WEDNESDAY found both the British prime minister and the Irish taoiseach passionately addressing their parliaments about the demystified lords of their universes
Frantically distancing himself from the pope of Fleet Street, David Cameron sardonically assured riled-up lawmakers that he had never seen Rebekah Brooks in her PJs because he had not attended Gordon Brown’s wife’s slumber party at Chequers with Wendi Deng and Elisabeth Murdoch in 2008.
He conceded that he should not have ignored warnings from the palace and elsewhere against bringing a capo from the sulfurous Murdoch gang into his inner circle.
Across the Irish Sea in Dublin, Enda Kenny took on the actual pope, making a blazing speech about the Vatican’s unconscionable behavior in the pedophilia scandal.
After 17 years of revolting revelations, Kenny said the latest report on the Cloyne diocese in County Cork exposed “an attempt by the Holy See to frustrate an inquiry in a sovereign, democratic republic as little as three years ago, not three decades ago.”
The report, he said, “excavates the dysfunction, disconnection, elitism, the narcissism that dominate the culture of the Vatican to this day. The rape and torture of children were downplayed or ‘managed’ to uphold, instead, the primacy of the institution, its power, standing and ‘reputation.’
“Far from listening to evidence of humiliation and betrayal with St. Benedict’s ‘ear of the heart,’ the Vatican’s reaction was to parse and analyze it with the gimlet eye of a canon lawyer. This calculated, withering position being the polar opposite of the radicalism, humility and compassion upon which the Roman church was founded.”
Pulling back the curtain to expose the profane amid the sacred would have been remarkable coming from any leader in one of the many countries scarred by pedophile priests, but from the devoutly Catholic prime minister of a nation whose constitution once enshrined the special position of the church, it was breathtaking.
The Irish were taken aback by the ire of the ordinarily amiable, soft-spoken Kenny, the longest-serving parliamentarian in the land. In his first few months as Taoiseach, the 60-year-old had not given any sign that he could throw such Zeus-style thunderbolts.
But bankrupt and battered Eire, which needed a shot of muscular national pride, was thrilled with his emphatic articulation of their revulsion at the tragedy, and his assertion of Ireland as a sovereign republic not under the thumb of Rome.
“If you look at some of his predecessors, going right back 50 years, they would have been very much of the view that they were Catholics first and politicians second,” said Diarmaid Ferriter, a professor of modern Irish history at University College Dublin.
Sounding like he could have been talking about Rupert Murdoch’s fief as well, Ferriter observed: “There has been this very obvious and planned and hugely arrogant policy of obfuscation and deliberate delaying tactics and complete avoidance of responsibility on the part of the Vatican. They were actually treating the sovereign government of Ireland with complete contempt.”
He added: “We’re fed up with hearing about canon law. This is a Republic, it’s about civil law.”
Garry O’Sullivan, the editor of The Irish Catholic, compared the resonance of the speech to the French revolution, without the violence. “The French Republic didn’t kick out the Catholic Church, but they set up a French Catholic Church and kicked out Rome,” he said. “Kenny has tapped into a vein in the Irish psyche, people saying, ‘Well done for standing up to those bloody bishops and the pope.’ It was lancing a boil.”
Like other elites in shaken Ireland, like the multimillionaire bankers and real estate developers, the church elite is rapidly losing clout. “The mighty have fallen from their thrones,” O’Sullivan said.
Diarmuid Martin, the archbishop of Dublin, who has been frozen out by the Vatican and his fellow Irish bishops for his tender solicitude toward abuse victims, teared up on Irish TV talking about Kenny’s cri de coeur.
What church “cabal” is this in the Vatican or Ireland, he asked, “who try to undermine what is being done, or simply refuse to understand what is being done?”
In Britain and in Ireland, two dictatorial institutions that once dominated with fearsome power are crumbling, brought low by highhanded cultures inured even to crimes against children.
A large part of the strategy of the Vatican and Rupert Murdoch in acquiring power was to create an aura of invincibility, a hallowed mystique. But those mythologies are cracking, and people are no longer afraid to confront these empires’ corrupt practices and vast cover-ups.
It is stirring to watch people who have long been cowed finally speaking up, shedding their fear of the authoritarian men at the top who owed their power to the awe of the people.
Sunday, July 24, 2011
Make Way for the Radical Center
DID I mention that I’ve signed a pledge — just like those Republican congressmen who have signed written promises to different political enforcers not to raise taxes or permit same-sex marriage? My pledge is to never vote for anyone stupid enough to sign a pledge — thereby abdicating their governing responsibilities in a period of incredibly rapid change and financial stress. Sorry, I’ve signed it. Nothing more I can do.
If this kind of idiocy by elected officials sends you into a hair-pulling rage and leaves you wishing that we had more options today than our two-party system is putting forward — for instance, a party that would have offered a grand bargain on the deficit two years ago, not on the eve of a Treasury default — not only are you not alone, but help may be on the way.
Thanks to a quiet political start-up that is now ready to show its hand, a viable, centrist, third presidential ticket, elected by an Internet convention, is going to emerge in 2012. I know it sounds gimmicky — an Internet convention — but an impressive group of frustrated Democrats, Republicans and independents, called Americans Elect, is really serious, and they have thought out this process well. In a few days, Americans Elect will formally submit the 1.6 million signatures it has gathered to get on the presidential ballot in California as part of its unfolding national effort to get on the ballots of all 50 states for 2012.
The goal of Americans Elect is to take a presidential nominating process now monopolized by the Republican and Democratic parties, which are beholden to their special interests, and blow it wide open — guaranteeing that a credible third choice, nominated independently, will not only be on the ballot in every state but be able to take part in every presidential debate and challenge both parties from the middle with the best ideas on how deal with the debt, education and jobs.
“Our goal is to open up what has been an anticompetitive process to people in the middle who are unsatisfied with the choices of the two parties,” said Kahlil Byrd, the C.E.O. of Americans Elect, speaking from its swank offices, financed with some serious hedge-fund money, a stone’s throw from the White House.
As the group explains on its Web site, www.americanselect.org: “Americans Elect is the first-ever open nominating process. We’re using the Internet to give every single voter — Democrat, Republican or independent — the power to nominate a presidential ticket in 2012. The people will choose the issues. The people will choose the candidates. And in a secure, online convention next June, the people will make history by putting their choice on the ballot in every state.”
Here is how it will work, explains Elliot Ackerman, an Iraq war veteran with a Silver Star, who serves as the chief operating officer of Americans Elect, and whose father, Peter, a successful investor, has been a prime engine behind the group. First, anyone interested in becoming a delegate goes to the Americans Elect Web site and registers. As part of that process, you will be asked to fill in a questionnaire about your political priorities: education, foreign policy, the economy, etc. This enables Americans Elect to put you in contact with others who share your views so you can discuss them and organize together. Then you will be invited to draft a candidate or support one who has already been drafted and to contribute to the list of questions that anyone running on the Americans Elect platform will have to answer on the site.
“The questions, the priorities, the nominations and the rules will all come from the community, not from two entrenched parties,” said Ackerman.
Any presidential nominee must conform to all the Constitutional requirements, as well as be considered someone of similar stature to our previous presidents. That means no Lady Gaga allowed. Every candidate will have to post in words or video his or her answers to the platform questions produced by the Americans Elect delegates. In April 2012, the candidate pool will be reduced to six through three rounds of voting. The six, assuming they all want to run, will then have to name their running mates. The only rule is that a Democrat must run with a Republican or independent, and a Republican with a Democrat or independent.
“Each presidential candidate has to pick a running mate outside of their party and reaching across the divide of politics,” said Ackerman. In June 2012, the online convention will choose who among the six will run as the Americans Elect candidate — automatically on the ballot in all 50 states. If President Obama wants to run with John Boehner on the Americans Elect platform that would be fine — provided they go through the process. (President Obama should dump the Democrats and run as an independent, which he is, at heart, anyway.)
Write it down: Americans Elect. What Amazon.com did to books, what the blogosphere did to newspapers, what the iPod did to music, what drugstore.com did to pharmacies, Americans Elect plans to do to the two-party duopoly that has dominated American political life — remove the barriers to real competition, flatten the incumbents and let the people in. Watch out.
If this kind of idiocy by elected officials sends you into a hair-pulling rage and leaves you wishing that we had more options today than our two-party system is putting forward — for instance, a party that would have offered a grand bargain on the deficit two years ago, not on the eve of a Treasury default — not only are you not alone, but help may be on the way.
Thanks to a quiet political start-up that is now ready to show its hand, a viable, centrist, third presidential ticket, elected by an Internet convention, is going to emerge in 2012. I know it sounds gimmicky — an Internet convention — but an impressive group of frustrated Democrats, Republicans and independents, called Americans Elect, is really serious, and they have thought out this process well. In a few days, Americans Elect will formally submit the 1.6 million signatures it has gathered to get on the presidential ballot in California as part of its unfolding national effort to get on the ballots of all 50 states for 2012.
The goal of Americans Elect is to take a presidential nominating process now monopolized by the Republican and Democratic parties, which are beholden to their special interests, and blow it wide open — guaranteeing that a credible third choice, nominated independently, will not only be on the ballot in every state but be able to take part in every presidential debate and challenge both parties from the middle with the best ideas on how deal with the debt, education and jobs.
“Our goal is to open up what has been an anticompetitive process to people in the middle who are unsatisfied with the choices of the two parties,” said Kahlil Byrd, the C.E.O. of Americans Elect, speaking from its swank offices, financed with some serious hedge-fund money, a stone’s throw from the White House.
As the group explains on its Web site, www.americanselect.org: “Americans Elect is the first-ever open nominating process. We’re using the Internet to give every single voter — Democrat, Republican or independent — the power to nominate a presidential ticket in 2012. The people will choose the issues. The people will choose the candidates. And in a secure, online convention next June, the people will make history by putting their choice on the ballot in every state.”
Here is how it will work, explains Elliot Ackerman, an Iraq war veteran with a Silver Star, who serves as the chief operating officer of Americans Elect, and whose father, Peter, a successful investor, has been a prime engine behind the group. First, anyone interested in becoming a delegate goes to the Americans Elect Web site and registers. As part of that process, you will be asked to fill in a questionnaire about your political priorities: education, foreign policy, the economy, etc. This enables Americans Elect to put you in contact with others who share your views so you can discuss them and organize together. Then you will be invited to draft a candidate or support one who has already been drafted and to contribute to the list of questions that anyone running on the Americans Elect platform will have to answer on the site.
“The questions, the priorities, the nominations and the rules will all come from the community, not from two entrenched parties,” said Ackerman.
Any presidential nominee must conform to all the Constitutional requirements, as well as be considered someone of similar stature to our previous presidents. That means no Lady Gaga allowed. Every candidate will have to post in words or video his or her answers to the platform questions produced by the Americans Elect delegates. In April 2012, the candidate pool will be reduced to six through three rounds of voting. The six, assuming they all want to run, will then have to name their running mates. The only rule is that a Democrat must run with a Republican or independent, and a Republican with a Democrat or independent.
“Each presidential candidate has to pick a running mate outside of their party and reaching across the divide of politics,” said Ackerman. In June 2012, the online convention will choose who among the six will run as the Americans Elect candidate — automatically on the ballot in all 50 states. If President Obama wants to run with John Boehner on the Americans Elect platform that would be fine — provided they go through the process. (President Obama should dump the Democrats and run as an independent, which he is, at heart, anyway.)
Write it down: Americans Elect. What Amazon.com did to books, what the blogosphere did to newspapers, what the iPod did to music, what drugstore.com did to pharmacies, Americans Elect plans to do to the two-party duopoly that has dominated American political life — remove the barriers to real competition, flatten the incumbents and let the people in. Watch out.
Saturday, July 23, 2011
Lai Changxing’s Deportation to China Is Upheld in Canada
VANCOUVER, British Columbia (AP) — A Canadian judge upheld the deportation on Thursday of one of China’s most wanted fugitives, calling him a “common criminal.”
The suspect, Lai Changxing, could be returned to China as early as Saturday, said Helen Park, the government’s lawyer.
Mr. Lai’s lawyer, David Matas, had asked Canada’s Federal Court to stay his client’s deportation, arguing he would not get a fair trial in his native country. Mr. Matas told Justice Michel Shore that Communist officials were using his client to deflect allegations of corruption against themselves.
“He’s become the poster boy for the fight against corruption,” Mr. Matas told the court via telephone from Berlin.
Mr. Lai, who is accused of masterminding a huge smuggling operation that robbed the Chinese government of millions of dollars in unpaid taxes, has been fighting his deportation to China for 12 years. He has long maintained that he could be tortured or killed if he were returned to his home country.
But Justice Shore ruled that “Mr. Lai has failed to establish that he will suffer irreparable harm if he were returned to China.” The judge said the fact that Mr. Lai had been in negotiations with Chinese officials to return belied his assertions of risk if he returns.
Chinese officials have assured Canada that Mr. Lai would not be executed or tortured and would get a fair trial with access to a lawyer if he is returned to face charges.
The suspect, Lai Changxing, could be returned to China as early as Saturday, said Helen Park, the government’s lawyer.
Mr. Lai’s lawyer, David Matas, had asked Canada’s Federal Court to stay his client’s deportation, arguing he would not get a fair trial in his native country. Mr. Matas told Justice Michel Shore that Communist officials were using his client to deflect allegations of corruption against themselves.
“He’s become the poster boy for the fight against corruption,” Mr. Matas told the court via telephone from Berlin.
Mr. Lai, who is accused of masterminding a huge smuggling operation that robbed the Chinese government of millions of dollars in unpaid taxes, has been fighting his deportation to China for 12 years. He has long maintained that he could be tortured or killed if he were returned to his home country.
But Justice Shore ruled that “Mr. Lai has failed to establish that he will suffer irreparable harm if he were returned to China.” The judge said the fact that Mr. Lai had been in negotiations with Chinese officials to return belied his assertions of risk if he returns.
Chinese officials have assured Canada that Mr. Lai would not be executed or tortured and would get a fair trial with access to a lawyer if he is returned to face charges.
Thursday, July 21, 2011
CIA veteran: Israel to attack Iran in fall
A longtime CIA officer who spent 21 years in the Middle East is predicting that Israel will bomb Iran in the fall, dragging the United States into another major war and endangering US military and civilian personnel (and other interests) throughout the Middle East and beyond.
According to Ben Caspit of the Israeli daily Maariv, Dagan's blasts at Israel's political leadership are significant not only because Mossad chiefs, in office or retired, traditionally have kept their lips sealed, but also because Dagan is very conservative on security matters.
Given all that, is it possible that the United States would allow Israel to attack when the president knows we would be forced to join the war on Israel's side?
It's a pretty frightening scenario, made infinitely more so by the fact that top Israelis (who have heard Netanyahu's thinking from Netanyahu himself) also see the future the same way. Those Israelis deserve a world of credit for sounding the warning bell loudly enough that we would hear it and do something about it - although it's impossible to know if the people who matter are paying attention.
Earlier this week, Robert Baer appeared on the provocative KPFK Los Angeles show Background Briefing, hosted by Ian Masters. It was there that he predicted that Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is likely to ignite a war with Iran in the very near future.
Robert Baer has had a storied career, including a stint in Iraq in the 1990s where he organised opposition to Saddam Hussein. (He was recalled after being accused of trying to organise Saddam's assassination.) Upon his retirement, he received a top decoration for meritorious service.
Baer is no ordinary CIA operative. George Clooney won an Oscar for playing a character based on Baer in the film Syriana (Baer also wrote the book).
He obviously won't name many of his sources in Israel, the United States, and elsewhere, but the few he has named are all Israeli security figures who have publically warned that Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak are hell-bent on war.
Most former Mossad chiefs wary of Netanyahu
Baer was especially impressed by the unprecedented warning about Netanyahu's plans by former Mossad chief Meir Dagan. Dagan left the Israeli intelligence agency in September 2010. Two months ago, he predicted that Israel would attack and said that doing so would be "the stupidest thing" he could imagine. According to Haaretz:
| When asked about what would happen in the aftermath of an Israeli attack Dagan said that: "It will be followed by a war with Iran. It is the kind of thing where we know how it starts, but not how it will end." The Iranians have the capability to fire rockets at Israel for a period of months, and Hizbollah could fire tens of thousands of grad rockets and hundreds of long-range missiles, he said. |
According to Ben Caspit of the Israeli daily Maariv, Dagan's blasts at Israel's political leadership are significant not only because Mossad chiefs, in office or retired, traditionally have kept their lips sealed, but also because Dagan is very conservative on security matters.
Caspit writes that Dagan is "one of the most rightwing militant people ever born here. ... When this man says that the leadership has no vision and is irresponsible, we should stop sleeping soundly at night".
Dagan describes the current Israeli government as "dangerous and irresponsible" and views speaking out against Netanyahu as his patriotic duty.
And his abhorrence of Netanyahu is not uncommon in the Israeli security establishment. Accordingto Think Progress, citing the Forward newspaper, 12 of the 18 living ex-chiefs of Israel's two security agencies (Mossad and Shin Bet), are "either actively opposing Netanyahu's stances or have spoken out against them". Of the remaining six, two are current ministers in Netanyahu government, leaving a grand total of four out of 18 who independently support the prime minister.
In short, while Congress dutifully gives Netanyahu 29 standing ovations, the Israelis who know the most about both Netanyahu and Israel's strategic situation think he is a dangerous disaster.
But according to Baer, we ain't seen nothing yet.
There is almost "near certainty" that Netanyahu is "planning an attack [on Iran] ... and it will probably be in September before the vote on a Palestinian state. And he's also hoping to draw the United States into the conflict", Baer explained.
The Israeli air force would attack "Natanz and other nuclear facilities to degrade their capabilities. The Iranians will strike back where they can: Basra, Baghdad", he said, and even Afghanistan. Then the United States would jump into the fight with attacks on Iranian targets. "Our special forces are already looking at Iranian targets in Iraq and across the border [in Iran] which we would strike. What we're facing here is an escalation, rather than a planned out-and-out war. It's a nightmare scenario. We don't have enough troops in the Middle East to fight a war like that." Baer added, "I think we are looking into the abyss".
Another US war?
Masters asked Baer why the US military is not mobilising to stop this war from happening. Baer responded that the military is opposed, as is former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who used his influence to thwart an Israeli attack during the Bush and Obama administrations. But he's gone now and "there is a warning order inside the Pentagon" to prepare for war.
It should be noted that the Iranian regime is quite capable of triggering a war with the United States through some combination of colossal stupidity and sheer hatred. In fact, as Baer explained, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard would welcome a war. They are "paranoid". They are "worried about ... what's happening to their country economically, in terms of the oil embargo and other sanctions". And they are worried about a population that increasingly despises the regime.
| They need an external enemy. Because we are leaving Iraq, it's Israel. But in order to make this threat believable, they would love an attack on their nuclear facilities, love to go to war in Bahrain and Saudi Arabia and Iraq and hit us where they could. Their defense is asymmetrical. We can take out all of their armored units. It's of little difference to them, same with their surface-to-air missile sites. It would make little difference because they would use terrorism. They would do serious damage to our fleet in the Gulf. |
Given all that, is it possible that the United States would allow Israel to attack when the president knows we would be forced to join the war on Israel's side?
"The president is up for re-election next year," Blair pointed out, and Israel is "truly out of control".
| What happens when you see 100 F-16's approaching Iraq and there is a call to the White House [from Netanyahu] that says "We're going in, we're at war with Iran"? What does the President of the United States do? He has little influence over Bibi Netanyahu. ... We can't stop him. And he knows it. |
It's a pretty frightening scenario, made infinitely more so by the fact that top Israelis (who have heard Netanyahu's thinking from Netanyahu himself) also see the future the same way. Those Israelis deserve a world of credit for sounding the warning bell loudly enough that we would hear it and do something about it - although it's impossible to know if the people who matter are paying attention.
Actually, only one person matters: the US president. If Israel bombed Iran tomorrow, Congress would forget all about their partisan differences and run, not walk, to the House and Senate floors to endorse the attack and call for unstinting support for Israel. That is what Congress always does, and will always do so long as the lobby (and the donors it directs) are the key players in making our Middle East policies.
And who knows what Obama would do? So far, he has not exactly distinguished himself when it comes to standing up to Netanyahu.
But an Israeli attack on Iran would be different. It would endanger countless Americans (in the region and here at home, too). It would kill off any economic recovery by causing oil prices to skyrocket. It would engulf us in another Middle East war. And it would threaten the existence of the state of Israel.
This is something the president needs to focus on instead of being forced to nickel and dime with the likes of Representative Eric Cantor and Senator Mitch McConnell. How incredible that these two, and their right-wing allies, have our government tied in knots in their incessant effort to elevate themselves by destroying the President of the United States. It is sickening.
Libyan rebels step up military campaign
Opposition fighters say they have forced Gaddafi forces back from Brega, while southern fighters prepare for battle.
Libya's anti-government fighters are escalating an offensive against Muammar Gaddafi's forces, pushing forward in the east of the country and preparing a fresh attack from the south of the capital, Tripoli.
Opposition forces said they had chased the bulk of the Libyan leader's eastern army from the oil town of Brega and surrounded Gaddafi loyalists holed up among oil installations in the northwest of the town.
In the west, rebels said they were awaiting orders from Benghazi, the rebel stronghold in the east, to start a fresh offensive from the Nafusa Mountains southwest of the capital just days before the Muslim fasting month of Ramadan, when the hardships of desert fighting are likely to be intensified for those going without food and drink during the daytime.
Around Brega, the rebels' advance towards the town has been slowed by vast quantities of anti-personnel mines planted by retreating loyalists and the difficulties in attacking an estimated 200 Gaddafi troops fighting from positions near vital oil facilities.
On Tuesday, 24 rebel fighters died in one of their bloodiest day since the battle for Brega began almost a week ago, a rebel military source told the AFP news agency.
Many of the casualties came when troops closing on isolated Gaddafi forces were hit by a rocket attack.
Rebel military sources said some Gaddafi forces were launching rockets over Brega onto rebel positions from the town of Bishr, while most Gaddafi troops had retreated to Ras Lanuf, another oil town further west.
Libya's government has denied rebel claims that they had retaken Brega. The rebels said Gaddafi troops inside the town were largely conscripts and volunteers who were surrounded.
'Preparing for battle'
But across the Gulf of Sirte, near the rebel-held enclave of Misurata, the picture was reversed.
Rebels said seven of their fighters were killed and 13 wounded when they repulsed a fresh Gaddafi attack.
On the frontline of the western desert village Gwalish, rebels said they were ready to fight during Ramadan if necessary, even as summer temperatures reached 45 Celsius.
"We are preparing for the battle. We hope [it occurs], God willing, before Ramadan, or just after," Mokhtar Lakhdar, a rebel commander, said.
"If there is fighting during Ramadan, we will fight as usual," he said. "We will not stop until we have liberated Libya."
"During Ramadan, it will be harder but, God willing, we will not be weakened but rather be stronger," added another fighter, Shaban Aabor. "Ramadan is a good time to be a martyr."
The next rebel target is Asabah, 80km south of Tripoli and the last barrier between rebels and the garrison town of Gharyan.
Libyan opposition leaders met French President Nicolas Sarkozy on Wednesday to press for more support.
"France can help us get this help from friendly Arab countries," Souleiman Fortia, a representative of the National Transitional Council, told reporters after the meeting. "With a bit of help we can be in Tripoli soon."
French foreign minister Alain Juppe said earlier on Wednesday that Gaddafi could stay in Libya if he quits politics under a ceasefire deal.
But Abdelati al-Obeidi, Gaddafi's foreign minister, said after talks in Russia that the Libyan leader's "departure is not up for negotiation".
 |
| Libyan rebel fighters and medics carry the body of a member of forces loyal to the Libyan leader [Reuters] |
|
| Libyan rebel fighters and medics carry the body of a member of forces loyal to the Libyan leader [Reuters] |
Libya's anti-government fighters are escalating an offensive against Muammar Gaddafi's forces, pushing forward in the east of the country and preparing a fresh attack from the south of the capital, Tripoli.
Opposition forces said they had chased the bulk of the Libyan leader's eastern army from the oil town of Brega and surrounded Gaddafi loyalists holed up among oil installations in the northwest of the town.
In the west, rebels said they were awaiting orders from Benghazi, the rebel stronghold in the east, to start a fresh offensive from the Nafusa Mountains southwest of the capital just days before the Muslim fasting month of Ramadan, when the hardships of desert fighting are likely to be intensified for those going without food and drink during the daytime.
Around Brega, the rebels' advance towards the town has been slowed by vast quantities of anti-personnel mines planted by retreating loyalists and the difficulties in attacking an estimated 200 Gaddafi troops fighting from positions near vital oil facilities.
On Tuesday, 24 rebel fighters died in one of their bloodiest day since the battle for Brega began almost a week ago, a rebel military source told the AFP news agency.
Many of the casualties came when troops closing on isolated Gaddafi forces were hit by a rocket attack.
Rebel military sources said some Gaddafi forces were launching rockets over Brega onto rebel positions from the town of Bishr, while most Gaddafi troops had retreated to Ras Lanuf, another oil town further west.
Libya's government has denied rebel claims that they had retaken Brega. The rebels said Gaddafi troops inside the town were largely conscripts and volunteers who were surrounded.
'Preparing for battle'
But across the Gulf of Sirte, near the rebel-held enclave of Misurata, the picture was reversed.
Rebels said seven of their fighters were killed and 13 wounded when they repulsed a fresh Gaddafi attack.
On the frontline of the western desert village Gwalish, rebels said they were ready to fight during Ramadan if necessary, even as summer temperatures reached 45 Celsius.
"We are preparing for the battle. We hope [it occurs], God willing, before Ramadan, or just after," Mokhtar Lakhdar, a rebel commander, said.
"If there is fighting during Ramadan, we will fight as usual," he said. "We will not stop until we have liberated Libya."
"During Ramadan, it will be harder but, God willing, we will not be weakened but rather be stronger," added another fighter, Shaban Aabor. "Ramadan is a good time to be a martyr."
The next rebel target is Asabah, 80km south of Tripoli and the last barrier between rebels and the garrison town of Gharyan.
Libyan opposition leaders met French President Nicolas Sarkozy on Wednesday to press for more support.
"France can help us get this help from friendly Arab countries," Souleiman Fortia, a representative of the National Transitional Council, told reporters after the meeting. "With a bit of help we can be in Tripoli soon."
French foreign minister Alain Juppe said earlier on Wednesday that Gaddafi could stay in Libya if he quits politics under a ceasefire deal.
But Abdelati al-Obeidi, Gaddafi's foreign minister, said after talks in Russia that the Libyan leader's "departure is not up for negotiation".
Atlantis space shuttle ready for last landing
Astronauts on final manned NASA mission prepare to touch down at Kennedy Space Center in Florida.
Space shuttle Atlantis is set to touch down early on Thursday in Florida, bringing an end to NASA's 30-year shuttle programme.
Final inspections of the shuttle's heat shield, which protects the craft during its fiery entry into Earth's atmosphere, were completed on Wednesday and NASA said the shuttle was in good shape for landing.
The weather forecast was also "very favourable" at Kennedy Space Center, NASA said, with the shuttle expected to land at 5:56am local time (0956 GMT).
Atlantis, which has traveled over 200 million kilometres in its life-span, is scheduled to begin its deorbit burn at 4:49 am (0849 GMT) to re-enter the Earth's atmosphere.
The craft has been cleared for deorbit burn, during which the engines will fire for just over three minutes in order to slow the shuttle down.
If conditions do not allow for the first attempt, a second opportunity for deorbit would begin at 6:25 am (1025 GMT) with the landing at 7:32 am (1132 GMT).
The four-astronaut crew, who have spent 13 days in space, were awoken at 9:29 pm on Wednesday (0129 GMT Thursday) to the sound of "God Bless America", having left the International Space Station earlier in the day
On Wednesday, pilot Doug Hurley said they were anxious to celebrate the landing with the shuttle's on-the-ground crew.
"We're very excited about seeing those folks ... to share the memories of the mission with them and once again just convey how proud we are of them and what they've done over this 30-year programme," he said.
End of an era
Atlantis' landing will end an era of US dominance in human space exploration, leaving Russia as the sole taxi to the International Space Station until a replacement US capsule can be built by private industry.
Thursday's landing also comes 42 years after US astronaut Neil Armstrong became the first person to step foot on the moon in the Apollo 11 mission.
"Forty-two years ago today, Neil Armstrong walked on the moon and I consider myself fortunate that I was there to actually remember the event," Chris Ferguson, the Atlantis commander, said to mission control, recalling the images of July 20, 1969.
"It is kind of interesting to be here on the final night of the shuttle mission. We don't quite know what to think. We are just trying to take it all in."
Over the course of the programme, five NASA space shuttles - Atlantis, Challenger, Columbia, Discovery and Endeavour - have comprised a fleet designed as the world's first reusable space vehicles.
The first shuttle flight to space lifted off April 12, 1981.
Challenger and Columbia were destroyed in accidents that killed their crews, leaving only three in the space-flying fleet and Enterprise, a prototype that never flew in space.
The remaining quartet will become museum pieces in the coming months.
Critics have assailed the US space agency for lacking a focus with the space shuttle gone and no next-generation human spaceflight programme to replace it.
The astronaut corps now numbers 60, compared to the 128 employed in 2000, and thousands of people are being laid off from Kennedy Space Center.
But NASA chiefs say future missions to deep space should revive hope in the US programme.
"We have just not done a good job of telling our story. NASA is very busy," Charles Bolden, the space agency's administrator, said. "The president said to us, 2025 for an asteroid and 2030 to Mars. We have a lot of work to do ahead."
NASA flight director Tony Ceccacci said his team was just trying to keep emotions at bay and focus on getting the shuttle home safely.
"We have a motto in the mission control center that flight controllers don't cry, so we are going to make sure that we keep to that."
Space shuttle Atlantis is set to touch down early on Thursday in Florida, bringing an end to NASA's 30-year shuttle programme.
Final inspections of the shuttle's heat shield, which protects the craft during its fiery entry into Earth's atmosphere, were completed on Wednesday and NASA said the shuttle was in good shape for landing.
The weather forecast was also "very favourable" at Kennedy Space Center, NASA said, with the shuttle expected to land at 5:56am local time (0956 GMT).
Atlantis, which has traveled over 200 million kilometres in its life-span, is scheduled to begin its deorbit burn at 4:49 am (0849 GMT) to re-enter the Earth's atmosphere.
The craft has been cleared for deorbit burn, during which the engines will fire for just over three minutes in order to slow the shuttle down.
If conditions do not allow for the first attempt, a second opportunity for deorbit would begin at 6:25 am (1025 GMT) with the landing at 7:32 am (1132 GMT).
The four-astronaut crew, who have spent 13 days in space, were awoken at 9:29 pm on Wednesday (0129 GMT Thursday) to the sound of "God Bless America", having left the International Space Station earlier in the day
On Wednesday, pilot Doug Hurley said they were anxious to celebrate the landing with the shuttle's on-the-ground crew.
"We're very excited about seeing those folks ... to share the memories of the mission with them and once again just convey how proud we are of them and what they've done over this 30-year programme," he said.
End of an era
Atlantis' landing will end an era of US dominance in human space exploration, leaving Russia as the sole taxi to the International Space Station until a replacement US capsule can be built by private industry.
Thursday's landing also comes 42 years after US astronaut Neil Armstrong became the first person to step foot on the moon in the Apollo 11 mission.
"Forty-two years ago today, Neil Armstrong walked on the moon and I consider myself fortunate that I was there to actually remember the event," Chris Ferguson, the Atlantis commander, said to mission control, recalling the images of July 20, 1969.
"It is kind of interesting to be here on the final night of the shuttle mission. We don't quite know what to think. We are just trying to take it all in."
Over the course of the programme, five NASA space shuttles - Atlantis, Challenger, Columbia, Discovery and Endeavour - have comprised a fleet designed as the world's first reusable space vehicles.
The first shuttle flight to space lifted off April 12, 1981.
Challenger and Columbia were destroyed in accidents that killed their crews, leaving only three in the space-flying fleet and Enterprise, a prototype that never flew in space.
The remaining quartet will become museum pieces in the coming months.
Critics have assailed the US space agency for lacking a focus with the space shuttle gone and no next-generation human spaceflight programme to replace it.
The astronaut corps now numbers 60, compared to the 128 employed in 2000, and thousands of people are being laid off from Kennedy Space Center.
But NASA chiefs say future missions to deep space should revive hope in the US programme.
"We have just not done a good job of telling our story. NASA is very busy," Charles Bolden, the space agency's administrator, said. "The president said to us, 2025 for an asteroid and 2030 to Mars. We have a lot of work to do ahead."
NASA flight director Tony Ceccacci said his team was just trying to keep emotions at bay and focus on getting the shuttle home safely.
"We have a motto in the mission control center that flight controllers don't cry, so we are going to make sure that we keep to that."
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)