#3
I also think this part of the "interview" is great.Must be doing something right to get these bitches feminazis bay-auches mad.
TOFTC has not been able to maintain complete secrecy and word has leaked out. I contacted Annette Spargas of the UC Berkley chapter of NOW and asked if she had ever heard of Operation Take One for the Country. Spargas said that she, in fact, had heard of TOFTC and was working to find and protest the group at the first opportunity. "These women are really sick, they are prostituting themselves", Spargas ranted, "they are objectifying their bodies to the killers of the Bush cabals war machine. They need to examine how men have made prostitutes of women throughout time". McDonough is un-phased by this type of objection, "What a bunch of bay-auches! Those femi-nazis really make me mad.
#4
Yeah, it looks like the site is down.
All those Rantburgers rushing there must have made it crash.
I've got the site in cache and could post the whole page, but Fred might get mad.
#7
Annette is not the brightest bulb in the hardware store is she? Think about this for a moment. These gals are going to bars around military bases, and picking up soldiers. For a NOW group to go into a military bar, and try to protest a bunch of gals trying to, well, do their patriotic duty, is not going to work at all. All NOW will do is piss off a bunch of guys with guns, on their home turf.
Not only are they bay-auches and femi-nazis, they are pretty brain dead as well.
Posted by: Ben ||
04/29/2004 8:28 Comments ||
Top||
#8
All NOW will do is piss off a bunch of guys with guns, on their home turf.
It is time, however, to amend the UCMJ. That violates the code, you know. Even for a married couple!
Posted by: Eric Jablow ||
04/29/2004 10:55 Comments ||
Top||
#12
I think this is an elaborate hoax.
If there is sentiment for providing this kind of, er, support (and I am sure there is), why would an organized effort be necessary to lay it out mobilize it?
I think this is just somebody trying to yank the feminasties' ideological chain, successfully it seems.
#17
David Hackworths' book ABOUT FACE mentioned something along these lines, for returning troops, to show that they were appreciated (the response they got instead was so vile the left is trying to rewrite history about it).
An Indian expatriate, who escaped this week from the group of terrorists hiding out in caves near Al-Ammariya, has identified one of his captors as Abdul Aziz Al-Muqrin, head of Al-Qaeda in Saudi Arabia, a source told Arab News. The Indian was held by the five terrorists who shot dead a member of the Al-Mujahedeen unit and wounded another two weeks ago near Al-Uyaynah. He said the group forced him to carry their belongings and to help them with directions in the rugged landscape of Al-Ammariya, 35 km northeast of the capital.
Grabbed an infidel to carry their luggage.
He later gave his captors the slip and told police officers at a security checkpoint of the groupâs whereabouts. The identification of Al-Muqrin came from police photos of the most wanted terrorists. The man said that his captors were desperate for food supplies and had resorted to eating desert plants and drinking rain water in order to survive.
On March 16, Khaled Ali Haj, the former Al-Qaeda leader in the Kingdom, and Ibrahim Al-Mizyani, wanted for security reasons, were killed in a Nissan Patrol during a shootout with security officers in Riyadhâs Al-Naseem district after they failed to stop at a security checkpoint.
Officers found the vehicle laden with six hand grenades, two machine guns, 10 machine gun magazines, three 9 mm pistols, and SR516,000. A statement from the Ministry of Interior later stated that no police officers were injured or killed in the shootout.
Humm, that'll be a first.
Meanwhile, a recent raid on a villa in Al-Naseem district in Riyadh by security officials unearthed a secret polyclinic and an operation theater used by terrorists. The villa contained several beds, medical equipment, medicines, phones, a classroom, and a storage room with 3 months of food supplies. The two-story villa also had a garage where the terrorists trained on how to wire car bombs and prepare hand grenades.
Posted by: Steve ||
04/29/2004 9:57:22 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I am still wiping the tears off my eyes from laughing so hard. Bringing, or in this case kidnapping, their servants to any occasion is just so typical of Saudis. They just cannot do without their servants! They suffer from a syndrome that we, expats, call Adversion to Physical labor!
Four men arrested during anti-terror raids 10 days ago have been released without charge, Greater Manchester Police say. They are the last of a group of 10 people to be released after being questioned under the Terrorism Act. Three were released without charge, and six were released under the Terrorism Act but rearrested and bailed for other offences, including immigration issues. The tenth man is due to be deported to North Africa on Thursday.
Another one of the infamous "North Africans"
The nine men and one woman were arrested on suspicion of the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism in an operation led by Greater Manchester Police. Six of the suspects, including the woman, were released earlier this week, and the final four were released overnight.
"As people will be aware, an operation was carried out on 19 April when 10 people were arrested under the Terrorism Act 2000," Greater Manchester Police assistant chief constable David Whatton said on Thursday. "The Act allows people to be detained for up to 14 days but after that time they can only be charged or released with no further restriction." Mr Whatton added: "Inquiries are continuing and will do for some time. As this is an ongoing inquiry, no further details are available. "We remain confident that we are doing everything to ensure people in Greater Manchester remain safe and secure."
Sometimes you have to shake the tree and see what falls out. Also watch who get's nervous in a different tree from the one you shook.
The operation involved 400 officers including members of the security services and the Metropolitan Policeâs Anti-Terrorist Branch. Seven of the suspects were arrested in Greater Manchester, and a further three in Staffordshire, South Yorkshire and the West Midlands. The 10 suspects were described by police as being of north African and Iraqi Kurd origin. The operation prompted extra security at Old Trafford football ground for last Saturdayâs game, but police said it was to put the public at ease rather than because of a specific threat. Mr Whatton added: "Inquiries are continuing and will do for some time. As this is an ongoing inquiry, no further details are available.
"I can say no more"
Surprise-o-meter not budging an inch on this one. Youâre a very naughty terrorist. Now donât do that again. Off you go...
Posted by: Howard UK ||
04/29/2004 5:35:34 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
Posted by: Howard UK ||
04/30/2004 10:01 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Howard - There is a phenomenon which might not be apparent to a UK citizen... A friend of mine owned and faithfully restored a 1959 Jaguar. It was his firm opinion, after about a year post-completion, that Lucas instruments don't operate correctly when taken more than 40 miles from Coventry. Eventually, he replaced the entire set of dashboard instruments (and much more: the thermostat, radiator and other parts of the cooling system) - as he lived in Dallas. ;-)
Posted by: Howard UK ||
04/29/2004 05:16 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Do as The Israelis would. Bulldozer the house and the houses of any of their related family nearby. Peace process? My arse!
Posted by: Howard UK ||
04/29/2004 9:27 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Note the way incindary devices mutate into explosive devices half way through the article. Also the last time I was in the Waterside it was 100% protestant, so to suggest it was a base for the IRA is like suggesting the Zionists are based in Jeddah. This is BBC yellow journalism.
Posted by: Phil B ||
04/29/2004 11:06 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Definitely not the scum IRA then...
Posted by: Howard UK ||
04/29/2004 11:26 Comments ||
Top||
#4
BBC yellow journalism? You mean you think they might twist news to fit an agenda? Hope they don't start doing that with the Iraq situation
On another note, its almost nostalgic - an article about old fashioned, non-islamist terrorists.
Posted by: Sam ||
04/29/2004 18:04 Comments ||
Top||
SAN SALVADOR, El Salvador (AP) - Masked protesters seized the San Salvador cathedral Wednesday, demanding President-elect Tony Saca pull Salvadoran soldiers out of Iraq. Saca, who takes office June 1, has said he will leave El Salvador's nearly 379-member detachment in Iraq until August, as planned, despite the early departures of the Spanish troops under which they were serving.
About 50 people wearing ski masks stormed the cathedral and kicked out visitors and faithful. They sealed the doors and hung banners protesting everything from the government's health policy to a proposed U.S.-Central America free trade agreement. They also demanded that Saca rehire about 150 government employees who were recently fired.
Sounds like some disgruntled leftie rebels up to no good.
They remained in control of the Roman Catholic church late Wednesday night and were spending the night there.
Wonder if they'll trash it Paleo-style?
Earlier in the day, police used tear gas and clubs to clear away dozens of protesters left outside the church and detained three people. Skirmishing outside the building continued sporadically. Demonstrators and police clashed dozens of times during the day, often violently, and protesters burned a van belonging to a television station as well as nearby phone booths.
"This isn't the way to talk to the government," Saca said of the protest.
But you'd better show them with more than just words.
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/29/2004 12:47:13 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
play them a video of the Moscow theater aftermath...heh heh
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/29/2004 7:48 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I thought the DNC Convention was being held in Chicago (or at least in the US)...
#2
Your link doesn't work (you dropped the jpg). This one should.
Very interesting. What are all the shiny white things in the "after" image? Can anyone find the center of the explosion? There's what looks like a big scar in the lower left of the image, between the train tracks and the road beside them. Is that it? The scar is perpendicular to the train tracks, and you can see a blue vehicle next to it. There's also a complex of white buildings across the street. Looks vaguely schoolish. You think that was the elementary school that was supposedly there?
I would assume the white objects were temporary structures, probably tents. The explosion was supposedly centred on the railway station sidings, and this seems to be case (easier to see from the large image).
#4
Thats allot of destruction. No way a fuel train would cause that much. We've had fuel trains blow up here in the States and they don't look anything like that. I'd love to know what the atmospheric reading were downwind after this. Anyone know of allot of iodine being used in the area?
Posted by: Yosemite Sam ||
04/29/2004 12:48 Comments ||
Top||
#5
YS, fuel train was just first report. Most recent admission was trainload of ammonium nitrate going to a mine to be used for blasting. In the US, it's mixed with fuel oil on site or as it's loaded into the hole for safety reasons. I wonder if the North Korean's mixed it at the factory before loading it on the train so it was ready to use at the mine. That would explain how a electric line falling on the car could ignite it.
Posted by: Steve ||
04/29/2004 14:16 Comments ||
Top||
#6
anyone heard from Kimmy yet? I can't stand the suspense. I'm going to put up a WOT on whether or not he is dead.
Posted by: B ||
04/29/2004 14:52 Comments ||
Top||
#7
To be honest, I do not see a whole lot of destruction. Given prevailing NK property values, costs of materials and labor rates, we are looking at less than US$2 million to rebuild. A far crime from the US$500 million the NKers are trying to get out of the free nations in aid. Piss on 'em.
#8
Imagery analysis and bomb damage assessment was my military specialty. There is one he$$ of a lot of damage to the city from what I see. It looks like all or most of an area a half-mile square suffered moderate to severe damage. This will be long - someone feel free to edit to save bandwidth, if necessary.
In the lower photo, notice the row of warehouses along the road running from the top to the bottom. These are totally missing from the top photo. Also notice the large four-storey white building in the lower photo - it, too is gone. There are a minimum of five craters: two large ones and five small ones. The largest, based on the 55-foot long railcars on the adjacent rail spur, is approximately 80 feet long by 35-40 feet wide, and probably 12-15 feet deep. The one up from that is smaller, maybe 35 feet long and 10 feet wide. These look to be made by a very powerful blast, and probably did 90% of the damage. There is another small blast/burn mark up further on the rail line that would be consistant with the deisel fuel storage of the engine catching fire and exploding. Also the dark color of the blast area indicates a fuel-oil type blast and fire, rather than ammonium nitrate or high explosives. There are similar blast/burn marks on two other rail lines, indicating that railcars on those lines caught fire and burned.
There also appear to be a number of circular "secondary explosion" marks all through the area between the railroad yard and the main road running from top to bottom on the upper photo. This would give me the impression that one or both trains were carrying munitions that were scattered and that exploded. From the size of the blast, the probable type of munitions would be mortar rounds or light artillery (60mm-105mm). There are very few burn/blast marks typical of those left by exploding vehicles, although there are a few in the photo.
Some of the other damage includes most of the roofs and much of the upper walls of the single-storey buildings to the right of the blast have been destroyed; approximately 200 feet of the covered passenger loading area on the left side of the railyard has been blown away; much of the main road and all of the secondary roads in the area are blocked by debris. There is at least one track operating through the railyard (there is a train on the tracks, obviously making its way through the yard), but traffic is probably limited, and yard transfer speed has probably reduced to the minimum for safety reasons.
I'd love to have better "before" and "after" imagery, so I could do a better job...
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
04/29/2004 22:14 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Mike - you've done pretty good, thx!
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/29/2004 22:21 Comments ||
Top||
#10
I finally managed to get the LARGE (4meg) photo downloaded, after trying three or four times today. After playing with it in LView, I have a much better shot that much more clearly shows the extent of the damage. It's pretty awesome. If someone with a blog wants it to post, email me, and I'll send it to you. It's big - 108kb - but not as big as the monster I took it from!
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
04/29/2004 22:30 Comments ||
Top||
Doesnât it nearly bring a tear to your eye?
Well if not a guffaw.
Many North Koreans died a "heroic death" after last weekâs train explosion by running into burning buildings to rescue portraits of leader Kim Jong-il and his father, the Northâs official media reported yesterday.
Portraits of Kim and his late father, national founder Kim Il-sung, are mandatory in every home, office and factory in the communist state of 23 million.
All adults are required to wear lapel pins bearing images of one or both Kims.
Last Thursdayâs blast in the town of Ryongchon, near the Chinese border, killed at least 161 people and injured 1,300, according to international relief agencies. Many of the victims were children.
The dead also included workers and teachers who died clutching the portraits of the countryâs ruling family, North Koreaâs official KCNA news agency said.
"Many people of the county evacuated portraits before searching after their family members or saving their household goods," KCNA said in a report with a Ryongchon dateline.
"Upon hearing the sound of the heavy explosion on their way home for lunch, Choe Yong-il and Jon Tong-sik, workers of the county procurement shop, ran back to the shop," KCNA said.
"They were buried under the collapsing building to die a heroic death when they were trying to come out with portraits of President Kim Il-sung and leader Kim Jong-il," it said.
The KCNA report could not be independently verified.
Kim Jong-il, 62, inherited power upon his fatherâs death in 1994 in the communist worldâs only case of hereditary succession.
The elder Kim was named "eternal president" and both Kims are the focus of cult worship of an intensity historians say surpasses that of Stalin in the Soviet Union or Mao in China.
"Teacher Han Jong-suk, 56, also breathed her last with portraits in her bosom," KCNA said.
Another teacher saved seven students but died rescuing the portraits, it said.
The prison diaries of North Korean defectors refer to people imprisoned for accidentally defacing portraits of the Kims.
Posted by: tipper ||
04/29/2004 12:58:23 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The dead also included workers and teachers who died clutching the portraits of the countryâs ruling family, North Koreaâs official KCNA news agency said.
And the state news agency is BRAGGING about this.
...and Simba looked into the sky and heard the voice of his father Moustafa, and was reminded of the circle of life....
In this movie was Whoopi Goldberg's type-casting as a hyena, but I digress, except to say she had musings in favor of Communism on Bill Maher several years ago. This anecdote was related by Dennis Prager who was on that show. .
The prison diaries of North Korean defectors refer to people imprisoned for accidentally defacing portraits of the Kims.
#2
Sorry. I just can't laugh about this one. Some day, God willing, all pictures of the Kims will be tossed onto a raging bonfire.
Posted by: John in Tokyo ||
04/29/2004 3:33 Comments ||
Top||
#3
The real story here is it (i.e. this drivel) is a Reuters report, published in Australia's largest circulation newspaper.
Posted by: Phil B ||
04/29/2004 3:46 Comments ||
Top||
#4
"Many people of the county evacuated portraits before searching after their family members or saving their household goods"
Crikey, I didn't know he was that popular ;)
Dead right - John/Tokyo
Posted by: Howard UK ||
04/29/2004 6:00 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Another teacher saved seven students but died rescuing the portraits, it said.
This teacher probably would have faced life imprisonment for saving the students before the portraits.
John, someday perhaps Kimmie-boy himself and the remains of his dead father will be tossed on the bonfire.
#6
HEY!! Maybe the PR machines are working overtime to crank out the "how beloved our dear leader is among the people" global press releases because....because.....
anybody seen Kimmy lately???
ah shucks...nobody can say I'm not an optimist :-)
#7
Sad to say, there's probably at least some truth to this. I've read several accounts of the loss of Japanese ships in WW2 (e.g., A Glorious Way to Die, which is about the last sortie of the battleship Yamato) in which it was said that officers and crew were sure to rescue the Emperor's portrait from the sinking ship, since it was a portrait of someone then considered to be a god. Kim Jong Il's personality cult is, if anything, even more extreme than Hirohito's, since there are no other gods in North Korea.
French President Jacques Chirac said Thursday that Turkey's entry into the European Union, which is set to expand to 25 members this week, is not "desirable" now but could be in the future. Chirac, speaking at his first full-fledged news conference in six years, said Turkey had not yet met the conditions for entry into the EU. He pointed to concern about issues ranging from human rights to judicial reform.
"The destiny of Turkey has always been deeply linked to Europe," Chirac said. "Turkey has made considerable efforts," but has a way to go, he said.
As soon as Turkey answers these issues, Chirac will come up with a few more.
Chirac's comments came weeks after Foreign Minister Michel Barnier told parliament that France would oppose Turkey's entry into the EU now because it had not met the criteria for entry. The European Commission in November noted "significant progress" by the Turkish government in meeting EU conditions for membership. However, it cited several areas where more needed to be done.
Predominantly Muslim Turkey has carried out sweeping reforms in the last two years as it tries to meet EU standards. It abolished the death penalty and has granted greater cultural rights to long-oppressed Kurds. The EU is set to expand from 15 to 25 members on Saturday, and EU leaders are scheduled to decide in December whether to approve Turkey's candidacy.
Looks like it's already decided.
Turkey could start membership talks in 2005.
And talk, and talk, and talk.
Posted by: Steve ||
04/29/2004 9:27:17 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
snicker..and just think of all the money you could have had from the US, Turkey, if you hadn't stabbed us in the back before we could give it to you.
#5
Yes, I'm afraid Turkey will find that the US has been (and could have been) a much better friend than the EU will ever be.
In the meanwhile, I look at the deaths in the Sunni triangle and know we could have had that area cleaned up a long time ago if we had come in from the north as planned. It makes me angry, not only for our deaths, but for the Iraqis whose stability and prosperity is being delayed.
#12
Not too surprised about this: EU membership would mean significantly eased rights to enter, live and work in all EU countries, including France. They're not all that happy about all the foreign 'guest workers' -- especially muslim ones...
Possibly to appease the anti-immigration cliques, although they seem not to be all that concerned by their suburban muslim hellholes outside the Paris 'ring road'...
But on the other hand -- who gives a shit what the French think about anything, anyway?
Posted by: BK ||
04/29/2004 22:52 Comments ||
Top||
La Vanguardia welcomed the decision as a sign of a "change of direction" towards a foreign policy based on "multilateralism, the defence of international law, and respect for the United Nations".
All of which has worked so well.
But the paper noted that the government's decision was not put to the vote. "Spanish troops returned from Iraq the same way they went there, with parliament debating a done deal," it said.
Much of that debate was a repeat of prewar arguments, said ABC, which accused the government of recycling "the same polemic of the past 14 months" to avoid explaining its decision not to wait for a new UN resolution - which would have enabled Spanish troops to remain in Iraq without breaking Mr Zapatero's pre-election promises. Mr Zapatero "should have explained the reasons for his decision [to pull troops out of Iraq], above all when other countries are trying to create a new UN consensus to support the transfer of sovereignty to the Iraqis", it said.
He explained it without saying a word.
ABC was one of several papers to question why the prime minister had not pushed harder for a new UN resolution - especially when Spain is a member of the security council. La Razón suspected that Mr Zapatero pushed ahead with the troop pullout because "he is not prepared to face the European elections [in June] under the threat of more casualties".
He wants to face the June elections with Socialist parties on the attack.
"Our troops are in serious danger," agreed El Mundo, but it concluded that "sending those troops was never justified, and there is no sense in prolonging their stay until" the handover of power to the Iraqi caretaker government on June 30.
El PaÃs called on Mr Zapatero to go beyond "good intentions" and outline his vision for postwar Iraq: "The government still has to define what strategy it supports ... Iraq is a problem that effects all. It is essential to rebuild the international consensus." But the paper agreed that the decision to withdraw troops was correct because, in the words of Mr Zapatero: "We should not have gone into Iraq, so we had to pull out as soon as possible."
Pull out as soon as possible, but at the same time develop a strategy. Guess the strategy won't include Spanish troops, will it?
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/29/2004 12:53:34 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#4
If that window is intact tomorrow, I'll be disappointed. Not that I think vandalism is a good thing, but I think we've let ourselves be deluded into believing treason is honest dissent. Maybe it's time to re-establish the difference, and let the traitors know they're not appreciated.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 16:37 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Someone explain to me what a socialist - feminist political party is. Is that where everyone shares the same vagina equally?
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
04/29/2004 16:39 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Who is the Iraqi 'resistance'? Those so-called 'insurgants' from Iran, Syria, Saudi-Arabia, Pakistan, etc... who are fighting like hell to insure that the Iraqis remain enslaved or those Iraqi's who are fighting tooth and nail as part of the defense force to insure that Iraq as a chance at a free democracy?
#8
It's high time 'Americans' assisting the enemy get arrested as was done during World War II. Anyone promoting the cause of terrorist jihad causes should be investigated and if deemed a threat, locked up.
#9
Patriotism issues notwithstanding, am I the only one these kind of people make puke? People who would have millions of Aghans, Vietnamese, Cambodians, Iraquis live under tyranny, be tortured and killed as long as this can piss the US. They don't act out of any sense of justice or of compassion towatrd the poor and wretched.
#10
Note that the stupid bint justifies herself by conflating the Saddamite/jihadi forces with the Iraqi people.
"The people" are equivalent to whomever the totalitarians say they are, that is the essence of their system.
Keep in mind that this terror-slut's heroes kill a lot more Iraqis than Americans. Well, Ms. asshat might say, that is because they are cooperating with Americans and the "Iraqi people" have a right to cleanse their nation of collaborators.
If so, then she is collaborating with a foreign force that seeks to harm Americans. Draw the obvious conclusion.
When right-wing vigilantes start killing these assholes (and I believe that is inevitable, however regretable) will the El-cubos conflate that with valid resistance by the "American people?"
#11
When I posted this I was so pissed off that my headline was. "Line them all up and shoot them"... or something like that. There are actual laws against behavior like this. But I will be damned to find a politician that has the gumption to do anything about it.
#12
From the article; There isn't a country in the world that practices her party's model for government, she said, but Cuba comes the closest.
Well, swim to Cuba bitch!
#13
The words to the "Internationale"
The left does not want you to see
Arise ye elite from your protests,
Arise ye agitators all,
For reason must be now silenced
For any power to be ours
Away with all who oppose us
Servile dupes must arise, arise
We'll change henceforth the old tradition
And spurn the truth to win the prize.
So comrades, come destroy
And smash good in the face
The Internationale divides the human race.
Does Seattle or Washington state have "hate speech" laws? If so, shouldn't these c*nts be prosecuted for violating them?
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 17:43 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Robert, Not sure on "hate speech" laws here. Yes, I'm in Seattle, and it's downright embarassing to have these types "speak" for our city. I think it's important to know that, while Seattle/King County is over-all pretty liberal, there are some normal folks living here too. Witness the wonderful support-our-troops events we've had down in Tacoma/Olympia.
Anyway, I'll take a look around for hate speech laws, but not sure anybody would do anything about it.
#16
RE: #12: TS (vice girl) right on! And you forgot, she must start from Seattle and go through the only known route to Cuba (the Panama Canal), which also happens to be run by some more of her favorite people (Commies).
Posted by: BA ||
04/29/2004 19:02 Comments ||
Top||
#17
prolly bad but make me feel young and victorius agin ima remember when you couldnd get date without a trace of cs behind the ear
From England, Scott Burgess at Daily Ablution offers a little list of some Imams and sheiks who are preaching sedition while drawing government benefits. He has some quotes, too.
Posted by: Old Grouch ||
04/29/2004 11:23:55 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Newly released Justice Department memos show that September 11 panel commissioner Jamie S. Gorelick was more intimately involved than previously thought with hampering communications between (We donât need no education) U.S. intelligence and law-enforcement agencies fighting terrorism.
As the No. 2 person in the Clinton Justice Department, Ms. Gorelick rejected advice from the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, who warned against placing more limits on communications between law-enforcement officials and prosecutors (we donât need no force control) pursuing counterterrorism cases, according to several internal documents written in summer 1995.
"It is hard to be totally comfortable with instructions to the FBI prohibiting contact with the United States Attorneyâs Offices when such prohibitions are not legally required," U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White wrote Ms. Gorelick six years before the 2001 terrorist attacks in New York and at the Pentagon. Our experience has been that the FBI labels of an investigation as intelligence or (no dark sarcasm in the court room) law enforcement can be quite arbitrary, depending upon the personnel involved and that the most effective way to combat terrorism is with as few labels and walls as possible so that wherever permissible, the right and left hands are communicating," she wrote.
The documents -- released yesterday by the Justice Department at the request of two Senate Republicans -- drew renewed calls for Ms. Gorelick to testify publicly before the September 11 commission about the so-called "wall" between law enforcement and intelligence agencies that many have blamed for allowing the 2001 terrorist attacks to occur.
Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican, said yesterday that Ms. Gorelickâs policies regarding the wall contributed to "blinding America to this terrible threat." Also, he said, the newly released memos raised apparent conflicts with statements Ms. Gorelick has made recently defending herself and her role in the Clinton Justice Department.
"These documents show what weâve said all along: Commissioner Gorelick has special knowledge of the facts and circumstances leading up to the erection and buttressing of âthat wallâ that, before the enactment of the Patriot Act, was the primary obstacle to the sharing of communications between law enforcement and intelligence agencies," Mr. Cornyn said.
In a June 19, 1995, memo, Ms. White recommended a series of changes to a Gorelick policy that went beyond legal requirements in separating law- enforcement and intelligence agencies. (Hey, Asst AG, leave those law enforcement agents alone) For instance, Ms. White said the local U.S. Attorney should be notified as soon as "criminal law enforcement concerns exist" while investigating terror suspects.
Deputy Director Michael Vatis rejected her recommendation.
"Notifying the [U.S. Attorney] as soon as law enforcement concerns exist -- but before [the criminal division] thinks that the investigation should âgo criminalâ -- is simply too early," wrote Mr. Vatis, who was concerned that Ms. Whiteâs proposal could result in "prejudicing a possible criminal prosecution."
In a handwritten note to Attorney General Janet Reno, Ms. Gorelick wrote, "I have reviewed and concur in the Vatis/Garland recommendations for the reasons set forth in the Vatis memo." The extent of Ms. Gorelickâs involvement, spelled out in these memos, in buttressing the law enforcement-intelligence wall also raises questions about statements she has made recently defending herself and distancing herself from the decisions about the wall.
Asked by CNNâs Wolf Blitzer earlier this month about whether she had written a memo helping establish the wall, she replied: "No, and again, I would refer you back to what others on the commission have said. The wall was a creature of statute. Itâs existed since the mid 1980s. And while itâs too lengthy to go into, basically the policy that was put out in the mid-â90s, which I didnât sign, wasnât my policy by the way, it was the attorney generalâs policy, was ratified by Attorney General Ashcroftâs deputy as well in August of 2001."
-snip-
"Even before the horrific events of September 11, I witnessed firsthand, as the deputy attorney general, some of the problems that we in the department had with sharing information," said Mr. Thompson, who appeared before the panel on Dec. 8.
Mr. Bond and his colleagues said Ms. Gorelick has critical information she can provide about the same topic, and said her private interview with the commission is not enough. "We believe, as was the case of [National Security Adviser Condoleezza] Rice, that public testimony by the decision-makers best serves the commission, the public, and ultimately Congress," the senators said, pointing to similar sentiments Ms. Gorelick herself expressed during the debate over Miss Riceâs testimony. "Unless Ms. Gorelick provides public testimony, like other key officials have done, there will be a significant gap of knowledge as far as what the public will know about its government prior to 9/11," they wrote.
Hound her mercilessly. Make her say Uncle Sam.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
04/29/2004 8:46:55 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
she must sleep well at night - that Ms. Gore-lick, knowing that she is personally responsible for the 3,000 people who died on 9-11. Does she ever dream of all those faces of people being forced to jump and realize that she was responsible their terror? And all for shallow political gain?? Sadly..it's unlikely that she cares.
Congratulations, you will be not be forgotten.
Posted by: B ||
04/29/2004 21:00 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
04/29/2004 02:19 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
AQ strikes in fall to try and hurt Bush, but misjudges us. Bush's popularity rises as Americans rally around him. Kerry and Dems wail, gnash their teeth, rend their garments over Bush's "October Surprise" and question "what did he know and when did he know it?"
It's like clockwork...
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/29/2004 12:12 Comments ||
Top||
#2
CNN. Undeterred by the polls showing popularity for Bush remains high, unnamed leaders of the radical Islamist branch of the Democratic National Committe met Wednesday night in a cave in Pakistan. At the conclusion of the meeting, reading from a prepared text, a spokesman said "We are not worried, the meeting is routine. We know the American people will see the truth. Bush knew we were coming before 9/11, he hyped the threat of terrorism, he lied about weapons of mass destruction, and he invaded Iraq to get their oil and to avenge his father's failed policies. Now he is leading the US into another Vietnam, and Iraq will become the mother of all quagmires. The American people are smart enough to see through the Bush attacks on the internationally esteemed Mr Kerry. What fools would believe Mr Kerry lied about American atrocities in Vietnam, lied about throwing away his medals, supported the communists in the Cold War, in Vietnam, in Nicaragua, that he is weak on defense, and flip-flops on issues depending on to whom he is talking. American's will not believe such lies. Meanwhile, we predict that the reckless, cowboy tactics of the US in Iraq will lead to more terrorists attacks (praise Allah) and that the American people will soon see that the only solution to such loss of life is to pull out of Iraq and all Islamic lands, and will take to the streets in mass protests. Allah, praise the United States of America."
#5
"'Praise Allah' for butchering people ? You people are demented and need to be placed in a home for sickos."
Don't they say that "Praise Allah" kind of stuff all the time? Does it make them bad people?
It issued a final report, blaming many involved in U.S. national security for failing to do their jobs and recommended sweeping changes to prevent a similar attack in the future.
-snip-
"The committee has been intrigued throughout the Pearl Harbor proceedings by one enigmatical and paramount question: âWhy, with some of the finest intelligence available in our history, with the almost certain knowledge that war was at hand, with plans that contemplated the precise type of attack that was executed by Japan on the morning of December 7 -- why was it possible for a Pearl Harbor to occur?â ââ the final report asked.
The committeeâs report told a tale of complacency, poor communications between government agencies and officialsâ stubborn refusal to contemplate the seemingly impossible, even though an attack on Pearl Harbor had been the subject of military war games. Glad we learned some good lessons and got our moneyâs worth out of that first commission. Can you imagine how vulnerable we would have been had we not cut through all the government bureaucracy?
Posted by: Super Hose ||
04/29/2004 8:55:41 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
well, Pearl Harbor remains unattacked since WW2 - guess the Gorelicks of the world are lying traitorous assholes counting on the military they disparage to win right
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/29/2004 20:58 Comments ||
Top||
#2
The main difference I see is that the Ringling Bros Commission is happening during the war and in an election year - i.e. pure partisan shit. The saddest thing, to me, is that there is no sense of shame present in any of these cretins. Being a partisan Commission member deserves a scarlet letter. As for the Gorelick creep, well... :-)
Posted by: Super Hose ||
04/29/2004 20:48 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Release them one at a time, then sound the bugles and let the fox hunt begin. Talley Ho ...
Posted by: Super Hose ||
04/29/2004 20:50 Comments ||
Top||
#2
five words....chip implants in the cortex
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/29/2004 20:52 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Newsweek: In any case, the continued flap over Gitmo could strengthen the Justice Department's argument to have a few prisoners transferred to the United States, where they could be tried in civilian courts.
Only Newsweek could come up with a conclusion like this from the available facts. Most ordinary people would see this revolving door as a reason to lock up them up and throw away the key - or worse (i.e. death by firing squad).
#4
Call me a madman, but I'd give the boys permission to gain as much info as they can extract, then kill 'em. You release 'em, they'll be back to kill our people. Makes no sense to me.
Posted by: Mark ||
04/29/2004 21:26 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Releasing detainees that were captured under arms in Afghanistan, before their is peace in that country is an idea so ludicrous that it was not even included in Hogan's Heroes, a show in which the SS were portrayed in a manner to invite laughter. In Iraq maybe 20 years down the road there will be a Sitcom about the bumbling exploits of Chemical Ali and his lovable Revolutionary Guardsmen.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
04/29/2004 22:26 Comments ||
Top||
#6
why don't we have a checkbox on our tax return for additional incarceration $ for these a-holes?
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/29/2004 22:28 Comments ||
Top||
April 29 (Bloomberg) -- Sinclair Broadcast Group Inc. ordered its ABC affiliates to preempt tomorrowâs broadcast of ``Nightline,ââ which will air the names and photos of U.S. military personnel who have died in combat in Iraq, saying the move is politically motivated.
Ted (Howdy Doody) Koppel gets a little slap
. . .
Sinclair owns stations affiliated with ABC, CBS, Fox, NBC, WB and UPN in 39 markets.
#2
allright Bloomberg! Anyone know who the advertisers will be? It would be great if we could get it pulled all together. Just like Air America, it would send a message to the LLL - you are small, stupid, unliked and outnumbered.
Posted by: B ||
04/29/2004 19:53 Comments ||
Top||
#3
This is my favorite part:
`Despite the denials by a spokeswoman for the show, the action appears to be motivated by a political agenda designed to undermine the efforts of the United States in Iraq,'' the company said in a faxed statement. Sinclair, which owns 62 U.S. television stations, said ABC is disguising political statements as news content.
Bravo, Sinclair!
At last, someone "Big" in America has the guts to say this openly and publicly what we've all been saying privately for years!
Posted by: Jen ||
04/29/2004 19:58 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Maybe they can sell the tape to HBO or Showtime. PBS would definitely air it.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
04/29/2004 20:20 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Did anyone else's jaw hit the floor?
It is awesome of Sinclair to stand up for our national defense and for those who are fighting as well as their families.
It is equally appalling that ABC would stoop to making a spectacle of the war dead for political purposes. I will be watching tomorrow for whomever advertises on it.
#7
badnov - if you do watch it - could you please take notes for the rest of us. I intend to write letters of complaint.
Posted by: B ||
04/29/2004 22:02 Comments ||
Top||
#8
The purpose of this for ABC is not political, but financial, as this is a ratings stunt by ABC for the start of the May sweep period. Sinclair's decision is not without cost to Sinclair and is therefor to be even more admired.
If Sinclair wants to really put Koppel down where he belongs, it should run the program on Memorial Day with a mix of patriotic music playing softly in the background. These folks deserve to be honored and have their sacrifice recognized appropriately.
Posted by: Mr. Davis ||
04/29/2004 22:07 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Charlie Gibson's bitch-slap to Kerry this week gave me hope; Koppel knocks it right back down again.
Fuck these guys, and Comedy Central, while we're at it. Spike TV's the place ya oughta be!
While Sinclair would support an honest effort to honor the memory of these brave soldiers, we do not believe that is what "Nightline" is doing. Rather, Mr. Koppel and "Nightline" are hiding behind this so-called tribute in an effort to highlight only one aspect of the war effort and in doing so to influence public opinion against the military action in Iraq.
Yet they mention this :
Based on published reports, we are aware of the spouse of one soldier who died in Iraq who opposes the reading of her husband's name to oppose our military action. We suspect she is not alone in this viewpoint. As a result, we have decided to preempt the broadcast of "Nightline' this Friday on each of our stations which air ABC programming.
WASHINGTON - A former manager in the scandal-scarred oil for food program will tell Congress today how top U.N. officials running the program deliberately looked the other way, congressional officials said last night. Frenchman Michael Soussan, a former program coordinator for the $100 billion fund, is expected to be the star witness of a House International Relations Committee hearing looking into Saddam's gigantic $10.1 billion rip-off.
George Bush has to be the luckiest man on the planet.
Committee sources said Soussan, now a New York-area writer, is expected to give the first, under oath, public account from an insider about how top U.N. officials were aware of Saddam's oil smuggling and kickback schemes but chose to let him get away with it.
Don't worry, Kofi, you can visit your son every other Sunday at the Swiss prison.
Allegations surfaced in a Baghdad newspaper earlier this year that Benon Sevan, the director of the program, was among 270 sympathetic international political and financial figures who received sweetheart oil deals from Saddam.
A commenter at Blair's Spleenville notes that Soussan wrote this article in the New York Post about a week ago. It's even more damning.
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/29/2004 1:35:03 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Malaysia urged neighbouring Thailand to resolve an apparent Islamic insurgency in its southern provinces due to fears it could spill across the border.
Abdullah Badawi, the Malaysian prime minister, said he was worried the suspected Muslim insurgents would seek refuge in Malaysia, which "would be a threat to us, also".
Border security patrols by Malaysia have been increased while Malaysia urged its citizens to avoid travelling to southern Thailand, a popular destination for Malaysians seeking to escape strict Islamic rules at home.
What is it, with jihadis, that one could write a boiler-plate draft of this story and simply change the names, dates, and countries for the latest ummah-update? Do these ruffians have any idea how much this turmoil will cost the members of the Phuket Chamber of Commerce?
EFL - this seems like fairly balanced reporting; not surprising that the islamofascists want to stir up trouble in Indonesia, lots of oil, lots of (at least nominal) Muslims . . . AMBON, Indonesia (AP) - Zeth Supusepa, an Indonesian Christian, is in no mood for forgiveness as he explains how suspected Muslim attackers hurled a bomb at him outside a church in the eastern city of Ambon.Gee, I wonder if the islamofascists realized what hard feelings theyâd generate, you know, like killing people and burning things down?
* * *
Across the city, Islamic fighters armed with long swords vow to avenge the deaths of fellow Muslims allegedly shot by Christian snipers. Allegations are enough? Hmm, I wonder whoâs spreading the rumors?
* * *
Unlike most of mainly Muslim Indonesia, the Malukusâ 2 million people are evenly divided between Muslims and Christians. //bitter sarcasm on//Oh, dear, we wouldnât want religious peace and harmony in Indonesia, the worldâs largest (at least nominally) Muslim nation. No, no, no, canât have that.//sarcasm off// The two sides are again afraid to meet each other, their hatred and mistrust growing amid allegations of the othersâ brutality.
* * *
Communal tensions have worsened in recent decades with an influx of Muslims from elsewhere in Indonesia. And Islamic radicals have been trying to whip up Muslim fervor in reaction to the global war on terrorist groups. The earlier conflict here galvanized militant Muslims across Indonesia, and it also attracted Islamic fighters from around Southeast Asia and from the Middle East.Oh, people like Bashir? So, the islamofascists are trying to //sarcasm on// get back to better days //sarcasm off//.
* * *
A U.N.-funded school that taught Muslim and Christian children was one of the first buildings to be burned when the clashes broke out last Sunday. Soon after, a mob torched the offices housing all the regionâs U.N. agencies. "Itâs all very sad," said Caroline Tupamahu, project manager for the U.N. Development Project in Ambon. "It will take a long time to recover now the people donât trust each other anymore." Like other U.N. staffers in the city, she was evacuated Wednesday. Real staying power, the UN.
* * *
Covering both sides of the story is all but impossible for local journalists.True even when there is no manipulation -- more so, now. The police station and the major government officers are in Christian parts of town, making official comment hard to find for Muslim reporters. A foreign-funded media center in what used to be the neutral part of town, where journalists from both faiths once met and worked on stories together, barely operates. The hotel that housed it was set alight during the troubles. So, the islamofascists didnât want any Muslim reporters getting them newfangled Western/Christian ideas now!
Sociologist Thamrin Amal Tamagola said the clash, which started on Sunday, was the culmination of several problems. The trigger was not the hoisting of the flag of the separatist Republic of South Maluku (RMS) movement, he said, but because "the police were not professional when they guarded the separatists during the rally as they celebrated the RMS anniversary in Ambonâs main street," adding that initially the clash was not between Christians and Muslims. //*I believe, IIRC, that the police were attacked, first.*// Some Muslims were irked by the police guarding the rally of RMS supporters, who were mostly //*but not all*// Christian, confirming earlier suspicions that the police, particularly those from Ambon and Seram islands, sided with Christians, he said. //*NOTE: This, by the way, provides great rationalizations to maraud and riot, because it offends the Indonesian principle of UNITY.*// Thamrin suggested that police from other ethnic groups be sent with riot control capabilities. "Donât send soldiers; that would ruin everything," he asserted. Another problem, he said, was that Jakarta had neglected to follow up the government-sponsored truce in February 2002. Thamrin called on the government to improve conditions in Maluku, where survivors were trying to return to normality.
Elsewhere, the complex nature of Indonesiaâs cultures and religions was previously addressed right here at Rantburg. It is helpful, though, I think to keep a picture of the Indonesian nation in mind with all that. Most of the population (about half) are in Java. There is easy access to the Ambon area from the Philippines, due North . . .
Posted by: cingold ||
04/29/2004 4:05:03 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#3
Nice mini-map cingold. Although that link about the President's daughter you give in the comments doesn't lead to that story anymore. I want to know what evil and dispicable habits our President lets his daughters do! Even the Muslims want to know!
Posted by: Charles ||
04/29/2004 8:48 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Charles, it's the Indonesian President's daughter. And, again, sorry about the Jakarta Post links (see comment #1 above), they #!@@/*! switch them around because (?).
CARACAS, Venezuela (Mehr News Agency)4-29-04 â- Iranian President Mohammad Khatami has refused to meet Argentine President Nestor Kirchner on the sidelines of the G15 meeting in Caracas, saying he would not meet him until Buenos Aires formally apologized to Tehran for falsely charging Iranian diplomats with involvement in the bombing of the AMIA Jewish community center in Buenos Aires in 1994, a source said.
Khatami also asked Argentina to make efforts to completely clear the reputations of the Iranian diplomats and to make up for the damage it has caused Iran in the international arena, an informed source who spoke on condition of anonymity told the Tehran Times.
The Argentine president had wanted to hold talks with Khatami on the expansion of bilateral ties.
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez hosted a summit of the G15 group of developing nations on Friday and Saturday in Caracas. The G15 actually has 19 members: Algeria, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jamaica, Kenya, Malaysia, Mexico, Nigeria, Peru, Senegal, Sri Lanka, Venezuela, and Zimbabwe.
Hadi Soleimanpur, Iranâs former ambassador to Argentina, was detained August 21 in northern England, where he was studying at a local university on a student visa. His arrest was a result of a warrant issued by Argentine judge Juan Jose Galeano, who had been investigating the 1994 attack on the AMIA center for the past ten years. The car bomb that exploded at the AMIA community center killed 85 people and injured hundreds.
Judge Galeano issued arrest warrants for a dozen Iranians. He even ordered that an arrest warrant be issued for any Iranian who had visited Argentina since the time of the blast.
The former diplomat was released on bail and the Argentine judge was given two months to present evidence against him, a move which proved a scandal for the Argentine judicial system.
Soleimanpurâs name was mentioned in the case from the beginning of the investigation, although Judge Galeano was not able to produce the least amount of incriminating evidence against him.
Finally, the British court ruled that Argentina had not provided sufficient evidence to extradite Soleimanpur and ordered that he be released.
In addition, an Argentine federal judge removed Galeano on December 3, after Argentine intelligence agents testified in a separate trial that Galeano had paid $400,000 in state money to Carlos Telleldin, a car dealer, in return for testimony in the case.
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
04/29/2004 3:37:54 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Khatami also asked Argentina to make efforts to completely clear the reputations of the Iranian diplomats and to make up for the damage it has caused Iran in the international arena, an informed source who spoke on condition of anonymity told the Tehran Times.
#2
I can't think of any reason why Argentina would want to strengthen bilateral ties with a rogue regime that has used diplomatic immunity to loose bombers from the Iranian embassy to attack Argentine civilians. Cut rate rug prices are just not worth it.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
04/29/2004 20:30 Comments ||
Top||
#3
From a New York Times article from way back: Former Argentine President Carlos Menem allegedly accepted a $10 million bribe to cover up Iran's responsibility for the attack.
It looks like the Iranians spread enough money around to get the judge who went after the terrorists fired. The equivalent in the US would be an impeachment of GWB for alleging that al Qaeda was responsible for 9/11.
What?!?!? This canât be! War in Iraq was supposed to breed MORE terror!
International acts of terror in 2003 were the fewest in more than 30 years, according to the U.S. State Departmentâs annual terrorism report released Thursday. The Patterns of Global Terrorism report said 190 acts of international terrorism occurred in 2003 -- a slight drop from 198 attacks the previous year and the lowest total since 1969. The figure marked a 45 percent decrease in attacks since 2001, but it did not include most of the attacks in Iraq, because attacks against combatants did not fit the U.S. definition of international terrorism....
The list of nations designated state sponsors of terrorism -- Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Syria and Sudan -- remained the same as the previous year. ... No Surprise. Although Libya is making headway.
Iraq remained on the list because U.S. law requires a country to have a "government in place that pledges not to support acts of terrorism" before its removal, the report said....
As in previous years, the report said Iran "remained the most active state sponsor of terrorism in 2003."...
The report praised Saudi Arabiaâs cooperation with the United States in combating terrorism after bombings in the country last May and November. The kingdom was cited by Black in the report as "an excellent example of a nation increasingly focusing its political will to fight terrorism," including arresting terrorists, cutting funding and strengthening legislation. ...
Although the report covered only terrorist attacks in 2003, Black reflected on the March 11 terrorist bombings in Madrid, Spain, which many believe tipped national elections against Prime Minister Jose Aznar. "Terrorists have concluded, with the help of many others, that there may be a relationship between a terrorist action and an election in a democracy," Black said.
Posted by: Rafael ||
04/29/2004 8:21:51 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Worldwide terrorist attacks down in 2003
Gee, wonder why?
Could it be because so many of them are in Iraq hiding behind children while attacking our military, instead of out bombing children elsewhere?
Just a (flypaper) thought.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
04/29/2004 20:25 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"But Osama, most our best people are held by the infidels in Guantanamo Bay, CUBA"
Maybe we arenât losing the PR/info war?
caught via LGF
WASHINGTON, April 29 (Reuters) - The controversial U.S. Arabic-language TV channel Alhurra is winning viewers as a news source in the Arab world despite rising anti-American attitudes in the region, according to a U.S.-financed poll released on Thursday.
The telephone survey of 3,588 people aged 15 or older in 13 cities was done by the French research company Ipsos-Stat in early April for the the Broadcasting Board of Governors, the independent federal agency that oversees all U.S. international nonmilitary broadcasting.
The results showed Alhurra -- in its first two months -- is being watched by an average 29 percent of the satellite-equipped households in seven countries, including a high of 44 percent in Kuwait and a low of 18 percent in Egypt.
The survey also found that an average 53 percent of the viewers consider the channel programming to be reliable or somewhat reliable. This includes a high of 70 percent reliability felt by Saudis and a low of 37 percent reliability among Syrians.
"I was very surprised by these numbers," considering all the negative press in the region saying no one is watching Alhurra and the fact that a religious "fatwa" edict was issued against the channel in Saudi Arabia, said Norman Pattiz of the Broadcasting Board of Governors.
"Within the first two months of broadcasting Alhurra has quickly established itself as a player among satellite stations in the Middle East," he told a news conference.
Some 40 percent of people in the Middle East have access to satellite television, Pattiz said.
Many Arab critics have argued that President George W. Bush launched Alhurra, the "Free One," as a propaganda tool to advance a war on Islam.
The Americans contend the TV channel is needed to compete for the hearts and minds of Muslims against pan-Arabic stations Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiya, which U.S. officials charge often distort U.S. policy and are hostile to it.
Pattiz said the survey numbers for Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiya are much higher but still the results for Alhurra are "great indicators."
"Our product is credibility in news and information. If we donât have that, weâre dead in the water," he said.
The station operates 24 hours a day every day and aims to "present U.S. policies accurately and credibly" through full discussions representing a variety of viewpoints, he added.
Pattiz said Alhurra and the U.S.-funded Radio Sawa, which also operates in the Middle East, still have hurdles to overcome in winning viewers and listeners.
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/29/2004 11:19:25 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
If this is the al-Reuters version, imagine how favorable the truth is...
#2
Would it be sacreligious to have a shows featuring a reasonable not culty-secty Sunni and a rereasonable not culty-secty Shia each with their own show, trying to be uplifting and not violent? It could start as just inspirational talk. "we need to build Iraq, becasue everyone will benefit. . ."
It might actually work into a thing where people write/email (filtering easier) ask for advice, etc. etc.
"What does the Koran say about. . . "
As we would have moderate sorts in the dias, we could show that we aren't against Islam, just the looneys, who are in reality against the common Iraqi as well.
This could make the desired message - the radical Clerics are (like the left wing of the Dems) - elitist Totalitarian-minded thugs.
EFL
Monotonous, militaristic chants rang out in Arabic from mosques throughout the northern rebel-held neighborhoods, all praising Allah and urging residents to slay the American infidels in Fallujahâs dusty streets.
The calls for holy war did not go unheard by Marines around the city; nor were they unheeded by insurgents.
Wednesday was another day of so-called cease-fire in Fallujah. Another day that rebels tried to kill Marines with rocket-propelled grenades and rifle fire. Another day that Marine snipers picked them off, helicopters mowed them down, and jets blew them up with 500-pound bombs.
Still, the insurgents kept coming. snip
Fallujah has become the focus of Americaâs war in Iraq, they say. And what happens in the flat river town could paint a picture of Americaâs future in Iraq.
"Even the president is thinking about Fallujah right now," said Lt. James Vanzant, a spokesman for the 2nd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment.
snip
Around 5:30 a.m. Wednesday, about 10 rebels attacked Marines from Fox Company in a former Iraqi Special Republican Guard compound on the northwest corner of town near the Euphrates.
The Marines fought them off with machine guns and small arms until the rebels either died or broke contact. A couple of hours later, Marines in another position saw men running down nearby streets carrying AK-47 rifles. When snipers fired on them, commanders nearby questioned why they would shoot armed men in the streets of Fallujah. They were told to go review the "rules of engagement."
The troops shrugged, relaxed and went back to searching for an enemy that they may ---- or may not ---- be allowed to shoot that day.
Now that Fallujah is a household name and the world seems to await the conflictâs climax, the rules of war have such wide swings that Marines are free to bomb neighborhoods to oblivion one day, but are kept from shooting armed men running in the streets the next.
Itâs a confusing, dangerous place, and young leaders say keeping busy is the key to staying alive and sane. snip
Later that day, a long silence in a Marine-held home was broken by giddy laughter and rapid boot stomping on the stairs.
Marines, all sweaty and smiling, rushed up to the bombed-out, second-level deck with full sandbags drooping from chiseled and tatooed forearms.
Even in the soggy midday heat, they turned the drudgery of filling and hauling the heavy sandbags to their defenses into a boysâ game ---- a simple competition and team effort full of laughing and taunting and encouragement.
It was the kind of fraternal spirit that seems to push the Marines through the long slog of each day in the field, gets them through the dark valley of night, and helps them reach the peak of the next day together to face whatever comes next.
"Laughing about it helps," said one Marine, panting after the climb.
"Itmakes the time go by fast," another said with a sigh.
ââIt keeps the Marines on their toes," said Cpl. Peter Madrigal of the effort to bolster the troopsâ defenses on a rooftop where rebels have tried to land mortar rounds day after day.
Madrigal, of Tucson, Ariz, was one of the young leaders who recently led Marines on a deadly ambush. On Wednesday, he led them in a boyish game.
"We try to do something to improve things every day," he said as huge explosions sent mushroom smoke clouds climbing the sky in the east. "It helps us stay on top. We canât get complacent."
On Wednesday, they had some rewards to look forward to after toil and stress: a rare hot meal and mail. snip About CNN footage
And late Tuesday night, the crew captured the near-nightly visit from the Air Force AC-130 Spectre gunship as it blasted vehicles and buildings where suspected insurgents were hiding.
Military officials Wednesday said the footage was played over and over during Tuesdayâs news reports in the states and was being billed as the much-ballyhooed "big offensive."
It was no such thing. snip
The officer agreed that even in a best-case scenario, the situation might just return to how it was when the Marines arrived in March ---- when they were only hit with the occasional mortar or roadside bomb.
But for the guys on the ground, in the streets and on the rooftops of Fallujah who daily are fighting off rebel attacks and trying to stay somewhat in the deniable bounds of the cease-fire rules, politics seemed to mean little Wednesday.
Marines from Fox Company ducked behind their doubled-up sandbag barriers when rebel mortar rounds crashed to the ground 100 yards away around sunset.
Theyâd tweak and add to the defenses tomorrow, they said. First, letâs get through the night.
Mail arrived, then hot chow. Then it was dark again and the second shift slept or read letters from home while the first shift donned helmets and flak vests and headed upstairs to their posts.
Rebels struck up the jihad tunes from local mosques and, at 9:45 p.m., the gunship "Slayer" arrived for its nightly rounds over Fallujah to enforce the cease-fire with cannon.
#1
I think we're going to have to kill these guys, and bringing in an Iraqi force will only delay the inevitable. These guys think it is ok to women and children as shileds, or to strap bombs to their (or more likely their neighbor's) kids. You can't reason with them, you can't negotiate with them, you just have to kill them. That's what we're going to have to do.
#2
Associated Press
"FALLUJAH, Iraq - U.S. Marines negotiated a "tentative" agreement Thursday to pull back forces from Fallujah, a deal that would lift a nearly monthlong siege and allow an Iraqi force led by a former Saddam Hussein -era general to handle security."
Who are we negotiating with? Is the Islamists (and the Dems) strategy is working? Is our will is wilting, our resolve melting? They cranked up the heat in April, and before the end of the month, . . .
Posted by: Sam ||
04/29/2004 18:32 Comments ||
Top||
United States soldiers at a prison outside Baghdad have been accused of forcing Iraqi prisoners into acts of sexual humiliation and other abuses.
The charges, first announced by the military in March, were documented by photographs taken by guards in the prison.
Some of the photographs, and descriptions of others, were broadcast in the US on Wednesday by a CBS television news program and were verified by military officials
Granted, I think this is extreme and I hope the Joe Soldier at the bottom of the totem pole doesnât get hung out to dry. But, I figure itâll just be another witch hunt.
#3
come on...maybe the second pict but def not the first...this is pure propaganda..
Posted by: Dan ||
04/29/2004 17:30 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I support the US over Iraq, but this kind of thing should be taken lightly by no-one. In fact the rightwing blogs should be the loudest in criticising this kind of thing.
It is despicable.
It is the discipline and humanity of our armed forces that distinguishes them from the rapers/looters and pillagers that the third world is used to. Blur that line and we cease to have a moral mandate to be in Iraq at all.
These images were far, FAR more damaging to the US's efforts in Iraq than any anti-war protest was before.
This is proof to the world of US-haters that the US really is as evil as they like to think.
Those soldiers need to be seen to be disciplined over this, justice needs to be seen to be done in this case because confidence in the US occupation has just taken a big hit.
The reputation of the US military has just been smeared. All that time, effort, restraint, discipline and hard work to build a good reputation, to ensure Iraqis know it's a liberation not an invasion has just been wiped off the board by a very few appalling individuals.
I am appalled this was even possible. I would have thought the discipline requirements would have taken into account the particular importance of strict behavioural guidelines.
#5
Assuming these are legit, this is shameful. Imagine if the US prisoners taken by the Iraqis early in the conflict had been treated this way. I (and I'm sure all rantburgers) would have been furious--like out-of-my-skull, nuke-the-whole-middle-east furious. Listen, I am no pacifist, but this bullshit is exactly what Al-Jazeera lies about us doing, and it looks like here we really did it. I am ashamed. Heads should roll, lots of them.
#6
Those soldiers need to be seen to be disciplined over this, justice needs to be seen to be done in this case because confidence in the US occupation has just taken a big hit.
Um, THEY ARE.
Goddammit, what part of them facing charges don't people understand?! This is precisely why CBS decided to run this old news, and why they downplay the fact that the idiots are already facing charges -- to confuse people.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 18:19 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Imagine if the US prisoners taken by the Iraqis early in the conflict had been treated this way.
I have no idea who you are, but you really can't be this stupid, can you?
US SOLDIERS CAPTURED BY IRAQ WERE TREATED MUCH, MUCH WORSE THAN THIS!!!
This doesn't excuse what the idiots -- who are facing charges, remember -- did, but, dammit, people, pull your heads out of your asses and get a sense of proportion!
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 18:21 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Amen RC, 12 former guards are facing charges. A few bad apples, nothing more and they will face justice. Trust me Military Courts will not see the humor value of these photos.
#10
Anon1 - you are assumming these are real. the first picture of the hooded guy with wire attached i highly doubt is genuine.
as Robert pointed out put it in propotion. the US is not some perfect society and we do have bad apples.
Posted by: Dan ||
04/29/2004 18:30 Comments ||
Top||
#11
RC. I'm a regular Rantburger, and don't appreciate being called stupid. Check my posts if you have no idea who I am before deciding I am so stupid. I generally agree with your posts, but would prefer reason to namecalling. I'm referring the the incident, early in the conflict, when a couple of Apache pilots were taken captive. I do not recall seeing photos of them being forced into a naked pyramid, or with hoods over their heads and mock-electrodes hooked up. If you had seen such pictures, what would your reaction have been? My point is not that Americans have not been mistreated in captivity by Iraqi military (and I am referring only the the real Iraqi military, not the insurgents or other irregulars/terrorists, I'm trying to compare apples to apples). Please don't knock down a straw man. My point is that this is incrediby, collossaly bad from every perspective (political, moral, pragmatic), and shameful. If you can't acknowledge that, then we simply disagree. But I don't think you are stupid.
#13
I have come to the conclusion that if these prisoners had information that related to terrorist attacks against innocents, the military would not be handling them.
The CIA would quietly extract all needed info away from cameras.
I now agree that the military needs to do what they need to do , but I think CBS' actions were jackassery, particularly in re: Gen Kimmit
Posted by: john slenge ||
04/29/2004 18:43 Comments ||
Top||
#15
One other point about "proportion." It is an important issue. The proportion at issue here is the treatment of enemy prisoners. The world expects tyrannical regimes to mistreat, torture, humiliate enemy prisoners. The world expects America not to do the same--because America expects that of itself. The talk about "bad apples" and fraternity pranks is true as far as it goes, but I don't think you are contemplating what effect this incident is going to have. We are trying hard as hell to be a "light on the hill" to a messed up world that slanders us every day. The point is to lead the world, and we need some moral authority to do so. Even when we act with great honor we face (illegitimate) criticism. But when we hand them ammunition like these photos we are making it almost impossible to respond to Al-Jazeera-like diatribes by saying, "the US would never do that." I like to be in a position where we can say that, and people of good faith know that it is true.
#16
If the President doesn't make a HUGE STINK of this, and speak out about it publicly, and find the higher-ups who were in cahoots, and punish everyone, I would say it will go very badly for us in November. Not only that, but there certainly is a clear moral imperative to do so. And everyone will need to see those heads roll--here and over there.
Anon1 said it : "All that time, effort, restraint, discipline and hard work to build a good reputation, to ensure Iraqis know it's a liberation not an invasion has just been wiped off the board by a very few appalling individuals."
I must admit, it really makes me want to be a lib again . . .
#17
I'm referring the the incident, early in the conflict, when a couple of Apache pilots were taken captive. I do not recall seeing photos of them being forced into a naked pyramid, or with hoods over their heads and mock-electrodes hooked up.
Ever hear of Jessica Lynch and the others in her convoy? There were more than just those two pilots captured.
What about the British members of Bravo 2-0? Yeah, that was the Gulf War, but...
BTW -- I'll call anyone stupid who thinks American POWs weren't treated worse than this.
Finally, yes, this looks bad. Primarily, though, because the FACT that welong ago started the process to punish these people is being IGNORED. If we were trying to hush it up, that would be horrible -- instead we're making it clear it's unacceptable and punishing the guilty.
Ideally, it never would have happened. But it did, and the real story is that we're doing the right thing about it. If you want to go along with CBS and the rest of the American-hating world and ignore that, go for it.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 18:57 Comments ||
Top||
#18
I must admit, part of me agrees with BigEd and RC! We need to get a sense of proportion, although this will be used against us. My question is, did anyone see the CBS show. The pics on the link are grainy at best, and I see no US military in the pics (granted, CBS, I assume has some). However, has anyone thought of...those that don't have US military in them directly could be leftovers from Saddam and his satan spawn havin' a lil' fun with the prisners?
Posted by: BA ||
04/29/2004 18:57 Comments ||
Top||
#19
If the President doesn't make a HUGE STINK of this, and speak out about it publicly, and find the higher-ups who were in cahoots, and punish everyone, I would say it will go very badly for us in November.
WTF are you talking about, ex-lib? Again, THEY WERE UP ON CHARGES A MONTH AGO.
God dammit, people, get a goddamned grip!
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 18:59 Comments ||
Top||
#20
RC. You are ignoring my point, and continuing to knock down a straw man. I never said that American POWs weren't treated worse than this. I might be stupid if I ever said that, but I didn't. Stop raising that lie. It is not helping you. Neither is calling me "american-hating." If you can't respond to the point, fine. I still don't think you are stupid, but I'm becoming convinced you are not a serious person.
Granted, but only when you willfully ignore that we started the punishment process a month before this pictures became public.
You can still say "America doesn't do that" because we sure as hell don't accept it. We punish the people who do that kind of crap.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 19:12 Comments ||
Top||
#22
RC. You seem to think the fact that people are up on charges means everything is cool, nothing to see here, move along. Of course it is crucially important for people to know that the morons are being punished, but there is also the issue of US credibility generally. It just took a big hit, and I feel totally sick about that (because I love my country, not because I hate it), not just mad at CBS. There is a principle that you don't mistreat or humiliate enemy prisoners. It is not a minor principle, it is a majorly fucking important principle. When someone mistreats US prisoners, I get pissed beyond just about anything else. If I didn't feel sick when the US violated that principle, then I am not a principled person. I don't think the answer is to downplay the incident, talk about a few bad apples, frat pranks. I think the answer is to bring down the hammer as if the US understands the principle and respects it. We are doing that by bringing charges. That was not dones publicly before. Okay with me. But now that the incident is public, the hammer has to come down publicly. The President should, and will, say something. Watch.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
04/29/2004 19:19 Comments ||
Top||
#24
Oh, and who did you think we sent to war? Angels?
Hell, no. We sent people. And people screw up, and some people are just rotten. Some of the people sent to war are going to do bad things, just as some people who stay here at home do bad things.
When we send people to war, we take responsibility for what they do. Part of that is making sure the rules we've established are followed. We're doing that. There's no cover-up, there's no white-washing; remember, the idiots were charged a month before these pictures were made public.
No doubt there are going to be people who get really big woodies over this, over proof that Americans are human, too. So what? Those same people already believe thousands of lies about Americans; this isn't going to change their minds or enrage them anymore.
Fence-sitters? Some of them might be turned against us, sure. But some of them might see something different in what we do and are because we are punishing the guilty.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 19:24 Comments ||
Top||
#25
Dad has reviewed the above and wonders what the fuss is. From Roi-Namur to Iwo the 4th Marine Division took exceptionally good care of their prisoners - all 138 of them.
#26
Sludj, by all accounts, this is being correctly handled by the proper military authorities. If the hammer needs to come down, it should be from the military brass. Indications are that already, one general has been dismissed over this. There's your hammer. I don't see a need for the POTUS to become involved at this point. RC is right, we need proper perspective.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
04/29/2004 19:26 Comments ||
Top||
#27
RC: I have a grip! I understand, precisely, what's going to happen. Nothing could make the Kerry campaign and all other anti-Americans happier. If you go to the blog listed for the pics, you'll see what people are saying. I'm not sure if you have a political sense of proportion about this. Post #15 has it right. No one's ever going to hear about all the nasty things the other side has done and does. And you're absolutely right that the punishment of these people is going to be ignored. Of course it will be.
See, it doesn't matter if they were up on charges a month ago--Perception is Everything , in this media-controlled world. Their bygone punishment will only be sidelined, anyway, if mentioned at all by the news outlets -- "those involved are facing charges." BIG FAT DEAL! the world will say to that.
Everyone will want to know exactly what happened to these yahoos. Not only that, but the denouncing--publicly--of their deeds has to be put out there again and again, without a shred of compromise or hint of "cover-up." It has to be said so many times, or in such a big way (like a press conference about it) that the press can't sweep it under the rug. The world will needs to see, and understand very, very clearly, what BUSH does to soldiers that do this kind of thing. And still, it won't matter that much. The deed's been done. If there is any hope of recovering from this thing, it's the moral issue that needs definition. And the Pres is the one who has to do it because he's the CIC. It's his call. The complexities of our military justice system don't make much sense to the average person, even if it were to be explained--which it won't be by our media people.
The Islamiodz and the libs will have a hey day with this, and so will most people who have a sense of basic decency. No one's going to know that our POW's are treated worse, and no one will care whether they were or weren't. We've lost the (pubic relations) initiative.
I agree with Anon1: "The rightwing blogs should be the loudest in criticising this kind of thing."
#28
I think the answer is to bring down the hammer as if the US understands the principle and respects it. We are doing that by bringing charges. That was not dones publicly before.
As you know, on 14 January 2004, a criminal investigation was initiated to examine allegations of detainee abuse at the Baghdad confinement facility at Abu Ghraib. Shortly thereafter, the commanding general of Combined Joint Task Force Seven requested a separate administrative investigation into systemic issues such as command policies and internal procedures related to detention operations. That administrative investigation is complete, however, the findings and recommendations have not been approved. As a result of the criminal investigation, six military personnel have been charged with criminal offenses to include conspiracy, dereliction of duty, cruelty and maltreatment, assault, and indecent acts with another.
That was on March 22nd. Like I described it yesterday, this is old news.
I don't understand all the calls for the President to get involved. We're doing everything that needs to be done. What do you want? Hairshirts, flagellation and scourging for the entire chain of command?
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 19:31 Comments ||
Top||
#29
RC. I didn't think we sent angels, but I was shocked and surprised by these photos. I would have hoped that there was closer supervision that would prevent this kind of immense screw-up. I agree with you that the fact that we are bringing the hammer down will ameliorate the damage somewhat. Rex. I think the President will comment. He is a principled person and I'm sure he is pissed as hell that this bullshit was allowed to occur. We have the finest, most professional military in the world. This crap has to be denounced from the highest levels. We'll see what happens. RC, I think I understand your position a bit better now, and we probably agree on more than we disagree about (except for the part about me being a stupid america-hater). I just think that for most people the big issue is not whether punishment is being meted out, but how the hell did this happen in our fine military?
Missed it, as I bet 99% of the US public did. Also, the photos add a little context beyond that bland statement. It may be old news to you, but it will be new news to most people, and new news needs a new response.
#31
RC: Excellent point. Problem: No one heard about it. Second problem: no one will get it said in that way, only. "A criminal investigation" "a separate investigation into system issues such as . . . " "Huh?" Average Joe-American says. The pics are what they're going to remember. The pics are all they're going to remember.
So what to do?
What needs to be hammered, and I do mean HAMMERED is:
conspiracy
dereliction of duty
cruelty
maltreatment
assault
indecent acts
and the Pres needs to make clear that the moral high ground is still ours--which will be a tough sell now.
"What do you want? Hairshirts, flagellation and scourging for the entire chain of command?" No. But the Islamic world would consider that a weak punishment. They don't understand our system--which plays into the hands of ALL the anti-American players, who do understand, but don't care.
#32
Give the Enlisted people Article 15s.
Give the Officers Letters Of Reprimand.
What's the big deal?
I'll be 'concerned' when our guys find an old
Field Phone Generator and start playing
'The Bell Telephone Hour'.
On either CBS, or the Iraqis!
Posted by: Jack Deth ||
04/29/2004 19:49 Comments ||
Top||
#33
Sludj....the President may very well comment.....most likely as a result of press badgering. Even if on his own, fine...not a bad idea. I just don't see it as a requisite. I think most level headed people will understand the bad apple aspect of this....that we can't tar the entire military establishment because of a very localized incident. The press may be tempted to go on a witch hunt for other such incidents... but such a move is likely to backfire on 'em.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
04/29/2004 19:50 Comments ||
Top||
#34
except for the part about me being a stupid america-hater
I never said you were an America-hater. I said you were following the line of CBS and other America-haters.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 19:51 Comments ||
Top||
#35
I'm waiting for CBS to infiltrate and record the treatment of...oh...let's say, the Italian hostages. I don't approve of what was done here, but a sense of proportion needs to be maintained
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/29/2004 19:53 Comments ||
Top||
#36
RC. Lame. Sounds like Clinton: "it depends on what the meaning of is, is." You slammed me without thinking about what I was saying. That's okay, heat of battle. But calm down with the namecalling (at least directed at me).
#37
and the Pres needs to make clear that the moral high ground is still ours--which will be a tough sell now.
Oh, yeah. We've definitely sunk to the level of people who stand behind women and children and shoot at soldiers. We're definitely no better than the people who set off a bomb next to a bus full of kids.
Yep, we've definitely lost the moral high ground.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 19:55 Comments ||
Top||
#38
Rex: The bad apple phenomenon will make sense to most people, IF the word gets out about where the President stands--needs to be crystal clear.
Frank G: Yeah--too bad CBS won't do that, and about a million other things.
#39
Those f__in idiots did more harm to our image than anything else I can imagine. I don't know how many are involved, 3 4 whatever. In anycase they don't represent the fine military we have in place right now. I will be waiting anxiously to see what is meted out to whoever was in charge at this time. I know and most Americansd know or should know that these people are aberrations. It won't change my mind about the war and keeping Dubya as Prez. Hanoi John will spin this somehow with the help of Kennedy, McAuliffe and the rest of the sickening Dims and left loons who puport to be concerned about our country. So be it. As for the Iraqis and the rest of those who wish us ill , a lot of fear of our troops is a good order of the day. Al Jizz et al can KMA
Posted by: Bill Nelson ||
04/29/2004 19:59 Comments ||
Top||
#40
Last shot.....this has been one of the better threads today. The fact that this debate exists is ample testimony to our moral high ground. 'nough said.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
04/29/2004 20:04 Comments ||
Top||
#41
We're definitely no better than the people who set off a bomb next to a bus full of kids. Yep, we've definitely lost the moral high ground.
RC. There he goes again, purposefully misunderstanding ex-lib. You need to change your handle to "half-cocked." Dude, slow down and think about what people are saying before your blast off into orbit against something they didn't say. He wasn't talking about how your or I are going to percieve this incident. Did you miss that part? C'mon.
#43
I'm not buying it-- fuzzy photos of "some guys being abused somewhere" as put in the Sydney Morning Herald (which leans Left, ask Tim Blair) and on DimUnderground aren't going to convince me that our soldiers did anything like this.
CBS and "60 Minutes" have been exposed with a partisan agenda long before this!
This is more Kerry "American soldiers are baby killers" propaganda.
Shame on you site pests for acting as if it's "true."
Posted by: Jen ||
04/29/2004 20:11 Comments ||
Top||
#44
Sludj -- please, ignore my comments. It's clear you can't comprehend them for some reason.
How does this incident make it a "tough sell" to say we have the moral high ground? We're punishing the perpetrators. In comparison, our enemies do everything I listed, and more, and celebrate their crimes.
If we can't make that point, we may as well surrender, because we'll never be able to win.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 20:12 Comments ||
Top||
#45
Doctor! It hurts when I do this!
Well f**kin duh, don't do that!
Bully: A coward with power.
Amen, Bill. This was not in the middle of a firefight - it's just thuggery. Never should've happened in the first place - do not defend them nor attack critics. Everyone involved knew better - and deserves what's coming. Everything else is twaddle. CBS is just another agenda-driven media whore playing sweeps-week politics.
#46
Jen, the military pressed charges against those involved a month ago. Sadly, it's real. Please don't hare off in the opposite direction of "sludj" and "ex-lib" by denying the possibility.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 20:13 Comments ||
Top||
#47
I'm still not buying it--went over to DUH underground.
It may have been one or 2 soldiers who went a little crazy when we first got there, but it's clear that this hasn't been widespread.
And the Army is doing an investigation.
Bottom line: This is not who our US soldiers really are and letting one or 2 "bad apples" speak for all our troops is Dimocrat Leftist propaganda.
Posted by: Jen ||
04/29/2004 20:16 Comments ||
Top||
#48
They F'd up, they disgraced their units, they're charged. Story over
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/29/2004 20:18 Comments ||
Top||
#49
RC. Sorry, can't oblige you by ignoring your posts, I find them fascinating. The most entertaining in this thread by far. But I do think there is a comprehension problem. If you do not understand how pictures of Iraqi prisoners being hooked up to mock-electrods and forced to engage in the Turkish-Bathhouse olympics makes our moral standing a harder sell, well . . . I guess we really see things differently. For one second try to see these photos from a perspective other than your own. Now, I'm not saying those perspectives are right--but they exist. You've got to let that fact sink in to understand why some of us are so sickened and angered by this injury to America's moral standing. And please, don't just say, "but charges have been brought . . ." I know that, and I have addressed it.
#50
What bullshit, sludj.
Are you getting paid for being a seminar poster for the Left?
This doesn't say *squat* about "America's moral standing!"
America, like every other country on the planet, has "bad people" or people who are do wrong.
The difference is that in America, we make a fuss over it, reprimand them and show that it was wrong to do what they did.
We are human and yet we have the rule of law...which we brought to Iraq.
I'm almost certain that some of those pictures were from Saddam's time and not under the U.S. liberation.
While what our soldiers did in this case was wrong and abusive, it was mild and tame compared to what had been done to Iraqis probably in those same rooms.
America owns the moral high ground of the world, which is lucky for the planet in that we're also the lone superpower.
We are the USA and that's a wonderful thing!
And we're not the Soviet Union, the Nazis, the Juches in North Korea or even Saddam's Baathists and I resent anyone like you, "sludge," that tries to lower our fine country to that level because it's politically convenient to you and your fellow travellers.
Posted by: Jen ||
04/29/2004 20:32 Comments ||
Top||
#51
I think there are four primary responses to these photos:
1) Those who want to make excuses for the behavior, or minimize it, and see the photos as representing nothing substantive, but primarily as a political weapon for use against the US.
2) Those who have the highest admiration, respect, and gratitude for our military, and who are sickened that these particular a-holes and their superiors acted to harm that military's moral standing. We see this as a substantive issue, but also recognize that enemies of the President and of the US will use the photos as a political weapon. We think that behavior (politicization of the incident) is shameful too.
3) Those who don't really care about the treatment of the prisoners, but are gleeful about the opportunities to use the photos against the President and/or the US.
4) Those few who, although liberal, actually see this as a substantive issue, not just a political weapon (few of these, and far between, but they may exist).
#52
By your terms you have defined the "issue."
Why is it that these photos and this "story" only appear on 2 of the main organs of the Left Wing Attack Machine: CBS and DU?
It's a political hit on America, President Bush and those who support both (the "silent majority" of Americans).
SSDD.
Posted by: Jen ||
04/29/2004 20:42 Comments ||
Top||
#53
Jen has a valid point. Just becuase these pictures are in a mainstream newspaper doesn't make them true nor does it explain the context. Recall that yesterday this same paper published the drivel about people in NK getting blown up rescuing pictures of Kimmie.
Otherwise, the pictures are from different sources. The first is from TV footage. My guess it was staged by an Arab TV network (or possibly photoshopped). The second assuming it is genuine looks to me like there was some misunderstanding resulting from poor Arabic that someone thought funny enough to record. Just image how hard it would be to explain to scared people who speak English that this is what you wanted them to do.
Storm in a teacup!
Posted by: Phil B ||
04/29/2004 20:44 Comments ||
Top||
#54
Jen, welcome in, the water's warm. Damn, I wish was getting paid. Anyway, I don't think the actions of these few hurts America's moral standing, but it does hurt the perception of that standing, which is a bad thing. See, we have lots 'o enemies in the world, even those who say they are our friends. They love this kind of shit, because now they can make up more lies, and when we say, "that is total nonsense, noone would believe the US military would do that stuff," they say, "LOOK AT THE PICTURES, LOOK AT THE PICTURES." Now, that is not a very good argument on their part, and it is not persuasive to me. But this incident plants seeds of doubt in the minds of some who otherwise would give us the benefit of the doubt. I don't like it when America gets unfairly trashed, and these morons just made it easier. So, please understand, I think America has the moral high ground, no question. But I'm thinking a little more practically about whether our moral force in the world has been harmed as a result of the perception this incident will create. Try to get that.
#55
I think this thread witnesses that there are simply two types of people in the world. Those who are ruled my emotion; and those by logic.
If you think those pictures are so horrible that they magically undo what good has been done you are emotional to the core, and likely will never comprehend why the photos are insignificant n the scheme of things. Yes, they will be held against us, but only by people who are looking for any excuse to do so.
People are being downright stupid if they think downplaying this incident is the way to go. That just makes it look like the US covers things up. Then all the horrible and untrue stories that our enemies make up will be given much more credibility. Islamofascists/leftists: 1, US: 0
Comparing our treatment of PoWs favourably to that of Iraqi militia/Baathists is worse than irrelevant in this case.
It makes it sound like you are justifying the despicable acts of those undisciplined, unprofessional people who have heaped shame on the US army.
whether or not that is your attention, that's the way it reads.
Yes, disciplinary action is being taken but there is a very real need to make a BIG deal about the disciplinary action , make it transparent, public and common knowledge around the world that the actions of those soldiers are NOT countenanced by the military or the US government and are NOT representative of the whole.
Whether we know this to be true or not isn't relevant. What is relevant is that the reputation of the US army is now stained in the eyes of the rest of the world.
Really it makes me absolutely irate that trained members of the armed forces could be so gormless so brainless as to think that this kind of behaviour is acceptable, and then to take tourist snaps is just the height of stupidity. If it weren't for the fact they were so dumb they didn't do it deliberately they should be shot for high treason considering the damage they have done to the war effort.
How many soldiers are going to die in Iraq as a direct result of the opposition that those photos being played constantly on Al-Jazeera will whip up among Iraqis who were previously friendlies?
This has endangered the entire mission. It may seem like a storm in a teacup to those living comfortable lives at home in the States but try to think just for a moment what the admission of a war crime with images to boot does in places like Iraq, where people live differently.
I am still just as shocked and appalled as I was earlier.
#58
If you do not understand how pictures of Iraqi prisoners being hooked up to mock-electrods and forced to engage in the Turkish-Bathhouse olympics makes our moral standing a harder sell, well . . .
Can we stack those pictures alongside those of children shredded by terrorist bombs? Or the X-rays of people going through life with bolts and nails embedded in their flesh? Or perhaps of people -- or parts of people -- draped over lamp posts on 9/11/2001? Or with the picture of Daniel Pearl being beheaded? Or pictures of Fabrizio Quattrocchi being shot in the head while bound by his captors?
How about a photo of the hands of a stewardess that were found on a roof near the WTC site a year after 9/11?
Or how about the tapes from Saddam's torture sessions? Or pictures from his mass graves?
What about pictures of a woman who just got stoned to death, or someone who just got tortured for practicing Christianity in Saudi Arabia?
Or how about the pictures of US airmen beaten by Saddam's armed forces? Or by the hordes of Somalia?
Hey, let's reach a bit farther into history, and throw in the pictures of the people shot down in an airport while travelling over the Christmas season. Or what was left of the people murdered over Lockerbie. Or the Olympians shredded by Palestinian grenades.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 20:51 Comments ||
Top||
#59
I think there are four primary responses to these photos:
Wow. You left out any option that fits my position.
Waytago, sparky. Weren't you complaining about strawmen earlier?
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 20:54 Comments ||
Top||
#60
RC - those would be too inflammatory - we might take decisive action. CBS chose not to show those
(/sarcasm)
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/29/2004 20:54 Comments ||
Top||
#61
An anonymous coward said:
People are being downright stupid if they think downplaying this incident is the way to go...
[snip]
It makes it sound like you are justifying the despicable acts of those undisciplined, unprofessional people who have heaped shame on the US army.
If you believe that is my position, you should perhaps re-read what I've written.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 20:55 Comments ||
Top||
#62
Thank you, Robert, for that timely reminder.
And here's the official reprimand story from the Leftist BBC: US general suspended over abuse
The problem has been dealt with.
It was clearly this U.S. general's fault who wasn't fit for leadership and "led" her soldiers in the wrong direction.
Her court martial is fitting.
And "Anon1," the Iraqis aren't fooled by these photos (if they saw them)--they know that Saddam's regime was far, far worse.
In fact, right after the liberation, Iraqs were buying up videos of the tortures and executions done in this same prison under Saddam so that they could find out what happened to their loved ones, relatives who haven't been seen or come home for years.
My heart broke for them when I read that.
The United States of America is a force for good and we want our military to exemplify that and 99% of the time, they do.
God bless them.
Posted by: Jen ||
04/29/2004 20:58 Comments ||
Top||
#63
#28 . . . What do you want? Hairshirts, flagellation and scourging for the entire chain of command?
Yes! But why?
Would you think it is because I donât agree with you that these actions are an anomaly by a minority, because I donât agree with you that the Military COC already is going to do a major clean-up job on these buffoons right in line with the UCMJ, because I donât agree with you that (in perspective, given human nature) this kind of stuff happens (i.e., if it didnât, why would we even need the UCMJ)? A resounding âNo!â
The reason we need some sort of moral equivalent to âHairshirts, flagellation and scourging for the entire chain of commandâ is precisely because of the very human nature you are talking about. And, because of that human nature, head must roll, and publicly, and soon. We are talking about attribution theory here. People believe what is most easily attributed, and events with a high emotional valence are the most easily attributed. I.e., a lot, and I do mean a lot of people will likely say (at some unconscious, preverbal level) something like, âIf you have led me to believe you are better than Saddam, then these pictures are all the more shocking, all the more disappointing, and I will all the more believe that all American soldiers are like this until you prove otherwise.â Innocent until proven guilty? Hah, thatâs a legal fiction! We people only even try to make believe that when we are being sworn into the jury box--ah, the jury system, our saving grace . . .[but, I digress] I mean, check it out, ex-lib is thinking about being a lib again? That's seriously messed up. Hang in there ex-lib! Seriously, though, why in the world do you think General Kimmet is so frigginâ hot under the collar about this? You donât think heâs a dummy, do you? What are all the idioms? âPerception is King.â âA good name is rather to be chosen than great riches.â âA good name is better than precious ointment.â âMy own honor and reputation I never will resign.â âTrust is hard to earn and easy to lose.â The list goes on and on . . . Why?
Yes, you better believe we need some sort of equivalent to âHairshirts, flagellation and scourging for the entire chain of commandâ, and fast! âTo whom much is given, much is expected.â If attribution theory is correct, and it is, really (I mean, it works, so . . . maybe it is at least half right), we must show (ourselves first, and then the rest of the world that) we expect much more from our soldiers than the world expects, and that we will discipline them for this kind of tom foolery much more severely than the world would, or we cannot hope to win the âhearts and mindsâ that are right now thinking we are just the newest contender to be the next Kinder and Gentler Saddam.â¢That's why General Kimmet is so pissed at these stupid, and I do mean stupid, f**k-ups. Damn straight, they disgraced their uniform! General Kimmet, I'm sure, is a great student of human nature and he knows exactly what these f**k-ups have cost us and what must now happen to change those perceptions back, and how hard it will be to do just that when the true story of Military Justice is not going to be broadcast over the airwaves nearly as far nor as well by the media as these #@!!/!#*# pictures these immature morons snapped of their âhandy work.â //saracam on// Hope they are still sooooo pleased with their little fun and games.//sarcasm off// Why do you think the military has the ceremony of drumming someone out of the Corp? I donât think drumming someone out of the Corp was ever done for the sake of drama and visual poetry. It is time for the POTUS, the C-I-C, to make use of his bully pulpit (precisely because the media wonât give equal time to the disciplinary process that --you are right-- is right on cue, as is our custom) and the POTUS, the C-I-C must be the great equalizer in the face of the mediaâs deafening silence and make an object lesson of those responsible. The world is watching us right now to see what we are going to do.It may seem childish and petty, and it may not be fair, but in this day and age of information overload and on demand, just about everyone interested (and there are hundreds of millions) will demand an electronic front row seat to watch how we drum someone out of the Corp. Basic human nature must be satisfied, because it is the most cruel of tyrants.
TRULY, I AM SORRY FOR THE LONG POST, BUT I TRULY THINK THIS IS A CRITICAL JUNCTURE.
#64
I shudder to think what these chicken-littles would think if they ever actually witnessed the Marine Corps at work, doing what it *really* does. If an annecdote of mean (wrong & illegal) humiliation is this disturbing to them, an annecdote of (right & legal) violent death would likely make their heads explode.
#65
Oh, BTW, the simplest but probably most effective thing for the POTUS to do would be to get on the air simply stating his disgust for the apparent actions that took place, his great faith in the militaryâs ability to police itself, and his promise that those found guilty will be stripped of rank and insignia and drummed out BY HIM PERSONALLY. It would take just moments, and the impact would last a lifetime.
#66
And why don't you take a look at what is going on in YOUR prisons. The ones near your home. I promise you they can be 10 times as appalling and inhuman as the treatment witnessed in the photos I saw. And those are in your backyard. Take your indignation and clean them up.
#67
The pyramid picture reminds me of last night's South Park episode. One of the best episodes EVER, I might add.
Posted by: Matt ||
04/29/2004 21:14 Comments ||
Top||
#68
RC. I guess I do need another category. (5) Those who, when presented with unpleasant facts say, "LOOK OVER THERE, LOOK OVER THERE." You totally dodged my question. I asked whether you really could not see how this incident would make our moral standard a harder sell. You responded, "LOOK OVER THERE, LOOKE OVER THERE." See, I'm not saying there is moral equivalence between any of the events that you described and this incident. Of course anyone with a pulse and a sould knows that this incident is nothing compared to how terrorists behave. That is a false comparison. The true comparison, which you stoicly ignore, is between what happened in that prison and what should have happened in an American prison to prisoners held by the US. Please don't argue that there are worse people in the world than these particular soldiers--of course there are, and no one has argued to the contrary. Another straw man. Listen. I think you are pissed about this incident, just like I am. We are both pissed that enemies of the US will exploit it. That angers me too--a lot. I think the right, moral, American thing to do is to take responsibility for the incident, condemn it, and punish the perpetrators, making clear that they do not represent the US military. I think you believe that too. So what is the big difference? I think I am more concerned about the short and medium term harm this incident will cause to our efforts to pacify and democratize Iraq. You don't seem to think it will be a big problem. Maybe I'm right, maybe you are. We'll see.
#70
I don't think that involving President Bush is necessary or called for.
Kimmit and the powers that be in the Pentagon are "handling this through channels" as is right and proper.
For Bush to step in and monitor every situation in the military occupation of Iraq would make him look like Musharraf and even Perv has removed himself as head of the Army.
Commander in Chief doesn't mean "meddler in chief."
You are making a big deal out of nothing, cingold.
Which is precisely what the Left would love to have happen.
This general is getting court-martialed and the others involved face a military tribunal.
Why must the United States (and her military) be like "Caesar's wife, " completely above reproach?
As cingold and I pointed out, these are human beings and as such, as Christ and the movie "The Passion" pointed out, subject to sin and violence and evil to their fellow human beings.
Same old story.
For Bush to promise the world that no American soldier will ever act out of line again is crazy!
The only reason this is happening at all is to bolster John Kerry's argument made in as Vietnam war protester in 1971 that the U.S. military are "babykillers" and that they commit "atrocities" as a matter of SOP.
IRT Vietnam, the only atrocity can think of is the My Lai massacre and William Calley (and then there was the junk Bob Kerrey cried about).
The military aren't just a "band of brothers;" they're our brothers and sisters.
What's important here is to find out what this lady particular lady general turned into such a Genghis Khan when she was in the leadership position and make sure that our troops are trained not to do this.
I imagine that "you had to be there."
This prison, Abu Grhaib, is so dark and evil and had clearly been the scene of so much horror under Saddam that she probably "lost it" and went overboard.
Posted by: Jen ||
04/29/2004 21:22 Comments ||
Top||
#71
Rawsnacks. Those are not our moral standards. That's why they are being punnished. /obvious You misunderstand. The question is whether it will make it harder to sell our moral standing to a world that is looking for any reason to hate us. The answer is yes. obvious/.
I shudder to think what these chicken-littles would think if they ever actually witnessed the Marine Corps at work, doing what it *really* does. Wow, you sound really tough ... oh, that was how you wanted to sound. Also, you are making a false comparison. This was not the heat of battle, where I agree that our marines should release hell on the enemy. These were guys in a prison. There is a principle that you don't do this shit to enemy prisoners of war. If you only apply that principle when it comes to US prisoners, and not to prisoners held by the US, then you have no principles.
Matt. I saw the SouthPark and had the same thought. Freaking hilarious episode.
sensible person: " If you do not understand how pictures of Iraqi prisoners being hooked up to mock-electrods and forced to engage in the Turkish-Bathhouse olympics makes our moral standing a harder sell, well . . ."
RC: "Can we stack those pictures alongside those of children shredded by terrorist bombs? Or the X-rays of people going through life with bolts and nails embedded in their flesh? "
RC is obviously stupid.
It was explained so simply an 8-year-old could understand it.
RC: the reason the US cannot afford to have a slur on its good name is because it is NOT the same as the terrrorist hordes or the murdering looting armies of third world despots.
The minute the US is seen to indulge in the same activities, or show lack of discipline however mild, they lose the high moral ground. IT is very difficult to get the high moral ground back.
The damage those bozos have done to the reputation and honour of the US military is severe.
I am proud of the long-standing disciplined, good record of Anglosphere troops. I hate to see it tarnished in this way.
Worse I hate to see people defending as if it were no big deal. What you want to associate yourself with war criminals? You want to drag down the moral standing of the US as well? You are a worse enemy than Al-Jazeera.
The propaganda bonanza sprouting from this is unlimited because it is an official admission that the US has committed a war crime.
Try to get out of your narrow little world and think of what it means to have your reputation shattered when you are a foriegn soldier.
Think of how much harder this makes it for US troops on the ground in Baghdad to do their daily job.
Think of how previously friendly Iraqis view them having been repeatedly shown those images.
Think of how the leftie enemies of america in countries like Spain, France, Russia, Australia, Britain are going to make hay out of this.
If you are too thick to comprehend then I spose it's a blessing you are posting on am internet message board and not formulating foriegn policy.
#74
Sludj, you've once more chosen to ignore my point and set up your own little strawman.
I asked whether you really could not see how this incident would make our moral standard a harder sell. You responded, "LOOK OVER THERE, LOOKE OVER THERE."
Bullshit. Utter bullshit.
I pointed out what we're in competition with. If we can't do the right thing -- which is exactly what we're doing -- and take the moral high ground from the beasts who committed all the acts I listed, then we fucking well deserve to live as slaves, because there's no hope we can win this war.
Clearly there's no point in discussing this with you anymore. You won't listen, because you're convinced you know what I think, despite it having no resemblence to my real position.
(Pardon my language. I'm just tired of someone who complained about his arguments being misrepresented purposefully misrepresenting mine.)
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 21:36 Comments ||
Top||
#76
Anon and Sludge, stop getting your panties in a wad.
This is only a "big deal" because the Left wants it to be.
You're missing the whole point, which is that the bad people involved will be disciplined and dealt with.
End of story.
The U.S. hasn't lost the moral high ground, nor will it, because what we're doing as a nation is morally right and good.
The difference between us and the rest of the world is that these types of abuse AND WORSE go on in prisons of recognized nations all over the world as SOP--and no one notices or cares!
The Red Cross would never visit this prison ONCE when Saddam was in power, now they've been to see him twice!
I'm sick, sick, sick of the Global Left holding the USA up to a standard of moral perfection (that no country's citizens could attain) while giving the truly morally wrong, evil-to-the-core and brutal nations of the world a total pass!
Posted by: Jen ||
04/29/2004 21:39 Comments ||
Top||
#77
The question is whether it will make it harder to sell our moral standing to a world that is looking for any reason to hate us.
Answer: no.
Wow, you sound really tough ... oh, that was how you wanted to sound.
I am really tough. And smart.
Also, you are making a false comparison.
I am not making a false comparison. Instead, you misunderstood my point. My point was that people who look at a situation (or mean pictures) from a purely emotional standpoint are not able to recognize their meaning.
#78
Antiwar is a fake -- she pretends to be a nice, concerned liberal, but s/he gets real nasty when support for islamofascists (including undermining Western society and values) is confronted too directly. So as not to waste bandwidth, you can read the Same Story, Different Day right here.
#79
"...and make sure that our troops are trained not to do this."
rofl, this is funny, it's called human decency, you either have it or you don't
"This prison, Abu Grhaib, is so dark and evil and had clearly been the scene of so much horror under Saddam that she probably "lost it" and went overboard."
Here you are just making an excuse for them. Since she made it all the way to the rank of general, I would expect that she would have been screened against "losing it"
Have you missed the nearly constant repetition of the point that those involved are being prosecuted?
THAT IS WHAT MAKES US DIFFERENT THAN THOSE WE FIGHT.
Anon1:
The propaganda bonanza sprouting from this is unlimited because it is an official admission that the US has committed a war crime.
Nope -- US soldiers violated the laws of war and are being punished. If the US did not punish them, that would be a war crime.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 21:44 Comments ||
Top||
#81
Igs, and you're saying what, exactly, with your parsing?
The woman's getting court martialed.
It's one woman. We know who she is. And we're drumming her out of the military.
Or would you prefer that she be hung up, tortured with electrodes until she says she's sorry, and then fed into a shredder?
Posted by: Jen ||
04/29/2004 21:46 Comments ||
Top||
#82
rofl Jen, I wan't even bother discussing anything with you, it's not worth my effort, you have serious psychological issue
#83
Say, Rawsnacks, Jen, Robert Crawford, sludj, Anon1, Igs, I think we agree more than we disagree. Jen said "Kimmit and the powers that be in the Pentagon are 'handling this through channels' as is right and proper." I think your right, and I think we all pretty much agree on this--we have the best, most professional military in the world and they will do a major clean up on their own who have disgraced the uniform.
The issue is how the media/LLL will spin this so that it is allowed to hurt us, and how to try to avoid that.
My only real point is that the POTUS can undercut the media/LLLâs thrust by using the bully pulpit to publicize what is already in motion--so everybody else can relax and realize that we are not just the next Kinder and Gentler Saddam.â¢
#84
RC. Answer this question. Will this incident make our moral standing a harder sell? You haven't answered it, although you seem to think you have. Maybe you don't care that this incident has that effect. That is a defensible position (but one I disagree with), but you haven't taken any position at all. Honestly, what you did was to dodge the question, and you have dodged it again.
Jen, you make RC's same mistake. Instead of thinking about America's interests, you just start flailing away, saying "but there are lots of really, really bad people out there, worse than these soldiers." For the last time, I agree. See, the US holds itself to higher standards, and it should, and it shouldn't make excuses, and I don't think it will, unlike you.
Rawsnacks, since you are tough and smart, I guess you are right. Oh, wait, you are still wrong. The fact that (as you say) "people who look at a situation (or mean pictures) from a purely emotional standpoint are not able to recognize their meaning" is precisely my point. Thanks for making it again though. The Iraqis, who we are trying to democratize and free from tyranny, are going to look at these pictures of their countrymen being humiliated (egregiously) by US soldiers and react emotionally. That is not good for our mission. So the fact that these photos don't shake your confidence in the US or the military is beside the point--they don't shake my cofidence either. But they will almost certainly make things harder for our personnel over there. Do you agree? Do you care?
#85
sludj, I'm not making excuses for her--she's getting her punishment.
But this general who "went native" (as the British used to say) doesn't define my country or its military.
Nor will she.
And the Left is going to keep pounding away on our "moral standing" any and every way they can.
This isn't the first "bad soldier" story by a long shot.
They have everything to gain and nothing to lose by making America, democracy and capitalism look bad.
Get used to it or you're going to be busy being on the defensive.
This woman's bad conduct does not typify the "face" of our military that the Iraqis and the Afghans see.
Some of you are buying into the Left's drivel, through ignorance or something more sinister by allowing yourselves to be their useful idiots.
The lady general was wrong. She's getting punished, as are any soldiers under her command who participated and it's not going to be happening again.
The UCMJ works--this has been proven over and over and over time.
Case closed.
Posted by: Jen ||
04/29/2004 22:01 Comments ||
Top||
#86
My only real point is that the POTUS can undercut the media/LLLâs thrust by using the bully pulpit to publicize what is already in motion--so everybody else can relax and realize that we are not just the next Kinder and Gentler Saddam.â¢
Then the 'media' could make Bush do a dance anytime they wanted him to by drudging up another 'atrocity.'
My idea: we just complete the job and render the point moot.
#87
Jen, I'm glad you are able to declare the case closed. I'm sure that will be the end of it and we won't hear another word about it. Thanks.
Again, you are accusing me of buying into the left's drivel, when what I am actually doing is experiencing the painful anticipation of that very drivel. Get it?
Hey, instead of bashing each other (since Cingold is right, I actually respect Jen and RC, and think they are patriots--but they don't seem to understand what I am saying, and think somehow that I am a leftist or stupid or anti-american) why don't we do something positive to combat the upcoming drivel. Donate to Spirit of America http://www.spiritofamerica.net/req_12/request.html, which is the Marines attempt to combat Al-Jazeera. Hard to think of a better cause.
#88
Will this incident make our moral standing a harder sell?
Only if we ignore the fact that we're doing something about it. Only if we let the crimes of our enemies be ignored. What's so hard to understand about that? If we can't defend ourself in this case, we may as well give up; you can bet harder cases will come along. (For that matter, may have already happened and already be in the public knowledge!)
During WWII, in one case, 42 US soldiers were court-martialled for the beatings of 24 POWs and the lynching of another. Did that hurt our moral standing? Didn't the crimes of the Nazis and the Imperial Japanese so eclipse that crime that it's a nearly forgotten piece of history? Didn't our punishment of the guilty satisfy the requirements of the Geneva Conventions?
See, the US holds itself to higher standards, and it should, and it shouldn't make excuses, and I don't think it will, unlike you.
I'm pretty sure you mean Jen in that, but you come close to my point here: WE'RE NOT MAKING EXCUSES AND WE ARE HOLDING OURSELVES TO A HIGHER STANDARD, AND THAT'S WHAT SETS US APART FROM OUR ENEMIES. I just don't think that means we should do anything beyond making it clear that's exactly what we're doing.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 22:10 Comments ||
Top||
#89
So the fact that these photos don't shake your confidence in the US or the military is beside the point--they don't shake my cofidence either.
As long as you and a majority of Americans vote that way, the pictures have no meaning. We will not fail because of Islamo-resistance. We can only fail through lack of American political courage. And frankly I give the American people more credit.
#90
think somehow that I am a leftist or stupid or anti-american
Bullshit. I think you're wrong, and that you're getting too wound up over what the stupid anti-American left will do. I've tried to make that clear; you treated my explanation as if it were Clintonian evasion.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 22:12 Comments ||
Top||
#91
It has been a pleasure. I'm done. To be honest, I don't have any hard feelings toward RC or Jen (or Rawsnacks, although I didn't think his posts added much substance to the discussion), I think we actually mostly agree, but are miscommunicating somehow. We all think (1) it is shameful for US soldiers to mistreat and humiliate Iraqi prisoners who pose no threat to the soldiers, (2) the military is taking the right steps in punishing them, (3) this incident will make our mission in Iraq harder, and (4) that sucks because we all want the best for America and our military. I think the President should say something, others disagree. Later.
#92
Great point, sludj, and it is a good time to mention Spirit of America, who are a bunch of Marines doing a lot of good in Iraq and Afghanistan.
You never hear in the media of all the great things our military are doing over there--building and equipping schools and playgrounds, helping out communities, Chief Wiggles getting the Iraqi kids toys, equipping hospitals, getting the power and water systems in better shape than they were in under 30 years' of Saddam.
Posted by: Jen ||
04/29/2004 22:14 Comments ||
Top||
#93
Sludj, you are right: Donating to Spirit of America (ad is on LGF frontpage) would be the best way that we here could do anything to help the situation.
And FWIW I think it's also a GREAT idea for POTUS and the C-I-C to undercut the media and immediately denounce those actions as despicable and to mention at every opportunity the heavy consequences that will befal them. They can restore the honour of the US marines by distancing them from such behaviour and making it clear and public the punishments forthcoming,
because WHETHER OR NOT they are already being punished/dealt with , the rest of the world ONLY SEES THE PICTURES and "US War Crimes" is indelibly etched on their memories.
#94
if this thread gets over 100, you should hit the paypal for each comment after...overkill
sorry, someone has to say it
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/29/2004 22:24 Comments ||
Top||
#95
They can restore the honour of the US marines by distancing them from such behaviour and making it clear and public the punishments forthcoming, because WHETHER OR NOT they are already being punished/dealt with , the rest of the world ONLY SEES THE PICTURES and "US War Crimes" is indelibly etched on their memories. = bad press for the US = less support = BAD
It wasn't the Marines.
and
The President has no credability with the audience you intend his message for.
If you have evidence of that, Orphan Anti, let's see it. Better yet, send it to the Adjutant General at the Pentagon.
The response here to this incident has certainly been a contrast to the Moonbat left's attitude toward jihadist atrocities, for which they offer lame excuses and moralizing justifications when they aren't cheering them outright.
And we aren't talking about people being humiliated or photographed in degrading positions when we speak of the atrocities committed by the LLL's jihadist allies, we are talking eye-gouging, tongues being ripped out, people being burned or skinned alive, or beheaded slowly with knives while the jihad porn cameras roll.
There is only so much murder, torture, and abuse you peace hypocrite animals can justify and incite before it catches up with you.
#99
Antiwar: shut up unless you're going to complain about how "unsurprising" it is that Islamoidz do the same and worse 24/7. This is an anomaly for the US military. Duh. But then, you knew that already, didn't you? Don't try to capitalize on it, because no one's listening.
sludg, .com and Anon1: Yes! Well-reasoned.
RC: Yes, with certain qualifications regarding applicability to the current press dominance of info sharing/info manipulating--which is the only real points sludg and I are making, which you agree with in your post #6.
cingold: Cool idea. Have the Pres. do the honors--then send her and whoever else off to prison. Ha-ha! (But then the press would probably think they're running the show. "Dance, George, dance!") Sigh.
Re: my"the Pres needs to make clear that the moral high ground is still ours" -- NOT that we've lost the moral high ground in reality--absolutely not--it's the PERCEPTION that we have lost it that matters in the field of public opinion and media manipulation. I know how these guys in the news biz think and act, and I know what they're going to do about it: slime, slime, slime our military, and cover up the crimes of the Islamoidz (you know--the ones that are happening all over the face of the frikken planet). On the actual moral high ground issue: We're still cool. The bad guys still suck. Period. (Sometimes us good guys don't know how bad the bad guys in this country really are, because we're so accustomed to the truth. We may, perchance, underestimate the public's "need to know.")
But, OTOH, no doubt there's enough good thinkers in the Bush camp that "get it" so . . . somebody will do something (drum roll) But will the press cover it?
#88Â RC: "Will this incident make our moral standing a harder sell? Only if we ignore the fact that we're doing something about it." Right on. But the media will go out of their way to IGNORE that we're doing something about it ("Punishment? What punishment?") Hopefully Bush will not let that happen.
"During WWII, in one case, 42 US soldiers were court-martialled for the beatings of 24 POWs and the lynching of another. Did that hurt our moral standing?" No--because people understood that WWII was a necessary and just war. The puke-head lefties have worked night and day to obscure the truth that the WOT is even more necessary and just.
"Didn't the crimes of the Nazis and the Imperial Japanese so eclipse that crime that it's a nearly forgotten piece of history?" Absolutely. But who ever hears about the crimes of the Islamoidz, thanks to the media?
"WE'RE NOT MAKING EXCUSES AND WE ARE HOLDING OURSELVES TO A HIGHER STANDARD, AND THAT'S WHAT SETS US APART FROM OUR ENEMIES." Yeah. And I want everybody to know it. (If I only had my own television news network . . . )
#85 Jen : I agree. (But stop trying to beat up sludg, 'cuz he's only saying what I'm saying, pretty much. Besides, the military people in Iraq know EXACTLY how much his will hurt our efforts there and endanger lives, and how much this will fire up the Islamoidz, here, there, and yon--remember, Islamoidz are Neanderthal--they'll never think this through. And the POTUS knows exactly how much trouble this will cause in an election year--what a pain! My opinion is that the people that took part in that are not just stupid, they're traitors precisely because this will cost more American lives when the jihadis become emboldened because of it.) And #81 Jen: Oh great. It was a woman. Are the Islamiodz going ever going to go nuts over that one! And I'm sure the some of the male US military counterparts are going: "Told ya--women in the military . . . they just can't handle it." Sigh.
If we on Rantburg, saw Islamoidz mistreating our soldiers this way, we would be "like out-of-our-skulls, nuke-the-whole-middle-east furious." Well, that's how people are going to feel ABOUT US now. It's like an anti-US dream come true.
Like I said before, we lost the initiative. But leave it to Pres. Bush to fix it and get the truth out. He's a good man.
#100
I too, trust the C-I-C and POTUS to fix what can be fixed, but I don't think it will be easy. The morons who did this are traitors in my book -- they compromised the mission, and should be shot. I just saw more of the pictures over at the [puke, cough, cough, gag] DU website. Sadly, IMO, a picture is worth a thousand words and will be used so by the islamofascists and their LLL comrades and complicit media moguls. E.g., this one picture:
What do you think the islamofascists will do with it? This is, in essence, aid and comfort to the enemy, donât you think? President Bush has to come out strong, telling the world what we already know (but the world doesnât), that we wont stand for this and these idiots are toast. These antics are nothing less than criminal stupidity -- and the morons doing it should find a terminal cure.
#102
SHAME ON YOU!
Is this what you boast of?
Is THIS how you liberate countries?
Would any of you take it if it was done to you?
your brothers? WOULD you?
Then how dare you act all happy and satisfied?
There truly is no decency left!
And don't start about the bridge, or the Spanish soldier!
Do you know why?
BECAUSE NO MATTER HOW TERRIBLE THAT WAS, IT WAS NOT DONE TO LIVING PEOPLE.
And it was horrible.
How dare you all speak of this so lightly, HOW DARE YOU?
#103
Gentle, HOW DARE YOU!
I haven't heard your shame for the hundreds of living people who jumped to their deaths for 100 stories from the burning World Trade Center on 9/11...
or for the beheading of Daniel Pearle on video solely because he was a Jew?
Or for the blowing up of hundreds of women, babies, little children and the elderly in Israel simply because they were Jews.
Or for the Bali bombings.
Or the Madrid bombings.
Or the explosion of the plane on Lockerbie, Scotland.
Or for all the sailors killed on the USS Cole.
Or the Marines killed in their barracks in Lebanon in 1983.
Or for the way our embassy staff was abused for over a year in Tehran, Iran.
ALL OF THESE WERE DONE BY MUSLIMS "for the Faith."
Religion of Peace, my ass!
And the stuff these photos show, even if it wasn't right, was TAME compared to what went on in this prison when Saddam was in power...and no-one ever said shit.
Shut up.
And only come back when you're ready to apologize to us for what you and your co-religionists have done to Americans, Jews and Israelis "in the name of Allah!"
Posted by: Jen ||
05/02/2004 5:51 Comments ||
Top||
#104
FINE JEN
FINE
I AM SORRY THAT HAPPENED, I AM!
HAPPY?
AT LEAST WE HAVE THE DECENCY TO ADMIT WHEN SOMEONE DOES THE WRONG THING!
WE KEEP TELLING YOU, WE ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THESE POEPLE!
THEY CALL THEMSELVES MUSLIMS, yet Islam DOES NOT TOLERATE WHAT THEY DO.
BUT YOU
YOU THINK THOSE SOLDIERS ARE RIGHT!
FINE, JUST WAIT TILL YOU ARE IN THE SAME ROOM WITH ONE OF THOSE AMERICAN GUYS AND LET'S SEE YOU TALK.
I BET YOU WOULDN'T FEEL SAFE!
If some one did that to an animal, I wouldn't ever look them in the face again.
Because they will be waaaaaay beneath me or any one who dares to call him/her self a human
#105
No, Gentle, those particular soldiers weren't right.
And if they're found guilty in a military court, they'll be punished for what they did.
And this legal process started long before these photos were published.
But since the Islamist Terror War began, only ONE group of Muslims have publicly denounced jihadi terrorism and that has been the Indonesians (and maybe some of Britain's).
But none of the other Muslims have publicly condemned terrorist murder in Islam's name and in fact, some of them have even asked for MORE.
Whereas millions of us--including President Bush--have condemned the bad behavior of these soldiers to Iraqis!
Posted by: Jen ||
05/02/2004 9:16 Comments ||
Top||
#106
"WE KEEP TELLING YOU, WE ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THESE POEPLE! THEY CALL THEMSELVES MUSLIMS, yet Islam DOES NOT TOLERATE WHAT THEY DO."
What you need to do is stop wasting your time telling us that Islam doesn't tolerate what they do, and put your energies into telling them that Islam doesn't tolerate what they do.
Because if they don't stop doing it, and soon, there is a very high probability that all of you will perish.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
05/02/2004 9:42 Comments ||
Top||
#107
What very nice, gentle, polite people you are.
How very sweet of you to threaten me.
Unfortunately it won't get you anywhere.
Sorry about that Dave.
You know David was supposed to be very patient, you sure don't take after your name sake.
Jen: we see thing from different perspectives. We do tell these people to stop what they are doing.
Haven't you heard what the Imams have said?
You can't bind us to radicals, that just isn't the way it should be done.
#108
Gentle, sorry, but we do read what the imams say--particularly the ones in Saudi Arabia and the news for we "infidels" isn't very good--it's "holy war" and fatwas against America, Jews and Israel all the time.
While we intellectually know that there are a billion Muslims worldwide, most of whom must be peace-loving, it's the radicalized (mainly Sunni Waahab) jihadi killers of kafir who have the megaphone that we hear and that Muslims feel inclined to obey.
Islam as a whole must be reformed or the alternative isn't pretty!
Posted by: Jen ||
05/02/2004 10:00 Comments ||
Top||
#110
"What very nice, gentle, polite people you are.
How very sweet of you to threaten me.
Unfortunately it won't get you anywhere."
I am not threatening you, Gentle; I am warning you of what will very likely happen if moderate Muslims fail to reclaim their faith from the violent ones who have proclaimed themselves the voice of "real" Islam.
You really, really, REALLY need to do this, before we are forced conclude that they ARE the real voice of Islam.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
05/02/2004 10:17 Comments ||
Top||
#111
Gentle, I'm going with Dave D. on this one, too.
If you are a Sunni Waahab, then you're at "Ground Zero" of the fundamentalist sect of Islam that MUST change the most.
Start the Islamist Reformation while there's still time.
If there's another big terror attack on America, we won't be so patient with you then.
Violence and murder of "infidels" (by this, I know that Waahabs mean Americans, Christians, Jews, and Shi'ites) must forever be removed from your religion as a way to wage "jihad."
Muslims the world over must decide that "jihad" means "inner struggle" and nothing more.
Nothing short of that will do and arguing about it won't accomplish anything.
Posted by: Jen ||
05/02/2004 10:22 Comments ||
Top||
#112
Hi Dave.
I've just posted an article.
I wish you would read it, then get back to me.
Thanks
As far as the issue of violence, intolerance, and aggression against innocent civilians is concerned, the eminent Muslim scholar, Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, states:
No doubt, aggression against innocent people is a grave sin and a heinous crime, irrespective of the victim's religion, country, or race.
No one is permitted to commit such crime, for Allah, Most High, abhors aggression. Unlike Judaism, Islam does not hold a double-standard policy in safeguarding human rights.
Following, I would like to highlight some relevant Islamic principles based on the Glorious Qur'an and Sunnah:
1. Islam Forbids Aggression against Innocent People
Islam does not permit aggression against innocent people, whether the aggression is against life, property, or honor, and this ruling applies to everyone, regardless of post, status and prestige. In Islam, as the stateâs subject is addressed with Islamic teachings, so is the ruler or caliph; he is not allowed to violate people's rights, lives, honor, property, etc.
In the Farewell Pilgrimage, the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, declared the principle that people's lives, property, and honor are inviolable until the Day of Judgment. This ruling is not restricted to Muslims; rather, it includes non-Muslims who are not fighting Muslims. Even in case of war, Islam does not permit killing those who are not involved in fighting, such as women, children, the aged, and the monks who confine themselves to worship only.
This shouldnât raise any wonder, for Islam is a religion that prohibits aggression even against animals. Ibn `Umar, may Allah be pleased with them both, quote the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, as saying: "A woman is qualified to enter (Hell) Fire because of a cat which she tied, neither giving it food nor setting it free to eat from the vermin of the earth." (Reported by Al-Bukhari)
If such is Islamic ruling concerning aggressive acts against animals, in fortiori, the punishment is bond to be severe when human being happens to be the victim of aggression, torture and terrorism.
2. Individual Responsibility
In Islam, every one is held accountable for his own acts, not others'. No one bears the consequences of others' faults, even his close relatives. This is the ultimate form of justice, clarified in the Glorious Qur'an, as Allah, Most High, says, "Or hath he not had news of what is in the books of Moses and Abraham who paid his debt: That no laden one shall bear another's load." (An-Najm: 36-38)
Therefore, itâs very disgusting to see some people â who are Muslims by nameâ launching aggression against innocent people and taking them as scapegoats for any disagreement they have with the stateâs authority!! What is the crime of the common people then?! Murder is one of heinous crimes completely abhorred in Islam, to the extent that some Muslim scholars hold the opinion that the repentance of the murderer will not be accepted by Allah, Most High. In this context, we recall the Glorious Qur'anic verse that reads, "Whosoever killeth a human being for other than man slaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if be had killed all mankindâ¦" (Al-Ma'idah: 32)
3. Ends Do not Justify Means
In Islam, the notion âEnd justifies the meansâ has no place at all. It is not allowed to attain good aims through evil means. By the same token, alms collected from unlawful avenues are not Halal (lawful). In this context, the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said, "Surely, Allah is Good and never accepts but what is good."
Thereby, in Shariah, with all its sourcesâ the Glorious Qur'an, the Sunnah, consensus of Muslim juristsâ aggression and violation of human rights are completely forbidden.
Besides, it is the duty of the Muslim scholars to do their utmost to guide the perplexed people to the straight and upright path."
Also, we'd like to quote the following Fatwa issued by Dr. Muzammil H. Siddiqi, former President of the Islamic Society of North America:
The Islamic position as regards non-Muslims is that they should recognize Allahâs Oneness and Prophet Muhammad as Allahâs Final Prophet. They should accept Islam to live happily and successfully in this world and to be saved in the Hereafter. It is Muslimsâ duty to give them this message clearly, but without any coercion or intolerance. If others accept this message it is good for them, but if they do not accept, Muslims should still treat them with kindness and gentleness and leave the final judgment to Allah.
In our enthusiasm for Daâwah, we should not be intolerant and aggressive towards others, but in our politeness and civility we should also not give up our mission and message. We should not be intimidated to become quiet and we should not feel shy to tell the truth.
We must know that Islam is Allahâs way to salvation. Islamic message is unique, authentic and divine. Islam is for the whole world and all people are invited to accept this message. It is our duty to convey this message in the most beautiful and effective manner. We should be the witnesses of Allah to the world by our words and our deeds to all human beings.
#114
Gentle, we've heard this lip service paid over and over to Islam being a "religion of peace" but no-one in the West is buying it.
Perhaps one or 2 voices preach peace, but the rest of the imams and clerics preach murderous jihad in Arabic to the faithful.
It's good to know that there are Muslim clerics who preach peace, but the War on Terror won't be won until they all do.
Until then, the fact remains that terror attacks are done by Muslim terrorists, most of whom actually take or claim credit for them "in the name of Allah."
As a Christian, I will pray for you to convert to Christianity.
As Christ said, "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No man cometh to the Father but through me."
Under the Christian Faith, you as a woman will be treated equally with men.
Again from the Bible, "In Christ, there is neither male nor female, Jew nor Greek, slave nor free."
Posted by: Jen ||
05/02/2004 10:52 Comments ||
Top||
#115
Gentle,
Those are all fine thoughts, but there's not much point in directing them at us: they should be directed instead at those whose violence and hatred are making a bad impression of Islam.
I would like nothing better than to be able to conclude that Islam is, indeed, a "religion of peace." But I cannot reasonably be expected to do so on the basis of what you tell me, as long as so many others spew hatred and "Death to the Infidel!" rhetoric-- and so many others act on that rhetoric by waging violent jihad against us.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
05/02/2004 11:09 Comments ||
Top||
#116
Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi is considered, notice the CONSIDERED, one of the most "trouble-making" Imams!
So much so, that he is banned from entering certain "peace loving" countries.
What you have read just now are the words of one of the most feared terrorist encouragers.
Believe it or not, a lot of people think what he says is too violent.
Believe it or not!
Oh, and Jen: I believe in Christianity. I believe in Jesus, though as a prophet.
And Allah, whom I believe in, is God.
Dave: Please give me one site, one Imam that proves that what you say about muslims is true.
Just one, please.
#117
Gentle, Jesus wasn't just a prophet: He is the Son of God.
Keep your imam--we know what we know and the Islam(ism) that most of us are familiar with are the jihadi "martyrs" and the "suicide bombers."
Muslims have had 1200 years to "convince" people that Islam is the "Religion of Peace" but all it took was one day--September the 11th, 2001--to prove that it wasn't.
Posted by: Jen ||
05/02/2004 11:51 Comments ||
Top||
#118
What very nice, gentle, polite people you are.
How very sweet of you to threaten me.
Unfortunately it won't get you anywhere.
Sorry about that Dave.
You know David was supposed to be very patient, you sure don't take after your name sake.
Jen: we see thing from different perspectives. We do tell these people to stop what they are doing.
Haven't you heard what the Imams have said?
You can't bind us to radicals, that just isn't the way it should be done.
#119
What very nice, gentle, polite people you are.
How very sweet of you to threaten me.
Unfortunately it won't get you anywhere.
Sorry about that Dave.
You know David was supposed to be very patient, you sure don't take after your name sake.
Jen: we see thing from different perspectives. We do tell these people to stop what they are doing.
Haven't you heard what the Imams have said?
You can't bind us to radicals, that just isn't the way it should be done.
#120
What very nice, gentle, polite people you are.
How very sweet of you to threaten me.
Unfortunately it won't get you anywhere.
Sorry about that Dave.
You know David was supposed to be very patient, you sure don't take after your name sake.
Jen: we see thing from different perspectives. We do tell these people to stop what they are doing.
Haven't you heard what the Imams have said?
You can't bind us to radicals, that just isn't the way it should be done.
#121
What very nice, gentle, polite people you are.
How very sweet of you to threaten me.
Unfortunately it won't get you anywhere.
Sorry about that Dave.
You know David was supposed to be very patient, you sure don't take after your name sake.
Jen: we see thing from different perspectives. We do tell these people to stop what they are doing.
Haven't you heard what the Imams have said?
You can't bind us to radicals, that just isn't the way it should be done.
#124
Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi is considered, notice the CONSIDERED, one of the most "trouble-making" Imams!
So much so, that he is banned from entering certain "peace loving" countries.
What you have read just now are the words of one of the most feared terrorist encouragers.
Believe it or not, a lot of people think what he says is too violent.
Believe it or not!
Oh, and Jen: I believe in Christianity. I believe in Jesus, though as a prophet.
And Allah, whom I believe in, is God.
Dave: Please give me one site, one Imam that proves that what you say about muslims is true.
Just one, please.
#125
Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi is considered, notice the CONSIDERED, one of the most "trouble-making" Imams!
So much so, that he is banned from entering certain "peace loving" countries.
What you have read just now are the words of one of the most feared terrorist encouragers.
Believe it or not, a lot of people think what he says is too violent.
Believe it or not!
Oh, and Jen: I believe in Christianity. I believe in Jesus, though as a prophet.
And Allah, whom I believe in, is God.
Dave: Please give me one site, one Imam that proves that what you say about muslims is true.
Just one, please.
This angers me. I linked the low bandwidth article. The college replaced this with the "Weâre sorry" spiel. I wish we could flood this place and writer with emails telling them what we think of her opinion.
Pat Tillman is not a hero: He got what was coming to him
By Rene Gonzalez
April 28, 2004
When the death of Pat Tillman occurred, I turned to my friend who was watching the news with me and said, "How much you want to bet they start talking about him as a âheroâ in about two hours?" Of course, my friend did not want to make that bet. Heâd lose. In this self-critical incapable nation, nothing but a knee-jerk "Heâs a hero" response is to be expected.
Iâve been mystified at the absolute nonsense of being in "awe" of Tillmanâs "sacrifice" that has been the American response. Mystified, but not surprised. True, itâs not everyday that you forgo a $3.6 million contract for joining the military. And, not just the regular army, but the elite Army Rangers. You know he was a real Rambo, who wanted to be in the "real" thick of things. I could tell he was that type of macho guy, from his scowling, beefy face on the CNN pictures. Well, he got his wish. Even Rambo got shot in the third movie, but in real life, you die as a result of being shot. They should call Pat Tillmanâs army life "Rambo 4: Rambo Attempts to Strike Back at His Former Rambo 3 Taliban Friends, and Gets Killed."
But, does that make him a hero? I guess itâs a matter of perspective. For people in the United States, who seem to be unable to admit the stupidity of both the Afghanistan and Iraqi wars, such a trade-off in life standards (if not expectancy) is nothing short of heroic. Obviously, the man must be made of "stronger stuff" to have had decided to "serve" his country rather than take from it. Itâs the old JFK exhortation to citizen service to the nation, and it seems to strike an emotional chord. So, itâs understandable why Americans automatically knee-jerk into hero worship.
However, in my neighborhood in Puerto Rico, Tillman would have been called a "pendejo," an idiot. Tillman, in the absurd belief that he was defending or serving his all-powerful country from a seventh-rate, Third World nation devastated by the previous conflicts it had endured, decided to give up a comfortable life to place himself in a combat situation that cost him his life. This was not "Ramon or Tyrone," who joined the military out of financial necessity, or to have a chance at education. This was a "G.I. Joe" guy who got what was coming to him. That was not heroism, it was prophetic idiocy.
Tillman, probably acting out his nationalist-patriotic fantasies forged in years of exposure to Clint Eastwood and Rambo movies, decided to insert himself into a conflict he didnât need to insert himself into. It wasnât like he was defending the East coast from an invasion of a foreign power. THAT would have been heroic and laudable. What he did was make himself useful to a foreign invading army, and he paid for it. Itâs hard to say I have any sympathy for his death because I donât feel like his "service" was necessary. He wasnât defending me, nor was he defending the Afghani people. He was acting out his macho, patriotic crap and I guess someone with a bigger gun did him in.
Perhaps itâs the old, dreamy American thought process that forces them to put sports greats and "larger than life" sacrificial lambs on the pedestal of heroism, no matter what theyâve done. After all, the American nation has no other role to play but to be the cheerleaders of the home team; a sad role to have to play during conflicts that suffer from severe legitimacy and credibility problems.
Matters are a little clearer for those living outside the American borders. Tillman got himself killed in a country other than his own without having been forced to go over to that country to kill its people. After all, whether we like them or not, the Taliban is more Afghani than we are. Their resistance is more legitimate than our invasion, regardless of the fact that our social values are probably more enlightened than theirs. For that, he shouldnât be hailed as a hero, he should be used as a poster boy for the dangerous consequences of too much "America is #1," frat boy, propaganda bull. It might just make a regular man irrationally drop $3.6 million to go fight in a conflict that was anything but "self-defense." The same could be said of the unusual belief of 50 percent of the American nation that thinks Saddam Hussein was behind Sept. 11. One must indeed stand in awe of the amazing success of the American propaganda machine. It works wonders.
Al-Qaeda wonât be defeated in Afghanistan, even if we did kill all their operatives there. Only through careful and logical changing of the underlying conditions that allow for the ideology to foster will Al-Qaeda be defeated. Ask the Israelis if 50 years of blunt force have eradicated the Palestinian resistance. For that reason, Tillmanâs service, along with that of thousands of American soldiers, has been wrongly utilized. He did die in vain, because in the years to come, we will realize the irrationality of the War on Terror and the American reaction to Sept. 11. The sad part is that we wonât realize it before we send more people like Pat Tillman over to their deaths.
Rene Gonzalez is a UMass graduate student. and a spoiled asshat
Posted by: Yosemite Sam ||
04/29/2004 2:32:30 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#3
Only through careful and logical changing of the underlying conditions that allow for the ideology to foster will Al-Qaeda be defeated.
You mean, like, we all convert to Islam??? This guy better not get within 100metres of me or he'll need new denture work.
Posted by: Rafael ||
04/29/2004 14:50 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Looks like he already need one, Rafael.
Posted by: Charles ||
04/29/2004 14:53 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Holy jumping Jesus on a pogo-stick!
Don't they teach logic or rhetoric anymore at UMass?
This is probably the purest example of the ongoing marriage between pop-culture conformity and self-righteous authoritarianism I have yet seen, wrapped up in a raving, disjointed rant that is almost hilarious in its unconcious arrogance and presumption.
Among many, many other shortcomings, note how the little shit equates nationality with legitimacy, a hallmark of third world and especially fascist dictators and their acolytes since the time of Mussolini.
This is also a pretty good indicator of yet another Orwellian contradiction in the pop-lefty viewpoint: totalitarians are legitimate solely because of their nationality ("it's their country") but any loyalty to the United States is an atavistic backward impulse that should be eradicated by a nuanced international perspective.
This contradiction is resolved if we realize that these people are racists and class bigots, nationalism uber alles is good for backward brown populations, but not for the global elite.
Being that this human piece of garbage is in Massachusetts, hold onto this article, and if his name ever shows up on any Kerry for President websites as a paid doofus, or the like, make a link, and send to FOX news, and the major talk show boys; Rush, Hannity, etc etc.
#7
When I was in college I learned that there is NOTHING more arrogant, smug, and annoying than a crowd of college students spouting their deeply thought-out and impressive-sounding BS - especially at the "better" schools. It got to where I dreaded the thought of going to movies, concerts, and such as these twits would invariably ruin the experience.
This article illustrates the same sort of exhibitionist intellectual masturbation I so despised in my college days.
He also uses enough scare quotes to work for Rooters.
#8
Oh, Rene, Rene, Rene...(shaking head sadly)...For what you are about to recieve,(in the form of a veritable tsunami of a s***storm) may the Lord make you truely thankful.
So, let's calculate the odds on him apologising within three days. That, or whining about his dissent being squashed.
#10
The U-Mass president is not happy: AMHERST, Mass. -- A University of Massachusetts graduate student who wrote a campus newspaper column saying former NFL player Pat Tillman was not a hero for being killed while fighting in Afghanistan was sharply criticized Thursday by the school's president.UMass president Jack Wilson issued a statement saying Rene Gonzalez' comments in The Daily Collegian "are a disgusting, arrogant and intellectually immature attack on a human being who died in service to his country."
In his column, which ran Wednesday on the opinion page and was posted on the newspaper's Web site, Gonzalez called the former Arizona Cardinals safety a "G.I. Joe guy who got what was coming to him." "That was not heroism," Gonzalez wrote. "It was prophetic idiocy." His column also criticizes America's military response to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Tillman, the San Jose, Calif., native who gave up his NFL career to join the Army Rangers in 2002, was killed in combat April 22 in Afghanistan. While recognizing Gonzalez' right to free speech, Wilson said the student owes Tillman a "debt of gratitude," and said he should apologize to Tillman's friends and family.
Gonzalez did not respond to telephone and e-mail messages left Thursday by The Associated Press.
Methinks Rene is in deep, deep shit. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy.
Posted by: Steve ||
04/29/2004 15:18 Comments ||
Top||
#11
His momma must be proud of that education she's paying for.What an idiot.
Posted by: Yosemite Sam ||
04/29/2004 15:23 Comments ||
Top||
#14
(If anybody thinks this didn't happen - the Brooklyn Bridge is for sale)
Jack Wilson, UMass President, got a call from Gov Mitt Romney (Republican):
You know I am getting a flood of calls here, and I don't like to get those kinds of calls about what is going on at a tax-payer funded institution. I don't want to hear any politically correct equivocation. I hope I am understood. (i.e. You can be replaced easily)
#15
Ole' rene is a grad student to boot, what a joke, I have a ton of 19 year old Marines who are more articulate and intelectual than this piece of sh*t. Go back to Puerto Rico Rene, obviously 4 years at UMass was a waste.
#18
Found on Tim Blair's comments page - examples of some of Rene's other fine work (please note - the first link is currently FARK'd due to high traffic).
#20
Ah, yes, the ol' we must address the "underlying conditions" of these goons! What a crock of s*it! As if any of the 9/11 goons were "poor, repressed Arabs" ya know! They were too busy living the "infidel life" here in the States...flying planes, wearing nice clothes, going to strip clubs, etc. What an idiot...go back to Puerto Rico if you don't enjoy your freedom here.
Posted by: BA ||
04/29/2004 15:50 Comments ||
Top||
#21
Their [the Taliban] resistance is more legitimate than our invasion, regardless of the fact that our social values are probably more enlightened than theirs.
This is the essence of Rene's stupidity. I know, I know, there are so many from which to choose, but this one is the corker. He thinks that our social values are "probably" more enlightened than that of the Taliban? Tell you what Rene, why don't you go to the Northwest Frontier and conduct a study. Let us know what you find. You're a grad student after all, and this would be scholarship.
We'll wait. Go ahead. Idjit.
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/29/2004 15:52 Comments ||
Top||
#22
Re #19 and the comment formerly known as #16: I deleted the comment because it listed the phone number. I don't want Rantburg to be associated with anything that might be considered harrassment.
Nuttin' personal to anyone, but let's not go there. Thx!
Steve (AoS)
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/29/2004 15:56 Comments ||
Top||
#23
How long do you think this asshat retains his perfect teeth after this? Anyone want to start a pool?
#24
I bet 'Rene' (isn't that French?) will get quite a few phone calls and maybe a visit from the football team. He looks every bit the sniveling little rich brat that begs for an ass whooping! Or maybe some Ex-Rangers attending UMass might have a word with young Rene. Someone, I am crossing the line and calling for personal harrassment. I have had enough of the LLL useful idiots. They have chosen sides let the chips fall where they may. Oh and BTW F#%& YOU RENE! (Articulate enough?)
#25
"Ole' rene is a grad student to boot, what a joke, I have a ton of 19 year old Marines who are more articulate and intelectual than this piece of sh*t."
It is amazing what PhD candidates don't know sometimes.
A few years ago, I was at a symposium on the Vietnam War at Texas Tech.
One of the visiting scholars was a PhD candidate in history at the University of New Mexico, a supposed specialist on the war.
It emerged during a conversation that this "expert" did not have the foggiest notion what the Republic of (South) Vietnam had been or who the ARVN were. So help me, this is true. His excuse was that his specialty was the antiwar movement. Presumably a knowledge of the most elementary facts wasn't necessary to a reasonable understanding of this phenomenon, just as an understanding of slavery has nothing to do with a study of Civil War copperheads or British colonial policy with the history of Revolution-era Tories.
Incidentally, a local hotel bellman, a veteran, had clued me to this guy's ignorance and I went out of my way to make a spectacle of him.
None other than Nguyen van Thieu, last President of the SVN, happened to be there. I introduced the asshat expert to him and remarked, "Mr. President, this gentleman is a leading expert on the politics of the War. By the way, he had never heard of you before today."
Thieu was pretty amused and the UNM guy slunk away never to be seen again.
If Rene went to the NWF, the boy'd come back with no teeth and a size 48 anal orifice. The Zukka Kheyl and the Ghilzais just LOVE cute little boys like that.
Posted by: mac ||
04/29/2004 16:05 Comments ||
Top||
#27
ima look for something positive.... mmmmmm got good teethes
#28
Sarge - as Steve said, "Rantburg" shouldn't be tied to harassment, but individually you might send him an EMail. The photo lists the website. Take a deep breath before you do (better for your bloodpressure). If he'd stuck to the typical pacifist-appeaser talking points, you'd just blow it of as him being a ninconpoop. But, Jihad Rene made cruel personal insults about Tillman. This is what is so unacceptable.
#29
Yep Rene, it's a free country. You are free to make as big an ass of yourself as you can. Of course, there may be consequences. You did consider that didn't you? .......no?
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
04/29/2004 16:11 Comments ||
Top||
#30
Boy... I wouldn't give a squirt of piss to be in your shoes right now."
/CHET
Posted by: Cthulhu Akbar ||
04/29/2004 16:14 Comments ||
Top||
#31
This guy really needs to check out this site to resolve his anger.
http://www23.brinkster.com/smallpenissize/
Shall I send him the link?
#33
The little punk will have to live with the consequences of exposing to the world what a small, little, man he is in comparison to Pat, the hero, Tillman. He'll be justifying those words for the rest of his life, and one day, if he's lucky, he'll realize what a stupid pea-brained ass he is.
I'd wish someone would beat him up - but I think the slow life-time torture of his own stupidity will be a far more painful lesson.
Posted by: B ||
04/29/2004 16:27 Comments ||
Top||
#34
Big Ed, you are right! I ammend my comments to:
"I hope this young misguided lad doesn't get quite a few phone calls or a visit from the football team. He looks every bit the intellection giant that that the Democratic party is counting on for leadership. If some Ex-Ranger is attending UMass I hope the get into a 'spirited' but non-violent debate with this young LLL, Communists, Whining, Sniveling but lovable example of a human being." Peace Rene Peace.
#37
As I said over at Tim Blair's site -- I hope this idiot gets what's coming to him, and that it involves baseball bats, lemon juice, and Certs mints.
And I think I'll add mice and a basket of figs to that, too.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 16:40 Comments ||
Top||
#38
Andlook at this phrase he uses; He was acting out his macho, patriotic crap and I guess someone with a bigger gun did him in.
#39
See Sarge- Doesn't that feel better? Now let's see if we can get an imbedded Fox News reporter with video camera when the football team visits him. A domestic front in the war on terror.
#40
Why don't you just say what you're feeling, Rene?
The military is an evil organization and you're upset that one of it's members is getting praised for his work and sacrifice. I mean, you're probably much smarter and more enlightened than this jock that it's insulting that a large portion of the small-minded public think highly of him.
So, not only did he turn down more money than you might make in a lifetime, he took a pay deduction and decided to get his hands dirty in protecting this country. In the process, he lost his life.
He CAN'T be a Hero, because he represents and embodies what you despise.
#41
Big Ed, you know I do feel better! Anyone want to bet that young Rene was not asked to pledge a fraternity? I sense a lot of Anger (and disappointment) in his article. I donât think Rene has Self-Actualized and that is why he is still attending college and not starting a career. It also might be because there are NOT too many PAYING jobs for PolySci major outside a LLL colleges. I bet Rene feel pretty superior to the rest of Umass because he has already graduated but he is still a sniveling, never getting laid, social retard. I bet he lives near campus with his parents in a Star Trek TNG themed basement that has NEVER had a female guest.
#43
what he really feels is jealous and inadequate and now he has shown the world how small he really is. He really doesn't need a clue-bat - he has already announced to the world that hates himself far more than we ever could.
Posted by: B ||
04/29/2004 17:06 Comments ||
Top||
#44
OK...I'll say it. I hope nobody beats him up, because he'd get great mileage out of that. What I do hope is that the next time he goes to the bar - and some really cute girl spits on him and Evan McConey (or whatever his name is) gets it on film for the world to enjoy.
Posted by: B ||
04/29/2004 17:09 Comments ||
Top||
#45
hmm..I feel much better now.
Posted by: B ||
04/29/2004 17:10 Comments ||
Top||
#46
There used to be a certain amount of intellectual maturity associated with the PHD - even for leftists - that is no longer the case.
I don't think that the punk understands the intellectual maturity of Tillman's decision that he needed to hazard sacrificing his own life. There is a certain amount of depth to a person who is willing to risk it all for an idea. They should award the kid a doctorate in immaturity and put him on staff in the Ted Kennedy Chair of stupidity.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
04/29/2004 17:16 Comments ||
Top||
#47
what an idiot..
Ask the Israelis if 50 years of blunt force have eradicated the Palestinian resistance
and this idiot has a college degree....before 67 Jordan controlled the west bank and Egypt the gaza...get you facts straight mr. rosy checks..
Posted by: Dan ||
04/29/2004 17:43 Comments ||
Top||
#48
I bet he lives near campus with his parents in a Star Trek TNG themed basement that has NEVER had a female guest.
Doubt it; Star Trek is too "militant" for this kind of asshat. I think he's more of a Care Bears, Rainbow Brite, unicorns type.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 17:46 Comments ||
Top||
#49
I'd love to hear this guy try to defend himself against Hugh Hewitt or Hannity. I bet he would come off as a big fool. Anyone know how to get this article to either/both of those guys?
Posted by: Yosemite Sam ||
04/29/2004 17:57 Comments ||
Top||
#50
RC, As a dedicated Trekkie, I can honestly say that Star Trek The Next Generation (TNG) was the least violent and MOST PC of all the Star Treks. It is also popular with most LLL with PolySci Degrees. I will bet you any amount that Rene wrote at least one term paper comparing TNG to the political social orders of world. In the one and ONLY PolySci class I took the grad student compared the life forms to TNG Species. Rene looks every bit that part of that grad student that taught my course. âLive long and prosper!â
#51
Robert C. -
The old Kirk Star Trek may be too millitant.
Uhuru believed in God, and was Christian. There seemed to be a genuine concept of good and evil, etc. There is an episode with a parallel planet where the "Coms" (Communist Chinese) have defeated the "Yangs" (US). Kirk sees a US-like flag and the native begins reciting words to the pledge. Kirk finishes it, using "UNDER GOD" and the native was surprised he knew "Holy Words".
Then when Star Trek was revived it went south:
The later Picard Star Trek (Next Gen) reflected Roddenberry's conversion to a touchy-feely politically correct environment where fighting back even was equivocal. I'd have to go look at a episode guide in a bookstore, but the few times I saw it I thought Roddenberry had lost his soul.
The only TNG character worth a damn was Worf. I'd figure out a way to deprogram Data and start over. Get Picard near a microwave with his artificial heart. Don't get me started.
Rene would be cozy, and, in fact I think in Sarge's description of his hideway in the basement of his folks house, there is a complete set of videos of all episodes of Star Trek-TNG. But no episodes of the original
#54
BigEd, Only by a couple of minutes and you had some good points too. I would add that he probably has a blow up 7-of-9 doll to 'command' under his bed. Stop me this is too easy!
#60
Speaking of Star Trek references in the propaganda war, an ongoing "black" propaganda is known to its principals as "Operation Indy-Borg." This is aimed at Indymedia and similar sites and the objective is to sow paranoia and confusion among the faithful, not to halt service or anything of that nature.
For example, Indy-Borg invents whacked-out conspiracy claims and places them on the Indymedia open newswire.
This is true "black" propaganda, attributed to a fictitious but plausible lefty group and superficially reflecting lefty values and sensibilities.
One example was a story characterizing Young-Earth-Creationist Kent Hovind as a fellow progressive, talking up YE Creationism in lefty language, and urging the LLL to take a sympathetic look at Hovind's ideas.
Another alleged that recent traffic accidents in West Texas were, in fact, caused by B-1s from Dyess AFB carrying out field tests of a new beam weapon. For this, real news reports were interspersed with fictitious witness accounts.
It was possible in this case to dress up the bogus witness accounts as news stories and link them from the same domain as the real news stories.
Another type of black story tries to tar loyal LLLs with the "Cointelpro" or "freeper troll" brush. This worked extremely well a while back with a notorious LLL troll who had been attacking Little Green Footballs.
After his expulsion from LGF, he started his spew at the friendly Indymedia site and was promptly, and very successfully, represented as an amateur COINTELPRO troll dispatched to Indymedia by LGF's Charles Johnson himself.
The overall effort has been a success. Indymedia of course is loaded with paranoid vigilantes who see "COINTELPRO" trolls everywhere. So far, not one of these, to my knowledge, has recognized an Indy-borg story for what it is.
Several other lefty sites have been similarly subverted. Surprisingly enough, the efforts of ideologically-driven moderators don't seem to make much difference on these.
They will basically tolerate any lunatic claim as long as it seems to be in political solidarity and isn't an obvious spoof.
#63
rantburgers always call people "asshats" and I'm not sure exactly what an asshat is...but I think this guy's dork-doo qualifies him as a ture "asshat".
Posted by: B ||
04/29/2004 20:02 Comments ||
Top||
#64
B:
Haven't you heard the expression "s*** for brains"?
S***, is located under area from where you wear a hat.
#69
To their credit the college responds:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,118580,00.html
UMass president Jack Wilson issued a statement saying the comments in The Daily Collegian on Wednesday were "a disgusting, arrogant and intellectually immature attack on a human being who died in service to his country."
#70
this idiot now apologized: http://www.wpxi.com/news/3252841/detail.html
let this not be the end of it. may it continue to plague him for years to come. he thinks Pat Tillman was an idiot!? Clearly, he's just beginning to learn the meaning of that word.
#73
This kid is clearly clueless. He has no grasp of the fact that soldiers don't select where they are going to fight - that is decided by echelons above. Tillman might just as well have ended up in Iraq, Kosovo, Haiti, Liberia, the Philippines - or (if his superiors ordered it) - performing a one-man airborne assault on Tehran - or defending some shitstain neighborhood in Puerto Rico from bad guys. The point is - he volunteered to join the fight against evil - anywhere someone felt a US Army Ranger was needed. He had no say in where he was deployed.
#74
Yosemite Sam asked for contact info for Hugh Hewitt and/or Sean Hannity:
hhewitt@hughhewitt.com
www.hannity.com/contact or 800-941-7326.
Sofia the Librarian
PS I always heard the etymology of asshat had something to do with "wearing your ass for a hat," i.e., having your head so far up your ass you were in danger of methane poisoning.
Posted by: Sofia ||
04/30/2004 11:01 Comments ||
Top||
Ah, Fallujah. Peaceful, verdant Fallujah. City of Gardens. City of Perfumed Alleys, the Mesopotamian Eden. One day a quiet happy burg of peace, the next a victim of American overbearance. From the Boston Globe, a lede by Thanassis Cambanis:
U.S. warplanes fired on Iraqi insurgents Tuesday in Fallujah in strikes that shattered a fragile cease-fire negotiated over a week ago.
Got that? We had a nice cease-fire going, and for no reason U.S. warplanes went and shattered it without provocation. I just stopped reading right there.
Posted by: Steve ||
04/29/2004 11:00:07 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"Violent military action by an occupying power against inhabitants of an occupied country will only make matters worse," U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan
WHEREâS Rudy Giuliani when we really need him? Looking back on a year of mistakes in Iraq, itâs clear he would have been a better choice to run our occupation than those we sent.
Hizzonerâs great insight was a blinding flash of the obvious: Respect for the law in great things starts with respect for the law in small things. Want to reduce urban violence? Bust the juvie who jumps the subway turnstile. Before he kills somebody.
Itâs appalling how weâve blustered on about building a civil society and a rule-of-law democracy in Iraq, while letting the streets degenerate into a wilderness. It began with the post-war orgy of looting. Our over-confident leaders looked away. Yes, some of the initial destruction after Saddamâs fall was an inevitable blowing off of steam by a long-oppressed population. But gutting museums, libraries and hospitals didnât fall into the post-game-exuberance category.
We never made more than a half-hearted effort to enforce order on Iraqâs streets thereafter. Often, we made no effort at all - in terror-cities such as Fallujah, Ramadi or Samarra. Even when street thugs danced atop damaged U.S. vehicles in Baghdad, we treated them as if they were respectable citizens expressing their rights of free speech.
The truth is that, after conquering a vast state and deposing a monstrous dictator, the Bush administration didnât really want to get involved.
News from the briar patch, guys: Weâre in it now.
If anything has encouraged insurgents, terrorists and opportunist thugs in Iraq, itâs been our lack of resolve to enforce order. The effect has reached beyond the countryâs borders. Weâve never made a serious effort to view our actions (or inaction) through regional eyes - except to recite mistaken claims that we mustnât use too much force for fear of alienating those who are already our enemies.
Whether among the confused people of Iraq or in the squalor of the greater Arab world, those images, repeated almost daily, of Iraqi gangstas jumping up and down on our burned-out combat vehicles created, then reinforced, the impression that American troops not only could be defeated, but were being defeated.
The truth was irrelevant. In the age of the satellite dish, the image trumps all. The greatest recruiting tool for our enemies in Iraq and beyond its borders has been those clips of Iraqis plundering disabled Humvees with impunity.
It may be too late to recover the chips weâve squandered at the strategic poker table. But we have to try our damnedest to come from behind.
In addition to the military reduction of the last breath of resistance in Fallujah and the arrest or killing of the renegade cleric Muqtada al-Sadr in Najaf, we need to change the rules on Iraqâs streets.
If any adult touches a damaged or destroyed U.S. military vehicle, he must be shot. Start with a one-week warning period to get out the new rules. Then execute. The Iraqis playing trampoline on the hoods of our charred vehicles arenât the ones who will build a better future.
As for the juvies, send them to reformatory camps. No exceptions, even if daddyâs the Sheik of Araby.
If we canât or wonât bring order to that festering countryâs streets, weâll never see a lawful state emerge. I still believe that most Iraqis want democracy - in some adjusted form that gives them a voice in their countryâs affairs. But they want and need security even more. You canât build a legal economy or hold honest elections if you canât control the neighborhoods in broad daylight.
Law first, then democracy. Sorry, but it doesnât work the other way around.
The lack of resolution and common sense on the part of the Coalition Provisional Authority has plunged Iraq into crisis. You canât change historyâs direction on the cheap. From turning a corner six months ago - we were doing exactly that - our diplomatsâ taste for displays of weakness and empty "negotiations" dragged the country back from the brink of success.
So, as the hordes of punk terrorists are merrily ringing our doorbell, here are "three simple rules for dating Iraq":
Bring order to the streets, no matter what it takes: If you shoot plunderers and the Arab world wails, too bad. If we wonât pay the price of unpopularity in the short-term, weâll fail and be despised for decades to come. Changing the direction of the Middle East is not about immediate popularity - itâs about go-the-distance effectiveness.
Never interrupt an ongoing military operation for "negotiations": Finish the job, then talk. In the Middle East, strength, not chitchat, elicits respect.
Add the stick to the carrot: Stop this nonsense of trying to bribe terrorists and murderous Baâathists to love us. Instead of pouring money into cities and town that kill American soldiers, expend development funds on the communities that behave. The present policy of rewarding those who assassinate our troops is as unacceptable as it is counterproductive.
This doesnât take a genius. Just the sort of common sense that Rudy Giuliani brought to the greatest city in the world. Baghdad doesnât need another "brilliant" diplomat. It needs a Wyatt Earp.
Ralph Peters is the author of "Beyond Baghdad: Postmodern War and Peace."
Posted by: tipper ||
04/29/2004 11:03:57 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"Baghdad doesnât need another "brilliant" diplomat. It needs a Wyatt Earp."
It keeps coming back to that. What seems complicated is really simple. What still makes sense is the policy that got us there - a little Cowboys and Islamists.
Posted by: Sam ||
04/29/2004 11:17 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Antiwar is a fake -- she pretends to be a nice, concerned liberal, but s/he gets real nasty when support for islamofascists (including undermining Western society and values) is confronted too directly. So as not to waste bandwidth, you can read the Same Story, Different Day right here.
#4
Saddam kept the extreme fundamentalists in control now they are running amuk in Iraq.
Ah...yes...it's too bad that ol' Sadaam is not still in power. And along those lines, it's too bad that you weren't one of the victims the rape and torture rooms. Since ol Saddy was fine by you, antiwar, I just wish you could have been there instead of someone else. Then the rest of us would be spared the torture of your stupidity.
Posted by: B ||
04/29/2004 12:43 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Saddam kept the extreme fundamentalists in control now they are running amuk in Iraq
"in control"--that is, murdered them, their families, etc. Saddam did indeed "have his faults."
But if the Israelis kill Islamonazi terror leaders like Yassin, then suddenly it's just awful, isn't that right, Antisemite?
#9
US should NEVER have invaded Saddam Hussein's capture left a vacuum which has different groups vying for power once USA leaves (IF they ever do)Iraq will probably end up a fundamentalist theocracy.
Translation: Iraq and it's inhabitants deserved to STAY under the thumb of Saddam Hussein and his brutal sons and henchmen in the interest of "stability". Ah yes, that coveted stability.....
I'm sure all those that died at the hands of Saddam would agree with you.
#12
Everyone including Ralph Peters has gone wobbly since the Sadr and Fallujah hardboys have attempted their mini-tet. Everyone wants payback, or to pull out. Why don't the Iraqi's help us people bemoan. We should have pummelled them to begin with others rant! Well the US left the shia high and dry in the early 90s and now we've got politicans and fools talking about turning things over to the UN and Spain bugging out. I don't blame Iraqi's for keeping their heads down until after the US elections at least.
#13
cingold, thanks for posting the link to the old thread. I missed that one. Sounds like antiwar hasn't developed a bullshit sensor yet and just believes any old garbage she finds on lefty websites. Very creepy if she really is a healthcare worker.
#14
Everyone including Ralph Peters has gone wobbly since the Sadr and Fallujah hardboys have attempted their mini-tet. Everyone wants payback, or to pull out.
#15
US should NEVER have invaded Saddam Hussein's capture left a vacuum which has different groups vying for power once USA leaves (IF they ever do)Iraq will probably end up a fundamentalist theocracy. Saddam kept the extreme fundamentalists in control now they are running amuk in Iraq. Don't know how Iraq will ever recover from the tangled plate of spaghetti it's in now.
EFL via Instapundit
In a deadly expression of feelings that until now were kept quiet, a group representing local residents is said to have killed at least five militiamen in the last four days. The murders are the first sign of organised Iraqi opposition to Sadrâs presence and come amid simmering discontent at the havoc their lawless presence has wreaked.
The group calls itself the Thulfiqar Army, after a twin-bladed sword said to be used by the Shiite martyr Imam Ali, to whom Najafâs vast central mosque is dedicated. Residents say leaflets bearing that name have been circulated in the city in the last week, urging Sadrâs al-Mahdi army to leave immediately or face imminent death.
"I donât think itâs entirely impossible that they may be backing this group either with men or advice," one coalition official said. "Sistani does not like people abusing the sanctuary of the holy shrines in this way, and if talks arenât working, force can be used to make the point." Sistani? Hah! Yes, ah, Mr. Sadr. I would like to introduce you to our Special Operations Group. The do lovely work.
Posted by: Dragon Fly ||
04/29/2004 10:11:33 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Sorry. Just discovered similar story linked yesterday. Pooh pooh on me.
Two days after U.S. Marines destroyed a minaret on a mosque in Fallujah, Irag, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld showed reporters a picture of a mosque in Najah with men holding weapons.
"You can see they have all kinds of religious instruments - called rocket-propelled grenades and AK 47âs," Rumsfeld said. "Thatâs what they do in their mosques," he told reporters after briefing members of Congress.
Rumsfeld complained such events arenât being mentioned in newspapers.
U.S. Marines say they opened fire on a mosque in Fallujah Monday after being fired on by insurgents inside.
In brief remarks broadcast live by television outlets, Rumsfeld said it takes courage in a violent environment for Iraqis to stand up and say they are for law and order and freedom.
"You donât see a lot of that in the newspaper," but a lot of Iraqis are doing it, Rumsfeld said.
When asked whether a major confrontation could still be avoided in Fallujah, Rumsfeld said, "Time will tell."
Posted by: TS (vice girl) ||
04/29/2004 9:33:57 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
'bout time, Rummy! Should've taken out a random reporter with the "snake-strike" move as a warning for future deliberate anti-American reporting
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/29/2004 10:01 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"You can see they have all kinds of religious instruments - called rocket-propelled grenades and AK 47âs..."
Rummy is the best! I love his no-BS style.
Posted by: Dar ||
04/29/2004 10:03 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Maybe Rums could help out a little till Fred heals up.
Posted by: Dar ||
04/29/2004 15:53 Comments ||
Top||
#6
The Feds should have been releasing guncamera footage weeks ago. Prepared people for the inevitable Mosque strike. The way things were going it was only a matter of time.
#8
I seriously hope this guy lives long enough to right a book when it's all over -- it would have to be the truest, funniest thing written by a gov't guy since Lincoln.
The northern Nigerian state of Zamfara has introduced a new package of Islamic, or Sharia, laws. All businesses in the state will have to shut down during the five daily Muslim prayers. The state government also says that all "unauthorised" places of worship will be shut down under "Sharia phase two".
That would be any non-islamic place of worship.
Zamfara was the first Nigerian state to introduce strict Sharia laws in 2000 and thousands turned out to welcome the new measures on Wednesday. The BBC's Yusuf Sarki Muhammad in the state capital, Gusau, says it is not clear whether churches will be targeted for closure under the new measures.
Ah, good old Yusuf Muhammad of the BBC, unbiased as ever.
He says there are many unauthorised places of worship in Zamfara, as elsewhere in Nigeria.
"Buddist temples, Shinto shrines, Baptists, why we even got a altar to Zul!"
Most other states in the predominantly Muslim northern Nigeria followed Zamfara by introducing Sharia laws. Thieves have had their hands amputated and several women have been sentenced to death by stoning for having extra-marital sex.
Or being raped.
But no death sentences have yet been carried out.
Give them time
The new laws led to clashes between Christians and Muslims, in which thousands of people died.
And they say this isn't a Holy War.
Posted by: Steve ||
04/29/2004 9:04:12 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Are you sure "unauthorized places of worship" is aimed at churches, or at non-Wahabi Mosques? The latter are probably more of a threat to the Wahabis than the former, and will draw less national and international attention.
I dont know much about the situation in northern Nigeria. I know hardline Orthodox Jews in Israel are MUCH more unhappy about Reform and Conservative Synagogues than they are about churches.
US marines are to withdraw from positions they have held in the flashpoint Iraqi city of Falluja, an American military commander has said. Lt Col Brennan Byrne said this would allow a newly created all-Iraqi force to take control of the city on Friday. The marines have been fighting insurgents based in Falluja for the past three weeks.
Elsewhere in Iraq, 10 US soldiers have been killed in attacks - eight in a car bombing south of the capital Baghdad. Falluja, a predominantly Sunni Muslim city, 50km (30 miles) west of Baghdad, has been a hotbed of resistance to the US-led occupation of Iraq.
Col Byrne said the new Iraqi force that will move into the city had been set up under a new agreement reached with local leaders. Known as the Falluja Protective Army, it will be made up of up to 1,100 Iraqi soldiers led by a former general from the Saddam Hussein era.
It will operate under the overall control of US forces. US forces moved against insurgents in the town following the gruesome killings of four American civilian contractors there. Recent days have seen an aerial bombardment of insurgent targets in the town. Helicopters and AC-130 have gunships bombed and strafed targets in several districts of the city. But US commanders were holding back from an all-out assault on the city of 300,000 people, in the hope of reaching agreement.
They had insisted that the insurgents - who they said included former members of Saddam Husseinâs Republican Guard military units and foreign Islamic militants - turn in their heavy weapons. United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan has warned that an American military assault on Falluja could lead to civilian casualties and fuel the resistance to the occupation. Doctors in Falluja say some 600 people have been killed since the siege began three weeks ago. Thousands have fled the city, but many are now attempting to return, despite the fighting. An unconfirmed report says US marines manning a checkpoint opened fire on a minibus on Thursday morning, killing four civilians. Known as the Falluja Protective Army, it will be made up of up to 1,100 Iraqi soldiers led by a former general from the Saddam Hussein era... Three guesses as to what happens next... [sigh]
Posted by: Howard UK ||
04/29/2004 8:49:13 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Fox is reporting that this is not true. Marines are moving some units but not withdrawing. Remember, the goal is to return the city to the control of the central government. If we can free up a rifle company or two by letting Iraqis patrol some of the already freed parts of the city or its environs, fine.
#2
News on Fox says this is inaccurate. Good, I want to see Mr Spooky-pants AC130 circling overhead and breathing fire on the heathens one last time (pleeeeez.)
Posted by: Howard UK ||
04/29/2004 9:02 Comments ||
Top||
#3
On the other hand, native Iraqi troops could probably run amok and no one would care.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 9:09 Comments ||
Top||
#5
And, on second thought, probably not true. The US would get blamed, regardless.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 9:23 Comments ||
Top||
#6
some folks would blame us, but it would be easier to shake off. And of course it depends what you mean by "run amok" If they massacre civilians, yeah we'll suffer. If they do what we would have to do anyway, fire on mosques, blow up building, etc - stuff thats within the Geneva conventions - they might get away with it.
#7
OTOH it does seem that may just be control of the more pacified parts of the city, and not the whole thing. Sounds like a good idea - I would like to know more about the Iraqi general in question though.
#8
And of course it depends what you mean by "run amok" If they massacre civilians, yeah we'll suffer.
That would be the worst case.
I suspect that even if they fought correctly, it would be spun against us. Hell, look at the reporting about the mob the Thais just put down -- it's being treated like a massacre of innocents.
My shift to pessimism on this comes from the fact that, well, the press wants us to lose. If they don't, they sure act like they do.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 10:04 Comments ||
Top||
#9
As an illustration of what RC is talking about, look at the Thai solution to jihadis hiding in a mosque. They gassed the hell out of it, and shot down anybody who stumbled out. It's A) chemical warfare (even if of the non-lethal variety) and B) shooting the incapacitated. If American cops or troops did anything even remotely similar, you'd never hear the end of it, even if you lived to the Judgment Day. Since it's Thais, nobody important gives two shits. Of course, if it were Thai troops under the nominal command of the US in Iraq or Afghanistan, they'd fall under I-Hate-America by contagion rules, and we'd catch the flak.
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
04/29/2004 10:17 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Thousands have fled the city, but many are now attempting to return, despite the fighting.
Here's a clue to support speculation that parts of the city are relatively calm. I doubt that many Fallujahans are interested in returning to Jolan.
#11
Belmont Club has links to a map and excellent analysis of the situation on the ground:
It suggests that the enemy is basically confined to the northwest corner neighborhood of 'Golan', a slum area of winding streets. I would guess -- purely guess -- that the Marines hold the southern half of Highway 10 and everything east of the main road which leads up from the Mayor's compound to the northern city wall. The tactical motivation would be obvious. The Marines, and especially the snipers, would have clear fields of fire across these thoroughfares and use them to cut off the enemy stronghold from the rest of the city both to the east and to the south. To the north the Marines hold the 8-foot high railway embankment, which is about 200 meters parallel to the north city limits. If my map analysis is right it reveals an astonishing success by the USMC. The enemy is now largely in a square about 2,000 meters on each side, with the river to one side and the open railway area to the other, facing the city streets both south and east.
Posted by: Steve ||
04/29/2004 10:35 Comments ||
Top||
#12
dare i say it looks like RC and MH are reading different reports about Thailand??:)
#17
LH -- no contradiction. It's being treated like a massacre of innocents but no one's screaming about even so. It's getting a "they's just wogs, what can you expect" reaction, not a "CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY" reaction.
Which do you think we'd get?
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/29/2004 10:55 Comments ||
Top||
#18
I suspect that even if they fought correctly, it would be spun against us. Hell, look at the reporting about the mob the Thais just put down -- it's being treated like a massacre of innocents
Im sorry, i read the above as indicating that since the Thais were being skewered in the press, that was evidence that we'd be more skewered. Its hard to see why the Thais NOT being skewered shows that we would be.
But RC is right we WOULD be skewered, in the West, in the Arab press and in Iraq. IF our troops did it. The question that was raised is what if the FPA did it? I think we'd STILL be skewered in Al Jazeera, and in Al Guradian, et al. But I dont think we'd be as badly skewered in IRAQ, which is the hearts and minds game thats most important now, not the game for the general arab street (important, but not urgent) or for the European left (feh on them)
#19
Naturally, the Beeb would spin this as a defeat for the US, forced by patriotic resistance to abandon the offensive and compromise, etc.
Nothing of the kind has happened, of course, but propaganda has become the major battleground in the war.
I am loathe to suggest that this should drive our plans but we must face facts: we are on the defensive against the enemy media.
This is not completely irremediable and an aggressive effort to counter it would not contradict valid military objectives, the exact opposite in fact.
The offensive should continue until the BBC and Al Jazeerah either admit defeat or (failing that) make big enough fools of themselves trying to contradict obvious facts that even their most credulous viewers will start to notice.
#20
Maybe it's time to reevaluate the idea that all reporters are neutral. IMHO, those that assist the enemy (rather than report on events) should be treated accordingly.
It's not like it's hard to figure out who is who..you just read what they write and... viola!
Posted by: B ||
04/29/2004 11:18 Comments ||
Top||
#21
Screw the "world press", Kofi Annan, and every other yammerhead out there. The only people who need to be happy with the outcome are the Americans and the Iraqis. And possibly the Brits, although they probably understand this.
CLEAR THE SECTOR! Go in there and kill everything with a weapon - man, woman, or "child". Fuck world opinion.
#23
A.C. We are not on the defensive. Being on the defensive implies that we are offering some sort of media defense. I don't see that here outside of Rummy's showing of a few pictures of them shooting from a mosque.
We need to get video of them hiding behind women and children on the nightly news and the morning news shows. We need to show an 'insurgent' shooting a women or a child in the back on every network. Gruesome yes but this is a war.
One of the things which grabbed the public attention during GW1 is the video of bunkers, bridges, and etc being blown up shown during the press briefings. Anyone remember the 'lucky Iraqi' who cross a bridge just before it was hit by a bomb?
And when the media refuses to show this we need to call them on it - very publically.
#24
The NYT is now independently confirming the story above. If true, it represents a return to the previous situation. Fallujah will remain a Baathist/Islamist enclave from which the enemy can stage and launch attacks.
#25
Why do I see reports about us putting an ex-Saddam general leading Iraqi forces, and there are reports on Drudge and elsewhere about intel reports stating that ex-Saddam loyalists planned this and are causing most of the trouble. Am I missing something?
#26
11A5S - why would we believe what the NYT says? You say that as if they have any credibility anymore. That's the bummer for the NYT, they lost their credibility. So now when you quote from them, we take it with the same level of skepticism that we give any other DNC propaganda rag.
Posted by: B ||
04/29/2004 12:21 Comments ||
Top||
#27
Look at the NYT report, the wire service reports, etc on the one hand, and the Belmont Club post, and the Fox reports on the other.
The reports of a deal say that the the FPA will replace US forces in fallujah. But some of the most heated fighting is on the northern edge?? Perhaps Im too much of a Talmudist (think jesuit for you Catholics) but could it be that we are interpretating the railway line on the north as NOT IN FALLUJAH??? After all we're certainly going to keep a cordon up. on the north the cordon comes adjacent to the city. So IF the baddies try to ambush the FPA (as they likely will) the USMC can still fire at and even raid the baddies from the north. And notice no mention of air power. So we will still be in position to hit the baddies, but the actual "occupation" will be by Iraqis, and under a Sunni general, so they dont start blaming the Kurds (ive seen reports of vengeance attacks on Kurds in Baghdad for the Peshmerga actions in support of the USMC in Fallujah) Im thinking Afghanistan as the model, with US special ops going in alongside the FPA, perhaps attempting to blend in with them.
Question - have they found any Iraqis other than Kurds who are at least as reliable as the Northern Alliance?
#28
B: It's just a data point. That's the nice thing about Rantburg, we all contribute and then contruct our own probability vector from all of the contributions. All I was doing was contributing a data point. I wasn't trying to say whether the NYT is credible or not. Right now the probability vector is pointing towards pullout with a very weak scalar component. Once the DoD issues a press release confirming or denying, then the direction of the vector will either change or remain the same and the scalar component will become very strong.
Is it ok by you if I post a link the DoD press release? Or are we going to start supressing information here?
Resumption of suicide attacks in a couple of weeks. Another "uprising" (in Fallujah especially) in 6 months. Now where's that Futures link...
Posted by: Rafael ||
04/29/2004 15:02 Comments ||
Top||
#30
115AS - well alright...fair enough...you are right, they are a data point. Credible source?? Not any more so than a blog. Data point worthy discussing?? yes..all right. I stand corrected.
Posted by: B ||
04/29/2004 16:18 Comments ||
Top||
#31
The danger with having the Iraqi troops involved reminds me of Israel forces in Lebenon. Some of their christian allies wiped out a Palestinian refugee camp and if you hear Fisk report it its as if Sharon killed each Pal with his bare hands. Its best to keep some allies on the back burner.
Early in April, I had sent a message to James Steele, Paul Bremerâs Counselor for Iraqi Security Forces, asking if we could talk. .... Steele had been in Iraq for several months, on his second tour of duty since the end of the war. Last summer, he spent four months training an Iraqi police swat team to deal with terrorists and organized crime. On April 10th, several days into the bloody battle in Fallujah and the Sadr uprising, we met at the entrance to the Green Zone. ....
A few days later, Steele invited me to come with him for a surprise nighttime inspection of the main Iraqi police station in Sadr City, where, in the first days of the uprising, Sadrâs militia seized most of the police stations and battled with American soldiers, killing a number of them. They fled when U.S. tanks moved in. ....
After a round of manly hugs and cheek-kissing with twenty or so Iraqi policemen heâd trained last summer â and who had apparently volunteered to go along with us â Steele led me to a white Japanese sedan parked outside the security barricades of the Green Zone. .... Steele said that the sedan was his goodluck car. He pointed to a couple of bullet holes in the right-hand side. ....
We were headed for the Al Jezaaer police station. It is on the very edge of town, separated from a mosque by a barricade of razor wire and concrete-filled oil drums. .... Inside the station, we crowded into the office of the Sadr City police chief, Colonel Marouf Amran Musa, a small, stocky man who seemed pleased to see Steele. Marouf said that order had been largely restored in Sadr City.
Five of Sadr Cityâs seven police stations had been taken over, but only for about four hours, Marouf said. He pointed to the stations on a map on the wall. His station and one other were the only ones that had not been seized. During the revolt, he said, he had gone to a station that was in the hands of Sadrâs men. There was little he could do. âThere were fifty guys with RPGs sitting on top of the building,â he said, âso I came back here and put twenty-five cops on our roof with the heavy machine gun. I sent some more policemen to the other station, Al Karama, so that it would not fall. Then I called the U.S. Army. They came with armor and choppers, and the militia ran away.â After it was all over, he said, he found that the police had lost a hundred and forty rifles, but he had managed to get seventy-five back. A handful of detainees had escaped as well. Heâd lost only one policeman, who had vanished along with his rifle.
Steele praised Marouf, saying that he was a brave man and had shown true leadership qualities. Marouf smiled and waved his hands in a show of modesty. âI am a son of this city, Iâve been with the force for twenty years and worked in all of its stations, and I have good relations with the people,â he said. ....
Marouf told Steele that his main problem was that he didnât have enough weapons or men. âThere may be five thousand RPGs in Sadr City,â he said, âand we have none. Some of the criminals even have mortars. We have five hundred policemen and only thirty bulletproof vests.â And only the one heavy machine gun. Steele smiled: âYouâre not asking me for mortars and RPGs are you?â âA heavy machine gun for each station would be good,â Marouf said. Steele nodded and made a note. Marouf said that he would also like commendations for fifty-seven officers who had stood fast during the revolt. Steele nodded, and noted this down as well.
Marouf turned to more long-standing problems. âThis city changed a lot for the worse during Saddamâs regime,â he said, âand, as you can seeâ â he cocked his head toward the back of the station, where the sewage-filled streets were â âwe need help. There are about three hundred and fifty thousand unemployed men in Sadr City.â Steele was getting impatient, and he interrupted Marouf. âYou need to get the city council up and running again,â he said. âIâve heard some members have resigned. That city council is your vehicle, your key, to getting services.â That wasnât what Marouf had in mind. âThe councilâs been in place for a year now and nothing has been done,â he said. He mentioned the sewage problem, and the fact that the electricity didnât come on in Sadr City until 2 a.m. âWe hear about a lot of money being spent on us, and weâve seen nothing here.â ....
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
04/29/2004 8:31:40 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Please shorten the title to "A Visit to a Police Station in Sadr City".
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
04/29/2004 9:12 Comments ||
Top||
#1
For reference, here's the Fallujah Map. Note that the city MUST have grow northward since this photo was taken as there is no intersection with the RR line. I've checked other maps and that line is the only one shown in any of them.
#2
[dropped bombs on the] "train station and in neighbourhoods that had seemed to be quieting".
....or maybe the Scotsman reporter is just wrong or he's trying to make it sound like the US decided to unleash it's wrath on a quite neighborhood for no apparent reason. Who knows anymore?
#3
UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan warned. âItâs definitely time, time now for those who prefer to get oil vouchers restraint and dialogue to make their voices heard.â
#5
I speculate that the bad guys got a strong case of claustrophobia after the AC-130 action the other night.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
04/29/2004 5:25 Comments ||
Top||
#6
First, the article describes fighting in the Jolan neighborhood, where it's been for the last four nights running. Second, the Jolan is in the north, so this train station is right next to the area where they have been fighting. Sounds as if the jihadis tried to sally. Possibly a breakout attempt? Nah, where would they go? Most likely it's just another move by another jihadi rapid-reaction force. Or by the same one as always. You'd think the old one would be attrited to pieces by now, given how active the Marines seem to have been in mousetrapping reaction forces.
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
04/29/2004 7:24 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Think three dimensions. For at least 20 years now, the US Army has had an integrated battlefield surveillance system that puts together ground and low-medium-high-space altitude recon together to help field artillery target. Believe me, 10 years ago this system was good enough to do a target analysis of every building and stationary target in a large city and give the speed, direction and distance of every moving vehicle. And it was just for field artillery. Since then, I'm sure it has been adapted for infantry use.
The surveillance has also improved on the scale of the jump from a 286 PC to a Pentium IV.
I mention this because the Marines have probably got real time intelligence that literally shows what building every single person who has been on the street holding a gun has *come* from, and where they have *gone* to.
Last but not least, they have GPS targeting, the final element. Now ALL they have to do is figure out some way to cajole the idiots into a place with no civilians.
Fallujah is a death trap.
#8
Itâs definitely time, time now for those who prefer restraint and dialogue to make their voices heard.
What do you call the talks in Fallujah, Kofi?
Why is it Kofi, while American troops are under and are delievring heavy fire, he wants dialog now.
Oh wait...
Kofi is a socialist. That's right. My bad. He wants to be taller than anyone else and a pile of dead, US or Iraq, it doesn't matter, is just the thing to make his day, along with calls for dialog and restraint.
At least 725 US troops have died in Iraq since the war began in March 2003. Up to 1,200 Iraqis also have been killed this month.
Doncha love it when leftist writers do statistics? Paraphrasing Chris Rock: It's like having someone on your basketball team who is physically challenged: you gotta let some things slide. I guess that's what passes for editorial overwatch of writing in newspapers these days.
Here's a tip for clear minded readers: When you read the term 'at least' or 'up to' followed by any digit from 0 to 2^64, just replace those phrases with the term 'this writer no fookin idea how many'.
#9
âViolent military action by an occupying power against inhabitants of an occupied country will only make matters worse,â UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan warned.
This silly son of a bitch has no shame. The UN oil-for-food scandal is being pried open and the outfit he heads is slowly being exposed for the inept and corrupt organization that it is, and he has the audacity to lecture the U.S. over what going on in Falluja????
The last time we checked in with Northeastern Illinois University accounting professor Yass Alkafaji, it was late January and he was heading to Baghdad to serve in the Coalition Provisional Authority as the director of finance for the Ministry of Higher Education. At the time, the Iraq-born Lake Forest resident didn't know what to expect from his job or the people of his native land. Alkafaji recently left Baghdad during one of the bloodiest months of the U.S. occupation. We shared chai lattes at a Starbucks in Sauganash to discuss what he saw and heard while he was there. We thought he would be full of tales of violence in Sadr City, mutilations in Fallujah and bombings in Basra. But, oddly enough, he said that while he was there, he hardly noticed these events that made headlines all over the world.
What he did talk about was the surreal life of pool parties, pirated film screenings and T-bone steaks inside the presidential palace compound called "the green zone." But also of long days of hard work and endless meetings often punctuated by explosions in the distance. The following is an edited transcript of our discussion.
Q. You were in Iraq during some of the worst anti-American violence of the occupation. How did that affect your work?
A. I did not notice it. Even though I was in the middle of it, I was apart from it. It was not something we thought about on a daily basis. We got briefings, and we'd hear people saying things here and there. Sometimes I would receive calls from my wife, and she was telling me what was happening in the green zone, where I was living, but I didn't know it. Or we would be working in the middle of the day at our computers and we would hear explosions, boom boom, and we would simply look up and go back to work.
Q. What is your take on the mood of the Iraqi people?
A. They are thankful to the U.S. for getting rid of Saddam Hussein, and they are content that the military needs to be there. But after that, they are divided between how long should the U.S. military stay and whether they are doing a good job or not. The U.S. military presence is very visible, and they [the soldiers] are really scared, so their posture is very offensive. They see Iraqis, and they put guns in your face. They move in convoys, and they tell people to get away from them. When the convoys are in a traffic jam in the middle of Baghdad, that is the most dangerous thing. So they shout at people to get out of the way, and they drive up on the sidewalk of some stores. That creates a lot of hard feelings for the Iraqis.
Q. What about the economic and employment situation with ordinary Iraqis?
A. Most of the people are not informed of what the U.S. is doing because they don't see the visible improvement of their livelihood, especially those who don't have a government job . . . I think there is still a lot of confusion about who is the good Iraqi and who is the bad Iraqi. I think [the U.S.] has shown to the rest of the world that we are really ignorant when it comes to dealing with other cultures. We have a great military power, but when it comes to building nations we have no idea. You can see the tension in the clashes between the British and Americans in the palace. The Americans will say `do this or do that' and the British will just be shaking their head. But the British have a much longer history in the Middle East, and they know how to deal with the Arab mentality. They feel very marginalized.
Q. Depending on how people want to spin it, they characterize the recent violence as a few bad apples or a popular uprising. How do you see it?
A. Surveys show about 70 percent of the Iraqi people accept that there is a need for the American military to be in Iraq, otherwise it will be chaotic and there will be no security on the ground. Of course, if you talk to someone in Sadr City with a first-grade education, they will say otherwise. One day I was waiting seven hours to try to leave the compound to try to see my sister. We had some thugs from the Sadr group demonstrating 15 feet away saying, "We want the U.S. out." So I said, "OK, the U.S. is out and then what next? Who is going to control the country?" They don't think about the implications of what they say.
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/29/2004 1:24:49 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The British do have a much longer history dealing with Arabs. But a closer look at that history is not all that encouraging. They basically fucked up the whole region when they started drawing all the borders at random. They are in reality responsible for most of the problems in the Middle East. Not too mention they are also responsible for the Kashmir problems as well. Now don't get me wrong, I love the Brits and truly appreciate their support of us. But their history of dealing with the Arabs is no better than our own. The main problem with the region, is of course, that it is populated with...Arabs and Muslims. That's certainly not their fault.
Posted in Full due to Reg Reqâd... Apply chainsaw and Dramamine where needed.
What we have here is an editorial agenda applied to partial truths about a military situation written by civilians. It sucks where it opines and blows where it embroiders. The title implies hand-wringing indecision and helplessness, yet where these conclusions are drawn, we find they are unattributed sources - when not coming from known idiotarian sources, such as the UN Secretariat - or purely speculative blather. The data in this piece is so dizzy, it lurches like a drunken Senator. Classic WaPo. Officials Find No Good Options for Ending Fallujah, Najaf Standoffs
By Rajiv Chandrasekaran and Robin Wright
Thursday, April 29, 2004
FALLUJAH, Iraq, April 28 -- Perched atop sandbags and peering through powerful binoculars, Marine officers manning front-line positions around this tense city can see the problem clearly enough, even through the swirling dust that gives Fallujah the sepia hue of a Wild West town: Military-age men in white robes swagger about with impunity, they say, hardening their defenses and resupplying their encampments.
The Marines say the men are Sunni Muslim guerrillas who have taken over this Euphrates River city and transformed it into a stronghold of resistance to the American occupation of Iraq.
But neither here, nor in the Baghdad palace that serves as the headquarters of the U.S. occupation administration, nor in the corridors of official Washington, is the solution to the Fallujah problem clear. Although American officials and Iraqâs U.S.-backed leaders agree that the insurgents should be captured or killed, preferably before the Americans hand over limited sovereignty on June 30, no good options exist to accomplish that goal, according to U.S. officials familiar with the issue.
A further incursion into Fallujah -- the only way many Marine officers say the insurgency here can be squelched -- has been rejected by local and national Iraqi leaders as an unacceptable risk to tens of thousands of noncombatants in the city.
"There are a lot of different proposals on the table, but all of them are fraught with problems," said one senior U.S. official in Iraq, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
The same dilemma confronts U.S. military commanders and civilian officials 130 miles to the south, in the holy city of Najaf, as they attempt to resolve a standoff with a radical Shiite Muslim cleric and hundreds of his militiamen. Even more so than in Fallujah, a full-scale move into the city by U.S. forces would fuel Iraqi anger and further poison relations between the United States and the countryâs Shiite majority.
As military commanders and civilian administrators scramble to craft solutions to the crises in Fallujah and Najaf, "all the choices are unpalatable," said a senior U.S. official in Washington who spent several months in Iraq last year and who declined to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject. "No one likes the options."
Even so, the senior military and civilian officials in Baghdad and Washington are committed to resolving both crises before June 30, when the occupation authority is set to hand over limited sovereignty to an interim Iraqi government. "Thereâs really no way that we can leave this as a mess for the new government," the senior U.S. official in Washington said.
Military officials estimate there are between several hundred and a few thousand armed insurgents in Fallujah. Speaking to reporters Wednesday at the Pentagon, Marine Maj. Gen. John F. Sattler, head of operations for U.S. Central Command, put the number at about 1,500.
"We have not been able to determine any single leader," he said in a telephone briefing from Centcomâs forward headquarters in the Persian Gulf country of Qatar. "There appears to be a loose federation of individuals who have come together with a common cause, and in this particular case, itâs to derail the process as we move towards sovereignty."
U.S. Officials said some of the insurgents were from other Arab nations but most were Iraqis -- a combination of Islamic extremists, loyalists of former president Saddam Hussein and criminals. People in Baghdad and other cities, however, maintain that the fighters in Fallujah are ordinary Iraqis who have taken up arms against the occupation; the sustained fighting and the Marine cordon around the city have prevented foreign journalists from independently assessing the nature of the guerrilla forces.
As they fight with Marines, some guerrillas have used techniques that suggest they have military experience, the officials said. In addition, based on the munitions and contraband uncovered by Marines during their initial foray into the city, U.S. military officials believe a large number of roadside bombs and car bombs used elsewhere in Iraq may have been manufactured in Fallujah.
A military intelligence officer noted this week that there have been no large car bombings in Baghdad since the Marines surrounded Fallujah in early April. "Fallujah is a place that is rife with terrorist leaders and bomb-makers who are responsible for attacks not just in Fallujah but across Iraq," the officer said.
Marines have established the cordon to prevent insurgents from slipping away. Combat engineers have built a six-foot sand berm along the cityâs southeastern fringe. Dirt-filled barriers and rows of razor wire block all roads into the city. Hundreds of Marines equipped with night-vision scopes patrol the urban edges in Humvees.
"If we let them get away, theyâll just find another place to bring their breed of terror and chaos," a senior military commander said. "Thatâs what this war is all about: Itâs about eliminating breeding grounds for terrorists."
White House Sets Strategy
U.S. military officials in Iraq said that because of political sensitivities, overall policy decisions about the standoff in Fallujah are being made by the White House, and Marine commanders have been reluctant to make public pronouncements about what should be done. But privately, many say they believe the only way to eliminate the insurgency is through a series of large raids.
They note that a cease-fire agreement signed April 19 has largely been ignored by people in the city. Although the deal called for such heavy arms as mortars and rocket-propelled grenades to be surrendered to the Marines, all they have received is a small assortment of rusty, inoperable weapons.
More significantly, Marines note, insurgents were supposed to stop attacking U.S. positions. But front-line Marine posts are fired on almost daily in some places, prompting the Americans to respond with everything from sniper fire to precision-guided 500-pound bombs dropped by Air Force fighter jets.
"The only way to ensure that we really get these guys is for us to go in and take them out," a Marine officer said.
Sattler, the Centcom operations chief, said the Marines and the Armyâs 1st Infantry Division, which has responsibility for north-central Iraq, have requested more armored equipment, including tanks and personnel carriers. Rotating into Iraq earlier this year, these units chose to leave much of their armor behind to allow greater mobility and closer contact with Iraqis, Sattler said.
On the Marine front lines, as snipers peer into the city through their scopes and infantrymen fortify their positions, there is an almost universal belief that offensive operations -- suspended in early April after just a few days of intense combat -- need to resume.
"Every one of them has a hunger deep down inside to finish the job," said Lt. Karl Blanke, a platoon leader with the 1st Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment. "Weâve now shed our blood in the city. The last thing we want to do is walk away from it."
But a resumption of offensive operations is widely opposed by Iraqis. "The only way to solve this is through a peaceful solution," said Hachem Hassani, a Sunni political leader who has participated in negotiations between city leaders and military commanders. "Attacking the city will only make matters worse."
The local leaders who participated in the discussions have described Fallujah as having been hijacked by foreign Islamic militants, people involved in the talks said. In a bid to end the standoff, the local leaders have urged U.S. officials to grant foreigners safe passage out of the city, but that request was rejected.
With persuasion and safe passage deemed unacceptable by the Americans, Iraqi officials have advocated another strategy: Let Iraqi security forces tackle the militants. The Marines have been ordered to conduct joint patrols in the city with Iraqi policemen and civil defense troops, but after three days of training conducted by Marine instructors, military officials said it was clear that the Iraqis did not have the skills to fight the insurgents on their own.
Plans to commence joint patrols on Thursday were postponed until at least Friday, Marine officials said. No reason was given, but intense clashes between insurgents and Marines on Wednesday have elevated tensions in Fallujah. The postponement also would give the Iraqis additional time for training.
Some Iraqi leaders have advocated bringing in security forces from other parts of the country or assembling a new force composed of former Iraqi army soldiers who are Sunnis. U.S. officials said both those concepts also have deep flaws. Allowing Shiites from the south or ethnic Kurds from the north to fight in Fallujah could spark ethnic and religious tensions elsewhere in Iraq; participation of Kurds in a special civil defense battalion that assisted Marines in the city earlier in the month fueled a wave of threats against Kurds living in Baghdad. Assembling a new force of military veterans also is regarded by American officials as a dicey proposition.
In Najaf, similar dynamics are in play. Any U.S. incursion into the part of the city around the tomb of Imam Ali -- one of the most sacred places in the world for Shiites -- is guaranteed to provoke a storm of anger from Iraqâs Shiite majority. Imam Ali was the son-in-law of the prophet Muhammad.
Even so, thousands of U.S. Army soldiers have taken up positions outside the city. Although military officials said the soldiers were not planning on entering the city, they are poised to attack cleric Moqtada Sadrâs militiamen if they attempt to leave or enter, or attack the soldiers. On Monday, after members of Sadrâs militia attacked soldiers near Najaf, U.S. forces responded with force, killing 64 Iraqis, many or all of them militiamen, the military said.
U.S. officials regard Sadrâs Mahdi Army militia as both an immediate security threat -- it has mounted sophisticated and deadly attacks on U.S. forces -- and a long-term risk to Iraqâs political transition. The officials expressed concern that Sadr could use his militia to intimidate voters and candidates during elections, now proposed for January.
"We canât leave a thuggish individual with his own gang of thugs in charge of a major city and leave it for the new government to deal with," the senior U.S. official in Washington said.
In addition to demanding that Sadr disband his militia, occupation officials have insisted that he surrender to face charges related to the slaying of a rival cleric. Army Brig. Gen. Mark Kimmitt, the chief U.S. military spokesman in Baghdad, said this month that soldiers were under orders to capture or kill Sadr.
Such statements are no longer being made by American officials, who are keen to find a negotiated settlement with Sadr. U.S. officials express hope that other, more senior Shiite clerics will convince him to back down.
For now, though, military commanders and civilian officials appear willing to wait for negotiations to play out, even as a spokesman for the occupation authority warned this week that Sadrâs militiamen were stockpiling weapons in mosques, shrines and schools, creating a "potentially explosive situation."
"Itâd be great if we resolve Najaf, but to the extent that weâve isolated or neutralized Sadr, at least we have the problem contained," a senior State Department official said.
U.N. Envoy Urges Caution
With the form and composition of Iraqâs interim government still undetermined, the U.S. approach to dealing with Najaf and Fallujah may also be influenced by veteran U.N. envoy Lakdhar Brahimi, who has been asked by the U.S. government to help form a caretaker administration to rule the country after June 30. Brahimi, a Sunni Arab from Algeria, has expressed concern that the military showdowns in Najaf and Fallujah risk alienating both Iraqi Sunnis and Shiites at a time when inclusion is in the national interest.
Brahimi has urged the Bush administration to find peaceful solutions in both cities. One U.S. official said Brahimiâs lobbying played a role in the White House decision over the weekend to postpone a resumption of large-scale Marine raids in Fallujah.
U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan also has urged U.S. officials to do everything possible to reach a peaceful resolution to the standoffs. Annan told reporters Wednesday that he subscribed to the view in Iraq that "violent military action by an occupying power against the inhabitants of an occupied country will only make matters worse."
Posted by: .com ||
04/29/2004 1:01:52 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
A military intelligence officer noted this week that there have been no large car bombings in Baghdad since the Marines surrounded Fallujah in early April
An interesting observation if it's true.
assembling a new force composed of former Iraqi army soldiers who are Sunnis.
Great idea. Reinforce the ranks of the jihadis. Throw in a convoy of ambulances full of..."medical supplies".
overall policy decisions about the standoff in Fallujah are being made by the White House
Just like I said. No surprise there.
Posted by: Rafael ||
04/29/2004 1:21 Comments ||
Top||
#2
at some point, you'd think these people would get embarrassed that they are always wrong.
it lurches like a drunken Senator heh! I'd say it's more like it's barfing in the toilet.
#3
Perched atop sandbags and peering through powerful binoculars, a Marine thought about a novel story.
It was a dark and stormy night. A shot rang out followed by a scream. Suddenly there was a knock at the door just as the lights went out. Reality lay in a hazy mist shrouded by illusion and fear.
#5
Great post, Dotcom!
After months (really years now) of reading their crap, I'm convinced that the WaPo is at the head of America's Fifth Column.
It doesn't get any more America-hating or Bush-bashy than the Washington Post!
(I used to think the Freepers were creepy to be so happy when Katherine Graham died; now I understand completely!)
Posted by: Jen ||
04/29/2004 4:18 Comments ||
Top||
#6
According to reports, our people are killing about 70 of them each day. There are/were supposed to be 1500 of them to start. Looks like Fallujah will be free of them long before June 30. As for Najaf, the locals are greasing al-Sadr's minions and will rid the holy city of that Islamo-fascist pissant in due time.
#10
at some point, you'd think these people would get embarrassed that they are always wrong
Socialists like those at the WaPo have an agenda and will never be embarassed, not even unto the day the Sharia police shuts their paper down.
See, when you want to destroy a great nation by demoralizing its troops and its people and by deprecating it military defenses, you care for little else; not even your own esteem, not even your own well being or the well being of your family matters to you.
#11
badnov...well said! But it's almost getting embarrassing, watching these folks. Like the class clowns, getting more and more outrageous, but nobody pays attention anymore...so the poor sap is busy farting, pulling pig tails and just making an ass out of himself - while everyone else just ignores him, other than to occassionally slap him down or tell him to shut up and sit down.
"...Before she could tell me why, a shot rang out and she dropped faster than a pair of sweat pants in July..."
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
04/29/2004 10:24 Comments ||
Top||
#13
But neither here, nor in the Baghdad palace that serves as the headquarters of the U.S. occupation administration, nor in the corridors of official Washington, is the solution to the Fallujah problem clear.
#15
It was a dark and stormy night. A shot rang out followed by a scream. Suddenly there was a knock at the door just as the lights went out. Reality lay in a hazy mist shrouded by illusion and fear. Before she could tell me why, a shot rang out and she dropped faster than a pair of sweat pants in July..
JERUSALEM (Rooters) - An Israeli newspaper poll on Thursday found that 47 percent of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's Likud party oppose a Gaza pullout against 39 percent supporting it, suggesting he could lose a key May 2 referendum on the plan. Of the 583 survey respondents from the right-wing Likud, 14 percent were still undecided on the "disengagement plan," the daily Yedioth Aharonoth said.
Sharon is due to appeal for party support on Israeli radio later in the day in a bid to win backing for the plan before the Likud referendum on Sunday.
A second poll found a slimmer lead for opponents of the Sharon plan. According to the daily Maariv, 45 percent of Likud's 200,000 members would vote against the plan if the referendum were held today, while 42 percent would back it. The rest were undecided.
Under the plan, backed by President Bush during Sharon's recent visit to the United States, Israel would withdraw all its settlements from the Gaza Strip and four small settlements from the West Bank. Many Likud members oppose ceding any land captured by Israel in the 1956 Middle East war and regard the plan to quit Gaza as a "victory for terror."
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/29/2004 12:50:24 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
Edited for length
A Pentagon intelligence report has concluded that many bombings against Americans and their allies in Iraq, and the more sophisticated of the guerrilla attacks in Falluja, are organized and often carried out by members of Saddam Husseinâs secret service, who planned for the insurgency even before the fall of Baghdad. The report states that Iraqi officers of the "Special Operations and Antiterrorism Branch," known within Mr. Husseinâs government as M-14, are responsible for planning roadway improvised explosive devices and some of the larger car bombs that have killed Iraqis, Americans and other foreigners. In addition, suicide bombers have worn explosives-laden vests made before the war under the direction of of M-14 officers, according to the report, prepared by the Defense Intelligence Agency. The report also cites evidence that one such suicide attack last April, which killed three Americans, was carried out by a pregnant woman who was an M-14 colonel.
Its findings were based on interrogations with high-ranking M-14 members who are now in American custody, as well as on documents uncovered and translated by the Iraq Survey Group. Officials who have read the study said it concludes that in Falluja, which is currently encircled by the Marines, an estimated 1,500 to 2,000 hard-core insurgents, including members of the Iraqi Special Republican Guard who melted away under the American-led offensive, are receiving tactical guidance and inspiration from these former intelligence operatives. "We know the M-14 is operating in Falluja and Ramadi," said one senior administration official, speaking about another rebellious Sunni Muslim city nearby. The report does not imply that every guerrilla taking up arms against the Americans is under the command of the M-14, nor that every Iraqi who dances atop a charred Humvee is inspired by a former Iraqi intelligence agent. But the assessment helps explain how only a few thousand insurgents, with professional leadership from small numbers of Mr. Husseinâs intelligence services and seasoned military officer corps, could prove to be such a challenge to the American occupation.
As the American-led forces approached Baghdad last spring, the M-14 put into place "The Challenge Project," in which Mr. Husseinâs intelligence officers scattered to lead a guerrilla insurgency and plan bombings and other attacks, the report states. The M-14 officers, according to the report, were sent "to key cities to assist local authorities in defending those cities and to carry out attacks." The operation was designed with little central control, so community cells could continue to attack American forces and allies even if Mr. Hussein was toppled, and in the event that local commanders were then captured or killed.
The document says that "cells of former M-14 personnel are organizing and conducting a terrorist I.E.D. campaign against coalition forces throughout Iraq. The explosives section of M-14 prepared for the invasion by constructing hundreds of suicide vests and belts for use by Saddam Fedayeen against coalition forces." The report says that under Mr. Hussein, M-14 was responsible for "hijackings, assassinations and explosives," and that its officers are responsible for "the majority of attacks" today. In one detailed section, it describes how M-14 organized "Tiger Groups" of 15 to 20 volunteers trained in explosives and small-arms who would organize and carry out bombings, including suicide attacks. It cites an attack in the first week of April 2003, when a suicide bomber killed three American special operations soldiers near the Haditha Dam. A civilian vehicle approached a checkpoint, and a pregnant woman stepped out and began screaming, the military said in a statement issued after the attack. When the soldiers approached, the woman and the vehicle detonated. The new intelligence report quotes captured M-14 officers as saying that the woman who carried out the suicide attack was a colonel in their organization
Posted by: Paul Moloney ||
04/29/2004 12:37:53 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
many bombings against Americans and their allies in Iraq, and the more sophisticated of the guerrilla attacks in Falluja, are organized and often carried out by members of Saddam Husseinâs secret service
Wotta surprise. Whoda thunk it?
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
04/29/2004 1:12 Comments ||
Top||
#2
MEMRI reported this last July! Glad to see the mainstream press is finally getting around to covering this. Maybe if they got out of the freaking Bagdad hotels they might figure some of this stuff out.
Go back to covering Kobe, Michael Jackson and Kerry's valet now, boys and girls. Leave the heavy lifting to the pros.
BAIDHA, Sudan (AP) - Stung by charges that his government is fomenting ethnic cleansing in western Sudan, the humanitarian affairs minister came to see the evidence for himself - looted grain silos, scorched farmland, huts burned to heaps of black clay, and accounts of hundreds of thousands made homeless. But left unanswered was the question of who is to blame for the tragedy and looming famine in the Iraq-sized province of Darfur - the Arab-dominated government in Khartoum, or the rebels it claims are threatening Sudan's stability with their campaign for autonomy?
I'll take "Arab-dominated government in Khartoum" for $200, please.
The Darfur disaster has emerged as a delicate peace, brokered by Western and African diplomats, is taking root in another of Sudan's conflict zones - a 21-year civil war broadly defined as pitting the Muslim north against the Christian and animist south.
In Darfur, which is almost completely Muslim, the division is between slaves African and the Master Race⢠Arab. Human rights groups say the government is giving air support to the Arab tribal militias in Darfur. The government says the tribesmen are defending themselves against autonomy-seeking rebels, but denies aiding them.
"Wudn't us!"
The government signed a 45-day cease-fire with the rebels on April 8, and during his visit last week, Humanitarian Affairs Minister Ibrahim Hamid appealed to international relief groups to help. Sudanese officials said U.N. human rights investigators who arrived in the country last week would have free access to Darfur.
Now that it's been "pacified."
To Hamid, villagers described fleeing from armed horsemen who burned and looted their homes. They said they didn't know who the attackers were, but out of the earshot of Hamid's entourage, an African tribal chief blamed "janajaweed" - tribal militias. The chief, who requested anonymity, did not say whether he believed the government was backing the janajaweed.
Human rights groups accuse the government of bombing villages before janajaweed raids and providing helicopter reconnaissance afterward. New York-based Human Rights Watch calls it "a strategy of ethnic-based murder, rape and forcible displacement of civilians in Darfur."
I'm glad to see HRW criticize something Islamic.
Last week it said it had documented dozens of janajaweed attacks supported by government forces. It described an operation in which troops allegedly worked with janajaweed to detain 136 African men whom the militias later massacred.
A U.N. report leaked last week accused Sudanese forces of raping non-Arab women and girls and bombing civilians in what may amount to crimes against humanity.
But they're infidels so it's okay.
West Darfur Governor Adam Sulieman has said any atrocities are the work of "bandits, outlaws and rebels." In a TV interview last week, Foreign Minister Mustafa Osman Ismail said the janajaweed "took up arms to defend themselves" against rebel attacks.
"They started it!"
But while denying the government was backing the janajaweed, he said it "may have turned a blind eye toward the militias ... because those militias are targeting the rebellion."
Some 70,000 of Baidha's 78,000 people have fled into Chad. Some who have returned since the cease-fire are in desperate need, local officials said.
"Desparate need" pretty well sums up all of Sudan.
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/29/2004 12:33:25 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) - For the first time ever, Pakistan will reduce the size of its army, but military officials said Wednesday the planned reduction by 50,000 men will not hurt fighting strength.
They're eliminating the 666th Lashkar Division, so I think that statement is true.
The reduction is not related to next month's peace talks with archrival India, officials said, but rather is aimed at saving money and modernizing the Islamic nation's armed forces.
"Moderinizing" and "Islamic" do not belong in the same sentence.
Pakistan, a key U.S. ally in its war on terrorism and one of Asia's poorest countries, has an army of more than 500,000 soldiers and spends about 20 percent of its annual $14 billion budget ineffectually on defense.
$3 billion doesn't go far even in Pakland.
Top military commanders, including army chief and president Gen. Pervez Musharraf, were briefed on the downsizing plan Tuesday. Pakistan army spokesman Maj. Gen. Shaukat Sultan said it was the first time in Pakistan's 57-year history that the army's manpower would be reduced. The cuts would come in the areas of logistics and administration, he said.
"Achmed! They're eliminating the 304th Donkey Cart Regiment! The bahstards!"
"It is part of a restructuring plan, and while doing so we will not reduce the combatant force," he told The Associated Press. "It in no way will effect our fighting potential."
Sure, just you wait til you need a donkey cart.
The substantial savings made in reducing the army's payroll by 50,000 men and donkeys would be used to upgrade its fighting capability, he said. Pakistan had frozen its defense forces budget in the past few years, he said. "The future battlefield will be different from what we have seen in the past," he said. "We are replacing men with machines to use new technology."
Upgrading to asses?
A military statement said Musharraf also approved the army's plan to stop using combat soldiers as officers' personal assistants and reassign them to operational duties.
"Mahmoud! My slippers!"
"A thousand apologies, sir, but I've been reassigned."
"Really? Why wasn't I told? And just who are you replacing?"
"A donkey, sir."
The huge burden of beasts the armed forces on Pakistan's finances has been largely justified by enmity with larger richer, stronger, more intelligent, better looking neighbor India, with which it has fought three disasterous, losing wars routs since independence from Britain in 1947. But tensions have eased in recent months, and in February the nuclear-armed neighbors agreed upon an ambitious donkey trail road map for peace.
Unemployed soldiers will have more time to plot the next coup. Plus I hear al-Qaeda is hiring.
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/29/2004 12:16:25 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
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.
