Minnesota : Zeynab Omar wins Young Pathfinder Award of 2012

Friday, January 6, 2012

From left, Julie Hawker, representing Lloyd Management, Wilburn Neuschwander-Frink and Zeynab Omar were announced as Pathfinder Award winners Thursday.

The Free Press, Mankato, MN

January 5, 2012

Pathfinder Awards announced

The Free Press

MANKATO — The Martin Luther King Jr. Commemorative Board of Mankato announced the winners this morning of the 2012 Pathfinder Awards.

 

Winner of the Pathfinder Award is Wilbur Neushwander-Frink, who has spent 17 years working with and advocating for the developmentally disabled.

 

Winner of the Young Pathfinder Award is Zeynab Omar, a senior at Mankato East High School who works with the elderly suffering from Alzheimer's disease and dementia.

 

Winner of the Business Pathfinder Award is Lloyd Management Inc., a company that established a transition program for immigrants to help them adjust to life in a new country.

The awards will be presented to the recipients at the 28th annual Martin Luther King Jr. Community Celebration Jan. 16 at Minnesota State University.

Minneapolis Bank Resumes Transfers to Somalia

Sunday, January 8, 2012

Tawakal Money Express allows $500 in emergencies

MINNEAPOLIS - After protests by Twin Cities Somalis, one Minneapolis has decided it will resume allowing money transfers to the African country.

Tawakal Money Express says it will allow people to send money to Somalia for family emergencies, but has limited the amount to $500.

Protestors argued they need the transfers to help their family members recover from a severe drought and famine that hit Somalia last year.

Tawakal was one of several Twin Cities banks that stopped offering the service last week, fearing some of the money was being transferred to terrorist organizations.

Somali Nationalism: A Dead Concept?

Monday, January 9, 2012

Grand Mosque in Garadag district, Somaliland

What are the prospects for urgently needed national unity?
ARTICLE  BY PETER LOCKWOOD

 

 
Nairobi , Kenya: Since 1991, Somalia has undergone a tumultuous process of geopolitical reconfiguration. Some have termed this the ‘balkanisation’ of Somalia, where regions and states have sought varying degrees of autonomy from central government in Mogadishu. After Somaliland’s unilateral declaration of independence in 1991, other regions followed, such as the Puntland State of Somalia, which declared its autonomy as part of a federal State of Somalia in 1998.

At first glance, these moves have been vindicated. By fencing themselves off from the wider environment of political instability, Somaliland and Puntland have been able to create internal environments of relative peace. Without the spectre of Al Shabaab that the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) has had to compete with in South and Central Somalia, the Somaliland authorities have successfully expanded their capacity, and developed their economy, largely due to the healthy state of livestock exports from the northern port of Berbera. Next door, in Puntland, post-conflict reconstruction has likewise benefited from internal stability, and the more effective state apparatus which that has allowed.

Social mechanisms for ending conflicts within these societies have remained strong. Elders, religious leaders and politicians notably came together towards the end of last year to end conflict in Galkacyo, Puntland. That is not to say that the regions are without serious problems. As security concerns related to armed conflict fade away, other more social and cultural concerns have arisen in these areas, such as gender inequalities, urban poverty, and the plight of the large numbers of internally displaced persons who have fled the south.

However, as Puntland and Somaliland move towards reconstruction and development, South and Central Somalia has been left behind. Caught in the mire of insurgency, famine, and now foreign invasion, many Somalis in the region can only dream of the peace that their northern brothers and sisters have been able to secure.

Echoes of nationalism

For many Somalis, the concept of reunification is out of the question. The inter-clan warfare that precipitated the fall of the Siyad Barre regime, and continued long afterwards, remains embedded in the country’s social memory.

Despite this, for some intellectuals national identity, and some kind of nation-state remain the most logical and practical ways for the betterment of the Somali people. In his 2010 book Understanding the Somalia Conflagration, Afyare Abdi Elmi argued for a national federal system, but which would be flexible enough to accommodate regional autonomy and clan differences.

Such a prospect looks extremely unlikely when one looks at the current situation, and yet more than ever Somalia requires the strength that a national identity, and national political structures could bring. In his book, Abdi Elmi continues to advocate for the unity of Somalia, and its need to defend itself against neighboring powers such as Ethiopia and Kenya.

There is no doubt that the state has failed in Somalia, and that the Somali people are divided by clan, and ethnic identity. However, these divisions see some Somalis prosper, whilst others must live under foreign occupation.

The Kenyan invasion of 2011 saw the international media abound with talk of the creation of a buffer zone, a move that would further divide Somalia, and render it a pawn of other regional and international powers. A fundamental way of reversing this process would be the realisation that Somalis from all regions and states have a common identity and a related duty to protect one another. The politicisation of clan identity at national level has thus far hindered this, but a change needs to occur. Northern regions cannot sit by whilst the South is torn up according to the interests of other regional powers.

The need for national identity, national politics

Islam will always provide a unifying identity for Somalis, and it is in this spirit that a national identity ought to be resurrected. Prior to the collapse of the Islamic Courts Union (ICU) government in 2006, its chairman, Sheikh Hassan Dahir Aweys, stated that: "We will leave no stone unturned to integrate our Somali brothers in Kenya and Ethiopia and restore their freedom to live with their ancestors in Somalia."

When faced with foreign occupation, and incursion, the need for Somalis from the north to assist their brothers and sisters in the south has become more important than ever. Whilst clan identity remains potent, Islam can provide the blueprint for a wider concept of Somali identity that can include the protection of all Somalis, especially those living in the South.  

Somaliland Police arrest Television Journalist in the town of Boorama

Monday, January 9, 2012

January 9, 2012/African Press Organization (APO)/ -- The National Union of Somali Journalists (NUSOJ) condemns the arrest of the Television journalist by the Somaliland Police in the town of Boorama on Sunday around 11:30 local time.

Journalist Yuusuf Ali better known as Indho-Qurux, who is the correspondent of the Royal Television in the town Boorama, was arrested on Sunday without warrant by Somaliland police in Boorama, according to local journalists.

 

The Arrest of the journalist has been confirmed by a colleague journalist, Mohamed Abdi Boosh, who also reports for the for the Royal Television by phone from Hargeysa.

 

"It is really disappointing, Yusuf Ali was arrested without a warrant and he staying in custody tonight." Journalist Mohamed Abdi Boosh told NUSOJ by phone from Hargeysa.

It is not yet clear the reasons behind his arrest. However, journalists believe Ali's arrest is related to an article he wrote about alleged corruption on regional projects in Awdal region.

"The Arrest of is an absolute voilation and we condemn it in the strongest terms possible." Mohamed Ibrahim, NUSOJ Secretary General said, "We call for the Somaliland authorities to immediately release the journalist and respect the freedom of the press."

 

Secretary General of Somaliland Journalists Association (SOLJA), Mohamed Rashiid also condemned the arrest of the journalist and demanded from Somaliland authorities to release the journalist from custody without condition.

 

Journalists in Somaliland have been subject to police brutalities - arrests, intimidations and harassment, among others.

Rwanda: Proposed media law fails to safeguard free press

A revised media law promised by the Rwandan government prior to and during its Universal Periodic Review at the UN Human Rights Council in 2011 fails to safeguard the right to freedom of expression and a free media.[1] ARTICLE 19 welcomes several improvements in the draft, but calls on the government to bring the law into full compliance with international legal standards on the right to freedom of expression.
The State retains its control over the media in the draft Law by determining rules for its operation and defining journalists’ professional standards. Media freedoms and the right to freedom of expression are not safeguarded and can be restricted in violation of international law due to overbroad definitions and the creation of vaguely defined prohibitions. The Minister in charge of information and communication technologies (ICT) is given unlimited powers to determine the requirements for establishing media outlets and conditions for accepting foreign audio-visual media to operate in Rwanda. ARTICLE 19 is also concerned that the proposed amendments leave untouched problematic provisions in the current Media Law that are not in compliance with international standards.
The draft Law amending the 2009 Media Law of Rwanda includes nine articles covering legal definitions, the right to exercise the profession of a journalist, the right to seek redress, requirements for launching an audio or audiovisual media outlet, licensing for foreign audio visual media organs to operate in Rwanda and penalties for crimes committed through the media. The Media Law is a comprehensive legal act containing ninety-nine provisions which determine “the responsibilities, the structure and functioning of the media.” It regulates the establishment and functioning of media outlets, including Internet publications. In addition, it regulates the status of journalists, outlines press offenses, and describes the liability regime for media and journalists and the rights to correction, reply and refutation.

Positive developments

The draft Law introduces additional definitions to explain the regime established by the Media Law. Another positive feature is the repeal of some problematic definitions concerning the right to reply, the right to rectification, and the right to correction as these are not in compliance with international standards and unnecessarily restrict the right to freedom of expression.[2] ARTICLE 19 considers the following changes to be positive from a freedom of expression point of view:

• Removal of the requirement that journalists hold particular academic qualifications as this unnecessarily restricts access to the profession[3]
• Removal of excessively bureaucratic requirements concerning press cards. These may be used as mechanisms through which to control who operates as a journalist[4]
• Lifting of a number of restrictions on journalists, including the prohibition from “the using of unlawful methods to obtain or to disseminate information”, “neglecting essential information”, “distorting ideas contained in an information or a text”, which are unclear and can be used by the authorities to harass journalists [5]
• Repeal of the grounds on which the authorities can refuse to provide information as these are not in compliance with international standards[6]
• Lifting of the requirement for photojournalists to seek authorization by the media authorities to perform their profession[7]
• Liberalisation of the system of sanctions for the media by repealing the provisions on warning or suspension of a press publication[8] and penalties for irregular press publications[9]
• Repeal of sanctions of “suspension” and “closure of a publication”, both of which are disproportionate restrictions on the right to freedom of expression[10]. There are always less intrusive forms of sanctions which may be used to ensure the media comply with the Media Law and do not violate the rights of others, for example fines[11].

Continuing problems with the draft Law

At the same time ARTICLE 19 is concerned that the following aspects of the draft Law do not comply with international standards on freedom of expression and information. Firstly, there are a number of problems in respect of the definitions advanced by the Draft Law:

• The definition of “journalist” is too broad in its scope and covers persons who are not professionally engaged in journalism (such as bloggers and social media users) into the existing media law regime: According to the definition in Article 1 of the draft Law, any person involved in the collection, processing and dissemination of information can be regarded as a journalist. It means that persons such as university researchers, bloggers and social media users, for example, would fall under this broad definition and hence are subject to legal responsibility under the Media Law. It is inappropriate and unnecessary for a media law to regulate non-journalistic activities.

• The definition of “news item” is overbroad and may be used to hold journalists liable for any information reported by them: The definition “news item” in Article 1 essentially includes any information published or broadcast by the media. The broad definition is dangerous from a freedom of expression point of view since Article 88 of the Media Law provides for criminal responsibility of authors and presenters for offences committed through news items. The broad definition of “news items” means that journalists can be held responsible for any information reported or distributed by them. This violates international standards, which provide individuals with protection for justified opinions (value judgements) and protect journalists from liability for reporting the statements of third parties. ARTICLE 19 is concerned that the unlimited responsibility of authors and presenters will have a chilling effect on free news reporting.^[12]

• The definition of “defamation” is overbroad and may be used to impose liability for the expression of opinions and to restrict in violation of international law certain forms of expression such as satirical publications or other forms of expression which by their nature are exaggerations, and parodies: Article 1 of the draft Law introduces a definition of defamation as “any act of using words, images or pictures published that are not accurate or true with the intention to offend the honour or estimation of the person or expose him/her to public contempt”. This definition can be used to restrict satirical publications or caricatures, which by their nature are exaggerations and parodies. Moreover, ARTICLE 19 is concerned that the definition allows for the imposition of liability for the expression of opinions, rather than for false statements of fact. We recall that international standards require a balance to be struck between the right to freedom of expression on the one hand, and the right of individuals to protect their reputations on the other. However, defamation provisions should not be used to restrict debate on matters in the public interest, particularly as they relate to the conduct of public officials or limit the use of different forms of expression, including those that are satirical.

In addition to the overbroad definitions outlined above, there are a number of substantive amendments made by the draft Law that are also problematic from a freedom of expression perspective:

• The Minister in charge of ICT has unlimited powers to determine the requirements for establishing media outlets and conditions for accepting a foreign audio-visual media to operate in Rwanda: Article 4 of the draft Law gives powers to the Minister in charge of ICT to determine the requirements for establishing a local or foreign audio or audiovisual media outlets operating in Rwanda. However, no regulatory framework places any limitations on the exercise of this power, leaving all decisions to the discretion of the Minister. The Draft Law provides no safeguards against unnecessary restrictions on media freedom or against the abuse of powers by the Minister. We note that the constitutional principles of separation of powers and protection of human rights require that Parliament as opposed to the Executive legislate on matters concerning human rights including the right to freedom of expression. Furthermore, when regulatory powers are delegated to the executive bodies the legislation should contain safeguards against misuse or abuse of powers by that executive body. These safeguards include guidance for the exercise of the regulatory powers and requirements to engage in consultations with affected stakeholders. There must also be judicial oversight of any executive regulation of the media, to ensure that the executive body is held to account for the misuse or abuse of their powers.^[13]

• Introduction of new offences for example “publication of false information, intended to undermine the morale of Rwanda Defense Forces and the National Police and to endanger national security” or “inciting the army or the national police to insubordination” or “glorification or promotion of massacre, looting, arson, theft, rape, terrorism or treason.” ARTICLE 19 considers that the actus reus (the guilty acts) of these crimes are broadly defined and illegitimate restrictions on freedom of expression.^[14] Moreover, ARTICLE 19 notes that the draft penal Code covers these offences.

Finally ARTICLE 19 is concerned that the proposed amendments leave untouched other problematic provisions in the current Media Law that are not in compliance with international standards, including:

• The determination by the state rather than by media professionals of media professional standards^[15]
• The test of legality of the restriction on the right to freedom of expression set out in Article 17 of the Media Law does not include a requirement to determine the necessity of the restrictions^[16]
• The confidentiality of journalists’ sources is not effectively protected. Courts are able to require journalists to reveal their sources in relation to any legal proceedings, rather than only in the most serious of criminal cases. In contravention of international standards, the Media Law does not provide that information disclosing the identity of a journalist’s source should only be ordered by a court where there is no other reasonable alternative means available for obtaining that information^[17]
• The licensing by the Media High Council of all media rather than limiting licensing to broadcast media only. Licensing of the broadcast media is justified due to demand for broadcast frequencies exceeding the limited number that are available at any one time. However, there is no equivalent technical constraint that justifies imposing a licensing requirement on the print media, or controlling the print media through such a licensing regime^[18]
• The vague powers of the Minister in charge of information to “determine the capital of media outlets”^[19]
• The requirement for authorization by the Media High Council for Rwandan journalists to become correspondents of foreign media outlets^[20]
• The Media High Council is not independent from government influence because the Minister in charge of information can reverse its decisions^[21]
• The registration regime for the copyright in press publications is not necessary, as copyright under international law does not require registration^[22]
• The unclear requirement for owners of internet cafes to screen and block pornographic websites^[23]
• The excessive fines^[24]
• There is also a lack of clarity regarding the enforcement of the Media Law, in particular it is unclear which bodies have the power to determine press offenses and what procedures and procedural safeguards are in effect for the determination of liability and sanctions for those offenses.

Changes needed

ARTICLE 19 calls on the Government of Rwanda and all stakeholders to work to incorporate the following recommendations to bring the Media Law into compliance with international standards on freedom of expression and information:

1. ARTICLE 19 recommends that the proposed definition of journalist be amended by placing the focus on the nature of the information and specifying that a journalist is a person engaged in information via means of mass communication
2. There is no need for a definition of a news item. Instead, Article 88 of the current Media Law which includes the expression “news item” should be modified to ensure that journalists and media are not responsible for opinion founded on facts and made in good faith and that they are protected against liability for statements of others
3. The definition of defamation should be revised so as to apply to any intentional false statement of fact, either written or spoken, that harms a person's reputation
4. Articles 12, 17, 20, 24, 25, 26, 38, 57 and 78 of the Media Law should be revised and brought in compliance with international law and media standards.

For more information 

Please contact Stephanie Muchai, Legal Officer - ARTICLE 19 Eastern Africa, muchai@article19.org or call +254 727 862 230.

---

[1] Report of the Working Group, paras. 79.12-15

[2] See Article 1 of the draft Law.

[3] See Article 1 of the draft Law.

[4] See Articles 5, 6, 9, and 11 of the draft Law.

[5] See Article 13 of the draft Law.

[6] See Article 14 of the draft Law.

[7] See Article 50 of the draft Law.

[8] See Article 75 of the draft Law.

[9] See Article 76 of the draft Law.

[10] See Article 84 of the draft Law.

[11] See Article 84 of the draft Law.

[12] ARTICLE 19 recalls that international courts make a distinction between opinions (value judgments) and statements of facts. For example, the European Court of Human Rights has stated that freedom of opinion is a fundamental part of the right to freedom of expression and that in contrast to statements of facts, individuals should not be expected to prove the truthfulness of opinions. The European Court of Human Rights has held that the right to freedom of expression protects the right of everyone to express an opinion as long as it is based on facts and was made in good faith. See the case of Lingens v. Austria, Judgement of 8 July 1986, Application no. 9815/82, para. 46.

[13] For example, the Delegated Powers Scrutiny Committee of the British parliament keeps under constant review the extent to which legislative powers are delegated by Parliament to government ministers.

[14] Article 6 of the draft Law. ARTICLE 19 has already expressed concerns that journalists and the media in Rwanda are held responsible for press offenses in violation of international law. See ARTICLE 19’s submission to the Supreme Court of Rwanda in the case against two journalists of Umurabyo newspaper who were sentenced by the High Court in Kigali to 17-year and 7-year jail terms on 4 February 2011 over articles critical to the Rwandan authorities. The decision demonstrated that judges don’t know how to strike the right balance between the right to freedom of expression and other rights and legitimate interest. ARTICLE 19 is of the opinion that one of the weaknesses of the Media Law of Rwanda is how to seek liability of journalists and impose sanctions for press offenses.

[15] For example, professional standards are established in Article 12 of the Media law imposing obligations on journalists to publish verified information, and give the floor to all parties.

[16] Article 19 (3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) sets out the test for assessing the legitimacy of restrictions on freedom of expression.  It states that these restrictions shall be only as are provided by law and are necessary:

[1] For the respect of the rights and reputation of others;

[2] For the protection of national security or of public order, public health or public morals

There exists a three part test to determine the legitimacy of limitations to freedom of expression.  Firstly the interference to the right must be provided for in the law, secondly it must protect or promote an aim that is deemed to be a legitimate aim in international law and thirdly, the restriction must be necessary for the protection of promotion of that legitimate aim.

[17] Article 20 of the Media Law.

[18] See Article 24 of the Media Law.

[19] See Article 24 of the Media Law.

[20] See Article 25 of the Media Law.

[21] See Article 26 of the Media Law.

[22] See Article 38 of the Media Law.

[23] See Article 57 of the Media Law.

[24] For example, Article 78 of the Media Law prescribes a fine for up to $8,400 for any act of interference with privacy.

Wariye Galabta lagu Xiray Magaalada Laascaanood

Wararka naga soo gaaraya magaalada Laascaanood ayaa sheegaya in ciidamada maamulka taabacsan Somaliland ee ku sugan magaalada ay xabsiga u taxaabeen wariye ka tirsan telefishanka Universal.

Wariyaha la xiray ayaa lagu magacaabaa Cabdiqani Xasan Faarax “Gadari” oo ahaa wariyihii Universal ee Laascaanood. Waxaana lala xiray illaa afar dhalinyaro reer Laascaanood ah oo xilligaasi ay wada joogeen.

Sida wararku sheegayaan ciidamo daacad u ah gudoomiyaha gobolka Sool ee maamulka Somaliland ayaa wariyaha iyo afarta dhalinyarada ah ka qabtay xafiiska Universal ee magaalada Laascaanood xilli ay dhalinyaradaasi telefishankau gudbinayeen hambalyo ay u diri lahaayeen shirka “Khaatumo 2″ ee ka socda magaalada Taleex kaasoo Somaliland ay diidan tahay.

Mid ka mid ah wariyaasha ku suganLaascaanood ayaa sheegay in uu jiray amar uu dhowaan soo saaray wasiirka warfaafinta Somaliland Axmed Cabdi Xaabsade kaasoo ahaa in aan warbaahinta laga siideyn karin taageerada shirka “Khaatumo 2″.

Wariye Gadari ayaa la sheegayaa in illaa haatan uu ku xiran saldhiga dhexe ee magaalada Laascaanood. Mana jiraan cid ka tirsan maamulka Somaliland oo ka hadashay xarigan.

Xarigan ayaa noqonaya kii labaad oo wariyaal loogu geysto Laascaanood isla toddobaad gudahiis iyadoo usbuucii hore sidoo kale ciidamada Somaliland ay xireen labo wariye oo ka tirsan telefishanada Horncable iyo Universal.

SHIRKADA SOMCABLE OO BARYAHAN WADA XADHIGA CABLE-KA SIDII AY U SOO GAADHSIIN LAHAYD S/LAND

 Mudo ku dhaw bil iyo dhawr cisho ayaa ka soo wareegtey inta ay shirkada Somcable ka wado shaqada ay ku soo gaadhsiineyso xadhiga Cable-ka kaasi oo marka uu dhamaado is gaadhsiin fiican siin doona dadka reer S/land iyo wadamada dariska la ahba.

Waxaanu xadhigaasi marayaa hada sida ay sheegayaan wararka aanu meeshaas ka helayno halka ama dooxa lagu magacaao Bariisle oo u dhaw magaalada Aysho cado waxaana ka shaqeeya shaqaale fara badan

Wararka aan maanta oo jimce ah halkaasi ka helnay waxaan ay sheegayaan in uu khilaaf dhax maray dadka ka shaqeynaya iyo shirkada kuwaas o shardi ka dhigay in meesha uu marayo dadka degan ay ka shaqeeyaan qodista meelaha xadhigu marayo waxaanay arintaasi keenatay in ku dhawaad 26 qof ay ku dhaawacmaan ama ay nabaro ka soo gaadhaan isku dhacyadaas sida uu u sheegay shabakada wararka ee SNN wariye ku sugan halkaas oo balan qaaday warka oo fiidow ah in uu dhawaan soo diri doono.

Wax uu intaas ku darey in xildhibaan Cabdinaasir Jaamac Xoosh oo ka mid ah golaha deegaan ee degmada Saylac uu dhacdaas aad u canbaareeyey maanta.

Qalabka ay shirkadu u adeegasado shaqad waxaa ka mid ah sida wararku sheegayaan cagafyo iyo gacnta dad guuli ah waxaa la filayaa xadhigan oo dhulka xeebta agdeeda la soo marin doono dhinaca barina ama xaga Hargaysa uu magaalada Boorama uga iman doono.

Salalnews desk
Boorama

Saylac: Hawshii Shaqo Ee Shirkada Somcable Oo Mar Labaad Hakad Gashay

Saylac: Hawshii Shaqo Ee Shirkada Somcable Oo Mar Labaad Hakad Gashay

Puntland and Somaliland could hold a huis clos in the US

The Presidents of Somaliland and Puntland, two unilaterally declared independent administrations in the north of Somalia that are locked in a border dispute, could meet in Washington at the end of January. 

Source: The Indian Ocean Newsletter - Breaking News - January 5, 2012

WASHINGTON | US: Iran has not yet decided to build nuclear bomb | The Herald - Rock Hill, SC

By DOUGLAS BIRCH - Associated Press

WASHINGTON --

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta says Iran is laying the groundwork for making nuclear weapons someday, but is not yet building a bomb and called for continued diplomatic and economic pressure to persuade Tehran not to take that step.

As he has previously, Panetta cautioned against a unilateral strike by Israel against Iran's nuclear facilities, saying the action could trigger Iranian retaliation against U.S. forces in the region.

"We have common cause here" with Israel, he said. "And the better approach is for us to work together."

Panetta's remarks on CBS' Face the Nation, which were taped Friday and aired Sunday, reflect the long-held view of the Obama administration that Iran is not yet committed to building a nuclear arsenal, only to creating the industrial and scientific capacity to allow one if its leaders to decide to take that final step.

The comments suggest the White House's assessment of Iran's nuclear strategy has not changed in recent months, despite warnings from advocates of military action that time is running out to prevent Tehran from becoming a nuclear-armed state.

Iran says its nuclear program is only for energy and medical research, and refuses to halt uranium enrichment

Several Republican candidates have called for a tougher line against Iran, saying they believe it is committed to building the bomb. "If we re-elect Barack Obama, Iran will have a nuclear weapon," said Mitt Romney. "And if you elect Mitt Romney, Iran will not have a nuclear weapon."

Rick Santorum has said that the U.S. should plan a military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities and "say to them that if you do not open up those facilities and close them down, we will close them down for you."

Iran has opened two dozen of its facilities to international inspectors, but has refused in defiance of the U.N. Security Council to suspend its uranium enrichment.

A leading hardline Iranian newspaper reported Sunday that Iran has begun uranium enrichment at a new underground site well protected from possible airstrikes.

Kayhan daily, which is close to Iran's ruling clerics, said scientists have begun injecting uranium gas into sophisticated centrifuges at the Fordo facility near the holy city of Qom.

In a talk at a Brookings Institution forum in December, Panetta said an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities would "at best" delay Iran's nuclear program by one or two years. Among the unintended consequences, he said, would be an increase in international support for Iran and the likelihood of Iranian retaliation against U.S. forces and bases in the Mideast.

Panetta did not discuss the issue directly on Sunday's "Face the Nation." But Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey, appearing with the defense secretary, said that he wanted the Iranians to believe that a U.S. military strike could wipe out their nuclear program.

"I absolutely want them to believe that's the case," he said.

Panetta did not rule out launching a pre-emptive strike.

"But the responsible thing to do right now is to keep putting diplomatic and economic pressure on them to force them to do the right thing," he said. "And to make sure that they do not make the decision to proceed with the development of a nuclear weapon."

Panetta said if Iran started developing a weapon, the U.S. would act. "I think they need to know that - that if they take that step - that they're going to get stopped."

Dempsey also said that Iran has the military power to block the Strait of Hormuz "for a period of time" if it decides to do so, but that the U.S. would take action to reopen waterway. "We can defeat that," he said.

Panetta said closing the strait would draw a U.S. military response. "We made very clear that the United States will not tolerate the blocking of the Strait of Hormuz," he said. "That's another red line for us and ... we will respond to them."

A number of experts say Iran is unlikely to close the strait, through which Gulf oil flows, because the action could hurt Iran as much as the West.

But a second Iranian newspaper, the Khorasan daily, on Sunday quoted a senior commander of the powerful Revolutionary Guard force as saying Tehran's leadership has decided to order the closure of the strategic oil route if the country's petroleum exports are blocked.

Iranian politicians have issued similar threats in the past, but this is the strongest statement yet by a top commander in the security establishment.

Associated Press writer Ali Akbar Dareini in Tehran, Iran, contributed to this report.

Read more here: http://www.heraldonline.com/2012/01/08/3645861/us-iran-has-not-yet-decided-to.html#storylink=cpy