Posted by: ed ||
07/21/2005 02:36 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This is nothing new to us, Nikita Kruschev gave a speech vowing to defeat the US without firing a single bullet, he got so wound up he took his shoe off and beat on the podium like a lunatic. If china thinks they are gonna do a sneaky on us the cat is out of the bag. You can buy that rag of a book on amazon, you can watch the news and figure out they are sneaky little bastards and you can take one look at that part of the world and figure out that they don't have too many friends. Could china defeat Taiwan, Japan, Australia, the US, and South Korea all at the same time? Because that is probably what they would have to do. It is not just china against the US, it really is china against most of the world. We handled russian communism and we will handle china. The way things are going in china, they may do it to themselves.
#2
However, it is a two edge sword because those returning with the technology also bring with them the exposure to real democracy. Its a retrovirus of political institutions. You can suppress it with a lot of effort but you can never purge it from the body. It will be waiting there to exploit any opportunity should the body politic falter.
#3
This was a pathetic article, in that it didn't even cite what the Chinese have said they mean by "unconventional warfare", instead what the reporter *thinks* they mean--interpreting routine diplomatic, cultural and economic stuff as "warfare". Phooey. The cited white paper called for the use of pre-positioned nuclear explosives, biological weapons, and basically "anything anybody can think of". Practically speaking, their real emphasis would only partially be on distracting the American public. Most of their efforts will have to be focused on neutralizing the Pacific fleet and preventing the Atlantic fleet from entering the Pacific through the Panama Canal, and thanks once again, Jimmy Carter.
The London bombing has evoked a world-wide determination to stamp out terrorism at its roots, and many are now hopeful that the mastermind of this atrocity will be apprehended, so that justice will be served. Yet soon after the awful events in Britain came the bitter anniversary of justice denied in another tragedy of terrorism. July 15 marked the third anniversary of the day when a court in Hyderabad, Pakistan, issued a death sentence to the man who organized the murder of our son, Daniel Pearl, along with life imprisonment for three accomplices.
It was the first verdict after Sept. 11 to convict and sentence international terrorists in a court of law. But three years after the verdict against Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh and the others, we note with sadness and disappointment that the sentence has not been carried out.
When our son Danny, a reporter for The Wall Street Journal, was murdered in Karachi in February 2002, we received letters of condolence from around the world, and particularly from many Pakistani citizens. They expressed shame and anger at the perpetrators, and reassured us that the vast majority of Pakistanis view Danny as a symbol of their country's long-standing struggle with terrorism. Following the verdict, we published an open letter to the people of Pakistan on the pages of this newspaper (on July 17, 20021) stating: "It thus proves to the world that Pakistan is not merely a place where people fear and abhor terrorism, but also a place that possesses the legal muscle to subdue terrorism and secure justice and dignity for its people."
That the sentence has yet to be carried out is contrary to any standard of sensibility. Saeed's appeal has been kept lingering in the court system, kicked from one adjournment to another, with no hearing to speak of and no end in sight. Using the protection of his jail cell, Saeed reportedly keeps in touch with his friends and followers in Pakistan and Britain, and advises them on future courses of action, which include: ways of retaliating against the alleged desecration of the Quran at Guantanamo; assassination attempts against Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf; and possibly even the latest bombing attacks in London (according to a report by an Indian analyst). Just very recently, the scheduled hearing of the appeal was adjourned for the 32nd time.
Paradoxically, a day after this latest adjournment, President Musharraf told law enforcement officials in Rawalpindi that "We owe it to our future generations to rid the country of the malaise of extremism." It is vital that President Musharraf realize that by allowing the arch-symbol of extremism, Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, to make a mockery of Pakistani justice for a full three years, he is effectively inviting the malaise of extremism in his country to make a mockery of Pakistan for many generations to come.
Posted by: john ||
07/21/2005 11:52 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[9 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The jihadis are going to regret this killing. This is one victim whose parents will not be nameless and who will accept excuses.
They will continue to push.
Perv should beware. A lawsuit against Pak entities may follow.
Posted by: john ||
07/21/2005 13:22 Comments ||
Top||
#1
Muslims are humans just like you and I. They become brain dead zombies only in matters of religion. All cultists are brainless zombies. Donât you think the 900 followers of Jim Jones who drank poison voluntarily and administered it to their children, or the educated members of the Solar Temple who committed mass suicide to meet the extraterrestrials navigating in the tail of the comet Haley, or the followers of David Koresh, John de Ruiter, Scientology {Waitaminute! Whaddabout Tom Cruise?} or all other cults were/are brain dead zombies? You donât kill people for being brain dead zombies. You try to enlighten them. This is what I try to do. On one hand I try to help Muslims see the light and leave this cult of hate and on the other hand I try to make others see Muslims as victims and not the villains. No. I do not think people should be annihilated just because they are brain dead zombies. Many of these brain dead zombies have been rescued and now you can see they are very smart and genuinely good people.
Not all wackos are Muslim.
Not all Muslims are wackos.
On C-Span a couple of months ago, I watched Muslim kids who had been foreign exchange students in the US for a year put questions to Mulim, Jewish, and Christian scholars. They had spent some minutes that morning with Bush in the Rose Garden. One of the scholars asked for a show of hands - who thought Bush was bad before they met him this morning? 95% of the hands went up. And after you met him/heard him speak? About 75%, more than I had hoped, but a real difference.
The last words from the three religious scholars were very similar - it's harder to hate people when you know something about them.
I remain hopeful.
Posted by: Bobby ||
07/21/2005 9:16 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Not all wackos are Muslim.
Not all Muslims are wackos.
It's a safe way to bet.
I remain hopeful.
My hope died this morning. The bombs may have been duds, but the intent was not, and there was no -- NO -- effort by the Muslim community to expose this. Just defense, equivocation, and whining about being under suspicion.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
07/21/2005 9:59 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Not all Muslims are Wackos
But a sufficiently large number are, and are tolerated by most of the rest. The time is rapidly approaching when it will be imprudent not to treat all Muslims as if they were Wackos. Something needs to change.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
07/21/2005 10:02 Comments ||
Top||
#4
No reason to be mean and malign the undead. Zombies might have a craving for human flesh, appear thoughless, and have communications problems and all, but they are people too. Or were. Be nice, don't compare them with Islamists.
#5
When is the last time you heard of a Tiawanese suicide bomber? They want their independence too, but they don't go around with a stick of dynamite up their ass.
When is the last time you heard of a Tiawanese suicide bomber? They want their independence too, but they don't go around with a stick of dynamite up their ass.
Part of that is because of their enemy.
Terrorism was invented by the totalitarians to be used as a weapon against more open societies. Leftist propaganda to the contrary, it doesn't work for an open society to use it against a totalitarian one. If there were taiwanese blowing up subway stations in Beijing, you'd NEVER see a communist party official there making excuses for them the way Bloody Ken did this week.
Posted by: Phil Fraering ||
07/21/2005 12:54 Comments ||
Top||
#7
"Not all Muslims are Wackos"
"But a sufficiently large number are, and are tolerated by most of the rest. The time is rapidly approaching when it will be imprudent not to treat all Muslims as if they were Wackos. Something needs to change."
If you lie down with dogs, you'll get up with fleas.
"Terrorism was invented by the totalitarians to be used as a weapon against more open societies. Leftist propaganda to the contrary, it doesn't work for an open society to use it against a totalitarian one."
Well, what about Los Pepes in Columbia? The only way they could fight the Escobar cartel was through rather unsavory means. Not saying it is directly applicable, but maybe.....
Posted by: Mark E. ||
07/21/2005 16:23 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Don't miss the similar discussion over on page 1 - 'Tube Cleared After Small Blasts'...
Posted by: Bobby ||
07/21/2005 16:36 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
