The dramatic attack on Kabul's Hotel Inter-Continental earlier this week ties in somewhat convolutedly with the arrest in Karachi in February 2010 of Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, a Taliban commander who led the Quetta Shura and directed the insurgency from Pakistan.
Let me explain.
The dream of strategic depth in Afghanistan, nurtured by the ISI, which helped train the Afghan Mujahideen against Soviet occupation, was eventually to be realised by installing a government of its choice in Kabul whenever an opportunity arose. That is why the ISI had helped and protected the Taliban. This facile game plan failed after 9/11 when US President George W Bush, egged on by the neo-cons, mounted a massive military retaliation in Afghanistan. The Pakistan-Afghan border became a sanctuary for Al Qaeda and Taliban.
The US could not have thought of a more menacing figure than deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage to deliver the threatening message to Pakistan. If Pakistan did not support the US-led war against Islamic terrorism, the country would be "bombed back to the stone age". This quote would be unbelievable had it not been repeated by former Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf on CBS News's 60 Minutes in September 2006.
The complications of what Musharraf was being asked to do are clear. He was being asked to eliminate the very force his ISI had helped create and nurture over the past two decades. Double-dealing was built into Musharraf's response - shoot the Taliban (or their lookalikes) when the Americans were watching, hide them when they weren't. Ambidexterous though he was, Musharraf couldn't avoid participating in the rendition program or in helping the Americans ferry Afghan Taliban to Guantanamo Bay. Remember, when the lawyers' agitation began to destabilise Musharraf, one sensitive issue the Army and the ISI had to deal with was "missing persons". If the Army's hand in the "missing persons" phenomenon came to public notice, there would be massive anger against the Army.
Over the years, much more came to light. Some sort of a crescendo was reached with the Lal Masjid affair. The blowback from the Afghan war, which was by now raging in NWFP (now Khyber Pakhtunkhwa) and FATA, eventually consumed Musharraf.
Despite Musharraf's departure, neither the ISI nor the Army could disengage from their policy of strategic depth in Afghanistan. For this, the Baradars, the Haqqanis and their tribe had to be pampered and kept on a leash.
Pashtuns in Afghanistan have had to cope with so many traumatic changes since the ouster of President Daud in 1978 that the traditional social structure has broken down. The Pashtun society on the Pakistani side has been relatively less unsettled. This explains why the Pakistani Pashtuns were able to open their hujras and extend hospitality to their cousins escaping the situation in Afghanistan. A large Pashtun population has therefore spread as far as Karachi.
This diaspora is sensitive to the "misfortunes of our brothers" that are to be blamed on the US and Pakistani Army. Their sympathy extends to the troubled Taliban too, who are described by some as a Pashtun resistance movement. It is therefore not surprising that the former Taliban ambassador to Pakistan, Abdus Salaam Zaeef, froths at the mouth at the mention of Pakistan's role in Afghanistan. He says the Pakistani Army facilitated his deportation to Guantanamo, where he was a prisoner for four years. "Pakistan has proved to be unreliable - it has no role in Afghanistan."
And now that the US is initiating a dialogue with the Taliban without assigning Pakistan a role, the Pakistan-backed Taliban and their handlers are angry. They will snap the leash and rush into exactly the sort of demonstration, blazing flames and billowing smoke, that was on display at the Inter-Continental in Kabul. This is desperation, not some well-thought-out long-term strategy. The latest attack in Kabul is linked to Baradar's arrest in Karachi in February 2010: that was the showdown with the CIA, which had started establishing direct contacts with the Taliban and circumventing their Pakistani handlers.
Or consider Operation Fast and Furious, about which nothing is happening terribly fast and over which Americans should be furious. The official explanation is that the federal government used stimulus funding to buy guns from Arizona gun shops for known criminals to funnel to Mexican drug cartels. As I said, thats the official explanation: As soon as your head stops spinning, well resume the narrative. Supposedly, United States taxpayers were picking up the tab for Mexican drug lords weaponry in order that the ATF could identify high-up gun-traffickers. But, as it turns out, these high-up gun-traffickers were already known to other agencies FBI, DEA, and other big-spending acronyms in the great fetid ooze of federal alphabet soup in which this republic is drowning. And, indeed, some of those high-ups are said to have been paid informants for those various federal agencies. So, in case youre wondering why Obamas second annual Recovery Summer is a wee bit sluggish at your end, relax: Stimulus dollars went to fund one federal agency to buy guns for the paid informants of another federal agency to funnel to foreign criminals in order that the first federal agency might identify the paid informants of the second federal agency.
The ATF's gun-running disaster was funded by the stimulus bill. Think of all the criminal and drug cartel jobs saved or created. And our attorney general once bragged to a Mexican audience about implementing it.
Attorney General Eric Holder's "I know nothing" routine has evaporated with the discovery of an April 2, 2009, speech to authorities in Cuernavaca, Mexico, in which he took Gunrunner credit for himself and the Obama administration.
The evidence indicates that Agent Terry's death was financed by the president's stimulus package with the full knowledge and support of Attorney General Holder.
Law enforcement officials consider the portrayal of the war on terror as an attack on Islam to be one of the most effective messages in radicalizing young Muslims.
#2
I'm curious -- is that good or bad? I'm not mil/ex-mil so I don't know.
Posted by: Steve White ||
07/09/2011 0:33 Comments ||
Top||
#3
There were bombings and base infil a-lot back then.
Well, it sure changes how you view your life where you live when you are Military. Civilian clothes only off base, no stickers, quiet family life off post, Rapid reaction forces and family evac plans, alert rosters, the regular.
What is different is instead of being overseas and trying to keep your identity quiet, you now do it at home.
There is surveillance on Service members abroad and apparently at home now.
#4
Scratch the veneer off some Muslims & you'll find a jihadi. Technique is as old as death to apostates / blasphemers / infidels / uppity wimmen / etc.
#5
We need to reevaluate our foreign bases based on current need and not the needs of the 50s. A big base with hospital in Perth might be more useful than bases in Germany and Europe for example.
#6
We need to reevaluate our foreign bases based on current need and not the needs of the 50s. A big base with hospital in Perth might be more useful than bases in Germany and Europe for example.
"The US has made preliminary contacts with Afghan Taliban guerrillas," Defence Secretary Robert Gates recently acknowledged. He went on to reveal the most accurate details of these negotiations. Germany and Qatar are at the forefront as mediators.
"But we have a serious problem with that," said a senior Pakistani security official who had attended talks between the US and Afghanistan.
Before this, Pakistani military generals had made several attempts to mediate between Hamid Karzai's government and Afghan insurgents, especially the Haqqani faction.
"Any resolution that does not include Pakistan will not guarantee Pashtun interests and will therefore not be sustainable," the official said.
Pakistan has historically ensured that it "micro-manages everything in Afghanistan", says Ahmed Raza Popalzai, a revered Afghan tribesman.
Pakistan's obsession with the US-Taliban talks can be measured from the fact that it arrested Mullah Baradar - Mullah Omar's number two and an important member of the Quetta Shura - when he tried to go freelance and started talking with the Americans via the Saudis in Dubai.
Baradar was caught from Karachi's Khuddamul Quran madrassa linked with Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam in early 2010 in a CIA-ISI raid, to the dislike of the Afghan president who was then talking to the Taliban.
Pakistan is also accused of providing safe havens to the Quetta Shura and the Haqqani network to promote its interests in Afghanistan.
What is the reason for this immense desire for a negotiated settlement with the Taliban?
"India," according to Afghanistan's former intelligence chief Amrullah Saleh. Pakistan is concerned about Indian influence in Afghanistan and instead wants a strategic depth in Kabul against its eastern neighbour. "Pakistan has Mullah Omar hiding in Karachi and supports active insurgency inside Afghanistan," Saleh said.
US President Barack's Obama's decision to withdraw 10,000 troops from Afghanistan after the killing of Osama bin Laden raises a number of questions about the endgame in Afghanistan.
"If the enemies of Afghanistan think they can wait it out until we leave, they have the wrong idea. We will stay as long as it takes to finish our job," said NATO secretary general Anders Fogh Rasmussen.
It is not clear who he referred to as the enemy of Afghanistan, but NATO and ISAF commanders often accuse Pakistan of orchestrating attacks on Afghanistan.
"The irony is that if Pakistan Army and the ISI hadn't let the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan become a festering sore in Waziristan, these fighters would not now be transiting through Afghanistan to attack Pakistan," a former CIA operative said. "The Taliban had been trained by Pakistan to control Afghanistan so it would have a 'strategic depth' - a direction from which they would not be attacked," he said. "But now, Pakistan has enemies on both sides and it had paid to train and arm one of them."
"I believe General Aslam Beg's nonsensical idea of strategic depth has long been buried and mourned," said Brig (r) Shaukat Qadir. "A peaceful, stable Afghanistan will not be antagonistic towards Pakistan. To ensure that, there should be a quick and total withdrawal of US troops and negotiations between Afghanistan, Pakistan and the Taliban. India should have minimal influence in Kabul."
Although negotiations are likely to take the centre stage, Pakistan is becoming increasingly isolated. Both the US and the Afghan Taliban are sceptical of Pakistan's role in Afghanistan.
At one time, after 9/11, Pakistan had tried to install the Haqqanis in Kabul as caretakers of Afghanistan, but they declined the offer, deciding to remain loyal to Mullah Omar. Islamabad still considers the faction its strategic assets and has tried to market the network to both the US and the Afghan government.
But "the recent attack on Kabul's Intercontinental Hotel changed everything," according to a US military insider. "It will expose the Haqqani network's links with Al Qaeda and we would want to push Pakistan to carry out operations in the Kurram Agency and North Waziristan."
NATO and ISAF causalities have risen from 191 in 2006 to 521 in 2009, 711 in 2010, and 284 so far in 2011. The Americans would not mind a quick exit and Pakistan will try hard for a good bargain in the endgame. But it seems like it will have to face problems of its own making. The Taliban have decided to bypass Pakistan and negotiate on their own.
#1
Pakistain has pretensions of being a big player, but found now that they can't even maintain their own sovereignty. I hope for a big karmic explosion, that takes out the ISI, Army assholes and Pols (and especially their loud-mouth lawyers) that have played this "great game" without control. They have been so obsessed with trying to take down India that they've become weak internally and need a civil war and financial collapse to start at ground zero, literally.
Posted by: Frank G ||
07/09/2011 17:54 Comments ||
Top||
#2
The fight is about money. Up till now, the US would fund the Pakistanis, who in turn would drop some spare change on the Taliban.
Now that the CIA is talking directly, it the Paks that are left with the empty wallet.
[Dawn] That reporting a rape is an arduous ordeal is a truth that resounds globally. When braving for police investigations, enumerating the ordeal in court and damaging stereotypical media representations become a norm then the argument for a pellucid approach becomes preemptory.
In 2006, a much-heated debate on the Hudood Laws revealed the anatomy of rape, conflicting legalities involving misinterpretations of Shariah Laws and the deeply engrained distorted public perceptions. For those who followed the debate, there should be no qualms in admitting that it made the inherent flaws in interpretations of the law and the systematic distortion of a society sensitive to violence and abuse evident.
The women protection bill implemented later that year made it possible for a woman to convict on the basis of forensic and medical evidence. Aimed at encouraging women to report the crime, which was deterred due to the farcical 'four witness' rule enforced by the Hudood ordinance, the act has been strongly opposed by Jamaat-i-Islami, whose activists and leaders continue to lobby against the act.
In a recent interview to a local news channel, Syed Munawar Hassan ... The funny-looking Amir of the Pak Jamaat-e-Islami. He joined the National Students Federation (NSF), a lefty student body, and was elected its President in 1959. He came into contact with the Islami Jamiat-e-Talaba (IJT) Pakistan and studied the writings of Mawlana Syed Abul Ala Maududi, The Great Apostasizer. As a result, he joined IJT in 1960 and soon he was elected as President of its University of Bloody Karachi Unit and member of the Central Executive Council. He was Assistant Secretary General of Jama'at-e-Islami Pakistan in 1992-93, and became Secretary General in 1993. After years of holding Qazi's camel he was named Amir when the old man stepped down in 2009... of Jamaat-i-Islaami had the following to say:
Anchor: Why did you vehemently oppose the women protection act?
Munawar Hasan: Women protection act was not aimed at protecting women instead it is meant to promote vulgarity and obscenity in the society.
Anchor: What is the basis of your allegations?
Munawar Hasan: On the basis of which we opposed the act.
Anchor: The fundamental purpose of the women protection act was (is) to provide women with the right to file cases on the basis of circumstantial and forensic evidence, making convictions of rape easier. Where is the obscenity in that?
Munawar Hasan: This bill has been part of law for years, how has that affected the rights of women in Pakistan? What is the one issue that can be pointed out as a success of this law?
Anchor: One blaringly obvious problem with the Hudood law was the need to present four witnesses in order to convict a rapist, failure to do so resulted in the arrest of the woman on charges of confession to adultery, that was the main issue.
Munawar Hasan: What is the problem in that?
Anchor: The problem is this sir, that according to the 2003 national commission status of women report 80 per cent women were forced to languish in jails because of inability to produce witnesses of their rape.
Munawar Hasan: The objective of Islam is to discourage such acts, no one can be shameless enough to commit such an act in the presence of four people. Making it impossible to prove such acts, therefore the whole idea is to discourage bringing such acts into public light. Discouraging it to the extent that the act is never quoted. If such a crime occurs and since there are no witnesses than both men and women are suppose to keep it under wraps and not discuss it in public.
Anchor: Sir, are you suggesting that a woman should stay silent after she is raped? That she should not report the crime?
Munawar Hasan: I am saying she should keep quite if she has no witnesses. If she has witnesses than she should present them.
Anchor: What kind of an argument is that? A woman is raped and she has to look for witnesses to prove the crime?
Munawar Hasan: Argue with the Quran and not me.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/09/2011 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under: Jamaat-e-Islami
#1
That reporting a rape is an arduous ordeal is a truth that resounds globally
Clearly, the writer properly appreciates Jane Austin. ;-)
#2
Munawar Hasan: Argue with the Quran and not me.
Does the Koran permit rape?
Maybe:
"And all married women are forbidden unto you EXCEPT those captives whom your right hand possesses. It is a decree of Allah for you. Lawful unto you are all beyond those mentioned, so that you seek them with your wealth in honest wedlock, not debauchery..." (4:24)
Ibn Kathir, the most prominent of all Quran interpreters, has this to say in regards to verse 4:24:
"The Ayah (verses) means Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess.), you are prohibited from marrying women who are already married, except those whom your right hands possess) except those whom you acquire through war, for you are allowed such women after making sure they are not pregnant. Imam Ahmad recorded that Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri said, "We captured some women from the area of Awtas who were already married, and we disliked having sexual relations with them because they already had husbands. So, we asked the Prophet about this matter, and this Ayah (verse) was revealed, Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess). Accordingly, we had sexual relations with these women." (Alternate translation can be: as a result of these verses, their (Infidels) wives have become lawful for us) This is the wording collected by At-Tirmidhi An-Nasa'i, Ibn Jarir and Muslim in his Sahih."
Maybe not.
[5:5] .. You shall maintain CHASTITY, not committing adultery, nor taking secret lovers. Anyone who rejects faith, all his work will be in vain, and in the Hereafter he will be with the losers.
[24:30] Tell the believing men that they shall subdue their eyes (and not stare at the women), and to maintain their CHASTITY. This is purer for them. GOD is fully Cognizant of everything they do.
[2:191] .. OPPRESSION is worse than murder.
[24:33] ..You shall not force your girls to commit prostitution, seeking the materials of this world, if they wish to be chaste. If anyone forces them, then GOD, seeing that they are forced, is Forgiver, Merciful.
[Dawn] 85 down. This is not a score of a cricket match; rather it's the number of people killed in Bloody Karachi in the last four days. Hoping against hope, I pray that the number does not increase any further as the day progresses.
As I write these lines, television channels keep giving updates of the worsening situation in the city. Every round of violence brings a different kind of death and destruction for the people of Bloody Karachi. It seems the terrorist play out newer and different ways of terrorism in Bloody Karachi like a scientist does in a lab. The authorities are constantly feigning ignorance of the parties involved, and media reports state that unknown people are causing havoc in the city.
This time the unknown criminals are bombing houses in various areas (namely Katti Pahari North Nazimabad) using hand grenades. These attacks are unique and new, these haven't been used since the time when homemade 'bottle bombs' were made more than two decades ago. But then one knew who the opponents were in the violence.
This time sophisticated ammunition is being used by the 'unknown assailants' -- hand grenades -- which can cause more damage. This area has a concentration of people belonging to various ethnic backgrounds; the majority belong to Urdu and Pushto backgrounds that have been pitted against each other again and again resulting in a heavy toll on the lives on no one else but the people of Bloody Karachi and Pakistain.
The 'invisible unknown' hands which are always blamed for spilling blood in the city keep playing the game of death, but no one ever seems to be caught for this. Unfortunately, neither the leaders nor the people of the city seem focused enough to get to the root of the problem, or is it that no one wants to do this for vested interests.
There is also news of passenger buses targeted by 'unknown' people, while various other areas were under constant fire and many lives snuffed out, in one instant a child as young as five. This baby girl had hardly even started her life before her life was mercilessly laid down at the altar of terrorism and death. Security personnel deployed all over the city, plus the police are as helpless in the face of the invisible 'terrorists' as ever. They are unable to contain the insecurity and fear spreading among the people of this huge city. No one feels safe in the city. One doesn't know if they will return home once they leave. There is a great deal of insecurity among the people of the city. Fear, death and insecurity are the order of the day, without any respite in view.
This frustrates the people and you hear many people say that every time one hears that the Rangers' role in the city is being curtailed, the city erupts in this senseless killing. This makes people question their role and importance of the security personnel even more, but the authorities panic and decide to retain them and then the killings abate temporarily but then begin. Although these security personnel have been around in Bloody Karachi since the early 80s and more permanently during the 90s till the present, things in the city have never been completely peaceful. It doesn't sit well that our security personnel are unable to handle any form of violence from petty crimes to terrorism. The authorities should look into this lapse and try to find a remedy to actually work out a plan to bring peace in Bloody Karachi and Pakistain as a whole without feeling offended.
As for Bloody Karachi, isn't it enough that an entire generation of Bloody Karachiites has lived their lives in front of the barrel of guns and may never know the life of peace and security that all citizens have a right to. Bloody Karachiites have known little peace and it seems no concerted efforts have ever actually been taken to improve the situation in the city.
All this death and destruction in the city has developed a sense of hopelessness among the people of the city, who carry on numbly with their 'existence' between the spates of violence, outwardly indifferent but seething from within. This has brought a certain callousness and coldness in the psyche of the people of Bloody Karachi; you can easily pick a Bloody Karachiite out of the people of the rest of the country. They seem distant, alert yet indifferent to all that is happening around them. They take certain things in their stride that other cities can't since they have not been made to feel insecure and alienated through constant violence over several decades.
As always, as a Pak city weeps tears of blood, our politicians sit in their cosy seats in safe environs debating who is responsible. And instead of calming the situation with a solution, they are playing politics completely devoid of any feelings for the people who have bit the dust. This is not the time for politics which as it is has nothing to do with the problem or lives of the common Pak but a time when important decisions should be taken to actually do something to change the dynamics so that all traces of violence, terrorism can be removed from within us.
But this can only be done if someone really cares enough to do so. The lot running this country doesn't seem interested or capable of doing so. They are too busy doing TV cameos. They have no time for mundane things like politics for the benefit of the masses. Politics like this has no value and doesn't look on ones resume. They have no compunctions of using the name of the common man and his problems, whatever they may be to forward their political career.
However, women are made to be loved, not understood... their sincerity would make more sense if there was some actual change in the current situation. Unfortunately, this has not happened so far and will not happen any time soon. The people of Pakistain will continue to be killed off, and their leaders will pretend to mourn this loss. But their sincerity will be doubted until and unless they actually do something concrete to curb or erase violence and terrorism in the Bloody Karachi and country alike. But until that happens, the people of Bloody Karachi and Pakistain will continue to be sacrificed for an unknown cause by invisible terrorists.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/09/2011 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
#1
You can't properly worship Ba'al without bloodshed.
#2
what a mystery...perhaps it has something to do with Moslem Values. And Karachi, by coincidence, is actually in Pakistan. land of the Pure, religion of Peace.....and all that. The VERY place Osama bin Laden decided he was safest.
So what's your guess..PBUH?
Posted by: de Medici ||
07/09/2011 9:02 Comments ||
Top||
Indeed - spotted yesterday on the T (Boston subway) - round orange sticker that proclaims 'Free Bradley Manning', complete w/ the idiot's picture. I wasn't able to scrape it off with one stop before changing trains.
#4
and try to remember that the Left elected Obama.
Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Michael Moore, people who hate Israel and bailed out Wall Street with YOUR money...and now tens of millions of you are out of a job, Obama had DOUBLED the National debt, wants to raise the debt ceiling still HIGHER, and wants to be re-elected for four additional years so he can continue to follow his policies which have accomplished NOTHING that has benefited the United States. .your grandchildren will be paying off this man's debts. Is Michael Moore your friend? Was he ever a friend of men who wear the Uniform of the United States and sacrifice their flesh and lives for the United States?
And he pities Chavez and points his finger at you and says you are GUILTY of Chavez's vital signs being at risk. Perhaps Michael will get Hollywood to make ANOTHER movie spitting on the United States.
HALF the population of the United States are unable to look at a man and judge his character...HALF the people in this country voted for Obama. Obama hates the United States, doesnt believe in it, would abandon Israel if he could, is incompetent to lead a single little rural county let alone a Nation.
And Bush for what faults he may have had....i liked and cared for the man...Bush won in Iraq and the Donks ran and squittered like fags the whole time.
Remember to Honor your home and your people and your Nation. REMEMBER whom you CAN trust. Hold to your Values and your Faith....and hold your ground.
The Left is not fit to stand with Americans. Its ALIEN. Its not in our BASIC Values. It deserves no allegiance nor ANY Respect.
Look to the Founders, look to your true roots, the Values that gave us birth and for which we should be willing to fight and die. The Left will strangle you IF they can. The Left will strangle your children if you let them. Obama is NOT your friend any more than Michael Moore is.
You cant compromise with them. You cant tolerate them. You are going to have to crush them....and only decent Values lived with good Faith can do that. Dont just push back, shove...push until their knives come out. Then begin...
You cant share the same ground with the Left. One of you will have to go down.
Posted by: de Medici ||
07/09/2011 8:55 Comments ||
Top||
#5
and try to remember that the Left elected Obama.
Sorry, no.
The center, center left and center right elected the President.
#6
Don't forget, it only takes 26% to elect if only half the people vote. If all the lefties votes, and all the conservatives stay home, then the center-left can elect a president.
Posted by: Dopey Smiter of the French9896 ||
07/09/2011 9:56 Comments ||
Top||
#7
HALF the population of the United States are unable to look at a man and judge his character...HALF the people in this country voted for Obama.
Mr. de Medici, you are hyperventilating again. First of all, the two sentences above are unconnected by cause and affect. American voter participation is notoriously low, and anyway, the entire population are not actually registered voters, whether because of citizenship, being underage, being unregistered, having a criminal conviction, etc and so forth. So, considerably less than half the population of the United States could have been the one's who put Mr. Obama into the White House.
Why they voted for him is a different story, and your assumption there is telling, I submit to you that a good many of those who voted for the man knew exactly what he is, and wanted those characteristics in the moest powerful man in the world on the assumption that they would benefit thereby.
Go look up what percentage of the population voted in the last election, and how Mr. Obama did in the general vs. Electoral vote. Then dig a bit deeper and see how Mr. Obama did in big union states vs. Right to Work states' just for one example of open-eyed voters choosing a champion. I leave it to you to expand your research to different groups before your next post on the subject. Really, it's much better to argue from knowledge, especially when arguing that the other side is ignoring facts in favour of emotion.
Posted by: Steve White ||
07/09/2011 10:30 Comments ||
Top||
#10
...and it would have been McCaincare otherwise. Waffling is not Donk monopoly but one they readily play upon that others exhibit. Maybe its better to be dropped into the boiling pot so you know to jump out now rather than allow them to slowly turn up the heat so you don't notice till its too late.
#13
Just remember folks, the center-asshole section of the spectrum elected Hitler and Stalin.
They didn't really elect Hitler, either. The Nazis never got a majority in the Reichstag when elections were free and fair. And voting in favor of something when the other option is a concentration camp, a bullet in the head, or exile isn't exactly Luxembourg City on a Saturday night, either.
#15
Really, it's much better to argue from knowledge, especially when arguing that the other side is ignoring facts in favour of emotion.
Noooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!! TW, please, I like Mr. de Medici fact free, emotion filled rants. I have the whole set (as best I could) and his alter-ego Angleton9. Leave. Him. Alone! ;-)
Posted by: Secret Asian Man ||
07/09/2011 19:07 Comments ||
Top||
#16
They didn't really elect Hitler, either. The Nazis never got a majority in the Reichstag when elections were free and fair. And voting in favor of something when the other option is a concentration camp, a bullet in the head, or exile isn't exactly Luxembourg City on a Saturday night, either.
Yah, there was never a real election, everyone just decided to go along with the center/asshole section of the populace. Same difference.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
The ATF's gun-running disaster was funded by the stimulus bill. Think of all the criminal and drug cartel jobs saved or created. And our attorney general once bragged to a Mexican audience about implementing it.
That reporting a rape is an arduous ordeal is a truth that resounds globally. When braving for police investigations, enumerating the ordeal in court and damaging stereotypical media representations become a norm then the argument for a pellucid approach becomes preemptory.
Syed Munawar Hassan
[Dawn] 85 down. This is not a score of a cricket match; rather it's the number of people killed in 
