BRITISH soldiers enjoy better living quarters in war-torn Afghanistan than back home, a report warns today.
Troops returning from action have to sleep eight to a room in slums with overflowing drains. Angry MPs blame shoddy accommodation on military bases for the growing manpower crisis in the Forces. They say it puts off would-be recruits and drives experienced servicemen and women to quit early.
The "disgraceful" state of housing with a backlog of unattended repairs that will take DECADES to fix is revealed in a damning report by the Commons defence committee.
MPs said of the Elizabeth Barracks in Pirbright, Surrey: We were told soldiers from the Royal Anglian Regiment on deployment in Afghanistan had more comfortable accommodation than their comrades left behind.
The report follows a Sun crusade to improve Forces accommodation and a British Legion plea to ministers to honour the ancient Military Covenant promising soldiers fair treatment.
#1
Of course, the fact that the barracks that the British are using in Afghanistan were built by US Navy Seabees, US Army Special Forces Civil Action troops, or private contractors like KBR or Blackwater is not mentioned.
The phenomenon of exploiting minors by terrorist groups to lead suicide attacks is under consideration by national gendarmerie department and other security corpses.
"We should pass a law, I think."
The head of prevention and public security department, colonel Djamel Abdesslem Zeghida made clear that the dangerous proportions the phenomenon is taking imposes on security services to face it up and got through every nitty-gritty to come up to a deep understanding. Colonel Zeghida further unveiled a series of measures to be taken by the new school year coming as well as the holy month of Ramadan, especially security strengthening to outmanoeuvre the criminal aggressions and limit the delinquent behaviour.
The national gendarmerie services are to take security measures including tightening security near important economic companies especially those who employ foreigners and their suburbs. Porosity of borders is also to be taken care of in order to control the smuggler networks.
Posted by: Fred ||
09/14/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: al-Qaeda in North Africa
The court heard that a large portion of the funds was collected after the December 2004 tsunami
Three men on terror charges have been accused of collecting $1.9 million in charitable donations from Australia's expat Tamil community and using a chunk of the funds to buy electronic and marine equipment similar to that used in suicide bombings. Melbourne Magistrates Court was told yesterday that Aruran Vinayagamoorthy, 33, Sivarajah Yathavan, 36, and Arumugam Rajeevan, 41, formed the Australian arm of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Ealam, also known as the Tamil Tigers. Commonwealth Prosecutor Mark Dean SC said the men were in constant contact with central LTTE command in northern Sri Lanka and formed part of an internationally organised network that provided $50million a year for the terror group.
Mr Dean told the court that $1.9million was deposited into the bank account of an Australian group called the Tamil Co-ordinating Committee, which was the "vehicle" for LTTE money collections in Australia. The court heard that a large portion of the funds was collected after the December 2004 tsunami and that $1.25million was withdrawn from the account in cash.
A Palestinian journalist has warned of a Muslim backlash over the failure of Australian authorities to grant him a visa in time to speak at today's Brisbane Writers Festival. Abdel Bari-Atwan, a best-selling author and among the last Western journalists to interview Osama bin Laden, was cancelled as a speaker at the festival yesterday as he waited for his visa application to be processed.
Atwan, author of The Secret History of al-Qa'ida, accused the Howard Government of discrimination in delaying approval for his visa application, submitted on August 16, after giving notice to authorities of his intention to visit Australia. "I believe this is a deliberate delay because I am an Arab and a Muslim," Atwan said. "It is ridiculous. I am not a terrorist, I am not a drug dealer, I am dealing in words and thoughts."
Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews denied any delay. "His application is currently being assessed and is subject to normal visa processing requirements," he said in a statement.
Normal? NORMAL??? Do you KNOW WHO I AM ????
Mr Andrews' spokeswoman later conceded that Atwan's 1996 interview with bin Laden in Afghanistan would be "a matter for security agencies" in processing his application. "This is not an unusual amount of time for the processing of a visa. He is in queue just like everyone else," she said.
Festival director Michael Campbell said visa applications for other international speakers had, on average, taken just "a few days". "I am appalled and embarrassed in equal parts by this situation," he said.
A self-described moderate, Atwan is editor-in-chief of the London-based Al-Quds Al-Arabi newspaper and a regular guest on the American university circuit and on CNN, BBC and the ABC. He said his visa problems would air throughout the Muslim world. "This could, in fact, incite trouble for Australia because there are a billion-and-a-half Muslims over the world and this will be publicised among those people," he said. "They are not serving the Australian peoples' interests, they are not serving Australian security, they are actually doing the opposite."
Human Rights lawyer Greg Barns, who advised Atwan, said there was no legal reason to deny him a visa.
But there are good reasons to keep him from speaking in Oz, I suspect.
#1
"This could, in fact, incite trouble for Australia because there are a billion-and-a-half Muslims over the world and this will be publicised among those people,"
If that's not a threat, I dunno what is.
Australia!, I demand you slap him round the face, with his shoes no less!, and tell him to bugger off! There will be consequences if you do not! The army of Tone, numbering one, may well feel aggrieved if you do not. This could lead to restrictions on buying Ozzy wine, and perhaps even a delay in returning to your lovely land to spend large quantities of moolah. Oh calamity!.
There. If it works for him, it should work for me.
(When interviewed later on, the Army of Tone confessed that it's highly unlikely they will stop drinking Australian wine or taking holidays in Australia, as "Oz is a top place, the Army has many mates out there". The Army did say however, that they will instead cheer for England against Australia in forthcoming sporting events instead. When it was pointed out that this is what happens anyhow, the interview was terminated abruptly)
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
09/14/2007 0:44 Comments ||
Top||
Crikey!, I'd better get out of this alter-ego, I need to go to work today, and it would not be good for me to start wandering around mumbling about 'the Army of Tone' - although come to think of it ... ;)
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
09/14/2007 0:57 Comments ||
Top||
#4
1.3 billion Muslims but there are 2.0+ Billion christians
Posted by: Boss Craising2882 ||
09/14/2007 2:54 Comments ||
Top||
#5
his visa problems would air throughout the Muslim world.
And this will cause Muslim tourists - er, terrorists, whatever - to leave Oz off their travel itineraries.
#6
I would actually pay to fly Qantas all the way down to OZ just to watch a bunch of silly muzzie terror wannabee's take on the Wallabies in anything, especially a death match. No contest. Why the hell threaten a country founded by bad boyz and pretty much one of the hard-ass countrys around? Picking on the wrong crowd there Abdel.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
09/14/2007 9:13 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Abdel's a Paleo - they're genetically predisposed to impotent rage and blustery threats
Posted by: Frank G ||
09/14/2007 9:38 Comments ||
Top||
No way. Catts at Fly but Barkley and Vickery are out. Tough to handle SA without some meat up front and some speed in the middle. Kicking will not win this match.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
09/14/2007 10:34 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Jack not to mention an 8 that's 40. But still I'd rather see a northern hemisphere win. Except France of course loved the Puma smack last Friday
#11
"I believe this is a deliberate delay because I am an Arab and a Muslim,"
Actually, it's because you're a pompous, self important asshole and we feel like breaking your balls. So sorry...
As far as "Muslim backlash" (shudder), would that be rage, seething, Dire Revenge, explosions, or beheadings, etc. We'd like to put it in the record for the next time you try to come back here.
#12
"I believe this is a deliberate delay because I am an Arab and a Muslim,"
And he'd be right. Few groups other than the Palestinians can take more credit for giving Muslims one helluva a crappy reputation. Suck it up you Islamic scribbler.
#15
"Army of Tone" here. Can we *please* not talk about the rugby :( - basically it's not been the best of days for English sports ... :(
However, thanks for the acclaims Swamp Blondie ;)
As it happens, I was going to Oz in 2006 and found that I couldn't get a visa because my passport only had 6 months on it. Instead of declaring war and preparing an invasion, I renewed my passport instead, spending a pleasant day in Durham in the process.
However, I'm not one of 'the master race', and so don't expect the kuffar to bend over for me.
In short, this guys a tool, needs ignoring or preferably, a good kicking.
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
09/14/2007 17:08 Comments ||
Top||
Sweden yesterday denied that its ambassador to Saudi Arabia apologized to the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) for the publication of a caricature of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) in a Swedish newspaper. According to a statement released to the media on Wednesday by the Jeddah-based organization, it was stated that the Swedish ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Jan Thesleff, met OIC Secretary-General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu on Tuesday in Jeddah and offered his deepest apologies for the controversy created by the publishing of the hurtful depiction.
The Swedish Foreign Ministry, however, immediately denied that the ambassador had made any apology, saying he had only expressed regret.
The Swedish Foreign Ministry, however, immediately denied that the ambassador had made any apology, saying he had only expressed regret. The ambassador repeated his regret at the controversy created by the publication, but not for the publication itself, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Anna Bjorkander was quoted as saying by The Local newspaper of Sweden.
There's a difference between expressing regret and an apology. I don't know the difference between the two but diplomats do. It's their job.
Bjorkander described the OICs interpretation of the meeting as a misunderstanding. She told the Swedish newspaper that Thesleff was dissatisfied that the OIC had said he had apologized, but did not plan to demand that the organization change its statement. He said he is not satisfied with the use of the word apologize, Bjorkander said.
The publication of the caricature in the Swedish newspaper, Nerikes Allehanda, on Aug. 18 sparked anger in the Muslim world, with Egypt, Pakistan and Iran lodging formal protests with the Swedish government. During his meeting with the Swedish ambassador, the OIC chief had conveyed his concerns that this kind of irresponsible and provocative incitement in the name of defending freedom of expression was leading the international community toward more confrontation and division.
Ihsanoglu strongly condemned the newspaper for publishing the blasphemous caricature saying it was an irresponsible and despicable act with malicious and provocative intentions in the name of freedom of expression. The caricature was intended solely to insult and arouse the sentiments of Muslims of the world, he said. The international community was well aware of the serious impact of such publications that were globally felt during the controversy created by the publication of similar cartoons in a Danish newspaper last year, he said.
The Swedish ambassador informed Ihsanoglu that his government had taken careful and serious note of his statement and acted in a proactive manner at an early stage. Sweden feels that the best possible action to resolve the crisis is to choose the path of dialogue, he said and pointed out that Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt had taken immediate steps by offering his personal regrets to the Muslim community in Sweden. Sweden is a country where people of different faiths can live together side by side, the Swedish prime minister said in his statement late last month. The foundation of this, our social model, is mutual respect and understanding, but also a desire for joint repudiation of offensive acts as well as acts of violence or aggression.
While expressing regret, the Swedish prime minister pointed out that Swedens social model is based on the premise that politicians must not pass judgment on freedom of the press and expression.
Ihsanoglu welcomed the prime ministers statement. However, he felt, there was a need for a legal mechanism for stopping the recurrence of such extreme provocation. He said by intentionally offending the sentiments of 1.3 billion Muslims, these caricaturists were leading the international community toward more confrontation and division and providing extremist and deviant ideologies with valuable ammunition.
Posted by: Fred ||
09/14/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: Global Jihad
#1
This isn't really Sweden's colletive responsibility, don't we deserve a Saudi 9/11 apOlogy btw
Posted by: Boss Craising2882 ||
09/14/2007 3:00 Comments ||
Top||
#2
This is the appropriate apology: "I'm sorry you are offended by this cartoon."
#3
This was my apology after the Pope Benedict kerfuffle-do-jour. It's short, so I'll put the whole thing in:
So, Pope Benedicts apology for having the temerity to point out that Islam is kinda, sorta, just a tad bit on the violent and coercive side, and that such coercion is something that Christians do not find logically defensible is not acceptable?
Well, since it was one of those Im sorry you were offended by what I said sort of apologies, yeah, I can see that you have the right to seeth and whine, and burn churches and shoot elderly nuns in the back. So, how about a real apology
I am so sorry that you lunkheads wouldnt know a logical theological disputation if it up and bit you on the butt.
I am sorry that large numbers of you are so illiterate that you believe any old load of old shoes that the imam tells you in the Friday sermon.
I am sorry that most of you have an overdeveloped sense of entitlement, and an underdeveloped sense of logic, technological skills, and smell.
I am sorry that a fair number of you want to turn Western Europe right back into the disease ridden, violence plagued, and autocratically ruled hellholes that you crawled out of.
I am sorry that your much-vaunted Caliphate was built, and maintained by a reliance on treachery, war, plunder, and the brutal oppression and economic skinning of various conquered peoples, and that when what had been conquered was squeezed dry, and the march of Islamic armies towards new sources of plunder was halted, it still took a couple of hundred years for it to rot from the inside.
I am sorry that your standing armies cant fight their way out of a wet paper bag, and that a nation and people you despise hand your own asses to you on a silver platter, every damn time. That must be so depressing for you try valium.
I am sorry that all you have is a lot of oil, and limitless reserves of resentment. Wait until the oil runs out, my little desert chickadees, and there is no more money to buy western technology, medical treatments, and all those pretty baubles that you cant build yourself because the education of your best minds (such as they are) is focused on memorizing the Koran!
I am sorry that I have to open the internet pages and read about Australians being blown up in Bali, teachers in Thailand being beheaded, the rape of Scandinavian school girls, the burning of cars in Paris suburbs, Afghan and Iraqi children blown up by car bombs, Spanish and English commuters exploded by bombs in backpacks left on trains, ad nauseum.
I am sorry you cant just stay in the 7th century and leave the rest of us the hell alone.
OK, is that better, as apologies go? Youre welcome. I live to serve.
#9
Beautiful! From another B5 fan. Have you seen the direct to DVD B5 episodes that came out in July? I enjoyed them.
Posted by: Titus Hayes4699 ||
09/14/2007 15:58 Comments ||
Top||
#10
I haven't, TH... I'm only a poor starving writer!I need to sell another 1,999,980 copies of "To Truckee's Trail" before I can even think of frivolities like buying the B-5 DVD set.
I do have the complete run taped from broadcast TV, which sufficies for now!
Posted by: Mike ||
09/14/2007 13:52 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
A few things come to mind:
1. Did anyone else notice the two pointed references to the "Thruthers" B.O. problem?
2. None of them look like structural engineers to me.
3. How many of them have prior experience with G-8 Summit meetings, International ANSWER, San Francisco addresses, Meth labs, Ron Paul and Lyndon LaRouche.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
09/14/2007 14:02 Comments ||
Top||
You might wonder whether the President of the United States pays any attention to blogs supporting the war effort. Is he aware of the contribution that milblogs and new media more generally are making to the effort to educate the American public on the war and convince them of the necessity of victory?
You can stop wondering. I am here today to happily report that he is indeed aware, and does indeed appreciate the work bloggers are doing.
This morning, I had the privledge of being among a small group of eight bloggers invited to the White House for a personal meeting with the President. We spent a full hour in the Roosevelt Room with President Bush and a few senior staff, including both outgoing press secretary Tony Snow and incoming press secretary Dana Perino. In addition to the folks in the room, we had two embedded bloggers videoconferenced in from Baghdad. After the discussion, the President showed us into the Oval Office, did some quick photos which each of us, and then led us out to the patio where he continued out to Marine One and we watched him take off while the assembled press watched us, clearly wondering "who the heck are those people?".
Not surprisingly, the President did not break any news with us, but he did have a few great comments and was overall just as engaging in person as I had expected him to be. The biggest impression I came away with is best expressed in a thought that occured to me during the session, which was that anyone who sat through an hour with this man as I did and came away unconvinced that he sincerely believes in the message of freedom and the necessity of this fight would have to be crazy. More juicy details at the Victory Caucus blog. Just click on the headline above to go straight there. Enjoy!
This story appeared in the Boston Herald this morning. I did not hear the speech myself until just prior to posting of this story. A link to the video of speech follows at the bottom.
Gov. Deval Patrick yesterday tried to put to rest controversy about his Sept. 11 memorial service speech, saying he never meant to imply that the United States bears any responsibility for the terrorist attack six years ago.
The Democratic governor had been criticized by the states Republican party chief and the prominent brother of a Sept. 11 victim for saying Tuesday that the terrorist attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people resulted from a failure of human understanding.
Let me be clear. I dont think that America bears any fault for the attack on us on 9/11, and I dont think that any of the family members with whom I spoke heard it or saw it that way, Patrick said during an appearance on WTKK-FM radio yesterday. Several callers challenged Patrick, who at one point said he felt no need to apologize.
I was there, I know what I said. I was as clear as possible in condemning the terrorist attacks, and I hope Im clear right now, he said.
He later told another critical caller: If you or anyone else heard me to say anything other than a total condemnation of terrorist attacks on 9/11 and since on the United States or on Americans, you are hearing something other than what I intend, and I am sorry for that.
#1
I wish I could say he's a bad governor, or a mediocre governor, or something. But he's...nothing. There's nothing there. And he's totally clueless about it. Probably thinks he's doing a helluva job.
The guy's not even smoke and mirrors, he's vapor.
#4
Isn't this typical demcraot playbook crapola? Grab headlines with BS and then at some later time do the "i didn't mean what I said" speech that gets buried somewher behind the obits and leagl notices; but it garners them the all important sound bite for the newsomercials????
#6
In a way he's right: how can us (humans) understand them (neanderthal cave men aliens from outer space). The problem he has is that he can't explain who he was talking about. Who was it that failed the "understanding" part? If it was us, then he was criticizing America and lied, again. It it was them that failed "understanding" then who was it they didn't understand, Us? See, he is a worm in a tube without any exit. But Mass. gets exactly what they deserve just like in Senators and Congressmen.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
09/14/2007 14:07 Comments ||
Top||
#7
But Mass. gets exactly what they deserve just like in Senators and Congressmen.
One of the main reasons I left and am never going back.
Posted by: Steve ||
09/14/2007 14:11 Comments ||
Top||
#8
But he's...nothing. There's nothing there.
He makes Dukakis look like Reagan...
Thanks for your input, tu3031 and Raj - I thought I was the only one who noticed ... or didn't notice. I've been calling him Gov. Zero for some time, myself.
Rudy Giuliani, the Republican presidential candidate, is working hard to claim his place as the Republicans leading hawk. The former New York City mayor recently announced the latest choice to join his presidential campaign team is neoconservative Daniel Pipes.
Pipes is viewed by many as anti-Muslim. Ahmed Rehab, the director general for CAIR, the Council of American Islamic Relations in Chicago, wrote last week in Media Monitors Network: Daniel Pipes is as much a scholar on Islam and Muslims as David Duke is a scholar on Judaism and Jews. Pipes is wedded to his personal political agenda to such a point that it dominates his worldview invalidating his ability to act as a neutral scholar on Muslim-related topics.
In his article, entitled: The Islamophobe Who Cried Islamist, Rehab writes: For Pipes, a bad Muslim is a Muslim who challenges his views on Israel and a good Muslim is one who agrees with them; in his scholarly lingo, the code terms are Islamist and moderate respectively. The fact that Pipes is taken seriously by anyone is an indication of how low the bar of discourse on Islam is today. With fear and suspicion clouding reason and critical thinking, it is not difficult for a Harvard graduate with a grim face and a set of intriguing theories to wrestle some media attention.
Giulianis choices are unusual: Last week he announced that he had hired Mideast hawk Norman Podhoretz as a foreign policy adviser. Podhoretz, one of the founders of the neoconservative movement, an unwavering supporter of the war against Iraq, has been in the headlines in recent months as one of most vocal proponents of American military action against Iran.
Giulianis team of foreign policy advisers already has several prominent neoconservatives. His eight-member advisory panel also includes several figures with experience in Israeli affairs. The news of Giulianis right-wing team has caused alarm in many circles. Ken Silverstein wrote in Harpers Magazine, that Pipes is further out ideologically than any other of the already ideologues working with the Giuliani campaign.
In an earlier piece, Silverstein quoted Augustus Richard Norton, a Middle East scholar who had been an adviser to the Iraq Study Group, who said: What I find fascinating, is how skewed this team seems to be in terms of the regional focus. ... There is no real expertise on Africa, Asia, Latin America, or much of Europe. This seems to beg the question of the criteria used by Giuliani in assembling his foreign policy advisors.
Another of Giulianis foreign policy advisers, Charles Hill, served as a top aide to Secretary of State George Shultz in the Reagan administration and once served as political counselor to the American Embassy in Tel Aviv. The team also includes Martin Kramer, an Islamic Affairs professor at Harvard University and a fellow with both the pro-Israel Washington Institute for Near East Policy and the Jerusalem-based Shalem Center.
Posted by: Fred ||
09/14/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: Global Jihad
#1
Sometimes it would be helpful to add a hi-lite noting the source of the article that's being abstracted. That way I don't have waste my time finding out who wrote this tripe.
Arab News, forsooth.
Posted by: Black Charlie Snerenter8619 ||
09/14/2007 0:17 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Charlie, just hover your mouse pointer over the article title. Most browsers will show the link, and that's how you know. Different browsers show said link in different ways. AoS.
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/14/2007 0:50 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Arab establishment uncomfortable with Rudy's advisors? Sounds good to me.
Nice, preposterous slander with the Pipes/Duke comparison. Also, check out the "war against Iraq". Hmmm, who would be behind that? Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria, Iran? I mean, that's where the money/weapons/human garbage come from to slaughter Iraqis, destroy infrastructure, block reconstruction. Meanwhile, the US and a few allies try to help build a civlized country.
Still waiting to find out what meaning "neoconservative" has. I'm sure someone will enlighten me some time. I have come to interpret the mere use of the word as confirmation of both 1) cluelessness on strategy and 2) a suspicious obsession with Izr'l, and perhaps even with folks of the hebraic persuasion
#4
Pipes, Podhoretz and Kramer? (I'm not familiar with Mr. Hill.) I am quite, quite impressed. Mr. Giuliani should be pretty much up to speed on Latin America -- the government of Mexico hired him as a consultant about establishing anti-terrorism measures and other things after he retired as mayor of New York City.
Giuliani and Thompson both get it... and they are first and second in the polls. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama choose not to, but at this point they're like two hamsters, trying their best to disembowel one another in front of the watching children. (Sorry, I was one of the watching children, back in the day. The image, and the sound of them screeching at each other, haunts me still. I don't remember how many times I was bitten, trying to pull the idiot rodents apart.
The only pets we ever had that I was glad to see shed this earthly coil.)
#15
Verlaine, prior to 911, the big money Jews were in the main liberals who even held back Israel whenever they wanted to pulverize paleos for various reasons. Then, along comes a serious attack right on the front porch. They turned anti-Islam within minutes, and thus gained the prefix neo meaning new. They are not conservatives like most of us, but Jews with a brain know a war that MUST be won as well as we. So, the brain dead left came up with the term neocons to slander their former buds. It doesn't work. Most of us welcome neocons and even late comers to the logical view that Islam must end.
"The only explanation that makes sense is that he's fallen in love with a much younger goat."
Al
Posted by: Frozen Al ||
09/14/2007 19:01 Comments ||
Top||
#2
The possibility/scenario remains that Osama is truly alive, i.e. that he did indeed escape Tora Bora, but that he is suffering from serious health afflictions, e.g. from kidney dialysis complications - in any case, the man I remember from the anti-Soviet/Commie Afghan war would want to fight to the end no matter his personal health status.
THE Pentagon has drawn up plans for massive airstrikes against 1,200 targets in Iran, designed to annihilate the Iranians' military capability in three days, according to a national security expert.
Alexis Debat, director of terrorism and national security at the Nixon Center, said last week that US military planners were not preparing for "pinprick strikes" against Iran's nuclear facilities. "They're about taking out the entire Iranian military," he said.
Debat was speaking at a meeting organised by The National Interest, a conservative foreign policy journal. He told The Sunday Times that the US military had concluded: "Whether you go for pinprick strikes or all-out military action, the reaction from the Iranians will be the same." It was, he added, a "very legitimate strategic calculus".
This article was linked on Drudge and prompted a big-time lefty freakout. At the time, I was highly skeptical that this guy would be in any position to know what U.S. military was planning to do about Iran. That was before learning about his serial fabrications. At this point it's hard to believe any story based on this guy's word.
A former ABC News consultant fired last year because he couldn't authenticate academic credentials is at the center of a new dispute over apparently faked interviews with Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Bill Gates and others.
The consultant, Alexis Debat, quit the Nixon Center, a Washington think tank, on Wednesday after Obama's representatives claimed an interview with the senator appearing under Debat's byline in the French magazine Politique Internationale never took place. The interview quoted the Democratic presidential candidate as saying the Iraq war was "a defeat for America."
Pelosi, Gates, former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg all said they never gave interviews that appeared in the magazine under Debat's byline, ABC News' Web site, the Blotter, reported on Thursday.
Debat acknowledged to The Associated Press on Thursday that he never conducted any of the interviews published under his byline. He said he hired another reporter, Rob Sherman, to conduct the Obama interview. He said he translated the remarks and sent them in to the French journal, which published it under Debat's byline. . . .
Politique Internationale editor and political scientist Patrick Wajsman . . . called Debat "a grand liar" and said he had hired a lawyer to pursue "all possible measures" against him. "We are the first victims. I am falling from the moon," he told The AP. "We were betrayed." . . .
Posted by: Mike ||
09/14/2007 09:09 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This is why I don't trust anything coming from the MSM anymore.
#3
There was a time, apparently long since passed, when you could tell the difference between the news, editorials and a bunch of guys making shit up. Makes you wonder if we are just seeing the tip of the iceberg here.
Lots of handwringing in this article, but there are a few nuggets of gold, including one nice one at the end.
When Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was strapped down to the water-board, he felt humiliated -- not by the treatment but by the fact that a woman, a red-headed CIA supervisor, was allowed to witness the spectacle, a former intelligence officer told ABC News.
The al Qaeda mastermind, known as KSM, stubbornly held out for about two minutes -- far longer than any of the other "high-value" terror targets who were subjected to the technique, the harshest from a list of six techniques approved for use by the CIA and Bush administration lawyers, sources said. Then KSM started talking, in idiomatic English he learned as a high school foreign exchange student and polished at a North Carolina college in the 1980s, sources said.
"It was an extraordinary amount of time for him to hold out," one former CIA officer told ABCNews.com. "A red-headed female supervisor was in the room when he was being water-boarded. It was humiliating to him. So he held out."
"Then he started talking, and he never stopped," this former officer said. KSM was never water-boarded again, and in hours and hours of conversation with his interrogators, often over a cup of tea, he poured out his soul and the murderous deeds he committed. "He was sitting across the table from his interrogator, and he just blurted out, 'I killed Daniel Pearl. I killed him Hahal (slit his throat in a ritual fashion).' There was no water-boarding, no belly slapping; just two guys sitting across the table having a cup of tea."
Water-boarding consists of strapping an individual to an inclined board with the person's head slightly lower than the feet and pouring water over the face to simulate drowning. It triggers a gag reflex and can make a person believe death is near. Water-boarding has been denounced as 'torture' by human rights groups and many U.S. officials, including Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who likened it to a mock execution.
But what if that one episode of water-boarding KSM had not occurred? It is a question at the center of the debate over the harshest technique in the CIA's repertoire that has raged for three years now, a time frame, intelligence officials note, in which the technique has not been used.
Would the agency have eventually worn KSM down? Would the confessions have poured forth about Daniel Pearl's beheading, about his role in the 1995 plot by his nephew, master bomber Ramzi Yousef, to assassinate Pope John Paul II during a visit to Manila, and detailed information about his role as mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks?
In the case of 9/11, U.S. intelligence officials were in the dark as to how exactly it was plotted because at the time KSM brought the idea to Osama bin Laden, the al Qaeda terrorist leader had just stopped using mobile telephones after media reports raised suspicions they were monitored by U.S. intelligence.
"If one water-board session got him to talk, you could have gotten him to talk (without it), given time and patience," said Brad Garrett, an ABC News consultant and former FBI agent. Garrett has 30 years of experience interrogating terrorists such as Yousef, the Pakistani man who killed two CIA employees at the gates to the agency's Langley, Va. headquarters in 1994 and hundreds of violent criminals. "If in fact it's true that they water-boarded him once and then he started talking and provided reliable information, then he falls under the category of the small minority of people on whom it works. But torture seldom works. Most people start talking...to get the pain to stop," Garrett said.
But in many cases, the harsh intelligence techniques led to questionable confessions and downright lies, say officers with firsthand knowledge of the program. That included statements that al Qaeda was building dirty bombs. "It is true that the person who was saying the nuke stuff said it under pressure. The analysts believed it was not true; it did not conform to other information," one former intelligence officer told ABC News.
As these targets were subjected to the increasingly harsh interrogation methods -- in some cases including water-boarding -- KSM sat in his cell in Poland, writing poetry in English, writing letters to the president and to the head of the CIA, and debating the merits of Christianity and Islam with his captor.
"Using torture says that we aren't any better than countries that historically tortured people. What are we telling the world about the United States?" Garrett, who has lectured on the subject of interrogation and torture and the perception of a nation, asked.
And just yesterday, an intelligence source told ABC News that the dapper man behind the most successful terror plot against America was not rumpled and disheveled when he was apprehended. He was as well-kept as ever. But the CIA, conscious of the propaganda value of appearance, messed his hair and pulled his shirt from his pants, leaving us with the image of KSM we have today, and according to days of NSA intercepts, leaving his fellow al Qaeda terrorists chagrined over the changes to their esteemed colleague.
Now that was a smooth move.
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/14/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[16 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Thought they plucked him in the middle of the night. He was wearing a tux then was he?
#2
"Using torture says that we aren't any better than countries that historically tortured people. What are we telling the world about the United States?"
OK, answer me two questions: Why does the US us "torture"? When you're done wringing your hands over that one, please tell me why terrorists use torture?
See the difference?
Now for a question that's been bugging me for some time: How does KSM know where to stop shaving?
#3
Kill 3ooo people, you have the right to be tortUred
Posted by: Boss Craising2882 ||
09/14/2007 2:41 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Sorry, Mr. Garrett, it's not about you, or your moral narcissism, or their extension - what "others think" about the US. It's about results.
Look, there's a large German industrial city. Go destroy it and kill many of its inhabitants, tomorrow, that's an order. OK.
Look, there are several million Japanese civilians who must be killed by bombing to break the Jap war machine and system. OK.
And the nation that did those things, Mr. Garrett, founded the UN, fought and defeated totalitarianism in various forms, invented human rights as an international cause, liberated millions and provided the spark of hope to many millions more, went to the moon, invented information technology and communications that changed lives everywhere, broke down the barriers of feudal and other dead-end economic systems, invented and to this day is the driving force behind humanitarian relief - and that's just a sampling. All of it by the same nation that slaughtered millions of civilians, rightly, and without hesitation, to serve the greater good for all concerned.
Mr. Garrett, did you know that one of the victims of the Abu Ghraib abuse (was it 4 or 5 hours on one night, I can't recall - oh, and some scary dog sessions, call Robert Conquest and Solzhenitsyn, they'll have to junk everything they've written and recalibrate their moral-historical scales to include this galactic barbarism that stretched over a couple of days and harmed no one), a Shi'ite Iraqi, had expressed a desire to immigrate to the US following his release? Hmmm - what to make of that, Mr. Garrett? Guess that even he has the ability to reason. An actual VICTIM of the horrible Americans whose fondest desire in the aftermath was to .... become an American.
If poorly educated Iraqi Shi'ites caught up in a detention operation can reason so clearly about America's moral character, Mr. Garrett, why can't people like you? NOT a rhetorical question.
Moral narcissism is contemptible in its own right. It is altogether more despicable when it's merely a cheap shield to protect one from the pressures and responsibilities of making moral decisions and choices. Just as an enemy combatant can be shot down on sight in war, without any due process or rights whatsoever, illegal combatants who may pose threats to large numbers of non-combatants can be treated any way that removes that threat. Common sense.
Garrett and Co. should take their moral narcissism and focus it on some exruciating ethical dilemmas like embryonic stem cells. Their histrionics concerning interrogation of terrorists are vapid and unimpressive. (Sorry, Sen. McCain, so are yours - "moral authority" is an inherently fallacious concept, as principles are above and apart from people, but to equate abuse intended to produce propaganda value from legitimate uniformed POWs and attempts to extract operational info from mass murdering terrorist illegal combatants is either plain stupid or calls into question your good faith).
Apologies for the .... uh, well, see title of website.
#6
Using torture says that we aren't any better than countries that historically tortured people.
This is the very worst sort of moral relativism. I'll be the first to go on record as defying such nonsense. America has the finest track record in all history of treating its prisoners of war in a humane fashion. I could care less that "water-boarding" may well even represent some sort of torture.
The fate of modern civilization is at stake and its salvation does not hinge upon whether some incredibly evil people suffer in the process of preserving it.
Cast reciprocity aside, for one surely knows that Islam willingly exceed honor's boundaries at the drop of a hat. Cast aside all notions of individual rights or common decency because these things simply do not exist for our enemy. Cast aside all concept of humanity because this is exactly what we are fighting: Namely, the single most inhumane and malignant entity known to modern man.
If we are not willing to discard all previous known restraints, we may well become the victim of our own humanity. Islam does not flinch at perverting the very finest concepts of dignity and courtesy into weapons to be turned against us without a moment's hesitation.
Welcome to the ultimate betrayal of all integrity. It's name is taqiyya and it marches under the banner of Islam. This one single tactic epitomizes the core of deceit and treachery that all Muslims willingly resort to in their attempt at overturning a millennia of Western progress.
Does anyone sincerely think that we are at risk of losing our souls in defending ourselveswith any means possibleagainst those who seek to reverse the dearly won results of a thousand years' struggle against barbarism?
This foe is so vile that there is no possible way for Western civilization to sink lower than Islam in our efforts to defeat it.
#8
I guess I'm going to be the far outlier in this Rantburg bell curve. I find the tactic of waterboarding, and the discussion that has sprung from it above, quite odious.
Waterboarding is not just "a professional interrogation technique", as the government describes it. It's torture. I find it abhorrent.
I live in Tallinn, about two blocks from the former KGB "interrogation" house. Waterboarding was a preferred sport of Stalin's goons.
They liked to loosen up "enemies of the people" by putting them in a room where you had to stand on a platform for days. The platform was about the size of a stool. The area around the platform was surrounded by cold water. Fall off the platform, and you get soaked. Then you got the waterboarding afterwards.
So I guess, definitionally, since waterboarding isn't torture, neither is the cold room.
But it's not about what people think, right? -- it's about "results." People that kill 3000 deserve what they get, after all.
I can't sign up for that. Instead, I accept the word of John McCain, who says it's torture. I decided in 2000 that I would never vote for the man, but I honor his service. I think he might -- just might -- have more of an insight into the difference between 'interrogation techniques' and 'torture' than some of the keyboard warriors of Rantburg.
Shiat, even the Israelis don't do this. They're under a hell of a lot more "ticking bomb" scenarios than we are, and they've found it counterproductive. My citation is Mark Bowden's excellent article "The Dark Art of Interrogation" in the Oct. 2003 Atlantic Monthly. You have to be a subscriber to get the entire article, but this is the start: Bowden
They've found many ways to psychologically co-opt their sworn enemies. And none of them involve physical violence of any sort.
Don't get me wrong. I don't cry for KSM. He is human vermin. I do a happy dance every time I think about him rotting in Colorado's SuperMax.
But we need to be better than some of this medieval shiat. At best, like with KSM, we get pretty good stuff (although it's been suggested that he was lying when he said he was involved with Pearl's death), and then we get the "not so best", like Abu Ghraib.
IMO, living outside the U.S., there has not been one more single, destructive event in world opinion regarding Iraq than that one. You invade a country without them crossing the border, you better damn well have the moral high ground. Abu Ghraib is when we lost it. And we're still struggling to get back to where we were before.
We are the farkin' USA (Hell, yeah), dammit. We're better than this shiat.
/End Rant
//Flame-retardant suit on
///agree with Steve - The wife-beater hair-mussed agitprop is the best detail of this article. That's how you win the propaganda war ...
#9
This foe is so vile that there is no possible way for Western civilization to sink lower than Islam in our efforts to defeat it.
No. You're dead wrong on that, Zen. Dead wrong.
Any civilization, any culture, any person can, if they rationalize it, justify actions that sink lower and lower over time. Any one.
Many years ago my father, whose family suffered greatly under the Communists, told me, "It could happen here too, if people start telling themselves that their cause is so important it trumps all moral issues."
Many years later, having seen it in some places, I realize how wise he was. The Soviets practiced hideous torture on political enemies, including the deliberate use of drugs to drive people mad, then letting the person go through horrid withdrawl only to start it up again.... And that doesn't count the physical tortures.
The Nazi horrors need little recounting.
But maybe it's worth remembering what has happened in the jungles of Columbia/Venezuela under FARC, or in the cocaine gangs in Mexico, or what the IRA did again and again in Ireland.
Islamcism needs squashing, hard. Their combination of fundamentalist fanaticism combined with tribal practices is particularly hideous.
But you make a fatal mistake if you think that there couldn't ever be the same degree of barbarism in the West. It's not all that long since a Queen of England applauded merrily while watching William Wallace be drawn and quartered while alive. Or since the burning of heretics at the stake in Europe. Or since the brutal and often fatal shipments of slaves to America.
That it HASN'T happened here - yet, at any rate - is due to a lot of people walking a knife's edge balancing morality with a desire to protect us.
Many of them never sleep well afterwards - which is how it should be.
I sincerely believe that you underestimate just how incredibly evil Islam is, lotp. I also believe that you overestimate the fragility of America's inherent decency. Do you honestly believe that we could ever permanently descend to Islam's current level of inhumanity in the effort to defeat it? If so, I will venture that you have a niggardly estimation of just how durable and substantial America's core values are. Thank goodness we live in a country where we can agree to disagree.
#11
The Abu Ghraib humiliations never bothered me. Dehumanization serves to induce moral ambiguity in the subject, causing them to break off loyalties. However, I am with the civil libertarians as far as keeping conditioned evidence out of the courts.
#12
No, I don't underestimate Islamicism. I've been in the Middle East.
Do I think we are at that point of vileness? No.
Do I believe that there is no possible way for Western civilization to sink lower than Islam in our efforts to defeat it?
No - I think that is an incredibly naive and dangerous thought to comfort yourself with.
My Israeli friends agree - men and women who have fought for Israel's survival over many long years.
My friends in the intel world agree too. And those in law enforcement. And so too the soldiers I've talked to who have been on patrol in Ramadi, Fallujah, Kandahar. Who've called in air strikes on houses where they knew there were children. Who've had to make an instantaneous decision about whether to shoot or not, risking the possible death of US soldiers or the possible murder of innocents. And yes, there are innocents in the Muslim world.
Zen, you tend to see things in black and white. It's comforting to try to make sense of the world that way. All well and good for rallying the keyboard troops here at the Burg.
But in the real world, real men and women have to find their way through situations where the facts aren't nearly so clear as the online crowd imagines. And where the struggle to both be effective and to save their own souls and self respect is an ongoing one.
You do them ill justice if you fail to realize that part of what makes this society worth defending is the service of those who are willing to take on that hugely difficult balancing act during unconventional warfare and the long civilizational struggle.
The rise of a group convinced that their cause justifies murder, torture, intimidation: it could happen here. We're not close to it. And it's true that PC tactics on the left are making the balancing act harder and harder to manage.
But don't kid yourself that we could not see the rise of such a movement here at some point in the future.
#15
In a war like this we need ways to get information from uncooperative subjects. And often we need it quickly. Ice cream sundaes aren't going to do it.
Having never endured it I don't understand why waterboarding works, but apparantly it does. It also seems to do so without causing lasting physical damage. This seems to distinguish it from most other practices we call torture (electric drills through the kneecaps etc.) I don't LIKE using it, but if it works, and works better than other techniques, I would do it.
If there was some drug that worked better I'd use it, and no doubt be castigated for it. (Of course neurologic drugs often cause permanent and/or recurring psychological damage - not that one could tell, with these guys.)
To me the problem is not the specific use of the waterboard technique, but the likelihood its use will become something casual, and its practitioners will become damaged themselves.
All that said, how is it that we find out about this stuff? And how much of what we find out is truth and how much is disinformation? If I wanted to improve my interrogation efficiency, I think I might want to spread the word that I had a technique that would terrify, that would cause even the strongest to crack in minutes, and that would be undetectable later - make the prisoners both fear the possibility and be encouraged to talk without using it because no one could resist in the end anyway.
#18
From Just and Unjust Wars, one of several books discussed in the ethics classes at West Point:
The world of necessity is generated by a conflict between collective survival and human rights ... Thomas Nagel has described our situation at such a time in terms of a conflict between utilitarian and absoutist modes of thought: we know that there are some outcomes that must be avoided at all costs, and we know that there are some costs that can never rightly be paid.
We must face the possibility, Nagel argues, "that these two forms of moral intuition are not capable of being brought together into a single, coherent moral system, and that the world can present us with situations in which there is no honorable or moral course for a man to take, no course free of guilt and responsibility for evil."
I (ed. the author, David Warren) have tried to avoid the stark indeterminacy of that description by suggesting that political leaders can hardly help but choose the utilitarian side of the dilemna. That is what they are there for. They must opt for collective survival and override those rights that have suddenly loomed as obstacles to survival.
But I do not want to say, any more than Nagel does, that they are free of guilt when they do that. Were there no guilt involved, the decisions they make would be less agonizing than they are.
And they can only prove their honor by accepting responsibility for those decisions and by living out the agony. A moral theory that made their life easier, or that concealed their dilemna from the rest of us, might achieve greater coherence but it would miss or repress the reality of war.
Warren was looking back at the firebombings of Dresden, at Hiroshima and at My Lai when he wrote that, but it's applicable today as well IMO.
#19
Mizzou doesn't need censoring - he has every right to present a different perspective. You all think we can win this thing with a one-way only approach? I agree with McCain about torture. Anyone who has gone through advanced SERE school (especially the R part) knows what I mean. This is purely CIA conventional wisdom. None of these guys spent 6 years being systematically tortured (I mean real physical torture) and still not given up the ghost. McCain and his fellow POW's did and survived and stayed honorable. They were strong - KSM was and is weak. You have to be weak to be an AQ type to begin with. Yeah, you can be clever and ruthless but that doesn't mean you are strong and resistant. I still say you can break these guys without torture but you can demonstrate it to them, show them what is in wait for them, etc. It may take a little time but torture never works on a strong determined patriot like McCain and it sure is not necessary for a scumbag like KSM and his ilk.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
09/14/2007 9:31 Comments ||
Top||
#20
Mr Mizzou Maffia
I was born in a land where terrorists didn't doubt a second in implaing babies like me, in machinegunning mery-go-rounds the kind I went there years later, to detonate bombs in front of schols and kindergartens like the one I assisted to or in trying to blow school busses (the kind, I fortunately didn't use because I lived close to school). I would probably be dead if some people hadn't thought that protecting babies from being killed was more important than being chivalrous with people who had no sense not merely of chivalry but of common decency.
So Mr Mizzou Maffia I suugest you go to a jihadist site and preach them about Genava conventions (BTW Geneva Conventions are based on reciprocity: if you violate them then the nenemy is no longer restrained), torture and so on instead of trying to tie the hands of the good guys. In the interim I suggest you put your moralistic speech where the sun doesn't shine.
#21
Methinks somebody is trying to drive the first Spike nail in Mizzous coffin, for some reason.
Posted by: Mike N. ||
09/14/2007 9:53 Comments ||
Top||
#22
Jack is Back said:
It may take a little time but torture never works on a strong determined patriot like McCain and it sure is not necessary for a scumbag like KSM and his ilk.
Only problem is that while you take your time, bombs are exploding, complices are escaping and innocents are dying.
Point to one instance where we had someone with prior knowledge and something bad happened because we did not torture the thruth out of them? Just one. Names, dates and event is all I want.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
09/14/2007 10:39 Comments ||
Top||
#24
The Clinton administration comes to mind.
The murder and coverup of Vincent Foster.
The murder and coverup of Ron Brown.
I'm not going on, but I would require their passing a water board inquiry before I vote for a democrat.
#25
But in the real world, real men and women have to find their way through situations where the facts aren't nearly so clear as the online crowd imagines. And where the struggle to both be effective and to save their own souls and self respect is an ongoing one.
Please do not think for one second that I have no appreciation for their efforts and sacrifices. If their experience dictates other than my perceptions I will certainly reconsider what I believe.
You do them ill justice if you fail to realize that part of what makes this society worth defending is the service of those who are willing to take on that hugely difficult balancing act during unconventional warfare and the long civilizational struggle.
Every single soldier and citizen is supposed to be guided by their own conscience and rationality as they pick their way through this moral minefield. I have no desire to undermine our military's efficacy or the public's ability to contribute constructively.
The rise of a group convinced that their cause justifies murder, torture, intimidation: it could happen here. We're not close to it.
I'm really glad you think so, as do I.
And it's true that PC tactics on the left are making the balancing act harder and harder to manage.
Here you get to the crux of the matter. Politically Correct thinkingand the Multicultural poison that it is usually handmaiden tois far more likely to summon forth abject cruelty and viciousness than even the most hawkish elements of our society.
Cultural relativism and morral equivalency continue to fetter our military's appropriate role in vanquishing this nation's enemies. It is this dawdling about that best guarantees a descent into barbarity. As we delayout of misplaced humanity where none is forthcoming in returnall that this self-imposed interregnum serves to do is increase the butcher's bill.
Senator McCain experienced torture at a level of savagery that I have no intention of supporting. Nowhere do we need to mix small white pebbles into cooked rice so that POWs would crack their teeth if they ate normally. Nowhere do we need to coerce POWs or detainees to assist in the manufacture of propaganda against their home country. Nowhere do we need to impose deprivation and intense suffering brought on by untreated disease and malnutrition. Most especially, nowhere do we need to apply such intensely vicious measures across the board as did the Viet Cong. It is precisely that sort of inhumanity we are fighting.
That in no way prohibits us from applying excruciating force or coercion against key terrorist operatives in the pursuit of organizational information or pending attacks. There is a huge difference between these two approaches and little risk of one blurring into the other.
As Wafa Sultan noted, we are not engaged in a clash of religions or civilizations but are instead battling against a mentality that is more at home in the Middle Ages. Victory is not an option, it is the only way civilization is going to survive.
While I continue to hope that the West's population obtains some moral clarity from our excessively humane efforts at containing Islam, none appears to be forthcoming. There seems to be an almost willful aversion to this clarity. Consider the North Carolina principal who banned all flagseven the Stars and Stripesat school on 9-11 so that educators would not be forced to pick one flag over another. So it appears with much of the West. Rather than exercise reason in the comparison of Islam and modern progressive culturea task that quickly polarizes perceptionsthey would simply prohibit all discussion of the matter as if that avoidance somehow constitutes problem-solving.
This is precisely what will increase the use of torture. Prevented from applying conventional military force, Islam's asymmetric assault upon the West will require less and less conventional means to combat it. If we were making the necessary inroads against Islam's power structure, I would not be typing these words.
Instead, out of an erroneous delicacy and completely mistaken sense of ownership in terms of who should be putting Islam's house in order, we are hastening ever more horrendous atrocities. Were we to have the courage to begin targeted killings of Islam's clerical, academic and financial elite it would obviate almost all need for torture. Instead, we so severely constrain ourselves that intelligence becomes of monumental importance because so many other measures intentionally are made unavailable.
Nothing could be more clear than the need to permanently eradicate political Islam in its most prominent form: Islamic theocracy. That we continue to countenance shari'a law and turn a blind eye to its manifold abuse of human rights represents signal failure in comprehending the threat we face. It is this continued refusal to confront reality that will drive the use of or need for torture.
Until we overcome this wholly inappropriate squeamishness I'll merely paraphrase Dennis Miller:
If defeating Islam requires hooking up known terrorists to car batteries, I have only two things to say:
#26
I've been on record before about this, and I posted the article because I thought it was interesting. I shouldn't be surprised that we rekindled a debate.
For the record, Mike S., Mizzou Mafia is nowhere close to being banned. He presents a viewpoint that I, for one, agree with. I'm with lotp and Jack: torture is wrong, it's always wrong, and we shouldn't do it.
Jack makes a great point about our hero-soldier-warriors like Mr. McCain, Adm. Stockdale, Col. Day and others who resisted torture, at great personal cost, precisely because they had the honor and moral strength that KSM lacks. Thanks for that observation, Jack, it had slipped by me.
As to waterboarding, it's on the borderline between torture and just rough treatment (my opinion), and I'm not sure what to do about it.
Now then, Zenster: while you have many interesting observations, you've been consistently wrong on this one point. It's not necessary for us to sink to the same level of barbarity as Islam, and indeed, it would be catastrophically counter-productive.
Please read the many milblogs about how the average Iraqi man, woman and (especially) child respects American soldiers. Ask yourself why. I have the answer: it's because we treat them decently. Even when we know there are scoundrels and terrorists amongst them, we treat the average person decently. We gather evidence. We treat people as though they have human rights. We're patient. We don't torture people.
While the average Dhimmicrat can't see the difference, the average Iraqi can. They've lived under Saddam and they're living under us, and they see the difference.
I will NOT sacrifice that to beat Islam. And indeed if we do sacrifice that difference, we'll lose.
And I won't have my daughter in a burlap sack.
Now to JFM: yes, we Americans haven't lived in a land where torture, bombings and impalings are part of the fabric of life. So Mizzou and I have a some different viewpoint than you.
With respect: ours is better. Especially in the long-term, ours is better. The latest proof will be Iraq, should we succeed there, and I think we will. I won't denigrate your experience, but eye-for-eye, torture-the-bastards philosophy is an end-game loser.
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/14/2007 11:36 Comments ||
Top||
#27
Zen, did you have to use the word "niggardly"!?
(just kidding. Someone in DC government got fired a few years back for using the word -- in its proper context! Words no longer have meaning)
Posted by: Captain Lewis ||
09/14/2007 11:42 Comments ||
Top||
#28
For the record, Mike S., Mizzou Mafia is nowhere close to being banned.
Bravo! Civil expression of an opposing viewpoint should never be discouraged. Personally, I think Mike S. is attempting to be provocative and nothing else.
Steve White, your last post was most likely without reference to my own latest submission. I'd really enjoy reading your response to it if you have the time.
Incidentally, I too feel that intentionally displaying KSM in disarray was a stroke of genius. Why this sort of propaganda approach is not being used across the board is a total mystery. We could be making much more significant inroads by doing so.
#29
I'm going to send this to all my friends and family who think Rantburg is only for right-wing extremists (like me? Which I am not.) Intelligent, educated discussion. Relevant personal experiences from over the world. Civil, well-reasoned discourse. Bravo!
Bu messing up his appearance, before the photo? Genius! How long before that counts as 'torture'?
Posted by: Bobby ||
09/14/2007 12:33 Comments ||
Top||
#30
Every single soldier and citizen is supposed to be guided by their own conscience and rationality as they pick their way through this moral minefield.
Service members are guided by the Code of Conduct.
I have no desire to undermine our military's efficacy or the public's ability to contribute constructively.
And yet, by making black and white demands for the utter destruction of Islam you fail to acknowledge the moral damage sustained by leaders and troops who would carry out such a policy.
"The rise of a group convinced that their cause justifies murder, torture, intimidation: it could happen here. We're not close to it. "
I'm really glad you think so, as do I.
But if many were to adopt your position in the real world we'd get there pretty quickly.
#31
As I recall, it was standard policy during WWII to shoot any wounded enemy soldies on the battlefield to prevent them from attacking other troops moving up. I don't know the actual policy at that time, but I don't recall ever reading of any prosecutions of US or Brit soldiers for this battfield tactic.
Currently that would be considered a War Crime under UCMJ.
My question is: were these soldiers guilty of war crimes?
#32
Service members are guided by the Code of Conduct.
And a conscientious and rational soldier who swears an oath to follow it will do so.
And yet, by making black and white demands for the utter destruction of Islam you fail to acknowledge the moral damage sustained by leaders and troops who would carry out such a policy.
My position is dictated by Islam's black and white desire for my death and that of billions of others. It is Islam that polarizes my thinking and not my thinking that demonizes Islam. Such self-demonization is something that Islam constantly performs by implementing shari'a while condoning terrorism and its atrocities.
I think I've made it pretty clear that I would prefer Islam to be dismantled. While I continue to predict a Muslim holocaust due to Islam's intransigence, it's something I'd rather see avoided. If Islam cannot be reformed or dismantled, then it needs to be destroyed. It is nothing short of a black plague and serves only to bring more death and destruction into this world. At some point the moral penalty of not neutralizing Islam will exceed the moral penalty of allowing it to persist. Current Islamic doctrine guarantees that such a tipping point will be reached. I hope like hell that the penalty for allowing Islam to persist does not include the nuclear destruction of several major Western cities. That penalty would be far greater than any moral burden carried by those tasked with destroying Islam.
Name one case? Very simple. When I told about a schoolbus it was a real case of the Algerian war and it was prevented by making the guy speak. But I can give you loooooooots of examples if I want.
#38
Maybe - but you're awfully glib in your eagerness for others to bear that burden.
One more time. I am not "eager" for some one billion Muslims to die nor am I "eager" for anyone to carry the moral burden for having to ensure it. Despite what you may think, I do not approach this casually in the least. If I did, why would I take such pains to elucidate instead of just squawking "kill 'em all!" like others do around here? What I am eager for is putting a permanent stop to Islam's constant predations upon all other cultures.
If you know of a way of doing this quickly enough to avoid some major new atrocities and without employing some serious violence, I'm all ears. One of the few ways I can imagine doing this is by targetted killings of Islam's elite. For some insane reason this concept is repugnant to those who plot our military's course.
We are currently pursuing a bottom-up strategy against Islam that simply will not work. Especially so within the relatively urgent timeframe imposed by proliferation of nuclear weapons technology in the MME (Muslim Middle East). Muslims do not want democracy and the Koran specifically forbids it. If we do not begin a top-down process of eliminating those who entrench a literal translation of the Koran within the ummah, we expose ourselves to some serious calamities. I vote against leaving ourselves vulnerable to an enemy who has sworn to destroy the Western world.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
09/14/2007 14:07 Comments ||
Top||
#40
JFM:
And you know from first hand witnesses or your own witness that torture was used? I'd like to expand this discussion by having you present us with these actual ocurrances since I have my doubts. If you can break a guy in minutes or hours then he is very weak and not trained. My point is that the weak do not need torture. There are extremely useful mental and emotional interrogation techniques that work just as well on someone who would give up his Mother or country in a few minutes of physical pain.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
09/14/2007 14:16 Comments ||
Top||
#41
Maybe - but you're awfully glib in your eagerness for others to bear that burden.
Glib? Don't you mean pragmatic, realistic? There are plenty of us that would step forward and assume the burden from those that would not. I'd be quite willing to risk my "soul" to break Islam for all time.
Posted by: Natural Law ||
09/14/2007 14:18 Comments ||
Top||
#42
Bu messing up his appearance, before the photo? Genius! How long before that counts as 'torture'?
I'll bet that photo is causing far more lasting damage to his psyche than a couple of minutes of waterboarding. You can be sure they showed it to him.
#47
Isn't much of this debate focused on the who and when with regard to waterboarding (and that is where I stop...anything beyond that doesn't work). If waterboarding is regarded as an extreme-only for very specific types of individuals, ie a case where lots of lives hang is the balance, then that is morally reconciliable. And it is those lives that cause me concern with blanket prohibitions against waterboarding.
We are making progress in Iraq and I firmly believe we will continue to do so over the coming months and yes, years (we are going to be there regardless of who the next president is). It is precisely because of the goodness of our Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines that we will win.
I want more definitive action against the sources of islamo-facism. And yes, targeted killings, as odd as it is to juxtapose that against torture, is ok with me. Keep it painless, just like putting down a rabid dog.
#48
Torture is bad ! Water boarding isn't torture.
Torture us when you slowly inflict pain and injury. Water boarding is faking the system into unknown fear. We should be using an MRI lie detector also. We should use these things on our elected officials, and on jerks like Joe Wilson, Al Gore, and a plethra of other a holes who take up more oxygen than they're worth.
We don't even need the theater of a jury trial any more. Lie detector and sentence. You need a prosecutor/lie detector operator, and a judge to determine if a law was broken. Let's bring investigations into the 21st century. While I'm at it, the Miranda is the biggest joke ever. You have the right to a Miranda, yet, ignorance of the law is no excuse. (but ignorance of your Miranda rights is ??????).
rant/
Yes I know it by first hand witnesses. In fact through the book from one of the main proponents (General Ausarress) of those methods.
But before you judge him read about what happened at Philippeville, he was there, he learned the information soon enough to avoid the bloodbath at Philippeville proper but too late to save the people around it. What the FLN people did to the children seems to have been particularly sickening.
#50
Some of the arguments being used here are pure BS: CIA agents waterboarding a terrorist MASTERMIND with innocent blood on his hand for 2 minutes makes them morally equivalent to Stalinist torturers who went after citizens SUSPECTED of POLITICAL disloyalty? Morally equivalent to North Vietnamese torturers who broke bones, teeth, and skin of legitimate Prisoners of War contrary to the Geneva conventions? THOSE guys KEPT TORTURING, while the CIA guys stopped right then and there. THEIR torture was politically motivated. The CIA had every expectation that this Terrorist MASTERMIND HAD SOMETHING BAD ON THE FRONT BURNER, and that being taken down would cause the others involved to SPEED UP the operation. What life-or-death issues motivated the Stalinists and North Vietnamese to do WORSE THINGS to those under THEIR hands?
Yes, apples ARE equal to oranges, but ONLY if you IGNORE DIFFERENCES. What aspects of one's morality allows them to overlook MITIGATING information? I don't call THAT sort of behavior MORAL.
Pure BS I say: a moral compass that states that such things are equivalent IS BROKEN. It serves no purpose but to be ignored and thrown away.
This is not the same as seeing a speck in the CIA's eye and ignoring the boulders in others: it's seeing the speck and saying its a boulder while justifying such a whopper of a misrepresentation by saying they're both made of the same material.
Hey its good chucks to juxtapose KSM as The Hedgehog but is Humiliation an effective deterrent against these fucks? Hell just publish a couple of cartoons and they want to blow shit up. And theres no doubt that the naked monkey-pile photos were a major turn in this campaign. Thinkaboudit that got even the garden variety Mooselimb all Jihadi-like. The experts tell us that the Ticking Time-Bomb scenario is rare. So perhaps we should give them what they desire. Death...you know...just with allitle... uhemm...dignity.
#52
When I see a group of Iranian parasites chanting, "death to America," I don't look on them as misguided humans. I look at them as being as worthy of life as a mosquito that is biting my arm.
I am not a strict believer in the notion that the end justifies the means, but causing the illusion of drowning isn't an extraordinary means, given what it could prevent.
Others assume that I am against torture and that I think waterboarding is the same as Stalinist torture or other atrocities. That's not what I wrote, although I can see how it would be assumed.
I don't think real torture works reliably. It just doesn't, by most accounts -- unless by 'works' you mean vengeance rather than producing actionable information that can save lives.
I think waterboarding is on the borderline, but not over it. Its use on KSM doesn't bother me. We did have every reason to believe he had information about planned operations and networks that would save lives.
We were right - the info gained from him was in nearly all cases validated (IIUC) and did save lives.
What I objected to was Zenster's blythe assertion that we are somehow immune from ever descending to the level of the worst in Islam, no matter what actions we take. That is IMO both naive and dangerous -- and all too very very convenient to assert.
Hard times make hard choices. There is no doubt in my mind that we are facing a really serious challenge from within and without. We may yet have to take actions we and our grandchildren will look on with regret and shame -- and relief.
My point is not to get too happy at the thought. Do what must be done, but don't take the easy route of thinking that relieves all guilt. And reserve the borderline treatments for cases like KSM where there is good reason to believe the moral stain, if any, is worth it.
No need for more on my opinion about this ... just wanted to clear up what sounded like a confusion about what I wrote.
#55
This bears repeating. I tried to draw the same distinction but Ptah has done so well beyond my own efforts.(with added emphasis)
Some of the arguments being used here are pure BS: CIA agents waterboarding a terrorist MASTERMIND with innocent blood on his hand for 2 minutes makes them morally equivalent to Stalinist torturers who went after citizens SUSPECTED of POLITICAL disloyalty? Morally equivalent to North Vietnamese torturers who broke bones, teeth, and skin of legitimate Prisoners of War contrary to the Geneva conventions? THOSE guys KEPT TORTURING, while the CIA guys stopped right then and there. THEIR torture was politically motivated. The CIA had every expectation that this Terrorist MASTERMIND HAD SOMETHING BAD ON THE FRONT BURNER, and that being taken down would cause the others involved to SPEED UP the operation. What life-or-death issues motivated the Stalinists and North Vietnamese to do WORSE THINGS to those under THEIR hands?
I hope that those who have criticized my position will heed Ptah's immensely important clarification. I DO NOT advocate torture for the sheer glee of inflicting pain upon our enemies. That is babarism, plain and simple. I'll make additional note of how it is precisely barbarism of this sort that we are fighting.
There are times when fire must be fought with fire. One excellent example is setting a backburn. Does this exceptionally effective technique involve kindling a blaze of equal proportion to the one being fought? HELL NO! The exact same pertains to dealing with known terrorists. These scum have no respect for human life. How is it that we should suddenly award them the milk of human kindness even as they seek to issue further orders to attack us from their very jail cells?
lotp, I politely inquired and I'll more pointedly ask right now a previous question:
If you know of a way of doing this [i.e. defeating Islam] quickly enough to avoid some major new atrocities and without employing some serious violence, I'm all ears.
An absence of reply will be interpreted as wholehearted support for our current and dubiously effective strategy against Islam. You have previously exhibited a willingness to exercise selective notice of my own posts so I'm hoping that this will not, yet again, be the case.
A colleague of mine once suggested that America's founding fathers simply could not have anticipated such an abject evil as Nazism when they framed our freedom of speech. Much as I feel Nazism's genocidal language should be subjected to official censure, so do I think that Islam and shari'a law merit some sort of legal prohibition. They simply transcend all limits of legitimate pursuit and amply meet any requirements for judicial proscription.
Islam, with its moral carte blanche of taqiyya and religiously sanctioned lust for global domination excludes itself from the circle of humanity's congregation. There is no compelling reason why any latitude or slack should be shown these monsters. In fact, doing so both legitimizes and validates their quest to kill billions of us. That is entirely unacceptable to me. Period.
I think waterboarding is on the borderline, but not over it. Its use on KSM doesn't bother me. We did have every reason to believe he had information about planned operations and networks that would save lives.
We were right - the info gained from him was in nearly all cases validated (IIUC) and did save lives.
Well alrighty then, suddenly we seem to be in significant agreement.
What I objected to was Zenster's blythe assertion that we are somehow immune from ever descending to the level of the worst in Islam, no matter what actions we take.
And I still assert that fighting fire with fire is called for in the specific case of Islam. The inhumanity of our enemy makes it vital that we do not flinch at imposing upon them the exact same measures they would accord us.
Do so on a continuing and permanent basis? In no way. As with what Ptah mentioned, such measures are to be used only so long as they are pertinent.
That is IMO both naive and dangerous -- and all too very very convenient to assert.
I'll await you own personal solutionsas requested in post #56before answering.
#57
Goddamn it Zenster! Chris, get yer own Fkn blog! if you have enuf traffic perhaps Fred will link it. I'm sick and tired of your repetitive bandwidth hogging, with your same f**kn message. Get over yourself, Jeebus!
Posted by: Frank G ||
09/14/2007 22:24 Comments ||
Top||
#58
There are plenty of us that would step forward and assume the burden from those that would not.
#59
Perish the thought that such an important issue as torture should be sorted out in detail here at Rantburg. Heaven forbid the notion that I might be allowed the opportunity to answer those who challenge my assertions, even if my posts are of equal length to those of others who say the same thing. Your own lack of position upon this vital topic is duly noted, Frank.
I took time to write a long response and Fred's spam filter ate it. I'm going to bed. Zen can believe whatever the hell he wants to about whether or not I have an approach to Islamicism. He will in any case.
Right on, Pappy. Anyone who seeks to alter the circumstances of how we currently oppose Islamic terrorism had better well be ready to clearly explain their position.
To the best of my ability, I attempt to illuminate exactly why the measures I propose should be implemented. However much you might disagree, Pappy, I will at least take responsibility for my positions by developing them with substantial argument.
Pappy, youabove nearly all others here at Rantburghave had the decency to criticize me at all turns with invarying determination. Be it to my face or behind my back, there is no deviation and that is most certainly worthy. Whether I like it or not means squat in the face of how respectable your own consistency is.
#63
lotp, If you do not have the wits to realize that any submission of more than a few paragraphs warrants transposing it over to your notepad or a Word document then any estimation of your own work's worth and the veracity of your excuses fall into equal question. Plainly put, if you hold your own opinion in sufficiently high esteem, you'll take precautions to ensure it is transmitted without abberation. If not ... well then, that's another matter now isn't it? I'll leave it to others to post "the dog ate my homework" sort of snark.
Here is the direct link to the speech last night, text, audio, and video (Windows).
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/14/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under: Iraqi Insurgency
#1
Editor's note: The following are reactions to President George W. Bushs Thursday night address to the nation on Iraq and General Petraeuss report.
Addressing the Address from:
Victor Davis Hanson
Kimberly Kagan
Mario Loyola
Clifford D. May
Michael Yon
"What do you think will happen now?" asked the soft-spoken Jamila. We were sitting in a restaurant in Malmo, Sweden. She had recently returned from Pakistan after spending three wonderful months in Bagh, helping the victims of an earthquake, which has been forgotten by most Pakistanis due to the unfolding of a political drama of high stakes. Jamila is a Swedish-born daughter of Pakistani immigrants.
"Nothing new," said Dr Jamal. "The same old game will be replayed. Perhaps, with more violence. Many lives will be destroyed, then the new rulers or the same old rulers will get busy with the task of plundering the country."
"Don't be so hopeless," Jamila said with youthful energy. "I cannot stand this anymore. Wherever you go in Pakistan, people speak in the same way. I have never experienced such hopelessness in my entire life. There has to be a solution."
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: john frum ||
09/14/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[10 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"That is exactly what I fear," Professor Kareem said, "the way things are going, the day when Europe takes off its kid gloves may not be far off, and we will relive the Andalusian tragedy at a scale far greater than any Greek tragedy."
The Islamist hard core shelters behind the "moderate muslim". To achieve change in Islam, direct pressure on the moderates to openly challenge the Islamists and renounce the offensive portions of the Koran is required.
Their fear of another Andalusia may be useful...
Posted by: john frum ||
09/14/2007 5:28 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"Our children grow up in an alien culture, we lose our language, culture, even religion--all in just one generation.
Is this just typical immigrant moaning, or are there really significant numbers of apostates? If so, then the demand for freedom from religion made on 9/11 is an even bigger cat thrown amongst the pigeons than I thought.
I think I have noted before, we have a very close friend in Malmo. She is a doctor there and we visit often. It is a haven of Muzzies. I'd believe anything coming out of there. The Swedes are really worried now - not their politicians but the average Olaf and Helga. The trouble is that they are not an activist society, they willingly believe the politicians will figure this all out. They are also a very passive society - look at the way they play ice hockey - not the cannuck way of purposely starting fights to get the scorers off the ice but in a controlled precise athletic way. Same goes for how they go through life.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
09/14/2007 9:45 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Jack is right. That is why it is fun to watch the Swedes don the cloak of invisibility when they take the flying boat to Copenhagen and actually have fun for awhile. Of course, the cloak comes off on the way back to Malmo and the burden of responsibility is reshouldered. I worked extensively with the FFV, FMV, and the Royal Swedish Air Force back in the day and believe that there are no more fierce warriors on earth than the Swedes when they allow themselves to be.
Europe is perfectly capable of doing the things the Professor says. The trouble is, not enough muslims know enough about European history, or believe it.
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
09/14/2007 18:16 Comments ||
Top||
#8
The trouble is, not enough muslims know enough about European history, or believe it.
Word, Tony. It falls in line with how they always spin even the worst sort of defeat into a most magnificent victory.
Osama bin Laden, according to Richard Clark, chief counter-terrorism adviser to the national security council in the Clinton and Bush administrations, is not in Pakistan but his native Yemen or perhaps in Somalia.
He made the claim in an interview on National Public Radio this week. In another appearance on the CBS weekly show 60 Minutes, in addition to a write-up in Newsweek, Clark related that after the World Trade Centre attacks on September 11, 2001, he told his colleagues at the White House, We have to deal with bin Laden; we have to deal with al Qaeda. But Paul Wolfowitz, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, said, No, no, no. We dont have to deal with Al Qaeda. Why are we talking about that little guy? We have to talk about Iraqi terrorism against the United States. Clark said, I blame the entire Bush leadership for continuing to work on Cold War issues when they (came) back in power in 2001. It was as though they were preserved in amber from when they left office eight years earlier. They came back. They wanted to work on the same issues right away: Iraq, Star Wars. Not new issues, the new threats that had developed over the preceding eight years. Clark said, Osama bin Laden had been saying for years, America wants to invade an Arab country and occupy it, an oil-rich Arab country.
He had been saying this. This is part of his propaganda. So what did we do after 9/11? We invade an oil-rich and occupy an oil-rich Arab country which was doing nothing to threaten us. In other words, we stepped right into bin Ladens propaganda. And the result of that is that Al Qaeda and organisations like it, offshoots of it, second-generation Al Qaeda have been greatly strengthened.
Posted by: Fred ||
09/14/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under: al-Qaeda
#1
Don't believe it. Only Pashto and Waziri primitives wouldn't give him up.
#3
Richard Clarke? The same guy who had a thousand and one chances of eliminating Binny on his watch under Clinton. The same one? Another Dhimmi version of "useful idiot". But he fits the narrative if not the facts, so he will be very legitimate in the eyes of the MSM.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
09/14/2007 9:48 Comments ||
Top||
#5
According to various Net articles, the USG has positively identified the voice on the new tapes as OBL's, indic that at least as of 2005 andor 2006, OBL was = is alive, which in turn by extens also means he did escape from Tora Bora - what is not clear from the new vids is the true state of his physical health. *OSAMA'S "RIGIDITY" > KIDNEY DIALYSIS > many persons on this, as OBL reportedly is, tend to die fast = early, from months to few years. It is also very difficult for someone on LT dialysis to recover to prior better states-levels of health, espec if suffering from other conditions/diseases. Kidney Dialysis is, unfortunately, popularly stereotyped as a "death sentence" for anyone. OSAMA WILL NEED MUCH PERSONAL STRENGTH, DEDIC, LUCK AND ASSISTANCE TO SURVIVE FOR A LONG TIME UNDER DIALYSIS.
Peshawar High Court Bar Association President Abdul Latif Afridi on Thursday warned intelligence agencies and the army to avoid torturing lawyers or face suicide attacks by lawyers at forces headquarters.
"Where was your mind the last time you used it?"
At an emergency meeting, the PHCBA passed a resolution denouncing a report that intelligence agencies arrested Advocate Ghulam Nabi on Thursday night and tortured him at a detention cell. Afridi said that if the army and spy agencies did not change their attitude towards lawyers and citizens, the people would ban the entry of military and agencies personnel to bazaars and main roads. He said the lawyers would charge secret agencies under sections 6 and 7 of the Anti Terrorism Act as they tried to terrify the entire lawyers community by torturing a lawyer. The lawyers later staged a protest outside the corps commander house in Peshawar.
Posted by: Fred ||
09/14/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under: Taliban
#1
face suicide attacks by lawyers at forces headquarters.
/N guard Blinks. re-reads article.
WTF?
...
...
...
Zenster--I'm beginning to agree with you. Help!
Posted by: N Guard ||
09/14/2007 7:39 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Islamist Pakistani lawyers exploding in ISI HQ. I fail to see a down side.
Posted by: Steve ||
09/14/2007 14:17 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: Fred ||
09/14/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
President General Pervez Musharraf and Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz have urged the nation to follow the teachings of Islam to help curb violence, and ensure justice and equity.
Hello! Yoo hoo! Big red truck! Islam is the cause, not the cure.
NORTH ARABIAN GULF U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Wrangell (WPB 1332) provided medical assistance to an ill Iranian fisherman the North Arabian Gulf Aug. 24 while conducting Maritime Security Operations (MSO) as part of Combined Task Force 158. The task force is responsible for protecting Iraqs two oil terminals and training Iraqi naval forces to take over the mission in the future.
The six-person crew of an Iranian-flagged fishing dhow indicated they needed help by approaching the Wrangell as the ship patrolled around the Khawar Al Amaya oil terminal. That should have made both parties quite nervous - the Wrangell crew out of concern this was another Cole incident and the Iranians out of concern they would be mistaken for another Cole incident (if they ever heard of it.)
A crew member aboard the dhow was lying unconscious on the deck. Wrangells medic immediately administered first-aid by pumping oxygen into his lungs via a bag-valve mask and placing ice packs to cool his body. After providing as much assistance as possible, Wrangells crew instructed the dhows master to return to port as soon as possible for further medical attention.
This is a great example of how the Iranian fisherman chose to seek help from the Coalition. I believe our presence is definitely appreciated out here, said, Capt. Paul Severs, commander of Combined Task Group 158.1. Its being recognized by local fisherman, regardless of nationality, that Coalition forces are here to not only provide maritime security in the region, but assist mariners in distress.
#3
I think it is fascinating. It seems to make clear that internal propaganda is not making itself 100% down to the blue collar, fisherman level ... and if people in the trenches like that think we can be counted on to do the right thing ...
Bethlehem Ma'an A Kuwaiti newspaper has said that Hamas is coming under pressure from all sides. There is no communication between the two wings of Hamas those in Gaza and those in exile.
Both the Saudi government in Riyadh and the Egyptian government in Cairo refused a proposed visit by Khaled Masha'l, Head of Hamas' political bureau in Damascus, stating that the Hamas takeover of the Gaza Strip must be reversed before they would allow him to enter the countries, the newspaper "Al-Jareeda" reported.
A Hamas leader, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told the newspaper that Hamas refused to accept these conditions. Under such pressure from the Arab states and other international countries, the efforts of Masha'l to improve the siege on Gaza has been made nigh on impossible. They are also demanding that Hamas accept the government of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas as the legitimate government in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
The Saudi and Egyptian officials have told the Hamas leadership that Masha'l has no official status as he has not agreed to the Oslo Accords and he is not living in the Palestinian territories. They said they are waiting for Hamas to send a Hamas delegation from inside the country.
The Hamas leader said two weeks ago communication between "Hamas inside the country" and "Hamas in exile" had stopped. The Hamas leader described Hamas' situation as a "slow suicide" because of the siege and the increasingly serious problems in the Gaza Strip.
The Hamas government urged Gaza terrorists militants Thursday not to attack border crossings with Israel in order to ensure the flow of basic goods into Gaza during the Muslim holy month of Ramazan.
Otherwise the fast is going to be 24/7 for the whole month ...
Hamas terrorists gunmen, along with terrorists militants from other groups, have been involved in rocket and mortar attacks on Israeli targets, including border crossings, and the statement Thursday by government spokesman Taher Nunu marked a change of position.
The government calls on the Palestinian terrorist factions to avoid shelling the crossing points, in the interest of our people, especially during the holy month of Ramazan, and to keep commercial traffic going and protect security and stability in Gaza, the statement said.
However, it was not clear whether other terrorists militants would heed the call. The Popular Resistance Committees said in a statement that it would send messages of death to Israel during Ramazan, a time of increased religious fervour. On Tuesday, a rocket fired by members of the Popular Resistance Committees and the Islamic Jihad group exploded in an Israeli army base near Gaza, wounding more than 40 soldiers as they slept in their tents. In recent years, Gaza terrorists militants have fired hundreds of rockets at Israeli border towns, and the attacks continued after Israels pullout from the area in 2005. Since Hamas wrested control of Gaza from the rival Fatah movement in June, Israel has largely restricted the movement of people and goods in and out of Gaza.
This article starring:
Islamic Jihad
Popular Resistance Committees
Posted by: Fred ||
09/14/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under: Islamic Jihad
Philippine President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo urged communist rebels to accept the government's new amnesty program or face military defeat, according to a copy of a speech released Thursday. Arroyo said the guerrillas have posed a low-level threat for years,
"If we are to become a modernized country, we have to put a stop to their ideological nonsense and their criminal acts once and for all."
and "if we are to become a modernized country, we have to put a stop to their ideological nonsense and their criminal acts once and for all."
"It is either amnesty or military solution. Whichever way, communist rebellion must be stopped," she told a peace forum late Wednesday. Last week, Arroyo signed a proclamation offering amnesty to rebels who turn in their guns. The guerrillas, who have been fighting for 39 years, rejected the offer as a gimmick.
Posted by: Fred ||
09/14/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Hey hey! my kind of President.
How Communism can continue to be perceived as something worthwhile, in the face of all the evidence to the contrary, is totally beyond me.
Brilliant idea Ms President, tell them the amnesty program is open until ... yesterday! >:)
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
09/14/2007 0:48 Comments ||
Top||
#2
How Communism can continue to be perceived as something worthwhile, in the face of all the evidence to the contrary, is totally beyond me.
Tony - how can you say that? In North Korea, citizens can get all the rocks and tree bark they can eat! Michael Moore says that Cuba has the best health care in the world. It's even brought Fidel back from the dead (although he's developed a taste for 'brains'). And Bob Mugabe after nationalizing everything in sight has achieved record levels of inflation.
#3
Ah silly me DMFD, I *completely* missed the bark bonanza in North Korea. I myself, being a Western running dog, am completely restricted from enjoying this bounty, no doubt by a Zionist-Amerikkkan conspiracy which is designed to keep me, the lumpen proleteriat, firmly ensconced in my role as footstool to the capitalist fatcats.
I shall storm the nearest Winter Palace immediately! Join me and we can wave bits of paper at each other whilst designing great bark-based projects for the glory of the people!
Jeez - it's dead easy to get into this psycho-babble mode isn't it - heh ;)
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
09/14/2007 16:42 Comments ||
Top||
#4
How come she's going all hard ass on the commies but bending over for the muslims?
You see, the Spanish lied that they own the Philippines when they gave it up to the US around the time of the turn of the last century. The Spanish managed the northern part, but only sorta flew the flag in the southern part. More to keep the other colonial powers away more than any real exercise of control over the locals. The people in Washington, not being aware of that point, thought they were getting something that was an integral entity of the treaty package. So when the muzzies objected to the Americans acting like they now really owned the place, the muzzies down south acted up. Tie that in with the fact the muzzies were actively engaged in slave trading as big commerce and the Americans were still on a crusade against slavery [post Civil War], resulted in a really messy quagmire(tm); tribes, burnt villages, dead civilians. However, the end result was that the Americans nailed the south down pretty well through military action. It did not set about to integrate the cultural differences that existed between the north and south that existed before the war. Of course, America unloaded the Philippines less than fifty years later, without that little issue really resolved. We've seen how friendly they are together as in Lebanon when the population ratio is close enough for them to force the issue of putting the infidel in his place.
For the north, they really don't have the military capacity to impose their will. So, its either try to negotiate [and we know how well that works] or cut them lose [which most countries are loath to do] or continue to muddle on hoping that either (a) they are able to convince the locals that union is better [with Christian corrupt pols and crooks running things] in the long run or (b) their own program of resettlement and displacement is able to marginalize the original locals [sorta like the American West].
#7
How come she's going all hard ass on the commies but bending over for the muslims?
Just the southern commies. They don't play well with the northern commies. The latter a) have a lot of influence on the government and b) are in sympathy with the muslims. Hence Arroyo's stance.
Iran wants "peace and friendship for all," the country's president said Wednesday while again denying Western assertions his nation is pursuing nuclear weapons and trying to destabilize Iraq. Peace is good, nuclear weapons bad, check.
But Mahmoud Ahmadinejad took a hard line against Israel, calling it "an invader" and saying it "cannot continue its life." Suppose for the sake of argument it was. What has it ever done to you? Is it taking up a huge area? Are they some kind of embarassment?
Asked if Iran had launched a proxy war in Iraq -- something the U.S. ambassador and top military commander there both asserted this week -- Ahmadinejad said the United States is merely seeking a scapegoat for its failing campaign in Iraq. No answer, but looks like we both agree that would be bad. Check.
"Forces have come into Iraq and destroyed the security, and many people are killed," the Iranian president told Britain's ITN during an interview in the garden of the Iranian presidential palace in Tehran. Suppose again it was true. Why do you care? They were your mortal enemy a few years ago. I thought muslims held grudges for centuries. What's going on here?
"And there are some claims that may seem very funny and ridiculous. Those who have lots of weaponry and warfare and thousands of soldiers -- if they are defeated, they blame others. There is no way to escape for peace." Huh? Anyway, grow some huevos and say what you want to say, girly-man of the sparse moustache.
Iranians do not believe in war and consider it a "last resort," he said. War bad, negotiations for the common good are good. Check.
He further claimed that Tehran is a friend of Iraq -- maintaining "good relationships" with the Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish factions -- and "if Iraq is not secure, we are the first country that would be damaged." That would be irrational, said the scorpion.
He added, "Responsible people should understand this: that Iran is against any sort of insecurity and attacks, and Iraq is able to defend themselves." Give them a while and they'll be able to attack, too.
During the interview, Ahmadinejad struck a friendly tone toward Britain, saying he regretted that British soldiers have died in Iraq. Now that you're gone . . .
"We are sorry for your soldiers to be killed. We think peace should exist. Why should there be an invasion so that people will be killed?" he asked. Doesn't make any sense, does it? Neither does prolonging sectarian violence by arming up both sides.
"We want friendship -- friendship to all. We love all nations and all human beings. Anyone who is killed, we are against it." Unless they are a kuffir, of course, but that goes without saying. Or if you are a threat to our plan of regional dominance, but that goes without saying, too.
Ahmadinejad urged the United States and Britain to reconsider the invasion of Iraq. The two countries should "correct themselves," he said. If they don't, "the defeat would repeat." OK, our mistake. We'll invade you instead.
The Islamic republic could help improve conditions in Iraq, but first coalition forces must leave, he said. If you love peace so much, why not just give us a hand so we can get out of here?
"We can help solve many problems in Iraq. We can help secure Iraq. We can help the attackers leave Iraq if the American government and British government correct themselves." he said. Which attackers are you referring to? I'm getting more confused by the minute here.
Ahmadinejad has said in the past that Tehran would fill any power vacuum left by a withdrawal of coalition forces in Iraq. I'm sure they would. Maybe even helping the vacuum along beforehand, too.
The United States has cited the Iranian president's remarks as a reason to continue its efforts in Iraq. And actions too, mind you!
As for allegations that Tehran is pursuing a nuclear weapon, Ahmadinejad said he resents the notion that Iran "has to obey whatever was put to us" and asked why there is no similar furor over American and British nuclear programs. Because we aren't religious fanatics and have a proven track record. And we don't say things like Israel must be wiped off the map along with the great satan.
"Our bombs are dangerous, but American bombs are not dangerous?" he asked. To just about everyone but you, that is true.
When the ITN interviewer asked if he could tour the Natanz nuclear facility in Iran, Ahmadinejad chuckled and asked him if he thought the United States or Britain would allow Iran to inspect their nuclear facilities. I take that as a "no". BTW, have you asked to visit a civilian nuclear power production facility?
"We do not need a bomb. We are against bombs, actually. There are many reasons we are against it," he said. "From a political point of view, it's not useful, we think." Quite useless, I assure you. But somehow I doubt that would stop you.
The United Nations Security Council has so far imposed two rounds of limited sanctions against Iran for the country's refusal to suspend its uranium enrichment program. I wouldn't really call them sanctions, but OK.
Tehran has insisted the program is meant for peaceful energy production. And if a nuclear bomb were to happen to appear as a by-product, oh well.
In regard to Israel, which Ahmadinejad has said should be politically "wiped off the map," the Iranian president said there is a way to deal with the Jewish state without violence. No, there isn't. Not for you. Without it, they will always be there. Unless they start behaving like the old Soviet Union.
Giving as an example the dissolution of the Soviet Union -- which he said came about "without war" -- Ahmadinejad suggested that "everything would be solved" if the Palestinian people were allowed to vote on their fate. Solved?! They have proven time and again they can't manage their own affairs. They don't even understand that you don't weaken the berm around a cesspool that they live under! Unless you are counting on them making the wrong decision, nothing will be solved.
However, his hard-line rhetoric resurfaced when Ahmadinejad said Israel "cannot continue its life." Please elaborate. I'm sure you have detailed plans on the economic and political measures you are going to take to persuade Israel to dissolve.
"Israel is an invader and is cruel, and it hasn't got a united public. All other nations are against it," he said. "We do not recognize them. They are attackers and illegal." Wait a minute Nutjob, I think I see your problem. That's a mirror you're looking into, not a window you're looking out of.
Posted by: gorb ||
09/14/2007 04:24 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[13 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Iran
#1
Doesn't Mahmoud remind you of the detective on Hill St. Blues who was always disguised as a bum with a flash temper? What was his name, anyway?
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
09/14/2007 10:43 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Taqiyya at work or just outright lying. Putting Iran in charge of Iraqi security is like putting a pedophile in charge of a day care center or a sexaholic in charge of a whorehouse or terrorists in charge of rooting out terrorism.
#6
FREEREPUBLIC > DEFENSE UPDATE article > ASSAD'S BIG SECRET - JOINT SYRIA-IRAN-NORTH NUKES PROGRAM??? Lest we fergit, Saddam's WMD reportedly was secretly sent to Syria and the Bekaa Valley.
In a joint meeting which was held on 10th of September with attendance of Iranian and Austrian authorities to see about economic cooperation between the two countries, Australians (sic) announced their readiness to take the responsibility for constructing the Persian Gulf Bridge despite all boycotts organized by western countries against Iran due to recent political crisis.
Evaluating the relationship between the two countries in the course of history, Dr. Werner Fasslabend, member of the National Assembly of Austria and head of Iran-Austria Friendship Association explained: "Austria and Iran used to have a good relationship and this relationship has even promoted during recent years in different fields including political, economic, cultural, artistic and diplomatic."
He further described Iran's strategic situation in a geopolitical sense unique in the world and explained about the vast cooperation of Iran and Austria in fields of Energy and announced the readiness of his country to expand these interactions by undertaking the project for constructing Persian Gulf Bridge. "In addition to Persian Gulf Bridge, Austria is also interested in cooperating with Iran in other economic fields such as oil industry," added Fasslabend.
Posted by: ryuge ||
09/14/2007 03:16 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Iran
#2
"Austria and Iran used to have a good relationship and this relationship has even promoted during recent years in different fields including political, economic, cultural, artistic and diplomatic."
So does the US and Austria, but ...
Posted by: Boss Craising2882 ||
09/14/2007 10:20 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Good. As this is part of the Qom - Tehran highway and will be heavily used by the Mullahs and Mahmoud and his ilk as we bomb the hell out of their nuke operations, it will give our B2 guys some precision bombing practice. I especially am thankful for all the western engineering and construction companies working in Iran, like Kvaerner, ABB, Technip, Bouygues, etc. that have very precise engineering information available on their computer systems for NSA and DIA to access in order to prepare targetting plans.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
09/14/2007 10:49 Comments ||
Top||
#4
This is the kind of crap by Austria that makes me regret that the US did not agree to the Soviet demands to include Austria in its "sphere of influence"/vassal states.
Former MP Nassib Lahoud made it official today and announced his candidacy for the next President of Lebanon, to replace his cousin the pro-Syrian president Emile Lahoud. In kicking off his presidential campaign, he declared that only the Lebanese army is entitled to bear arms and defend the country.
Here are some highlights of his presidential platform.
Lahoud called for:
Enrolling Hezbollah fighters into and under the command of the Lebanese army insisting that only the army should be the "legitimate armed forces of Lebanon"
Training Lebanese army and supplying it with all the equipment needed to properly defend the country .
Establishing friendly, but balanced relations with Syria. Lahoud called for mutual respect of sovereignty , independence and freedom between Lebanon and Syria and also called for diplomatic relations and demarcation of the borders between both countries.
Lahoud also called for reforms against corruption , improved rights of women, improved standard of education in the public schools, reviving the Labor Unions and political freedom .
He expressed his frustration with the current crises and called for ending the current sit- in protest and the closure of the parliament
Unlike Emile Lahoud, Nassib lahoud is a leading member of the March 14 alliance.
Unlike Emile Lahoud, Nassib lahoud is a leading member of the March 14 alliance. In 2001, he joined the Qornet Shehwan Gathering, regrouping prominent Christian opposition figures under the patronage of Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Boutros Sfeir.
Posted by: Fred ||
09/14/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
As promised, the ruling March 14 parliament majority accepted on Thursday a proposal by Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri to resolve Lebanon's deep political crisis and called for cancellation of reciprocal conditions.
"March 14 Forces urge the opposition to spare the country the dilemma of reciprocal conditions which hampers the dialogue and does not guarantee avoiding a presidential vacuum," said the statement read at daybreak by MP Saad Hariri. "March 14 welcomes the principles of dialogue and agreement and stresses that dialogue is the Lebanese' only salvation and (the only way) to rebuild trust in their nation, state and institutions," the statement said at the end of a late-night meeting of March 14 leaders at the residence of former President Amin Gemayel in Bikfaya.
Posted by: Fred ||
09/14/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11 views]
Top|| File under: Hezbollah
#1
My God, if that is an english translation of Arab polyspeak then they are more screwed up rhetorically than we are. How the hell can you have any meaniful dialogue with people like that. Well, I guess Obama and Edwards talk like that so maybe they could.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
09/14/2007 10:51 Comments ||
Top||
Turkey provided Israel with intelligence on Syria prior to last week's alleged IAF flyover into the country, Kuwaiti newspaper Al-Jarida claimed on Thursday. According to the report, the country had a central role in delivering precise information regarding targets in Syria that were to be hit by Israeli planes. Further, the report claimed that the Israeli pilots were given authorization by the Turkish army to use its airspace in order to carry out the operation.
Sources told Al-Jarida that Turkish intelligence did not coordinate the move with Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan. "Coordination of the [release of information] occurred far away from the political echelon," it said.
The Israeli and Turkish armies share a strong relationship that has been felt through several joint exercises and weapons sales. On Saturday, an unnamed Turkish official demanded explanations from Israel after fuel tanks allegedly dropped by Israel F-151 planes who were conducting a foray into Syrian airspace, were found on the Turkish-Syrian border. Turkish paper Hurriyet reported that Turkey was demanding whether the Israeli planes also passed over its own airspace.
Posted by: Fred ||
09/14/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Syria
#1
SYRIA > Analyst > SYRIA HAS FOUGHT ISRAEL BEFORE, WILL BE READY FOR ANYTHING. ALso, Syria says its response will be "in due time".
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.
Sweden yesterday denied that its ambassador to Saudi Arabia apologized to the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) for the publication of a caricature of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) in a Swedish newspaper. According to a statement released to the media on Wednesday by the Jeddah-based organization, it was stated that the Swedish ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Jan Thesleff, met OIC Secretary-General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu on Tuesday in Jeddah and offered his deepest apologies for the controversy created by the publishing of the hurtful depiction.
Rudy Giuliani, the Republican presidential candidate, is working hard to claim his place as the Republicans leading hawk. The former New York City mayor recently announced the latest choice to join his presidential campaign team is neoconservative Daniel Pipes.
"If one water-board session got him to talk, you could have gotten him to talk (without it), given time and patience," said Brad Garrett, an ABC News consultant and former FBI agent. Garrett has 30 years of experience interrogating terrorists such as Yousef, the Pakistani man who killed two CIA employees at the gates to the agency's Langley, Va. headquarters in 1994 and hundreds of violent criminals. "If in fact it's true that they water-boarded him once and then he started talking and provided reliable information, then he falls under the category of the small minority of people on whom it works. But torture seldom works. Most people start talking...to get the pain to stop," Garrett said.
Peshawar High Court Bar Association President Abdul Latif Afridi on Thursday warned intelligence agencies and the army to avoid torturing lawyers or face suicide attacks by lawyers at forces headquarters.
The Hamas government urged Gaza 
Philippine President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo urged communist rebels to accept the government's new amnesty program or face military defeat, according to a copy of a speech released Thursday. Arroyo said the guerrillas have posed a low-level threat for years, 
Iran wants "peace and friendship for all," the country's president said Wednesday while again denying Western assertions his nation is pursuing nuclear weapons and trying to destabilize Iraq.
As promised, the ruling March 14 parliament majority accepted on Thursday a proposal by Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri to resolve Lebanon's deep political crisis and called for cancellation of reciprocal conditions.
