Akhunzada is a 46-year-old would-be suicide bomber from Afghanistan's southern Helmand Province. The father of 10 children, Akhunzada spent years studying Islam in Afghanistan and as a refugee in Pakistan. Until early this year, Akhunzada was teaching at a religious boarding school for the poor, a madrasah, in Pakistan's Baluchistan Province.
He says he saw two Taliban commanders come to his madrasah repeatedly in order to recruit young students as suicide bombers. In February, amid intense pressure from others at the madrasah, Akhunzada says he joined a group of three dozen young men who were recruited by Pakistani militants to become suicide bombers.
"It was in the middle of the night [when we left]," he told RFE/RL's [Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty's] Radio Free Afghanistan. "They took us in a specially prepared vehicle when it was dark. [There were no windows but] there were some small holes in the roof [of the vehicle] to allow air for us to breathe. Through those small holes, we could see the sky. They took us from Kuchlagh [a small town in Baluchistan near the city of Quetta]. Then we went to a madrasah in Quetta. But I don't know where they took us after that.
"On the way [to a training camp somewhere near the Pakistan-Afghan border], I was looking at the mountaintops [through the holes in the roof] and I was trying to draw them on paper," Akhunzada says. "I was imagining that these could be mountains in Afghanistan. That's when I began to think that this work was not being done for God's sake. It is against Islam and it is against Afghanistan. That's when I realized that this is absolutely a case of interference [by militants] of Pakistan within Afghanistan."
Akhunzada says that despite his doubts, he completed a short training program with the other recruits. Often militant trainers indoctrinate young men -- using passages from the Koran out of context to justify the killing of innocent people, including Muslims. Akhunzada says he became convinced that his militant trainers were manipulating and misleading the younger students. But he feared for his own safety if he spoke out. Instead, he kept his thoughts to himself until after the training was completed and each recruit had been given explosives along with instructions to carry out suicide attacks in Afghanistan.
"There were 36 of us [including one Chechen], who were transported [to the training camp]," Akhunzada continues. "We all completed our training. And after we finished the training, we were allowed to return to our homes for a week to 10 days to say goodbye to our families, to pray, and to prepare ourselves mentally for a suicide attack. This is the normal process for suicide bombers. But I didn't return [to the militants]. They were very much on my trail, trying to catch me. But I went into hiding instead."
During the six months that have passed since Akhunzada went into hiding, he says four suicide attacks have been carried out in Helmand Province by men that he knew from the mountain training camp. Akhunzada says he managed to convince two young recruits from the group to abandon plans to commit suicide attacks in Afghanistan. Those two also have gone into hiding, fearing that they would be killed by militants because of what they have learned about the Taliban's recruiting and training infrastructure. ....
Another would-be suicide bomber told RFE/RL that he felt trapped and helpless once he had been trained for a suicide mission. Mohammad Feroz, a man from southern Afghanistan, says he was recruited by militants who trained and paid him to carry out a suicide attack in Kandahar in late 2006.
Feroz went into hiding and contacted Radio Free Afghanistan by telephone after he decided not to detonate the suicide bomber's belt that his trainers had given him. He credited a Radio Free Afghanistan report on suicide bombers with dissuading him from carrying out the attack.
"I am in Kandahar right now," Feroz said. "I want to get out of this place. I was listening to Radio Free Afghanistan and they had a report. Thank you for such a good message -- it has saved my life. I received [the equivalent of $10,000 in afghanis] from a man who told me that I must become a suicide bomber in Kandahar. [But] I have escaped and I am in hiding now." .....
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/08/2007 17:45 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under: Taliban
Canadian soldiers look on as members of the Afghan National Army crouch behind barriers at Camp Hero and lob grenades overhead. There is no big bang. These are fake grenades, and Camp Hero is a practice range just outside the international military base at Kandahar Airfield. And that's a good thing because not all of the grenades land on target.
When they first took to the firing range a few weeks ago, the mostly young and inexperienced soldiers of the 201st Brigade fired wildly toward their targets - if they could get their weapons to fire at all. "They were shooting from the hip and leaving Allah to guide the bullets," says Capt. Sylvain Caron, who is in charge of the Canadian team mentoring 3,000 members of the Afghan National Army. "We had to explain that's not exactly how it works." Mmmm. Lovely Canadian understatement.
But the Canadians who have taken on the task, the 140 members of the Operational Mentoring Liaison Team, are patient and determined. For Sgt. Dave Querry, it's a matter of honour. "I have friends who died here. Their families are in mourning," says Querry, who is training Afghan infantrymen. "I don't want to leave this country thinking my friends died for nothing."
Regardless of the insurgent death tolls and the ground won or lost, the Taliban will likely remain in Afghanistan for a long time. Aside from the unlikely prospect of insurgents putting down their weapons to join the Afghan government, the only hope for long-term peace in this war-battered country is an effective national security force.
The Afghan army is not up to the job but they've come a long way. A year ago, when Canadians took on the mentoring program, it seemed an impossible task. Although made up of many seasoned fighters, the Afghan army was short-handed, undisciplined and out-manoeuvred by Taliban insurgents. Their death toll was staggering. That's how I remember it.
Col. Mohammad Anbia, commander of the 5th Company, 1st Kandak of the 205th Brigade, has been a soldier for over two decades. Forty-three year-old Anbia fought the mujahedeen when he was with Afghan government forces that were allied with the Russians in the 1980s. Later on, he fought the Taliban. He is a proud fighter and reluctant to admit the Afghans needed help. But he says he sees day to day changes as his men work closely with the Canadians. "We're getting their soldiers' experience," he says through an interpreter.
His company is on active duty, supplying their own forces in place at forward operating bases throughout Kandahar province. The Afghan army is holding its own in some areas already and they are poised to undertake an operation of their own. Yet Anbia, who is the commander of the logistical company - a new idea to the Afghan army - says the Canadians and international forces must stay a long while yet. "If they leave Afghanistan, maybe it will be a civil war again," he says. "The Afghan people are very good at killing each other."
But equipment is not their only, or even their biggest, problem. There are 42 U.S.-bought Humvees and dozens of International trucks and Ford Rangers sitting in a yard on the base, waiting for drivers. Most Afghan soldier just want to get in the field and fight. "They're warriors. They have a warrior mentality," says Chief Warrant Officer Guy Suttenwood-Johnston. "They want to fight." It is a long process to instil in the Afghans the idea of a military-support system with logistics and planning. Even the idea of dedicated mechanics to maintain vehicles was foreign.
Usually, there are 100 soldiers in this company of the 201st Brigade. But on one particular day, there were 35. The day before was pay day and most of the company left for home overnight.
There are 45,000 soldiers in the Afghan National Army. The Canadian team is mentoring 3,000 of them. The United States and the Netherlands are also involved in training. And the benefit is not all one-sided. The Afghan army's greatest strength is just being Afghan. They've tipped Canadians to the locations of roadside bombs and other insurgent activity.
#1
USA > reportedly MASSIVELY EXPANDING its primary base in Aghanistan plus other facilities. Expansion will suppos accom any and all US-Allied milfors + assets for the duration [and then some] of the US presence in Afghanistan
Add this news to Net Pundits arguing that US milfor-basines should stay in IRAQ for many years yet. EVERMORE EVIDENCIA THAT DUBYA'S = USA's ENTRENCHMENT IN ME IS CONTINUING UNABATED.
Muslim medical students are refusing to learn about alcohol-related illnesses and sexually-transmitted diseases because they say it goes against their religious beliefs. And a small number are even refusing to examine patients of the opposite sex because they say it is forbidden by the Koran.
The General Medical Council and the British Medical Association both say they have heard of cases of trainee doctors having religious objections. But they say they did not approve of them, pointing out that a doctor would not be able to qualify if they missed parts of their course.
The BMA, the professional body for doctors, said it had been notified of Muslim students who did not want to learn anything about alcohol or the effects of overconsumption. 'They are so opposed to the consumption of it they don't want to learn anything about it,' a spokesman said.
And the GMC, which regulates doctors and maintains the medical register, recently brought out a paper for medical schools explaining what to do if students ask whether they could still graduate if they omitted parts of the medical curriculum. The document makes it clear that doctors will not be able to opt out of any part of their training despite any religious objections.
Professor Peter Rubin, chairman of the GMC's education committee, said: 'Examples have included a refusal to see patients who are affected by diseases caused by alcohol or sexual activity, or a refusal to examine patients of a particular gender.'
But he said trainees who refused to carry out these parts of their courses would not be allowed to graduate because 'prejudicing treatment on the grounds of patients' gender or their responsibility for their condition would run counter to the most basic principles of ethical medical practice.'
Dr Abdul Majid Katne of the Islamic Medical Association said he did not support students who wanted to opt out of certain aspects of their courses. 'To learn about alcohol, to learn about sexually-transmitted disease, to learn about abortion, it gives us more evdience to campaign against it,' he said. 'There is a difference between learning and practising.
'It is obligatory for Muslim doctors and students to learn about everything. The Prophet said: "Learn about witchcraft, but don't practise it".'
Sainsbury's and Boots allow their pharmacists to refuse to sell the morning after pill to customers if they have 'ethical' conerns.
Posted by: anonymous5089 ||
10/08/2007 12:34 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: Global Jihad
#1
Dammit, button doesn't work.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
10/08/2007 13:08 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I hear Pakistan and Afghanistan need doctors. And since there's no alcoholism and STD's over there, they should be all set.
Put 'em on the next flight out...
#3
The US used to have a program, the Civil Reserve Air Force 9CRAF) whereby the gov't paid airlines a set amount every year to maintain some level of airflit capability, whether the ability to divert equipment to gov't needs, or helping to finance aircraft with additional abilities that they would not normally need ( example: the purchase of a convertible air freighter or stronger floors for hearier loads).
Does the UK have a similiar program, and if so does XL participate? they may be in real trouble it that is the cse.
Catholic and Anglican vicars should remove their clerical collars while off-duty to avoid being singled out for attack, a church safety group said Sunday.
Criminals often target clergymen because they are perceived to have money. The stiff white neck pieces - nicknamed "dog collars," also can attract those bearing a "grudge against God," said Nick Tolson, who heads National Churchwatch. "They've got to be aware that when they're on their own, they're at high risk," Tolson said. "What we're saying is that when clergy are off duty - say when they're shopping at (the supermarket) - they should slip off the dog collar and put it in their pocket."
Britain does not routinely monitor violence against clergy. But a 2001 University of London study found that seven in 10 clergy had experienced some form of violence between 1997 and 1999, and more than one in 10 reported being assaulted, according to Tolson.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: Global Jihad
#1
Better solution: keep the collars but carry a .45. UK just won't think outside their box though.
#8
Hey "Church Safety Group": Where is your FAITH???
2 Samuel 22:2-4 "The LORD is my rock, my fortress and my deliverer; my God is my rock, in whom I take refuge, my shield and the horn of my salvation. He is my stronghold, my refuge and my savior from violent men you save me. I call to the LORD, who is worthy of praise, and I am saved from my enemies."
Psalm 27:1-2 "The LORD is my light and my salvation. Whom shall I fear? The LORD is the stronghold of my life. Of whom shall I be afraid? When evil men advance against me to devour my flesh, when my enemies and my foes attack me, they will stumble and fall."
Psalm 34:7 "The angel of the LORD encamps around those who fear him, and he delivers them."
2 Thess 3:3 "The Lord is faithful, and he will strengthen and protect you from the evil one."
But I guess this doesn't apply to you??? Here's an idea: Take off the collar and KEEP it off. You're obviously not men of God anyway.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
10/08/2007 13:11 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Faith versus .45? I'll take the .45 thank you.
Not VERSUS, RJ. Although I am a Christian, I believe in one's right to defend himself, with a gun if necessary. I have a Concealed Handgun License, and I used to be a firearms instructor.
My point was that removal of the collars was an act of cowardice that exposes the fact that the promises of scripture mean nothing to these people.
#13
In Mexico, clergy are required to wear street clothes when they leave a church or seminary. But the reason isn't security; the Roman Catholic church opposed the Mexican Revolution, and got hit with payback.
As for the UK clerics, I would think their attackers would most likely be Muslims.
#15
I'd like every red-blooded man or woman of faith to learn at least a minimum of self-defense techniques. Can you imagine some group of young jihadis stumbling on a couple of females with a third-degree black belt in karate? Double humiliation - getting beaten, and getting beaten by WOMEN.
A .45 is heavy, noisy, and cumbersome for some people. A .38 does well enough, and is frequently small enough to be overlooked. Remember the words of St. Robert of Heinlein: "An armed society is a polite society."
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
10/08/2007 19:35 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Is my a .357 OK, OP? ;-p
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/08/2007 20:29 Comments ||
Top||
#17
Europe is lost. And on many measures Britain leads the way down.
It's painful to watch them assiduously dismantle the tattered remains of a once vibrant and worthwhile civilization.
lotp, you are sadly close to the truth. I can only hope that we are wrong. Worst of all is how both of us will likely be disproven when Europe once again solves the problem by re-opening their too-highly-prized charnel house.
Is my a .357 OK, OP?
Dear Barbara, I could probably give you a frazzled toothpick and still be assured of the same results.
Hackers in Turkey have attacked more than 5,000 Swedish Web sites in the past week, and at least some of the sabotage appears linked to a Swedish newspaper's publication of a disparaging caricature of Islam's prophet, an Internet company and a media watchdog said Sunday.
Around 1,600 Web sites hosted by server-provider Proinet and 3,800 sites hosted by another company have been targeted, Proinet spokesman Kjetil Jensen said. Jensen said the hackers, operating on a Turkish network, removed all files on the Web sites and in some cases replaced them with messages. According to Swedish news agency TT, the Web site of a children's cartoon called Bamse was replaced by a message saying Islam's holy prophet had been insulted. The incidents have been reported to the police.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under: Global Jihad
A two-day international conference gets underway in Spain on Tuesday that seeks to analyse the intolerance and discrimination faced by Muslims in the West and discuss ways to fight it, organisers said. There is a lack of data regarding the phenomena. It is important to collect data to avoid overestimating or minimising Islamophobia, said Gema Martin Munoz, the director of Arab House, a public body which works to strengthen ties between Spain and the Arab world.
The conference will take place under the aegis of the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in the southern Spanish city of Cordoba.
Taking part will be high-ranking delegations from the 56 nations that make up the OSCE as well as non-governmental organisations. Spain and Turkey have co-chaired the UN organisation since it was formed in 2005. In April 2007 former Portuguese president Jorge Sampaio was appointed as the head of the new alliance. Sampaio is scheduled to attend the conference as is the General Secretary of the Cairo-based Arab League, Amr Mousa.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: Global Jihad
#1
Is it not a fact that Muslims are disintegal elements in Western Civilization? They are a foreign oriented supremacist and exclusivist group, void of loyalty to the west. To me they are like an insect infestation.
OSCE Chairmanship Conference on Intolerance and
Discrimination against Muslims, Oct. 9-10, 2007, Cordoba, Spain
The US will be represented by Randal Brandt, (Bureau of Human Rights and Labor, Office of International Religious Freedom, Department of State). Bureaucrats like long titles.
#6
WAFF.com > BRITAIN - ISLAM WILL BECOME THE DOMINANT RELIGION IN UK, circa Year 2020. More and more Brits are inquisitive. ALSO, LUCIANNE > YOUGOV SURVEY - ONE IN THREE BRITS WANT TO LEAVE BRITAIN.
The United States appears to be illegally torturing terror suspects contrary to denials by President George W Bush, House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi said on Sunday.
The countrys highest ranking Democrat also said that she still hoped to get most US troops out of Iraq by the end of 2008, despite the partys repeated failure to win over enough Republicans in Congress to an exit strategy.
Interviewed on Fox News, Pelosi said reported interrogation tactics such as simulated drowning, head slapping and exposure to extreme temperatures would amount to banned torture. There is a legal definition of torture that I believe this would fit. The president says it is not, she said. But the House speaker said she had received only limited briefings from the Bush administration on its interrogation tactics, and had not seen a controversial 2005 memo issued by the Justice Department.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under: Global Jihad
#1
Yeah, Right. Pelosi says that bondage, whippings and nudity in front of a Catholic church as an assault on Christianity in San Fransicko is free speech and then seeks to protect terrorists from far less, even if it saves American lives...
Houston we have a problem (regarding a very sick Congress).
#3
Procedures such as subjecting prisoners to freezing temperatures or depriving them of sleep for extended periods should be codified as legal under specified circumstances. The public is far more tolerant of these pressure techniques in emergency circumstances than liberals would care to admit.
If our government is too queasy to officially sanction these actions, then they must be forbidden absolutely with severe penalties attached. But keeping the grey zone of what is or is not legally considered to be "torture" gives liberals a free opportunity to both condemn and undermine their nation at a time when we need clarity and unity.
#4
nancy hopes to get most US troops out of Iraq by the end of 2008, but Petreaus may beat that.
Posted by: Bobby ||
10/08/2007 6:34 Comments ||
Top||
#5
You will never clarify what is permissible and what is not, because once you've defined that, you'll have automatically defined a set of rules to be judged by, and you will be bound by the rule of law that you have yourself set.
And the rule of law is anathema to all seekers of power, and all lackeys thereof -- no matter what that law is, no matter if it was you yourselves that wrote it.
So you'll keep on using "enhanced interrogation" (a vast category that contains everything from "bright lights" to "being anally sodomized with a broomstick") but never "torture", and everything will be fine, because after all your government always knows best, and it will never never ever use these techniques against innocents. At least not against innocent white Christians, and that's what matters, no?
On a sidenote, here's some words spoken by a dirty liberal scumbug in order to undermine his nation:
"Should any American soldier be so base and infamous as to injure any [prisoner] ... I do most earnestly enjoin you to bring him to such severe and exemplary punishment as the enormity of the crime may require. Should it extend to death itself, it will not be disproportional to its guilt at such a time and in such a cause... for by such conduct they bring shame, disgrace and ruin to themselves and their country,"
-George Washington
#7
Lackeys, Aris? And clearly it's escaped your notice that the war thus far has more lawyers involved than ever in history. Until General Petraus took command in Iraq, the soldiers had to get approval from the unit JAG before firing in either offence or defence. Never before have illegal combatants (historically referred to as spies) had outside lawyers insisting they be given the same legal rights in civilian courts as the legal residents of the nation -- instead of a drumhead court martial and a firing squad.
Perhaps you are recalling Abu Ghraib. But then in fairness you must recall the nasty idiots were knowingly sneaking off during the night against the rules, that they had all of two or three nights before being turned in by the first of their fellow soldiers that they showed the photos to, that they were immediately hauled before a court martial, and that their commanding officer was fired for dereliction of duty for allowing an atmosphere to develop in which such a thing could happen. All before the newspapers chose to trumpet the partial truth.
Or perhaps you are thinking about the behaviour of the police and army and politicians of Greece, whose shortcomings are such that the protections of the EU are preferable. A pity, as my husband so enjoyed the time he spent working there, despite several just-missed-by-the-angel-of-death experiences that he didn't mention to me until many, many years later. (Involving bombs and machine guns in 1987 or so -- he rather enjoyed the insouciant skill of the taxi drivers, after experiencing the ones of Egypt.)
#8
The democrat leadership, itself an oxymoron, is despirate for an issue to remain appear relevant. Why not pick up the fallen banner of patriotism and seal the southern border and stop the NAFTA highway ?
No, thankfully my memory is less influenced by photographs than yours is. I'm mostly recalling cases like the torturous death of Mr Dilawar by your torturers (aka interrogators) in Bagram e.g. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/20/international/asia/20abuse.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin
But you will never remember him or any of your other innocent victims. It's all "panties on heads" for you.
#14
Bobby, it was because I had a knack for mentioning the facts you would like to ignore and smashing the fantasies you hold dear.
You keep on wanting to pretend that it is only the guilty that get tortured by you, or that end up dead in your "interrogation rooms". This is a pretty fantasy that eases your consciences, but it's nothing more than a pretty lie.
#18
BTW, Pelosi is being disingenuous when she says she only got limited briefings and never saw the Justice memo.
As House Speaker she has access to all of those. She has, in fact, deliberately ducked briefings offered to her and refused to read the memo. It's a form of massive cowardice designed to further her prejudices without confusing herself with facts she would then bear responsibility for knowing.
#19
As for western Europe, it's so very much EASIER to hate the US mindlessly than to take sober stock of the challenges we all face.
From hating the US mindlessly (and this is a particular pathology on the left) it's an easy step to Islamic fundamentalism. I am in my mid 50s. I expect to see mass conversions among the young Left in Europe in my lifetime.
None of which justifies torture - but then, as TW has noted, that's a red herring anyway. Simply an excuse to keep on hating the US for being big, successful in many ways, unsucessful in some and above all for just being.
#21
During this brief period while a broader range of opinions about torture is being allowed into Rantburg's discussion for a while, I would like to point out frankly that Nancy Pelosi is right when she says:
Interviewed on Fox News, Pelosi said reported interrogation tactics such as simulated drowning, head slapping and exposure to extreme temperatures would amount to banned torture. There is a legal definition of torture that I believe this would fit. The president says it is not, she said.
And I believe that most Americans would agree that she is right.
Frankly, President Bush's argument that waterboarding is not torture is a lame, losing argument. It's stupid semantics.
The Bush Administration (and the Republican Party) should grab the bull by the horns and explain why the use of waterboarding, albeit a torture, was a reasonable decision in the perceived circumstances following 9/11. The Bush Administration believed that Al Qaeda could and would use anthrax and radioactive materials imminently in follow-up attacks inside the USA. Explain to the public the reasons why the Bush Administration believed so, and you might have a really winning argument instead of the current, stupid semantic argument.
We are heading for a Democratic victory in 2008 unless the Republicans wise up fast.
By the way, has Rantburg lifted its ban on Gentle too?
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/08/2007 9:33 Comments ||
Top||
#22
"Bobby, it was because I had a knack for mentioning the facts you would like to ignore and smashing the fantasies you hold dear."
Aris is projecting his reactions to JFM again.
How pathetic indeed!
Posted by: E. Brown ||
10/08/2007 9:42 Comments ||
Top||
#23
Mr Katsaris
Washington was speaking about honorable opponents, not about spies and not about people who wouldn'yt hesitate a second into, say, blowing a maternity.
For your information teh Genava conventions stipulate that you lose all rights when you don't respect a number of dispositions aimed at protecting civilians, wounded and prisoners. Like wearing an uniform, not taking posituions in or observing for airstrikes/artillery from certain kinds of byuildings (eg hospitals), not using ambulances for transporting troops, weapons or ammo, not using human shields. If you do it, ennemy is free to have you executed. I don't know if according to Genava Conventions torture is allowed for poeple who violate the rules but it should: it happens I would be possibly have been killed before I was four if some people hadn't extracted confessions from an ennemy who had no qualms in bombing schoolbusses or impaling babies so you will have a hard time making me cry over the pooooooor terrorists.
#25
I don't three shits whether terrorists are tortured and killed personally. The Geneva accords don't grant them any protection. If you are caught out of uniform, not being represented by a recognized nation and having a symbol of that nation (which is why troops where the flag on their uniform), legally we can do anything we fucking feel like.
Now, I would like to be able to take the moral high ground and not do said things. I would like to show the world that there are higher morals you can fight for. However, when your opponent is lower than whale shit and will do anything to kill, maim, torture you (up too and including hiding amongst civilians so it looks like we killed them), then all fucking concerns go out the window in my view.
And any group which bakes a boy and feeds it to their family to get them to shut up and play along deserves whatever it gets.
#26
"For your information teh Genava conventions stipulate that you lose all rights when you don't respect a number of dispositions aimed at protecting civilians, wounded and prisoners. Like wearing an uniform, not taking posituions in or observing for airstrikes/artillery from certain kinds of byuildings (eg hospitals), not using ambulances for transporting troops, weapons or ammo, not using human shields. If you do it, ennemy is free to have you executed."
Aris Velouchiotis loves to see innocents murdered and fascists escape punishment. That's just his style, being the gutless moral coward that he is.
Posted by: E. Brown ||
10/08/2007 10:03 Comments ||
Top||
#31
By the way, has Rantburg lifted its ban on Gentle too?
Feeling like donning the burqa again, eh? Don't expect the results to be any better this time, hussy.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
10/08/2007 11:12 Comments ||
Top||
#32
"Washington was speaking about honorable opponents, not about spies and not about people who wouldn't hesitate a second into, say, blowing a maternity."
And I'm talking about complete innocents that happened to be in the wrong place in the wrong time (and the wrong religion).
Got that? I'm not arguing about how you deal with terrorists, though with better people I would debate the moralities of *that* as well.
But right now, with *you*, and in this thread, I'm only discussing how you deal with complete innocents that happened to be in the wrong place in the wrong time. Baby steps, JFM.
Do you have the remaining shreds of morality, humanity (let alone Tao) that you can atleast call the torture of *innocents* a crime?
DarthVader, the same question applies to you. You keep on trying to switch the argument to how you should deal with *terrorists*, and the question preserving a moral high ground.
It's a worthwhile question, but *my* question was about the way you deal with innocents. And fact remains is that (if they happen to be Muslim) you, oh so honorable citizens of Rantburg, don't give a damn about them.
E.Brown> "loves to see innocents murdered "
Speak the name of Dilawar. It was not I who murdered him. It was you. It's not you who remember him and want no more Dilawars to exist. It's me.
#34
Note that Aris sidesteps the question of how one determines innocence, except in retrospect.
Again, I'm not in favor of torture. Nor am I sure that the interrogation techniques used fall into that category, although the line is thin.
But assuming a clear line that is somewhere beyond serving tea and cookies to the nice gentlemen one unfortunately detained, just how does one go about determining who is who and who has done what when by definition terror network members tend to lie about such things?
#35
You may not be talking about how we deal with terrorists - but I'm sure Queen Nancy is. I doubt that our policy is to waste the time and effort torturing some poor Afghan farmer or other cannon-fodder who obviously doesn't know anything.
Didn't she take it upon herself to meet with the terrorist-enabling head of Syria and interfere with US (and Israeli) foreign policy?
#36
Aris,
I would only preserve the moral high ground with states and people that try to follow it.
Now with the slime that refuse to follow it. There are no morals with them. I recommend that you live with their ilk for a while and see how long you keep your head.
And I am not condoning the slaughter of the innocents as you are trying to pin on me. Terrorist, death.
Civilian, left alone.
See? simple. If civie tries to help said terrorist, prison. If civie takes up arms with terrorists, civie now is terrorist and see above for disposal.
So, if you can't figure that out on where my position is on this or try to moral equivalent my position to anything that doesn't resemble the above, go fuck yourself with cacti and enjoy the coming collapse of Europe.
#37
"Note that Aris sidesteps the question of how one determines innocence, except in retrospect."
That's just how Velouchiotis operates. One death is a tragedy, 2,000 murdered in the Peloponeses is a case for unbridled joy.
Posted by: E. Brown ||
10/08/2007 11:59 Comments ||
Top||
#38
"It's not you who remember him and want no more Dilawars to exist. It's me."
I see that the totalitarian-loving filthbag Velouchiotis not only lies, but likes spreading crocodile tears around as well.
His Euro-chauvinism and self-degraded anti-Enlightenment humanism and liberalism are obvious from the historical record.
Sod off and die, troll.
Posted by: E. Brown ||
10/08/2007 12:04 Comments ||
Top||
#39
Ease off on Aris. He's pissed that the fires he set didn't bring the Socialists back into power like he thought they would.
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
10/08/2007 12:13 Comments ||
Top||
#40
"And I am not condoning the slaughter of the innocents as you are trying to pin on me. "
Good for you Darthvader. Now please explain to me your utter lack of outrage at what happened in Bagram against innocents by soldiers of your own country, supposedly acting out to protect you and yours.
Then explain to me what conditions and laws you support in order to ensure no civilians are ever tortured, and what should happen to those that do end up torturing civilians against those laws.
E. Brown> I'm still not quite why you find it clever in any way to google up my first name and try to pin the crimes of others from more than half a century ago on me. To me it just reminds me of the Obama/Osama comparisons and simply exemplifies your kindergarten mentality.
In short, the name is "Katsaris", not "Velouchiotis". (It's not "Onasis" either for that matter.)
"His Euro-chauvinism and self-degraded anti-Enlightenment humanism and liberalism are obvious from the historical record."
Oh, my horrible humanism and love of liberty. Crimes I tell you, crimes. I pin racism and torture on you instead, not "humanism" and "liberalism".
#42
"Ease off on Aris. He's pissed that the fires he set didn't bring the Socialists back into power like he thought they would."
The Rallisian collabo is always upset when totalitarians of any stripe don't get to kill more people.
Posted by: E. Brown ||
10/08/2007 12:19 Comments ||
Top||
#43
Mitch, I wonder if you realize that in Greek forums, I'm bashed for an American lackey and tool, because of the way that I defend you in comparison to the the other *more* horrid imperialisms and brutalities out there -- like Russia or Iran or China.
Basically, I'm among the best friends you have in Greece. Chew on that.
#44
I do it because you are a gutless felching moral coward who would grovel and urinate in your pants if we were actually 1/10th as oppressive as you Eurofilth make us out to be.
You are NOT in favor of liberty, freedom or anything resembling human dignity, if it could possibly issue from this country. Your EUro-chauvinism and pathetic love for bureau-fascism is duly noted and despised.
Posted by: E. Brown ||
10/08/2007 12:23 Comments ||
Top||
#45
"This will happen if the West doesn't awaken from its own fantasy ideologies of Political Correctness and Multiculturalism."
Political correctness is what you do when you claim that it's the illegality of the Mexican immigrants that you oppose to, not their brown skins.
It's also what you do when you still decline to legitimize torture, and pretend to be still giving a damn about the Geneva conventions.
Be true to yourselves for once, and call a spade a spade.
#47
"Oh, my horrible humanism and love of liberty. Crimes I tell you, crimes. I pin racism and torture on you instead, not "humanism" and "liberalism"."
Don't worry, Aris, I'd never accuse you of supporting those things, just the opposite.
Posted by: E. Brown ||
10/08/2007 12:26 Comments ||
Top||
#48
"Basically, I'm among the best friends you have in Greece."
"Some of my best friends are Ameriswine..."
Posted by: E. Brown ||
10/08/2007 12:28 Comments ||
Top||
#49
Same ol' shit--full of itself. It'll never grow up. Sigh.
#51
And a really big hello to Mrs. Davis. Haven't seen you post in ages!
You keep on wanting to pretend that it is only the guilty that get tortured by you, or that end up dead in your "interrogation rooms". This is a pretty fantasy that eases your consciences, but it's nothing more than a pretty lie.
Aris, you neglect to note that even so-called "innocents" amongst the vast majority of this world's Muslim population remain conspicuously silent about terrorism to the point of tacit approval or covert support. So long as Islam does NOTHING to fight terrorism, they are fair game. At some point silence is no longer just mere consent, silence becomes a LIE.
Now, I would like to be able to take the moral high ground and not do said things. I would like to show the world that there are higher morals you can fight for. However, when your opponent is lower than whale shit and will do anything to kill, maim, torture you (up too and including hiding amongst civilians so it looks like we killed them), then all fucking concerns go out the window in my view.
Which is a pretty good summary. However, all of this "torture" nonsense was put in far better perspective by another eloquent Rantburger. To wit:
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.
#52
You know, Aris .... I support having a wide variety of viewpoints at Rantburg. But there's serious discussion and then there's showing up first and foremost to lob off-topic bombs like #45.
It would be pathetic if it weren't such a pain in the ass to be assumed to be racist by someone who lives in a country that's far far less diverse than the US.
Stay on topic in the threads here or go masterbate on some other site.
#53
by definition terror network members tend to lie about such things
Not just "tend to", but are RELIGIOUSLY SANCTIONED to lie, cheat, steal, torture, kill innocents and commitnot only genocidebut any atrocity, any crime against humanity and any abomination (think Beslan) in pursuit of their Islamic agenda. It's called TAQIYYA and it represents one of the ultimate moral and ethical crimes there is on earth.
#54
Why should we object to tanned Mexican skins when there are so many successful, equally tanned American skins, a goodly proportion of whose ancestors originated in Mexico? For perspective, Aris, Mexicans are about as dark as Greeks and Italians. In this country brown skins belong to African-Americans... at least for a bit longer. There is so much intermarriage these days that Tiger Woods, with his mixed Thai, African-American, Native American, and Caucasian ancestry is normal rather than otherwise.
You are the best friend of an Platonic ideal of America, Aris. And a worthy ideal it is, too. But you don't know nearly as much as you think about the real one, no matter how many of our books you've read and our films you've watched... much like I felt about Europe before living there for half a decade.
This country was set upon a foundation of rocky realism, not a Platonic ideal. That's why it was established as a democratic republic, not an Athenian-style democracy. That's why our elections are winner take all, not proportional representation. And that's why those who comply with the Geneva Conventions get treated in accordance with those self-same conventions, while those who choose not to... take the risk of meeting up with American pragmatism or individual excesses instead of American generosity.
Finally, while you are attacking us, do try to remember the difference between unsanctioned individual excess (no matter how the uninvolved may approve) and institutionalized. Two minutes of simulated drowning, causing no damage and with at no actual risk of harm, is not at all the same as using an electric drill to painfully destroy joints and bones before killing the victim with no other purpose than the sheer joy of inflicting pain and terror, sawing off heads with unsharpened swords and, yes, baking a boy into a casserole to serve to the unsuspecting relatives to their coerce cooperation are not at all in the same set of behaviours. To claim otherwise is disingenuous in the extreme.
#55
pretend to be still giving a damn about the Geneva conventions
What if we are entirely mistaken to allot Geneva protections to our enemy? How about an answer, Aris? Islamic terorists have no protection under the Geneva Conventions. In no way do the Conventions apply to them, NOT AT ALL. We have every right to torture, maim and kill them on sight. You can argue about the morality of torture all you want (and I'll merely refer you to post #51), but DO NOT try to confuse the issue by injecting our complete and total error in showing any humanity to these Islamic savages solely because we are so civilized and they are not.
I'll not even stoop to your "Mexican immigrants" comment. That one is so far beyond the pale that you have pretty much eliminated any respect I might have once had for your views.
#56
"This country was set upon a foundation of rocky realism, not a Platonic ideal. That's why it was established as a democratic republic, not an Athenian-style democracy. That's why our elections are winner take all, not proportional representation. And that's why those who comply with the Geneva Conventions get treated in accordance with those self-same conventions, while those who choose not to... take the risk of meeting up with American pragmatism or individual excesses instead of American generosity."
Thank you, Trailing Wife, for your usual eloquence in treating Velouchiotis better than he deserves. I grow tired of these moral equivalence morons ignoring a genuine need for nuance when it comes to this country.
Posted by: E. Brown ||
10/08/2007 13:27 Comments ||
Top||
#57
And that's why those who comply with the Geneva Conventions get treated in accordance with those self-same conventions, while those who choose not to... take the risk of meeting up with American pragmatism or individual excesses instead of American generosity.
Superb post, trailing wife. Especially your last paragraph.
#58
"Islamic terorists have no protection under the Geneva Conventions."
Aris knows this about franc tireurs and terrorists, he's just willfully lobotomized himself to eliminate this fact in the interest of bashing Americans.
With reference to #7, none of us here have any problems with prosecuting murderers and even giving them death sentences, even if they happen to wear American uniforms. For a EUro-pig like Aris to whinge on about light treatment of killers is ironic in the extreme.
Posted by: E. Brown ||
10/08/2007 13:35 Comments ||
Top||
#59
You flatter me inordinately, gentlemen. I think lotp, who's been quite pithy lately, summarized beautifully in post #52. And one can never go wrong quoting Ptah Aegyptos.
#60
Re #45 I support having a wide variety of viewpoints at Rantburg. But there's serious discussion and then there's showing up first and foremost to lob off-topic bombs .... Stay on topic in the threads here or go masterbate on some other site.
--------
Thanks for moderating, the Rantburg way.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/08/2007 14:00 Comments ||
Top||
#61
"And fact remains is that (if they happen to be Muslim) you, oh so honorable citizens of Rantburg, don't give a damn about them."Airhead)
EXACTLY
The Koran demands that don't give a damn to Jews and Christians, and along the way to Sunni Muslims if they are Shia, and Shia Muslims if they are Sunni, nor Shia or Sunni if they are Wahhabbi... And death to anyone who leaves any of the above...
Islam is demands totalitarian 7th century politics dominant over and above the "infidels" and a sick religious aspect requiring big fat black sheet over any woman in public.
"Don't give a damn about Muslims" is an understatement, chump.
#63
Over and above the complete and total "death cult" mentality of the Muslim on the social level that Pelosi should be addressing, the religious aspect of Islam is totally without merit.
All the old and new testiment prophets throughout the 1600 years of the writing of the book of Christianity (Bible) claimed without hesitation the message came to them straight from God while the murderous, pedophile Mohammed claimed to recieve his halucinations from an angel (Gabriel). Since I recogn God will be seated on the throne of judgement and not Gabriel, I'd rather read the God's Word and not Gabriel's word...
#64
Why should I give a candy-coated crap what Aris thinks?
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
10/08/2007 14:33 Comments ||
Top||
#65
It's nice you approve, Mike S. After all, Rantburg is Fred Pruitt's private property, and we are all his guests.
In the meantime, Fred is still between jobs, and needs help paying the bills to keep this site running. Aris, you've been gainfully employed for a year, now. It's time you pitched in for the bandwidth you've been using. I know Zenster has been doing his share, so this is for the rest who haven't -- there are Paypal and Amazon buttons in the right margin.
#66
Re #54 (Trailing Wife) Two minutes of simulated drowning, causing no damage and with at no actual risk of harm, is not at all the same as using an electric drill to painfully destroy joints and bones before killing the victim with no other purpose than the sheer joy of inflicting pain and terror
I appreciate that you, Trailing Wife, are addressing the issue thoughtfully, but I think that most people right here in the USA will agree that waterboarding is torture. It might be last damaging torture than your other examples, but it still is torture.
When President Bush and others in his Administration say that the USA does not torture prisoners, then most Americans (and practically all foreigners) think the denial is ludicrous.
When someone says it is ludicrous here in Rantburg, then that person will be shouted down and probably will be banned after a few months. Nevertheless, I think that is the opinion of most Americans: Waterboarding = torture.
I am against torturing captives as a rule, but I am willing to allow reasonable exceptions in extreme cases. Instead of arguing that the USA indeed did torture some captives as an exception because the situation was extreme, however, the Bush Administration persists with its lame, losing, stupid, semanitic argument that waterboarding is not torture.
Here I must agree with Nanci Pelosi that the Bush Administration is making a ludicrous claim. And I think that most Americans agree with Pelosi on that specific issue that waterboarding is torture.
I wish the Bush Administration and the Republicans would argue this issue in a smart manner.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/08/2007 15:06 Comments ||
Top||
#67
I meant to say: It might be less damaging torture
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/08/2007 15:07 Comments ||
Top||
#68
Re #18 (lotp): Pelosi is being disingenuous when she says she only got limited briefings and never saw the Justice memo.
I assume that she did learn authoritatively in her briefings and readings that the USA has used "interrogation tactics such as simulated drowning, head slapping and exposure to extreme temperatures."
Her opinion that the drownings and extreme temperatures are "torture" is a reasonable opinion, and I think most most people agree with that opinion.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/08/2007 15:18 Comments ||
Top||
#69
Indeed, you would assume that she was so briefed.
But that is not what she is admitting. She is, in fact, making allegations that are carefully unattached to specific information about specific interrogations, in most cases. It's a deeply, deeply cynical move born out of political calculus.
I could respect a thoughtful argument that we should leave ourselves significantly open to major casualty attacks in a principled avoidance of tough interrogation. I probably would not agree, but I could respect it.
The Democratic party of which I continue to be a registered member has not made such an argument and won't, because their goals are short-term political advantage. The deeper well being of the country is, along with other pressing challenges, not apparently a major concern of theirs.
#70
When President Bush and others in his Administration say that the USA does not torture prisoners, then most Americans (and practically all foreigners) think the denial is ludicrous.
Mike S, the Bush administration has been so legalistic on other issues that I'm inclined to believe they are using the term as historically defined. Just as the use of the term Geneva Conventions has been stretched far beyond the original definition in attempt to require the U.S. to apply it to those the Conventions were deliberately devised to not apply (see above posts in this thread for an example), so to is the term torture being redefined in an attempt to prevent the U.S. from being able to act effectively in time of need.
Just because a great many people who have not thought much about the issue share an opinion does not make that opinion valid. A great many people think Jews are intrinsically evil, and that America deserved to have the Twin Towers toppled on their heads by a bunch of angry Arabs. I know you wouldn't argue that sheer numbers mean those beliefs are true.
"Washington was speaking about honorable opponents, not about spies and not about people who wouldn't hesitate a second into, say, blowing a maternity."
with
And I'm talking about complete innocents that happened to be in the wrong place in the wrong time (and the wrong religion).
Don't try this BS on me. Religion is not race something you are born with and you cannot change. Being a secular guy you should be putting religion into exactly the same place as othezr forms of ideology. Be it Nazis or Muslims people who choose to believe they are herrnsvolk entitled to conquer and enslave other people shouldn't come complaining if the prospective dhimmis retaliate. And peoplme who even while not taking arms pêrsonally aid them financially or ideologically are not innocents and are not entitled to complain.
I'm not arguing about how you deal with terrorists, though with better people I would debate the moralities of *that* as well.
I have heard of some of this morally superior guys who agitpropped against use of torture by the French in Algeria (aimed at preventing FLN atrocities) but who themselves had hemlped the Vietminnh in torturing its captives in Indochina.
But right now, with *you*, and in this thread, I'm only discussing how you deal with complete innocents that happened to be in the wrong place in the wrong time. Baby steps, JFM.
I have never advocated torturing suspects in order to establish if they are guilty. But I have no qualms about people whose guiltiness is established when allowing them to remain silent would translate into dozens of dead.
Do you have the remaining shreds of morality, humanity (let alone Tao) that you can atleast call the torture of *innocents* a crime?
I am no friend with people who torture inocents. Neither with people who wear T-shirst with the image of sadistic torturer Ernesto Guevara de la Serna.
I am no friend with people who would stretch hands with one of our first world rich white kids a la Rachel Corrie who have sympathy with people who try to blow maternities.
DarthVader, the same question applies to you. You keep on trying to switch the argument to how you should deal with *terrorists*, and the question preserving a moral high ground.
It's a worthwhile question, but *my* question was about the way you deal with innocents. And fact remains is that (if they happen to be Muslim) you, oh so honorable citizens of Rantburg, don't give a damn about them.
100 thousand people were blown at Nagasaki. Nagasaki was largely a Christioan city, the place in Japan were people were the least enthousiast with the impeerialistic dreams of teh Shintoists. But it saved about a million Americans, at least thirty of fourty millions Japanese and last but not least every month it shortened the war meant saving three hundred thousand Chinese and a number of Filipino, Indonesians, Burmese... I would have nightmares if I had ordered the bombing but I would have had worse nightamres if I had failed to take it. 100,000 < 30,000,000
Now, returning to the main thread the people who made the Geneva Conventions knew dar too well that they if enforcing them would gave an advantage to the enemy the end result would be that nobody would enforce them. And here they had a stroke of genius: if you don't comply with the the rules you free the enemy of any constraint so you gain nothing and you can be sent to the firesquad for war crimes. So no incentive to cheat, everybody complies and no civilians get shot because they were mistaken for people fighting out of uniform, civilians don't die due to lack of hospitals (after one side used them militarily and other side retaliated). But for this to work it is essential to deliver the message "cheat and you will regret it". If you don't more people will die that if you do.
#72
Re #70 (Trailing Wife) I'm inclined to believe they are using the term as historically defined. .... ... the term torture being redefined in an attempt to prevent the U.S. from being able to act effectively in time of need.
I don't agree with you that for most people the term is being redefined with an intent to inhibit effective action.
Very simply, when most people hear about waterboarding, they reflexively define it as torture. And then when they hear President Bush basically deny that this method is torture, they think the denial is ludicrous. He can say it a million times with a straight face, and most people just won't buy it. They think he must be plain lying or else playing some wierd word game -- something like Clinton's "it depends on what your definition of 'is' is."
This denial is not intellectually respectable for most people. Republicans will have enough trouble this next election without aping Bush's stupid position on this issue.
I do agree with you, Trailing Wife, that most Ameicans will cut through the semantics and accept such techniques exceptionally for extreme situations -- such as certain knowledge of an imminent attack on the USA with weapons of mass destruction -- no matter what the Geneva Convention says.
Unfortunatelty, though, Bush doesn't have enough sense to make that argument. He keeps trying to convince the public that waterboarding and nakedness in extreme cold are not torture.
It seems to me that Giuliani is making the argument sensibly. His problem, though, is that he is not able to speak authoritatively about the circumstances of the decisions to use those techniques. He can speak only hypothetically, and he gets in a lot of trouble when he answers hypothetically, saying straight out that he would authorized such techniques in such hypothetical situations.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/08/2007 16:45 Comments ||
Top||
#73
Re #69 (lotp) But that is not what she is admitting. She is, in fact, making allegations that are carefully unattached to specific information about specific interrogations, in most cases. It's a deeply, deeply cynical move born out of political calculus.
I'm sorry, but I simply don't understand your point here. I am interested, so please restate it in other words.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/08/2007 16:47 Comments ||
Top||
#74
Pelosi has refused to attend briefings about specific terror threats and about specific interrogation activities.
By doing so, she can throw mud at the Administration in ways that make it hard to hold her to account. She can, for instance, saying in a superficially factual way that the US 'appears to be' 'illegally' torturing detainees.
And that there is 'a' (unspecified) legal definition that she 'believes' would 'fit' 'reported' tactics.
Note that by refusing briefings and not reading the Justice Dept memo, she allows herself to remain usefully uncertain as to whether or not those tactics are in fact being used - and if so, under what circumstances.
All in all, why let statesmanship and the challenges of truly leading the country in a difficult time get in the way of destructive politicization of national security issues? Much easier for her to avoid any of that and continue to seek short-term political gain.
#75
I hear Aris saying he's worried about torturing innocents. Me too. Are we waterboarding everyone we detain?
Like so much of which passes for discussion of late, the problems of the few are extrapolated to the millions.
If Aris equates waterboarding with using electric drills on people's knees, perhaps we need some new definitions - and I think Bush has tried this, distinguishing torture from extreme interrogation techniques (or something like that)
Maybe the words should be 'abuse' and 'torture'. Waterboading and cold cells are abusive, but result in no permanent damage. Bamboo splints under the fingernails, breaking bones, and shooting folks in the back of the knee (remember "kneecapping"?) result in permanent damage.
On the other hand, sawing off someone's head is not the equivalent of torture, (even if waterboarding is torture,) it is murder, and doing it with the video camera running to terrify one's opponents is a new low in human existence. Which of course is exceeded by the reported baking of Iraqi children by al Qaeda. At least the savages didn't videotape it.
So we have at least four categories, ranging from bad (abuse,) through torture and murder, to the pinnacle of evil - the terrorist.
That about sums it up for me. What do you think, Aris?
Posted by: Bobby ||
10/08/2007 16:59 Comments ||
Top||
#76
Speaker Pelosi has carefully avoided being briefed precisely so that she can make accusations she knows from information received previously as a House committee member are not true, without it being exactly lying about specific cases.
Mike S., I agree President Bush isn't doing a good job making the arguments to the American people and the world. But at least part of the fault lies with journalists and politicians -- here and abroad -- cynically shouting, "Liar, liar!" no matter what he says, and no matter that they know better. That those who take their understanding from such have a Pavlovian response to trigger phrases only speaks to the effectiveness of such Goebellesque tactics.
Fortunately, Mr. Bush is not running in the coming election, and those better able to articulate key points are: Mr. Guiliani and Mr. Thompson, and Senator McCain, who provides a helpful rear guard from his impossible position.
Could Mike or Aris please explain to me why someone can give his kid brother a swirly, yet waterboarding is defined as torure?
Is it possible that we've gotten so deep into the PC hole that we now consider simple childs play to be torure?
Posted by: Mike N. ||
10/08/2007 17:15 Comments ||
Top||
#78
I think that most people right here in the USA will agree that waterboarding is torture.
That statement is disingenuous at best and just as easily outright misleading. Considering that the vast majority of Americans have little to no knowledge about Islam, their consequent opinions on how to define torture are rendered irrelevant.
We are confronted with an enemy so heinous that it forces the recalibration of nearly every single previously established war-fighting fundamental. The mere existence of taqiyya demands that we ignore in Islam everything that should be of substance in a more worthy foe.
This subsequently erodes all ability to rely upon conventional warfare in dealing with Muslims. Not just Muslim hostilessince terrorists can so easily submerge into a largely supportive community of co-religionistsbut Muslims in general because their professed and voluntarily adopted religion permits them a degree of deceit and treachery that makes every one of them a potentially great danger.
They do not approach battle in uniform and it makes their operations so difficult to detect that unconventional interrogation techniques are required to uncover them. Far more vile is that these un-uniformed Muslims do not blanch at committing the very worst atrocities known to man. Preventing such crimes against humanity preordains a singnificantly greater degree of harshness in how any captured enemy is interrogated. Considering how terrorists can be, literally, of nearly any age, nationality or gender, it makes ALL Muslims into possible enemies.
Islam's own choice of self-absolving doctrine makes it into a gigantic opponent whose every action must interpreted in the very worst light. That Muslims are willing to advance their political ideology by all means available makes it vital that we fight them by any means necessary. To do otherwise gives the enemy an irreversible advantage. The most cruel and disgusting element of this is that Islamthrough its barbarous savagery and indiscriminate slaughterDEMANDS that we foresake our own sense of well-established humanity. Muslims intentionally lever every best notion we have of fair play, justice, freedom and legality both against us and wholly in their own favor. They have ZERO right to decry any brutality demonstrated by those who remain determined to defeat Islam. Those in the West who assert that Islam must be treated humanely effectively collaborate with the enemy. They are free to implore others that they retain a sense of humanity, but in no way do they have the right to condemn those who are determined to defeat Islam.
One extremely simple question: If Islam possessed the West's nuclear arsenal and we did not, would we even be having this discussion? End of story.
#80
Yes, swirly. That's when you stick someones head in the toilet bowl and hit the flush button.
Posted by: Mike N. ||
10/08/2007 17:30 Comments ||
Top||
#81
All in all, why let statesmanship and the challenges of truly leading the country in a difficult time get in the way of destructive politicization of national security issues?
This is a question that most democrats will have to take with them to their graves. It is borderline criminal and represents nothing short of outright treason.
#82
Ab Snowman - heh Pelosi said reported interrogation tactics such as simulated drowning, head slapping and exposure to extreme temperatures would amount to banned torture.
Feel that way any time I read/hear an interview with members of the The 110th Congress.
#83
Spike and Aris in a single thread, and Gentle is added in? Three strikes!
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/08/2007 18:07 Comments ||
Top||
#84
Re #74 (lotp) Pelosi has refused to attend briefings about specific terror threats and about specific interrogation activities.
I did some of my research about this, and I found that she occasionally decided to not attend particular events. I did not find that she has refused to attend briefings on threats or interrogation activities as a rule or on principle or that she has avoided becoming informed about these subjects.
If you can correct me, then please link me to some article showing that she is avoiding such information. Thanks in advance for any link proving your point.
I don't think you prove much, however, by pointing out her absence at particular events. She is a busy person, and she has many opportunities to receive information at other events.
I am not interested in a link showing she missed a particular event. I want a link showing that she is systematically avoiding briefing opportunities on these subjects.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/08/2007 19:27 Comments ||
Top||
#85
Re #76 (Trailing Wife) at least part of the fault lies with journalists and politicians -- here and abroad -- cynically shouting, "Liar, liar!" no matter what he says, and no matter that they know better.
I don't think so on this particular question of whether waterboarding or exposure to extremely cold temperatures are fairly included in the category of "torture."
I suppose some people don't consider these techniques to be torture, but I think they're a small minority.
Let's do a thought experiment. Let's imagine that the Democrat ticket will be Al Sharpton and Dennis Kunich, and the Republican ticket will be Fred Thompson and Rudy Giuliani. Let's imagine further that each voter must vote honestly on a single issue: Is waterboarding torture? All yes votes go to the Democratic ticket, and all no votes go to the Republican tickets.
Not only would the Democrats win in a landslide, they would win in a landslide among registered Republicans.
Why, then, should any sensible Republicans support the Bush Administration's implicit denials that waterboarding is torture. It's a stupid, losing argument.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/08/2007 19:39 Comments ||
Top||
#86
Re #77 (Mike N) Could Mike or Aris please explain to me why someone can give his kid brother a swirly, yet waterboarding is defined as torure?
No, I don't think I can explain it to you, and I doubt that Aris can explain it either to you. I think you are impervious to any explanation.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/08/2007 19:42 Comments ||
Top||
#87
I suppose some people don't consider these techniques to be torture, but I think they're a small minority.
Please reconcile your assertion with the following: (Post #78)
the vast majority of Americans have little to no knowledge about Islam, [therefore] their consequent opinions on how to define torture are rendered irrelevant
Or do you argue that Islamic terrorism can be defeated using current conventional warfare and without any use of harsh interrogation techniques?
#88
Re #78 (Zenster) Considering that the vast majority of Americans have little to no knowledge about Islam, their consequent opinions on how to define torture are rendered irrelevant.
Our country's future policies will depend on the results of the next Presidential election. Some people will vote with the opinion that "the Moslem threat is so terrible that we should use torture a lot." Other people will vote with the opinion that we never should use torture, and some people will have an intermediate or no opinion.
This is only one issue of many, but it is a significant and emotional issue.
I think that you, Zenster, are in that first group, and I think you should recognize that it's a minority opinion.
Insulting the US voters with accusations that they are ignorant and that their opinions are irrelvant is not going to help you develop a majority between now and November 2008.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/08/2007 19:55 Comments ||
Top||
#89
Her opinion that the drownings and extreme temperatures are "torture" is a reasonable opinion, and I think most most people agree with that opinion.
Posted by Mike Sylwester
Spit.
In Minnesota we call those an early Spring dip in the lake.
#90
Pelosi and the rest of the dingbats are pure torture. They should do the rest of us a favor and resign so we don't have their plastic surgery smiles staring at us from the TV all the time.
#92
I'd disagre with your assertions. When faced with teh risk to American lives/cities/society, and teh ongoing violations of ALL tenets of the GC by our enemies and opponents. I bet I can rally a LARGE majority to not only approve rough treatment of our enemies, but a general applying of societal noogies to both you and Aris. Your simpering effete appeals matter nought when lives are at stake, especially since I don't see either of you condemning the kidnapping and murder of western soldiers/civilians. When have you spent the time to condemn bombing of girls' schools in Afghanistan? A quick search shows NOTHING. That's why I despise your mealy-mouthed nothingness
/rant
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/08/2007 20:10 Comments ||
Top||
#93
Re #87 (Zenster) do you argue that Islamic terrorism can be defeated using current conventional warfare and without any use of harsh interrogation techniques?
The selection of interrogation techniques is a minor and ambiguous consideration in the much larger questions of whether or how we will defeat Islamic terrorism.
I can imagine extraordinary situations in which the selection of interrogation techniques might be crucial. If we captured a Moslem terrorist who was about to dump a ton of anthrax over Manhattan, then it might turn out that historians might say that our defeat of Islamic terrorism required harsh interrogation techniques.
However, most situations are not crucial, and the factors are ambiguous.
When our country determines its policies about interrogation techniques, we have to balance many considerations -- legal opinions, popular opinions, military opinions, allied opinions, reliability, policy clarity, possibilities of retaliation, the willingness of enemy soldiers to surrender, and the effects on the population in the combat theater.
When weighing all these many and important considerations, few people conclude that we should use torture as a normal interrogation technique.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/08/2007 20:18 Comments ||
Top||
#94
#92 (Frank G) I don't see either of you condemning the kidnapping and murder of western soldiers/civilians. When have you spent the time to condemn bombing of girls' schools in Afghanistan? A quick search shows NOTHING.
Aris and I have been banned from Rantburg for the past two years. We weren't allowed to comment on anything at all.
Personally, I am in favor of bombing girls' schools, but I don't know whether Aris shares my opinion.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/08/2007 20:22 Comments ||
Top||
#95
Hey Mikey...
How-about some asteroids for Mecca and Qom.
I would vote for that!
#96
Once more Aris has managed to hijack a thread and use it to spread his stupidity for all to see. What a shame.
A friend of mine graduated from the Air Force interrogation school back in the late 1960's. He told me quite a bit about it. NOTHING HE SAID HE DID could be considered "torture" unless you make the definition of "torture" so broad that it covers everything. This seems to be what Aris and Nancy Peelotsi are attempting to do. There is no doubt that it will lead to more dead Americans, but that, too, seems to be what both Aris and Nancy want. Such people should be cursed by every thinking human being, both publically and privately. We are fighting people who behave worse than the demons of NAZI Germany or Tojo's Japan combined. Aris, you disgust me more than Hillary Clinton, and that takes some doing. Blessed are the idiots, because they're too stupid to know how childish and immoral they sound. Lots of idiots on the Left, both in our Congress and in Europe.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
10/08/2007 20:25 Comments ||
Top||
Where did I say that "we should use torture a lot"?
I think that you, Zenster, are in that first group
Fine, that's your opinion, now back it up with some cites and direct quotations or retract it.
Insulting the US voters with accusations that they are ignorant
Again, where did I accuse the US voters of being "ignorant". That's another strawman.
I said, "the vast majority of Americans have little to no knowledge about Islam". That is a matter of being under-informed or mis-informed but not necessarily "ignorant" overall. That is your own assertion and not mine.
Do you argue that the majority of American voters are well-informed or even moderately informed about Islam in general and Islamic terrorism in particular? Do you honestly think this is the case with morons like Rosie O'Donnell being given airtime to spew her truther bullshit? For that matter, even Bush continues to spout his Kool-Aid about Islam being the Religion of Peace. [spit]
Do you deny that all of this helps militate away from a full and proper understanding of Islam's severe character flaws, or do you deny that Islam is in dire need of reformation or suppression?
#100
few people conclude that we should use torture as a normal interrogation technique.
Keep slipping in those strawmen, Mike. Where did I say "that we should use torture as a normal interrogation technique"? Cites and direct quotations, please. Otherwise I invite you to retract your continued lies.
#101
Re #99 (Zenster) Nice bunch of strawmen there
I stand corrected. I am glad that you agree with me that we should not use torture a lot.
I also misinterpreted your statement:
Considering that the vast majority of Americans have little to no knowledge about Islam, their consequent opinions on how to define torture are rendered irrelevant.
I misunderstood that to mean that the vast majority of Americans are ignorant about Islam and that their consequent opinions on how to define torure are rendered irrelevant.
I was inaccurate to use the word "ignorant" in paraphrasing your opinion. I stand corrected on that point too.
Nevertheless, despite those two misinterpretations, I still expect you will have difficulties attracting a majority of the voters into your opinion between now and November 2008.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/08/2007 20:47 Comments ||
Top||
#102
Mike Sylwester,
Any chance you'll tell us if, in your opinion, a swirly is torture?
Posted by: Mike N. ||
10/08/2007 20:47 Comments ||
Top||
#103
I meant to say "use torture as a normal interrogation technique."
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/08/2007 20:48 Comments ||
Top||
#104
Re #102 (Mike N) Any chance you'll tell us if, in your opinion, a swirly is torture?
In my opinion, it is not. I am not interested in your opinion. Don't bother to share it with me, if you do not wish to do so.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/08/2007 20:50 Comments ||
Top||
#105
So if the U.S. substituted waterboarding with a swirly, would you then stand up and defend the practice?
Posted by: Mike N. ||
10/08/2007 20:54 Comments ||
Top||
#106
Sylwester, Katsaris & Zenster -- it's not a law firm, it's a bandwidth beast.
Anyone who has read his posts already knows his position. If stopping a U.S. city from catching a nuke meant we had to stuff a Muslim in a toaster, he'd be all for it.
You, I'm not so sure.
Mike, I'll ask you again. If the U.S. dumped waterboarding in favor of the good old fashioned swirly, would you support it?
Posted by: Mike N. ||
10/08/2007 21:12 Comments ||
Top||
#116
Butch,
Do you have anything to say about this topic?
Posted by: Mike N. ||
10/08/2007 21:13 Comments ||
Top||
#117
Butch comes to us from Canada, so factor that into your evaluation of his response.
#118
Re 107 (Butch Sneatle7489) And it's "masturbate", not "masterbate", oh wise one.
I noticed that too, but I was too proper to point it out. I wasn't the only one who looked away.
I'm glad we do have a spelling teacher in this thread, Butch, but remember the saying that those who cannot do -- teach. And those who cannot teach -- teach teaching.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/08/2007 21:20 Comments ||
Top||
#119
So, Mike S., you're in the camp of 'better that thousands are killed rather than losing the high moral ground'? That seems a bit stupid if you are one of the 'thousands dead', and that Ramsey Clark do-gooder barrister wouldn't allow you to raise your voice to his client to prevent the carnage, which revalidates the saying "Nice guys finish Last". This is the reletivist thinking the aclu uses, habeus corpus for all, and does not apply to islamic terrorists in the least, nada, zip, ever.
#120
Re #109 (Butch Sneatle7489) Aris & Mike: you can't just waltz back in here and talk sense and logic, you'll make their heads explode!
We'll all be banned by the end of the year. You too. Mizzou Mafia too.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/08/2007 21:24 Comments ||
Top||
#121
I still expect you will have difficulties attracting a majority of the voters into your opinion between now and November 2008.
So, now that you're starting to stick to facts, one more question. If the American public were fully aware of Islam's routine war crimes, constant human rights abuses, Abject Gender Apartheid, use of taqiyya and total disqualification from any protections by the Geneva Conventions, do you think that they would still remainpresuming you are right, which I personally doubtadamantly opposed to harsh interrogation techniques? Especially if they truly understood what life in America would be like under shari'a law?
Furthermore, do you deny that fully informing the public regarding these serious threats to our nation's security in time for the 2008 election cycle has only been made more difficult due to intentional media obsfucation and disinformation smear campaigns by the democrats?
#122
Re #108 (Frank G) I'm sure Aris & Spike responded to Fred's Paypal/Amazon plea, though.... right?
Maybe that's why he removed the ban. Every time I tried to donate money through this page's Paypal during the last two years, I got transfered right to a See American website.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/08/2007 21:28 Comments ||
Top||
#123
Mikey! I'm hurt, you skipped my question.
Posted by: Mike N. ||
10/08/2007 21:29 Comments ||
Top||
#124
..and you did too presumably.
From what I'm led to understand, Frank G. has set up a dedicated PayPal account to make regular contributions to Rantburg, Butch. I'll rely upon Frank to correct me if I'm wrong. It's something that I admire and wish I had the financial latitude to do myself. So, for now, unless you contribute to this site at all, I'll suggest that you go piss up a rope.
#125
Would you still think waterboarding is torture if we had a Democrat President?
Posted by: Mike N. ||
10/08/2007 21:33 Comments ||
Top||
#126
Re #115 (Mike N) I'll ask you again. If the U.S. dumped waterboarding in favor of the good old fashioned swirly, would you support it?
Gee, I unexpectedly find myself in an uncomfortable situation. I kind of promised Zenster that he could answer first for both of us.
I do promise, however, that if Zenster does not cover the issue fully, then I will add any tiny, itty-bitty comment that might still be needed to ensure absolute completeness of Zenster's and my mutual response.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/08/2007 21:34 Comments ||
Top||
#127
So, Mike S., you're in the camp of 'better that thousands are killed rather than losing the high moral ground'?
An important question and one that I hope you'll address, Mike. I gotta walk my mutt and will be back in a short while. As to swirlies, waterboarding is far more hygienic.
If the American public were fully aware of Islam's routine war crimes .... do you think that they would still remain ... adamantly opposed to harsh interrogation techniques?
I assume that by "harsh interrogation techniques" you mean methods like stress positions, white noise, nakedness, sleeplessness, yelling, ridicule, etc.
I think that most people who support "harsh interrogation techniques" would support them no matter whom we were fighting against.
In general, I myself think that using such methods is silly. And I think that getting outraged about such methods is silly too. If some US interrogation unit wants to waste its time and energy in this way, then I don't approve or protest. I just shrug my shoulders. Let them do their job as they see fit.
A unit interrogating in that manner is spending a lot of time on resistant captives, and using those "harsh" techniques is not going to break much resistence in many of them.
Most interrogation units will have only a few interrogators who speak the language well and who write thorough, accurate reports. You don't want to waste their time yelling at mules. But if you want to assign your low-ranking, inexperienced interrogators to spend a lot of time yelling at mules, then I think there is little harm. It's either that or assign them to paint rocks.
I do agree with you, Zenster, that if the American public were more aware of the danger that the USA faces from anthrax attacks and dirty bomb attacks here in the USA, then I think there would be more public support for accepting the possibility that the US might have to resort to torture in some extraordinary cases.
I myself understand that this was the situation in a very few cases, such as Sheikh Khalid Mohammed. I suspect also that the justification was inadequate in most other cases.
But I don't know. Instead of addressing my concerns and opinions, President Bush just says that the USA never has tortured any captives. His denial is ludicrous, in my opinion. I have to conclude that he is rather thoughtless on this issue.
I hope the Republicans' candidate for president will argue this issue a lot smarter. Otherwise this is a losing issue for the Republicans.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/08/2007 22:13 Comments ||
Top||
#135
Re 121 (Zenster): do you deny that fully informing the public regarding these serious threats to our nation's security in time for the 2008 election cycle has only been made more difficult due to intentional media obsfucation and disinformation smear campaigns by the democrats?
Is this a question for me or for Mike N?
Mike N, I trust you to answer this first for both of us. If you miss any points, then I'll add an appropriate comment of my own.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/08/2007 22:15 Comments ||
Top||
#136
Let them do their job as they see fit.
Curiously enough, I feel the exact same way. I trust America's military to do the right thing. Our politicians are another matter entirely. Far too many of them belong in the category of "traitor elite".
do you deny that fully informing the public regarding these serious threats to our nation's security in time for the 2008 election cycle has only been made more difficult due to intentional media obsfucation and disinformation smear campaigns by the democrats?
That one was directed specifically at you, Mike S. It represents a tipping point where the media and democrats have long had their thumb on the scale.
PS: If you're truly serious about contributing at Rantburg, just click on the main page's "E-Mail Me" link to ask Fred where a personal check or money order can be sent. Rantburg is the only Internet site I've ever donated to and never have I seen one more deserving. Totten and Yon are next on my list.
#137
RE: 134 My two cents. Americans will not give a rat's a$$ what kind of interrogation is used after the Muslims nuke a city or Beslan a school in America. Just how far away do you think we are from the Marines of WW II who willingly burned the Japanese from their holes with flame throwers, up close and personal? How far from the mass fire bombing of Japanese cities? As the Japanese ratcheted up the brutality, our forces matched them.
Americans are less ignorant than they were. The more they know, the less patience they have. The moral high ground will not last long if Muslim atrocities continue. The holiday from history is ending, and even the Left knows this.
Now pony up some green for that bandwith or go waste someone elses, Swyrlester.
Posted by: Mike N. ||
10/08/2007 23:08 Comments ||
Top||
#140
Re #137 (SR-71): Americans will not give a rat's a$$ what kind of interrogation is used after the Muslims nuke a city or Beslan a school in America.
If nothing like that happens before November 2008, however, there will be a strong desire to clarify our country's position on this issue.
The election might be decided by a narrow margin, as the most recent several elections will be decided. The decisive voters in the middle, who could go either way, might be affected by issues such as this.
The Democratic candidate will argue that the Bush Administration made too many rash decisions that turned out to be counter-productive. For example, our invasion of Iraq.
And for another example, that candidate will claim, the Bush Administration apparently tortured a hundred or so captives, got only a lot of useless misinformation in the process, and disgraced the USA in front of the entire world.
If the Republican candidate apes President Bush and says, oh, waterboarding is not torture, so we never tortured anyone, then guess what?
Guess this: Most of those central, swing voters will say, these Republicans think we are idiots who will swallow mindlessly whatever gruel we are fed. Those Republicans are crying wolf about terrorists all the time, and they are arrogant and reckless, and we think we will teach them a lesson by voting for the Democrat this time.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/08/2007 23:18 Comments ||
Top||
#141
So, Butch, when a Beslan shows up here, are you blaming it on Bush, or are you just saying it won't happen here and wring your hands? Dipshit.
#143
Word, SR-71. If a nuked city or an American Beslan is required, we will only have the media and this nation's democratswith then, perhaps, our own selvesto blame. In my entire life, never have I seen such a committed effort upon America's own shores to cloud and discourage this nation's resolve in a time of war.
Can you name any city nuked by Muslims or schools Beslaned in the US? So stfu.
Butch, it is obvious that you are painfully unaware of how terrorists have already been apprehended with floor plans for multiple American schools, not to mention specific drills oriented towards managing media coverage of how to slaughter preadolescent students with minimal blowback and public outrage. I'll ask that someone please provide a link to the "American Beslan" thread.
I'll also take this opportunity to ask you, Butch, about what sort of methods and measures should be used in fighting Islamic terrorism. Mind that if you cannot postulate any sort of viable strategy, then you are both morally and intellectually bankrupt with respect to your objections and criticisms at this site.
You've already ignored the way your challenge of Frank G. was disputed and disproved by both myselfwhom (to put it politely) Frank is less than fond ofand himself. More importantlyas notedyou have not proposed even the least alternative sort of solutions to defeating Islam's declared goal of subverting America's constitutional law and defying the general concept of human rights.
Any refusal or neglect to adequately address these questions will be interpreted as both voluntary and dedicated support for Islam's desire towards establishing a global caliphate.
#144
By the way Mike, that bridge was crossed a long time ago in the "stay the course" days. Anyone with 1/2 of a brain could recognize the BS coming out of the Casa Blanca for what it was, and the Republicans paid dearly. Here's hoping for a repeat in '08, because at this point, the Democrats can only do less damage.
#145
The donk candidate would be stupid to say that all we got was bad information. There are several good examples to disprove a moronic statement such as that one.
KSM is one. Feel free to look into the facts for yourself. Chickenshit.
Caution: It will take more effort than answering that yes or no question you haven't answered yet, so you might not be up for it.
Posted by: Mike N. ||
10/08/2007 23:34 Comments ||
Top||
#146
you have not proposed even the least alternative sort of solutions to defeating Islam's declared goal of subverting America's constitutional law and defying the general concept of human rights.
to adhere to your own basic tenets upon which your nation was built would be a first step. Otherwise you could just as easily be lumped in with the other (bad) side, tempting many to say "same shit, different pile". Realizing that you're not infallible is also a good step forward.
#148
And for another example, that candidate will claim, the Bush Administration apparently tortured a hundred or so captives, got only a lot of useless misinformation in the process, and disgraced the USA in front of the entire world.
Do you deny that the interests of national security most likely occludes any possible perception of what has, or has not, been garnered from harsh interrogation or even outright torture? You are being most disingenuous, Mike S.
If the Republican candidate apes President Bush and says, oh, waterboarding is not torture, so we never tortured anyone, then guess what?
Again, you rely upon the fundamentally biased platform cobbled together by media lies and the misrepresentations of so many democrats. You've already conceded how lack of timely information has likely and inappropriately swayed the opinion of America's electorate.
How in Hell are you able to continue doubting the way that public perception of "harsh interrogation" or even "torture" is almost entirely disconnected from reality by media distortion?
Need I remind youyes, you Mike S.of how the so-called "tortured" inmates of Iraq's ever-so-horrid al Ghraib prison literally BEGGED their American captors to come back, once they learned of how Iraqi officials were to take control of the institution?
Please explain that one away, especially so in the context of our deplorable "torture" and persistent violations of human rights.
#150
because at this point, the Democrats can only do less damage
Speaking as a lifelong democratic voter who will NEVER vote democrat againquite possibly likely in my entire lifetimethis is more than less than hilarious.
#151
Mods, please consider rolling this thread over into tomorrow so that assholes like Aris, Butch and Darrell can post more substantial truthful replies.
Two Utah men are accused of trying to illegally export surplus pieces of F-14 fighter jets, a plane that is flown only in Iran. Abraham Trujillo, 61, and David Waye, 22, both of Ogden, are alleged to have tried exporting the parts to Canada, but the charges don't specify how they supposedly got the parts and don't list all buyers. Trujillo and Waye were charged Friday with three counts each of attempting to export a defense article without a license. Penalties can carry 10 years in prison and a $1 million fine per count.
The U.S. attorney's office says federal immigration agents discovered a Web site with listings of F-14 parts offered by Trujillo and his Ogden business, NSN Specialists. Over several months in 2006 and 2007, agents bought cable assemblies and other F-14 and F-4 jet items from Trujillo.
The U.S. sold the F-14 to Iran in the 1970s when it was under the rule of the Western-friendly shah. In 1979, the shah was deposed, and the U.S. eventually banned the sale of military equipment to Iran.
Iran, trying to maintain its F-14s, is aggressively seeking components from the retired U.S. Tomcat fleet. Members of Congress have expressed concerns about the Department of Defense selling surplus F-14 parts because they're worried they could wind up in Iranian aircraft.
Posted by: trailing wife ||
10/08/2007 15:58 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Iran
#1
Here's an idea. How about hanging them using those cable assemblies they were trying to sell as the nooses?
#2
Oh, for some creative counter-espionage ops. How about we take some of those cables and subject them to certain conditions to invisibly degrade their capability - hydrogen embrittlement comes to mind, but there are others. Then let them enter the world of black market arms deals.
#5
The US has a great chance to outfit dozens of its old F-14's as cruise missiles, strap in some of the many Iranian operatives we've captured in Iraq, and send them to bomb their own mullahs, and post the "martyrdom" videos on the internet at the same time. Talk about plausible deniability.
The Ohio State Capitol in Columbus will be the setting for a curious convocation later this month when it hosts an event featuring several well-known Islamic extremists as part of an interfaith conference entitled, The Many Faces of Islam. The conference, which is to be held in the atrium of the Statehouse on Sunday, October 28th, will feature two well-known speakers with multiple connections to the HAMAS international terrorist organization, a host of convicted terrorist leaders, and colleagues who fled the US to avoid prosecution on terrorism-related charges. The event is sponsored by the Interfaith Association of Central Ohio.
One of the featured speakers at the conference will be Anisa Abd El Fattah, the chair of the National Association of Muslim American Women based in Columbus. Fattah is best known for co-authoring two books with current HAMAS spokesman Ahmed Yousef, The Agent: The Truth Behind the Anti-Muslim Campaign in America and Al-Aqsa Intifada. Yousef fled the US in 2005 to avoid prosecution in the Fawaz Damra terrorist support trial and reappeared in Gaza as the official spokesman for HAMAS, a position he still holds. One recent report in Asharq Alawsat described Fattahs co-author Yousef as The Smiling Face of HAMAS. President Clinton identified HAMAS as a Specially Designated Terrorist Organization in a January 1995 executive order.
Both Yousef and Fattah worked together at the United Association for Studies and Research (UASR), where Fattah served respectively as both president and director of public affairs. Yousef and Fattah also co-edited the UASRs quarterly publication, the Middle East Affairs Journal. As UASR director of public affairs, Fattah issued a press statement in March 2004 condemning the assassination of HAMAS founder Sheikh Yassin and saying that Yassin, who had ordered numerous suicide bombings targeting civilians and was responsible for the death of hundreds of innocent men, women and children, was a man of peace.
UASR was founded in 1989 by Mousa abu Mazook, who currently serves as the Deputy Chief of the HAMAS political bureau in Damascus, Syria, and has been listed as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist by the US government in 1995. According to a February 1993 New York Times article, convicted HAMAS terrorist operative and former UASR employee, Mohammed Salah, told federal authorities that UASR served as the political command of HAMAS in the United States. Another 2004 report by investigative journalist Scott Wheeler, Alleged Terrorist Threat Operates in DC Suburb, describes multiple ties between UASR and al-Qaeda.
This past May, UASR was named as unindicted co-conspirator by federal prosecutors in the current Holy Land Foundation terror financing trial. During the trial, FBI agent Lara Burns testified that UASR was part of the Muslim Brotherhoods Palestine Committee in America. A 1991 Palestine Committee document introduced as evidence shows that the head of UASR, a position Fattah previously held, was a part of the Central Committee, and states that UASR was the official organization which represents the media and the cultural aspects to support the cause [HAMAS]. The recording of that history of Islamic work for Palestine and providing a frame for media, political and cultural address is done through it.
Fattahs ties to terror are not limited to heading the primary political front group for HAMAS in the US and co-authoring two books with the terrorist groups current spokesman. In fact, Fattah was actively involved the in formation of the American Muslim Council, which was founded and led by convicted terrorist leader and fundraiser, Abdurahman Alamoudi. Her own bio states that she has been credited with developing the blueprint for what later became the American Muslim Council, and served for nearly 10 years as an unofficial advisor, indicating her critical role in the planning and continued operations of the organization. She was also a founding board member of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).
As one of the foremost spokesman for HAMAS in the US, Fattah has published a litany of screeds denouncing Zionism and promoting violence against Israeli civilians. A letter to the editor she had published last month in the Columbus Dispatch (Israelis in Gaza arent civilians), Fattah indicated that any Israeli man, woman or child in Gaza was fair game for terror attacks: There are no Israeli civilians in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem. There are only illegal Jewish settlers, who, by Israeli law, are also citizen-soldiers. They are heavily armed with fully automatic weapons.
In a May 2006 article, Condemning Zionism is crucial to world peace, Fattah rages against Israel, arguing that Zionism is an evil and racist ideology that not only directly contrasts everything we profess to stand for as a country, but that also violates every relevant divine, human rights, or other law, including our own laws, as well as every norm of decency known to the human species. She concludes her article by adding that Zionism was attempting to expand into Sudan through Darfur, and thus, responsible for the genocidal violence there, rather than the Islamic government in Khartoum.
An April 2006 article by Fattah, A Religious History of Justice and Palestine, begins with her pronouncement that [t]he racist and colonizing legacy of the Zionist Christian Church, and the Synagogue continues into the 21st Century .
This is one of the featured speakers at the interfaith conference at the Ohio State Capitol.
Also appearing with Fattah on the interfaith panel is Robert D. Crane, who according to his bio served on the UASR Board of Directors from 1996 until its demise after Ahmed Yousef fled the country, and also was instrumental along with Fattah and convicted terrorist leader Abdurahman Alamoudi in the formation of the American Muslim Council, where he was the director of the groups legal division. He also was the managing editor, in cooperation with co-editors Fattah and HAMAS spokesman Ahmed Yousef, of the UASRs Middle East Affairs Journal. He is currently an editor for The American Muslim online magazine.
Additionally, Crane served as the director of publications for the International Institute for Islamic Thought (IIIT), which in 2004 the Washington Post described as the center of the DC-area terror financing network that was set up in the 1980s largely by onetime Brotherhood sympathizers with money from wealthy Saudis. In 1992, IIIT established a partnership with the World Islam and Studies Enterprise (WISE) at the University of South Florida, which was led by Sami al-Arian, the North American leader of Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Another WISE founder, Ramadan Abdulah Shallah, fled the US in 1995 and is currently the head of Palestinian Islamic Jihad based in Syria. WISE received more than $50,000 in funding from IIIT, while much of the IIITs funding came from the SAAR Network, which was raided by federal authorities as part of Operation Greenquest.
If it werent troubling enough that a major HAMAS operative and another individual with multiple connections to terrorist organizations and convicted terrorist leaders were featured speakers at an event at the Ohio State Capitol, the news that outspoken terror apologist Abukar Arman, who was the subject of a FrontPage exposé just a few months ago, Hometown Jihad: The Somali Terror Apologist Next Door, which led to his forced resignation from the board that oversees Central Ohio Homeland Security (see Terrorist Sympathizer Tossed from Homeland Security Panel), is the individual responsible for organizing this interfaith conference will hopefully get the attention of Ohio state legislators. Abukar Arman is a board member of the Interfaith Association of Central Ohio, and he is listed as the contact person for the event and identified as a member of the groups Education and Executive Committees.
An additional note worth mentioning is that an August 11th conference scheduled to be held at the US Capitol in Washington DC featuring Fattah, Abukar Arman, and CAIR national vice chairman Ahmad Al-Akhras (also a Columbus, Ohio resident and the subject of a FrontPage exposé, Hometown Jihad: Getting By With a Little Help From His (Terrorist) Friends), was cancelled the day before the event and denied entry by the US House of Representatives Sergeant-at-Arms when the extremist background of the speakers was discovered.
What remains to be seen is whether officials responsible for booking this conference at the Ohio Statehouse were aware of the extremist views of the scheduled speakers, and whether a sponsoring Ohio legislator was needed to book the event. But in light of the precedent recently established by the US House Sergeant-at-Arms in denying these extremists from holding their event in such a prominent public venue, perhaps Ohio legislative leaders will be prompted to reconsider their tacit endorsement for these terror-tied extremists and the legitimacy that such an event held in the political epicenter of Ohio would give them.
#1
I'm afraid Governor Strickland is willfully blind in his fondness for CAIR and their fellow travellers. He spoke at CAIR's annual dinner in Columbus this past June. link
The comments are rather interesting, I thought, if only because they're being posted at a newspaper blog rather than Rantburg.
#3
BOGGLE Arrest them all and detain them for however long it takes to rustle up some sort of charges that will stick. I don't care if it's for spitting on the sidewalk.
From Wall Street Journal, dunno how long the free linky will last:
Since summer, one of North America's most important oil towns has witnessed a disappearing act. The mammoth storage tanks that blanket the rolling grasslands around this remote prairie town had been filled to the brim with crude oil. They aren't anymore. Since May, millions of barrels of crude have been sold off, and Cushing's inventory has fallen by nearly 35%.
Oil traders around the globe obsess about inventory. Storage levels have fallen, not just in Cushing, but in other oil depots as well. Fearful that the U.S. cushion of spare fuel could hit a low by year-end, traders drove prices to a record of nearly $84 a barrel last month. On Friday, oil closed at $81.22 on the New York Mercantile Exchange, up 33% this year.
The reasons Cushing's crude has been disappearing are surprisingly complex, and shed light on the growing involvement of speculators in the global oil market. Tanks are emptying partly because producers have been straining to keep up with demand. But investment banks and other financial firms also played a part by abruptly shifting their oil-trading strategies this summer. Even the credit crunch sparked by the subprime mortgage fiasco had an effect.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Seafarious ||
10/08/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: Global Jihad
#1
Oil prices are at their all time height and oddly enough people are selling the stockpiled quantities? Hardly a mystery.
#2
It is imperative that people are educated on how this industry works. This is a global issue and it is only getting more dire. It is also imperative that government stay out of it because they f everything up to the max.
#4
What a dumb question from the Journal. There is pre-Summer hoarding every year. This year, concerns about Iranian aggression has caused extended hoarding. Available oil is either being stored by the retailers, or held in trust by the producers. The oil is out there and conditions are ideal for more exploration. However, we need to grant heavy subsidies to those who convert their vehicles to natural gas or propane fuel use, if not hybrid or electrical.
#5
The worldwide economic boom (especially in China and India) is responsible for the high crude futures prices. Commodity prices are very responsive to supply/demand imbalances and there is no reason for prices to drop in the foreseeable future.
#6
That yes, plus the whole damned thing is rigged.
I'm sick and tired of hearing how a "Dynamic" market is better for me the consumer. It hasn't done shit for me, it only serves to fatten up the vultures.
#7
Oil tanks "stretching to the horizon" seems a bit of a ... stretch. Map
Posted by: Bobby ||
10/08/2007 6:05 Comments ||
Top||
#8
I trield Google Map's new linking feature and managed to blow it.
Google map Cushing, OK and go south of town, east of the airport.
Posted by: Bobby ||
10/08/2007 6:07 Comments ||
Top||
#9
bigjim-ky; 30 years ago we had a 'non-dynamic' market, with shortages and lines (AND high prices). For the moment the dynamic market has mostly kept the shortages and lines away. For this accomplishment the vultures expect to be paid.
Fear not - before too much longer even they won't be able to help.
#10
It's a troubled market because of government interference. The restrictions on refinery building and exclusion of exploitable land is not of non-governmental making. We can point to China and India, but when we have the capacity for self service here within our own border, its all about 'will' not about resources.
#11
Bobby's right in #7 & 8 - I drive the skyway through Gary, Indiana every month or so - google over there and see how you could take all of Cushing and scatter it amongst the mills and nobody would even notice. Perhaps it stands out more noticably in the Okla. prairie, but it's really not that significant as storage goes.
Former prime minister Benazir Bhutto spoke of risks to her life as Pakistani Taliban were quoted as saying they would launch suicide attacks against her, when she returns home. I know there are security risks, people who want to kill me and to scuttle the restoration of democracy, Bhutto said in an interview with the Sunday Times.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under: Taliban
Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl (JUI-F) Secretary General Maulana Abdul Ghafoor Haideri and Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) Punjab Ameer Liaquat Baloch are trying to save the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA), which is on the verge of collapse after serious differences arose between JI Ameer Qazi Hussain Ahmed and JUI-F chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman over the dissolution of the NWFP Assembly and en bloc resignations from the assemblies, Daily Times learnt here on Sunday. The JUI-F and JI are the biggest components of the five-party religious alliance.
Qazi, Fazl not on speaking terms: Sources said that MMA President Qazi Hussain Ahmed and MMA Secretary General Maulana Fazlur Rehman were not on speaking terms. Haideri and Baloch held a meeting to defuse the tension between the two leaders. The sources said that another meeting was expected in the next few days to resolve the issue. Haideri told Daily Times, It is true that I have met with Baloch to resolve the crisis although the JI deserted the JUI-F on the issue of the NWFP Assemblys dissolution.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under: Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal
From an interview of Iraqi parliament speaker Mahmud al-Mashhadani, conducted by Kathleen Ridolfo, an Iraq analyst at Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty.
al-Mashhadani: .... Iranian influence [in Iraq] is clear and present. As parliamentarians, we cannot do anything but open dialogue with the Iranians and urge them not to interfere, and insist on our demands that they should not interfere.
Concerning the security level, there are the executive bodies -- the ministries of Defense and Interior. These have some kind of agreements on reducing the arms smuggling. The ideal solution is an Iraqi solution -- dismantling of the militias and their canceling. .... If all rivals are brought to the parliament and to the political arena, and all the militia-like or terrorist groups that reject the political process are decapitated, then no one will be able to interfere in our internal affairs. ....
RFE/RL: Let me ask you about the ... the Sunni resistance. .... Will there be some kind of reconciliation coming?
Al-Mashhadani: In fact, we have reached a really great achievement in the separation of the resistance from Al-Qaeda. .... Now, we are on the way to opening talks with them [the resistance] so that they can join the political process. ....
There are some obstacles. There are some people from the resistance who have got involved in certain crimes similar to Al-Qaeda. There is dialogue on how we should deal with this group whose majority -- we believe -- can be drawn in the political process. Through that, we would put an end to military operations, for instance by setting a timetable for a real withdrawal, sovereignty, and a full independence. We see that their demands are reasonable ....
Moreover, they have representatives in the parliament. [Shi'ite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr's Imam] Al-Mahdi Army has its representatives in the parliament, the Islamic Army has its representatives in the parliament -- all of them have their representatives in the parliament. But, their representatives in the parliament work hard to persuade them [to lay down arms in support of] the political process. .... Our situation now is that the political approach has succeeded and prevailed over the language of a military approach. And this is a really great achievement.
RFE/RL: The deposed Ba'ath Party of says that it is working to liberate Iraq. .... What is their role on the ground in Iraq? ....
Al-Mashhadani: A part of the Ba'ath Party has fled from Iraq, another part is imprisoned, another part is fighting, and another part has quietly and peacefully infiltrated government institutions to work there and make a living. The part that has fled from Iraq does not interest us. It does not have any influence. As for the part that has stayed in Iraq fighting, we have started to get closer to them in slow steps and we understand what they want.
We have the law on responsibility and justice [that has replaced the old de-Ba'athification law], which they, I think, are now somewhat rejecting. We can persuade them that this is the best we can offer them.
Also, they resist the occupation. Well, if we get full sovereignty and our genuine forces are built up, and if real democracy is established through the Iraqi parliament, which is now close to succeeding in the democratic process, then they will no longer have any justification for saying, "We are convinced in the democratic process, but we believe that the foreign presence has caused problems to us."
We are now close to solving the obstacle of the foreign presence in Iraq. By agreement of the parties involved, we try to foster the role of the United Nations; there is a wish that a schedule for the withdrawal is set; there is a wish that the [foreign forces] do not stay. All this will depend on whether we manage to control the security in Iraq."
RFE/RL: ... Sunni Vice President Tariq al-Hashimi ... has made some statements in recent days that he is in talks with some other political parties in the parliament to push a new national compact, a national-unity agreement. Is this agreement going to take hold? ....
Al-Mashhadani: ..... it seems that the national compact was already made when we agreed on the political program, on the basis of which we formed the government. And that is a successful program. But the problem is in implementation, not in written programs. I can write programs that you will like. But who will implement the program? And what is the will for its implementation? What is the mechanism for making decisions on the implementation? That is where the disagreement is.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/08/2007 17:31 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under: Iraqi Insurgency
#1
JOE BIDEN OP-ED > FEDERALISM CAN WORK IN IRAQ, IF THEY/WE WANT IT TO.
Things are getting interesting over there!
General David Petraeus's decision to out the Iranian ambassador to Iraq as a member of the Quds Force coincides with a new tribal outreach campaign aimed at prying Iraqi Shiites in the south from the grip of Iran's powerful security services.
American and Iraqi forces and intelligence agencies in August began to send emissaries to southern Iraqi tribal sheiks in an effort to recruit a Shiite version of the Anbar Salvation Front, the Sunni tribal chieftains who aligned themselves against Al Qaeda. In this case, however, the plan is aimed largely at turning the local population in five key cities Basra, Karbala, Kut, Najaf, and Nasiriyah against Iran's Revolutionary Guard and the militias that the guard largely controls.
In the last two months in particular, General Petraeus, the top American commander in Iraq, has blamed a good deal of the violence in Iraq on Iranian meddling. He went much further yesterday, telling CNN that the Iranian ambassador in Baghdad, Hassan Kazemi Qomi, was a member of the country's Quds Force, the elite terrorist training arm of the Revolutionary Guard.
With the new information now confirmed by General Petraeus, any future talks with the Iranians over their role in fueling the insurgency in Iraq are unlikely. The Quds Force not only is implicated in planning attacks on American soldiers, it also is "implicated in the assassination of some governors in the southern provinces," the general said.
He added that there was no chance he would return the Iranians captured in operations since January, a key demand of Mr. Qomi. The New York Sun reported in April that those Iranians are being held in jails run both by Iraq's Sunni intelligence service and the American military. In yesterday's interview, the general said there was no debate that the men captured were members of the Quds Force.
Of the negotiations with Iran, General Petraeus said America was in "show-me mode." A number of Iraqi leaders have traveled to Tehran and asked that the Iranians "stop the lethal assistance," he said. "There have been sub-ambassadorial meetings, as well. And there have been assurances in return, actually from Iran to Iraqi leaders, and we are waiting to see if those assurances bear fruit."
The outreach effort began in August, a military officer said yesterday, and the CIA, the Army, and the Iraqi security agencies are coordinating meetings with local tribal leaders. "In a lot of cases, we are gauging interest," the officer, who requested anonymity, said. Any effort like this is not likely to show signs of success until early next year, he added.
Another component of the southern tribal outreach is to draw elements of Moqtada al-Sadr's militia, the Mahdi Army, into the government, separating those elements of the militia believed to be controlled by members of the Revolutionary Guard.
A militia affiliated with the Supreme Iraqi Islamic Council, known as the Badr Brigade, was trained by the Revolutionary Guard when Iran harbored the organization before the war. However, the leader of the SIIC, Ayatollah Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, announced in June that his organization no longer accepted the Shiite doctrine associated with Iran's Islamic revolution called the Rule of Jurisprudence, or the notion that Shiite clerics should also wield political power in Shiite states. After his declaration, Ayatollah Hakim flew to Iran for surgery, leading some American analysts to doubt the sincerity of the group's conversion.
The tribal outreach campaign with the Shiites is meant in part to marginalize the Shiite theology of the leader of the 1979 Iranian revolution, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the military officer said. "We are trying to make the case that he was an infidel," he said.
For much of this year, the U.S. military strategy in Iraq has sought to reduce violence so that politicians could bring about national reconciliation, but several top Iraqi leaders say they have lost faith in that broad goal. So even if the surge is working, we're still quagmired.
Iraqi leaders argue that sectarian animosity is entrenched in the structure of their government but certainly not in the tribal culture. Instead of reconciliation, they now stress alternative and perhaps more attainable goals: streamlining the government bureaucracy, placing experienced technocrats in positions of authority and improving the dismal record of providing basic services like controlling their borders.
"I don't think there is something called reconciliation, and there will be no reconciliation as such," said Deputy Prime Minister Barham Salih, a Kurd. "To me, it is a very inaccurate term. This is a struggle about power."
Humam Hamoudi, a prominent Shiite cleric and parliament member, said any future reconciliation would emerge naturally from an efficient, fair government, not through short-term political engineering among Sunnis and Shiites. "Reconciliation should be a result and not a goal by itself," he said. "You should create the atmosphere for correct relationships, and not wave slogans that 'I want to reconcile with you.' " Except in the US Congress and several other guilt-ridden European contries.
Posted by: Bobby ||
10/08/2007 08:29 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: Iraqi Insurgency
#1
I'm unsure about the Reconciliation goal as well ... the reconciliation desperately needed within the US!
#2
Some people won't believe anything is being accomplished until the hot and cold running champagne faucets are in place and the diamond dust mountains are shimmering all around baghdad...
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
10/08/2007 11:32 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I question anything the pants on the head retards up at state do.
#4
the U.S. military strategy in Iraq has sought to reduce violence so that politicians could bring about national reconciliation, but several top Iraqi leaders say they have lost faith in that broad goal.
Just as those "several top Iraqi leaders" continue to foment sectarian violence, mobilize personal militias and skim off millions in revenues at every opportunity.
Iraqi leaders argue that sectarian animosity is entrenched in the structure of their government
Perish the effing thought that they might somehow abandon these centuries-old blood feuds they've been fighting over how somebody's thrice removed Uncle in-law cheated his way to a win in the final heat of their regional holiday camel races.
Instead of reconciliation, they now stress alternative and perhaps more attainable goals:
Like getting the car bombings down to only one or two a day.
streamlining the government bureaucracy
Unless it means getting their fat arse out of office or firing the twelve different cousins they've managed to featherbed at the ministry.
placing experienced technocrats in positions of authority
But only if they're bought and paid for like every other minor official in the entire Iraqi mafia government.
and improving the dismal record of providing basic services
That they've sat back and whined about how long its taken our sweating soldiers and CBs to put in place for them at no charge.
Screw all of these wannabe warlord gangster sectarian-baiting poverty pimps and the camels they rode in on.
Iraqs government said on Sunday that the death toll from last months shooting involving Blackwater security guards stood at 17, six more than it had previously reported, and accused the guards of deliberate killing.
Spokesman Ali Al-Dabbagh said in a statement that an investigative committee set up by Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki had found no evidence that the private American security firm had come under fire during the incident.
He said Blackwater guards had violated rules governing the use of force in the September 16 incident when the firm was escorting a US convoy in Baghdad, and should be held accountable, reported Reuters. Iraqs cabinet would look at the recommendations presented by the committee and by a joint US-Iraqi investigation and take the legal steps to hold the company to account, Dabbagh said.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under: Iraqi Insurgency
#1
I agree that the shootings were deliberate. And they most likely even hit what they were aiming at. I only disagree with the conclusion that they were not justified in aiming at those people.
#2
investigative committee set up by Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki had found no evidence that the private American security firm had come under fire during the incident.
The top US military commander in Iraq, Gen David Petraeus, has accused Iran's ambassador of belonging to an elite unit of Iran's Revolutionary Guards.
Gen Petraeus said Hassan Kazemi-Qomi was a member of the Quds Force, which the US believes backs foreign Islamic revolutionary movements.
Gen Petraeus said he had no doubt Iran was behind attacks that had led to the deaths of US soldiers.
Iran has so far not commented, but regularly denies any such involvement.
Separately, the US military said it had captured three Iranian-linked Shia militiamen believed responsible for abducting five British security contractors in May.
Gen Petraeus made his comments during a briefing to journalists at a US military base near Iraq's border with Iran.
Gen Petraeus said the Iranian ambassador to Iraq was a "Quds Force member", but added: "Now he has diplomatic immunity and therefore he is obviously not subject [to scrutiny]. He is acting as a diplomat."
Mr Kazemi-Qomi has twice met US counterpart Ryan Crocker this year to discuss Iraqi stability.
"There should be no question about the malign, lethal involvement and activities of the Quds Force in this country."
Iran admits the existence of the Quds Force but gives few details of its activities. Analysts believe it is behind funding of such groups as Hamas and Hezbollah.
Gen Petraeus said: "There should be no question about the malign, lethal involvement and activities of the Quds Force in this country." He said Iran was "responsible for providing the weapons, the training, the funding and in some cases the direction for operations that have indeed killed US soldiers".
Gen Petraeus said Iran was implicated in the car-bomb assassinations of two provincial governors in southern Iraq in August.
The BBC's Jon Brain in Baghdad says some analysts believe the US is deliberately ramping up the rhetoric against the Iranian authorities to prepare public opinion for possible military strikes against Revolutionary Guard facilities within Iran.
Gen Petraeus also delivered a more upbeat message on security in Baghdad in the wake of this year's "surge" by US and Iraqi forces. He said in some parts of the capital it was secure enough for him to walk down the street unprotected.
"Certainly in places you could do that. You could walk right down Haifa street right now," Gen Petraeus said. But he added: "Nobody will let me do it."
The general said he was not "naive" and knew there was an ever-present threat of bomb attacks.
"If you say: 'Will there be a time when you can walk around Baghdad?', obviously I hope that will be realised in the future."
Meanwhile, the US military said it had captured the three alleged Shia militia fighters in a raid on Saturday in Sadr City, Baghdad. The fighters were believed to be involved in kidnapping four British security guards and a computer expert from Iraq's finance ministry.
Sunday also saw Iraqi security officials report that bomb attacks in Baghdad had killed at least nine people. Two of the blasts targeted security patrols, but, in both cases, the victims were civilians.
A third bomb exploded near the Baghdad provincial council building, killing three bystanders.
Posted by: lotp ||
10/08/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Iran
Security forces foiled seven suicide attacks in Israel over the past month and a half, Shin Bet head Yuval Diskin told the cabinet Sunday morning, adding that the apparent lull in terror was attributable to the vigilance of the IDF, Shin Bet and other security apparatuses.
Diskin also noted a marked decline in the number of Kassam rockets fired at Israel, from 110 a month in August to 85 in September. According to Shin Bet assessments, the figures were the result of the Hamas making a strategic decision to cease rocket fire.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: Hamas
"Captured IDF soldier Gilad Schalit is being looked after and is in good condition," jailed Fatah Tanzim leader Marwan Barghouti told Labor Knesset Member Nadia Hilu during a meeting in Ayalon Prison on Sunday.
Barghouti also claimed that he was included on the list of 350 prisoners Hamas was demanding be released in a prisoner swap deal for the captured IDF soldier.
He also told Hilu that the Palestinians wanted to make a success of the Annapolis conference and expressed his determination to join the efforts to bring this about. "Barghouti is a man who can influence the Palestinian public, who can open doors and who can bring about changes that other Palestinian figures can't," Hilu told The Jerusalem Post after the meeting. "He's respected by the Palestinians, and also by many of the Israeli Arabs I represent. If freeing him would help get Schalit's release, and if Barghouti will be able to move the peace process forward and be a positive influence toward the summit, then I support his early release."
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under: Fatah
Prime Minister Fouad Saniora criticized Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah's call for direct popular presidential elections, saying this could lead to one sect crushing the other. "This proposal is, in principle, against the constitution," the daily An Nahar on Saturday quoted Saniora's sources as saying. "At the very least, one could say about this proposal that it would lead to one sect defeating the other," Saniora said.
On Nasrallah's accusations that Israel committed the serial killings in Lebanon to facilitate creation of an international tribunal that would be used to topple Syrian President Bashar Assad's regime, Saniora said: "No one brushed aside that possibility. It is likely."
However, Saniora, wondered that if Israel was behind those killings, "is it by chance that it chose its targets from March 14 only?"
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: Hezbollah
#1
YNETNEWS Op-Eds > THE IRANIAN BEAR HUG. Iran is a problem for peace-minded Arabs and Muslims, Not just Israel; + IRAN IS OUR PROBLEM.
#2
REDDIT > OPEDNEWS > There is a 90% chance that Iff a US-Iran Conflict occurred, Iran will use its SCUDS/IRBMS, etc. to attack US milfors and facilities in the ME, plus source claims Russia advised USA may go on a "FULL WAR FOOTING" after this weekend; + TOPIX NEWS > USA MAY ATTACK IRAN BTWN JANUARY-APRIL 2008?
Lebanons next president must find a way to integrate Hezbollah guerrillas into the army and set ties with Syria on a new footing after the black decades of the past, presidential hopeful Boutros Harb said yesterday.
Hezbollahs arsenal is a divisive issue in Lebanon, where rival political camps are trying to agree on who should replace pro-Syrian President Emile Lahoud when his term ends on November 23.
Harb, one of two Maronite Christian candidates endorsed by the anti-Syrian majority bloc, said Lebanon could not continue with a Hezbollah mini-state inside the state.
The Shia militant group, which is backed by Syria and Iran, has sworn to use its weapons only against Israel. Harb said a priority for any new president who must be a Maronite in Lebanons sectarian power-sharing system should be to reconvene a national dialogue to discuss how Hezbollahs military power could be brought under state control so that only the government could decide on matters of war and peace. Whenever we have a state and government ready to fight for the countrys independence, at that moment Hezbollah will not have a pretext to continue having their arms and well invite them to be part of the institutions of the state, he added.
Sunni, Druze and Christian factions which command a slim majority in parliament say Hezbollah dragged Lebanon into an unwanted conflict last year by seizing two Israeli soldiers in a cross-border raid to trade for Lebanese held in Israel.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: Hezbollah
U.S. Congressmen are lobbying against signing a deal with Lebanese contractor Wadih Abbsy to build the new U.S. Embassy compound in the Saudi capital of Riyadh, accusing him of financially backing Free Patriotic Movement leader Michel Aoun, a Kuwaiti newspaper reported Sunday.
The newspaper al-Rai said some congressmen have launched a campaign against granting contracts to Abbsy for building U.S. embassies "because they confirm that he is one of the financial backers of Gen. Michel Aoun, who heads the Lebanese Change and Reform (Parliamentary) Bloc."
The report said Aoun is openly branded in Congress halls as a "licker of Syrian boots, a phrase used by Rep. Gary Ackerman in his address to congress while lobbying for approval of a new resolution pressuring Syria into halting its intervention in Lebanon's affairs and putting an end to the campaign of terror against the March 14 movement."
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under: Hezbollah
Anti-Syrian lawmaker Wael Abu Faour poured scorn on claims by Hassan Nasrallah that Israel is responsible for the spate of political assassinations in the country.
He said that such remarks by the Hezbollah leader cleared the way for another politically motivated killing, by attempting to absolve Syria of any blame for the murders.
In a televised speech broadcast Friday evening to his supporters to mark Al-Quds (Jerusalem) Day, Nasrallah accused Israel of killing anti-Syrian figures in Lebanon to cause strife and drag his militant movement into fighting other Lebanese communities. He said Israel has a network of agents working in Lebanon who are responsible for the assassinations. "If Israel is indeed to blame for what is happening in Lebanon, why is the Hezbollah-led opposition working to thwart the establishment of an international court to try the killers of the former prime minister [Rafik Hariri]," Abu Faour asked.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under: Hezbollah
#1
I was temepted to say he should be first, but even if Nasrallah lived to be 138, his death would still be part of a plot by the Jooos.
Posted by: Bobby ||
10/08/2007 5:55 Comments ||
Top||
#2
even if Nasrallah lived to be 138, his death would still be part of a plot by the Jooos.
Who cares? Living Nasrallah = More dead Jews. Dead Nasrallah = Happy dance!
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Sunday that he was not asking for talks with the United States but they would be possible if Washington changed its policy toward Tehran, the official Web site reported.
Referring to last week's comment by US President George W. Bush of Washington's willingness to negotiate with Iran if it suspended its nuclear program, Ahmadinejad responded, "we firstly say that we never asked for negotiations with the United States. Negotiations with the US will happen when the US government applies basic changes in its behavior and attitude." "Setting conditions is our right since we have been worrying about your atomic bombs as well as the warmongers standing beside them," Ahmadinejad was quoted by the Web site as saying.
He reiterated that Iran was ready to negotiate any individual and country except its arch foe, Israel.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Iran
#1
TOPIX NEWS/WORLDNEWS /LUCIANNE > IRAN WILL NOT SUSPEND/GIVE UP NUCLEAR ENRICHMENT. Willing to talk wid USA only as long as issue is not nuke enrichment or Iran's right to same.
#4
QATAR NEWS > RUSSIA-LED ALLIANCE, CHINA-LED ALLIANCE merge. Russia-led SCO and China-led CST all but officially one and same - GUAM/GUUAM Treaty-Agreement = Nations??? Wanna work wid NATO, not compete agz NATO.
#5
If State hasn't learned its lesson from dealing with North Korea, then all of them need to be fired on the spot. Muslims make Kim look like a total piker by comparison. There will never be anything even remotely resembling sincere negotiations with an Islamic country, EVER. If we think otherwise, we will continue to be milked like the last cow on the farm and then betrayed at the very next available opportunity. Thinking or hoping that this will ever change is not just delusional, it is fundamentally irrational.
British Premier Gordon Brown has agreed to support US air strikes against Iran if Iran were to carry out large-scale attacks by militant proxies against British or American forces in Iraq, the Sunday Telegraph reported Sunday afternoon, quoting unnamed senior Pentagon officials.
Reportedly, Washington sources said Brown has been informed of US plans to launch limited air and special-forces raids against Revolutionary Guard bases.
After talks with President George W. Bush in July, Brown left US officials with the belief that Britain was "on board" for a military response - but only if Iran was proven to be behind a big militant attack or if an incident similar to the kidnapping in March of British sailors occured again, the British daily reported.
According to the Sunday Telegraph, the US wanted Britain's Special Air Service Regiment to take part in special-forces raids inside Iran and has requested help from the Royal Navy to combat Iranian retaliation in the Gulf. But no decisions have yet been made.
Brown reportedly clarified to Bush that he would not support a campaign to destroy Iran's nuclear program and bring about regime change in Teheran, but Pentagon officials said he did indicate he would be prepared to back strikes in certain circumstances.
The threat of action has been passed to the Iranian government and is credited with slowing the flood of Iranian weapons into Iraq, the Telegraph reported.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Iran
#1
According to the Sunday Telegraph, the US wanted Britain's Special Air Service Regiment to take part in special-forces raids inside Iran and has requested help from the Royal Navy to combat Iranian retaliation in the Gulf. But no decisions have yet been made.
#4
Well, it would probably mean we didn't use B52s stationed in Britain. And it would further deteriorate military relationships between our countries, but those are on a serious decline anyway as the British forces are split between those that want weapons that work and those that like to bash the US.
#6
"if Iran were to carry out large-scale attacks "
Define 'large scale': It's plural, so he must mean two or more attacks; three attacks killing 1000 each would seem adequate, as would thirty attacks killing 100 each. How about 3000 attacks killing one each - which is about where we are right now?
By definition, it would be a large attack or series of simultaneous attacks designed to inflict maximum casualties and damage. It could be anything from surface-to-surface missiles, an anti-ship missile attack (similar to what happened to the Saar-5-class warship), surface-to-air missile attacks, a series of simultaneous ground assaults by militants, a series of suicide attacks, or a combination of all of them.
As for specific numbers, I lack the sense of humor to engage in that sort of game. It's interesting that Gordo agreed to it at all, let alone with the stipulation.
#8
Pappy, the numbers 'game' was not intended to require a sense of humor. I was trying to indicate that by some reasonable metrics Iran has ALREADY carried out large-scale attacks against our forces. To me the more significant question is whether the attacks are by 'Iran', or just by Iranians. We may believe the attacks are officially sanctioned by Iran, but if Iran denies it, and says it is renegades of some kind, what are we to do? (The same situation seems to be occurring in Pakistan and KSA - different elements of the government working in different directions (one could even make the same claim about the US State Department and Military.))
Six years after the September 11 attacks in the United States, the war on terror is failing and instead fuelling an increase in support for extremist Islamist movements, a British think-tank said on Monday. A report by the Oxford Research Group (ORG) said a fundamental re-think is required if the global terrorist network is to be rendered ineffective.
If the Al Qaeda movement is to be countered, then the roots of its support must be understood and systematically undercut, said Paul Rogers, the reports author and professor of global peace studies at Bradford University in northern England.
If the Al Qaeda movement is to be countered, then the roots of its support must be understood and systematically undercut, said Paul Rogers, the reports author and professor of global peace studies at Bradford University in northern England. Combined with conventional policing and security measures, Al Qaeda can be contained and minimised but this will require a change in policy at every level.
He described the US-led invasion of Iraq as a disastrous mistake which had helped establish a most valued jihadist combat training zone for Al Qaeda supporters. The report Alternatives to the War on Terror recommended the immediate withdrawal of all foreign troops from Iraq coupled with intensive diplomatic engagement in the region, including with Iran and Syria. In Afghanistan, Rogers also called for an immediate scaling down of military activities, an injection of more civil aid and negotiations with militia groups aimed at bringing them into the political process. If such measures were adopted it would still take at least 10 years to make up for the mistakes made since 9/11.
Failure to make the necessary changes could result in the war on terror lasting decades, the report added. Rogers also warned of a drift toward conflict with Iran. Going to war with Iran, he said, will make matters far worse, playing directly into the hands of extreme elements and adding greatly to the violence across the region. Whatever the problems with Iran, war should be avoided at all costs.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2007 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: al-Qaeda
#1
The author of this study is a professor of "Global Peace Studies." You think his findings may have been somewhat pre-determined by his anti-war beliefs?
Naw, that wouldn't be scholarly...
Posted by: Abu Chuck al Ameriki ||
10/08/2007 0:18 Comments ||
Top||
#2
As a peace gesture, I propose sharia be implemented at Bradford University.
Posted by: ed ||
10/08/2007 1:34 Comments ||
Top||
#3
TOPIX NEWS > OUT? US BASES SHOULD STAY IN IRAQ FOR 20 YEARS, or title to that effect.
#8
Giving them too much credit, BP. It's not lofty causes, it's personal well being. If the academic environment rewarded conservatism the way it rewards leftism now, the overwhelming majority of academics would be "conservative".
#9
This guy sure likes to put the cart before the horse. A more cogent argument can be made for Al Qaeda fueling the war on terror. Estimates of more than 20,000 terrorists went through the AQ training camps in Afghanistan--another source of fuel for the terrorists' war on the West. Another source of fuel for terrorism is the Saudis funding terrorism through the madrassas and terror-related charities.
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.
Muslim medical students are refusing to learn about alcohol-related illnesses and sexually-transmitted diseases because they say it goes against their religious beliefs. And a small number are even refusing to examine patients of the opposite sex because they say it is forbidden by the Koran. 
Catholic and Anglican vicars should remove their clerical collars while off-duty to avoid being singled out for attack, a church safety group said Sunday. 
Hackers in Turkey have attacked more than 5,000 Swedish Web sites in the past week, and at least some of the sabotage appears linked to a Swedish newspaper's publication of a disparaging caricature of Islam's prophet, an Internet company and a media watchdog said Sunday. 
A two-day international conference gets underway in Spain on Tuesday that seeks to analyse the intolerance and discrimination faced by Muslims in the West and discuss ways to fight it, organisers said. There is a lack of data regarding the phenomena. It is important to collect data to avoid overestimating or minimising Islamophobia, said Gema Martin Munoz, the director of Arab House, a public body which works to strengthen ties between Spain and the Arab world.
The United States appears to be illegally torturing terror suspects contrary to denials by President George W Bush, House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi said on Sunday.
The Ohio State Capitol in Columbus will be the setting for a curious convocation later this month when it hosts an event featuring several well-known Islamic extremists as part of an interfaith conference entitled, The Many Faces of Islam. The conference, which is to be held in the atrium of the Statehouse on Sunday, October 28th, will feature two well-known speakers with multiple connections to the HAMAS international terrorist organization, a host of convicted terrorist leaders, and colleagues who fled the US to avoid prosecution on terrorism-related charges. The event is sponsored by the Interfaith Association of Central Ohio. 
Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazl (JUI-F) Secretary General Maulana Abdul Ghafoor Haideri and Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) Punjab Ameer Liaquat Baloch are trying to save the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA), which is on the verge of collapse after serious differences arose between JI Ameer Qazi Hussain Ahmed and JUI-F chief Maulana Fazlur Rehman over the dissolution of the NWFP Assembly and en bloc resignations from the assemblies, Daily Times learnt here on Sunday. The JUI-F and JI are the biggest components of the five-party religious alliance.
"Captured IDF soldier Gilad Schalit is being looked after and is in good condition," jailed Fatah Tanzim leader Marwan Barghouti told Labor Knesset Member Nadia Hilu during a meeting in Ayalon Prison on Sunday. 
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Sunday that he was not asking for talks with the United States but they would be possible if Washington changed its policy toward Tehran, the official Web site reported. 
British Premier Gordon Brown has agreed to support US air strikes against Iran if Iran were to carry out large-scale attacks by militant proxies against British or American forces in Iraq, the Sunday Telegraph reported Sunday afternoon, quoting unnamed senior Pentagon officials. 
