Hi there, !
Today Sat 06/26/2004 Fri 06/25/2004 Thu 06/24/2004 Wed 06/23/2004 Tue 06/22/2004 Mon 06/21/2004 Sun 06/20/2004 Archives
Rantburg
531689 articles and 1855967 comments are archived on Rantburg.

Today: 80 articles and 606 comments as of 11:22.
Post a news link    Post your own article   
Area: WoT Background                   
Saudis Offer Militants Amnesty
Today's Headlines
Headline Comments [Views]
Page 1: WoT Operations
14 00:00 Jen [] 
3 00:00 Jen [] 
1 00:00 smn [] 
2 00:00 BH [] 
24 00:00 Arijit [1] 
2 00:00 smn [1] 
25 00:00 Aris Katsaris [] 
6 00:00 someone [] 
29 00:00 Sam [] 
4 00:00 smn [] 
36 00:00 Jen [] 
7 00:00 smn [] 
4 00:00 Zenster [] 
7 00:00 Laddy [] 
20 00:00 Zenster [] 
2 00:00 rkb [] 
0 [] 
0 [] 
9 00:00 smn [] 
1 00:00 borgboy2001 [] 
5 00:00 Silentbrick [] 
20 00:00 Atabeira [1] 
10 00:00 tu3031 [] 
5 00:00 Anonymous5350 [] 
3 00:00 Chris W. [] 
2 00:00 Robert Crawford [] 
0 [] 
15 00:00 Pappy [] 
4 00:00 Shipman [] 
2 00:00 Frank G [] 
6 00:00 Mark Espinola [] 
2 00:00 Anonymous5341 [] 
15 00:00 CrazyFool [] 
15 00:00 Ruprecht [] 
8 00:00 Bulldog [] 
5 00:00 Capt America [] 
7 00:00 Mark Espinola [] 
7 00:00 mojo [] 
24 00:00 Pappy [] 
0 [] 
1 00:00 jules 187 [] 
3 00:00 Howard UK [] 
15 00:00 Anonymous5483 [1] 
0 [] 
19 00:00 ed [] 
11 00:00 mhw [] 
3 00:00 Dan Darling [] 
2 00:00 Shipman [] 
1 00:00 Capt America [] 
0 [] 
4 00:00 jules 187 [] 
4 00:00 B [] 
16 00:00 Shipman [] 
Page 2: WoT Background
2 00:00 ex-lib []
0 []
6 00:00 Barbara Skolaut []
4 00:00 ex-lib []
13 00:00 Mike Sylwester []
3 00:00 Pappy []
1 00:00 Barbara Skolaut []
1 00:00 Shipman []
1 00:00 john []
5 00:00 Pappy []
11 00:00 Werner []
27 00:00 RWV []
8 00:00 Chris W. []
0 []
3 00:00 Chris W. []
10 00:00 RWV []
3 00:00 Random thoughts []
0 []
11 00:00 cingold []
3 00:00 Shipman []
5 00:00 Kathy K []
6 00:00 Shipman []
1 00:00 eLarson [1]
1 00:00 Robert Crawford []
7 00:00 Zenster []
13 00:00 rex []
23 00:00 Robert Crawford []
Arabia
Saudis kick off amnesty program for terrorists
Saudi Arabia announced a limited amnesty Wednesday for Muslim militants who surrender in the next month, saying they will not face the death penalty and will only be prosecuted if they committed acts that hurt others. Crown Prince Abdullah read the brief announcement on behalf of his half-brother, King Fahd, on state television Wednesday. He said the offer was open to anyone who has not yet been "arrested for carrying out terrorist acts." "We are opening the door of amnesty ... to everyone who deviated from the path of right and committed a crime in the name of religion, which is in fact a corruption on earth," he said. "We swear by God that nothing will prevent us from striking with our full might" anyone who ignores the offer, Abullah said.
"Youse guys are really gonna get it! I'm warning you!"
Posted by: Dan Darling || 06/23/2004 12:50:34 PM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Flashback to an alternate history where Hitler gives amnesty to Ernst Roehm & assorted SA thugs instead of liquidating them in "The Night of the Long Knives during the summer of '34.
_____________________________________criminals offering amnesty to criminals methinks sez borgboy
Posted by: borgboy2001 || 06/23/2004 17:07 Comments || Top||


SAS sent to protect British embassy in Saudi Arabia
Britain has sent a special force to Saudi Arabia to bolster security at the British embassy and plan a possible mass evacuation of foreigners, the Daily Telegraph newspaper said on Wednesday, quoting defence sources. “There is very serious nervousness about the situation in Saudi Arabia,” one British official told the newspaper. According to the report, the 25-man Special Air Service (SAS) team is backed by many more special forces in Qatar which could be called upon if the 20,000 British nationals in Saudi Arabia had to be withdrawn in a hurry. The SAS team in Saudi Arabia are counter-revolutionary warfare specialists and were deployed last week, the Daily Telegraph reoprted. It added the larger SAS force based in Qatar has been given approval by the Saudi authorities to move in should any threat develop against the embassy.
The jihadi hard boys will stay far away from the embassy, too many people with guns. Easier pickings elseware.
Posted by: Steve || 06/23/2004 12:31:49 PM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Whoa! 25 SAS! That's like sending in a whole Texas Ranger 6 Troop!
Posted by: Shipman || 06/23/2004 13:18 Comments || Top||

#2  Comment -- trying to get Rantburg to remember me! I know I don't post much, or make comments.
Posted by: Sherry || 06/23/2004 13:37 Comments || Top||

#3  Sherry,.... hmmmm.... I seem to remember a Sherry.
I remember! The Janaweed flame war? :)
Posted by: Shipman || 06/23/2004 14:35 Comments || Top||

#4  That's the proverbial waste of a military asset. If I may be so bold, there are some sensors yet to be laid in Iranian waters. Or perhaps some remaining wet work in Fallujioh.

Shipman, isn't the Ranger motto "One Ranger, One Riot"?
Posted by: Zpaz || 06/23/2004 15:49 Comments || Top||

#5  One thing is sure, nobodies forgotten that the SAS boys do NOT play nice. Irritate them, and there's no messy trial or prison scandal, you just go away. Far far away. Like nailed to a tree someplace.
Posted by: Silentbrick || 06/23/2004 18:23 Comments || Top||


Saudis Offer Militants One-Month Summer Vacation Amnesty
EFL & Found in Comments over at LGF
Saudi Arabia announced a limited amnesty Wednesday for Muslim militants who surrender in the next month, saying they will not face the death penalty and will only be prosecuted if they committed acts that hurt others.
The vacation is believed to include a job application for the Sody police department: Now Hiring.
Crown Prince Abdullah read the brief announcement on behalf of his half-brother, King Fahd, on state television Wednesday.
The statement also included commentary of the Jooooos and how they are responsible for everything!
He said the offer was open to anyone who has not yet been "arrested for carrying out terrorist acts." "We are opening the door of amnesty and will allow you free passage to country of your choosing... to everyone who deviated from the path of right and committed a crime in the name of the religion of peace, which is in fact a corruption on earth," he said. "We swear by God that nothing will prevent us from striking the infidel Americans and Joooos with our full might" anyone who ignores the offer, Abullah said.
He later added that all memebers of the Sody security force that are affiliated with AlQ were not required to turn themselves in.
Posted by: Dragon Fly || 06/23/2004 11:53:33 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Sorry. I couldn't help it.
Posted by: Rafael || 06/23/2004 12:13 Comments || Top||

#2  Rafael---LOL! I tried to put the square root of -1, i.e. i into the probability, but it just came out as zero. Fred, I found a bug in your program, sorry, LOL!
Posted by: Alaska Paul || 06/23/2004 12:19 Comments || Top||

#3  Saudi Arabia announced a limited amnesty Wednesday for Muslim militants who surrender in the next month, saying they will not face the death penalty

Refresh my memory, exactly how many real jihadis have gotten the death penalty lately?
Posted by: Steve || 06/23/2004 12:22 Comments || Top||

#4  "Dan" (Darling?) had 2%.

You incurable optimist, you !

Posted by: Carl in N.H || 06/23/2004 12:23 Comments || Top||

#5  Refresh my memory:

100, ah...er no. 50 ...10....1....gheez
Posted by: Dragon Fly || 06/23/2004 12:26 Comments || Top||

#6  I screwed up. The event should have been better defined as "scores of militants surrender in SA". We know there are thousands of potential militants in SA, but the number with AK47s attached to their bodies is probably smaller. Was there ever an estimate done?

In any case, the lights have just been turned on in the Magic Kingdom. Now watch the scurrying. A futile attempt, but so fun to watch.
Posted by: Rafael || 06/23/2004 13:00 Comments || Top||

#7  AP input a whole imaginary number like 11teen.
Posted by: Shipman || 06/23/2004 13:13 Comments || Top||

#8  Ya know, I'd like a nice summer vacation. I hear Arabia is nice this time of year...
Posted by: Seafarious || 06/23/2004 13:28 Comments || Top||

#9  Didn't President W. issue an ultimatum to nations who harbor terrorists about 2.5 years ago?

Even using the New Math, these Saudi jerks and the Clown Prince should have 48 hours to give the Coalition forces 20 reliable Al-Queda targets / base cities (I don't care which) for us to BOMB or we'll stick some ordinance up THEIR asses instead.

Allegedly, Al-Queda has been blackmailing the Saudis for years... so it shouldn't be a big deal for the Saudis to tell us where the terrorists are. Right??
Posted by: Chris W. || 06/23/2004 15:55 Comments || Top||

#10  Where's the "repenting"? I didn't see the "repenting". I hear they're big on that over there. It's like two minutes for high sticking.
Posted by: tu3031 || 06/23/2004 19:45 Comments || Top||


Al-Qaeda information center found in al-Suweidi
Police in the Saudi capital have discovered the "information centre" of al-Qaeda terrorists in Saudi Arabia, a newspaper reported Tuesday. According to the report in the Saudi Okaz newspaper, a raid in the al-Suweidi part of the capital uncovered the headquarters of the Sawt al-Jihad Islamic website, which in the past has disseminated several statements credited to the al-Qaeda network in the Arabian Peninsula. Two men were arrested, both of whose names appeared on a list of 26 suspected al-Qaeda members released by the authorities in December. According to the newspaper, the police also uncovered tailor shops used to make the uniforms worn by the extremists.
Posted by: Dan Darling || 06/23/2004 10:50:38 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  "Information Center" ?

Brochures helpfully placed in a rack by the receptionist ?

Proud displays of bomb belts, knives, and hoods ?

Application forms conveniently placed on the desk as you come in ?


Posted by: Carl in N.H || 06/23/2004 12:28 Comments || Top||

#2  rrriiggghhhtt - of course they didn't get Saudi police uniforms from actual Saudi police. They knitted them themselves, kinda like the fridge story in the Miller beer ads
Posted by: Frank G || 06/23/2004 12:35 Comments || Top||

#3  Frank, cheez, they went to the Police Uniform Store. They have those in every mall in Saoodi land. Separate stores for the wimmin, of course, else the terrorists would get confused.
Posted by: Steve White || 06/23/2004 15:47 Comments || Top||

#4  Did they have the presence of mind to unplug the fighting Racals?
Posted by: Shipman || 06/23/2004 19:29 Comments || Top||


Seven Yemeni soldiers killed in clashes
Seven Yemeni soldiers have been killed and nine wounded in clashes with supporters of a firebrand preacher near the border with Saudi Arabia, the defense ministry has said. It said on its Internet site on Tuesday that security forces arrested more than 30 supporters of Hussain Badr al-Din al-Huthi who were involved in the fighting, which began late on Sunday. "Security forces continue to encircle the rest of elements hiding in the Hidane region," in Saada province, about 250km north of Sanaa.
Hope they are better at surrounding people than the Saudis. Of course, that wouldn't take much.
Tribal sources said earlier that security forces were attempting to force the remaining fighters to surrender. They said the army used heavy weapons in the fighting, during which there were also an undetermined number of civilian casualties. The army laid siege to hundreds of Huthi's supporters on Monday. Armed partisans also came out in force in two other locations in Saada, the sources said. Yemeni authorities accuse Huthi of stirring trouble by organising anti-US demonstrations after weekly Muslim prayers on Fridays. His supporters are "outlaws... extremists and trouble-makers," the ministry charged vowing that they would be brought to justice. "They have opened fire on government institutions, police pickets and roughed up students to stop them from going to school," it added.
School being a waste of time better spent on learning jihad.
Posted by: Steve || 06/23/2004 9:07:04 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Steve, I think you've hit the 'arab cultural stagnation' nail on the head.
Posted by: Howard UK || 06/23/2004 9:50 Comments || Top||

#2  Steve, I think you, by yourself, could do a better job of "surrounding" than the Saudis...
Posted by: Frank G || 06/23/2004 10:07 Comments || Top||


Western citizens leave for Bahrain
In the course of the deteriorated security conditions in Saudi Arabia and the escalation of attacks against foreigners, western citizens started to leave the Kingdom to Saudi Arabia neighboring states especially to Bahrain. An immigration official in Manama said that a huge number of Europeans and Americans arrived from Saudi Arabia and that this wave started one year before but was escalated during the few past weeks. The sources indicate that while some foreigners transferred their work from Saudi Arabia to Bahrain, others preferred to send their families to Bahrain and continue their work in Saudi Arabia.
You can do administrative work and the like from outside Saudi, but the wrench turners don't have that option. Smart move with the families. Just how secure is Bahrain, anyway?
Posted by: Steve || 06/23/2004 8:54:39 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Pretty secure. You need to take a causeway from Soddy there. Surrounded by water. The boomers would have to have really fast boats since you could seal it up pretty quick. Lots of American and British and Euro companies there working. Huge Alumina smelter and other industries plus nice western-liberal accommodations. Doubt the AQ's would be welcome by the locals - very astute business oriented society.
Posted by: Jack is Back! || 06/23/2004 10:14 Comments || Top||

#2  .com may have a bit more up to date info on Bahrain than I do, but there was/has been a low-level insurgency running there for more than a decade now - the briefing I got when I was there in the mid-90s was that it was a 3-way fight between the Emir's security goons, goons backed by Iran, and goons backed by Iraq. OTOH, the worst they ever seemed to be able to do was pop off propane canisters, which made for a lovely, if ineffective display.

Mike
Posted by: Anonymous5341 || 06/23/2004 14:23 Comments || Top||


Arabs Look at Themselves and Don't Like It
The death of Saudi al Qaeda leader Abdulaziz al-Moqrin, and three other al Qaeda members, was unique in several respects. This killing of Islamic terrorists was openly applauded by most Saudi, with the police being cheered in the neighborhood where the four were hiding out and killed. That had never happened before. The general population saw the murder and beheading of Paul Johnson as crossing some kind of line.

But there's something else going on as well. Arabs are beginning to question the wisdom of this al Qaeda "jihad" against the rest of the world. People throughout the Arab world cheered as pictures of the burning towers appeared on their TV sets on September 11. Here was an Arab accomplishment. The sad fact is that there have been very few Arab accomplishments in the past century or so. Currently, the 300 million citizens of the Arab league countries, with a population ten times that of the state of California, have an economy (GDP) half the size of Californias. Even with all the oil wealth, the majority of the worlds known oil deposits in fact, the Arab world has fallen behind every other region in the world, except black Africa, in economic growth and development. Israel, with a population of six million, produces more scientific papers each year than 300 million Arabs. Greece, with a population of 12 million, translates more foreign language books each year than 300 million Arabs. Ignoring new, or foreign, ideas, has long been an Arab custom. But now many more Arabs are beginning to see it as a bad idea.

Another bad idea is blaming Israel for all the Arab world's troubles. Most of the Arabs killed in wars and terrorist violence during the last half century had nothing to do with Israel. For example, the 1980s war between Iraq and Iran, which killed several hundred thousand Arabs, had nothing to do with Israel...
Posted by: tipper || 06/23/2004 08:38 || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Ignoring new, or foreign, ideas, has long been an Arab custom. But now many more Arabs are beginning to see it as a bad idea.

Another bad idea is blaming Israel for all the Arab world's troubles. Most of the Arabs killed in wars and terrorist violence during the last half century had nothing to do with Israel. For example, the 1980s war between Iraq and Iran, which killed several hundred thousand Arabs, had nothing to do with Israel.


A beautiful light shines when a people are willing to confront their own demons.
Posted by: jules 187 || 06/23/2004 10:28 Comments || Top||

#2  I hate to admit it, but I was hearing MJs "Man in the Mirror" song while I was reading this.
Posted by: Cyber Sarge (VRWC CA Chapter) || 06/23/2004 10:31 Comments || Top||

#3  He sings? Is there nothing that Michael Jordan can't do?
Posted by: BH || 06/23/2004 11:00 Comments || Top||

#4  Technical note: Iranians and many other Shiites are *not* Arabs. They are "Indo-European" (sometimes called "Aryan") ethnically, and this *ethnic* difference is at the root of a lot of the Sunni-Shiite animosity.
The Shiite also differ in that their abhorence to modernity can be traced to a single man, the Persian philosopher Al-Ghizzali, who, for nationalist reasons, taught the rejection of all knowledge not found in the Quran.
The Arab peoples have some religious and some cultural reasons for primitivism, but only slowly and never totally discarded modernism in the fringes of their society.
Dating from Ghizzali's writings begins the end of scientific advance and innovation in the Moslem world, however.
Posted by: Anonymoose || 06/23/2004 11:30 Comments || Top||

#5  For example, the 1980s war between Iraq and Iran, which killed several hundred thousand Arabs, had nothing to do with Israel.

I am 99 and 77/100 percent sure that statement is wrong. Maybe not Israel but Zionists for surely.
Peace be ripon you infidels.
Posted by: prince purdy naif || 06/23/2004 11:34 Comments || Top||

#6  Technical note: Iranians and many other Shiites are *not* Arabs. They are "Indo-European" (sometimes called "Aryan") ethnically, and this *ethnic* difference is at the root of a lot of the Sunni-Shiite animosity.
Anonymoose-wasn't sure if this was directed to my comments, but my intention was to apply the word "people" instead of selecting "Arabs", etc. (terms of national or ethnic identification), making this idea universally applicable to any group of humans with shared beliefs.

If not, then as Gilda Radner would say, never mind. :)
Posted by: jules 187 || 06/23/2004 11:49 Comments || Top||

#7  Further notes
1. Some persian speakers ARE sunnis - notably in Central Asia.
2. Some Shia ARE arabs - notably in Iraq, in eastern Saudi Arabia, and in Lebanon.
3.Indo-European or "indo-aryan" are language groupings, and this does not necessarily mean a common physical origin. Swedes for example, are physically similar to Finns, who speak a non or pre-Indo-European language. Languages are carried by conquerors, who typically assimilate physically to the conquered, even while imposing their own culture.
Posted by: Liberalhawk || 06/23/2004 13:03 Comments || Top||

#8  Languages are carried by conquerors, who typically assimilate physically to the conquered, even while imposing their own culture.

That would explain my red skin and passion for Sinatra.
Posted by: Zpaz || 06/23/2004 13:25 Comments || Top||

#9  They are "Indo-European" (sometimes called "Aryan") ethnically, and this *ethnic* difference is at the root of a lot of the Sunni-Shiite animosity.

While not wishing to argue the technicalities of this observation, I think that Anonymoose is closer to the point.

The Arab peoples have some religious and some cultural reasons for primitivism, but only slowly and never totally discarded modernism in the fringes of their society. Dating from Ghizzali's writings begins the end of scientific advance and innovation in the Moslem world, however.

The biggest player in all of this seems to be a lusty desire to retain a hidebound fundamentalist interpretation of even the most self-contradictory doctrine. To doggedly embrace such a dualistic and self-negating philosophy literally guarantees the mindless slaughter that has accompanied Islam's entire existence.
Posted by: Zenster || 06/23/2004 13:28 Comments || Top||

#10  LOL Zpaz!
Posted by: Shipman || 06/23/2004 14:36 Comments || Top||

#11  The 19thc century immigrations are different - bronze age and earlier conquerors didnt have steamships to carry immigrants, and generally didnt have the population bases to supply such migrations anyway. Even so Mexico, central Ameria (other than Costa Rica) and several south american countries are basically unchanged racially from pre-columbian times, even while being overwhelming Spanish speaking. Ditto little physical change in Britain from Bronze age era, despite invasions of celts, romans, anglo-saxons, etc. And the areas which were linguistically arabized were still populated by the descendants of speakers of Syriac, coptic, and punic.

Note - exceptions when hunter gathers are replaced by more agriculturalists - this is the case in africa, where the bantus displaced the pygmies and click language speakers, and some other instances. (in fact to some extent this is the explanation in North America, and the South American cone)

I suggest "Guns, Germs, and Steel" for more.
Posted by: Liberalhawk || 06/23/2004 14:46 Comments || Top||

#12  Point taken, Running Hawk. I suggest "Luck be a Lady" or "Girl from Ipanema".
Posted by: Zpaz || 06/23/2004 15:41 Comments || Top||

#13  Arabs Look at Themselves and Don't Like It

But it sure beats smelling themselves...
Posted by: Chris W. || 06/23/2004 16:04 Comments || Top||

#14  SOB
LH is an Anthro Major!
(me too, don't tell)
Posted by: Shipman || 06/23/2004 16:28 Comments || Top||

#15  Arabs Look at Themselves and Don't Like It.

World looks at Arabs and don't like 'em either.
Posted by: Ruprecht || 06/23/2004 17:05 Comments || Top||


Caribbean-Latin America
Brazil to shoot down drugs planes
Posted by: Mark Espinola || 06/23/2004 21:21 || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Thanks Brazil, enact it...enact it!! I'd rather see a flightless Brazil than a drug dominated flighted Brazil. I remember the peace WE had after ALL our planes were downed after 911, albeit so shortly!
Posted by: smn || 06/23/2004 23:47 Comments || Top||


China-Japan-Koreas
Angered Citizens Threaten Mosque in Seoul
Police on Wednesday beefed up security around the Islam mosque in Seoul after some people, agitated by the death of the South Korean hostage Kim Sun-il on Tuesday in Iraq, made threats on Muslims. Cho Min-haeng, an official of the Islam mosque in Hannam-dong in Seoul, said he received several phone calls from early in the morning from people threatening to set the mosque ablaze and kill believers of Islam. `We are terrified to receive the threatening calls", Cho said. ``We are asking believers to stay home for a while and refrain from meeting people outside." Police believe some angry citizens made the threat after watching the news of Kim’s death, but it is not likely the threats will be realized. Police stationed 15 officers at the main gate of the mosque to control the ins and outs and some 40 officers are patrolling around the mosque on shifts, according to police.``I don’t understand why Muslims should be targets of terror in Korea", said a Pakistani, who attended a dawn service at the mosque. ``Kim’s death came as a shock and surprise for all believers of Islam in Seoul as well. We hope the Korean people know that we are also very sad about Kim’s death." A Korean group of Islamic followers issued a statement in the afternoon to prevent possible terror against Muslims.``Korean people should know Islam has nothing to do with the death of Kim Sun-il. Muslim people don’t commit such inhuman acts", the group said. ``We deeply regret Kim’s death and offer condolences to his family."
Posted by: TS(vice girl) || 06/23/2004 2:50:34 PM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Guess those soldiers converting to Islam prior to shipping out didn't really make a difference did they.
Posted by: Ruprecht || 06/23/2004 15:41 Comments || Top||

#2  "I don’t understand why Muslims should be targets of terror in Korea"

Hey Paki, maybe it's because a Korean was a target of terror by Muslims?

Is today Stupid Day or something?
Posted by: Raj || 06/23/2004 15:44 Comments || Top||

#3  You notice that they don't Condemn the murder? But instead deny... deny.... deny...

Muslim people don’t commit such inhuman acts

Yes Raj, it must be stupidity day.....
Posted by: CrazyFool || 06/23/2004 15:52 Comments || Top||

#4  "I don’t understand why Muslims should be targets of terror in Korea", said a Pakistani, who attended a dawn service at the mosque. ``Kim’s death came as a shock and surprise for all believers of Islam in Seoul as well. We hope the Korean people know that we are also very sad about Kim’s death."

When I was in Okinawa, I ate at an off-base McDonalds and was amazed to discover that, in a foreign country thousands of miles from home, the food tasted exactly the same.

McDonalds has nothing on these guys for uniformity of message. I'm starting to wonder if this "religion" isn't some sort of creepy hive mind. Brrrr.
Posted by: BH || 06/23/2004 15:59 Comments || Top||

#5  Hey Raj and CF:

In Islamowhacko World, * every * day is Stupid Day !

Posted by: Carl in N.H || 06/23/2004 16:01 Comments || Top||

#6  This should tip the scale. The world has been fooling itself that the West is on a crusade against Islam, when in fact until recently ONLY the West has been providing them with understanding and protection of rights. Those days are gone, though.

Koreans have every right to be pissed off at the Islamicists for their barbaric, Neandrathal murder of the Kim SunIl.

To the Islamicists-if you think things have been getting tough in the WoT, just wait. When non-Western hostages get brutalized by Muslim jihadists--did you hear, Muslim jihadists, one more time to make sure it registers, MUSLIM JIHADISTS, you're going to see that there are plenty of non-Western people in this world just itching for a chance to string you up and give you some joy with a cattle prod and a head saw. Happened in Afghanistan this week, and the trend is likely to build. Western, Eastern, all non-Muslim desire for vengeance is every bit as firy and creative as yours, so pray quick. With no America stopping them from reaching you, you'll be shaking Allah's hands really soon.
Posted by: jules 187 || 06/23/2004 16:02 Comments || Top||

#7  Thasssss right, moose-limbs don't commit such crimes - feh. This is why this is quckly becoming a global war against Islam. Moderate moose-limbs, instead of disassociating themselves from the Izzies, are acting as enablers. So the Koreans didn't behave like Westerners when one of theirs was murderedI? Surprise! Instead of hand-wringing, they reacted with righteous outrage at such barbarism. Same thing in Thailand. jules 187 is on target.
Posted by: Rex Mundi || 06/23/2004 16:40 Comments || Top||

#8  BH,

If you want to feel creepier, check out this post by Donald Sensing. Go to the post above to see what's next now that the shock value of beheadings is wearing thin.
Posted by: Mr. Davis || 06/23/2004 17:05 Comments || Top||

#9  Fact is the religion of peace is at war with their neighbors on nearly every non-Islamic border. Its time the world stopped playign the Religion of Peace games and started calling a spade a spade. A religion is what its members make it, and they've made it a religion of conflict and silent assent.
Posted by: Ruprecht || 06/23/2004 17:05 Comments || Top||

#10  CF, first thing I noticed is that neither the Imam nor the Paki denounced the killing only that those who did it were not Muslim. Leaves the door open for blaming those wily Zionist that seem to have their finger in everything. Next week the Arab papers will carry a story that claims that JOOOOOOSSSSSS killed the Korean and not Arabs.
Posted by: Cyber Sarge (VRWC CA Chapter) || 06/23/2004 17:15 Comments || Top||

#11  A short excerpt from a very good article (thanks, Mr. Davis):

An historical, basic tenet of Islam, not just radicalized Islam, is that all human affairs of any kind must be under divine control, mediated through sharia. The separation of religion and politics that the West took centuries to develop is formally absent from Islam...al Qaeda et. al. say that the return of Islamic societies to the rule of strict sharia law is a non-negotiable goal.

UK, Canada--are you awake? Any brain activity registering in your oh-so-worldly-and-wise legislators' brains on the danger of sharia ?
Posted by: jules 187 || 06/23/2004 17:22 Comments || Top||

#12  Mr. Davis, great article. Thanks.
Posted by: BH || 06/23/2004 17:32 Comments || Top||

#13  "You notice that they don't Condemn the murder?"

Yeah, I noticed.

jules187 kicks muslim, and the stupid residing in UK, butt today! :-)

Posted by: ex-lib || 06/23/2004 17:46 Comments || Top||

#14  Mr. Davis, Donald Sensing took it down!
What does it say? Got a screen capture?
Posted by: Jen || 06/23/2004 18:05 Comments || Top||

#15  Jen, he didn't take it down. Looks like he just fixed the permalink. Here you go.
Posted by: BH || 06/23/2004 18:10 Comments || Top||

#16  Much obliged, BH!
It's a terrific piece.
Posted by: Jen || 06/23/2004 19:08 Comments || Top||

#17  After reading some absolute disturbing messages from people of Muslim faith from all over the world on a link provided by LGF's last night, and doing some real soul searching and research. As radical as this may sound. I no longer have any feeling for Muslims, they're is not peace loving Muslim in the world, there religion is a fraud. A political religious cult that has found a way to infiltrate country’s that love peace and respect one another no matter who you are. Islam has found away into our way of life and is trying to destroy it. I say KILL THEM ALL, get them the hell out of my country NOW!! I no am longer willing to give them the benefit of the doubt. These people want Christians and Buddhist and anyone else who is not of Islamic faith dead or converted. We will not even get into the Sunni or Shiite part of this that will be the next big slaughter if they have there way. We need to kill them first before they kill us. Plain and simple. They are the religion of the Sword, they think I am a sissy for being a Christian!! They have another thing coming!! They think there god is greater than my god!! They are the religion of Satan! These people are demonic! They have tipped the scale for me, I want a part of the action when it starts!!

Yes I know how I sound, and I am not proud of it. I only am looking at this from a very real perspective. And as many you have stated, it will take about 100,000 Americans to die before we start circling our wagons around a Mosque. The writing is on the wall and this tolerance bullshit is going to get us all killed. This is NOT a religion. It needs to be thought of as a cult.
Posted by: Long Hair Republican || 06/23/2004 20:00 Comments || Top||

#18  You mean they're sort of like the Branch Dividians, or should be? Maybe it's time to get Janet Reno back at DoJ if nobody likes Ashkkkroft.
Posted by: Mr. Davis || 06/23/2004 20:07 Comments || Top||

#19  You're on the right track...if Hitler had declared Naziism a religion in the 40's, we'd all be talking German now. The islamists use the tolerance of civilized people to further their agenda, which is islam. It means submit, and they won't give up this agenda until the world is under the caliphate - total islamic rule. You should all know by now that this is the religion of pieces...they aim to convert you, or kill you. It's all the same to them. Wake up pc fools.
Posted by: jawa || 06/23/2004 20:13 Comments || Top||

#20  #17 Yes I know how I sound, and I am not proud of it. I only am looking at this from a very real perspective. And as many you have stated, it will take about 100,000 Americans to die before we start circling our wagons around a Mosque.

Not much there for you to be proud of, LHR. At the same time, neither do you have much to apologize for. All of us should regret being forced into what amounts to dismissing the humanity of other people. However, militant Islam is forcing that EXACT ISSUE.

Any religion that seeks universal dominance defies the very basis of its own existence. Tolerance is what allows any and all religions to flourish. The barbarity and psychosis displayed by jihadist Islamists is a direct byproduct of so much denial from moderate and militant Muslims alike.

Witness Saudi Prince Abdullah's febrile attempts to blame al Qaeda operations within the Arabian kingdom upon Zionist interests. This adamantly blind rejection of reality is not Islamic leadership's exclusive domain. Consider the thundering silence and abject refusal of moderate Muslims to either accept complicity in the rise of Islamic militancy or at least take their religion's reformation upon themselves in some demonstrable fashion.

#17 The writing is on the wall and this tolerance bullshit is going to get us all killed. This is NOT a religion. It needs to be thought of as a cult.

As you noted, 100,000 deaths will more likely be required for the current administration to overcome its exaggerated emphasis on religiosity and get down to the business of eliminating this virulent threat. At no point should religion have entered into the prosecution of a warranted campaign against criminal elements parading under the false colors of spiritual faith.

LHR, it is here where you've ably cut to the chase. Jihadist Islam is a cult, plain and simple. Those Muslims who are unwilling, incapable or just plain stupid enough to allow their faith's hijacking by an intensely violent faction must quickly realize the importance of vigorously combatting such abomination of their spirituality or suffer being lumped together with those who seek such brutal domination.

I do not think this world will go gently into the theocratic night of Islamic supremacy. I, for one, will fight it with my dying breath. Nor do I think I am alone in saying so. The (obvious) backlash I have so often predicted is beginning to manifest and woe be it if Islam does not immediately start responding to it's demands. Reformation and rejection of universal sharia law or utter extinction are the only alternatives.
Posted by: Zenster || 06/23/2004 20:59 Comments || Top||


Europe
Israel Has Major Role in Olympic Security
Look for the Zionist-occupied kosher doughnut shop at the Acropolis...
Israel will play a major role in securing the Athens Olympics, with its navy patrolling the Greek coast and military and intelligence officers working closely with the Greek armed forces, the U.S. Army and NATO. Israel also is advising Greece on how to seal its airspace and coastal waters in the event of a terror attack, Israeli military officials said Tuesday. A seven-nation security task force, including the United States, Britain and Israel, is part of the $1.2 billion security plans for the Aug. 13-29 games. There already are ties involving the Israeli navy, its Greek counterpart, the U.S. 6th Fleet and the relevant air forces. Greece, the U.S. Army and NATO also are in close contact with Israeli intelligence, the officials said. Israel expects one of its senior officers to be at NATO’s southern command headquarters in Naples, Italy, during the games. NATO is still undecided on such close Israeli involvement, the officials added.
"They might give us cooties."
Private Israeli firms will also contribute to the Greek security effort, supplying patrol boats for the Greek navy, closed-circuit TV and other monitoring systems for the streets of Athens and other services. Israel’s Shin Bet security agency will protect the Israeli team, guarding Israeli quarters in the Olympic village, sites Israeli athletes may visit and sailing events off the Greek coast. The agency has provided such protection since the 1972 killing of 11 Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics.
By General Arafish and the PLO.
The Olympic guard detail will be Israel’s largest because of intelligence estimates of a potential terrorism against Israelis at the Athens Games, officials said. Greek officials said the foreign security agents will not be allowed to carry firearms.
"Mossad don’t need no steenkin’ weapons."
Posted by: Seafarious || 06/23/2004 5:03:29 PM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Don't need firearms when you've got a radio to call in hellfire strikes.
Posted by: JerseyMike || 06/23/2004 19:59 Comments || Top||

#2  Radio! LOL What a '90s concept.
Think point and shoot.

(emphasis on the think) :)
Posted by: Shipman || 06/23/2004 20:04 Comments || Top||

#3  I don't think the Zionist death-ray is technically considered a "firearm"....
Posted by: Scooter McGruder || 06/23/2004 20:21 Comments || Top||

#4  Damn, and I thought the Games would be unsafe!! Mossad has 'eyes' everywhere...we can all party now!
Posted by: smn || 06/23/2004 23:29 Comments || Top||


Dozen Osamanauts under surveillance in Ireland
A dozen suspected international terror suspects operating in Ireland are being closely monitored as security for the visit of the US President tightens. The suspects, linked to the al-Qaida network, are top of the surveillance list drawn up by the Garda Special Branch. Senior anti-terrorist officers have said there is no evidence indicating that any of the suspects are planning an attack on George Bush’s visit. However, the 12 suspects are known to be in regular contact with active terror cells in Europe. The main group includes Algerians, Egyptians, Libyans, Moroccans, Afghans and Pakistanis. They are believed to be mainly operating in south Dublin. Detectives from the Garda Middle Eastern desk have stepped up monitoring of the suspects in the run up to this weekend’s visit.
Posted by: Dan Darling || 06/23/2004 11:11:45 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Hope the Garda are more useful than they were with the IRA - as famous for surrounding people as the Saudis. Al-Muhajiroun have been suspiciously keen to establish a group in the Republic - was all over their website for a period of time. I think if we're reading this then they've probably already been busted.
Posted by: Howard UK || 06/23/2004 11:18 Comments || Top||

#2  hmmm Antiwar's got company
Posted by: Frank G || 06/23/2004 11:34 Comments || Top||

#3  She's probably hiding Whitey Bulger...
Posted by: Raj || 06/23/2004 12:27 Comments || Top||

#4  just do not understand that is the countrys intle know for a fact these people have contacts with known terrorists why they are still walking...if the west ever loses the WOT it will be of our own doing
Posted by: Dan || 06/23/2004 16:11 Comments || Top||

#5  One hopes the Garda are a little more competent than as portrayed in J.P Donlevy's books.....
Posted by: Anonymous5350 || 06/23/2004 19:10 Comments || Top||


Fifth Column
Trial of Terrorist Sheik’s Lawyer Opens
A lawyer who has made a career out of defending radicals went on trial Tuesday on charges she helped one of her clients - a jailed terrorist sheik - communicate with his followers. Federal prosecutor Christopher Morvillo told the anonymous jury in his opening statement that Lynne Stewart "used her status as a lawyer as a cloak to smuggle messages into and out of prison." He said she allowed Omar Abdel-Rahman to "incite terrorism." Abdel-Rahman is a blind Egyptian cleric serving a life sentence at a maximum-security federal prison in Florence, Colo., for conspiring to blow up New York City landmarks and assassinate Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. Defense lawyer Michael Tigar told the jury "in 40 years in this town, Lynne Stewart has been building for justice, not for terrorism." He described her as a "compassionate, skillful and brave lawyer" who has been falsely portrayed by prosecutors relying on erroneous and incomplete information. Tigar said Stewart, 64, will testify. She could get about 20 years in prison if convicted.

Stewart is on trial with two other defendants: a translator for the sheik and a U.S. postal worker. The three were "able to break Abdel-Rahman’s message of terror out of jail and deliver it to the very people who never should have heard it," Morvillo said. The postal worker, Ahmed Abdel Sattar, faces the most serious charge: conspiring to kidnap and kill people in a foreign country. He could get life in prison. Stewart and the Arabic translator, Mohammed Yousry, are charged with providing material support to terrorists. A lawyer for Yousry, David Ruhnke, told jurors his client was "not a terrorist, not a supporter of terrorism. ... This is a case that never should have been brought." A lawyer for Sattar was scheduled to make his opening statement Wednesday.
Posted by: TS(vice girl) || 06/23/2004 12:36:16 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Bet Lynne is wishing Mom and Dad had named her Martha. Somehow, I don't think she'll get a room with a decorating potential and a view at Lompoc.
Posted by: Mr. Davis || 06/23/2004 0:45 Comments || Top||

#2  Lynne Stewart has "issues":
http://asia.news.yahoo.com/040618/ap/nyr12106182023.html

The jury may be sympathetic, do you think?
Posted by: rex || 06/23/2004 3:24 Comments || Top||

#3  she's so darn ugly, she doesn't stand a chance.
Posted by: B || 06/23/2004 7:07 Comments || Top||

#4  May I suggest these fine lines of legal defense products.
Legal aids
Posted by: ed || 06/23/2004 8:22 Comments || Top||

#5  ugly? not sure. I'll know better after she shaves.
Posted by: Dirty Old Man || 06/23/2004 9:12 Comments || Top||

#6  what a pig! Looks like a female Ernest Borgnine

(apologies to Ernest)
Posted by: Frank G || 06/23/2004 9:54 Comments || Top||

#7  good to see we are in no danger of a sudden break out of maturity.
/sarc
Posted by: dcreeper || 06/23/2004 10:16 Comments || Top||

#8  Cut back on your carbs, eat smaller meals five times a day, and begin a rigerous cardio program...
Posted by: Dragon Fly || 06/23/2004 10:36 Comments || Top||

#9  Or just wear a burkha.
Posted by: ed || 06/23/2004 10:39 Comments || Top||

#10  Lynne Stewart, the antidote to Viagra.
Posted by: Raj || 06/23/2004 12:30 Comments || Top||

#11  Lynn Stewart: commie lawyer who openly advocates the violent overthrow of our government. Execute her, but:
Electric Chair - who could afford that electric bill?
Gas Chamber - she IS the gas chamber
Hanging - she hasn't got a neck
Lethal Injection - possible if the necessary chemicals are stored in a barge nearby
...it's a quandry folks. Got it! Lock her in cell and force her to watch Yankee Doodle Dandee until chokes on her own 5th columnist vomit.
Posted by: Rex Mundi || 06/23/2004 12:53 Comments || Top||

#12  Purdy damn good Rex M. I think Sands of Iwo Jima would prolong the agony.
Posted by: Shipman || 06/23/2004 13:25 Comments || Top||

#13  No! Wait! The DI! With Jack Webb being in
full Jack Webb lecture mode.... that's the one.
Posted by: Shipman || 06/23/2004 13:27 Comments || Top||

#14  What rodent died on her chin?
Posted by: Zpaz || 06/23/2004 13:30 Comments || Top||

#15  Ship-
"...Who is that tapping on my timber?!"

My dad was AT Parris Island when they made The DI , I think I've seen that film so many times I can recite it in my sleep. The bit about the sand flea is still priceless...

Mike
Posted by: Anonymous5341 || 06/23/2004 14:26 Comments || Top||

#16  Heavens 5341! I am hoping your dad is still around
and knows the kid who played "HillBilly" is a pawnbroker in DeLand FL.... got an autographed pikcture last month.
Posted by: Shipman || 06/23/2004 14:41 Comments || Top||


Home Front: WoT
Book by CIA official slams US war on terrorism, Iraq
EFL
A book by an anonymous CIA official titled "Imperial Hubris," describes Iraq and Afghanistan as two "failed half-wars" that have played into the enemy’s hands and complicated the war on terrorism, reports said.
BRILLIANT!!! An active spook Sh&^%$@ in our pool.
Posted by: Dragon Fly || 06/23/2004 7:17:48 PM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Here's a link to an long interview with the CIA author - excellent read, even if you cannot agree with all his points, he engages the reader. I have cut and pasted a few paragraphs to whet your interest:
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/week_2004_06_20.php#003082
Expanding Hamid Karzai's writ across the country is a recipe for violence, he writes: "After twenty years of war and ineffective or alien government in Kabul, the regions, subregions and tribes have never been more autonomously minded and jealous of their prerogatives." Democratization in Afghanistan, he believes, is a mirage. "We focus on issues that don't matter to Afghans--women's rights, democracy--and we denigrate those things that matter to Afghans--Islam, tribal and clan relationships, ethnic pecking orders," he says. Sometime soon, "you're going to have a government back in Kabul that looks like the Taliban, perhaps under a different name." The proper purpose of the 2001 war, he believes, was to use U.S. forces to annihilate the Qaeda presence in the country and do no more. With our inability to do that, our garrisoning of troops in Afghanistan and support of a weak central government of ethnic minorities provides little aside from an Islamist rallying cry against U.S. occupation--what he terms "an unmitigated defeat."

Then there's Iraq. "[T]here is nothing bin Laden could have hoped for more than the American invasion and occupation of Iraq," he writes.

All Muslims would see each day on television that the United States was occupying a Muslim country, insisting that man-made laws replace God's revealed word, stealing Iraq's oil, and paving the way for the creation of a "Greater Israel." The clerics and scholars would call for a defensive jihad against the United States, young Muslim males would rush from across the Islamic world to fight U.S. troops, and there--in Islam's second holiest land--would erupt a second Afghanistan, a self-perpetuating holy war that would endure whether or not al-Qaeda survived.

The reason we've made these mistakes, he argues, is that we fail to understand that bin Laden doesn't hate us because of our freedom. Or, rather, while he does hate the licentiousness and modernity that the U.S. represents, it's not what compels him to declare war on us. Nor does an anti-modernist bent explain bin Laden's appeal across the Muslim world. Instead, it's what Anonymous identifies as six points bin Laden repeatedly cites in his communiqués: "U.S. support for Israel that keeps the Palestinians in the Israelis' thrall; U.S. and other Western troops on the Arabian peninsula; U.S. occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan; U.S. support for Russia, India and China against their Muslim militants; U.S. pressure on Arab energy producers to keep oil prices low; U.S. support for apostate, corrupt and tyrannical Muslim governments." Combined with his charismatic biography, bin Laden's strategic success has been to frame these arguments through a Koranic prism, "to convince everyone that U.S. policy is deliberately anti-Muslim and anti-Islamic," he says. Bin Laden's critique presents in resonant Islamic terminology a coherent jihadist explanation for practically everything Muslims can find offensive about the U.S.--the most deadly slippery slope there is. And the more Americans insist on treating bin Laden's anger with the U.S. as a pure hatred of freedom, the less equipped we'll be to answer him in a battle of ideas.Without the option to work for reform, a large portion of what Anonymous advocates is essentially a policy of brutal and unforgiving war.

To secure as much of our way of life as possible, we will have to use military force in the way Americans used it on the fields of Virginia and Georgia, in France and on Pacific islands, and from skies over Tokyo and Dresden. Progress will be measured by the pace of killing …Killing in large numbers is not enough to defeat our Muslim foes. With killing must come a Sherman-like razing of infrastructure. Roads and irrigation systems; bridges, power plants, and crops in the field; fertilizer plants and grain mills--all these and more will need to be destroyed to deny the enemy its support base. … [S]uch actions will yield large civilian casualties, displaced populations, and refugee flows. Again, this sort of bloody-mindedness is neither admirable nor desirable, but it will remain America's only option so long as she stands by her failed policies toward the Muslim world.

Posted by: rex || 06/23/2004 19:51 Comments || Top||

#2  There's got to be more to this story. Maybe the administration wants to float the idea espoused by "Anonymous" that total war is necessary and the utter destruction of the Islamofascists is required to see how the public reacts. Maybe it's a Bush hater trying to stake out a position on al Qaeda that's to the right of Bush. Maybe it's Valerie Plame getting her revenge. Maybe he's a bitter, arrogant @sshole who was passed over for a promotion. Anyone else have other thoughts?
Posted by: Tibor || 06/23/2004 20:10 Comments || Top||

#3  Maybe it's Aris?
Posted by: Mr. Davis || 06/23/2004 20:12 Comments || Top||

#4  This guy is peddling a bunch of BS. His bottom line is that the US is justifiably hated in the Muslim world, which is basically what left-wingers and Muslims have been saying for a while now. The whole screed is a bunch of stream-of-consciousness bunk designed to fool people who don't know the history behind the names and places he's mentioned. He's gone completely native - all of the things leftists and Muslims attribute to American machinations are neither particularly bad, harmful to Muslims nor unique. Russia and China have killed many more Muslims than the US without incurring anywhere the same amount of oppobrium. If this guy is an active-duty analyst, let's hope that he gets retired real soon.
Posted by: Zhang Fei || 06/23/2004 20:38 Comments || Top||

#5  Anonymity makes it extremely difficult to prove his background.
Posted by: Robert Crawford || 06/23/2004 21:16 Comments || Top||

#6  The author has 22 years experience with the CIA, the latter years being spent in a unit devoted to tracking Bin Laden. It appears he very frustrated with policymakers and the Clinton and Bush Administrations alike so it's not clear to me at this point that he is a DNC operative or that he is peddling "B.S." Maybe once the book gets more press and he is interviewed more, we'll learn more about what axe he is grinding. There are a few things he brings up which I personally agree with:
a) This is not a war on generic "terror." It is specifically a war against radical Islam, and our political leaders need to properly identify the "enemy" in order for us to win. How can we win against a nameless enemy?
b) The values we think are important are not what Afghanis and Iraqis think are important. Denigrating tribal and clan relationships while promoting women's rights and democracy seems somewhat self-defeating if we want pro-America mindsets to germinate there.
c) OBL has articulated why he wants to defeat America. We have ignored his stated reasons and instead have supplanted them with our version of why he hates us[our freedom] and moreover, we think if we instill freedom around the world, OBL will be defeated. So the author is saying we are only hurting ourselves by basing a solution to terrorism on a false premise. On the otherhand if we would only listen to what OBL states, we'd realize that there is no way we can change our policies to satisfy him, and that we need to implement a "policy of brutal and unforgiving war" to keep America safe. So he's saying spreading democracy is not the answer but rather military domination. Whether that's tenable or not is questionable, but at least it makes you think about "worst case scenario" if nation building in Iraq and Afghanistan does not work.
Posted by: rex || 06/23/2004 21:35 Comments || Top||

#7  Denigrating tribal and clan relationships while promoting women's rights and democracy seems somewhat self-defeating if we want pro-America mindsets to germinate there.

I guess those tribal and ethnic relationships are the reason why Afghanistan has, for centuries, been the Eden-on-Earth that everyone wants to migrate to.
Posted by: Pappy || 06/23/2004 21:57 Comments || Top||

#8  Very troubling that this guy (we'll dub him "Clueless," seems to fit better than "Anonymous") could have ever been in a position of responsibility dealing with life/death matters -- but perhaps it also helps explain the limp and ineffective early responses in the 1990s.

The title is almost enough -- "Imperial Hubris". What sophomoric nonsense -- whether applied to the purported failed policies or the Afghanistan and Iraq operations.

Let's dutifully trudge through the indictment:

"U.S. support for Israel that keeps the Palestinians in the Israelis' thrall" (revealing that he puts this first, since it was tacked on to AQ propaganda only quite recently, and obviously in the typical transparent attempt to latch onto a broader audience -- also recall that AQ attacks on the US started and built in ferocity as .... the Palestinians were approaching having 90%+ of their populace under PA administration during the Palestinian-dynamited Oslo Process, and the White House seemed to be under the "thrall" of Yasser, who visited more than any other foreign leader during the Bubba Admin.)

"U.S. and other Western troops on the Arabian peninsula" (they were only there to protect strategic interests against obvious and even realized threats, e.g. Iraq in 1990 -- I guess to avoid annoying the august members of AQ we just have to go naked and hope for the best when it comes to global economic security)

"U.S. occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan" (ah, the Temporal Inversion Theory of Causation at work again -- sort of like saying Japan had no choice but to attack Pearl Harbor, considering the US attack on Hiroshima; so among the "policies" that provoked AQ's mounting campaign of terror against the US starting in 1993, culminating in the September 2001 attacks, were US responses in late 2001 and 2003 - WTF??)

"U.S. support for Russia, India and China against their Muslim militants" (damn! [smacks forehead] all we have to do is not support aforementioned countries against their murderous insane islamonut terrorist elements, why didn't we think of this earlier?)

"U.S. pressure on Arab energy producers to keep oil prices low" (double whopper here: OIL PRICES ARE NOT LOW, YOU FUCK-WIT -- they are the most artificially inflated commodity prices in human history, as anyone with minimal economic literacy understands; and we are to understand that AQ wants to touch off a nuke in LA Harbor or Manhattan because we -- and every other importing country -- naturally seek moderation in OPEC price fixing? So I guess we'd better acquiesce to astronomically extortionate oil prices that will cripple us and impoverish half the planet -- THAT will mollify OBL and his psychopath medievalists)

"U.S. support for apostate, corrupt and tyrannical Muslim governments." (at last, something not entirely preposterous -- but of course, AQ considers them "apostate" because while authoritarian and unsavory to varying degrees, these regimes aren't caliphates that would be far more tyrannical -- so, translated, we've pissed them off by supporting regimes far less odious than the ones they would rather see installed; and the strategic question remains, what would this genius recommend instead?)

The implicit logic of Clueless' indictment is that these policies should be changed -- as only that will address the "real" grievances that give AQ and others traction in the Muslim world. In effect, the US should experiment by obliging idiotic, baseless, or unacceptable misconceptions on the part of ignorant Muslims of ill-will, as manipulated by cynical and/or hostile regimes. Now there's realism and sophistication.

The Afghanistan discussion is equally bizarre. We did precisely what Clueless claims to recommend -- annihilated AQ's presence in the country, their ability to use it as a sanctuary. His description of our operations above and beyond that accomplished goal is way off base. Our strategic interest is negative -- that the place not again become an AQ or other terrorist sanctuary/base. That interest can be secured in various ways, and current efforts to strengthen central control and advance modern practices in urban centers may ultimately fail but is a "no regrets" tactic.

And it's topped off by the assertion that carthaginian policies of destruction will be "America's only option so long as she stands by her failed policies toward the Muslim world."

Uh, Clueless -- we don't HAVE "policies toward the Muslim world." We have policies towards governments and terrorist organizations. For example, we took down the odious and dangerous regime in Iraq, while we work closely with governments in Morocco and Malaysia on terrorism matters. All three Muslim countries. Get it?

So OBL & Co. are thrilled with us taking down Saddam? Funny, the now-dead AQ ideologist (can't recall his name, killed in Saudi Arabia last year) who wrote one of the longer and more serious recent AQ documents spent most of it obsessing in detail about the threat to AQ and its aspirations posed by democracy in Iraq. Zarqawi said similar things in his captured letter a few months back regarding conditions in Iraq, especially the planned quick transition to Iraqi sovereignty.

There's more to be said -- but why bother. Two depressing things in closing: the seemingly limitless supply of sophomoric policy critiques from senior government employees, and the seemingly insatiable media apetite for them.
Posted by: Verlaine || 06/23/2004 21:59 Comments || Top||

#9  But he's peddling a false choice, Rex. We've taken and will continue to take aggressive military action -- and at the same time use other weapons, such as democracy, as the situation permits. We can stipulate his completely implausible pseudo-sophisticated view that AQ doesn't hate freedom -- and continue to use it as a weapon, since AQ sensibly and obviously is terrified of it.
Posted by: Verlaine || 06/23/2004 22:05 Comments || Top||

#10  Let's dutifully trudge through the indictment:
The author lists what OBL hates about the USA. The author does not say OBL's reasons are valid, but rather that we cannot change our policies and therefore, we must come to the quick realization that unless we dominate the Muslim world, we will lose the war against radical Islam, because more and more Muslims are getting on board with OBL since OBL artfully presents his list of grievances against the USA in Koranic text.
Posted by: rex || 06/23/2004 22:10 Comments || Top||

#11  The author has 22 years experience with the CIA, the latter years being spent in a unit devoted to tracking Bin Laden.

How do you know this? We don't know his name; the people who claim to have vetted him could quite easily be lying. I mean, God, look at how they've covered things like the 9-11 Commission -- when the statements don't agree with them, they lie.

Also, don't forget that guy who lied about being an ex-Ranger. No one bothered to check his claims for, what, a couple years?
Posted by: Robert Crawford || 06/23/2004 22:18 Comments || Top||

#12  I would point out Osama said nothing about Israel before 9-11,that US had not invaded Afghanistan and Iraq prior to 9-11.Islamic crowds do not chant "US stop helping Russia!",they chant "Death to America".Rebuilding Afghanistan is said to be huge mistake,so what does he say we should do?If we had killed Osama and all of top leadership,leaving might have been an option.Failing to do that,killing a bunch of followers and then leaving would have proved to Osama and world,that US wasn't serious and had no stomach for war.The other choice,hunting Osama in Afghanistan hostile to US isn't serious.We are supposed to believe Osama wants US to retreat into total isolationism because some of his communiques speak of US policies,while the communiques that speak of evil Western culture and how it must be destroyed are to be ignored.

All-in-all,books sounds like sour grapes of Mid-East specialist whose advice was ignored.(Read some post yesterday discussing how some of language in book seems fake-macho/insider,some language was how someone thought tough CIA operative should sound.Grain of salt.)

Mark Steyn has excellent article on similarities to critics of Bush Iraq/WOT policy and Latin America in 70s and 80s.
Posted by: Stephen || 06/23/2004 22:25 Comments || Top||

#13  rex, I know when someone mentions talkingpointsmemo and Josh M. Marshall that they are invariably on the Left.
Period.
This book is just the latest hit piece on the Bush Administration and should join the others on the markdown table soon.
Posted by: Jen || 06/23/2004 22:34 Comments || Top||

#14  There are so many things going on in the global jihad that have nothing to do with US policy or the Zionist entity. What does the jihad in China have to do with US policies? What about Sudan's war of extermination against Christians and blacks? What about the Muslim Brotherhood's war in Egypt? What about the insurgencies in Algeria, Kashmir, Chechnya, and Thailand? No, this jihad is much bigger than Al Qaeda's war with the US, and has to be attributed to bigger causes.
Posted by: virginian || 06/23/2004 22:35 Comments || Top||

#15  Rex, the argument as presented by Marshall (whatever Anonymous' argument is) is fairly incoherent, so we'll tie ourselves in knots trying to sort it out here. But even stipulating all the contrdictory stuff and moving on to solutions, it's hard to see how our (by historical standards) rapid destruction of two enemy regimes doesn't fit into the category of "dominating the Muslim world." Amateurs talk hearts and minds and "recruits" -- professionals talk WMDs, sanctuaries, money, and aggressive actions including pre-emption to address same. We're taking prudent actions to deny the enemy heavy artillery (pre-empting or pressing most likely WMD sources), we're hardening the target, and strategically all the anti-US sentiment imaginable in weak/backward Muslim countries is irrelevant as well as mostly beyond our control.

Current policy, and specifically Iraq and Afghanistan, make good sense regardless of the operating assumption WRT AQ's true motivations or its ability to appeal (in a mostly meaningless, abstract way) to the Muslim masses.
Posted by: Verlaine || 06/23/2004 22:42 Comments || Top||

#16  I left the following comment on another site in response to a comment from a lefty.

The lefty's comment:

"It's not every day that a top CIA counterterrorism official -- still serving in the government -- is allowed to publish a book that blasts the White House.

But that's precisely what has happened.

The book is titled "Imperial Hubris." The author is a veteran of the CIA for more than two decades, and is identified only as "Anonymous."

Sources say he ran the hunt for Osama bin Laden from 1996 to 1999.

Among his charges:

. . .

He says the biggest mistake made after 9/11 was that top intelligence community leaders were not fired."

MY RESPONSE:

So a "top CIA counterterrorism official" thinks that the "biggest mistake" made after 9/11 is that he (who claims to have "ran the hunt for Osama bin Laden from 1996 to 1999") was not fired? Makes sense to me. One thing [the lefty] left out is that "Anonymous" advocates aggressively prosecuting the War on Terror and killing as many Islamofascists as fast as possible.
Posted by: Tibor || 06/23/2004 22:49 Comments || Top||

#17  a) I read about this guy on FreeRepublic last night, #11, so maybe I should post the NYT article I read there. Perhaps it has more about his background than the article under discussion here.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/23/politics/23INTE.html
...the author is identified only as "Anonymous," but former intelligence officials identified him as a 22-year veteran of the C.I.A. who is still serving in a senior counterterrorism post at the agency and headed the bin Laden station from 1996 to 1999...Under C.I.A. rules, the book had to be cleared by the agency before it could be published. It was approved for release on condition that the author and his internal agency not be identified...The book itself identifies "Anonymous" only as "a senior U.S. intelligence official with nearly two decades of experience in national security issues related to Afghanistan and South Asia." It identifies a previous book, "Through Our Enemies' Eyes: Osama bin Laden, Radical Islam, and the Future of America," as being written by the same author...

b)I think the guy is who he says he is because he needed to get approval from the CIA before he could publish the book and the CIA would have double checked his credentials, one would think.

c) #9, I think the author is saying our military action has been underwhelming and we have not established domination. As for spreading democracy, the author states it's a waste of our energies and GI lives because lack of democracy is not the problem,rather Islam is the problem because it lends itself to militantcy when a charismatic leader like OBL uses it to couch his arguments for anti-American hatred and as a rallying cry for jihad.
Posted by: rex || 06/23/2004 22:52 Comments || Top||

#18  rex, notice how everyone's a critic these days and thinks they can do a better job in the WOT than Bush?
Some write books like this clown and Dick Clarke, some post on internet forums (Ahem).
The more compelling the alleged street "creds" the more useful the idiot, eh?
Yet, Mr. Fabulous still has to remain anonymous.
And who would Mr. Fab like to see as President--Pat Buchanan?
These whiners are those with failed careers, who've seen their peers like Rumsfeld and in this case, Tenet, play starring roles while they spend the war putting toner in the copy machine.
We are at war and all Americans, no matter how savvy or well-meaning need to lead, follow or get out of the way!
This book, like the other Bush hit pieces, is "not helpful," to quote the Divine Rummy.
And Rex,hon, one of these days you're going to have to pick between Free Republic and TalkingPointsMemo...unless you're either Bill Clinton or just plain schizophrenic.
Posted by: Jen || 06/23/2004 23:03 Comments || Top||

#19  Mr. Fabulous is still one of the people who utterly failed to stop 9/11. His insight wasn't that keen in that case, was it?

Verlaine's analysis of what you quoted is spot-on. This guy's an indiot; the temporal-inversion is the cutest bit.
Posted by: Robert Crawford || 06/23/2004 23:10 Comments || Top||

#20  Actually, Jen, the TalkingPoints interview with Anonymous was posted on FreeRepublic as supplemental information on the author. Fyi, I never heard of TalkingPoints before I got the link from FreeRepublic.

I don't think[I might be wrong]that this guy wants any particular man in the Oval Office. I think he wants a President who will face the fact that this is a war on radical Islam and that there will come a day real soon when the President will need to authorize drastic military action in the ME, etc. if we are to survive as a nation. Since this guy criticizes BOTH Clinton and Bush for being too soft, I think it's unlikely he'd want John Kerry in the Oval Office.

Perhaps he is a failed CIA bureaucrat - I don't know enough about him at this point..but he sure views his project which involved tracking down OBL as a "failed" undertaking. Maybe it's this bitterness that prompted him to write this book.

I suspect this book will get interest in MSM. Hopefully he will be interviewed on FOX and we'll learn more about him and his agenda, if he has one.
Posted by: rex || 06/23/2004 23:23 Comments || Top||

#21  Look, there is a lot commented about this unknown author thus far, but the author doesn't have to be unknown. He could be like other cop-outs, quit the CIA and make a bundle writing a hate-Bush book like all the others. So, being unknown is not only disengenious, but is fool-hearted, and less profitable.

If the Iraq invasion is so much playing into OBL's hands, why is it that so many of his rag-heads are getting taken down in Iraq. OBL must not be communicating with Zarqawi very well.

Last time I checked, we have been relatively successful in chasing the Taliban and al Qaeda into the Pak-Aft mountains with no return sans periodic flare ups.

Unknown should remain that way, book wise.

Posted by: Capt America || 06/23/2004 23:30 Comments || Top||

#22  rex, no doubt--the MSpartisanM will get around to it just as soon as they've milked Bill Clinton for every drop of....whatever.
Oh, yes--they'll be delighted.
"Informed criticism" like this TRAITOR'S is not helpful to the conversation about the war right now.
Unless and until the Bush Doctrine fails, I'm going with what the Commander-in-Chief has laid out as our current war plan.
And Robert Crawford and Verlaine are exactly right; the WOT, as conducted by President Bush, is going pretty well--we've freed about 40-50 million people so far and taken a lot of IslamoNazis out of circulation, most of them permanently.
Could we do it the easy way and bomb and kill the Middle East into submission?
Sure.
It's just not our style at this juncture.
We do have to live on this planet after the WOT is over.
Posted by: Jen || 06/23/2004 23:31 Comments || Top||

#23  Yes, we have liberated 40-50 Million Muslims,Jen, but the verdict is still out as to whether or not these newly liberated Muslims will be pro-America. This author is suggesting these Muslims will still hate America because of our policies, which we cannot and should not change. The author is saying we are on a collision course with Muslims. I am not convinced that this is a hate Bush book. Evidently he criticizes Clinton as well. He is predicting a WWIII, and no, we would not want to start with drastic actions, but on the otherhand, we should be honest with ourselves when moderate approaches are not working instead of pretending they are. Anyways, we need to keep this guy on our radar-at least I will-and try to catch any TV interviews he gives. I don't know enough about him or the book to label him a "traitor" or a "visionary" for that matter.
Posted by: rex || 06/23/2004 23:49 Comments || Top||

#24  Don't you read any Iraqi blogs, rex, like Iraq the Model?
They like us fine over there.
And anytime, you hear someone say the "p" word ("policy/policies"), head for the hills, because you've got a Leftist, an appeaser and a peacenik on your hands.
That is a variant of the "Why do they hate us?" school.
Again, this is not a valid part of the war conversation and never should have been.
These bastards attacked our us and killed 3,000 of our civilians on our own soil.
And as Robert Crawford pointed out, this CIA rat wasn't part of helping to stop 9/11 from happening when he had the chance.
This guy is part of the problem, not the solution.
Posted by: Jen || 06/23/2004 23:58 Comments || Top||

#25  No I do not read any Iraqi blogs, Jen. Call me close minded but I would not trust my pet parakeet with an Arab. Words are cheap, Jen, but it's actions that really count. I have yet to see any actions on the part of Iraqis as a whole that have won over my confidence or trust in them. There is absolutely NO REASON that Al Queda operatives should not have been "outed" by Iraqis, who can easily identify them as being "outsiders" in their neighborhoods.Please don't say that Iraqis are "fearful" and that's why they are not fingering the terrorists, because thatr is being awfully naive.

Consider that ZERO GI's have been killed by Al Queda in Kurdistan, and Kurds have been subjected to genocide - if there are any Iraqis who should be fearful it is the Kurds, yes? But, no the brave Kurds, as persecuted as they have been, have a spine and a desire to help the US because they value freedom, liberation. Iraqi Arabs are not like the Kurds. Sunni/Shiite Iraqis are by and large stereotypical Arabs. They value hatred for infidels and until I see ACTIONS, not mere words, to the contrary, I have no reason to see them as allies and worthy of our trust and dreams. Call me cynical or call me a realist...your choice.
Posted by: rex || 06/24/2004 1:03 Comments || Top||

#26  rex, you're babbling and have gone completely off topic and off the comments, too.
Frankly, without being in Iraq with our troops, I can't say how much we can "trust" the average Iraqi but they formed the transition government, have helped put down the al-Sadr insurgency, and are aware that they face death from the terrorists for "collaborating" but to a much lesser extent than they faced death and torture under Saddam.
I think you're getting way too into an "Us vs. Them" scenario.
Only a small percentage of the Iraqi population are the active enemy, hence our willingness to use ex-Baathists even.
If these people are clearly not "dead-ender" jihadis, then why should we assume they're bad guys, too?
At some point in the very near future, we're going to have leave Iraq to the Iraqis and pray that democracy catches on there and that they don't revert to an Islamist dictatorship again.
As President Bush said, "Time to take the training wheels off."
We have more war still to fight.
And do yourself a huge favor: Read the Iraqi blogs--Iraq the Model, the Messopotamian, Hammorabi and Iraq at a glance (Google for links).
You won't be sorry and you'll find that those Iraqis aren't all that different from you except that they've been through a very bad time under Saddam and are grateful to the US for liberating them.
Posted by: Jen || 06/24/2004 1:22 Comments || Top||

#27  Folks, I personally know and have worked with this individual. He is also the author of "Through Our Enemies Eyes." He's not a malcontent...or a Bush basher. He has called it as he sees it. The last 2 administrations have gotten it wrong when it comes to terrorism. He is correct. And until there's access to the oval office by intel officials OTHER THAN appointed staff and bureaucractic sychophants, little will change. And that's all that needs to be said.
Posted by: TerrorHunter4Ever || 06/24/2004 9:11 Comments || Top||

#28  TerrorHunter, I don't care if he's your best friend--this kind of book now in the public domain is detrimental to the war effort and not helpful except that it helps the Enemy believe that they are winning.
The CIA has complete access to the Oval Office under President Bush which is a marked distinction to Clintoon's Administration when Slick Willy saw both CIA directors Woolsey and Tenet exactly twice in his 8 years in office.
Posted by: Jen || 06/24/2004 14:31 Comments || Top||

#29  Clueless is probably right that we may not completely understand the islamofascist/al Qaeda types. I am a little stumpted. How do they sell a philosophy that puts the suicide bomber on a religious pedestal? How do they convince a mother that it is great to send her child wrapped in a bomb to kill himself and innocent people on a bus? How do they convince people that they are doing good - not just good, but Allah's work - by blowing up fellow Muslims by the 100s in Iraq? Yeah, I admit it. I don't understand these folks, not one bit.
Posted by: Sam || 06/24/2004 14:43 Comments || Top||


Who is Ahmed Hikmat Shakir?
THE WASHINGTON POST reported yesterday morning that an Iraqi present at a key al Qaeda summit may not be the same Iraqi listed on lists of officers of the Saddam Fedayeen captured in postwar Iraq.

In Al Qaeda Link to Iraq May be Confusion Over Names, the Post broke very little new ground. Both the Wall Street Journal (which broke the story) and this magazine (which confirmed it) openly acknowledged that possibility. And John Lehman, the September 11 Commissioner who raised the issue on Meet the Press on Sunday, allowed that "still has to be confirmed."

The Post added to the debate in one interesting way when it reported that U.S. intelligence officials have "discounted" reports in this magazine that Ahmed Hikmat Shakir, the Iraqi at the al Qaeda meeting, was "under Iraqi intelligence control." That the Post has finally acknowledged the existence of Shakir might be considered a promising development, since his name has never previously graced its pages. But having whetted our appetite for substance, the Post account simply ends.

Here is the Shakir chronology as reported in this week’s WEEKLY STANDARD:

Ahmed Hikmat Shakir. Shakir, as WEEKLY STANDARD readers may recall, is an Iraqi who was present at the January 2000 al Qaeda planning meeting in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. U.S. intelligence officials do not know whether Shakir was an active participant in the meeting, but there is little doubt he was there.

In August 1999, Shakir began working as a VIP greeter for Malaysian Airlines. He told associates he had gotten the job through a contact at the Iraqi embassy. In fact, Shakir’s embassy contact controlled his schedule--told him when to report to work and when to take a day off. The contact apparently told Shakir to report to work on January 5, 2000, the same day September 11 hijacker Khalid al Mihdhar arrived in Kuala Lumpur. Shakir escorted al Mihdhar to a waiting car and then, rather than bid his guest farewell, jumped in the car with him. The meeting lasted from January 5 to January 8. Shakir reported to work twice after the meeting broke up and then disappeared.

He was arrested in Doha, Qatar, on September 17, 2001. Authorities found both on his body and in his apartment contact information for a number of high-ranking al Qaeda terrorists. They included the brother of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Abu Hajer al Iraqi, described by one detainee as Osama bin Laden’s "best friend." Despite this, Shakir was released from custody. He was detained again on October 21, 2001, in Amman, Jordan, where he was to have caught a flight to Baghdad. The Jordanians held Shakir for three months. The Iraqi regime contacted the Jordanian government and either requested or demanded--depending on who you ask--his release. The Jordanians, with the apparent acquiescence of the CIA, set him free in late January 2002, at which point he returned to Baghdad. Then earlier this spring, Shakir’s name was found on three lists of the officers of Saddam’s Fedayeen.

It’s possible, of course, that there is more than one Ahmed Hikmat Shakir. And even if the Shakir listed as an officer of the Saddam Fedayeen is the same Shakir who was present at the 9/11 planning meeting, it does not mean that the Iraqi regime helped plan or even had foreknowledge of those attacks.

The Post article mentions none of this; we learn only that these reports have been discounted by intelligence officials who talked to the Post, but never why. Here is one possible explanation, from a WEEKLY STANDARD article on Shakir last October:

Some intelligence officials believe that the Iraqi embassy employee who got Shakir his airport job may have been an agent of Saddam Hussein’s intelligence service, the Mukhabarat, and that high-ranking elements of the government, perhaps including Saddam, knew about his activities. After all, the intelligence service placed its agents liberally in Iraqi embassies throughout the world. In some cases, intelligence agents made up more than 50 percent of the employees in an Iraqi embassy. This doesn’t mean that Saddam or anyone in his government necessarily had foreknowledge of September 11; only that his intelligence service may have provided logistical support to the men who gave us September 11--again, perhaps without precise knowledge of their plans.

Others, primarily at the CIA, are more skeptical. They point out that the Iraqi embassy employee who got Shakir his job and managed his schedule was a lower-ranking embassy official. That, they argue, does not fit the profile of a Mukhabarat foreign agent. There are alternative explanations for some of the details, too. Shakir may have accompanied the September 11 hijackers to the Kuala Lumpur Hotel because they gave him a big tip or, some have suggested, because he knew the way. It’s possible that Shakir was an Iraqi who had joined al Qaeda and,
apart from his contact with the Iraqi embassy employee, had nothing to do with the Iraqi regime. The Iraqi regime, for its part, may have simply requested Shakir’s release from the Jordanian government as a routine matter.

So was Saddam Hussein involved in September 11? Evidence, at this point, is scarce . . .

There are two critical questions, then, about Ahmed Hikmat Shakir. Was the Shakir in Kuala Lumpur the same man listed as an officer of the Saddam Fedayeen? And more important, what was the relationship, if any, between the Ahmed Hikmat Shakir who is known to have been at the Kuala Lumpur meeting and the Iraqi government?

I don’t have the answer to either one. (In fact, that uncertainty is why the first chapter in my book is not a declarative statement, but a question: "Case Open: Who is Ahmed Hikmat Shakir?")

JONATHAN LANDAY, a reporter for Knight Ridder, also spoke to intelligence officials who doubt that the Shakir in Kuala Lumpur is the same one on the captured lists. "But U.S. officials told Knight Ridder on Monday that U.S. intelligence experts were highly skeptical that the Iraqi officer had any connection to al-Qaida."

But in contrast to the Post’s report, Landay attempted to answer the second of the two main questions about Shakir: Here is how Landay reported that question (with a slightly different name spelling):

Ahmad Hikmat Shakir was employed with the aid of an Iraqi intelligence officer as a "greeter" or "facilitator" for Arabic-speaking visitors at the airport at Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

In January 2000, he accompanied two Sept. 11 hijackers from the airport to a hotel where the pair met with Ramzi Binalshibh, a key planner of the attacks, and Tawfiz al Atash, who masterminded al-Qaida’s strike on the USS Cole in October 2000.

There’s no evidence that Ahmad Hikmat Shakir attended the meeting. Four days after it ended, he left Kuala Lumpur.

Several days after the Sept. 11 attacks, Ahmad Hikmat Shakir was arrested in Qatar in possession of highly suspicious materials that appeared to link him with al-Qaida.

The Qataris inexplicably released him, and he flew to Amman, Jordan, where he was arrested again. The Jordanians freed him under pressure from Iraq and Amnesty International, and he went to Baghdad.

This account is reason enough for the September 11 Commission to take a good look at Shakir. According to Landay, Shakir was "employed with the aid of an Iraqi intelligence officer" and later "accompanied two Sept. 11 hijackers from the airport to a hotel where the pair met with Ramzi Binalshibh, a key planner of the attacks, and Tawfiz al Atash, who masterminded al Qaida’s strike on the USS Cole in October 2000." After his capture in Jordan the Iraqi regime exerted "pressure" and, upon his release, he fled to Baghdad. Landay notes that no major al Qaeda operative has implicated Shakir in the 9/11 attacks and that U.S. intelligence analysts are "highly skeptical" that he played a role.

Landay may be right. There may be an innocent explanation for Shakir’s activities in Kuala Lumpur. We may see that explanation in the September 11 Commission’s final report later this summer. But that report will be incomplete if it does not attempt to answer the question: "Who is Ahmed Hikmat Shakir?"
Posted by: Dan Darling || 06/23/2004 11:00:50 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  I think that if Iraq participated in this meeting, then its participation was limited to a discussion of chemical and biological attacks separate from the 9/11 attack.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester || 06/23/2004 11:31 Comments || Top||

#2  Yeah, but you also believe what Sy Hersh writes.
Posted by: Robert Crawford || 06/23/2004 12:40 Comments || Top||


Ports ’rush’ to adopt terror security standards
EFL
... But just weeks before that deadline, fewer than 20 percent of the world’s ships and 10 percent of global ports had certified that they have made the changes called for by the new rules, according to the International Maritime Organization, which is overseeing the regulations. The agency says there are no provisions to grant extensions for countries or shipping companies that need more time. The penalty for those that don’t comply could be harsh: ranging from a ban on specific ships entering U.S. ports to an all-out trade embargo for a country whose ports don’t meet security standards. “That is a real danger,” said Hartmut Hesse, head of the IMO’s maritime security section in London. “We keep telling our member governments that this could have a huge economic impact," he said. "It may prevent ships docking in a port or even expulsion of ships from a relevant port. And the end result is no trade.”

[On Monday, IMO Secretary General Mr. Efthimios Mitropoulos said 16.2 percent of ports and about a third of all ships covered by the code were in compliance. Of the 148 countries covered by the code, the IMO has surveyed 50 and gotten only 39 replies. "I am, therefore, concerned that, unless prompt action is taken urgently by all parties concerned, we may live to regret any delay in acting,” he said in a press release. Mitropoulos also said the IMO is undertaking a review of critical shipping lanes that are vulnerable to terrorist attack to try to beef up security in those areas.]

Ports and shipping companies have been tightening security for years, but that effort took a major step when Congress enacted the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 – a series of measures designed to thwart attacks by vessels entering U.S. ports. A similar set of rules was adopted by the IMO, the United Nations organization that oversees safety and environmental regulations for the world’s commercial shipping fleet. Despite 18 months of preparation, the world’s ports have been slow to adopt the new rules and upgrade facilities. Coast Guard officials say nearly all U.S. ships and ports have already filed their security plans and expect most of them to be approved. IMO officials say many countries are simply waiting until the last minute to file the appropriate paperwork. But a series of interviews with security experts, industry, Coast Guard and port officials, and testimony at recent congressional hearings point to a number of hurdles in the effort to protect the world’s maritime industry from terrorism.
I’m betting that Yemen is not in compliance.
Posted by: Super Hose || 06/23/2004 2:36:16 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:


International-UN-NGOs
US Troops no longer immune from international war crimes commision
Posted by: CCat || 06/23/2004 13:29 || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Meaning what, we accede to demands for war crimes trials against us?



Posted by: jules 187 || 06/23/2004 16:16 Comments || Top||

#2  In light of America's de facto role as Global Cop™ and the obstructive opposition we routinely face within the UN, this is very bad news. Fortunately, the United States has no shortage of lawyers. I just hope that the losing party in any ensuing lawsuits must carry the burden of legal costs.
Posted by: Zenster || 06/23/2004 16:22 Comments || Top||

#3  I'd rather see us pull out of the UN, but that's the optimist in me...
Posted by: Raj || 06/23/2004 16:25 Comments || Top||

#4  Throw the bums out of NY, bring home all troops engaged in peacekeeping duties. Wait.

If needed: rinse, repeat...
Posted by: mojo || 06/23/2004 16:56 Comments || Top||

#5  Looks like a high level game of chicken is about to begin. Hope Kofi doesn't have automatic door locks.
Posted by: Mr. Davis || 06/23/2004 16:59 Comments || Top||

#6  UN BE GONE!
Posted by: Cyber Sarge (VRWC CA Chapter) || 06/23/2004 17:01 Comments || Top||

#7  Mojo, your plan is incomplete. If youre gonna play defense you must demand visa's from all visitors to the US and monitor those that do come in legally. Stop illegal immigration.
Posted by: Ruprecht || 06/23/2004 17:09 Comments || Top||

#8  You're right, Ruprecht. Before we throw the bums out of NY, execute a "sieze & search" entry, looking for all documents pertaining to the UNSCAM mess. Just so nothing takes a walk, y'know.
Posted by: mojo || 06/23/2004 17:16 Comments || Top||

#9  After I have cooled off I realized that we don;t have any troops for UN ‘Peacekeeping’ missions so we won’t have to worry about this too much.
Posted by: Cyber Sarge (VRWC CA Chapter) || 06/23/2004 17:22 Comments || Top||

#10  Hell, lets tape off the entire UN complex in NYC as a crime scene.
Posted by: eLarson || 06/23/2004 17:27 Comments || Top||

#11  eLarson, that's a brilliant, subversive idea of the type normally reserved for those on the left. If you know how to get your hands on about a mile of "crime scene" tape, we should give it a go.
Posted by: Tibor || 06/23/2004 17:31 Comments || Top||

#12  The key phrase in this article is "new resolution." We currently don't allow our troops to be subjected to this kind of nonsense. As long as George Bush is in the White House, I don't believe that there is anyone with a high enough testosterone level to try and arrest any US troops or officials for war crimes. With Kerry, all bets are off.
Posted by: RWV || 06/23/2004 17:34 Comments || Top||

#13  Not to worry, the UN only deploys peacekeepers once all the inhabitants are peaceful (cemetaries are very peaceful.)
Posted by: Super Hose || 06/23/2004 17:45 Comments || Top||

#14  Fortunately, the United States has no shortage of lawyers. I just hope that the losing party in any ensuing lawsuits must carry the burden of legal costs.

Why bother with such a waste of money? Give them three choices:

1. Knock off this ICC bullshit now, period.

2. Immediate disengagment from UN missions by U.S. forces and a reduction in U.S. monetary contributions.

3. Get out of NY altogether and find a new home NOT on U.S. soil.
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama || 06/23/2004 17:50 Comments || Top||

#15  A wire service story on this says the US has signed bilaterals with 90 countries to avoid prosecution of US troops. That would only leave 4 signatory countries without bilaterals with us. Kind of a nice tactic -- just modify or gut a treaty by carving out our own arrangements directly with other states. If this serves to discourage US contributions to "peace-keeping" activities, and force others to start being adults (if only), then it will be a good thing.
Posted by: Verlaine || 06/23/2004 18:00 Comments || Top||

#16  Troops currently on Peacekeeping missions are covered by prior resolutions. Such troops are in Bosnia, Kosovo, etc. As soon as the prior resolutions expire I expect we'll be withdrawing our troops, unlike Spain which couldn't even wait for June 30. Let's see how Jacquestrap and Gerd like them apples.
Posted by: Mr. Davis || 06/23/2004 18:00 Comments || Top||

#17  Someone throw me a clue, please!
Why are we seeking immunity if we're not a signatory to the ICC?
(Whose idea was this?
I smell something bad and I think it's French, too!)
Posted by: Jen || 06/23/2004 18:01 Comments || Top||

#18  Jen,

The ICC is international law, now. My understanding is a suit could be brought against an American and if that American went to a signatory country could be apprehended by local authroities and conveyed for prosecution in the ICC sort of like what they tried to do to Pinochet in England. I believe Kissinger and McNamara have such warrants outstanding.
Posted by: Mr. Davis || 06/23/2004 18:06 Comments || Top||

#19  OK, thanks, Mr. Davis...but (I went to law school just long enough to be dangerous), there still is really no such animal as "international law" and what you seem to be telling me is that the ICC has to get jurisdiction over the wanted "criminals" like Kissinger and Ariel Sharon, so the trick is, "Don't ever go to the Hague on vacation."
I noticed that Milosevich didn't overly suffer for his little trial in the ICJ dock, either.
Posted by: Jen || 06/23/2004 18:10 Comments || Top||

#20  So...does this mean we can arrest the entire UN staff as corrupt? Or at least the ones in our country, which is like, all of them anyway.
Posted by: Silentbrick || 06/23/2004 18:13 Comments || Top||

#21  So what happens our troops are turned over to the E.U. or U.N. if a 'crime' is commited? NOT kosher!

It's bad enough U.S. troops are stuck in a hot, humid terrorist rat hole like Iraq and now this?

What numb numb allowed this sellout of our nation's servicemen?
Posted by: Mark Espinola || 06/23/2004 18:21 Comments || Top||

#22  Jen,

I'm not a lawyer either, I just pay them or play them on the internet. This topic is also on Page 2 with a thread you might enjoy. #19 in particular deals with Tony Blair's vacation hot spots.
Posted by: Mr. Davis || 06/23/2004 18:29 Comments || Top||

#23  Actually, there is a formal law on the federal books that explictly orders the President to use any force necessary to rescue any military personnel taken captive and transported to the ICC. Bi-partisan effort back in Clinton's days. That force requirement is stated in such a way as to require military intervention if it should prove useful.
Posted by: Anonymous5348 || 06/23/2004 19:00 Comments || Top||

#24  An important point about this nonsense is who *exactly* is given "standing" to sue for arrest. I recall that when Belgium briefly had a law like this, some Belgian lawyer immediately sued Bush on the grounds that he had done something somewhere. Noteworthy, this lawyer had never been there, and had not been retained by anyone there, but in Belgium, had "standing" to bring the case anyway.
Posted by: Anonymoose || 06/23/2004 19:06 Comments || Top||

#25  I stand corrected, the law was in fact enacted in the past 2 years : One month after the ICC obtained the needed number of signatures for its establishment in July 2002, Congress passed a law, the American Service Members Protection Act, prohibiting any American cooperation with the ICC, and authorizing the executive to order the use of force to "free" any American citizen or resident who might be taken into ICC custody. This law has been mocked by critics as the "Hague Invasion Act."

Still it did enjoy significant bi-partisan support.
Posted by: Anonymous5348 || 06/23/2004 19:07 Comments || Top||

#26  just kick the un out..let the EU pay the majority of the budget..it could become the league of nations for the 21st century..
Posted by: Dan || 06/23/2004 19:32 Comments || Top||

#27  I have been listening to Michael Savage today. Say what you will about Savage, he enjoys considerable influence on conservative voters in America. Savage was furious about this latest Bush "cave-in" and there is no better way to describe this action.

Savage's point was well taken ie. GI's are paid poorly to do a dangerous job in response to the direction of the Commander-in-Chief, and at the very least this Administration should give the military 150% support and protection from frivolous lawsuits, which will surely come up, you can bet the farm on that. Savage says this is the final straw that breaks the camel's back...he will not vote this November because both Bush and Kerry are inferior candidates.

When right wing talk show hosts like Savage begin withdrawing support from Bush, this can decide the election. I think the WH should pay close attention.
Posted by: rex || 06/23/2004 19:37 Comments || Top||

#28  I'm not a lawyer either, I just pay them or play them on the internet.

Did you stay at a Holiday Inn Express? ;)
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama || 06/23/2004 21:20 Comments || Top||

#29  "Savage was furious about this latest Bush "cave-in" and there is no better way to describe this action."

If that's what Savage thinks, then Savage is an idiot. How is this a Bush cave-in? This is an annually renewed immunity, voted on by the Security Council. Over the last several weeks, it has become clear that the U.S. does not have the votes necessary to pass, same type of deal as the resolution we sought before the start of hostilities in Iraq. So now that we don't have the votes, the request has been withdrawn.

American troops are protected by various means, not the least of which is their ability to defend themselves. Now, American businessmen who find themselves caught in some ICC prosecution are a different story.
Posted by: mva30 || 06/23/2004 22:16 Comments || Top||

#30  BAR, over my head.
Posted by: Mr. Davis || 06/23/2004 22:36 Comments || Top||

#31  American troops are protected by various means, not the least of which is their ability to defend themselves
What "various means" are at the disposal of ordinary GI's to protect themselves from anti-American frivolous legal cases that will be trumped up against them?

That you don't see this as a cave-in is strange. We could have told Kofi Annan that we will immediately pull out our troops from all regions that they are deployed along with other UN peacekeepers. We could have told Kofi that we will hold back all financial contributions to the UN, including the $15 Billion that we have promised to throw at Africa to fight AIDS. We could have told the Security Council that we have very sensitive information that incriminates many of them in the oil-for-food scandal and that we are prepared to release this information post-haste. Those are a dew things we could start with to "persuade" Kofi and our "allies" to see this issue our way.
Posted by: rex || 06/23/2004 23:06 Comments || Top||

#32  'We could have told Kofi Annan that we will immediately pull out our troops from all regions that they are deployed along with other UN peacekeepers."
rex, actually, that's exactly why we did do this!
(The U.S. has been doing the lion's share of all the military work for the U.N., too.)
To remove our forces from having to join any more peacekeeping missions is a feature not a bug--and we made it clear that should the ICJ try to grab our soldiers for "legal reasons," that we're prepared to use force to come and get them.
(You might say that President Bush has rope-a-doped his enemies yet again by getting them to vote on counting us out!).
As for the UN Oil-for-palaces scandal, hold on.
That's coming.
Paul Volcker and his committee are preparing an American criminal investigation as we type.
Even though the UN used the French/Dutch bank ParisBas for the scam, I'm willing to bet that most of those billions are still in U.S. banks given the world financial markets.
Posted by: Jen || 06/23/2004 23:20 Comments || Top||

#33  Given the so-called moral authority of international bodies, this is not a good sign. However, we were pretty much fighting an uphill battle, given the B.S. hurled by main stream media.

We presently have bilaterial exemption agreements with 90 countries, and that effort will continue.

As the de facto world's cop, we need to set preconditions for each future intervention. That being exemption from the ICC.
Posted by: Capt America || 06/23/2004 23:36 Comments || Top||

#34  What the hell are we supposed to do when this "loose Wing Nut" Michael Savage spews this disinformation and infuriates the uninformed?

Something to note about Savage, very much ego driven. If it's not about him then he pisses all over it.
I think he gets his info from the NY Times web site or CNN, the exact web sites he loathes and then he starts to spew uncontrollably.
So what can you do when you give an idiot a mic and 10 million listeners?
Posted by: Long Hair Republican || 06/23/2004 23:48 Comments || Top||

#35  The Republican Party has conservative talk radio to thank for its majority win of Congress and the Senate. Like it or not that's a documented fact. When Savage, a pro-Bush talk radio host, comes out and says he will not vote for Bush because he is pissed with Bush's betrayal of the military, it would be unwise for the WH to ignore the message. You are right Savage has influence over 10 Million Americans and believe me, they are LOYAL listeners.

So I think it would behoove the State Department-calling Colin Powell- to get in front of a microphone a.s.a.p. and put information out to the public about how the US government will support the military come hell or high water against any frivolous lawsuits promoted in a UN kanagroo court. That's my suggestion. Savage also recommended that GI's threaten not voting for Bush unless he does right by them about this issue.

I support Savage on this point. State Department better get off its over paid a** and get agreement from every Third World hellhole that we give foreign aid to and get their signature on binding contracts that they will NEVER press charges against our GI's for perpetuity.

Posted by: rex || 06/24/2004 0:43 Comments || Top||

#36  rex, buy a vowel, would you?
I listen to Savage pretty regularly myself and he's gonna vote for Bush.
At least once a day, he'll bash Bush and say he's withholding his vote "as someone who cares" about this country.
What's he gonna do? Vote for Kerry or Nader? Stay home?
Get real.
Savage's schtick is that he shocks and he mocks.
He is one extreme Right Wing voice--he stimulates conversation, but in his case, much of it isn't thoughtful and getting the extreme views out there helps the rest of us land on more sensible and practical solutions.
It's fun to hear him yell and abuse callers, but take him at his word?--No, thanks.
Posted by: Jen || 06/24/2004 0:49 Comments || Top||


U.S. Drops U.N. Bid for War Crime Shield
UNITED NATIONS (AP) - Facing strong opposition, the United States announced Wednesday it was dropping a resolution seeking a new exemption for American peacekeepers from international prosecution for war crimes.
This is really bad.
Posted by: JerseyMike || 06/23/2004 1:30:32 PM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Jersey--

Yes, bad for the UN, if W had the guts to make it so. But he probably won't.

In practice it makes no difference however. Let the ICC--to which the US is not a signatory--try to enforce its subpoenas and see what happens.
Posted by: BMN || 06/23/2004 16:18 Comments || Top||

#2  At first I was bummed and angered by this... but then I realized something...

If things do pan out on the bad side, ie, Soldiers being tried in the ICC as a sort of Blackmail or Revenge tactic, then the UN will be in a world of hurt.

And we might even see a bigger move AWAY from the UN.

Who knows.
Posted by: Anonymous4021 || 06/23/2004 16:24 Comments || Top||

#3  not to mention that the US has a open resolution to invade the Hauge if necessary to free our citizens held in the ICC
Posted by: Sam B || 06/23/2004 16:26 Comments || Top||

#4  Let's see if Flipper is able to hang himself on this issue.
Posted by: someone || 06/23/2004 16:53 Comments || Top||

#5  The law of unintended consequences will bite the UN over this. There'll be a time when they need American help (after all, when was the last time the Euros or anyone else actually achieved anything on the international scene) - and they'll either rethink this ICC routine, or the US will just let the phone ring. They do have call-display at the White House, don't they?
Posted by: Patrick || 06/23/2004 17:38 Comments || Top||

#6  ..or the US will just let the phone ring.

Don't count on it. Too many people (left and right alike) seem to think that the corrupt UN has some sort of value to add, and are willing to go back to it time and time again in futile attempts to get something noteworthy done.
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama || 06/23/2004 17:54 Comments || Top||

#7  Actually the ICC is based on treaty law. Since the U.S. is not a party to the treaty it isn't subject to the ICC provisions no matter what the U.N. or anyone else contends. Plus U.S. law requires the President to send armed forces to rescue any and all citizens from the ICC. Lastly the U.S. has bilateral treaties with more than 100 countries against subjecting U.S. soldiers to the ICC. The loser here is really the U.N., but we already know it's a loser anyway.
Posted by: Laddy || 06/23/2004 19:41 Comments || Top||


U.S. Offers UN Compromise on Immunity for Its Troops
The United States, hoping to avert a defeat, floated a compromise proposal on Tuesday to seek just one more renewal of a U.N. resolution exempting American soldiers from international prosecution. But it was uncertain whether the proposed change in the resolution on the International Criminal Court would be enough to win U.N. Security Council approval due to international fury over prisoner abuse at Iraq’s Abu Ghraib detention center.

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan last week urged council members to oppose the resolution...The United States has proposed asking the council to renew an existing exemption, which expires on June 30, once more, in return for which the United States would pledge not to ask for another extension next year, Cunningham said.

This new "compromise" stinks. What happens to our GI’s after June 30, 2005??? Why doesn’t the US tell Kofi and his thug pals at the UN to put their international prosecution threats where the sun doesn’t shine?
Gorsh, guess we won't be helping the U.N. in any more peace-keeping missions, will we?
Posted by: rex || 06/23/2004 1:52:24 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  The UN will forget all about this issue when a number of their members get boomed or attacked in some way, then it is a different tune.
Posted by: Alaska Paul || 06/23/2004 2:16 Comments || Top||

#2  Under no fucking circumstances should we crawl and cringe to Kofi for anything. And I would not blame any American serviceman who refused to obey orders that would inevitably lead to him facing a UN kangaroo court as a "war criminal".
Posted by: Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) || 06/23/2004 2:53 Comments || Top||

#3  There's a 0% chance that any US soldier will be subject to ICC perprosecution in the forseeable future.

Unless Flipper wins, of course.
Posted by: someone || 06/23/2004 2:54 Comments || Top||

#4  If the RFG (Rich French Guy) gets elected, the first thing I predict is a really large rash of senior-officer resignations.

I remember reading somewhere that during Bubba's administration, the Friends of Hillary who'd already succeeded in forcing co-ed basic training in the rest of the military decided to go after the Marine Corps. According to this article, fifty Marine general officers threatened to resign en masse if this nonsense wasn't abandoned.

I may be wrong, but fifty generals has to be about ALL the generals in the USMC. Even if it wasn't, the gesture got the attention of the right people. Jean-Pierre's expressed desire to subject American military personnel to Kofi's "justice" is a MUCH bigger issue, and I think it will have a much bigger effect on the officer corps' personal career decisions.
Posted by: Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) || 06/23/2004 3:06 Comments || Top||

#5  While it is true that a RFG win in November may hasten the departure of officers, as of June 2005 whether it's RFG or GWB in the Oval Office, lots of volunteer grunts will depart for a different reason...ie. imminent prosecution by the anti-American hyenas in the IWC... this "compromise" stinks.
Posted by: rex || 06/23/2004 3:15 Comments || Top||

#6  Rex: that shouldn't be a problem, as the Dems are on record as demanding that we reinstate the draft.
Posted by: B || 06/23/2004 7:17 Comments || Top||

#7  Being filled with Solomonic wisdom today, may I suggest a compromise? Withdraw all US support (personnel, equipment, financial, and political) for "peacekeeping" and other UN operations. Get our people out of the Balkans, Sinai, Liberia, Haiti and wherever the hell else the US has no interest. Of course the US will also need to form a group (with arrest and trial powers) to file charges of UN abuse, starting with UN peacekeeping child rape and prostitution and UN financial corruption.
Posted by: ed || 06/23/2004 10:15 Comments || Top||

#8  What's this compromise crap? The UN isn't an organization that's worth coming to a compromise with. If Kofi wants to go through with this, then he needs told to give Bekins a call, and make arrangements accordingly. (Hopefully Bekins does international moves; if not, then some other outfit will have to be hired)
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama || 06/23/2004 11:25 Comments || Top||

#9  Ricky, meh theres nothing wrong with coed basic training. There IS something wrong with permitting the idea that it is 'OK' for women to be weaker than men. let 'em in, but they better be worth the time/$ spent training
Posted by: Dcreeper || 06/23/2004 11:34 Comments || Top||

#10  Rex, there aren't going to be any prosecutions, ever. (It would be frankly unconstitutional to allow them, for one thing.) In a year's time we'll finagle yet another work-around, just not this one. And so on, until the bilateral arrangements cover everything.

Unless Flipper is elected, of course.
Posted by: someone || 06/23/2004 12:09 Comments || Top||

#11  What's this horseshit?

You either exempt, permanently, or you supply your own troops for peacekeeping duties. End of choice. Decide now.

Can't we accidentally drop a 500 lb'er on the ICC building?
Posted by: mojo || 06/23/2004 12:37 Comments || Top||

#12  BTW, doesn't the US Constitution NOT ALLOW for US citizens and soldiers to be tried by the courts of other nations?
Posted by: Anonymous4021 || 06/23/2004 12:47 Comments || Top||

#13  AP is reporting on Drudge that the US has withdrawn its immunity application.
Thats a really bad idea and will be sure to create major headaches in the future if true
Posted by: JerseyMike || 06/23/2004 13:27 Comments || Top||

#14  A4021 - that was my understanding. The Supremem Court is the highest authority by definition in the constitution. Agreed: IMNSHO looks like the EUniks et al will be getting all the peacekeeping work - we're outta there
Posted by: Frank G || 06/23/2004 13:31 Comments || Top||

#15  W, if you have your opperatives out there, DON'T compromise on this issue. If you do you'll have every podunk malcotent in the world dragging our soldier into these kangaroo courts. Don't just say no say HELL NO.
Posted by: Cyber Sarge (VRWC CA Chapter) || 06/23/2004 13:43 Comments || Top||

#16  The bad part is that the Supreme Court has, more and more often, cited international or european law instead of our own consitution abandoning our own consitution for 'diversity' and 'compromise'... and allowing treaties to trump our own consitution.

What we need to do is tell Anon to take a flying fark at a rolling doughnut -- and to get the hell out of our country.
Posted by: CrazyFool || 06/23/2004 14:08 Comments || Top||

#17  Beyond doubting the UN because of Oil-For-Food corruption, hypocrisy, and resolutions with no resolve, the UN is most most unfit to be in charge of such prosecutions because it is so saturated, POISONED, with anti-Americanism that not convicting an American of SOMETHING, ANYTHING, would fall into the same probability ratio as seeing a pig fly.
Posted by: jules 187 || 06/23/2004 14:36 Comments || Top||

#18  You don't think that there will be prosecutions? Just wait until some ultra-left Spanish magistrate arrests some ex- or current GI on his honeymoon and remands him to the ICC for the war crime of merely having been in Iraq/Afghanistan/Panama, etc. I think that I'm going to put this in the "Futures" section.
Posted by: 11A5S || 06/23/2004 14:47 Comments || Top||

#19  There is no need for a futures section. Just replace Bush with Blair, Spain with Greece.
Blair faces war crimes suit

and don't forget that last year, a war crimnes suit was filed in Belgium, who claimed world wide jurisdiction. And if any country should know about war crimes, it's Belgium who killed at least 10 million Congolese for the personal benefit of King Leopold 100 years ago.

War Crimes Suits Filed In Belgium Against Bush, Blair

Nope, no political use of Kangaroo courts. Nope.
Posted by: ed || 06/23/2004 18:07 Comments || Top||


Southeast Asia
MILF gets 6 months to come clean on JI
Unrest in the Philippines will increase in coming months as a militant group steps up efforts to undermine the government of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, the country’s national security adviser said on Wednesday. Norberto Gonzales told Reuters in an interview the threat from the group linked to the political opposition had eased for now, but would probably strengthen, adding to security threats from communist and Muslim rebels. "The problem lingers and you will see an increase in the so-called parliament of the streets -- there will be demonstrations, lots of filing of cases of corruption," he said. "We know more or less the persons or persons behind it. This is a group that has no following within the armed forces at all."

Three explosive devices found and dismantled in Manila earlier this week raised concern that groups linked to the opposition were trying to undermine Arroyo, who is expected to be officially proclaimed president by Congress on Thursday after narrowly winning the May 10 elections. Three men suspected of planting the devices, one in an exclusive residential area, were arrested on Tuesday in a raid on a house in a town east of Manila, the military said on Wednesday. Bomb-making materials and guns were also found, it said. Gonzales said the group that planted the devices was likely to renew attempts to destabilise the new government after Arroyo is sworn in for a new six-year term, although it had apparently given up attempts to stop her proclamation. "Most of the plans for destabilisation have more or less fizzled out," said Gonzales. "We have not monitored any assembly that is being held to cause us to worry." He said the group did not have enough support to launch an uprising similar to that by disgruntled army officers that Arroyo faced down last July.

Gonzales also said the new government would take a tough line against Muslim rebels believed to be sheltering foreign militants in the country’s south, demanding that they expel suspected members of the Jemaah Islamiah movement by the end of the year. Gonzales said the new government would give leaders of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), the largest of four Muslim separatist groups, less than six months to expel around 30 JI members believed to be using its hideouts in troubled Mindanao island in the country’s south. "We can’t wait too long," he told Reuters. "It is sufficient that we give the MILF leadership sufficient time. It is to their best interest to keep the JI group away as quickly as possible."

Four MILF members arrested at a military checkpoint two months ago admitted they were getting money and instructions from an Indonesian JI leader, military officials said. Gonzales said government would not be convinced by the MILF statements that it has no active links with either JI or al Qaeda unless the rebels "do something about it." He said some JI members fought side-by-side with MILF fighters when the military launched attacks in 2000. "It’s probably an emotional issue to some elements in the MILF, so I don’t know how they will handle it," he said. "But, I think the MILF is fully aware that they cannot allow the JI to continue staying in their territories."
Posted by: Dan Darling || 06/23/2004 11:03:17 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  This title sounds waaaayyy dirtier than it should.
Posted by: BH || 06/23/2004 15:02 Comments || Top||

#2  They need to change their acronym so hot moms everywhere don't get tainted
Posted by: Frank G || 06/23/2004 15:23 Comments || Top||

#3  I love it when a hot MILF gets nice and clean for me...
Posted by: Chris W. || 06/23/2004 15:47 Comments || Top||


NPA may be using child soldiers
Washington has alerted the Philippines to a recent practice of terrorist groups of increasing their ranks by abducting children to become soldiers and slaves. The United States State Department reported that terrorist organizations in Sri Lanka, Colombia, Uganda, and Nepal are now practicing this heinous system and terrorists in the Philippines may not be far behind. John Miller, director of the U.S. State Department’s Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons, said, “There are a number of terrorist groups in the Philippines that may be abducting individuals especially children to augment their needs.” Miller admitted, however, they have yet to receive specific information on child abduction by Philippine terrorists. Miller was speaking in Washington through a video teleconference with Manila-based reporters at the U.S. Embassy Wednesday morning. The Armed Forces had reported that the NPA already has younger teenage combatants with several having been captured, but the communists continue to deny they have such child soldiers.
Posted by: Dan Darling || 06/23/2004 10:55:19 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:


Hambali providing intel on JI
Hambali, once dubbed the face of terror in South-East Asia, is providing vital information to security agencies on the operations of Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda movement in the region. It is learnt that the Indonesian preacher, who had plotted and carried out a militant campaign, has told his interrogators how al-Qaeda had funded the Jemaah Islamiah, the extremist group he headed that has been blamed for church bombings in Jakarta and the deadly 2002 Bali bomb blasts. “He is talking but we want to know more,” said a regional security source who has been receiving periodic reports from the American interrogators. However, security sources declined to reveal details of the funding as investigations were still in progress.
"We can say no more!"
Hambali, or Riduan Isamuddin, who was the brains behind the fanatical JI that has been accused of carrying out a series of church bombings in the Indonesian capital and the Bali blasts that killed over 200 people, is also said to have spoken about his meetings with Khalid Sheikh Mohamed, a brother-in-law of Osama. Khalid, who has since been arrested, allegedly delivered money to Hambali to finance his JI operations. The sources said that the Americans, who had yet to allow regional security forces to quiz Hambali, wanted to know how Hambali arranged for militants from Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore and the Philippines to travel to Afghanistan via Pakistan. “Hambali was said to have helped provide these extremists with forged documents purportedly for them to study religion in several madrasah in Pakistan,” a source said. 
Forged documents and Pakistan do seem to go together.
In Afghanistan and in the southern Philippines, these terrorists were given arms training before they embarked on their series of bombing campaigns in Indonesia and the Philippines. The intelligence agencies also want to hear from Hambali whether training camps were set up in Indonesia for recruits in what were known as Camp Bushra and Camp Abubakar. It is understood that the intelligence agencies were also trying to find out who the other key al-Qaeda leaders that Hambali had met and their roles. 

Intelligence sources said the interrogation focused on Hambali’s tactical support, financial capabilities, cell network and associated organisations of JI in the region. “The agencies are also keen to trace the JI’s links to the MILF (Moro Islamic Liberation Front) and the Abu Sayyaf in the Philippines,” a source said. The source said this was vital as two of the JI’s most wanted men, Malaysians Dr Azahari Husin and Noordin Mohd Top, were still at large and posed a serious threat to the region. It is learnt that authorities probing Hambali’s activities in the region recently seized several of his personal belongings, including photographs taken before his capture. The Star managed to obtain a new photograph of Hambali who had used it to get a fake Spanish passport in his bid to elude the police dragnet. Gone were the beard, spectacles and white skullcap he had used at the time of his arrest in Thailand last August. In the photograph, which has never been published, Hambali, known to be a master of disguise, is pictured wearing a Western-style jacket. Not only did he change his hairstyle, he also changed his name to Daniel Suarez Naviera.
Now he's a captured master of disguise.
Posted by: Dan Darling || 06/23/2004 1:40:29 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  They must have tickled his feet until he coughed the intel up.
Posted by: Capt America || 06/23/2004 23:42 Comments || Top||


Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Iran parades blindfolded Brit soldiers on beach
Fury erupted yesterday over new TV footage of eight blindfolded British servicemen held in Iran. The sickening scene showed the captives marching single-file along a baking hot beach. It was their second day of public humiliation since they were held on Monday after being accused of straying on to the Iranian half of a waterway bordering Iraq. The beach is thought to be near where their boats were seized. The six Royal Marine Commandos and two Royal Navy sailors were forced to tramp up and down first hands on heads — then holding the shoulders of the man in front. Looking scared and disorientated, several of the captives stumbled into each other during the cruel charade filmed for Iranian TV. The ordeal sparked international condemnation as a promise to free the men was broken. At midday Iran had claimed the eight were free to go. But the deal stalled.

Last night the Foreign Office announced that the men would finally be freed this morning — if Iran sticks to its pledge. The international incident had threatened to become a full-blown crisis. Previous footage of the eight in blindfolds had already caused a storm. Two senior NCOs among them were forced to make a grovelling TV “confession”. A Foreign Office spokesman said last night: “We are deeply concerned to see these sort of pictures for a second day.” For the first time, UK diplomats were let into the Bandarmahshar army base where the men were held. But they were still not allowed to see them. The team had fallen into the hands of the hard-line Revolutionary Guards — an elite military unit who answer only to Iran’s leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Former SAS chief General Sir Michael Rose told The Sun: “The Geneva Convention was agreed to stop this sort of thing happening.” Top analyst Major Charles Heyman said: “There’s no military reason to march men up and down a beach blindfold. It can only have been done to humiliate them.”

It emerged yesterday that one of the group’s leaders, dad-of-two Chief Petty Officer Robert Webster, is a reservist and normally a firefighter at Newcastle airport.
Two others had been named as married Royal Marines Sergeant Thomas Harkins and ex-Scottish amateur boxing champ Marine Scott Fallon. A fourth was revealed yesterday as Royal Marines Corporal Chris Monan, 26, of Marske, Cleveland. The MoD insists the men were on a routine trip when they were forced on to the shoreline and arrested.
Posted by: TS(vice girl) || 06/23/2004 9:57:47 PM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Awfully quite in the House Of Commons...Hmmmm, all those 'lefty' Libs were so outspoken during the Abu Graib incidents, but I understand...
Posted by: smn || 06/23/2004 22:12 Comments || Top||

#2  This can't be a GC violation -- no panties.
Posted by: Robert Crawford || 06/23/2004 22:30 Comments || Top||

#3  According to Koranimal law, now that the British feel humiliated, they now have the right to boom the Grand Mosque in Tehran during Friday prayers. That's the law. Right?
Posted by: ed || 06/23/2004 22:50 Comments || Top||

#4  I don't know where the mad mullahs are going with this, but I don't care for it at all--this was an act of war.
Posted by: Jen || 06/23/2004 22:53 Comments || Top||

#5  Obviously the Iranians consider coalition forces as hostile.
Posted by: Lucky || 06/23/2004 22:58 Comments || Top||

#6  Oh I dunno Jen. Giving the west a pretext might not be such a bad thing in the long run.
Posted by: AzCat || 06/23/2004 22:58 Comments || Top||

#7  Their goal is simple: call our bluff.

They know nothing will happen to them, that they've sucessfully paralyzed the West.
Posted by: Robert Crawford || 06/23/2004 23:04 Comments || Top||

#8  AzCat, can you say causus belli? Oh, yes!
These people must be "regime changed" one way or the other.

And RC, the mullahs will settle for getting Blair to do a Zapatero with British forces...for now.
Posted by: Jen || 06/23/2004 23:06 Comments || Top||

#9  don't expect any Sir Lancelot chivalry here. The Brits are going to back down and "boot lick"! I would not be surprised if the Brits convoyed up the Iraqi side of the waterway (on land) after this incident.
Posted by: smn || 06/23/2004 23:15 Comments || Top||

#10  Prediction: Tomorrow's (today actually) video from Iran will show the Brit hostages in orange jumpsuits.
Posted by: Classical_Liberal || 06/23/2004 23:24 Comments || Top||

#11  I tend to agree with #7. Iran knows that they are safe and can use this event to beat their chests and look good to their Muslim brethern. They see[quite rightly] that both the US and the UK have their hands full right now with Iraq and Afghanistan; that both Blair and Bush are up for re-election and don't want undertake any new military "projects" in the ME because they need to focus on being re-elected.

After another day or two of Iranian preening and chest beating theatrics, the UK boys will be released unharmed and with little fanfare. I think we need to grit our teeth and turn the other cheek on this one. I think we need to pick our battles and this is not a good time to respond to Iran with force.
Posted by: rex || 06/23/2004 23:33 Comments || Top||

#12  Gee, rex, I hope this story's still up when Howard UK and Bulldog wake up in a few hours...we'll see if they'd like to see Britain be so passive.
The Iranians have committed an act of war, partly in retribution for Britain taking our side at the IAEA meeting last week in which Iran was severely reprimanded for their pursuit of nukes.
(Britain tried to get in bed again with France and Germany to run interference for Iran.)
Blair is in much more political trouble in Britain on several fronts--not just his support for us in the WOT, but on domestic issues and on wanting Britain to sign the EU Constitution.
As for President Bush, the current theories that he is directing US policy "softly" right now to ensure his re-election is BULLSHIT.
Everything that President Bush has done has been politically risky and bold and now is not the time for either power to "go wobbly."
Bush put Iran in the Axis of Evil for a reason and nothing's changed.
In fact it's worse.
This incident with the Brits just shows that some in Iran think they're so eager to get it on that they'll start the action.
If you're old enough to remember, this is exactly how the 1979 embassy hostage situation started which Jimmy Carter (scumbag!) should have answered with a firm and overwhelming military response.
In fact, Iran is betting that Bush is just like Carter...HEHEHEH.
Wrong, assclowns.
Posted by: Jen || 06/23/2004 23:51 Comments || Top||

#13  I can appreciate your desire to take on Iran- I'd love to see that happen, believe me, Iran should be in our sights - BUT I don't think this is the time to follow through. When we take on Iran, it should be at a time of our choosing with pre-planning and not as a knee jerk reaction to Iran basking in their 15 minutes of fame and glory. I think everyone with half a brain knows that Iran would be mincemeat if we chose to respond with force. So such time that we think the UK boys are in danger, I feel we should let Iran strut and beat its chest like the hollow banana republic that it is, while we make a mental note to blast these little creeps to Allah in another year or two.

I don't see George Bush taking "risks" in recent months, nor should he, quite frankly. He needs to hand over sovereignity to Allawi on June 30th and make it a happy, happy occasion. He needs to start spending more time kissing babies in Kansas City and doing press conferences about the strong economy. To take on another foreign war at this time would be an election disaster IMHO. Unlike yourself, I think most Americans are tired of foreign wars and if George Bush does not cultivate a nice happy calmness in the voting public, he will lose the election. Forget about Iran. They are bunch of boobhead losers and everyone but Tehren knows that. This incident is not the same as what happened under Carter. This is an incident where the UK may actually have been in error by having their men in Iranian jurisdiction, innocently of course, but nevertheless it is not clear to me that the US should jump into this matter and use military action when a) our soldiers are not involvedand b) when our ally's soldiers may have been in error. I'd say discretion is the better part of valour at this moment.
Posted by: rex || 06/24/2004 0:25 Comments || Top||

#14  I disagree almost completely.
I have no doubt that these Brit sailers were on a patrol that they've made every day for the last 18 months.
The Iranians just plain snagged them "because they could" to borrow Clinton's excuse.
President Bush does need to campaign more aggressively, but Iran will have to be dealt with:
They are supporting terrorists and terrorism and they are pursuing nuclear weapons.
This is Reason #1 for Bush to be re-elected.
This incident is almost exactly like what they did in 1979--think Carter +Zapatero.
We will only join in to help our ally Britain and/or when it becomes clear that Iran is defying the world by building nuke missiles and harboring terrorists.
Frankly, I'd prefer for the Iranians to start it as the Left has now made the "Saddam approach" (complain to the UN, followed by sanctions, then militarily-forced regime change as in Iraq) virtually impossible as a way to remove the evil mullahs.
Posted by: Jen || 06/24/2004 0:33 Comments || Top||


Iran Postpones Talks on British Sailors
The release of eight British sailors has been postponed at least until Thursday, Iranian state television reported Wednesday, contradicting reports that the men were already freed. There was no immediate clarification. Hours earlier, an Iranian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman told The Associated Press the eight Britons had been released. Iran’s Arabic-language TV channel Al-Alam broadcast an urgent evening report that said: "The second round of talks on the British detainees is postponed until tomorrow, Thursday." The station had earlier reported that the sailors’ release could be delayed to Thursday. It said British and Iranian officials had been negotiating in the southwest Iranian town of Mahshahr near the place where the Britons were detained. In London, the British Foreign Office said it had not been told officially that the release had been delayed to Thursday. A British diplomat said, however, that a delay was possible because it was already nighttime in Iran.
Posted by: TS(vice girl) || 06/23/2004 2:04:40 PM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:


Al-Assad arrives in Peking
President Bashar al-Assad and his wife arrived in Beijing on Monday on state visit to the People's Republic of China. The visit is the first by a Syrian President to China since the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries in 1956. The visit lasts for five days and aims at discussing issues relating to peace, Iraq and fighting the USA terrorism and " reforming the disorder in the world system" as well as enhancing political, weapons deals trade and economic relations with China, which President al-Assad described as a " great international player." President Assad is accompanied by Foreign Minister Farouk al-Shara, Ministers of Economy and Trade, Petroleum and Mineral Resources, Tourism, and Chairman of the State Planning Commission.
Chinese sticking their noses in another trouble spot, why am I not surprised?

Additional: LONDON [MENL] -- China and Syria have launched an effort to conclude what could be a series of defense and military deals. Western diplomatic sources said the two countries were expected to complete agreements on several military projects during the current visit by Syrian President Bashar Assad. Assad arrived in Beijing on Monday for a visit of several days. This was the first visit by a Syrian president to China and officials from both countries said defense trade would play a major role in discussions. They said Syria wants China to sell unspecified systems and help develop Syria's defense industry. The CIA report that covered the first half of 2003 asserted that Syria has sought assistance to establish a solid-propellant rocket motor development and production capability. U.S. intelligence sources said China has provided such help.
The DEBKA article I posted yesterday stated that Iran had control of a major portion of the Syrian defense industries. If true, then this could be a China to Syria to Iran arms deal.
Posted by: Steve || 06/23/2004 9:00:17 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  What are the odds Syria will develop their own peaceful nuclear program in the next 6 months?..ng
Posted by: Nick || 06/23/2004 10:50 Comments || Top||

#2  Time marches on. The fascists will not sit idly and wait for us to attack.
Posted by: virginian || 06/23/2004 11:00 Comments || Top||

#3  he's on his way to NK to check on the shipment of SCUD-D's to replace what the Mossad blew up on the train
Posted by: Frank G || 06/23/2004 11:08 Comments || Top||

#4  Yo ho, me hearties, yo ho!
Posted by: mojo || 06/23/2004 11:11 Comments || Top||

#5  I just knew it. China is bad bad bad bad bad news. Bet they loved not being labled directly with the other "axis" members.

Posted by: ex-lib || 06/23/2004 19:49 Comments || Top||

#6  The new Axis powers must visit the boss for marching orders.
Posted by: Mark Espinola || 06/23/2004 21:25 Comments || Top||


British troops make televised confession
EFL
...but only after they were shown on state television blindfolded and then making a public confession. In a dramatic and humiliating twist to the incident, two officers admitted they had made a "big mistake", insisted it was an accident and apologised to the Islamic republic’s Revolutionary Guards. "My name is Thomas Hawkins from the British Royal Navy, number D04428," said the first officer, who appeared to be reading from a prepared text. "Our team of three boats and eight crew entered Iranian waters by mistake. We apologise because this was a big mistake," he said, according to a translation of the Arabic voice-over provided by Al-Alam, Iran’s official Arabic-language satellite news channel. The second officer, clearly reading from a prepared text and also standing on the banks of the Shatt al-Arab waterway, introduced himself as "Chief Petty Officer Robert Webster of the Royal Navy, number D987567 Alpha." He said the team had "accidentally entered Iranian waters" when they were arrested on Monday. Prior to the confessions, state television had shown the men being held blindfolded in a cramped room.
Posted by: Super Hose || 06/23/2004 2:55:15 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  We should wait for them to stray into Iraqi waters and put their troops through a similar ordeal. The ensuing outcry from the Arab world would be deafening. Animals. Time to up the anti in that part of the Shatt al-Arab - get the SBS patrolling regularly.
Posted by: Howard UK || 06/23/2004 8:47 Comments || Top||

#2  Howard. How's the mood in the UK? Are they blaming that evil dumb cowboy and his poodle or are they angry at the mullahs?
Posted by: JAB || 06/23/2004 9:02 Comments || Top||

#3  The only thing that seemingly matters at the moment in the UK is the football/soccer!
I don't think the Iranians have to do very much to get the collective British 'back up' -(Iranian Embassy siege etc.) The press seems to be focussing upon the machinations of the regime - who will get the upper hand? What their purpose is when relations between the two countries have been at their strongest for some time? No criticism of our role in the war that I've seen. Personally praying that our boys come home safe.
Posted by: Howard UK || 06/23/2004 9:09 Comments || Top||

#4  That outcome we're all praying for is most likely if this does not degenerate into some sort of finger pointing exercise. Sounds like it hasn't.
Posted by: JAB || 06/23/2004 9:25 Comments || Top||

#5  Howard is right. Wayne Rooney is the only thing on (English, at least) minds now...
Posted by: someone || 06/23/2004 11:36 Comments || Top||

#6  Rooooooooooooooooooooooney!!!
Posted by: Howard UK || 06/23/2004 11:41 Comments || Top||

#7  Roooooooooooooneeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeey!!!
Posted by: Bulldog || 06/23/2004 17:06 Comments || Top||

#8  :)

JAB: I haven't heard people blaming anyone except the Iranians themselves. People are aware of the incident, I think they just believe it's all a bit of nonsense and/or posturing that'll be resolved peacefully in a few days.
Posted by: Bulldog || 06/23/2004 17:10 Comments || Top||


An Outrage...but West needs Tehran
Posted by: Classical_Liberal || 06/23/2004 03:25 || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  "More important, despite all indications to the contrary, we have a surprisingly good relationship with the Tehran regime. They could have caused much more trouble for the coalition in Iraq than they have"

Can this columnist buy a clue? Tehran is the source of much of the violence and Islamic terror going on throughout the ME. I'd wait til the sailors are returned and send a cruise missile to blow those boats to bits
Posted by: Frank G || 06/23/2004 10:15 Comments || Top||

#2  Can this columnist buy a clue?

Maybe he should lay off the opium.
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama || 06/23/2004 10:58 Comments || Top||

#3  I don't get it. Normally The Sun is the home of tub thumping jingoism. Hardly the place you'd expect a commentary piece along the lines of "Our Mullah Mates Matter". Makes me wonder if there was a behind the scenes lobbying campaign by Downing Street to keep the rhetoric down. And if so, why? And why would the Sun editors care?
Posted by: Classical_Liberal || 06/23/2004 11:28 Comments || Top||

#4  More important, despite all indications to the contrary, we have a surprisingly good relationship with the Tehran regime. They could have caused much more trouble for the coalition in Iraq than they have.

Saying that "They could have caused much more trouble for the coalition in Iraq than they have." is like thanking a mugger for not being a murderer.

The author is a blatant facilitator of Tehran's goals. This world is infested with morons! Stupidity should be painful.
Posted by: Zenster || 06/23/2004 13:02 Comments || Top||

#5  Oh, no, the terrible tyrants of Tehran --- burrr.

Six months before launch.
Posted by: Capt America || 06/23/2004 23:40 Comments || Top||


Sailors ’To be released’...
Iran is reported to have issued an order giving the go-ahead for the release of eight Royal Navy sailors captured after sailing into Iranian waters. The order was made after the men admitted making the "mistake", Iran’s ISNA news agency quoted the country’s foreign minister as saying. The crisis had appeared to escalate earlier when the men were paraded blindfolded on state-run television. However, a source close to the negotiations between Iran and Britain said the unit’s release should be concluded today. The British embassy in Tehran would only say it was still in talks with Iranian authorities. Iranian officials have indicated the men would be freed if it was established they did not enter Iranian waters deliberately. Nonetheless, there have been conflicting signals from Tehran over how the authorities intended to deal with the situation.

The men were arrested on Tuesday after their patrol boats apparently strayed into Iranian territorial waters close to the Iraq border.After viewing the TV footage of the blindfolded men, Downing Street warned it expected them to be treated in accordance with international law. A Foreign Office spokesman said they were "extremely concerned" about the development and would be raising the matter with the Iranians "at the appropriate level". Further television pictures have been shown two of the captured men - not blindfolded this time - apparently confessing to the intrusion into Iranian waters and apologising for the incident. Earlier Foreign Secretary Jack Straw intervened personally with his Iranian counterpart, Kamal Kharazzi, to appeal for the men’s release.

Doubtless the Mad Mullahs will insist that only Allan can make a decision and consequently they must watch the skies for a sign. Not holding my breath. Weren’t they putting them on trial yesterday?
Posted by: Howard UK || 06/23/2004 4:58:34 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Done
Posted by: Dragon Fly || 06/23/2004 7:57 Comments || Top||

#2  Good news. Looks like the moderates ones with brains got their way. Allahu Akbar.
Posted by: Howard UK || 06/23/2004 8:23 Comments || Top||

#3  Or maybe not.
Posted by: Howard UK || 06/23/2004 10:33 Comments || Top||


Terror Networks
MAP: Fundamentalist Muslims are the source of 98% of the world’s conflicts!
Posted by: Mark Espinola || 06/23/2004 19:33 || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Curious. There is no geographic mention of the United States. Wonder why?
Posted by: Dragon Fly || 06/23/2004 19:39 Comments || Top||

#2  This was very helpful in planning where NOT to vacation! : )
Posted by: ex-lib || 06/23/2004 19:44 Comments || Top||

#3  The map is misleading in part, which makes the title wrong.

The most obvious example of that to me is that fundamentalist Islam has nothing whatsoever to do with the tensions between Greeks and Turks (whether in Cyprus or in the Aegean) -- and I believe it also has nothing to do with the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

It's also noteworthy that the map ignores those conflicts that don't have to do with Muslims of any sort -- like Nepal, or the separatist Basques in Spain, the catholic/protestant thing in Northern Ireland, or the separatists in Eastern Orthodox Georgia and Transnister in Moldavia.

But other than that, yes, fundamentalist Muslims are indeed currently the source of *most* the world conflicts. But "98%" is a hyperbole.

As a sidenote it'd probably have been better if you had linked to this:
http://hasbara.us/flatto_charon/the_enemies_of_the_world.htm
rather than the image directly.
Posted by: Aris Katsaris || 06/23/2004 19:53 Comments || Top||

#4  ima wonder if they are involve the turf wars in los angeles.
Posted by: muck4doo || 06/23/2004 19:56 Comments || Top||

#5  muck4doo...to quote a great urban philosopher:

"I got 99 problems, but that bitch aint one."
JayZ
Posted by: Dragon Fly || 06/23/2004 19:58 Comments || Top||

#6  As another sidenote: Thanks. I had been looking for a semi-decent map that depicted Huntington's view on the different "civilisations".
Posted by: Aris Katsaris || 06/23/2004 20:00 Comments || Top||

#7  Thinking Aris is right again, looking more like 62.3%. The rest seem to be kickball related.
Posted by: Shipman || 06/23/2004 20:02 Comments || Top||

#8  This weeks vacation specials are:

1) Three weeks in wonderful sun soaked Saudi Arabia. (This is a one way fare only) Free tank of gas-Duty-Free!

2) Explore Kosovo! Muslim tour guides available. Take a mule ride to Pristina. Visit live mine fields

3) Sun & fun on the beaches of Syria. Bring enough cash in case taken hostage.

4) Iran, FREE TICKETS FROM PARIS! Visit 'Mullahland' in exotic Qom, a 7th century amusement park. Free Yugo rental car!

5) Two great weeks at the Gaza Camel Hilton Resort. Guest singing group: Yassir & the Dishrags, held over this week ONLY!

6) Pakistan, white river rafting for your life! Begin on the Afghan border and race through Talaban villages. Canadians receive 40% discount on this package! At least 4 passports required, per passenger, for this unbelievable vacation deal!

7) Back packing for two in Kashmir. Take a mule ride in Peshawar! Call for details. Almost SOLD OUT, so what are you waiting for?

8) Chechnya is for lovers. 10 days of sight seeing in your own Russian T-72 tank! 50% reduction this week only! Tank insurance required.

9) This is a winner of a trip! Go on a real live jihad explorer cruise down the unprotected Nile River. Meals included, but not kosher.

10) 80% standby fair special! One whole week in the new Islamic Republic of Francestan. Be the first on your block to visit this shoppers & fashion paradise! Free burka upon arrival. Americans strongly advised to say your Canadian!

The following fine print is brought to you by Mumbo-Jumbo Travel Inc. This travel advisory should be read only between the hours of 4PM & 410PM only if residing in 5 miles outside the City of Chicago during the month of June. All air fairs & hotel package deals subject to VAT, Airport, Federal, State, Provincial, City, Departure, Arrival, Rubbish, Electric, Water and Air taxes, of not less than 32.7%, doubled if departing from northern New Jersey airports on Thursdays through Tuesdays, unless rerouted via NYC-JFK to Boston's Logan Airport, by way of London, only when included as a secondary destination with a return ticket dated on the previous Friday but not prior to 1AM Mountain Time. Cancellation fees shall only exceed 150% or original ticketed prices, in Euros, if Mumbo-Jumbo Travel Inc is not notified before you cancel. Subject to change at moments notice, just like our vacations. No rights reserved.
Posted by: Mark Espinola || 06/23/2004 20:38 Comments || Top||

#9  ROFLMAO, Mark!

That's priceless.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut || 06/23/2004 21:37 Comments || Top||

#10  :)
Posted by: Mark Espinola || 06/23/2004 21:48 Comments || Top||

#11  That really was priceless, Mark. You have an uncanny insight into the travel industry.

Thanks for taking the time to make us all laugh.

Best Wishes,
Posted by: Traveller || 06/23/2004 21:49 Comments || Top||

#12  Isn't Darfur Arab on African violence? (All parties essentially muslim)
Posted by: RussSchultz || 06/23/2004 21:50 Comments || Top||

#13  There are also Christians and animists caught up in the Sudan mess. The Muslim-on-Muslim violence is Arab against African.
Posted by: Robert Crawford || 06/23/2004 22:16 Comments || Top||

#14  And by African, we probably mean "black". :-)
Posted by: Aris Katsaris || 06/23/2004 22:45 Comments || Top||

#15  I thought the context made it clear.
Posted by: Robert Crawford || 06/23/2004 22:49 Comments || Top||

#16  Akris Catshit, in this case, yes, RC means black.
It's becoming very clear that Arabs are extremely rascist about black people, even fellow black Muslims.
Read Arab News sometimes if you want to see what "kind" of Muslims get beheaded as criminals in Saudi Arabia.
And when the American Muslims had their conference in Chicago last summer, they wouldn't meet with the Nation of Islam Muslims who were meeting in Chicago also at the exact same time.
Posted by: Jen || 06/23/2004 22:52 Comments || Top||

#17  Evidently Ivory costs conflict . . .
Posted by: The Doctor || 06/23/2004 22:58 Comments || Top||

#18  Akris Catshit,

Jen seems to be in a constant state of seething against me.
Posted by: Aris Katsaris || 06/23/2004 23:55 Comments || Top||

#19  Mark - LOL ! ! ! I love it!

But you forgot my favorite - North Korea ! Home of Bark and Grass soup!
(Yeah, I know its not Islamic...)

And Jen, you are right, Arab muslims are 'holier' then non-arab muslims. I think the Koran mentions that.
Posted by: CrazyFool || 06/23/2004 23:59 Comments || Top||

#20  Mark, a new RB classic!
Hilarious!
Posted by: Jen || 06/24/2004 0:04 Comments || Top||

#21  Islam has nothing whatsoever to do with the tensions between Greeks and Turks (whether in Cyprus or in the Aegean) -- and I believe it also has nothing to do with the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan.
That's OK, dude, you can ignore hundreds of years of Ghazi's (I suggest you look it up) clamoring at the gates of Southeastern Europe in the name of expanding Islam through conquest, and also ignore the very long memories of many Western nations, which presumably excludes that of Greece.
For someone who claims to be a starving student, you don't seem to read or work much.
Posted by: therien || 06/24/2004 2:36 Comments || Top||

#22  Therien> I'm sure you know much more than I do, about the role of religion in modern-day Balkan politics.

That was sarcasm btw.
Posted by: Aris Katsaris || 06/24/2004 8:16 Comments || Top||

#23  Sarcasm aside, Aris, do you mind if I call down on you and mock you the next time you comment on anything American because as a foreigner, you can't possibly know what you're talking about?
Posted by: therien || 06/24/2004 10:45 Comments || Top||

#24  kudos Mark! Reminds of P.J. O'Rourke's "Holidays In Hell"
Posted by: Frank G || 06/24/2004 11:05 Comments || Top||

#25  therien> Feel free, but what'd be the difference? You already mocked me in #21 when I commented on something Balkan, so I'm quite sure you'll also do it when I comment on something American.

I don't comment on American internal issues *that* often anyway.
Posted by: Aris Katsaris || 06/24/2004 11:20 Comments || Top||


Iraq-Jordan
Linked Video of South Korean Man Murdered by Islamic terrorists
Posted by: Mark Espinola || 06/23/2004 21:39 || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  According to an article at this website, the decapitated body of the S. Korean was also booby-trapped. Savages.
23 June 2004 - Iraqi Militants Plant Bomb in Kim Sun-il’s Corpse

When the body of Kim Sun-il, murdered and beheaded by Islamic terrorists, was found yesterday about 20 miles west of Baghdad near Falluja , it was discovered that a booby trap had been installed in his body.

On the road between Baghdad and Falluja, American forces located a body assumed to be that of an Asian, which an officer from Korean Embassy to Iraq and Kim Chun-ho, president of Gana General Trading Co., identified.

“It looks like the body was thrown from a vehicle, and the body was beheaded,” said Mark Kimmitt, coalition deputy operations chief and spokesman of American forces in Iraq.

“A booby trap was placed in Kim’s body,” reported CNN, quoting Pentagon sources. A booby trap is an explosive device, which is designed to blow up on contact. It appears that Iraqi insurgents were hoping to kill coalition forces or rescuers recovering Kim’s body. Outrage at the brutality of a terrorist organization that abducted Kim exploded after people learned that Kim’s body had been booby-trapped.
Posted by: rex || 06/23/2004 22:04 Comments || Top||

#2  Every Iraqi should be tied down, with their eyes kept open Clockwork Orange style, and watch this.
Posted by: Destro || 06/24/2004 0:09 Comments || Top||

#3  Destro, sadly, I think that Iraqis and the rest of the Muslim world are only too familiary with these images.
It's those on the Liberal Left here in the West (America, Europe and Oz) who should be made to watch it Clockwork Orange style.
Posted by: Jen || 06/24/2004 0:19 Comments || Top||


Iraqi Militants Planted Bomb in Kim Sun-il’s Corpse
When the body of Kim Sun-il was found 35 km west of Baghdad toward Falluja at 5:20 p.m. (10:22 p.m. Korean time) on June 22, it was discovered that a booby trap had been installed in his body. On a street between Baghdad and Falluja, American forces located a body assumed to be that of an Asian, which an officer from Korean Embassy to Iraq and Kim Chun-ho, president of Gana General Trading Co., identified. “It looks like the body was thrown from a vehicle, and the body was beheaded,” said Mark Kimmitt, coalition deputy operations chief and spokesman of American forces in Iraq. “A booby trap was placed in Kim’s body,” reported CNN, quoting Pentagon sources. A booby trap is an explosive device, which is designed to blow up on contact. It appears that Iraqi insurgents were hoping to kill coalition forces or rescuers recovering Kim’s body. Outrage at the brutality of a terrorist organization that abducted Kim exploded after people learned that Kim’s body had been booby-trapped.
Posted by: TS(vice girl) || 06/23/2004 8:39:07 PM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Thank goodness they routinely use metal detectors in these instances."Never prove someone dead" until safe to do such!
Posted by: smn || 06/23/2004 23:38 Comments || Top||

#2  Someone set him up the --

Aw, hell, I can't do it. This is awful. Islamic bastards! You damned dirty apes!
Posted by: BH || 06/23/2004 23:56 Comments || Top||


Home Front: Tech
General: U.S. Dominance of Skies May Wane
The success of the Indian air force against American fighter planes in a recent exercise suggests other countries may soon be able to threaten U.S. military dominance of the skies, a top Air Force general said Wednesday. "We may not be as far ahead of the rest of the world as we thought we were," said Gen. Hal M. Hornburg, the chief of Air Combat Command, which oversees U.S. fighter and bomber wings.

The U.S.-India joint exercise, "Cope India," took place in February near Gwalior in central, India. It pitted some F-15C Eagle fighters from the 3rd Wing at Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska, in mock combat against Indian MiG, Sukhoi and Mirage fighters. The F-15Cs are the Air Force’s primary air superiority aircraft. The Indian fighters, of Russian and French design, are the type of planes U.S. fighters would most likely face in any overseas conflict. Hornburg, speaking to reporters, called the results of the exercise "a wake-up call" in some respects, but he declined to provide details, other than to suggest the Indian air force scored several unexpected successes against the American planes.

For the last 15 years, the U.S. military has enjoyed almost total command of the air during conflicts. A few fighters and fighter-bombers have gone down, usually victims of surface-to-air missile fire, but in general, American planes have been able to target enemy ground forces at will. In the most recent invasion of Iraq, Saddam Hussein’s air force stayed grounded. Still, new tactics, better Russian fighters like the Su-30, and a new generation of surface-to-air missiles mean that U.S. dominance could be ending, said Loren Thompson, who follows military issues for the Lexington Institute, a Washington think tank. "The United States has grown accustomed to having global air superiority, yet we haven’t put much very much money in the last generation into maintaining that advantage," he said, noting the F-15 first flew in the 1970s. "So of course the rest of the world is finally starting to catch up," he said. Hornburg said the exercise shows the need for some new Air Force fighters, particularly the F/A-22 Raptor, which is intended to replace the F-15C. But critics deride the aircraft as too expensive and built to counter a threat that hasn’t existed since the Soviet Union collapsed.
Posted by: Anonymous5089 || 06/23/2004 4:59:45 PM || Comments || Link || [1 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Lockheed test pilots flying the Indian birds?
Posted by: RWV || 06/23/2004 19:46 Comments || Top||

#2  Two thoughts (only one of which requires my tinfoil hat). First, the exercises took place over India, and it is obvious that the Indian pilots would have a clear home field advantage in terms of knowing the terrain, atmospheric conditions, etc. Second, by having the F-15C's perform poorly, the case for the F-22 becomes more compelling (think modern day "missile gap").
Posted by: Tibor || 06/23/2004 19:52 Comments || Top||

#3  Tibor,

Naw our Air Force would never do that...would it?
Posted by: Mr. Davis || 06/23/2004 19:57 Comments || Top||

#4  Our boys would never throw a fight.

The Raptor may be expensive, but being the best and having the best is never cheap. Plus a single Raptor is worth a couple 15C models in a fight anyways. Have you seen the capabilities of that plane? Oooo-fucking-rah. But, truth is, we'll probably have a remote controlled air force in another 10-20 years.
Posted by: AllahHateMe || 06/23/2004 20:21 Comments || Top||

#5  AHM, your last point is the best one, I think.

Familiarity with the atmosphere etc. probably wouldn't help the red side much, but it certainly is the case there there is (and will be) a big emphasis on unmanned combat air vehicles (UCAVs). There was a fairly successful test firing of a missile against a truck from a UCAV recently. I suspect there will be a big push for cheap, easily replaceable UAVs/UCAVs in the next decade or so. While there's a good case to make for having an advanced fighter, there's so much else that could be done with that money .... or so goes the argument, anyway.

I'll be posting a series on military transformation and technology shortly over at Winds of Change. Y'all who've been in uniform are welcome to drop by and kibbitz it LOL.
Posted by: Robin Burk || 06/23/2004 20:33 Comments || Top||

#6  Why would there be an automatic assumption that the Indian aircraft is now superior, when all these aircraft have been around since the 70's? Is it possible that the high op-tempo of the WOT have improved our ground support and bombing capability at the expense of our dog-fighting skills?
Posted by: Super Hose || 06/23/2004 20:39 Comments || Top||

#7  Gosh, Robin, while the USAF fighter jocks push for the F-22, what branch will be seeking to develop all those low cost, man launchable UC/UAVs to provide close air support to infantry and protect Apaches from the beating they took at Karbala?
Posted by: Mr. Davis || 06/23/2004 20:56 Comments || Top||

#8  Russia has licensed its SU-27 aircraft to the Indian Air Force to be built in India. The way I hear, the SU-27 has received some signifigant avionics upgrades in the passed six years or so.

The InAF also flies the MiG-29, which is an awesome dogfighting bird. the MiG-29 has also recent undergone big avionics upgrades to put them on par with the F-15 and F-16.

We have heard about how superior our pilots are against MiG pilot, but I have to believe Indian pilots may well wind up taking their place amoungst the worlds best fighter pilots, right alongside with US, British, Russian, Israeli, US Navy and German pilots.

It is also interesting to note that our air force has suffered greatly in the 90s from lack of training flights to keep our pilots in the best training. Dunno if that is still the case, or not. I hope not.

I think some pilots may be doing some extra calesthenics when they get home.
Posted by: badanov || 06/23/2004 21:01 Comments || Top||

#9  The Indians are flying SU-27, SU-30 and Mig-31's, many of them with uprated electronic the Indian's have gotten from Israeli sources (India enemy = Pakistan, Israel = helping enemy of an enemy).

These are all 1990's design and construction airframes, and are more aerobatic than the US equivalents (F15, F16). Combine that with the improved electronics, and probably one of the best multimode tack-while-scan multitargeting radars on any aircraft of any nation (MiG-31), and India now having a lot of good software - unless we really put newer aircraft up, we will get smoked.

About the only thing we have that can deal with this is the F/A-18 E/F (uprated models), and our Airborne radars and processing capability (AWACS and the JSTARs follow-on, as well as probably satellite stuff).

Plus US air-to-air flying time dropped out hte bottom in the 1990's under the defense cutbacks and groundstrike missions of the Balkans and Iraq (No-Fly Zone enforcement) - so our pilots are not trained as well as they should be.

Glad this happened in a drill.

All those software and electronics engineers we let in here in the 1990's are now back home, fully trained, while their American counterparts are unemployed and losing ground in the skills dept, while US corporations farm out their software to Indian companies (furthering the gap).

Anyone thats been around has known that we were losing our edge. Now its becoming public knowlege because somone in the USAF is seeing political advantage. Where the hell were these people 5 years ago?
Posted by: OldSpook || 06/23/2004 21:09 Comments || Top||

#10  Correction: MiG-29 (31 as yet unconfirmed).

SU-30 are definitely confirmed in service there, and they SU-30MK variant with the local's (India with Israeli help) radar and computer systems in it is probably superior to the home-build one in the CIS, and on par or better than the Starship (F-15).
Posted by: OldSpook || 06/23/2004 21:11 Comments || Top||

#11  Wish I could say it was the Army, Mr. Davis, but while there's lots of UAV/UCAV and unmanned ground vehicle stuff going on in the Army, the Marines are taking the lead in battlefield use of micro-UAVs for recon. It'll be interesting to see if / how they adopt UCAVs too.

OldSpook, got to agree with you re: the engineers .....
Posted by: Robin Burk || 06/23/2004 21:11 Comments || Top||

#12  But critics deride the aircraft as too expensive and built to counter a threat that hasn’t existed since the Soviet Union collapsed.

Problem is, even though the threat no longer exists, some of the hardware that gave the threat substance still does.
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama || 06/23/2004 21:16 Comments || Top||

#13  No details provided but it sounds like several times Indian pilots bested US pilots,with an overall exercise exchange rate far below what USAF expects in wartime.The USAF expects to dominate over hostile territory,so having "home-air" should not be a factor,unless USAF had no AWACs or ground radar help and India AF did.As suggested,F-15 pilots' reliance on radar/radar-guided missile kills combined w/Indian pilots willingness to get close and mix it up(esp.w/Russian IR sight on helmet)could have led to US flight getting 2-3 "kills",but unexpectedly losing 1-2 to do so;not what USAF wants to do.

I have some serious doubts about UAVs replacing as many tactical a/c as some think.First,attrition rate is fairly high.If a $2million UAV lasts about 100 missions before crashing one thing,but one costing $20mil is another matter.(Yes I know new technology and it will mature,but improvements will have to be in electronics which are always costly.)Second,they are new,which means people have just started thinking of ways to defeat them.I wonder if they will turn out to be vulnerable to ARMs.UAVs communicate w/ground controllers,esp. for attack,w/GPS sats,com sats,and I have to believe the Russians,French and even US will find way to exploit that for detection and missile acquisition.As to air-to-air UAVs,how do they detect hostile a/c?Can't use radar,as that lets everyone know where you are.IR is short-range and cameras see where they are pointing.

For past quarter-century Second and Third World countries have relied on ground-based defences to deter US airpower.The results have been dismal.We may see countries in future decide to field numbers of fighters w/purpose of knocking down several US a/c in opening of any conflict.(Unlikely,true,but China at least is starting to field large numbers of decent fighters.)Build 1,000 a/c shelters for 150 a/c and think how expensive it would be to launch a first-strike cruise missile attack,esp.if lots of long taxiways and multiple runways,reinforced highways available.
Posted by: Stephen || 06/23/2004 21:51 Comments || Top||

#14  F-15 pilots' reliance on radar/radar-guided missile kills combined w/Indian pilots willingness to get close and mix it up

That's the key. Put some F-16s up there, then mix it up and see what results you get.
Posted by: Rafael || 06/23/2004 21:58 Comments || Top||

#15  Robin,

The Marines aren't showing the Army the way again, are they? Actually, the Field Artillery is missing the boat here big time. They should have made a deal for UAV as a quid pro quo for dropping Crusader voluntarily. Once Army avation gets the SDB on the UAV's they'll become the low cost time on target winner.
Posted by: Mr. Davis || 06/23/2004 22:06 Comments || Top||

#16  Folks before anyone gets too excited either way allow me to point out excercises like these are extremely staged. They are designed to throw unlikely scenarios and have the pilots engage in such ways that it tests tactics that both sides try to cook up. These excercises aren't even designed to show whos the best but rather what possibilities can be done by each side when developing offensive and defensive strategies and maneuvers. Even with that kind of level of interaction a lot of tactics, ideas, technology and various other capabilities are not thrown in these engagements, afterall neither participating side wants to reveal ALL their capabilities.
Posted by: Valentine || 06/23/2004 22:23 Comments || Top||

#17  Valentine,valid points,but when USAF General in charge of prepping US pilots for combat expresses concern,that means bad things happened that were not expected.The bit about not as far ahead could be being polite to hosts or way of saying "they have some good pilots".But when top General uses phrase "wake-up",that means something went wrong-whether tactics,skill level,equipment whatever.Something came out of the exercise that USAF didn't expect.Which is why such exercises are valuable.
Posted by: Stephen || 06/23/2004 22:43 Comments || Top||

#18  Wasn't this particular fight also 12 Indian planes v US 4 in favor of the Indians?
Posted by: Laurence of the Rats || 06/23/2004 22:47 Comments || Top||

#19  Here is the link to the execise. It apears to be the Indians used the MiG-21 the MiG-27 ( I didn't even know the MiG-27 was an air superiority fighter ) and the SU-30. The MiG-21 is an interceptor, not designed to be a dogfighter (it's wings are too stubby ), the MiG-27 was designed as a night/all weather ground strike bird and the SU-30 is actually a varient of the SU-27, which is a multi-role aircraft. The other bird, the Mirage2000 is Frog, and with the SU-30 the only other aircraft even eorth upgrading avionic on.

Old Spook: the MiG-31 is a primary high altitude interceptor, not intended to be used as a general air superiority fighter the way the MiG-29 and SU-27/30 is. As I understand it, the MiG-31 was built to handle high altitude threats such a strategic bombers, and that was why it was built with a multi-function radar-avionic suite. When cruise missles started to enter service with the US, the Russians kept the aircraft as a high altitude interceptopr, but they changed their design paradigm to deal with multiple threats both from low-flying missiles and bombers, as well an enemy air superiority fighters.

The MiG-31 is still in service, I think, but only with the POV forces, whatever they call them now .(Air Defense )
Posted by: badanov || 06/23/2004 23:21 Comments || Top||

#20 
Air Force General: We Need New, Really Expensive Planes
Whatta surprise!
Posted by: someone || 06/24/2004 5:20 Comments || Top||

#21  Given how much pressure the fighter jocks are under, due to the dominance of the groundstrike element and ground forces in the news and strategic situation, there's a great temptation to write this off as a showboat.

I just hope it isn't a case of crying wolf. Who cares about the Indians? We aren't in a position to get into a strategic conflict with them in the next fifty years or so, barring some sort of mind-meltingly bizarre eventuality. The Chinese are the primary worry. Once they think that they've got enough of a chance in the air to cover an amphibious force, they're very, very likely to make a try for Taiwan.

It's the naval air force that we need to concentrate on, not the Air Force proper. As I understand the F-22, it's not usable as a carrier plane. That makes it not useful in the Straits of Taiwan situation, which is the only near-term air-superiority theatre of importance.

What are we going to do, base a Raptor squadron outside of Taipei? That's a diplomatic nonstarter. If the Chinese decide to rush the straits, we won't have time to surge Raptors into position. It'll be a naval operation.

And don't hand me "what if air superiority fighters make it into the Middle East"? The day an Arab nation manages to field a competent air force is the day after the end of the world. It'll take divine intervention.
Posted by: Mitch H. || 06/24/2004 8:25 Comments || Top||

#22  There is one insightful comment here by someone who points out that one needs to pay attention to the "words" used by the US general. This was not an ordinary "pretend" mock fight where a lot of politics was being played. There was more to it. For the very first time the US was confronting SU27/30 . By the way no MKI nor the the latest radar etc was used by the IAF as the US was not using their latest avionics even though they did use the upgraded radar packages. So in essence the participants pitted aircrafts that are not the "best" but close enough in capabilities.

Also the source of this "leak" is not India but the US itself so there should be more weight given to it. Some people have claimed that the US loses such battles as a political gesture but this is not always so because I have seen documents about how US took part in an exercise and came 2nd amongst the 5 or 6 nations (I believe in this one exercise Greeks did better but the Turks and others faired worse than the US). Note not last but 2nd and this is consistent with what I have seen about engagements between the US and German flyers flying MiG29s etc. In any case apparently Rep. Duke Cunningham made statements in the Congress how the IAF won 90% of the engagements in Cope India where the US was fighting against a greater number of attacking/defending aircrafts of the IAF. While this is "disturbing" it is not "worrisome" since USAF is unlikely to be outnumbered by any AF in the near future. Also US did not have AWACS nor did the Indians who have no AWACS yet. But the USAF is designed to use AWACS etc whereas the IAF is not so the USAF was at a greater disadvantage relatively speaking.

There have been some rumors, actually also hinted at by my friend (an IAF officer who is an instructor and a test pilot), that the 1-v-1 type of engagements went surprisingly in the favor of Indians to the tune of 3:1!!!! Now that is "worrisome" and as you can see there are some statements being made by the USAF about bringing about a change in training both in terms of content and quantity.

Finally no need to worry really since even if every IAF pilot is better trained/educated than his/her US counterpart, as an organization the IAF would not last very long in any confrontation with the US given the technology gap. This was acknowledged by the IAF itself.

So where does it all leave us. Training and equipment go hand in hand. IAF with very fine equipment and perhaps superior training is capable of dealing with the USAF's second rung aircrafts but US has no need, and I do not think any desire, to fight on an equal footing. The day of knights in shining armor is past. The name of the game is overwhelming superiority. This the US has. IAF might be able to sting and hurt a little but is going to get stomped in a no-hold-barred kind of a fight with the USAF. For instance how would it help the IAF to be able to win every dogfight but have all their aircrafts destroyed on the ground so that no dogfights ever take place? In the end it is a good learning experience for the IAF and the USAF but it is not then end of the world for the US. A little humility will be good for the US.
Posted by: Anonymous5478 || 06/30/2004 12:56 Comments || Top||

#23  Does anyone have any information on the profile of the pilots who participated in Cope India? Their age-group, ranks, and flying hours (on actual machines as well as simulators)? Even a broad idea would be interesting, provided it was in the right direction.


Posted by: Anonymous5555 || 07/06/2004 7:29 Comments || Top||

#24  As an Indian was a bit skeptical about the 90 percent of the time losses suffered by the USAF. Also we never fielded the Su 30 MKI, but the basic Su 30 K (which has a different radar and avionics pacakage as compared to the Su 30 for Russia). What really might have happened is that if you take out the AWACS then it proves that no force is as dominant. And secondly the USAF might have gotten ready to face the us with their Soviet / Russian tactics mode and were unpleasently surprised when we played to a different tune. As far as the Mig 21's and 27 were concerned, they were used as sheep for the F 15's and Su 30's to guide over troubled spots. The newly upgraded Mig 21's are reportedly capable of precision bombing and maybe they were being used in this capacity and not as an interceptor. In any case the Mig 21 will not last long against either the F 15 or the Su 30 or the Mig 29 as an interceptor. As far as the AWACS are concerned, the Phalcon will join the IAF by 2007. War between US and India, not in a million years - we have just too many things invested in each other to start another war.
Posted by: Arijit || 08/12/2004 8:04 Comments || Top||


Iraq-Jordan
After killing of hostage, U.S. launches airstrike
Iraq’s interim prime minister said Wednesday he was determined to confront the mastermind of bombings and beheadings who threatened to assassinate him, and the U.S. military said it killed 20 foreign fighters at the suspected terrorist’s hideout.
Hmmm... I thought the locals said it was only three or four grannie ladies who were running a petting zoo for underprivileged children?
A recording purportedly made by Jordanian-born terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi threatened to kill interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi and fight the Americans ``until Islamic rule is back on Earth.’’ The audio was found Wednesday on an Islamic Web site from the group that claimed responsibility for the beheading of American hostage Nicholas Berg and Kim Sun-il, a South Korean whose decapitated body was found Tuesday between Baghdad and Fallujah. After the slaying, U.S. forces launched an airstrike on what the Americans said was an al-Zarqawi hideout in Fallujah. A senior
coalition military official said 20 foreign fighters and terrorists were believed to have been killed in the Tuesday night strike. Dr. Loai Ali Zeidan at Fallujah Hospital put the death toll at three with nine wounded. It was the second U.S. airstrike on Fallujah since Saturday. ``In both cases, we believe we hit significant numbers of al-Zarqawi lieutenants and al-Zarqawi fighters,’’ said another official, Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt. The airstrikes also destroyed large ammunition stores, Kimmitt, coalition deputy operations chief, said Wednesday in an interview with Associated Press Television News.
Posted by: Anonymous5089 || 06/23/2004 4:15:57 PM || Comments || Link || [1 views] Top|| File under:

#1  petting zoo...bwawawawa!

Now its a scratch-n-sniff interactive crafts center.
Posted by: Dragon Fly || 06/23/2004 19:44 Comments || Top||

#2  20 to 1, not bad for starters! If we keep this average up, Zarqawi may not respect us any more so, but his underlings will definitely have the fear of God from us!!
Posted by: smn || 06/23/2004 21:48 Comments || Top||


Baghdad’s view on Korean beheading: he deserved it
...On the streets of Baghdad, there was little sympathy for South Korean Kim Sun-Il, beheaded by his captors and dumped on the road between Baghdad and Fallujah.

Abu Zaman, a 53-year-old driver, was blunt on the fate of the 33-year-old evangelical Christian: "He deserved it. I object to beheading, but if he was co-operating with the Americans he made a bad decision."

...In Baghdad, most ordinary Iraqis criticise beheading as offensive to Islam, but they draw distinctions between the different victims - American Nicholas Berg was the least deserving of their sympathy because of his Jewishness; and for them, Paul Johnson, the Saudi victim, had died in another crisis in another country.

Ziad Omar, a 46-year-old unemployed postal worker, said: "If [Mr Kim] was working for a company that supplies the Americans then he was guilty."

Saad Latief, a 36-year-old English literature graduate, was shocked on moral and religious grounds; and Alan Enwia, an interpreter about the same age as Mr Kim, argued the beheadings had to be seen in the context of Iraqi suffering. Asked if Iraqis were talking about the killing, he said: "Not much. It is ugly, but deep inside we are hurting and if you have to carry a heavy weight it doesn’t matter if someone puts a little more on your back."...
The reactions of Iraqis are troubling. We have lost 900 American GI’s trying to help these losers. What’s the point?
Posted by: rex || 06/23/2004 7:22:00 PM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  yea these guy would be much better if we just allied with old saddam, took up his offer of cheap oil and attacked iran from iraq..but no we took the moral road...
Posted by: Dan || 06/23/2004 19:43 Comments || Top||

#2  Hold on. Consider the source, the Sydney Morning Herald. According to Tim Blair it's to the left of the NYT. These are probably selective quotes sourced by a stringer who used to work for Saddam's Ministry of Information.
Posted by: Mr. Davis || 06/23/2004 19:49 Comments || Top||

#3  Good point, #2. I thought about the bias as well, and there may be some of that, but the reporter included "neutral" reactions of the English Literature graduate and the interpreter, so it seems he tried to present a cross section of feedback, making it more believable to me. But what really troubled me was the visceral hatred that came out in 2 of the comments of Iraqis.

But even if Iraqis are unhappy about the US "occupation," I would have hoped that ordinary Iraqis would have wanted to distance themselves from the barbaric actions of the terrorists because those actions reflect poorly on Islam. But they did not even bother doing that and that is very disconcerting.
Posted by: rex || 06/23/2004 20:07 Comments || Top||

#4  Paul McGeough, whose byline appears at the top, is known for being extremely anti-American in his both his news coverage and his op-eds (not that there's any real distinction here).
Posted by: Zhang Fei || 06/23/2004 20:08 Comments || Top||

#5  Come on guys. This moron probably made up all the "interviews" although there is a SLIGHT possibility he interviewed a hundred iraqis until he found a few scum bags to quote. Stop buying into this crap will you?
Posted by: Damn_Proud_American || 06/23/2004 21:02 Comments || Top||

#6 
What's the point?
Congratulations! You've been suckered by the defeatist media.
Posted by: someone || 06/24/2004 5:14 Comments || Top||


Army unit claims victory over sheik
Again -- will be see this on the front page anywhere?
The Army’s powerful 1st Armored Division is proclaiming victory over Sheik Muqtada al-Sadr’s marauding militia that just a month ago seemed on the verge of conquering southern Iraq. The Germany-based division defeated the militia with a mix of American firepower and money paid to informants. Officers today say "Operation Iron Saber" will go down in military history books as one of the most important battles in post-Saddam Hussein Iraq. "I’ve got to think this was a watershed operation in terms of how to do things as part of a counterinsurgency," said Brig. Gen. Mark Hertling, a West Point graduate and one of two 1st Armored assistant division commanders, in an interview last week as he moved around southern Iraq. "We happened to design a campaign that did very well against this militia."

When the division got word April 8 that Sheik al-Sadr’s uprising meant most 1st Armored soldiers would stay and fight, rather than going home as scheduled, it touched off a series of remarkable military maneuvers. Soldiers, tanks and helicopters at a port in Kuwait reversed course, rushing back inside Iraq to battle the Shi’ite cleric’s 10,000-strong army. Within days, a four-tank squadron was rumbling toward the eastern city of Kut. And within hours of arriving, Lt. Col. Mark Calvert and his squadron had cleared the town’s government buildings of the sheik’s so-called Mahdi’s Army. Meanwhile, Maj. Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, 1st Armored commander, huddled with Gen. Hertling and other senior aides to map an overall war strategy. The division would shift from urban combat in Baghdad’s streets to precision strikes amid shrines of great religious significance.

Hunting the enemy in tight city streets broadened to patrolling a region the size of Vermont. Gen. Dempsey first needed the locations of Sheik al-Sadr’s rifle-toting henchmen. Average Iraqis, fed up with the militia’s kidnappings and thievery, quickly became spies, as did a few moderate clerics who publicly stayed neutral. Once he had targets, Gen. Dempsey could then map a battle plan for entering four key cities — Karbala, Najaf, Kufa and Diwaniyah. This would be a counterinsurgency fought with 70-ton M-1 Abrams tanks and aerial gunships overhead. It would not be the lightning movements of clandestine commandos, but rather all the brute force the Army could muster, directed at narrowly defined targets.

Last week, Sheik al-Sadr surrendered. He called on what was left of his men to cease operations and said he may one day seek public office in a democratic Iraq. Gen. Hertling said Mahdi’s Army is defeated, according the Army’s doctrinal definition of defeat. A few stragglers might be able to fire a rocket-propelled grenade, he said, but noted: "Do they have the capability of launching any kind of offensive operation? Absolutely not." The division estimates it killed at least several thousand militia members.

Gen. Dempsey designed "Iron Saber" based on four pillars: massive combat power; information operations to discredit Sheik al-Sadr; rebuilding the Iraqi security forces that fled; and beginning civil affairs operations as quickly as possible, including paying Iraqis to repair damaged public buildings. "As soon as we finished military operations, we immediately began civil-military operations," said Gen. Hertling. "We crossed over from bullets to money." The strike into Kut was followed by an incursion into Diwaniyah. Then an 18-tank battalion entered Karbala, a holy city where precision operations were needed to spare religious shrines. Then soldiers moved into Najaf and Kufa, where Sheik al-Sadr was hiding out and where about 3,000 of his fighters occupied government buildings, mosques, amusement parks and schools. "We were going from outside in to get this guy," Gen. Hertling said. "We had to go after them one city at a time."
Posted by: Sherry || 06/23/2004 1:34:36 PM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  It's good work...but this is a bit of an overstatement!
that just a month ago seemed on the verge of conquering southern Iraq.
Posted by: Anonymous5333 || 06/23/2004 17:17 Comments || Top||

#2  Anonymous5333, obviously you don't read the NYT or the LA Times. Nice to see things worked out the way the CPA said they would.
Posted by: RWV || 06/23/2004 17:40 Comments || Top||

#3  I hope that all of this is true, but I still wanna see Mucky's head on a pike.
Posted by: Craig || 06/23/2004 20:34 Comments || Top||

#4  I lik Mucky. Mucky mak funny comment sometime.
Posted by: Mr. Davis || 06/23/2004 20:48 Comments || Top||

#5  The First Armored Division is my old outfit (MOS131) and I'm a little skeptical of this report.

"... a four-tank squadron was rumbling toward the eastern city of Kut"

When I was a member of that division I was in a three tank SECTION. As I remember, and I could be wrong, American armored outfits don't have squadrons. I think the British call them squadrons.

"Then an 18-tank battalion entered Karbala..."

Eighteen tanks is hardly a battalion. That number is closer to a platoon. Minor mistakes for a civilian I admit but, if the reporter can't get the basic facts right, it gives me pause to question the whole article.
Paul Wolfowitz said recently that the reporters in Iraq are afraid to move so they stay in Baghdad and make up rumors. This may be the case. I'll wait for more confirmation before I get too excited over this. If true, it is one more source of pride in having been a member of "Old Ironsides".
Posted by: Larry Everett || 06/23/2004 21:38 Comments || Top||

#6  al Sadr has discovered a fundemental truth about democracy: dead constituents don't vote .... except in Chicago.
Posted by: Super Hose || 06/23/2004 22:02 Comments || Top||

#7  As expected; he'll be the joker in this card game! His end game will be to stir civil war after the handover; within the next 3 years. His goal is to "unite" the Iraqi Islamic sympathizers with the rule of Iran to formulate a defacto 'Super State'!Should he survive, of course and banking on inaction from Israel (interceding into Iranian airspace!!)
Posted by: smn || 06/23/2004 23:20 Comments || Top||


Israel-Palestine
Palestinian Authority commitment.....to terrorism
The money quote:
"As long as there is an occupation, there will be resistance, but the resistance should take different forms in accordance with the circumstances and nature of the phase," he said.
Translation: they’re not going to give up.
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama || 06/23/2004 11:11:11 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Fortunately, Israel is equally determined to vaporize every terrorist they can get their hands on. As the Palestinian cause continues to demonstrate its reliance upon terror instead of legitimate diplomatic intercession, the outside world increasingly recognizes them for the barbarians they are.

Only the congenital denial complex of other Arab countries prevents them from seeing this as well. Egypt has begun to purchase a clue regarding Arafat, but their own overtures reek to an almost equal degree with conflict of interest. Still, it is more than a litle gratifying to see Arafat being labeled as a nexus of obstruction and interference for a change.
Posted by: Zenster || 06/23/2004 16:09 Comments || Top||

#2  As the Palestinian cause continues to demonstrate its reliance upon terror instead of legitimate diplomatic intercession, the outside world increasingly recognizes them for the barbarians they are.

You're BEAUTIFUL, Zenster. Bulls-eye!
Posted by: jules 187 || 06/23/2004 16:12 Comments || Top||

#3  "As long as there is an occupation, there will be resistance, but the resistance should take different forms in accordance with the circumstances and nature of the phase," he said.

Then don't be surprised by the Jenin-type raids and terrorist leader assassinations.

And forget the idea of a Palestine. That is what your resistance will mean.
Posted by: jules 187 || 06/23/2004 16:19 Comments || Top||

#4  You're BEAUTIFUL, Zenster. Bulls-eye!

My pleasure, jules 187. I've been enjoying your posts here as well. The Palestinians were but a foretaste of future patterns in Islamic violence. There is no way to feel sorry for them.
Posted by: Zenster || 06/23/2004 21:34 Comments || Top||


Iraq-Jordan
Iraq’s Allawi Requests NATO Military Training Help
The prospect of a NATO role in Iraq grew on Wednesday when Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi formally asked the alliance to help train his country’s fledgling security forces. Such a task would fall far short of Washington’s original hope -- thwarted by opposition from France and Germany -- that the 26-nation alliance would take command of a multinational stabilization force in central Iraq. But France has said it would consider any request from Allawi’s interim government, due to run Iraq after the U.S.-led occupation formally ends on June 30. France and Germany have made clear, however, they would not deploy troops of their own.

A NATO official, declining to be named, said Allawi made his request in a letter to NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer that also called for "other technical assistance," though the nature and timing of this was not spelt out. "The next step is to consult with nations," the official said, adding a decision on how to respond would not be taken by the 26-nation alliance before its summit in Istanbul next Monday and Tuesday. President Bush said at a Group of Eight summit earlier this month that NATO ought to be involved in Iraq, but was contradicted by French President Jacques Chirac.

De Hoop Scheffer, seizing on Chirac’s stated willingness to consider a role if Iraqis made a request, said last week NATO would not "slam the door in the face" of Allawi’s government. So far NATO has limited itself to providing logistical support for a Polish-led multinational division in south-central Iraq as part of U.S.-led forces, though 16 of the 26 alliance’s member states have troops in the country. "Training of Iraqi security forces is the likely option for NATO to start in Iraq -- and some say that’s where it will end," said one alliance diplomat, also declining to be identified. French and German resistance to a collective mission for NATO has hardened in the past few weeks because of unrelenting violence in Iraq and a prisoner abuse scandal involving U.S. troops. Diplomats say dismay over Bush’s perceived support for Israel in its conflict with the Palestinians had made some European nations even less inclined to help Washington carry some of the military burden in Iraq.

Washington has lowered its ambitions for the alliance’s role in Iraq, partly because it believes the presence of NATO-led troops could complicate the chain of command but also because many of its European allies are militarily overstretched. "Let’s not think there is a huge body of troops waiting in NATO just to be asked to come to Iraq," Secretary of State Colin Powell said in an interview earlier this month. One European diplomat, asking not to be named, said it was not clear what NATO could offer Allawi since it had no previous experience, as a collective organization, of training armed forces from a non-member.

The interim government has said it plans to restructure Iraq’s security forces, fashioning the existing Civil Defense Corps into a national guard. The nascent army would also back police units dedicated to fighting guerrillas and preventing sabotage attacks on vital oil pipelines, while border and coastal police would be beefed up to keep foreign fighters out.
Posted by: TS(vice girl) || 06/23/2004 2:16:24 PM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Club NATO is on the case, children. Keep your fingers on your cheese and your eyes on your white sheets. The Chirac unit is comin' to town. Eeez large and en charge.
Posted by: Zpaz || 06/23/2004 15:27 Comments || Top||

#2  Allawi is putting pressure on NATO to cough up support. They can stonewall the US but will find it more embarassing to do so to the Iraqis themselves - heh.
Posted by: rkb || 06/23/2004 16:03 Comments || Top||


Caucasus
Official Puts Russia Attack Toll at 92
A nighttime attack this week in the Russian republic of Ingushetia by militants near the border of war-ravaged Chechnya killed 92 people and wounded 125, a regional government official said Wednesday. Among the dead were 67 members of law enforcement agencies, said the official, Magomed Ziyaudinnov. About 1,000 militants had taken part in the attacks late Monday night, Ziyaudinnov said, quoting the Ingush Interior Ministry. Ingush officials had previously said about 200 fighters had participated. The regional branch of Russia’s Federal Security Service received information about the movements of an armed group about 30 minutes before the start of the attacks, the ITAR-Tass news agency quoted the deputy of the regional branch, Andrei Konin, as saying. "But we did not expect such breadth — simultaneous attacks on 15 sites," Konin told ITAR-Tass. An Ingush policeman who identified himself only by his first name, Musa, said the attacks appeared to be timed around the changing of the guard at the Kavkaz checkpoint, the biggest army and police traffic stop on the main highway between Chechnya and Ingushetia, shortly before midnight Monday. Many soldiers were killed in ambushes, while police and other law enforcement officials were shot and killed after being called to work after an alert was issued, Musa said. The officials were stopped and asked for identification papers at checkpoints set up by the gunmen, who were dressed in black balaclava masks and camouflage uniforms or black leather jackets similar to those worn by police.
Posted by: TS(vice girl) || 06/23/2004 1:58:07 PM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:


Iraq-Jordan
Sadr's Followers Won't Join Council
Posted by: Frank G || 06/23/2004 13:20 || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  F*** 'em if they can't take a joke.
Posted by: Zpaz || 06/23/2004 14:16 Comments || Top||

#2  It still amazes just how stoopid arabs can be. How Tater can be popular is beyond me. it seems coherency in thought processes has still penetrated the arab mind only slightly. Too bad.
Posted by: Brett_the_Quarkian || 06/23/2004 14:35 Comments || Top||

#3  General Hertling was overheard to reply: "Don't like that invitation, fatso? How 'bout this one: You and a 1000 of your mini-martyrs meet me at the OK Corral Mosque. It should be easy to spot me. I'll be the one wearing a light tan, late model Abrams. Bring buckets so we can clean the floor with you afterwards. We are very keen to preserve the sanguinity sanctity of the mosque."
Posted by: Zpaz || 06/23/2004 14:57 Comments || Top||

#4  Maybe we should invite him to join the choir invisible.
Posted by: BH || 06/23/2004 15:01 Comments || Top||

#5  Not a problem. No participation, no say. If they try to impose their views on everybody else at gunpoint, kill them. Simple as that.
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama || 06/23/2004 15:18 Comments || Top||

#6  But Bomb-a-Rama! Sadr is a 'legitimate' voice in Iraq! Just ask Kerry!

I say fuck-em! If they dont like the results and try to impose their will, kill them.
Posted by: CrazyFool || 06/23/2004 15:35 Comments || Top||

#7  Sadr is a 'legitimate' voice in Iraq! Just ask Kerry!

This may or may not come as a surprise, but I feel that some of the current administration officials get some of the blame also. Gen. Kimmitt stated a while back that Sadr was either going to be captured or killed, but at the moment we have neither. Excuse me for sounding exasperated, but IMO a lack of testicular fortitude is what's caused all these problems, from Fallujah to Sadr. And for the record, I don't believe Kerry is going to be any better.
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama || 06/23/2004 18:12 Comments || Top||

#8  Or perhaps the current administration plans to let the Iraqis execute him for the murder for which he is charged. He'll be equally dead, we won't have made him a martyr, the Iraqis will get some experience with how to handle "insurgents" and a message may be sent to future "insurgents". Doesn't get the blood up as well, but probably better in the long run.
Posted by: Mr. Davis || 06/23/2004 18:33 Comments || Top||

#9  As expected; he'll be the joker in this card game! His end game will be to stir civil war after the handover; within the next 3 years. His goal is to "unite" the Iraqi Islamic sympathizers with the rule of Iran to formulate a defacto 'Super State'!Should he survive, of course and banking on inaction from Israel (interceding into Iranian airspace!!)
Posted by: smn || 06/23/2004 21:59 Comments || Top||


How we kicked Sheik Muqtada al-Sadr's ass
Posted by: Dragon Fly || 06/23/2004 12:02 || Comments || Link || [1 views] Top|| File under:

#1 
The division estimates it killed at least several thousand militia members.
Nice.
Posted by: someone || 06/23/2004 12:14 Comments || Top||

#2  Apparently Gen Hertling didn't get the memo - this was supposed to be a QUAGMIRE. Good article...can't wait for the networks to follow up on this great news.
(/sarcasm off)
Posted by: Rex Mundi || 06/23/2004 12:15 Comments || Top||

#3  Great article--too bad nobody outside of Rantburg and the Washington Times readership will hear about it! Spread the word, gents (and ladies)!
Posted by: Dar || 06/23/2004 12:31 Comments || Top||

#4  As happy as i am about the whumping we gave this guy, I think we should learn from the examples of Arafat, Hussein, etc... that his ass ain't totally kicked until he takes the dirt nap. As any new parent can attest to, even a baby with only one tooth poking through it's gums can give a nasty bite.
Posted by: Dripping Sarcasm || 06/23/2004 12:34 Comments || Top||

#5  Dripping Sarcasm while you are correct that this assmuzzle needs a dirt nap...The important point here is how wrong the partisan media was in its dire prediction of doom and failure.
Posted by: Dragon Fly || 06/23/2004 12:39 Comments || Top||

#6  Alternative Headlines:

Tons of Toe Tags for Tater's Toadies
First Herd Stampedes the 'Tater'
Posted by: badanov || 06/23/2004 13:11 Comments || Top||

#7  As happy as i am about the whumping we gave this guy, I think we should learn from the examples of Arafat, Hussein, etc... that his ass ain't totally kicked until he takes the dirt nap.

Agreed.

The important point here is how wrong the partisan media was in its dire prediction of doom and failure.

Um ... no. The "important thing" is somehow ensuring that brain dead people of every stripe and office get clear on the fact that Sadr must face trial instead of saying how the United States will not oppose a political role in Iraq for Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr. This @ssclown has weasled his way through murder, mayhem and mindless savagery. How in hell anyone can think that this maggot has a place anywhere except a jail cell is simply in-f&%king-credible.
Posted by: Zenster || 06/23/2004 13:12 Comments || Top||

#8  Tater isnt Arafat. Arafat spent years establishing Byzantine controls on the Pal security services, and indeed throughout the Pal kleptocracy, so that its taken huge efforts to even begin to clean it up. even so he seems to be on the point of being marginalized.

Tater was just a young preacher, with a famous name, and a constituency among the dispossed poor Shia of East Baghdad. Which he used to build a militia several thousand strong. He decided to hit the mattresses before reconstruction could begin to normalize East Baghdad, and introduce normal politics there. Well he lost his war, and lost his militia. Hes still got his name, and will still try to be a player. But hes pretty marginalized. So much so that when the "friendlies" invited his party to join a national conference (shocking conservative pundits like Tacitus) they only offered him one seat out of a thousand - so humiliating that he turned it down.

Better to jail him now, or wait till the Iraqi govt is more settled - i dont know i'll leave that to the judgement of the guys on the ground, esp the Iraqis. But marginalized he seems to be.
Posted by: Liberalhawk || 06/23/2004 13:19 Comments || Top||

#9  Zenster: Read

Not everything we read from Rooters is trustworthy!
Posted by: Dragon Fly || 06/23/2004 13:29 Comments || Top||

#10  Thank you for the link, Dragon Fly. Thanks to Rantburg, I have become a lot more sensitive to media bias than in the past. I still feel that even passing the buck to Iraq's government is dead wrong. Sadr was directly responsible for the murder and mutilation of American soldiers and citizens.

While there must be a degree of respect shown for Iraq's sovereignty, a firm insistence upon Sadr's trial and loud protestations of any consideration given to a political future for him would be more appropriate.

Even Fox News is carrying blather like this:

Still, U.S. civilian and military officials have floated ideas about offering al-Sadr's followers various roles in Iraqi society, including jobs within the police or civil defense forces.

Such spineless crap literally invites reestablishment of the usual thugocracy.
Posted by: Zenster || 06/23/2004 13:48 Comments || Top||

#11  While Fox is much better than CNNABCCBSNBCBBCNPR, I find that they too often focus on issues that support the other side.

It doesn't matter if they run piece after piece supporting Rusmfeld and Bush on Abu Gharib - they are still putting the focus on AG - instead of the UNSCAM. If they run piece after piece of "Did Bush Lie", instead of interviews with grateful Iraqi's, happy to be rid of their Rapist Murder in Chief, or in-depth interviews on what really happened to the WMD's or stories about how the sewage treatment has improved or electricity is at pre-war levels. But yet, if you turn on FOX, I assure you, you will only find stories about DID BUSH LIE? No matter how many flags FOX waves or "kudos" they throw Bush's way, it still benefits "the other side".

How many pieces have you seen FOX run about Kerry's shady past, or Iraqi's grateful for their new services, schools, and support. How many pro-US demonstrations did they cover? PRECIOUS FEW, if you ask me!!

It's not like they can't find plenty of good material to run with. It's available on the blogs daily. Yet instead they almost always run: Our bipartisan panel is here to discuss AG, Where are the WMDs, Did Bush Lie, Is Bush an Idiot with Big Ears?

It's just a more sophisticated propaganda machine, if you ask me.

NOT HELPFUL
Up at 10:00 - Critics say the potential homecoming Queen has a big butt - share your opinion - next!
Posted by: Anonymous5333 || 06/23/2004 14:27 Comments || Top||

#12  rather than Fox being a very sophisticated propaganda machine for the left, wouldnt them being an incompetent propaganda machine for the right be a simpler explanation? :)
Posted by: Liberalhawk || 06/23/2004 14:35 Comments || Top||

#13  LH - works either way.
Posted by: Anonymous5333 || 06/23/2004 14:48 Comments || Top||

#14  Or, perhaps, they're at the mercy of the news wires.
Posted by: Robert Crawford || 06/23/2004 14:49 Comments || Top||

#15  Allow me to be the first to welcome the return of the Powell Doctrine.

Posted by: H.D. Miller || 06/23/2004 17:02 Comments || Top||

#16  I believe it was Allawi who said that Sadr would of course be welcomed into politics... after he turns himself in for trial.

I assume this is also the Bush line.
Posted by: someone || 06/23/2004 17:25 Comments || Top||

#17  This codicil to the Bush Doctrine clearly states that when faced with a quagmire, first apply enough heat to dry the swamp, then kill anything that tries to crawl out. Seems to work well enough. Maybe we should apply it to some of the other "quagmires" that the press is so quick to point out for us.
Posted by: RWV || 06/23/2004 17:45 Comments || Top||

#18  How many of the dead terrorists are Iranian agents? How many are from Arabia or Syria?

Where is the media on this?
Posted by: Mark Espinola || 06/23/2004 21:24 Comments || Top||

#19  Now Mark, you know exactly where the media is. They've got their head up Clinton's ass. They can't see anything but crap and a gerbil.
Posted by: Silentbrick || 06/23/2004 23:14 Comments || Top||

#20  Oh my God, and i was complaining about the forum i visit.
Posted by: Atabeira || 06/23/2004 23:31 Comments || Top||


Afghanistan/South Asia
Death of Nek Mohammed weakens al-Qaeda but angers Pashtuns
For many tribesmen, he was like David fighting the Goliath of Pakistani and US forces, and his "martyrdom" Thursday ensures him a place in the myths and legends of Pashtun culture. Naik Mohammad, a top Al Qaeda supporter, led the armed resistance against Pakistan’s security forces and protected hundreds of Arab, Chechen, and Uzbek guerrillas hiding in the tribal region of South Waziristan. The long-haired holy warrior and seven comrades were killed in a rocket attack in a village named Doag outside the regional capital of Wana. His hideout, a fellow tribesman’s mud hut, was located after tracing a satellite phone call by Mr. Mohammad - perhaps with US help.
Mmmmm.... Perhaps.
As thousands of tribesmen mourn his death, Pakistan and US officials are hailing the strike as a success for their coordinated strategy to trap Al Qaeda remnants - possibly including Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri - along the Afghan border. "This is a big success in our ongoing war against terrorism," said military spokesman, Maj. Gen. Shaukat Sultan. In Kabul, Lt. Col. Tucker Mansager of the US coalition forces said, "It is our hope that his death will help disorganize the ongoing fight by foreign terrorists in the tribal areas of Pakistan and allow the Pakistan military to better destroy the terrorists that remain in the area."

Some analysts agree that Mohammad’s death will disrupt the local support network relied upon by the foreign militants. "The killing of Naik Mohammad is like removing the shield of Al Qaeda militants in the tribal region," says Sailab Mehsud, an expert on South Waziristan. "It will benefit fighting Pakistani forces on both local and international fronts. It will demoralize and warn local militants that if their commander can be killed, so can they. And it will send a strong message internationally that Pakistani forces are serious in their fight against terrorism." So far, the tribal belt is quiet after Mohammad’s killing; but the local saying is that tribesmen become silent whenever they are angry. Naik’s deputy commanders are choosing his replacement to continue their fight, while his footmen are stoking anti-US sentiments.
Notice that Nek's boyz didn't have a replacement waiting in the wings, waiting to take over within hours, like the Arabians did when al-Muqrin was banged. Nek was the top in his nek of the woods — which implies that Qaeda bigs are elsewhere.
"Our operations will continue and the anti-Muslim forces will have to face the consequences.... Naik Mohammad embraced martyrdom with the grace of Allah, but the mission and our activities will continue as long as mujahids are alive," says his associate.
Your operations were continuing before he was banged, so I guess it's a wash, huh? Except that he's dead and his successor will hopefully be a target...
Rumors are circulating among tribesmen that an unmanned US spy plane was in the vicinity prior to the attack and may have fired the deadly shot. Tribal elders say Mohammad’s supporters are exploiting these stories to rally the tribes against Pakistan’s security forces. "They are distributing pamphlets and seeking help of local clerics in the far-flung areas to put the blame of Naik Mohammad’s death on America and to malign Pakistan’s security forces [by saying] they got the help from Americans to kill tribesmen," says a tribal elder.
I have my doubts it was a super-accurate, doughty Pak myself. Perhaps we should be pushing the idea that you're not safe anywhere if you're a Bad Guy, and maybe bump off a few clerics the same way to drive the point home...
Mohammad became controversial for some tribesmen who saw him as responsible for their suffering by not giving up support of the foreigners, deemed to be terrorists by the government. But his sudden violent death is eclipsing the resentment. His comrades are lionizing him and saying that he is an example of the immortality jihadis achieve - in this life and the hereafter. The tale resonates at least among one local tribesman. "He lived and died like a true Pashtun," says Ahmed Noor. "He was a symbol of bravery according to tribal culture and traditions.
"He had a turban! He had a gun! And nobody rolled his eyes like old Nek!"
"His life is a perfect story for any play or a movie: the mission to liberate Afghanistan from occupying forces ... the fight against Americans in Afghanistan and then Pakistani troops ... and a perfect ending as he breathed his last while his guns, grenades and rocket lay next to him."
Posted by: Dan Darling || 06/23/2004 10:53:28 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Rumors are circulating among tribesmen that an unmanned US spy plane was in the vicinity prior to the attack and may have fired the deadly shot

"couldnt be those wog Punjabis serving Musharaff, oh no, had to be the Kaffirs with the their superweapons, especially their death rays"

The implicit RACISM of the jihadis, with their unwillingness to credit muslim anti-jihadis with any level of military competence, is striking.
Posted by: Liberalhawk || 06/23/2004 11:02 Comments || Top||

#2  Frankly, LH - I also subscribe to the US UAV/Hellfire hit. I don't see much to admire in the Pak operations
Posted by: Frank G || 06/23/2004 11:12 Comments || Top||

#3  "Oh, don't you dare kill them, you might make them angry." (wring, wring).
Posted by: Anonymoose || 06/23/2004 11:15 Comments || Top||

#4  I am nearing a Nashville moment.
The long-haired holy warrior and seven comrades were killed in a rocket attack in a village named Doag
Posted by: Shipman || 06/23/2004 11:30 Comments || Top||

#5  C'mon Frank, it was the drums. The drums.
Posted by: Seafarious || 06/23/2004 11:35 Comments || Top||

#6  Did the hellfire also call 100 jihadis on the ground? Or is the Pak army making those numbers up?
I dunno, it seems that when the Pak army screws up, its on the Pak army, and when they bag somebody, it had to be the Americans. Seems like Pak army uselessness is an unfalsifiable.

Seems to me more that the assasination attempt on a general in Karachi got them to act more serious.
Posted by: Liberalhawk || 06/23/2004 11:49 Comments || Top||

#7  As thousands of tribesmen mourn his death, billions worldwide celebrate it.
Posted by: Anonymous5333 || 06/23/2004 12:17 Comments || Top||

#8  Nek was dead in Doag. Nice ring to it.
Posted by: Alaska Paul || 06/23/2004 12:22 Comments || Top||

#9  typical lefty crap. Underneath the happy surface masks a dark and sinister facade.

Why don't they just start every BBC, NPR, AJ, Reuters, AP piece just like that.

I love this line: So far, the tribal belt is quiet after Mohammad’s killing; but the local saying is that tribesmen become silent whenever they are angry.

Translation: no seething, no rage, just a great big giant yawn. Though to the causual observer it might appear that they really don't even give a damn. Ahhhh....but don't be fooled by appearances. Instead you should "interpret" their silence as a warning of dire revenge. Why? Because contrary to how it seems, the relative calm and clear skies mask a dark and stormy night.

yawn. Bottom line: Nek's dead. It's a huge blow to AQ and relatively few seem to care.
Posted by: Anonymous5333 || 06/23/2004 12:29 Comments || Top||

#10  If they start to seethe (TM) they will get out of their depth quickly. This a**hole place of the world would not be missed by anyone. Send in the '52s to flatten the place if they get out of line. Hopefully, Anon5333 is right, no one really gives a damn and they are all hitting the pipe at the bazaar.
Posted by: remote man || 06/23/2004 13:06 Comments || Top||

#11  CSM actually isnt as lefty as the NYT, NPR, etc (at least thats my impression) but they have been historically hostile to Israel and to US policy in the Middle East.
Posted by: Liberalhawk || 06/23/2004 13:09 Comments || Top||

#12  dunno, it seems that when the Pak army screws up, its on the Pak army, and when they bag somebody, it had to be the Americans. Seems like Pak army uselessness is an unfalsifiable.

I think old man you've got it!
Posted by: Shipman || 06/23/2004 13:15 Comments || Top||

#13  "I never liked him anyway." commented a surviving neighbor, "He kept bothering my goats."...
Posted by: mojo || 06/23/2004 14:18 Comments || Top||

#14  For many tribesmen, he was like David fighting the Goliath of Pakistani and US forces

BWAH HAH HA!!! That means you're nothing but a dirty Joooo!
Posted by: Chris W. || 06/23/2004 15:58 Comments || Top||

#15  For many tribesmen, he was like David fighting the Goliath of Pakistani and US forces

It is a rather ironic turn of phrase, isn't it?
Posted by: Pappy || 06/23/2004 20:29 Comments || Top||


Israel-Palestine
Israel is WINNING the intifada
Israeli security guards to lose jobs,June 23, 2004
or correctly titled, Israel is winning the Intifada.
ABOUT 20,000 Israeli security guards are likely to soon find themselves out of work as a result of the decline in Palestinian attacks, an Israeli official said today. Many restaurateurs and the owners of other leisure facilities were set to lay off staff who frisk customers and their bags after a marked drop in attacks in the first half of the year, Benny Peperman, director of the infrastructure ministry, told the Yediot Aharonot daily. The Israeli military said yesterday that the number of attacks by Palestinian militants in the first six months of the year had dropped by 75 per cent from the same period in 2003. The number of private security guards has risen from 17,000 to 46,000 since the September 2000 start of the Palestinian intifada or uprising.
Posted by: Anon1 || 06/23/2004 8:51:53 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  one word - Fence
Posted by: Liberalhawk || 06/23/2004 9:19 Comments || Top||

#2  agreed, liberalhawk: build it high, build it wide, flood it with a moat, electrify it... yes they need a big fat WALL: wonder of the modern age. Sometimes people just physically need to be kept out, sad but true.

Also it can't hurt that sugardaddy Saddam is gone with his lollybag of US$14k for the families of every suicide boomer.

Also the icing of every top Hamas official from Tehran to Timbuktu can only have helped the situation.

I love how the tele mirror spins it as just a "decline in Palestinian attacks" as though it was due to an absence of trying rather than a successful put-down.
Posted by: Anon1 || 06/23/2004 9:39 Comments || Top||

#3  "decline in successful Paleo attacks" would've been accurate
Posted by: Frank G || 06/23/2004 9:56 Comments || Top||

#4  Wow, Liberalhawk, we find common ground!

I agree with LH & Anon1 about the wall. That said, it seems to be a pattern over there that, whenever we make a prediction about what will or will not happen, the terrorists are listening and try to produce conditions that are 180 degrees different from what we pronounce. A wall will make conditions less easily "adjusted" by the suicide bombers.
Posted by: jules 187 || 06/23/2004 10:22 Comments || Top||

#5  The wall has helped, especially near Jenin.

However, other things are going on. The wall is not in operation near Jerusalem where some of the most deadly attacks were. The removal of Saddam's money from the terrorfata and the decrease in Saudi money probably are key elements here. Somewhat ironically, Arafat embezzles most of the discretionary EU money before it can get to the hands of the terror gangs. This means the Israelis can buy more agents.
Posted by: mhw || 06/23/2004 11:45 Comments || Top||

#6  mhw - the fence covers the whole Samaria area IIUC, from Jenin around Nablus and Ramallah. Gaza was already fenced, so that leaves Jerusalem, and Judea (ie Hebron etc) but the south the terrain is more open and desertlike, and distances to main population centers are greater. Only good route left is Jerusalem - and the fence by freeing up resources, makes it easier to stop attacks there.

Jules - well our common ground only goes so far, i fear. I note that reports indicate that the fence has also made life better for Pals in Jenin, and I celebrate that, as well.
Posted by: Liberalhawk || 06/23/2004 11:55 Comments || Top||

#7  That also is not a point of disagreement. I vehemently oppose the "resistance" (suicide bombers), but I am certainly not against the Palestinians and in fact hope to see a peaceful and tolerant Palestinian state (but not at the price of eliminating the state of Israel). I hope the Palestininas' lives get easier, too, so they get some momentum and faith in the future.

While justice for Israel after WWII was well deserved (Jews had been the favorite kicking boy of the whole world for a long time), the justice the Israelis received through a return to native land came at the price of injustice to Palestinian inhabitants of the shared land. I don't think we disagree there? If the two religions could have fully accepted each other (live and let live toleration), this debate would be nonexistent. Since they can't or won't, then we have to find a MEANINGFUL way to try to put things right. It won't come through human manna floating through the air.
Posted by: jules 187 || 06/23/2004 12:26 Comments || Top||

#8  Let me see: 1)Build a fence, 2)Take away funding, 3)Kill Leaders. Sound like a good recipe for success. Notice not ONE Arab country can running to the aid of Arafish or his thugs? That should tell you a lot.
Posted by: Cyber Sarge (VRWC CA Chapter) || 06/23/2004 14:06 Comments || Top||

#9  Jules, I can relate to what you are saying. However hasn't that route has been tried for the past 20-30 years to no avail?

The latest 'roadmap' was targeted and murdered on a bus by Hamas. Arafat has shown no interest in solving the problem (only of prolonging it). Aid money for the Palistinian people are being outright stolen by Arafat and his gang (so much for giving a shit about 'his people'....).

Perhaps after the current 'leadership' in Palistine is dead (or killed) can we get someone in there who is truly interested in helping palestine.

In the meantime the fence/wall seems like the best idea - create a defacto Palestinian state.
Posted by: CrazyFool || 06/23/2004 14:26 Comments || Top||

#10  Cyber - er Syria, it would seem. with the Egyptians and Jordanians participating in plans that would weaken Arafats hold on the PA, and Arafat screaming bloody murder, he was backed by terror groups meeting in BEIRUT, all the groups based in DAMASCUS. I think i saw a quote from Baby Assad, but im not sure.

To some extent this is an extension of a struggle for power over Palestine between Egypt and Syria, a struggle that antedates modern times.
Posted by: Liberalhawk || 06/23/2004 14:39 Comments || Top||

#11  I agree with you, CF. Most people that aren't fixed into a philospohical corner can see that, too.

And I bet you would agree that the Palestinians don't see it that way-they actually honor these "martyrs" and astoundingly don't make the connection that the continuation of the suicide bombings has caused the 4-party Peace Plan to stall out. We have been waiting for 2 1/2 years for them to discard this "resistance", and they haven't. There are just a lot of dead bodies-no Palestinian state.

So we go back to the original idea, where stangely enough, you, LH, and I all agree--the wall is accomplishing what no other approach seems to: a reduction in the rate of suicide bombings and therefore a step toward real progress.

Personally, I don't see how Palestinians continuing to stand by Arafat, a leader whose name is now synonymous with terrorism, will get them any closer to having a state.
Posted by: jules 187 || 06/23/2004 14:54 Comments || Top||

#12  The wall is cutting down on the number of boomers and at the same time it is destroying the "boomer as crutch" meme.

If there're fewer boomers the pali people may be able to let go and see the intifada has the poor investment it is.

Is that clear?
Rite.

Posted by: Shipman || 06/23/2004 16:59 Comments || Top||

#13  I heard from one Israeli that it's not so much about religion, etc., but that the Palestinians want the land because of what the Israelis have done with it through farming and development ($$$).

I bet if the Palestinians were half as smart, the surrounding Arab countries would be begging them to be "immigrants." As it is, Palestinians, in general, are just dead weight on any economy.

Agree with you Shipman--at least I hope you're right. Of course, "the wall" itself could be the next gripe, and the "source" of all their troubles.

Do they have monitored entrances (in the wall) into Israel for Palestinian workers? (Is this a dumb question?)


Posted by: ex-lib || 06/23/2004 19:39 Comments || Top||

#14  I think that the Israelis should expel all Palestinians, seal the border and then do what everyplace from Iowa to Canada has done, import Mexican workers.
Posted by: RWV || 06/23/2004 22:38 Comments || Top||

#15  ex-lib. I seem to recall that the Paleo's and their media lapdogs are already complaining about the wall cutting them off from their wall.

They even complained because one woman had, in effect, her own personal crossing. I guess it wasn't enough for them.

In a way I kind of feel sorry for them - the average Palestinian. They do really live in a hell hole. But it is a hell-hole of their own making. They have had plenty of chances to settle it and find final peace but each time Hamas and Arafat have deliberatly killed any prospect for peace.

They need to take responsibility for their own actions and stop blaming it on 'Zionist' and the 'Imperial Americans'....
Posted by: CrazyFool || 06/24/2004 0:36 Comments || Top||


Iraq-Jordan
Saddam’s Prison Letter: ‘say hello to everyone’
Posted by: Super Hose || 06/23/2004 03:14 || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  "Hello, everyone."
Posted by: BH || 06/23/2004 10:16 Comments || Top||

#2  Odd, but I won't be tying that yellow ribbon 'round the old oak tree for you, Saddam.
Posted by: eLarson || 06/23/2004 10:38 Comments || Top||

#3  I would, if by "yellow ribbon" you mean "hemp noose" and by "around" you mean "over a branch".
Posted by: Robert Crawford || 06/23/2004 11:02 Comments || Top||

#4  Argh! My keyboard! bwa-hahahahaha! ;)
Posted by: eLarson || 06/23/2004 11:40 Comments || Top||

#5  hello sammy! hope they are feed you well. purdy soon you are can say hi to ooday and coosay for me. :)
Posted by: muck4doo || 06/23/2004 14:11 Comments || Top||

#6  ah jeeez....

hello kofi,
hello johnny
ima calling from camp north ali

we have a counselor name of england...
Posted by: Shipman || 06/23/2004 16:46 Comments || Top||

#7  Hello, Hello .....Hello :)
Posted by: Mark Espinola || 06/23/2004 21:26 Comments || Top||


Lawyer: Red Croissant Cross documents show Saddam abuse
From CNN Senior Editor for Arab Affairs Octavia Nasr
A lawyer for former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein has alleged that Red Cross documents show his client has been abused while held in detention. Jordanian defense lawyer Mohammad Rashdan showed CNN the documents, which were filled out after the International Committee of the Red Thingy Cross (ICRTC) visited the captured leader on January 21.
Egads, the man has been made to suffer? Call out the avenging angels! What’s that you say, they’re all busy poking pitchforks into his spawn sons, Qsay and Oday?
Rashdan showed one page of the ICRTC report, on which various boxes can be checked to indicate the physical condition of a detainee. "Good health" and "slightly wounded" are marked to indicate Saddam’s condition. "Why would he be slightly wounded a month after his arrest?" Rashdan asked during an interview with CNN.
Because he might have rammed his head into a wall after thinking about all of the innocent people he’s slaughtered over the years?
"He’s being abused, just like the prisoners of Abu Ghraib were abused." However, the attorney had no proof of any abuse. Rashdan has never spoken to or seen Saddam, despite making several requests to do so, he said.
Oops, sorry. I left out the part about those panties. He was even rewarded by getting the used ones.
Saddam was captured by U.S. forces in December near his hometown of Tikrit and has remained in coalition custody at an undisclosed location since. Rashdan said he has sent several letters to U.S. officials, including Attorney General John Ashcroft, requesting his client have "the basic rights anyone on the face of this earth has: the right to a representation and fair trial."
His lawyer left out; "The right to remain dead."
So far he has received no responses, he said. The attorney is in the United States this week, visiting media outlets with the ICRTC documents.
I’m crushed, positively sleepless over such terrible news!
He is set to appear on several American news programs and plans to hold a news conference in Washington in the coming days. Rashdan also complained that he doesn’t think the United States will be able to provide him and his client with a safe meeting place when they are finally able to get together. "They cannot even protect their own troops from insurgents. It’s a disgrace," the attorney said.
No one can protect anybody from determined and psychopathic murderous thugs. But you can always try.
"How can they provide me with a chance to sit down and talk to him without dangers of all kinds looming around us?"
Ummm ... maybe this has something to do with the need to protect him from thousands of shoe-wielding Iraqi citizens.
Pentagon sources have said Saddam is being held in Iraq but the exact location has not been disclosed for security reasons.

Letter to spawn daughter
Rashdan also showed CNN part of the ICRC report entitled the "Family Message" section. In it, Saddam had written a letter to his daughter, Raghead (sorry folks, I just couldn’t resist) Raghad, though most of the text is blacked out. It is not clear if the redaction was done before the letter was sent, or if it was blacked out afterward to protect the family’s privacy. "To my small family and my big family ... in peace," part of the letter reads.
They left out the part about how his "big family" gets the "big one."
"As far as my soul and my morale, they are twinkling in the great Shaitan’s Lord’s blessing. My regards to everybody, (signed) Saddam Hussein," the letter finishes. U.S. officials have said that the former president has been less than cooperative during questioning by interrogators and has not divulged much useful information. Saddam has not yet been officially charged with any crimes.
But curiosity about that missing $40,000,000,000 USD somehow keeps them motivated.
When asked if the former president would testify on his own behalf at a trial, Rashdan said that question is "jumping the super gun." The attorney said that in his view, the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq was morally obligated illegal, and therefore, everything that came after it is pure gravy "null and void." On Tuesday, Salim Chalabi, the head of the Iraqi war crimes tribunal, said that the Iraqi government could get legal custody of the former president while leaving him under U.S. guard.
Tasers and cattle prods remain entirely optional to all parties, however.
Chalabi said he doesn’t believe at present that Iraq has the ability to hold Saddam securely, citing the chance that insurgents might try to spring him from jail. A CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll released at the end of April showed that 83 percent of Iraqis questioned agreed the former president should be put on trial, and 84 percent believed him probably guilty of murder and torture.
But the "shredder minority" is gaining!
A majority, 56 percent, believed Saddam will get a fair trial, and 61 percent would support the death penalty for him. Rashdan says his client is the sole legitimate president of Iraq, and he believes he should be treated according to the Spanish Inquisition Geneva Conventions -- and with the disrespect due his position. Saddam himself appears to agree with his lawyer. On the ICRC document, he listed his occupation as "Republic’s President and Torturer in Chief."
Posted by: Zenster || 06/23/2004 2:54:49 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  84 percent believed him probably guilty of murder and torture.

Is 12% of the population really that stupid? Isn't that the percentage of the population that enjoy Air America? No, I think AA's listening population is MUCH smaller than that. Says alot, no?
Posted by: B || 06/23/2004 8:58 Comments || Top||

#2  An American captured by Saddam's forces was murdered after capture. Arguably, that changes Saddam's status from POW to unlawful combatant.
Posted by: Robert Crawford || 06/23/2004 9:44 Comments || Top||

#3  Perhaps we should give him some of his own justice. I am sure the Iraqi's can find a people-shreadder in working order somewhere.

And of course his daughters are accessable and still have their eyes we can have goughed out in front of him...... /SARCASM

Isn't it interesting how the Red Thingy is all up in an uproar about this while ignoring the real abuses going on in Sudan, North Korea, ..... You dont think they have a political motive do you?

Oh perish the thought!
Posted by: CrazyFool || 06/23/2004 9:58 Comments || Top||

#4  his attorney should be able to safely fly into Baghdad. What happens after he gets off the plane, however might be rightly called street justice
Posted by: Frank G || 06/23/2004 10:05 Comments || Top||

#5  I'm still waiting for the Red Thingy to demand access to Matt Maupin. I've even emailed them a couple of times to ask them about it.

Never heard back, oddly enough.
Posted by: Robert Crawford || 06/23/2004 11:03 Comments || Top||

#6  A lawyer for former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein has alleged that Red Cross documents show his client has been abused while held in detention... "Good health" and "slightly wounded" are marked to indicate Saddam’s condition.

Well, we don't know anything about the nature of the wounds yet, so it's a pretty big leap to assume "the wounds" were caused by mistreatment or torture.

We better produce a Picture Book of Torture guide so these workers can reference gouged out eyes, pureed human bodies, perineum tears, and amputations, and see if Saddam's wounds fall into one of his own areas of speciality, or if his "wound" is more along the lines of the ol schoolyard split lip for a big mouth model.
Posted by: jules 187 || 06/23/2004 14:04 Comments || Top||

#7  In short: tough shit. Cry me a friggin' river, Sammy.
Posted by: mojo || 06/23/2004 18:05 Comments || Top||


Africa: Horn
Sudan Arabs: You Are Black Women, and You Are Our Slaves
From The New York Times, an article by Nicholas Kristof
.... Hatum Atraman Bashir, a 35-year-old woman who is pregnant with the baby of one of the 20 Janjaweed raiders who murdered her husband and then gang-raped her. Ms. Bashir said that when the Janjaweed attacked her village, Kornei, she fled with her seven children. But when she and a few other mothers crept out to find food, the Janjaweed captured them and tied them on the ground, spread-eagled, then gang-raped them. "They said, `You are black women, and you are our slaves,’ and they also said other bad things that I cannot repeat," she said, crying softly. "One of the women cried, and they killed her. Then they told me, `If you cry, we will kill you, too.’ " Other women from Kornei confirm her story and say that another woman who was gang-raped at that time had her ears partly cut off as an added humiliation. ....
Posted by: Mike Sylwester || 06/23/2004 8:23:12 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Hey Antisemite and Sammy--these animals aren't antiblack, they're antisomething else! Surely, Israel should "make peace" on the terms of these dedicated antisomethingists!
Posted by: BMN || 06/23/2004 8:35 Comments || Top||

#2  they are barbarians....enabled by Islam. Not all Moslems are barbarians, but the "religion of peace" enables this behavior by those who are.
Posted by: B || 06/23/2004 8:38 Comments || Top||

#3  Ok, I am sounding like a broken record, but why aren't there any Western/Christian "charities" to provide arms to African undergoing genocide by Arabs and Muslims? Sally Struthers, want to really "Save the Children"? Then arm their fathers and mothers. The best thing we can do for Africa is to defeat/kill/chase these Arabs and their jihadi mullahs all the back into that shithole Arabian peninsula.
Posted by: ed || 06/23/2004 8:44 Comments || Top||

#4  What Ed said.And when they go for some payback just sit back and let them go.
You do notice when we see these news items like this we seldom hear from the Islam supportter that hang out here,when we do they use the lame excuse"they are not true Muslims".
Posted by: Raptor || 06/23/2004 9:11 Comments || Top||

#5  Are you kidding Raptor? Antisemite never posts in threads like this one--though she might now, saying "I condemn this, but of course the US and Israel are much worse." That would miss the point, which is that her jihadi boyfriend has tricked her--not at all difficult, considering she believes absolutely everything she reads from the Islamofascist websites she's always blathering about--into thinking that the poor Hamasniks are any different than these "militia" pieces of shit.
Posted by: BMN || 06/23/2004 9:22 Comments || Top||

#6  Ok, I am sounding like a broken record, but why aren't there any Western/Christian "charities" to provide arms to African undergoing genocide by Arabs and Muslims?

Sadly, a lot of them have objections to people defending themselves, even against slavers.
Posted by: Robert Crawford || 06/23/2004 9:42 Comments || Top||

#7  I believe the problem is that the Janjaweed have government airpower backing them up.
Posted by: someone || 06/23/2004 12:00 Comments || Top||

#8  RC is right. Most of the charities working in this area are peaceful Christian organizations and would not supply arms to the south Sudanese even if they could. What we need is a government organization that can secretly funnel arms and train a non-Muslim army in the south. Too bad we don’t have a secret organization that would be able to perform this task. We used to have one but they are too busy having ‘Gay Pride Day’ and are too scared to venture into a war that might upset some political/religious/ethnic group. Kind of makes you want to cry.
Posted by: Cyber Sarge (VRWC CA Chapter) || 06/23/2004 12:12 Comments || Top||

#9  So much for the vaunted "Islamic equality."
Posted by: The Doctor || 06/23/2004 12:26 Comments || Top||

#10  Whenever the black villagers fight back a little the Janjaweed killers withdraw and call in the Sudanese military. The Army and Air Force then levels the village under the pretense of "keeping the peace". Nothing will happen about this because the US is busy and the rest of the "civilized" world doesn't care.

Face it, in the absence of a strategic resource to protect, it's difficult to get First World taxpayers excited about defending foreigners.
Posted by: Dan || 06/23/2004 12:32 Comments || Top||

#11  Time to fund a trip by Al Sharpton to Western Sudan.
Posted by: mhw || 06/23/2004 12:36 Comments || Top||

#12  Dan, probably right. They need to start wearing womens panties on their heads to get any real attention from the media....
Posted by: Anonymous5339 || 06/23/2004 12:37 Comments || Top||

#13  oops, that last comment was mine....
Posted by: CrazyFool || 06/23/2004 12:38 Comments || Top||

#14  Time to fund a trip by Al Sharpton to Western Sudan.

Yeah, and more-time to start making US funding of the UN contingent upon taking action against genocidal crimes before they become genocidal extermination. (Not holding my breath, France, Germany, Chile, Russia,...)
Posted by: jules 187 || 06/23/2004 15:19 Comments || Top||

#15  actually, among the many atrocities visited upon these poor people last year was a visit from the Rev hissownself
Posted by: Frank G || 06/23/2004 15:26 Comments || Top||

#16  What we need is a government organization that can secretly funnel arms and train a non-Muslim army in the south.

Why government? Why not an independent charity to do it?
Posted by: Robert Crawford || 06/23/2004 15:29 Comments || Top||

#17  #2 they are barbarians....enabled by Islam. Not all Moslems are barbarians, but the "religion of peace" enables this behavior by those who are.

Well put, B. I still do not comprehend why civilized countries do not simply monitor Jangaweed activity for a major concentration of their troops so that one single air sortie could be used to wipe them out. They are committing crimes against humanity and the Sudanese government's complicity demands that outside forces eliminate these maggots.
Posted by: Zenster || 06/23/2004 15:52 Comments || Top||

#18  I think these kinds stories bother me the most among the multitude of stories that get IGNORED by our LLL "friends".

How can they turn their backs on this, while reporting with a straight face Barry Bonds's statements about the "racist" Boston Red Sox?

I find the concept profoundly disturbing.
Posted by: Chris W. || 06/23/2004 16:07 Comments || Top||

#19  Chris W., as I've asked many times here on RB, where are Harry Belafonte and Danny Glover on this? They are both loud mouth liberal jerkoffs. Maybe they can use their celebrity to shine some light on this problem and do some good for a change. But, since they are both hard core lefties, that means they are in league with the Islamofascists. They won't say a thing.
Posted by: remote man || 06/23/2004 16:15 Comments || Top||

#20  ima always think of "What would Danny dooo".
Posted by: abu HalfEmpty || 06/23/2004 16:24 Comments || Top||

#21  Danny G. is busy trying to find a new long-distance company to get fired from.
Posted by: Chris W. || 06/23/2004 16:35 Comments || Top||

#22  It is a dirty little secret but the colonization of Black Africa was sold to XIXth century public opiniuon as the means to protect the blacks against Arab slave traders.

And if you look in the press from 188x, 189x you see here and there accounts of battles between the patrols of the colonial armies and expeditions of slave traders.
Posted by: Anonymous5345 || 06/23/2004 18:00 Comments || Top||

#23  Anon5345, plz take you pill today, you are ranting but making little sense. What happened in 1800s has NOTHING to do with what is going on in Sudan (other than it's still going on). Why aren't the Black leaders in Congress and Jeese 'Shakedown' Jackson wailing about this? they were plenty loud when South Africa had apartheid, why the silience on Sudan?
Posted by: Cyber Sarge (VRWC CA Chapter) || 06/23/2004 19:30 Comments || Top||

#24  Dan, it might be that "there's no strategic assets", but there weren't and aren't any in Kosovo.

Frankly, it's a non-starter because there are no political points to score in this one, and there also is no clear "enemy" for the usually-outraged to get outraged about.

There isn't a middle-class being turned out and killed by text-book facists, there's no clear racial oppression, there's no 'scenic' territory to get romantic about. It's just a dusty place where one group nearly physically identical to second group is killing them.

Besides, there's an election coming up- regaining the White House is more important than a bunch of Africans anyway...
Posted by: Pappy || 06/23/2004 20:45 Comments || Top||


Afghanistan/South Asia
Pak Al-Qaeda death toll hits 100
THE death toll from Pakistan’s crackdown on al-Qaeda fugitives hiding near the Afghan border rose to 100 today, when troops reportedly killed 30 locals in addition to dozens of foreign militants. Brig. Mahmood Shah, the head of security in Pakistan’s northwestern tribal regions, also said authorities were still uncertain whether any leading al-Qaeda figures were among some 70 "foreign terrorists" who died in the operation earlier this month. "We have no information about it," Shah said.
"We know nothing! NOthing!"
"I mean, they're dead guys. They all look alike."
The dead include Nek Mohammed, a renegade tribal leader accused of sheltering al-Qaeda fugitives. He was killed last week in a missile strike on a mud-brick compound near Wana, the main town in South Waziristan. Six of his associates also died in the assault. This morning, Shah said Mohammed was a "criminal" and had been supporting al-Qaeda suspects for "monetary gains."
Oh, horrors! Not monetary gains!
Shah said the tribal leader was targeted after admitting he was behind attacks on the army in South Waziristan and Karachi, where a senior military official earlier this month escaped an assassination attempt. "He was given enough time to change himself, but he wasted the opportunity," Shah said.
"Repent!"
"Never!"
"Hokay!" [BLAM]
Claiming credit for the boom was stoopid, especially since he claimed it before the boom.
Shah said that, after Mohammed’s death, local tribesmen were helping authorities in their efforts to trace and arrest al-Qaeda figures "more willingly." He said troops had searched 172 homes in the area in the past two weeks. They found neither militants nor weapons, he said.
They did turn up a handsome set of drums, however.
The area is considered a possible hideout for al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden, though there is no hard intelligence on his whereabouts. Government officials had said they believed a high-ranking al-Qaeda operative - possibly bin Laden No. 2 Ayman al-Zawahri - was surrounded in the March attack, but no senior leaders were found. An Uzbek militant, Tahir Yuldash, was reportedly injured in the assault, but he got away.
As Fred would say, pray for sepsis.
Posted by: tipper || 06/23/2004 8:03:44 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  The tribespeople are in the same razor's edge position they've been in for centuries--the most brutal and powerful tribal leader gets your allegiance, unless you want to die. Unfortunately for them, death is ready with either choice now.

It may take so long that the rest of us are all long gone, but I pray the concept of peace-a way of thinking and life that is completely alien to people in that world-will win out.

That being said, I still feel like lighting a birthday cake with 100 candles to celebrate the demise of the Al Qaeda sympathizing beasts that make up the rest of that population.
Posted by: jules 187 || 06/23/2004 15:12 Comments || Top||


Iraq-Jordan
’Wounds’ on Saddam’s body
The lawyer representing Saddam Hussein claims the former Iraqi dictator has been mistreated in US custody. Jordanian lawyer Muhammed al Rushadan, who has been retained by Saddam’s family, said his client had wounds on his body. "There are fresh wounds on his body," he said, citing a Red Cross document he claims to have. Al Rushadan also released comments from Saddam that were taken from a letter to his family. In the note, Saddam asked his family to "say hello to everyone". The deposed Iraqi leader wrote in the heavily censored letter, "my spirit and my morale, they are high, thanks to greatness of God". The letter was written on a standard form provided by the International Committee of the Red Cross, taken when they visited him in February. Yesterday it emerged that the US will hand legal custody of Saddam and a number of other former regime figures to the interim Iraqi government as soon as local courts issue warrants for their arrest and request the transfer. But the US will retain physical custody of Saddam and the prisoners, while giving Iraqi prosecutors and defence lawyers access to them, a US official said.
Posted by: Howard UK || 06/23/2004 4:41:47 AM || Comments || Link || [1 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Boo hoo hoo.

In other news, Rashadan criticized the United States for unnecessarily witholding Sadaam's personal property. Claiming that Sadaam had a right to access to his personal video collection of tortures, rapes and murders, AlRushadan noted, "Mr. Hussein can not sleep without watching these videos before going to bed." "The sleep deprivation this causes Mr. Hussein, falls clearly constitutes cruel and unusual punishment," he said.
Posted by: B || 06/23/2004 6:49 Comments || Top||

#2  "My spirit and my morale are high, thanks to the $40 billion I have stashed away that I will use to bargain for my life."
Posted by: virginian || 06/23/2004 7:59 Comments || Top||

#3  This: "There are fresh wounds on his body"

Does not mesh with

This: "My spirit and my morale, they are high, thanks to greatness of God".
Posted by: Dragon Fly || 06/23/2004 8:00 Comments || Top||

#4  DF,
Incorrect methodology. You are applying the dead white male patriarchal concepts of "logic" and "cause and effect". The correct way looking at things is blame the infidels, inflame Allah's chosen ones with wild accusations, and show he memorized the koran, thereby absolving him of all guilt and blame.
Posted by: ed || 06/23/2004 8:35 Comments || Top||

#5  ed...I stand corrected. In'shalla, I will not let that happen again. Bishmalla!
Posted by: Dragon Fly || 06/23/2004 8:54 Comments || Top||

#6  Zounds!!!
Posted by: BH || 06/23/2004 12:02 Comments || Top||

#7  IF he has fresh wounds I hope some blond female made them while Sammy was wearing a thong over his head. It's as if we captured Hitler and thay are worried if he has fresh sheets! GAWD I HATE THESE TYPES OF LAWYERS!
Posted by: Cyber Sarge (VRWC CA Chapter) || 06/23/2004 13:47 Comments || Top||

#8  BH, that borders on blasphemy. "Zounds" means "by God's wounds," as I recall from my Shakespeare.
Posted by: Tibor || 06/23/2004 15:37 Comments || Top||

#9  Sorry 'bout that. My HS book defined it as the more general (and, no doubt, more PC-ized) "by His Wounds". While I was reading the article, I got this image of a Jordanian lawyer jumping up in court and shouting, "Zounds!!!"
Posted by: BH || 06/23/2004 15:50 Comments || Top||

#10  BH, I, too, misstated things. It should be "by Christ's wounds."
Posted by: Tibor || 06/23/2004 17:46 Comments || Top||

#11  smegmata, no doubt, as opposed to stigmata. BTW_ do you all think that maybe the quality and quantity of his "wounds" might change after he's turned over to his loving countrymen?
Posted by: Anonymous5351 || 06/23/2004 19:13 Comments || Top||

#12  "The lawyer representing Saddam Hussein claims the former Iraqi dictator has been mistreated in US custody."

Well, you know us--abusing Iraqi prisoners right and left . . .
Posted by: She-Troll || 06/23/2004 19:29 Comments || Top||

#13  A tiny sample of the horrors this savage killer dished out to millions of others.

Posted by: Mark Espinola || 06/23/2004 21:08 Comments || Top||

#14  Funny, nobody said much when Stacy Keach got his butt kicked by guards in a UK prison for being stupid, and he did a helluva lot less than Saddam.
Posted by: Pappy || 06/23/2004 22:09 Comments || Top||

#15  sounds a little strange
Posted by: Anonymous5483 || 06/30/2004 16:09 Comments || Top||


U.S. to Hand Over Legal Custody of Saddam
Confirmation of what was reported previously.
The United States will transfer legal custody of Saddam Hussein and other top prisoners to Iraqi authorities giving access to Iraqi prosecutors and defense lawyers as soon as Iraqi courts issue the necessary warrants, a U.S. official said Tuesday. But U.S. forces won't let go of Saddam, even after Iraq regains its sovereignty next week, because Iraq doesn't yet have a prison strong enough to hold the ex-dictator, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. U.S. forces will honor transfer of custody requests from Iraq's incoming government, which takes power June 30, as long as they are accompanied by arrest warrants from an Iraqi court, the official said in a legal briefing with reporters. Details of the transfer will be laid out in a memorandum of understanding between U.S.-led multinational forces and the incoming Iraqi government, he said.

American forces need to keep Saddam and other top figures from his regime in coalition lockups for their own safety and to secure against escape or other mishaps, the official said. Saddam, who is said to be incarcerated at a U.S. prison near Baghdad International Airport, will be in the first group of prisoners turned over, he said. Once his legal custody shifts, Saddam will lose his prisoner of war status and will be considered an accused criminal. As such, the longtime Iraqi strongman will win due process rights, including access to an attorney.
Subject to Iraqi law.
He will also be subject to questioning by an investigating judge from the special Iraqi war crimes tribunal set up to try him and others for crimes against humanity committed during his brutal reign, the official said. "We will maintain physical custody and control and look after their safety and security and well being, and make sure they are treated in accordance with applicable Iraqi law," the U.S. official said. "And we will grant access as appropriate and as required."
Posted by: Steve White || 06/23/2004 2:00:23 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:


Zarqawi Vows to Assassinate Iraqi Leader
Like this is news.
An audio recording purportedly made by the militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and found online Wednesday threatened to assassinate Iraq's interim prime minister. "As for you (Iyad) Allawi ... you didn't know that you have survived already traps we made for you, but we promise you that we will continue the game until the end," the online recording said. "You are the symbol of evil and the infidel nation; you are the source of all traitors."
"Rabid, scared, high-pitched, like a flouncey little girl, yep, that's him, Boss!"
The Jordanian terror suspect is believed to have ties to al-Qaida, and groups associated with him have claimed responsibility for a number of bombings and attacks in Iraq, most recently Tuesday's beheading of South Korean hostage Kim Sun-il.
Posted by: Steve White || 06/23/2004 1:50:23 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  So the race is on, who kills who first. Odds?
Posted by: Lucky || 06/23/2004 1:58 Comments || Top||

#2  For those of you who understand three dimensional thought (logic), the key to neutralizing Zarqawi, is to kill him in the past or the future, not in the present. We'll miss him every time!
Posted by: smn || 06/23/2004 2:22 Comments || Top||

#3  Have we got time travel yet? I heard about the Philadelphia experiment in WW2. It could be useful if we have.
Posted by: Howard UK || 06/23/2004 5:00 Comments || Top||

#4  Killing them in the present always worked for us.
Posted by: Aaron || 06/23/2004 11:37 Comments || Top||

#5  ok, so we've hit two safe houses in Fallujah in the last 5 days, all preceded by what Kimmet calls "actionable intelligence"

This is with USMC withdrawn from Fallujah. So who is providing the intell, who is gathering it etc?

Is it possible that all the problems and frustrations with the Fallujah Protective Service are simpley cover for what is actually an effective means of getting info from the nest of foreign fighters in central Fallujah? (baruch hashem)
Posted by: Liberalhawk || 06/23/2004 12:02 Comments || Top||

#6  On the subject of multidimensional logic, I partly concur with LH that we are getting a lot of intel from the locals in Fallujah. However, the 'problems and frustrations' were definately not a cover; they are real. The non violent, just trying to get by segment of the Fallujah population is getting bullied, extorted, etc. by the insurgency. Of course this is one reason why the intel is better with locals getting grudges against the insurgents, but its too bad it comes this way.
Posted by: mhw || 06/23/2004 12:12 Comments || Top||

#7  mhw, As far as the Fallujah locals go, I don't have much sympathy. You reap what you sow...

I'm for building a fully armed and manned wall around the entire city (None in or out withing a full search and vetting) and letting them have exactly what they want.
Posted by: CrazyFool || 06/23/2004 12:17 Comments || Top||

#8  Old Boy(tm) will be SOOO surrounded by Blackwater and I.S.A.T. gunners, anyone trying to off him will have a helluva time putting him on ice. I've done a lot of training with I.S.A.T. in Germany, and they produce some top-notch bodyguards. Zarqawi would be a fool to try anything, because the best Hired Guns, tribal intel, technology, and purchased loyalties will be on Allawi's side.
Posted by: Bodyguard || 06/23/2004 12:53 Comments || Top||

#9  Of course this is one reason why the intel is better with locals getting grudges against the insurgents

good point
Posted by: Liberalhawk || 06/23/2004 13:11 Comments || Top||

#10  It is possible that what occurred in Najaf and Karbala with Al Sadr's boys will also occur in Fallujah. Namely, as mhw points out, the locals will get sick of Zarqawi and his team of asswipes and eventually rat on them. Despite Fallujah being a Sadaam hotbed, it is possible that the regular folks there had a taste of freedom before the uprising in April. I'll bet some of them liked it...a lot. And I'll bet that they hate being bullied by Syrians, Algerians, Chechens and Saudis who act as if they own the place. Yeah, that kind of situation could produce an ever-growing stream of actionable inteligence.
Posted by: remote man || 06/23/2004 13:38 Comments || Top||

#11  remote man

Yes I suppose its possible. However Fallujah has, what I call, a high jihadist ratio (you might call it a high asswipe ratio). That is, the hard core anti Iraq govt. anti American anti kfr population is at least 5% of the total population. The jihadist sympathizer population probably is another 15% at least.

In Najaf and Karbala, this ratio was way down, probably below 0.5% and the asswipers weren't homeboys either.
Posted by: mhw || 06/23/2004 16:27 Comments || Top||


Saddam link to Bin Laden
Via the Professor, a link to a Guardian article about al-Q and Sammy.

From 1999.

Man, those neo-cons were devious!
Posted by: Steve White || 06/23/2004 1:44:53 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  And the other story:
http://edition.cnn.com/WORLD/meast/9902/13/afghan.binladen/

All a MOSSAD CONSPIRACY, I'm afraid.

;)
Posted by: Anonymous4021 || 06/23/2004 10:04 Comments || Top||

#2  neocons have mastered mind control and time travel as well
Posted by: Frank G || 06/23/2004 10:12 Comments || Top||

#3  And let us not forget astral projection and necromancy ...
Posted by: Dan Darling || 06/23/2004 10:49 Comments || Top||


Caucasus
Ingush corpse count now at 75, only 2 hard boyz dead
An audacious overnight raid by heavily armed militants in a southern Russian republic neighboring Chechnya killed at least 75 people and wounded dozens more before the fighters withdrew with minimal losses and a cache of captured weapons, officials said Tuesday.
Worse and worse for the Rooskies.
The raid, which began late Monday night with attacks against police and security posts across the republic of Ingushetia, was concentrated in the principal city, Nazran. It was the largest attack by Chechnya’s separatist rebels outside Chechnya since 1999, and it appeared to catch police and security officers in the region off guard and ill prepared. President Vladimir V. Putin, meeting with his law enforcement deputies in the Kremlin on Tuesday, vowed to retaliate for the raid, as he has before when the war in Chechnya has flared, though to little obvious effect. "We have to find and destroy them," he said in remarks broadcast on the state television channels. "Those whom it is possible to take alive must be brought to trial." Underscoring the severity of the attack, Mr. Putin later flew to Ingushetia and met with the president, Murat M. Zyazikov, and other officials. "Based on everything that is happening here, the federal center is not doing enough to protect the republic," Mr. Putin said in televised remarks, in which he denounced the raid as an attempt to destabilize southern Russia. He ordered a regiment of Interior Ministry troops to Ingushetia, as well as additional army troops to mill around aimlessly bolster security at the republic’s airport.

The death toll remained unclear Tuesday night, but among the dead were at least 47 local police or security officers, the senior Kremlin official in the region, Vladimir Y. Yakovlev, said, according to the Interfax news agency. At least four more police officers were listed as missing. The office of Ingushetia’s president said at least 28 civilians had died. At least 100 militants seized the Interior Ministry’s headquarters for several hours and destroyed several other security posts around Nazran and in two other cities before breaking off the raid and retreating early Tuesday, official accounts said. Ingushetia’s acting interior minister, Abukar Kostoyev, and his deputy were killed in the fighting. Two criminal investigators and four prosecutors died as they drove separately through an intersection controlled by militants in Nazran, according to news reports. A United Nations aid worker, Magomed Getagazov, was shot dead as he rode home in a taxi from work in the city, the organization’s office in Moscow said.

In all, 200 militants were believed to have taken part in the attacks. According to two security officials interviewed in Mozdok, north of Ingushetia, only two militants died. New fighting was reported Tuesday afternoon near Galashki, a small village in Ingushetia, where at least some of the militants appeared to be making their way through the rugged Caucasus foothills southeast of Nazran toward Chechnya. They were driving stolen vehicles loaded with arms, ammunition and possibly explosives, most taken from the Interior Ministry, the officials said. "The main goal was to get weapons," Sergei B. Prokopov, an official the with the regional prosecutor’s office, said in an interview in Mozdok. Referring to fighting overnight in two other towns, Karabulak and Sleptsovskaya, he added, "The other attacks were just a diversion."

The violence badly undermined repeated assertions by Russian officials that the Chechen rebels were too battered to mount significant offensive operations. Mr. Prokopov said the raid’s focus on seizing weapons suggested that Chechnya’s insurgents still had a reservoir of support. "This means they have new recruits they have to arm," he said in an interview as he traveled with journalists on another of the periodic trips the Kremlin organizes in an attempt to highlight the progress being made in Chechnya. Only last week, Maj. Gen. Alu Alkhanov, Chechnya’s interior minister and the frontrunner in the republic’s coming presidential election, said no more than 500 rebels were still resisting federal and local forces in Chechnya. In Grozny on Tuesday, General Alkhanov denounced the attacks as an act of desperation. "They have a desire to show their activity, to show the conflict is expanding," he said in an interview with reporters in his office in Grozny.

The Chechen separatist leader, Aslan Maskhadov, told Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty last week that the rebels would change tactics and focus on larger attacks. General Alkhanov said the effort would fail. "I don’t like to make predictions, but in my view, they gathered everything they could to show they still exist," he said. "They showed that today. From today on, appropriate work will start, and this bold work will be punished because innocent people died."
Sure, anytime now.
Posted by: Dan Darling || 06/23/2004 1:44:11 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Time to bring back the Cossacks for raping and pillaging Russki style?
Posted by: ed || 06/23/2004 9:59 Comments || Top||

#2  Indeedy. Perhaps the Joe instead of the Don for a change.
Posted by: Shipman || 06/23/2004 13:20 Comments || Top||


Zakayev statement on recent happenings in Ingushetia
In a statement devoted to the Monday night events in the Russian internal republic of Ingushetia, Akhmed Zakayev, a spokesman for Chechen rebel leader Aslan Maskhadov, said the separatists had more than once warned that the explosive situation could not be contained in Chechnya for long.
The leadership of the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria has more than once warned Russia and the international community that the flames of war cannot be contained in Chechnya for long, the statement reads. We can see the hostilities now spreading to Ingushetia as well. No-one can guarantee that tomorrow the war will not spread to other parts of the Caucasus and elsewhere in Russia if the Kremlin continues to follow its blind suicidal policy, attracted by the desire to resolve by force the problems which could naturally be settled only by peaceful political means, the separatists claim.

We can say confidently that the war in Ingushetia started back at a time when the Kremlin ousted President [Ruslan] Aushev and replaced him with its humble protege [Murat] Zyazikov, a carrier Chekist. Ever since then Ingushetia has been an area of the bloody activities of Russian death squads. Killings, kidnappings, terror against Chechen refugees and total lawlessness have become a daily routine in Ingushetia, as has the growing resistance to the unbearable arbitrariness that reigns in the region. Finally, public indignation has reached breaking point and grown into an armed rebellion.
Posted by: Dan Darling || 06/23/2004 1:40:29 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:


Thousands of Russian troops deployed to hunt down Ingush attackers
Thousands of Russian troops streamed into a province bordering war-torn Chechnya on Tuesday to search for heavily armed militant separatists who killed at least 57 people in fierce attacks. President Vladimir Putin vowed to stop the spreading insurgency. Troops searched for the attackers, who officials said may have come from Chechnya and were believed to have melted into the thick woods along the Chechen border or were trying to flee over the Caucasus Mountains into Georgia. Visiting Ingushetia after the attacks, Putin said a regiment of Interior Ministry forces would be stationed permanently in the province. The move raises the number of Russian troops in the troubled Caucasus region even as Moscow tries to distance itself from the war in Chechnya, west of Ingushetia. Meeting with Ingush President Murat Zyazikov, Putin said the search for the attackers must go on "as long as necessary." He thanked those who "did not allow the bandits to achieve their goals."

Maj. Gen. Ilya Shabalkin, spokesman for the Russian forces in Chechnya, blamed Chechen rebels for planning the attacks, but said the raids were carried out by fighters recruited from both Chechnya and Ingushetia. A significant recruitment of Ingush fighters could mean a spreading of the war beyond Chechnya. "The attacks were clearly saber rattling, aimed to demonstrate the rebels’ effectiveness to attract funding from foreign terrorist networks," Shabalkin said, according to Interfax.
Since al-Walid is dead, along with his connections to the money men. Haven't heard of a replacement yet...
Rebels stage small deadly hit-and-run assaults daily in Chechnya. Despite an arsenal of heavy weapons and warplanes, Russians have been unable to uproot the insurgents.
I put that down to crummy organization of their tactical intelligence assets...
In the past day alone, nine servicemen were killed, an official in the Moscow-backed Chechen administration said Tuesday. Russian news media reported only two deaths among militants. An Associated Press reporter also saw the body of one militant near Yandare. At least one group of rebels were caught by police as they retreated through Galashki, near the Chechen border, said Yakhya Khadziyev, spokesman for Ingushetia’s Interior Ministry. The U.N. office of humanitarian aid coordination in Russia said a U.N. worker, Magomed Getagazov, was killed in crossfire while returning home from work in Nazran, the main city in the province. Russian television broadcast footage of smoke-charred buildings and burned out vehicles. Shamil Basayev, one of the most audacious Chechen commanders, was likely behind the highly coordinated attack, Chechnya’s Interior Minister Alu Alkhanov said, told ITAR-Tass. Russia’s NTV television showed footage of its crew encountering some of the presumed attackers, wearing masks and speaking accented Russian, at a border crossing with North Ossetia. One of the attackers, carrying an automatic weapon, identified the group as "the Martyr’s Brigade," according to NTV correspondent Maxim Berezin. The man added, "We have shot everyone here. Go and announce that."

Acting Ingush Interior Minister Abukar Kostoyev, the health minister and a deputy interior minister were killed in the fighting, officials said. ITAR-Tass said Nazran city prosecutor Mukharbek Buzurtanov and Nazran district prosecutor Bilan Oziyev also died. "Wherever we were, there were armed people, some in uniform, some not, and you didn’t know whose side they were on," said a firefighter in Nazran who identified himself only as Aslan.
Posted by: Dan Darling || 06/23/2004 1:37:34 PM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Maybe 'We' should now down talk, discourage, and UN fight the "new" Russian resolve. Amazing how what comes around, goes around!!
Posted by: smn || 06/23/2004 1:40 Comments || Top||

#2  Master smnnnnn drops Turd #2 - and it almost makes sense. Frightening. More!
Posted by: .com || 06/23/2004 1:45 Comments || Top||

#3  Yes, let us advise our good friends and allies not to act unilaterally in responding to this tragedy. After all, the whole world joins them in their sorrow. Surely they wouldn't want to squander all that goodwill?
Posted by: BH || 06/23/2004 9:56 Comments || Top||

#4  Exactly BH.

Not only that, but won't the contrast between the way US soldiers treat prisoners and they way the Russian soldiers treat prisoners be something to behold? There won't be a scratch on those poor Chechnyans/Ingushetians, will there, because everyone knows only the American military is barbaric, and the rest of the world's militaries are good boys!

Boy, things are really getting interesting in politics lately.
Posted by: jules 187 || 06/23/2004 15:37 Comments || Top||


Iraq-Jordan
Pipes: anti-neocon leakers, not Chalabi, to blame for Iran code mess
EFL
Whichever scenario actually took place, the implication is identical: the brouhaha in D.C., not what Mr. Chalabi did or did not say, signaled Tehran that the Americans broke their code. That’s because anyone can assert that the code was cracked, but why should he be believed? The Iranians surely would not accept Mr. Chalabi’s assertion on its own and go to the huge trouble and expense of changing codes because of his say-so. They would seek confirmation from American intelligence; and this is what the unnamed sources who leaked this story did — they supplied that proof. Their fury at Mr. Chalabi instructed the Iranians to change codes. Americans might pay heavily for the rank irresponsibility of those in State and the agency who publicly confirmed the code break as part of their turf wars with the Defense Department and, more broadly, their fight with the so-called neoconservatives.
Posted by: someone || 06/23/2004 12:07:14 AM || Comments || Link || [0 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Off topic, but did any one else see the 'take down' O'Rielly did to former Clinton Chief of Staff, damn whatzhisname, Podesta(?). Dude looked like Goebels, methinks he be possesed, if Mucky saw it he could confirm, and I saw fangs, no really, fangs!

O'Rielly can be a bit much but today he bitched slapped an evil punk.

Then after that I saw the same piece of shit on MSNBC with Darla Kissme and she had a 'come hither' moment with the prick. Not a challenging question, nada!
Posted by: Lucky || 06/23/2004 2:16 Comments || Top||

#2  I respect Pipes, but this has the look and feel of wishful thinking to me.

Here's another thought. Perhaps we never did break their code, but DC made up the brouhaha to get them to change them. I mean the possibilities are endless here. We'll never know, will we?

I don't have a clue, but this whole Pipes piece just sounds like an exercise in tortured denial to me.
Posted by: B || 06/23/2004 7:01 Comments || Top||

#3  Well, Pipes is wrong if he thinks this clears Chalabi in any sense, but he's right that the fact that it got into the rumor mill, let alone the papers, is a fucking billboard advertising the fundamentally unserious attitude of far too much of the establishment, neocon or mainstream, towards operational security.

This shit should have never, ever, been talked about. The codes shouldn't be mentioned, not even if a spy plane full of smoking guns gets taken down and recovered by a target nation.

Pipes is right - I could stand here right now and tell you that we've got every code the Russians and Chinese use, and what are they going to do - change 'em all because some guy on a website said they're compromised? Great way to get the targets to put a lot of energy and work into changing codes that weren't even broken in the first place.

On the other hand, if those that are expected to know start cutting each other up in public over a "leak", that's a lot of political pain to go through just for a codes headfake. The targets are going to give that a hell of a lot more credence than they would if it were some anonymous me doing the talking.

Chalabi is about half of one, half of the other. He's exactly the sort of plausible denial, compromised channel scumbag who might be conceivably used to pass along a headfake. If the fucker actually compromised an active exposed channel, you could plausibly get the target nation confused as to whether it's a scam by flooding other, similar channels with "confirmation" of other, unbroken codes having been broken. Bury them under with bullshit. The last thing you want to do is kick up a public storm about an actual leak by coming down on Chalabi like a ton of bricks. That just confirms his information was good. Cut the sonofabitch off, and leave him in the figurative cold, sure. But don't crucify him in public. That validates the story.
Posted by: Mitch H. || 06/23/2004 7:58 Comments || Top||

#4  Mitch, interesting.

But don't crucify him in public.

I don't know. In the double triple doublecross world, I have to think that maybe, just maybe, "old scam's" razor applies here. Somebody set Chalabi up with bait and he took it.
Posted by: B || 06/23/2004 8:31 Comments || Top||



Who's in the News
80[untagged]

Bookmark
E-Mail Me

The Classics
The O Club
Rantburg Store
The Bloids
The Never-ending Story
Thugburg
Gulf War I
The Way We Were
Bio

Merry-Go-Blog











On Sale now!


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.
Click here for more information

Meet the Mods
In no particular order...
Steve White
Seafarious
tu3031
badanov
sherry
ryuge
GolfBravoUSMC
Bright Pebbles
trailing wife
Gloria
Fred
Besoeker
Glenmore
Frank G
3dc
Skidmark

Two weeks of WOT
Wed 2004-06-23
  Saudis Offer Militants Amnesty
Tue 2004-06-22
  Korean beheaded in Iraq
Mon 2004-06-21
  Iran detains UK naval vessels
Sun 2004-06-20
  Algerian Military Says Nabil Sahraoui Toes Up
Sat 2004-06-19
  Falluja house blast kills 20 Iraqis
Fri 2004-06-18
  U.S. hostage beheaded
Thu 2004-06-17
  Turks Nab Four In Nato Summit Bomb Plot
Wed 2004-06-16
  Hosni shuffles off mortal coil?
Tue 2004-06-15
  Zarqawi sez jihad's not going great
Mon 2004-06-14
  Somali charged in plot to blow up Ohio mall
Sun 2004-06-13
  Iran sez no to nuke oversight
Sat 2004-06-12
  Brahimi hangs it up?
Fri 2004-06-11
  Dagestani Duma turns down ban on Wahhabism
Thu 2004-06-10
  UN experts find evidence of WMD
Wed 2004-06-09
  Boom in Cologne

Better than the average link...



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.
3.236.234.62
Help keep the Burg running! Paypal:
WoT Background (27)    (0)    (0)    (0)    (0)