The International Atomic Energy Agency has been quietly cooperating with the United Arab Emirates to end shipments of nuclear fuel and components through the Gulf region. Diplomatic sources said the UAE has allowed the agency to conduct inspections of facilities in Dubai and other areas where weapons of mass destruction were suspected of being stored or shipped. They said the targets included three facilities in Dubai believed to be exporting WMD material to Iran. Dubai has been the leading port for supplies to Iran. The sources said the UAE port served the Pakistan-led nuclear smuggling ring of Abdul Qadeer Khan, which exported nuclear material and gas centrifuges to Iran, Libya and North Korea. The sources said the agency pressed the UAE for access to facilities in Dubai following the disclosure of the Khan network and investigations in several countries. Khan maintained an office in Dubai that handled nuclear orders from Middle East and Asian states.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/03/2005 3:41:58 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
KUWAIT CITY — Religious groups in Kuwait have gone on the defensive as liberals step up calls for a clampdown on fundamentalists in the wake of deadly gunbattles between security forces and militants. Mainstream Sunni groups moved swiftly to distance themselves from the violence that has rocked the normally peaceful country after the first gunfights broke out on January 10, killing two police officers.
"Wudn't us." "Nope, not me." "I know nothing." "Pshaw."
Leading religious figures, groups, organisations and charities have since issued statements condemning the militants and declaring their total backing to the government's iron-fist policy to stamp terror. They also held public rallies and lectures focused on the need for "national unity" in order to confront fundamentalism which they said was "alien" to Kuwait and its people. "We meet today to prove on the ground that we all stand united against all terrorists and those who believe in violence," MP Nasser Al Sane told a public rally late Tuesday.
Posted by: Steve White ||
02/03/2005 00:00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
liberals in the old fashioned sense i discussed the other day, those who support a liberal democracy. Hillary, Ron Reagan, John Kerry, Maggie Thatcher all liberals by this definition. Senator Byrd, Michael Moore, and Pat Buchanan NOT liberals.
Islamic groups in Kuwait have gone on the defensive as liberals step up calls for a clampdown on extremists in the wake of deadly gun battles between security forces and Islamists.
If they weren't so closely identified with the extremists they wouldn't have anything to worry about, would they?
Mainstream Sunni groups moved swiftly to distance themselves from the violence that has rocked the normally peaceful emirate after the first gunfights broke out on Jan. 10, killing two police officers.
"Nope. Nope. Wudn't us."
Leading Islamic figures, groups, organizations and charities have since issued statements condemning the militants and declaring their total backing to the government's iron-fist policy to stamp terror. They also held public rallies and lectures focused on the need for national unity in order to confront extremism which they said was alien to Kuwait and its people. "We meet today to prove on the ground that we all stand united against all terrorists and those who believe in violence," Islamist MP Nasser Al-Sane told a public rally late Tuesday.
"Our kinda violence is entirely different from those guys!"
"The group that carried out those incidents has no roots in Kuwait. They are alien to the Kuwaiti people," Khaled Sultan Al-Issa, head of the Islamic Salaf Alliance, said during the rally.
"It's only coincidence that most of 'em wuz Kuwaitis and some of 'em wuz holy men!"
Security forces over the past month fought four bloody gun battles in three weeks with gunmen linked to Al-Qaeda network, killing eight of them and capturing 14 others.
It's the 14 who were captured that the Islamists have to worry about. Some of them may talk...
Islamic groups, which form the largest single bloc in the 50-seat parliament with 13 MPs, have been directly accused by liberals of breeding extremism and creating an environment conducive to the spread of terrorism. Liberal groups, reduced to a small minority in parliament after the 2003 elections, have also accused government of turning a blind eye and failing to curb extremism. In a statement yesterday, the three main liberal groups the Democratic Forum, National Democratic Movement and National Democratic Alliance said government leniency was to blame for the rise of extremism in Kuwait. Former Oil Minister Ali Al-Baghli, a liberal, wrote in Al-Qabas yesterday that "it is not enough to cut the tail of the snake because it will grow another."
Could he be referring to the holy men? Or perhaps even to certain princes resident in a neighboring country?
"What is needed is to cut off the snake's head, namely the masters of terror and all those who propagate for terror in mosques and the media," he said. Islamists however charge that liberals are trying to capitalize on the bloodshed. "(Liberal) writers are instigating and pouring fuel on the fire rather than cooling things down," Islamist MP Daifallah Buramia said.
Cooling things down is what you've done up until now, isn't it?
This article starring:
KHALED SULTAN AL ISA
Islamic Salaf Alliance
Posted by: Fred ||
02/03/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Posted by: Fred ||
02/03/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Um, let me guess - they'll stop indoctrinating them with the Islamic memes and send them all out of the country to Western non-Muslim host families for raising? A couple of generations of that and we'd be getting somewhere.
The IRA has withdrawn its offer to complete the decommissioning process. In a statement, the organisation said it had taken the offer to put its weapons beyond use off the table. The IRA, which denies claims it was behind the £26.5m Belfast bank raid, said the British and Irish governments had "tried its patience to the limit". Last year, the IRA said it would complete the decommissioning process within weeks and move into what it called a new mode. A Downing Street spokesman said they were not surprised by Wednesday's statement, passed to the An Phoblacht newspaper. "The fact remains that it was the IRA that did carry out the Northern Bank robbery and as the prime minister and the taoiseach said on Tuesday therefore it is the IRA that is the sole obstacle to moving forward," he said. However, the spokesman made it clear the government does not interpret the statement as a threat to return to terrorism. BBC correspondent Mark Simpson said the statement was "more of an IRA tantrum than anything more significant".
Wednesday's statement said: "Our initiatives have been attacked, devalued and dismissed by pro-unionist and anti-republican elements, including the British government. The Irish government have lent themselves to this. At this time it appears that the two governments are intent on changing the basis of the peace process. They claim that 'the obstacle now to a lasting and durable settlement is the continuing paramilitary and criminal activity of the IRA'. We reject this."
DUP leader Ian Paisley said the statement proved the IRA never had any intention of decommissioning in a credible, transparent and verifiable way. "They never had any intention of giving up their criminal empire," he said. "The IRA had better realise that we will not be bullied or threatened and we will accept nothing less than the complete and utter end of all terror and criminal activity and the decommissioning of all their illegal weaponry in a transparent manner."
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Bulldog ||
02/03/2005 2:57:43 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
Try the Mossad approach and liquidate a few of the key figures in the IRA - the big guys financiers, logisticians etc? As soon as the first boom goes off in London just send the SAS in and 'remove' the entire leadership.. I suppose we can arrange a couple of mysterious fatal car crashes for Adams/ McGuinness or simply contract the job to the UDA/UVF. Pope dead yet?
Posted by: Howard UK ||
02/03/2005 4:09 Comments ||
Top||
#3
So, "guns don't kill people, people kill poeple," and "I'll give up my gun when they pry it out of my cold dead hand," works here but not there? Has the DUP decommissioned yet? We have 30+ thousand gun deaths in this country yearly. How many do the IRA kill a year?
Posted by: Weird Al ||
02/03/2005 7:43 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Most American gun owners are responsible and respectable members of society, using their weapons for sport and/or self defense. If the same were true in Ireland, then disarmament would not be at issue. However, most gun owners over there use their weapons for crime and/or harming those who disagree with them. This is a significant difference, as I'm sure you'll agree, Weird Al.
#5
"Security sources believe the Irish Republican Army (IRA) alone has enough weaponry to equip a small country's army and sustain a campaign for at least a decade. The arms -- about 1,700 weapons, 50 heavy and general-purpose machine guns, 40 rocket launchers, grenades, mortars, flame throwers, booby traps, ground-to-air missiles and an estimated two tons of Semtex -- are hidden in deep bunkers, almost certainly in the Irish Republic, their whereabouts known to just a few. The IRA's arsenal was amassed over several years, some of it smuggled in from America and continental Europe, but most of it in several shiploads from Libya in the mid-1980s."
Just a bunch of small arms enthusiasts, huh, Weird Al? Since when have you thought it a good idea to allow terrorists and bank robbers access to guns?
Has the DUP decommissioned yet?
The DUP will never decommission, because it has never commissioned. It's a political party, not a terrorist organisation. The reason the mutual decommissioning process, involving both Loyalists and Republicans, has broken down is that the IRA used the DUP's request for photographic evidence as a pretext for shelving the decommissioning process, claiming they felt that such a procedure would be "humiliating".
#7
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. The IRA has pretty good justification to be called both. They have certainly attacked civilian targets as well as military ones, making them less than upstanding. They have decommissioned their heavy weapons and bomb making materials. I misspoke earlier, mentioning the DUP when I meant the RUC. They have decommissioned? I haven't heard about it. And they are estimated to have about ten times the arms of the IRA, and have been equally likely to attack civilians. More so. So, the ultimate question is whether the IRA should trust the british to the extent of handing in all their weapons.
To trailing wife: most gun owners in this country are law abiding. We also have some real nut cases, who have armament caches that probably equal anything the IRA has. The reason a high proportion of people in Ireland with weapons are considered outlaws (the IRA, not the RUC. I haven't heard them denounced in similar terms) is that the average person doesn't have the right to own guns.
I'm not against ownership of weapons. I gave the quotes above to illustrate what I consider one extreme point of view in this country. I knew I would generate a storm...that's OK. I don't think the IRA should decommision until 26 + 6 = 1. Sorry.
Posted by: Weird Al ||
02/03/2005 10:10 Comments ||
Top||
#8
I believe the RUC/PSNI have not decommissioned. That is because they are the police. Perhaps you have them confused with some other organization. The IRA are terrorists. No better than al Qaeda, regardless of the merit of the cause for which they slaughter innocents.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
02/03/2005 10:18 Comments ||
Top||
#9
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
Oh. You're one of those.
They have certainly attacked civilian targets as well as military ones, making them less than upstanding.
Not "less than upstanding". Attacking civilians makes them terrorists. For that they should be exterminated, and their political goals should be consigned to the sewers, never to be considered until their crimes have been forgotten.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
02/03/2005 10:20 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Someone wrote on RB recently - One man's Nazi is another man's German hero. Go figure..
Posted by: Howard UK ||
02/03/2005 10:28 Comments ||
Top||
#11
I'm not "one of those", whatever the hell that's supposed to mean. I thought I was clear. Both the IRA and the RUC can be considered terrorists, but only one side gets called. it. The RUC may be the police now, but they sure weren't in the past. They were essentially thugs working on the protestant side, and equally as liable for atrocities as the IRA. I would suggest an excellent book on the subject "The IRA", written by Tim Pat Coogan. Or any one of half a dozen of others. Or does everyone else here feel that the british have been even handed understanding landlords of Ireland for the past 700 years or so? Apparently so. And please don't give me this cultural relativism baloney. Ain't true. They're all terrorists. And if someone has called Nazis german hero's it's news to me, and evidence of a mind a lot more disturbed than mine.
Apparently Howard just isn't quite ready to give up the last remnants of empire. Go figure.
Posted by: Weird Al ||
02/03/2005 10:49 Comments ||
Top||
#12
The RUC may be the police now, but they sure weren't in the past. LOL!
Posted by: Howard UK ||
02/03/2005 11:06 Comments ||
Top||
#13
The next time i run from an IRA bomb alert in central London I'll console myself with the fact that the immediate threat to my personal safety is the fault of my forefathers and I'll beat my chest with guilt... Hang on! I'm of Irish descent... errrr...
Anyone IRA scum sets off a bomb near me and they deserve to have my government pop a cap in their ass.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
02/03/2005 11:10 Comments ||
Top||
#14
Apparently Howard just isn't quite ready to give up the last remnants of empire. Go figure.
I presume your one of those Americans who happily drops dollars in the NorAid tin, thereby sponsoring the cold blooded murder of men, women and children by cowards on the far side of the Atlantic. How do you feel about Muslims who donate to Hamas?
#15
Weird Al - Look, knock it off with the "700 years ago...." crap. EVERY NATION on this planet has screwed over their neighbors and pissed on the tribe next door, and if by some chance they haven't done that yet (unlikely), it's just because for whatever reason they couldn't get their sh*t together in time to take advantage of the opportunity.
Anyone who knows anything about Irish history knows about the abuse of the locals by the British. Still, I don't see how setting off a bomb in downtown London is an intelligent reply to, say, the Potato Famine.
BTW....if I am correct, RUC stands for "Royal Ulster CONSTABULARY". Lemme borrow Mucky's dictionary (or however he spells it). "Of or relating to a constable". You know....a cop, as we put it on this side of the pond. Their responsibility was law enforcement and anti-terrorism. They did like to beat up the Catholics. Occasionally they killed them, too. Unfortunately, abuse of police power is nothing new. But from the start, they always were the police, so to say that they started out as something else is silly.
In any event....they don't exist anymore, and haven't since 2001, when Tony Blair started the Police Service of Northern Ireland.
If you mean to call Ian Paisley a terrorist, or a terrorist sympathizer, fine....just make sure you get your facts in a row.
And don't drag out that stupid cliche of "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." Nope. A freedom fighter goes after the government.....you know, people who can fire back. A terrorist goes after kids, old people, anyone else who basically has to just sit there, take it and die. There's a huge difference.
#17
im one of those americans who despise the IRA. Terror is terror. The Brits conceded enough by allowing Sein Fein into negotiations and the NI govt at all. They MUST disarm completely for the agreements to continue. The US govt MUST reassert its absolute support for the UK in insisting on disarmament.
#18
Howard UK..."Pope dead yet?" Just what the f**k does that mean? You sound like one of the so-called Moderate Muslims who hides his hate for the Jews until he thinks that no one is looking, or Senator Byrd who has freshly starched sheets in the closet. Somehow it amazes me that it takes so little to bring out the lurking vileness in people.
#19
RUC was formed by protestants, was 100% manned by protestants, and had the job of making sure the folks on the other side of the tracks behaved. If the IRA sets off a bomb in your nieghborhood, hunt them down and kill them. RUC has been "integrated" - they now recruit catholics. Well and good. Basicly, the IRA are terrorists, but the RUC are OK...schizophrenic at best. Don't kid yourself the RUC has been disbanded. They've simply gone underground. Read the history of the IRA for god's sake before you start screaming. They have plenty of reason not to trust the gov't with their lives. And until the recent holdup, they have behaved pretty well in the past few years. Apparently I'm the only one who isn't willing to give the brits a free pass simply because they're british
Posted by: Weird Al ||
02/03/2005 12:49 Comments ||
Top||
#20
Yup, he's one of those.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
02/03/2005 12:58 Comments ||
Top||
#21
Wierd Al, I think you mean the UDA/UVA or red hand, are you sure you mean the RUC (Royal Ulster Constabulary)?
I've never condoned the IRA's actions wrt any sort of terrorist or criminal activity involving civilians, terrorism is terrorism. Sticking a bomb in a mail box or car and letting it blow to kill whomever happens to stroll by is cowardice in my book. OTOH, and I may draw some fire on this, wrt going after purely military targets - I don't want to see any Brit lads get killed but I do respect that aspect of the IRAs guerilla warfare. Personally I wish it was one island under the Republic, though I know it's not that simplistic & there are lots of issues from both the N.Ireland protestant and catholic sides.
I've had family in the IRA, some buried in the IRA cemetery in Belfast, others in Derry. I'm neither proud nor ashamed of it. It's an awkward situation as I've great respect for the British soldiers but think N.Ireland should be returned to the Republic of Ireland.
#22
re: 12 I'm glad you got some enjoyment out of my comment about the RUC. The Royal Ulster Constabulary were a bunch of strong arm artists from the 1920's right through the troubles of the 70's and 80's. A comparison with the brown shirts is probably not too far-fetched. As to the IRA fighting governments rather than people, they did just that for many years. First against the british gov't until the sweet heart deal that Michael Collins signed in 1922 allowing the british to maintain controlof the six northern counties. Next in the Irish civil war that occured from 1922 until 1924, fighting against Collins and the interim Irish government. They went into eclipse for many years, only to re-appear when the troubles started. At that time the splinter group Provos appeared. They were a frankly marxist group, funded by people such as Libya, and were responsible for many of the civilian bombings. They were very nasty people. Even the traditional IRA disowned them. Just to further infuriate people, if that's necessary, it warms my heart to see Martin McGuiness and Gerry Adams sitting in meetings with the Brits. Not to mention the fact that they have in fact held their people in check since negotiations began. Will they ever trust the brits? When hell freezes over, more or less.
Just to set the record straight, no, I'm not a marxist, communist, or etc. Don't waste you breath. I too have taken the libertarian test. Only missed on one answer.
Posted by: Weird Al ||
02/03/2005 13:06 Comments ||
Top||
#23
Weird Al - As a Catholic who has actually been to Ireland, I'm in no way, shape or form an apologist for the Brits. They have, without question, acted abominably. There is plenty of evidence of that in Ireland still should you care to look.
However....The RUC doesn't exist any more. Period. What about that do you NOT understand? I did not dismiss the idea that there are Protestants who act just as badly as the IRA (or don't you know who the hell Paisley is??)
I stand by my definition of terrorist v. freedom fighter. It's pretty simple to see who falls on what side of that argument.
I am not going to give the IRA a pass because they call themselves "Catholics". Bullshit. There is nothing in Catholic dogma that justifies blowing up innocents. They know it, they just ignore the inconvenient parts of doctrine.
Just keep putting in the cash in the NorAid jar and thinking you're helping the good fight...If you do, Weird Al, your hands are as bloody as the imbecile that built the bomb or shot at some kids.
#24
23: Thanks, but I've been there too. You beiieve that just because the british gov't disbanded the official RUC that they have disappeared? I have some great land to sell you in Florida. Actually is above the water line at least 8 hours a day. Nobody gives the IRA a "pass". I do not however simply give a knee jerk in the other direction. We are after all talking about whether the IRA will give up it's weapons. I don't believe they will as long as the british hold the final say on the political structure in northern ireland, which they have amply proved by rescinding the powers of the elected officials.
As to NorAid, I admit I don't even know what the hell you're talking about Never heard of them.. When you can't win on facts, start throwing insults?
Posted by: Weird Al ||
02/03/2005 13:21 Comments ||
Top||
#25
On the insult thing, i must apologise for the Pope comment - it's hard to shift out of caveman mode without coffee - also hard to escape the moronic religious/football terrace culture. Apologies to one and all.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
02/03/2005 13:38 Comments ||
Top||
#26
I have this thing. All Bombers need to die. I don't give a flying leap who's side they are on. When you target Moms and Kids you lose the right to anything but a bullet behind the ear. The last thing North Ireland needs is explosives, heavy machine guns, mortars and rockets. The IRA can keep the assult rifles and hand guns. Everything else has to go. Put beyond use isn't enough. Cut the weapons up and burn the explosives in a very public way.
An American group decides to start a campaign to reclaim North America on behalf of the pre-European population, and do so through violence. Let's call them the IAA (Indiginous American Army). They plant a bomb at your local mall one Saturday morning and kill YOUR wife or YOUR children or YOUR parents because they hold THEM responsible for the actions of dead ancestors who may or may not have engaged in an injustice against their own dead ancestors. They talk about the Sand Creek Massacre and the Wounded Knee Massacre a lot, and prefer not to mention the Jamestown Massacre and what happened in the Wyoming Valley. Let's get back to the present: YOU are lucky. YOU just lose your legs.
And MY response (as a Brit) is to say: "you had it coming". Payback's a bitch. And your police force and army are no better than the bombers - they're just descended from Wild West lawmen and the contemporary US soldiers who used to shoot Indians on sight.
I have never stated that there weren't extremely bad people in the RUC. I have also never stated that the bad actors haven't gone over to another group, where they act as badly or even worse today. Where you get that from my comments is a mystery.
And for someone who thinks they know a lot about Ireland, your ignorance of NorAid is...interesting. NorAid is/was a not-so-subtle financial drive for the benefit of the IRA. Lots of Irish bars, especially around Boston, used to have jars for donations. There were some other names, but that was the best known. Since I haven't been up there since 9/11 I don't know if the jars are still there. I just know I haven't seen one in my neck of the woods for a long time. The only way you could say that it went to old people and kids is if you clarified it and said it went to BLOWING UP old people and kids.
They aren't going to give up their weapons, simply because they only feel big & tough when they can make someone else scared to death. The current batch using the name aren't really out to reunify Ireland like the original gang was back in the 20's. They just get their jollies out of being pathetic little killers.
I don't throw insults, Weird Al. I just put out inconvenient (to you) facts. If you choose to be insulted by the truth, that's not my problem.
#29
The photo of the IRA member looks much like the terrorists operating in Iraq, Lebanon, Palestine, etc. How is the IRA different than these terrorists. How are the IRA different than Tim McVeigh, Bob Matthews (Christian Identity bank robber and terrorist), or the North Hollywood bankrobbers. The results are the same. Innocents get wounded or killed for some bullshit cause that generally falls apart on serious scrutiny.
#30
Oh, boy, have I stirred up the hornet's nest. I meant to. For (I hope) one last time. I don't live in Boston, so I don't hang out in irish bars there, so I don't know the name NorAid. Do I know money has been sent from the US to ireland to buy guns? Of course I do. The american irish financed virtually the entire thing. The financing has been explored in other books, some by Coogan, some by others. Interestingly, people in the Republic don't care about the IRA one way or the other, and don't really think much about re-unification. If pushed, they tell you that it's happening financially anyway, and that's all they care about. The republic is in better financial shape than the north, in contrast to what was true twenty years ago. It's just another market to them. Most of them don't give a damn about the british one way or the other, except in terms of sport. Some of them are rabid fans of british soccer teams.
Actually, I agree with SPOD. Kill the bombers, get rid of the heavy weapons. If the IRA wants rifles and hand guns, nobody should care.
Finally, I agree with a statement made many years ago by a sci-fi writer named A E Van Vogt, who wrote a book called The Weapon Shops of Isher. I recommend it highly. A quote from the preface is instructive: " The right to have weapons is the right to be free." Period.
Posted by: Weird Al ||
02/03/2005 14:53 Comments ||
Top||
#31
Weird Al: The 30K + gun death statistic is a bit distorted. In 2003 there were 9,638 murders caused by firearms. The remainder of deaths were caused by suicides and accidental discharges. This is down from 11,348 in 2001. During 2001 (the latest data I can find on gun related suicides), the number of suicides by fire arms is 16,869. The total in the last few years has fallen under 30K.
Sorry to be such a pedant, but the 30K figure is another one of those figures that the MSM keeps tossing around without any explanation or breakdown and it drives me nuts.
#32
#31. Thanks for the correction. I'm not surprised to hear it. So roughly 25k deaths of all kinds. Not a problem.I've probably been the same way in this series. The provisional IRA is as ugly a bunch as ever came done the pike, with a marxist philosophy that promoted anarchy as a way of social change, just as in other parts of the world. I hope they're all dead. The traditional people are actually working in the system at this point, but asking them to trust the brits and give up their total stock of weapons is pretty naive. I meant the quote before, the right to have weapons is the right to be free........from governments you don't trust.
Posted by: Weird Al ||
02/03/2005 16:02 Comments ||
Top||
#33
"The IRA can keep the assult rifles and hand guns."
-I agree, and no one should care about rifles or pistols. OTOH, I don't think they will ever give up all their weapons, even though I think they should give up the heavy stuff.
I was in Ireland in 1996. As I recall the police force there when I went to Derry was the RUC. I remember that I thought they looked like bobbies at the time.
I don't know anything about any Nor-aid as I'm not from Boston. I do know that many Irish Americans did indeed finance IRA activities by whatever means, though I've never heard of nor-aid. The British government does not deserve a pass and neither do the provos.
#34
A bit of history. While Northern Ireland was technically part of the UK prior to around 1970 it was internally autonomous. The RUC was more or less a regular policeforce, but there was a militia force under RUC control called the B Specials who's only task was to keep the Catholics under control and responsible for widespread anti-catholic violence. The government was entirely controlled by protestants and discrimination was widespread and systematic.
This was the environment in which the modern IRA developed. I won't pretend to make sense of the IRAs politics - mixture of Marxism, Irish Nationalism and good oldfashioned anti-Brit sentiments, but they were never terrorists in the sense of randomly killing people like AQ or Saddam Hussien. Their terrorism was intended to make NI cost too much to run for the Brits. You can't plant thousands of bombs as the IRA did and not kill people. I have personally seen at least a dozen IRA bombs explode and I never felt particularly threatened by them.
Protestants were the primary cause of random killings especially bombings and Paisley was almost certainly involved. He was saved by an amnesty around 1973 and was smart enough to keep his hands clean after then (I've met him).
As I have remarked before, terrorist organizations mutate into criminal gangs. Its the way they fund themselves. The modern IRA is mostly a criminal gang, but one with considerable popular support. Sein Fein (the IRA's political arm) consistently gets the largest share of the Catholic vote. The reality of N. Irish politics is you have to deal with the IRA. Like it or not they represent a large consituency.
otherwise the right to have weapons is the right to be free........from governments you don't trust. Or at least negotiate from a position of strength.
#37
I know who the hell Paisley is. Just didn't want to actually write his name. I was told not too long ago by someone in the republic that his son is just like him, only meaner and not very bright. Wonderfull.
Posted by: Weird Al ||
02/03/2005 18:28 Comments ||
Top||
#38
I shouldn't say this prolly but Ian Pasley is a Ass. He is a stiff necked, obstreperous pig with blood on his hands. At least some of the "troubles" largely are his fault. It's too bad he isn't dead. I have no love for the IRA but his Protestant camp is as guilty as the IRA. A well placed brick to his head is long past due.
#39
Tough f-in' luck. They had their chance with Trimble, played hudna games instead of actually trying to settle anything, and got Paisley. More false promises broken, more Arab-style obsession with "face", and we're beginning to see a pattern here...
Who's contemptible enough still to defend the IRA? Too many folks, it seems. This thread makes me sick -- there aren't any "buts" on terrorism.
When I was in Derry I walked the bog-side. Very sad, but I never felt threatened by anyone. The locals would say watch out for this pub because its IRA or watch out for that one because its loyalists owned. I never gave a shit. I went where I pleased and was warmly received by protestants and catholics a like.
As an American of strong Irish background and being a catholic I often empathized w/the Irish up north but never condoned any targeting of civilians or criminal activities on either side. Though I think elected officials who legislate unfair laws are fair game. I think the catholics did get a raw deal and I hope Ireland does re-unite under the Republic, however, if that happens the catholics need to remember that Ireland is also just as much the home of the protestants as well, they needed to be treated fair like any other people. I know some of the history but not nearly as much as some of the others on here.
someone - if this thread makes you sick, maybe you should try another one. If I was a catholic in N.I. I'd never give up my guns, ever.
Agreed. History blurs. Especially in today's world of globalized funds flows and multiple links between international crime syndicates, narcoterrorists, rogue states and terror movements, it's harder and harder to say that terror movements are essentially political in nature. In fact FARC, the IRA, Hamas, Fatah, AQ and many other groups are so heavily interpenetrated with criminal activity and internecine thuggery that it's hard to distinguish their m.o. from that of your garden-variety mafia family.
These days, the political agenda is less clear than the profiteering, the drug-running, the racketeering, the shake-downs of the people these thugs claim to lead. Like Arafat's organizations, like FARC, the IRA today are essentially a mafia syndicate with an overlay of political ideology.
#42
Right on, Lex. The terrorists are mainly criminal gangs. I have been in the North when bombs went off and blew up innocent kids. Hey, the Barleycorn had fun and clever songs in the 80s and 90s, but they are not fun anymore as the so called IRA is just a bunch of murdering criminals. It is easy to build a bomb or hijack a car in Armagh and blow up something. It takes a special character to recognize one's own resources and limitations, and to compromise to make a decent start. Read Michael Collin's biography. He fought the Brits and Black and Tans, then he exhaustively negotiated with the British govt for 6 months to get the beginnings of independence. Then some breakaway IRA nutcase murdered him in Cork. Great loss to Ireland.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
02/03/2005 23:29 Comments ||
Top||
#43
Indeed. "We who are but weasels, fighting in a hole..."
BTW, add the Chechen "rebels" to the list. I think the process of criminalization simply happens faster and more thoroughly these days due to the impact of globalization. The greater the funds flows from the outside-- be it from coca barons or Saudi princes or east european mafiya elements-- the easier it is for thugs and thievery to snuff out any pretense of political dedication, asceticism or commitment.
#44
You can't plant thousands of bombs as the IRA did and not kill people. I have personally seen at least a dozen IRA bombs explode and I never felt particularly threatened by them.
You are a lying, terrorist-apologist sack of shit, Phil_b.
Same goes for the arabs or whoever. I'm consistent across the board w/the right to bear arms for any people. I could personally give a fuck if some paleo owns a rifle, shotgun, or handgun for personal protection or hunting rabbits etc. If some paleo or catholic in N.I. want to own a gun in their home WTF should anyone care? If they are criminals or terrorists then they will end up in jail or dead, same as in the States. You don't remove the ability to own a firearm just because some people in that particular region are assholes. That's LLL thinking someone.
Controversial government plans to keep terror suspects under house arrest rather than in jail could falter in parliament and fail to become law. The Conservatives declared on Wednesday they would oppose the new scheme, hastily drawn up after the highest court ruled that imprisoning foreign suspects without trial broke human rights law. With the Liberal Democrats also against, and many in the Labour party uneasy, the legislative battle could be bloody. "Internment without trial creates martyrs. It can be a very effective recruiting sergeant," Conservative leader Michael Howard told a news conference on Wednesday. "The government believes in house arrest. I do not. If people are dangerous terrorists they should be in prison not at home. But their innocence or guilt must be determined by a court of law, not by the Home Secretary."
Prime Minister Tony Blair's huge majority should ensure he wins the day in the elected House of Commons but a tight vote will give Lords in the upper chamber a green light to mount their own challenge -- altering, delaying or even sinking the legislation.
Home Secretary Charles Clarke bowed last week to the Law Lords' December ruling, replacing jail with sweeping powers to impose house arrest on terrorism suspects regardless of nationality. Civil liberties campaigners said the new measures could prove even more draconian than the old ones. "We are going to oppose those and try and defeat those in the Commons and Lords," Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman Mark Oaten told BBC Radio. "You cannot have a situation where the Home Secretary is able to impose house detention now on UK nationals as well as foreign nationals." Clarke said 11 foreign terrorism suspects held under the old powers, some for as long as three years, would remain jailed until the new measures were in place.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
02/03/2005 12:12:05 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
As long as the "Law Enforcement" approach to terrorism prevails, the citizens are at great risk. I would wager that no police force in the West is sufficiently empowered, as the laws are full of assumptions that everyone is more or less civilized, to consistently prevent crime, especially cell-based subversives. So far, it seems the UK has staved off successful attacks through truly extraordinary effort and amazing luck. The traditional job of the Police is to clean up the mess and figure things out - after the fact. How long can they last before one slips through? When the asshats pull off a major event in the UK, the politicians (who aren't among the insane SocioFascistIslamoBatsâ¢) will have to address the issues and create something similar to the Patriot Act to enable more effective domestic security. It's not a question of "if", but "when".
#2
The irony is that the UK for quite a number of years had effective anti-terrorism laws that the chattering class was relatively unconcerned about becuase they were directed against the Irish. The mystery is why muslims evoke the sympathies of the Left while the Irish do not.
#3
Phil, not a mystery. Left, especially the far left, is totalitarian. They appreciate similar mindset. They also live in illusion that they would be able to manipulate islamonazis later in the game, same as Stalin thought vis-a-vis nazis.
#4
I think the main difference is that since Islamist violence has for the most part been contained, it is regarded as more of a hypothetical threat than a real one. Once ordinary Brits start to die on British streets at the hands of Islamic terrorists, public and even the chattering classes' attitudes will rapidly change, possibly overnight. That's what the IRA did, and that's why few people worried about how heavy handed the authorities' response was.
But it's interesting to note that many prominent left-wing politicians (extreme examples being Ken Livingstone and George Galloway) are sympathetic towards both the left-wing IRA and Islamofascism, and the Left in general has always been more sympathetic towards Irish causes than the Right, in the UK.
#5
Dead right Bulldog - I remember reading the Socialist Worker (as a student!) and was amazed at its open sympathy for the IRA/ republican cause (*spits*).
Phil - I don't think the chattering classes were concerned about the terror laws used against the IRA because innocent people were being killed. As soon as the Islamofascists get lucky here I don't think the chattering classes will give a shit about the laws used to combat the new threat either. It's just a damn shame that it takes bloodshed to shake the touchy-feely mob out of their woolly headed liberalism.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
02/03/2005 5:16 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Bulldog, Howard, I know you genuinely believe what you say, but the current European example on offer is Madrid (and I speak as a Brit who long ago left those dismal (literally) shores for sunnier climes)
#11
[Michael] Howard doesn't get it. At all. When will the Tories grab a clue(tm)?
His comments about a 'recruiting sergeant' are stupid. But at least the Tories and the Lib Dems are effectively opposing Labour's compromise solution. House arrest is not only extremely expensive, it ties down personnel who would be much better spent doing other things, elsewhere. It also adds to the impression that the UK Gevernment doesn't take dealing with suspects seriously. There does seem to be an overhaul of the system needed, but IMO the answer should be more, faster, repatriations and more power to the authorities to imprison with 'secret' evidence, and on the basis of evidence which at the moment isn't allowed (e.g. phone tapping).
#12
Hey, it seems that the Brits are letting an opportunity to make two problems each other slip through their fingers.
On one hand, as detailed above, their "liberal" judiciary won't let their gov do any thing meaningfull about jihadists.
On the other hand, as detailed in another article here: IRA Reneges on Commitment to Disarm---principaly because the Provo membership doesn't have any non-violent marketable skills...
Georgia's Prime Minister Zurab Zhvania has died, with initial indications the cause was gas poisoning, the ex-Soviet state's Interior Minister said. "Since he did not answer his telephone for a long period his bodyguard broke through the window ... and found Mr Zhvania's body. We can say that this is a case of gas poisoning," Interior Minister Vano Merabishvili said on Georgian television.
Zhvania was found dead at 4:30 a.m. (0130 GMT) on Thursday morning along with an unnamed friend, Merabishvili said. It was not immediately clear if Zhvania was in his own apartment or elsewhere, or whether he died as a result of foul play. Zhvania, who was 41, was appointed prime minister in January 2003 by President Mikhail Saakashvili, who was swept to power by a wave of protests over a fraudulent election that forced veteran leader Eduard Shevardnadze to resign.
Additional:The prime minister was visiting the Tbilisi apartment of his friend, Zurab Usupov, deputy governor of the Kvemo-Kartli region, who also died, Interior Minister Vano Merabishvili said on Rustavi-2 television. Security guards broke through a window when they heard no signs of life from inside several hours after the prime minister arrived, Merabishvili said. Zhvania had entered the apartment about midnight Wednesday, and the guards came in between 4 a.m. and 4:30 a.m. "It is an accident," Merabishvili said. "We can say that poisoning by gas took place." A gas-fired heating stove was in the main room of the mezzanine-floor apartment, where a table was set up with a backgammon set lying open upon it. Zhvania was in a chair; Usupov's body was found in the kitchen. Police declined to give further details.
Levan Chichua, a top official in Georgia's National Bureau of Forensic Medicine, said there were no signs of violence and that preliminary examination showed both died from carbon monoxide poisoning. Deputy Prosecutor-General Georgy Dzhanashia told journalists the heater was installed "with serious technical violations ... there was no ventilation in the apartment." Central heating is scarce in Georgia. Many people rely on gas or wood stoves in their homes and fatal malfunctions are often reported.
Well, as much as I like a good conspiricy, it looks like a tragic accident. Carbon monoxide poisoning from bad heaters happens all the time, even in the US, during colder months.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
02/03/2005 1:23:05 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
Poisoning seems to be popular these days in the FSU. Was it carbon monoxide or something more along the lines of sarin? Not that you can't easily buy a cylinder of carbon monoxide...
Posted by: Tom ||
02/03/2005 7:58 Comments ||
Top||
#3
along with an unnamed friend
"unnamed friends" Must be every serious security detail's nightmare.
#5
Sitting in a chair near a table with a backgammon game?
Hmmmm....
Former VP Nelson Rockefeller was found sitting at a table, in his bathrobe, slumped over the Wall Street Journal... He was assuming room temperature...
The mistress disappeared and the bed was made, (and the body moved).
No foul play here. Just heart attack at the height of...
The widow, who was known as "Happy", wasn't.
One always has to be suspicious of bodies found reading or near board games...
Russian President Vladimir Putin has come out against parts of an anti-terror bill that would drastically restrict media reporting of militant attacks, a newspaper reported on Wednesday. Putin had told parliament he feared the section of the bill relating to journalists reporting of such attacks violated Russia's existing press law, the respected Vedomosti daily said. The bill, that has already passed the first of three readings in the State Duma (lower house), would bar publication of graphic scenes of violence and restrict journalists' access to the scene of militant strikes.
The bill followed criticism of the media's actions during the Beslan hostage crisis in September, when more than 330 people died. Officials said journalists showed no restraint in publishing graphic pictures of dead and injured people. Journalists in turn said official spokesmen at the scene lied about the number of hostages and the militants' demands, and were forced to seek information from unofficial sources -- something the new law would make illegal.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/03/2005 00:00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Interesting. First thing Putty's done in the last 2 years I would consider as summing to a positive. Good for him - and Russia. Now about those hand-picked Governors, the theft of Yukos, and a shitload of other totalitarian Soviet-style developments from the last few years...
Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi has backed revising Japan's post-World War II pacifist constitution and referring to its Self-Defence Force as the nation's military. The war-renouncing constitution - drafted by US occupation forces and unchanged since 1947 - bars the use of military force in settling international disputes and prohibits maintaining armed forces for warfare. Tokya has interpreted that to mean the nation can maintain troops for self-defence and has one of the most modern, best-equipped militaries in the world. However, Japanese troops have taken an increasingly high-profile role in recent years, prompting some critics to accuse Tokyo of moving away from its post-war pacifism. Koizumi, who has strongly backed a bigger role for Japan's forces, on Wednesday said it was time for the troops to be openly referred to as a military.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/03/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Let them go - we need a hedge against Chinese Imperalism anyhow. Banzai!!
#4
Japan Good
Iran and Korea Evil
Need I say more ?
Posted by: Bill Clinton ||
02/03/2005 11:22 Comments ||
Top||
#5
excuse me North Korea
Posted by: Bill Clinton ||
02/03/2005 11:23 Comments ||
Top||
#6
It looks like just a name change... but I wonder if any of the Chinese leadership is beginning to regret supporting Little Kimmie in his adventures?
#7
What I wouldn't give to fight alongside the Japanese. Might require a bit of explaining to my father, though! ;-)
Posted by: Mark E. ||
02/03/2005 13:57 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Kimmie and the ChiComs had better think this one through quickly before something starts that won't stop.
Posted by: Tom ||
02/03/2005 14:05 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Imagine the headlines..."Today US and Japanese Marines together stormed ashore in a daring assault behind North Korean/Chinese lines..."
Posted by: Laurence of the Rats ||
02/03/2005 17:21 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Cool. New alliance needed: US + Japan + Australia + India. Awesome firepower, battlehardened yanks and aussies, Indian naval power and Japan on the rise = China well and duly contained. Make it happen.
#12
Well, US + J + Aus is a pretty good start. India can help immediately in some areas like combatting piracy on the seas. In any case we need to shift our attention away from Europe, esp from France and Germany, and toward Japan and India, which are far more important to us and our security than the EU heavies.
#3
German regulatory agencies should double check the plans to see if there are any unusual empty spaces situated in any hard-to-get-at location. Spaces that are big enough to accomodate crates of AK-47s, grenades, RPGs, etc, etc...
WASHINGTON - Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld disclosed Thursday that he had offered President Bush (news - web sites) his resignation twice during the height of the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal last year. He said he wanted the decision on his future to be placed in Bush's hands.
"He made that decision and said he did want me to stay on," Rumsfeld told CNN's "Larry King Live," according to a transcript provided by CNN before the program aired Thursday.
In the CNN interview Rumsfeld asserted, as he has many times in the past, that as defense secretary he could not be expected to know all that takes place in war zones halfway around the world. But he also indicated that he could have done more to head off the trouble.
The release of photographs last spring depicting American soldiers abusing Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib triggered worldwide outrage, particularly in the Arab world. Rumsfeld told Congress at the time that he would quit if he felt he could no longer serve effectively, but he also said then that he would not resign simply to please his critics and political opponents.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
02/03/2005 7:11:20 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
You all did see that on the Lupercal I thrice presented him a kingly crown, Which he did thrice refuse: was this ambition? Julius Ceasar, Act III, Scene II, (Mark Anthony's speech.)
I think this was a special part of the SOTU address...
WASHINGTON - They met just before the speech began: the mother of a soldier killed in Iraq and the daughter of a man killed by Saddam Hussein's regime. They found some comfort in a spontaneous moment that electrified President Bush's State of the Union address.
The two women, both touched by death in Iraq, reached out for each other while lawmakers, military leaders, the president and the nation watched. Their locked embrace inspired the longest applause of the evening.
On Thursday, the parents of Marine Corps Sgt. Byron Norwood said the Iraqi woman, Safia Taleb al-Suhail, had turned and introduced herself just before the speech.
"She thanked us for our son's sacrifice and made sure we knew the people in Iraq were grateful for the sacrifices that were made not just by our son, but by all of them," Janet Norwood said.
"I just told her how happy we were that the elections were successful and told her our son would have been pleased," said Norwood, appearing on ABC's "Good Morning America" with her husband, Bill.
Al-Suhail's father was killed 11 years ago by the Iraqi intelligence service. Now the leader of the Iraqi Women's Political Council, she watched the annual presidential address Wednesday night at the Capitol as a guest of first lady Laura Bush.
Behind her sat Janet Norwood, who sent her son into battle wishing she could "protect him like I had since he was born." Her son was proud to fight, loved his job and wanted to protect the nation, the mother wrote in a letter to the president.
"We have said farewell to some very good men and women who died for our freedom and whose memory this nation will honor forever," Bush said.
Pain etched lines in Norwood's forehead as she held a woman who won the freedom to vote in Iraq's election on Sunday. Norwood finally let go, took her husband's arm and rested her head on his shoulder.
I dont think Karl Rove could have planned it better. Oh wait.....
Posted by: CrazyFool ||
02/03/2005 11:42:36 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Comments here, put on page 2 to keep things balanced.
Posted by: Steve White ||
02/03/2005 00:00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I missed it because of a class tonight, but I saw the picture of the Iraqi hugging the Marine Mom. Few things make me tear up but seeing that picture and knowing what each of them went through to get there tore me up. Risking my life to vote Republican, Democrat, or Pagan is something I can't fathom. And losing a son in a far away land is something I hope I never have to face. On the flip side on want to applaud the Democrats for finding the shallowest ideas to talk about on this historic night. They are nearly on the verge of becoming an even smaller minority than they are now.
#6
Today, from Alaa in Iraqi on their special day on Sunday, on voting in Iraq on Sunday....
Alaa, at the THE MESOPOTAMIAN puts it best on Monday, Jan 31, 2005.... http://messopotamian.blogspot.com/
"Finally, we heard the speech of President Bush Loud and clear. He, and the American people and their British and other valiant allies have much to do with this event. All I can say is that this man has all the essential traits of character that distinguishes the great men of history; the insistence and utter conviction and the perseverance and steadfastness in the face of all doubters and detractors. This was no ordinary election, and it was not simply to elect a constituent assembly. It was the answer of the people, what they really thought about the liberation, what they really thought of the ideas preached by the president. This was a message by the Iraqi people to the American people and their great president. It was the heart of Iraq answering the heart of America that voted to give the President the mandate to finish the task; it was the answer that the common people of Iraq gave by braving danger and exposing their life and that of their children and families to death, this was their way to make their voice heard.
Well, thank you Mr. President, we heard you; and I am sure you also heard us."
You have to know, the rest of the world heard those words that Alaa heard, and tonight, W added his signature to Iranians, etc. "I mean what I say."
The people of the world will long remember that embrace of a Marine's mom with that Iraqi woman. Alaa's words let us know, they hear our words. W, again tonight, delivered them for us. And, he knows it!
1. My kids (ages 12 and 9) watched parts of the speech with me. On the Social Security part, the 12-year old (who could care less for policy wonkery) was saying "He's kickin' it. I didn't know he was that good."
2. Inaugural Address, Part 2: W called out the Saudis, the mullahs of Iran, Baby Assad, Mubarak -- the same way he called out the Dems on Social Security. Ain't no backdown with this dude.
3. (I know, I can't count.) Hillary looked as peevish last night as she did on 9/20/01. "Now I'll NEVER be president!"
Posted by: Mike ||
02/03/2005 5:55 Comments ||
Top||
#11
I think the Left is generally in shock that tide has turned so much. The snippet I posted yesterday from Simon Jenkins illustrated it well. In summary, 'this is not the right future - something went wrong.'
When they come to write the history, GWB's name will be writ large as the man who epitomized the triumph of principal over both ideology and (craven) self interest. Applause.
#13
Hey Gluper, if you don't like President Bush, you wouldn't like the idea of president Cheney.
Posted by: Steve from Relto ||
02/03/2005 9:08 Comments ||
Top||
#14
Would have been interesting to be a fly on the wall in Mubarak's office when GWB got to that part about Egypt "leading the way" to democracy in the region. Heh...
Posted by: Dave D. ||
02/03/2005 9:34 Comments ||
Top||
#16
I noticed the President mentioned energy in the context of demanding action on the legislation he submitted to Congress in 2001 (actually before the 9-11 atrocity).
Near as I can tell that same bill, which has oodles of tax code manipulations (most of which I'm against - I'm the kind of fellow who'd rather the govt simply spend $100 on windmills than credit $100 in tax relief to windmill builders), is still on the table. This contradicts the 'simplify the tax code' portion of the SOTU.
#17
I'm a pretty hard-core cynic. I'm also a political independent that doesn't agree with a number of Pres. Bush's policies (ex. Border control / immigration, etc.). However comma that was probably the boldest, most moving and motivating State of the Union speech I have ever witnessed.
What I saw last night was a strong leader who communicated a vision with clarity, optimistic enthusiasm and resolve. Inspiring. Thatâs what a leader does and thatâs what a President should be.
#19
PH-I'm with you. I am concerned about what is going to happen/not happen with immigration and social security. I am VERY concerned about what is going to happen with my 25+ years of payments into social security. I will wait to watch the debates and will be ready to dissect proposals presented for their true effects. I will say, thank God that Pres. Bush is strong enough to welcome different ideas instead of being rigidly locked into a plan now. That gives me hope.
Bush is getting stronger, and, I get the impression, more comfortable in his role as president. He is inspiring to watch. I don't agree with everything the president does, but I think he is a decent man with big vision. That's unusual for a politician.
I thank God every day that Bush was in office on 9/11 and after 9/11. I shudder to think what slimy deals the Dems would have made with folks overseas through the mere mirage of fighting terrorism.
#23
It looked like Reid and Pelosi had to wipe drool off their chins from all the frothing at the mouth they were doing in the rebuttal. Someone needs to advise them to say something CONSTRUCTIVE, because they are becoming laughing-stocks...
Skateboard kid want's to be like Reid? So when did the kid's Ritalin perscription run out?
#24
I don't cry at ANYTHING, but when I saw those two women embrace, my eyes started to tear up; I almost started sobbing. It was moving, and it was beautiful.
I started watching the Democrats' rebuttal. Reid impressed me a bit at first - having heard rumors of his "Bush's S.S. plan will NEVER pass the Senate! MWA-HA-HA!" statements earlier in the day, I was expecting someone far more deranged. Instead, he told a nice little story (although I was constantly wondering, You say you believe this, and this, so why aren't you a Republican?). It was when he got to the social security issue that he started to become a little unhinged, though, and when Pelosi started talking I started reaching for the remote before remembering that I don't have one, so I had to get up and walk over to the TV. Reid's was at least something a rational person could listen to and definitely disagree with (at least in my uninformed opinion). Pelosi just started ranting about Iraq, and was so crazy I couldn't take it.
As for Bush, he seemed a little slow at the very beginning, on the education issues, but he very quickly picked up steam, and I really enjoyed the rest of the speech. Clear plans, excellent delivery, and (my favorite part) a wink and a smile every now and then. At one point, he wiggled his eyebrows and grinned, don't remember what the context was, but it was great. W is The Man after last night; keep this up and the far-lefties will self-destruct in no time.
Posted by: The Doctor ||
02/03/2005 13:45 Comments ||
Top||
#25
"You say you believe this, and this, so why aren't you a Republican?"
Don't be fooled, they can only win people over by pretending to be conservative, but they are far from it. Billary is putting up a big smoke screen, but she would undo every conservative law or appointment if she could.
#26
Hey, Sarge -- you shifting your loyalty from Hillary??
Cold, man ..... although I have to agree, Boxer's on-the-edge-of-insanity, spittle-flying delivery is a nice change from the Hon Sen of NY's remote-controlled automaton sometimes.
#28
Glad Bush mentioned the 4 middle easter countries I only caught part of the SOTU address, but I was happy to hear Bush name Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt to the official poop list. I am especially glad he mentioned Egypt, a coutry who has so far gotten a free ride. Egypt, the country of the most vile government sanctioned anti-American propaganda, a country surviving on American generosity, the birthplace of the ideology and core members of Al Qaeda.
Posted by: ed ||
02/03/2005 17:08 Comments ||
Top||
#29
Like they would ever let me pick thier candidates. My Sharpton/Kusinich ticket was rejected by the DNC long before the Iowa Caucus. However I am floating a Clinton/Boxer ticket for 2008. That would be especially sweet to see Babs drag Hillary down with her. Hell that ticket might give the Republicans their first 50-State win. Run Babs RUN!
Don't they have a charm school where they teach Generals not to tell the ugly truth in front of traitorous reporters?
A senior U.S. Marine Corps general who said it was "fun to shoot some people" should have chosen his words more carefully but will not be disciplined, military officials said on Thursday. Lt. Gen. James Mattis, who led troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, made the comments at a conference Tuesday in San Diego. "Actually it's quite fun to fight 'em, you know. It's a hell of a hoot. It's fun to shoot some people. I'll be right up front with you, I like brawling," said Mattis.
"Mike, I'll betcha $20 I can make at least two Rooters reporters poop themselves tomorrow!"
"Okay, Jim! You're on!"
"You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil," Mattis said during a panel discussion. "You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them."
"C'mon, Mike! Pay up!"
"You cheated, dammit!"
In a statement, Gen. Michael Hagee, commander of the Marine Corps, praised Mattis as "one of this country's bravest and most experienced military leaders." "While I understand that some people may take issue with the comments made by him, I also know he intended to reflect the unfortunate and harsh realities of war," Hagee said. "I have chewed his ass pretty goodpaid counseled him concerning his remarks and he Knows if he says sompthin stupid like this in front of some reporter again, it'll be the last time agrees he should have chosen his words more carefully," Hagee added. Maj. Jason Johnston, a Marine spokesman at the Pentagon, said Hagee did not plan any disciplinary action against Mattis. Johnston declined to provide details of how Hagee had counseled Mattis, calling it a private matter.
"Bartender! Another round here!"
At a Pentagon briefing on Thursday, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said he could not comment on the remarks, but Gen. Peter Pace, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, praised the general as having set a stellar example for troops in his service abroad. Mattis is commander of the Marine Corps Combat Development Command at Quantico, Virginia, south of Washington.
Think real hard, now, Mr. Rooters: Who'd you rather shoot? Guys you like? Or wife-thumping crapbags?
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
02/03/2005 3:48:37 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Sure hope they don't find out about the "napalm sticks to kids" cadence.
#4
That's true, Muck. The ad should read: If you feel this way, the Marines are for you!
Posted by: Mark E. ||
02/03/2005 16:21 Comments ||
Top||
#5
I'm with the general. It'd be a hell of a lot of fun for me to get my firearms training practicing on Zarqawi and Bin Laden. Cuz you know, I might not be a very accurate shot at first, but with a lot of practice...might prove they have "Swiss heritage"...
#6
A Patton for our time. Outstanding comments Sir! It is fun to shoot known women beaters and pedophilers. The only people who think different are Islamists, pussies, and msm reporters.
#7
Who wouldnât feel good about ridding the world of a terrorist? Notice there was no talk about relieving him or making him retire? Yes, that is what Marines do they kill the bad guys. Semper Fi Marines.
#15
My apologies SPOD, you are of course quite correct. "Some Peoples just needs a killin'" - Seems to me that quote was an official defense in justified homicide cases in Texas. Imho that could cover Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Saddam, Zarqawi, Khameni, Castro, Ward Churchill & that bitch from the pretenders.
#16
The fact that Mattis' remarks even raised eyebrows in this county is further proof of the continued attempts of "pussification" (hat tip du Toit) of the US male by fifth column journ-weenies, lll educators (indoctrinators) & metro-sexual prancers (not to be mistaken w/the avg gay guy though some of them could fall into that category). I've got a gay uncle whose more of a man then that fat drunken blow hard kennedy will ever be. TK is an embarrasment to Americans of Irish descent everywhere.
I long back to the time when men were men, warriors were warriors & they meant what they said and told it like it is. They knew life and war was rough, and you had to be a rough man w/a hearty soul to persevere. No lame-ass belly aching about sensitivity, save that shit for the p.c. college profs & other non-hackers.
The folks Mattis offended are 100% candy-asses. The msm is trying to make a mtn out of a moles ass on this one.
"I'd like to spit some beech-nut in that dude's eye and shoot him down with my ole' forty-five....."
The head of the Iraq Oil-for-Food Program investigation has formally presented an interim report to United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan. Paul Volcker, chairman of The Independent Inquiry Committee into the Iraq Oil-for Food Program, brought the report Thursday to U.N. World Headquarters in New York from the panel's offices a few blocks away. He did not comment to reporters. However, Volcker, former chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserve, in a Wall Street Journal op-ed piece Thursday said, "The findings do not make for pleasant reading." He said the humanitarian program's "procurement process was tainted" and "the management responsiveness critical to achieving a fully effective auditing process were lacking.
But, before you get your hopes up.....
"The management of program administrative funds appears free of systematic or widespread abuse."
Kofi gets off, but they seem to have decided on a scapegoat..
But he found "disheartening" the performance of the program's chief, saying, "The evidence is conclusive that (Benon) Sevan ... placed himself in an irreconcilable conflict of interest, in violation both of specific U.N. rules and of the broad responsibility of an international civil servant."
Posted by: Steve ||
02/03/2005 2:12:04 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
Via Lucianne, how brown is her nose??? ... The assumption is that NBC is a valuable resource. But on one of the hottest stories around, the U.N. corruption scandal, NBC has been out to lunch. Why? Its U.N. reporter has been on the payroll of the U.N. lobby.
Linda Fasulo, the U.N. correspondent for NBC News and MSNBC, has written a pro-U.N. book, An Insider's Guide to the U.N., which reads like the U.N. paid for it. Actually, the pro-U.N. lobby paid for it. In a monstrous conflict of interest for a supposed straight news reporter, Fasulo acknowledges Ted Turner's U.N. Foundation and Better World Campaign for "their generous financial support" of her book project. She also thanks the Rockefeller Brothers Fund "for helping to fund the project."
The book is about "one of the finest and most important governing bodies," she says. Of the U.N. chief, she writes like a school girl with a crush. "It is hard to find anyone who can mount a serious criticism of [Kofi] Annan's performance as Secretary General," she claims. His performance is so "impressive" that she wonders if a "cult of personality" has risen up around him. One U.S. official is reported to be "astonished by just how good a Secretary General Kofi Annan has been."
#1
Somehow, this doesn't surprise me, but I can't put my finger on why . . .
Posted by: The Doctor ||
02/03/2005 13:47 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"The book just sings!" - Mike Sylwester
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/03/2005 13:51 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Edward R. Murrow rolled over to face down in his grave last year. I doubt you can hear him gag anymore. What you probably heard was the reaction of Paul Volcker to the part about "...Volcker was a board member of the BCUN, a group partly funded by BNP Paribas, the French bank that handled all oil-for-food transactions...".
Posted by: Tom ||
02/03/2005 13:54 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Cross your legs, babe. The position you're in is undignified.
#7
Ha! No Effin way! I bet she rationalized it by saying something like her intentions are pure, and who could argue regarding the value of the UN; I mean, it stands for the "United Nations." With a name like that, what could be bad about it?
Posted by: Mark E. ||
02/03/2005 16:25 Comments ||
Top||
My head: A luxuriant growth of blond hair likely in 6 months...
THE PHILIPPINES will likely seal a peace pact with Muslim separatists in six months provided both sides cooperate the MILF rearming goes as planned and strictly stick to a ceasefire, President Gloria Arroyo's chief aide said Thursday. I'm sure the Easter Bunny will deliver it to.... only to be blown up by the Islamics for being christian.
A draft document that would serve as "reference material" for government negotiators and Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) leaders was being worked out to kickstart the next round of talks, Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita told reporters. Ermita said lead government negotiator Silvestre Afable had expressed confidence a peace pact would be signed within six months.Of course the MILF is incapable of enforcing it on its 'members' but I'm being paid to get any deal, any deal at all, signed.
"He is confident that an agreement would be signed provided that there will be cooperation on both sides, and the arms shipments to the MILF occur on schedule especially with the help of the Malaysian government and the IMT (International Monitoring Team)," Ermita said.
The Malysian-led IMT has been on the ground in the southern island of Mindanao since late November to check on violations of a ceasefire.
The team last month unsuccessfully prevented any further hostilities when a renegade MILF unit attacked an army outpost that left 23 dead in Mindanao, 17 of them rebels. 23 dead is a sign of *success*?
A military air strike on the same group Which the MILF protected last week reportedly left as many as 40 dead, but this has yet to be independently confirmed.
Despite the attacks, Afable has said talks would resume at a date still to be specified by Malaysia, which has been brokering the talks.
In the southern city of Marawi, meanwhile, Malaysian peace monitor head Major General Zulkefli bin Mohammad Zin said the ceasefire was being maintained by both sides and that "the peace process is very much on track."
"We, members of the IMT, can feel the pulse of transparency We *feel* your pain!
getting to be stronger.
Commitments and cooperation shown by all parties concerned are commendable," Mohammad told a gathering of peace advocates.
"We could also see that restraints are being exercised. The peace momentum is now getting to be much stronger," he said.
"If the current trend prevails the people of the Philippines and those living in the region should be able to see a bright light at the end of the tunnel soon," he said. Er.... bright lights at the end of tunnels usually mean an oncoming train.
The MILF has been waging a separatist rebellion in Mindanao since 1978. It is pushing to create an independent Islamic state in the region, but has struggled to appear to distance itself from terrorist groups in the region linked to Osama bin Laden's Al-Qaeda network.
Authorities say that the MILF, despite its repeated denials, are harboring or training members of the Jemaah Islamiyah (JI), the al-Qaeda's Southeast Asian arm.
Did anybody else notice that there are no 'hopeful' quotes from anyone associated with the MILF?
I believe the President has settled on the direction he is going to pursue with Iran. If I am reading the tea leaves correctly, it would appear a pattern has begun to emerge in the recent statements by President Bush, Condolezza Rice and others.
What is the new strategy?
Let's begin with President Bush's State of the Union speech. The President warned the Iranian regime that he is willing to significantly ramp up his support for the Iranian people:
"And to the Iranian people, I say tonight:
As you stand for your own liberty, America stands with you."
The President has recently warned Iran to end its nuclear enrichment program and that he has not taken the military option off the table. At the same time, he also made clear his interest in pursuing a "diplomatic solution."
Why A diplomatic solution?
First, military action in Iran would likely be counter productive. Military action would almost certainly have the unintended consequence of killing large numbers of civilians and thus create a "rally around the government" effect. This would provide a tremendous opportunity for the regime to argue that the US government does not really "care about the people" of Iran. Thus alienating the very people we want to support.
Second, it is also unlikely that such military action could permanently stop Iran's nuclear effort. To accomplish this would require an invasion of Iran and therefore a much larger military force than we have available at this time, so we are told.
Third, Europe is unlikely to ever support military action against Iran and the US public would also find it hard to support it unless there was an imminent threat. (Nearly everyone would want irrefutable proof of Iran's nuclear weapons program).
So what options are left?
An effective non military response to the Iranian threat would require the administration find an issue that is universally accepted in order to gain international support. Such international support was essential in the recent popular revolt in the Ukraine.
Such an issue already exists.
I believe the issue the administration intends to focus on is human rights in Iran.
If you follow the news on Iran, the administration has begun focusing on the human rights issue as it relates to Iran. Here are a few examples:
From the day of our Founding, we have proclaimed that every man and woman on this earth has rights, and dignity, and matchless value, because they bear the image of the Maker of Heaven and earth. Across the generations we have proclaimed the imperative of self-government, because no one is fit to be a master, and no one deserves to be a slave. Advancing these ideals is the mission that created our Nation. It is the honorable achievement of our fathers. Now it is the urgent requirement of our nation's security, and the calling of our time. ...
America will not pretend that jailed dissidents prefer their chains, or that women welcome humiliation and servitude, or that any human being aspires to live at the mercy of bullies.
We will encourage reform in other governments by making clear that success in our relations will require the decent treatment of their own people. America's belief in human dignity will guide our policies, yet rights must be more than the grudging concessions of dictators; they are secured by free dissent and the participation of the governed. In the long run, there is no justice without freedom, and there can be no human rights without human liberty.
Condoleezza Rice:
Iranians "suffer under a regime that has been completely unwilling to deal with their aspirations and that has an appalling human rights record". BBC
Even Senator Brownback, the new chairman of the Helsinki Commission says he plans to highlight Iranian human rights issues with Europe. The NY Sun reports:
The plan by Senator Brownback, a Republican from Kansas, is in keeping with the president's commitment to spread freedom throughout the world...
Senator Brownback said he planned to publicize the plight of Iranian dissidents in hearings before the Helsinki Commission, the American body created in 1976 to engage the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe on their treatment of political prisoners and human rights. American envoys would often read the names of political prisoners aloud at commission-related meetings, at first to embarrass their Soviet counterparts. Later this technique proved effective, when in the twilight of the Cold War many political prisoners were released.
"We are going to bring up human rights issues and what is taking place in Iran aggressively," he said.
Europe and the UN have a long history of advocating human rights. Europe has tied increased trade with Iran to improvements in their human rights record. European leaders advocacy for Human Rights in Iran bought them popular political support at home at very little cost.
Europeans are proud of their leaders stand for Human Rights. It was no surprise to Europeans that the Iranian human rights lawyer, ShirinEbadi, won the 2003 Nobel Peace Prize.
If the US makes Human Rights in Iran a centerpiece of its Iran policy, the EU and the UN will have to support it. Russia and China would find it difficult to oppose it.
President Bush's support for "their issue" will likely be perceived by Europeans generally as a European victory. Popular support could force their leaders to join the US effort.
If Iran refuses to permanently end its uranium enrichment program, as they claim, the EU will have to withdraw its offer of increased trade.
Instead, I would then expect an ever increasing demand of the international community to end all trade (the EU's only real weapon) until the regime guarantees the Iranian people's human rights.
Already British firms such as BP have declared that they will not invest further in Iran. US firms have also taken similar positions and I expect we will see an ever growing number of international firms ending their business relations with the Iranian regime.
Why will this help bring down the regime?
First, the people of Iran will at long last receive the international attention and support they have been pleading for. This support will encourage the people to stand against the regime and various elements in government will be forced to decide whether to support the people of Iran or their unpopular leaders.
Thus the regime will face a serious dilemma.
On the one hand, cracking down on dissent will further alienate the regime and likely result in an end to international investments/trade in Iran.
On the other hand, the regime cannot comply with this without risking encouraging a popular revolt.
Iran's presidential elections are scheduled for June. The hardline elements in Iran have been hoping to further consolidate their power and will not likely be interested in being pressured by the international community on human rights.
If the Iranian regime cracks down on popular dissent this time, the international community will be watching as never before. Crack downs will lead to further doubts by the international business community. As more firms pull away from Iran, investment dollars will dry up.
Iran needs the investment dollars to keep the regime in power. Unemployment is already unbearable. Significant increases in unemployment will only fuel more civil unrest.
It would appear the regime will be in a no win situation.
President Bush is about to travel to Europe. If I am right, we will see a mending of relations and a new unity among the US and the EU.
Time appears to be running out for the Mullahs of Iran. It may prove to be a very hot summer in Iran.
#1
I would not underestimate the possibility of a military assault using unusual tactics. For example, bottling up the cities and other strongpoints, then attacking the rural nuclear facilities. The purpose of this is to cut off their military from their civilian population--met in the field they could only surrender or die. This would amaze the Iranians by *not* destroying their cities, and most likely *capturing* most of their army. This would leave the Mullahs stuck in the cities, trying to motivate a civilian population to "go out there and die". Highly unlikely that this would last long. Then, we would make a deal with their military leaders that *they* should rule Iran as a junta until *fair* elections could be held--mullahs need not apply.
#2
....don't think we have the boots available for such an action - unless we knew exactly which facilities were key. I don't think we have that kind of intel. It's a tough case. The diplo route may take a very long time. Military action probably can't guarantee the results we seek. At the very least, we need to ratchet up the pressure and be ready to face a nuclear Iran and be ready to back Israel if / when they take action.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
02/03/2005 20:03 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I generally agree with this analysis. I particularly agree that an Iraq style invasion is both unfeasible due to manpower constraints and would risk causing Iranians to rally around the government.
Still, I have always been skeptical that a bunch of coffeehouse students have the spine to stick up to the harsh government crackdown that would follow any serious revolt.
However, the main vulnerabilty of the Mullacracy is that the sham elections they hold are a tacit admission that democracy is legitimate. This gives us, and the liberty seeking Iranians we support, a rhetorical opportunity with every election season to support human rights and real, free choice in leaders.
What's missing is a charasmatic, effective leader to become the alternative in waiting and followers willing to take up arms should he or she not be given their due. It's the latter missing requirement that distinguishes Iran from Georgia or the Ukraine. We better be contacting to the more sensible members of the Iranian military as Anonymoose states. I also hope to see us supporting organized exile movements.
In the 'election crisis' scenario I think is our best hope, limited use of US airpower and ground troops are conceivable if not likely. I'm no military expert, but I would expect missions to include interdiction Revolutionary Guard movement against friendly military formations, destroying secret police buildings, securing nuclear materials, etc. Our presence in Iraq would make this more doable than it would have been in the past despite our problems there.
If this best case scenario fails to work in time, massive air strikes should remain an option (taking this option of the table as advocated recently by Straw and Clinton is insane) but I would have to think they will be ineffective as the Iranians have had a long time to dig in. We may just fall back on our strategic triad -- second strike anhilation.
#4
I think there will be military action of one sort or another. Remember, we don't have to stop their nuke program forever -- just delay it long enough for the bums to be tossed out.
#6
I tend to agree with the article, but I also agree with Jarhead. We are stretched too thin for any more major projects in the style of Iraq. We sure do not have the occupation/nation building resources to take on another project. What we will need is a bunch of crowbars, i.e., leverage in key places to multiply our application of force. It seems to me that Syria needs a few well placed crowbars. Their actions or condoning of nefarious activities inside their country has been a source of misery to Iraqis and a source of loss of our troops in Iraq. Iran has a forward base in Syria. Take it away or neutralize it and more heat goes onto the MMs.
At the risk of being maudlin and over the top, I think that Bush, in his SOU address, raised the battle to a moral issue, just like Lincoln did in the War between the States. Fredrick Douglass used to work on Lincoln to take the moral high ground and to include liberation of the slaves as one of the war aims, and not to just explain the war as saving the Union. When the moral high ground was taken, it made the enemy weaker in people's eyes. Doing this with human rights in Iran is a smart move by President Bush.
We do not have the options in Iran that we had in Iraq. A regime change is an option that needs to be pursued. The human rights thing ought to make the EUniks uncomfortable, well, maybe. I would not count on it.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
02/03/2005 23:06 Comments ||
Top||
Syrian opposition sources have reported fighting within the security services under the regime of President Bashar Assad. The Reform Party of Syria said the infighting was prompted by the appointment of Brig. Gen. Ghazi Kanaan as Syrian interior minister in mid-2004. The group, supported by the U.S. Defense Department as a democratic alternative to the Assad regime, said Kanaan was provided a mandate to unify the rival intelligence services.
[Digs in ear with end of car key]
Dang. I thought I'd heard that someplace before...
Quoting "reliable sources in the Middle East," RPS said that since Kanaan entered the Interior Ministry, Syria's security and intelligence services, including military intelligence services, "have been at each other throats for control. The in-fighting is almost at a point of spilling of blood."
The cockles of my heart are all toasty...
RPS said Assad's brother-in-law, Assaf Chawkat, regarded as the liasion to the security agencies, had opposed their consolidation. The group said Defense Minister Hassan Turkmani also opposed the move out of concern that he would lose his authority.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/03/2005 3:31:42 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
PARIS (Reuters) - Iran has conducted successful experiments on a crucial triggering mechanism for a nuclear weapon, an exiled opposition group said on Thursday. President Bush on Wednesday renewed his accusation that Iran was seeking to develop atomic weapons and called it the "world's primary state sponsor of terror." Tehran dismisses the accusations and says its atomic ambitions are limited to the peaceful generation of electricity. The National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), which wants to oust Iran's clerical rulers and has given accurate information on its nuclear sites in the past, said Iran was close to producing the 'neutron initiators' that spark the chain reaction in a bomb.
"Tehran has already succeeded in using beryllium in conjunction with polonium-210 for large scale laboratory testing purposes, and it is getting very close to the point of industrial production," Mohammad Mohaddessin of the NCRI told a news conference in Paris.
Diplomats have already said there is evidence that Iran has bought small quantities of beryllium and tried to buy much more, and that the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) is examining this as part of a two-year investigation of Tehran's nuclear program. Beryllium also has many innocent uses, but Mohaddessin said Iran had not only secured significant quantities but also tried to conceal its purchases from the IAEA.
"Tehran currently has enough beryllium to produce initiators for a dozen nuclear bombs," he said. He said the laboratory tests had been conducted at the Lavizan II site close to Tehran by experts from the Malek-Ashtar Industrial university, which is run by the Defense Ministry.
Germany, France and Britain, acting for the European Union, have been urging Iran to permanently scrap the uranium enrichment that could give it the potential to make nuclear explosives in return for political and economic incentives. Washington takes a harder line and wants Iran to be reported to the U.N. Security Council for possible sanctions.
The NCRI is a coalition of exiled opposition groups. The State Department lists it and its armed wing, the People's Mujahideen, as terrorist organizations.
Pity, they produce damm good intel, I'll wager the nuclear spies Iran arrested last year were members of NCRI.
Posted by: Steve ||
02/03/2005 1:58:49 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
If this can be verified its just the lightening rod Israel needs to take action. I don't see up getting involved with a preemptive strike cause of politics. I do see us giving flyover permission and logistical support in any way to the Israelies. This will up the pucker factor for everyone in the area.
Posted by: Yosemite Sam ||
02/03/2005 15:01 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Anybody think the timing (i.e. within 12 hrs of the SOTU address) is a coincidence?
#3
Where are the carriers? Are any headed in for the next rotation? Though I suppose now there are enough bases in the area to do it without many carriers, which would let the US drop that particular "It's Coming" tipoff.
Posted by: Laurence of the Rats ||
02/03/2005 16:06 Comments ||
Top||
#4
LotR, I guess the question is whether that is what we want to be provoked by these guys into doing.
I would love to see the mullahs gone -- but I also would love to see that younger generation both free and without overwhelming resentment of us. They would be a formidable asset to us and the world if they took power there. Let's be careful not to be manipulated by exile groups. We may choose to strike, but it would be best if it were due to our own analysis, not a response to carefully publicized info from a group with a clear agenda.
#5
Listen mullahs.... a finished game of "Mousetrap" isn't a nuclear triggering device.....
Posted by: Mark E. ||
02/03/2005 16:18 Comments ||
Top||
#6
If this berrylium and Po210 story is correct, then the Iranians are well along to the plutonium bomb. The berrylium and Po mix in the center of a sphere of plutonium serves as the sparkplug at the moment of implosion, sending neutrons into the plutonium to initiate the chain reaction.
Thanks to the evil Dr. Khan, the Iranians probably have the explosive lense details knocked out. Now all they will need is the plutonium (from Bushehr, the Norks, or other willing seller) and the precision electric detonators that set off the explosive lenses, initiating the implosion.
And Yosemite Sam, this is definitely a pucker factor raiser if it is tee-rue.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
02/03/2005 16:34 Comments ||
Top||
#7
rkb - That is true, it would be better if something internal could stop this, but with a story like this it seems like they are moving too fast for a real revolt to get steamed up.
Good point on not letting an exile group getting us going. That sort of thing should be an asset or a piece of information, not the deciding factor in a decision to attack.
Posted by: Laurence of the Rats ||
02/03/2005 17:16 Comments ||
Top||
Lebanon's opposition on Tuesday laid out its demands for the future of relations with Syria during a highly unusual meeting with an envoy from Damascus. The opposition figures told Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister Walid Muwallem, whose country dominates Lebanon, they wanted to see a dramatic and swift reduction of Damascus' influence over the country and a withdrawal of its troops. "The solution is for Syria to lift its control of Lebanon, which must now recover its sovereignty and independence," said opposition deputy Nassib Lahoud after a meeting with Muawllem. "This is the central objective. Any other way will prolong the crisis," said Lahoud. "There must be a complete Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon within a short timescale," he added
Haven't you guys figured out that you're supposed to be grateful? You're natives, and they're the colonists.
Muwallem's meetings with anti-Syrian figures during his two-day visit mark a new departure for Damascus and come amid increasing pressure on Syria from the United States to reduce its presence in the country. After a series of partial withdrawals, some 14,000 Syrian troops are still deployed in Lebanon, but this is less than half the number stationed in the country since 1976. Lahoud said the opposition wanted Damascus to dismantle its joint security services in Lebanon before spring elections and treat the country as an "independent state" instead of a colony. After the elections, a Lebanese government of national unity should set out a timetable for Syria's complete withdrawal from Lebanon, he said. Muwallem, a respected diplomat who was Syrian ambassador to Washington, has spoken of the need for an "evolution" in relations and acknowledged "erroneous practices" between the two countries.
Not that they'll give anything back, ya understand.
Posted by: Steve White ||
02/03/2005 00:00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I wonder how baby Assad likes being asked for his "exit strategy."
President George Bush last night issued clear warnings to Syria and Iran that they were next in his sights in his declared mission to spread democracy around the world.
The state of the union address to Congress had been billed as reconciliatory, but, along with a series of references to alliances and international initiatives, there were some blunt words. After recounting the fall of the Taliban in Afghanistan and Saddam Hussein in Iraq, the president said: "There are still governments that sponsor and harbour terrorists, but their numbers have declined.
"There are still regimes seeking weapons of mass destruction, but they are no longer without attention and without consequence."
The president then singled out Syria, which he said "still allows its territory and parts of Lebanon to be used by terrorists who seek to destroy every chance of peace in the region." "We expect Syria to end all support for terrorists and open the door to freedom," he said, to heavy applause from members of Congress.
He turned to Iran, which he said "remains the world's primary sponsor of terror" and he issued a direct message to Iranians to stand up to the clerical regime in Tehran. He said the US was working with European states to make clear to Tehran it must give up its uranium enrichment programme, but he also signalled a much broader agenda, aimed at the ultimate removal of the clerical regime itself.
He declared "to the Iranian people, I say tonight: As you stand for your own liberty, America stands with you."
Only way he could have been more blunt would have been to wear an orange tie and wave a purple-stained finger.
Posted by: Steve White ||
02/03/2005 00:00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Clear. Just like the Mullah declaration that they will not give up their desire for nukes.
#2
I wonder if "W" will give the clerical regime 48 hours to get out of Dodge comply with nuclear proliferation demands, when the fat hits the fan (the point of no return)?
#3
Why? You do know that Arabs live by colorful and very visual speech - empty speech - recall Saddam in Gulf I - "mountains of bodies and rivers of blood", etc., right? One of the things you'd learn living in an Arab country is how totally amazed and shocked they are when you do precisely what you say you'll do. Even people who've worked with Westerners a long time, such as at Aramco, still never quite grasp that we are not full of bullshit - and talking just to hear ourselves, as they commonly do.
So I'd say they've had more than enough notice and they wouldn't "get it" anyway. When the time is right, just do it.
#5
Absolutely - the Iranians are Persians, not Arabs, but their "leaders" exhibit the same penchant for hyperbole. Who started it (lol!) I dunno, heh. I'll readily admit that the Iranians I know personally are "Americanized" and do not follow this - and a friend who toured Iran (backpacker style) for a month last year didn't comment on whether this is common among them in Iran. I'll ask him and get back to you when he deigns to reply, heh. But the Mad Mullahs certainly have the trait, no? Here's the link to the last May Day style parade where they showed off their Shahab-3 missiles with all sorts of anti-Israeli and anti-US epithets and declarations as an example...
#7
Well I know the MMs talk alot of crap. But 20 years of "Death to American" and "Death to Isreal" lends it's self to thinking you are right .com. I just think unlike most Arabs, they don't talk trash. I actually expect the MMs to try and deliver on their promises. I just wonder if your typical run of the mill Iranian is more like and Arab than not.
#8
Putting the hurt on Syria and Iran is good, but IMHO the world's primary sponsor of terror is Saudi Arabia. They have the money and desire to spread their poison around the world. Those jerks need a whoopin' too.
#9
I can't really disagree with you, Spot, but I can see reasons for going after them last. Syria and Iran are unstable, but possess enough weaponry to make a big mess if they have the initiative. They've been doing enough damage in Iraq as it is. If you take out Syria, that gets rid of a big terrorist staging area. It also strengthens Israel, which can concentrate its defenses on the east and south. Toppling the Iran regime (provided the opposition can do it with only indirect help from us), blows out the most powerful terrorist-supporting regime.
The Soddies spend lots of money, but cannot do anything directly. It's safe to turn our backs on them to clean out Syria and Iran. It is notsafe to go after Saudi with Syria and Iran free to act as they want.
Of course, that's just My opinion. I only know what I read in Rantburg.
#10
At the end of âHigh Noonâ Gary Cooper drops his badge in the dust and drives out of town. Guess what Syrians and Iranians? OUR âGary Cooperâ still has his badge (for FOUR more years!)
So it isnât that thereâs a NEW Sheriff in townâ¦itâs the SAME Sheriff!! And he just flat out doesnât like bad guys!!
#11
Jackal-
You may be right about the order, but I can't help but wonder that the Soddies have a nuke or two hidden away (gotten from the Paks whose bomb development they helped finance). The Mad Mullahs are a wild card because they're, well, mad (in the crazy sense) and bent on nukes. But if you look at whose money and influence feed radical islam look no further than the Magic Kingdum.
#12
Order of precedence, feasibility of success, and economic reality all dictate Syria and Iran before Saudi Arabia. Syria is non-oil-producing with a decrepit military, a weak no-chin Baathist {facist} dictator, and an open sore militarily in Lebanon. Iran is cracking up due to demographic and ideological divisions, has a more capable military than Syria, and is actively supporting Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad.
The big problem with Saudi Arabia is the muslim holy sites of Mecca and Medina, and the oil shock that a disruption of their pumping would cause. We would need the backing of the Hasemite royals to re-establsh their control of those holy sites along with agreements of the local Sufi/Shiaa populations - eg, Republic of Eastern Arabia. Saudi Arabia becomes much easier if Syria and Iran are out of the way.
#14
Spot, I'm sure they've got one, but which of them knows how to maintain or detonate it?
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
02/03/2005 19:45 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Syria and Iran are unstable, but possess enough weaponry to make a big mess if they have the initiative. They've been doing enough damage in Iraq as it is. If you take out Syria, that gets rid of a big terrorist staging area. It also strengthens Israel, which can concentrate its defenses on the east and south. Toppling the Iran regime (provided the opposition can do it with only indirect help from us), blows out the most powerful terrorist-supporting regime.
The Soddies spend lots of money, but cannot do anything directly. It's safe to turn our backs on them to clean out Syria and Iran. It is notsafe to go after Saudi with Syria and Iran free to act as they want.
Good assessment, Jackal. The Saudis are among the few Mideast Arab "allies" we can turn our backs on. Better that we first clean out the other hornets' nests in Syria and Iran before addressing such momentous power-shifts as with Saudi Arabia. Yes, they are a major terror lever, but they are also more stable per se. Better to denude the region of its favorite safe havens before closing down the biggest whorehouse of all.
Nabatieh MP Mohammed Raad, a member of Hizbullah's parliamentary bloc, said the elections this spring will determine the balance of power in Parliament and the majority will decide whether to promote or abolish the "national constants" that led to the liberation of the South. Speaking during a political meeting organized by Hizbullah on Tuesday, Raad referred to the continuing need for the resistance and the continuity of relations with Syria. Raad said the party was not affected by electoral divisions, but added that small districts "pave the way for a swift return of sectarian and confessional division."
Raad said that the adoption of the proportional system was the way to provide true and fair representation. He said Hizbullah appreciated that the government's draft law was a sincere attempt to avoid the "blackmail" attempt presented by UN Security Council Resolution 1559. Observers believe the government has adopted small districts to dismiss accusations that Lebanon's politics are under Syrian tutelage. Raad added that UN Security Council Resolution 1559, "which some forces depend upon to make local political choices," was directed against the resistance, its allies and Lebanon's Arab identity.
This article starring:
MOHAMED RAAD
Hizbullah
Posted by: Fred ||
02/03/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Otherwise he'll have to go back to being a 7-11 night clerk. The pay is much better, I guess.
Anything less than eternal is temporary, I suppose...
Mohammed Zohdi Nashashibi, member of the Palestine Liberation Organization's (PLO) executive committee, said on Wednesday the Palestinian presence in Lebanon was temporary and that the PLO will never relinquish the Palestinians' right to return to their homeland.
Which, I suppose is a reasonable stance, given that the Lebanese will never, ever allow them to become integrated into their country...
Nashashibi indicated that Palestinian weapons in refugee camps in Lebanon will remain as "a legal means of self-defense," stressing that "those who passed Security Council Resolution 1559 should pressure Israel instead into stopping its attacks on Palestinians," rather than demanding a disarmament of militias.
In other words, they're going to remain an uncontrolled and uncontrollable armed camp occupying a sovreign country and refusing to abide by its laws, while at least talking about carrying out attacks on another sovreign country...
He made the comment during a visit to the Ain al-Hilweh refugee camp, Lebanon's largest, hosting 75,000 refugees in a space of 2 square kilometers, when he was inquiring about the status of refugees in Lebanese camps and trying to consolidate a dialogue between Palestinians and between Palestinians and Lebanese people. Palestinian sources familiar with the issue said the visit is a complementary step to a previous visit by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Ahmad Qorei. The visit also took place in order to clarify to concerned officials, the circumstances of the upcoming meeting between Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and to discuss the possible "mitigation" of the situation in Palestine.
This article starring:
MOHAMED ZOHDI NASHASHIBI
Palestine Liberation Organization
Posted by: Fred ||
02/03/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"Anything less than eternal is temporary, I suppose..."
#2
the Lebanese will never, ever allow them to become integrated into their country
And rightly so Fred. Nobody likes the Paleos, certainly not their "brother" Arabs who only need them to kill Joooos.
#3
Not even the West Bank or Gaza Paleos will want these lawless (even by Paleo standards) assholes as neighbors and competitors. They are destined to die in the camps by their own hands
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/03/2005 9:44 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Somebody please explain to me why such hatred in the Arab world of Palestinins and Kurds. They are all Muslims and it's Hallal for Muslims to kill other Muslims. I'm sure the answer isn't in todays sociopolitical situation but any rants are welcome.
#5
The Kurds aren't Arabs, but once they ruled...remember Saladin?
The Palestinians, on the other hand, are everyone's ill-mannered poor relations: originally they had migrated to British Palestine for the jobs that resulted when the Jews developed the economy (anyone who arrived by 1945 is entitled to call himself a Palestinian). When the surrounding Arab countries were about to invade in 1948, they called on the locals to leave, so that they would have a clear field of maneuver, with the promise that the locals could come back after and take over the Jews' houses and possessions. But it didn't happen that way, so the temporary charity guests became permanent. On the one hand a reminder of the failure to drive the Jews into the Mediterranean Sea, on the other a permanent source of political capital and cannon fodder. Hence the refusal of the Arab countries to allow the Palestinians to settle permanently anywhere. They remain officially Stateless, and I believe carry U.N. passports.
In a case of very mistaken judgment, the Palestinians have been inculcated from the get-go with the idea that they would soon return in violent triumph to their homes. Thus the summer training camps for the children, and so on. While this does make them eminently suitable for cannon fodder, it makes them equally unsuited for living among people. Thus the ungovernable armed chaos in the now-permanent refugee camps.
#6
Why can't they just be asked to leave?
Just ask anyone honestly they are nothing but trouble. Send them away minus their weapons and bulldoze the camps.
The opposition demanded for the first time Wednesday on a "total withdrawal" of Syrian troops from Lebanon and not a mere redeployment along the borders. "The opposition asks for a compromise with Syria to remove all its troops from Lebanon based on the Taif Accord," said a statement released after a two-hour closed meeting of members of the opposition held Wednesday at Le Bristol Hotel in Beirut.
While the first Bristol gathering, held in December, only called for a redeployment of the remaining 14,000 Syrian troops in Lebanon, on Wednesday the opposition agreed on an outright withdrawal. Some opposition members, particularly Chouf MP Walid Jumblatt, had been reluctant to use the word "withdrawal," arguing that the Syrian presence in the border area was necessary in light of the conflict with Israel. But sources said Wednesday the prominent opposition leader specifically called for the total withdrawal during the meeting. The opposition's new position comes a day after a visit to Beirut by Syrian Deputy Foreign Minister Walid Moallem, seen as the start of a new phase in bilateral relations, free of Syrian tutorage of Lebanon's politics through intelligence apparatus.
Moallem even met with opposition members Batroun MP Butros Harb and Metn MP Nassib Lahoud. But Qornet Shehwan Gathering member Samir Franjieh said there are two conditions for the opposition to start talks with Syria: that all the opposition is part of the discussions, and that Damascus respects its demands. Following the Bristol meeting, Jumblatt accused the Syrian authorities of maintaining their intelligence apparatus in Beirut, despite earlier claims that those services have been moved outside the capital. "I would like to make the following remark to Moallem that Beirut southern suburb's intelligence posts have been moved to Beau Rivage (a hotel in the center of Beirut) and Aley." "We ask those (Syrians) that next time they want to come here, they should bring with them tow-trucks. It would be better for us and better for them," Jumblatt said.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/03/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
Chouf MP Walid Jumblatt's comment over the weekend about the importance of drawing the border between the Shebaa Farms in Lebanon and Syria to provide Hizbullah with legal coverage to maintain its activities against Israel, had negative repercussions for Hizbullah. The statements showed Hizbullah's lifelong ally is trying to deprive the party of its resistance character in the wake of harsh bickering between Jumblatt and Syria, and as part of Jumblatt's dedication to consolidate the opposition facing the Lebanese government.
Such a position embarrassed Hizbullah secretary general Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, who was forced to adopt a defensive position that showed in his recent statements, at a time when he cannot afford to fall into the trap that led to internal dispute, particularly with Jumblatt. Efforts to involve Nasrallah as an internal party in the confrontation at a time when he is still consolidating Hizbullah's presence as a resistance against Israel tarnishes the party's image. As for the repercussions of Jumblatt's statements, they were harsh on Hizbullah, not just because they were issued by Jumblatt, the ally with whom Hizbullah mediated for Syria to restore relations after the extension of the presidential term. The statements coincided with a Christian position that was declared by Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Butros Sfeir, the spearhead of the opposition which Jumblatt is a part of, who expressed support for Security Council Resolution 1559. The statements also coincided with a similar position expressed by former army commander General Michel Aoun, who urged Hizbullah to disarm, and with the passing of Resolution 1583 that stipulates the extension of UNIFIL's term. In its fourth article, the resolution urged Lebanon "to spread its control on all its territories," which is widely interpreted to mean regulating Hizbullah's action in South Lebanon.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/03/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
Say! How're those EU negotiations with Iran going? Is it true the head of their negotiating team's the Dark Lord of the Sith?
Posted by: Fred ||
02/03/2005 00:00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Good. Clarification is good. It's clear. This has been a consistent message now for the last 3 or 4 months.
When the E3 pull their collective heads out of their asses and acknowledge this obvious fact, perhaps they will let go of the fantasy of their negotiations having any effect, whatsoever, and either join us in a rational and aggressive effort or, if the politics of their constituencies is so rabidly blind as to make that impossible - a creature of their own devise, they will Shut The Fuck Up - and remove any personnel from Iranian soil. Collateral damage should be minimized.
On second thought, France can just STFU and go away - I would not trust collaborating with them in any degree or with any intel even remotely sensitive.
I recall a phrase which applies: Lead, Follow, or Get Out Of The Way. It's time. Choose.
Europe is pressing Iran for concessions on its nuclear program, which the United States claims is aimed at producing atomic weapons. In exchange for nuclear guarantees, the Europeans are offering Iran technological and financial support and talks on a trade deal. ... Iran suspended uranium enrichment and all related activities in November to build trust, reduce international suspicions and avoid UN Security Council sanctions. The International Atomic Energy Agency agreed to police the suspension.
Under an agreement reached with France, Germany and Britain, which negotiated on behalf of the European Union, Iran will continue suspension of its enrichment activities during negotiations with the Europeans about EU economic, political and technological aid. Iran has said it will decide within three months whether to continue the suspension.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
02/03/2005 7:30 Comments ||
Top||
#5
So, Mikey, you've gone from questions-mode to article-quoting mode. Would you like to clue us in on why you picked those two paragraphs out of the entire readily-accessible article?
Posted by: Tom ||
02/03/2005 7:53 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Tom - go round to Mike's house and threaten to kill him. He'll probably give you a DVD player.
Posted by: Tom ||
02/03/2005 8:35 Comments ||
Top||
#8
lol
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/03/2005 13:31 Comments ||
Top||
#9
What .com said.
Europe's rectal-cranial insertion factor is so acute that oral re-emergence is merely a matter of time. Mike S, your confidence in Europe's approach appears to be sorely misplaced. I suggest you reconsider the ramifications of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons and adjusting your world-view accordingly.
Do you honestly discount the utterly insane consequences of Iran going nuclear or are you merely blinded to that possibility? I mean no insult but sincerely question your mentative capabilities if you are willing to disregard the threat that a nuclear Iran poses.
Syrian President Bashar Assad met with Jordan's King Abdallah yesterday, officials said, a sign the two countries want to put mutual recriminations about US policy in Iraq and a border dispute behind them. "Syria has come out with a positive stance over Iraq and this is encouraging," Jordan's Foreign Minister Hani Mulki told reporters after the talks in the royal palace.
Syria's come out with positive stances over Iraq several times, only to change its mind and go back to siding with the Bad Guyz. Possibly this time is different, but I doubt it. Baby Assad might be occasionally able to see which side the bread's gonna land on, but I'm not sure he has enough control to get his country on the winning side.
Assad's one-day visit was aimed at improving ties between the two neighbors of Iraq, long at odds over the aims of the US invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the Middle East peace process. Jordan, a key US ally who covertly supported the invasion, has in recent months joined Washington in piling pressure on Damascus to be more supportive of the postwar political process in Iraq, officials said. "We told the Syrians repeatedly the regional situation has dramatically changed and they could no longer put conditions but must comply," one official said on condition of anonymity.
Abdallah's been smart enough to follow what was happening from the first. And Jordan ate droppings for a few years after the first Gulf War, after King Hussein backed the wrong side.
Amman is Iraqi interim Prime Minister Iyad Allawi's firmest Arab ally and hosts the largest training scheme outside Iraq to rebuild its neighbor's fledgling security forces. Syria opposed the invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein and Washington has accused it of failing to stop infiltrations and weapons smuggling into Iraq, which Syria denies. Relations between Jordan and Syria also took a turn for the worse when Amman publicly raised a long-buried border dispute last year. Jordanian officials said Damascus should reverse several decades of creeping encroachments on Jordanian land. Syria has in recent months agreed to move back fences and sand posts it gradually shifted beyond the internationally recognized border, they said. "After several meetings with the Syrians we have witnessed a positive readiness to end this issue," said one Interior Ministry official. Jordan has boosted security along the Syrian border amid concerns Syrian militants were abetting Jordanian radicals in alleged plots, revealed last year, to attack Jordanian and US targets in the kingdom.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/03/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Fred - Are you saying that Jordanian dogs can learn new tricks, whereas Syrian dogs can't? Lol, er, Woof! Either RKB or Ship will have the last word on this topic, I'd bet!
#2
Old dawgs learn just as fast, but most have learned to game the system, the massive positive reenforcement - treats, praise, cash make for an inefficient learning environment.
Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs David Satterfield said Wednesday that "visits and statements are not enough," scorning Syria's apparent shift in dealing with "the Lebanese case." Meanwhile, in Lebanon, Damascus' new approach in dealing with Lebanon, characterized by the unusual flow of Syrian officials to Lebanon, was seen as a step in the right direction - even if it might only be an attempt to dispel international pressure. Commenting on the recent visits of Syrian officials here, Satterfield told the state funded Radio Sawa in Washington: "We are not interested in visits, climates or statements. We have gone past this stage a long time ago and so have the Lebanese. We are now interested in seeing fundamental change indicating that Syria is willing to comply with (UN) Security Council 1559." Satterfield said Syria has not made serious moves toward granting the Lebanese more independence or towards pulling out its 14,000 remaining troops from Lebanon, as mandated by Resolution 1559. He also denied Syrian and Lebanese claims that the Israeli-occupied Shebaa Farms are Lebanese and therefore fall under UN Resolution 425.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/03/2005 00:00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
"Hello? King Gyanendra? This is Aziz, the prime minister of Pakistan... Say, are you nuts?"
ISLAMABAD: Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz on Thursday called Nepal's King Gyanendra Bir Bikram Shah Dev and the two leaders discussed holding the 13th South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation Summit (SAARC) and the Pakistani-Nepalese relations, said a Foreign Ministry press release. King Gyanendra shared Prime Minister Aziz's disappointment over the postponement of the SAARC Summit and expressed full confidence in Pakistan to set new dates and assured Mr Aziz that he would attend the summit.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/03/2005 9:25:49 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
Israel's unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip could turn the Palestinian area into a sanctuary for Al Qaida, a new report said.
A larger version of Ein el-Hellhole, perhaps?
The Jerusalem-based Institute for Contemporary Affairs said Al Qaida could fill the vacuum left by the death of Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat and the departure of Israel from the Gaza Strip.
I'm making the assumption the writers don't want them to depart...
The report envisioned the prospect of a Hamas takeover of the Gaza Strip and its invitation to other Islamic insurgency groups, such as Al Qaida. "The eventual takeover of the Gaza Strip by Hamas certainly cannot be ruled out, given the enormous political clout it already possesses and the relative decline of the Fatah movement in recent years," the report, authored by [Res.] Maj. Gen. Yaakov Amidror, a former military intelligence chief, said. "Even if the Hamas takeover is partial and Hamas only shares power with Fatah in Gaza, the political behavior of a post-withdrawal Palestinian government will have to be very carefully monitored." Since the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001, Al Qaida has sought sanctuaries in Iraq, Mali, Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen. The report said the ideological affinity between Hamas and Al Qaida would convert the Gaza Strip into a base for Osama Bin Laden's movement.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/03/2005 3:38:55 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[9 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Hizb'Allah gets its money from Iran. If Hamas has problems getting funding, and they should have problems, given their dismal record of success, then Hizb'Allah should be able to take over. Just with money and muscle. They will be in Gaza and they are in southern Lebanon and Syria. The Paleos are tools. I see this development as a real threat to Israel, as these terrorists will disburse themselves among the masses of Paleos, using them as shields, so to speak.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
02/03/2005 16:26 Comments ||
Top||
#2
One more reason why the notion that a party (Hamas, etc.) can have both political and military wings should go the way of the dodo. Define these groups as terrorist groups, period.
#4
Zhang Fei-Do you think the movers and shakers in the EU on Israel/Palestine policy (our "partners' in the Peace Plan) make that fine a distinction, in terms of their pet causes? Does Israel?
It may well have been about shielding the leadership, but anyway, why should they be shielded?
#6
This could be the opportunity to decide this issue once and for all. The Israelis complete their security fence, pull their forces out of all the disputed territories, and the Paleos give the self-governing thing a go. If and when the Paleos really phuque things up and Hezbollah, IJ, and/or AQ end up being the absolute ruling authority in the West bank and/or Gaza and begin launching attacks anew on Israel, then the IDF goes in with guns blazing, mows down all the terrorists in sight, and banishes forever the idea of a nation named Palestine.
#7
B-A-R I go along with your plan. I really think the Paleo need to be given all the chances they can to get their act together with out any external influence or intervention from anyone as the only caveat. Once they totally screw that up if they attack Israel then the land should be cleared of them or they can die where they stand.
Hamas and Hizbullah have agreed to continue the war against Israel. Leaders from the two groups met in Beirut and discussed strategy amid efforts to arrange a Palestinian Authority ceasefire with Israel. The Islamic insurgency organizations rejected the ceasefire and said they would maintain the war against the Jewish state.
Toldja there was no way Hamas was going to let peace happen...
"They agreed that the option of resistance and steadfastness was the only choice to confront the current situation," Hizbullah said in a statement after the meeting. The statement said the Jan. 30 meeting comprised of Hizbullah secretary-general Hassan Nasrallah and Hamas political bureau chief Khaled Mashaal. Both groups have received significant support from Iran.
This article starring:
HASAN NASRALAH
Hizbullah
KHALED MASHAAL
Hamas
Posted by: Fred ||
02/03/2005 3:35:05 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Well, all that needs to happen now is for one bona fide attack by either org. Then it'll be time for "Targeted Killings, The Next Round".
#3
Then we freeze our announced aid to Palestine and refuse to meet on the Peace Plan until Hamas and Hizbullah are out of the picture. This may sound petulant, but we cannot get caught up in this spin cycle again-domestic politics and the WoT leave us no time for deadly nonsense.
#6
SPOD - the targetted killings ineveitably take apart a couple henchman in every helizap. Makes it hard to maintain a chain of command or get an escort of intelligent henchmen. Either way, it puts a crimp. Israel needs to get the internecine war going among the Paleos. I'm still in favor of a bloody civil war among the f*ckers
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/03/2005 22:29 Comments ||
Top||
#7
As far as I am concerned the dirt under the Paleos feet need to be wetted with thier blood not anyone elses. Pretty much these assclowns invented the type of terrorism we as a civilization are faced with right now. How random or specific they get eliminated from the gene pool is not important. It's just that they do.
#8
I would not pump too much US money into the Paleo PA until they show something besides decibels. The building of the wall and evacuation of undefensible settlements is a good first step. If Hizb'Allah and/or Hamas steps into Gaza and starts lobbing missiles into Israel, then Gaza becomes a Free Fire Zone. If Abbas wants to compromise with Israel, then they will have to literally take the bull by the horns and take out Hamas and Hizb'Allah. That is one Tom Wallager tall order!
I think that the way that this one will play out is that Abbas will do his best with what he has. He will be powerless to act against the terrorists. The Paleo people will not be like the Iraqis and start to rat out the rats. This Paleo situation will stabilize for a little while, then the nutcases will start their terrorist missile attacks and the Paleos will get the sh*t kicked out of them in their own personal free fire zone.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
02/03/2005 23:14 Comments ||
Top||
#9
the only way he can take on Hamas and Hizbollah is with Egyptian and Jordanian SF help....
sounds good to me
Posted by: Frank G ||
02/03/2005 23:27 Comments ||
Top||
In a clear reference to Iraq's weekend balloting, a statement purportedly made by Osama bin Laden's top deputy says holy war, not ''rigged elections,'' is the only path for reform in Islamic nations. The written statement, said to have been the transcript of an audio taped recording of a speech by al-Qaida No. 2 Ayman al-Zawahri, first appeared on several Islamist Internet sites Tuesday. ''Reform can't be achieved under governments installed by the (foreign) occupier through rigged elections conducted under the supervision of the United Nations and protected by B-52s and Apache helicopter rockets,'' al-Zawahri said. ''There is no reform except through holy war.''
It was not immediately possible to authenticate the statement. The audiotape itself was inaccessible on several militant Web sites where it had been posted. A U.S. intelligence official who was able to access the tape said on condition of anonymity that the voice is believed to be that of al-Zawahiri. Iraq's Association of Muslim Scholars months ago urged Sunnis to shun the polls because of the presence of U.S. and other foreign troops, while insurgents threatened to kill anyone who voted in Sunday's polls, in which Shiites and Kurds turned out in huge numbers. Islamic militants, led by al-Qaida in Iraq terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, claimed responsibility for numerous suicide bombings and attacks against polling stations Sunday.
Al-Zawahri, who is believed to be hiding with bin Laden in remote, mountainous regions along the Pakistani-Afghanistan border, renewed his attack on the United States for invading Afghanistan and Iraq, saying, ''America is seeking by every means to fight the Islamic community.'' The undated statement also referred to recent events like Egypt's December signing of a trade agreement with Israel and the United States. The deal paves the way for establishing Qualified Industrial Zones, where Egypt which signed a 1979 peace treaty with Israel can export goods to America duty-free as long as a minimum 11.7 percent of their value is made in the Jewish state. ''No reform could be achieved while our (Arab) rulers are pursuing a normalization policy with Israel to destroy our economy to achieve their personal interests,'' the statement said.
This article starring:
ABU MUSAB AL ZARQAWI
al-Qaeda
AIMAN AL ZAWAHRI
al-Qaeda
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
02/03/2005 12:41:21 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Boo - freakin - hoo.. I hope when they get this bitch they put him in with the 'sisters'. That beard's gonna give em plenty to hang on to.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
02/03/2005 6:28 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I had to check to see if this was ScrappleFace:
"Reform can't be achieved under governments installed by the (foreign) occupier ... There is no reform except through holy war."
I'm thinking that our strategy worked for Germany and Japan without holy war. Perhaps he should have spent less time memorizing the Koran and more time reading history.
Posted by: Tom ||
02/03/2005 8:19 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Better punishment for Ayman. Force him to watch Reid and Pelosi's speechs over and over again.
Turkey yesterday pledged support for Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas in his people's struggle for statehood and efforts to reform Palestinian institutions. "Lasting peace and stability in the Middle East will not be possible until the Palestinian people achieve their independent state and the honorable, prosperous and free life they deserve," Turkish Parliament Speaker Bulent Arinc said at a lunch with Abbas. "Rest assured that all your efforts for peace will be wholeheartedly supported by Turkey," he said, according to a statement released by parliament. "We are confident that you will accomplish in the most efficient way the reforms required in the institutions of the Palestinian Authority. We will be happy to share with our Palestinian brothers our experience on reform and extend our solidarity."
Abbas, who was visiting Ankara on the last leg of a four-nation tour following his election as successor to Yasser Arafat, welcomed Turkey's support. "We take Turkey's democratic experience as a model," he told reporters through an interpreter. Abbas also highlighted the importance of Jerusalem for the world's Muslims. "With the support of peace-loving nations, Jerusalem will again belong to the Muslims and worship will continue in Jerusalem until doomsday," he said. On Tuesday, Abbas met with President Ahmet Necdet Sezer and Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan as well as Turkish business leaders, who said they would convene a meeting with Palestinian and Israeli colleagues in Turkey in March to discuss possible joint projects.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/03/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
âLasting peace and stability in the Middle East will not be possible until the Palestinian people achieve their independent state and the honorable, prosperous and free life they deserve,â Turkish Parliament Speaker Bulent Arinc said at a lunch with Abbas.
#3
Abbas: "...Jerusalem will again belong to the Muslims...".
On that alone I can see that Abbas isn't going to accomplish anything more than Arafat did.
Posted by: Tom ||
02/03/2005 14:01 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Turkey to Back Abbasâ Struggle for Statehood
The only "struggling" that Mazen is going to be doing is with the enemies under his own roof.
The historic summit between Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon will be held in Egypt next week. This is the first summit between the two sides in four years of armed conflict, officials said yesterday. The talks, to be joined by Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and Jordan's King Abdallah, would aim to solidify a shaky new de facto cease-fire by setting in motion a peace process based on a US-backed road map to a Palestinian state.
Sharon, who refused to meet Abbas' late predecessor Yasser Arafat, and the Palestinian leader accepted invitations from Mubarak to meet at Sharm El-Sheikh on the Red Sea on Feb. 8. Mubarak's office said it was time for a summit "in light of the delicacy of the stage the peace process is going through and in an endeavor to seize the auspicious opportunity to achieve tangible progress on the Palestinian track". A senior Israeli official said Sharon would be looking at the summit for Palestinian commitments to "prevent terrorism" by dissolving militant groups. Persuading them to observe a truce was not enough to launch road map talks, he said. "They want to move fast on political issues but we will accept no leapfrogging over security commitments written into the first phase of the road map," he said.
Abbas, citing a concern not to stir civil unrest, has said he wants to co-opt rather than crush militants many Palestinians regard favorably as "freedom fighters" in occupied territories. Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qorei said Abbas would seek an Israeli promise to stop all military action, free thousands of jailed militants and withdraw forces from Palestinian areas. He said Palestinians "will exert 100 percent effort" on security but expected Israel to honor reciprocal obligations in the road map, including a halt to expansion of settlements in the West Bank.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/03/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
Kurdish self-rule is inevitable if not imminent, according to Kurdistan Democratic Party chief Masud Barzani. Commenting on an almost unanimous vote for independence in an unofficial referendum held on 30 January, Masud Barzani said on Wednesday that "when the right time comes it will become a reality".
"Self-determination is the natural right of our people, and they have the right to express their desires," he added. Barzani heads one of the two main Kurdish groups which control Iraq's northern Kurdish zone. The KDP leader was speaking three days after more than 1.9 million Iraqi Kurds - some 95% of those asked - voted for independence in an informal survey conducted by volunteers. Iraqi Kurds have long pushed for independence, but Turkey, Iran and Syria - all with substantial Kurdish minorities - oppose the establishment of Kurdish state on their borders.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/03/2005 00:00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Indeed.
The absurdity that is Iraq, that is a confabulation of Sykes-Picot, that saddles the Kurds' future with the stupidity and backward Sunnis, will eventually be addressed. And, in the end, only Partition or Independence will adequately and fairly resolve the matter.
#4
The Kurd's are badasses (at least Saladin was) and I'm amazed the local Arab states can't get beyond their prejudices and get the Kurds fighting for them (sort of a Gurkha/Scots sort of thing).
Not only that the Kurds could then be used as leverage against neighbors with Kurdish populations who might be afraid of mixed kurdish sympathies.
A wiley Turk following such a pattern could have taken half of Northern Iraq and Iran while those two were bleeding each other white. They could have created a Kurdish state at the expense of others.
Any Kurdish politician with an ounce of strategic sense would rather be autonomous inside a federal Iraq, than out on his own, landlocked, and surrounded by states none of whom could be counted on to be friendly and some of whom could be counted on to be deadly enemies.
A top Shia leader tipped to become Iraq's next prime minister has branded Iyad Allawi's interim government as the most corrupt in the country's history.
This, coming after the Saddam Hussein regime? My breath is taken away.
A close confidant of Grand Ayat Allah Ali al-Sistani, Husain Shahristani lashed out at the Allawi government and singled out defence minister Hazim Shaalan as the main offender. "It is very well known in the country that the corruption is very widespread from the police to the judicial systemsâŠas a matter of fact Iraq has never known the level of corruption prevailing now," Shahristani said.
How many palace has he built with the national grocery money?
"A lot of public funds have gone missing under the Coalition Provisional AuthorityâŠand even now," he said, of the disbanded US occupation authority. Shahristani took Shaalan to task for the defence ministry's transfer of $300 million to Lebanon as part of an arms deal last month. "The fact that the minister of defence, on the day there were four suicide bombings in the capital, spends all his day at the airport trying to take a few hundred million dollars in cash out of the country before the elections doesn't speak very well for the government's performance." Shahristani, formerly a nuclear scientist who spent 10 years in the Abu Ghraib prison, vowed the next government would review all suspect contracts made under the Allawi cabinet. "One thing we are going to pursue is that all suspicious contracts should be properly examined and any funds that have been misused should be returned to the publicâŠand these things should be explained to the Iraqi people," he said.
This sounds like that infighting we heard about yesterday...
Posted by: Fred ||
02/03/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Ah, the smell of regular ol' politics... Gotta love it.
#2
Hazim Saalan, mentioned in the article, was the one who had named Iran as the "number one enemy of Iraq", saying that Iran supported terrorism and brought enemies to Iraq, sending spies and saboteurs and even infiltrating in the Iraqi government. He had even threatened of invading Iran, if it didn't stop what it was doing.
It's therefore probably not a coincidence that he's been singled out for this attack.
#3
Both comments above are spot on. I spent most of a day this week near a checkpoint to the Zone, and just outside at one point a smallish group of Iraqis demonstrated, holding hand-lettered banners aloft and chanting. An Arabic-speaking colleague said he could just make out something about "Allawi is a thief". We both smiled and thought -- "Merely a thief? What an improvement over the previous regime!".
#4
note shaalan also said Chalabi was about to be arrested. Hes made some odd statements himself over the last couple of months.
Look, whoever want to dig at the Iraqi Alliance list will call them pro-Iranian. The Iraqi alliance will naturally respond with charges of corruption (though there own administration of Basra has been riddled with corruption, per the WaPo.) Its regular politics, like someone said. -:) -
Ive seen reports that Iraqi Alliance will only get 40% of the vote. That will mean they will heavily need coalition partners. Allawi will get about 20%, as will the Kurdish alliance. the Communists will get about 5%, and two sunni parties (led by Yawer and Pachachi respectively) will get 2 - 3 % each. Rest scattered, including smaller ethnic minorities.
That to me is hopeful, as it means no one agenda can be imposed. But it also means the maneuvering will be bitter, and the name calling loud.
This is beginning to sound very much like Israeli (!!!!!) politics, and that to me is a hopeful sign.
#5
Corrupt? thats ALL? When will Hakim accuse Shalaan of being a Bolshevik? When will Shalaan accuse Hakim of being a racist bigot? Theyve got a long way to go to reach Israeli levels of civilized political discourse.
#6
A top Shia leader tipped to become Iraq's next prime minister has branded Iyad Allawi's interim government as the most corrupt in the country's history.
Hey man, the time for stump speeches has passed. It's time to start compiling material for your "49% of Iraqis were disenfranchised" speech.
The top UN envoy in Sudan said he was horrified by fresh attacks in Darfur and urged both sides yesterday to stop fighting this month and conclude a peace agreement by the end of the year. "Stop the fighting in February. Talk 10 months ... but you should not give yourselves 10 years," envoy Jan Pronk said, referring a separate deal to end more than 20 years of civil war in southern Sudan signed last month after a decade of talks.
He told reporters that last week he visited the Labado area in the east of South Darfur state, which saw fierce fighting between the government and rebels in December, followed by what Pronk called a "systematic pattern" of attacks by militias on civilian villages in which many people died. "I was horrified by what I saw in Labado. All huts had been demolished and burnt down... All water wells have been destroyed," he said. Militias had destroyed dozens of villages around the town in a similar manner, he added.
He said the African Union (AU) summit to be held in Khartoum in January 2006 should be an incentive to achieve peace before receiving the presidents from more than 50 nations to Sudan. Pronk was speaking two days after an independent commission of inquiry, in a report to the United Nations, stopped short of the US assessment that there has been genocide in Darfur. But it said government and military officials and allied Arab militia leaders were responsible for widespread abuses which may constitute crimes against humanity.
Oh, innat terrible? He's "horrified." Not to the point where he calls for real armies to step in and depose a corrupt dictatorship that commits what may constitute "crimes against humanity," though not genocide, of course. Instead, he calls on both sides to "stop the killing" and be nice. I'm ready to scrape the UN from the national shoe every time I read something like this.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/03/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I guess since the US didn't ratify the ICC, the UN will not do anything, out of spite.
#5
In keeping with the Bush Doctrine I say we send some Special Forces troops along with CIA assets into Darfur and get Black Africans back on the offensive and work to collapse this Regime as well. PS Where is public outcry from Rangel, Obama, Jesse Jackson etc about the abject slaughter of "Blacks" by Insano Muslims. Not a peep. Disgusting.
Posted by: Mark E. ||
02/03/2005 13:39 Comments ||
Top||
#8
The so called "Dafur Crisis" will need to wait until the superb bowl is over. This will free up the cruise shipping necessry for a balls to the wall UN effort.
LiberalHawk... WOT heard Jacksonville described on NPR as Baja Florida. LOL!
#9
Re #6 (Pappy): Where is public outcry from Rangel ...
I know that Rangel has been very outspoken about the problem.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
02/03/2005 18:15 Comments ||
Top||
#10
He's "horrified." Not to the point where he calls for real armies to step in and depose a corrupt dictatorship that commits what may constitute "crimes against humanity," though not genocide, of course. Instead, he calls on both sides to "stop the killing" and be nice.
The very same can be said about President Bush.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
02/03/2005 18:17 Comments ||
Top||
#11
MS-That's because Pres. Bush already knows that any offers to intervene militarily WITH THE HELP OF ALLIES will be flatly refused and mocked by the less ethical among the UN members, while 6000-10000 people per month are dying in Darfur from unnatural causes.
Mike-It's amazing to me that you can be so sensible on WoT issues, but when it comes to the UN, you are as unwilling to criticize the UN as a cowed woman is of a spouse who has just beat the crap out of her and the police are on the phone asking if she needs help.
"Oh, no, he's wonderful, he's the best thing I know in this world. Nothing's wrong. Oh, those bruises? Well, I tripped down the stairs..."
#13
Re #11 (Jules): That's because Pres. Bush already knows that any offers to intervene militarily WITH THE HELP OF ALLIES will be flatly refused and mocked by the less ethical among the UN members
There's inadequate political support within the USA for a military intervention in Darfur. In that regard, the USA is no different than its allies or than other members of the UN Security Council.
We are not in a situation where the USA would decide to intervene if it had support from the UN and from other countries. The real situation is that the USA does not want to intervene.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
02/03/2005 19:14 Comments ||
Top||
#14
Re #11 (Jules): when it comes to the UN, you are as unwilling to criticize the UN
I've criticized the UN plenty, and I'll criticize it again. The UN is structurally unable to intervene effectively in many major international problems. The UN consists mostly of countries that are undemocratic, ignorant, corrupt, backward, foolish, and so forth. The UN wastes a lot of money. Does that make you happy enough for now?
That doesn't mean, though, that the UN is to blame for all the world's problems. It doesn't mean that the USA's own non-intervention in such problems is the fault of the UN. It doesn't mean that if the UN disappeared, then the world would be a better place. It doesn't mean that the UN does not serve some useful purposes, such as providing a forum where practically all the world's countries belong and participate.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
02/03/2005 19:21 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Luckily the UN is too ineffective to cause many problems.
#18
Europe is full of sympathy for others and that is about it. If someone balls have to be placed on the line outside of the UK there is nothing. The Phrench will gladly defend their interests but noting else. The rest of them are pretty much usless as tits on a bull. Sudan is Europes problem. They were never a colony of the US or a client state. We have our hands full. We have had no problem using the G word. The rest of the UN has.
#19
Sounds like a good case for getting the locals some serious training in weapons and tactics so they can defend themselves. Some SF leverage might do some good. I am not familiar with the details involved, but the Sudan govt needs a good bloody nose. Read the history of the Sudan and weep.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
02/03/2005 23:17 Comments ||
Top||
#20
I know that Rangel has been very outspoken about the problem.
I thought he was involved with PETA in shaking down berating KFC.
Sudan has slammed US insistence on imposing sanctions over Darfur even as doubts have been raised whether Washington will succeed in its attempts. Speaking to Aljazeera from Khartoum on Wednesday, Sudan's Information Minister Abd al-Basit Sabdrat, commenting on the US threat to impose sanctions on Sudan's oil trade, said Washington judged events on its own terms. The minister was addressing US insistence that the conflict in Darfur amounts to genocide despite a contrary finding by a United Nations fact-finding investigators.
He pointed to US allegations on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction which were later proved to be false by committees that Washington itself had constituted, Sabdrat said. Although the International Committee for Investigation in Sudan (ICIS) had found no evidence of alleged genocide, the US was bent on imposing sanctions, the minister said. Explaining Sudan's violations in Darfur listed by the ICIS in its report, the minister said there was a war raging in the region. During any war, laws could get violated and other consequences could follow, he said. The Sudanese government had taken a positive step to form a national judicial committee which submitted its report last week. "We are following up on its recommendations," the minister said. A second committee would study the damage inflicted on the people and a third would solve the issues that had triggered the fighting, he said.
Posted by: Fred ||
02/03/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
Pakistan President Gen. Pervez Musharraf made a call to foreign investors yesterday to help his country fight extremism and terrorism by investing and creating more jobs to alleviate poverty. "I say to foreign investors ...contribute indirectly in fighting extremism and terrorism by creating more jobs and alleviating poverty," Musharraf said at the opening of Expo Pakistan 2005 — at the Karachi Expo Center here. "You can help by investing in Pakistan and increasing imports from here," he told delegates at the fair designed to attract foreign investors scared off by violence that has plagued the country since the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on the United States.
I've got a better idea: you kill all the extremists or chase them out of the country and have them take the fundos with them. Establish a stable secular state. Then people will be willing to invest in Pakland. Nobody wants to put money and resources into a country where its facilities are liable to be blown up, its personnel kidnapped and held for ransom, and its employees shot up because of their religious preferences. You don't want to be anybody's colony, so take charge, dammit!
Posted by: Fred ||
02/03/2005 00:00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
We only have one N-bomb, and cannot afford any more.
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.
The 
Islamic groups in Kuwait have gone on the defensive as liberals step up calls for a clampdown on extremists in the wake of deadly gun battles between security forces and Islamists.
The IRA has withdrawn its offer to complete the decommissioning process. In a statement, the organisation said it had taken the offer to put its weapons beyond use off the table. The IRA, which denies claims it was behind the £26.5m Belfast bank raid, said the British and Irish governments had "tried its patience to the limit". Last year, the IRA said it would complete the decommissioning process within weeks and move into what it called a new mode. A Downing Street spokesman said they were not surprised by Wednesday's statement, passed to the An Phoblacht newspaper. "The fact remains that it was the IRA that did carry out the Northern Bank robbery and as the prime minister and the taoiseach said on Tuesday therefore it is the IRA that is the sole obstacle to moving forward," he said. However, the spokesman made it clear the government does not interpret the statement as a threat to return to terrorism. BBC correspondent Mark Simpson said the statement was "more of an IRA tantrum than anything more significant".
Georgia's Prime Minister Zurab Zhvania has died, with initial indications the cause was gas poisoning, the ex-Soviet state's Interior Minister said. "Since he did not answer his telephone for a long period his bodyguard broke through the window ... and found Mr Zhvania's body. We can say that this is a case of gas poisoning," Interior Minister Vano Merabishvili said on Georgian television.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has come out against parts of an anti-terror bill that would drastically restrict media reporting of militant attacks, a newspaper reported on Wednesday. Putin had told parliament he feared the section of the bill relating to journalists reporting of such attacks violated Russia's existing press law, the respected Vedomosti daily said. The bill, that has already passed the first of three readings in the State Duma (lower house), would bar publication of graphic scenes of violence and restrict journalists' access to the scene of militant strikes. 
Prime Minister 
The head of the Iraq 
... The assumption is that NBC is a valuable resource. But on one of the hottest stories around, the U.N. corruption scandal, NBC has been out to lunch. Why? Its U.N. reporter has been on the payroll of the U.N. lobby. 
Syrian opposition sources have reported fighting within the security services under the regime of President 
Nabatieh MP 
Chouf MP 
Syrian President 
ISLAMABAD: Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz on Thursday called Nepal's King Gyanendra Bir Bikram Shah Dev and the two leaders discussed holding the 13th South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation Summit (SAARC) and the Pakistani-Nepalese relations, said a Foreign Ministry press release. King Gyanendra shared Prime Minister Aziz's disappointment over the postponement of the SAARC Summit and expressed full confidence in Pakistan to set new dates and assured Mr Aziz that he would attend the summit.
In a clear reference to Iraq's weekend balloting, a statement purportedly made by Osama bin Laden's top deputy says holy war, not ''rigged elections,'' is the only path for reform in Islamic nations. The written statement, said to have been the transcript of an audio taped recording of a speech by al-Qaida No. 2 
Turkey yesterday pledged support for Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas in his people's struggle for statehood and efforts to reform Palestinian institutions. "Lasting peace and stability in the Middle East will not be possible until the Palestinian people achieve their independent state and the honorable, prosperous and free life they deserve," Turkish Parliament Speaker 
The historic summit between Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon will be held in Egypt next week. This is the first summit between the two sides in four years of armed conflict, officials said yesterday. The talks, to be joined by Egyptian President 
Kurdish self-rule is inevitable if not imminent, according to Kurdistan Democratic Party chief 
A top Shia leader tipped to become Iraq's next prime minister has branded 
The top UN envoy in Sudan said he was horrified by fresh attacks in Darfur and urged both sides yesterday to stop fighting this month and conclude a peace agreement by the end of the year. "Stop the fighting in February. Talk 10 months ... but you should not give yourselves 10 years," envoy 
Sudan has slammed US insistence on imposing sanctions over Darfur even as doubts have been raised whether Washington will succeed in its attempts. Speaking to Aljazeera from Khartoum on Wednesday, Sudan's Information Minister 
Pakistan President Gen. Pervez Musharraf made a call to foreign investors yesterday to help his country fight extremism and terrorism by investing and creating more jobs to alleviate poverty. "I say to foreign investors ...contribute indirectly in fighting extremism and terrorism by creating more jobs and alleviating poverty," Musharraf said at the opening of Expo Pakistan 2005 — at the Karachi Expo Center here. "You can help by investing in Pakistan and increasing imports from here," he told delegates at the fair designed to attract foreign investors scared off by violence that has plagued the country since the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on the United States.
