Pakistan redeploying troops to Indian border

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan – Pakistan began moving thousands of troops from the Afghan border toward India, officials and witnesses said Friday, raising tensions between the nuclear-armed neighbors and possibly undermining the U.S.-backed campaign against al-Qaida and the Taliban.

The country also announced that it was canceling all military leave in the aftermath of last month's terror attack on the Indian financial capital of Mumbai.

India has blamed Pakistani militants for the terrifying three-day siege; Pakistan has demanded that India back this up with better evidence.

Pakistan's latest moves were seen as a warning that it would retaliate if India launches air or missile strikes against militant targets on Pakistani soil — rather than as an indication that a fourth war was imminent between the two countries.

The United States has been trying to ease the burgeoning crisis while also pressing Pakistan to crack down on militants Washington says were likely responsible for the Mumbai attack. The siege left 164 people dead after gunmen targeted 10 sites including two five-star hotels and a Jewish center.

On Friday, U.S. intelligence and military officials were trying to determine if the reported troop movements were true and — if so — what Pakistan's intent might be.

They cautioned that the reports may be exaggerated, aimed more at delivering a message than dispatching forces. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters.

Any significant troop movement would likely dash President-elect Barack Obama's strategy of having Pakistan concentrate on the threat emanating from the lawless tribal regions close to Afghanistan, where Osama bin Laden and other al-Qaida leaders are believed hiding out.

Obama said nothing publicly about the Pakistan situation Friday.

"This is a serious blow to the war on terror in the sense that the whole focus is now shifting toward the eastern border," said Talat Masood, a former general and military analyst. "It will give more leeway to the militants and increased space to operate."

Two Pakistani intelligence officials said Friday that elements of the army's 14th Infantry Division were being redeployed from the militant hotspot of Waziristan to the towns of Kasur and Sialkot, close to the Indian border.

The military began the troop movement Thursday and plans to shift a total of 20,000 soldiers — about one-fifth of the deployment in the tribal areas, they said without providing a timeframe.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the situation.

An Associated Press reporter in the Dera Ismail Khan district and a witness thirty miles away in Bhakkar, a district bordering Waziristan, saw long lines of military vehicles carrying hundreds of soldiers and equipment away from the Afghan border toward India.

"It was a big, big convoy," said Mushtaq Bokhari, a resident of Bhakkar district in Punjab province close to the border with Pakistan's North West Frontier Province. "It took about three hours to pass through our city."

However, a senior Pakistani security official denied that the troops were being deployed to the Indian border.

He said a "limited number" of soldiers were being shifted from areas "where they were not engaged in any operations on the western border or from areas which were snowbound."

He declined further comment and asked that his name not be used, also citing the sensitivity of the situation.

Pakistan and India have fought three wars since their independence from Britain in 1947, two over Kashmir, a majority Muslim region in the Himalayas claimed by both countries.

They came close to a fourth after suspected Pakistani militants attacked India's parliament in 2001. Both countries deployed hundreds of thousands of troops to the disputed Kashmir region, but tensions cooled after intensive U.S. diplomacy.

India and Pakistan have said they want to avoid military conflict over the Mumbai attacks, and most analysts say war is unlikely, not least because both sides have too much to lose if conflict breaks out.

But India — which is under domestic pressure to respond forcefully — has not ruled out the use of force. And Pakistan has promised to respond aggressively to any strike on its soil.

Even as reports emerged Friday about a major redeployment, Pakistani Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani and other top government officials Friday sought to reduce tensions.

"We will not take any action on our own," Gilani told reporters. "There will be no aggression from our side."

Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee accused Pakistan of trying to divert attention away from what many analysts say is a halfhearted attempt to rein in homegrown terror groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba, which India accuses of masterminding the Mumbai attacks.

"They should concentrate on the real issue: how to fight against terrorists and how to fight against and bring to book the perpetrators of Bombay terrorist attack," he said.

Pakistan says it has arrested several senior Lashkar members and cracked down on a charity the U.S. and the U.N. say was a front for Lashkar.

U.S. and Indian officials say Pakistan's powerful intelligence agencies created Lashkar and other militant groups in the 1980s by to battle Indian-rule in Kashmir.

While they have been careful not to accuse Pakistani state agencies in the Mumbai attacks, there are doubts that the young civilian government of President Asif Ali Zardari is strong enough to persuade the security forces to move decisively against the militants.

Pakistan has promised to cooperate with India in any probe but says it needs to see evidence before it can investigate any further. Mukherjee said Friday that India had provided more than enough evidence about the militants, who infiltrated Mumbai by sea.

"We have indicated to them that there are ample evidences from the log book of the captured ship, from the information available from satellite telephones and various others that elements from Pakistan were responsible for this attack," Mukherjee told reporters.

Pakistan has deployed more than 100,000 of its 600,000-strong army in Waziristan and other northwestern regions to fight Islamic militants blamed for surging violence against Western troops in Afghanistan as well as suicide attacks in Pakistan.

Security officials have previously said the country would be forced to withdraw troops from the Afghan border if tensions with India — whose army is twice as large — escalated.

Many of the country's remaining troops are believed to be based close to the Indian border already, a legacy of the countries' history of conflict.

C. Uday Bhaskar, former director of India's Institute of Defense Studies and Analyses, said he saw the troop movement as "more to do with a signal to the Americans — don't push us too hard.

"I think there's posturing within Pakistan to say, 'No one can push us around, not the Americans, not the Indians,'" he said.

____

Associated Press reporters Sebastian Abbot, Asif Shahzad and Zarar Khan in Islamabad, Sam Dolnick in New Delhi and Lolita C. Baldor in Washington contributed to this report.

Kennedy says 9/11, Obama led her to public service

NEW YORK – Caroline Kennedy emerged from weeks of near-silence Friday about her bid for a Senate seat by saying that after a lifetime of closely guarded privacy, she felt compelled to answer the call to service issued by her father a generation ago.

She said two events shaped her decision to ask Gov. David Paterson 11 days ago to consider her for the position if Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is confirmed as secretary of state: the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and her work for Barack Obama's presidential campaign.

In her first sit-down interview since she emerged as a Senate hopeful, the 51-year-old daughter of President John F. Kennedy cited her father's legacy in explaining her decision to seek to serve alongside her uncle Massachusetts Sen. Edward Kennedy.

"Many people remember that spirit that President Kennedy summoned forth," she said. "Many people look to me as somebody who embodies that sense of possibility. I'm not saying that I am anything like him, I'm just saying there's a spirit that I think I've grown up with that is something that means a tremendous amount to me."

She also credited her mother, Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, with giving her the courage to seek the job.

"I think my mother ... made it clear that you have to live life by your own terms and you have to not worry about what other people think and you have to have the courage to do the unexpected," she said.

Since Kennedy expressed interest in the job, she has faced sometimes sharp criticism that she cut in line ahead of politicians with more experience and has acted as if she were entitled to it because of her political lineage. More than a half-dozen elected officials are vying for the seat, including New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo and several members of Congress.

Kennedy said that she had long been encouraged to seek public office and that Clinton's expected departure from the Senate offered the perfect opportunity to follow in the footsteps of her father, two uncles and cousins.

"Going into politics is something people have asked me about forever," a relaxed Kennedy said as she ate a grilled cheese and bacon sandwich and sipped coffee at a diner in Manhattan. "When this opportunity came along, which was sort of unexpected, I thought, `Well, maybe now. How about now?'"

She said she realizes she will have to prove herself and "work twice as hard as anybody else." She acknowledged, "I am an unconventional choice," but added: "We're starting to see there are many ways into public life and public service."

Since Kennedy's name first surfaced as a possible replacement for Clinton, her advisers have shielded her from the media, with the exception of a few brief interviews on a swing through upstate New York and a visit to Harlem with the Rev. Al Sharpton.

Some commentators likened her to Sarah Palin in the way her dealings with the media were being carefully managed.

She agreed to sit down for interviews Friday with The Associated Press and NY1 television.

Kennedy acknowledged that her recent time in the limelight — after a relatively private life as a wife, mother of three, best-selling author and fundraiser in New York City — had not gone entirely smoothly.

But she said she had turned down interview requests and tried not to appear to be campaigning for the job because she knew that the choice rested solely with the Democratic governor.

"I was trying to respect the process. It is not a campaign," she said. "It was misinterpreted. If I were to be selected, I understand public servants have to be accessible."

Asked about criticism from other politicians and members of the public that she seems to regard herself as entitled to the job as a member of America's most storied political dynasty, she said: "Everybody that knows me knows I haven't really lived that way. ... Nobody's entitled to anything, certainly not me."

Kennedy chuckled when she was asked if her brother, the late John F. Kennedy Jr., had ever suggested she run for public office some day. "He usually thought about himself," she said. "He would be laughing his head off at seeing what's going on right now."

She also was asked to explain why she failed to vote in a number of elections since registering in New York City in 1988, including in 1994 when Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan was up for re-election for the seat she hopes to take over.

"I was really surprised and dismayed by my voting record," she said. "I'm glad it's been brought to my attention."

Former New York Rep. Geraldine Ferraro, who urged Paterson last weekend to consider experienced members of Congress for the job, said she was glad to hear Kennedy was willing to "work twice as hard as others."

"I think it's great she understands she will have a tougher time," Ferraro said. "I don't know if she can work twice as hard because having been a member of Congress I know they work 24-7. They already work hard."

___

Associated Press reporter Michael Gormley contributed to this report from Albany.

Presidents Bush throwing shoes

A TV journalist Baghdad Iraq, Muntazhar Furthermore (29) threw a pair of Sounds in the direction of the U.S. President, George Bush in the event a press conference. This is an insult to Bush. Former Israeli PM also had thrown shoes and sandals.

"in the Arab culture is a symbol of insult," said Member of Commission I FPKS House, Al-Muzzammil Joseph in short message through to Google, Mon (15/12/2008).

Muzzammil add, this has been done during the Iraq memukuli statue of Saddam Hussein by shoes and sandals. Similar events have also overrides the former Prime Minister of Israel, Ariel Sharon, which also thrown shoes and sandals by Muslims will be when the time came to Masjidil Aqsa.

"Egypt, Laos, Out Damned Spot Taher, also dilempari shoes by the people of Egypt setiba from kunjungnnya to Tel Aviv," added the head of the Department of Polhankam DPP MCC this.

Muzzammil believes, Bush has become the main actors hatred and having people of the world, not only Irak.

Former vice-Chairman of the House of Representatives Commission III of this opinion, it is impossible not to adjudicate claims Bush as war criminals will be more appreciated. Although the law will prove to be complicated. "The problem is more political power in the world dealing with the super power the U.S.," said the Muzzammil.

Bank of America plans up to 35,000 job cuts

NEW YORK - Bank of America Corp. said Thursday it expects to cut 30,000 to 35,000 jobs over the next three years, as it faces a deteriorating economic environment and tries to absorb Merrill Lynch & Co.

The final number could be even higher, analysts say. Charlotte, North Carolina-based Bank of America said it hasn't yet completed its analysis for eliminating positions, and won't until early next year. The company and Merrill have about 308,000 employees in total, and the cuts will affect workers from both companies and all types of businesses.

Bank of America is considered one of the country's healthier banks, and its decision to slash so many jobs illustrates the breadth of the layoffs hitting the United States. The nation lost more than half a million jobs in November alone, and economists expect many more to come.

Bank of America's action is a particularly hard blow for Charlotte — which is also home to the beleaguered Wachovia Corp., a once strong bank that is now being acquired by Wells Fargo & Co. in what amounts to a fire sale. Just three months ago, when the Merrill Lynch deal was announced, Charlotte was dubbed Wall Street South; now, the banking center is being hit as hard as Wall Street and other towns across America, where people go to work in the morning unsure if they will still have a job that night.

Thursday's announcement of job cuts at Bank of America was hardly unexpected, considering the merger and the wave of job losses seen in the banking industry and in other sectors over the past few months. Bank of America and Merrill Lynch have already eliminated thousands of investment banking jobs over the past year, as have other banks, in an effort to lower costs as they face increasing defaults in mortgages, credit card debt and other loans.

With no end in sight yet to the economy's troubles, Bank of America might have to slash even more jobs as loan losses mount, said Alois Pirker, a senior analyst at Boston-based research firm Aite Group. If the company's earnings worsen from this year to next, "I think that might lead to more reductions."

Other big banks — which have all received loans from the government's bailout fund — have been cutting jobs as well.

New York-based Citigroup Inc. has been slashing jobs the most. By next year, Citigroup expects to have shrunk its work force by 75,000, or 20 percent, since its headcount peaked in late 2007.

JPMorgan Chase & Co. is shedding about 7,000 employees, or 10 percent, of its investment bank staff, and cutting 9,200 jobs at Washington Mutual Inc., the bank it acquired in September. Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley, meanwhile, are reducing their staffs by about 10 percent.

The massive layoffs have raised questions about executive pay: With so many people losing their jobs, should the companies' executives still receive lucrative packages? CEOs at Citigroup Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Bank of America Corp. have yet to reveal whether they will receive bonuses this year, but those at Merrill, Morgan Stanley and Goldman have announced that they will forgo them.

Some argue, though, that the shotgun deal between Bank of America and Merrill, valued at $50 billion when it was initially announced in September, may have saved jobs in the end. It was struck as the solvency of investment banks was in grave doubt, and kept Merrill from a complete meltdown like the one suffered by Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., which was forced to file for bankruptcy. Shareholders of both companies voted to approve the deal last week and it is expected to close by Jan. 1.

Bank of America shares fell $1.78, or 11 percent, to close at $14.91 on Thursday, while Merrill shares fell $1.43, or 10 percent, to $12.67.

In after-hours trading, Bank of America shares rose 12 cents to $15.03, and Merrill shares rose a penny to $12.68.