April 7, 2006: Civil war is again brewing in Chad, and here is a scorecard so you can tell who is who. Another civil war in Chard should not be surprising, as this is a nation with several dozen different ethnic groups, and a long history of factional fighting. During the 1980s, there was a civil war with fifteen different groups battling each other.
Currently, the biggest faction is the government forces, with about 20,000 troops. Most are poorly trained and equipped. One exception is the Rapid Intervention Force (Force d'intervention rapide, or FIR). Actually, this 5,000 man organization operates more like a Presidential Guard, and a guarantee that the rest of the army won't get out of hand.
The principal opposition is a coalition of rebel groups called the United Front for Democratic Change (FUC). There are at least eight groups in the FUC, but only two of them (SCUD and RDL) have significant numbers of armed men available. Even then, FUC can only muster a few thousand gunmen. SCUD is led by a disaffected relative of Chad president Deby, while the RDL is composed of people from eastern Chad who have been unhappy with Deby for a long time. RDL is believed to have received help from Sudan. Which makes it's alliance with SCUD interesting, as SCUD formed late last year because Deby refused to get involved in the Darfur war just across the border in Sudan. But that's the problem, as one of the tribes getting hammered are the Zaghawa, which also has branches in Chad, and which president Deby belongs to. The SCUD rebels believe that Chad should get involved in helping the Zaghawa people in Sudan. Does all that make sense? Well, it shouldn't, but that's the current state of politics along the Chad-Sudan border.
President Deby is corrupt, which isn't unusual in this part of the world, and is using the new oil money, and any other cash he can get his hands on, to keep people on his side. Deby doesn't want to get involved fighting in Darfur, as it would be expensive, and cause long term ill-will with the Sudanese. But tribal politics counts for a lot in Chad, and that is dragging the country towards another civil war.
Posted by: Steve ||
04/07/2006 10:53 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
Britain's defense secretary says international terror has the potential to become civilization's most dangerous enemy because al-Qaida fighters have access to destructive modern technology.
Because of that, Secretary John Reid suggested Wednesday night, international law, including the Geneva Conventions that set the laws of war, should be strengthened and expanded, not abandoned.
As important as ideological and cultural aspects are to the conflict, Reid said, "the nature of the enemy and its tactics and philosophy" lead to "the utter lack of constraint. Legal, moral, conventional self-discipline."
Speaking to the Council on Foreign Relations, Reid said terrorists of the 20th century, such as the Nazis, similarly ignored society's norms.
"But what is new is the combination of wholesale license in the intention side and the use of indiscriminate violence allied to modern technological capacity and capability, at least potentially," he said.
Reid called al-Qaida and other terrorist groups "absolutely a threat which is potentially, I think, greater than any we have ever faced."
"While the evil intent was there in previous generations, constrained by relative inefficiency in technology," Reid said, al-Qaida and other terrorist groups have "potential access to modern destructive capacity (of) unimaginable scale in the form of chemical, biological and radiological weapons."
Reid said a major tactic of the al-Qaida network is to use the West's system as a weapon of war by counting on the press' freedom to wear down the civilian support for the fight.
"There would be no freedom of speech in a society ruled by al-Qaida," Reid said. "In this life-and-death struggle, they want both their hands free and ours tied behind our back."
On Iraq, Reid said other countries in the region _ Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, Turkey _ need to become involved in the country's recovery.
"The ultimate solution in that area would be to ensure that these countries of the region itself play an important role," Reid said.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/07/2006 02:34 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"Secretary John Reid suggested Wednesday night, international law, including the Geneva Conventions that set the laws of war, should be strengthened and expanded, not abandoned."
Tell us John, if the terrorists do not follow any rules now, how will puttering about in the verbiage change anything? Other than tying our hands with new and different knots?
This is simply blind, ultra-dense, non-thought. Wanking for PC.
#2
Well, "strengthened and expanded" could involve spelling out what happens when an enemy purposely ignores the conventions. I would assume that they would be strengthened in the name of our cause, not theirs.
Of course, the changes must be negotiated amongst sane and rational countries... NATO + Japan + Australia + whoever... I guess there isn't much chance of that, though.
Al-Qaeda sympathizers are living in New Zealand and could pose a security risk but the likelihood of an attack by Islamic extremists is low, the country's spy service said.
The Security Intelligence Service (SIS) said in its annual report that threats could come from within New Zealand as al-Qaeda often sought to inspire other radicals to carry out attacks.
"The inspirational approach means that the threat could come from individuals who are already living here," Director of Security Richard Woods said in the SIS annual report presented to New Zealand's parliament on Thursday.
"There are individuals in New Zealand who are sympathetic to al-Qaeda, have strongly anti-western views and have links to extremists overseas," Woods said.
People in New Zealand had joined "jihad" in places such as Bosnia and there were links between criminals and Islamic extremists in the country.
The report said the SIS was not aware of any specific terrorist threat, but there was a need for increased vigilance if New Zealand was to continue to be neither the victim nor source of terrorism.
Despite this, the SIS assessed the chances of a terrorist attack in New Zealand as low.
The report said most local Muslims and immigrants were law abiding and of no security concern. Moderate Muslims had sometimes moved to check the activities of more radical Muslims.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/07/2006 01:12 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
headline doesn't fit this article. It should read:
SIS says threats exist from individuals already living amongst us.
Or:
Director of Security Richard Woods says, "individuals in New Zealand sympathetic to al-Qaeda, with links to extremists overseas.
Integrate - or go back to the shithole you came from.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
04/07/2006 19:58 Comments ||
Top||
#2
We should bring a common European imams' voice, because we are Europeans, so we need to create our [own] European Islamic jurisprudence specific to the areas where Islam is not an authority. How Muslims should behave and live in non-Muslim societies, what our rules and duties are, and what the duties of preachers and teachers are.
You should live and behave according to the laws and principles of the land youve chosen to join leaving your country, as unacceptable to you, behind. Your rules and duties are what the law and society tell you they are. And dont forget responsibilities, responsibilities are the part you always seem to miss in all this duty and submission nonsense.
All these issues will be discussed. I hope we'll create a permanent committee and this permanent committee will guide European Muslims in all daily issues, and also, dealing with authorities like the European Commission, European Council [comprising the heads of EU states], ministers, governments, because we are here to stay.
And be in total control too, I see. Sounds a lot like slavery to me, this guiding and dealing. Frightening cult, this islam.
We need to restrict ourselves, otherwise we all will be naked in this open and free world.
And there is the horror in a nutshell. The denial of freedom and truth the painful fear of them. And the demand to restrict ourselves burrowing in the ancient sands of this ignorance. Lest someone see a little titty. If not for the potential nakedness, would you truly embrace open and free? Or is the self-punishing restrict too strong a draw?
They are free to criticize Islam and Muslims without any problem, but with respect
Criticism is rarely offered in respect of its target.
Sajid: We do have an image problem. Why? Because Muslims do not control the press or media in this country [Britain]. Media [staff] mostly [come] from secular and nonreligious backgrounds and they have their own agenda
Yup, they show the film. (But dont worry, they dont really report all the real news.) Your countries dont show any film or report at all anything that isnt stamped Halal. Maybe the brief clips we see of foaming, frothing, violent, insane, rioters is what does it. Reality, Sajid. Its real.
Sajid: Well, Muslims are multifarious and multifaceted people throughout the world, and Europe is not separated from the world
And duplicitous. And invading.
Sajid: Well, Muslims are multifarious and multifaceted people throughout the world, and Europe is not separated from the world
#4
Thanks for the post Tipper. Euro weenies ought to pay very close attention to this kind of commentary. They have a cancerous growth in their system. As the cancer gets larger, it consumes more of the systems strength. It lives off the system, until it overtakes it and kills it. Excise the cancer now while you can. Start with this meeting of shitheads. Round them up. Get them on a flight to "somewhere". Make them disappear.
SPAIN'S High Court has said overnight that it had quashed jail terms handed down to three of 18 Al-Qaeda operatives, including the Syrian head of a Spanish-based cell found to have helped to organise the September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States.
According to court sources, the High Court freed Driss Chebli, Sadik Meriziak and Abdulaziz Benyaich after receiving notification from the Supreme Court that the trio's appeal would lead to their being absolved.
Earlier, at the Supreme Court, the state prosecutor accepted Meriziak and Benyaich should be freed and said doubts surrounded the conviction of Chebli.
Chebli was serving a six-year term for collaboration with a terrorist organisation but was due for release next year as he was only serving half the term owing to time spent on remand.
Meriziak and Benyaich were serving eight years for the same crime.
(CNSNews.com) - The man responsible for the "GodHatesFags.com" and "GodHatesAmerica.com" websites picketed the Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Washington, D.C., Thursday with a dozen of his family members and followers. They carried signs stating "Thank God for Maimed Soldiers," "Thank God for Dead Soldiers" and "God Hates You." Fred Phelps, pastor of the independent Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kan., claimed the injuries and fatalities suffered by American military personnel are the product of God's wrath.
"God almighty is punishing this evil nation by killing their kids over in Iraq and by maiming, crippling and mangling their kids over in Iraq," Phelps told Cybercast News Service. "This nation is going to continue to be punished by God until they repent, but we don't believe they're going to repent."
Phelps believes military personnel share the blame for court decisions and legislation favoring homosexuality, even if those service members do not support that lifestyle. "It's irrelevant whether they as individuals support them. They joined an army and became a part of a military establishment, voluntarily, knowing that that military establishment was packed and jammed with homosexuals," Phelps argued. "If they join an army that they know is a sodomite army and fight for a nation that they know is a sodomite nation, they are equally guilty."
O.P. Ditch of Woodbridge, Va., retired from the U.S. Air Force, learned of Phelps' planned protest and displayed his own printed sign at the main gate of the Walter Reed hospital. "I disagree with anybody who comes to a military hospital and, you know, says trashy things like 'God Is America's Terror.' I'm reading their signs right now, 'Thank God for Maimed Soldiers,'" Ditch said "That's the same word that Code Pink uses -- 'maimed' soldiers. They said the soldiers were 'Maimed for a lie,' and this guy's using the same words."
As Cybercast News Servicepreviously reported, the anti-war group Code Pink began picketing Walter Reed in August of 2005. The group lost its permit to protest at the main entrance to the hospital last month.
Ditch held his sign, which stated, "Code Phelps -- Human IED," an acronym for "improvised explosive device." "He doesn't belong here," Ditch concluded. "If he wants to protest, go to the White House or to Capitol Hill and he can protest, but he shouldn't be here protesting the troops."
Wesley Cook of Philadelphia agreed, calling Phelps' and his followers' actions "a disgrace. "We have soldiers here that are healing. They need peace and quiet. Mr. Phelps, 'Pastor' Phelps, Mr. Phelps is just looking for publicity," Cook said. "I am also a Christian. He is not practicing a brand of Christianity that I recognize. I think he's shaming the name of Jesus Christ."
Don Smith of Maryland turned up the volume on his opposition to Phelps' protest. The owner of what he described as "the loudest Harley I know of," Smith brought his motorcycle and had other friends bring theirs to wait for Phelps' group. Shortly after Phelps and his followers marched into position -- singing "God Hates America" to the tune of "God Bless America" -- Smith and his friends started their engines. In law enforcement and military circles, the procedure is called "acoustical countermeasures." Smith referred to it as "protestus interruptus."
"I understand First Amendment rights, but my personal feeling is, there [is] a time and a place for everything," Smith argued. "These people are protesting at funerals of guys -- men and women killed in Iraq and Afghanistan and outside a funeral or outside an Army hospital, holding signs that say 'God Hates Wounded Soldiers.' It's not the time or the place."
After approximately 30 minutes of no one being able to hear their chants and songs over the motorcycles, a large group of off-duty military personnel in civilian clothes approached Phelps' followers and began verbally challenging the anti-military signs. Phelps' group packed their belongings and walked away, followed briefly by the servicemen. Members of FreeRepublic.com and TroopsSupport.com immediately took up positions on all four corners of the intersection at the main gate to the hospital, waiving American flags and displaying signs supporting the troops.
Posted by: Steve ||
04/07/2006 10:32 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I wouldn't want to be standing in Fred Phelps's shoes come judgement day...
#5
Fred Phelps picketed the funeral of my young friend Cpl. Reed last year. It was extremely hard on the family. It was almost impossible for me and the other Veterans attending to refrain from seriously cracking his head.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
04/07/2006 12:28 Comments ||
Top||
#6
It's time to pass some laws to make this illegal.
#13
Fred Phelps, pastor of the independent Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kan.
I love how the MSM always reports this matter-of-factly, as if it's just another typical red state Christian church. When, in reality, it's a family cult with no standing in any Christian circles.
#14
No violence, please. Phelps' supporters have people videotaping each potential confrontation in hopes of violence, so that their slimy lawyers can then go to court and make more of a spectacle of themselves. Don't give them what they want.
I like the motorcycle dude's approach best.
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/07/2006 17:31 Comments ||
Top||
#15
I'd pay for a crop duster to spray them with liquified dogshit. I mean, what would it cost? A couple of thou?
#19
I encourage Fred Phelps to have a face-to-face with God. I don't think he'd survive. God does not like people like Fred Phelps. I will be praying that God corrects the attitude of this nutcase. Let no human hand intervene, but let God do what He will. I just want popcorn rites.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
04/07/2006 18:57 Comments ||
Top||
#21
No violence, please. Phelps' supporters have people videotaping each potential confrontation in hopes of violence, so that their slimy lawyers can then go to court and make more of a spectacle of themselves.
No violence? When was the last time you saw a 'slimy lawyer' suing a mafia family?
President George Bush admitted on Thursday the US military made mistakes in Iraq but defended his domestic eavesdropping programme, insisting to a hostile questioner he had no reason to apologise for it.
Beset by low approval ratings dragged down by pessimism over Iraq, Bush also signalled impatience with Iraqi leaders and urged them to break their deadlock and form a national unity government seen as crucial to averting sectarian civil war.
Trying to rally sagging US support for the war, Bush went to a Republican Southern stronghold for the latest in a series of speeches meant to convince an increasingly sceptical public that he has a winning strategy in Iraq.
In some of his frankest language so far, Bush responded to a question on what he could have done differently in Iraq by acknowledging the United States could have moved faster in training Iraqi troops and police.
He said Iraqi security forces were originally trained to handle external threats but instead the threat came from inside the country, from al Qaeda leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.
"In retrospect, we could've done better," Bush said. But he insisted the overall US strategy in Iraq had been correct.
Bush said he was "just as disappointed as everybody else was" about erroneous pre-war US intelligence on Iraq.
US officials had said they had evidence that Saddam Hussein was developing weapons of mass destruction but none were found.
Bush also said the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison "hurt us in the international arena particularly in the Muslim world."
Bush played to a mostly sympathetic college audience of more than 900 in Charlotte, North Carolina.
But as he stood atop a stage in a town-hall format, one questioner launched into a scathing attack of the kind Bush has rarely faced at public events where attendance is often tightly controlled.
"You never stop talking about freedom, which I appreciate, but while I'm listening to you talk about freedom I see you assert your right to tap my telephone, to arrest me and hold me without charges," Harry Taylor told Bush to a chorus of boos.
He was referring to Bush's warrant-less domestic eavesdropping program, which civil liberties advocates have condemned as a violation of Americans' rights.
Taylor politely but firmly skewered Bush, telling the president he hoped he had "the grace to be ashamed of yourself."
Bush responded that he was doing what was necessary to protect Americans from another Sept. 11 attack by allowing the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on domestic phone calls and emails that officials suspect are linked to al Qaeda contacts overseas.
"Would I apologise for it? The answer is absolutely not," he said.
Bush's comments were part of a new approach of mixing a more candid assessment of problems in Iraq while holding to an upbeat view of U.S. chances of success.
More than three months after parliamentary elections, Iraqi leaders have little to show for their efforts to forge the first full-term government since a US-led invasion in 2003 toppled Saddam.
Bush, speaking after a weekend visit to Baghdad by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and her British counterpart, Jack Straw, said Rice's message to Iraqi leaders was to "get moving" in resolving their differences.
"We're very much involved," Bush said. "The (Iraqi) people want there to be a unity government. It requires leadership, for people to stand up and take the lead. So we're working with them to get this unity government up and running."
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/07/2006 01:22 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Harry Taylor = simpering @$$hat. Hero to the beef-witted.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
04/07/2006 1:29 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Hey look, they used the macro again, but, you know what I missed the first time through? The guy got booed. Times have changed, eh?
This is damage control for the fact that young people are booing guys like this. They try to make it sound like the audience was a tightly controlled Republican stronghold and only this brave soul got through and then talk about low poll ratings, etc. etc. to undermine the damage that caused.
I'm guessing this guy was a ringer whose beloved friends in the MSM knew was going to stand up and give his little preachy sermon. But they didn't expect him to get booed, live on TV. Bummer dudes. The times they are a changing!
#3
Come mothers and fathers
Throughout the land
And don't criticize
What you can't understand
Your sons and your daughters
Are beyond your command
Your old road is
Rapidly agin'.
Please get out of the new one
If you can't lend your hand
For the times they are a-changin'
When is listening to someone talking to another person in another country 'domestic'? Nothing like being presented with the BS identifier in the first line of an article.
And mistakes - go read An Army at Dawn. Based upon the standards demanded today, Roosevelt should have been impeached. Well, you know, since we're all ajudged today by actions of earlier generations. Like holding white Americans responsible for slavery in order to extort power and resource. Not that my post-Civil War legal immigrant ancestors had anything to do with it. But I am presumed guilty just the same. So how about a little post facto judgement upon Chimp-Stalinist-Roosevelt's performance too.
#5
It was a great thing, Yusef Islam. But Allah would be more pleased if the ISI would stop training and funding Talib and Kashmiri terrorists. Pakistan will never be allowed to have Afghanistan as its "Defence in Depth", nor will India ever allow Pakistan to take over Kashmir and [whatever the J stands for -- Jummah?], so they might as well stop wasting everyone's time, money and men.
#9
Related story: Bush admits mistakes on the MSM.
Today supporters of America, admitted that the Main Stream Media should have been beaten into submission fined for statements and positions which gave and continue to give moral support to America's enemies. It's not too late, however to kick the shit expose the MSM anti-Bush bias.
Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales suggested on Thursday for the first time that the president might have the legal authority to order wiretapping without a warrant on communications between Americans that occur exclusively within the United States.
"I'm not going to rule it out," Mr. Gonzales said when asked about that possibility at a House Judiciary Committee hearing.
The attorney general made his comments, which critics said reflected a broadened view of the president's authority, as President Bush offered another strong defense of his decision to authorize the National Security Agency to eavesdrop without warrants on international calls and e-mail messages to or from the United States.
Mr. Bush, in an appearance in North Carolina, told a questioner who attacked the program that he would "absolutely not" apologize for authorizing it.
"You can come to whatever conclusion you want" about the merits of the program," Mr. Bush said. "The conclusion is I'm not going to apologize for what I did on the terrorist surveillance program."
At the House hearing, Mr. Gonzales faced tough questioning from Democrats and Republicans but declined to discuss many operational details.
Representative F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., the Wisconsin Republican who is chairman of the Judiciary Committee and one of the administration's staunchest allies, accused the administration of "stonewalling."
"Mr. Attorney General, how can we discharge our oversight responsibilities if every time we ask a pointed question, we're told that the answer is classified?" Mr. Sensenbrenner asked. "Congress has an inherent constitutional responsibility to do oversight. We are attempting to discharge those responsibilities."
The House and Senate have conducted limited inquiries into the surveillance program, which many Democrats contend is illegal.
Republicans on the Senate intelligence panel have agreed on measures to impose new oversight but allow wiretapping without warrants for up to 45 days.
Senator Arlen Specter, the Pennsylvania Republican who is chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has proposed that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court have a role in ruling on the legitimacy of the program. In the past, Mr. Gonzales and the administration have avoided discussing what they consider hypothetical possibilities in the face of Democrats' accusations that Mr. Bush has asserted unbridled authority to fight terrorism.
At the hearing, Mr. Gonzales inched closer toward acknowledging that intercepting purely domestic calls could be considered legally permissible in his view if the communications involved Al Qaeda.
"You would look at precedent," he said. "What have previous commander in chiefs done?"
Answering his question, he cited Woodrow Wilson's authorizing the interception of all cables to and from Europe in World War I "based upon the Constitution and his inherent role as commander in chief."
Mr. Gonzales said he would use that legal framework to decide whether intercepting purely domestic communications without a warrant was legally permissible. He would not say whether such wiretapping has been conducted.
The attorney general and other administration officials have said the National Security Agency eavesdropping was authorized just to monitor communications with one end outside the United States.
Representative Adam B. Schiff, the California Democrat who raised the question with Mr. Gonzales, said the refusal to rule out purely domestic interceptions without a warrant was "very disturbing."
The position, Mr. Schiff said, "represents a wholly unprecedented assertion of executive power."
"No one in Congress would deny the need to tap certain calls under court order," he added. "But if the administration believes it can tap purely domestic phone calls between Americans without court approval, there is no limit to executive power. This is contrary to settled law and the most basic constitutional principles of the separation of powers."
The Justice Department later backed away somewhat from Mr. Gonzales's statement and said his comments should not be interpreted as a change in policy.
A department spokeswoman, Tasia Scolinos, said, "The attorney general's comments today should not be interpreted to suggest the existence or nonexistence of a domestic program or whether any such program would be lawful under the existing legal analysis."
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/07/2006 01:11 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[10 views]
Top|| File under:
Media reports to the contrary, Congress is not considering a key enforcement measure that the Border Patrol says would halt illegal immigration by 95 percent - a continuous 2,000 mile border fence extending from the Pacific Ocean to the Gulf of Mexico.
Even HR 4437, the bill passed by the House in December, proposes only a 700 mile barrier that would cover just the points where the illegal traffic is deemed the highest.
But according to the Border Patrol - a security fence is far and away the most effective way to halt the flow of illegals currently deluging the Southwest.
After interviewing border agents, National Public Radio reports that apprehensions of illegals plummeted after the border was fenced off in San Diego, dropping from 100,000 in 1993 to just 5,000 in 2005.
However, the decreased traffic in San Diego had been offset by higher numbers of illegals going around the California fence, exacerbating border problems in neighboring Arizona.
The "end-run" phenomenon makes clear the folly of having a partial barrier covering only high traffic areas. And yet even the allegedly "draconian" House bill proposes that only "parts" of California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas be protected with a physical barrier.
Versions of the immigration bill currently under consideration by the Senate are even weaker on this key provision.
Sen. Jon Kyl, who's considered a border hawk, has offered an amendment calling for double fencing only in the urban areas of Arizona, which now have single fencing, plus a stretch of the border west of Naco.
But after the plan raised the hackles of environmentalists, Kyl removed the proposed fencing from a sensitive wildlife corridor.
Instead of following the Border Patrol's advice, Congress is insisting that a "virtual fence" - with high-tech motion detectors and surveillance cameras - will be an effective supplement to areas protected by a physical fence.
But as Human Event's publisher Terry Jeffries argues: "A virtual fence is specifically designed to force hands-on confrontations between Border Patrolmen and foreign nationals crossing our border. It would cause dangerous situations, where a real fence could deter and prevent them."
With Washington refusing to stop the bleeding, private groups are stepping into the breach.
The group "BorderFenceProject.com" has launched a civilian effort to seal off the entire Southwest border. "We are in the process of obtaining permits from the Department of the Interior, through the Bureau of Land Management, and other government authorities to build a high-tech barbed-wire fence" the group says on its web site.
As the federal government continues to dither, groups like the Minutemen and the BorderFenceProject may be America's last hope for effective border security.
#3
We very well may have a third party by the 2008 elections if Congress doesn't shape up. The Permenent Revolutionary Party will have eclipsed the Greens by then.
#4
Rjschwarz-I don't know what it would be called, but I would heartily welcome it-and add even another. It is moronic that people feel trapped to vote for one of two parties. Kinda like a waiter with appetizers walking up to you saying, "would you prefer the boiled cockroach pate or the pureed eyeball pate"? I've lost my appetite for this menu.
#7
But according to the Border Patrol - a security fence is far and away the most effective way to halt the flow of illegals currently deluging the Southwest.
Thank you feckless, appeasing, politically correct Congress for fully avoiding the "most effective" solution.
#8
A viable third party would focus on the defense of the United States and leave those vexing social and cultural issues to the states -- as the founding fathers intended the system to work. It would admit that Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are our enemies, and it would seriously tackle our energy reliance on nasty regimes. (One idea: massive income tax cuts for the middle class, to be replaced by massive taxes on imported energy, coupled with a major program to build new nuclear power facilities. Another idea: demand that Saudi Arabia immediately stop exporting Islamism and start acting like a normal country -- if not, a nice little Shiite-dominated US protectorate in the eastern oil-rich area of the country will soon appear on the map).
Posted by: Jan ||
04/07/2006 13:56 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Sadly, I don't think that the democratic party can produce a serious candidate in the next several rounds. They have become a party controlled by raging moonbats with no serious plan for national security - no matter what rhetoric they try to cobble together.
A third party never does anything but split the vote in the general election. The best thing that could happen would be a serious republican candidate who will win the primary by standing for serious immigration reform. Time to get rid of the good ol' boy network in the republican party by voting out the dead wood in the primary elections. The immigration issue, and the Republican party's inability to address it, may just be the ticket that will finally do just that.
#11
For all his faults, Jesse Jackson did once say something that is cynically accurate.
"If you can get 100 businessmen to agree on something, it is the law."
Much of US law is indeed "business-centric" when the republicans are in charge, and "NGO (special interest group)-centric" when the democrats are in charge. In neither case do the interests of "the people" carry much weight because "the people" do not lobby, frame the debate, or really do much more than vote.
The political parties, business organizations, and non-governmental organizations all agree that the status quo, that is, the two existing political parties only, shall be maintained by law, no matter how unrepresentative or ineffectual they become.
So there is some truth when people say that there is no difference between the two parties. And yet they are profoundly wrong with what "no difference" means.
On this issue, this means that the republicans are split between the businessmen who want open borders, and their NGO factions that want the border closed. Conversely, the democrats NGO factions want the border open, and their business (union) factions want the border closed.
This split means that despite the bluster, dust and smoke, neither party intends to do anything, yet declare victory. Paralysis at the federal level.
However, this does leave an opening for border State governments and even private organizations to intervene. And this leads to considerable irony.
That being that there are ways to do this on a budget, that have not been seriously considered. Ways of dissuading illegals from crossing in the first place that are not terribly expensive and work. Tent cities, national guard, minutemen, Indian tribes, etc.
We, the people, might not have even bothered the feds in the first place, and handled the problem ourselves. So all we would really need is that the feds stay out of the way and not try to prevent us from restricting the border.
#12
If you're sick and tired of politics, wait until you get a taste of minority governments, which a viable third party would bring. Be careful what you ask for.
#13
With the majority of American citizens-voters in favor of immigration reform, no pol in his or her right mind would support this kind of a limited measure - methinks we should prob be interpreting this article as "Congress votes for Phase One Fence Construction. Phase Two Up for Vote after 2008".
#14
JEWISH WORLD REVIEW reports that CHavez of Venezuela may be providing $$$ support to Mexico's ultra-Left political opposition, includ for the upcoming Mexican elections for President.
SO we've got Radical Spetzlamists up north in CANADA endangering AMerica not only from radical terror but also from the Gorby-Yelstin-Putin Doctrine where Russia reserves its right to use military force to protect Russian citizenz/emigres anywhere in the world, and now Mexico potens succumbing to the Ultra-Left. AMerica is being surrounded, boyz, FTLG STAY ARMED AND READY!?
(ScrappleFace Network News Audiocast Transcript. To listen, scroll down, or subscribe to the ScrappleFace podcast at iTunes.)
Just a day after Katie Couric announced shell leave NBCs Today Show to host the CBS Evening News, CBS chairman Les Moonves said hes close to a deal to replace 60 Minutes reporter Mike Wallace with Wheel of Fortunes Vanna White. The world-famous letter-turner said, Im not really a journalist by training, but I might give it a spin.
-30-
The number of New York City residents on welfare fell to about 402,000 last month, the lowest level since 1964 down sharply from the peak of 1.2 million people in 1995. Upon hearing the news of growing employment and shrinking dependency on government, New York Democrats called an emergency summit to deal with the crisis.
-30-
Scientists have discovered a fossil near the Arctic circle which they say provides a missing link between sea-dwellers and land-based animals. The creature, with a head like an alligator and a body like a fish, may have been able to breathe air and even waddle across land for short distances. The journal Nature says the find is the most important evidence for evolution since the discovery of the jack-a-lope.
-30-
In an attempt to break the Senate deadlock on immigration reform, Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel and Florida Sen. Mel Martinez proposed a bill today that would crack down on recent illegal immigrants, yet offer a path to citizenship for those who violated U.S. immigration law before January 2001. Under the terms of the measure, roughly six million undocumented workers living in the U.S. for five years or more would be granted guest worker visas and then hired to work for the Immigration and Naturalization Service. With the INS, they would try to find and deport six million others who broke U.S. law more recently. Sen. Hagel, reportedly a Republican, said putting our illegal amigos on the federal payroll, will help us keep track of them. As federal bureaucrats, their high pay and excellent government health insurance will keep them from becoming a burden on American taxpayers.
-30-
In related news, Sen. Hillary Clinton, of New York, said yesterday that under the immigration reform bill, already passed by the House, she could be jailed for giving assistance to undocumented workers who live among her constituents. It was not immediately clear if the senator would serve time in the same correctional facility as the Good Samaritan and Jesus of Nazareth.
-30-
The 2006 Congressional Pig Book hit the stores yesterday, with a list of $3.4 billion in Congressional spending for pork-barrel projects. A coalition of senators from the south immediately earmarked $14 million for a study to determine if next years Congressional Pig Book could be printed on domestically-grown tobacco leaves.
-30-
#1
Scientists have discovered a fossil near the Arctic circle which they say provides a missing link between sea-dwellers and land-based animals. The creature, with a head like an alligator and a body like a fish, may have been able to breathe air and even waddle across land for short distances. The journal Nature says the find is the most important evidence for evolution since the discovery of the jack-a-lope.
/we lived on jack-a-lope back in the winter of 19 and 21..ah the memories »:-)
US Senate leaders have declared a breakthrough on a long-sought overhaul of the country's immigration law, clearing the path to possible citizenship for millions of illegal immigrants, if among other things, they register for military service.
Bill Frist, the Senate Republican majority leader and Harry Reid, the leading Democrat in the Senate, said while some details still had to be worked out, they expected the Senate to pass a comprehensive reform package shortly. Frist, at a news conference with Reid and a dozen other Republicans and Democrats, said: "We've had a huge breakthrough ... that will lead us to the conclusion of passing a very important bill."
The deal centres on a compromise offered by Republicans that included a temporary worker programme backed by George Bush, the president. It also would allow illegal immigrants who have been in the US for more than five years a chance to become citizens, if they meet a series of requirements - including registering for military service - and pay a fine.
Twenty years from now they're going to be doing the exact same thing all over again, with many of the same players spouting exactly the same arguments.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/07/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I harbor mixed feelings about them enlisting:
if they are truly only joining to gain legal status and not really caring about their position in the service, would you want them watching YOUR back?
With the recent waves of protests with the Mexican flag being hailed, it's hard to know where their true allegiance is. Most being here for the jobs and free services that are provided them, not because they love america and are willing to die for this country.
Also remembering that these are folks that are here illegally and knowingly have broken the law.
It used to be thought that if you weren't smart enough to get into college you went into the military, not the case anymore. With all of the high tech stuff our military has now, you have to be fairly smart to join. Plus speaking english would be a plus huh? The educational level of most illegals is 2nd or 3rd grade I think.
Posted by: Jan ||
04/07/2006 1:06 Comments ||
Top||
#2
also, integrity is a big deal to me. Folks that break the law by being here illegally, and think that they are getting their way by having protested as they did, is sending the wrong message.
Posted by: Jan ||
04/07/2006 1:09 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Not really the brightest thing in the world to train self-proclaimed lawbreakers in the use of deadly force. But this bill will never get past the House. Unlike the House of Lords Senate, members of the House of Representatives actually have to face their constituents and be accountable for what they do. There are enough people (me included) who would go ballistic at any whiff of amnesty that no bill with amnesty in it will emerge from the House Senate conference.
#4
Despite the good and decent folk of this country we may yet lose this this war because we are governed by whores - as this story so amply demonstrates.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
04/07/2006 1:24 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Sure makes Frist look weak. No leadership in the Senate.
#9
This actually makes me happy, because it means Frist just made himself unelectable in the primary for the next Republican presidental candidate - and he was shaping up to be a contender. I've never liked the cat torturer/killer and he is, IMHO, unelectable in the general election anyway. H'es just waaay too creepy to be in charge. Adios, Frist.
#10
This is simply more appeasment. Teddy had it so right! Not Kennedy, but Roosevelt!
Theodore Roosevelt's ideas on Immigrants and being an AMERICAN in 1907.
"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."
#13
Most senators have been playing politics with this borders issue. They bob and weave giving a little and taking a little. This is how they play their game. This works with senators, but these same honorable assholes don't realize that playing like this with the voters is suicide. Every day, 3 different organizations urge me to make calls or send faxs to the senate on the borders issue. I am to the point that I'm ready to march on Washington and capture the city. I urge everyone else to call all senators offices and send faxs to them. When 60 or 80 million calls a day are being made, then maybe they will stop playing politics with US and OBEY their employers like good little senators.
Seal the borders NOW !
#14
We've all heard that building a wall or watertight manned border security is logistically impossible; I'm not sure that's true. A smartly constructed electric fence might work and is easier on the eyes than concrete, though I am sure that those with MUCH greater technological expertise than I have (I have none) would have a way of realizing the same effect without an actual structure-kind of a tazer "zap-em" approach.
IMO, the temporary worker program, however, IS a logistical impossibility. Just going through the mental steps of how it would work is an exercise in comedy. Costly? How high can we count? Reliable? We're talking about humans with pieces of paper as proof of legality-pretty dam*ed unreliable, in my experience. The bulk of the workers are doing lower-paying jobs, is that correct? So companies and corporations, already with tight budgets and schedules, are going to go through the machinations of filing papers and waiting to hold on to these low-paid workers? Something stinks here. If we were talking about 6-figure executives keeping their jobs, I might be able to believe that companies would go through this temporary program, but not with lower-level workers. It sounds like a sham-and a pricy one-to me.
Priority: Secure the borders. Whatever you use-fence, electric currents, something else-I think this is what we all want most.
Next priority: assimilation. Require 4-5 years of ESL classes for all immigrants and require an exit exam of proficiency. Stop providing Spanish or English options on phones-one because it encourages Spanish-language chauvinism (which those of us in ESL have noticed for some time), and two, it creates a system of preference where immigrants of other languages aren't getting the same treatment as Hispanic immigrants. How many companies are offering Chinese language instructions by pressing 2? Or Vietnamese? Or Russian? There are hundreds of languages and dialects; if we believe in a land of equal rights, are we going to offer translations for every language? Of course not-it's ridiculous. So why are we doing it for Spanish? Because they are the largest minority is not a good answer.
I understand why fellow bloggers are upset about lawbreakers getting what amounts to amnesty-and do agree in principle. But HOW are we going to round up 10-20 millions illegals and deport them, and while we shout and stomp for this, are WE prepared to pay for it? WE would be paying for it. This is the toughest question.
How about this idea for the illegals already here-let each pay the fine and jump through the hoops for the opportunity to be a RESIDENT only? After 25 years or so, then they can jump through some more hoops and pay more fines to be citizens, if they've worked off their criminal debt. Would this work?
#15
Going to be a bloodbath like '94 for the trunks in 2006 and 2008. This is what happens when you fail to show leadership. The congress-critter DO think we are stupid. That is the whole problem.
#16
Breakthrough? What breakthrough? The bill wasn't even brought to a vote. The bill stalled because the Dem leadership objecteted to allowing ammendments to be brought to the floor. Can you imagine that a bill of this complexity is so perfect comming out of committee that it doesn't warrant offering ammendments? BTW, this bill was cobbled together on monday (one day) and final language (500+ pages) wasn't introduced untill Wednesday afternoon. I'm no fan of Sen.Sessions (R-AL), but I encourage everyone to read his top ten "loopholes" on this pending bill. IMO, even with ammendments, this bill looks really bad.
#18
Jules, I'm with you. Seal borders first, then allow them to blend in speaking english only and not voting. Tax them to pay for the border patrols. Also, count them as immigrants from Mexico and add them to the back of the line to become citizens, accept for those who serve in the military.
Now is that hard ? Why does it take the phukan senate years to get here ?
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/07/2006 10:58 Comments ||
Top||
#20
this is political suicide for both sides. These guys are like the hollywierd actors, they've forgotten that its the little people who make them what they are.
Few people are asking to round up and deport the hard working Mexicans who want to become productive citizens, they are welcome here. But if no wall is produced and the border isn't sealed, expect pitchforks and lighted torches in an upcoming election.
#21
Remember when Mexico was about to go belly-up financially in the 1990s? Remember when Clinton decided to bail out the Mexican government to prevent the Mexican economy from collapsing? Remember his reason for doing so? It was to prevent a tidal wave of illegals from heading north across the border.
Now picture this: if all the illegals are sent back, if the border is sealed preventing illegals from entering, if no guest-worker program is implemented, then at least one of two things would happen: the Mexican economy deteriorates over time to the point of destitution, and a possible civil war.
In either of the two cases, you will need several divisions along the border to stop that wave, but this time they would be called refugees.
The problem is not an unsealed border, but what lies on the other side of it, to the south: a corrupt economical and political system.
I think you should give the folks in Washington a little more credit. Emotional, short-sighted reactions will not solve anything.
#23
I agree with Jules earlier comment, that it would be a good idea to have them pay fines to be able to be residents only and not have the right to vote. At least for this very important first step in the process. I would like to see strong hoops of some kind to attain citizenship.
I also like the idea of not having everything in bilingual modes, it does seem to send the message that it isn't necessary to learn english.
Job issues aside, I would like to stop all of the free services we give these illegals. Stop the anchor baby law, and only keep services given to real emergencies.
Being able to attend schools needs to be looked at as well. I'm not quite sure what the answer is here but it isn't right to keep going the way we are with our school system. It's scary to look at the progression of our wanting to be PC, placing our flag as an equal to the Mexican flag. To allow illegals to feel comfortable in our american schools. Please check out the link below:
I still want a fence, this would be money well spent.
Posted by: Jan ||
04/07/2006 13:49 Comments ||
Top||
#24
SA4511: "The problem is not an unsealed border, but what lies on the other side of it, to the south: a corrupt economical and political system."
True, that is a big part of the problem, 4511. But what is the solution? AN ACHIEVABLE, NON-'EMOTIONAL' SOLUTION? We gonna help Mexico become non-corrupt? From the movie 'The Big Easy': "you got your work cut out for YOU, sugar". Or, as I suspect, would you advocate a solution somehow involving "leveling the economic playing fields"? If that's the solution, I would say forget about extra divisions at our borders; get ready for civilian strife bubbling up right in the heartland. Non-emotionality is as important as not giving ourselves away.
#27
I don't know that I agree with the oft-repeated mantra that we couldn't deport 11 million illegal aliens. I just completely disagree with that premise.
If we built a wall, punished employers with prohibitive fines, and authorized local authorities to arrest illegal immigrants on behalf of the federal government, then we could complete the job in a few years. A combination of exclusion, enforcement and attrition would definitely take its toll. Think about how many arrests are performed every year by local police forces (for a reference point, 1.6 mil in 2003 for drug offenses alone). General local enforcement could be combined with targeted enforcement in large illegal alien areas (such as parts of Northern Virginia) If you empowered local authorities to enforce federal immigration law, and provided federal holding facilities in central locations with buses running back and forth to the border on daily deportation runs it could work. Am I missing something? Where does the idea that we CAN't POSSIBLY do this come from? I think it's another example of leftist dogma that conservatives have adopted in an effort to appear reasonable in their argument and, in so doing, giving up the argument. If nothing else, this model should at least be a starting point for negotiations...
#28
You'd have to deal with the "sanctuary" cities, not that cleaning those city governments out would bother me much. This we're so "moral" we're above the law insanity, ala the SanFran Tweekers, has gone on long enough.
#29
I feel we should at least START trying to deport them. Our not doing anything bugs the hell out of me. The catch and release attitude I'm sure drives our law enforcement folks nuts. Seeing illegals seemingly not worried about getting caught is a big deal.
Posted by: Jan ||
04/07/2006 14:19 Comments ||
Top||
#30
How about this ?
Step 1. Close southern border.
Step 2. No more legal immigrants from Mexico after those already in the pipeline are processed.
Step 3. All illegals must register and be issued a number (not a Social Security number), told that they must have a job, place to stay, learn english, or join and be accepted by the military.
Step 4. Find and deport anyone without a number.
Step 5. Give community service time to all without a fulltime job.
Step 6. Put those who have full time employment, speak and read english, at the back of the citizenship line and process them into citizens after any fines are paid.
Step 7. Repeat steps 4 thru 6 until no more non citizens.
Step 8. If a company or farm wants green card labor, then that company brings them here and takes them home. If any fail to go home, that company loses it's priviledge to do so again and pays a fine so we can hunt down the illegal.
Re: The "Sanctuary" cities, think about the MASS migration of illegals FLOCKING to those cities in a scenario of aggressive deportation. Eventually, the strain on community resources from overloading the infrastructure (schools, hospitals, etc.) would be so great, either the local governments would have to levy huge taxes on local population to support them, the residents would vote in new leaders, or the entire place would collapse.
Any municipality who maintained asylum laws in the face of a coordinated deportation program would quickly come under seige from within which would eventually result in the deportation of those lawbreakers seeking asylum...
#33
Good point, mjh. Not sure how long it would take nor if you could keep like-minded state legislatures out of the equation so the implosion would occur without outside interference - I'm thinking El Lay and CA, of course.
lotp - Re: #25 - The bad shit is probably already happening - whether we leave them to their own devices (their feudal system) or [insert your plan here]. There is no easy answer and I don't accept your easy (rather cheap shot) criticism without at least the beginnings of a workable alternative. But controlling the border comes first or everything offered is a joke. Surely that makes sense to everyone but La Raza.
I've just completed a double shift and have to go home to eat and sleep. Have fun, folks.
#34
Wasn't meant as a cheap shot criticism, but just a warning. I don't disagree that we need to control the border. I just think that we all need to be very clear-eyed about the 2nd order effects of any serious crackdown.
The bad stuff that is 'probably already happening' could get a lot worse more quickly than we would be ready to handle it. Right now, for instance, we can't use UAVs in any significant number to monitor movements across the border because the technologies for "sense and avoid" are not developed - and that means they can't fly where general and commercial aviation flies.
We've waiting too long to deal with this - but realistically we are also stretched heavily in some areas. What is needed IMO is both to begin a crackdown on those we catch and ALSO to accelerate a build up of capabilities. Broadcasting a tough line we cannot enforce is counterproductive.
#35
lotp, given the involvement of the Federales, MS-13 and al-Qaeda in the drug trade, is there any doubt that the contacts have been made, even if they haven't formed a firm and fast alliance? If al-Q wanted to get across the border I have no doubt they could do so now in whatever numbers or with whatever weapons they wish simply by buying off whatever Mexicans they need to.
#36
Where does the idea that we CAN't POSSIBLY do this come from?
From the notion that greater men than you have tried and failed, in all sorts of places and in all sorts of political systems in the world. Migration, whether legal or not, is nothing new and there hasn't been a method developed yet to stifle it, although the Berlin Wall came close. Unfortunately, your border is a bit too long to implement such a solution without the necessary $trillion that it would take.
More realistically, and the snarkiness aside, what you are proposing is just a respite, trading the term illegal for refugee in the long term. If you think illegals have sympathizers on the inside, wait until they become refugees. This is fine if the number of sympathizers in the US is relatively smaller than the number of non-sympathizers (and the up-coming elections will show if this is the case). That's the sociological angle.
From the economical angle, there's also the notion of return on investment. Is it worth it to spend the billions necessary to make the border impassable? Can this money be spent more wisely elsewhere, such as the military or intelligence services? What impact will a reduction of illegals have on the US economy, without a guest-worker program as a substitute? And the all-encompassing...is it simply worth it?
As long as Mexico remains a basketcase, there is no simple solution.
#38
We could deport 11 million illegals the problem is that we would have to go seriously draconian to do it. Don't know if puplic would except that and spend the money to do it.
Give an example of "greater men than me" that have tried and failed? You have raised the tired Berlin analogy...without addressing the standard (and, in my mind,correct) rejoinder that the Berlin Wall was intended to keep people FROM LEAVING an oppressive state, and where people were willing to risk violent death at the hands of the regime they sought to escape. When illegal immigrants come here, they are not fleeing mortal danger.
I'll give you an example of where a wall has worked: Israel. It has achieved its purpose there, despite the wailing and gnashing of teeth that preceded its construction.
As for the cost of our wall, assuming that a wall would raise our border enforcement to 85%, I would guess that the per mile cost of a wall would be FAR less costly and more effective than providing sufficient staff and resources to ensure 85% success without a wall. (It's an arbitrary number, but whatever number you choose, it holds true)
Your sociological angle holds absolutely no water with me...I believe whatever policy that is designed can sufficiently disincentivize the hosting of "refugees" to make it a non-issue.
As for ROI, I heartily agree, but to make a full accounting, you need to take into account ALL costs and foregone revenue that result from the presence of illegals, including tax revenue that is not collected, the degradation of infrastructure and public services that occur due to the number of free riders, the opportunity cost of care not given to the citizens when warranted due to limited resources and any other externalities that occur due to illegals (for example, one that is not accounted for above in my list would be the cost of uninsured drivers who cause accidents). Finally, I would include the cost of incarcerating illegal aliens who, aside from their presence here, commit felonies and are hosted in our federal and state penitentiaries.
Assuming you are correct about the situation in Mexico, and the lack of a simple solution, who said my proposed solution was simple? It's not, it's complex. But it requires will and commitment to restore LAW and ORDER.
I don't disagree that the situation in Mexico contributes, but I do disagree with any implication (not sure that you were implying this, but...)that it is the job of the US to improve the situation in Mexico, that is the same logic of the Left that holds that Israel is responsible for the plight of the Palestinians...though I will say that the comparison is valid in that a wall worked there, and it can work here.
#41
An America that would round up 11 million people and ship them across a border wouldn't be America anymore.
1) Secure the border with an appropriate, physical fence from San Diego to Brownsville.
2) Institute a guest worker program that accomodates the needs of American business (unemployment is < 5%, so no nonsense about displacing American workers) and allows orderly entry into the country by foreign nationals (not just Mexicans). Foreign nationals who play by these rules get improved status for subsequence citizenship (those who join the US Army do even better). We can do this, and it pays dividends in the long term.
3) Regularize the status of illegal aliens by the methods proposed, including ESL, a monetary settlement, and a period of waiting. And of course, a renunciation of other citizenship claims when they become citizens here.
I don't see any other way that works.
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/07/2006 17:46 Comments ||
Top||
#42
You have raised the tired Berlin analogy...
...as an example of what extreme (and very effective) border security looks like. This is not what the solution calls for in the US, but it's the sort of thing that would be required, in my opinion, if you intended to stop most illegal immigration from Mexico. A wall won't do it.
The question of leaving or entering is irrelevant. It's the border's porousness that is at question.
When illegal immigrants come here, they are not fleeing mortal danger.
But they are fleeing extreme relative poverty. The incentive to cross the border is just too great. Stop immigration completely, legal or illegal, and the incentive will turn into an even bigger necessity.
BTW, the vast majority of escapees from eastern Europe during the Cold War were economic and not political.
I'll give you an example of where a wall has worked: Israel.
You can't realistically compare Israel and the US. I have no idea what its length is, but let's assume a figure of 200 miles. This would hardly solve the problem in the US. In addition, a long wall without significant spending on maintenance, surveillance, countermeasures, etc., is useless. Israel is a microcosm of the situation in the US. In their case, a wall is feasible.
I would guess that the per mile cost of a wall would be FAR less costly and more effective than providing sufficient staff and resources to ensure 85% success without a wall.
I disagree. A physical obstacle without additional security measures is just as useful as no barrier at all. People can get very resourceful when pressed. Additional security measures add costs. In this case, I would prefer to spend the money on other means and resources, rather than a wall by itself.
Your sociological angle holds absolutely no water with me...
By sympathizers I was refering not only to people who actively help illegals, but also skeptics who see that a wall will not solve the problem, or even that it is necessary. I assume you can count most Democrats in that category, but again, the elections will provide more insight.
As for ROI, I heartily agree, but to make a full accounting, you need to take into account ALL costs and foregone revenue that result from the presence of illegals,
If you could legally import a class of people willing to do the same jobs under the same conditions, then you would find that these people incur the same costs to the American economy that you speak of. And unless you are not interested in a stable economy, such a class of workers is indeed needed in the US.
I don't disagree that the situation in Mexico contributes, but I do disagree with any implication (not sure that you were implying this, but...)that it is the job of the US to improve the situation in Mexico,
You will note my reference to Clinton and Mexico's financial crisis in the 1990s. Criticize Clinton all you want, but at least he (or his advisors) had the foresight to understand what would happen if Mexico went belly-up economically. So you see, the fact that the US is physically attached to the US, means that, from time to time, you indeed have to care about improving the situation in Mexico. It's my understanding that the loans provided by Clinton have since been forgiven. So there you have it.
Other than putting some sort of constant and meaningful pressure on the Mexican government, and I have no idea what that would be, there is very little that can be done. NAFTA was the big hope, but that turned out to be a big flop. This is just an unlucky circumstance of the world's biggest economy, sitting geographically next to...well...Mexico.
Lastly, this is just like the ports fiasco that the media, and people like Lou Dobbs, have latched on to. People are basing their opinions on emotions, without considering the entire long-run picture. (You know, the best thing that the anti-globalization crowd can do right now, is sit back, get some popcorn, and watch protectionism and overheated nationalism do its thing.)
Disclaimer: I am not for illegal immigration. I would rather things would be done according to the rules. But sometimes, life is just not fair.
#43
I think WXJAMES post #30 is pretty close to right on. We have to use the National Guard to close the border as step 1. We need to give those illegals that are here 6 months to register for either a path to permanent citizenship or as temporary guest workers. After the 6 months any business that hires an unregistered worker can be fined big dollars. This fine revenue will be shared between the state and local municipality where the infraction occurred (financial incentive for enforcement). The illegal would be deported and NEVER have the opportunity to be either a guest worker or citizen candidate. Same goes for any illegal found after the 6 month registration period.
With respect to the effect this will have on Mexico, my feeling is that only pressure will generate change there. The ruling elites of Mexico might rather see economic reform than to be disembowled by a raging mob. They have far more to gain by positive participation than by attempting to maintain the status quo.
#45
Step 3 of #30 above stays as is. Many of these illegals are now integral workers in their companies. Sending them home will add to the turmoil. They can stay put. They must register within 60 days, not 6 months. Why would they need 6 months. And finding those who don't register is as simple as offering a reward. $10 bucks per head would bring them in by the thousands.
My impression is that Mexicans are good workers and industrious, unlike some of our home grown minorities. Also, they have a moral compass and will fit in well if we help, rather than herd up in ghettos. Focus on regular work, communications in english, and accepting and following the rules we live by will allow them to melt, unlike Muslims, who don't want to lower themselves to our level. But I digress.
#47
In 24 years as president, Saddam Hussein managed to put at least 300,000 of his citizens in mass graves -- that's an average of at least 34 per day. He also spent eight years at war with Iran at a cost of perhaps 1.7 million lives. That's 582 per day. Where was your outrage then? STFU.
#48
Naomist - Fred Phelps has a place for you in his "church" - take it,you deserve it (and him).
TROLL
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
04/07/2006 19:49 Comments ||
Top||
#49
Announce that illegal aliens caught will be organized and armed for the return tip. The Mexican government will seal the border the next day.
Posted by: ed ||
04/07/2006 20:13 Comments ||
Top||
#50
Ed, there's an idea! ;-)
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/07/2006 20:29 Comments ||
Top||
#51
No real explanation in the comments above on how the guest worker program would actually work. From beginning to end, step by step, how would it work? Start with the illegal immigrant being here...
MULTAN: The District Bar Association (DBA) in Multan has decided to send a lawyers delegation to Denmark to file a case against people who were involved in the publishing of caricatures of Holy Prophet (PTUI PBUH). Pervez Aftab will lead the delegation. DBA President Syed Athar Hussain Shah Bukhari told a Shan-e-Risalat Conference at the Bar Room on Thursday that the bar would give a Rs 10 million reward to a person who kills people involved in the publication of caricatures.
He said the Danish law did not allow any one to hurt others religious sentiments. He said enlightenment and moderation were the symptoms of Bush-flu and that Pakistani rulers were suffering from it. He said he was detained for 11 hours when the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal announced that it would take out a Namoos-e-Risalat rally. The delegation included Pervez Aftab, Mian Habibur Rehman Ansari, Abdul Sattar Goraya, Moulvi Sultan Alam Ansari, Senator Sardar Latif Khan Khosa, Javed Hashmi, Malik Sajjad Ahmed Chavan and Pir Akhtar Bodla.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/07/2006 00:18 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It won't be long before an eye-for-an-eye comes into play.
Unless I-slamics find self restraint, they will find themselves on the wrong end of a vendetta.
QUETTA: Around ten thousand expelled Maisuri, Raiheja and Kalpar Bugti tribesmen have so far returned to their native villages in Dera Bugti, District Coordination Officer Abdul Samad Lasi told reporters on Thursday. Lsi said the returning tribesmen were being rehabilitated and the government was providing them tractors, seeds sheep and goats. Life has returned to the area and the civil administration has already been resorted in the district, he said. Schools and shops have also reopened in the area, he added.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/07/2006 00:27 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
ISLAMABAD: People trying to destabilise China using the "Tibet card" and "religion card" oppose regional peace and stability, and as such are Pakistan's enemies, said Mushahid Hussain Sayed, the Pakistan Muslim League (PML) secretary general, on Thursday.
Mushahid said the PML felt a healthy relationship with China was important for Pakistan's economic development and regional role. He rejected fears that Beijing was a "regional threat to Islamabad", saying China was a peace loving country with good relations with Pakistan. He praised China's economic progress, particularly in lessening poverty. "Pakistan should take lessons from China, which has brought 300 million people living below the poverty line into the economic mainstream," he said. The PML leader hoped both countries would continue their long friendship. "We believe our all-weather friendship has been reinforced in several areas despite the changing regional scenario," he said.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/07/2006 00:25 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
Tibet card? Ya, right. Hollyweird has been trying that for years, without success. The US is going for capitalism and free market. Can't have a solid dictatorship with a free market. Just doesn't work.
#3
Does this mean that Pakistan will be expelling all Uighur students from its madrassas? No more support for the "free eastern Turkestan'" movement seeking to to strip Xinjiang from China? Or is that religion card OK? I'm confused.
#4
The "China Card" is dated. A woeful attempt by a backward country to offset the "India Card".
Drop the card, WackiPacki and find binny and the doc.
Posted by: Captain America ||
04/07/2006 9:46 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Iff CHINA = IRAN succeeds in its ambitions for hegemony =empire, Pakistan should know there no seats on the Chicom Politburo or Presidium reserved for Pakistanis. Prob this article has more to do wid imploding China in the name of capitalism and capitalism-based modernization than anything else.
KARACHI: Two guards and a driver of Akhtar Mengal, the president of the Balochistan National Party, are in the custody of intelligence agencies and have yet to be produced before any court of law in Karachi, claimed MNA Abdul Rauf Mengal of the BNP at a press conference at the Karachi Press Club on Thursday. Rauf Mengal said he and other party leaders had gone to the Darakhsan police station to see their men and obtain information on where they were going to be produced for remand. "But the SHO told us that all the men — Mehboob Ali, Haider and Nasrullah - had been taken away by the personnel of intelligence agencies," he added. Mengal said the charges against the three men were still unknown, as when they went to the police station they were told that intelligence officials had taken the 154 CrPC Book (FIR book) with them.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/07/2006 00:23 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Indias premier investigating agency the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on Thursday arrested five people including three former naval officials in the Navys War Room leak case, more than a month after the Defence Ministry handed over the probe to the investigating agency. At least 17 places were raided countrywide after the agency registered a case against nine people, including Ravi Shankaran, a kin of navy chief Admiral Arun Prakash, in connection with the case under the Officials Secrets Act.
Three people, Kulbhushan Parashar, a retired Navy officer, VK Jha and Vinod Rana, were arrested late Wednesday night and early morning and two more people, Mukesh Bajaj and Raj Rani Jaiswal, were arrested from Pune on Thursday afternoon. While Parashar was arrested from the Indira Gandhi International Airport upon his arrival from London, Rana was nabbed from Dwarka in south west Delhi this morning and Jha was arrested from Muzaffarpur in Bihar. Parashar and Rana were produced before Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Seema Maini at her residence, who remanded them to 14 days in CBI custody.
The others named in the war leak case include Kulbushan Parashar, Wing Cdr (r) S K Kohli and Wing Cdr (r) S Surbe. Places that were raided included the national capital, Goa, Chandigarh, Mumbai and Muzaffarpur. The Defence Ministry had asked the CBI on February 18 to probe the leaks from the naval headquarters, which had led to the sacking of three senior navy officials. The government had referred the case after reports suggested that the leaks pertained to a high-profile defence deal.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/07/2006 00:14 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
ISLAMABAD: The National Accountability Bureau (NAB) on Thursday claimed to have found evidence that former prime minister Benazir Bhutto was involved in the United Nations oil-for-food scandal in Iraq. Bhutto gave a $2 million commission to the defunct regime of Saddam Hussein to win contracts worth $115 million through two Sharjah-based companies she registered in 2000 and 2001, Hassan Waseem Afzal, NAB deputy chairman, told reporters here. He also released documents suggesting Bhuttos connections with international companies involved in the scam and facing prosecution in their countries.
He said NAB began suspecting Bhuttos involvement in the scam after the UN inquiry report into the scandal. He said that Petroline FZC, a Sharjah-based company involved in the scam, is owned by Bhutto and her aides Rehman Malik, former FIA additional director, and Hassan Ali Jaffery, her nephew. The Pakistan government will prosecute these three Pakistanis under UN guidelines. The second company, Tempo Global Gains FZC, is owned by Bhutto and her three children. This company appears to be the ultimate destination of all money siphoned off by Benazir and her aides, he said, adding NAB would ask the UAE government to freeze these companies accounts.
Afzal said that a report sent by Spanish authorities investigating Bhuttos bank accounts in Spain showed that she had received money from banks in Switzerland, the UK and US and companies involved in the oil-for-food scam. NAB would also ask Washington freeze Bhuttos accounts in the City National Bank, Florida, he added.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/07/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Suddenly ? You've been posting the same lame statement all over the burg. Doesn't seem too sudden, seems like a plan. Premeditated. Insincere. Pointless. Dumb, even.
#2
wxjames, Yusef Islam's "Suddenly..." statement is not what he originally posted. But appparently he's been deemed a troll, and it amuses whichever moderator handled it to change the statements. I wonder if he really is Man Bites Dog/Listen to Dogs as someone suggested, or a poorly brought up Pakistani living in Europe as he claimed.
#3
He is LtD (MBD, etc. etc.) and his comments are no longer welcome here. A fact that he is well aware of. As such, he is cordially invited to go set up his own blog, where he'll never be bothered by the RB moderating staff.
#5
It was Eric Hoffer's belief that when dealing with complete fanatics, such constructs as "left" and "right" were, to a certain extent, illusions.
Watching a certain unwelcome individual here switching back and forth between the extreme left and the extreme right IMHO only illustrates a more extreme version of this idea.
Posted by: Phil ||
04/07/2006 12:30 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Suddenly, I got nothin' to say.
Posted by: Yusef Islam ||
04/07/2006 5:19 Comments ||
Top||
Two people were killed and several injured when groups of Hindus and Muslims clashed over prayers at a Hindu temple in north India. Officials said the rioting erupted in a crowded neighbourhood of Aligarh town in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh on Thursday after Muslims objected to the use of loudspeakers overnight by Hindus, who were celebrating the birthday of the Hindu god-king, Rama. "Additional police, including riot police, have been deployed in affected areas and a curfew has been imposed," said S K Aggarwal, the principal home secretary for Uttar Pradesh.
Knives, bricks and bamboo sticks were used in the fighting, and police reported gunshots. Eight of the injured were in a critical condition, officials said. Aligarh, which has a large Muslim population, has been the scene of frequent clashes between Hindus and Muslims in the past.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/07/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Shortly after September 11, the phrase "9/11 changed everything" got popular. I thought it a useful overstatement. More than anything we needed unity, and that helped. Almost five years later, it looks like an understatement. Politics in America, the law, the conduct of war, the West and Islam, U.S. allies past and present--all changed.
But there's a difference. Normally when something changes in the physical world we can see what replaced the old. In the post-September 11 world, about all we can see is that the old templates for understanding these things are under pressure and may be broken. But in nearly each instance, the new template for how we think about them isn't clear. Should prisoners from the terror wars be moved here from Guantanamo and put under established U.S. law, or is something less than that more appropriate?
In an important speech delivered Monday in London, the British Defense Minister John Reid suggested that we consider revising the Geneva Conventions regarding conduct in war. He wants to accommodate the altered reality of modern terrorism. "I believe we need now to consider whether we--the international community in its widest sense--need to re-examine these conventions," Mr. Reid said. "If we do not, we risk continuing to fight a 21st-century conflict with 20th-century rules." The Geneva Conventions were shaped 50 years ago, Mr. Reid said, but "warfare continues to evolve, and, in its moral dimensions, we have now to cope with a deliberate regression towards barbaric terrorism by our opponents."
This summary does not do justice to Mr. Reid's speech, which was at pains to seek a balance in the tension between a West that struggled to mitigate the savagery of armed conflict and an enemy that daily dishonors those principles. He is not suggesting that we adopt the enemy's methods. He is worried that the old rules are putting the soldiers on our side at unacceptable risk. "If we act differently today from how we behaved yesterday, it is not necessarily wrong. Indeed it may be wrong not to." . . .
. . . The central issue raised in the speech by U.K. Defense Minister Reid involves the tension between what up to now has been illegal in war and what in the future should be illegal, if the purpose of law is to protect the innocent against barbarism. My view is that the likelihood of the U.S. or the U.K. "losing its soul" if it upgrades the rules to suppress a shame-free terrorism is about nil. Yes, September 11 changed everything, and it's time to start talking about whether the changes are helping us, or them.
Those italics in the last paragraph (in the original) are the key point. The purpose of the law of war is to mitigate the effect of war on noncombatants. It does this by dividing the universe of potential targets into "combatants" (people you're allowed to deliberately shoot) and "noncombatants" (people you're not allowed to deliberately shoot), then requires the combatants to wear uniforms and carry arms openly. If a combatant follows the law of war in this respect, making himself distinct from a noncombatant, he gains certain protections for himself such as POW status.
The enforcement mechanism is not an "international tribunal" or some such, but reprisal. If a combatant violates the laws of war, by blurring the distinction between himself and noncombatants, or by deliberately targeting noncombatants, he loses those protections--that is, the Geneva Convention permits the opponent to then shoot prisoners and such. As countless old movies remind us, "spies" (i.e. combatants out of uniform) can be freely shot or hanged.
There have been various attempts, including a 1970s "amendment" to the Geneva Convention that the US never signed on to, to dilute these rules by giving "guerillas" a privilege to be pose as noncombatants, use civillians for cover, and so on. In the present conflict, the "antiwar" movement (i.e., folks rooting for the other side) has tried to do something similar, by repeatedly claiming that the US and coalition partners are bound to treat the terrorists as POWs, and so on, even though the terrorists have never observed the laws of war in the first place.
If that becomes the new rule, and there is no disadvantage to routinely violating the laws of war, then there is no incentive to follow them.
Posted by: Mike ||
04/07/2006 06:56 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Why can't people just grasp that morality must be based on reciprocity.
#2
The whole concept is stupid to begin with. Name one country the US has fought who obeyed the Geneva Conventions as well as we have? Our troops face barbarism if captured by *everybody* we fight. Only if we went to war against England would these be of any use.
If we are going to follow these stupid things then follow them to the letter. When they violate them then we are no longer bound by them either. Announce this publicly and repeatedly, then carry it out.
Posted by: Laurence of the Rats ||
04/07/2006 9:14 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Well, Nazi Germany pretty well followed the Geneva Convention in regards to American troops, with one or two exceptions.
IIRC, they were the only ones we have fought in the last 70 years who did. Ironic, isn't it?
#4
Sgt. Mom: I believe you are correct. Imperial Japan, North korea, Vietnam, Saddam's Iraq, al-Qaida; all routinely violated the Convention with respect to POWs.
Note also that captured members of the uniformed Iraq army were accorded POW status in both GWI and the present conflict.
Posted by: Mike ||
04/07/2006 9:58 Comments ||
Top||
#5
It's not about our enemies following the conventions, it's about a nation being able to look its self in the mirror. We should always hold the highground on this, without exception.
The geneva conventions has the points for dealing, or removing the rights, of combatants that do not comply with the rules of land warfare. We need to toughen up, regognise those rule don't apply to terrorists and not feel guilty or even debate our treatment of terrorists, just kill them. Civilized treatment is for those who act in a civilized manner, even during wartime.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
04/07/2006 10:09 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Our gentleness invites their agressiveness. If we were brutally bloodthirsty, then the enemy would become meek. It's not rocket science.
#7
The ironic thing is, during the first Gulf War, the regular Iraqi army treated our POWs very well. Once they were handed off the the special police and Saddam's thugs, things went south.
But you guys are right. For the most part, we can't rely on countries/terrorists to treat our people well. The rules do not apply to the majority of the world.
#8
Japan and North Vietnam never signed the Geneva Conventions.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
04/07/2006 12:37 Comments ||
Top||
#9
49 - I agree with you about keeping the high road. But keeping the high road assures that barbarians are not free to roam at will, killing people in churches, mosques and just minding their own daily business. Life is about balance and balance requires tough choices on what you want to keep and what you need to give up. Saying that we don't have to stoop to barbarism is not the same thing as saying we need to find some sort of balance our fight against barbarians.
#10
The Geneva Conventions and the Treaty of Westphalia were rules adopted by a club of nations in response to a very specific set of circumstances and in congruence with a largely common culture. That same congruence has pretty much rendered war among the members of that club obsolete.
No nation outside of that club is ever going to adopt the rules without strong incentives (the fire and nuclear bombings of Japan come to mind). Enlarging the club is the real goal of this war. Terrorism is a violation of both Westphalia and the GC. So is burning down embassies. Rich, feudal, oil-rich entities sponsoring proxy armies and using religion and emmigration to subvert existing nation states is an even bigger violation.
I don't think that we need to change the GC or give up on the nation state. We need to severely punish the entities that don't adhere to them.
#11
2b your right. I am not saying we need to stoop to terrorists or adopt terrorist acts. The terrorists we are fighting do not adhere to the Geneva convention and are not afforded the protection of enemy combatants when captured. You are also right in that we whould not give one inch of ground to them, my position is to kill them. For example: when the IED's would go off in Bagdad people would come and jump on the vehicles and fire AK's into the air. That was until the Stryker BDE's began to ambush them and shoot them. Then the people quit taking part in the bombings. The fact that we would take action drove them away. This is a lesson we must take across the entire battlefield. They understand and respect someone who is not afraid of violence. We should give it to them.
Posted by: 49 pan ||
04/07/2006 15:59 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Sgt. Mom,
I believe a number of Jewish US soldiers were sent to concentration camps.
Besides, there was the Malmedy massacre. That's more than one or two, I guess.
Posted by: Eric Jablow ||
04/07/2006 18:11 Comments ||
Top||
#13
The Geneva Conventions and the Treaty of Westphalia were rules adopted by a club of nations in response to a very specific set of circumstances
Nice insight. T of Westphalia prevented serious horror war on civillians until 1914. (in Europe)
April 7, 2006: It's shaping up to be a bad year for al Qaeda in Iraq. For example:
@ Following months of rumors, it's pretty much been confirmed that al Qaeda-in-Iraq leader Abu Musab al Zarqawi has been demoted. An Iraqi Sunni now heads the operation, with Zarqawi just dealing with "military matters." Even in that respect, Zarqawi is probably on a short leash. His strategy of all out attacks on Shia Arab Iraqis didn't work, and angered many Sunni Arabs because they lost people as well. Even attacks on U.S. troops were a failure. The Americans were hard to kill, fought back with terrible effect, and many of the roadside bombs used went off in Sunni Arab neighborhoods. That was because the guys planting the bombs were less likely to be betrayed to the police in Sunni Arab areas. But when the bomb went off, the terrorists often did not warn nearby Sunni Arabs (because that would tip off the Americans, who were quick to pick on the meaning of no civilians along a stretch of road.) When Sunni Arab leaders asked Zarqawi to back off, Zarqawi went after the Sunni Arab leaders. That led to open warfare between Sunni Arab tribes and al Qaeda, with the terrorists losing. This, more than anything else, led to Zarqawi's demotion.
@ Last month, U.S. troops captured Zarqawi lieutenant Mohammed Hila Hammad Obeidi. This guy was, like many of the terrorists, a former intelligence officer for Saddam. Obeidi was believed responsible for kidnapping of Italian journalist Giuliana Sgrena last year, and organizing an assassination campaign against government officials. Obeidi is one of over a dozen key al Qaeda leaders captured or killed in Iraq during the past year.
@ Last year, al Qaeda boasted that they were going to establish a "liberated zone" in western Iraq. This is a thinly populated (mainly by pro-Saddam Sunni Arabs) area. A series of American offensives in the area kept al Qaeda groups on the run, and the local Sunni Arabs unimpressed with the ability of the terrorists to fight. Then Zarqawi's tactics turned the Sunni Arabs against al Qaeda, and by early 2006, most of western Iraq was lethally unwelcome for the terrorists. Sunni Arabs were openly welcoming the Americans.
@ You can't beat the trends. After three years of boating of big victories just around the corner, the Arab world has resigned itself to the fact that al Qaeda is all smoke and no fire. No one can deny that most Iraqis hate al Qaeda. Big time. This has become accepted wisdom throughout the Arab world. All the things al Qaeda promised to do (expel the Americans, stop elections and the formation of a democratic government, and so on) they have failed to do. No one likes a loser.
@ Al Qaeda is having a lot of trouble recruiting. No one wants to join a losing team. There are more Iraqi terrorists fleeing to Saudi Arabia, than are coming north to join the jihad. There are still volunteers coming over from Syria, but many more are getting caught, or turned in by Sunni Arabs who live along the border. The Americans are paying bounties for terrorist border crossers, and Sunni Arabs see this as a justifiable source of income.
On the down side, the gangs are still conducting an unprecedented crime wave. This got started during the 1990s, as the UN sanctions left more and more Iraqis unemployed, and desperate. Even Saddam could not halt the growing crime wave. Months before he was overthrown, Saddam opened the jails and freed thousands of the criminals he had not killed yet. It's still not clear why he did this, but it gave the crooks time to get organized, because after Saddam fell, the Sunni Arab secret police and organized street thugs, who kept the gangsters at bay, were gone. It's been gangster heaven ever since. While there are more and more police on the streets, and jails are filling up with more hoodlums than terrorists, the crime rate is still very high.
The corruption in the government is still a big problem. While there are billions of dollars in oil money and foreign aid coming in for reconstruction, Iraqis still see a lot of stealing. Then again, Iraqis are at least admitting that this is not the fault of the Americans. It's Iraqis stealing from Iraqis, and Iraqis have to solve this one.
The corruption has made politics more complicated than it has to be. Political differences are not as divisive as is the competition for key government jobs that give you the best opportunities to steal public money. The squabbling over which party gets what has prevented the new parliament from putting together a new government. It's inefficient, and embarrassing. And it's Iraqis doing it to Iraqis. This is very unpleasant for most Iraqis.
Religious zealots are often as bad as the gangsters, with their demands for "contributions," and physical violence against those who are not "Islamic enough." Iraqis know that they are descended from the people who first made beer and wine. Despite Islamic laws against alcohol, Iraqis like to enjoy a cold beer, or something stronger. But not if the Islamic lifestyle police are in the neighborhoods.
The corruption among so many Iraqi politicians, and maintenance of private armies, means that, while Saddam is gone, there are still Iraqis who would like to replace him as dictator. Democracy isn't something you just put on like a coat, and it works. You have to work at it, and while many Iraqis are, there are many more who would like to bring back the bad old days, just with a different cast of characters.
Posted by: Steve ||
04/07/2006 10:42 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
The US ambassador to Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad, has said US officials have held talks with some groups linked to the Sunni-led Iraqi insurgency. Mr Khalilzad told the BBC that, in his opinion, the talks had had an impact as the number of attacks on US troops by Iraqi militants had fallen. But he stressed he would not negotiate with "Saddamists" or terrorists seeking a war on civilisation.
Mr Khalilzad also warned a civil war in Iraq remained a real risk.
Mr Khalilzad would not specify which groups the US had had contact with other than to say it would not talk to people he called "Saddamists" or terrorists seeking a war on civilisation. That is usually a reference to al-Qaeda figures such as the Jordanian militant, Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi. However, the ambassador said militia groups, which he described as the infrastructure of civil war, were just as much of a problem.
Mr Khalilzad is seen as one of the architects of US President George W Bush's decision to overthrow Saddam Hussein three years ago. He has been more prepared than most US officials to admit things have not worked out as planned. He said the risk of sectarian war breaking out in Iraq remains if ethnic divisions between its Kurdish and majority Arab population developed, and warned it could turn into a wider regional conflict.
"Iraq must succeed," he said. "Not to do everything humanely possible to make this country work would have the most serious consequences for the Iraqis, for sure, but also for the region and for the world." With talks over forming a new Iraqi government still deadlocked almost four months after elections, the ambassador said the patience of the international community with the country's political leaders was running out.
Mr Khalilzad, who was born in Afghanistan, was the US ambassador there before his current posting. Asked if Iraq could do with a political figure who could reach across ethnic and sectarian divides, similar to the Afghan President Hamid Karzai, he agreed such a person would be an asset.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/07/2006 02:58 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
The Arab League will send a delegation to the Iraqi capital next week to open an office in the city, paving the way for a stronger Arab involvement in post-Saddam Hussein Iraq.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/07/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Arab holders of the Khaliphate did not do well by Allah. The restoration of the Khaliph must go to a Pakistani, for only Pakistan had the national will and scholarship to develop the atom bomb without the assistance of anyone. Lahore must be the new centre of the Muslim world.
#2
There will never be a Khaliphate, neither Pakistani nor Saudi, Salafi, Deobandi or otherwise. If we have to glass over the entire world to ensure it. Be wise, Yusef Islam, and explain this to your Muslim brothers so that they understand -- they will not succeed in imposing Islam on the world, neither by force, nor by pursuasion, nor by displacing Westerners by outbreeding them.
Dr. Khan stole the information needed to make the Pakistani nuclear bomb from the European laboratory at which he worked for some years. He did not develop the knowledge and techniques independently. If this little Midwestern housewife knows as much, Yusef Islam, why do not you also?
April 7, 2006: The royal family of Jordan has remained in power partly due to the creation and maintenance of a highly trained, and very loyal, Special Forces command (SFC). This organization is receiving lots of new equipment in the next year, and additional counter-terrorism training as well. About ten percent of the Jordanian armed forces are in the SFC, which consists of a ranger brigade, a paratrooper brigade, a special operations brigade and a newly formed aviation unit. By next year, the SFC will have a helicopter battalion with twelve MD500 light helicopters and a dozen UH-60 Blackhawks. The SFC is basically a light infantry organization. Trucks are more common than armored vehicles. To enhance that mobility, the Jordanians are buying Chinese 120mm mortars to replace the towed 105mm howitzers currently used.
The SFC contains a lot of Bedouins, an ethnic group that has long been very loyal to the royal family. In turn, the royal family takes good care of the SFC, treating them, "like family." But the SFC isn't the royal bodyguard. The SFC is meant to quickly deal with any armed unrest in the kingdom, no matter where the gunmen come from (inside, or outside of, Jordan.) Palestinians are a large segment of the Jordanian population, and have never been happy with the fact that Jordan has a peace treaty with Israel. Jordan is also a refuge for many Iraqi Sunni Arabs who supported Saddam, and are now in exile to avoid retribution for past sins. The SFC is there as a reminder that, no matter how much you may disagree with the king of Jordan, it's not a good idea to get violent about it.
Posted by: Steve ||
04/07/2006 10:50 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
The leaders of Egypt and Israel have announced plans to meet as soon as the Israeli prime minister puts together a government, officials say. Hosni Mubarak, Egypt's president, called to congratulate Ehud Olmert on his being asked by the Israeli president on Thursday to head a government after winning the general election last month. A statement from the Israeli prime minister's office said: "The two agreed to meet immediately after a government is formed." Mubarak also wished Olmert good luck at forging a coalition.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/07/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
The Palestinian prime minister has rejected a decision by the president to assume security control over the Gaza Strip's border crossings. The decision by Mahmoud Abbas on Wednesday night highlights tensions with Hamas in the wake of the Islamist group's victory over the president's long-dominant Fatah in elections in January. Officials close to Abbas, also known as Abu Mazen, said he had come under pressure from the European Union, which threatened to withdraw its monitors from the key Rafah crossing between Gaza and Egypt in response to Hamas's rise to power.
But Ismail Haniyeh, the prime minister, said on Thursday: "The government does not accept the creation of parallel bodies that may take away its authority. This is an elected government, not an appointed one. Brother Abu Mazen confirmed to me more than once that he will not touch the authority of the current government." He said that he would meet Abbas later on Thurdsay to discuss the crossings and other security concerns.
Posted by: Fred ||
04/07/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Elections have consequences, Abby, like the bitch slap. Also consequences for the hamsters, as in no money.
Posted by: Captain America ||
04/07/2006 9:49 Comments ||
Top||
#2
This ongoing farce is starting to resemble Monty Python's "Fish Slapping Dance"...
Have you ever wondered how loyalty among jihadists gets started? Usually, we think of them as a product of a highly contagious ideology. But the stretch of their loyalty has a lot to do with the skillful use of group power.
The idea is simple. If you want to bring about fundamental change in people's beliefs and behavior, a change that would endure and provide an example to others, you needed to form a group around you, where your beliefs can be practiced and articulated and nurtured.
This helps to explain why jihadists are required to attend regular meetings, say weekly or monthly, and to adhere to a strict code of conduct. If they fail to live up to the group's standards, they are reminded of these standards and even punished.
But what are the most effective groups that can bring about carnage?
The answer might lie in the arrests by the Indonesian police in mid-2003 of the first Bali bombers. Fifteen jihadists were directly related to the attacks, another 35 were guilty of harboring fugitives or withholding information, and another 30 possessed explosives or firearms.
In my reading, there are characteristics that distinguish each arrest. Those 15 jihadists who were directly related to the attack show us the fact that the group was aware that for a deadly operation, they had to keep themselves to a smaller group of people.
So they were close knit, which was very important for a successful operation. Imagine if the group got too large, then they would not be able to share things in common and they would start to become strangers. The operation would not work because they could not maintain the loyalty of each member.
In small groups, everybody knows each other and each person has a clear job distribution. As a result, most of the attacks, such as the JW Marriott Hotel, the Australian Embassy and the last year's Bali bombings, were carried out by a small group of hard-core loyalists.
National Police chief Gen. Sutanto said that Noordin and his followers remained hard to catch because they were "highly mobile and because they had a small team", allowing them to easily elude arrest.
While the other 35 who were guilty of harboring fugitives or withholding information in the first Bali blast may not have necessarily agreed with the attack, they shared some degree of loyalty to the group.
An example of this category is the grandson of Achmad Dahlan, the founder of Muhammadiyah, Achmad Roichan, alias Saad, who was arrested in April 2003 for withholding information on the whereabouts of Bali bomber Mukhlas.
Roichan is slender and composed. He talks slowly, with a slight Javanese accent. He has a kind of wry, ironic charm that is utterly winning. In my interviews with him in a Jakarta prison last year, he said he openly disagreed with the motive behind the Bali blasts. But he had fought with Mukhlas in Afghanistan from 1985 to 1988, and that created loyalty to the group.
Next on the list would be Herlambang, alias Subai, a 33-year-old Javanese who was arrested in December 2002 for harboring Bali bombers Sawad, Imam Samudra and Abdul Ghoni after the attack.
He is now in Krobokan Prison in Bali serving a six-year term. He was not directly involved in the attack and may have disagreed with it. But loyalty to the group triggered him to provide sanctuary for the bombers.
Psychologists here in Brussels tell us much about this phenomenon: When people are asked to consider evidence and make decisions in a group, they come to very different conclusions than when they are asked the same questions alone. Once we are part of a group, we are all susceptible to peer pressure and social norms.
"Peer pressure is much more powerful than a concept of boss. Many, many times more powerful. People want to live up to what is expected of them," these psychologists explain.
Historically, loyalty between members of regional terrorist group Jamaah Islamiyah seems to have been assumed within the group and has adjusted to internal needs, external shocks and demographic changes.
For that reason, many who are familiar with the group's workings were not surprised to learn that Abu Dujana has become the reported current leader of JI. According to Petrus Reinhard Golose of Indonesia's counterterrorism task force, Abu Dujana is "the guy who leads and has good relations with al-Qaeda and is trusted".
Abu Dujana, who is originally from a stronghold of Darul Islam in West Java, has proved his unquestionable loyalty to the group. He fought in Afghanistan together with Hambali. He shared his skills as a military trainer in the group's camp in Mindanao and allegedly worked closely with Abu Rusdan, a senior member of the group, before Rusdan's arrest.
As a secretary for Rusdan, Dujana was deeply involved with the group, getting reports from members and arranging meetings.
As for the international community, the real challenge is not merely to counter specific terrorist groups, but to always anticipate those individuals who might join a terror campaign because of an imagined connection with other people's struggles.
These "emotional" connections represent one obscure but real and lasting legacy of events such as the current ethnic-religious insurgency in southern Thailand, the unfinished Moro movement in the Philippines, the ongoing Palestinian struggle in the Middle East and obviously the war in Iraq that has drastically boosted terrorism, instead of lessening it.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
04/07/2006 01:08 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Dude are you for real or has Joe Mendiola found allah and meds?
I should have a free version up in a day or so. I'll post a link when I do.
BTW, they (jamestowm.org) are wrong about a single ship not being able to block the shipping channel at One Fathom Bank. The channel is 0.6 kilometers (600 meters) wide. A Very Large Crude Carrier of 250,000 tons is 330 meters long. Sink it sideways in the channel and you have blocked it.
#2
Terrorists could hijack an LNG [Liquefied Natural Gas] tanker and blow it up in Singapore harbor.
And to continue my nitpicking about the article. Singapore doesn't have a harbour, in the sense the word is generally understood (excepting Changi Naval Base). It doesn't need one. The waters of the Singapore Strait are sheltered and being on the equator, it doesn't experience high winds.
#3
Iff airports can X-ray/image both passengers and passenger possessions, seaports can do the same both during both loading and unloading, plus for tractor-trailers and aboard ship(s) itself.
#4
Joe, its happening. Largely un-noticed, there is a big effort to secure the supply chain. Such that the source of everything is known and no tampering occurs along the way.
From Vietnam to 9/11, remembering a true hero
Tribune Editorial
FORT BENNING, Ga. - The word ''hero'' has been so debased and overused in our modern society that it is almost meaningless when applied to the real thing.
This past week, here at the U.S. Army home of the infantry, several hundred people gathered for the dedication of a larger-than-life bronze statue of a real American hero named Rick Rescorla.
The statue is iconic: the young infantry 2nd lieutenant platoon leader leading the way in combat, his M-16 rifle with bayonet attached ready for use. It is based largely on the photograph on the cover of the book We Were Soldiers Once . . . and Young, written by Lt. Gen. Hal Moore and me, which tells the story of the deadly battles in the Ia Drang Valley in the dawn of the Vietnam War.
Rescorla was a hero of the battles of Landing Zone X-Ray and Landing Zone Albany. He earned a Silver Star, the third-highest military medal for heroism, for his sterling leadership of a platoon of Bravo Company 2nd Battalion 7th U.S. Cavalry, 1st Cavalry Division (Airmobile) in those battles in November of 1965.
But that statue in the home and headquarters and training ground for the mud-foot infantry was the result of unvarnished heroism long after the British-born Rescorla left the Army, became an American citizen and retired from the Army Reserve with the rank of colonel.
The statue of the young Rescorla was born out of what he did as an older, heavier civilian vice president for security for Morgan Stanley in New York City. The brokerage firm occupied 22 floors of the south tower in the World Trade Center.
Ever since the failed terrorist truck bombing in 1993 in the basement of that building, Rescorla was convinced that the terrorists would come back to finish the job. He urged Morgan Stanley to build its own low-rise, high-security headquarters across the river in New Jersey, where most of its employees lived. Not possible, he was told, because the firm had a long-term lease on those 22 floors.
Rescorla fought for the time and money needed for half a dozen surprise full evacuation drills each year. And, yes, he knew how much it cost to pull a couple thousand stockbrokers off their telephones. He knew and didn't care.
On Sept. 11, 2001, Rescorla stood at the window of his office on the 66th floor and watched the tower across the way burn. The Port Authority Police squawk box on the wall urged everyone in the other buildings of the Trade Center to remain at their desks and not panic. You are safe, the reassuring voice said.
Rescorla responded with a curt word: ''Bull--!'' He grabbed his bullhorn and moved floor by floor, ordering Morgan Stanley's 2,700 workers to evacuate immediately. They knew where to go and how to do that, thanks to Rick. Two by two, the old buddy system, they began the long walk down the stairs to the street.
Halfway down, the second hijacked airliner plowed into their building. The building shook and swayed to the impact. Smoke began filling the stairwells. People were frightened. Rick Rescorla used his bullhorn again. This time he sang to the evacuees, just as he sang to his soldiers on a long night in Vietnam. He sang ''God Bless America.'' He sang the songs of the British Army in the Zulu Wars. He sang the old Welsh miner songs.
He got them all out and headed for safety down the streets away from the World Trade Center. Four of his own security people were still up clearing the Morgan Stanley floors, so Rick Rescorla turned and headed back up the stairs with New York City firemen. None of them made it out alive, and neither did Rick Rescorla.
His widow, Susan, spearheaded the drive to raise $100,000 to create that bronze image of her hero and ours. Eventually it will occupy a spot on the Walk of Heroes in a new $76 million Infantry Museum being built at the gates of Fort Benning. More than 500 people turned out to see it unveiled outside the Infantry Museum on the old Army post.
Among them were plenty of other real American heroes. There were three recipients of the Medal of Honor for heroism above and beyond the call of duty. Scores of veterans of America's wars of the past half-century and more. Also, Gen. Moore and his sidekick, Sgt. Maj. Basil L. Plumley.
As I sat there looking at the statue of Rick, my mind carried me back 40 years to that terrible November in Vietnam and the words of the young Rescorla as he and his battle-weary soldiers strode into the surrounded position at LZ Albany to rescue their decimated battalion: ''Good, Good, Good! I hope they hit us with everything they got tonight - we'll wipe them up.''
You want a definition of the word hero? In my dictionary it says simply: Rick Rescorla.
Posted by: Abu Miner ||
04/07/2006 13:34 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Thank God for people like you and Rick. We need people like you now. Everyone has to realize what's at stake here, and get off their ass and do something, like Rick always did.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Britain's defense secretary says international terror has the potential to become civilization's most dangerous enemy because al-Qaida fighters have access to destructive modern technology.
US Senate leaders have declared a breakthrough on a long-sought overhaul of the country's immigration law, clearing the path to possible citizenship for millions of illegal immigrants, if among other things, they register for military service.
MULTAN: The District Bar Association (DBA) in Multan has decided to send a lawyers delegation to Denmark to file a case against people who were involved in the publishing of caricatures of Holy Prophet (
QUETTA: Around ten thousand expelled Maisuri, Raiheja and Kalpar Bugti tribesmen have so far returned to their native villages in Dera Bugti, District Coordination Officer Abdul Samad Lasi told reporters on Thursday. Lsi said the returning tribesmen were being rehabilitated and the government was providing them tractors, seeds sheep and goats. Life has returned to the area and the civil administration has already been resorted in the district, he said. Schools and shops have also reopened in the area, he added.
ISLAMABAD: People trying to destabilise China using the "Tibet card" and "religion card" oppose regional peace and stability, and as such are Pakistan's enemies, said Mushahid Hussain Sayed, the Pakistan Muslim League (PML) secretary general, on Thursday.
KARACHI: Two guards and a driver of Akhtar Mengal, the president of the Balochistan National Party, are in the custody of intelligence agencies and have yet to be produced before any court of law in Karachi, claimed MNA Abdul Rauf Mengal of the BNP at a press conference at the Karachi Press Club on Thursday. Rauf Mengal said he and other party leaders had gone to the Darakhsan police station to see their men and obtain information on where they were going to be produced for remand. "But the SHO told us that all the men — Mehboob Ali, Haider and Nasrullah - had been taken away by the personnel of intelligence agencies," he added. Mengal said the charges against the three men were still unknown, as when they went to the police station they were told that intelligence officials had taken the 154 CrPC Book (FIR book) with them.
Indias premier investigating agency the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on Thursday arrested five people including three former naval officials in the Navys War Room leak case, more than a month after the Defence Ministry handed over the probe to the investigating agency. At least 17 places were raided countrywide after the agency registered a case against nine people, including Ravi Shankaran, a kin of navy chief Admiral Arun Prakash, in connection with the case under the Officials Secrets Act. 
ISLAMABAD: The National Accountability Bureau (NAB) on Thursday claimed to have found evidence that former prime minister Benazir Bhutto was involved in the United Nations oil-for-food scandal in Iraq. Bhutto gave a $2 million commission to the defunct regime of Saddam Hussein to win contracts worth $115 million through two Sharjah-based companies she registered in 2000 and 2001, Hassan Waseem Afzal, NAB deputy chairman, told reporters here. He also released documents suggesting Bhuttos connections with international companies involved in the scam and facing prosecution in their countries.
Two people were killed and several injured when groups of Hindus and Muslims clashed over prayers at a Hindu temple in north India. Officials said the rioting erupted in a crowded neighbourhood of Aligarh town in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh on Thursday after Muslims objected to the use of loudspeakers overnight by Hindus, who were celebrating the birthday of the Hindu god-king, Rama. "Additional police, including riot police, have been deployed in affected areas and a curfew has been imposed," said S K Aggarwal, the principal home secretary for Uttar Pradesh.
The leaders of Egypt and Israel have announced plans to meet as soon as the Israeli prime minister puts together a government, officials say. Hosni Mubarak, Egypt's president, called to congratulate Ehud Olmert on his being asked by the Israeli president on Thursday to head a government after winning the general election last month. A statement from the Israeli prime minister's office said: "The two agreed to meet immediately after a government is formed." Mubarak also wished Olmert good luck at forging a coalition.
The Palestinian prime minister has rejected a decision by the president to assume security control over the Gaza Strip's border crossings. The decision by Mahmoud Abbas on Wednesday night highlights tensions with Hamas in the wake of the Islamist group's victory over the president's long-dominant Fatah in elections in January. Officials close to Abbas, also known as Abu Mazen, said he had come under pressure from the European Union, which threatened to withdraw its monitors from the key Rafah crossing between Gaza and Egypt in response to Hamas's rise to power.
