This report from the July 31 Weekly News Update on the Americas on changes in top State Department positions on Latin America indicates that the White House is preparing to escalate its regime change offensive against Cuba:

Osman Hussain, a Somali man believed to be one of the four suspects in the July 21 bombing attempts in London was arrested July 29 in Rome after police traced his cell phone calls across Europe after the attacks. The ANSA news agency said he was arrested at the apartment of his brother, who also was taken into custody. (AP, July 29) In custody, he allegedly told police that the second London bomb attack wasn't botched—it was merely "a demonstration" for a real attack to be carried out in another European capital. "We wanted to stage an attack, but only as a demonstration," several newspapers quoted Osman as telling interrogators. Il Messaggero newspaper quoted the police as saying that Osman could have been in Rome to set up a terrorist attack there. (Electric New Paper, Aug. 1) Six more people were arrested in two police raids south of London July 31. (SA News24, July 31)

As we recently noted, Paraguay is currently seeing an upsurge of peasant and popular unrest—just as the US has established a new military presence there (ostensibly aimed at chasing down Islamic militants who have supposedly established the country as a base of operations). This report from Weekly News Update on the Americas, July 24, gives a picture of what kinds of landed interests Paraguay's peasants are facing:

Pakistan's Tribal Areas along the Afghan border seem to be slipping into all-out war. On July 29, militants launched missiles at the Tochi Scouts Fort, one of the government's official paramilitary outposts in Miramshah, North Waziristan Agency. No injuries were reported, but some damage to the building. (Dawn, July 30) That same day, one was killed and four others arrested in a clash between security forces and gunmen near a madrassa outside Miran Shah in North Waziristan, where a large cache of explosives was reportedly discovered. (IRNA, July 31)

The regime of Islam Karimov in Uzbekistan, heretofore attempting to play both sides in the Great Game between Moscow and Washington, appears to have finally and decisively thrown in its lot with the former. From Pakistan's Daily Times, via AFP July 31:

US military evicted from Uzbek air base
WASHINGTON — Uzbekistan has formally evicted the US from a military base that has served as a hub for its combat operations in Afghanistan, The Washington Post reported on Saturday.

In an op-ed in the July 28 New York Times, "Oil and Blood," Bob Herbert insists on looking at the glaringly obvious elephant in the room that so many on all sides of the Iraq debate are blinding themselves to:

[T]he whole point of this war, it seems, was to establish a long-term military presence in Iraq to ensure U.S. domination of the Middle East and its precious oil reserves, which have been described, the author Daniel Yergin tells us, as "the greatest single prize in all history."

The Brownsville Herald reports that the US has temporarily closed its consulate in Nuevo Laraedo following a gunbattle the night of July 28 between drug traffickers armed with grenades, rocket launchers and heavy machine guns. US Ambassador Tony Garza said in a written statement that the consulate would suspend all operations except for emergency services for US citizens through at least Aug. 5. The closure comes two days after Garza announced that escalating violence has prompted the State Department to extend a travel advisory for the entire Mexican side of the border until further notice.

Its a little ironic. The Irish Republican Army has actually been portrayed since 9-11 as the "good terrorists," in contradistinction to Islamic extremists who supposedly have no "grievances" and with whom there can be no dialogue. Henry Kissinger wrote in a 2002 commentary:

European critics holding more traditional concepts have accused America of overreacting because terrorism is a phenomenon new primarily to Americans and that Europeans overcame terrorism in the 1970s and 1980s without undertaking global crusades. But the terrorism of two decades ago was of a different character. It was on the whole composed of nationals of the country where the terror took place (or, as in the case of the IRA in Britain, by a group with special national grievances of its own). Though some received foreign intelligence support, their bases were in the country where they operated. Their weapons of choice were mostly suitable for individual assaults. By contrast, Sept. 11 terrorists operate on a global basis, are motivated less by a specific grievance than by a generalized hatred and have access to weapons by which they can give effect to their strategy of killing thousands and ultimately far more if they acquire weapons of mass destruction.

So the IRA's decision (announced yesterday) to formally lay down arms after a century of armed struggle (or 36 years, if one starts counting from the emergence of the Provisional IRA) comes at a propitious time for the counter-terrorist establishment. The group has outlived its usefulness to the security wonks, who now have much bigger fish to fry. The IRA's announcement may have been a reaction to public outrage at the London bombings, which is a sign of political maturity; the security state, in turn, has exhibited no such capacity for self-criticism. Notes the Boston Globe today: "Human rights activists reacted with creeping concern that the same policies -- including shoot-to-kill orders for police and detentions without trial -- that they say undercut civil liberties for many Irish people during the IRA period have once again surfaced in the probe into the London bombings."