A distraught Kazakh mother kept her daughterâs mummified corpse in her apartment for three years hoping she would be resurrected by aliens, police said on Thursday. Damn! Kazakhstan.... or Berkeley?
Police spokeswoman Nina Tsys told Reuters by telephone from the town of Pavlodar in northern Kazakhstan that Olga, 27, was believed to have died from an autoimmune disorder after her mother failed -- or declined -- to call for medical help. She should have known better.
She said Olgaâs cousin, worried by her long absence, had repeatedly tried to see her, but the mother would always refuse to let him in under various pretexts. Finally police broke in and made the gruesome discovery. "We believe death was from natural causes, although due to the long time that had passed we canât be absolutely sure," Tsys said. "At least we found no signs of vandalism." Popular Kazakh daily newspaper Vremya carried a picture of the mummified body, with withered limbs and parched skin, lying on a plain bed in the flat in this industrial town. Vremya suggested the mother -- a former nurse -- could have known how to treat the body to preserve it. Man, she really should have known better!
Tsys said the mother appeared to have been influenced by a sect preaching "cosmology" that promised resurrection of her child with the help of a "third cosmic eye" or by aliens. She said the mother was undergoing medical checks at a psychiatric clinic. Her daughterâs remains had been given a proper burial.
Iâll leave the in-line commentary to Fred... the possibilities are endless.
NEW YORK â A new Las Vegas game gets thrill-seekers out of the casinos and into the great wide open â to shoot naked women with paintball guns.
In "Hunting for Bambi," men pay $10,000 each for the challenge of tracking the women, who are nude except for sneakers, and trying to blast them with colored paint.
"You can actually hunt one of our Bambi [expletive] and shoot her with paintballs," Mike Burdick, who runs the game and the site for Real Men Outdoor Productions, says on his Web site, www.huntingforbambi.com.
According to the site, the hunters also have the option of mounting their prey when theyâre done â and having sex with the women.
Despite criticism that the game is sick and barbaric, Burdick said it was all in fun and caters to both male and female fantasies.
"The majority of women have a deep-seated fantasy of that bad-boy image, to be sought after by a stranger," he told Fox News, adding that the women get paid $1,000 to participate in the game â and $2,500 if they avoid getting hit.
Womenâs groups and legal experts are, not surprisingly, up in arms over the cruel game.
"I couldnât quite believe it. [The site] advertised this as really hurting people," said legal expert Susan Estrich on Fox News. "[Theyâre] violating about 20 criminal laws, including assault."
The National Organization for Women has also spoken out against the game.
"Itâs appalling, and itâs really frightening," Rita Haley, president of NOWâs New York City chapter, told the New York Post. "It says something about the men who want to play this game and something about the financial climate that drives women to participate. The big fear is that somebody who plays will eventually want to use real bullets."
But at least one woman who has participated as a target in "Bambi" said people are over-reacting.
"Weâre not getting hurt that bad," Taylor, who didnât give a last name, told Fox News. "[The paintballs] donât hurt as bad as everyone says they do. Itâs about as bad as getting slugged in the arm." I can vouch for that, though Iâd say itâs more like a slap than being slugged - not much inertia in a paintball.
Guns, Babes, Sex, satisfying the Hunting & Mating instincts, the Great Outdoors. This has it all. If he doesnât end up in jail, all participation IS voluntary, after all, heâll make millions.
Alley Oop gives it 5 stars.
Posted by: PD ||
07/17/2003 1:36:57 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Do any of the models look like Ned Beatty?
Posted by: Mountain Man ||
07/17/2003 3:18 Comments ||
Top||
#2
How much it hurts depends upon where you take it. Whilst paintballing, a friend of mine took a ball in the balls - from a member of the fairer sex, whilst taken prisoner. This sort of thing might appeal to him. Strangely, I've found shoulder shots to be the most painful. Can't explain why.
If the chick's only wearing sneakers, she won't be happy about clean shots aimed for between the eyes.
#4
The first thing I thought (Other than, "Ewww!!") was the problem of getting hit in the eyes: The girls should be wearing goggles. The price for avoiding getting hit is set appropriately high, to encourage canniness.
A few other issues: Bugs, poison ivy, cuts and bruises from stones and trees. The girls had better have good insurance.
#5
I've read some stories that this is a scam. They have a videotape of a hunt for sale (suprise). The thinking is that the girls are actresses and did this as a one time thing and are now going public to boost sales of the video. I'll bet if you tried to book a "hunt" they'd tell you that they didn't have any openings right now, but buy the video and call back later.
Posted by: Steve ||
07/17/2003 8:47 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Steve - That would certainly solve any legal problems - and the video, well, that was a "movie" - it was all "staged" and "f/x"... no harm, no foul for the authorities to follow up.
#7
As a tournament paint ball player I find this whole matter extremely distasteful. Paint ball is a great (is painful) family sport, the sort of thing that fathers play with sons. The sort of scenario playing that my team (BMF Renegades) does is very war game like; and I don't want to give some sort of soccer mom with time on her hands an excuse to start "Mother's Against Paint ball." Plus, the guys doing the hunting in this video aren't exactly the finest example of manhood, to put it mildly.
#9
Am I the only person who sees the grotesque similarity to a very REAL serial killer who was doing just this with his vicitms?
Doesn't anyone think this might be unwise: linking sex, violence, and death?
Who do you guys think will be buying these videos? Not Fred and Ethel, but the sick bastard who is already contemplating some "hunting" games of his own.
#10
snopes.com thinks it's a scam as well. Here's the meat: Moreover, in common with most web-based business hoaxes, the Hunting for Bambi site displays a curious lack of contact information. Its putative parent company, Real Men Outdoor Productions, is indeed a registered Nevada corporation, but that in itself doesn't mean much, as anyone can register a business for a small fee. (The address listed for Real Men Outdoor Productions corresponds to the address of another registered Las Vegas company, Clean Your Carpets Inc., whose corporate status has since been revoked.) Perhaps more significant is that no business address or phone number is to be found on the Hunting for Bambi site, and several readers who expressed interest in booking a "hunt" have told us their e-mail inquiries to the Hunting for Bambi folks went unanswered. Those are rather odd business practices for a legitimate company looking to book customers at $10,000 a pop. We're still investigating, but we'd be quite surprised if this scheme was hatched as anything but an attempt to sell videos. (After all, $19.99 tapes and DVDs, and not $10,000 hunts, are the product advertised on the site's opening page.) Our estimation is that the whole "hunt" concept was a phony promotional dog-and-pony show staged for credulous reporters.
Posted by: Steve ||
07/17/2003 14:12 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Celissa: Let's not put the cart before the horse. The whole thing is defiantly "unwise," not to mention bad publicity for a sport I personally like, but lets not start walking down the righteous "there ought to be a law" path just yet. No actual crime has been committed and here are already far to many laws, I think you will agree.
#12
Actually, local âobscenity/public decency/community standardâ type laws should handle this kind of cr#* quite easily -- the problem is how âfreedom of speechâ has been morphed into a veritable license for lasciviousness. The courts can distinguish between political and commercial speech, but have some real problems recognizing the difference between expression and excess. As a fan of state rights in a constitutional federal republic, I think it would be great to give real power to police this stuff back to the local communities that are most affected by it. Oh, and BTW, linking sex and violence is dangerous. Those attracted to it tend to tire of a purely mental exercise . . .
#13
If this is true, all they would have to do is get Bill Clinton to be one of the hunters and NOW and Susan Estrich would see nothing wrong with it. It's a private thing between consenting adults, after all.
#14
On O'Reilly's show, a former prosecutor (female) said she'd like to charge the shooters with assault and battery and the organizer with conspiracy. If this is a crime, why isn't regular paintball combat a crime? That would be just a start: Boxing is obviously assault, as are tackle football, hockey, basketball, water polo, lacrosse, baseball and who knows what. they just add a little nudity and the puritans go ape kaka.
I certainly wouldn't pay $5000 bucks for this privilege. I'm thinking the whole thing is a big hoax by the famous media hoaxer.
The article's from the Pak Daily Times. Curiously, I read Borchgrave's piece yesterday (on dead tree, in fact) while I was having lunch. In the space of 24 hours it's traveled around the world...
The Saudi royal family has finally conceded that the root cause of Islamist terrorism has been its own Wahhabi ideology, and the kingdom has prohibited any reference to jihad in radio and television broadcasts, a Washington Times report said on Wednesday.
Makes for an interesting development, assuming the Soddies are serious about it. I wonder if Pakland will follow suit? Soddy Arabia without jihad is just a place with a lot of oil and playboys, vieled women and scimitars. Pakistan without jihad is just a place with ummm... head lice.
Following the Al Qaeda suicide bombings of apartment buildings in Riyadh on May 12 that killed 35, Saudi security and intelligence organizations reported what the royal family was loath to hear: Almost 1,000 Saudi clerics are either linked to, or in sympathy with, Al Qaeda. They have been fired or banned from addressing worshippers after Friday prayers, Arnaud de Borchgrave wrote for the Times.
They're being "reeducated"...
Acting in the name of King Fahd, who is too ill to rule, Prince Abdullah has issued new regulations prohibiting any reference to jihad in radio and TV broadcasts. âThe royals are also drafting new regulations that the Wahhabi clergy will most probably consider sacrilegious. The new rules would actually remove elements of Wahhabi doctrine â Islamâs strictest interpretation of the Quran â as it is presently taught in mosques and schools around the kingdom,â Borchgrave said.
And that would be a dramatic change. It would imply the Soddies are abandoning their quest for world domination...
Security chiefs of the 22 Arab League nations, meeting in Tunis last week, quickly agreed on the existence of a direct link between Al Qaeda terrorist attacks and a clergy that promotes holy war in holy places.
How'd they ever come to that conclusion? And after not even two years! It's so... so... obvious.
Mohammed bin Al Kuman, chairman of the Arab Leagueâs council of interior ministers, said the most urgent need was for moderate clerics who can see that Islam has been hijacked by extremists who preach hatred of the United States and Israel in particular, Western values in general.
It's become such a clichè to say that Islam has been "hijacked." It brings to mind visions of bearded men, rolling their eyes as they take over mosques with bombs in their hands. The actual case is that the Soddies set out on a program of world domination, using money as the means and Islam as the method. Not being a very powerful country physically, they tried to hide it, modeling their approach on that of the Learned Elders of Zion. Once caught at it, they could either fight in the open or pretend it's all a misunderstanding. They can't fight in the open, because they'd get flattened. They could also surrender, but that's a last resort...
Borchgrave said the Saudi clergy had sent Wahhabi clerics as missionaries all over the world to build mosques and set up madrassas. There are about 2,000 mosques in the United States, most of them started by Wahhabi clerics, he claimed. âIn 1979, scores of Muslim terrorists seized the Grand Mosque in Mecca and kept Saudi security forces at bay for two weeks. Non-Muslims are not allowed anywhere near Mecca or Medina, so Saudi authorities deny to this day that French specialists were called in with sophisticated methods to subdue the Wahhabi rebellion. The Wahhabi revolutionaries had sought refuge in the catacombs. The French specialists advised them to flood them and then stick high voltage cables in the water,â wrote Borchgrave. He said the clergy pledged in the following âconcordatâ to refrain from criticizing the extravagant excesses of the royal family. âIn return, the House of Saud gave free rein to the Wahhabis â outside the kingdom.â Following the withdrawal of Soviet forces from Afghanistan in February 1989, the Saudi Wahhabis lavished some $300 million a year on building a network of several thousand madrassas across Pakistan. âFrom Pakistani madrassas, young Muslim men from some 30 countries, went on to Afghanistan for training in Al Qaedaâs camps,â the report said. Borchgrave said a small number of these schools had gone along with reform but âthe overwhelming majority of religious teachers have told the authorities to butt outâ. He claimed Saudi Wahhabi money was still outspending US aid to education reform by 10 to 1.
That's an accurate description of what we've been watching for the past couple years. Qazi, Fazl and Sami dug in their heels as soon as Perv mentioned reforming the madrassah system...
âSince September 11, Saudi authorities have long dismissed stories about Wahhabi-Al Qaeda connections as anti-Saudi propaganda. Yet leading Saudi businessmen conceded that in a free election in the kingdom, with Osama Bin Laden a candidate for the top political post and the royals sitting it out on the sidelines, the worldâs most wanted terrorist would win hands down. The House of Saud has finally shed its blinkers. Not a moment too soon.â
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
07/17/2003 17:07 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
SANAA â Yemen has arrested 195 people with suspected links to the Al-Qaeda terror network, including eight connected to the attacks on a US destroyer and a French oil tanker off Yemen, Interior Minister Brig. Rashad Al-Alimi said yesterday.
I think that's the cumulative total, counting from x (unstated) date...
âIn all 195 people accused of belonging to Al-Qaeda remain in custody for their insistence on the ideas they believe in,â Al-Alimi reported to the House of Deputies during a debate on terror-related detainees. Some 95 others have been released after they were persuaded by leading clerics to turn their back on extremism and correct their beliefs, he said.
"Go, and sin no more! Or at least don't get caught..."
Of the 195, five are suspected of links to the suicide bombing of the US Navy destroyer USS Cole at the southern port of Aden in October 2000, the minister said, adding that eight other accomplices were still on the run. Earlier in the week, Al-Alimi told journalists that Saudi Arabia would extradite to Yemen eight fugitives, some of them involved in the Cole bombing that killed 17 US sailors. Out of ten suspected plotters of last Octoberâs attack on the French oil supertanker Limburg off the southeastern coast, only three have been arrested and the search for the other seven is continuing, the minister said. He vowed to send all the detained terror suspects to courts for trial.
Have they actually shot anybody yet? Or hanged them? Has there been any serious jail time handed out?
Still waiting...
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
07/17/2003 16:18 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I think Yemen generally chops off body parts (heads, arms, legs, whatever - I know where I would start), or else they have a deep hole where they dump these folks.
Posted by: Douglas De Bono ||
07/17/2003 20:07 Comments ||
Top||
The Court of North Sanaâa decided Sunday that the verdict against the suspect assassin of Jarallah Omar, the socialist leader, and members of the suspectâs gang, would be passed on September 14th while the Socialist Party denounced this step taken by the court, appealing that investigation into the case should reveal the political motives behind the assassin and his group.
As opposed to strictly criminal motives...
In its hearing last Sunday, the Judge of the court, Abdulrahman Jahaf refused the appeal made the advocates of the family of Jarallah Omar to return the case to the prosecution for further investigations. During the session, attended by some socialist and opposition leaders, including the YSP Secretary General, Ali Saleh Obad as well as some intellectuals and writers whose names were mentioned in the list of targets of Ali Jarallah and his team, the team of advocates asked the defendant some questions related to the incident, finance and the people he met before assassinating Omar. The suspected assassin confessed before the court of his crime and said he did that because Omar and the other targets were secular people who do not recognize Islam as a religion.
I'm sure they recognize Islam as a religion. They're just not slavish to Ali's particular brand...
He also said that he met some people like Dr. Ahmad al-Daghshi who was arrested but later released. In a written paper which he read out before the court, Ali Jarallah said that the other detained suspects have no link to his plan for murdering what he described as âsecular politicians and writers, missionaries and member of the al-Buhrah religious sect.â He said he deceived them by telling them that he could facilitate their travel to Chechnya and Palestine to perform Jihad, pointing out that they had no idea about the messages which he sent to them.
And don't they feel foolish now?... Oh. They don't.
He said that he did not plan to create an organization to carry out his ideas, rather he recorded a tape in which he explained his ideas of the necessity that such people should be killed.
"Yes, yes! Kill them all!"
He denied that he received finance for such operations and assassination of Omar from Sheikh Abdulmajeed al-Zindani and Mohammed al-Anisi, both of them are leading members of the Islah party and said that he admitted their involvement in the plan because he was beaten up at the intelligence prison.
"Yeah! They dunnit! Now stop hitting me there!"
He made it clear that he meant in the beginning to make government officials, including the president, as targets of his operations as they protect such missionaries, seculars and infidels. But he said he excluded the president and top officials as this might have been exploited by the Socialist party. The defendant demanded in a cynical tone that leaders of the Socialist, Nasserite and Baath parties to be tried for their infidelity till they repent.
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
07/17/2003 16:04 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
Saudi Arabia has reduced its supply of free crude to Pakistan under a facility Islamabad has been enjoying since 1998, a senior Pakistan official told Dow Jones Newswires yesterday.
Abdullah Yousaf, secretary of the Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Resources, said Saudi Arabia would provide 60,000 barrels a day of free crude in 2003, down from 80,000 b/d last year. The reduction is due to Pakistanâs improving financial situation, and comes as part of an annual review, Yousaf said. Hummm, Iâd say itâs due to Saudi beginning to have a cash flow problem of itâs own. Either that, or they are puting the screws to Perv for helping the US.
Posted by: Steve ||
07/17/2003 1:52:14 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Saudi, I'm sure, still needs the close ties to Pakland to help out in the military, so I think that they are playing the cash flow game. The Saudis are in a continuous high wire act as they try to have it both ways.
While on the same subject, I wonder how Syria is doing with Iraqi crude now. How much are they getting and what's the deal with the US? Anybody heard anything of substance?
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
07/17/2003 16:20 Comments ||
Top||
KUWAIT CITY : A group of seven Islamists have submitted to the Prosecution, for the first time in Kuwait, a complaint against Kuwait's State Security accusing 12 of its officers of allegedly arresting and torturing them unjustifiably. "The complainants submitted their complaint against 12 State Security officers holding different ranks to Public Attorney Hamed Al-Othman," attorney Osama Al-Munawer, who is representing the seven men, told the Arab Times Wednesday. Al-Munawer added his clients claim they were arrested frequently by the State Security over the past two years. "Although their arrest was unjustifiable, they were tortured and forced to confess to things which they did not do," he added.
"Mahmoud, round up the usual suspects. Again."
"Yes, effendi!"
"And â torture them, okay? Make them confess to something unlikely."
"Of course, effendi! Just like last week!"
Al-Munawer also said despite confessions made by the seven men under duress, no official charges were filed against them and they were released "as if the State Security intends to use these confessions as a sword on my clients' neck at any time in the future."
"Lookee here, Abdullah. You remember, 12 years ago, when you confessed to blowing up the Brooklyn Bridge and having sex with chickens?"
"That... That confession was coerced!"
"Still a confession, ain't it?"
"Oh, mercy, effendi! The chickens were all hens!"
He added the State Security arrested his clients for allegedly plotting to assassinate some of its officers. "We have confidence in our judiciary which is why we decided to file the case. Even the Public Attorney assured no one is above the law," he elaborated. Al-Munawer said the Prosecution has already opened an investigation and recorded statements of a number of complainants. He added some other citizens are expected to file similar cases next week.
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
07/17/2003 10:01 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The only thing that matters here is what Al Sabah thinks. Law? Heh. Lawyer? Heh, heh. The State Security guys aren't in their positions because they aced Quantico - they're loyal Sabah men. If he decides he needs to play up to the West, he'll shuffle them to some other part of the board. Otherwise, this is a joke - except for the 7 fools who started this show. They are screwed if they remain in Kuwait. One way or another - to one degree or another: screwed. There might be something done quickly, too, to ward off the others, as implied in the story, with similar ideas.
The letter is unsigned. It demands in the name of "Allah the most gracious, the most merciful" the release of all Muslim prisoners from NSW jails. The letter, addressed to the Corrective Services Commissioner, Ron Woodham, states that if the demand is not met "we will attack and bomb the people of Australia". Oh, thatâll go over well.
Bilal Skaf, who is serving 40 years in jail as the leader of a gang who pack-raped young girls in Sydney in 2000, faced court yesterday accused of being the author of the threat. It was a Muslim gang practicing their religion.
The letter, which also allegedly contained a white powder, was found in an internal prison mail box in the high security "Supermax" prison at Goulburn jail on December 4 last year. It was not until March that police charged 21-year-old Skaf with making the threats. But yesterday, magistrate Robert Rabbidge gave Skaf permission to have an unexpected day out of his sentence when he ordered that he be brought in person to the court in September for a one-day hearing of the threat case.
The order was made when Skaf appeared before Mr Rabbidge via a video link from Goulburn jail to Goulburn court. The charge stated that Skafâs letter was intended to induce the false belief that the powder " was likely to be a danger to the safety of Corrective Services Commissioner Ron Woodham and certain property". Ya think?
The letter demanded that all Muslim prisoners be released from jail by January this year. Er, no!
"Every inmate will be accounted by us. If you choose to follow instructions the people of Australia will be safe. If directions are failed to be complied with we will surely show yous [sic] an example," it said.
"If you and the racists of Australia follow instructions given by us then surely there shall be no sorrow . . . we will attack and bomb the people of Australia if our directions are not complied with . . . the people of Sydney are not safe." Sounds like a threat to me.
Skaf indicated through his solicitor David Tyler that he would plead not guilty. "Lies, all lies!" "Bilal, wait till we get into court, OK?"
A request that the charge be dealt with in a one-day hearing before a magistrate on September 12, and not before a District Court jury, was granted. Skaf asked that he be aided at his defence by a fellow prisoner, Bassam Hamzy, 24. But Mr Rabbidge expressed doubts that Hamzy, sentenced in March last year to 21 years for the murder of a teenager at a city nightclub and for seeking to have a witness killed, would be allowed to represent Skaf. Why not, he seems to be qualified to me.
A Director of Public Prosecutions solicitor, Brett Diggins, said the two inmates would "pose a massive security problem". Two inmates are a problem? Guess you donât get many big cases down there.
He said prosecutors would call six witnesses, including two handwriting experts. Last September, Skafâs mother was banned from jail visits for two years after being caught trying to smuggle out a letter to her sonâs fiance and a drawing of his cell. Sheâs just trying to be a good mother.
Posted by: Steve ||
07/17/2003 1:39:57 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
It seems that these idiots are impervious to learning.
Posted by: Ernest Brown ||
07/17/2003 15:16 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Well at least these DUIs (Down Under Islamists) do not hide behind the "discrimination and intolerance" facade. These chaps are down to earth nasties and they make no bones about it.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
07/17/2003 16:27 Comments ||
Top||
The Treasury vowed last night to veto a "ridiculous" Brussels plan for VAT reform that would mean scrapping the British exemption for childrenâs clothes while reducing the rate charged by restaurants in France.
Ministers reacted angrily to a European Commission proposal for simplifying the VAT regime across the EU that would give tax breaks to the French while penalising British parents.
Frits Bolkestein, the EUâs Dutch tax commissioner, admitted that the tax on childrenâs clothing could rise to 17.5 per cent - the British rate of VAT - but that the move was necessary to end what he said was unfair economic distortion.
The scheme was voted through after a stormy session of the College, the top policy-making body, during which four commissioners objected including Neil Kinnock, the former Labour leader. He warned his colleagues that it was senseless for Brussels to pick a fight with the British government on a highly emotional issue it was bound to lose.
Childrenâs clothes, along with books and newspapers, are among the goods that are exempt from VAT. Labour promised in its last manifesto to defend zero-rating against any EU attempt to abolish it.
The scheme unveiled yesterday is part of the continuing attempt by Brussels to force through tax harmonisation - standardising tax rates across the EU. Gordon Brown has rejected the suggestion, claiming that taxation is a matter for national parliaments.
The Commission scheme to "streamline" VAT would abolish zero-rating on childrenâs clothes and shoes in Britain and Ireland, ending the permanent opt-outs the countries secured when they joined the EC in the 1970s.
...a typically postmodernist definition of "permanent" from our EU friends.
But following intense lobbying by Jacques Chirac, the French president, for a special exemption on restaurant bills, the Commission proposes to cut VAT rates for French diners from the present 19.6 per cent to as low as 5.5 per cent.
Ahh, more French "cultural exceptionalism" in action.
Also, the Dutch will retain a zero rate for their cut-flower industry and the Italian media empire of Silvio Berlusconi will be spared VAT on broadcasting.
Itâs good to have the Presidency
Posted by: Ernest Brown ||
07/17/2003 3:12:02 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
A powerful shrapnel-filled bomb exploded Thursday near a police station in Russiaâs troubled Dagestan region, killing three people and injuring 18 others, officials said. The bomb, attached to a parked motorcycle or scooter in the city of Khasavyurt exploded at about 10:00 a.m., the regional Interior Ministry said. The blast killed one police officer, a pregnant woman and a 5-year-old girl, the ministry said. Bastards
The officer, the head of a branch of the city police that provides security to private companies and state-run enterprises, was killed in his office, about 50 feet from the bomb. Authorities earlier said that a second officer, a member of a squad that fights organized crime, also died, but later said that information was wrong. The ministry said 18 people were hospitalized, three in critical condition. A spokesman for the Emergency Situations Ministry in southern Russia, Andrei Somishchenko, meanwhile, said 12 people were in the hospital, including three in critical condition. He said a total of 35 people were hurt in the explosion. The bomb was filled with nuts, bolts and ball bearings, the ministry said. Of course it was, itâs a anti-personnel weapon.
Television footage showed a street that looked like a firestorm passed through, with gutted cars and heavily damaged buildings. That sounds like a pretty big bomb for a motorcycle.
Dagestan, a mostly Muslim region in southern Russia, is plagued by violence â at least some of which is related to the separatist fighting in neighboring Chechnya. Dagestanâs Interior Minister Adilgirei Magomed-Tagirov said he believed the attack was carried out by militant Wahhabi sect Muslims active in Chechnya and Dagestan. When I hear a bomb loaded with ball bearings has gone off, I think of Wahhabiâs too.
Posted by: Steve ||
07/17/2003 11:22:13 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
A widespread inquiry into secret bank accounts and fictitious contracts across the European Commission was launched on Wednesday, amid growing anger at the scale of alleged fraud in the European Unionâs executive. Neil Kinnock, EU administration commissioner, is ordering the Commissionâs most senior officials to answer a "fraud questionnaire" to assess the extent of the problem. The move reflects fears that the "vast enterprise of looting" which fraud investigators found at Eurostat, the Commissionâs statistical arm, may also have occurred in other departments.
Members of the European Parliament on Wednesday expressed their concern about the issue and called Romano Prodi, Commission president, to answer questions in September. MEPs accused Mr Kinnock and Pedro Solbes, the commissioner in charge of Eurostat, of failing to heed several earlier warnings about alleged wrongdoing. Some MEPs even called for Mr Solbesâs resignation. Problems were identified at Eurostat by trade unions in 1997, by internal Commission audits in 1999 and 2000 and by Paul van Buitenen, a whistleblower, in 2001, but Mr Solbes said he knew nothing about the scale of the problems until he read newspaper reports in May 2003. You didnât know about it till you read it in the paper?
He said: "I canât be blamed or asked to take responsibility for something I didnât know about." Oh, yes you can.
Last week Mr Kinnock revealed the "relatively extensive practice" at Eurostat until 1999 of setting up secret and illegal accounts, into which millions of euros are thought to have disappeared. Some Commission officials say the practice, ostensibly to give more "flexibility" in carrying out EU work, was widespread in the 1990s. Mr Kinnock said there was evidence this "utterly reprehensible" practice was continuing and has ordered an immediate inquiry into other Commission departments.
He has asked the most senior civil servant in each department to give assurances that all contracts are awarded according to EU law. "Any statements you make can, and will be used against you in a court of law."
If the inquiry reveals the practice still exists, it could mean European taxpayers have been defrauded on a large scale, and would place huge pressure on Mr Prodiâs Commission. The last Commission, led by Jacques Santer, was toppled by the parliament in 1999 amid allegations of financial misconduct, and Mr Prodi came in to office promising to clean up the institution with "zero tolerance" towards fraud.
The secret bank accounts at Eurostat were set up by Commission officials to hold money paid through inflated contracts to sub-contractors. Mr Kinnock told the parliamentâs budgetary control committee: "If they are discovered [elsewhere], for whatever reason and to whatever degree we will take appropriate action."
Mr Kinnock says he has no idea how much money has gone into them, or what happens to it. Check the Swiss banks.
Posted by: Steve ||
07/17/2003 10:33:14 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Isn't lack of accountability on a continent-wide scale just "loverly?"
Posted by: Ernest Brown ||
07/17/2003 10:55 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"I'm shocked, shocked, to learn that financial irregularities occured!"
#3
Sounds like Kinnock is desparately trying to claw his head to the front of the outrage. He's been the chief administrator for a while, and fair bit of this happened on his watch. He has as little excuse as Solbes.
Posted by: Steve White ||
07/17/2003 12:37 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Gak. "claw his way to the front of the outrage."
Posted by: Steve White ||
07/17/2003 12:38 Comments ||
Top||
#5
That no one is above accountability seems to be a lesson that needs to be relearned in Brussels.
#6
Okay, I'm not getting this. In what way does the launch of an inquiry suggest to all you guys that these people are above accountability? Ernest? Hiryu?
Or am I not getting the meaning of the word "accountability"?
"Problems were identified at Eurostat by trade unions in 1997, by internal Commission audits in 1999 and 2000 and by Paul van Buitenen, a whistleblower, in 2001"
...as well as the "accountability" shown by Chris Patten's anxious desire to get to the bottom of Arafat's use of EU monies.
/sarcasm
Posted by: Ernest Brown ||
07/17/2003 16:37 Comments ||
Top||
At least nine people were injured when a bomb exploded inside a hospital in Hyderabad. The device wrapped in a plastic bag was hidden beneath a bench of a waiting shed in front of the Surgical Ward of Liaqat Medical Hospital. "It was a home made device," police chief Iqbal Sarhandi told reporters after an initial check by investigators and bomb disposal experts. The victims were patients' relatives who were sitting on a verandah outside a ward when the bomb exploded. They were all listed in stable condition, Sarhandi said.
The Jhangvi killers like to pot doctors and the like because so many of them are Shias.
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
07/17/2003 09:52 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
Separatist rebels have shot dead five communist supporters in Indiaâs north-eastern state of Tripura. Police said the outlawed National Liberation Front of Tripura (NLFT) had carried out the attack. A group of about 10 guerrillas attacked Rathinjoypara village in the stateâs northern district of Galai late on Wednesday. They then opened fire, killing three communist supporters on the spot. Later, the same group of rebels attacked a neighbouring village, Thanabul, and killed two more communist supporters. The victims belonged to Tripuraâs Halam tribe. The guerrillas, who claim to fight for the independence of Tripura, have regularly attacked Bengali settlers. The rebels were upset by the victory of the stateâs ruling communists in legislative assembly elections in February. In recent weeks, the rebels have begun attacking tribes people who support the communists. Lose an election, kill the voters.
Posted by: Steve ||
07/17/2003 9:14:51 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It's one thing to have a few communist remnants leftover from some tattered past. Echoes of idiocy that haven't yet completely faded. It takes a special breed of stupid to be voting IN new communists. Nothing else has been more thoroughly discredited - except, perhaps, the Order of the Solar Temple or Heaven's Gate adherents - see this for a refresher. This is just goofy.
From al-Jazeerah:
Iraqi diesel has emerged as a major attraction in UAE markets in the post-Saddam Hussain era. The chaos on the administration front and a difficult law and order situation have added a new dimension to the diesel business, which has flourished with the lifting of UN sanctions. During the past few weeks the Iraqi diesel supply business has become so lucrative that some operators have bought back the old vessels they had sold for scrapping. Sources in the petroleum product market told Gulf News that the sudden jump in the Iraqi diesel supply business has raised demand for vessels 4,000 DWT to 5,000 DWT in size, which is considered ideal for transporting diesel. The operators familiar with the sea route in the Gulf use small capacity vessels to transport diesel to the UAE. Sometimes, diesel transporters use cargo vessels to take cars and other commodities from the UAE and bring back diesel, said sources. Ah, free trade. Just search the boats, OK?
The competitive price of diesel is the major attraction for local buyers. A major portion of Iraqi diesel is used for blending purposes, they said. Some local companies based in various emirates use Iraqi diesel for this purpose, and the final product goes to the market through private channels. The removal of UN sanctions has come as a major blessing for operators, who do not face many security-related problems on the sea route. Only the Iranian territorial waters in the Gulf are considered a difficult area as Iran has been maintaining a close vigil after the fall of Saddam Hussainâs regime. Iâll bet they are.
The Iraqi diesel business is considered a major challenge to established retailers, who do not have the freedom to sell the product at the market rate. Get your non-OPEC price controlled diesel right here.
The competitive price depends largely on the supply of diesel from Iraq. According to sources, the price sometimes rises as much as 40 per cent above the price commanded by Iraqi diesel. I think heâs trying to say that Iraqi diesel is up to 40 percent cheaper than what the other states charge. Bet the Saudis and Iranians donât like that.
Posted by: Steve ||
07/17/2003 2:37:25 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I'm sure they hate it, and will try and force Iraq into OPEC again.
#2
Anal-retentive math nitpick:
If the "competitive" price is 40% more than the smuggled Iraqi price, then the Iraqi price is about 72% of the competitive, meaning a savings of 28%, if I understand correctly. [Ratio is 140:100, or 7/5, so reverse ratio is 5/7]
Posted by: Dar ||
07/17/2003 15:30 Comments ||
Top||
#3
another nitpick
doesnt OPEC just have quotas on crude, not product? I guess that would leave refinery construction as a way around quotas, but thats a pretty long term thing and something they probably take into account when setting the crude quota.
July 17, 2003: U.S. Marines in Iraq were assigned to pacify towns near the Iranian border after the fighting stopped in May. They soon noticed Iranians organizing and leading demonstrations against the Marines. The Marine commander hired Iraqis as security guards, specifically to keep the Iranians away from the Marines. This was no problem for the Iraqis, who, in general, donât like Iranians (because so many Iraqi families lost at least one member during the war with Iran in the 1980s.) But the Iranians stayed around, and appeared to be armed and ready to fight if the Marines tried to run them out of town. So the Marine commanders had heavily armed patrols move past the compound where the Iranians were staying. The patrols operated 24 hours a day, and at night made enough noise to awaken the, by now, nervous Iranians. After a week of not much sleep, the Iranians left town without a fight when the Marines broke into their compound. *Chortle*
Posted by: Dar ||
07/17/2003 2:10:15 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
THE REAL IRAQ - By Amir Taheri EFL Note: Link found at Instapundit.
Editorial Introduction: July 17, 2003 -- Open up almost any American or European publication these days, and youâll be bombarded with grim news about "horrific" conditions in Iraq - and Americaâs "poor handling" of the post-war reconstruction effort. All of which, it is claimed, is made all the more tragic - because President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair maliciously exaggerated the threat from Iraq. They may have won the war, but theyâre losing they peace. Author and Middle East expert Amir Taheri spent several days on the ground in Iraq last week and found reality to be starkly different from what is so ubiquitously reported.
This chorus wants us to believe that most Iraqis regret the ancien regime, and are ready to kill and die to expel their liberators.
Sorry, guys, this is not the case.
Neither the wishful thinking of part of the Arab media, long in the pay of Saddam, nor the visceral dislike of part of the Western media for George W. Bush and Tony Blair changes the facts on the ground in Iraq.
ONE fact is that a visitor to Iraq these days never finds anyone who wants Saddam back.
There are many complaints, mostly in Baghdad, about lack of security and power cuts. There is anxiety about the future at a time that middle-class unemployment is estimated at 40 percent. Iraqis also wonder why it is that the coalition does not communicate with them more effectively. That does not mean that there is popular support for violent action against the coalition.
Another fact is that the violence we have witnessed, especially against American troops, in the past six weeks is limited to less than 1 percent of the Iraqi territory, in the so-called "Sunni Triangle," which includes parts of Baghdad.
Elsewhere, the coalition presence is either accepted as a fact of life or welcomed. On the 4th of July some shops and private homes in various parts of Iraq, including the Kurdish areas and cities in the Shiite heartland, put up the star-spangled flag as a show of gratitude to the United States. . . .
The portrayal of Baghdad as an oriental version of the Far West in Hollywood Westerns misses the point. It ignores the fact that life is creeping back to normal, that weddings, always popular in summer, are being celebrated again, often with traditional tribal ostentation. The first rock concert since the war, offered by a boysâ band, has already taken place, and Iraqâs National Football (soccer) Squad has resumed training under a German coach.
Hereâs the money quote: THERE are two Iraqs today: One as portrayed by those in America and Europe who wish to use it as a means of damaging Bush and Blair, and the other as it really exists, home to 24 million people with many hopes and aspirations and, naturally, some anxiety about the future.
Posted by: ColoradoConservative ||
07/17/2003 11:37:13 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Great post.
Posted by: Matt ||
07/17/2003 15:48 Comments ||
Top||
Severely EFL
In a marked escalation in attacks, suspected insurgents tried to shoot down a U.S. transport plane with a surface-to-air missile Wednesday, killed an American soldier in a convoy and gunned down the mayor of an Iraqi city. The new American commander in Iraq acknowledged for the first time Wednesday that coalition forces are facing a ``classical guerrilla-type war situationââ against opponents ranging from members of Saddam Husseinâs Baath Party to non-Iraqi fighters from terrorist groups. Gen. John Abizaid spoke on the eve of a banned holiday Saddam loyalists could use to demonstrate their power.
The U.S. military said one surface-to-air missile was fired on a C-130 transport as it landed at Baghdad International Airport. It was only the second known missile attack on a plane using the airport since Baghdad fell to U.S. forces on April 9, said Spc. Giovani Lorente. He said he did not know where the plane came from or whether it was carrying passengers, cargo or both.
Meanwhile, Mohammed Nayil al-Jurayfi, who had actively cooperated with U.S. forces as the new mayor of Haditha, was killed when his car was ambushed by attackers firing automatic rifles as he drove away from his office in the city 150 miles northwest of Baghdad, police Capt. Khudhier Mohammed said. One of the mayorâs sons also was killed. Mohammed said the mayor, who took office after Saddamâs fall, was slain because he was ``seizing carsââ from Saddam loyalists who used to work in the deposed Iraqi leaderâs offices in Hadithah, a city in the restive ``Sunni Triangleââ that is home to many supporters of the ousted dictator.
The American soldier was killed and three others were injured in a rocket-propelled grenade attack west of Baghdad near the Abu Ghraib prison, a U.S. military spokesman said. In a separate attack, an 8-year-old Iraqi child died when an assailant threw a grenade into a U.S. military vehicle guarding a bank in west Baghdad. The American driver of the vehicle was wounded along with four Iraqi bystanders, according to Army Maj. Kevin West. ``Theyâre killing more Iraqis than they are Americans,ââ West said, shaking his head. That doesnât bother the Baâathists.
The Haditha police captain, whose station is next to the mayorâs office, told The Associated Press some government employees received a leaflet Wednesday warning them not to go to work. The leaflet was signed ``Liberating Iraqâs Army.ââ The Arab satellite broadcaster Al-Jazeera reported that residents of Hadithah had accused the slain mayor of collaborating with coalition forces. Hadithah shopowner Amir Jafar concurred, saying: ``This mayor is an unwanted person ... He doesnât belong to this city. He is from another city and he was cooperating with the Americans.ââ "We just HAD to shoot âim. Had to!"
The attack was certain to have a chilling effect on other Iraqi officials. Samir Shakir Mahmoud, one of the members of the new Governing Council hand-picked by Iraqâs U.S. administrator, hails from Haditha.
Former New York police commissioner Bernard Kerik, who is now running the Iraqi Interior Ministry and working to rebuild Iraqâs police force, was asked if he thought Osama bin Ladenâs al-Qaida terror network was behind the attacks. ``Nobody is identified as al-Qaida yet. Could they be out there? Itâs possible. The bottom line is I donât care if theyâre al-Qaida, I donât care if theyâre Fedayeen. I donât care if they are Baathists, I donât care who they are. If they attack the coalition and they attack the police theyâre gong to be arrested or theyâre going to be killed,ââ Kerik said. Now letâs make it happen.
Posted by: Steve White ||
07/17/2003 2:48:34 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Zero freedom of movement. Curfews. New ID cards. Fortress Baghdad. Now let's make it happen.
Posted by: Rafael ||
07/17/2003 5:22 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Rafael - Yours sure looks like the best approach. As it appears, now, we have nothing left to lose and a lot to gain by choking off any resupply of arms and idiots. Do we have enough boots? I dunno. I still favor adding to your recipe a no-BS, no-warning, complete sweep. One warning - then shoot to kill would be the ROE. Purpose is to collect the arms. All of them. Except only shopkeepers and similar - and they only get shotguns. Police take over afterwards and should be armed to the teeth and wired to each other in a modern combat comm net for rapid-response mutual support. 6 months of lockdown ought to be worth a few years of peace - if they don't become complacent and let their guard down. Mebbe even send people to Israel for training in this type of policing - they sure have the most practical applicable experience. If Iraqis went, too - now wouldn't THAT be an eye-opener! Of course, it would invite more stupidity - so nix the Iraqis going anywhere.
Does this sound familiar? From MEMRI. Stop by and put something in their kitty jar.
"Top Secret"
"To all state agencies listed below/"
"Secret emergency plan:"
"-Security [Agencies]"
"-Military Intelligence"
"-Secret Services""
"Following on our secret letter No. (3870) of 1/19/2003. In the event of the downfall of the Iraqi leadership in the hands of the American, British, and Zionist forces, God forbid, it is incumbent on all the members of the agencies listed above to act in accordance with the instructions listed below:"
"Looting and burning of all state agencies connected with our directorates and other [government agencies]"
"Changing residence from time to time"
"Destroying power generating stations"
"Destroying water installations"
"Mobilizing of dependable elements and bringing them into mosques"
"Joining the religious centers in Najaf"
"Joining the nationalist and Islamic parties and groupings"
"Cutting off internal and external communications"
"Purchasing stolen weapons from citizens"
"Establishing close ties with those who are returning from outside the country"
"Assassination of imams and preachers of mosques."
"Copies to:"
"Secret Service Bureau - Baghdad"
"Secret Service Bureau - [unclear]"
"Secret Service Bureau - [Basra]"
[Signed]
"Comrade Head of Secret Services"
"January 23, 2003"
Posted by: 11A5S ||
07/17/2003 12:20:34 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Okay we have some die-hard fanatics. Let's help them on their way to Allah.
Posted by: Douglas De Bono ||
07/17/2003 0:27 Comments ||
Top||
This is turning into a bad movie, "Escape From Camp Crame".
Fathur Rohman al-Ghozi was assisted in his escape from a Manila police intelligence lock-up by his former accomplice in crime, Abu Ali, who had turned state witness and was given freedom and a job as a janitor in the building that contained Al-Ghoziâs cell. Our story opens with Ali slowly pushing a mop along the cellblock. As he passes Fathurâs cell we hear a low whisper, "Itâs on for tonight!" Abu nods slightly and keeps mopping.
The latest in a series of startling revelations about corruption and incompetence among Al-Ghoziâs jailers came as investigators revealed that he had asked for, and been given, a haircut and a clean shave the day before his escape. "Hey, screw! I need a haircut and a shave!"
"Whatâd ya need them for, convict?"
"I gotta escape, er, court date tomorrow."
"OK"
General Eduardo Matillano, the Philippines police officer leading the investigation into the escape, shrugged and held his arms in the air when asked why intelligence officials had allowed a former accomplice-turned-informer access to Al-Ghoziâs cell. "Thatâs what we are trying to find out," he said. Thereâs a guy who will be looking for work real soon.
Abu Ali, whose real name is Cusain Ramos, was supposed to join a witness-protection program after he agreed to give evidence that he had bought the explosives for Al-Ghozi and fellow Jemaah Islamiah member Muklis Yunos, which they used in a Manila bombing in December 2000, killing 22 people. "How about hiding me in Miami? I hear the weather is nice."
Instead, Ali was employed as a janitor in the Intelligence Group building housing Al-Ghozi, and was allowed to come and go. "Nah, weâre putting you to work in our most sensitive intelligence headquarters where we keep all our secret information as well as the prison where we keep your former terrorist comrades locked up. Here is your ID badge giving you complete access as well as a set of master keys. Now get to work."
Ali will now face new charges after he admitted telling Al-Ghozi two weeks ago it would be easy for him to leave the building but that he would need a car to get out of Camp Crame, the national police headquarter complex where the IG is housed. Ali is still around? Are you sure?
General Matillano said he did not yet know whether Ali provided Al-Ghozi with the vehicle for the escape. "Maybe." he said. The General is watching his career circling the drain.
Philippines President Gloria Arroyo, under fire for the apparent ease of the escape, vowed yesterday to sack the Philippines National Police leadership if it were demonstrated they were to blame for the escape. Going, going, gone.
Posted by: Steve ||
07/17/2003 1:07:11 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
The Philippine president said Thursday that police corruption likely led to the escape from prison of three terror suspects, including a top bomb expert, and threatened to shake up the police force. The escape of Indonesian Fathur Roman al-Ghozi, an alleged bomb expert of the al-Qaida-linked Jemaah Islamiyah group, along with two other suspects has been an embarrassing blow to the Philippine governmentâs high-profile role in the U.S.-led war on terrorism. A regional hunt for al-Ghozi continued with Philippine authorities checking a claim that he slipped back to Jakarta with the help of a top Filipino police general. When it pays to bribe the very best.
"I acknowledge the serious problem of corruption in the police organization and I am making no excuses for it," President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo said in statement. She said it was "highly probable" that corruption played a part in the escapes from a high-security jail in the Philippine National Policeâs main camp. Two other prominent detainees have escaped from the same camp over the past year. Didnât know that.
She told the police leadership to "shape up or ship out, and I will not hesitate to undertake a top-to-bottom revamp if no results are forthcoming." Those responsible for al-Ghoziâs escape will be dealt with "no matter who gets hurt," she said. Sheâs pissed, and women never forget.
Manila alerted neighboring countries, particularly Indonesia and Malaysia, to be on the lookout for Al-Ghozi, who is accused of involvement in deadly bombings in Manila. Filipino investigators filed a criminal complaint Wednesday against four guards over the escapes.
Try them today, shoot them tomorrow. Next time, either there's no escape or the guards go with the bad guys...
On Thursday, a man who identified himself as Solaiman called the Radio Mindanao Network in the Philippines and claimed his group, called Ali Rahman, was holding Al-Ghozi in Jakarta. The caller claimed Al-Ghozi was turned over to his group by Virtus Gil - the name of the Philippine National Policeâs deputy chief - and suggested his group was ready to hand back Al-Ghozi to Manila in exchange for $10 million. Humm.
Defense Secretary Angelo Reyes said the manâs claim was "extremely wild," but that he would nevertheless check the report with Indonesian officials. "Anybody there ever heard of this guy?"
Gil angrily denied the callerâs allegation as "character assassination." Police spokesman Col. Zainuri Lubis called the claim "untrue, confusing and ridiculous." "Lies, all lies."
It'd be worth it to the Philippines government if "Ali Rahman" could produce Fathur's head (but no more of him). As boot for the deal, the PI could then throw in Virtus' head (but no more of him). But I'd guess "Ali Rahman" is Eid Kabalu's nephew with a cell phone.
Posted by: Steve ||
07/17/2003 9:25:53 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
More info, there seems to be a little confusion on the $10 million: The Philippine government said on Thursday it was checking reports of a $10 million payoff in the escape of a notorious Islamic militant from a maximum-security prison in the capital. The comments by Defence Secretary Angelo Reyes came as President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo vowed to stamp out corruption in the police, saying that was most probably how Indonesian Fathur Rohman al-Ghozi, the chief bomb-maker of the Jemaah Islamiah network, was able to escape. Reyes also said he was checking with Indonesian officials whether al-Ghozi had reached Jakarta, as a local radio station has reported.
According to Reyes, the radio station reported that al-Ghozi was now in Jakarta and that a senior Filipino police officer who helped him escape received a payoff of $10 million. "We will check on that," he said, adding that the government had received no such reports.
Posted by: Steve ||
07/17/2003 9:43 Comments ||
Top||
Airport security workers found a loaded handgun stuffed inside a brown teddy bear that a 10-year-old boy was carrying on a trip home after his familyâs Florida vacation, authorities said Thursday. The FBI is investigating how the gun got inside the teddy bear. Donât hold your breath.
A Transportation Security Administration worker noticed the outline of a gun when the bear passed through an X-ray machine at Orlando International Airport on Saturday. Iâm impressed he was awake enough to see it.
The TSA found a loaded .22-caliber gun after the bear was opened. The boyâs family told investigators that the bear was a gift from a girl at the hotel where they stayed during their Orlando vacation. `She appeared at their hotel room door and offered them the bear,â said Robert Johnson, a TSA spokesman in Washington. `The mother said it was OK and so the boy took it.â No strange girls bearing gifts have ever showed up at my hotel room door. Iâd remember.
The Miami Herald reported that the gun had been concealed by cutting a half-inch hole at the bottom of the bear, and that the gun had been reported stolen in 1996 in California. Bet that gun has been hidden in the bear for years, somebody forgot about it. Maybe someone in the supposed strange girls family. Too bad you didnât get her name.
Johnson said the incident ``underscores the need to screen everyone and everything no matter how innocent the people or their belongings may appear.ââ The TSA will milk this for all itâs worth.
The boyâs parents, Robert and Angela Barry of Grove City, Ohio, were questioned by FBI agents and released. From her home in suburban Columbus, Angela Barry said she didnât want to talk about what happened until the FBI investigation was finished.
``I want every way possible for them to find out who did this,ââ she said. The FBI did not immediately return a phone call seeking comment. They want to find Jimmy Hoffa to question him about the anthrax case first.
Posted by: Steve ||
07/17/2003 4:52:56 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
And no body wondered that the freakin' bear weighed so much? The gun had to add, what, four pounds, and make a really hard and dense place in the soft, cuddly bear.
#2
So Teddy was packing heat. I am so sick of the FBI and the TSA hassling citizens who are not interested in crashing airliners into buildings. Have you heard there is a second amendment, and we have the right to bear arms? Regardless of the idiotic gun laws passed in the last hundred years, there is nothing in the Constituion that gives the Feds purview to infringe on my rights (and I'm not talking about hunting or target shooting!)
I am sure the TSA and Gestapo like Homeland Defense will milk this for all it is worth. However, remember that if you fail to exercise your rights, they will soon vanish.
Finally, if citizens had had weapons on 9/11, then there would have been 19 dead dirt bags and 3000 fewer casualties. Think about the next time someone wants to ban guns from schools or anywhere else - soft targets are easier to hit.
Sorry about the mini-rant.
Posted by: Douglas De Bono ||
07/17/2003 20:03 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Chuck, the story says that the gun was inserted into the bear through a half inch hole. Sounds like a baby automatic or one of those tiny revolvers, I forget the make. It would only add a few ounces. They don't say how big the bear is either.
Posted by: Steve ||
07/17/2003 20:45 Comments ||
Top||
A Montreal-based photojournalist who died of a brain hemorrhage in an Iranian hospital was beaten about head with a shoe by a high-ranking Iranian official, the French newspaper Liberation reported today. The newspaper, quoting unnamed sources, said Said Mortazavi, an official with the ruling Islamic government in Tehran, used his shoe to deliver the blows to Zahra Kazemi. He had apparently been questioning Kazemi, who had been arrested for taking pictures of an Iranian prison. A high-ranking fall guy.
Kazemi fell into a coma and was transported to a detention centre run by revolutionary guards before she was taken to hospital three days later, the newspaper said. If she had gone straight to the hospital they may have been able to save her life. Bet they wish they had done that now.
Kazemi, 54, a freelance photographer from Quebec, was arrested in Tehran on June 23 and branded a spy for taking photos of a prison during student-led protests against the ruling Islamic establishment. Kazemi held Iranian and Canadian citizenship.
Her only son, Stephan Hachemi of Montreal, said Wednesday his mother "wonât be buried in the land of the people who murdered her." Differing reports on how she died took over from days of confusion about whether or not her body had been buried and doubts still linger about that.
Posted by: Steve ||
07/17/2003 4:19:26 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
What will the Canadian Government's reaction be to the murder of a citizen by officials of a foreign government? I predict the Canadians will apologize for her unfair reporting....grrrr.
Liberian rebels seized the strategic town of Kley Junction, 37 km west of the capital, Monrovia, as fighting resumed between government troops and two rebel groups on three fronts, threatening a fragile 17 June ceasefire. If they are fighting on three fronts, Iâd say itâs cancelled.
Relief workers in Monrovia told IRIN that the rebel Liberians United for Reconciliation and Democracy (LURD) overran Kley Junction early on Thursday morning, raising fears that they could mount a third assault in two months on Monrovia.
Liberian Defense Minister Daniel Chea was quoted by international news agencies on Thursday afternoon as saying the LURD had advanced past Kley Junction to Sastown, 20 km from Monrovia. "The military situation is developing into a full-scale attack against our positions," Chea said. Clashes were also going on between government fighters and rebels of the Movement for Democracy in Liberia (MODEL) in the southeastern Sinoe County, the relief workers added. They got tired of waiting.
On Wednesday, General Benjamin Yeaten, the Liberian government frontline commander, told reporters that MODEL attacked government positions at the port town of Greenville, Sinoe County, 250 km southeast of Monrovia and at Belliewaley, a town in lower Nimba county, 280 km northeast of the capital.
LURD leaders attending Liberian peace talks in the Ghanaian capital, Accra, however alleged their positions were attacked by government troops, a diplomatic source said. "They said they are only defending themselves from a government attack," the source said. The best defense is a pre-emptive strike.
Kley junction links Monrovia to the Sierra Leone border and to the rebel main stronghold of Tubmanburg, which is also the provincial headquarters of Bomi County. It was the springboard for previous rebel attacks on Monrovia. LURDs big problem is that there is only one way into the capital from the north. Itâs a bottleneck across the bridge.
The sound of light weapons fire from the direction of Kley Junction could be heard around the government controlled Po-River area, 17 km west of the capital, defense sources in Monrovia told IRIN. Letâs hope they finish it this time before the US gets in.
Posted by: Steve ||
07/17/2003 2:57:33 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Hereâs the divisions.
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The Pentagon (news - web sites) could start a call-up of as many as 10,000 U.S. National Guard soldiers by this winter to bolster forces in Iraq (news - web sites) and offset a lack of troops from allies, The Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday.
One senior U.S. defense official, asked by the Journal if he had ever seen the Army stretched so thin, said: "Not in my 31 years" of military service. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is expected to sign off later this week on a plan that would set up rotations to relieve Marine and U.S. Army soldiers stationed in Iraq, the newspaper said, citing a Pentagon official.
Twenty-one of the Armyâs 33 active-duty combat brigades are already in Iraq, Afghanistan, South Korea (news - web sites) and the Balkans, the paper said. Three other brigades cannot currently be sent abroad, leaving nine brigades, or 45,000 troops, as relief for deployed soldiers, the report said. Some of those forces are being held back in case they are needed near North Korea (news - web sites) or in Afghanistan, further limiting U.S. options in Iraq, the Journal said. I would turn over the Balkans completely to the Europeans. If they want want them, leave anyway.
#1
thats only 2 brigades. even if we pay the political cost of leaving the Balkans, thats only one more brigade.
So we rotate the Marines out, to be replaced by about 8000 spanish, italians, poles, danes, etc, plus iraqi police. 3rd ID comes out to be replaced by 1st Cav. Then sometime in winter the national guard goes in, and 101st comes out. (plus the armored cav regiments?) Still leaves us somewhat shorthanded. with 1st cav, 1st armored, 173rd AB, 4th ID, and one brigade of 1ts ID in Iraq. Oh, and we need to rotate the brigade from 82nd AB out of afghan. We have 2nd ID in Skor, and 25th ID plus a Marine Div as backup for Korea. Meanwhile is 10th Mountain "recovered" (see sensing's blog) from Afghan? Cause the remaining Marines (plus the remaining brigades from 1st ID) are the only fresh divisions left for any contingency (other than units designated for Korea).
Oh and we already have close to 200,000 army NG mobilized, doing everything from force protection to border patrol.
#2
LH: I agree with you. There is a long term danger of ruining the armed forces in the same manner as we did in Viet Nam (see Shelby Stanton's The Rise and Fall of an American Army for an excellent history). There is a short term danger of another conflict rearing its ugly head and leaving us completely unable to meet the manpower needs. We may have really reached a point where we need to start making sacrifices. Can we have guns and butter (or tax cuts) when we are fighting a war? It didn't work during Viet Nam. One could argue that it won't work now. As to the Balkans, I think the price we pay depends a lot on how we position the withdrawal. If we position it as another FU to the Europeans the political price will be very high. If we position it as a gesture of reconciliation (give Chirac and Schroeder what they say they want, a chance to prove their conception of "European idea") then the price may be small. Even if the Euros balk, we come out looking like the good guy. We are, after all, just trying to help them realize their hopes and ambitions of Europe as a major power.
#3
i sympathize with your view on tax cuts, but im not sure that it makes much difference in the short term. Even if you increased the defense budget more than we are already doing, how long would it take to ramp up recruitment, to train and equip a new division? (although we could use re-up bonuses to deal with retention) The crunch time is in the next 12 to 18 months (i guess that makes me an optimist on Iraq :)) - I dont think you can materially change the force structure that fast.
I continue to think the best way to handle this is to swallow hard and do a deal with the weasels.
#4
to get chirac and schroeder to help you inthe balkans, when everybody knows its to free up troops for Iraq, youre gonna have to make some concessions. And you still have an American (and Brit/coalition of willing) face on the occupation. Make slightly (?) more concessions and get French, Germans, Indians, and Pakistanis on the ground in iraq - youve done alot more to make youre life easier (assuming you can avoid somalia type mistakes)
#5
There are 15 separate brigades and 8 divisions in the National Guard. It'd take about six months to bring them up to snuff, but it could be done. It's going to be a big budget outlay and the political impact is going to be huge. Plus, the NG and Reg. Army are like cats and dogs, they don't play well together. Also, some NG units have already been cannibalized for "force protection." Finally, it's only a temporary solution, but then what solution isn't. Still, between the NG and the Individual Ready Reserve (folks who have only been off active duty for a few years and have thus retained a lot of skills and who still have a contractual obligation to serve if called up), you could meet the manpower requirements. I just don't think that any politico has the huevos to do the call up.
As for Chiraq and Schroeder, I'd be willing to make concessions to them in the short term. Defeat the main enemy first, then come back and take care of that dynamic duo. I just can't see the EU ever being a real threat to the US. A pain in the ass, yes. A threat, no.
#6
Regardless of American national pride, in the first Korean conflict most of the units and most of the casualties were those of the South Korean Army. Korea II would not be any different. This time around they're starting with a real ROK army, equiped and trained [and well fed]. The last time the NKPA was largely cadred and manned by Korean veterans of the Chinese Civil War and well equipped. This time they don't have the edge they had in 51. So what and how much could the Pentagon put in place that would make a significant difference? If the South Koreans break, highly unlikely, we won't have enough forces to put in place to stop much. If the North Koreans break, most likely, it will be up to the South Koreans to decide the next move more than the US. Outside air, comm, intel, and logistics, the American forces would be as much in the way as a help except to pump up the morale of those defending their own homes.
Posted by: Don ||
07/17/2003 20:35 Comments ||
Top||
Jordan has again imposed restrictions on Palestinian entry from the neighboring West Bank. Jordanian government sources said new regulations drafted and distributed over the last month have imposed new limitations on the entry of Palestinians as part of an effort by the Hashemite kingdom to quell unrest. The sources said tens of thousands of Palestinians have moved from the West Bank to Jordan during the Israeli-Palestinian war, which is nearly completing its third year. The new Jordanian rules deny the prospect of an entry visa to most Palestinians. The exceptions are those who apply for a Jordanian visa on humanitarian grounds. The sources said this includes medical treatment or attending a marriage or funeral ceremony in Jordan. The rules drafted by the Interior Ministry have been discussed between Amman and the Palestinian Authority. They stipulate that any Palestinian wishing to receive medical treatment in the kingdom must bring documents from a Jordanian hospital and approved by the Health Ministry.
Having had the disease once, they want to avoid getting it again. Which is why proposed solutions to the Paleoconflict that involve Jordan absorbing the Paleos won't come to anything.
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
07/17/2003 13:26 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
Exactamundo, Fred. The Jordanians sure as hell don't want 'em. The Syrians keep 'em locked up in pestilential camps in Lebanon. The Saudis are happy to pay them to stay where they are.
Iran and Saudi Arabia have signed an extradition pact that could pave the way for the transfer of Al Qaida suspects to the Saudi kingdom. The two countries signed an agreement over the weekend during the visit by an Iranian delegation to Saudi Arabia. The delegation was led by Iranian Justice Minister Esmail Shoushtari, who signed the judicial accord with his Saudi counterpart, Abdullah Ibrahim Al Sheik. Officials from both countries said the agreement calls for an expansion of cooperation in the extradition of wanted suspects. The two countries plan to establish a panel to discuss legal issues, including extradition requests. The accord was signed at the end of the visit by Iranian judiciary chief Mahmud Hashemi-Shahrudi, who met with senior Saudi officials. The Iranian chief was said to have discussed counter-insurgency issues as well as regional strategic issues.
Might see something happen here in a week or two...
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
07/17/2003 13:24 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
No, in reality it will opperate as:
Hey, if you catch any of our dissidants, send them home. And we'll do the same for you.
Adds to yesterday's story...
Abdullah Shreidi died from severe chest wounds sustained in the fighting.
Ahhh... Pain. Suppuration. Sepsis. An agonizing death... Sounds good.
Shreidi passed away Wednesday at dawn and his death has created unrest in the camp. A security source within the camp reported high tension between Palestinian factions, saying all armed factions  including the Lebanese Army, which guards the campâs entrances  were on high alert for fear of retaliation by factions loyal to Shreidi.
Even better: hundreds of turbans, giving each other the hairy eyeball, the while fondling their weapons...
Meanwhile, Palestinian factions met at the camp to discuss whether Shreidi should be buried at a graveyard within the camp or outside it. They decided it was in everyoneâs interest to bury Shreidi outside the camp, at the New Sidon Graveyard in the Sirop area.
"Yes. It's better for all concerned if we plant him outside the camp."
"How far outside the camp?"
"Someplace in Newfoundland..."
Sheikh Maher Hammoud, a prominent cleric in the camp, conferred with several political and security leaders to ensure Shreidiâs funeral procession and burial would take place without complications. About 200 Lebanese soldiers were posted on the road from the campâs entrance to the cemetery. At the army checkpoint east of the camp the funeral procession was allowed to pass without army inspections. âThey did not identify the dead nor did they make sure there were any weapons being smuggled out of the camp,â sources at the camp said.
That means there were four wanted Bad Guys, snuggled in the coffin with Shreidi, and there are land mines and RPGs left behind half the headstones...
Shreidi was buried at around 5pm Wednesday.
To general relief and to the applause of many...
Abu Mehjanâs [head of Usbat al-Ansar, currently on the run] brother, Abu Tarek, contacted members of Usbat al-Nur following the death of Shreidi and worked on avoiding any clashes that could destabilize the camp. However, Fatahâs commander at the Ein el-Hilweh camp, Maher Shabayta, denied the possibility of clashes between any factions, saying: âThe primary reason for the clashes was Abdullah Shreidi. Now that he is gone we no longer have any reason to fight among us.â
Except for Dire Revengeâ¢...
About a year ago, the Fatah group, the biggest in the camp, blamed a series of explosions on Shreidi. Fatah strongman Brigadier Sultan Abul-Ainayn then ordered his fighters to âkill Shreidi, wherever he is found.â Shreidi was ambushed and wounded some two months ago by Fatah while returning from a funeral.
Might as well have stayed â just laid down and saved everybody the trouble...
In the ensuing fighting Shreidiâs bodyguard, his cousin and four Fatah militiamen were killed. Palestinian Islamic forces commander Sheikh Jamal Khattab said at Shreidiâs burial, âWe have footed the bill beforehand and Shreidiâs death is part of that bill ... logic demands we cross this hurdle because in the end we are all losers.â
I'm not sure that statement makes any sense, except for the part about them all being lo-o-o-o-sers...
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
07/17/2003 12:19 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[9 views]
Top|| File under:
Administration of âKavkaz-Centerâ would like to inform that this website is temporarily inaccessible, because the agencyâs physical server was seized by Lithuanian Security Department on June 20. The date when âKavkaz-Centerâ will resume its work will soon be published.
Kavkaz Center is the Maskhadov Bad Guys' web presence.
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
07/17/2003 12:06 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I believe al-Neda is still gathering dust in cyberspace as well. Hopefully Kavkaz will follow suit.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
07/17/2003 12:39 Comments ||
Top||
Iranâs supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has denied rumours his office receives a percentage of profits from all cars sold in the country. Wha? No way, wasnât us... Nope. Nâuh uh.
Ayatollah Khameneiâs decision to take the unusual step of denying he receives any illegitimate payments shows he is very sensitive about rumours of corruption. Recognition that the little people matter?
There is a widespread belief among ordinary Iranians that 20% of profits from every car sold in the country goes to the ayatollah as a religious tax, or Khoms. They get a cut of everything else, so why should cars be any different?
The story became headline news in Iranian opposition media last week after Iranâs ministry of industry announced that the countryâs state-owned car manufacturers will no longer pay any money to the supreme leaderâs office. "We will no longer extort money from the car industry..."
Although the statement was later withdrawn, it strengthened rumours that Ayatollah Khamenei may indeed receive a hefty cut from the sale of new cars. Uh, we withdraw the previous statement. It shouldâve read, "We have never extorted all that much money from the car industry. Yeah, thatâs the ticket. Nope. Never did that. Cuz we said so. Just now.
His office says that it is rumour-mongering by the enemies of the country in order to discredit the Islamic leadership and has ordered the intelligence ministry to identify those behind the rumours so they can be prosecuted. Itâs all Lies! We are Holy Men! Do you not see our Black Hats? We must root out the infidels who speak these falsehoods! And weâll start with that dimwit DisInformation Ministry Spokesperson...
But the ayatollahâs denials will do little to dispel the widely-held view in Iran that a new class of millionaire mullahs are plundering the riches of the country. The asshat Black Hats are as corrupt as $3 bills - and political whores of the first order. They will, one day very soon I hope, come to regret their suppression and violence... as it will come back to them 100-fold. Be gone you worms.
Posted by: PD ||
07/17/2003 11:46:11 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Does the Koran have a passage justifying this?
Probably.
Strategypage.com is supplying a breakdown of US Army combat units and their current location and condition.
Where are the Divisions?
As of July 13, 2003
Mike Robel
It is said that the President of the United States always asks, âWhere are the carriers?â when a crisis erupts. StrategyPage.com will now provide the answer to another important question - based on open source information â âWhere are the Divisions?â
This monthâs posting shows that 17 of the Armyâs 34 ground maneuver brigades are deployed in Iraq. A Marine division is also employed in Iraq. The 3rd Infantry Division is in the process of redeploying to the United States. The 35th (KS Army National Guard) Infantry Division is in the Balkans. (Federalized National Guard units are shown in blue.)
Posted by: Patrick Phillips ||
07/17/2003 10:20:19 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This can hardly be true. 25th ID, First Infantry, 10th Mountain, First Cavalry, etc. are not in Iraq. However, even they were, it wouldn't be a bad thing. They are in contact with the enemy, learning about him, studying how to fight him. It is hard on the troops, but better for them to be there than in barracks.
#2
one brigade of 1st ID is in Iraq, and 10th mntn is only 2 brigades.
Comabt experience may be a good thing, but do we want all the divs to be getting it at the same time? Leaves little available for contingencies (Isnt 25th ID supposed to be available for Korea, for example?) And theyre supposed to be getting training in maneuver warfare that theyre not getting in Iraq. And of course some troops need to be trained first to go over to Iraq. And being hard on the troops is not trivial, with an AVF, and with morale considerations (we dont want trigger happy guys, too beaten down too care) So there is a real question how long this deployment is sustainable. Pentagon still says 3rd ID all be home by Autumn, but will be replaced by more US troops if necessary (presumably 1st Cav)
My own opinion is thats why the accelerated schedule for the Iraqi governing council. We want more foreign troops - and we know we wont get them without UN approval, and that means a greater UN role in Iraq. So we want to get the Iraqi authorities in place early, so the UN can't screw up the Iraqi political situation.
In the long run, if we want to be less reliant on the UN, we probably need a US peacekeeping corps.
#3
We could probably stand to raise another division or two more of light/"leg" infantry to spell the mech divisions on occupation duty. It would also help a bit if we could pull the 35th out of Bosnia and let the Euroweenies handle it.
If we do raise some new formations, might I suggest that one of these be designated the "93rd Volunteer Infantry," in honor of the volunteer militia who gave their lives on 9/11. The divisional motto should be easy to figure out.
Posted by: Mike ||
07/17/2003 12:23 Comments ||
Top||
#4
The key question that I have not seen discussed in this blog is whether we need to expand the army for the time being.
Also, isn't it about time we sweeten the pot for those in at least combat arms and give extensive GI Benefits to them. Paying for school entirely, etc? Don't we owe it to them?
#5
LH: despite the obvious need for more troops and the need to rotate the 3ID home, I'd really prefer to keep the UN out of Iraq as much as possible. It's the old "camel's nose" problem, and the UN folks are just creaming their pants hoping we'll get to that point.
Mike and Penguin: I'm not mil/ex-mil, but I'd suggest that we need two more divisions of light infantry or light mech infantry. One should be the 93rd (I really like that). Both should be trained as peacekeeping infantry (American style peacekeeping -- "mess with us and we kill you"), expressly to take on jobs like Iraq, Bosnia, etc. They might not be the first in to fight (though they could), but they would have a good punch, could handle the duties of peacekeeping/occupation/rebuilding, and would relieve the pressure on the heavy infantry and mech divisions. These divisions could be airlifted quickly into place and would have sufficient mech power (Bradley's, etc) and helo support to ensure that we'd never face a Mogadishu problem.
Posted by: Steve White ||
07/17/2003 12:52 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Even our light infantry is fairly high tech, and
thus expensive, and is trained for combat. Thats why i think Rummy is reluctant to add a full division - IIUC the plan was to reduce the number of divisions even further prior to 9/11.
What we need is arguably a seperate service - a cross between the peace corps, the marine corps, and the foreign service - that is speficically trained for civil affairs, policing, peacekeeper stuff - and has a level of fluency in foreign languages and cultures more analogous to the foreign service than to the military. That is not resentful of having to deal with the locals, but is recruited for just that purpose. But unlike peace corps types, expects to carry and use weapons. Somebody pointed out that the number of folks who apply to the US foreign service far exceeds the number accepted - well heres a career for all the liberal arts types who are idealistic, good with languages, and looking for overseas adventure.
#7
What bugs me is that all this was fairly predictable. To be more precise, just why did the administration refuse to believe that a five-figure level of manpower commitment was going to get the job done when it seems as though we're going to have to keep the force levels where they are for the foreseeable future?
#8
Re: keeping the un camel out - well yeah, i agree thats desirable - the UN is folks are itching to reduce the role of the INC and the Kurds, pump up Pachechi (sp?) and the less pro-US elements among the Shiites, etc, and generally screw around. Which is why it would have been great if we had managed things in such a way that Iraq today was more orderly and we didnt need so many troops (would that have been possible with better planning? - quite honestly I dont know) But "we are where we are" And keeping 148,000 US troops in Iraq for a year or more is going to impose a significant cost on our strategic posture, given the force structure we started out with in March 2003. Either overstretch the regular army - with consequences for readiness and retention - use Marines - with consequences for USMC's combat edge (Marines dont do occupations) - or use National Guard - far more than the 2 brigades theyre now talking about - with consequnces for National Guard availability for Homeland Security, and for retention and recruitment. Those costs have to be weighed against the negatives of the UN camels nose. Im beginning to lean to the idea that if we can get the Iraqi political situation at least pointed in the right direction first, it may be worth letting the camel in. In addition to providing troops, it diffuses some of the political cost of occupation, and may make the occupation more acceptable in some parts of Iraq (particularly in the Sunni triangle). It also can be part of a healing of the US relationship with the great powers other than the UK - which to my way of thinking is a plus, though i suspect to some of the harder line Jacksonians thats a negative.
#9
and i would suggest that letting the UN camel in is far less damaging to our strategic position than withdrawing and leaving the country either to Baathists, pro-Iranian islamists, or a civil war between them. And while I realize the strategic differences from Viet Nam, i would suggest its quite possible that as time goes on there will be growing sentiment (and not just from the ideological left) to "bring the boys home".
#10
Lots of discussion on this topic in other blogs. Up to five additional divisions are projected.
The problem with our military is that we're reactive. We liberated Iraq with a military basicly designed to beat the Soviets. Now we're trying to flesh out what type of military can handle peacekeeping and multiple small conflicts.
The base problem goes back to the reductions under Clinton. The American people had no particular objection to them, though some few of us did object. Other bloggers have suggested that President Bush would have a difficult time selling an expansion of the military to the people, since we're handling what comes along. Expansions only win popular approval when a need is seen.
As an EMT and former firefighter, I can assure you that taxpayers worry more about the guys they see standing around the stationhouse, washing the rigs, than they do about whether or not there are enough firemen or EMT's if there is a need. In other words, taxpayers, the vocal ones, don't want to see people standing around, on the clock, just in case. I think the same point of view holds true for the military.
I'm a reactionary. I think we need both armor and light infantry. I think the airborne units need to be stripped of all the non fighters, as they once were. I want battleships as well as carriers. I like the idea of the Stryker brigades, but nothing beats a column of M-1A-2's for punching a hole in an enemy formation.
#11
help me here chuck - ISTR that the conservative obejctions to Clintons military policy focused on inadequate readiness, and the lack of support for ballistic missile defense, NOT the reduction in the number of active divisions. And again, when Dubya and Rummy came in, they were planning on reducing the army further, to 8 divisions, in order to focus on weapons systems and transformed force.
I think anyone looking for a 15 division army is dreaming. Thats 50% more divisions to be trained, armed, transformed, etc. The whole focus is to have a few divisions with LOTS of bang per division. Which seems to work quite well, as demonstrated during the Major Combat ops phase of the Iraq war. Where it doesnt work is peace-keeping/nation-building. Its simply a waste of resources to build up more army divisions, even light ones like 10th Mountain, for peace-keeping/nation-building. And since it involves long tours overseas, its probably not the right assignment for the NG. We either go back to the 9/10 Bush approach - we dont do nation-building, leave it to the UN - or we try something different like a peacekeeping corps.
#12
I want newer and better technology that will make our troops and tanks invisible. But seriously, more R&D would help a lot too.
Posted by: Rafael ||
07/17/2003 13:37 Comments ||
Top||
#13
BTW, the peacekeeping corps is not my idea - i got it from oxblog - heres what they say
"So what are the alternatives? Patrick, Rachel and myself have talked about this and are slowly working our way towards the idea of a nation-building force that has the virtues of both the Peace Corps and the Foreign Service. Like the Peace Corps, it should be composed of idealistic young men and women who want to better the lives of impoverished nations. Like the Foreign Service, it should be composed of professionals whose expertise in local languages and cultures enables them to advance American ideals and interests.
Given that the Foreign Service accepts only an infinitesimal percentage of its applicants (and the Peace Corps is extremely selective as well), there is clearly an untapped reserve of American citizens who want to serve their country abroad. One should also note that the Foreign Service is extremely attractive because it offers what is, in essence, lifetime employment and excellent benefits. If we want to establish a professional corps of nation-builders, attached to the Department of State or any other, I think that offering similar terms will be absolutely necessary.
And extremely expensive. Without knowing much about military logistics, I still suspect that having combat divisions serve as nation-builders is far less cost effective than having a purpose-built nation-builiding corps. To be sure, there will still have to be significant combat forces deployed to protect our nation-builders. However, the nation-building corps should be able to perform those tasks which resemble the work of an American police department.
In other words, nation-builders should not be afraid of carrying a gun. If you are a pacificst, go to the Peace Corps. If you a warrior, enlist. But if you are prepared to face the maddening complexity of working on the margins of peace and war, then you are ready to build nations."
#14
Not a lot of info on attacks against occupation troops in Germany post-WWII, but I have put a little bit here. Scattered attacks through 1947. I titled my blog post Quagmire.
On of the last lines from the exerpt from the 100th Infantry Division's history says it all, though, I think. In reality, the German nation was so thoroughly defeated, and the vast majority of German civilians so destitute, that very little came of this brainchild of Heinrich Himmler. It's been said before, the Iraqis don't believe they were beaten.
#15
I think a separate force of peacekeeping troops that look like soldiers but are trained as peacekeepers would be a disaster. Who would join such a dead end force? Who would lead such a career-ending force? And if they look like real soldiers, at some point down the road they will be put into a sitution requiring real soldiers and get popped big time for their troubles. Our enemies won't respect semi-soldiers but will appreciate the imagery of killing people who look like US soldiers. Makes it more dangerous for all of our troops.
The solution is to greatly expand the MP force. They have both a law enforcement outlook and are extremely well-armed light infantry. Add more Military Police brigades that can do base security (so dismounted ARNG tankers aren't doing the job) and which can handle peacekeeping (so 3rd ID can go home and rest) as well as securing lines of supply (the way 101st AB did during the war).
And for God's sake, keep the heavy armor--it sure isn't obsolete yet.
#16
And, BTW, Germany was surrounded by nations hostile to the Nazi regime. And there was a four power occupation. And the US had conscription and a massive army (though with considerable pressure for demobilization) So all in all a rather different situation - in Iraq we have an essentially 2 power occupation (so far), the several neighboring powers hostile to the occupation, and an overstretched US, with a population whos commitment to occupation is questionable. Not that im saying we're not gonna win this - just that theres lots of differences from Germany 1945.
#17
BJD - why would it be a dead end force? and why wouldnt they have the ability to fight, even though not trained for conventional war. I guess the difference is seeing the mission as more than just policing - nation building, with needs for language and cultural knowledge. Yeah, theyd need conventional forces with them - presumably theyd work in tandem with regular army in some situations - but theyd recruit people who dont WANT to be warriors - for whom being an army MP is not a satisfying career. Just as Foreign service and Peace corps are not. They would be both more distinct from US soldiers, and yet better at protecting themselves than current logistics and support units (who the baddies ARE taking potshots at)
I guess it depends on what you see as real problems over there. Does it matter that hardly any units have anyone who can speak the language? Does it matter that when Salaam Pax sought admission to a meeting as a translator for a reporter, the GI said "oh, you speak French?" Does it matter to have large numbers of people who are interested in fully understanding the local culture, and using that knowledge in searches, running checkpoints, etc? Even if theyre not as expert in combat as the army guys. I dont know, but i sure hope that some people examine the afteraction reports from Iraq with an open mind, and consider that as an option.
"But if you are prepared to face the maddening complexity of working on the margins of peace and war, then you are ready to build nations."
If you dont think this work is maddengly complex, but think its just a matter of applying sufficient force to overwhelm the baddies, i dont suppose youd support a peacekeeping corps.
#19
I favor the MP approach,they are trained in police techniques,crowd control,and when necassary can kick serious ass.
I don't care what that nitwit said awhile back,when it comes to pay and benifits our proffesional soldiers airmen,& marines(especially e-1 to e-6)get screwed.I'm not talking about R.E.M.F.s,but up-front,ass on the line troops.
If the recruiters start really pushing for those interested in a carrer in law enforcement,and increase the pay and bennies I bet they could get a lot of recruits.
#20
liberalhawk:
Well, I think it would be dead end for officers and senior NCOs who would get stuck with leading pseudo-soldiers. Yeah, I'd boast about that tour of duty were I an aspiring officer. Dead end for the privates--no--they would likely be one-termers. Any that wanted to go on in a career in the military would be handicapped by their peacekeeping training. Nor do I think too many people who don't want to be regular Army would join an outfit that is like the Army but not actually the Army. It takes tremendous discipline to be a soldier--perhaps especially in peacekeeping duties--and I doubt those types would be good peacekeepers.
Any Army unit that undergoes peacekeeping training becomes combat ineffective until they can be retrained. I would not want to institutionalize this.
Do we need peacekeepers--even regular Army--on occasion? Sure. But don't like it too much. A necessary evil. MPs are already police-like and since they would be able to do more than just peacekeeping, would be more useful.
All the cultural and language people can be attached to the MP units. Shoot, our Special Forces types do a lot of this. Nor do I agree that they would be better at defending themselves than the rear echelon types. Besides, I thought your idea was that peacekeeping corps replaces regular Army line units--won't the logisitcs people still be driving the trucks?
The Army is stretched taut and we do need to do something. I'm open to thoughts but nothing I've read in years convinces me that a dedicated peacekeeping force (or constabulary corps or whatever) is the right idea.
#21
The last time I had official relations with Peace Corps was 1989 as a teacher trainer. (I've been back to Morocco many times since and have run across PCV's on occasion) I wasn't particularly impressed then; too much whining about too much work, but that was at the beginning of their 2-year commitment, so maybe most turned out OK. BTW, you can quit PC at any time and get your ticket home the same day. Would that be same for LH's idea?
Re FS, July '02 I had passed written exam and went to a State dept. workshop to get tips on oral exam. Most ?'s at workshop concerned How much vacation do I get, How much $ do I get, How can my wife get a job abroad, What kind of immunity do I get with a diplo passport? etc. Damn little about how to help my country. The oral itself in Oct '02 was my first and I wasn't offered a position. I heard a couple of the other 9 present were. I would have thought 17 years of living in Araby on local economies plus French would have put me in a special category, but only 1 question was asked about Araby re my Saudi experience: "So how was it?" Rest all bureaucratic mumbojumbo like, "If you were the consular officer on duty and you got a call from an American who's just been put in jail, what would you do?" "You are running the embassy commissary, and a former ambassador wants to buy whiskey to sell to his friends outside the embassy walls, and you knew about it, what would you do?" Nothing about how the world has changed since 9/11, WOT, etc. It is still a mystery to me, but life goes on. As it turns out, I've passed most recent written and will have a special strategy to do well on oral; a BS strategy, but you gotta play the game sometimes to get the ring.
ANYWAY, I describe all this because liberalhawk's idea is an intriguing one. BUT, I don't think, in spite of the selectivity of PC and FS, that today's typical pool of PCV's and FS would be able to hack Iraq. You want to be serious about this idea the way Oxblog and LH have outlined it? Recruit and let trainees know they will have weapons and combat training plus intensive lang. and cross cultural training 24/7 for at least 3 months. Experts can work out if more is necessary. No PC bullshit. Tell them what the hell the word "mission" and "chain-of-command" mean. Tell them we're in this to promote the interests of the USA; Syrian, Iranian, Palestinian sympathies are to be put on back burner, never to be turned on. No Corrie Bulldozerfood types. Got it? You participated in peace marches in Feb/March '03? Got any good Shrub jokes? Like Molly Ivins? There's the door. Don't tell me about your first-amendment rights. Go do bee-raising in the Middle Atlas. Yeah, that's what it would take and that's only the beginning because what has become apparent IMHO in the last 6 months is that the Baathists were worse than we had ever imagined a regime could be. Pan-Arab/Stalinist/Ceusescu (?) tyranny/brain-washing culture that was in its own vacuum for decades. And you think today's young generation knows that? shit, give me a break. If our govt. can't put together a group of folks like that, then BJD's idea re MP's is the way to go.
I also read on blogosphere recently about putting together a special "Colonial Office" composed of DOD, USAID, DOState proactive types. I think Weekly Standard. Something like this would be a start. In any case, good debate and let's think out of the box. If we keep our lines of comm. open to regular Iraqis and our military heroes there all the BS about BUSH LIED!!! will be long forgotten soon. Class time! Gotta go.
Posted by: Michael ||
07/17/2003 16:59 Comments ||
Top||
Oboy! Another mosque!
The World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY) has recently started the construction of a new mosque in Sudan at an estimated cost of SR. 25,150. In a statement to Saudi Press Agency (SPA), the assistant secretary general of WAMY Dr. Abdulwahab Nour Wali said that the construction work of the project which is named 'Abu Bakr Al-siddiq' mosque has been going on in a very good way, expecting the work to be finished on the fixed time. He pointed out that the building of such a worshipping place is part of WAMY's consistent efforts to promote the cause of Islam. He thanked the philanthropist who has provided the fun.
I think that last is a typo for "funding." The actual fun hasn't started yet. That'll come when the arms and ammunition arrive — though that seems kind of redundant for Sudan.
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
07/17/2003 10:19 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
omg- the actually picked the acronym "Whamy(!)"
Hmm could have been worse - what words add up to "Kaboom"?
#2
Yeah, you can never have enough mosques. Where does this one go on the list of "Islam's holiest places"? Did Mo take a dump there about 10000 years ago?
#3
In the long term, it is not a good idea to store jihad weapons and munitions outside under a tarp. So one needs a storage magazine. Digging around the local municipal (read Imam or mullah's) office, one comes upon a standard set of plans for Insta-Mosque. Hey, this looks good! Space fits the ticket. Soon the local craftsmen have it done. Voila! Multipurpose building doubling as a mosque, armory, munitions factory, staging area. Good ideas spread quickly all over the middle east. Inshallah....
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
07/17/2003 19:19 Comments ||
Top||
SPA — Russia and Egypt called Thursday for the revival of negotiations between Israel and the Syrians and Lebanese as part of the ongoing process to achieve comprehensive peace in the region. Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov and his Egyptian counterpart Ahmad Mahir made the call at the joint press conference in Cairo following talks. The talks focused on the developments in post-war Iraq and the implementation by Israel and the Palestinians of the Middle East peace plan or road map. "We call for the full and unconditional implementation of the road map," said Ivanov.
You can't do that, Igor. The Paleofundos are going to make it a dead issue, and then it'll be Bush's Failed Road Map™. Best not to be associated with it...
The Russian and Egyptian ministers agreed that the peace process should be expanded to include negotiations between Israel and Syria and Lebanon based on existing "resolutions of international legitimacy." Ivanov also commented on the situation in Iraq, saying that Russia fully supported the "stability, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Iraq." He added that immediate steps should be taken to establish "a legitimate leadership elected by the Iraqi people."
Like they had before...
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
07/17/2003 10:15 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
A well-informed Syrian source said that a Syrian Republican decree was issued providing for full pardoning of several exiled and political detainees, Syrians as well as "opinion prisoners," including Haitham Mannaâ and Riad al-Turk.
The source which asked to be anonymous said that the decree stated the return back of Mannaâ -- the spokesman for the Arab committee for human rights who is now in France -- to Syria and to practice all his political and civilian rights unconditionally. The sources expected al-Mannaâ to return back to Syria in August. The decree also stated releasing the Syrian opposition member and the former secretary general of the Syrian Communist Party, Riad al-Turk, who was arrested in September 2001 just three years after his release after he had completed 17 years in prison.
The decree also stated cancellation banning of several Syrians whose official travel documents will be given back to them, and be permitted to move freely inside and outside the country.
It was also officially announced the pardoning of the Human Rights Society chairman in Syria, Haitham al-Maleh, according to the Presidential decree. Al-Maleh is facing the charge of being a member in an unlicensed political party and disseminating information damaging to the state. Al-Malehâs lawyer said that dropping the accusation and the pardoning is considered a form of licensing the human rights league which he presides over.
Mannaâ praised the Syrian decree and described it as a positive step by the side of the authorities. In a press statement, he expressed his hope that the pardoning will cover all exiled Syrians and all political detainees and prisoners of opinion in the Syrian jails. Mannaâ said that it is ripe time to work according to the content of the "Greater national panel" in which Syrian national and political leaderships demanded several reforms. He expressed his conviction that the motive behind this decree is Damascusâ desire to withstand the foreign political challenges. Hummmm, pardoning opposition leaders could mean a couple of things. Either Assad is really trying to set up a more open Syria, or he is in trouble and needs all the help he can get. Iâll vote for number 2.
Posted by: Steve ||
07/17/2003 10:03:54 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Or, in that grand Ba'athist tradition, he'll ace them when they return?
The confusion over the arrest of an Irish language expert near Ramallah on Saturday deepened Wednesday as both the Israeli Shin Bet security service and British MI5 intelligence agency both insisted separately that they had found the right man, before Israel released him without charge late in the afternoon.
British media reports following the arrest claimed that John Morgan, known also as Sean OâMuireagain, was mistaken for a notorious IRA bombmaker with the same name. Family and friends were quick to tell the British media that the pro-Palestinian activist from Belfast went to the territories to set up a cultural exchange program and had no terrorist connections. They called for his immediate release.
But Israeli security officials stood by the arrest Tuesday, noting that it was the foreign media and not they who had given Morgan the bombmaker label. "There are two John Morganâs, both are linked to the IRA, one ideologically and the other actively. We arrested the person we were looking for and are checking his motives and his reasons for staying in the West Bank," an official told the Jerusalem Post. "Either way, heâs outta here!"
British intelligence sources are also insisting there is no mistake over the information they passed to Israel about Morgan, information that apparently linked his travel to Israel with instructing Palestinian terror groups in bomb-making techniques, according to a report in The Guardian Wednesday.
Morganâs arrest created headlines worldwide after an article in The Guardianâs sister newspaper The Observer on Sunday claimed Israel had launched a manhunt for Morgan, who was in the region to assist Palestinian terror groups improve their bomb-making capabilities. The newspaper report claimed that the British intelligence had tipped off their Israeli counterparts.
According to another British newspaper, the Daily Telegraph, however, there is a long and dishonorable Irish republican tradition of hostility to Jewish national aspirations, which could explain Morganâs presence in Ramallah in either case.
In an article published Wednesday the Telegraph details ties between the IRA and Nazi Germany during the Second World War, including the death of the IRA chief of staff on a German submarine and his subsequent burial at sea wrapped in the swastika. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
Posted by: Steve ||
07/17/2003 9:48:14 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Classic Den Beste Analysis - Short ân Sweet, this time...
(On Screen): In war and conflict, tactics flow from strategy, and strategy flows from goals. How you fight the war depends on what youâre attempting to do.
Describing the situation in Iraq as highly complicated, German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer said a trans-Atlantic debate was needed to develop a common strategy to deal with the postwar situation and other security issues. ... On Monday in New York, Fischer said he has tried to heal the rift between Berlin and Washington and was looking forward to discussing a broad range of security issues with U.S. officials. These included not just the implications of the Iraqi invasion, which Germany along with other European nations tried to prevent during heated debates at the U.N. Security Council, but also Iran, Afghanistan and the Middle East.
But there can be no common strategy if there is no consensus about goals, and there isnât one. In the last year, itâs become apparent that the primary Franco-German goal was to hobble American international power and influence as much as possible, while the Anglo-American goal was to eliminate the threat from Arab/Islamic extremism. Fischer says that debate is needed if there is to be a common strategy. He doesnât explain why there needs to be a common strategy, however. And simply to admit that such a thing is required amounts to giving Berlin and Paris a hecklerâs veto over American foreign policy. Which is what Fischer is after. After all, if we can only follow a "common strategy" then it means we canât do anything without their permission. And thatâs been something theyâve been demanding since the war began. Itâs taken many forms, and been stated in many ways. It was "Weâre all Americans now" (i.e. "Americans should act European now"). It was "consultation with allies", and it was "NATO invocation of Article V". It was "multilateralism", and it was "diplomatic partnership". Now itâs "common strategy". Itâs been the same old whine no matter what bottle itâs been delivered in, and itâs no different this time. Itâs always been the same message: We Europeans think you Americans should never do anything without our permission, because weâre smarter and more sophisticated than you are. And the message has never been accepted.
It wonât be accepted this time, either. State will smile and shake Fischerâs hand, pat him on the back and send him home, but thereâs not going to be any commitment to development of a common strategy. Nor should there be; for there is no shared goal. When goals contradict, shared strategy is nonsense. But Fischerâs own goals (heh) are contradictory. He wants rapprochement with the US and he also wants America chained. Is rapprochement an end in itself, or a means by which to bind and hobble America diplomatically? It seems to be both, but as long as itâs viewed here as even somewhat a means to binding, it wonât succeed at all. Simply put, if you want to be our friend so that you can use that friendship against us, you arenât a friend and wonât be treated as one. Perfect.
Posted by: PD ||
07/17/2003 8:36:11 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"We're all americans now" and NAto invoking article V were just ways to constrain the US? I dont think so - I think Den BEste (who is sometimes insightful) is here taking his Jacksonianism too far.
In particular he hasnt explained how Fischers goals contradict US goals - in fact he hasnt made clear his goals at all - is rapprochment an end in itself - well no. Is keeping America chained an end in itself - presumably its not. Even for Chirac keeping america chained is onlya means to the goal of keeping France a great power on the world stage. As far as i can tell, the French alliance is for Germany merely a means to the development of the EU on economic and political terms desirable for Germany (possibly including the economic domination of eastern europe) Keeping America chained is primarily a means to retaining the French alliance, and secondarily perhaps reassuring Russia while a German dominated EU expands.
Are these different from US goals - certainly - do they contradict US goals - not necessarily - not if we can provide Germany ways of assisting US goals that dont so set Germany against France as to undermine Germanys strategy in Europe. Can we adopt a common grand strategy - probably not, our goals are too different, this isnt the cold war. Can we adopt a common strategy for speficic situations - very likely. can we adopt a common strategy for dealing with the middle east - maybe.
#2
That's a very Joycian post, LH! Stream o' consciousness.
I don't think you ended all that far from Den Beste. Our goals should reflect what we believe, what we think is in the US's best interests. Period, full stop. And stop apologizing for it.
We should not develop our goals, Foggy Bottom style, as an imaginary global village jigsaw puzzle with pieces of ours and everyone else's tossed together - then worry off the corners of our pieces to make them fit with those of other countries - i.e. multilateralism.
Nor should we allow ANYONE to tell us what our fair share (recognize that little gem of BS?) is - ever again. I believe we're doing that for the last time right now - in the ME.
If the pieces fit - great, we offer to cooperate, as in coalitions of the willing. If they don't, then we go our own way. That's it. Those that disagree may do so - and have as many litters of press kittens as they like. They will rant and rave and take turns dropping their load at the UN. Fine. Yawn.
I'm glad you brought up the ME as a possibility.
The ME is a classic case of the US having taken the lead everyone insists we must take (our fair share), only to be undercut and undermined by either the Zeros or the Pals - over and over and over again.
The current case has the Zeropean dicks visiting and flattering and elevating Arafish - an obvious roadblock to any sort of peace - to the level of a human.
Voila - Den Beste's point is made: the Zeropeans are undermining Mazen / Abbas - and wasting Bush's / our time and burning what little goodwill we have left in Arabia. No one, including the Arabs and Zeros (well, maybe a Swede or Norweegie or two), believe this will work. Bush does the heavy lifting while they sit back and snipe.
When the levee breaks, and it will, in this lost cause, Bush will have done more than enough. Israel will have done more than enough. What will this exercise have accomplished, other than setting too many Israeli's up for killing when the "hudna" is discarded in a coordinated attack?
#3
"We're all americans now" and NATO invoking article V were just ways to constrain the US? I dont think so - I think Den Beste (who is sometimes insightful) is here taking his Jacksonianism too far.
Not at all. When NATO invoked Article V I was heartened that our allies in Europe would show such support for America in her time of need. When it became patently obvious that Brussels, France and Germany only approved the invocation of Article V so they might control the scope and depth of our response I felt totally betrayed. And as someone whose job requires frequent contact with counterparts in France, Spain and Germany let me just say that "We're all americans now" doesn't mean the same thing to them as it does to us, it might be better translates as "Now you know what it's like, eh buddy?"
I am confused as to how you cannot see the way in which Fischer's main goals of rapprochement and common strategy with the U.S. are not inherently contradictory in themselves. For rapprochement to work Germany must genuinely want to help the U.S. in achieving it's main foreign policy goal - elimination of the islamo-fascist threat (i.e. terrorism). Yet common strategy is not possible with a Germany that overtly opposes American attempts to combat ME terrorists and the regimes that support them, while simultaneously covertly supporting those same regimes.
Let me remind you that rapprochement is necessary only because Germany, via Joschka Fischer and Gerhard Schröeder, made a concerted effort to distance themselves from us. Who made Anti-Americanism the cornerstone of their re-election strategy? Who gave aide and comfort to our Saddam Hussein? Who helped derail the second resolution in the U.N.? Those were in fact the results of German policy executed by Fischer and Schröeder.
Now explain to me how there can be both rapprochement and a common strategy with Germany as long as those two are executing German policy? Contradictory indeed.
Posted by: Robert Modean ||
07/17/2003 12:53 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Don't forget when you talk about Joschka Fischer, you're talking about the head of a political party in a colilation government. Fischer has dreams of being head of government himself, someday. He can be expected to advance his own party's goals as much as possible withint the current structure.
And... Fischer is an ex-street thug. His background in street politics is remarkably similar to Saddam's. As I've said before, I would not be surprised to see his name on the list of Stasi informants the CIA sent over to Berlin a while ago.
#5
RM - i dont see rapprochement with the US or undermining the US as goals from the German POV -those are means to achieve some goal. Just as for the US acting unilaterally or multilaterally, invading Iraq, or giving foreign aid to africa are not goals. Our goals are to reduce terrorism and elimanate the salafist threat to our security, maintain broadly our position without creating a hostile coalition against us, and continue to expand trade such as to strenghten the US economy. Acting unilaterally or multilaterally, going to war or extending foreign aid, are merely means to achieve those goals. I dont think the ultimate goals that Germany has are incompatible with US goals, though they are not identical, and that working out elements of a common strategy is therefore not impossible, though by no means simple.
And, BTW, I was using Mideast here in its somewhat more traditional usage - IE the entire sweep from Iran to Egypt - not just Israel and Palestine. I presume thats the goal here - not a common global strategy between Germany and the US - but something broader than a common strategy on the Road map, or on Iraq.
Germany supporting pro-terrorist regimes - well im sure TGA will jump in here - let me say that the US has an issue now with ALL the Europeans, including the UK, regarding how to deal with Iran. That is one place where we need a common strategy, since the Euros may have more leverage there than we do. And there may be reason to link some of these issues together. The euros fear a US victory (not necesssarily military) in Iran and Israel/Palestine would combined with Iraq lead to US hegemony cross the mideast. We fear that UN/Euro interference in Iraq would steal the fruit of victory, the ability to use Iraq to influence the rest of the region. A grand compromise naturally suggests itself - the euros get behind us on change in Iran and Palestine,in return we open up Iraq to their influence and economic penetration. Im not sure thats where we end up, but things like that are worth thinking through and discussing. Which it seemed that Den Beste precluded, although perhaps i was misreading him.
#6
--A grand compromise naturally suggests itself - the euros get behind us on change in Iran and Palestine,in return we open up Iraq to their influence and economic penetration. Im not sure thats where we end up, but things like that are worth thinking through and discussing.--
We can jaw-jaw all they want, but they're not only going to want a piece of Iraq, they're going to want Iran and whatever ends up next to Israel.
And they're going to want US to do the heavy lifting, usual, while they collect the bennies.
Assuming you're correct that Germany's actions were not "goals" in and of themselves, so what? It matters not and I can't help but see the argument as moot. German actions were specifically designed to thwart the US from achieving one of its goals - one that we were very serious about and willing to spend blood and treasure to secure. What were Germany's goals? What were their motives? Why do they like strudel? We know some of it, but in the final analysis, who cares? We differed and parted ways.
Now, eyeing the spoils - and maybe some of the pain that comes from the loss of US business, troop-basing, etc, they (Shroeder & Fischer - not sure about the public) wanna be buddies, again. How, uh, convenient. How obvious does it need to be?
The joke buried in this little debate is thinking that we were bound, heart, hand and foot, to them and that it is somehow wrong for us to pursue our interests & policies - but right for them to do so.
As Den Beste concludes: "Simply put, if you want to be our friend so that you can use that friendship against us, you arenât a friend and wonât be treated as one."
#9
They opposed us for their own interests - and now they want to join with us for their own interests - so why shouldnt we move forward.
You wnat to be our friend so you can use that friendship against us - is rather different from - you want to be our friend for your own benefit, and so lets see where we can cut a deal for mutual benefit. In fact this talk about friends is a tad naive in international relations. We have,at most, allies - not friends. Nations that work together out of mutual interest, not pals. A betrayal on one issue should lower our trust of them, but shouldnt end our cooperation. Should we bound heart, hand and foot to them? well of course not, but that should have been obvious on 9/10/2001. And it should be obvious today, with regard to any state. If thats what Den Beste is saying, hes attacking a straw man. If OTOH hes saying that we should not cooperate with Germany moving forward (beyond some reasonable punishment - er consequences) then he is being foolish. The US cant bind itself hand, heart and foot to other countries (or to international organizations for that matter) but neither can we pretend to go it alone (and dont bring up UK and the Coalition of the willing - if we're too spiteful toward the weasels we'll lose UK and the others as well)
shifting coalitions - well thats basically what multilateralism IS - you use whatever works - an ad hoc coaltion - a bilateral temporary allinance - a long term alliance like NATO - or even, heaven help us, an international body like the UN to advance those goals. And i rather think thats what most of the folks at Foggy Bottom think as well - contrary to what you may have heard, most US foreign service types are not members of Greanpeace or PETA, and their daily bread and butter is watching out for US interests on items from trade to treaty interpretation. They have a professional bias towards keeping good relations with the countries they deal with - since that helps them get stuff on the minutae of trade deals and treaties and so forth - much as a salesman want the best price for the company he works for, but doesnt want to lose the customer. They may not alway make good grand strategists (i think theyve been failing abysmally lately, because of changed circumstances) but the idea that they are a bunch of transnational progressives who just want to share the pie equally with everyone is misguided. Of course in some situations you DO need to share things out, or youre not going to get a deal. If you can afford to walk away from the deal thats ok, but thats generally a decision for the Pres, and the NSA, and Sec of State, not the State Dept bureaucrats.
You certainly cant reach for your gun all the time. You cant treat everyone as your enemy, and always resort to your superior strength in negotiations. Over time you'll find yourself increasingly isolated, even from states that have an interest in your grand strategic goals. Unless you think you have most of the hard power on the planet, this is most unwise.
#10
I'm somewhat puzzled and to a certain extent saddened by this discussion as it shows how deep the Atlantic rift has become between the Bush administration (I dare not say America) and Germany (as a part of Europe). Yet it is not Europe (or Germany) that has redefined the transatlantic relations, it's the United States.
Of course 9/11 did change America. The European solidarity shown after 9/11 was genuine and heartfelt, at least on the German side. And it was Fischer who strongly backed the U.S. action in Afghanistan, clashing with his own party (and winning most of them over).
Europe may not like the wording "War on Terror" because our ideas of war might be a little more traditional than yours. But that doesn't mean that we don't clearly recognize the danger and most of us are fully aware that Islamist terror will strike here as well (and has already). Whether this means a poison attack in a subway or a plane crashing into the Reichstag, I don't know. We all have to work together to prevent this from happening.
Most of us think that war(s) in the Middle East will not prevent terrorism but encourage it. Iraq never seemed to fit into the War (or Fight) against Terror picture. While nobody was ignoring the brutatility of the Saddam regime, we didn't buy into the WMD meet terrorists idea, at least not in "controlled" Iraq. Germany did never break the UN sanctions against Iraq and/or helped Saddam after 1989. Some German businesses broke the law and are prosecuted. Quite a few ended up with lengthy jail sentences (apply German standards).
What were our goals for Iraq? Simply speaking, we didn't want to get involved in the first place. Bad diplomatic handling on both sides (put more of the blame on the German side if you want) pushed Germany in a corner with France without an exit strategy. While Schroeder's mediocrity and incompetence (which tied Fischer's hands) certainly did a lot to strain ties between Germany in the USA, most of German concerns about Iraq were genuine and not anti-American. We rather felt that the U.S. was making a mistake and would get bogged down into a guerilla war in Iraq which would just destabilize the Middle East further. Well, we have a leading U.S. general talking about "guerilla war" now and Iraq is anything but pacified (yet). It will take very costly U.S. efforts to succeed in Iraq. Germany feared it would get involved in Iraq exactly because of this. Our economic interest have never been as high as France's or Russia's.
Many Germans were also taken aback by the cavalier approach of the U.S. at the UN. We all know that this war was decided (at least) a year before it was led and there was never any room for negotiations. Europeans felt that anything they would have to say (or warn about) would be disregarded. And so it happened.
"No role for Europe or UN" I heard a lot of Rantburgers say. Just months later the Senate wants Europe involved because the whole thing gets too expensive. Yet we see no "draining of swamps" as LH claims, we see a new swamp opening up in which we don't want to venture. And what would we have to gain? A few subcontracts? The Saddamites (and we haven't talked about the Shiites yet) will shoot German soldiers as gladly as U.S. troops. And how will our government explain to us that we fiercely opposed the war and now we should send troops?
Germany has no interest in "obstructing the U.S. fight against terrorists" (that would be extremly dumb), Germany may prefer a United States that is not a completely "unchecked" megapower, a "free floating" nation that makes up it's own rules without adhering to anything else, a nation that does anything to liberate itsself from treaties or contracts. But that's dangerous. Why do nations sign treaties and agree to be bound by terms? To establish mutual trust. Companies do the same, even very big companies will sign contracts with small ones. Of course every treaty, every contract is mutually binding and restricts your sovereignty a little bit. The bigger nation may dislike that fact more than the smaller, but that's the price to pay. "Just trust us" won't do unfortunately, neither in business nor in politics.
Nobody in Germany wanted or wants to "use that friendship against you" as Den Beste claims. If Robert Modean says that "for rapprochement to work Germany must genuinely want to help the U.S. in achieving it's main foreign policy goal - elimination of the islamo-fascist threat (i.e. terrorism)" he is right and why would any intelligent person disagree? But we do differ when it comes to the means of achieving this goal. Has post Saddam Iraq made the world any safer (yet)? The Syrians might back down a little, but how impressed are the mullahs? Kimmie? The Pakland nutbags? How secure is Afghanistan?
We are only at the beginning. But if Iraq already strains U.S. ressources to a point that has the Senate worried, then I doubt that the "clean sweep" of ME nutbag nations is an option for now. The United States may occupy Syria in a week and Iran in a month. And then? Two more guerilla wars?
You said that the U.S. and Europe need a common strategy for Iran. I agree. But I don't really know what the U.S. strategy is. And Iran is certainly more than nuke loving mullahs.
Last point: Is Den Beste news or opinion? (I guess Fred's rules need to be stretchable, right?)
#11
Germany want's rapprochment and common stratigy with th U.S.,fine.Here is my proposal:
Germany's constitution forbids sending troops to foriegn wars,ok I can live with that.
Form an alliance with the U.S. declareing war on all terrorists world wide,start taking down terrorists,state sponsors of terrorisam,and thier financial supporters(both private and state).
Since Germany can not(by law)provide combat troops they can provide material,baseing,and monetary support.In addition they can provide peacekepping,policeing,and support units.
Lets start with the PLA and Yasser,stop all support to the Palistinians and Yasser,sieze/freeze all moneys and properties owned/control by Yasser,the PLA,and thier supporters and cronnies.
How long do you think it would take the Palistinians to cry enough?
#12
most of us are fully aware that Islamist terror will strike here as well
TGA, on this I respectfully disagree. Europe is now seen by the Islamists as a potential ally against America. The clapping and cheering during De Villepin's speech at the UNSC I think epitomized this very well. Even before 9-11 Europe was relatively safe, inasmuch as any bombs going off would be against American targets.
You say that the decision to war with Iraq was made earlier on, and I agree. I think what comes into play here, and where our respective views diverge, is precisely that it is not Europe's head that the whole world wants on a platter. It is America, that is the root of all evil, right? As a non-American, I don't blame my American cousins one bit for seeing Iraq as a direct threat, in this world climate of a pathological hatred of everything American. I don't think Europeans are in a position to understand (or maybe they do but are just guarding their positions).
Posted by: Rafael ||
07/17/2003 21:00 Comments ||
Top||
Much of official Washington is worried, quite rightly, about the crisis over North Koreaâs nuclear weapons program. Pyongyangâs secret program to make bomb-grade uranium, its eviction of nuclear inspectors and its claims to have reprocessed spent reactor fuel for nuclear weapons pose direct threats to U.S. national security. I encourage President Bush to keep working with our friends and allies in the region to persuade North Korea to change course. In addition to efforts on security issues, we need to address a parallel humanitarian problem in North Korea that now appears to be worsening. Up to 300,000 North Korean refugees are stuck in China. Many of them live in hiding in the border areas of northeastern China, fearful of being arrested by Chinese authorities and being sent back to North Korea. Many of the women are exploited by Chinese gangsters and forced into prostitution or abusive marriages. Senator Lugar -- a sober, dry-eyed fellow -- goes on to talk about what we might do. Since itâs an op-ed piece I wonât post it all, but itâs worth the read.
Posted by: Steve White ||
07/17/2003 2:55:42 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
EFL
South and North Korean soldiers briefly exchanged machine gun fire along their border on Thursday, but the South Korean military said it did not suffer casualties in the shootout. Shouldnât be any if people are doing their jobs correctly.
It was not immediately known whether any North Korean troops were injured or killed in the firefight in the Demilitarized Zone. Tension on the Korean Peninsula is high over North Koreaâs suspected development of nuclear weapons, and such shooting incidents in the DMZ are rare. In recent years, however, negotiations and reconciliation efforts have moved forward despite such outbreaks of violence. "Honest Ma, he wants to play with me. I donât think that foamy stuff around his mouth means anything! Nice doggy ..."
North Korean soldiers fired four rounds at 6:10 a.m., and South Korean soldiers fired 17 rounds in response one minute later, said Maj. Lee of the South Korean Joint Chiefs of Staff. He said the North Korean fire came from a machine gun, and that the South was using a machine gun called a K-3. Three of the North Korean bullets hit the wall of a South Korean guard post 300 yards away. The South Koreans issued a loudspeaker broadcast after returning fire, telling the North Koreans that they were in ``clear violationââ of the terms of the armistice that ended the Korean War. ``Immediately stop the provocation,ââ said the broadcast. "Thatâs telling them, Ray!"
The shootout occurred on a national holiday in South Korea that commemorates its 1948 Constitution. Under terms of the armistice, North and South Korean soldiers can patrol in the DMZ, but they are not allowed to move around with heavy weapons such as machine guns. However, Lee said the two sides are allowed to keep machine guns inside observation posts, and that the guns used in the shootout were located in such posts. Lee, who did not give his first name, said the incident happened near the South Korean town of Yonchon, 35 miles north of the South Korean capital, Seoul.
Posted by: Steve White ||
07/17/2003 2:40:38 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Once in a while you gotta break the monotony. Why not. Use something heavier next time, like an rpg.
Posted by: Rafael ||
07/17/2003 5:27 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Geez, only 4 rounds?
The russkies used to fire up their tanks in the early morning. My dad has some fun stories.
Of course, weapons were discharged, too, then the paperwork came, what were you shooting at, how many bullets did you use, yadda, yadda, yadda.
In Cuba, everybody knows ``the five.ââ Never hoid of âem.
Their cause is mentioned in nearly every newspaper, every Web site and every conference sponsored by Cubaâs communist government. Hundreds of thousands of dupes have marched for them. Enough about Berkeley already!
For Cubaâs communist government, the five Cuban agents convicted in Miami of spying against the United States represent the countryâs right to defend itself against ``terroristsââ in the post-Sept. 11 world. Except these terrorists, it says, are anti-Castro exiles in the United States and elsewhere. ``These five comrades were in the United States defending the Cuban people from acts of terrorist aggression by organizations based in the city of Miami,ââ said Jose Luis Toledo, head of the constitutional affairs committee in Cubaâs parliament, who recently toured Mexico to seek support for the men. I think the âFree Mumiaâ guys will take this one up next.
The government has tried to imbue their case with as much passion as it did when it demanded the return of young Elian Gonzalez, from the United States. But, unlike the Elian case, which raised widespread U.S. sympathy, the crusade to free ``the five heroes imprisoned in the empireââ hasnât attracted nearly as much outrage. The five were convicted in a Miami court on charges of trying to infiltrate U.S. military bases and Cuban exile groups in South Florida. They are serving sentences ranging from 15 years to life. Infiltrate a military base? Gutsy. Stupid, but gutsy.
One, Gerardo Hernandez, was found guilty of contributing to the deaths of four American anti-Castro activists whose planes were shot down on Feb. 24, 1996, off the Cuban coast. Thereâs an extra 20 years!
Cuban officials and the menâs lawyers argue that the five should be freed or have their sentences reduced. ``My client is serving the same time as Aldrich Ames and Robert Hanssen, the two top-level (U.S.) operatives who gave thousands of top-secret documents to the Russians,ââ said Leonard Weinglass, attorney for Antonio Guerrero. ``In the case of Hanssen, he compromised the lives of some American agents.ââ This man needs a round or two with the ClueBatâ¢.
Weinglass and others say trial testimony showed the men never harmed U.S. national security and say their surveillance of exile groups was justified by U.S. sluggishness in pursuing what Havana says are terrorists who have blown up a Cuban airliner, hijacked planes and boats, as well as attacking ships and tourist hotels. ``You have to look at this case ... in an international context of cross-border warfare ... (as) a response of a neighboring country to four decades of attacks,ââ Weinglass said. Yeah, yeah, whatever.
Among the targets, they say, was a ``terroristââ who was pardoned by the first President Bush and who has ties to current Bush administration figures. Orlando Bosch was convicted in 1972 of a bazooka attack on a Polish freighter. Cuba blames him for the 1976 bombing of a civilian airliner in which 73 people died, though a Venezuelan court acquitted him. But it wasnât revolutionary justice!
Cuba has long linked acts like hijackings to its standoff with the United States, saying American laws that give special treatment to Cuban migrants once they reach U.S. shores encourages people to flee. We only encourage people living in totalitarian dictatorships to flee.
On Wednesday, the U.S. Coast Guard boarded a 36-foot Cuban boat and took 15 people into custody, a day after the government-owned vessel was taken from the island and was chased by Cuban authorities. U.S. officials said it appeared the boat had not been forcibly hijacked. The first clue was the skipper singing the Star Spangled Banner.
That incident and a failed hijacking of a boat Monday were the first significant boat or plane seizures in Cuba since the April 11 execution of three men convicted of seizing a ferryboat in Havana Bay — a case that helped chill Cubaâs relations with Europe. Cuban officials have tried to counter international outrage over its treatment of accused hijackers, as well as the trial and conviction in April of 75 dissidents to prison terms ranging from six to 28 years. Cuban officials accused them of acting as foreign agents. Cuban news media say that nearly 200 local committees, many in the United States, have been created to back the five. A U.S. group, Free The Five, has collected about 55,000 signatures seeking the menâs release, according to one of its volunteer leaders, Alicia Jrapko. Berkeley or Cambridge, you make the call.
While the dissidents were convicted in hasty trials and the U.S. trial lasted six months, Toledo said it was unfair to compare them: ``They are two totally different systems of law.ââ Hey, he got one right! Ours is fair, Cubaâs isnât. Oh, sorry, that isnât what he meant.
As in the Elian case, the campaign has been long and intensive. It began with their trial in late 2001 and shows few signs of flagging. Still, internet searches reveal few recent stories about the case outside Cuba, even in leftist publications that are often sympathetic to Cuba. ``One of our great tasks is to break that barrier of silence that exists,ââ Toledo said, complaining of ``a complicit silence in all the mass media of communications.ââ "They arenât repeating what we tell them!" Lisandro Perez, director of the Cuban Research Institute at Florida International University, said the campaign seemed to have little effect so far in the United States. Perez said that during a recent visit to Cuba, ``I could see that campaign going on and it kind of surprised me that they have put so much publicity into it.... Usually when they do these things, itâs because they have a pretty good idea they can win.ââ Asked why, Toledo replied, ``Cuba never abandons its sons.ââ Never! Itâs easier to starve them or toss them into a corrective labor sugar cane plantation.
Posted by: Steve White ||
07/17/2003 2:34:39 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
Follow-up to this Rantburg article. Powerline
When we last heard from the State Department in yesterdayâs post regarding the brutal 1973 assassinations of U.S. Ambassador to Sudan Cleo Noel and charge dâaffaires George Curtis Moore, Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs deputy director of press affairs Gregory Sullivan spoke on behalf of the department. Sullivan conceded that "[e]vidence clearly points to the terrorist group Black September as having committed the assassinations." This is not much of a concession; the eight operatives who executed the operation had themselves proclaimed their membership in Black September at the time of the operation and after they surrendered to Sudanese authorities on March 3, 1973.
Sullivan indignantly denied, however, that the evidence linked Yasser Arafat to the operation. According to Sullivan, "though Black September was a part of the Fatah movement, the linkage between Arafat and this group has never been established." On its face, this claim is suspect. In 1973, as now, Arafat was the undisputed leader of Fatah. But in light of the contemporaneous State Department cables that have now been declassified and released to me in response to my Freedom of Information Act request, Sullivanâs statement is both false and inexplicable. The cables reflect the intense concern among the department regarding the security issues raised by the Khartoum operation. The department received reports from its embassies and missions reporting the results of intelligence inquiries and the Secretary of State himself (William Rogers) promptly disseminated his conclusions regarding responsiblity for the operation based on these reports and other intellligence sources.
Contary to Sullivanâs assertions, the cables demonstrate that in March 1973 the State Department had promptly concluded that Black September was nothing more than a front for Fatah and that Arafat himself had directed the operation resulting in the assassination of Noel and Moore. Both points are made over and over again in the cables both to and from the Secretary of State. To take one example, in March the U.S Mission in Vienna reported to Rogers: "The Black September Organization (BSO) is a cover term for Fatahâs terrorist operations executed by Fatahâs intelligence organization, Jihaz al-Rasd... For all intents and purposes no significant distinction now can be made between the BSO and Fatah... Fatah leader Yasir Arafat has now been described in recent intelligence as having given approval to the Khartoum operation prior to its inception."
As the department came to its conclusions regarding the ultimate resonsbility for the operation, it dispatched its representatives to meet with sympathetic governments and attempt to persuade them to take appropriate precautionary measures. The American ambassador to Tunisia, for example, met with the then-Tunisian President Bourguiba on March 10 to convey the departmentâs concerns about Fatah in light of the Black September Khartoum operation: "I referred to Sudanese governmentâs revelation that head of Fatah office in Khartoum masterminded Khartoum assassinations... I noted that there is Fatah office in almost every Arab capital operating openly and, in light of Khartoum tragedy, this has clear implications." On March 13 Secretary of State Rogers issued a comprehensive cable summarizing the departmentâs conclusions and sent the cable to American embassies around the world. (I was provided a copy of this cable by Jim Welsh. Although the cable lacks any FOIA release data â Welsh appears to have obtained it through sources of his own â it closely tracks the language and conclusions of the cables released to me by the department.) Rogersâ cable states: "Question of link between Black September Organization (BSO) has been subject of much public discussion since murder of U.S. diplomats in Khartoum. Fatah leader Arafat has disavowed connection with BSO..."
The cable then attributes the following paragraphs to an intelligence brief prepared by the department and the CIA: "The Black September Organization (BSO) is a cover term for Fatahâs terrorist operations executed by Fatahâs intelligence organization... Fatah funds, facilities, and personnel are used in these operations... For all intents and purposes no siginificant distinction now can be made between the BSO and Fatah... Fatah leader Yasir Arafat has now been described in recent intelligence as having given approval to the Khartoum operation prior to its inception." Why does the department cover up for the chief assassin of its officers thirty years after the fact? Intelligent observers such as Daniel Pipes (in his review of Assassination in Khartoum) have offered informed speculation in answer to this question. The State Departmentâs records themselves provide no ground whatsoever to challenge the premise of the question -- indeed, they corroborate it, and they further provide much reason to think about what the answer could be. Somebody give The Smoking Gun a ring - Scott has the goods on Arafish
Posted by: PD ||
07/17/2003 12:20:42 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Doesn't matter if you have the goods on Arafat or not. The Foggy Bottom crowd does not want to be troubled by the facts, they prefer their fantasy land where Palestine can coexist peacefully with Israel. It is this kind of crap that leads us down the roadmap to peace.
Posted by: Douglas De Bono ||
07/17/2003 0:31 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Problem with Foggy Bottom's attitude, is that an institution that does not defend itself against the killing of its own staff, does not exist for long.
Posted by: Be ||
07/17/2003 7:59 Comments ||
Top||
Follow-up to Mondayâs China blast report. It turns out that the blast was due to a broken heart and an ugly divorce. At least thatâs the party line.
Police on Wednesday announced that they have discovered the cause of Mondayâs blast in a food store in downtown Xiâan, capital of northwest Chinaâs Shaanxi Province. According to the police, 43-year-old Wang Dayong was distraught over his broken marriage and the division of property. At around 9:00 a.m. Monday, Wang, armed with explosives, went to his ex-wifeâs food stall and entered into negotiations, which ended in a violent argument. In desperation, Wang set off the explosives, killing himself, his ex-wife and three court employees and injuring nine others seriously. Li Jianguo, secretary of the Shaanxi Provincial Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC), and Jia Zhibang, Shaanxi governor, ordered police to investigate the cause of the blast.
Posted by: 11A5S ||
07/17/2003 12:13:36 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Yep. This one was a broken marriage. Last month's was a shakedown scheme. Sure. There's no terrorism in China... is there?
Proportionately speaking, the number of hard-cores is probably not terribly higher for Iraq. To quote a US four-star general, speaking of El Salvador in the 1980âs: "80% of the people just want to live their lives. They are your allies. 15% are fence sitters. They will follow whomever they think is the most powerful. They will take care of themselves once you start winning. The remaining 5% are hard core Marxist-Lenninists. You just have to kill them."
KHANKALA, July 16 (Itar-Tass) -- Russian Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov visited Chechnya on Wednesday. He met the commander of federal troops in the North Caucasus, Sergei Makarov, who briefed him about the situation in Chechnya. Ivanov told reporters after the meeting that "about 1,200-1,300 active militants, diehard bandits act in Chechnya, the talk with whom can be only one - their destruction". Some 300 foreign mercenaries fight with rebels groups, Ivanov said. "This figure changes, because some militants go abroad, while others come to the republic," he said.
Posted by: 11A5S ||
07/17/2003 12:09:57 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
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.
