a bill so as to insert a taxation or supply-related provision.

That should suffice for the nonce - no point getting too radical too early.

[bush] george and his new world order

As Whitney and Whitney say [p449]: No one guessed how quickly the breeze the President mentioned would become a gale. In a whirlwind of events, the Communist governments of Hungary, Poland, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Romania, Bulgaria, and Yugoslavia gave up their monopolies on power and held popular elections. These astonishing changes came quickly and with remarkably little violence.

Then Desert Storm came around. Again from W&W: On September 11, 1990 the President addressed a joint session of Congress on live television. He spoke of the crisis in the Persian Gulf and of America's place in a post Cold War world:

"We stand today at a unique and extraordinary moment. The crisis in the Persian Gulf, as grave as it is, also offers a rare opportunity to move toward an historic period of cooperation … Out of these troubled times, a new world order can emerge: a new era, freer from the threat of terror, stronger in the pursuit of justice and more secure in the quest for peace. An era in which the nations of the world, east and west, north and south, can prosper and live in harmony."

In poetic language the President said:

"a hundred generations have searched for this elusive path to peace, while a thousand wars raged across the span of human endeavor. Today that new world is struggling to be born. A world quite different from the one we've known. A world where the rule of law supplants the rule of the jungle. A world in which nations recognize the shared responsibility for freedom and justice. A world where the strong respect the rights of the weak."

In other words, largely by agreement. This and the rhetoric Bush often employed reminded me of something but I couldn’t think what - the breeze, reborn, new world order can emerge, elusive path, a thousand wars, the strong, the weak.

These last two terms were particularly surprising as most politicians refer to rich and poor, haves and have-nots and so on. There is one organization I know of that speaks in the rhetoric of ‘strong’ and ‘weak’ and maintain this tone. They call themselves Moriah Conquering Wind and this immediately reminded me of a passage from ‘N or M’, by Agatha Christie:

"It's people like you who will be needed in the new State — the State that will arise in this country when your present imbecile Government is vanquished. We want to turn some of our enemies into friends — those that are worth while. If I have to give the order that ends your husband's life, I shall do it — it's my duty — but I shall feel really badly about having to do it! He's a fine fellow — quiet, unassuming and clever.

Let me impress upon you what so few people in this country seem to understand. Our Leader does not intend to conquer this country in the sense that you all think. He aims at creating a new Britain — a Britain strong in its own power — ruled over, not by Germans, but by Englishmen. And the best type of Englishmen — Englishmen with brains and breeding and courage. A brave new world, as Shakespeare puts it.

We want to do away with muddle and inefficiency. With bribery and corruption. With self-seeking and money-grubbing — and in this new state we want people like you and your husband — brave and resourceful — enemies that have been, friends to be. You would be surprised if you knew how many there are in this country, as in others, who have sympathy with and belief in our aims. Among us all we will create a new Europe — a Europe of peace and progress. Try and see it that way — because, I assure you— it is that way."
His voice was compelling, magnetic. [Manager edition pp 191/2]

In a later passage, this exchange takes place:

Tommy and Tuppence stared.

"Incredible!" said the former.

Grant shook his head. "You do not know the force of the German propaganda. It appeals to something in man, some desire or lust for power. These people were ready to betray their country not for money, but in a kind of megalomaniacal pride in what they, they themselves, were going to achieve for that country. In every land it has been the same. It is the Cult of Lucifer — Lucifer, Son of the Morning. Pride and a desire for personal glory!" [Manager edition p202]

In an article from November 27, 2003, Wes Penre states: In 1922 the Lucifer Trust was created in London, but later changed its name to Lucis Trust, as the first name was too obvious. The Trust is a non-governmental body and publishing house officially listed by the United Nations, an extension of the Theosophical Society which influenced Adolf Hitler in developing his doctrine about the Arian Super Race.

The Lucis Trust is sponsored by, among others, Robert McNamara, former minister of Defense in the USA, president of the World Bank, member of the Rockefeller Foundation, and Thomas Watson, IBM, former ambassador in Moscow. In turn, Lucis sponsors: United Nations, Greenpeace Int., Greenpeace USA, Amnesty Int. and UNICEF, to name a few. The Lucis Trust had a chapel, the Temple of Understanding, until recently within the UN headquarters in New York [A 205 Basic Course II Police High School autumn 1991; authors: Ingela Göransson and Lena Martinsson, Sweden.]

I’ve seen this chapel – it had a three dimensional geometric design in the centre and was bathed in cold blues and other shades, all diffused and overlapping. There was no discernible religious icon anywhere – it supposedly represented what you wished it to represent. Another organization similarly worshipping a nebulous figure named ‘the great architect’ is quite influential in the monied world. Again, cold blue is the chosen colour of their decor.

Most people remember the interview Gen. Tommy Franks gave to the December 2003 edition of the men’s lifestyle magazine Cigar Aficionado. He warned that if terrorists succeeded in using a weapon of mass destruction against ‘‘the U.S. or one of our allies, it would likely have catastrophic consequences for our cherished republican form of government.’’

If that happens, Franks said, “... the Western world, the free world, loses what it cherishes most, and that is freedom and liberty we’ve seen for a couple of hundred years in this grand experiment that we call democracy.”

Franks then offered “in a practical sense” what he thinks would happen in the aftermath of such an attack.

“It means the potential of a weapon of mass destruction and a terrorist, massive, casualty-producing event somewhere in the Western world – it may be in the United States of America – that causes our population to question our own Constitution and to begin to militarize our country in order to avoid a repeat of another mass, casualty-producing event. Which in fact, then begins to unravel the fabric of our Constitution. Two steps, very, very important.”

Franks didn’t speculate about how soon such an event might take place.

Franks offered his assessment on a number of topics to Cigar Aficionado, including:

On the motivation for the Iraq war: Contrary to claims that top Pentagon brass opposed the invasion of Iraq, Franks said he wholeheartedly agreed with the president’s decision to invade Iraq and oust Saddam Hussein.

“I, for one, begin with intent. ... There is no question that Saddam Hussein had intent to do harm to the Western alliance and to the United States of America. That intent is confirmed in a great many of his speeches, his commentary, the words that have come out of the Iraqi regime over the last dozen or so years. So we have intent.

Capturing Saddam: Franks said he was not surprised that Saddam has not been captured or killed. But he says he will eventually be found, perhaps sooner than Osama bin laden. “The capture or killing of Saddam Hussein will be a near term thing. And I won’t say that’ll be within 19 or 43 days. ... I believe it is inevitable.”

Franks ended his interview with a less-than-optimistic note. “It’s not in the history of civilization for peace ever to reign. Never has in the history of man. ... I doubt that we’ll ever have a time when the world will actually be at peace.”

He’s right, as long as the NWO brigade rule the roost. The interesting thing is that the ‘kooks’ on the web whom everyone, including myself, dismisses as conspiracy theorists, might just be borne out in the not too distant future. Moriah, for example, sets a 2012 deadline for the first part – the militarization of the western world.

Well, we can only wait and see.

[europe] eu leaders wine and dine putin

Continued … Europe has long been scared of Russia. Just 20 years ago, it the fear of a strong Soviet Russia threatening invasion. 10 years ago it was fear of a weak Russia flooding Europe with starving refugees. Now Europe is worried about energy.

Russia is the world's biggest gas exporter and the second biggest oil exporter after Saudi Arabia. Already 40 per cent of Germany's gas comes from Russia, within ten years most of Britain’s gas will have to be imported.

So what happens when the EU's leaders all get behind closed doors with Vladimir Putin? According to one EU insider quoted by the BBC, the leaders all say 'I love you, Vladimir'. A little cynical perhaps but that’s the sort of unilateral approach that will give Russia the upper hand, according to the Director of the EU Russia Research Centre, Fraser Cameron.

The problem is that too many member States are not really taking the common policy we have towards Russia seriously. They’re cutting bilateral deals. You will only deal with Russia seriously, and I think gain influence, if you operate collectively as an EU and that’s the challenge ahead to try and get all the member states to sign up for an agreed EU policy.

When Russia cut off the gas to Ukraine and Georgia this year, it conjured up nightmares of a freezing Europe, a dystopic vision of what an energy giant could do to those who pushed too hard for cheap energy. Unlikely perhaps, but Russia's massive energy conglomerates, unrestrained by EU competition law and with helpful friends in the Kremlin, are exactly the sort of corporate behemoths cause geopolitical nightmares in European capitals.

But it’s that sort of talk that appals Vladmir Chisov, Russian Ambassador to the EU, who was told about similar concerns on BBC Radio. I was appalled by those comments. I think they are based on wrong information. Dependence on Russia’s energy supplies is an objective fact.

This meeting that should around now be up to the whisky and cigars stage, is being held in Helsinki because Finland currently holds the EU's rotating Presidency. Foreign Minister Erkki Tuomioja says Russia can make threats but Moscow needs the EU just as much as Europe needs Russian gas.

So as you contemplate your breakfast and Europe’s leaders eyeball Vladimir Putin, why would any common European front be replaced by unilaterally cut deals? Lithuania may provide a reason.

The government there sold an oil refinery to a Polish rather than a Russian company. In July, Russia cut off oil supplies to the plant after the pipeline was damaged by quote, "unknown factors." This week a fire at the plant caused the equivalent of $100 million damage. Authorities in Lithuania are now investigating.

[torture] bush signing interrogation laws right now

Concluded ... The new law means Bush can continue a secret CIA program for interrogating terrorism suspects he believes have vital information that could thwart a plot against America. More here.

It establishes military tribunals that would allow some use of evidence obtained by coercion, but would give defendants access to classified evidence being used to convict them. "The president will mark a historic day in which he will sign a bill that he knows will help prevent terrorist attacks," said White House spokeswoman Dana Perino.

[express poll] the general got it right

concluded ... 57 per cent agree that Muslim extremists are exploiting a “moral vacuum” in Britain to undermine our way of life and 44 per cent want to see a greater role for the British Army in combating Islamic terrorism. Lord David Ramsbotham, adjutant general of the army during the first Gulf War said: “I don’t think Sir Richard should be sacked. The point he has made quite rightly and strongly is that if the Army continues to be hammered into the ground, there won’t be an Army in five to 10 years.” For what it's worth, this blog concurs with these findings.

[congress today] mann and ornstein - summarized comments

Continued… Ornstein: Part of the response to Foley was undoubtedly human nature -- lawmakers wanting to take Foley at his word that he wouldn't write any more improper e-mails. But it is hard to look at the responses without putting them into a context that makes it more damning.

Ornstein: [With] the small majorities the Republicans have had in both houses; it is hard to command perfect party unity in both houses for any length of time. United government in an age of fierce partisanship and sharp ideological polarization between the parties does not work very well for very long. ...

Mann: It is striking, the extent to which the Republican majority in Congress deferred to the president in the face of one of the most aggressive and ambitious assertions of executive authority in American history [and] it has meant flawed planning, poor implementation and no midcourse corrections...

Mann: The last five congressional elections have produced fewer incumbent defeats and seats changing party hands than any comparable period in American history. Congressional districts have become safer for one party. ... Those recruited, elected and re-elected from such districts tend to reflect the ideological pole of their party rather than the center of public opinion.

Incumbency adds a layer of advantage on top of this party dominance. But rather than foster an environment in which members of Congress feel free to buck popular sentiment and wrestle seriously with the problems confronting the country, it reinforces the ideological divide between the parties. Incumbents are safe, but party majorities are not. This fosters symbolic votes, message politics and little serious legislating in Congress.

Ornstein: Voters -- and even more, nonvoters -- deserve some of the blame. The low turnout we get exaggerates the power of the ideological activists who do turn out, skewing the system away from the middle. But voters do not create the system that shapes the districts into noncompetitive ones, nor do they play a meaningful role in recruiting the candidates we get ... And we cannot expect voters to pay close attention to the ins and outs of the legislative process, until some crisis demands it.

It is the voters' surrogates, including the press, who have to alert them when something is seriously wrong. But ultimately, only a credible threat that the public is prepared to throw the rascals out will change the ways in which politicians in Washington operate.

Charles Babington, Washington Post

[ban ki-moon] next secretary-general [probably]

Continued … Ban, 62, is gentle and soft-spoken and values relations with other people. Some call him a natural-born diplomat who has the ability to avoid making enemies.

Secretary-General Kofi Annan steps down from the post on Dec. 31, and the U.N. Security Council has set an Oct. 9 date to pick his successor. The 192-nation General Assembly must approve the council's choice - which it has traditionally done without debate or protest.

On Monday afternoon, Ban's dream took another step forward when he cemented his position to succeed Annan, becoming the only one of six candidates to escape a veto in an informal U.N. Security Council ballot while securing 14 votes in favor.

"It is quite clear that from today's straw poll that Minister Ban Ki-Moon is the candidate that the Security Council will recommend to the General Assembly," China's U.N. Ambassador Wang Guangya said.

The setting of the Oct. 9 date offers another clear indication that Ban is a near certain choice to be the eighth secretary-general of the United Nations' 60-year history.

Ban has acknowledged criticism that he isn't strong enough for the job, but noted that as South Korea's top diplomat, he has dealt with such weighty issues as the international talks aimed at ending the nuclear standoff with neighboring North Korea.

"This has not been an easy job," Ban told The Associated Press in a recent interview. "You may look at me as a soft person, but I have inner strength. This is what normally people from the outside world would have some difficulty in seeing - people from Asia particularly, when we regard humility, a humbleness, as a very important virtue."

His dedication to his job is well-known. He has said many times that it's one of his lifelong principles to put his job ahead of private affairs.

"I'm sorry for my family, but even if I can't take care of my home, I have to do my job first," he told a class of high school students last year. "Diplomats enjoy a lot of privileges and immunities abroad and therefore, they have unlimited responsibility."

The wedding ceremony of his eldest daughter last year coincided with a conference that he had to attend. Ban briefly stepped out of the conference to attend the wedding, and then returned to the convention center. It was unclear if he intentionally chose a wedding hall near the conference center.

Born June 13, 1944, Ban attended the country's most prestigious institute of higher learning, Seoul National University, where he received a degree in international relations in 1970. He earned a master's degree in public administration from Harvard University in 1985.

Ban's first overseas posting was in India, and he also served in Austria, the United Nations and the U.S. along with other positions in Seoul before becoming foreign minister in January 2004.

His campaign for the U.N. position has been low-key, but there have been allegations in some media reports that South Korea has been seeking to buy the job by strategically giving aid to certain developing countries.

Last week, the South Korean Foreign Ministry strongly dismissed those claims, asserting that decisions on where to give aid were planned in advance of Ban's candidacy for secretary-general.

[sudan] best to skip over this post - it's quite nasty

Continued … Steidle says he was warned the Sudanese Government wanted to keep it that way. African Union commanders – not wanting to offend the host government – were suspicious of the new man who’d brought a camera as he heard Janjaweed riders explain that they destroyed villages over stolen cattle. He saw neither regret nor remorse: "It was like looking into the devil's eyes."

In January, he predicted – based on Janjaweed movements – that the town of Hamada would be attacked within two weeks. When it was hit 10 days later, Steidle says he refused to go with the observation team: "I knew what they were going to see. I said, `I've seen enough.' " The team found babies with their faces bashed in. When members returned, "they were like zombies", Steidle recalls.

He returned to the US in February 2005 with hundreds of images, including those of a man castrated and left to bleed to death, people with their ears cut off and eyes plucked out and an aerial view of government troops joining ranks with the Janjaweed.

Is this an aberration? Are these Arab militias only native to the Sudan? Look back at this piece and decide:

http://nourishingobscurity.blogspot.com/2006/09/algeria-western-veil-of-silence.html

This is from that story: The GIA get my vote for the sickest, craziest, bloodiest guerrilla group since the Khmer Rouge went out of business. They're the ones who do the massacres that make Algeria the place you'd least like to spend your honeymoon.Just killing isn't enough for these guys. Killing is for wimps. The GIA started coming up with new touches to keep the game interesting: burning people alive, bayoneting babies, raping and killing children in front of their parents. All in the name of God, you understand. Very nice people, these Arabs.

The less gruesome Sudan pics by Steidle are here:

http://www.ushmm.org/conscience/alert/darfur/steidle/

The original story is here:

http://www.news.com.au/sundayheraldsun/story/0,21985,20504619-663,00.html