Month: June 2006

  • Safavian, Helping Someone Arrested, Today’s Blogs, Today’s Papers, Missing Soldiers

















    Safavian Is Found Guilty in Lobbyist Trial










    Doug Mills/The New York Times
    David Safavian, in his lawyer’s office on May 19, 2006.


    June 20, 2006


    Safavian Is Found Guilty in Lobbyist Trial


    By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS


    Filed at 10:30 a.m. ET


    WASHINGTON (AP) — A jury found former Bush administration official David Safavian guilty Tuesday of covering up his dealings with Republican influence-peddler Jack Abramoff.


    Safavian was convicted on four of five felony counts of lying and obstruction. He had resigned from his White House post last year as the federal government’s chief procurement officer.


    The trial consumed eight days of testimony about Safavian’s assistance to Abramoff regarding government-owned real estate and a weeklong golfing excursion the lobbyist organized to the famed St. Andrews golf course in Scotland and London. Safavian went on the trans-Atlantic trip while he was chief of staff at the General Services Administration, and other participants were Rep. Bob Ney, R-Ohio, two Ney aides and Christian Coalition founder Ralph Reed.


    The verdict came on the fifth day of jury deliberations.


    Safavian sat impassively as the judge read the verdict and showed no expression when the judge announced the guilty verdicts on each of four counts. Sentencing was scheduled for Oct. 12.


    Safavian was charged with two counts of obstructing justice during investigations into the Scotland trip by the GSA inspector general and the Senate Indian Affairs Committee. He also was charged with three counts of making false statements or concealing information from GSA ethics officials, a GSA inspector general investigator and a Senate investigator.


    The jury found Safavian guilty of obstructing the work of the GSA inspector general and of lying to a GSA ethics official. It also convicted him of lying to the GSA’s Office of Inspector General and of making a false statement to the Senate Indian Affairs Committee. He was acquitted of a charge of obstructing the committee’s investigation.


    This was the first trial to emerge from the scandal surrounding Abramoff, who is a former business partner of Safavian. Abramoff, who has pleaded guilty to federal crimes here and in Miami, would likely be a witness if the Justice Department assembles criminal cases against any members of Congress.


    The government made its case without ever putting Abramoff on the witness stand. It relied on the testimony of the officials Safavian was accused of deceiving.


    A key witness in the case was Neil Volz, a convicted partner of Abramoff’s and ex-chief of staff to Ney. Prosecutors introduced hundreds of e-mails exchanged among Safavian, Abramoff, Volz and others in 2002.


    The Justice Department made a case that Safavian provided Abramoff advice and some inside information about two government properties including the Old Post Office in downtown Washington.


    Prosecutors said Abramoff wanted to buy or lease part of the GSA’s White Oak property in the Maryland suburbs for use by a Jewish school he had established. They also said he wanted to give an Indian tribe client a leg up on obtaining the contract to redevelop the Old Post Office in as a luxury hotel, near two restaurants Abramoff owned.


    Volz testified the Abramoff team referred to Safavian as one of their ”champions” inside government, who could give them insider information they couldn’t get elsewhere. He said Safavian was the mastermind of some of the strategy for developing congressional pressure or action to sway GSA.


    Volz said they tried to keep this maneuvering secret.


    Prosecutors showed that Safavian’s advice began right after he went to work at GSA and was intensely pursued in the weeks before Safavian went on the weeklong golfing expedition to Scotland in August 2002. Abramoff had arranged the trip for members of Congress and invited Safavian to come along when one of them dropped out.


    Safavian took the stand for two days in his own defense. He acknowledged some misjudgments and forwarding Abramoff some insider information, such as the position of other government officials on the GSA properties, but attributed these errors to his inexperience.


    Basically he maintained he simply gave generally available information to an old friend who was inquiring about government property that the GSA had not even decided what to do with yet.


    He said he answered all investigators’ questions. Safavian said he didn’t volunteer information about his advice on the two properties. Safavian said he didn’t consider Abramoff was doing or seeking business with GSA because the agency wasn’t letting contracts at the time.


    Safavian claimed he thought he paid all of his costs with a $3,100 check to Abramoff on takeoff, though he acknowledged that trial testimony had shown him some elements were more expensive than he thought.


    Prosecutors said the trip of nine participants cost more than $130,000. They scoffed at the notion anyone could think $3,100 would cover his share of chartered jet travel, $400 and $500-a-night hotels, $400 rounds of golf and $100 rounds of drinks.


    GSA officials and a Senate investigator said Safavian never told them about the advice he was giving Abramoff on the two properties or details about the Scotland costs. They also said they would have wanted to hear that. The GSA officials said if they had known, they might have ruled differently on his request to go on the trip. The GSA Inspector General’s office closed an investigation of the trip without taking any action against Safavian in 2003. Safavian’s problems didn’t begin until 2004 when investigators began looking into Abramoff’s illegal conduct.




     







    How to Help a Friend Who Gets Arrested in the Middle of the Night



     



    DWI Stop

    Enlarge
    DWI Stop
    It is 2 AM and someone you love has just been arrested. You know you need legal help. You do not want your loved one to make a confession or be in a line-up or even get fingerprinted if it can be avoided. It is tough to know what to do or who to trust. Moreover, you do not know who will even answer the phone at that time of day. Here is what you need to know if this happens in the United States of America.

    Steps



    1. Find out where they are being held and by what police agency. Whether you get the call from a police officer or your loved one, make sure that this is the first thing you ask. If you can, tell your friend or family member that you are finding him a lawyer and not to answer any police questions until the lawyer arrives. Your friend MUST invoke his rights himself. If you tell the detective not to talk to your friend (or loved one) without an attorney, he’ll laugh at you. Only the arrested subject can invoke his rights.
    2. Ask what the charges are and what time the arrest was made. Do not let your loved one tell you what happened. The call is not privileged and it can, and probably will be, recorded by police for later use against your loved one. They should just tell you the actual charge. If they cannot tell you without explanation, tell them that it doesn’t matter, and continue to step three below. If the arrested is an adult, the police are not required to tell a friend or family member anything.
    3. Tell your loved one not to make any statement or take any test and tell them you are getting a lawyer and not to do or say anything until they hear from that lawyer. (In some states, you have a very limited time or no right at all to contact a lawyer regarding alcohol testing. Also, in many states, refusal to take an alcohol test is treated as an admission of guilt and carries the same penalty as a test failure. If you don’t know, ask the officer.)Only the arrested subject can invoke his rights; you can not do it for them.
    4. Select a criminal defense attorney. See the related wikiHow’s below for steps to take in finding one. Keep calling lawyers until you find one that either answers their phone or has an answering service that can reach them anytime, day or night.
    5. Tell the lawyer that your friend is arrested and give as much information as you can. Ask that they immediately call the stationhouse and stop your friend from being questioned. Many lawyers will do this for free, but expect to pay at least $150-350 for that call.
    6. Gather as much money as you can to both pay the lawyer in court and to post bail. It is more important to get a good lawyer into the case early than to immediately get your friend out of jail.




    Tips



    • Always keep about $500-$1000 available without having to go to the bank. Most minor crimes and traffic violations can be bailed out from the stationhouse through the use of a desk appearance ticket or a desk sergent’s bail.
    • Do not feel obligated to stay with the lawyer who helps you the first night. Selecting a lawyer for a case long-term should be done with the accused person’s participation. Tell the lawyer you found that you are using him for the purpose of securing your loved ones rights only for the night in question. Do not sign a long term retainer.
    • Any legal fee for standing in at arraignment should either be a flat fee or should be hourly. Again, most criminal defense attorneys will charge between $150-$350 per hour. It will cost more in many big cities or urban areas. For example, many well known NY lawyers charge upwards of $600 per hour.
    • At the arraignment (the formal reading of criminal charges, and entering your plea) you do not have to use the lawyer that helped you get your loved one . A free lawyer is often available. However, it is better to have your own lawyer at arraignment if you can.
    • If you run into trouble finding out where your friend is being held and by what police agency, get ahold of a bail bondsman (see link below, how to make bail) as they are experienced at this, and can sometimes locate your friend faster than you using the same resources.




    Warnings



    • Remember the best way to help your friend with the problems associated with being arrested is to avoid the arrest in the first place. Keep your friends out of fights, drink responsibly, drive responsibly, and help your friends do so also.
    • Police do not have to “give you your rights,” and their failure to do so does not invalidate an arrest. They only have to give you your rights if they (a) arrest you and (b) ask you questions about the crime. Hence, tell your friend who is under arrest to plead the fifth.
    • An oral statement is just as bad as a written statement. It is always best to say nothing.
    • Do not worry if you cannot find an attorney to represent your friend in court without being retained. Some courts will not let a non-retained lawyer stand in at arraignment. The court must provide an attorney at an arraignment if one is requested, or give the accused time to retain someone before he is arraigned.
    • There are times when the best thing you can do for your friend or loved one is to let them deal with the consequences of their actions on their own. Spending a night in jail can be a real wakeup call for someone who is in need of a wakeup call.





     







    Today’s Blogs


    Murtha vs. Rove
    By Darren Everson
    Posted Monday, June 19, 2006, at 6:01 PM ET


    Bloggers discuss John Murtha’s targeting of Karl Rove’s “big, fat backside.” They also react to North Korea’s missile test plans and a high school that anointed 41 valedictorians.


    Murtha vs. Rove: Stepping up the recent rhetoric regarding the Iraq war, Pennsylvania Rep. John Murtha ridiculed Karl Rove on Meet the Press Sunday. Rove gave a speech last week in which the president’s senior adviser criticized Murtha’s call for a quick withdrawal and rebuked the Democrats’ “old pattern of cutting and running.” In response, Murtha said, “You can’t sit there in the air-conditioned office and tell troops carrying 70 pounds on their backs, inside these armored vessels hit with IED’s every day, seeing their friends blown up-their buddies blown up — and he says stay the course? Easy to say that from Washington, D.C.”


    In Washington, the Iraq war debate has intensified in recent days as Republicans seek to capitalize on Abu Musab al-Zarqawi’s death and Democrats, on the defensive, propose a Senate resolution seeking a timetable for a phased withdrawal.


    Murtha’s latest rant may rally some on the left”If EVER there was someone deserving to be the Speaker of the House (it’s) Jack Murtha,” writes commenter Curlew on Daily Kosbut his reasoning is giving ammunition to others.


    “I don’t seem able to speak ‘Murtha,’ ” concludes Colorado blogger Jeff Goldstein at Protein Wisdom. “John Murtha has now made the transition from gutless Congressional peace activist to outright laughingstock,” writes Froggy at military blog Blackfive.


    Murtha critics are seizing on other exchanges in the Meet The Press interview, including when Tim Russert pointed out that, in 2004, Murtha cautioned against a premature withdrawal. Russert also asked where withdrawn American troops could redeploy and be close enough to aid the nascent Iraqi army. Among other places, Murtha mentioned Okinawa.


    “Okinawa?” conservative Ed Morrissey writes incredulously at Captain’s Quarters. “Okinawa is five time zones away — over 5,000 miles from Baghdad. … The question for Democrats is why they keep putting Murtha out as their defense expert when he can make statements like this with a straight face. It reveals the utter lack of military scholarship on their part when their two most hailed experts on military affairs are a man who cannot see why Okinawa might be a bad place for a staging ground for Southwest Asia, and a man who wants to turn over Iraqi sovereignty to Iran and Syria.”


    But on the Huffington Post, Rachel Sklar reviews Murtha’s performance and gives him two thumbs up: “I mean, did Murtha stick it to them or what? Boom! They have no plan. Boom! It’s lipservice from Washington. Boom! History will prove them wrong. Boom! Karl Rove has a big, fat ass. It almost makes you weep.”


    Read more about Murtha.


    Getting testy: North Korea may soon test an intercontinental ballistic missile. U.S. officials said Sunday that North Korea appears to have completed fueling a long-range missile, indicating a test might be imminent. The United States and others are urging against it, so much so that State Department officials directly contacted North Korean diplomats at the United Nations.


    Such warnings proved ineffective in 1998, when North Korea fired a missile over Japan despite the Clinton administration’s protestations. North Korea agreed to a moratorium on long-range missile testing in 1999 and has not fired one since.


    But if North Korea goes ahead with another similar testlaunching a missile over another country’s airspaceJames Robbins at the conservative National Review’s blog The Corner actually sees an opportunity: “Sounds like a great opportunity to test our missile-defense technology.” Liberal Kevin Drum, the Political Animal of Washington Monthly writes: “Hell, I could almost sign up for that. After 20 years, it’s time for the missile defense guys to put their money where their mouths are.”


    Drum also asks whether this latest North Korean crisis constitutes grounds for another pre-emptive strike. Andrew Olmsted answers: “We would doubtless prefer they not test a missile capable of striking the United States, but doing so is hardly grounds for war. And war is what we would have if we struck a target inside North Korea.”


    Read more about North Korea.


    Everyone’s a winner: Forty-one students were honored as valedictorians this year at a high school in Fairfax, Va., continuing a trend in which schools are increasingly recognizing as valedictorians every graduate who earns a 4.0 grade point average or better. Bloggers aren’t fooled.


    Law blogger Ann Althouse rails against this supposed scourge, including the phenomenon of weighted grades that contributes to it. “The title of valedictorian is a terrific prize, and it becomes meaningless if every great student wins it,” Althouse opines. “Why replicate the message that is already present in the academic records? Just give the prize to the person with the highest GPA and be done with it.” A commenter at her site has a novel idea: “I read a suggestion that high schools use the system colleges use: Everybody with a 4.0 is summa cum laude and so forth,” writes reader Jim C. “That’s better than watering down the meaning of valedictorian.”


    The very term valedictorian, writes Houston Chronicle writer John Whiteside at his personal blog, By The Bayou, “is commonly understood to mean the top student in a school. If educators really believe that the competition for that spot is a bad thing, they should just stop recognizing it altogether.”


    Read more about the valedictorian debate.

    Darren Everson is a sportswriter in New York City.


     







    Today’s Papers


    H2 Uh-0
    By Eric Umansky
    Posted Tuesday, June 20, 2006, at 3:13 AM ET


    The New York Times, Wall Street Journal‘s world-wide newsbox, and Washington Post all lead with the Supreme Court’s divided ruling that “came close to rolling back” the Clean Water Act. The Los Angeles Times leads with the White House again warning North Korea to stop toying with a long-range missile test. Japan’s prime minister also said his country “would have to respond harshly” to any test. USA Today leads with police in big cities across the U.S. saying “no, thanks” to the feds’ requests that they help I.D. illegal aliens.


    The Supreme case involved what the plaintiffs argued is the government’s too-loose definition of “wetlands,” which results in altogether too much land being protected by the Clean Water Act. Four justices agreed and voted to restrict the definition, while four justices voted to leave things be. Justice Kennedy wrote his own, fence-sitting opinion where he agreed that the protections are being applied too broadly but didn’t agree with the other justices on what to do about it. The upshot: The case was kicked back down to lower courts without much guidance.


    And what will that mean? Eh, good question:


    The WP: “JUSTICES REIN IN CLEAN WATER ACT.”


    The LAT: “DIVIDED SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS FEDERAL PROTECTIONS FOR WETLANDS.”


    It’s still not a sure thing that North Korea is now ready, willing, and able to test a big missile. One of the key issues is whether it’s actually fueled the thing. And countering yesterday’s NYT, the Post says that’s not clear. “We can’t say anything for sure,” said one “top official with access to the intelligence.”


    The NYT editorial page takes another bold stance and declares that a missile test would be “thoroughly bad for North Korea, for its region and for just about everyone else.” The editorial concludes, “We hope that North Korea’s next surprise is to respond … sensibly and cancel whatever plans it has for such a self-destructive move.” You hear that, Pyongyang? Don’t even think of crossing the Times editorial page.


    Bonus material: There’s been some chatter among experts on blogs about how little we know of North Korea’s overall missile program.


    According to late-night reports, Japan is ending its mission in Iraq and pulling its 600 troops. “We’ve finished this chapter,” Prime Minister Koizumi reportedly said.


    Only USAT fronts a well-known insurgent group, an umbrella organization, really, claiming they’ve captured the two GIs who’ve been missing in Iraq. It’s an interesting choice by the paper given that, as the NYT emphasizes, the group offered no video or other proof. (Witnesses have reported seeing the soldiers being pushed into cars.)


    The NYT alone fronts the military charging three soldiers with murdering three Iraqis. The Iraqis had been captured, but the Times says investigators have concluded the soldiers released them “before they were shot, apparently to have a pretext for killing them as they fled.”


    About 25 Iraqis were killed in assorted attacks.


    USAT fronts a feature on the spiraling insurgency in Afghanistan and the West’s less-than-full-fledged support for the country. The paper says one study concluded that aid to Afghanistan “equals $57 per person, compared with $679 in Bosnia and $206 in Iraq.”


    The NYT points out that Taliban guerrillas killed 32 members of one pro-government family over the weekend. The WP has a feature inside on how Taliban militancy is spreading in Pakistan. “Things are starting to spin out of control,” said one Western diplomat. “In some areas, it’s beginning to look like they are setting up a government within a government.”


    The LAT fronts New Orleans Mayor Nagin asking the National Guard to help patrol the city’s streets after a shooting last weekend in which five teenagers were killed. Nearly a year after Katrina, the police force is still in a bad state, short on cops, money, and according to the NYT, “low on supplies like ammunition.”


    The WP mentions that Bush attended an annual congressional GOP fundraiser where he “generally avoided the harsh language he used to describe Democrats at last year’s dinner.” The president said Democrats are “good talkers,” while Republicans are “good doers.” Using some of that non-harsh language, he said, “It’s important to have members of the United States Congress who will not wave the white flag of surrender in the war on terror.”

    Eric Umansky (www.ericumansky.com) writes “Today’s Papers” for Slate. He can be reached at todayspapers@slate.com.


     







    Missing G.I.’s Are Found Dead in Iraq










    In this undated photo released Monday, June 19, 2006, by the Menchaca family, Army Pfc. Kristian Menchaca is shown. A senior Iraqi military official announced Tuesday June 20, 2006 that the bodies of two missing soldiers, U.S. privates, Menchaca 23, of Houston, and Pfc. Thomas L. Tucker, 25, of Madras, Ore., had been found. An al-Qaida-linked group said Monday it was holding captive two soldiers who went missing last week in one of Iraq’s most dangerous regions. (AP Photo/Menchaca family via The Brownsville Herald)

    June 20, 2006


    Missing G.I.’s Are Found Dead in Iraq


    By SABRINA TAVERNISE


    BAGHDAD, June 20 The Iraqi military said today that the bodies of two American soldiers missing since Friday were found this morning outside the town where they were captured.


    Although American military officials would not immediately confirm the report, CNN reported from Houston this morning that one of the families had been informed that the body of their son had been found dead.


    According to Reuters, an Iraqi military official, Major General Abdul Aziz Mohammed, said in Baghdad that the two bodies had marks showing that “they had been tortured in a barbaric fashion.”


    An American military spokesman, Maj. Gen. William B. Caldwell IV, said that the military’s first responsibility for reporting any news was to the families of the soldiers, who were identified by the military on Monday as Pfc. Kristian Menchaca, 23, of Houston, and Pfc. Thomas L. Tucker, 25, of Madras, Ore. He said it would be “very inconsiderate” to say more about the search for the two men.


    A third soldier, Specialist David J. Babineau, 25, of Springfield, Mass., was killed when insurgents attacked the three at a traffic checkpoint. “The search has been extremely extensive in continuing to look for our two soldiers, whose duty status and whereabouts was unknown,” General Caldwell said.


    The two soldiers disappeared Friday night in an ambush southwest of Baghdad, and the military has been searching vigorously in and around Yusufiya with a force of 8,000 American and Iraqi troops.


    Ibrahim Obeidi, a spokesman for the Iraqi ministry of defense, said that soldiers had discovered the two bodies early this morning in the village of Jarf as-Sakhr, which is on the outskirts of Yusufiya.


    On Monday, an Islamic militant group linked to Al Qaeda had said it had captured two American soldiers listed as missing, but it offered no proof, and American military officials remained skeptical.


    Regarding the search for the two soldiers who have been missing since Friday, a message posted Monday on a Web site of the Council of Holy Warriors, which says it oversees Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia and seven other militant groups, said, “Our brothers in the military wing” had seized the soldiers near Yusufiya, the town where the military began its search. “We will provide you with more details on this incident in the next few days,” the group said.


    It was not clear whether the assertion was true: the group’s posting was unusually brief and did not say precisely where the soldiers had been seized. It offered no pictures of the soldiers.


    In a separate posting, the same group said it had kidnapped four Russian Embassy employees in the upscale neighborhood of Mansour in early June. The group gave the Russian government 48 hours to withdraw from Chechnya, a rebellious Muslim republic within Russia, and to release Muslim detainees from Russian prisons.


    The Russian Foreign Ministry, in a statement on Monday, called for the release of the embassy employees.


    An American military spokeswoman said the military was investigating the claim about the soldiers, but an American official in Baghdad cautioned that the military viewed the Web statement with some skepticism. It contained only information that could have been easily gleaned from news articles on the Internet.


    Also, the official said, the council is an umbrella group and does not itself have the fighters needed to carry out an attack like the one it says led to the soldiers’ capture.


    The sweeping search continued for the soldiers, identified by the military on Monday as Pfc. Kristian Menchaca, 23, of Houston, and Pfc. Thomas L. Tucker, 25, of Madras, Ore. A third soldier, Specialist David J. Babineau, 25, of Springfield, Mass., was killed when insurgents attacked the three at a traffic checkpoint.


    Since Friday, troops had searched 12 villages, detained 34 Iraqis and conducted 12 cordon-and-search operations, the military said. Troops were supported by fighter jets and pilotless Predator drones.


    A resident in Karagol, the village that appeared to be closest to where the soldiers were taken, said the Americans had shut off all water and electricity in the town.


    The troops appear to have met some resistance. Since Friday, three Iraqis identified as insurgents have been killed, the military said, and seven Americans have been wounded.


    Another Internet posting surfaced Monday in which Ansar al-Sunna, a militant group operating in northern Iraq, said it had captured an Iraqi woman serving as a translator, Salma Gasem Hamadi, a Shiite who the group said was working for the American military in Tikrit.


    The posting included a chilling warning for translators in the area to “leave your work immediately before we get you,” according to a translation provided by the SITE Institute, a group that tracks militant Web sites.


    In Rome on Monday, three Italian prosecutors requested the indictment of an American soldier for the shooting of an Italian intelligence agent, Nicola Calipari, who was killed by gunfire at a checkpoint in Iraq last year, the Italian news agency ANSA reported.


    According to the report, the Italian prosecutors have asked that the soldier, identified as Specialist Mario Lozano, a member of the New York National Guard, stand trial for murder and attempted murder.


    On March 4, 2005, just after securing the release of an Italian journalist who had been kidnapped in Baghdad, Mr. Calipari was killed when the car carrying him and the journalist, Giuliana Sgrena, came under fire at a checkpoint.


    A spokesman for the United States Embassy in Rome said ithad not been contacted about the indictments and declined comment.


    Also on Monday, Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki said Iraqi troops would assume full responsibility in July for security in Muthanna Province, making it the first province outside of the Kurdish north to be under full Iraqi control.


    [On Tuesday, Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi of Japan announced said that Tokyo would withdraw its troops from Iraq, Reuters reported. About 550 Japanese soldiers have been in Samawa, part of Muthanna Province in southern Iraq, since February 2004 on a non-combat mission.]


    In all, 13 Iraqis were killed and 36 wounded Monday in violence in Baghdad and in Diyala Province to the north, Iraqi authorities said.


    Sabrina Tavernise reported for this article from Baghdad. Reporting was contributed by Richard A. Oppel Jr., Mona Mahmoud and Omar al-Neami from Baghdad, Peter Kiefer from Rome and John O’Neil and Christine Hauser from New York.









  • Noun 1. avidity – a positive feeling of wanting to push ahead with something
    avidness, eagerness, keenness

    enthusiasm – a feeling of excitement


    ardor, ardour, elan, zeal – a feeling of strong eagerness (usually in favor of a person or cause); “they were imbued with a revolutionary ardor”; “he felt a kind of religious zeal”

  • British Grand Prix 2006













    Standings after British GP









    Racing series   F1
    Date 2006-06-11





















































































































































































     
    Drivers’ Championship:
     
    Pos  Driver  Nat  Team  Points 
    1.  Fernando Alonso  E  Renault  74 
    2.  Michael Schumacher  D  Ferrari  51 
    3.  Kimi Raikkonen  FIN  McLaren-Mercedes  33 
    4.  Giancarlo Fisichella  I  Renault  32 
    5.  Juan Pablo Montoya  COL  McLaren-Mercedes  26 
    6.  Felipe Massa  BR  Ferrari  24 
    7.  Jenson Button  GB  Honda  16 
    8.  Rubens Barrichello  BR  Honda  13 
    9.  Nick Heidfeld  D  BMW  10 
    10.  Ralf Schumacher  D  Toyota  8 
    11.  David Coulthard  GB  Red Bull-Ferrari  7 
    12.  Jacques Villeneuve  CDN  BMW  7 
    13.  Mark Webber  AUS  Williams-Cosworth  6 
    14.  Nico Rosberg  D  Williams-Cosworth  4 
    15.  Christian Klien  A  Red Bull-Ferrari  1 
             
     
    Constructors’ Championship:
     
    Pos  Constructor  Nat    Points 
    1.  Renault  F    106 
    2.  Ferrari  I    74 
    3.  McLaren-Mercedes  GB    60 
    4.  Honda  J    29 
    5.  BMW  D    17 
    6.  Williams-Cosworth  GB    10 
    7.  Toyota  J    8 
    8.  Red Bull-Ferrari  GB    8 
             

    



    


    

     
    

    

    




    


    


    

    British GP: Winners’ press conference 

    


    

    British GP: Winners’ press conference

    







    


    
Racing series  
F1 
    

    
Date 
2006-06-11

    

    British Grand Prix FIA winners’ press conference transcript with 

    

    1. Fernando Alonso (Renault), 1h25m51.927s 
    2. Michael Schumacher (Ferrari), 1h26m05.878s 
    3. Kimi Raikkonen (McLaren), 1h26m10.599s 

    

    Q: Fernando, that looked to be a perfectly judged race for you and in some ways, on home soil too. 

    

    Fernando Alonso: Yes, it’s true. Victory today was quite OK for us. Yesterday, getting pole position made the thing a little bit easier, starting from pole. Today, we saw that we had more fuel than the others yesterday in qualifying so this also helped in terms of strategy and things like that. The tyres performed really well all through the race so there weren’t many opportunities for opponents to beat us and this is good news for the rest of the season. But we have to take the advantage now. We had a good car, no problems, no mechanical problems and we are taking good points, step by step. 

    

    Q: Your race was very much defined by the early phase, a lot of pressure from Kimi and Michael but you managed to pull away tenth by tenth in that early phase of the race. 

    

    Fernando Alonso: Yes, in the first two laps after the safety car Kimi was very quick. We had a little bit too much understeer. We prepared the car to be quick at the end of the stints. Lap by lap the car was feeling better and better, so I built a gap in the first stint and then I controlled it a little bit for the rest of the race. I had some graining problems in the second stint but nothing big and as I said, tyres were again perfect today. Thanks to all the team, all the mechanics and for the tyres; victory was in our hands again. 

    

    Q: How does it feel to win here at Silverstone, in Britain. 

    

    Fernando Alonso: Fantastic. To be honest, winning in Spain, Monaco, Silverstone, for me, the last three races is a dream come true. They are circuits with big names and big emotions. Great atmosphere at this circuit, it’s all about Formula One and to win in this country, 20 minutes away from my home in Oxford is for me a really good feeling and I’ve had a fantastic day. 

    

    Q: Michael, a great drive to second place, taking second place in the second pit stops there, but very close racing with Kimi right at the start, almost touched wheels going into Abbey? 

    

    Michael Schumacher: Touched sidepods, I would say. I was already at the limit of the circuit. He didn’t want to give me the inside so I had to try the outside. The rest worked out fine. We obviously got stuck in the early stages of the race but nevertheless, I have to say that we weren’t quick enough this weekend but we will keep on working on that. 

    

    Q: That was a great period of the race when you did take second place from Kimi. Talk us through that: very quick on that lap after your tyre change, fastest in sectors two and three. 

    

    Michael Schumacher: We knew we had two sets of new tyres left. We knew that all the other guys chose to use their new set at the start, so they had no new sets left, so that was the only strategy we could pull out, to come in a lap early and then have a lap free of traffic and then build a gap to second and then get into second. 

    

    Q: Kimi, it was very close with Michael there going into Abbey. What was it like in that early phase of the race for you, with Michael and also Fernando just in front of you? 

    

    Kimi Raikkonen: We were really a bit too slow in a straight line to challenge anyone. I got quite close to Fernando after the safety car and on the first lap I just couldn’t quite pass him. Then I was in front of Michael and I didn’t know that we got so close but we didn’t hit each other which was good. It wasn’t an easy race, we weren’t quick enough so there wasn’t much we could do, but I did the best I could and we finished third. I think that was maximum that we could have done today. 

    

    Q: A good podium finish for you, but Giancarlo Fisichella was very close to you in the closing stages. What condition was your car in at that point? 

    

    Kimi Raikkonen: It wasn’t perfect. I lost the rear end a little bit at the end of the race and I also got the lapped traffic in the first sector and Fisichella was always very quick through there. It was sometimes a bit difficult when you follow someone and on the back straight he was quick, but he wasn’t too much of a problem. But I could have done without it also, but I’m happy with third place. 

    

    Q: Fernando, the run goes on: incredible reliability, a string of podium finishes for you, eight in a row now, it’s been an amazing season. 

    

    Fernando Alonso: Yes, so far it has been fantastic: three wins and three seconds. Obviously there’s nothing more to find in the car. We’re running on the limit of the car. No mechanical problems, a fantastic job from all the people in the team, and for sure, we need to keep doing things like this. I think the best defence from now on will be attacking and keep winning races is what we have to do. 

    

    Q: Fernando, early on, Kimi seemed to be really having a go at you in those opening laps. How close was it? 

    

    Fernando Alonso: Very close. We prepared the car to be quicker in the middle and end of the stints, so for the first two laps, I had a little bit too much understeer and for sure, during the first and second laps I wasn’t quick enough and Kimi obviously tried, but we had good straight line speed and it wasn’t easy to overtake us, so we were lucky with that. 

    

    Q: And after that, no problems with the car? 

    

    Fernando Alonso: Well, the conditions haven’t been easy all weekend here. It was very windy in the high speed corners so there were some surprises on some of the laps. Lap by lap the circuit was changing a little bit so you have to guess when you arrive at a corner, but no, not really. The car performed really well. I had a little bit of graining during the second stint but the gap was big enough not to have too many worries. 

    

    Q: You all seem to be quite hot and tired after that race; how was it? 

    

    Fernando Alonso: Well, we are not used to this temperature in England and I think we have all been a little bit surprised. It’s quite tough, this circuit, with these high speed corners, especially this year with the V8, very quick through the corners, and yeah, it was quite a physical race. 

    

    Q: Michael, second place, was the car good, good enough for first, do you think? 

    

    Michael Schumacher: Don’t know! It was going well, I didn’t have any particular issues or problems but it’s a bit difficult for me to analyse where we could have been and what could have happened. You guys sit there, have all the information. I just have my personal information but at the end of the day, we weren’t good enough for the weekend. That is pretty obvious. 

    

    Q: The tactics of the second pit stop were obviously vital to your second place. 

    

    Michael Schumacher: Yeah, we would have loved to do that at the first pit stop already, but it didn’t work out. I think there was even a bit of traffic involved. I’m not sure what happened at the very first pit stop, but if I remember correctly, the other two guys were on new tyres, I was on older tyres, which also made it a little bit more difficult for me to be right on Kimi’s tail, whereas at the second pit stop I was very close to him and then had a quick lap on new tyres and got him. But after spending forty laps or more behind him, there’s no opportunity left. 

    

    Q: How worrying is the Renault pace given that we’re going to two flyaway races in succession? 

    

    Michael Schumacher: There’s nothing new or a surprise. We have seen that they are strong all year long. We have been strong all year long with a couple of hiccups in some of the races and that’s the difference. So we’ll have to work on that to get even more out of our car and to have two cars up front and that is our target and our aim. We will work on this. I’ve heard some people saying that this is a crucial race but for me it’s not crucial at all. There are ten races to go, plenty of opportunities. We believe in ourselves and we will do a lot of hard work to get going and to take as many points as we can to be up front at the end of the year, as much as they will keep working for the opposite. It’s very natural, but there’s no way we are resigning at all. 

    

    Q: Kimi, obviously frustrated to have lost second place. 

    

    Kimi Raikkonen: Err, yeah, but we were just not quick enough and there’s nothing that I could have done. I went as quickly as I could but with Michael on new tyres there was no way that I could have kept him behind any more. We tried, but it wasn’t enough. 

    

    Q: And you were really having a go at Fernando in those early stages. 

    

    Kimi Raikkonen: Yeah, but as I said, they were quick on the back straight and I got a very good exit in the last corner before the straight but I just couldn’t get a tow and we were just not quick enough so it made it impossible to overtake him. 

    

    Q: Was it an aerodynamic thing when you say slow in a straight line? 

    

    Kimi Raikkonen: I don’t know if we’re running more downforce. Maybe we are, because we need to get more grip in the corners or maybe there is a slight difference in engines but I think it’s the only way we can manage to go quicker around the lap so that’s what we chose to do and I still think it’s the best result we could have had today. The car was pretty OK, it was a bit difficult to drive when you pushed the whole way through the race but that’s how the racing is. 

    

    Q: Fernando, it looked easy out there. What made it so easy for you? 

    

    Fernando Alonso: I think it’s true in the race we work hard in every race, every weekend and it’s going well so far. I don’t know. Every race is a big challenge for us to stay competitive and working what we need to with the car. We need to keep developing, and, as I said in the press conference, we need to keep winning races to defend our position and, you know, to do a good job, as professional as we can all the time, so to keep ahead of the other teams, and I think this is a result of the victory. We are all focused, with all the people working in the same direction with no mistakes, and this is what we’re aiming (for). 

    

    Q: Michael, you spent the early part of the race behind Kimi. Was it just that you wanted to keep a certain distance and how much were you advantaged when you got ahead of him? 

    

    Michael Schumacher: I guess you could see once I was in front of him what was the difference between him and me after that. To answer your question correctly, the reason to stay a second behind him is that when you get closer you just start sliding around because this is a very high-speed circuit, aerodynamics are very important and there is unfortunately no way to try and stick close because of the track. 

    

    Q: Kimi, Once Michael passed you, you dropped back from him a bit. Were you pushing hard still, or did you accept that Michael had passed you and not go full speed anymore? 

    

    Kimi Raikkonen: We were still going as quick as we could because Fisichella in the second Renault had still not stopped and so we didn’t really know where they were going to end up and we saw that they were very close to us and in the race it is important to us to have to go as quickly as we can because otherwise we might lose places, so I was going as fast as I could. 

    

    Q: Fernando, Michael has a record of 19 successive podium finishes. You have now 14. Do you think that you can break the record? 

    

    Fernando Alonso: To be honest, we will try to finish on the podium in all of the races so far, but maybe, I don’t know about the record but it’s not very important. To finish in front for the championships at the end of the season, then for sure if I keep moving in that direction of the top three then it puts us in a good position to defend the championship and I hope to finish a lot more times on the podium this year. 

    

    Q: Michael, on the fourth lap you had a battle with Kimi going into the chicane. How close was that. It looked like it was wheel to wheel? 

    

    Michael Schumacher: Yes, it was. We didn’t touch but I guess there wasn’t a piece of paper’s space left. It was close but it was okay. 

    

    Q: Fernando, that win was pretty easy. Was it your easiest win of the season? 

    

    Fernando Alonso: I don’t know. Really, in Australia I had a little bit of a space, here, it was necessary to keep pushing all the race because we never know what was going to happen with tyres — raining-wise — Anything can happen in one of the pit-stops so it was worth having a little gap not to come into the pits too close. You never know what’s gonna happen with Michael, He overtook Kimi at the second stop and he was on the pace with me in the Ferrari and so he had no chance to catch up and so I try to push for every lap of the race, but it’s with the conditions we had here — very windy in the high-speed corners. 

    

    Q: Fernando, how would you feel to have Lewis Hamilton as a team-mate next year? 

    

    Fernando Alonso: Don’t ask me that. I try to win this year and next year we will have time enough to discuss about my team-mate. At the end of the day it’s not very important to me. 

    

    Q: All three of you look very sad — like you lost your parents this morning. Was it a very difficult race? 

    

    Fernando Alonso: My parents are still at home, I hope. For me, it was okay. I think I was a little more tired in Monaco because it was a stressful race with Kimi fighting a lot. Today I’m happy. It’s my way of expressing my happiness. 

    

    Michael Schumacher: It was probably a lonely race for Fernando, there was a bit of action between me and Kimi, but it wasn’t that exciting. There’s no reason to jump around and be happy. In this season there’s still a long way to go and everybody’s got to try and focus on what happens next rather than feeling joy too much. 

    

    Q: As you said, it was not an exciting race, so, to all of you, how exciting is it to race to win when you cannot even overtake — the overtaking is just in the pit-stops. Is it fun to race like that? 

    

    Michael Schumacher: It’s part of the game. I think the ideal world doesn’t exist. You always can improve things absolutely, but that’s the way it is and that’s the way it has been for so many years. 

    

    Fernando Alonso: I believe if you are quick, then you will overtake the guy in front, as Michael did today — not in the circuit but in the pit-stops. Formula One is not just about a fast car. It’s about a strategy and a combination of many things and for this it is so popular because it’s quite interesting on the track in what goes on. 

    

    Kimi Raikkonen: Yeah, For sure everybody would like to have more overtaking, but, ever since I’ve been in Formula One it’s been like this so it’s not only for me, it’s for everyone in Formula One, so in some races you have more, and some traces on high-speed circuits you just have it where people overtake on the last pit-stops. It’s this kind of thing sometimes. 

    

    Q: Kimi, when you finished fifth in Barcelona, you said that was the maximum from the car. Now that you’ve finished third, is that more than the maximum. 

    

    Kimi Raikkonen: I think the car has maybe improved a bit from Barcelona in a bit and that is good because we struggled a bit in Barcelona, so hard to say how much improvement we’ve had. We are still too slow to try to fight for wins in the races. I think Monaco was a special place where we could challenge for a win but here it’s back to reality. 

    

    Q: Fernando, what was the significance of your stance when you finished the race? It looked like you were firing an arrow or a catapult. 

    

    Fernando Alonso: Yes, it was an arrow. 

    

    Q: No specific reason? 

    

    Fernando Alonso: No 

    

    -fia- 

    


    

     
    

    

    




    


    


    

    Fernando Alonso Wins British Grand Prix 2006 

    


    








    


    

    

    

    

    
Podium: race winner Fernando Alonso celebrates
    F1 > British GP, 2006-06-11 (Silverstone): Sunday race

    

    Alonso victorious at British GP for first time

    







    


    
Racing series  
F1 
    

    
Date 
2006-06-11

    

    By Nikki Reynolds – Motorsport.com

    

    Renault’s reigning world champion Fernando Alonso claimed victory in the British Grand Prix, his first win at Silverstone, with another faultless drive from pole to the chequered flag. Ferrari’s Michael Schumacher put in a super-fast lap after his second pit stop to beat McLaren’s Kimi Raikkonen to second and the Finn had to settle for third. 

    


    








    


    


    

    

    




    


    
See large picture

    Fernando Alonso. Photo by xpb.cc.

    		


    

    It was another hot and sunny day for the race, with the track temperature around 40 degrees at the start. It was a clean getaway in formation for the first five, pole man Alonso leading Raikkonen and Michael followed by Ferrari’s Felipe Massa and Renault’s Giancarlo Fisichella. Nick Heidfeld’s BMW Sauber flew off the line to move up to sixth from ninth. 

    

    Juan Pablo Montoya’s McLaren got a hefty bump from someone early on but he seemed to escape unscathed, and behind him there was trouble. Ralf Schumacher had a poor start from seventh and dropped back, while Toro Rosso’s Scott Speed had a good start from 15th and the two clashed through Maggots and Becketts. 

    

    Speed made contact with the Toyota and Ralf was forced wide then veered back across the track, into the path of Mark Webber’s Williams. The two cars collided, Ralf’s Toyota sustaining some damage and both went off track and retired. Speed went into the pits but evidently was also too damaged to continue. 

    

    “We had a bad start and lost too many places and got into a mess,” Ralf commented. “I didn’t see anything; I had cars all over me.” The stewards are investigating the situation — it did appear that Speed was the one who initiated the accident, but the young American shrugged it off as a racing incident. 

    


    








    


    


    

    


    




    


    
See large picture

    Scott Speed. Photo by xpb.cc.


    

    “I had an awesome start and tried to go round the outside of Ralf at Maggots and Becketts,” Speed explained. “It was working, I was alongside him but I don’t think he saw me. I was just one of those things, nobody was really to blame.” 

    

    There was quite a bit of debris on the track from the Toyota and the safety car was deployed for a couple of laps while it was cleared. At the restart Alonso really backed the pack up and made a good getaway. Montoya got past the Honda of Rubens Barrichello for seventh and the top three were glued together at the front. 

    

    Michael attacked Raikkonen and they went side by side with a little pushing and shoving but Raikkonen held the Ferrari off. Meanwhile, Nico Rosberg’s Williams had climbed to ninth and back-starter Jarno Trulli had got his Toyota up to 13th. BMW Sauber’s Jacques Villeneuve and Red Bull’s David Coulthard held station in 10th and 11th. 

    

    Montoya was closing on Heidfeld and Honda’s Jenson Button, who started 19th, was also on the move, up the field to dispatch Toro Rosso’s Tonio Liuzzi for 12th at Stowe. But it was a short lived charge for Button as his Honda abruptly spouted flames at the back, caused by an engine oil leak, and he went off into the gravel to retire. 

    


    








    


    


    

    

    




    


    
See large picture

    Jenson Button. Photo by xpb.cc.

    		


    

    “It was a massive blow up, and a massive blow as well,” he said. I started 19th and was up to 12th and things were looking pretty sweet. I think I could have got past DC (Coulthard) in the next couple of laps. The car was working pretty well. Its a shame for the British fans and particularly myself because I think we were in for a good race.” 

    

    There was no change for a while in the top 10 order, with Alonso gradually pulling away from Raikkonen at the front and reeling off fastest laps on his way. Trulli was the first to pit, around lap 17 which was quite early as it was thought he would be heavily fuelled after starting at the back. Michael was next in, also quite early. 

    

    Everyone else peeled through the pits in fairly quick succession, Raikkonen and Massa next then Barrichello and Montoya. Fisichella managed to get ahead of Massa after his stop and Alonso rejoined in the lead after his. Montoya’s McLaren had some damage to the side pod from his early bump but it didn’t appear to be hugely affecting him. 

    

    The top eight order was then Alonso, Raikkonen, Michael, Fisichella, Massa, Montoya, Heidfeld and Rosberg. Heidfeld had some kind of problem in his stop which lost him time, otherwise he probably would have been higher up. Alonso was 12 seconds clear of Raikkonen, who had Michael homing in behind. 

    


    








    


    


    

    


    




    


    
See large picture

    Michael Schumacher. Photo by xpb.cc.


    

    Villeneuve and Barrichello made up the top ten, then came Trulli, Coulthard, Klien, Liuzzi, the MF1s of Christijan Albers and Tiago Monteiro and the Super Aguris of Takuma Sato and Franck Montagny. The race had settled into a fairly static state of affairs and Michael was first to duck in for the second round of pit stops. 

    

    Raikkonen was in next and Michael put in an absolutely storming lap to beat the McLaren to the first corner as Raikkonen exited the pits. Alonso made another clean stop and rejoined ahead of Massa, so Ferrari couldn’t make use of the Brazilian in any tactical way. 

    

    Michael just wasn’t close enough to think about mounting a challenge on the Renault for the remainder of the race. In the final laps Fisichella was homing in on Raikkonen but despite the team’s encouragement on the radio to get revenge for Suzuka, the Italian couldn’t find a way past. 

    

    Alonso crossed the line 13 seconds ahead of Michael to claim his first British GP win. It was a deserved victory as the Spaniard didn’t put a foot wrong the whole race. It’s looking harder and harder to imagine anyone being able to wrest the title from Alonso’s grasp — although there’s still a long way to go. 

    


    








    


    


    

    

    




    


    
See large picture

    Podium: Race winner Fernando Alonso, second place, Michael Schumacher, third place, Kimi Raikkonen. Photo by xpb.cc.

    		


    

    “The race was really competitive, and tough,” said the winner. “We had a set-up on the car that meant it was quite understeery in the first part of the stint, but just got better and better and I could build a lead as the fuel loads came down — although I had a little bit of graining in the second stint that slowed my pace. It was windy out there too, like all weekend, so that made things a little bit unpredictable, and we are not used to this heat in Silverstone.” 

    

    “So it was never an easy win, but this shows we are working really hard. There’s no secret to this fantastic season. We attack every race as a new challenge, we are concentrating all the time and there are no mistakes from the team. The best form of defence is attack — and we showed that today.” 

    

    Michael drove well enough — his lap to get ahead of Raikkonen was a stunner — but Ferrari can’t match Renault at the moment. Massa did a solid job for fifth but didn’t really play any part save to keep himself out of trouble and pick up some more points. 

    

    Michael was reasonably content with second. “Although there were no real problems with the car this weekend, we were simply not quick enough to win. We must work very hard now to come back right from the next race. But all in all, we should still be pleased with these eight points. There are still ten races to go with a hundred points to play for. Even though I am twenty three points behind Alonso, I don’t think the fight for the championship is over.” 

    

    Raikkonen was surely disappointed to lose second but conceded that McLaren doesn’t have the straight line speed. He didn’t do anything wrong, and neither did Montoya in sixth, but McLaren is not displaying the flair and competitiveness that it had last year. 

    

    However, Raikkonen believes the team is moving forward. “We were not as quick as Alonso and Schumacher and third place was the maximum possible, but I think the good news is that this weekend has shown we are moving in the right direction and are getting more and more competitive,” he commented. 

    

    “I made a good start off the line and was able to maintain my second place. However I was not fast enough on the straights to pass Alonso. After the Safety Car came back in I could close the gap a bit, but that was it really. I suffered from oversteer towards the end of the race which allowed Fisichella to close up. However I wasn’t too worried as I knew it would be almost impossible for him to actually overtake.” 

    


    








    


    


    

    


    




    


    
See large picture

    Nick Heidfeld. Photo by xpb.cc.


    

    BMW Sauber got both drivers in the points, Heidfeld seventh and Villeneuve eighth. A good effort from the team, although Heidfeld may well have been a place higher if not for his overly long pit stop. Rosberg was ninth and Barrichello rounded off the top 10. Behind them it was Trulli and Coulthard, followed by Liuzzi, Klien, Albers, Monteiro, Sato and Montagny. 

    

    Silverstone was not exactly a thriller of a race; after the early incident and safety car period it settled into a rhythm with little in the way action, which was disappointing. Having Alonso, Raikkonen and Michael at the front of the grid had raised expectations for a good battle but it just didn’t happen. 

    

    However, F1 next heads to Montreal and Indianapolis, two races that have been known to produce all sorts of peculiar incidents and unexpected results. Final top eight classification: Alonso, M. Schumacher, Raikkonen, Fisichella, Massa, Montoya, Heidfeld, Villeneuve. 

    


    


    


    



    

    Photos for British GP
    
							
    
					
    
		
    
			
		
    
	
    

    •