Saudi guards arrested four gunmen on Saturday night after an exchange of fire outside a housing compound in the capital Riyadh where many Western expatriates live, security sources said. The clashes were the first since militants killed five Westerners in a shooting earlier this month in the Saudi petrochemical hub of Yanbu, and the latest in the wave of militant violence rocking the birthplace of Islam. There was no immediate word on casualties but security sources said no expatriates were injured in the shooting, which took place outside the Kingdom City Compound, an exclusive residential complex. âThere was a commotion on the waste ground next to the compound. There were shots fired from there. The National Guard engaged them in a fire fight,â one source said. Residents said security was tightened at the compound after the shooting and no one was allowed in or out.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 7:54:40 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Q.2. Should fighting break out between India and a Muslim country, what should Indian Muslims do? Can they fight against their fellow Muslims?
Abd Al-Ahad
A.2. When Muslims are a minority in a country, they should not engage in discussing hypothetical situations that call their loyalty into question. That brings them trouble with the non-Muslim majority. However, Muslims are not allowed to fight other Muslims, except in cases where they are subject to aggression. In this case, their fighting should be limited to repelling the aggression. In the period prior to a war breaking out, Muslims should do their utmost to bring about reconciliation so that they are not caught up in a situation of conflicting loyalties.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 7:17:39 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
Gulf Arab states must embrace real political, economic and democratic reforms before they are imposed by external pressure, speakers at a conference here on âThe Region and the Futureâ said yesterday. Political reform in the Middle East can only be achieved from within, with the cooperation of the countries involved, Kuwaiti Prime Minister Sheikh Sabah Al-Ahmed Al-Sabah said at the opening of the meeting organized by Kuwaitâs Parliament. He urged Western nations seeking to inspire sweeping reform in the region to first take a more aggressive stance in helping to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as well as the Iraq crisis. Sheikh Sabah also said Iran should play a greater regional role.
Officials and academics discussed at the two-day symposium the future of the region in light of US initiatives to bring democracy, better human rights and economic reform to the Middle East. Qatari Foreign Minister Sheikh Hamad ibn Jassem, who was the key speaker at the opening session which tackled Gulf-West relations, said countries in the region have to âreally believeâ in reform, which must be tailored to their own needs. He called on the GCC states to initiate such reforms before they are imposed from outside, saying that if âwe did so, we will gain respect from the West and the rest of the world.â âThis is a very huge wave. It will not go away before each country does what is required in terms of real reforms. We must satisfy our people too,â Sheikh Hamad said. âGiving up attempts to impose reform and change from the outside is the beginning of implementing the hoped for reforms from the inside,â Sheikh Sabah said.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 19:45 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Crown Prince Abdullah yesterday warned terrorists and their supporters that the Kingdom would not allow them to tarnish its international image.
"Yeah! You guys are really gonna get it!"
Saudis and their government were âagainst those who undermine the Kingdomâs security and try to damage the countryâs reputation,â he told a group of citizens from the southern Asir region. The crown prince reiterated that the government was determined to track down âthis deviant group, who have abandoned the Islamic nation and faithâ and violated humane values.
"And we're gonna make 'em promise never to do it again!"
Speaking to another group of citizens from Taif, Prince Abdullah said the Kingdom would nail the terrorists sooner or later.
But more likely later.
âLeave the matter of this deviant and aggressive group to us,â he said. âWe will go after them no matter how long it takes.â Both groups of citizens had come to see the crown prince to pledge their support in the fight against terror.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 19:42 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
...the Kingdom would not allow them to tarnish its international image.
I do not think that the terrorists could ever do that, being that it is already corroded tarnished.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
05/15/2004 23:20 Comments ||
Top||
A Saudi high court judge has dismissed as âbaselessâ allegations by four Britons that they were tortured at a Riyadh prison to extract confessions. Sheikh Ibrahim Al-Khudairy said the six Westerners â four Britons, a Canadian and a Belgian â were convicted after 13 judges had looked into the case. Three of them were sentenced to death while two others were given jail terms for carrying out a series of blasts in Riyadh and Alkhobar in 2001, Okaz newspaper reported. The court convicted the five after they confessed their crimes on Saudi Television. Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Fahd later pardoned them at the request of their families.
âThe case had been looked into by three judges in the first phase before it was taken up by five judges of the cassation court and five judges from the Supreme Judiciary Council,â Khudairy said. He said the five Westerners were given access to all judicial facilities including freedom to talk, simultaneous translation and defense lawyers. âNo coercion or torture was used to extract their confessions. They revealed the source of the explosives they used to carry out the blasts,â he said. Khudairy denied the prisoners complained about torture in Hair Prison at the time. âThe judges asked the prisoners whether they had been tortured to extract confessions, but they said no,â he said. The prisoners were speaking through a translator. âThe Kingdom treated these people well but they did not deserve it,â he said in reference to the royal pardon and their later allegations.
Dr. Ibrahim Al-Otaibi, a security and political affairs adviser, said the issue was being raised now to deflect attention from the torture of Iraqi prisoners by British soldiers. âWe are confident in our Islamic judiciary, which is based on justice and truth. We are also confident in our security officers who investigated the prisoners; they are known for their truthfulness, honesty and impartiality,â he said. âThese prisoners admitted their crime. Their accusations now that they were tortured have no value,â he added.
#1
Hair Prison - the barbarians ... I think I've been to that place.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
05/15/2004 15:44 Comments ||
Top||
#2
âThe judges asked the prisoners whether they had been tortured to extract confessions, but they said no,â he said. The prisoners were speaking through a translator.
I don't see any problems with denial, do you?
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
05/15/2004 23:43 Comments ||
Top||
Al-Qaida's alleged leader in Saudi Arabia said in an Internet statement that the militant network was helping insurgents who are battling occupation forces in Iraq. In the statement that surfaced Friday on an al-Qaida-linked online periodical, Abdulaziz Issa Abdul-Mohsin al-Moqrin said al-Qaida is in close contact with fighters in Iraq. ''By our jihad in the Arab peninsula, we are serving Iraq's cause and helping the mujahedeen (fighters) there, whom we are in close contact with,'' he said. ''There is mutual support between the two of us and we are working on confusing the American enemy. Muslims should realize that jihad in this country to apply sharia (Islamic law) and expel occupying Crusaders is a duty for all able ones.'' He said al-Qaida relies on independent cells who function without ''organizational cohesion'' to carry out its goals, following the group's example and books and periodicals on how to carry out militant operations.
I think we have that down by now...
As an example, he praised one cell for a May 1 attack in the western Saudi city of Yanbu that killed five Westerners and a Saudi. ''The Yanbu Cell that implemented the heroic successful operation this month is one of the best examples of what is required,'' the statement said.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/15/2004 11:47:02 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
IT is now clear that the photographs the Mirror published of British soldiers abusing an Iraqi prisoner were fakes. The evidence against them is not strong enough to convict in a court but that is not the burden of proof the Daily Mirror demands of itself. Our mission is to tell the truth.
Hand me a Kleenex, please...
That is something this newspaper has been doing for more than 100 years and will always strive to do. If ever we fail, we are letting down the people who mean most to us. Our readers. So to you today we apologise for publishing pictures which we now believe were not genuine.
... that we could have determined weren't genuine with less than an hour's work...
We also say sorry to the Queen's Lancashire Regiment and our Army in Iraq for publishing those pictures. The Daily Mirror printed the photographs with glee in good faith. We hoped absolutely believed they were what we were told they were, otherwise we would never have printed them. They provided pictorial evidence of a shocking story of abuse, given to us by two soldiers from the QLR. Since then, four others have told similar stories. Not only has no evidence been produced to disprove what they said, but the thrust of their allegations has been confirmed by the Red Cross and Amnesty International.
So we're hoping somebody might eventually prove it...
But that does not excuse the publication of those photographs. We were the victims of a hoax. And that led to us hoaxing our readers.
"We're victims! Victims, y'unnerstand?"
Many people - especially those who serve in the Queen's Lancashire Regiment - will delight in the Mirror's apology over the hoax pictures. Others will regret that serious allegations of abuse by members of the British Army in Iraq have been diminished by the furore over the pictures. The Mirror's admission that the photographs were not genuine must not allow the Ministry of Defence to avoid dealing with the real issue. The Prime Minister, Defence Secretary and Armed Forces Minister have claimed that our photos were hoaxes. They have been vindicated.
"Oh, cheese! It hurts so bad to say that!"
But they have also insisted that there was no abuse which has not been dealt with and that is simply not true.
"We don't have any proof, but we know it's not true."
Just as the Government turned its considerable firepower on the BBC when Dr David Kelly died, so it has done the same to the Mirror over the allegations of abuse.
Y'mean when the Beebers published lies, falsehoods and calumnies, too?
It is not an honourable way to behave and is leading to growing disenchantment among the British people. The one thing on which all sides agree, and from which the Mirror has never deviated, is admiration for our armed forces and the remarkable job they are once again doing. They are the envy of the world and their reputation for courage and honour is unrivalled.
We'll continue doing our best to undermine it, of course...
A few rotten apples will not sully their good name as long as they are rooted out. That is what the Mirror hoped to achieve with these stories. The hoax photographs are a sad episode in our long and distinguished history. It is now behind us.
It's time to move on to the next episode...
We look forward to a future in which we continue to serve our readers in truth and honesty.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 19:29 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Andrew Sullivan says that the Mirror's editor refused to resign and apologize and had to be escorted from the premises. Apparently his successor put this "apology" together.
From The Sun newspaper
A £6-million fake sports gear racket that helped to fund terror chief Osama Bin Laden has been smashed in a series of raids. More than 4,000 counterfeit England football shirts were recovered in the UKâs biggest ever seizure of bogus goods. Investigators believe cash from the illegal trade is channelled to al-Qaeda to fund its terror campaign. The clothing â which included fake Nike, Burberry and Aquascutum gear â is made in sweatshops in Pakistan and then shipped to the UK. Private investigator Brendon Otuathalain â who led the operation â said: âIt is known that Bin Laden gets a rake-off from the money made by the Pakistani manufacturers.â And terrorism expert Chris Dobson said: âThe making and selling of counterfeit clothing is a lucrative alternative to the drugs trade for al-Qaeda.â The clothing â which filled six 40ft trucks â was seized in raids in Greater Manchester and Lancashire after a three-month undercover operation. It was destined to be sold on market stalls across the UK. ....
"Duck 'n cover, Mahmoud, Brendon Otuathalain is on our tail!"
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
05/15/2004 12:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
the people need to be informed about this. A boycott of all sports wear should do it,might have known the paki made goods would turn up in fuckin Manchester.when my old dear lived up there it was a lovely place,nowdays its been invaded by the religion of peace and the whole city and large swathes of the surrounding country side have rotted away and been turned into haven for Islamozoids and thier death cult ways. pisses me off!!
Posted by: Shep UK ||
05/15/2004 4:15 Comments ||
Top||
#3
In othezr words Bin Laden uses pakistani slave children to fund himself.
Two Spanish men arrested in Belgium on suspicion of belonging to the Basque separatist organisation ETA are to be extradited to Spain. The two men, Jon Lopez Gomez and Diego Ugarte Lopez de Arkaute, were arrested at the end of March in the Belgian town of Bossu. The Belgian authorities initially refused to send the two men back for trial in Spain, despite an official extradition request from Madrid. But on Friday a Belgian court overturned the earlier decision on the case and said the two suspects should be extradited. The change of heart followed a frank exchange of views on the subject between Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt and his Spanish counterpart Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero. Diplospeak for "nearly coming to blows", plus Spain prolly had an ace up its sleeve (maybe some sort of EU carrot/stick).
When the two men met for talks last month, Zapatero insisted that the Belgian government "do everything in its power" to ensure that the countryâs judicial authorities respect extradition requests from other EU countries. Hmmm...still donât like/trust Zapatero, but he was able to strongarm Belgium into coughing up some terrorists. The US better not get caught misunderestimating him.
Police have arrested six people for allegedly recruiting Islamic terrorists to fight in Iraq, it was revealed Friday. The arrests of five Algerians were made in Madrid, Barcelona, Bilbao. Another Spaniard was arrested in Castro Urdiales, in Cantabria, northern Spain. A seventh person was arrested then later released.
The National Police carried out the arrests between Wednesday and Thursday but only made the operation public Friday. Nice operational security.
The operation is linked to a long-running investigation â codenamed Date â which was launched in November 2001. The investigation aimed to dismantle an al-Qaeda cell in Spain linked to the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States. Judge Baltasar Garzón, who has been leading the operation since September last year, has been hunting for 35 people. Among them are al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden, the head of the cell in Spain, Imad Eddin Barakat Yarkas, alias âAbu Dahdahâ, and Amer Azizi, alias âOthman Al Andalusiâ. Abu Dahdah has been arrested and remains in prison. Last month, Garzon charged Amer Azizi in connection with both the 11 September and 11 March attacks, the first time investigators have established a link between the two bloodiest al-Qaeda atrocities. Azizi is alleged to have helped organise a meeting in Spain a few weeks before September 11 between the key plotters, including the suicide pilot Mohamed Atta.
Meanwhile, in the latest development, two people were arrested in Barcelona in the Vilanova and Geltru areas. A third was detained in Madrid and a fourth in Bilbao. The man arrested in Madrid had been stopped as he traveled from Zaragoza in eastern Spain. All will appear before Judge Garzon on Monday. The police also carried out raids in Madrid, the Bilbao area of Deusto and in Santurce in the Basque Country and in Castro Urdiales. But according to police sources one of the those arrested could be released shortly. They added that the gang was thought to have provided the infrastructure, support and false documents for Islamic terrorists. They are also linked to recruiting terrorists to train in al-Qaeda camps. Nice work, Judge Garzon and Spanish intel. Now your job is to keep these guys in jug.
Two Algerian men were to appear before a French anti-terrorist judge Friday on suspicion of belonging to an underground Islamist network with links to Chechnya, judicial officials said. The two were being questioned at the headquarters of the domestic intelligence service, the Territorial Surveillance Directorate (DST). The wife of one of the men who was also in detention has been released, the officials said. One of the two men was arrested in the Paris region on Monday, and is suspected of having contacts with Islamists in Spain where he made frequent journeys. The other man was already in custody suspected of trafficking false identity papers.
Counterintelligence agents have arrested two Algerians suspected of ties to a dismantled network accused of planning a chemical attack, judicial officials said. One of the two was described as an important member of the cell who made frequent trips to Spain. Several suspected members of the French-Chechnya network were arrested in Spain in early 2003, the officials said. They spoke on condition of anonymity. Three of them had trained with Chechen rebels and met ``high-level al-Qaida operatives'' in Georgia's Pankisi Gorge, near its border with Russia, the Interior Ministry said at the time.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/15/2004 12:17:22 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
New European Union counterterrorism chief Gijs de Vries said cooperation with Washington in the global war on terror is strong despite continuing deep differences over the war in Iraq and other policies. Even countries that sharply opposed the U.S.-led war in Iraq recognize they are targets for al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations, said Mr. de Vries, who was in Washington to meet with Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge, Attorney General John Ashcroft and other senior U.S. officials. "There are no illusions in France and Germany about their vulnerability to terrorism, certainly not after the March 11 bombings in Madrid," Mr. de Vries, a former Dutch lawmaker and Cabinet official, said Thursday. He declined to estimate how many al Qaeda cells are active in the European Union, but he said recent arrests by French, British and Italian authorities demonstrated that the danger remained. "Europe is both a target and a base for al Qaeda," he said, adding, "the problem is not getting any smaller. I would not suggest for a moment that there is not a clear-eyed analysis of the threat we face all across the Continent."
In Paris, both French President Jacques Chirac and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder forcefully denounced the videotaped beheading of American civilian Nicholas Berg by Iraqi militants. "Nothing can ever excuse such acts," said Mr. Chirac, whose government actively opposed the war and has refused to send troops for the postwar reconstruction mission. The two leaders also condemned the abuse of Iraqi detainees by U.S. troops in Iraq, but softened their criticism by noting that U.S. authorities have admitted the abuses and vowed to punish those responsible.
Mr. de Vries said the bloc's executive arm has put out a number of concrete proposals to boost cooperation, including a unionwide arrest warrant, joint investigative teams and better pooling of information from various national databases. But he added that the EU states still have a long way to go in implementing policies adopted in Brussels. His new post is largely advisory and does not include a separate budget or staff to help push counterterrorism policies. "I am not a European Tom Ridge," he said. "Our model is based on working together with all the national services in Europe from a bottom-up approach." But the March 11 Madrid attacks exposed a continuing problem for EU states: Spanish authorities did not know that many of those suspected in the attacks were already known to security services in other EU states. "We have to make sure there are no gaps in our legal armor, that the best practices in one country aren't undermined by weaknesses in other countries," Mr. de Vries said. But, he added, "twenty-five nations do not just merge overnight."
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/15/2004 11:51:45 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Spanish police arrested three Algerians and a Spaniard on suspicion of recruiting for Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda network, officials said. The arrests in Madrid, Barcelona, Bilbao and the Cantabria region were part of Judge Baltasar Garzon's investigation into suspected Al Qaeda cells, a court official said. The arrests were not part of the probe into the March 11 train bombings in Madrid, officials said.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/15/2004 11:48:32 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
A special commission researching the Srebrenica massacre of Bosnian Muslims said Friday it has learned of three more mass graves of victims. So far U.N. and Muslim experts have found the remains of about 5,000 of the more than 7,000 Muslim men and boys who were killed and buried in mass graves around Srebrenica. Milan Bogdanic, the head of the Srebrenica Commission, said he had no information on when the new graves would be exhumed from Europe's worst civilian massacre since World War II. The government commission was formed last year by Paddy Ashdown, Bosnia's international administrator, to investigate who was involved in the massacre and where the bodies were hidden.
Wonder if the Dutch government volunteered to help?
Bosnian Muslim officials have said that up to 20 mass graves are still undisclosed.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/15/2004 12:38:43 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Why would educated people go ape on their neighbors? Prolly wanted to win. That "war is hell" thing. Not pretty, not cool, but...but what comes next?
Oh, gee, golly. I wonder why that would happen?
After the Abu Ghraib shocker, the wave of revulsion that swept across America, generating in the process much sympathy for the Iraqi victims, is reversing itself because of the blood-curdling video depicting the beheading of the young American businessman Nick Berg.
A little reminder now and then helps keep us on target. Sometimes we forget that we're fighting savages...
The worldwide circulation of the video via the Internet, television, radio and the print media, has reinforced the line the Bush administration has been plugging in since coming to office about terrorism bearing an Islamic face, and characterised by animal brutality.
Allahu akbar [holy shit!] Kinda hard to argue with that, isn't it?
Backed by a massive onslaught on this theme by the popular US media, the image of a Muslim now familiar to most Americans is that of a brutal killer who hates the West as much as he hates Christians and Jews.
If he doesn't have Christians or Jews to hate, he contents himself with hating Sunnis or Shias, depending on the cut of his turban...
By putting out the video, the killers of Nick Berg have only ended up doing the greatest possible disservice to Islam and its image in the world, according to Muslims living in the Washington area. On Friday, the Sean Hannity radio show, one of the most widely-heard in America, played the chilling audio from the videotaped beheading of Nick Berg. The 33-second audio clip contained at least nine blood-chilling screams from Berg, heard over continuous chanting from his hooded killers.
Continuous chanting of "Allahu akbar"...
His final scream seemed to have ended with a gurgling sound. âI think people need to know what weâre dealing with - itâs evil right before your eyes,â said Mr Hannity of the right-wing Fox News Channel. âThese people want to kill all Americans, not just this poor kid, Nick Berg,â he later said in a newspaper interview.
That's a little more compelling than Britney's breasts. Unfortunately, Americans have a short attention span...
He made it clear that he had given his radio audience âample time to tune out with a full and complete disclaimer. I counted down from 10 and said I didnât want to hear any complaints.â Mr Hannity said he wouldnât show the video in full on his TV show, âHannity & Colmesâ on the Fox channel.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 19:58 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
By putting out the video, the killers of Nick Berg have only ended up doing the greatest possible disservice to Islam and its image in the world, according to Muslims living in the Washington area.
Actually it gives a pretty good idea of what Sharia will be like. If the so-called moderate muslims do not clean up Islam's act, others in the west will. With Nick Berg's murder, Islam's sympathy card just ran out of points.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
05/15/2004 23:12 Comments ||
Top||
Watching the amazing ugliness and incoherence of the Iraqi battlefront of the war on terror, it is easy to understand Otto Von Bismarkâs comment that a special providence watches out for drunks, fools and the United States of America. Why? Because America is winning the war on terror. How? By slowly but surely making the Middle East safe for democracy. Indeed, it is even possible to argue that the American stumbling in Iraq is providing a cover under which reform can be presented as an alternative, even a rebuke, to American military power. In other words, the U.S. is winning the way it has often won, ugly....
#2
I think it's meant in the sense of "it doesn't have to be pretty, just so long as it gets done."
Posted by: Dave D. ||
05/15/2004 18:40 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Oh absolutely. The Euros, who are unquestioned judges in these matters, were doing splendidly in Yugoslavia until Clinton and the USAF started making things ugly.
/sarcasm.
Someone linked to an article which pointed out that Americans regarded European competence in international affairs as being in the same class as Barney Fife and Wile E. Coyote, Genius.
Note to Abu Banan: Donât be a bandwidth thief!
by Laura Mansfield
This evening, analysts with the Northeast Intelligence Network were surprised to find a link to this website on a jihadi board. The posters at the Al Hesbah board seem to have a complaint - they are complaining that we are continuously watching them, and recording what they have said. It seems we have the only online copy of their archives, according to Abu Bananâs post. He is upset both at the Northeast Intelligence Network (who he calls the Intelligence Service of the Eastern North) and at that of Haganah, a reference to Internet Haganah.
Although we appreciate the publicity for our website, and thank them for the links, we will not be providing them with a reciprocal link. We also would like to take the opportunity to remind Abu Banan that itâs not nice to steal other peopleâs bandwidth - the images have a nasty habit of changing in an unpredictable manner.
Abu Banan, take a look now at the message you are sending your fellow jihadis!
Posted by: badanov ||
05/15/2004 8:26:41 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Abu Basan, a moron who puts up a billboard for Arabs and wants his enemies to close their eyes when they pass by it.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
05/15/2004 16:01 Comments ||
Top||
A new terror warning has been issued. Local law enforcement officials are being warned about Al-Qaeda's new interest in using trucks packed with explosives, NBC11 News reported. According to U.S. intelligence, the interest is specifically related to large trucks, including tractor-trailers. The warning is in response to a recent terrorist plot uncovered in Jordan, NBC11 News reported. The Homeland Security Department reports no known plan for these tactics in the U.S.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/15/2004 11:54:12 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
FYI - this is from NBC11 in San Jose, Oakland, and San Francisco.
You know the reporter should give his home phone number so that people can call him and report each and every tractor trailer, truck or pickup sighted in the Bay area.......
And I thought the local news in the Seattle area was bad.
.... Any information gained through torture will almost certainly be excluded from court in any criminal prosecution of the tortured defendant. And, to make matters worse for federal prosecutors, the use of torture to obtain statements may make those statements (and any evidence gathered as a result of those statements) inadmissible in the trials of other defendants as well. Thus, the net effect of torture is to undermine the entire federal law enforcement effort to put terrorists behind bars. With each alleged terrorist we torture, we most likely preclude the possibility of a criminal trial for him, and for any of the confederates he may incriminate. ....
The FBI has instructed its agents to steer clear of such coercive interrogation methods, for fear that their involvement might compromise testimony in future criminal cases. .... The use of torture during interrogation has so many negative consequences that it may ultimately allow some accused terrorists to win acquittals merely because it will lead to suppressed evidence of their factual guilt.
Evidence (such as a confession) gathered as a result of torturing a person like [Khalid Sheik] Mohammed will be excluded at his trial, if he ever sees one. This is true both in federal courts, which operate under the Federal Rules of Evidence, and military courts, which operate under the Military Rules of Evidence. Both the Fifth Amendmentâs right against compulsory self-incrimination and the 14th Amendmentâs guarantee of due process preclude the use of a defendantâs coerced statement against him in criminal court.
In addition, any evidence gathered because of information learned through torture (sometimes called "derivative evidence") will likely also be excluded. Furthermore, the Supreme Court suggested in its landmark Fifth Amendment case, Oregon v. Elstad, that it might exclude evidence gathered after the use of any coercion, regardless of attempts by police and prosecutors to offset the coercion with measures like a Miranda warning. If Mohammed were prosecuted, and a court followed the line of reasoning set forth in Elstad, he might well see the charges against him evaporate entirely for lack of evidence.
Right now, the Justice Department has no plans to criminally prosecute Mohammed or other top al-Qaida leaders (like Abu Zubaida) currently being held by the United States in shadowy detention facilities overseas. But federal prosecutors have filed charges against alleged al-Qaida member Zacarias Moussaoui for being part of the 9/11 conspiracy. And the Supreme Court is now considering whether trials of some sort are constitutionally required for other alleged terrorists. Problems with the Moussaoui case reflect the problem with evidence obtained through coerced confessions. In that case, itâs not the government that seeks to bring in the tortured al-Qaida leadersâ out-of-court statementsâitâs Moussaoui, the defendant. However, the result may be the same. Such out-of-court statements will likely be challenged as hearsay by whatever side isnât trying to bring them into court. And under the applicable hearsay exception, for declarations against interest [see Rule 804 (b)(3)], such statements are only admissible if they carry certain indicia of reliability. Given the questionable ability of torture to produce reliable information, this will be a hotly contested issue. Itâs not clear whether this evidence will ever be admitted to court.
This torture of top al-Qaida leaders may also cause problems for the government were there to be a trial for the alleged "dirty bomber" Jose Padilla. The tip that led to Padillaâs initial detention on a material witness warrant in May 2002 came from intensive CIA interrogations of Zubaida, a close associate of Osama Bin Laden. In December 2003, the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals ordered that Padilla be released from military custody and either charged in federal court or released. However, any prosecution of Padilla could be very problematic for the government, because the case for his guilt rests mostly (if not entirely) on secret interrogations of al-Qaida leaders, which now appear to have involved torture. If a criminal case is ever brought against Padilla, his lawyers are sure to challenge this crucial evidence on a number of grounds, including reliability and the fact that it was procured with torture in a way that "shocks the conscience."
Interestingly, such problems would not have arisen had these suspects been hauled before a military tribunal at the outset. The Pentagonâs procedural rules for tribunals allow evidence to be admitted if it "would have probative value to a reasonable person." These rules contain no provision for the exclusion of involuntary statements, and on their face, do not allow the presiding officer of such tribunals to rely on Supreme Court precedent or federal case law to decide issues of evidence. Presumably, these tribunals were designed to allow for the admission of evidence from dubious circumstances, including the "intensive questioning" of Mohammed and Zubaida. So, if the Pentagon moves forward with its plans to try al-Qaida members before these courts, it may be able to evade this problem altogether.
However, even that wonât solve the problem for the rest of the legal system, which only allows evidence obtained through constitutional means. By using torture to question the top terrorists it has in custody, the government has effectively sabotaged any future prosecutions of al-Qaida players â major and minor â that might depend on evidence gathered through those interrogations. Itâs plausible that skilled interrogation by the FBI, in accordance with American law, could have produced valuable evidence of these terroristsâ guilt, which could have been used in court. But now that torture has been used, that may just be wishful hindsight. ....
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
05/15/2004 9:39:34 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Phil Carter: Itâs plausible that skilled interrogation by the FBI, in accordance with American law, could have produced valuable evidence of these terroristsâ guilt, which could have been used in court. But now that torture has been used, that may just be wishful hindsight.
Phil Carter is right, and that is exactly the point of putting these terrorists before military courts. The problem at hand is that the people in question are terrorists, not ordinary criminals. The operations undertaken to capture them are of a military, not civilian nature. The entire reason that risks are being taken to capture instead of kill them is to obtain actionable information for stopping or killing the perpetrators of other terrorist plotters. The thought of civilian trials does not enter into it. As unlawful combatants, terrorists ought to, ideally, be summarily executed once interrogations are over. This is what the US did with captured Germans in American uniform during the Battle of the Bulge, when no American civilians back in the continental US were under threat. There is no reason to keep these people alive once they have outlived their usefulness.
#2
Kindly take note of the leftward pedigree of the source of this news article.
This is a release of information to coincide with all the news about Abu Ghraib. Its release is clearly timed to induce confusion over the detainees at Guantanamo and elsewhere: an attempt to cloud the public mind over issues that have little to do with the war,
Liberals are work since 2001: Trying to enable more terrorist attacks. They can't send money, but they can sure muddy up the waters with news articles like this.
#3
By using torture to question the top terrorists it has in custody, the government has effectively sabotaged any future prosecutions of al-Qaida players â major and minor â that might depend on evidence gathered through those interrogations.
Guess, we'll just have to kill them then.
Yes, yes. I woke up this morning and thought about how concerned I should be about the legal rights of foreign terrorists? My conclusion... not very.
#4
Hmmm... no mention of the fact that terrorists, as unlawful combatants, are not entitled to a trial at all. We don't have to submit them to a court; we can shoot them out of hand, or drop them into a vat of hot pig fat -- perfectly legally.
I guess the left has a problem with the idea that people who have placed themselves outside the rule of law are not entitled to the protection of the rule of law.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
05/15/2004 11:20 Comments ||
Top||
#5
#1: There is no reason to keep these people alive once they have outlived their usefulness.
#3: Guess, we'll just have to kill them then.
#4: Terrorists, as unlawful combatants, are not entitled to a trial at all. We don't have to submit them to a court; we can shoot them out of hand.
First we conduct a military tribunal and then we execute them. That's what we should do selectively and thoughfully.
What we instead allowed to develop out of control was a frenzied routine of tormenting anybody and everybody brought to the prison. The decisions were made by the military policemen on the midnight shift and by junior interrogators fresh out of language school. It was a mindless conveyor belt, and promotions would be earned by increasing the sytem's "productivity," measured by numbers of reports, no matter how short, unreliable, false, useless and misleading.
Someone would be arrested in his home, hauled to the jail, and right away some guard or interrogator who knew nothing at all about him or about the circumstances of his arrest would routinely start "softening him up."
.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
05/15/2004 11:48 Comments ||
Top||
#6
I agree that it is time to start institutionalizing the practice of shooting terrorist suspects who are trying to escape - after we have extarcted any useful information from them.
'Tis better to act now, and later ask for forgiveness, than to wait for permission.
#7
Phil Carter is right, and that is exactly the point of putting these terrorists before military courts.
There's a problem here though: Carter calls the interrogation methods torture, but are they really? Has any U.S. legal body yet determined that prisoners were indeed "tortured"? Gen. Pace says that Geneva Conventions were violated, so does that mean that any violation of the Geneva Convention can be considered to be torture?
Criminals? Then they should be handled by the civil courts with all the safeguards that implies.
Militants? then they are POWs and we end up with military courts and Geneva convention restrictions which were aimed at making war "civilized".
Obviously, neither approach applies to this new thing under the sun. Personally I think we should bring back an old Northern European tradition, outlawry. To be named an outlaw didn't mean you operated beyond the limits of the law, it meant you were beyond the protections of the law. And so it should be with these mokes. They recognize no civilized law (Islamic law? I said civilized.), so they are free from its restrictions and protections. Open season, shoot 'em, hang 'em, beat the hell out of them for info. Makes no difference, there's no weregild.
A Lynnwood soldier accused of spying for al-Qaida terrorists came one step closer Thursday to a general court-martial that could mean a long prison term or death sentence. An investigating officer said he will recommend a military trial for Spec. Ryan G. Anderson, 26, a Washington National Guard enlisted man whose unit was called up for deployment to Iraq. "These are serious criminal offenses that present a real and present danger to U.S. soldiers who are currently serving in harm's way," said Col. Patrick Reinert, who presided over a two-day hearing to take preliminary evidence in the case. "There are reasonable grounds to believe that the accused has committed each and every one of the offenses" with which he was charged, Reinert added.
The final decision on an Anderson trial and whether to seek the death penalty will be made by base commander Lt. Gen. Edward Soriano. Army officials said they don't know when that decision is expected. Anderson was arrested in February and charged with five counts of trying to provide information about troop strength, methods for killing U.S. soldiers and other information to people he thought were in the al-Qaida terrorist network. The 1995 Cascade High School graduate was nabbed after an amateur terrorist sleuth from Montana noticed a posting on an extremist Muslim Web site and traced it to Anderson, who had converted to Islam. Anderson allegedly told the Montana woman he was "bearing the arms of the enemy" and wanted to switch sides.
#2
The 1995 Cascade High School graduate was nabbed after an amateur terrorist sleuth from Montana noticed a posting on an extremist Muslim Web site and traced it to Anderson, who had converted to Islam. Anderson allegedly told the Montana woman he was "bearing the arms of the enemy" and wanted to switch sides.
First off, was this woman ever given any recognition or (preferrably) a substantial reward for her successful interdiction of this traitor?
Secondly, if by "switch sides" this scumbag means actually finding out about the afterlife, I say let's give him his wish.
Who knew? Who ever coulda guessed?
Fluctuating oil prices should not cause alarm, but are a key source of global instability, participants at the World Economic Forum said Saturday. Oil prices have soared, with the degenerating security situation in Iraq and a recent terror attack on a petrochemical facility in Saudi Arabia fueling the rise. Lost production in Iraq, lower production in Nigeria and Venezuela and exploding demand from China have aggravated the situation, analysts said. "We should be concerned, not alarmed, about oil prices," said Alan Larson, the U.S. undersecretary of state for economic affairs. "Oil is available to meet the needs of the global community, but fluctuating prices is a source of concern." Augusto Lopez-Claros, chief economist and director of the Global Competitiveness Program in the World Economic Forum, said "delays in restoring Iraq's oil production" are of concern to the international community, as are fluctuating prices. "Oil will remain a source of instability in the world, and perhaps in the short-term it is the most significant factor," Lopez-Claros said.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 19:27 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
He was invited by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to conferences in Washington D.C. and New York but he never made it. Instead, he was detained in Los Angeles for 24 hours and then sent back to the Philippines. Muslim scholar Abhoud Syed Lingga, former secretary-general of the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF), arrived in the United States on May 12 (US time) but never got past LA immigration. During his 24-hour detention, he was not allowed to make phone calls. Not even the UN official who had invited him to the conferences was aware that the professor was in the custody of US authorities, said Linggaâs wife, Jo.
Oh, my heartstrings!
Relatives who were supposed to pick him up upon his arrival were also interrogated for an hour. Jo said the UN only learned of Linggaâs detention after she e-mailed Eugene Martin of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) who had invited Lingga to the conferences scheduled from May 12 to 20. âHe (Martin) was very apologetic. He said he did not expect any of these difficulties and promised to work hard to arrange everything,â Jo said. The Inquirer learned that Lingga was denied a US visa when he first asked for one to attend the conferences. Later, the US Embassy in Manila called him up and then granted him a visa.
Guess somebody changed his mind...
Lingga arrived Saturday morning at the Ninoy Aquino International Airport in Manila and flew immediately to Cotabato City where his wife and family were waiting for him. When the Inquirer tried to interview Lingga, he said he was âOKâ but refused to comment further on the incident. Lingga is a professor at the Institute of Bangsamoro Studies in Cotabato City. Described as a dignified intellectual by colleagues, he was behind the creation of the Muslim Alliance in 1983. In 1996, he organized and chaired the Bangsamoro Peopleâs Consultative Assembly (BPCA). He also inspired the organization of the group Maradeka, an Islamic democratic political organization. He was involved in various peace negotiations between the government and the secessionist Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF). Bob Alonto, also a professor at the Islamic school, condemned the incident and said they will ask the UN to act on it. Alonto said that what happened to Lingga was proof that the US was âa racist, paranoid country out to discriminate against every Muslim who wants to enter its territories. âWe protest the shabby and unfair treatment of Professor Lingga.
Protest and be damned.
"Itâs ironic how the country which calls itself the bastion of democracy and human rights can easily violate human rights,â Alonto said. âThe US is panicking. Every Muslim they see is a terrorist. The US is (becoming) a closed-door society,â he added.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 19:47 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Alonto said that what happened to Lingga was proof that the US was âa racist, paranoid country out to discriminate against every Muslim who wants to enter its territories.
Except that ISLAM ISN'T A RACE. Its a religion which you Choose to follow.
Malaysia will bar companies from hosting Internet sites such as the one that carried a video of the beheading of American Nicholas Berg, Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said on Friday. Acme Commerce Sdn Bhd, the Malaysian firm hosting the Muntada al-Ansar Islamist Web site www.al-ansar.biz that originally showed the killing, pulled the site on Thursday. âWe will not allow any kind of web page or any company operating on behalf of any terrorist organisation, we wonât allow certainly,â Abdullah told reporters.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/15/2004 12:11:05 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Two days after the T.R. Sport soccer team won a local tournament last month, the squad members left this remote rubber tappers village on their motorcycles, telling their families they were headed for Muslim missionary work. The next morning, shortly after daybreak, the 12 young men and seven friends from other teams launched a raid on a police post in a nearby town. Though authorities said the attackers had an assault rifle and several shotguns, most carried only knives and wooden planks in what villagers described as an act of suicidal zeal unprecedented in southern Thailand. Well-armed police were waiting and killed them all.
But the violence also offers a case study of the spread of Islamic militancy. Officials and local villagers said the attacks were spurred on by widely broadcast images of al Qaeda and the U.S.-led war in Iraq. Those interviewed said Islamic operatives may have entered the region from outside the country, exploiting local issues and a growing sense among Muslims that they have been wronged. "Villagers often talk about American abuses of Muslims -- in the mosque, in the coffeehouse, wherever they gather, especially if there's a television and the news is on. The way Muslims are treated really makes people angry," said Masduki, 38, a slight Suso villager. "Some people in the village say the way the Thai government treats Muslims is the same way Americans treat Muslims." Local residents complained about arbitrary killings and arrests, commando-style raids on mosques and unwarranted searches of their religious schools. The clampdown stirred simmering resentments over perceived discrimination by Thailand's majority Buddhists. Residents of southern Thailand said Muslims were denied a fair share of places in universities and government jobs, that Muslim villages received paved roads and electricity long after Buddhist ones, that it was easier to get government approval for nightclubs than for Islamic schools.
In Suso, tucked deep in the groves of skinny rubber trees, villagers followed events in Bangkok and beyond on a large television set out on a shelf in the local coffee shop, an open-air structure under a thatched roof. The men, clad in sarongs and often wearing white Muslim caps, gathered nightly after sunset prayers at the nearby mosque, villagers said. The news provoked debate and consternation among the patrons, while reports about suicide attacks in Iraq and Israel drew praise. After mornings in the rubber tree groves and afternoons on the soccer field, Dareh Dueramae, 32, would wade into the coffee shop talk, recalled his niece, Manasada Jehmasong, 22, days after his death. "He talked about the situation in the south like other people. After January 4, the situation became scary, and people were getting killed," Jehmasong said inside her modest wood-plank home, erected on stilts, like many in the village. "People compared what's happening in Iraq with the local people who have been killed since January 4."
T-shirts depicting Osama bin Laden were a common sight during recent visits to Suso. At the new village mosque, still under construction, a notice was posted outside the entrance: "Stop buying American and Jewish products. The money you spend goes to buy weapons to kill our Muslim brothers." It was at the mosque that the soccer players often gathered, sometimes spending the night there in private conversation, relatives said. T.R. Sport was a tight-knit group of men, 18 to 32 years old. Many had played together since they were schoolchildren. They took their name from the Than Khiri subdistrict, where Suso is located, and they were the top team in that area. Some aspired to play soccer at the provincial, even national level, said coach Pittaya Maeprommit. His younger brother, Kamaruding, 23, a midfielder on the squad and one of those who died in the raid, had been named to the team from Songkhla province. But as sons of poor rubber tappers, they could not afford to go to schools with strong soccer programs. Though a few of the players had attended private Islamic high schools in surrounding towns, most stopped studying by the time they were 14 to work in the groves, said Somkhit Khwaisuk, principal of the local elementary school.
But villagers said they had been doing more than training for the tournament. Two years ago, strangers had appeared at the local mosque and organized an Islamic study circle. Some of the players joined, traveling occasionally from village to village, preaching and proselytizing, said Ma Mangputeh, grandfather of team goalie, Abdul Bassi Mangputeh, 21. Some of the strangers were not from southern Thailand, Mangputeh said, because they could not speak the local Yawi language. A Muslim educator in the area said parents had told him the outsiders had come across the border from neighboring Malaysia. Gen. Kitti Rattanchaya, the government's top security adviser for southern Thailand, said in an interview that separatists with possible links to foreign Muslim extremists were behind the attacks. He said these rebels had recruited the local men through the missionary groups, manipulating their religious beliefs.
Villagers recalled strange behavior by the soccer team members that began several months before the attacks. They said the players cleared brush from the village cemetery. Then, in the last few weeks before their deaths, several requested that they all be buried together if they should be killed, villagers said. After evening worship on April 27, the team members took their prayer mats and traditional caps and drove out of the village on about 10 motorcycles, leaving word they were going on a religious outreach trip. Some said they would be back in about three days, relatives said. Others did not say where they were going. Word of their deaths reached Suso the next morning. "They thought they were fighting for justice," said their coach, Pittaya. When the bodies were recovered, villagers said they discovered that some of the men had tucked their caps into their backpacks. In their place, they had donned red-and-white checked headdresses rarely worn in Thailand but common in the Arab world.
When Sama-ae Wani, 51, was growing up in Yupo, another village of rubber tappers east of Suso, there was no television, just radio. But he recalled that in recent months, he and his son would sit together and watch the news on Thailand's state-run television. Though the programming was not anti-American, the reports from Iraq troubled him, and he said his son's face showed he felt the same. "What happens in Iraq and Palestine and Afghanistan really makes me angry. I feel Muslims all over the world are victims. Even here, it's the same," Sama-ae said. "It makes me want to fight back."
The young men of Yupo village did just that. Like their counterparts in Suso, Sama-ae's son, Aliyah, 22, and at least six other men left their homes April 27. The next morning, five were killed in a raid on a police position elsewhere in the province. "They were so brave to fight against officers who have rifles," Sama-ae said. Aliyah was shot in the leg and survived. From his hospital bed, he confided to his father that a stranger had encouraged him to participate in the attack with the aim of stealing weapons from the police, Sama-ae said.
A neighbor's son, Yahya Doloh, 32, did not live to give a similar account. Yahya's involvement in the fatal endeavor came after months of chatter in the local coffee shop about the similarities between the situation in southern Thailand and that confronting Iraqis and Palestinians, recounted his brother, Doramae Doloh, 36. They cheered the courage of these Arabs willing to die for their cause. "In my heart, I feel that way, too," said Doramae, a rubber tapper who wore a black tank top and blue sarong, smiling shyly. "I am a Muslim, and I see Muslim victims. I want to hit back, but I can't. Unlike my brother, God did not choose me for this."
Ahmad Somboon Bualang, a retired lecturer at Prince of Songkhla University in the nearby city of Pattani, is a sharp critic of the Thai government's policies in the south. But he said the homegrown grievances of local Muslims were not so severe that they alone could have motivated the young, mostly lightly armed men to fling themselves at the security forces. The explanation, he said, is the wider sense of being a Muslim victim. "Whatever way people in Afghanistan or Iraq or Palestine have been treated, it is the same way people here have been treated," Somboon said. "The extent may be different, but it has become symbolic of the same kind of treatment. The point is injustice."
In Suso, the bodies of the soccer players were returned to the village late on the night of the attacks. They were buried in a common grave, together as they had requested, with the site marked only by a thin red ribbon strung along wooden sticks around the edge. Though Muslim ritual requires corpses to be bathed before they are buried, in this case, the local imam directed that the bodies be placed in the grave unwashed, villagers said. It is a practice reserved only for those who have fallen as martyrs.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/15/2004 12:03:28 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This was my favorite part...
Well-armed police were waiting and killed them all.
#2
The explanation, he said, is the wider sense of being a Muslim victim.
Exactly, the problem is that moslems view themselves as victims of some vast conspiracy. Be careful what you wish for!
Posted by: Phil B ||
05/15/2004 18:23 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Abundant food, beautiful weather, plenty of work in the rubber groves, freedom of religeon... yeah, those Muslims in southern Thailand are really friggin' oppressed.
Islam is such a poisonous creed it can even make a virtual heaven-on-earth seem like oppression to these losers!
Indonesian police on Friday were questioning a suspected senior member of the Jemaah Islamiyah regional extremist network deported earlier by Malaysia, a senior officer said. Mohamad Iqbal Abdul Rahman, also known as Abu Jibril or Fihirudin, was in Jakarta and "still being questioned" by Indonesian detectives, Brigadier General Pranowo, director of the police anti-terrorism branch, told AFP.
He did not elaborate but said Abu Jibrilâs questioning "has nothing to do with JI." Inspector General Paiman, the national police spokesman, said Jibril is being questioned in connection with the alleged falsification of documents and giving false testimony. "Heâs being questioned now in connection with false evidence in the case of his passport," Paiman said. Indonesiaâs chief of detectives, Commissioner General Suyitno Landung, separately told reporters "so far there isnât a connection" between Jibril and bombing cases. Malaysia deported Jibril earlier Friday just hours before the High Court was due to hear an application for his release, a Malaysian government lawyer said.
The Indonesian preacher was sent back by the immigration department, which had been holding him since he was freed from a detention camp last August, Deputy Public Prosecutor Fadzilah Begum told the court. Malaysian judges had last week ordered that Jibril be produced before them on Friday afternoon after his lawyers sought a habeas corpus ruling pressing for his release. Jibril, 46, who has a Malaysian wife, was arrested in June 2001 for alleged militant links.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/15/2004 11:55:30 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 20:09 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Nearly spilled my ice-water on the computer when I read the line about avoiding war by inviting them to pay that protection money.
Say what you will about Christianity's "turn the other cheek" philosophy - I go with the "just war" theory myself, since I equate complete pacifism, which some of my friends embrace, with suicide - but the fact is that it is not an inherently violent religion. You want to talk about submission, talk about Jesus being crucified. I won't deny that Christians have done some terrible things in previous centuries, but I would argue that on the whole we have learned from those mistakes. But Muslims have a built-in mechanism for fighting each other, that whole jihad-against-the-non-Muslim-Muslims thing, and that by itself means the system is going to be abused. And from just looking at history - the sheer number of murders, Muslims murdering Muslims - it's pretty clear that the loophole was exploited. Hell, three of their four "rightly-guided" caliphs were murdered, and that's in less than a century after the Profit's death.
So don't give me any of this jihad-can-be-good crap. It's nothing more than an excuse.
Posted by: The Doctor ||
05/15/2004 22:25 Comments ||
Top||
Of course, what we were looking for is proof that they aren't... Mohamed ElBaradei, the director-general of the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency, said on Friday Tehran "had the know how" to enrich uranium but he had no proof that it had been processed to a military level.
The witnesses are dead?
"We will close the file when we have dealt with all the issues that require to be investigated," said ElBaradei, whose board of governors will meet in June on Iran's nuclear activities. "It will come to an end when it comes to an end -- when I am satisfied based on the technical advice I get that 'yes' now we can bring that issue to a close and 'yes' we can say that Iran's program is dedicated exclusively for peaceful purposes ," ElBaradei told diplomats and business leaders at the Council on Foreign Relations think tank in New York. Iran's ambassador to the United Nations in Vienna, Pirooz Hosseini, said on Thursday that his government was ready to present a complete account of its nuclear activities and plans to the agency by mid-May. Tehran says it is only interested in generating electricity and wants the agency to take Iran off its agenda after the June meeting.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 19:51 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Bet he's spent all his oil for food money and has shaken down the mullahs.
Posted by: Mr. Davis ||
05/15/2004 22:47 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Sure, and it snows during the month of July in Chad as well.
Iran is the main exporter of Shi'ite linked terror around the world. Iran's mullahs in conjunction with North Korea are very busy attempting to secure nuclear weaponry if they have not already!
Iran's pays for North Korean nuclear 'advice' through the billions of dollars (euros) that rouge Islamic terror state earns off the continued sale of her exported OPEC crude oil.
Cut off Iran's oil exports though an enforced Persian Gulf embargo of all supertankers with Iranian crude, and the result will be a reduction in Islamic terrorism on a world-wide basis.
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
05/15/2004 23:07 Comments ||
Top||
#3
The confrontation is coming. They have been concentrating U235 for quite a while now, so they should have adequate fissle material for some bombs. The clock is ticking. The question is when they will start nuclear blackmail, or will they set proxies to do their dirty work. This is downright dangerous, and bloody frightening. Mad Mullahs on the loose.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
05/15/2004 23:18 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Paul,
the expanding situation with Iran, which supports terrorists in Lebanon & various pro-Shi'ite gangs which attack Israel should not surprise anyone in Washington, since as far back as 1979, when the Carter Administration pull the rug from under the Shah and Khomeini and his followers sized Americans as hostages. Khomeini stated then that Iran would Muslim nation which would trigger a form of global jihad, one nation at a time.
Nothing has been altered from ayatollah dangerous view of a future international Muslim caliphate.
The only question remaining is when will the West wake up and respond as a unified counter force to the goals of the jihadists.
How can any unity be achieved to stop the threat of the forced globalization of Islam, with the likes of appeasing nations such as France, Russia, Germany, and as of late, Spain (under former Islamic control until 1492)?
I am firmly convinced the only real option Washington, London and the rest of the members of the Coalition has, regarding the threat of terrorist exporting Iran is to blockade all Iranian petroleum products attempting to exit the Persian Gulf for the Arabian Sea, by force if necessary, which in Iran's case is a sure bet.
In conjunction with an economic embargo, the continuation of supplying pro-western-anti-mullah forces operating along the Iranian border, coupled with like minded domestic organizations, with the means to overthrow the current Iranian dictatorship, the sooner the better.
In case neither one of those options list above are not fully successful, global security mandates elevated military action be taken over the issue of Iran, therefore cutting off monetary support & weapons shipments the renagade mullahs have been supplying to Syria, Lebanon's Shi'ite terror group, Hizballah, along with pro-Iranian terrorist groups attacking Coaltion forces throughout Iraq, and those attacking Israel.
People need to finally understand radical Islam's set goals are the re-conquest all lost 'Muslim lands' such as Spain & Portugal to name just two. If non-Muslims to do willing submit to Islam the same revolting, brutal horror which was inflicted upon Nick Berg awaits all of us in the enemy's demented sick mindset.
Soon, after some other horrible slaughter of innocents by the savage forces of jihad, the world shall realize we united & we should have acted against this growing threat to international economic stability and global security .....a long time ago.
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
05/16/2004 0:14 Comments ||
Top||
#5
You are watching too many american movies.Don't spread your ignorance and arrogance throught the world and bee good boys !
#6
5653, you're just a passing (jihadi apologist) troll.
None of the informative comments made here were based on "info" gleaned from movies, but because we know the score in Iran.
Posted by: Jen ||
07/09/2004 19:28 Comments ||
Top||
Four men accused of carrying out an attack in Syria's capital last month were Syrian Islamic extremists who acted on their own, Syrian officials said Saturday.
Just decided to get themselves killed in a four-man uprising, did they?
Syria's state-run news agency quoted an Interior Ministry official as identifying the assailants as Ayman Shlash and Mohammed al-Nahhar, said to have died in the April 27 clash with security forces in a diplomatic quarter of Damascus. Two others, identified as Ahmed Shlash and Ezzo al-Hussein, were arrested. The unidentified official did not say whether the men were related or what their motive was.
I thought three of them were brothers and one was a cousin?
But a Syrian close to the government told The Associated Press last week that among the men were two brothers, the Shlashes, and a cousin, and that they were among Arab volunteers who went to Iraq early in the U.S.-led war on Saddam Hussein's regime. The Syrian, who did not want to be identified, said the attackers came from the small town of Artouz, about 12 miles south of the capital. Two attackers, a policeman and a civilian passer-by were killed in the attack in the upscale Mazza neighborhood when gunmen detonated a bomb and opened fire. Security forces had engaged them in a 90-minute gunbattle. Syrian officials and diplomats said soon afterward that the clash, in which an abandoned building that once housed United Nations offices was hit and set afire, was the work of terrorists — a rarity in this tightly controlled Arab country. One report said the attackers were foreigners, another said Syrians might be among them. Since then, the government has backed away from suggestions international terrorists were to blame. Syria's prime minister said Tuesday that attack was a homegrown, isolated incident. He did not specify whether the attackers had been in Iraq, but said there was no foreign link.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 19:34 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Via LGF:
A military source familiar with Korean Peninsula affairs revealed on 6 May that Syrian technicians were killed in a train explosion incident that occurred on 22 April in Yongchâon in the northwestern part of the DPRK and that the damage was especially serious in that section of the train where the Syrians were aboard, along with large equipment. The same source noted that although the contents of the equipment are unknown, DPRK military-related personnel wearing protective suits arrived on the scene immediately after the explosion and removed debris only from that section of the train where the Syrian group had been aboard. Consequently, there is a strong likelihood that the accident occurred when military materials were being secretly transported between the DPRK and Syria.
#1
Concerning the cause of the explosion incident, the DPRK has explained that a train carrying fertilizer containing ammonium nitrate and a railroad tank carrying petroleum were being shunted, and, in the process, came into contact with electrical wires, due to carelessness.
Typical railway marshaling yards are conspicuously free of overhead high tension wires in order to avoid exactly this sort of scenario. Methinks we have a cover story.
The presence of Syrian technicians and any influx of aid from their country is just one more good reason to put that terrorist anthill under the magnifying glass.
The United States has determined that a Syrian government bank helped fund Al Qaida. The Treasury Department said the Commercial Bank of Syria and its subsidiary provided financial services to what the government agency described as "terrorists and their sympathizers." The department did not identify the groups, but officials said they included Al Qaida and satellite groups. "Numerous transactions that may be indicative of terrorist financing and money laundering have been transferred through CBS, including two accounts at CBS that reference a reputed financier for Osama Bin Laden," the department said. The department has designated the Commercial Bank of Syria and its subsidiary, the Beirut-based Syrian Lebanese Commercial Bank, as financial institutions of "primary money laundering concern." The designation provides the U.S. government with a range of options to target money laundering and terrorist financing.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/15/2004 12:12:04 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
The notions of Islamic jihad and the Christian Crusades might appear similar, but there are deep differences between them, says a French historian. Jean Flori, medievalist and research director of the National Center of Sociological Research and of the Center of Higher Studies of Medieval Civilization of Poitiers, is the author of the book "The Holy War: Development of the Idea of the Crusade in the Christian West," published by Trotta and the University of Granada.
Asked if it is possible to compare the Crusades with the Islamic notion of jihad, Flori told ZENIT: "It is a difficult question to address in a few words. I would say no if it is a question of the contemporary jihad, exactly as it is preached and, lamentably, practiced by Muslim fanatics whom we call Islamists. Indeed, the latter adopt a policy of blind terror and they strike Western populations indiscriminately, with no other objective than revenge, and racial or religious hatred." By contrast, "the Crusade, no matter how terrible and condemnable it was, had as its objective the recovery and defense of the Holy Sepulcher of Jerusalem, the most important holy place of Christianity, which was in the hands of the Muslims since A.D. 738," Flori said.
Yet, in a certain sense, "the Crusade can be compared to the jihad" in the Middle Ages, "as they both gave way to massacres and atrocities," the historian said. "Both were considered holy wars that would obtain paradise for their combat warriors. However, there are notable differences. The jihad was practiced from the beginning by Mohammed, the founder of Islam. Jesus, on the contrary, rejects in his actions and in his preaching all recourse to arms and violence. The jihad, in its warlike form, was allowed from the beginning. It preceded the Christian holy war, which was a doctrinal deviation. The jihadâs objective was the conquest of territories which had not been colonized by Islam, the so-called war territories, for the purpose of establishing the Islamic law and not to convert its inhabitants. The Crusade, instead, had as its end the reconquest of the holy places and of the old Christian territories, still inhabited by numerous Christian populations."
Flori said that today some try to identify the U.S.-led war with the term "Crusade." He said the extremist Islamists are happy with that, given that they define their own objectives with terms such as "Jews," "Crusades" and "traitor and tyrants" -- words that carry racial, religious and political overtones. "If in the warlike reaction of the Bush administration, there are dimensions of religious fundamentalism, this is lamentable, but this war cannot be compared to a Crusade, or to a holy war," Flori said. "This war has not been preached in the name of a religion, nor does it promise any spiritual recompense to those who are involved in it. And these would be distinctive elements of a holy war," he said. "Only religious authorities could proclaim a holy war. A proclamation of this kind is possible only in a society that is controlled and directed by religious, as was the case of medieval Christian society and as is the case today in Muslim states that are ever more numerous."
EFL. These people are trapped in the 7th Century.
Berg is, of course, not the first to be murdered in such a gruesome manner. Nor, alas, is he likely to be the last. For the cutting of heads (in Arabic, qata al-raas) has been the favorite form of Islamist execution for more than 14 centuries. In the famous battles of early Islam, with the Prophet personally in command of the army of believers, the heads of enemy generals and soldiers were often cut off and put on sticks to be shown around villages and towns as a warning to potential adversaries.
In 680, the Prophetâs favorite grandson, Hussein bin Ali, had his head chopped off in Karbala, central Iraq, by the soldiers of the Caliph Yazid. The severed head was put on a silver platter and sent to Damascus, Yazidâs capital, before being sent further to Cairo for inspection by the Governor of Egypt. The Caliphâs soldiers also cut off the heads of all of Husseinâs 71 male companions, including the one-year-old baby boy Ali-Asghar. Islamic history is full of chopped heads being sent around by special delivery to reassure rulers, to terrorize foes and to impress the common folks.
Iranâs Khomeinist mullahs also love severed heads. In April 1980, Ayatollah Sadeq Khalkhali wanted to cut off the heads of eight American soldiers who had died in a failed hostage rescue mission in the Iranian desert. He was prevented from doing so thanks to a last minute intervention by the Swiss government. In 1986, the Khomeinist mullahs cut off the head of William Buckley, the CIAâs Beirut station chief who had been kidnapped by the Hezbollah and sent to Tehran for interrogation.
One Algerian specialist in slitting throats and cutting off heads was known as Momo le Nain (Muhammad the Midget). He was a 20-plus-year-old butcherâs apprentice recruited by the GIA for the purpose of cutting off peopleâs heads. In 1996 in Ben-Talha, a suburb of the capital Algiers, Momo cut off a record 86 heads in one night, including the heads of more than a dozen children.
Chopping heads is also practiced by Muslim militants on the Indonesian island of Borneo as a means of driving the Christian majority out. It has been effective in forcing nearly half of the islandâs Christians packing. Lots more chopping in the article. Read it all.
Posted by: RWV ||
05/15/2004 10:18:28 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I thinking we need to buy some more D-9s and drop the walls on ROP die hards.
#2
Japs used to have the "tradition", until a couple nukes cured 'em of the bloody obsession. The more one learns of Islam the more one realizes the religion is merely an attempt to codify all the sicko stuff the Arabs were doing after too many generations with too much sun, poor nutrition and damn little to do to keep their minds occupied.
From Al Muhajiroun
... The widespread support of Western regimes for the pirate state of Israel, the sanctioning of the occupation of Iraq and the discrimination of Muslims in many countries including the holding of innocent Muslims in jails in Cuba, Italy, Spain and Germany, for example, in fact lays all their tourists and overseas civilians open to retaliatory attacks in return for the release of Muslims being held or changes in these regimes foreign policies.
In light of the above we urge all non-Muslims to leave Muslim countries at a time when we are being ruled by dictatorial regimes supported by the West. Since the collapse of the Islamic State on the 3rd of March 1924 Muslims and Islamic movements have risen to re-establish the Khilafah (ruling by Islam) but have come up against a host of obstacles both physical and intellectual. The physical obstacles have included the puppet regimes imposed upon Muslims by the British, French and Americans (amongst others), dictators ruling with barbaric and murderous agendas and armies looking after the interests of their masters, as opposed to defending the lives, wealth and honour of the Muslims as they should. Intellectual obstacles have included the imposition of un-Islamic education curricula leading to a lack of understanding of Islam as a unique divine way of life by the masses, the imposition of government scholars heretically introducing innovations which make Islamic law secondary to Western or Secular Jurisprudence and even completely dismantling some aspects of Islam altogether, in order to please their Kings and Presidents. Hence central and clear cut concepts such as the obligation to fight Jihad, martyrdom operations and the rejection of all non-Islamic legislative bodies and laws (such as the UN, IMF, NATO etcâŠ) have suddenly become the subject of false Fatwas.
Alhamdulillah (praise be to Allah) there is a revival of Muslims taking place around the world, and a wish to fulfil the promise of the Messenger Muhammad (saw) that Islam will one day dominate the world. Obviously this will clearly not be achieved unless all obstacles to the implementation of Islam are removed and there is an awakening of the Muslim masses from the stupor in which they have found themselves for the last 80 odd years. For it is ultimately the job of the Khilafah (the head of the Islamic State) to impose Shariâah law upon all its citizens and to declare the foreign policy of the future State to remove obstacles outside of its frontiers in order to expand its boundaries - so that one day the Shariâah can be implemented world wide.
Oh, what a joyful day for the baby ducks!
Any misconceived ideas that Democracy and Freedom could still be the future for Iraq or for any other Muslim countries, have thankfully received the ultimate nail-in-the-coffin through this latest Abu Ghuraib episode and have made the job of decomposing Sheikh Usama Bin Laden and other Islamic Scholars and revivalist that much easier. For the results of Democracy, freedom and womenâs rights being captured in over 1,800 photos and displayed in the 100âs of 1000âs of corpses trailing behind the US and UKâs policies in Afghanistan and Iraq. Therefore as the US and UK withdraw their forces from Iraq â as they now surely must unless they want to be buried in the deserts of Iraq by the seething angry masses â we remind them to take their civilians and contractors with them because they will not be needed when the Shariâah is implemented.
'cause everything works by itself in Shari'ah, ya know.
Moreover it is important that the non-Muslim occupiers and tourists in Muslim countries appreciate that without a Khalifah the apostate leaders in Muslim countries cannot make binding covenants of security sanctifying the lives and wealth of non-Muslims when they enter or have entered (post 1924). This, together with the fact that the Messenger Muhammad (saw) used to take non-Muslims hostage in order to release Muslims being held captive by the enemies, is all the more reason for non-Muslims to leave Muslim countries until we have removed the apostate rulers and once again protected the lives of all citizens by implementing the Shariâah over all Muslim lands. In short, there is no reason that anyone need lose their head in Iraq or indeed elsewhere in the Muslim world - once we have restored the Khilafah non-Muslims will once more be welcome, but until such time their presence is clearly a cause of instability in Muslim countries.
"And after we implement Shari'ah, no one loses their heads ... expect the kufrs, ... and the apostates ... and the non-believers ... and cousin Mahmoud with the shifty eyes who looks like he wants my bejeweled turban ...
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
05/15/2004 12:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
An honorable enemy is one who declares war before beginning combat; fights according to recognized rules of war, honoring such traditions as the flag of truce; treats civilians in occupied territory with due consideration; andâa crucial pointârefrains from the mistreatment of prisoners of war. Those who surrender should be treated with generosity. Adversaries who honor the code will benefit from its protections, while those who want a dirty fight will get one.
-- Walter Russell Mead, "The Jacksonian Tradition"
#4
"In light of the above we urge all non-Muslims to leave Muslim countries at a time when we are being ruled by dictatorial regimes supported by the West."
I've got a better idea. Why don't ALL Mooselums leave all Non-Mooslum countries and go back to their countries and leave the rest of the world alone. Where they can cut each others heads off to their hearts content.
#5
Anonymous4617: So Mojo, are you saying because 7 soldiers abused some prisoners the whole world deserves to be ruled by a bunch of retards from the Middle Ages?
This has nothing to do with who deserves what. It has to do with what happens when rules are broken. Who starts the chain of rule-breaking is irrelevant - the moment it starts, neither side needs to obey the rules. And this has nothing to do with the Geneva Convention - these are rules that precede it. By fighting out of uniform, terrorists are breaking the traditional laws of war. Napoleon's armies had one punishment for such men - summary execution.
#7
Of those who were abused at Abu Ghraib, how many were uniformed Iraqi soldiers, innocent bystanders, baby duck farmers, or father's of the year? Okay, and how many were some asshole in civilian clothes planting IEDs, toting RPGs, and shooting at our lads w/AKs? For the latter group - I could give a shit how much they were humiliated, beaten, hazed or pseudo-tortured.
#10
Hmm . . . interesting how they mention their own rulers in there. In an effort to become slightly more educated on Islam, I've been reading up on it lately, and everything seems to indicate that it's not just the West that they don't like, but their leaders, too, to a certain extent. This would seem to fit right in with that theory.
Yet, the more I read, the more I am at a loss to explain how to stop them peacefully. Logic is foreign to them. Consequences are foreign to them. Pluralism is foreign to them. Perspective is foreign to them. Even truth is foreign to them.
Posted by: The Doctor ||
05/15/2004 18:51 Comments ||
Top||
#11
The Doctor, nice one. Foreign is foreign to them.
#12
Doctor, victimhood seems central to Islam and moslems self-image (and world-view). Its almost as if they need to be ruled by dictators and despots in order to be victims.
Posted by: Phil B ||
05/15/2004 21:38 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Phil, I've found that, too, and I'm wondering if it's not partially brought on by the conspiratorial worldview that they have. For centuries it's been every-man-for-himself in the Arab world, and if you want to get to the top, you have to work secretly with a few people to get there: conspiracy is therefore a given. Along with money, favors, and patrons (whom you may be scheming to overthrow), conspiracy is one of the things that seems to make the Arab world "work." Therefore, if you're a victim, someone else has a better conspiracy.
Just a thought. Technically, anyway.
Posted by: The Doctor ||
05/15/2004 22:08 Comments ||
Top||
The leader of a group of Palestinian terrorists who took over a Pan Am jet and killed 22 people was sentenced to life in prison Thursday, capping an emotional two-day hearing in which survivors recounted their trauma from the 1986 hijacking attempt. Zayd Hassan Abd Al-Latif Masud Al Safarini was sentenced to three consecutive life terms plus 25 years on 95 charges of murder, attempted murder and conspiracy to attempt murder as part of a plea agreement approved Thursday in U.S. District Court. .... Earlier in the hearing, Safarini read a five-minute apology to more than 50 survivors and victimsâ relatives from five countries who attended the hearing. Safarini, a Jordanian, told the court he was "brainwashed" into doing horrible actions, believing it would promote the Palestinian cause. ....
Brainwashed? How could they tell?
[Judge Emmet] Sullivan ruled in April 2003 that there was no federal capital punishment available for air piracy on Sept. 5, 1986, when Safarini and three others took over the Boeing 747 while parked at Karachi Airport. .... During the two-day hearing, 27 survivors and relatives testified to the horror they felt when Safarini and three others boarded the plane and demanded that 1,500 prisoners in Cyprus and Israel be released. ... The hijackers, all members of the Abu Nidal Palestinian terror organization, began shooting after 15 hours and throwing hand grenades at the passengers. In all, 22 people were killed, including two Americans, and more than 100 wounded. .... In a 1988 trial in Pakistan, the four, and a fifth, who plotted the takeover, admitted the hijacking but maintained Pakistani commandos were responsible for the passengersâ deaths. The five were convicted in that trial and given death sentences that were commuted to life imprisonment.
Their victims are still dead, I hear.
Four of them remain in prison, but Safarini was released Sept. 27, 2001, after his sentence was reduced by a series of amnesties. U.S. law enforcement agents caught him the next day as he traveled to Jordan to join relatives. ...
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
05/15/2004 12:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
US-led coalition forces urged residents to leave this Iraqi holy city after three civilians were killed and seven wounded in fighting between Shiite Muslim militiamen and Iraqi troops. US warplanes flew low overhead and coalition soldiers drove through town telling people to leave over loudspeakers following clashes between US-trained Iraqi paramilitaries and loyalists of Shiite radical leader Moqtada Sadr. A patrol of the Iraqi Civil Defence Corps (ICDC) came under attack 50 metres (yards) from the mausoleums of Imam Hussein and Imam Abbas, among Shiite Islam's most revered shrines, said witness Hassan Ghanem. Ghanem said he saw a fighter from Sadr's Mehdi Army militia beat an ICDC officer. Doctor Ali Ardawi told AFP three dead and seven wounded had been admitted to Karbala's hospital. "All the victims were civilians," he said.
A Qatari cameraman working for the Al-Jazeera Arabic television channel told AFP he was lightly wounded around 6:30 pm (1430 GMT) Saturday after a US tank opened fire near the Imam Hussein shrine. He was being treated at the hotel where he was staying because it was impossible for ambulances to get near the area. "I was filming US tanks firing at the Mehdi militia near the holy shrines when a strong explosion suddenly knocked me to the ground," he said. The Polish-led multinational division based in the region said one coalition soldier was wounded after his patrol came under attack around 10:50 am (0650 GMT) near the Al-Muhayem mosque in Karbala.
A representative of Shiite Islam's top cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, called on local people to find a "peaceful solution" to the violence. "I call on residents to intervene with both parties in the conflict to find a peaceful solution," Sheikh Abdel Mehdi Karabalai told AFP. A senior official said the US military was urging local leaders to secure a peaceful outcome, but insisted that the militia disband and Sadr face justice for his alleged role in the murder of a rival cleric last year.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 9:20:49 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This military action by the anti-terrorist forces of the Coalition is long over due. If the jihadists store weapons in mosques, then the mosques become fair game.
If the Muslim thugs hide weapons in historic Muslim graveyards, the graveyard itself shall be the final resting place for the terrorists threatening the freedom of Iraq.
The anti-American mass media promoted dangerous p/c method of fighting against ruthless Islamic fanatics is getting our boys killed.
Enough is enough, take the Muslim murderers out by whatever means required for the sake of the security of our forces stationed in arms way.
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
05/15/2004 22:18 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Mark E - ummmm - ditto?
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/15/2004 22:30 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Could be .
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
05/15/2004 22:48 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Al Jazerra guy got a warning. Next time HE needs a tank round. He is the enemy, based upon Al Jazerra's track record.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
05/15/2004 23:07 Comments ||
Top||
#5
you bastard fanatic if you or any scum invade my country i will rape and roast your ass, iraqi freedom fighters are in their own country ....
bolony sandwich an corn raised american scum are not...
Shiite Muslim radical leader Moqtada Sadr warned a rival Shiite faction Friday not to side with the US-led coalition in Iraq against him and his Mehdi Army militia. He also took a swipe at the Najaf-based Shiite religious hierarchy for keeping quiet as US troops "defile" the sanctity of holy cities like Najaf and Karbala. "I wonder what has happened to the Badr Brigade," Sadr told worshippers at the main weekly Muslim prayers in this Shiite shrine town, referring to the militia of the Iran-backed religious party, the Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI). "They were the most supportive of my late father and his fight against the dictator Saddam (Hussein).
Could it be Pop wasn't quite the dumbass Sonny is?
"They must watch out so that they are not sucked into America's plot to incite fighting among Shiites," Sadr warned. Unlike Sadr, SCIRI's leader Abdul Aziz al-Hakim sits on Iraq's US-installed interim leadership and has declined to join his armed campaign against coalition troops in Shiite areas of central and southern Iraq. The loudmouth firebrand cleric also condemned the "traitors who willingly execute the orders of the occupation forces" and criticised the Shiite religious authority for its inaction during his conflict with the coalition. "The sanctity of our holy cities is being defiled and no one is coming to aid us or support us," Sadr told his followers.
Probably because they consider you to be a dumbass...
He made no direct comment on Friday's six-hour battle between his militia and US troops in nearby Najaf, in which at least 10 of his militiamen died, but vowed that his forces would be victorious over their enemies. "The spilling of your blood in this blessed land is the beginning of your victory, God willing," said Sadr.
"The fact that it's the end of your miserable existence doesn't particularly bother me..."
He said that the United States would "pay dearly for its plan to exterminate Muslims and Islam in Iraq and worldwide." The head of the Badr Brigade, Abu Hassan al-Ameri, was among a group of Shiite leaders who travelled to Najaf earlier this week in a bid to convince Sadr to step back from a showdown with US troops in Najaf. Sadr snubbed their efforts Wednesday, vowing to fight and die a martyr. Also in a move aimed at squeezing the religious hierarchy further, he said he would only disband his militia if the top clerics gave the order. The office of the senior Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, has issued just one statement on the crisis, calling more than a month ago for a peaceful resolution to the standoff and for the sanctity of holy cities to be respected. His office has refused to comment on Friday's events in Najaf.
"Eh? No skin off my fore..."
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 20:03 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
*snort* It's getting bad for al-Sadr and he knows it.
"Sons of Saddam", isn't that the term he and his band of jihadis are called on the Iraqi street now? As I understand it, neither the Badr Brigades nor the mysterious Thulfiqar Army are siding with the US, the US is just happy to let them run wild on him, like Iran reportedly tried to "sic" al-Sadr on the US ...
Posted by: Edward Yee ||
05/15/2004 20:06 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I think Edwards right. It looks like Iran's Iraq strategy is coming seriously unglued.
Posted by: Phil B ||
05/15/2004 20:15 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Thanks for the props, Phil B, but Amir Taheri previously spoke of this at length. I don't think any of us would have guessed that it would come apart in this way, through an anti-Sadr popular revolt in the form of the Thulfiqar Army.
What do you think?
Posted by: Edward Yee ||
05/15/2004 20:54 Comments ||
Top||
Investigators probing the devastating suicide bombing attack on a Shia mosque in Karachi on May 7 have confirmed the banned Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, a Sunni Deobandi terrorist group, was âdirectly involved in the attack.â The literature and many clues found from the house of the absconding pesh imam of a Lyari mosque show the attack, which killed 20 people and injured more than 100, âwas masterminded by the Lashkar and the man in front was Murtaza, who was pesh imam of the mosque,â a senior investigator told Daily Times.
Planned by the holy man. Wotta surprise.
The records of Baghdadi police station relating to the bomber, Akbar Niazi, have been seized and the pesh imam of the mosque of Lyariâs Niazi Chowk area is also in custody. The pesh imam was âvery friendly with Akbar,â he added. Police are reported to have found jihadi literature, including âA Guide for Jihadis,â and many other important clues from the house of the pesh imam, who is 24, the same age as Niazi. Sources in the police said their department had also arrested four accomplices of the pesh imam and were interrogating them for their possible connection with terrorist outfits. âThe literature we have found from the pesh imamâs house confirms that Lashkar-e-Jhangvi was directly involved in the incident,â an investigator said. âBut Niaziâs direct involvement with the group has not yet been established, except that they could have motivated him recently,â he added. âWe are questioning his family members about the friends who used to visit him, or whom he visited. We are also questioning policemen who were close to him,â the investigator said.
Doesn't make much difference if he was a member of contract labor, does it?
The police also conducted raids on a number of madrassas in Karachi and took an unspecified number of people from there for questioning. Niazi, himself a resident of Lyari Town, fought alongside the Taliban in Afghanistan until the late 1990s and then joined the police a couple of years ago. He belonged to a religious family from Punjabâs Mianwali district and was believed to have had âdangerous jihadisâ for his close friends, investigators grilling his father Kashmir Khan, two brothers and two of his friends, told Daily Times. âHe was a dangerous man while he was being recruited in the police force, but he managed to secure a positive character certificate from the Baghdadi police station,â a senior police official said.
I wonder, from whom?
His father told investigators that Niazi left the house a day before the attack on the mosque, wearing police uniform, and did not return. The dead bomber was identified from the buckle of his police belt, part of which was found in the mosque, according to the investigator. However, investigations show Niazi had not been involved in any criminal acts in the past.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 19:58 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
South Waziristan Agency Chief Administrator Asmatullah Gandapur on Friday accused Nek Muhammad of double-crossing the administration by first agreeing to the foreignersâ registration and later denying that it was part of the deal and warned that the administration would arrest him if it took action against the Wazir tribe under the Frontier Crimes Regulation (FCR). âHe will not be an exception if the authorities take action against the Wazir tribe,â Mr Gandapur told Daily Times on the phone from Wana.â The chief administrator accused Nek of doing little with regard to his pledge to identify foreign militants after he was given amnesty in April 24 as part of the Shakai deal after he surrendered to the authorities. Mr Gandapur said that certain elements were trying to dictate terms to the government through Nek. But he would not identify them. âNek walked out when modalities of the registration process were being worked out,â said Mr Gandapur, who took charge of office after the Shakai deal.
The chief administrator made it clear that the administration would act against the whole Wazir tribe if an agreement on the registration process was not reached. But he was waiting for Sundayâs jirga of the Ahmedzai tribe to take the final decision. On Saturday the jirga formed a 36-member team to lead a 2,000-man Lashkar if Nek does not agree to registration. Malik Dost Muhammad, a committee member, told Daily Times that the committeeâs decision would be in the interest of the country as well as the Wazirs. âWe will look at the ground realities before delivering the final verdict on the registration issue,â he said. He said Sundayâs jirga of the Wazir tribe would consider taking action against foreigners if they refused to show up for registration. âThere will be a final decision on Sunday,â he said. FATA Security chief Brig (r) Mehmood Shah said if the need arose, initially the administration would take action against the whole Wazir tribe under FCR 21 and then military would act if is asked to.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 19:55 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Major (r) Islamul Haq, the principal staff officer to Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan, was released on Saturday to attend his brother Inamul Haqâs funeral ceremony. Mr Haq was taken to Wah Cantt graveyard from Islamabad to attend his brotherâs funeral. He was released for a very short period and will be taken to Islamabad again. The Review Board of the Supreme Court extended his detention for three months in April. Mr Haq was detained on charges of leaking nuclear technology to other countries.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 7:50:12 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
Nadeem Haider Shah, the complainant of the cold-blooded mass murder at Fayyaz Park in Mughalpura, was also murdered on Saturday. Nadeem Shah was lying injured on the Dyal Pulley when passing villagers found him bleeding to death but semi-conscious, his wrist slashed. They were taking him to the nearest hospital but he died on the way and the panic-stricken local yokels left Mr Shah by the road and fled from the scene.
Chaudhry Shafqat Ahmad, Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) Investigation Wing said that Nadeem Shah was depressed after his brotherâs burial. He left his house by car and reportedly drove around aimlessly. He then visited his in-laws at Baghbanpura and returned with his wife and children. When he dropped them all home he left the house again without giving anyone a reason. Nadeemâs wife became so anxious that she fainted and his aunt took her to hospital. When Nadeem returned his relatives told him about his wife and he left the house once again. That was about the time he was murdered, the SSP said, between 5:30 and 7pm. The SSP said Nadeemâs brother-in-law told police that both the murdered brothers had an old enmity in their hometown in Manawala, Sheikhupura. On Friday, unidentified assailants shot five members of Nadeem Shahâs family including a year-old baby and their seven-year old maid in Fayyaz Park in Mughalpura. The intruders shot them once each in their heads after binding their hands and feet with masking tape and gagging them with it too. Police said silenced pistols were used.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 19:53 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The (presumably) Pakistani reporter - or translator - uses the term "local yokels" to describe villagers!!!
The commander of coalition forces in Iraq yesterday demanded a swift end to the uprising led by Moqtada Sadr as fresh clashes across the country claimed dozens of lives. Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez said the uprising had to be ended âfairly quicklyâ after more than a month of fighting between Sadrâs followers and coalition troops across central and southern Iraq. More than 40 people were reported killed in the 24 hours to yesterday afternoon after the US forces vowed to destroy Sadrâs Mehdi Army militia that has hamstrung its efforts for a stable handover of sovereignty by June 30.
The US-led forces described fighting in the towns of Nassiriyah and Amara as a âminorâ uprising that had been quelled. The uprising started last month when US overseer Paul Bremer closed a Sadr newspaper with a tiny circulation and troops arrested one of his aides over the murder of rival cleric last year. The worst of the latest fighting was near the southern city of Amara late Friday. British troops killed 20 militiamen after two vehicles were ambushed. US troops killed another 14 militiamen in a series of clashes in Sadr City, a Shiite district of the capital where Sadrâs Mehdi Army has battled with US forces for weeks. In the central holy city of Karbala, the clericâs militia clashed with US forces for a fourth straight day, losing four fighters, as coalition soldiers using loudspeakers urged people to leave the area.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 19:46 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
The U.S. Army has filed criminal charges including adultery against Military Police Cpl. Charles A. Graner in connection with the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal. Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt said the seven charges against Graner included conspiracy to maltreat detainees, dereliction of duty for woefully failing to protect detainees from abuse, maltreatment of detainees, assaulting detainees, committing indecent acts, adultery and obstruction of justice. Graner, a member of the 372nd Military Police Company, will be arraigned Thursday but no trial date has been set, Kimmitt said. The charge of adultery was for having sex with Pfc. Lynndie England, who was married, the military charge sheet said. She also faces charges in the prison scandal, and family members have said she is pregnant with Graner's child. Graner was photographed with a big grin as he stood behind a pile of naked Iraq prisoners in one of the series of pictures that triggered an international scandal about America's treatment of captives at the Abu Ghraib prison west of Baghdad.
Spc. Jeremy C. Sivits, of Hyndman, Pa., goes on trial Wednesday before a special court-martial in the first trial of defendants in the abuse scandal. On Thursday, the military set a May 20 arraignment date for Staff Sgt. Ivan Frederick II and Sgt. Javal S. Davis. Charges against the soldiers were announced Wednesday.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 19:40 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Fighting ebbed Saturday in the southern city of Nasiriyah, where gunmen believed loyal to a radical cleric had attacked the local headquarters of the U.S.-led coalition, a coalition official said. Two Filipino guards were wounded. Shooting lasted all night until 6 a.m. around the coalition building, where some international staffers and four Italian journalists were trapped inside, said spokesman Andrea Angeli, who was among those in the building. Italian forces and Filipino security guards in the compound fought militiamen who fired mortars, machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades from the southeast and northeast parts of the city, Angeli said by telephone. Two Filipino security guards were wounded by shrapnel, he said. One was hit in the head and the other suffered leg injuries. "They were treated inside the building and were evacuated by a military convoy to the Italian military hospital around 2 o'clock this morning," Angeli said. "They are not in serious condition." The coalition staffers, including Italians, Americans and Britons along with drivers and security guards, and Italian journalists remained inside the building, he said.
The gunbattle erupted about 7 p.m. Friday. Earlier Friday, militiamen pushed their way into the governor's office and moved near a hotel, a main bridge and police stations. They left the governor's office later, residents said. Trouble started in Nasiriyah after daylong fighting in the holy city of Najaf between American forces and radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's fighters.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 19:38 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
British troops killed up to 16 Iraqi insurgents in a gun battle after their patrol was ambushed in southern Iraq, the Ministry of Defense said Saturday. The ministry said that two British soldiers were wounded and an Iraqi was taken prisoner in the firefight that broke out Friday in the Maysan province, south of the city of Amarah. A spokesman said that a two-vehicle British convoy called for back-up after Iraqi forces reportedly armed with rocket-propelled grenades opened fire.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 19:37 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
An Israeli helicopter fired a missile at the home of an Islamic Jihad leader in the southern Gaza strip early Saturday, lightly wounding two bystanders, residents said. The target of the attack was Mohammed Sheik Khalil, a leader of the group's military wing, the witnesses said. He was not home at the time. The army said Islamic Jihad had used the targeted building as a bomb-making facility and center for planning attacks against Israel. The attack took place in the southern Gaza town of Rafah, where Israeli troops have been operating in recent days after five soldiers were killed in an attack on their armored personnel vehicle. Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for that attack. Earlier Saturday, Israeli troops withdrew from the nearby Rafah refugee camp after recovering the remains of the five soldiers, leaving behind at least 100 demolished homes.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 19:36 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
IDF Pussies. Blowing Children and women and paralyzed wheel-chair guys courtersy of American Hardware.
#2
Mr. Goyem, the Intifada is what gave the Islamist Paleos the "excuse" to kill women, children and the elderly if they were Jews.
The IDF and IAF--anything but "pussies"--are trying not to kill anyone but bad guys, but in the "Palestinian areas,' that includes almost everyone.
Remember the suicide bomber babies?
Posted by: Jen ||
05/15/2004 19:56 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Jen, at least pretend to have some decency. The Jews are the illegal occupiers of Palestinian lands. Period. Just are yankees are occupiers of Iraq. You think that Iraqis view yankees are liberators?. Wake up man. Kudos to the jews for driving the Paleo frustation to such an extent that they blow themselves up in their faces. As i said elsewhere, the solution is to relocate the zion or annihilate it. With people like Sharon 'The Butch' in the driving seat, i don't think that peace would be around the corner.
#4
The Jews are the Legal owners of the Holy Land and Israel.
Not only did God give it to them, his Chosen People, but they've fought for the land and won it in 1947, 1967 and 1973.
The Paleostinians are the murdering illegal occupiers of Israeli land!
Their only claim to the land is the one they gave that promised peace for land and yet, they have given the Israelis no peace.
The Palestinians need to go back home...to JORDAN.
There is no such place as "Palestine."
Posted by: Jen ||
05/15/2004 20:45 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Legal by all standards as far as I can tell Jen.
Faisel, hang around and keep commenting the moronic verse. Maybe you can be flipped. But you'll not find many here who will go down your road of smoke. When the butchering starts you'll be really shocked.
#6
Goyem, I think if you check the Rantburg archives, not to mention a couple of other places on the Internet, you'll find a substantial number of Iraqis who do consider us to be liberators. Not everyone, surely, and that's only to be expected - but there are an awful lot of them who were very happy to see Saddam go.
Posted by: The Doctor ||
05/15/2004 22:11 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Faisal the troll - explain to me why the evil Joooos haven't cleaned the Paleos from the Earth's surface - could it be ethics and morals? Which are so notably missing from the Islamic Heroes⢠world? Can you say Human shields? I didn't think so, asshat
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/15/2004 22:17 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Jen: Well both sides have arguments. 'Not only did God give it to them...'. A stupid argument. If you think that fighing and winning makes one the owner of the land, then let the paleos do it. Why the whining?.
The Doctor: Well as Senator Kennedy put it 'The Abu Ghuraib prison found a new administration...'. So much for liberation.
Frank G: Mr Frank, it is quite customary for the IDF to make the palestinians human shields while searching neighbor hood. Read the news.
Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat on Saturday called on his people to "terrorize your enemy" as he bitterly marked the 56-year anniversary of Israel's establishment, but also signaled that he is ready for peace. In a speech broadcast live on Palestinian television, Arafat repeatedly called on his people to be steadfast in their struggle against Israeli occupation. He ended the speech with a quote from the Quran. "Find what strength you have to terrorize your enemy and the enemy of God," he said. "And if they want peace, then let's have peace." Arafat, whom Israel accuses of supporting militant groups, did not appear to be calling for new attacks on Israel. The passage in the Quran refers to the early Muslims' wars against pagans and is frequently invoked by Islamic leaders today to encourage strength in times of conflict.
Then what the hell did it call for?
Arafat spoke as Palestinians marked what they refer to as the "catastrophe" of Israel's independence on May 15, 1948.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 19:36 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
An explosive planted on a road in southeastern Afghanistan severely wounded a U.S. soldier, the military said Saturday. The soldier was traveling in a convoy of U.S. military vehicles southeast of the Zabul provincial capital of Qalat on Thursday when an improvised explosive device detonated, U.S. military spokesman Tucker Mansager told a news conference. The soldier was sent to the U.S.-led coalition headquarters at Bagram, north of Kabul, for medical treatment. The spokesman gave no further details, including the identity of the injured soldier. Also Saturday, a U.S. convoy on patrol was attacked in southern Helmand province, an Afghan official said. Mohammed Wali, spokesman for the governor of neighboring Kandahar province, said that U.S. and Afghan forces were hunting for the unidentified attackers. He had no information about any soldiers killed or injured in the attack in Helmand's Musa Qala district.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 19:35 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
The U.S. military said Saturday it killed 18 gunmen believed loyal to radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr in Baghdad, and jet fighters bombarded militia positions on the capital's outskirts. Skirmishes persisted in the southern holy cities of Najaf and Karbala. The U.S. military also announced the deaths of five soldiers, including three killed by rebel attacks. In northern Iraq, rebels fired a mortar round at an Iraqi army recruiting center, killing four volunteers, hospital officials said. U.S. troops are trying to disband the cleric's army and sideline its radical leadership before handing power to a new Iraqi government June 30. Al-Sadr is a fierce opponent of the U.S.-led occupation who launched an uprising last month and faces an arrest warrant in the death of a rival moderate cleric last year. In Najaf, militiamen fired a rocket-propelled grenade at a U.S. tank stationed at the city's Police Directorate. The rocket missed its target, and the two sides exchanged gunfire. Elsewhere, a shell landed on a house, wounding a woman. The normally bustling area around Karbala's Imam Hussein shrine, one of the holiest centers for Shiite Muslims, was silent except for intermittent blasts and machine-gun fire. After one blast, a huge column of black smoke wafted over the golden-domed shrine. One Polish soldier was wounded in Saturday's skirmishes, the Polish military said in Warsaw.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 19:28 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
More than 100,000 Israelis rallied Saturday night in favor of a pullout from the Gaza Strip, a massive show of strength by the long-dormant opposition movement. Saturday night's protest, led by the opposition Labor Party, followed a bloody week in Gaza in which 13 Israeli soldiers and 32 Palestinians were killed. Fighting continued early Sunday, as Israeli helicopters fired missiles at targets in Gaza City, knocking out power and causing widespread panic. Demonstrators packed Tel Aviv's Rabin Square, where Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was killed in 1995 by a Jewish extremist opposed to peace efforts, for Saturday's rally. Israeli media estimated the crowd at up to 150,000 people, one of the largest rallies by Israel's so-called peace camp since Rabin's death. Organizers hoped the strong showing would breathe new life into the opposition and help restart peace talks with the Palestinians, which have been stalled for months. "Exit from Gaza, begin talking," read a large poster over the main stage. Some demonstrators held placards in support of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who has proposed withdrawing from the Gaza Strip, a volatile area where 7,500 Jewish settlers live among 1.3 million Palestinians. Members of Sharon's Likud Party recently vetoed the pullout plan, although polls have shown a solid majority of Israelis favor the proposal.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 19:28 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Israeli helicopters fired missiles at three targets in Gaza City early Sunday, knocking out electricity and wounding four Palestinians, medical workers said. The attacks occurred minutes apart just after midnight in two residential areas of the city. Dozens of people rushed into the streets in their pajamas. The first strike targeted a building housing a branch office of Yasser Arafat's Fatah movement. The attack lightly wounded three boys, ages 3, 14 and 15, medical workers said. Ahmed Halless, Fatah's secretary-general in the Gaza Strip, said the site was a cultural center that offered social and educational programs to local families. "Israel should understand that aggression will not bring peace. Violence will bring more violence," he said. The blast, in a residential neighborhood, caused heavy damage to the building and shattered windows in nearby homes and cars. Israeli Apache helicopters hovered overhead as ambulances arrived on the scene.
The second strike hit a multistory building housing the offices of Al Resala, a newspaper affiliated with the militant Hamas group. The newspaper's office suffered heavy damage. One bystander was lightly wounded by shrapnel, medical workers said. The Israeli army described the targets as "focal points of terrorist activity." It said the Fatah building was used by the Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, a militant group loosely affiliated with Fatah, and said the Hamas newspaper was used for incitement and to pass messages between the militant group's leaders.
Palestinians said a third attack struck an electric transformer, knocking out power in the northern third of Gaza City, home to 40,000 people. The army had no information on the strike.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 19:17 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
just after midnight, to avoid civilian injuries...that's the difference between the pathetic death cult Paleostinians and the Israelis
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/15/2004 19:28 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Lol. well...lets see how many tanks blow up in the coming days ....
And here I though Reuters were merely had communists on their staif. They apparently have terrorists too, whoda thunk it. Oh yeah and I would like to send a big BFH (boo friggin hoo) out to the Paleos and their explosive culture.
Posted by: Ol_Dirty_American ||
05/15/2004 9:08:38 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
But as fellow Palestinians on Saturday marked the 56th anniversary of the time they call the Nakba or "catastrophe"
Nakba rolls of the tongue better than Palestine. Also Palestine is a western word. Nakbarians.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
05/15/2004 15:55 Comments ||
Top||
#2
dam this blog slow on weekend. palasnians and other all arounfd the world sad but that not reason for news story. news slow on wekend to. superhose make good try though. :)
#3
The Gaza bloodshed, like a vast Israeli barrier going up in the West Bank, has all but dashed Palestinian hopes of statehood on the land Israel captured in the 1967 Middle East war.
Reality sets in for a change.
... The Nakba marks the uprooting of 700,000 Palestinians from towns and villages during that conflict.
And just how many of them left voluntarily because they stupidly listened to their hate mongering anti-Semitic leaders who promised them that all the Jewish land and homesteads would be their's to loot immediately after they got rid of those pesky Jews? Evidently, not the least thought was ever was given to honorable negotiations over compensated resettlement, mutual right of return or (gasp!) peaceful coexistence.
"The issue of refugees...is a matter of destiny. There will be no yielding, no bargaining, no resettlement," Palestinian President Yasser Arafat, whom Israel has sidelined with U.S. backing, said in his annual television address.
Look no further than this to find the culprit(s) responsible for every single shred of Palestinian misery. Arafat's continued intransigence perfectly mirrors the surrounding Arab world's obsessive hatred and congenital assignation of blame everywhere else but exactly where it should be properly placed, which is squarely upon their own shoulders.
"I am afraid they will seize what is left of my land because Israel's policy is an expansionist one," said West Bank farmer Rashid Abu Taher, whose family lost 20 hectares (48 acres) of land in 1948 and another 30 hectares (72 acres) to the barrier.
If Israel's policy was truly an "expansionist one," all Palestinians would be dead or imprisoned and those "occupied territories" would be merely a fading memory of bad times long ago passed. The only "catastrophe" is how murderous thugs like Arafat were ever handed the reins of power. For this, the Palestinian people only have themselves to blame and no one else.
#4
Actually, Zipperhead, the Paleos had a lot of help from your Lib Dim presidents (and idols) Jimmy Carter and Bill Clintoon, who gave Arafat political cover and legitimacy for 25 years.
Posted by: Jen ||
05/15/2004 18:28 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Paleos are sad...pathetic, even
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/15/2004 18:41 Comments ||
Top||
#6
I'm trying to figure out this "refugee return" business. Seems to me that it's very logical that Palestinians go to a . . . Palestinian state. Why should Israel take them if they've got their own damn country? Why is this such a sticking point for Arafat? Good Lord, you'd think those "refugees" are the very ones you'd need to build a new state! If Israel did allow "refugees" in, there'd be no one but a handful of thugs in Gaza, and they'd immediately blame the "Zionist Entity"(TM) for stealing all their people.
Maybe I missed something; is there more to this refugee return thing than I'm aware of?
Posted by: The Doctor ||
05/15/2004 18:44 Comments ||
Top||
#7
well, did you notice he had 40 relatives in his house? Being poor and oppressed doesn't seem to stop them from breeding like rats.... They hope to accomplish victory by demography via one man one vote in Israel
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/15/2004 19:06 Comments ||
Top||
#8
As I commented once before, the zion is in the wrong place. It needs to relocated to Alaska or wherever ... or risk annihilation.
#9
Zion isn't going to be moved--the Jews know where their homeland is, the Paleos don't (Hint: it's in Jordan).
Posted by: Jen ||
05/15/2004 19:51 Comments ||
Top||
#10
If the zion isn't moved, then it will end. Period. Looks like gas is already running out of Israel. Look at the Newyork based thugs starting wars now to keep the zion alive.
#11
Zion will not be moved--many have tried to do so and failed before you jihadi motherf*ckers and done a better job of trying!
Give up, Muslims!
Israel belongs to God's Chosen People, the Hebrews.
Israel wil fight you Musselmen to their last person and the United States of America will be behind them!
Am Yisrael Chai!
Posted by: Jen ||
05/15/2004 20:50 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Right on! Jen. Like the saying goes, Never Again!
The fanatical international death cult of jihadists will be defeated!
If enough of these jihad boys pratice the deadly act of suicidal bombing on each other, they would do the world a huge favour :)
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
05/15/2004 21:33 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Hey Faisal, ask the Germans, Japanese, or any number of Arab nations what happens when Americans or Isrealies get pissed off, stop screwing around, and really start to fight. (Hint: it ain't pretty! Be careful what you wish for....)
#14
Which is the only religion in the world which thinks of all the other people as being not equal??
Americans and Israelis are two different things. Don't try to portray them as one.
Excerpted/Translated from Iraqi Papers by IWPR. Al-Jazeera news with 2/3âs less spittle.
The abuses in Abu Ghraib prison have served the interests of terrorists. Two days ago, an American was killed under the pretext of revenge for prisoners. Thus, what we expected came true: namely, that the wave of violence might open endlessly in spite of reassurances made by the American president and other officials that such abuses would not be repeated. To avoid the wave of hatred, we think all prisoners who were not convicted must be released, especially given news reports that say 60 percent of them were arrested by mistake. Besides, Iraqisâ participation in supervising prisons is a prerequisite. As to the hurry in trying those responsible for abuses, it is indisputable. As we condemned abusing Iraqi prisoners, so do we condemn killing the American hostage. (Baghdad is a daily newspaper issued by the Iraqi National Accord.) I wish the DNC criticism of Bush was as hospitably presented as this editorial from the Iraqi National Accord.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
05/15/2004 3:14:58 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
EFL; nothing really new, it just talks a little more about the politics of the situation, and some speculation about what the US might be doing. This link wonât be good over any sort of long time span, since strategypage doesnât have permanent links.
The MDJT, a tribe based group that has been fighting the Chad government since 1998, is the sole remaining rebel group in Chad. The MDJT resistance is currently fairly low key, with only a few major battles in all of 2003. The Chad government is hoping that the withdrawal of Libyan support for MDJT will cause the rebels to make a deal with the government... The Chad government cooperated with the United States in tracking down and destroying the GSPC group, and now expects to take the lead in any negotiations with the MDJT. But the MDJT wants some benefit for turning over the GSPC captives. Itâs possible that the US has sent commandoes and special operations intelligence forces into northern Chad to help the Chad government capture the MDJT fighters holding the GSPC men. Something has to be done, lest al Qaeda, which has long been associated with GSPC, raise a suitable ransom for the GSPC captives. The main question that comes to my mind is how close were the events outlined to the part of Sudan where the ethnic cleansing is taking place? How much of that is screwing up Al Qaeda, and causing tribes they thought theyâd bought off to turn on them?
Posted by: Phil Fraering ||
05/15/2004 12:28:49 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
A mortar or grenade attack on Iraqi civilians lining up to join the new Iraqi army killed four people and wounded at least 15 on Saturday, hospital staff and the U.S. military in the northern city of Mosul said. Men were queuing at the entrance to a base set up for recruitment in an industrial area in eastern Mosul when the attack happened at 10:35 a.m. (0635 GMT), police said. They said a mortar bomb landed in the crowd. A U.S. military spokesman blamed rocket or rocket-propelled grenade fire. The coroner at a nearby hospital said at least three people had been killed in the attack. Hospital staff said 17 were wounded, two of whom were in a serious condition. Lieutenant Colonel Joseph Piek, a spokesman for U.S. forces in the region, said later four had died and 15 were wounded.
Anti-American guerrillas have frequently targeted Iraqis joining new, U.S.-supervised security forces such as the police. "The victims were either new army recruits at the recruitment station waiting to enlist or civilians," Piek said. Saddam Husseinâs 375,000-strong armed forces were disbanded after their defeat last year but, in anticipation of next monthâs return of sovereignty to an Iraqi interim government, U.S. commanders are overseeing recruitment to a new army. "With only 47 days until the transfer of sovereignty, this attack on Iraqi armed forces shows the desperate nature of the terrorist forces who are trying to hinder Iraqi progress toward security and prosperity," Piek said.
A unit of Chechen guerillas was eliminated in a clash with a federal special task force in a wooded area in Chechnya's Gudermes district, a spokesman for the regional headquarters for the antiterrorist operation in the North Caucasus told Interfax Saturday. "In the course of a search operation, information was received from local residents that armed rebels were hiding in the woods between the villages of Braguny and Komsomolskoye. The sources said that the rebels had been staying in empty houses during the day, disguised as local residents, and gathered at their base in the woods at night," the spokesman said. A federal unit, which was sent to the area to verify the information, spotted a base on the bank of the Terek River where ten rebels were hiding. "Taking into account the situation and the firm stance of Chechen people towards members of underground gangs, a decision was made in coordination with the command that the discovered unit be wiped out. Five guerillas were killed on the spot and the others fled. The federal forces did not suffer any losses," the spokesman said.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
05/15/2004 12:13:46 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Pakistan police investigating last weekâs suicide bomb attack in a Shia mosque in Karachi suspect that the suicide bomber who blew himself up was a local policeman with links to banned extremist Sunni militant group. Reports from Karachi quoting police officials said that the man, Mohammad Albar, who had blown himself up in the Hyderi Mosque in Karachi during the Friday prayers on May 7 was an activist of Sipha-e-Sabaha, the Sunni extremist group banned by President Pervez Musharraf. Akbar joined the police to be an informer to his groups previously took part in âjihadâ in Afghanistan and later joined police as a constable, they said. "We have almost identified this man as the suicide bomber and statements of witnesses also substantiated his presence in the mosque," local daily Dawn quoted a police investigator as saying.
Significantly, Akbar went into the mosque to pray wearing the police uniform and was identified by the buckle of the police belt which bore the number "8242". Barring the buckle, the rest of the body was disintegrated under the impact of explosives strapped to his body. "We have obtained samples of Akbarâs belongings from his home and these samples along with specimen of the limbs of an unidentified person, were sent for DNA tests. We believe the limbs were of Akbar but things would be clear only after the DNA tests," a police official said. Akbarâs identity came even as suspected extremists killed five members of a shia family, including an infant and their maid in their house-cum-school at Lahore. Police said six persons including two children and two women were brutally shot dead. The killers also wrote anti-shia graffiti on the walls of the house.
Posted by: TS(vice girl) ||
05/15/2004 11:19:18 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Sounds like good, old-fashioned scare tactics. Itâs amazing how low morale among these jihadis is - simply playing mind games transforms these people in quivering bowls of Jello who will pose for humiliating pictures that can later be used to blackmail them. One (almost) longs for the "death before dishonor" ethos among Japanese prisoners in WWII. These Iraqi terrorist scum are not worth a tenth of those Japanese prisoners from generations ago. THE United States prison guard holds a snake up to the camera: "This is a sand viper," she says. "One bite will kill you in six hours. Weâve already had two prisoners die of it, but who cares? Thatâs two less for me to worry about."
By her own admission, she was a fearsome guard. The prisoners were scared of her, and she had been in trouble for throwing stones at them. "We actually shot two prisoners today," she says. "One got shot in the chest for swinging a pole against our people on the feed team. One got shot in the arm. We donât know if the one we shot in the chest is dead yet."
Posted by: Zhang Fei ||
05/15/2004 10:35:13 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Have you got a link to the rest of that, ZF?
Posted by: Dave D. ||
05/15/2004 11:10 Comments ||
Top||
#2
...You know, I went through USAF basic training in the late 70s - and admittedly, what we call Basic the other services call a weekend pass - but we had TIs routinely threaten us with broken bones, jail, venomous reptiles, summary execution, and other charming thoughts, and I never once considered myself abused. Am I missing something here?...
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
05/15/2004 12:54 Comments ||
Top||
#3
The whole thing makes me yawn. If I went to jail in the U.S., I would fully expect the same treatment, including the beatings and gang-rape. Not much different from Fraternity pledging and high-school hazing. F8cking pussies. Bring back Saddam and elect Kerry - I'm sick of this.
#4
All of you are soo ignorant. First of all, these tortures are against the Geneva Convention. It's inhumane to treat prisoners like this. Also, if the U.S. is going to invade a country, they should at least learn about the culture that they're invading. In Islam, nakedness is a huge taboo. By having prisoners pose naked, it would naturally enrage not just the Muslim world, but also those that are trying to develop better relations with Iraq and the rest of the world. By torturing the Iraqi prisoners the way that they were tortured, it sets back all the work that the U.S. has done to try and better the relation between the U.S. and Iraq because the way that the Iraqis were tortured in Abu Ghraib is worse if not the same way that Sadaam Hussain tortured people when he was in power.
#5
Samihah, what's Islam's take on prisoner beheadings? Or prisoners' charcoled corpses hanging from bridges? I know it's not panties on the head, but over here we thought it a bit... much.
#6
Samihah: First of all, these tortures are against the Geneva Convention.
Actually, the Geneva Convention merely codifies what had been customary practice for a while. And one of the things it codifies is this - reciprocity. If the enemy ill-treats American prisoners (and I define torture and mutilation as ill-treatment), then the US is under no obligation to treat enemy prisoners well. In fact, being out of uniform, enemy prisoners are subject to summary execution. The US has stepped back from this as well. I think this is a mistake. It is time to take the gloves off.
Samihah: By torturing the Iraqi prisoners the way that they were tortured, it sets back all the work that the U.S. has done to try and better the relation between the U.S. and Iraq because the way that the Iraqis were tortured in Abu Ghraib is worse if not the same way that Sadaam Hussain tortured people when he was in power.
Let me get this straight - Muslims would have been less offended if the US had raped the captives' relatives and fed them into plastic shredders? Well, then - we need to get on with the program.
#7
Samihah, I have a strong recommendation for you: you need to stop worrying about whether we are doing enough to avoid enraging Muslims, and start worrying about whether YOU are doing enough to avoid enraging US.
Time is running out, and our patience along with it.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
05/15/2004 15:28 Comments ||
Top||
#8
"Samihah"--Bull!
Dave D. is right--the "Arab street" had better worry about not making the U.S. hate you!
The beheading of the American Jewish civilian Nick Berg for no reason whatsoever made any bad things we felt about the Abu Ghraib abuse pale in comparison to the RAGE we feel to kill and stop the Enemy (Radical Islamists) that we're already fighting.
It could be that our prison guards (and their commanders) have figured out that using lady soldiers to guard male chauvinist IslamoFacists and making them get naked was precisely the way to intimidate and subdue these killers without harming a hair on their heads!
Posted by: Jen ||
05/15/2004 15:42 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Samihah, you're right. Everybody would have been better off if we had just shot them to begin with. That way no one would have been humiliated and Arab TV would have to look elsewhere for their soft homoerotic porn, maybe the Animal Channel episodes on goats.
#10
Agree with Dave -- the question is not "why do they hate us?" but "why do they not fear us?" The only answer I can come up with is they haven't seen us mad yet.
#11
"The only answer I can come up with is they haven't seen us mad yet."
No, they certainly haven't.
What Arabs in particular, and Muslims in general, don't seem to understand yet is that our efforts in Iraq amount to an experiment; and the outcome of that experiment will either support or refute the notion that the society which produced the 9/11 atrocity, as well as the long string of terrorist attacks in the 30 years leading up to it, can be rendered non-toxic by the introduction of liberal, consensual self-governance.
The outcome of that experiment, and the conclusions we reach from having conducted it, will be all-important in the event Islamic extremists manage to pull off another massive attack on U.S. soil: it very likely will determine whether the Islamic world survives that attack or not.
If Iraq quiets down and gets on with the business of developing a peaceful, prosperous, and liberal society-- and does it RFN-- we would be encouraged to respond to some future terrorist attack by redoubling our efforts and sowing the seeds of democracy in the next problem area, in hopes of getting similar results and further reducing the threat.
But if Iraq descends into an incurable cesspit of theocratic extremism, inter-tribal warfare, or warlordism despite our most strenuous efforts, we won't ever again be tempted to undertake the task of reforming a pathological society; we'll just obliterate it.
As I understand it, we actually came close to using tactical nuclear weapons on bin Laden's camps in Afghanistan in response to 9/11; I shudder to think what we would have done if Flight 93 had not gone down at Shanksville, PA, but had proceeded on to a successful hit on its target in Washington, DC.
If I were an intelligent, clear-thinking Muslim, I'd pray five times a day to Allah for two things: that the United States succeed in Iraq, and that there be no more terrorist strikes on American soil.
I'd pray for those things very, VERY fervently.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
05/15/2004 18:32 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Dave, hon, RFN=Right F*cking Now?
Otherwise, great rant!
Posted by: Jen ||
05/15/2004 18:34 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Samihah would do well to reflect on what a great democracy does when it gets angry, really, really, angry.
Berg first worked in Iraq in December and January and returned in March. He was inspecting communications facilities .... and worked at night on a tower in Abu Ghraib, a site of repeated attacks on U.S. convoys. .... Nicholasâ paternal aunt, now dead, married an Iraqi man named Mudafer, who became close to Nicholas. In one of the e-mail messages, Nicholas Berg describes going to the northern city of Mosul, where he introduced himself to Mudaferâs brother, identified as Moffak Mustaffa. "We got along splendidly," Berg wrote. "We spent a few hours and I helped him establish an e-mail account." ....
In a Jan. 18 e-mail, Berg said his company had been announced as an approved subcontractor for a broadcast consortium awarded a contract for the U.S.-controlled Iraqi Media Network. ... On April 14, the consulate sent a private contractor to the Fanar Hotel to see if Berg was still there. "The people we talked to at the hotel didnât remember him being there," Shannon said. .... But hotel staffers, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Berg had stayed in Room 602 from April 6 until April 10. One of them said Berg lived in the same room during an earlier visit, which the employee could not remember. .... "He ... liked the Internet," another hotel worker recalled. "He usually left the hotel in the morning and returned late, around 10 p.m., usually carrying a sack of beer and mineral water." ....
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
05/15/2004 9:22:01 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I think US psych ops is missing a golden opportunity here. The muratbats are blaming Berg's death on the CIA. They blame 911 on the CIA. Zarqawi is involved in both, is he not? So doesn't it logically follow that Zarqawi is the CIA? Islamonuts who support Zarqawi are in fact supporting a CIA plot. Silly fools.
Zarqawi is involved in both, is he not?
Maybe, maybe not, how will you know, you did a fingerprint test?
Islamonuts
What is this? Islamonuts, Christian flakes (chokonuts and cornflakes?), seems that your kind of fat American internerds are specializing in creation of a new language (of hidden advertisements)
Posted by: Murat ||
05/15/2004 14:01 Comments ||
Top||
#3
According to you, I thought this beheading thing was all faked. Right, Murat?
#5
Murbat, what's the matter, did my comment worry you? If you think Berg and 911 are CIA - what's to say that the whole AQ movement isn't CIA and all of the jihadi's are just CIA dupes.
By the way, I'm uncertain about your buthead comment as "buthead" is not a word. Did you mean behead?
Posted by: B ||
05/15/2004 18:33 Comments ||
Top||
#6
You guys are confusing me.... AQ is actually a Mossad operation, isn't it?
#7
Wuzzalib - yes, but that's only because the Zionists control the CIA who control AQ who have created the pretend "jihad" movement. The purpose of the jihad movement is to get naive islamists to blow each other up and start a civil war between the various Moslem factions such as Shia, Sunni, Kurd, etc. And the unwitting American population, who never before had anything against Islam, will assist by being duped into going to war and further destroying them. And then, once this deed is done, the evil Zionists will turn the Americans against the Christian Bush, rising from the ashes of destruction to install the Zionist Kerry and rule the world.
Bwahaahahahahaaaaa.
BTW...I'm selling tin-foil hats for only $19.95. And if you buy now, you can have your own copy of the Elders of Zion...free!
Posted by: B ||
05/15/2004 21:26 Comments ||
Top||
#8
B--
Thanks for clearing that up for me!
p.s. I already have a tinfoil hat and a copy of the Elders of Zion. But my Nina Totenberg tote bag is getting a little threadbare.... You got any of those?
Iraqis are likely to say they want to live in a democracy, though they don't necessarily understand how it works.
First, you jug all your crazies ...
Some pollsters who have done nationwide surveys of Iraq in recent months talked about their findings at a meeting this week of the American Association for Public Opinion Research. One barrier to democracy is that many in the country need more information about how it would work, their research suggests. "There's the sense that people in Iraq know they want democracy, but they don't know how to get there," said Christoph Sahm, director of Oxford Research International.
Democracy's the mechanism, individual liberty's the goal. Explain that to them. The rest falls into place. If you only talk about the mechanism and never mention the goal, they get confused. Look at Pakland...
Richard Burkholder, director of international polling for Gallup, said the type of government Iraqis preferred was a multiparty democracy like those in many Western European countries. "Very low down the list is an Islamic theocracy, in which mullahs and religious leaders have a lot of influence, such as in Iran," said Burkholder, who polled in Baghdad in August and nationwide in late March and early April for CNN and USA Today.
You might also want to explain to them that individual liberty also includes religious freedom, that they can be any flavor Moose limbs, or they can Christians (a large number of them will stop listening right there), or Jooooos, or become Tantrists or worship at the Church of the Divine Elvis — or even decide that they neither know nor care anything about the nature of God but they'd really like to get a motorcycle and ride it from Umm Qasr to Sueleimaniyah.
In the most recent Gallup poll, four in 10 said they preferred a multiparty parliamentary democracy -- that was the form of government most often mentioned. When Oxford Research International asked Iraqis in a separate poll to name the party they favored or the candidate they backed, the majority offered no preference on either question. For Sahm, the inability or unwillingness to answer those questions indicates Iraqis have much to learn about how democracies and political parties work after decades living in a country ruled by a dictator.
They've already learned not to trust pollsters.
Sahm and Burkholder said they've found Iraqis have a sense of optimism about the future of their country. But they understand that nothing can be achieved until the nation is more secure. Both pollsters found Iraqis very willing to share their feelings. Burkholder recounted how a transitional Iraqi government minister initially told his team Iraqis would not talk to pollsters. But as soon as the minister left the room, another Iraqi laughed and told the Gallup pollster: "Don't pay any attention to him, he's been in Minneapolis for the last 19 years."
No wonder, the DFL got to him!
Added Sahm, "The response has been tremendous. We go into 100 households and only four or five refuse. It's unheard of." Both pollsters found Iraqis growing more impatient with the presence of coalition troops, even before the prison abuse controversy emerged. However, most favored getting rid of Saddam Hussein. Iraqis have identified some successful areas in post-Saddam Iraq, the pollsters found. "One of the things that comes up again and again as a success in the transition so far is education," Sahm said. He also mentioned increasing trust in the Iraqi police and the new Iraqi army. "When we see the images of war and terror on the TV screen," Sahm said, "it's hard to believe that behind all of this, many Iraqis are leading normal lives and going about their business."
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/15/2004 12:52:45 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Democracy's the mechanism, individual liberty's the goal
Let the Iraqis determine their own means of building a democracy, as long as it incorporates individual rights, the right to make a profit, and whatever they need to maintain a deomcracy.
#4
He's right that Arabs don't know how to live without a dictator to tell them what to do. That's the root of their problem. All these years we've been trying to nudge them toward the potty of individual liberty by being nice. Since 9-11 we've adopted the rolled up newspaper approach.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/15/2004 19:26 Comments ||
Top||
The US yesterday freedmore than 300 detainees from Baghdad's notorious Abu Ghraib prison, in the first of a series of releases that should see the number of security prisoners in Iraq halved by the time a new Iraqi government assumes sovereignty. On Thursday Donald Rumsfeld, US defence secretary, urged Major General Geoffrey Miller, who has assumed responsibility for prisons in Iraq, to speed the release programme. Gen Miller, who was appointed to try to repair damage caused by revelations of widespread abuse and humiliation of Iraqi prisoners by US military guards, has said that the current prisoner population of around 4,000 will be reduced to below 2,000 by the middle of next month.
Ok, I suppose, as long as we keep the right 2,000.
The furore over prisoner abuse has focused attention on US forces in Iraq and their ability to deal with detainees after June 30, when an Iraqi government is due to assume sovereignty. A senior British official yesterday said control over Iraqi prisons should rest with the new Iraqi caretaker government but indicated that the US had yet to reach this conclusion. The status of Iraqi prisons is one of the thorny issues being addressed in negotiations over a new UN Security Council resolution, the first draft of which the US and UK are hoping to present in two weeks. "The logic is that overall control of prisons rests with that government," said the official. "The US is busily addressing the issue."
Euros are assuming that the Iraqis will be less rough on these prisoners than us. Might be wishful thinking.
With the US still standing reeling from the scandal over the treatment of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison, the UN resolution could expose other difficulties American forces will face in dealing with detainees. According to the senior British official, once a "sovereign" Iraqi government is in charge, the state of armed conflict will end and with it the ability to take prisoners of war. The question, said the official, is whether US forces could detain Iraqis suspected of attacking them or would have to hand them over to Iraqi forces. The US and its allies in the Group of Eight developing countries yesterday clashed openly over Iraq, as foreign ministers argued about how much authority the proposed interim government would exercise after the June 30 transfer of sovereignty, Guy Dinmore reports from Washington. Pre-war transatlantic tensions surfaced again, with the foreign ministers of France, Russia and Canada telling a Washington news conference that their countries would not send troops to Iraq even if their demands were to be met in a UN Security Council resolution.
So why are they even at the table?
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/15/2004 12:40:57 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I say now would be a splendid time to turn the tables on these jihadi al querda mofos; when we want to sping one or more of them from jail, I say we strap the jihadi scum on to the outside of our armored personnell carriers, our tanks, our cars, our jeeps whatever, and upgrade them from ILLEGAL COMBATANTS to the INHUMAN SHIELDS they so deserve to be. So when they shoot or bomb ours, they get to take out some of their own. So long Suckas
The United States is quietly pressing its allies to send more troops to Iraq, but it's getting a lukewarm response amid escalating violence and public outcry over the abuse of Iraqi prisoners. Washington asked Albania to increase the size of its 71-soldier non-combat unit patrolling the northern Iraqi city of Mosul, and the Albanian government is receptive, Defense Ministry spokesman Igli Hasani confirmed Friday. "Albania is ready to respond to such a request" and had already offered additional troops, Hasani said. He said the mostly Muslim country, a staunch U.S. ally, may boost its contingent to 200 soldiers if parliament approves.
Denmark will extend the mission of its 496 troops in southern Iraq by six months, and Norway will maintain a small military presence after it pulls out its main contingent next month. The Philippines is sending 45 more soldiers and police to strengthen its humanitarian effort, restoring the total to its original 100. "Our government has made a very categorical statement on this matter - that we stand pat on our commitment to the coalition," said Lt. Gen. Rodolfo Garcia, the Philippines vice chief of staff.
Most other allies appear far more cautious, given worries over mounting coalition casualties and disgust over the abuse of Iraqi prisoners by some U.S. troops. Even Britain, the United States' chief ally with 7,500 soldiers, has said only that it is keeping its troop levels under constant review. And Poland, which has 2,400 troops and commands a multinational force in south-central Iraq, says its soldiers will stay "as long as needed and not a day longer." Thailand's Defense Ministry spokesman, Maj. Gen. Palangun Klaharn, said the United States has not yet requested more troops, and that its 443 troops are expected to wrap up their mission in Iraq in September.
The Dutch are considering whether to extend the stay of their 1,300 soldiers beyond June 30, when an Iraqi administration is due to take power, but there is no talk of sending more troops. Although the conservative government in the Netherlands had leaned toward an extension, one party in the ruling coalition has broken ranks, saying it will support keeping soldiers in Iraq only if there is broader United Nations involvement and a greater handover of power to the Iraqis. Japan has agreed to replace 500 non-combat troops on a humanitarian mission in southern Iraq. But it has no plans to send additional forces; opposition at home has grown because of the escalating violence and the kidnappings of five Japanese citizens by insurgents. The five were released unharmed.
The Czech Republic, which has 120 military police officers in Iraq, has no plans to send more personnel or extend the mission, Defense Ministry spokesman Vladimir Sticha said Friday. Nor does Slovakia, which has 105 soldiers in Iraq, or Bulgaria, whose infantry battalion of 454 soldiers has come under heavy fire in recent weeks. Hungary is prepared to keep its 300-member transportation contingent in Iraq through year's end - its current parliamentary mandate. But as attacks on coalition forces increase, so have calls from opposition politicians to bring the troops home. Hungary's leading opposition group, the Fidesz-Hungarian Civic Party, is pressing the government to recall its troops unless the United Nations takes over responsibility in Iraq by June 30. Recent polls show that eight in 10 Hungarians oppose keeping the troops in Iraq. But the leadership won't budge, government spokesman J. Zoltan Gal said. "This is not a government which adjusts its policies based on the result of opinion polls," he said.
For that, thank you.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/15/2004 12:34:23 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I was unaware that Albania had that many troops with us. It's oddly ironic that our detractors refer to all our allies as âbought and bribedâ. A reasonable observer would note that many of our detractors have been bought, bribed and subverted by a large selection of some pretty nasty killers throughout the last century.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
05/15/2004 3:54 Comments ||
Top||
#2
...You gotta admit, if somebody named J. Zoltan Gal says something, you listen...
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
05/15/2004 12:57 Comments ||
Top||
#3
perhaps Kurdistan would like their army to be well-outfitted and brought south for maneuvers?
Could always train them at Incirlik, right, 'Rat?
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/15/2004 13:27 Comments ||
Top||
U.S.-led coalition forces would leave Iraq if a new interim government should ask them to, Secretary of State Colin Powell said Friday, but such a request is unlikely. Powell said the United States believes that a U.N. resolution passed last year and Iraqi administrative law provide necessary authority for coalition forces to remain even beyond the scheduled June 30 handover of government to Iraqis. "We're there to support the Iraqi people and protect them and the new government," Powell said at a news conference with his counterparts from other Group of Eight nations preparing for an economic summit next month. "I have no doubt the new government will welcome our presence and am losing no sleep over whether they will ask us to stay."
Nod, nod; wink, wink; nudge, nudge.
But were the new government to say it could handle security, "then we would leave," Powell said. L. Paul Bremer, the top U.S. administrator in Iraq, told a delegation from Iraq's Diyala province Friday that American forces would not stay where they were unwelcome. "If the provisional government asks us to leave, we will leave," Bremer said, referring to an interim Iraqi administration due to take power June 30. "I don't think that will happen, but obviously we don't stay in countries where we're not welcome."
Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman had told the House International Relations Committee on Thursday that although it was unlikely, the Iraqi interim government could tell U.S. troops to leave. But Lt. Gen. Walter Sharp, who was also at the hearing, contradicted his statement, telling the panel that only an elected government could order a U.S. withdrawal. White House spokesman Scott McClellan told reporters Friday that the Iraqi people still want help from the United States and coalition forces to provide security. "Iraqi security forces are not fully equipped and trained to provide for their own security and defend their country against terrorists," McClellan said. "And so, after the transfer of sovereignty on June 30, we expect to continue to partner with the Iraqi forces to improve the security situation."
British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said at the news conference with Powell that stability in Iraq would not be served by an abrupt withdrawal. "But were the government that takes over to ask us to leave, we would leave," Straw said. Britain is the main force other than the United States in the U.S.-led military coalition that brought down Iraq's authoritarian government last year and is trying to restore calm in the aftermath. Powell said he expected the commander of coalition forces in Iraq to remain an American and report up his chain of command to maintain military effectiveness. Also, a consultative process can be established so the U.S. commander and the American ambassador kept the Iraqi government informed of their activities, he said. French officials are urging that the new Iraqi government be given the power to evict U.S. forces if it so chooses. "There has to be a complete break with the past, with the Iraqi government replacing the coalition," said French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier.
Funny, I don't recall him asking for a break from the past when Saddam was around.
He repeated that France would not now nor in the future send troops to Iraq but said France would join its European partners in helping to rebuild Iraq.
Uh huh, sure you will.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/15/2004 12:28:02 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Maybe Barnier is awaiting a translation of Colin Powell's statement. He doesn't seem to be picking up the gist of what Colin has repeatedly said. I am begining to wonder how large the downside is to just letting Putin have the joint. As long as we aren't funding the French rebuild, the Iraqis can do whatever they want.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
05/15/2004 4:02 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Man, I am so hoping that we can stick it to the French some day. The sooner, the better, too.
Posted by: Infidel Bob ||
05/15/2004 9:08 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Of course, in one way, I guess we are sticking it to them. The louder they shout, the louder we don't listen.
Posted by: Infidel Bob ||
05/15/2004 10:13 Comments ||
Top||
#4
The best response to this is a VIGOROUS and completely public investigation of the Oil for Food program. A public airing of French greed, graft, and perfidy is certainly in order.
I'm not sure how welcome the French would be in Iraq if the Iraqis knew how much Saddam paid the French to help him loot their country and oppress them.
As for French troops, with the exception of the Germans in the Foreign Legion, they haven't been worth much since Napoleon. Leave them at home to deal with the coming Islamic uprising in France.
And for your info a number of Legionnaires are French on false names. And _all_ officers are French. Do you really think it is the privates who lead officers into battle?
#6
JFM, I am well aware of the French armies' performance in WWI, particularly the action at Fort Vaux at Verdun. They fought well but only the Germans advancing beyond their plan and the German High Command's intent to bleed the French white at Verdun kept them from overrunning the place in the initial attack. Also, shortly after this was the time when the French pulled divisions out of the line for "cowardice" and shot every tent man "pour encourager les autres."
Individual soldiers may have fought well, but the French Army has been a disaster for a long time.
#7
Every tenth man. Sorry about that. The inflexibility of the French officer corps was one of the main reasons the French were bled white in the First War. For every one like Petain, there were a dozen like Foch. They had absolutely no qualms about sending their troops into the grinder.
JFM, if you like pictures of WWI, try Andy Simpson's "Hot Blood & Cold Steel: Life & Death in the Trenches of the First World War"
#8
Are you talking about the mutinies consecutive to the Nivelle offensives? The tropps rebelled because they were tired of how lazy generals were sacrifying them, generals were never held accountable and who didn't care about soldiers lives. Foch told "I have two hundred thousand men to spend". That was the kind of things who pushed the French soldiers to mutiny. And of course the high generals reacted by calling them cowards as this diverted the responsibilities from them.
Now the Nivelle mutinies were suffocated by Petain who sent only less than fifty men to the firing squad. (This, and his handling of Verdun made Petain immensely popular as the only general who cared for the troops, you can't understand Vichy without thinking in veteran's veneration of Petain). Another point is that the mutinies ended when the Germans tried to take advantage of them through an offensive. As told by a French WWI soldier "Wars are made to be won" and the mutineers were not willing to let the Germans win this one.
#11
Truce, JFM. One of my favorite stories as a young man was La Chanson de Roland. My people left France in 1066 and returned only sporadically thereafter. The French fighting man has always acquitted himself well but has had to endure indifferent leadership.
The U.S. military, embroiled in a scandal over the abuse of prisoners at the Abu Ghraib jail, has prohibited several interrogation methods from being used in Iraq, including sleep and sensory deprivation and body "stress positions," defense officials said on Friday. The officials said these techniques previously required high-level approval from the U.S. military leadership in Iraq, but now will be banned completely. They said the decision was made on Thursday by the top U.S. commander in Iraq, Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, on the same day Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld met with him on a surprise trip to the country and visited Abu Ghraib on the outskirts of Baghdad.
A senior Central Command official said the U.S. military leadership in Iraq never actually approved a request from prison personnel to use any of the techniques that now are forbidden, although these methods had been listed as among those for which approval could be requested. Officials refused to say the methods were barred because they were onerous or violated the Geneva Convention governing the treatment of prisoners of war. The interrogation methods that Sanchez has prohibited were among a list of techniques U.S. military jailers holding thousands of prisoners were permitted to use if they gained the approval of the top American military leadership in Iraq, the officials said. From that list, Sanchez decided to continue to allow jailers to seek the option of isolating a prisoner for more than 30 days, officials said. All the other items on the list -- none of which Sanchez ever approved for use -- have been prohibited, the officials said, including sleep and sensory deprivation, "dietary manipulation," forcing a prisoner to assume body "stress positions" for longer than 45 minutes, and threatening him with guard dogs... So what is "allowed" when interrogating POWâs? What bunk. Expect more body bags as a result of this PC posturing. Iraqi unlawful insurgents are not covered by the 1977 Protocol I that beefed up Geneva Convention III because the USA and Iraq never ratified the Protocol. Ronald Reagan refused to ratify Protocol I.
Hereâs a good 10/23/03 article written by Bruce Bowden, the author of Black Hawk Down on POW interrogation techniques used for years and years. "The Dark Art of Interrogation"
Posted by: rex ||
05/15/2004 12:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Rex, your link to The Dark Art of Interrogation doesn't work.
Rex: So what is "allowed" when interrogating POWâs? What bunk. Expect more body bags as a result of this PC posturing.
Rough interrogations don't reduce the number of US body bags. Rough methods might work on a few POWs but backfire with a much larger number of POWs. When all considerations are weighed, the use of rough methods is not the most effective interrogation policy.
Conservatives ought to respect the experience of civilization, which long ago and very widely banned the torture of POWs. It has been embarrassing to watch the Bush administration resort to primitive, discredited methods and now belatedly rediscover the wheel. On this issue it is the liberals who have based their position on well-established, civilized experience instead of experimenting with goofy tricks and gambits.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
05/15/2004 8:59 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Conservatives ought to respect the experience of civilization, which long ago and very widely banned the torture of POWs. It has been embarrassing to watch the Bush administration resort to primitive, discredited methods and now belatedly rediscover the wheel. On this issue it is the liberals who have based their position on well-established, civilized experience instead of experimenting with goofy tricks and gambits
I guess it escaped your attention those who did resort to 'primitive methods' were relieved and/or court martialed.
It seems it has not been necessary for the press or their leftist allies to point out that for all the 'horror' of the methods, they were getting results: information.
After all, us lowly conservative type might not consider this Abu Ghraib hysteria overblown, otherwise.
#4
Mike Sylwester: On this issue it is the liberals who have based their position on well-established, civilized experience instead of experimenting with goofy tricks and gambits.
As usual, Mike Sylwester is mobying around, pretending to be a conservative while peddling his radical left horse manure. I alway thought his postings of goofy Jihad Unspun and anti-semitic articles were kind of strange. Now he comes out as a creature out of the Democratic Underground.
#5
As usual, Mike Sylwester is mobying around, pretending to be a conservative while peddling his radical left horse manure. I alway thought his postings of goofy Jihad Unspun and anti-semitic articles were kind of strange. Now he comes out as a creature out of the Democratic Underground.
Alrighty then!
Howdy Mikey!
Coming out of the closet, as your DU friends might say?
#6
Mike S., personally I don't care what your political affiliation is. Professionally though, a few stupid pictures taken by some derelict guards who overstepped their bounds is much different then precision psychological pressure. Don't confuse the mallet swung recklessly by a drunk w/the scalpel being used by the surgeon. As someone else said - this is PC bullshit.
#7
"Conservatives ought to respect the experience of civilization, which long ago and very widely banned the torture of POWs."
No, "civilization" did not "ban" the torturing of POWS: the signatories of the Geneva accords agreed not to use torture on prisoners from other signatory nations. It is a matter of agreement, resting entirely on the assumption that the other side will reciprocate with like restraint.
The enemy we face cannot even grasp the basic notion of "morality", much less does it give a fat rat's ass about anything we could possibly call "civilization." They are brute savages, and nothing more, and constraining our own treatment of their prisoners will have absolutely NO moderating effect on their behavior toward us in the slightest.
"On this issue it is the liberals who have based their position on well-established, civilized experience instead of experimenting with goofy tricks and gambits."
Bullshit. Liberals are basing their position on the only thing they ever give a damn about, and that's winning the next election-- and that means undermining the war effort by any available means.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
05/15/2004 10:59 Comments ||
Top||
#8
#7: the signatories of the Geneva accords agreed not to use torture on prisoners from other signatory nations
The problem with this line of argument, Dave, is that President Bush declared that the Geneva Accords would be applied to all captives in Iraq. That means these methods were illegal there in these circumstances.
On the other hand, President Bush declared that the Geneva Accords would not be applied to members of Al Qaeda. I think that's a valid distinction that I agree with.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
05/15/2004 12:19 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Only problem Mike how do we know that some of th iraqi's arn't Al-Q.
#10
Alright, let's get a few things straight. They weren't POW's. The people in the two cell blocks in question were accused of involvement in acts of terrorism against Coalition troops. These were the badest of the bad, the guys with the explosive residue on their hands or the det wires in their hands when caught. We had every right to shoot them on the spot.
In addition, most of what could be termed violations are a matter of interpretation. The conventions don't contain a list of disapproved items. I, for one, don't feel that hoods, stress positions without restraints, or the wearing of women's underwear constitute violations. Nor is the use of force to restrain a prisoner or move an unwilling prisoner necessarily a violation. Much of the IRC beefing, for example, is just that. We weren't nice to the prisoners. Boo freakin' hoo.
#11
President Bush declared that the Geneva Accords would be applied to all captives in Iraq."
Actually, he didn't, Mike.
For a complete explanation of the legal status of the WOT's prisoner status, check out our official policy as outlined by Albert Gonzalez in yesterday's NYSlimes:The Rule of Law and the Rules of War.
Bacisally, Iraqi captives don't rate the Geneva Convention because they don't fight in a nation's uniform for a country that's waging war according to the rules of war.
Posted by: Jen ||
05/15/2004 15:35 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Re #11: Jen, here's the relevant part of the article you linked: Despite being a crucial front in the war on terrorism, Iraq presents a very different situation. Both the United States and Iraq are parties to the Geneva Conventions. The United States recognizes that these treaties are binding in the war for the liberation of Iraq. There has never been any suggestion by our government that the conventions do not apply in that conflict. Although recent news reports from Iraq have caused some to question our commitment to the treaties, make no mistake that the United States is bound to observe the rules of war in the Geneva Conventions.
Please explain your point to me so I can understand it.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
05/15/2004 17:37 Comments ||
Top||
#13
I'll add that I saw and heard during the current Congressional hearings that an Administrative spokesman said explicitly that the Administration declares that it applies the Geneva Convention to all captives in Iraq, just like I said.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
05/15/2004 17:39 Comments ||
Top||
#14
Let me add also that the article The Dark of Interrogation is superb (good link at #2). Thanks for the recommendation, Rex.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
05/15/2004 18:07 Comments ||
Top||
#15
For your further education in our policy of treating Iraqi prisoners, read Jed Babbin's piece at NRO.
Some of the Iraqis were treated as POWs under the Geneva Convention as Gonzalez stated-these would be Saddam's Army and National Guard that we first encountered last year.
The prisoners under consideration at Abu Ghraib are rather different--Again, per my remarks about "official" soldiers fighting in uniform for a declared enemy power.
Posted by: Jen ||
05/15/2004 18:14 Comments ||
Top||
#16
From Babbin's article and to address your specific complaints, MS:
The decision correctly reads terrorists out of the third Geneva Convention, whose definitions of prisoners of war are broad, but clearly don't include terrorists. By deciding that some of the prisoners at Abu Ghraib aren't POWs is simply to state the obvious. Some are held as mere criminals for "Iraqi on Iraqi" street crimes. Some are held as POWs, former members of the Saddam forces who wore uniforms and were under command of the regime (only two of the Geneva criteria). And some, like the so-called "foreign fighters" â terrorists from Iran, Syria, and their ilk â are held as non-POWs, outside the Geneva conditions. According to Rumsfeld's testimony, at least 3,800 of them are members of the Iranian-backed terrorist Mujahedin-e Khalk organization.
That should clear up those problems you have with the GC and who does and doesn't qualify.
Posted by: Jen ||
05/15/2004 18:19 Comments ||
Top||
#17
Thank you, #2, for providing a link that works to Mark Bowden's article. It's a long article but worth the read.
Basically, Bowden shows that "torture lite" has been used effectively for years and years[not for the sake of cruelty, as bleeding hearts may suggest]but for the sake of extracting valuable information that could save lives. To ban torture lite is to bloc valuable information being extracted. Ergo, more body bags coming home, while armchair jurists force our military and intelligence officers to "take the higher road" while prosecuting a war.
It is unfortunate that Bush caved so visibly in regards to the Abu "humiliation" scandal. As #9 points out, how do we know the good guys from the bad guys, and certainly Al Queda is not the only terrorist groups operating in Iraq. As well, any unlawful combatant, not in uniform putting bearing arms or using boms to try to kill civilians or uniformed coalition troops, should not be afforded Geneva Convention protections by letter of int'l law.
It was unfortunate that Bush made the concessions he did. It was uncalled for. He could have merely said that the offending military police would be investigated and punished due to the fact that they transgressed US military codes of appropriate behavior. Now his aquiescence about Geneva Convention covering un-uniformed Iraqi POW's may have even compromised the Gitmo cases before the Supreme Court.
But what do I know? I'm not trying to get re-elected as President nor am I trying to maintain the good will of coalition forces serving with us in Iraq, who may not want to be associated with what the media has described as an "atrocity."
Here's why I think legally, at least, Bush could have stood his ground that like Gitmo un-uniformed insurgents were not POW's covered by the the Geneva Convention or its Protocols. The Iraq captives are in the same situation as the Gitmo crew, except now, because of the naked pee-pee/gog leash photos, the WH has been brow beaten into pretending Iraqi POW's are part of a state's armed forces. They are not, nor are they protected by Protocol I of the Geneva Convention.
Geneva Convention III addressed treatment of POW's in traditional wars. Both Iraq and the USA ratified Geneva Convention III. Then in 1977, Jimmy Carter, Yasser Arafat, and the Red Cross [what an unholy threesome!] tried to push through ratification of Protocols I and II which would extend POW status to un-uniformed combatants,etc. Protocol I was especially worrisome. Good for us, Jimmy got the boot before he could get the Senate to ratify Protocol I. Ronald Reagan deep sixed Protocol I and most of Protocol II. Bottom line: the USA was one of 2 nations I know of that did not ratify Protocols I and II. The other nation that did not ratify Protocols I and III was Iraq. Interesting, yes?
Now internationalists [and unfortunately Bush] are stretching Geneva Convention IV by saying insurgents are covered as "civilians"-say what?? There's the 1987 Convention against Torture which the US ratified, which addresses "severe" torture, but are Abu "humiliation" techniques considered "severe torture?" Doubt it.
I heard Michael Savage interview a Senator last week,[I don't recall his name], who confirmed that what the media and Democrat Party grand standers refuse to acknowledge is that life saving information was extracted from high value POW's in Abu as a result of the softening measures used by the military police.
Fyi, I'll cut and post some passages from Bowden's article that show a difference between the purposes of torture and torture lite, as well as distinctions between civilan rules and warrior necessities. It's clear to me that if we expect our warriors to follow the rules of war to the letter, we should only use them as peacekeeping forces. Prosecuting a war according to the Geneva Convention is very selfish to our troops. Our state side generated high brow demands of having soldiers behave like gentlemen on the battlefield will end up victimizing them as surely as the enemy's bullets will.
From Bowden's 10/03 article: "...Torture is repulsive. It is deliberate cruelty, a crude and ancient tool of political oppression...But professional terrorists pose a harder question. They are lockboxes containing potentially life-saving information...Then there are methods that, some people argue, fall short of torture. Called "torture lite," these include sleep deprivation, exposure to heat or cold, the use of drugs to cause confusion, rough treatment (slapping, shoving, or shaking), forcing a prisoner to stand for days at a time or to sit in uncomfortable positions, and playing on his fears for himself and his family. Although excruciating for the victim, these tactics generally leave no permanent marks and do no lasting physical harm.
The Geneva Convention makes no distinction: it bans any mistreatment of prisoners...But some nations that are otherwise committed to ending brutality have employed torture lite under what they feel are justifiable circumstances...Indeed, some police officers, soldiers, and intelligence agents who abhor "severe" methods believe that banning all forms of physical pressure would be dangerously naive. Few support the use of physical pressure to extract confessions, especially because victims will often say anything (to the point of falsely incriminating themselves) to put an end to pain. But many veteran interrogators believe that the use of such methods to extract information is justified if it could save livesâwhether by forcing an enemy soldier to reveal his army's battlefield positions or forcing terrorists to betray the details of ongoing plots. As these interrogators see it, the well-being of the captive must be weighed against the lives that might be saved by forcing him to talk. A method that produces life-saving information without doing lasting harm to anyone is not just preferable; it appears to be morally sound...A way of sorting this one out is to consider two clashing sensibilities: the warrior and the civilian...The warrior sensibility requires doing what must be done to complete a mission. By definition, war exists because civil means have failed. What counts is winning, and preserving one's own troops. To a field commander in a combat zone, the life of an uncooperative enemy captive weighs very lightly against the lives of his own men. There are very few who, faced with a reluctant captive, would not in certain circumstances reach for the alligator clips, or something else...Calling detainees "prisoners of war" would entitle them to the protections of the Geneva Convention, which prohibits the "physical or mental torture" of POWs, and "any other form of coercion," even to the extent of "unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind." (In the contemptuous words of one military man, they "prohibit everything except three square meals, a warm bed, and access to a Harvard education.")...The history of interrogation by U.S. armed forces and spy agencies is one of giving lip service to international agreements while vigorously using coercion whenever circumstances seem to warrant it...Torture is a crime against humanity, but coercion is an issue that is rightly handled with a wink, or even a touch of hypocrisy; it should be banned but also quietly practiced. Those who protest coercive methods will exaggerate their horrors, which is good: it generates a useful climate of fear. It is wise of the President to reiterate U.S. support for international agreements banning torture, and it is wise for American interrogators to employ whatever coercive methods work. It is also smart not to discuss the matter with anyone..."
Postscript: Another good article which I will post in its entirety for others to read outside this particular thread is from Frontpage and it reveals the nature of the enemy. Who's going to protect us against them...the Geneva Convention? JAG lawyers? http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=13372
"Dismemberment:the new terror campaign" May 13/04
Posted by: rex ||
05/15/2004 18:37 Comments ||
Top||
#18
Note the way the Left is progressively replacing the term 'abuse' by 'torture'. I have seen no evidence that torture has been used, even by those (few) who were clearly abusing prisoners.
Posted by: Phil B ||
05/15/2004 18:42 Comments ||
Top||
#19
rex, you're kind of new here, so I'll let you in on one of our RB bits of knowledge--Reuters, from whence this story came, is very Left and very pro-Islamist/pro-terrorist and quite anti-Bush and anti-America.
We often call it al-Reuters.
So, keep that in mind when you read anything of theirs!
Posted by: Jen ||
05/15/2004 18:45 Comments ||
Top||
#20
Jen - you forgot to mention the "sneer quotes" Al-Rooters is infamous for
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/15/2004 19:04 Comments ||
Top||
#21
Rex is new here, but he's already offered up two links with great stuff in them. Thanks, Rex.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/15/2004 19:05 Comments ||
Top||
#22
True, Steve...I just wanted him to know not to let al-Rooters upset him too much if it had.
And Frank, yep-the sneer quotes around words like "terrorists" are indispensable!
Posted by: Jen ||
05/15/2004 19:22 Comments ||
Top||
#23
Bowden: Torture is a crime against humanity.
Bowden's delicate lefty sensibilities at work. I really don't see it. If torture is a crime against humanity, what would he call the fire bombings of Dresden and Tokyo?
Here's an interesting passage from the Atlantic article:
She knows that the use of coercion in interrogation did not end completely when the Israeli Supreme Court banned it in 1999. The difference is that when interrogators use "aggressive methods" now, they know they are breaking the law and could potentially be held responsible for doing so. This acts as a deterrent, and tends to limit the use of coercion to only the most defensible situations.
Has anything noticed that the Second Intifada, which has killed over 1000 Israelis, began after the routine use of torture against terrorists was banned in 1999? Could it be that Israeli security men were not willing to put their reputations and livelihoods on the line every time the use of torture was called for, and decided against torturing a terrorist for information? The Israeli judiciary may be salving their collective consciences by disallowing torture, but ordinary Israelis, both civilians and military draftees, are paying a high price for their pangs of conscience.
Here's another passage from the Atlantic article:
In other words, when the ban is lifted, there is no restraining lazy, incompetent, or sadistic interrogators. As long as it remains illegal to torture, the interrogator who employs coercion must accept the risk. He must be prepared to stand up in court, if necessary, and defend his actions. Interrogators will still use coercion because in some cases they will deem it worth the consequences. This does not mean they will necessarily be punished. In any nation the decision to prosecute a crime is an executive one. A prosecutor, a grand jury, or a judge must decide to press charges, and the chances that an interrogator in a genuine ticking-bomb case would be prosecuted, much less convicted, is very small.
This is such horse manure. In Bowden's moronic scenario, the lazy interrogator is supposedly going to become more hardworking if he's not allowed to torture terror suspects. The reality is that he's going to become less effective, together with the rest of his cohorts. If torture of terrorist suspects is banned, why would a lazy interrogator bother to torture the prisoner? If he can't get the information from the terror suspect without torturing the prisoner, no one's going to blame him - I've never heard of anyone getting demoted for *not* getting information that, in any event, no one is *sure* that the suspect possesses. When torture is banned, if the interrogator does get the information by torturing the prisoner, he finds himself suspended, his reputation in tatters and his pension at risk.
Why would any rational interrogator put his whole future at risk? Did FBI investigators put themselves at risk by cutting Moussaoui to ribbons in order to find out what he knew about any terror plots? No. Those 3000 lives and billions of dollars of infrastructure could have been saved by torturing Moussaoui, but no FBI investigator put his career on the line to save those lives. And no FBI investigator is going to. That is the result of banning the torture of terror suspects.
#24
Mike, and another thing. About this little paragraph:
"Rough interrogations don't reduce the number of US body bags. Rough methods might work on a few POWs but backfire with a much larger number of POWs. When all considerations are weighed, the use of rough methods is not the most effective interrogation policy."
You have no way of knowing if this is true or not. But I'll betcha a dinner at Ruth Chris that it's not.
Zhang Fei is right-
Those 3000 lives and billions of dollars of infrastructure could have been saved by torturing Moussaoui, but no FBI investigator put his career on the line to save those lives. And no FBI investigator is going to. That is the result of banning the torture of terror suspects.
National security forbids us being told right now, but we'll never know how many attacks on either our soldiers or on us here at home have already been foiled by what enemy detainees at Gitmo and in Iraq have told us!
I trust my fellow Americans (and by this I mean our soldiers and intell agents) enough to rely on their sense of fairness and humanity in wartime to treat prisoners properly to extract information without the hysterical sturm und drung we've just been drug through here.
This media mess is what I call torture!
Posted by: Jen ||
05/15/2004 20:07 Comments ||
Top||
#25
Jen and all others, I'll say it again. The Bush Administration has declared that the Geneval Convention is to be applied to all captives -- not just to all POWs -- in Iraq.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
05/15/2004 20:12 Comments ||
Top||
#26
I don't think so, Mike.
President Bush and his team want the humane spirit of the GC applied but I can't believe Islamist terrorists will get so many protections, especially after that Berg beheading they did the other day to remind us of how they don't play by the rules.
Posted by: Jen ||
05/15/2004 20:16 Comments ||
Top||
#27
The Bush Administration has declared that the Geneval Convention is to be applied to all captives
I seriously doubt this is true as it would in itself be a violation of said convention. Probably what they said was that the standards in the Geneva convention would applied to all (combatant) prisoners, as others have pointed out this allows summary execution amoungst other things.
Posted by: Phil B ||
05/15/2004 20:23 Comments ||
Top||
#28
a. Thanks #19 for the tip about Reuters, but I am well aware that mainstream press like "al reuters and al-aAp" is left wing biased. You misunderstood my point for posting the article.
I quoted this particular article because it reported a new POW policy at Abu that is likely true and with which I vehemently disagree. Also, this new POW policy of "limited interrogation tools" makes for good discussion points. Look, we are up to #28 now.
Sometimes quoting articles from the Fifth Column lets us know about new difficulties we're up against in the war on terrorism. Quoting such articles should not automatically imply that the poster agrees with the contents of the article.
b. I'm sorry I'm screwing up with my article links. In #17, the article entitled "Dismemberment:the new terror campaign" May 13/04 has a url as follows: http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=13372
That's the nature of the enemy, folks. The enemy has to be broken, not coddled. I'll post the article properly elsewhere for all to read.
c. And #18, I agree with you completely. Humiliation is not torture, much less severe torture.
IMHO, Bush should not have caved to international and internal pressure last week to voluntarily give Iraqi POW's Geneva Convention protections. Only uniformed Republican Guard at the initial stages of the war as well as innocent civilians throughout the war are protected by the Geneva Conventions.
Maybe I tried to include too many things in my # 17 post. There are 4 Geneva Conventions. They cover the rules of war as they apply to neutral medical personnel and the sick and wounded armed forces in the field and at sea [I and II]; POWâs [III]; and civilians[IV].
In 1977, two Additional Protocols were added to the 4 Geneva Conventions. Protocol I expanded the definition of POWâs per Geneva Conventions III to include un-uniformed insurgents and Protocol II enhanced protections for civilians per Geneva Convention IV. Though Iraq and the USA were signatories to all 4 Geneva Conventions, neither nation ratified Protocols I and II. Un-uniformed combatants that are captured in Iraq fall under Additional Protocols I and II, to which neither the USA nor Iraq are signatories. They get whatever POW treatment the USA chooses to offer them.
The Abu POW folks, from what I have heard and read, were neither uniformed Republican Guard soldiers nor were they innocent civilians herding camels on the desert and minding their own beeswax.
I believe it was Spengler who published an article in Asia Times about the only Achilles heel that Muslim extremists have, and that is the fear of humiliation. They fear neither torture nor death. So it follows that the fear of humiliation may be our most effective weapon against them to extract valuable information, and now we can no longer use that coersive technique in Iraq.
I wish that what Mike says were untrue but I think he heard President Bush's words right.
Posted by: rex ||
05/15/2004 20:36 Comments ||
Top||
#29
Great points, rex, but I need a link to Bush's exact words, if not a quote, too.
I want to see in black and white that President Bush said we would treat every detainee at Abu Ghraib under GC rules.
(I think you'll find that he did not.)
And also, even if Iraq had been a signatory to any of the GC Protocols, wouldn't that be the old Iraq under Saddam which no longer exists?
Niether Bremer nor the IPC has signed the GC for the new provisional government, to my knowledge.
Posted by: Jen ||
05/15/2004 20:41 Comments ||
Top||
#30
Jen[#29]...I am not sure what Mike source [#25] is referring to for his comments, here's what I found in a May 15/04 Op-Ed NYT article written by the President's Chief Counsel, Albert Gonzales, entitled "The Rules of Law and the Rule of Law".
Gonzales appears to say that all Iraqi detainees will have Geneva III POW protections accorded to them irrespective of the fact that they may be non-Republican Guard soldiers ie. unlawful combatants.
I'm not sure from his words if foreign fighters caught in Iraq would be accorded these same protections, but I think he does, maybe, perhaps.
Gonzales gets kind of wishey washey when he talks about Iraq. He says Iraq is a different situation from Afghanistan and he implies that any abuse of a prisoner in Iraq is "abhorrent."
Gonzales does not make any reference to the Additional Protocols I and II. So I guess Gonzales has advised the President to ignore legal loopholes offered by Iraq and the USA not being signatories. Rather it appears that Gonzales has advised the President to take the higher road for any detainees caught in Iraq. Sort of, maybe, perhaps, probably. Go figure.
"...With questions being raised regarding the treatment of detainees in both Guantánamo Bay and Iraq, it is important to revisit the origins of what has been a consistent and humane policy by the United States on this matter...In February 2002, President Bush determined that Al Qaeda terrorists were not prisoners of war under the treaty known as the Third Geneva Convention. Al Qaeda could not be a party to the convention because it is not a state. The president also determined that while the Taliban â Al Qaeda's collaborators â were covered by the treaty, they did not qualify as prisoners of war under the terms of the treaty. It stipulates that combatants must distinguish themselves from the civilian population, which the Taliban clearly did not...Despite being a crucial front in the war on terrorism, Iraq presents a very different situation. Both the United States and Iraq are parties to the Geneva Conventions. The United States recognizes that these treaties are binding in the war for the liberation of Iraq. There has never been any suggestion by our government that the conventions do not apply in that conflict. Although recent news reports from Iraq have caused some to question our commitment to the treaties, make no mistake that the United States is bound to observe the rules of war in the Geneva Conventions. The abuse of any prisoner is abhorrent. Americans, including the hundreds of thousands who serve with dedication and honor in our armed forces, viewed the images of the treatment of detainees in Abu Ghraib prison with disbelief and anger. The United States government understands and seeks to comply with its legal obligations and will act swiftly and responsibly under the law to address violations of those obligations. We must both protect our citizens from attacks by terrorists and protect the values our citizens cherish..."
Posted by: rex ||
05/15/2004 23:21 Comments ||
Top||
#31
This is an excerpt from the New York Times of May 12, describing a hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee on May 11:
Mr. [Stephen A.] Cambone, [the under secretary of defense for intelligence] and other military officials said the interrogation techniques approved for use in Iraq were straight out of the Army manual and followed the Geneva Conventions. In that respect, he said, they differed from harsher techniques, like sleep deprivation and forcing prisoners to disrobe entirely for interrogations, that are authorized for use at the American prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.
Lt. Gen. Lance Smith, the deputy commander of American forces in the Middle East, said that under a policy issued last Oct. 12, the only extraordinary measure authorized for use in Iraq was placing prisoners in solitary confinement for more than 30 days. That step required the approval of the American commander in Iraq, Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, but General Smith said he was not aware of it ever being used.
I remember seeing the committee's senators question Cambone on this subject on TV. The senators asked whether the Geneva Conventions would be applied to prisoners suspected of placing bombs, prisoners suspected of committing ordinary crimes, and so forth and so on. To each such question Cambone answered that, yes, this and that and the other prisoner would be treated according to the Geneva Conventions.
I wish I could provide the hearing transcripts here, but I can't. You'll have to take my word that the issue was discussed in great detail, and the answers were clear and consistent.
People writing in this thread are making various distinctions between normal prisoners of war, on one hand, and terrorists and criminals, etc., on the other hand. These are reasonable distinctions for you to make, but I am telling you that the Bush Administration has decided not to make such distinctions in Iraq. The only exceptional prisoners are Al Qaeda members.
The Bush Administration has not approved sleep deprivation, uncomfortable positions, bright lights, white noise, nakedness, or any such methods -- whether you want to call them torture, abuse, harsh treatment or whatever else you want to call them. The only extraordinary method approved is solitary confinement.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
05/16/2004 0:26 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
05/16/2004 0:28 Comments ||
Top||
#33
It is what I feared, #31.
As I've said before, I have no doubt that the President could legally choose not to grant POW status to Iraqi POW's. I've read that previously Rumsfield and the military believed that Iraqi unlawful combatants, like those in Afghanistan, fall outside the G.C., most likely because they know AP I and II were never ratified by Iraq or the USA.
But Bush, as Gonzales says, has decided that Iraq is a unique situation and he is VOLUNTARILY extending the protections of Geneva Conventions AP I and II, without being legally compelled to do so.
I'm not sure if it's because coalition partners threatened withdrawing support because they had signed AP I and II and were upset about the POW "humiliation" scandal. Or perhaps it's Bush's Christian sensibilities that were shocked by the sexual nuances of the photos. Or perhaps, he feels he needs to redeem himself with the Iraqi gov't officials, lest they boot the US forces out of Iraq come July 01. Who knows what motivated President Bush to be so generous with G.C. protections?
Taking POW's in Iraq now is useless, for intelligence value, that is.
As other posters suggested, now Al Queda operatives will claim they are Iraqis who have lost their papers and it would be hard to prove otherwise, because so many Iraqi gov't buildings had their offices burned, materials and files vandalized shortly after the invasion. Al Queda are not the only bad guys in this picture. Baathists themselves are pretty nasty folks, as are Saddam's ragtag Feyadeen. Come to think of it, Shiite militia are creepy, too.
I think this issue illustrates the conflict the Bowden's article mentioned in prosecuting a war: ie. warrior[military] versus civilian[politicians, JAG]points of view. Civilian camp just took won. Rumsfield may volunteer to resign if he is forced to fight a war in Iraq like a wuss. The only Senator on Rumsfield's side on the Armed Forces Commitee and who has a grip on the reality of fighting and winning a war is Senator Inhofe. The media ridicules Inhofe, of course.
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/0513IraqAbuseInhofe13-ON.html
"Iraqi prison scandal overblown, senator says"
Posted by: rex ||
05/16/2004 1:26 Comments ||
Top||
#34
Now, men, rex and Mike, I wouldn't go off half-cocked.
We still don't know definitively that President Bush is going to have all Iraqi detainees under the GC, do we?
Or that anyone, least of all SecDef Rummy, is "wussing out."
The President merely vowed that the Abu Ghraib abuses we've seen in the photos will be stopped and that detainees there will be treated "humanely."
What both Bush and Rumsfeld never forget is that their first duty is to protect Americans, both our soldiers and we civilians.
Getting intell about saving American lives takes priority over mollycaudling terrorist detainees.
(Rummy better not resign! He has both the President's confidence and that of 2/3 of the American people. The Senate knows what it can do and that's get over itself!
The Senate can't hire or fire the Cabinet!)
Posted by: Jen ||
05/16/2004 1:43 Comments ||
Top||
From Jihad Unspun
The American website, Iraq Babes, has been shut down as the controversy over pictures depicting US GIâs gang-raping Iraqi woman continues. Linda MacNew, the siteâs registrant, told World Net Daily that she was not able to verify conclusively that the photos, which she said were produced by the Hungarian Sex in War site, were legal or illegal â meaning whether the women involved were without question porn actresses or were actually raped on camera. The photos were picked up by the Boston Globe on May 12th causing embarrassment to the paper for the photos have largely been dismissed as âfakeâ. How do we know that? After JUS [Jihad Unspun] published a censored version of the photos last week, we received a deluge of mail from both Muslims and non-Muslims alike. While the entire point of our article Violating Arab Honor was missed by most of the male population, it wasnât by many Muslim sisters wrote to show there support for our report. Because SOME of the photographs appear on porn sites in no way legitimizes them nor does it mean they are fake.
"No, no! Certainly not!"
The real questions are, who are these women and how did the photos come to reside on these sites? Are these women our Muslim sisters and were they forced to participate as our information indicates? In January 2004, we received information that tipped us off to what was really going on. We were told by an anonymous source that the wifeâs [sic], sisters and daughters of those arrested by US forces, British forces and the hired mercenaries (that are so often overlooked) were being used to âsoften upâ detainees in Iraq. Either the male relatives cooperated with interrogators they were threatened with their female family members ended up on porn sites. If the detainee was not forthcoming, this is what occurred and the photographs were then presented to him. Six weeks later we received another claim of the same abuse. This isnât rocket science.
Though it might as well be for JUS, they can't understand anyway.
It is a well known fact that incidents of real rape and even child rape turn up on âlegitimateâ porn sites on the internet every day. While Sex in War claims âWe do not condone non-Consensual sex. This site is about role playing fantasy only and performed by professional actors and modelsâ, law enforcement largely turns a blind eye to these âadult entertainersâ who generate 70% of internet revenue. Are sites like Iraq Babes and Sex in War in bad taste when thousands are dying and prisoner abuse is rampant?
Does the Pope have some sort of affinity for Catholicism?
Most definitely, however this in of itself is not surprising in a demoralized world. Are they promoting hate and racisim? Most assuredly, considering these photos were picked up in many daily newspapers through out the Arab world as examples of US brutality. Are crimes being committed here? Very likely - if not the greater crime of rape itself, profiteering is certainly at play.
Last I checked, there aren't any laws against making a profit, not even against making a profit from a porn site...
Veteran police detective and novelist Michael Tremoglie, commenting on the four websites involved and statements made by some of the persons connected to them who could not verify if the individuals appearing in these shots were actors, "If there was any question in their mind about whether real rape was going on in these photos, why didnât they contact the responsible authorities, instead of trying to cash in on it?"
An enlightened quesion on JUS? Dang, that twitched the ol' meter!
We call for an immediate full scale investigation into the Sex in War, the alleged creators of these pictures. In fact, considering the controversy surrounding these photos, it is amazing that this âlegitimateâ business has not come forward with details of the photos in question. We also call on the women who appear in these shots to come forward. If they are paid actresses, they would vindicate a host of mainstream press including the Boston Globe and others and would help to heal an already alienated Arab world. If they are rape victims, the truth will be known and remedies can be sought. Regardless, if these photos are the work of pornographers, this is a clear act of inciting violence and the criminal act of profiteering and the sites should be brought down and individuals responsible should be brought to justice.
Having a little trouble with the concept of profiteering and making a profit, isn't he? While I in no way condone, etc., blah blah blah, the content or even the existence of the website, the fact remains that the pix are fake.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
05/15/2004 12:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Jihad Unspun will continue to relentlessly investigate. Please send them hand lotion and towels in support of their efforts to get to the bottom of this. It could take years.
Libya has agreed not to trade arms with countries accused of seeking the spread of weapons of mass destruction, according to a US envoy. John Bolton, US Undersecretary of State for Arms Control, said Libya would have no military trade with countries including Iran, North Korea and Syria. .... On a landmark official visit to Europe last month, Libyan leader Colonel Muammar Gaddafi called for peace and disarmament. He said that by renouncing weapons of mass destruction, Libya had secured more benefits for itself than it could by possessing such weapons. .....
I dunno, my professional opinion is that he's acting more sane all the time. What'dya say was in them big orange pills again?
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
05/15/2004 12:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Gotta agree. Still wonder when the stab in the back will happen though. Prolly when any sign of weakness. They being pirates and all (muslim)
#2
If he stabs us, then I hope he speaks Chinese. I don't think too many other countries are shopping for slightly used satellites countries.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
05/15/2004 4:09 Comments ||
Top||
#3
All along peeps missed the big point about Gaddafi . He's trying to start a United states of Africa , so as he can be the head of it and increase his power base both internally and externally . Once a Dictator always a Dictator .. Still a little backstabbing weasel in my opinion ..
The important thing is that Gaddhafi wants Lybians cponsidering themselves Africans not Arabs and that is a GOOD thing. Also, he has ever been a free thinker regarding Islam and has cracked on the Muslim brotherhood and alike
An amnesty deal for foreign militants in Pakistanâs Afghan border region has suffered a setback, with them failing to begin registering as agreed. Under the deal, the fighters would be able to stay if they halted activities against Pakistan and Afghanistan. Pakistan has now given local tribesmen who brokered the deal more time but said they might face legal action if they failed to deliver. Hundreds of foreign militants are thought to be hiding in the region. ....
Local tribesmen are now believed to be pursuing more consultations with the foreign fighters - mainly Arabs, Uzbeks, Chechens and Afghans. But Asmatullah Gandapur, an administrator in South Waziristan, told 100 local tribal elders in the regionâs main town, Wana, on Friday that the governmentâs patience was running out. "We are working with full restraint but if tribesmen do not fulfil their collective and territorial responsibilities, the law will take action against them," Mr Gandapur told the Associated Press news agency. .... Wednesdayâs announcement that the fighters had agreed to the amnesty deal came after two deadlines set by the Pakistani authorities for foreigners to register or face renewed force had passed. More than 100 militants and troops were killed in the fighting in March.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
05/15/2004 12:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The Brotheren Abu?
Yes Lucky, my brothers in allah. Would you like to become muslim?
Can I travel Abu?
Oh yes, we have many ways. All the guys are friendly.
#2
Angry Arab Blogster takes a piece out of oily Saudi mouthpiece, Adil al-Jubayr:
I was getting ready to grade some papers (I have graded none so far), when a familiar voice from the TV blasting outside came on. It was the Saudi Crown Prince's advisor on National Security, `Adil Al-Jubayr, who resides in Washington, DC. Now imagine if "Bush"'s National Security Advisor resides in Paris, France. That is hilarious. He was on MSNBC's Hardball (how much Mathews hated me the one time he had me on). He took it upon himself to lecture the US about humane and civil treatment of prisoners. I kid you not. Now `Adil and I go a long way back. He took some classes with me at Georgetown and Angry Arab had some fun at his expense in a few classes. At one point, in one IR class, I had to turn to him and say in front of the class: "You really do not have to propagandize for the House of Saudi IN CLASS. Do that outside of class." It was incredible. And this Al-Jubayr was telling the American audience today about the civilized methods of interrogation in Saudi Arabia, where beheading of lovers still takes place, and where women are still stoned, and where people who enjoy their drugs are executed, and where the prisons of Prince Nayif are run like medieval dungeons with routine torture, and urination over the heads of inmates. And the propagandists of the House of Saudi are now allowed to preach tolerance and humane treatment on US TV?
http://angryarab.blogspot.com/
Posted by: Army of Satan ||
05/15/2004 2:33 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Army of S --
And, of course, Matthews just ate this crap up.
Posted by: Infidel Bob ||
05/15/2004 8:43 Comments ||
Top||
#4
... the governmentâs patience was running out.
Our patience is running out, but if you continue to stonewall and defy us, well........
our patience will still be running out.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
05/15/2004 12:26 Comments ||
Top||
#5
When I find out were Lucky lives
I'm gonna buy him big meal
and happy juice.
From Jihad Unspun. The article is titled, "Taliban Execute Two Government Officials; Five Taliban Martyred"
Taliban Mujahideen used a road block to stop the members of the puppet regime of Karzai and executed two officials from the Kandahar government who were close associates to former governor of Khandahar Gul Agha Sherzai. Both were decapitated. The Taliban Mujahideen escaped the scene without incident. The operation has sent shivers of fear throughout the puppet regime, and American forces have surrounded the area to search for Taliban members. ... Five Taliban Mujahideen have been killed when they attacked a U.S. military convoy in the southern province of Kandahar Wednesday morning in Kotal. Mullah Sabir Momin the Talibanâs deputy commander of operations in the south made the report to Reuters yesterday "The American forces repelled the attack and used heavy weapons in which five of our Taliban were martyred".
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
05/15/2004 12:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Decapitated ya say, who would of thought. May be a modus operendi, of a sorts. Could mean a trend, something to consider in the long run, muslims being cut-throats. Cut-throats, is their nothing they can't stain.
#3
As a sidenote, actually, from what I heard in the long run since the Agerian civil war began in 1992, cutting heads was as popular as slitting throats, and so was viedotaping slaughters for propaganda purposes. It's a global trend. It's so chic.
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.
