US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Wednesday reaffirmed Washingtons support for Afghanistan, saying it would not allow the countrys ruthless Taliban enemies to succeed while describing embattled Afghan President Hamid Karzai as one of the worlds most respected leaders. The top US diplomat, who had flown from Pakistan to meet Karzai in Kabul, told a press conference with the Afghan president, following their talks at the presidential palace, that the international community stood behind Kabuls fight against a common enemy that was responsible for attacks around the world. Recognising that both Taliban and Qaeda operatives had changed their tactics, Rice stressed that Kabuls allies were working together to find new strategies against this common thinking enemy.
Afghanistan has determined enemies, they are ruthless but they will not succeed . . . They are simply not going to win . . . we will not allow it to happen . . . We are not going to tire, we are not going to leave. They should know that we are in this fight until it is victoriously concluded. In a show of support for the Afghan president whose administration has lost standing amid frustration about the relentless violence and lack of significant change since the Taliban were toppled, Rice went on to say: I dont know anyone who is more admired and respected in the international community than President Karzai for his strength, for his wisdom and for his courage.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/30/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Could you get "Darth Bolton's" lightning bolts coming off Condi's fingers.
Just seems appropriate somehow.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
06/30/2006 6:27 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Condi's using the "Two Spiders" technique, borrowed from Rumsfeld. Her Kung-Fu is strong!
Taliban forces fighting US troops in Afghanistan have grown stronger and more sophisticated, and are directing operations from neighbouring Pakistan, a senior US commander said on Wednesday. More than four years into the war in Afghanistan, an operation often overshadowed by the focus on Iraq, the top US commander there said the Taliban has grown in the south and reconstituted itself elsewhere. It is displaying better military command and its leaders remain elusive, he said. The fact remains that were up against an enemy that is able to operate very effectively on both sides of the border, Lt Gen Karl Eikenberry said in testimony to US lawmakers. There are areas that theyre able to stay within and to direct combat operations against ourselves and against the Afghan National Army.
Despite growing violence funded, US officials say, by drug money, NATO will take over military operations in southern Afghanistan in July, according to Mary Beth Long, the Defense Departments principal deputy assistant secretary for international security affairs. Ultimately, NATO rather than the United States will play the lead military role throughout Afghanistan. Long did not offer lawmakers a timeline, saying NATO would take full responsibility when conditions were right. The planned transition to NATOs military leadership will allow the United States to bring home some of its 23,000 troops in Afghanistan, a Pentagon spokesman said. But in his public testimony, which preceded a closed-door classified briefing to lawmakers, Eikenberry did not discuss troop levels or offer a timeline for their drawdown.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/30/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The more I read about Pakistan, the more I'm convinced that they're just "Palestine" on a vastly larger scale.
The ulema of the al-Azhar university, the highest seat of Sunni Muslim learning, have renewed their criticism of suicide bombers, this time underlining how many confuse "suicide" with "martyrdom" in defence of ones faith of country. In Islam, they explained, those who commit suicide are condemned to hell. In this case they are not considered "true Muslims" even if they are pushed to this dramatic gesture by religious motivations. In the pan-Arab daily al-Sharq al-Awsat, Mohammed Rafit Othman, a scholar at al-Azhar explained that there is a "difference between jihad and terrorism" and also "between martyrdom and suicide". He admitted that there was considerable confusion in this point. In fact a suicide bomber commits a mortal crime in that his presumed 'martyrdom' leads to the death "of others", for reasons which are purely political and not religious.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/30/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Translation.
You only supposed to kill infidels.
Women candidates in Kuwait's parliamentary elections failed to win any seats but anti-corruption reformists that included some Islamists made big gains. It was the first time in the oil-rich Persian Gulf emirate that women were both voting and contesting in an election.
The BBC quoted local media that voter turnout was high with women making up 57 percent of the electorate. The report said there 28 women candidates out of a total of 252, contesting for the 50-seat parliament.
The opposition reformists, many of them Islamists, added four seats, moving their total in parliament to 33, the report said.
The parliament has powers, but the emir, Sheik Sabah al-Ahmed al-Sabah, has the final word on most government policies and key Cabinet appointments.
#1
Hopefully in the long run this will have been a good election, because it may help persuade some Arab leaders that women vote conservatively and for the status quo. And that, more than anything else, may lead to more enfranchisement.
Talks between the US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and her Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov grew heated in Moscow when the question was raised of addressing the Iraq issue in the final G-8 declaration.
"Look, Condi, Condi," Russia's chief diplomat was heard to plead with Rice, when someone forgot to switch off the microphones during a G-8 lunch.
Rice was apparently angry at Lavrov's rejection of one of her proposals.
May I propose a swift knee into Sirgay's groin?
For some 20 minutes of discussion, she and Lavrov, both speaking English, were practically the only ones to intervene, and their exchanges were occasionally quite animated.
The passage referring to "the barbarian killing of five members of the Russian embassy in Iraq" was the first point of discord, as Rice objected to the last phrase of the resolution which lays out that "urgent measures are taken to provide security for diplomats."
"It implies they are not being taken and you know on a fairly daily basis we lose soldiers and I think it would be offensive to suggest that these efforts are not being made," she told Lavrov before pointing out that diplomats are not the only victims of violence in Iraq.
Lavrov in his turn assured that he did not intend any insult and thanked Americans and Canadians for their efforts on behalf of the diplomats kidnapped and killed this week.
However, "the Iraqi interior ministry should pay more attention to the safety of foreign missions," he noted, adding that "if you feel uncomfortable about it, maybe we should make it shorter, saying there is a need for improved security for diplomatic missions."
"Sergei, there is a need for improvement of security in Iraq, period!" the secretary of state retorted sharply. "The problem isn't diplomatic missions."
Lavrov tried to interrupt, but Rice would not let him.
"I understand that in the wake of the brutal murder of your diplomats it is a sensitive time, but I think that we can't imply that this is an isolated problem or that it isn't being addressed," she added.
A third minister -- apparently Canada's Peter Mackay -- suggested a compromise formula which is then accepted, the final version reading "this tragic event stresses the importance of improving security for everyone in Iraq."
Lavrov then demanded to strike out the term "convention" in a paragraph referring to international aid to Iraq, alluding in passing to intervention of some countries he would not name into Iraq's political process.
"What does that mean?" demanded Rice, piqued.
"I think you understand," Lavrov answered after a long pause.
"No, I don't," was the curt reply.
The debate went on in a less heated tone, Rice proposing that the final text includes a "concept" for an international convention without immediately defining the content, adding that this would "provide momentum" for the idea.
The European Union's high representative on foreign policy, Javier Solana, approved, and European ministers as well as Lavrov accepted the compromise formula.
The final document says that the ministers "call on the international community... to respond to this new era in Iraq's development by giving great support to the new Iraqi government and its people, including response to the Iraqi government's proposal of an international convention."
US President George W. Bush said earlier this month that his administration will press leaders in Europe, Asia and the Middle East to boost support for Iraq's fledgling government.
Posted by: Captain America ||
06/30/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
One solution to the diplomatic impasse over "the barbarian killing of five members of the Russian embassy in Iraq" would be turn the Russian security forces loose for some traditional rooski heavy-handed spetsnaz flavored violence. The bad guys get wacked and when the islamo-seething begins, we get to shrug apologetically and say hey, we're not involved, go complain to those guys.
#3
I have yet to hear the Russians offer a reward for information leading to bringing the beheaders to justice. The choppers like to brag.
How about this?: full Russian disclosure of the Iranian nuke plants, and support facilities (ie: targets) in exchange for free-range Russian commando operations against the Iraq based beheaders.
Posted by: Mike ||
06/30/2006 6:56 Comments ||
Top||
#5
When they are acting like Europeans, the Russian diplomatic way is to emphasize the exact letter of the wording of documents, then violating the hell out of the spirit. But we are long aware of such semantic games.
#6
Two women, both originally German, Empress Elizabeth and Catherine [the Great] put the good o'boy Ruskies in their place. Want to try for a third? Don't make her put her power boots on again. On second thought she did look 'hot' in those pictures. Hey Fred why not use that one.
Turkish parliament has passed a law increasing the number of crimes classified as terrorism in legislation that has worried the European Union and been criticised by rights groups as an invitation to torture. The government says the law is needed to fight resurgent Kurdish separatists who have stepped up attacks in the last two years after calling off their unilateral ceasefire. The new law will delay guaranteed access to a lawyer for the first 24 hours of detention and expand the definition of acts classified as crimes of terrorism.
Critics say the law would make it a crime simply to espouse views shared by rebel groups or even to publish a statement by an illegal organisation. Critics also say the anti-terrorism law gives too much leeway to conservative nationalists who dominate Turkey's judiciary and who see their main task as defending their view of the state.
The European Union, which began accession talks with Turkey in October, has expressed concern over the legislation. "The anti-terrorism bill does not restrict press freedom and freedom of expression," state news agency Anatolian quoted Cemil Cicek, the country's justice minister as saying.
The last two years have seen a resurgence of rebel attacks, particularly by the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK). The attacks had, in fact, subsided after the capture of the group's leader, Abdullah Ocalan, in 1999. The outlawed rebel group, considered a terrorist organisation by Ankara, the United States and the EU, launched a campaign in 1984 for an ethnic homeland in the country's predominantly Kurdish southeast.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/30/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The correct title for this article should read, "Turkey becomes even more fascist: Believe it or not."
Posted by: Azad ||
06/30/2006 16:33 Comments ||
Top||
After remaining mum for the past week, even as controversy swirled around newspapers' revealing the banking records surveillance program, the Wall Street Journal editoral page weighed in today. Although the Journal published its own story just hours after The New York Times -- which has taken the most heat -- its editorial defended its own action while blasting the Times.
It even included a personal slam at Times' publisher, Arthur O. Sulzberger, Jr. and said the Times did not want to win, but rather obstruct, the war on terror.
Sulzberger responded this afternoon: "I know many of the reporters and editors at The Wall Street Journal and have greater faith in their journalistic excellence than does the Editorial Page of their own paper. I, for one, do not believe they were unaware of the importance of what they were publishing nor oblivious to the impact such a story would have."
Among other things, the Journal editorial criticized the Times for using the Journal as "its ideological wingman" to deflect criticism from the right. It pointed out that the news and editorial departments are quite separate at the Journal, and the editorial side there would have opposed printing the article the kind of article the Times ran.
Finally, it explained how it got its own story, then slammed the Times for a wide range of sins, claiming that the "current political clamor" is "warning to the press about the path the Times is walking."
The Times has defended its reporting, saying publication has served America's public interest. Its executive editor, Bill Keller, said in a statement on Thursday that the paper took seriously the risks of reporting on intelligence.
"We have on many occasions withheld information when lives were at stake," Keller said. "However, the administration simply did not make a convincing case that describing our efforts to monitor international banking presented such a danger. Indeed, the administration itself has talked publicly and repeatedly about its successes in the area of financial surveillance."
Journal editors have not responded to repeated requests from E&P for comment this week.
Here are a few excerpts from Friday's Journal editorial.
*
We recount all this because more than a few commentators have tried to link the Journal and Times at the hip. On the left, the motive is to help shield the Times from political criticism. On the right, the goal is to tar everyone in the "mainstream media." But anyone who understands how publishing decisions are made knows that different newspapers make up their minds differently.
Some argue that the Journal should have still declined to run the antiterror story. However, at no point did Treasury officials tell us not to publish the information. And while Journal editors knew the Times was about to publish the story, Treasury officials did not tell our editors they had urged the Times not to publish. What Journal editors did know is that they had senior government officials providing news they didn't mind seeing in print. If this was a "leak," it was entirely authorized....
The problem with the Times is that millions of Americans no longer believe that its editors would make those calculations in anything close to good faith. We certainly don't. On issue after issue, it has become clear that the Times believes the U.S. is not really at war, and in any case the Bush Administration lacks the legitimacy to wage it.
So, for example, it promulgates a double standard on "leaks," deploring them in the case of Valerie Plame and demanding a special counsel when the leaker was presumably someone in the White House and the journalist a conservative columnist. But then it hails as heroic and public-spirited the leak to the Times itself that revealed the National Security Agency's al Qaeda wiretaps.
Mr. Keller's open letter explaining his decision to expose the Treasury program all but admits that he did so because he doesn't agree with, or believe, the Bush Administration. "Since September 11, 2001, our government has launched broad and secret anti-terror monitoring programs without seeking authorizing legislation and without fully briefing the Congress," he writes, and "some officials who have been involved in these programs have spoken to the Times about their discomfort over the legality of the government's actions and over the adequacy of oversight." Since the Treasury story broke, as it happens, no one but Congressman Ed Markey and a few cranks have even objected to the program, much less claimed illegality.
Perhaps Mr. Keller has been listening to his boss, Times Publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr., who in a recent commencement address apologized to the graduates because his generation "had seen the horrors and futility of war and smelled the stench of corruption in government.
"Our children, we vowed, would never know that. So, well, sorry. It wasn't supposed to be this way," the publisher continued. "You weren't supposed to be graduating into an America fighting a misbegotten war in a foreign land. You weren't supposed to be graduating into a world where we are still fighting for fundamental human rights," and so on.
Forgive us if we conclude that a newspaper led by someone who speaks this way to college seniors has as a major goal not winning the war on terror but obstructing it.
#1
MoDo also ridiculed the arrest of the Fla 7. I guess they do seem like "small potatos" as far as risk to national security when you work aside Pinch, Keller, Frank Rich, Krugman, Risen, et al.....
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/30/2006 15:42 Comments ||
Top||
#6
I disagree JohnQC - this in my opinion nails it:
On issue after issue, it has become clear that the Times believes the U.S. is not really at war, and in any case the Bush Administration lacks the legitimacy to wage it
#10
Our country would be far ahead if creeps like Arthur O. Sulzberger, Jr. and said the people who work for the New York Times didn't exist. Since they do they belong in jail and in the unemployment line.
Treason and sedition must cost. We should make sure these criminal asssclowns pay every cent of what they owe this nation. Then they should pay somemore. Make what they hare and have been doing the most public, unattractive, and painful thing anyone will remember for years.
#13
Ooooo - it's from Editor&Publisher. The trade rag. And they thoroughly dissed the NYT in favour of their key competition for hearts and minds. What a pity I don't know anyone who even thinks about going to the Hamptons. This is going to be uglier than merely NYT v. WSJ -- there's pride of craft involved, too. Delicious!
A prominent national Islamic civil rights and advocacy group today said Israel's targeting of the Palestinian civilian infrastructure is a "war crime" that should be condemned by the Bush administration.
Following a Palestinian attack on a military post, Israeli warplanes fired missiles at the Gaza Strip's only power station, cutting electricity to most of Gaza. Israel also targeted three Gaza Strip bridges. Palestinian officials say the cut in power will impact water supplies and health services.
In reaction to the Israeli strikes, a White House spokesman said: "In any actions the government of Israel may undertake, the United States urges that it ensures that innocent civilians are not harmed, and also that it avoid the unnecessary destruction of property and infrastructure."
The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) said in a statement released today: "Mild rebukes for the deliberate targeting of civilian infrastructure in Gaza will not stop Israeli missiles. The Bush administration should condemn these war crimes and demand that Israel stop using American taxpayer- funded weapons to carry out attacks that will only serve to intensify the humanitarian crisis in Gaza."
CAIR recently called on President Bush to help end the Israeli and international "siege" imposed on the Palestinians because of the results of democratic elections.
The Washington-based group also condemned Israel's killings of Palestinian civilians and has repeatedly condemned Palestinian attacks on Israeli civilians.
CAIR, America's largest Muslim civil liberties group, has 32 offices and chapters nationwide and in Canada. Its mission is to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding. Firing random missiles at Israeli civilians is just fine, though.
#1
CAIR. Ever check the list of CAIR members and associates arrested, charged and/or convicted of aid or supporting a known terrorist organization? Just asking.
BTW - did anyone see Ibrahim Goober Hooper's not-so-subtle threat (link) against the Marine of Haji Girl fame? This guy must have a black belt in petulance.
#9
The goal of war is to destroy the enemy's will to fight. Killing people and blowing up their stuff is just a way to get there. Destroying infrastructure is demoralizing and reduces the enemy's ability to fight. It is also arguably easier on the populace than, for example, carpet bombing.
Governments are responsible for the people and territory they govern. While most of us learned this in ninth grade civics class, the Paleos have been too busy memorising the Koran, jumping thru flaming hoops and practicing up for jew killing to go to school. In short, this Israeli operation is simply a remedial course in government.
As long as 'the Palestians' were assorted gangs of armed thugs, they could get away with bad behavior by saying "Hey, it wasn't us, it was the other guys". Once the HamAsses became the elected government, that excuse went out the window. Can you imagine Bush saying, "Hey, don't blame me. It was those wack-jobs in the Department of the Navy who launched that SLBM strike on your punk-ass country. They crazy!"
War crimes? Collective punishment? Bah! This is just international relations. Welcome to the real world where hostile acts against your neighbors have consequences.
#11
#9 Steve S: "Can you imagine Bush saying, "Hey, don't blame me. It was those wack-jobs in the Department of the Navy who launched that SLBM strike on your punk-ass country. They crazy!""
I can imagine a DemocRat president saying it.... ;-p
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
06/30/2006 14:39 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Islamic civil rights group... Oxymoron? These words just do not go together.
Or else you will engage national identity feelings, which researchers say will lead to dangerous "Islamophobia." Deal with your hate for peace-loving Muslims and recognize that the real "threat" rests in your stereotype-feeding, patriotic love for your soon to be Muslim, Kaffir country (Dar-Harb). See below, even Secular products of UK colleges, know that all sovereignty belongs to Moon-God Allah.
Hyped media reporting on terrorism increases Islamophobia, according to a new study by social psychologists at Royal Holloway, University of London. The study, the first of its kind in Britain, analysed the psychological reasons behind the reported rise in Islamophobia and how this is linked with a perceived threat to national identity. The research, which follows a similar one undertaken in the US post 2001 attacks, drew the same conclusion. It concluded increased perception of national threat increased support for draconian strategies and immigration policies, including policies, which would reduce the civil liberties enjoyed by British Muslims.
The research, carried out before the July 7 attacks on London, highlights the key role the media play in reporting acts of terrorism. The study shows how media articles portraying the idea that Islamic terrorism constitutes a significant threat can lead to increases in Islamophobic prejudice, targeted not just at the terrorists, but all Muslims, especially those living in the UK. The Royal Holloway team created two bogus national newspaper articles, one suggested threat of Islamic terrorism was high and one suggesting the threat was low. The high threat article suggested dire outcomes for the nation itself, and the low threat article suggested few long-term consequences for the UK.
Half the participants, all of whom were white British, read the high threat article and half the low threat article, and then completed a questionnaire on their attitudes towards Muslims and terrorism. A further group read an article about crime on university campuses before completing the same questionnaire. Participants who read the high threat article had significantly more negative attitudes towards Muslims, feeling, for example, that Muslims presented a greater threat to Britains security, compared with participants who were in the control or low threat conditions.
The researchers also measured the level of British national identity that participants had, using a questionnaire scale. The findings revealed that those high in national identity had more negative attitudes towards Muslims, and showed greater support for the hypothetical immigration and policing policies compared with participants low in British identity. In a statement to The Muslim News Dr Marco Cinnirella said, British Muslims have reported increasing levels of Islamophobia, yet there have been very few studies attempting to explain what lies behind this. Simply reading a newspaper article about terrorism can elevate an individuals level of Islamophobic prejudice and lead them to feel more supportive of changes to policing and immigration policies that could restrict the civil liberties of British Muslims.
Psychologically, we believe that these effects are partly driven by an individuals sense of British national identity, and the tendency to react negatively to anything that is seen to threaten the nation. Our findings also suggest that when such threats are perceived, negative stereotypes may be applied to the majority of British Muslims, not just those seen to be terrorists, said Dr Cinnirella.
#1
Ya know, I'm wondering if they had done their "high threat, low threat" test using articles about Jehovah's Witnesses rather than muslims, would the results have been the same?
It seems disingenious to prove "media hype" effect on a group that is actively involved in terrorizing the test subjects - some of whom are more versed in the depth and danger of the islamic attack than others.
What's the point here? Some test subjects are smarter than others?
#2
Another "hallowed" study for the apologists to point to in hushed tones when something is needed to advance the Beeb's (or any other anti-West entity) agenda. The pattern of pseudo-intelligentsia collusion is clear - this is where they can do the most damage.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist urged President Bush on Friday to intensify efforts to put interceptor missiles at a site in Europe to protect against potential attacks from Iran.
"The threat from Iran is only going to grow in the years ahead. We need to take steps now to prepare to deal with that threat," Frist, R-Tenn., said in a letter to the president.
"The time has come to revive and reinvigorate discussions with allies in Europe that have previously expressed interest in hosting these interceptors at a third site on their territory," said Frist, who is retiring from the Senate and is considering running for president in 2008.
The United States has interceptor missiles buried in California and Alaska to counter potential threats from the Pacific, including from North Korea. The Bush administration has spent more than a year negotiating with several European allies to find a third site for the ground-based interceptor missiles, including discussions last year with Poland.
For the budget year that begins Oct. 1, the U.S. Missile Defense Agency requested $61 million to produce 10 more interceptor missiles and $56 million to prepare for a third site. There has been no final decision on where that site may be, said Rick Lehner, an agency spokesman.
In the letter, Frist sought to send a signal to Iran that the United States is committed to countering that country's nuclear ambitions. At the same time, the potential presidential candidate aimed to show that he's strong on national defense, which could be a major issue in the White House race two years from now.
Putting interceptor missiles at a site in Europe would significantly enhance the United States' ability to protect against ballistic missiles launched from Iran, Frist said in the letter.
"As Iran continues to make progress in deploying its Shahab 3 missiles and developing new, longer range missiles, while simultaneously pursuing nuclear weapons, the ability to shoot down Iranian warheads in flight becomes increasingly critical to our national security," Frist said.
His comments came as the United States and European allies continue their efforts to persuade Tehran to roll back its uranium enrichment program that can produce fuel for nuclear power generators or the material for nuclear warheads.
#1
Frist is an idiot. He's assuming Bush will let the MM get nukes. I have my doubts. Let the Euros develop their own BMD or get on board with the GWOT. We should defend only those who are on board with GWOT, UK, Denmark, Poland, etc.
#4
#2 Steve White: "It's hard to defend the UK, Denmark and Bulgaria without defending the rest of Europe."
If it's aimed at frogistan or spain, couldn't we "miss"? Oops. ;-p
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
06/30/2006 18:16 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Europe has enjoyed decades and billions of dollars of military welfare. If they want it, they can buy it. Knowing that the major parties will insist on Euro content/development, its unlikely they'll have anything functional for another two decades.
#6
Cover our allies and friends - criteria should be what help they've delivered since 9/11. Poles, Bulgarians, Hungarians, andBrits, sure, Danes? sure. Everyone else and all those refusing basing on their soil can get f*cked, especially Ireland, based on the last couple days' posts
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/30/2006 20:05 Comments ||
Top||
The University of Wisconsin-Madison announced Thursday that it would launch a review of an instructor who argues that the U.S. government orchestrated the Sept. 11 attacks for its own benefit.
The instructor, Kevin Barrett, is co-founder of an organization called the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance, which claims the Bush administration planned the attacks to create a war between Muslims and Christians. He argues that members of the faiths must work together to overcome the belief that terrorists were to blame.
"The 9/11 lie was designed to sow hatred between the faiths," Barrett has written on the organization's Web site. Either we discuss the compelling evidence that 9/11 was an inside job, or there is precious little to talk about."
Continued on Page 49
#1
I think it speaks poorly of us that we have ANY tolerance for this kind of crap.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
06/30/2006 10:02 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"Madison is fairly liberal. It's not surprising that a lot of people agreed with him."
So "liberals" believe that 9/11 was an inside job?
There is so much wrong with the beliefs expressed in this article that I wouldn't know where to start. The Left, MSM, Universities, et al have all gone collectively stark raving bonkers. The collective brainwashing is on par with the Islamofascists.
Our very own madrassas - learning nothing but leftist sqawk. No knowledge, no facts - these have no purpose. Just opinion; baseless, ill-informed, misinformed, uninformed, unformed opinion.
Gotta get me some o that skul larnin and gets me a digre.
#3
If I recall correctly, Steven Jones is a crackpot who's frequently on with George Noory and/or Art Bell on Coast-To-Coast AM (which I listen to as frequently as possible for its, ahem, entertainment value). I believe Jones is also the owner of the crackpot website Prison Planet - one visit there gave me exactly the information I needed to know about this kook (though I have suffered through a number of Coast To Coast shows that have had him on it).
#4
"Mr. Barrett's statements regarding the events of Sept. 11 have raised some legitimate concerns about the content and quality of instruction in his planned fall course."
In the category of "Most Amusing Understatement," the nominees are . . . .
Posted by: Mike ||
06/30/2006 10:29 Comments ||
Top||
#7
David D...I actually think it speaks highly of us. Nutballs like this are generally institutionalized or enprisoned in islamic countries. However, the fact that Barrett is a state employee is another story (e.g., Ward Churchill). As long as he has credentials and the people (state) want him, Bucky the Badger can do whatever the heck they want. Look at Angela Davis at UC-Berzerkley.
Actually it says more about the dementia associated with conversion to islam than anything else.
#10
Good grief, this guy runs with a LOT of "trustworthy" characters, doesn't he. Alex Jone's website alone was enough to turn me off to these crackpots.
And me being in Atlanta, I've learned two things first hand about 9/11. I know someone who PERSONALLY saw the plane strike the Pentagon (she now works here in ATL/was at another agency in D.C. on 9/11 and the plane flew right over her head and into the side of the Pentagon). And, two, my sis knows someone who we'll say serves closely to the President at times, and according to him, we may have actually shot down Flight 93. If you'll remember the F18s were actually within 5 minutes of catching the 2nd WTC plane nose-to-nose, so I (personally) have suspicions that we might've gotten Flight 93. BUT, in no way do I doubt the heroism going on inside that plane...the first citizen-soldiers in this long war, NOR do I doubt it was the right thing to do (shoot her down).
Posted by: BA ||
06/30/2006 12:17 Comments ||
Top||
#11
This just goes to show you the value of a college education at a major university. You can do better (and save a lot of money) at a local library.
Al
Posted by: Frozen Al ||
06/30/2006 13:26 Comments ||
Top||
#12
pretty obviously a university that employs this kind of whackjob has others, and is unserious about an education. To me, now, a degree from UWM is the equivalent of a piece of trash - I hold in the same esteem. I will also look at their graduates in the same manner. Alumni should be ashamed at allowing this to occur
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/30/2006 15:48 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Hey now! We've still got a good physics department! The university inflicts quite a lot of PC mickey mouse on the students otherwise, though.
Pity about Steven Jones: it looked like he was doing serious work with cold fusion before Pons et al published to the papers. Could be that incident has had him looking for betrayals ever since.
Posted by: James ||
06/30/2006 16:12 Comments ||
Top||
#14
We've still got a good physics department! This is a little off-topic but there is a medical technology developed a few years ago at Wisconsin-Madison for treating prostate cancer called TomoTherapy--it marries CT imaging with very focused radiation therapy. Turns out that it limits many of the side effects of radiation to surrounding areas. The technology was the outgrowth of a physics student's doctoral dissertation. Madison has crazy friggin moonbats there but also there are also some good things going on there in the way of research.
#19
Even iff F18's did shoot down Flight 93, the "shootdown" in no way diminishes the heroism of those airline passengers whom tried to stop the terrorists despite knowing they had a high prob of death anyway. Are Americans going to raggle over servicemembers-civilians whom courageously despite fear + uncertainty sacrificed their lives to save their charges or civilians just becuz the latter still died or was destroyed in the end - NO! * "PRECIOUS LITTLE TO TALK ABOUT" - IOW, only one all-encompassing view of reality-truth is allowed > NO DIFFERENT THAN THE COMMIES ANDOR RADICAL MUSLIMS, ETAL. THEY WANT WAR, ANARCHY, REVOLUTION, DESTRUCTION and ABSOLUTISM IN AMERICA WITHOUT EXPLAINING WHY TO ANYONE - SOMEONE ELSE, ANYONE ELSE, HAS TO EXPLAIN THEIR MOTIVES FOR THEM + TAKE BLAME IN THEIR PLACE. Iff I were an dedicated enemy of America, you can gurantee my men would not be sent on suicide missions, my reasons for war would already be given out, and Washington DC, etal US cities would already had been attacked and destroyed long ago.
The government has set aside Rs 97 million for scholarships in Pakistani universities to 75 Muslims from southern Thailand - both teachers and students. A total of 25 Thai teachers and 50 students would be offered Rs 1.3 million each to stay in Pakistan and do post graduate degrees. The duration of their stay would be 64 months. The project developed by the Higher Education Commission (HEC) has been submitted for approval to the Central Development Working Party(CDWP), which meets here today.
The scheme, the first of its kind here, was drawn up in accordance with a directive issued by Prime Minister Shuakat Aziz, who had promised to give scholarships to Thai Muslims during his recent visit to the country. Candidates for scholarships will first be short-listed by Sheikh Islam of Thailand and the Southern Muslim Association. A committee headed by the Pakistani ambassador to Thailand, and including representatives of Sheikh Islam and Thai ministries, will then select the candidates. The Thai students will get free tuition in Pakistani universities, a return air ticket, living expenses for the stipulated period of the degree programme, a book allowance, and healthcare allowance. The 25 scholarships for teachers include 10 scholarships in science subjects, 10 in language and five in education. The 50 scholarships for Thai Muslim students include 20 in science subjects, and 10 each in management sciences, arts, education, Islamic laws and language.
The project documents state that the project will help compensate for the lack of education facilities in the southern Muslim provinces of Thailand. Thai Muslims by and large cannot even speak the Thai language, let alone English, which limits their access to education, say the documents. So it has been proposed the Thai teachers and students should first complete an English language course of six months in a registered institute before starting studies in Pakistani universities.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/30/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
Balochistan Governor Owais Ahmed Ghani on Wednesday backtracked from his earlier offer of amnesty to those who would give up arms. He also said there were no contacts between the government and Akbar Bugti. Talking to reporters, Ghani said the government would never compromise with those who incited violence in the province. He said the government was determined to eliminate terrorists from Balochistan. Violence cannot be justified by any means. It is a menace that needs to be combated with joint efforts, he said. About his earlier amnesty offer, Ghani said, I was misquoted by the press. The government will never negotiate with anti-state elements.
He said that the development process in Balochistan would go ahead despite all hurdles. Earlier, addressing a seminar organised by a local newspaper, he said the government was capable of dealing with the handful of terrorists who had created law and order problems. He also talked about various development and mineral projects in the province.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/30/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
The new UN Human Rights Council voted Friday to make a review of alleged human rights abuses by Israel a permanent feature of every council session.
The resolution, which was sponsored by Islamic countries, was passed by a vote of 29-12, with five abstentions. It effectively revives a practice of the UN's dissolved Human Rights Commission, which also reviewed alleged Israeli abuses every time it met.
Israel protested Friday's vote, calling it a perpetuation of "the old infamous habits" of the widely discredited commission.
The resolution requires UN investigators to report at each council session "on the Israeli human rights violations in occupied Palestine."
The resolution also said the council "decides to undertake substantive consideration of the human rights violations and implications of the Israeli occupation of Palestine and other occupied Arab territories at its next session and to incorporate that issue in its following sessions."
One of the United States' main criticisms of the 53-nation Human Rights Commission that was replaced this year by the council was that it spent one week of its annual six-week session criticizing Israel and made other frequent attacks on the Jewish state.
"Voting in favor of this draft resolution will lead you directly to the old infamous habits of the commission," Israeli Ambassador Itzhak Levanon told the council. "Voting yes essentially means that no lessons have been drawn. It means that there is no fresh beginning."
Besides Arab and other Muslim countries, "yes" votes were cast by African nations, Brazil, China, Cuba, Ecuador, Guatemala, India, Mexico, the Philippines, Russia and Sri Lanka. Canada and European Union members on the council voted against it.
The United States is not a member of the council and, like Israel, was unable to vote.
The council has two more sessions this year, starting in September and December.
#7
Dead on, AH6228, and I've repeatedly written my Representative and both Senators to urge that option. If you (and other Rantburgers) haven't done the same, I strongly suggest you do so ASAP.
Posted by: mac ||
06/30/2006 18:12 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Just in case someone doesn't know
Membership of the "new" Human Rights Council.
Algeria , Argentina, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Brazil, Cameroon, Canada, China, Cuba, Czech Republic, Djibouti, Ecuador, Finland, France, Gabon, Germany, Ghana, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Japan, Jordan, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Netherlands, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Republic of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Switzerland,
Tunisia, Ukraine, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Zambia.
#9
Well, damn, you didn't think they were going to investigate human rights violations in Cuba or North Korea, did you? That would require possibly doing something about them.
Just say that we'll pay what we owe when Hamas makes good on their paychecks to their personnel. Yanking all the money overnight is so....unilateral. ;)
#10
Wow. Good to see how things are so very, very different over there at Human Rights.
Keep it up UN. Keep pissing what infinitismal credibility you've got left in this country right down the shitter...
#11
Man, what do we have to do to get rid of these diplomatic scumbags. First, UN employees are now being accused of killings in the Rwanda massacre, and now this tripe? Almost makes me wanna hijack a plane myself and fly it into the UN building (/rant off/).
Posted by: BA ||
06/30/2006 23:55 Comments ||
Top||
Karen Hughes makes the case for a military solution to end the WOT. However, that was not her intention. How can "education" create understanding while Saudis textbooks promote hate for Christians, Jews and Hindus? And should our "respect" for other cultures, include the jihadist cultures? I do agree with much of what she says.
Press Release: US State Department
Karen Hughes, Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs
Remarks at the U.S.-Arab Economic Forum
Houston, Texas
June 26, 2006
...Here in America, we need to do a better job of educating our young people about the world, learning more about other countries and cultures, learning languages such as Arabic so we can better communicate with and understand each other. With education also comes the ability to decide for yourself and that's what we want. Because I believe most people with educated open minds will choose liberty over tyranny, tolerance over extremism, and hope over hate. Open minds also inspire people to stand for their rights: the right to live in freedom, to participate in choosing their governments, to live in just societies that are governed by the rule of law and whose officials are not corrupt. Open minds are what will ultimately allow us to prevail in the war of ideas.
Our opponents want closed minds. They say their way or no way. Death to anyone who disagrees with them, no matter what faith or what religion. Together we must confront the violent extremists and their ideology of tyranny and hate. They seek to portray the West as in conflict with Islam, because that's the window into which they recruit. They can only flourish in environments that foster anger and misunderstanding. Yet their world view is wrong. Islam is a part of America. As an American government official, I represent almost seven million American Muslims who live and work and practice their faith freely here in our country. Together we must undermine the extremists by providing platforms for debate, by empowering mainstream voices of tolerance and inclusion, and by demonstrating our respect for Muslim cultures and contributions to our society and to world society. We can also undermine the extremists by building a world of greater opportunities...
Posted by: Jonathan ||
06/30/2006 9:51 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Right after I learn Latin as a useful language for day to day commerce and interaction. I recommend Karen brush up on her Spanish. More likely to be useful for her, particularly at forums in Houston.
#7
I think more people learning Arabic is a great idea. OTOH, this is complete claptrap:
"They seek to portray the West as in conflict with Islam, because that's the window into which they recruit."
It is not only "they" that portray the West in conflict with Islam. Anyone with a brain can see that the West IS in conflict with Islam. Our enemies can identify us as enemies, but we can't identify Islam as what sustains the enemy. Great PR campaign there, Karen-much promise for ROI. A good look at history will show how effective extending respect towards Islam has been. /sarcasm off/
#8
The more people who can read the Koran [insert alternate spellings as desired here], understand the Friday sermons and what the Palestinian leadership says to its people, the fewer who will be able to close their eyes to what we're really fighting. Even knowing little things like the difference between a Western ceasefire and a Muslim hudna, or the rules for Dar el Harb vs. Dar al Umma are critically important... or what jihad really means. You don't study the enemy's language to be sensitive and understanding, but to take away something else he assumed was secret -- the same way they can't hide if they have a cell phone (remember when the phones of all the Iraqi military commanders rang with the same message just before we invaded?).
#9
I can tell you that even my limited residual capacity with Arabic has helped me unmask a lot of the BS - plus knowing Arabic and having learned it in an immersive environment at DLI, expecially a given dialect (Iraqi in my case), you really learn what the culture is about.
And thats what a lot of our leadership is missing: theyhave no idea how the US "Political Correctnes" plays out to Arabs as weakness & subservience, and invites attacks in justification of thier dominaace to our subservience.
A proud man does not bow his neck to anyone exept Allah. Yet we pay for damage, obsess over every little possible nit and pay reparations for it, and let criminals go unpunished, andlack the will to act consitently and constantly with strength. So unitl we do manage to show solid resolve, and kick some ass continuously without regard to "PC" issues, we will continue to generate Jihadis because their culture tells them we are weak and the weak deserve (by Allah) to be enslaved by the strong.
That's thier culture - and why the "go easy" people in this country are writing a ticket to defeat.
#11
We actually have enough arabic speakers to understand the Koran, Jihad, Sharia, etc.
We need more people like Karen Hughes to be open minded enough to realize that the 7 million American muslim figure is BS (this number has been debunk on RB) to realize that Jihad is a fundamental part of Islam and to realize other dirty stuff.
#13
Good gawd, I guess we'll now be graced with a Muslim History Month now, Karen? I'm with the others here....the ONLY reason to learn arabic is to see what they're REALLY saying and to DEFEAT them...PERIOD! Man, this makes me wanna rant like Mendiola!
Posted by: BA ||
06/30/2006 12:05 Comments ||
Top||
mhw-Other than specialists, you mean? I was thinking in general populace terms. One idea might be to shake up the way high school foreign language curriculum is geared.
#21
Barbara, the world is convinced native English-speakers are incapable of learning foreign languages. (Which fact has given so clearly American that he needn't even open his mouth to prove it Mr. Wife a real advantage in negotiations -- so often foreigners will have what they assume to be private side conversations right in front of him...)
#23
I'm willing to learn how to say: "Give up yer jihad and quit treating women as chattel, or die!" in Arabic.
On the other hand, Moslems would do well to study the Federalist Papers, when they're ready to abandon the death cult. Surely there's a translation of that book in all major languages?
#24
Its always useful to speak a for language, IMHO.
Im not formally studying Arabic, but trying to pick up words here and there, esp using my Hebrew knowledge to help - eg the day Zarqi was killed, NPR ran clip of Maliki saying in Arabic what they translated as "today Zarqawi was killed" Started with Al-yom. Well today, in Hebrew, is Ha-yom, so i figured good, ive just learned another Arabic word. Too bad my Hebrew isnt better, though ;)
Learning a language for love and understanding, and learning it for eavesdropping and espionage, are sort of the polar opposites. In between is just learning it for practical, direct reasons - whether its a GI communicating at a roadblock, or us trying to make sense of Iraqi or Egyptian or Syrian politics - its good to know even for those of us who DONT think all arabs are the enemy, but also dont think we're gonna win this war by hugs and singing kumbaya.
BTW - re:hispanics - the ones who come here are usually eager to learn english.
#29
T-Wife, we don't need a nanny telling us what is good for us. And we don't need to "conform" to the so-called "world".
As for hubby, should he or any other American determine for him or her self that knowing one or more other languages, s/he should pursue.
Relative to negotiations, side conversations are smoke while direct party discussions are signals. After all, negotiations require agreement on both sides of a deal.
Posted by: Captain America ||
06/30/2006 18:29 Comments ||
Top||
#30
Nothing speaks more elegantly than the offer or withholding of $$$
Posted by: Captain America ||
06/30/2006 18:31 Comments ||
Top||
#31
yikes! Hostile crowd. Can we all agree that one should learn the language of teh enemy for all the good reasons noted above? Speaka Da English at home, but use every tool to undo those who would try and kill us? I'm an E"nglish-only for America" guy, but learned to hablar when travelling in Mexico. Good to learn phrases, like Agua Peligroso, and Uno mas Cerveza por favor!
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/30/2006 19:39 Comments ||
Top||
#32
Perhaps it was a special case then, Captain America -- I'm not very knowledgeable about such things. In the tale Mr. Wife told, the others were discussing what they did and didn't like about the various clauses (?? or whatever they were).
Sadly true, lotp. Americans put their pants on one leg at a time, just like everyone else (except those that don't wear pants, of course)... So many times when we lived over there I was complemented on how surprisingly well I spoke English. (!!!)
#34
Hey, it never ever hurts to learn the language of your enemy. It's even better if you don't look like someone who would understand the language (classic case when I was at the PD.....two Mexican murder suspects were busy coordinating their stories in Spanish in front of a black police officer. Said officer was fluent in Spanish. Como se dice "conviction" en espanol, pendejo? ;) )
But, yes, I never speak English overseas if I can avoid it when discussing matters I'd rather keep private. Too many of them understand, even if they pretend not to. (FYI....Spanish works great in Germany. Especially if you can rattle it off a la Mexican radio. Russian, not so much, too many former DDR's understand a little.)
#35
Folks, I'm only gonna mention this one more time, so get yur pencil and paper ready.
Being "advised" by someone to do anything is akin to nannyhood. As in, take your medicine, I (Ms. Hughes) know what's best for ya.
Surmising for one's self that one should use another language for one's own benefit (like ordering Mexican beer) is different and perfectly reasonable IMHO.
Cautionary note: Ms. Hughes completed her road show months back, visited several ME countries. She has an expectation and, it is expected of her, to make the surveys read "we Muslims heart America" -- good luck with that
Posted by: Captain America ||
06/30/2006 22:30 Comments ||
Top||
#36
Reads like a Hillarycare memorandum to me
Posted by: Captain America ||
06/30/2006 22:35 Comments ||
Top||
#37
sounds like you have issues. I took it completely different. Now...if I was told I have to.....
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/30/2006 22:39 Comments ||
Top||
#38
"Together we must undermine the extremists by providing platforms for debate, by empowering mainstream voices of tolerance and inclusion, and by demonstrating our respect for Muslim cultures and contributions to our society and to world society."
-contributions to our society and to world society? Hahahaha......gimme a break or here ya go Hughes how about my favorite arabic phrase:
Iraqi and U.S. troops battled Shiite militiamen in a village northeast of Baghdad on Thursday...Iraqi security officials said IRANIAN FIGHTERS HAD BEEN CAPTURED IN THE FIGHTING (emphasis added)...The U.S. military had no immediate comment.
In recent days there have been several stories further documenting the Iranian role in the terror war in Iraq, especially in the south, where Tehran has been working assiduously for several years to create a regional Islamic republic. So the al-Reuters report should not be a surprise.
But it gives us the opportunity to reflect on three serious questions, none of which has been sufficiently integrated into our national debate on the war:
Whos an Iraqi?
Whos a Shiite?
Whats the Iranian threat, anyway?
Whos An Iraqi?
Al-Reuters speaks of Iranian fighters mixed in with Shiite militiamen. But lots of Shiite militiamen entered Iraq from Iran around the time of Operation Iraqi Freedom, and many of those had originally fled Iraq in the early 1980s to join Iranian forces in the war against Saddam. Were talking big numbers here. Millions of Iraqi Shiites went to Iran, and tens of thousands of them (and, later, their children) were trained by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps. They are ideal for infiltration into Shiite or Sunni militias since they speak Arabic with an Iraqi accent.
I have been saying for years now that those who have been insisting that the insurrection is primarily an internal, Iraqi phenomenon, have missed this basic analytical conundrum: are those people Iraqis or Iranians? Should we call them Iranian agents (or as al-Reuters prefers, Iranian fighters)? Or should we call them Iraqis who spent time in Iran? Who are they?
The important thing is that they are working for Iran; their ultimate national allegiance is irrelevant in terms of understanding the nature of the terror war. They respond to the terror masters in Tehran.
What seems to be happening is that the Iraqis are not playing along with the American intelligence game of blaming Baathists for most of the terrorism. The Iraqis see Iranians and Iranian agents all over their country, and they dont like it. They have been joined by British intelligence and military officers, who know whos killing their men in and around Basra, and have been leaking like crazy to the British press, from the Telegraph to the Guardian. You could publish a substantial pamphlet of press clippings on this theme.
Whos a Shiite?
The single greatest distortion of reality in the war is that old chestnut about the profound hatred and total incompatibility between Sunnis and Shiites. The truth is that Sunnis and Shiites happily cooperate when it comes to killing Americans, Europeans, Jews, Christians, Suffis, Bahais, and anyone else who can be defined as an infidel and/or crusader. This has been going on for a very long time. In the early Seventies, for example, the (Shiite) Revolutionary Guards were trained in Lebanon by the (Sunni) Fatah of Yasser Arafat.
Obsessed by this great distortion, our analysts have lost sight of the profound internal war under way within Shiite Islam, the two contending forces being the Najaf (Iraqi, traditional) and the Qom (Iranian, heretical, theocratic) versions. Tehran fears ideological enemies inspired either by democracy or by Ayatollah Sistanis (Najaf) view of the world, which is that civil society should be governed by politicians, not mullahs.
Thus it is a mistake to assumeas it is so oftenthat Shiites in Iraq are automatically pro-Iranian. No matter how many times smart people such as Reuel Gerecht detail the intra-Shiite civil war, it just goes in one ear and out the other of the intelligence community and the policymakers.
WHATS THE IRANIAN THREAT?
The Iranian threat is both religious and murderous. Yes, they want to spread their doctrine, they do indeed want to create (Qom-version) Islamic republics all over the world, but that can come later. The main mission is to drive us out of the Middle East, above all from their eastern (Afghanistan) and western (Iraq) borders. The prime instrument for this mission is terrorism, and they do not care at all about the ethos of the terrorists. Indeed, as I reported some months back, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei told his closest advisers late last year that Iran now controlled all the major terror groups, religious or Marxist, Sunni or Shiite.
We are wrongly focused on the Iranian nuclear threat, which is obviously worth worrying about, but this excessively narrow focus has distracted us from the main threat, which is terrorism. The mullahs are not going to nuke our fighters in Iraq; they are going to kill as many as they can on the ground with IEDs, suicide terrorists, and assassins. And we have given them a free hand in this murderous campaign instead of unleashing political war against them in their own country. We hear lots of talk from the president and the secretary of state, but there is no sign of the sort of aggressive support we should be giving to the forces of freedom inside Iran.
#1
As I have said all along...the black hats are in power ONLY because oil flows down their pipelines. What we have needed to do for a long time is ensure a couple of Iranian oil pipeline terminals have major accidents. As long as the black hats have money they will continue fomenting terror.
If they get pissed and do something REALLY stupid...like retaliate...we crater their sorry a***s and let the chips fall where they may. I am not sure that is any worse then where we are right now.
The black hats are the greatest threat to peace...greater than the Krazy Kim. They fund, train, and spread murderers through the Hezbollah and countless other terrorist outlets. Eventuallly...someday...they will get a nuke and the means to deliver it.
#2
We know the Radics wanna drive us out of the ME - its the "Beyond the ME", "America + Israel + West + World must and will submit to Islam", anti-US/West/Democracy Global Islam/Islamist, Global Caliphate, etal. rants and ambitions, violence terror and force, thats the prob thingy(s).
YORK, Pa.--Three days before terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was killed by a U.S. air strike in Iraq, Pastor Moussa Joseph Moussa led a group of 500 believers in praying for the insurgency to be defeated. After the bombing, Mr. Moussa says, "I really believe that because we prayed, God dealt with the evil forces."
Inside his evangelical Arabic Christian Church on Alliance Avenue, Mr. Moussa, a native of Syria, is prone to deliver such patriotic lines. "I really commend this nation for having the heart to stand with another nation that has been oppressed." While in Baghdad two years ago, he recalls telling U.S. troops: "You are doing a noble job liberating people. Sometimes it is costly, but you are doing the right thing, and we are praying for you."
The 44-year-old pastor isn't the typical portrait of Arab America that most Americans see. Drowned out in the post-Sept. 11 media frenzy to cover Muslims, Arab-American Christians have been neglected. But 63% of the country's estimated 3.5 million Arab-Americans are Christian. Most are Catholic, while a smaller number are Protestant and Eastern Orthodox, which includes the Antiochian, Syrian and Coptic traditions. These Middle Eastern churches date to the dawn of Christianity. Most Copts are Egyptians who believe the Apostle Mark founded their church in Alexandria. Many Maronites hail from Lebanon, believed to be where disciples of St. Maron took refuge in the fifth century.
In addition to their diverse religious beliefs, Arab Christians also represent a variety of American political perspectives, not a monolithic bloc. In the last presidential election, nearly 34% of Arab Catholics and 48% of Orthodox Arabs polled by Zogby voted for President Bush; just over half of Arab Catholics and almost 47% of Orthodox Arabs voted for John Kerry.
After Sept. 11, many Arab-American Christians worked to voice their allegiance to the nation. In Richmond, Va., the Rev. Fakhri Yacoub of the Arabic Christian Fellowship church wrote a letter to the local newspaper explaining that "as Arab-American Christians, we condemn and denounce such evil actions." Pastor Esper Ajaj of the Arabic Baptist Church in Washington, D.C., worried that the Arabic writing on his church's front sign would scare passersby. So he put up an English sign that read, "Don't Mess With the U.S. God Bless America."
But Arab Christians still find themselves the victims of public wariness toward Islam. In a recent Washington Post-ABC News poll, the percentage of Americans who admitted holding prejudices toward Arabs--one in four--was the same as the percentage who admitted prejudices toward Muslims.
Mr. Moussa is doing everything he can to combat these attitudes. He considers it his duty to not only spread the Gospel but also to help other Arab immigrants "be good American citizens." Indeed, church is a strong force for assimilation. Arab parishes commonly share space with more established nonimmigrant churches, which plugs them into the larger community. The mixing also extends to where Christians live. In the Detroit area's large Arab community, Christians tend to be dispersed throughout the suburbs, while Muslims cluster in the Dearborn region. Almost half of the area's Muslim Arabs say their religion isn't respected by mainstream society--compared to just 11% of Christian Arabs and Chaldeans, according to a University of Michigan study.
Worshippers at Mr. Moussa's church are encouraged to vote and pray for the country's leaders, children's Bible study is taught in English and church picnics feature barbecue. Mr. Moussa is also spreading his message via satellite TV. His program, called "Peace With God," which features Mr. Moussa's sermons, currently reaches America, Mexico and Canada and soon will be seen in another 20 countries in the Middle East.
In August, Mr. Moussa plans to return to Iraq and visit Syria and Jordan for missionary work. If possible, he will also try to get back in front of the troops in Baghdad. "Many of the people in Iraq feel liberated," he says. "In the news, we only hear of negative things. But a lot of things are getting better. Freedom is coming."
Ms. Miniter, a Phillips Foundation fellow, is a writer in New York.
At least, I now know my surprise meter is still working.Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak demanded from his Syrian counterpart Bashar Assad to deport the Syrian-based Hamas leadership unless it agrees to release kidnapped IDF soldier Cpl. Gilad Shalit, Palestinian sources said on Friday.
The demand was made in the context of a compromise that Egypt was attempting to draft between the Israel and Hamas, whose Damascus leader, Khaled Mashaal was demanding that thousands of Palestinian detainees, held in Israeli prisons, be released. Mubarak warned Mashaal that his position was leading the Palestinians to disaster, Israel Radio reported.
According to the Palestinians, the Egyptian compromise calls for the withdrawal of Israeli troops from the Gaza Strip, as well as the release of prisoners who were already scheduled to be released within the next year.
Meanwhile, Mubarak stated in an interview to Egypt's leading pro-government newspaper, Al-Ahram that Shalit's kidnappers have agreed to his conditional release, but Israel has not yet accepted their terms.
Mubarak said, "Egyptian contacts with several Hamas leaders resulted in preliminary, positive results in the form of a conditional agreement to hand over the Israeli soldier as soon as possible to avoid an escalation.
The president said he had asked Prime Minister Ehud Olmert "not to hurry" the military offensive in Gaza, but to "give additional time to find a peaceful solution to the problem of the kidnapped soldier."
Egyptian Intelligence chief Omar Suleiman, was expected to go to Gaza on Friday, as Mubarak's representative, to advance the compromise. He was also scheduled to travel to Syria to meet Mashaal.
MK Ephraim Sneh (Labor) dismissed the Egyptian initiative, saying "a diplomatic option is when someone brings about the unilateral, unconditional release of the kidnapped [soldier], not when someone serves as a mediator between us and the Hamas head in Gaza," Army Radio reported.
Sources in Jerusalem stated that they had not yet received the details of the compromise. Moreover, the Prime Minister's Office insisted that it was not negotiating for Shalit's release.
Israel suspended on Thursday a planned ground invasion of northern Gaza, giving diplomacy another chance to free Shalit, whom terrorists linked to Hamas kidnapped Sunday from an Israeli camp near Gaza.
Mubarak's remark implied he was claiming a role in Israel's decision.
In Jerusalem, a senior Israeli Foreign Ministry official, Gideon Meir, said Israel did not know of such an offer.
Reached just after midnight on Friday morning, Meir told The Associated Press that Israel would have no comment until daybreak.
"In general Israel's stance is, as the prime minister said earlier, that the soldier will only be released unconditionally and there will be no negotiations with a gang of terrorists and criminals who abducted a soldier from Israeli territory," Meir said.
#7
Guess this was just before his staff blamed the whole thing on the Jooooooss, right? Or is Hosni getting into that whole Paleo say 1 thing in Arabic/the opposite in English thing?
Posted by: BA ||
06/30/2006 12:00 Comments ||
Top||
#8
on the one hand hosni knows Hamas is aligned with the muslim brotherhood, his enemies in Egypt. Now Assad doesnt like the Syrian muslim brotherhood, but he seems to have Hamas enough under his control that theres no worries there. Hosnis not in that position. To him Hamas is Syria's agent in Gaza, against the Fatahniks who are Egypts friends, and Gaza is too close to Egypt not to worry about whos in control there. And yeah, the Egyptians and Syrians were intense rivals, even back when Egypt had a more anti-western govt under Nasser.
OTOH Hosni has to worry about the Egyptian street, and so Israels incursion is ALSO a threat to him, since it angers the street, and puts him in an uncomfortable position. But Hosnis realistic enought to know that the Israelis are serious about this, and that the US, and even the Euros, dont have the desire to really hold Israel back, as long as they dont go too far.
So for Hosni best way out of this is for Hamas to cave more or less completely, then the Israelis go home, and all is good again. And Syria has the levearge over Hamas to make that happen.
But does Hosni have any leverage over Assad? Im not sure he does.
Hamas says it has not agreed to recognise Israel despite a political deal reached with Mahmoud Abbas on Tuesday. Hamas - whose charter calls for the destruction of the Jewish state - rejected any suggestion the deal to end its damaging power struggle with rival Fatah could imply it now accepts Israel's existence.
With Israel and the Palestinians preparing for a possible Israeli push into the Gaza Strip following the tank gunner's abduction, there appeared little chance that the agreement over the document could open a path towards peacemaking soon. Israeli troops massed at the Gaza border while Palestinian fighters planted land mines and piled up mounds of sand as obstacles. Abbas, the Palestinian president, had sought to soften Hamas's line in the hope of ending the US-led financial siege aimed at forcing the group to recognise Israel, renounce violence and accept peace accords.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/30/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#6
You cannot trust anything these child buggers tell you. The only thing that is certain is that they want to destroy Israel and allies. They will tell any lie to advance their cause. They will change the story whenever convenient to their end goal. The left in the U.S. is dangerously naive. I guess they don't mind being enslaved. I guess they like the fashion statement made by burkas.
An Israeli "war on all fronts" drew a rare warning from Egypt on Thursday that the military escalation jeopardizes a peace treaty with Israel as the Arab League held an emergency session to discuss the crisis. The threat of a regional conflagration rose Wednesday after Israeli warplanes overflew a palace of Syrian President Bashar Assad, whose country is host to several Palestinian militant groups. A defiant Syria on Thursday vowed to defend itself against Israeli attacks.
While Cairo has remained mum since the kidnapping of an Israeli soldier in Gaza, the head of the Egyptian Parliament's Foreign Affairs Committee said Israel should not think the "peace reached with an Arab country can be guaranteed while it continues to perpetrate its crimes and aggressions."
Mustafa al-Fekki, a senior member of President Hosni Mubarak's ruling party, was referring to the peace treaty Egypt signed with Israel in 1979. Fekki also voiced fears the flare-up could spill over into Egypt and threaten the country's security. "The Egyptian Parliament has expressed its concern for Egypt's borders and its peace deal. We respect it but the threats are coming from Israel," said Fekki. Mufid Shehab, secretary of state for parliamentary affairs, openly accused Israel on Wednesday of having threatened Egypt's stability.
Following an emergency meeting, Arab League ambassadors roundly condemned the Israeli military offensive in the Gaza Strip as "state terrorism," but failed to come up with an immediate diplomatic solution for the conflict. Hoping to prevent the crisis from spinning out of control, Egyptian officials have been talking directly with Hamas' political leader, Khaled Meshaal, who is based in Damascus, to push him to facilitate the soldier's release. An aide to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has said both Abbas and Egyptian officials called Assad to ask him to persuade Meshaal to release the soldier, with no results so far. Mubarak also spoke with Abbas and Assad on Thursday, the Egyptian state news agency said.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/30/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The damn Egyptians should remember that military sales, training, equiping, and 2.5 billion dollars a year in aid is absolutely dependent on them maintaining their peace treaty with Israel. If they wish to lose all of that, break the peace.
#6
As far as Radical Iran is concerned, EGYPT is just another future Iranian-Shia controlled province of the future revived Persian, etc Muslim empires. Wid Iran now publicly admitting to supporting anti-Israeli, anti-democracy regional terror groups, including but not limited to HAMAS, to support HAMAS, etc Egypt is helping its own destroyer.
#9
Cut their 2 billion dollars in aid off from the US per year and stop giving them parts for their M1s and Apachies and see how for granted they take the peace treaty.
#10
Cut off American tourist $ in the event of a war and see how well Egypt's economy does. Euros won't be going there either if there's hostilities. Mubarak's blowing smoke for domestic consumption. Far be it from telling his Islamist population the truth: "we'd get our asses handed to us"
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/30/2006 8:46 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Seems to me Egypt has been pretty anti-Hamas in word and deed. A little anti-Israel bloviating for domestic consumption is not to be denied them if it keeps things cooler internally.
#13
"The Egyptian Parliament has expressed its concern for Egypt's borders and its peace deal. We respect it but the threats are coming from Israel," said Fekki.
In other words, "Quit sending those pesky Paleos our way. I mean, we don't even want them in the Sinai peninsula, much less Egypt proper. And, oh yeah, it's the Joooooooos fault."
Posted by: BA ||
06/30/2006 10:07 Comments ||
Top||
#14
A word of caution to Mustafa al-Fekki.
Remember what happens when a slow neutron hits a Uranium atom ?
Good, Eh, I new you did pay attention in Physics class....
Posted by: Elder of Zion ||
06/30/2006 10:36 Comments ||
Top||
#15
"The Egyptian Parliament has expressed its concern for Egypt's borders"
i.e., they don't want a flood of Palestinians over their border. I can sympathize.
His name used to be Daniel Sonier, but that was when he was a troubled Scarborough teenager with dreams of becoming a rap star.
Now he is Shaheed. In Arabic, it means martyr. It is the name the 22-year-old of Acadian and aboriginal ancestry adopted when he became a Muslim five years ago.
Since his conversion, he has shed his baggy hip hop garb for a white turban and gown, married a woman from Djibouti and fathered two children. "Those who were around me, who knew me from the past, they see me now, they don't even recognize me," he said. "They call me Daniel, but really, in my heart, I'm Shaheed."
Continued on Page 49
Cpl. Joshua Belile wont be punished for his song about killing Iraqis. Just dont expect to hear him sing it again until hes out of the Corps.
Corps officials announced on Monday that Belile did not violate any of the articles of the Uniform Code of Military Justice by singing his song, Hajji Girl, which was posted on the Internet this spring and drew the ire of an influential Islamic advocacy group.
Subscribe Today!
No further investigation into the matter is necessary, said Maj. Shawn Haney, spokeswoman for 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing at Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point, N.C.
She said Belile received administration action as a result of the investigation, but that it was non-punitive in nature. Plus, Belile had said he was free to perform the song, as long as he didnt do it in uniform.
But according to a record producer who was planning to record Beliles song for free, the corporal was told by his command that he couldnt perform or record the song even when hes off-duty.
Beliles song tells the first-person story of a Marine who falls in love with an Arab woman at a Burger King in Iraq. After the woman lures him to her house, her brother and father confront him with AK47s. The Marine in the song uses the girls little sister as a human shield when the brother and father open fire, then ducks behind a television to load his weapon before killing the men who attempted to ambush him.
Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said the video of Belile performing the song during a deployment to Iraq with Marine Light Attack Helicopter Squadron 167, which was later uploaded to the popular Web site www.youtube.com upon the units return to New River in March, glorifies the killing of Iraqi civilians.
After CAIR sent out a press release on the video, officials with Marine Corps headquarters declared the song clearly inappropriate. The commanding general of 2nd MAW Beliles parent command ordered a preliminary inquiry to establish the facts in the matter.
Hooper said that the investigation ends the matter for him and his organization.
We said initially that we would leave it in the Marine Corps hands, and I guess we just have to accept what they decided, Hooper said. Everyone has the right to do stupid things. We consider the matter closed.
Belile, in a June 26 e-mail exchange with conservative blogger Michelle Malkin, which she posted on her Web site, explained the outcome of the investigation.
Although I was reprimanded for performing such a song while in uniform, my rights as an American, to include the First Amendment, have not been compromised. And as long as I am not performing as a U.S. military representative, to put it bluntly, I can sing whatever I want.
I am planning on recording and releasing a professionally produced and engineered version of Hajji Girl which will be aired on the Mike Church [radio] Show, and will be available for sale through their Web site within the coming weeks. I have decided to take this step to show that I am in full support of every Americans right to his or her own freedom of speech, military or civilian, to include my own.
But by June 29, Belile was singing a different tune.
Jimm Mosher, record producer and co-owner of Hit Music Incorporated of Spencer, N.C., said his studio is on retainer for radios internationally syndicated Mike Church Show, which often produces and features satirical songs.
He said Belile was scheduled to record his song there for free until he called and canceled June 29.
James Parker, the shows senior executive producer, said he tapped Mosher to record Belile as an independent artist, outside of the Marines, not as a representative of Marines, but as Josh the civilian.
According to Parker, Belile agreed on the day of his exoneration to record Hajji Girl with the Mike Church Show Band after being advised by Marine officials that he was free to perform the song as long as he didnt do it as a Marine in uniform.
But by the end of the week, according to Mosher, the Corps position had changed.
He told me he couldnt do it at this time because he had talked to his command, Mosher said on Friday. When he phrased it like that, I asked if it was something that would get him in trouble and he said yes.
Col. David Mollahan, commander of Marine Aircraft Group 26, did not respond to a June 29 e-mail asking whether Belile is permitted to perform or record the song, and under what circumstances.
Haney said she couldnt discuss whether or not Belile had been ordered to reverse his decision to record the song, but said that anything that has been done has been done administratively and is therefore not releasable to the public.
When contacted by Marine Corps Times, Belile confirmed that he had canceled the free studio time, but declined to specify whether he had changed his mind or if it had been changed for him.
Eugene Fidell, president of the National Institute of Military Justice, said an order that prevents Belile from performing and recording the song in his off hours certainly raises a First Amendment question in my mind.
They could get him for disobedience, but there is still a question about whether the order is lawful, Fidell said.
#3
The Marines are missing a bet, here. The psyops guys should create an entire album for him to perform. Think "Marine Corps Gangsta Rap". Song after song about how the Marines be the toughest, the baddest, and how they kick it out of cowardly scum who hide behind women and children. Lots of graphic, video-game style violence. Maybe with one power-tragedy ballad that is a triple hankie.
Set up the whole record deal as a serious civilian production, fully funded from some undisclosed source. Give the Corporal his exit papers so the Corps hands are clean; but if he is happy in the Corps, offer him his job back with a promotion and he gets to disappear to some distant corner of the planet, after the hubbub dies down in a year.
With professional production, it is almost guaranteed to hit it big and provoke a media crisis with the left demanding it be banned, etc.
Sucker would go triple platinum. Leave the Ballad of the Green Beret in the dust. Waiting lines at the recruiting office.
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.
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Wednesday reaffirmed Washingtons support for Afghanistan, saying it would not allow the countrys ruthless Taliban enemies to succeed while describing embattled Afghan President Hamid Karzai as one of the worlds most respected leaders. The top US diplomat, who had flown from Pakistan to meet Karzai in Kabul, told a press conference with the Afghan president, following their talks at the presidential palace, that the international community stood behind Kabuls fight against a common enemy that was responsible for attacks around the world. Recognising that both Taliban and Qaeda operatives had changed their tactics, Rice stressed that Kabuls allies were working together to find new strategies against this common thinking enemy. 
Taliban forces fighting US troops in Afghanistan have grown stronger and more sophisticated, and are directing operations from neighbouring Pakistan, a senior US commander said on Wednesday. More than four years into the war in Afghanistan, an operation often overshadowed by the focus on Iraq, the top US commander there said the Taliban has grown in the south and reconstituted itself elsewhere. It is displaying better military command and its leaders remain elusive, he said. The fact remains that were up against an enemy that is able to operate very effectively on both sides of the border, Lt Gen Karl Eikenberry said in testimony to US lawmakers. There are areas that theyre able to stay within and to direct combat operations against ourselves and against the Afghan National Army. 
The ulema of the al-Azhar university, the highest seat of Sunni Muslim learning, have renewed their criticism of suicide bombers, this time underlining how many confuse "suicide" with "martyrdom" in defence of ones faith of country. In Islam, they explained, those who commit suicide are condemned to hell. In this case they are not considered "true Muslims" even if they are pushed to this dramatic gesture by religious motivations. In the pan-Arab daily al-Sharq al-Awsat, Mohammed Rafit Othman, a scholar at al-Azhar explained that there is a "difference between jihad and terrorism" and also "between martyrdom and suicide". He admitted that there was considerable confusion in this point. In fact a suicide bomber commits a mortal crime in that his presumed 'martyrdom' leads to the death "of others", for reasons which are purely political and not religious.
After remaining mum for the past week, even as controversy swirled around newspapers' revealing the banking records surveillance program, the Wall Street Journal editoral page weighed in today. Although the Journal published its own story just hours after The New York Times -- which has taken the most heat -- its editorial defended its own action while blasting the Times. 
The government has set aside Rs 97 million for scholarships in Pakistani universities to 75 Muslims from southern Thailand - both teachers and students. A total of 25 Thai teachers and 50 students would be offered Rs 1.3 million each to stay in Pakistan and do post graduate degrees. The duration of their stay would be 64 months. The project developed by the Higher Education Commission (HEC) has been submitted for approval to the Central Development Working Party(CDWP), which meets here today.
Hamas says it has not agreed to recognise Israel despite a political deal reached with Mahmoud Abbas on Tuesday. Hamas - whose charter calls for the destruction of the Jewish state - rejected any suggestion the deal to end its damaging power struggle with rival Fatah could imply it now accepts Israel's existence.
