(2003-07-17) -- As the major news organizations go into their annual summer re-run cycle, CNN announced today it will package its programming in topical categories as "headline theme shows".
Among the categories scheduled for rebroadcast:
-- Arab TV airs more tapes from guys we thought we had killed.
-- Democrats shocked and saddened at things George Bush does.
-- If you lived here, this weather would probably kill you.
-- Someone you never heard of is missing...possibly killed.
-- The economy, while apparently rebounding, will likely get worse.
-- Diseases with acronyms or animal names will probably kill you.
-- Someone is killing people in a town you never heard of.
-- Something you use everyday will probably kill you.
-- Everybody in the world still hates America.
-- Someone you never heard of just won the lottery.
-- Someone famous said something outrageous.
-- Stories we broke keep making news on our network.
-- Disturbing video you need to see again and again.
Not. But itâs hard to be sure with CNN.
Posted by: PD ||
07/20/2003 10:29:22 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
speaking of disturbing video we haven't seen much of lately - anybody seen video of two jets slamming into two towers lately? Americans bloody running through the streets or jumping from the 102nd floor while holding hands? What do you think the odds are these video clips ("too inflammatory and disturbing! we can't show that again!") will be shown again extensively - unless if Bush's administration can be blamed for the lapses - prior to the next election? Between nil and none?
I'm back
Posted by: Frank G ||
07/20/2003 10:40 Comments ||
Top||
#2
WTF you been? It's great to have you back - puhleeze, wade in and wreak some havoc!
#3
Welcome back, Frank, but I disagree. Hell, I still have the video on my computer. When people say they'll never forget, they mean it. This isn't spin control by the Bush Administration, this is an effort to prevent the American people from duplicating what happened after the Edict of Nantes was overturned...
Posted by: Brian ||
07/20/2003 11:40 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Week and a couple days in the Sierras/Tahoe to recharge the batteries. Brian, I understand our point yet for the networks to decide we've seen enough, so we don't go nukular (heh heh) is elitism at its worst. If every time the media ran a story on some disgruntled 3ID guy bitching and moaning, or on the Niger uranium "scandal", or on a another poor GI getting shot guarding a bank or City Hall in Iraq or Kabul, they also showed a inset screen shot of the towers falling, this countries' resolve would not be in question. IMHO, Rantburgers have longer memories, attenton spans, and more knowledge of the world situations than most Americans, and in particular, than most reporters
Posted by: Frank G ||
07/20/2003 11:48 Comments ||
Top||
#5
I'm with Brian. I still pull out the CBS "9/11" special every couple months and watch the firefighters milling in the lobby, trudging up the stairs, wincing at the crashes of bodies hitting the sidewalk, running from the collapsing towers, choking on the dust, regrouping at the station house, and picking up the pieces, and that reminds me why we're in Afghanistan and Iraq.
In fact, I gotta find this on DVD, 'cause the VHS tape is getting old, worn, and crappy.
Posted by: Dar ||
07/20/2003 12:14 Comments ||
Top||
#6
I don't disagree with either of you, Brian and Dar, but how many people have those tapes/DVD's (by the way - if you find the DVD cheap, I'd like to know where so I can do the same). My beef is with those who've decided we all have seen it enough. If it's rebroadcast on 9/11/03, 9/11/04, I'll freely admit I was (like on many other issues...D'oh!) wrong. I don't think it'll be broadcast this year (because we "need to move on") and next (because it'll "influence the election too much" - for a side the media doesn't want winning)
Posted by: Frank G ||
07/20/2003 13:23 Comments ||
Top||
U.S. soldiers killed about two dozen suspected Taliban militants in southern Afghanistan after their convoy came under attack. The suspected militants ambushed the convoy Saturday near the town of Spinboldak, said U.S. military spokesman Lt. Col. Douglas Lefforge. The American troops returned fire, killing five attackers and pursuing the rest into the surrounding hills. U.S. Apache helicopter gunships chased the group and killed an estimated 19 of the suspected Taliban, he said. There were no coalition casualties.
To which I can only say: "Heh heh!"
Also Saturday, some 60 suspected Taliban fighters attacked a border post in southern Afghanistan with heavy machine guns and assault rifles before escaping across the border into Pakistan.
Where else?
None of the Afghan soldiers at the post were hurt in the three-hour battle late Saturday at the Shero Obah government post, said Khalik Khan Achekzai. They called about 100 Afghan soldiers and 20 U.S. Special Forces for assistance from Kandahar, about 60 miles away. Two of the suspected Taliban fighters died and five were injured in the border attack, said another government official, Fazluddin Aga. "They (the attackers) came from the direction of Pakistan. When we sent more troops with U.S. soldiers, they crossed the border and returned to Pakistan," Achekzai said. The U.S. Special Forces called in helicopter gunships, which pounded the area.
The Paks, of course, know nothing...
FOLLOWUP, from Pak Daily Times...
Speaking by telephone from an unknown location, Taliban official Mulla Abdul Rauf said at least 20 government soldiers had been killed in the fighting, which involved 200 guerrillas. âOne of our comrades was also killed,â he said. âThe Taliban fighters later left the area.â
The Afghans say none of their guys were hurt...
Achakzai said the clash involved at least 75 Taliban fighters led by former minister Mullah Abdul Razzaq, commander Hafiz Abdur Rahim, and Rauf, a former provincial governor. He said the guerrillas came from the Pakistani side of the border. Rauf said Taliban fighters had also attacked a US base, but it was unclear how much damage had been inflicted. He said the attacks were planned in a meeting three days ago the Taliban, Mullah Omar.
"Okay, here's the plan: Rahim, you take a bunch of your boys and stage a pointless attack from Pakistan. Razzaq, you take a bunch of your boys and attack from... ummm... Pakistan. And Rauf, you take a bunch of your boys and attack from... from... uhhh..."
"How 'bout if I attack from Pakistan, boss?"
"Sounds good."
"Gosh, boss! That's a brilliant plan!"
"Now, get out there and die!"
An official with Pakistanâs border security force, Major Shaukat, said Pakistan had beefed up security along its border after the fighting broke out.
He's probably referring to their border with Iran...
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
07/20/2003 23:15 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
Of course, every society has similar anomalies - Iâm not picking on the Saudis, this time. But since I have seen this one myself - on every flight I ever took in or out of the Kingdom - I know itâs an accurate observation. Others may find it interesting, as well.
A foreign journalist told me about a weird incident that happened to him on his flight from Jeddah to London. After taking a short nap on board, he woke up to set eyes on a totally different scene. His veiled neighbor wearing the familiar long black abaya had disappeared. In her place, he found a beautiful and stylish girl in tight pants checking her make-up. Still dazed, he looked right and left trying to find his veiled neighbor, but then came the second surprise: All surrounding veils were gone. Some men who had been taking care of their women were busy watching others, some of the completely silent women started talking and laughing loudly, expensive dresses came out, and for the first time the astonished journalist saw and heard Saudi women. In London, it was the same. Cheery Arabs were gathering in Londonâs markets, squares and nightclubs dressed in the latest Western fashions.
My confused friend asked: If your religion and traditions specify certain features for a womanâs dress, why is their use limited to your country? Why canât I phone my friendâs wife in Jeddah if I can meet her in full make-up in London? Why does my Muslim friend perform his prayers regularly five times a day in his country and turns his back on some or all of them in London? Is your religion confined to the land of Islam or do rules vary according to time, place and occasion?
I explained to him that these few donât represent the whole of society. There are maximum and minimum levels of veiling depending on persuasion and circumstances. Covering the face is not required in most Islamic schools of thought. The black abaya is a societal tradition and not a condition for wearing the veil. Foreign women do the same when they visit the Kingdom. They wear veils and dress in long abayas out of respect for the country and its authentic traditions.
Although I believe in that answer, I also share the desire to explore the reasons for the âschizophreniaâ many segments of our society suffer from. Our young are taught the noble values and virtues of the Prophet (peace be upon him) in schools and mosques, and learn about them from radio and TV, but when they are out in the real world dealing with adults and observing the behavior and attitudes of their teachers and parents, they discover that what they had learned is not necessarily what is practiced. Confusion rules and innocence is submerged in a sea of contradictions.
We are in real need of religious, sociological, and scientific studies concerning these phenomena. Experts in each field should participate in exploring ways to get us out of this situation. Allah doesnât help a people unless they help themselves. This is just a taste - and he picks one of the most innocuous examples: womenâs dress. He failed to point out the most obvious example: the instant an outbound flight is airborne, the "attendant call" buttons light up like a Christmas Tree: itâs all the Saudis dying for a drink and demanding immediate service. Just ask any stewardess on any International flight about the legendary stories from co-workers whoâve been on flights in and out of the Gulf. I guarantee that she will know a bunch and enjoy telling them. BTW, this is possibly the best opening "line" you can use to chat up a stew... Good luck!
I don't think the problem's one of schizophrenia, but one of "do as I say, not as I do." They (princelings and technocrats) figure they can handle that decadent Western stuff, but The Masses™ can't. And they could very well be right...
Posted by: PD ||
07/20/2003 4:14:38 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"they discover that what they had learned is not necessarily what is practiced."
Like with every other religion on this planet. Nothing new here.
"We are in real need of religious, sociological, and scientific studies concerning these phenomena."
No we're not. It's simply human nature. Nothing difficult to understand here. For as long as there were humans walking around, we were screwing things up, and at the same time, striving for perfection as prescribed in the holy books.
"Allah doesnât help a people unless they help themselves."
Given that Islam tends to abhor modernity, and prefers the 7th century lifestyle, I don't think Allah will help anyone soon if that statement is to be taken as correct.
Posted by: Rafael ||
07/20/2003 9:42 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"Foreign women ... when they visit the Kingdom ... wear veils and dress in long abayas out of respect for the country and its authentic traditions."
Like Hell they do. They wear them so they won't be beaten, locked up, and/or raped and then beheaded for "adultery."
And if "Allah doesn't help a people unless they help themselves," then it's obvious the Middle Eastern Muslims haven't been helping themselves for over a thousand years. Everything they have they've taken from someone else.
Religion of Peace and Toleranceâ¢, my ass.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
07/20/2003 11:55 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Barbara - I love your comment and I have a couple of funny & relevant stories from SaoodiLand I could tell, but Anonymous would undoubtedly show up and shit on the living room floor, again. He hasn't been house-trained, yet.
#4
I've heard these stewardess tales for a long time too. One said that, as the plane approached Saudi Arabia and the men started to don their Arab dress, they would become offended if they were offered drinks. They were good Muslims! How dare she insinuate they drink alcohol! These are the same guys who'd knocked back a quart of hooch during the flight.
I liked this bit the best: The black abaya is a societal tradition and not a condition for wearing the veil.
Uh huh. This in itself is a schizophrenic statement. When repressive covering requirements for women are used to criticize Islam, we're told that these are cultural customs, and not religious requirements. And yet when it's suggested that those customs might be changed, there is outrage, because we are challenging religious law.
What I don't get is why, if the Saudis are so eager to shed their customs---which are only customs, remember, not the requirements of Islam---they don't agitate for looser ones. It's possible, I suppose, that they don't really want to shed their customs, but believe that it's necessary to dress and behave as Westerners while in the West. But surely it can't have escaped their notice that no one in the West is beating women who don't wear make-up and tight pants.
#5
This activity demonstrates the lack of their religious or cultural conviction. A true test of ones religion is how you follow it when no one is looking. If they think the veil is necessary within the kingdom, then it should be necessary outside the kingdom.
#6
Cyber Sarge - You're right, in the West. The way it works within Islam, however is a real eye-opener. Muslim men get a pass. No matter what happens, it's never their fault. It's one reason Islam is attractive to certain types of people. You don't even have to do a bunch of equivalent Hail Marys or any such silliness. If he is tempted - it's not his fault. He does not have to have any self-control or discipline - that's Western thinking.
Examples:
Ramadan - during the "holy" month Muslims may not eat, drink, smoke, or have sex - and that includes water or anything - from sun-up to sun-down. And this is in a desert country... Westerners are ALSO required to abstain. We get into serious trouble if we break this stricture and are reported. Why, you ask? Why should WE have to live by this moronic display of nothing? Because if we do it - then he is tempted and we have harmed him and Islam. Let that circle the drain for a few seconds... now extrapolate...
Beach Riots - last summer there were "riots" in the Jeddah area. I know this didn't make the news in any big way outside of Saudi, because it was suppressed and downplayed so well within. Large roving gangs / groups of young men descended upon the Red Sea beaches around Jeddah and "attacked" women. Now I have seen families at the sea-shore around Dhahran. It's a helluva sight - clusters of ninjas with men and children. Fully covered in the MBO (Moving Black Object) garb in the middle of summer by the sea serving their families picnic lunches. And the young Saudi men drive back and forth on the nearest road "checking out the babes." If it wasn't so pathetic, it would be hysterically absurd. Once you've been there long enough to become a full-fledged cynic, it IS hysterical. Ok. Back to Jeddah. The "attacks" (an Arab News euphemism) were supposedly sparked by some woman or women who weren't covered correctly. I doubt this, personally, but it doesn't matter. Whatever it was, it "set them off" and the melee was on. There were hundreds of these young assholes. Rapes occurred - recall the euphemistic language of one of the official newspapers of the Govt of the birthplace of Islam. The Arab News (and other pubs) is no different from Pravda in the days before Gorbachev. It was undoubtedly bad for them to have even reported the sanitized version that they did. Certainly the scale of the event kept them from hushing it up. When questioned by the police and military (there were a LOT of these guys gone amok) the story given was that they were unduly tempted by some women. Once tempted, well, all bets were apparently off. It might have been triggered by some Western woman who didn't realize she was breaking the "rules" - such detail never made it to print - but if it had been, I bet they would've said so and blamed the West and its "decadence" for the whole thing. In fact, in retrospect, I'm sure they missed an opportunity, there. I DO know that the story was pulled off the online version of The Arab News within 2 days - cuz I looked for it to save. Bottom Line: almost all of the young hoodlums were released because they were held as not being responsible for their actions: they were tempted.
You hear stories of this behavior on a smaller scale in other places. Western women are ALL considered fair game and whores becasue they don't cover. Whether a Muslim can take advantage of this temptation without fear of legal consequences merely depends on where they are. In PakiLand and other equally insane Sharia Law controlled locales, similarly absurd acts are not uncommon.
Islam of the Sharia Law flavor, Religion of Peace, is hollow and barbaric in practice, fuck what they say, and it certainly caters to a certain kind of sick individual... the gutless kind. Alley Oop would recognize the fit and sign up in a minute.
#7
How do Soddies act outside the kingdom? Walk down Pat Pong. Watch the Soddies, proudly wearing their skirts and scarves, leering at the 12 year old boys performing the boy-f***ing-boy shows. Listen as they mutter something about this not being against their religion as they waddle off to the side room with boy #4.
EFL
The United States has not asked Saudi Arabia to send peacekeeping troops to Iraq and such a request would have to come from an incumbent Iraqi government, Foreign Minister Saud Al-Faisal told a press conference here yesterday. âNo such request was made to us. I donât think the Kingdom is prepared to send any troops to Iraq unless it was at the request of an incumbent Iraqi government,â Prince Saud clarified. We suggest you hold your breath until it happens.
Al-Faisal also said that Saudi Arabia welcomed the formation of an interim governing council in Iraq, and expressed his hope that this would lead to the setting up of a permanent national government in Baghdad. âIt is a positive step in the right direction for re-establishing civil institutions which will in turn make way toward normalcy returning to our fellow Arab nation,â Al-Faisal said. Yeah. You should try it! Just give Bremer a ring — Iâm sure heâll be happy to help our Saudi friends.
He also expressed the Kingdomâs support for a bigger UN role in Iraq in keeping with Security Council Resolution 1483. Hold you breath on this one, too.
Prince Saud said the Kingdom was pursuing active contacts with other Arab countries to hold a meeting to discuss the future of post-Saddam Hussein Iraq and the future of the region. Yep. Hold a meeting. Work on those frequent flier miles. Soon youâll have enough for that one-way ticket to Switzerland. Think of it your "Get out of Jail Free" card.
Saudi Arabia will not open a representative office for the Iraqi governing council on its territory, Prince Saud noted, adding: âDiplomatic representation should come after a legitimate government is formed in Baghdad. All activities that could possibly complicate or hinder the Middle East peace process should be avoided at all costs. The Saudi government is closely monitoring the peace process with great interest and concern.â You should recall all of your Wahabbi asshats, then. Closely monitor this, asshole.
Prince Saud commented on the future meeting between US President George W. Bush and Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas. âI hope it will result in productive outcome for the sake of peace,â he said. The foreign minister also highlighted Americaâs involvement in the road map for peace. âThe United States has played a large and pivotal role, which is compliant with its pledge toward achieving peace,â the prince said. Prince Saud also applauded the positive role played by the Palestinian leadership and organizations toward implementing the road map for peace in the Middle East. Our "compliant" days, vis-a-vis SaoodiLand, are coming to an end...
Another episode of Phantasy Island, Saoodi-style.
Posted by: PD ||
07/20/2003 3:36:18 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
LONDON/SEOUL (Reuters) - Britainâs Tony Blair ruled out resigning over the suicide of a defense expert whom the BBC identified on Sunday as its main source for an accusation that the government exaggerated the case for war in Iraq. resigning? bwahahahah
"Youâve got to have broad shoulders in this job...Iâve got them," the prime minister said on an Asia tour overshadowed by the death of mild-mannered scientist and former U.N. weapons inspector David Kelly.
Fueling a blame game that has dominated UK politics, the British Broadcasting Corporation confirmed Kelly was "the principal source" for its bombshell allegation that London hyped intelligence over Iraqâs weapons to justify an unpopular war.
"The BBC is profoundly sorry that his involvement as our source has ended so tragically," BBC head of news Richard Sambrook said in a carefully worded statement.
Politicians said the BBCâs admission called its whole report into question, and Blair said he was pleased it had confirmed Kellyâs role as the source. "Whatever the differences, no one wanted this tragedy to happen," he said in a statement.
Speaking in Asia, a defensive Blair also rejected suggestions he should curtail his trip or recall parliament from its summer break to debate what drove Kelly, 59, to slit his wrist in woodland near his Oxfordshire home on Thursday.
Two days before, Kelly was grilled in parliament over his role as a Ministry of Defense source who spoke to the author of a BBC story that Blairâs communications chief Alastair Campbell "sexed up" a September dossier on Saddam Husseinâs weapons.
The BBC allegation that Campbell exaggerated intelligence to indicate Saddam could mobilize weapons of mass destruction in 45 minutes is at the center of claims Blair misled the British public and parliament over the case for war.
Kellyâs death has left Blair, 50, facing the biggest political crisis of his six-year rule and turned a week-long foreign trip into a nightmare.
After a rapturous reception in the United States for his support on Iraq, Blair heard the news about Kelly on the plane to Japan and has looked ashen-faced ever since.
BBC UNDER PRESSURE
In the unseemly recriminations over Kellyâs death, critics of the government say it put him under intolerable pressure by face the limelight in an effort to discredit the BBC report and therefore clear Campbell and Blair.
But the BBC, which had until Sunday refused to confirm whether or not Kelly was its source, is charged with heightening the media frenzy around him. His position also did not fit the BBCâs description of him as a senior intelligence source.
Kellyâs local member of parliament, Robert Jackson, said BBC Chairman Gavyn Davies and Director General Greg Dyke should quit. "If they had made this statement while Dr Kelly was alive, I believe he would still be alive," he said.
In its statement on Sunday, the BBC said it "believes we accurately interpreted and reported" information from Kelly.
That backing of its journalist Andrew Gilligan was at odds with Kellyâs own comments to a parliamentary committee that he did not provide the crucial 45-minute claim in the BBC report.
If Kelly was the source but did not make that claim, it would strengthen the Blair governmentâs accusation that Gilligan hyped his report. He and Campbell have a long-running enmity.
Ignoring calls to resign from radical members of his own ruling Labour Party, Blair urged people to wait for the results of a judicial inquiry and said he would accept responsibility if there was any wrongdoing by members of his administration.
Beyond the debate, Kellyâs family echoed a sentiment of disgust among many Britons with the whole "Westminster Village" world of British media and politics.
"Events over recent weeks have made Davidâs life intolerable and all of those involved should reflect long and hard over that fact," they said.
Posted by: Frank G ||
07/20/2003 3:33:32 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The BBC may claim to have "accurately interpreted and reported" Kelly's information, but former BBC correspondent Tom Mangold, writing in The Scotsman, isn't sure:
"He [Kelly] told me then he was anxious that reporters who did not fully understand the politics and mechanics of weapons of mass destruction should understand quite clearly what Iraq had been up to, and why it might be difficult, perhaps impossible, to find actual weapons...
But he told me he certainly did not brief anyone that Iraq had weapons ready to go at 45 minutes? notice...
That is why he did not recognise his briefing to Gilligan and assumed that he must have had another source..." --"We are all involved in the death of a fine and honourable man"
Interesting profile of Kelly and backgrounder on the whole WMD thing.
(Pointer from Wretchard the Cat).
Posted by: Old Grouch ||
07/20/2003 17:21 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Where are the reporter's notes or tape recording of the conversation?
I read an interesting point: The timing of the release of the original story. Maybe the bbc deliberately waited to release it to do damage to Blair.
Cracks appear in BBC ranks as executives face staff revolt
Journalists fear they may be tarnished by Kelly furore
(You think?)
Senior BBC executives seemed isolated from their own staff last night when the corporation implicitly accused David Kelly of failing to be entirely open when he appeared before MPs last week...
But journalists, editors and presenters contacted by the Guardian yesterday questioned - on condition of anonymity - the credibility of this stance. They expressed doubt about the positions of Gilligan and Richard Sambrook, the director of news, who has given unswerving support to the reporter since he learned that Dr Kelly was his source. A few even talk darkly of revolt. Support for Gilligan, outside the increasingly fraught confines of the Today programme where he is defence and diplomatic correspondent, is slipping away....
---
I would think, with renewal so recent, this really has to be hitting them to the core.
hehehehehehehehehehe
"It's one thing if the top brass choose to go to the wall for Gilligan. It's quite another if they expect us to do it too," one insider said.
BY JAMES TARANTO Friday, July 18, 2003 3:51 p.m. EDT
As in America, a concerted effort is under way in Britain to discredit the liberation of Iraq. Because Tony Blairâs Labour Party dominates the government in a way that Americaâs Republicans do not (yet), the role of disloyal opposition is being played not by a formal political party but by the taxpayer-funded British Broadcasting Corp.
On May 29, as a Times of London timeline recounts, a story by reporter Andrew Gilligan aired on a BBC radio station. It included "claims by an unnamed intelligence source that Downing Street âsexed upâ the dossier on alleged weapons of mass destruction in Iraq." Specifically, Gilligan accused communications chief Alistair Campbell of having inserted into a report a claim that Iraq could deploy weapons of mass destruction "within 45 minutes." The Foreign Affairs Committee of Britainâs Parliament investigated and issued a report earlier this month that cleared Campbell of Gilliganâs charge.
The Ministry of Defense identified David Kelly, a former weapons inspector, as the likely source of Gilliganâs charge. Kelly did indeed meet Gilligan, at the latterâs request, for an interview on May 22. "But Dr Kelly said he did not think he could have been the source for the story," the Daily Telegraph reports--although he acknowledged, in the Telegraphâs words, "that elements of his story were similar to things they had discussed, such as a suggestion there was a 30 per cent probability Iraq had chemical weapons."
Now Kelly is apparently dead. He "had not been seen since leaving his home at around 3pm yesterday after telling his wife he was going for a walk," reports the Edinburgh Evening News. "Police said the body of a man was found close to his Oxfordshire home--an hour after a public appeal was made."
The Associated Press quotes television journalist Tom Mangold, who says he spoke to Kellyâs wife this morning:
"She told me he had been under considerable stress, that he was very, very angry about what had happened at the committee, that he wasnât well, that he had been to a safe house, he hadnât liked that, he wanted to come home," Mangold told ITV news.
"She didnât use the word depressed, but she said he was very, very stressed and unhappy about what had happened and this was really not the kind of world he wanted to live in."
"Westminster insiders said the possible suicide of Dr Kelly would make Mr Campbellâs position as Downing Streetâs director of communications impossible," reports the Edinburgh paper. "They also questioned whether Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon--who effectively named Dr Kelly as Mr Gilliganâs âsourceâ--could continue. One senior figure said: âThis raises questions about the conduct of people at the very top of Tony Blairâs administration.â "
If Kelly committed suicide, his is obviously a tragic story. But if indeed he was Gilliganâs source, itâs not clear why this should reflect unfavorably on the government. His suicide, after all, would demonstrate that he was mentally ill, which hardly enhances the credibility of whatever he told Gilligan.
Gilligan is still mum as to who was the source for the "sexed up" allegation. According to the Timesâ Tom Baldwin, the Beeb is not exactly standing behind its report:
The BBC will not admit that the allegations are false but nor does it still insist that the story was correct--merely that it has the right to broadcast what it wants. Greg Dyke, the BBC Director-General, has persuaded his governing board that a high principle of independence is at stake and an apology would cede editorial control to No 10.
The BBC, which is a creation of the British government, claims it is holding the government accountable for alleged dishonesty. But faced with the possibility that it "sexed up" its own report, the Beeb proclaims its immunity from accountability as a matter of high principle.
Last night CNNâs Aaron Brown interviewed Matt Frei, the BBCâs Washington correspondent, about Tony Blairâs speech to Congress. Frei made mostly disparaging comments about Blair, President Bush and Iraqâs liberation. In introducing Frei, Brown made no reference to the adversarial relationship between Blairâs government and the Beeb. At least with respect to the Iraq war, the BBC is a political player, not merely a disinterested conveyor of information. One may hope the tragedy of David Kelly will make this impossible for journalists on this side of the Atlantic to ignore.
Updates & Additional Information:
The current reporting indicates Dr Kellyâs death appears to be suicide. Was it due to pressure from the Govt or the BBC?
BBC Watch (referenced above) presents its efforts in a report and analysis format. A report on the current flap regards Dr Kelly has not yet been released.
Glenn Reynolds at InstaPundit has this: The BBC Is Getting Pounded in The Times The last link offers a new definition of BBC: Blundering Bombastic Cynicism. Sounds about right to me. Sexed up. Yeah, thatâs the ticket.
Posted by: PD ||
07/20/2003 1:03:16 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The title of the Andrew Sullivan piece should be "The BBC's Unraveling".
#3
Get'cher Mark Steyn fix on the issue as well - as usual, he's on the money
Posted by: Frank G ||
07/20/2003 13:16 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Ya know Tony could kill two birds with one stone. Sell the BBC and give the proceeds back in the form of no more BBC tax. Good for him, good for the nation and some adult leadership at the BBC.
The Prosecutor General's Office has brought charges in keeping with three Criminal Code articles against a Chechen resident who tried to stage a terrorist act in Moscow last week. Zarema Muzhikhoyeva was charged with terrorism, premeditated murder and attempt to murder. The woman will remain in custody. Muzhikhoyeva, an ethnic Ingush, was detained in a restaurant in Pervaya Tverskaya-Yamskaya Street. She intended to detonate an explosive devise hidden in her handbag.
And a policeman died trying to disarm it...
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
07/20/2003 23:01 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Scare quotes for fun!
This yearâs brilliant Bastille Day parade delighted the French with precision marching and freshly painted armored vehicles, but it was seen by some as camouflage for Franceâs significant military difficulties. The conservative Paris daily Le Figaro described the situation as the "long march toward a new army." The spectacular display Monday led to a national debate on how effective the countryâs "new army" really is. Although Defense Minister Michele Alliot-Marie praised the armyâs recent transformation, some French commentators and senior cadres remain skeptical. French newspapers quoted an unnamed general as saying: "Our materiel is insufficient. We have nothing that moves satisfactorily. And whatever you say, I know we didnât go to Iraq because of that fact." You .. you mean the French didnât stay home based on their moral principles?
Officials invariably point to the positive side of the shift in the armed forces from the draft to an all-volunteer army, navy and air force â now in its third year. The number of units has been drastically reduced; army divisions have become brigades. With the fighting strength of battalions.
But despite budgetary restrictions, equipment is on order. However, one military source said, "We have to realize that our armed forces are far from being equipped with state-of-the-art material comparable to that of the Americans or even the British." Bet it galls them to admit theyâre behind the Brits.
Military sources say orders for weapons are behind schedule, citing Giat Industries, which manufactures the highly regarded Leclerc tank, and Panhard, which makes light armor. It is said that the firms give priority to deliveries for Arab countries, particularly the United Arab Emirates. Who have better credit.
To equip up-to-date brigades of 6,000 personnel capable of quick intervention in "brush-fire wars," one general said, the shortage of modern equipment is such that "to ready one brigade for action, the weapons of five others have to be cannibalized." Sounds like the Congo stripped them bare.
Whatever the difficulties, France has sent army and air force units to NATO deployments in Bosnia and Macedonia, and, for the United Nations, to the Democratic Republic of Congo. Its Foreign Legion and army paratroops intervened in the conflict in Ivory Coast and served in Afghanistan. Still, officials acknowledge that this yearâs defense budget of about $15 billion, up 11 percent from 2002, is not sufficient to modernize the army and deploy its elements in far-flung places. Per capita defense spending in France is $800, compared with more than $1,000 in the United States. Although plans call for the ability to muster 50,000 troops for crisis intervention, officials say that if the government had agreed to join the coalition against Saddam Hussein, the French contribution could not have exceeded 5,000 troops. Mrs. Alliot-Marie, the defense minister, argues that the military transformation into an all-volunteer force was a great success and that 30,000 young French men and women volunteer every year. More and more women are joining, she says, and the armyâs aim is to raise their number to 12 percent of the nearly 300,000 personnel. However, army sources complain of slow recruitment of qualified personnel, citing in particular computer-literate candidates. Old army leaders also say that with the recent reductions in strength, the armed forces will soon lack adequate trained reserves and that the "links between the army and the nation" are weakening. A frequently expressed opinion is that many of the volunteers serve for pay and not for their country. Not a problem here.
The public at large is barely aware that there are any problems with the military, and the nearly 4,000 troops and 350 tanks, jeeps and other vehicles on display for Bastille Day as 70 warplanes roared overhead could hardly have looked better to a layman. "Look mama, it is a division of our countryâs finest!"
"Oh, Pierre, you silly boy, that is not a division, that is a battalion."
"But mama, the man over there said that it was the entire army of France on display!"
"Like I said, Pierre, it is a battalion. Now shush, M. de Villepin is about to speak on the role of France in the world. Doesnât he look so handsome?!"
The shortcomings exist in every branch of the armed forces, and particularly in the much-publicized "Eurocorps" of the European Union â a French idea. A small detachment of 150 Eurocorps troops led Mondayâs holiday parade along the Champs Elysees, under the command of a German, Gen. Holger Kammerhoff. Five EU member nations out of 15 have so far agreed to provide troops to the Eurocorps. France, Germany, Belgium, Spain and Luxembourg, have agreed, though Luxembourg has only a token military force. So do the French, but we donât expect more from the Luxisâ.
Strong opposition to the Eurocorps idea has come from Britain, Italy and various NATO members, who say it duplicates the aims and tasks of the alliance. France, a political member of NATO but not of its military arm, says the Eurocorps would offer its services to NATO when it becomes operational with 60,000 troops. At its headquarters in the French border city of Strasbourg, officers say that different military traditions and concepts have yet to be overcome. To facilitate contacts among its multinational components, English â the main language of none of its five members â was chosen as the "operational language" of Eurocorps. Bwwaaahaaaaaaa!
Posted by: Steve White ||
07/20/2003 3:01:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Hmmmm. Perhaps it makes sense (in more ways than just that many are former colonies of this Olde European former Hegemonic Power) that Phrawnce limits its "independent" force actions to backward backwater African locales. Their arms and numbers are then at least nearly equivalent to those of their putative adversaries.
The coup de grace, that English was chosen as the operational language, is beyond funny - that's just simply priceless! I can feel their pain all the way over here in Thailand!
#2
There are similar problems with most European armies, with the notable exception of the British, and to a lesser extent smaller countries like Holland, Denmark etc.
Posted by: Paul Moloney ||
07/20/2003 4:59 Comments ||
Top||
#3
For all the jokes about French "surrenderitis," it pays to remember that the "poilus" always get the back-stab from their government, Jeanne d'Arc being the paradigmatic example. A touching species of insanity to be sure, the act of volunteering to defend France.
Posted by: Ernest Brown ||
07/20/2003 20:25 Comments ||
Top||
#4
And France needs defending from what external threat...? French people I know are more concerned about the ticking time bomb of North African immigrants destroying the French way of life/culture from within. Where is Madame Cresson when they need her?
Posted by: Not Mike Moore ||
07/20/2003 20:57 Comments ||
Top||
Itâs a good article. Canât really summarize, you need to read the entire article. âIt was recognized from the first that a campaign of genocide would be necessary to eradicate the threat: "Kill three million of them," said President (general) Yahya Khan at the February conference, "and the rest will eat out of our hands". On March 25 (1971) the genocide was launched. The university in Dacca was attacked and students exterminated in their hundreds. Death squads roamed the streets of Dacca, killing some 7,000 people in a single night. It was only the beginning. "Within a week, half the population of Dacca had fled, and at least 30,000 people had been killed. Chittagong, too, had lost half its population. All over East Pakistan people were taking flight, and it was estimated that in April some thirty million people were wandering helplessly across East Pakistan to escape the grasp of the military." â Robert Payne, Massacre [1972]
Paraphrasing Christopher Hitchens, every decade or so, the US writes a blank check to some obscure dictator in Pakistan, and the Pakistani army happily uses this free ride to perpetrate genocide in its neighborhood.
In the 70âs, we turned a blind eye while Gen. Yahya killed millions in Bangladesh, with a kill rate that would put Hitler to shame. Even after the US congress cried foul and the US ambassador to Bangladesh declared âgenocide in Bangladeshâ, Nixon and Kissinger praised Yahya and sent him arms to aid in the killing. In the nineties, after the Russians had left Afghanistan, the Pakistani army happily armed, fed, financed and trained a band of jihadi hoodlums, now known to us as the Taliban; of course, the Taliban directly caused the death of hundreds of thousands of Afghan civilians in the nineties. While the cleansing continued unabated, oil executives busily negotiated oil-pipelines with the Taliban, with nary a consequence for the Pakistanis.
After 911, writing blank checks to the Pakistanis seems to have come back in vogue. The only question that remains unanswered is â where will the genocide be, this time?
#1
There are no good dictatorships - I'd hoped the Bush administration had finally learned that.Now I'm not so sure.Persia,Saudi-Arabia,Iraq,Pakistan,Indonesia - with friends like these,who needs enemies?
Posted by: El Id ||
07/20/2003 18:42 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Let's not get out of hand here. Yes, the Paks did arm the Taliban but not with genocidal intentions. Furthermore, the Afganistan conflict would have been much more difficult without the support of the Paks. The Paks have their bad side, their intrigues, etc. but does anyone think they are really into genocide.
#3
I don't dispute this, but from a semantics freak, "genocide" requires the targetting of a particular race/religious/ethnic group. Who do you speak of?
Posted by: Lu Baihu ||
07/20/2003 21:17 Comments ||
Top||
#4
"genocide" requires the targetting of a particular race/religious/ethnic group
That ethnic group would be Bengalis. Rabindranath Tagore is Bengal's most famous son. Like China, India is a hodgepodge of languages (even more distinct than China's misnamed dialects) and ethnic groups. Unlike China, India was never a unitary empire prior to British rule.
India consists of an agglomeration of Britain's South Asian holdings. When the British left, traditional ethnic rivalries bubbled to the surface. Pakistan itself is a mix of ethnic groups ranging from Mohajirs (Indian Muslims who fled India - Keralan, Tamilian, et al), Sindhis, Pathans (Pashtuns), Hazaras, et al, all of whom speak distinct languages.
The top U.S. official in Iraq painted an upbeat picture of postwar reconstruction Sunday, even as he warned of continued attacks on American forces in Iraq and acknowledged that Saddam Hussein was probably alive and still in the country. In a series of TV interviews Sunday, L. Paul Bremer III, the veteran diplomat serving as the U.S. civilian administrator in Iraq, predicted that electric and water services could be restored to prewar levels within eight weeks, and that an elected Iraqi government could be in place by as soon as next year.
On the other hand...
Bremer's comments came on the same day thousands of angry Iraqis in the Shiite holy city of Najaf marched on the headquarters of the U.S. commander, demanding the removal of U.S. forces. The protesters were followers of Moqtada Sadr, an Iranian-backed cleric who since the end of the war has emerged as the most militant of several leaders seeking the loyalty of Iraq's Shiite majority.
He's the nuttiest of them...
Bremer acknowledged that the United States would likely be compelled to maintain a military presence in Iraq for a lengthy period. "I think it's clear that, given the size of the task, we are going to be there for a while," he said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "I don't know how many years."
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
07/20/2003 22:37 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
U.S. military commanders plan to train and arm thousands of Iraqis to conduct military missions alongside U.S. and British troops in an effort to restore security and quell resistance by forces loyal to ousted president Saddam Hussein, the new head of U.S. military forces in Iraq and the rest of the Middle East said today. "The Iraqis want to be in the fight," Army Gen. John P. Abizaid said in his first interview since taking over U.S. Central Command this month. "We intend to get them in the fight." And much more...
Posted by: PD ||
07/20/2003 11:50:11 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
PD, in regards to the anon who freaks out about your comments regarding Saudi, tell him to stick it: the coward leaves no identifying information about him and your comments are certainly relevant to the WOT, you were, after all, in the heart of the beast.
Posted by: Brian ||
07/20/2003 18:37 Comments ||
Top||
#2
PD - tell him to stick it on GP - good enuf for me
Posted by: Frank G ||
07/20/2003 21:09 Comments ||
Top||
#3
OK, you guys are right. See response on the Schizophrenia article. Islam is a trip. What surprised me most after a few years is that I stopped noticing just how screwed up it is. I know that the human creature would go insane without the habituation effect (consider The Princess and The Pea), but it means that the litany I could recite is only the highest peaks - those that broke through the "this is normal" level of insanity and truly surprised me. I wish some other Rantbugers who lived there would chime in with their experiences. BTW, I have an electronic edition of a book written by a guy who was there for about 40 years - and I might put it up on one of my sites for everyone to see, but he had the same problem. Only the really totally wacked-out stuff is in the book - either he ignored a lot or the book would've been 10,000 pages had he told it all.
Another long but good WaPo piece that tells the world what Rantburg has known for a while: the average Iraqi soldier was not equipped, trained, supplied or led to fight the US. Just the first few paragraphs here.
At 8:30 p.m. on April 7, two days before the fall of Baghdad, Iraqi Col. Abdul Kareem Abdul Razzaq assembled his remaining soldiers and looked into their heartbreakingly tired, dispirited faces, he recounted in an interview last week. "The [U.S.] Air Force is bombing, thereâs a huge American Army coming we canât fight, we are losing control," he told them. "Weâve been ordered to continue fighting. What do you think we should do?" The men — only 600 of his original 1,500 soldiers had not deserted or been killed during the battle for Baghdadâs airport — were nearly unanimous in their decision to take their Kalashnikov rifles and go home. "I gave the order to retreat," Abdul Razzaq said, his face contorted by deep furrows and an anguished grimace. "If I had given the order for my soldiers to stay, theyâd all be killed." Continues ...
Posted by: Steve White ||
07/20/2003 2:47:43 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
If he had given the order for his soldiers to stay, he would be the one killed, nevermind...
Posted by: Rafael ||
07/20/2003 9:50 Comments ||
Top||
Long but good article at WaPo about the early planning and bombing phase of the Iraq War, starting in 2001. Too long to be reproduced here but read it all, as they say.
As early as the autumn of 2001, U.S. military authorities took steps to increase surveillance of southern Iraq and then to systematically bomb Iraqâs command posts, air defense weapons and communication links in anticipation of possible war, according to the American general who commanded the air campaign. The intensified airstrikes, which got underway in earnest in the summer of 2002, were justified publicly at the time as a response to increased Iraqi targeting of U.S. pilots patrolling a no-fly zone. But providing new details about how the operation — dubbed "Southern Focus" — was conceived and executed, Lt. Gen. T. Michael "Buzz" Moseley said the fact that the United States had put more planes in the air over Iraq may have prompted the Iraqis to shoot more. "So there is a chicken and an egg thing here," he said in an interview. continues ...
Posted by: Steve White ||
07/20/2003 2:37:24 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
USAF - Just a bunch of Boy Scouts living the dream...
In this situational summary, rather than a story just about the US "sweep", The Sydney Morning Herald spins it their own way... EFL
A US soldier was shot and killed guarding a bank in Baghdad yesterday, while the US military concluded two separate sweeps in and around the capital — arresting more than 1,200 people and seizing weapons, explosives and ammunition. Also yesterday, the military announced it had wrapped up two sweeps - dubbed Operation Ivy Serpent and Operation Soda Mountain earlier in the week. Some 1,210 people were detained in the two operations, including 112 people suspected of close ties to the former Saddam Hussein regime. The operations, both of which ended on Thursday, also netted some 6,000 mortar rounds, more than 1,400 rocket propelled grenades, explosives, AK-47 assault rifles and other weapons. Good. Thatâs a lot of people and ordinance - that wonât be fired at the coalition forces.
Violence against US troops has been concentrated in Iraqâs "Sunni Triangle", stretching north and west from Baghdad. The obvious result of no Northern front. Fuck Turkey.
Iraqâs minority Sunni Muslims have long ruled the country, and many of them fear Saddamâs ouster will swing the balance of power to the majority Shiites. The new 25-member ruling council, appointed by the Americans, has a slim Shiite majority. Yep. You Sunnis donât run dick, anymore. Yeah, it hurts, huh?
At a major Sunni mosque in Baghdad, formerly known as the Mother of all Battles Mosque, preacher Khalid al-Dari called yesterday for the Americans to leave Iraq and said the new US-appointed government "will enshrine Iraqâs sectarian differences." No - you guys do that bit of stupidity all by yourselves.
Also on Friday, Moqtada al-Sadr, addressing thousands of Shiites at a mosque in the central holy city of Kufa, vowed to establish a council "of the righteous" that would rival the new government. Al-Sadr, the Shiite cleric who spoke to a crowd that overflowed onto the streets around the mosque in Kufa, said the government is comprised of "non-believers" who donât represent the people. "We will not cooperate with the council," he told the crowd. "We will form our own council. Iraq will then have two councils: one of the wrongdoers and one of the righteous."
One with power and one with a mouth behind a pulpit...
"Zionists!" the crowd chanted. "Zionist council!" Zionists? What a load. These people have elevated "non-believer" to a badge of honor.
In an interview later with The Associated Press, al-Sadr said he would launch a parallel government and draft a constitution in consultation with all the countryâs Islamic movements. "Eventually, weâll have a referendum separate from the Americans and, God willing, elections separate from the Americans," he said. News Flash for the religiously-blind and democracy-challenged: this is called sedition. It is punishable by death. And this time it will be you and yours on the receiving end.
In the northern city of Tikrit, American soldiers used plastic explosives to topple a nine-metre-tall bronze statue of Saddam brandishing a sword atop a rearing horse. The toppling of Saddamâs statue didnât play well for some in Tikrit. "He was the symbol of Iraq, and this action was like a challenge to us," said 32-year-old Hayam Latif. "We are ready to sacrifice ourselves for Saddam." Puhleeeze do. The swords are set up over there. Please, please, line up in a proper queue and take your proper turn falling on it. Thereâs a good boy.
Posted by: PD ||
07/20/2003 2:31:56 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Grin, some of them mouth the words and yet don't get it. You bet your backside that it is a challenge to you and Saddam. Bring it on.
Posted by: Be ||
07/20/2003 3:37 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"Zionists!" the crowd chanted. "Zionist council!"
And true to form, they resort to a tired old ploy...
The United States and Turkey have discussed possible military measures against an estimated 5,000 Turkish Kurdish rebels in northern Iraq, the Turkish military said Saturday. The statement came a day after two top U.S. generals held talks in the Turkish capital in an apparent effort to smooth relations between the two countries. Gen. John Abizaid, the new head of U.S. Central Command, and Gen. James L. Jones, who serves both as NATOâs supreme allied commander and the head of U.S. forces in Europe, met separately Friday with Turkeyâs top military brass, including military leader Gen. Hilmi Ozkok.
Turkeyâs military said the two sides discussed ``what can be done jointlyââ against the Kurdish ``terror organizationââ in northern Iraq. In view of the detention incident, both sides decided to establish better coordination. The United States alleged the Turkish soldiers detained in the Iraqi city of Sulaymaniyah were part of a plot to assassinate an Iraqi Kurdish official. Turkey denied the plot. Is this what the Turks mean by âbetter coordinationâ?
Turkey maintains several thousand troops in northern Iraq to chase Kurdish rebels who fought a 15-year war for autonomy in southeastern Turkey and to monitor the situation in northern Iraq. But those troops fall outside the scope of the U.S.-led mission. The Turkish military said the two sides also discussed other military cooperation to establish stability and security in Iraq. The statement did not elaborate. Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul, who plans to travel to Washington next week, said the United States would ask Turkey to contribute peacekeepers to Iraq. No-o-o-o! Donât do that!
Posted by: Steve White ||
07/20/2003 12:27:59 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"met separately Friday with Turkeyâs top military brass"
I wonder if they did the sa'laam a rama lama ding dong routine with 'em - y'know, to make 'em feel comfortable...
"The United States alleged the Turkish soldiers detained in the Iraqi city of Sulaymaniyah were part of a plot to assassinate an Iraqi Kurdish official. Turkey denied the plot."
People with weapons and ordinance usually have a reason for dragging such heavy goodies along. Of course, Turkey is an ally, so they were prolly on a picnic. No mission. Uh uh. They're our 'slamic buds...
It never ceases to amaze me how totally disingenuous and absurdly obvious the lies are - and there must be a training course for keeping a straight face while spewing them. Even Amarillo Slim's poker face would slip over something that obvious.
"said the United States would ask Turkey to contribute peacekeepers to Iraq"
If the US is STUPID enough to invite Turkey to do anything other than keep its mitts to itself and stew in its own juices, then we have been betrayed. Don't forget that we undoubtedly took more casualties - and still are taking them - because there was no Northern front - and just look where the trouble comes from: the Sunni Triangle lying North of Baghdad. This cesspool would have taken it head-on has there been a Northern front.
EFL.
BAGHDAD (AP) - Iraqâs American-backed administration succeeded failed in its first week to choose a president, abandoning that mission in favor of a weak, three-man rotating leadership. The top U.S. official in Iraq - who hand-picked the Governing Council - returned to Washington while an insurgency killed another American soldier Saturday. Think the AP reporter has an axe to grind?
The council, agonizingly shepherded into existence by L. Paul Bremer, the U.S. administrator for Iraq, was announced last Sunday, saying its first order of business was the election of a president. When that did not happen after six days in session, officials of the Iraqi government told The Associated Press on Saturday that it would share the leadership job among at least three of 25 members. This isnât a bug, itâs a feature!
Meanwhile, thousands of Shiites marched on the U.S. military and political headquarters in a former presidential palace in Baghdad. They were protesting because they said the U.S. military briefly surrounded the house of a Shiite cleric in the holy city of Najaf after he issued an anti-American sermon during Friday prayers. Time to demonstrate whoâs boss, and it ainât Muqtada.
The military said it was checking whether they had taken any action against the cleric, Muqtada al-Sadr, who called the governing council an assembly of ``nonbelieversââ and said he would form a rival political body. "Checking"?
Bremer had given Shiites - who were harshly oppressed by Saddamâs Sunni-dominated regime - a slim majority on the governing council. But most of the Shiite members are secular figures or moderate clerics. Translation: Muqtada didnât get his.
The U.S. administrator left Baghdad unannounced Friday and was expected to be in Washington for about a week. His Baghdad office said the 61-year-old former diplomat and counterterrorism expert would visit the U.S. capital for consultations. He also was scheduled to appear on three weekly U.S. television interview programs Sunday.
In Baghdad this week, Bremer nearly disappeared from public view after the council was announced, an apparent bid to diminish the widely held perception among Iraqis and the rest of the world that the new Governing Council was an American puppet. Bremerâs office did not respond to requests for an assessment of the councilâs first week in business, but a spokesman for one council member issued a short statement. ``There is a general agreement that the presidency should be on a rotational basis because each political group in the council should shoulder an equal role and equal responsibility,ââ said Ali Abdul-Amir, spokesman for council-member Iyad Allawi of the Iraqi National Accord. Thereâs a reasonable idea.
The three likely members of the rotating presidency will be a leading Shiite politician, a highly respected Shiite cleric and former Foreign Minister Adnan Pachachi, a council source told the AP, speaking on condition of anonymity.
The 80-year-old Pachachi, a Sunni Muslim, served in the government that Saddamâs Baath Party ousted in a 1968 coup. He will be joined in the leadership troika by 78-year-old Mohammed Bahr al-Uloum, a cleric who returned from London after the 1991 Gulf War. He served as the council president during its first week in session.
The leadership group will be rounded out by Abdel-Aziz al-Hakim, who is in his early 50s, head of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq and also a Shiite cleric. He opposes the U.S. presence in the country but has close ties to U.S.-backed Kurds and Ahmad Chalabiâs Iraqi National Congress. Chalabi, who left Iraq as a teenager, has been touted in some U.S. government circles as Iraqâs likely first post-Saddam leader. But many in Iraq are distrustful of his close ties to Washington.
A Western diplomat who works closely with the council said the decision to establish a rotating presidency did not reflect political divisions among members of the governing body, whom, he said, were cooperating despite their religious and ethnic differences. The diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the move to a joint presidency meant the job would be largely symbolic. The move clearly reflected an unwillingness among council members to vest too much authority in any one of them. But the AP reporter, of course, saw this as a "failure", when the Council actually showed good sense.
Posted by: Steve White ||
07/20/2003 12:21:30 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"failure" ... "weak" ... "agonizingly" ... "slim majority" ... "widely held perception" ... "close ties" ... "many in Iraq are distrustful"
Nope. No bias or ax-grinding here. Nothing to see, Move along. Move along.
THE escape of Indonesian bomber Fathur Rohman al-Ghozi together with two others last week may have been part of a police intelligence project, sources from the Philippine National Police revealed the other day.
Yeah. Right...
The intelligence project, according to the source, may have been carried out to determine al-Ghoziâs operational value in the field by having him lead authorities tailing him to other members of his terrorist cell. The source declined to reveal further details about the project but hinted that it could be similar to earlier operations carried out by the defunct Military Intelligence and Service Group (MISG) in the 1970s and 1980s. âThatâs what I have heard in the âinsideâ since their escape. Itâs up to you now to validate this,â the source told The Manila Times.
Uhuh. Sure. Say, is that egg on your face?
The official said it is unlikely that al-Ghozi agreed to serve as a deep penetration agent for the government because of his strong ideological beliefs in Islam and his high level of terrorist training with Jemaah Islamiah and al-Qaeda trainers. It is possible, however, that his movementsâboth in the Philippines and abroadâare being tracked by authorities in the hope that he will lead them to more Jemaah Islamiah âsleeper cells.â PNP officials declined to comment on the issue.
But no doubt they're hoping somebody's going to buy this load of fertilizer...
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
07/20/2003 22:46 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Well if this is "a police intelligence project". Then Gozi's cover is blown and is a"load of fertilizer".
Conclusion:this story is just that,a story.
On the other hand this could be a way to get his own bud's to whack him.
Militias loyal to Liberian President Charles Taylor held off a rebel assault on Monrovia Sunday, pushing the invaders back from the two main bridges into the capital during a day of sporadic but fierce fighting. Government forces, who had retreated steadily before a rebel advance Saturday, made the most of the cover provided by the concrete landscape of Monrovia's mildewed downtown, which overlooks the strategic bridges. Militia fighters in shorts and T-shirts charged down the spans repeatedly Sunday, firing automatic rifles toward a bank of warehouses until the rebels fell back in early afternoon. The rebels' retreat may have been strategic, however, as they appeared intent on entering the city by another route.
Ummm... I'd say Wednesday...
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
07/20/2003 22:31 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
Embattled Liberian leader Charles Taylor vowed Saturday to fight to the last man against a rebel assault as his armed opponents advanced and crossed a key bridge leading into the capital, Monrovia.
Oh, good strategy...
Taylor was talking tough. "We will fight street to street, house to house and we will defeat them," he warned, speaking from his Executive Mansion in the city. "I will stand and fight to the last man until they stop killing my own people."
Uhhh... They are your people...
Meanwhile, rebel leader Sekou Damate Konneh denied that his forces have taken the offensive. "We were provoked. Taylor has been attacking us every day," Konneh told AllAfrica by telephone from Conakry, capital of neighboring Guinea, which has backed his movement, Liberians United for Reconciliation and Democracy (Lurd). Asked what instructions he had given to his forces in Monrovia, he said: "The boys are trying to maintain their position. I told them we are not going to hijack any government, but we have to keep the pressure on for Taylor to leave."
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
07/20/2003 17:01 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Kim Jong-Il, the leader of North Korea and the most dangerous remnant of George Bushâs "axis of evil", orders his troupe of female dancers to strip for guests and dines on the finest imported foods while most of his countrymen starve to death in his famine-plagued land. In a rare insight into his life of privilege and excess, Kimâs former executive chef has described how the "Dear Leader" washes down exotic sushi, Iranian caviar and gourmet shark fin soup with vintage French wines from his 10,000-bottle cellar before treating himself to his favourite tipple, Hennessy XO cognac. The diminutive dictator with the bouffant hair is also partial to the traditional Korean delicacy of dog stew. Yet his desperately impoverished people have been reduced to making gruel from wild roots and tree bark - and even eating human flesh on sale at farmersâ markets, according to some recent reports.
The fascinating revelations about Kimâs personal extravagances, culinary indulgences and temper tantrums appear in the memoir of Kenji Fujimoto, a Japanese chef who became a friend and gambling partner of the North Korean leader. Mr Fujimoto (a pseudonym) wrote Kim Jong-Ilâs Chef after fleeing back to his homeland in fear of his life in 2001. During his 13 years of service in Pyongyang, he travelled the world to purchase mouth-watering treats for Kim and his cronies: caviar from Iran and Uzbekistan, melons and grapes from China, durian fruit from Malaysia, papaya from Singapore, bacon from Denmark and beer from the former Czechoslovakia. At the same time, the Northâs disastrous communist policies - the average annual income is just £430 a year - exacerbated by drought, caused a famine that claimed two million lives and left large swathes of the country almost entirely reliant on World Food Programme supplies. Asked about the problems of life in Pyongyang, one diplomat remarked that "obesity is not one of them".
Kimâs "Pleasure Group" of female singers and dancers are a staple attraction at all-night banquets prepared by dozens of highly-trained chefs. On one occasion witnessed by Mr Fujimoto, Kim ordered the girls to strip naked, then made his guests dance with them, but warned them to go no further. "Dancing is okay but you canât touch. If you touch, itâs theft," the Dear Leader told them. Kim, he writes, specifically forbade his underlings to sleep with members of the Pleasure Group. Mr Fujimoto later married one of the troupeâs entertainers whom he first glimpsed singing at one of Kimâs late night banquets; the next time he saw her, she was boxing other women for the amusement of guests.
Kim adores toro sushi, the most expensive cut of tuna, and often called out to Mr Fujimoto in English for "one more" piece. He became a fanatical aficionado of shark fin soup, eating it three times a week. In summer, he eats the Korean speciality of dog stew on traditional feast days. All his dishes are first carefully tested for poison by food checkers. It was common for banquets to start as late as 2am.
Kim also considers himself a practical joker, summoning Mr Fujimoto the day after his wedding to inquire if he had any hair "down there". Mr Fujimoto then found that he had been shaved after drinking himself into a stupor and passing out. "That is what we do at North Korean weddings,"
Kim told him. There are also some weightier revelations in the book, including a telling insight into Kimâs nuclear ambitions. When Kim asked Mr Fujimoto if he thought North Korea should have nuclear weapons, the chef replied that - coming from the only country that had suffered atomic attack - he felt such armaments were wrong. Kim yelled back that North Korea required nuclear weapons for its own defence.
Mr Fujimoto also disclosed that Kimâs wife feared he might commit suicide after he became depressed following the death of his father, Kim Il-Sung, in 1994. The chef, now 55, had been working in Tokyo before he was lured away to become Kimâs sushi supremo on a salary of £3,000 a month plus tips of hundreds of pounds each time he cooked. He was rewarded with a Mercedes-Benz, a luxurious home and high-quality suits imported from England. He once flew to Japan for Kim simply to buy 100 Daifuku rice cakes - usually costing about 50p each - from a specialist Tokyo store. He even persuaded the Korean dictator to switch his favourite brand of beer from Kirin to Asahi Super Dry by telling him it was more popular in Japan.
Mr Fujimoto initially felt excited and honoured to serve a man he admired, but came to fear for his life after witnessing the power of life and death that Kim held over his underlings. Now he lives in secrecy in Japan after escaping North Korea by tempting Kim with tales of the gorgeous taste of sea urchins from Japanâs far north. When he was sent to buy some, he took his chance to disappear.
Mr Fujimoto gradually realised the horrendous inequalities of life in the self-styled "workersâ paradise". He wrote: "I know of no country on earth with a bigger gap between rich and poor. If you are from a labourerâs family, however clever you are, you will always be a labourer, working with a shovel in minus 20 degrees." Itâs bordering Peshawar, but was too engrossing to EFL.
Chinaâs got more worrisome issues on its plate than removing the NK irritation from the world stage
CHINAâs leaders have endorsed besieged Hong Kong Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa, signalling they will not bow to pressure during the biggest political crisis in the former colony since the 1997 handover from Britain. Chinese President Hu Jintao appeared to warn that further unrest could jeopardise Hong Kongâs future freedom. Tiananmen II?
Thereby killing the golden egged goose...
After meeting Mr Tung in Beijing on Saturday for the first time since half-a-million people protested in Hong Kong on July 1, Mr Hu said the central Government was "extremely concerned" about recent events in the territory. But he insisted the controversial security legislation that sparked the mass protests would be passed. "Only by maintaining social stability can Hong Kong maintain a good business environment, maintain the characteristics of a free port and its standing as an international financial, trade and transport centre," Mr Hu said. "After earnest and wide-ranging consultations, the relevant legislation will certainly be understood, supported and endorsed by the Hong Kong compatriots." The central Government "firmly supports the Government led by Mr Tung Chee-hwa", he said.
But Mr Hu acknowledged a need to address some of the shortcomings that have angered Hong Kong people. Mr Tungâs Government would "certainly be able to do still better in gathering together social consensus, caring for the condition of society and the peopleâs wishes, and improving governance", he said. However, many in Hong Kong believe Mr Tungâs administration has merely earned a temporary reprieve while Beijing decides what to do next. Its challenge is to find a solution without being seen to intervene too directly in Hong Kongâs affairs, which China pledged not to do for 50 years under the "One Country, Two Systems" principle agreed for the 1997 handover from Britian and repeated in Mr Huâs comments at the weekend. Christine Loh, a former Hong Kong legislator and head of political think tank Civic Exchange, said: "Beijing is doing what it knows best, which is to show the strongest symbolic support, while thinking what it can do without outright controlling Hong Kong." Ms Loh accused Mr Tung of impulsive decision-making, favouritism, a low level of professionalism, elitist arrogance based on wealth rather than ability, poor use of talent and policy conservatism. But she said it was easier for Beijingâs leaders to blame the usual suspects â unco-operative civil servants, bad economic conditions, democratic forces, unsympathetic media and meddling foreign governments â than admit they had chosen the wrong man for the job.
In a commentary published in Hong Kong, an influential Beijing academic has suggested a way out: Mr Tung could delegate some of his duties to a new deputy capable of making up for his shortcomings. "Mr Tung lacks political skills and has been poor in handling crises," said Shi Yinhong, a professor in the school of international studies at the Peopleâs University in Beijing. "He is stubborn and reluctant to listen to different views. Besides, he is not adept at making compromises." But he was a crucial political symbol, and removing him now would damage the Governmentâs credibility, Professor Shi said. Professor Shi rated Mr Tungâs chances of retaining the central Governmentâs support at 60 to 70 per cent, "on condition he will make much more substantial change in his way of governance".
Two key executives in Mr Tungâs cabinet resigned last week, prompting a cabinet reshuffle. While this might create an opportunity to promote a deputy and other new faces as Professor Shi suggests, Ms Loh said Mr Tung had "such a poor reputation in how he works that people may be unwilling to work with him". It was also questionable whether he had the capacity to learn from his mistakes and consult more widely in future, as he has promised to do, she said. Professor Shi called for political compromise on all sides, warning that the central Government "cannot tolerate for long" any situation in which democratic forces have the upper hand in Hong Kong.
Pro-democracy legislator Lee Cheuk-yan said Beijingâs backing was not unexpected but noted the central Governmentâs dilemma. "If it removed Tung it could adversely impact social stability," Mr Lee said. "But if he stays, then his political clumsiness could alienate more people and hurt the economy and stability. Itâs a catch-22 situation. Support from Beijing does not mean Tung will get support from Hong Kong people, and he needs that more. We will continue our push for democracy." Democracy? In a country that jails and beats to death a religious Tai Chi group? Riiiggghhtt
Posted by: Frank G ||
07/20/2003 12:09:11 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"Only by maintaining social stability can Hong Kong maintain a good business environment, maintain the characteristics of a free port and its standing as an international financial, trade and transport centre," Mr Hu said.
"After earnest and wide-ranging consultations, the relevant legislation will certainly be understood, supported and endorsed by the Hong Kong compatriots."
Righteeeooo. Lessee, didn't HK do just fine - no make that GREAT - for about 100 years before you communist gutless turds played legal footsie to grab the Golden Goose? Didn't it do this without any of your "management"?
Keep it up, assholes. You'll kill the Goose and have to figure out how it worked and why it worked - the hard way. It sure didn't start laying golden eggs because it was oppressed by clueless relics of the 19th and 20th centuries' most flawed and spectacularly failed political and economic nightmare.
#2
It's also an excellent "preview" for any Taiwanese anticipating reunion with the mainland. One nation, two systems...for a couple weeks at least
Posted by: Frank G ||
07/20/2003 13:17 Comments ||
Top||
#3
"Only by maintaining social stability can Hong Kong maintain a good business environment, maintain the characteristics of a free port and its standing as an international financial, trade and transport centre," Mr Hu said.
Mr. Hu has it only 20% right. The environment of freedom, creation of and respect for FAIR and EQUITABLE laws, resepect for individual creativity and reward for that creativity is what makes Hong Kong an economic powerhouse.
Mr. Hu misses the main reason for Hong Kong's success. Mr. Hu does not have a clue. When one is tied to an ideology with out peer review, one will get stuck in the mud.....maybe forever.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
07/20/2003 14:05 Comments ||
Top||
#4
First we have a raging SARS epidemic for six or seven months. This does wonders for China's textile industry, and now we are going to practice civil rights like they did in Hungary 1956. Why did we give these butchers MFN status? Enlighten me.
Posted by: Douglas De Bono ||
07/20/2003 20:24 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Tick, tick, tick, every day closer to the Olympics. They want to put on their best face for *the world.* 2 Tianamen's inside of 15 or so years isn't good.
--"After earnest and wide-ranging consultations, the relevant legislation will certainly be understood, supported and endorsed by the Hong Kong compatriots." --
Of course once we enlighten the uneducated masses, our policies will, naturally, be supported. Except the masses are usually more educated than they think. 500K already "got it."
Long piece - but worthwhile due to fairly complete background and inclusion of political goodies, such as Bushâs African Safari and Mbeckiâs role...
ZIMBABWEAN President Robert Mugabe is manoeuvring to ensure a key political ally known as âThe Butcher of Matabelelandâ is installed as his successor before standing down on his 80th birthday. The prospect of Emmerson Mnangagwa assuming power — which would ensure Mugabe avoids a potential trial for human rights abuses and allow him to remain in his palatial home called âGracelandsâ — will dismay political opponents as he is considered to be even more dangerous than Mugabe himself. Mnangagwa masterminded the slaughter of more than 25,000 civilians opposed to Mugabe in Matabeleland in the mid-1980s and was also largely responsible for the controversial land reform programme that resulted in attacks on white farmers by army veterans who seized their property.
Despite mounting speculation by Western diplomats that Mugabe will relinquish power this December, informed sources in Harare told Scotland on Sunday that the Zimbabwean leader has chosen his birthday, February 21, to make his departure from office. "He feels that at the age of 80 he will have a wonderful excuse to step down and hand over to a younger man," a former cabinet minister in Bishop Muzorewaâs short-lived government said.
That would be Able Muzorewa, Zim's answer to Desmond Tutu...
At that age no one could accuse him of cowardice, said the source, who has asked not to be named at a time when the dreaded Stasi-trained Central Intelligence Organisation (CIO) is hunting down "dissidents" and "traitors to Africa". "Robert is a bit like Macbeth. Heâs haunted by the number of people he has killed. He is terrified of going on trial somewhere and being remembered not as a hero, but as a monster," the source said. "He knows that Emmerson Mnangagwa is a safe pair of hands because theyâre as bloody as his own."
A bit late for that, isn't it? And there was a way he could have been remembered as a hero, rather than a monster. He just didn't want to take it...
He added: "He [Mugabe] wants Emmerson Mnangagwa to take-over, and although there are other people in line for the job, I canât see either the Central Committee or the Politburo challenging the will of a man who still somehow controls the police, the army and most important of all, the CIO, which has been responsible for thousands of murders and political assassinations since independence in 1980."
That's why they call them "dictators", isn't it?
Mnangagwa, 60, has been at Mugabeâs side since the late 1970s when the Jesuit educated Marxist guerrilla fighter fled to Mozambique, where he helped lead a protracted war against white rule in Zimbabwe, then called Rhodesia. After independence, Mnangagwa was given key ministries in Mugabeâs handpicked cabinet of loyalists, and even when he lost his seat at the 2000 election, he was made speaker of the parliament, a post he holds today. The source said: "We must never forget that between those dreadful years 1982 and 1987 when Mugabe unleashed the North Korean-trained Fifth Brigade of the Zimbabwe National Army and let hooligans in uniform slaughter upwards of 25,000 black civilians because they opposed his rule, it was Mnangagwa who stood beside him and ran the CIO."
In uniform, out of uniform, the end result's the same, isn't it?
Last year, Mnangagwa, who also heads up Mugabeâs vast business empire in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), led a government and ruling party delegation to a meeting of Thabo MbekiâsAfrican National Congress party in Pretoria. Informed reports say that when US President George W Bush was in South Africa last week, Mbeki told him to stop talking about Mugabeâs track record of human rights abuses. While the Americans and the British want to see a "democratic" presidential election when Mugabe steps down, the South African leader is said to be content to see Mugabe choose his successor, as long as his choice is approved by his Zanu-PF party.
The linkage between ANC and ZANU-PF is pretty comfortable. The fact that people like Thabo can live comfortably with people like Bob bodes pretty ill for South Africa...
While Washington and London believe opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) would easily win a genuinely fair election, Mbeki wants to see an ideologically and politically correct âold styleâ leader take over north of the River Limpopo. Sources say Mbeki personally likes Mnangagwa, who has a legal and business background. He is said to be a man of great personal charm and is also a close friend of one of Zimbabweâs most important men, Army commander General Vitalis Zvinavashe. It was Zvinavashe who commanded the Fifth Brigade when it invaded Matabeleland in a terrifying campaign to wipe out the opposition, which was led by Dr Joshua Nkomo of the Zimbabwe African Peoples Union (ZAPU).
When President Bush was in South Africa he described Mbeki as "the point man" on Zimbabwe. Zimbabweans in exile in South Africa — there are now close on two million of them — say that Mbeki remains "highly suspicious" of Tsvangirai. President Mbeki is known to regard the MDC as a creation of white Zimbabwean farmers. The MDC receives funds from wealthy whites with mining and farming interests in Zimbabwe and Mbeki regards Tsvangirai as little more than a puppet manipulated by big business. Mugabe and Mbeki have become close friends since 1999.
Basildon Peta, the respected Zimbabwean correspondent in Pretoria, said this week that America recently pledged a "reconstruction" package for Zimbabwe worth up to $10bn (£6.2bn) over an unspecified time frame. The deal, says Peta, was discussed by the two leaders during a private meeting in Pretoria. Opposition politicians fear that now he is Americaâs "point man" on Zimbabwe, Mbeki will be able to persuade Washington to accept any new leader as long as he demonstrates a desire to "start again" without embarrassing the outgoing Mugabe.
Rival contenders:
FORMER finance minister SIMBA MAKONI who is known to be the favourite of America and Britain. He opposed Mugabeâs land reform programme which he said would cause inflation to soar and even more unemployment. Makoni is popular with whites in Zimbabwe and big business in South Africa, but he has little support in the townships, from the MDC opposition or from the churches.
DUMISO DABENGWA, former home affairs minister, who fought against the Rhodesian forces with the Zimbabwe African Peopleâs Union under Joshua Nkomo. He rose to become the commander of Nkomoâs military forces and was known as the uncrowned king of Matabeleland. A former opponent of Mugabe, he sided with the government after 1987 and lost the support of the young and the MDC opposition.
MORGAN TSVANGIRAI, the leader of the main opposition group, the Movement for Democratic Change, is still challenging the result of last yearâs contested presidential election through the Zimbabwean courts. The ballot last year gave Mugabe a further six-year term in office but there were claims of vote-rigging and intimidation. The former trade union leader, spent 10 days in prison on treason charges for allegedly plotting to overthrow Mugabe. Africa is one big MoFo swamp. Iâd like to see it drained, but donât want to see a single US trooper lose his life in such an insane mess. Africa is where the PC-Press can use âquagmireâ freely - I sure as hell wonât object.
Posted by: PD ||
07/20/2003 3:00:15 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Do you all notice how much Mbeki loves Bob? S. Africa is the next on the "Golden Goose Murder" parade that characterizes that continent.
Posted by: Ernest Brown ||
07/20/2003 13:16 Comments ||
Top||
#2
For the things we need to do in the WoT alone, not to mention any other ongoing efforts and what we might need to do in the future, the US must be so clean we squeak. We always need all the credibility we can muster - when push comes to shove in the real world, it saves American lives. Doing business with and accommodating just one dirty bugger like Mbecki and his ilk destroys years of hard work and honest dealings in one fell swoop.
Zimbabweâs petrol crisis is set to worsen after President Robert Mugabeâs attempt to resume fuel supplies from Libya stalled. He was unable to reach an agreement over the value of oil assets mortgaged to Libyaâs leader, Colonel Muammar Gaddafi. Bob couldnât close a deal with Gaddafi? Heavens!
Mr Mugabe agreed to mortgage Zimbabwean oil assets to Libya in exchange for oil when he met Colonel Gaddafi in Tripoli earlier this month. These included a major oil pipeline, which runs from Beira port in Mozambique to Zimbabweâs eastern city of Mutare, as well as oil storage facilities in Harare, under an asset arrangement deal aimed at settling Zimbabweâs debt to Libya and securing fresh fuel supplies. Senior oil industry sources in Zimbabwe said Libya had not taken over the assets because Gaddafi wanted "to pay peanuts for them". They said the state-run National Oil Company of Zimbabwe (Noczim) had done an independent valuation of the assets in conjunction with an Italian company, Roux Italia, and valued them at about $150m (£95m). Libyaâs oil company, Tamoil, valued them at only $38m. This seems awfully capitalist for a bunch of socialists.
A Zimbabwean oil official said: "This is totally unacceptable." Officials said it was unclear how the disagreements would be resolved. They said they had left everything in President Mugabeâs hands. They said a powerful lobby in the Zimbabwean oil sector had also emerged which was strongly against the decision to mortgage the oil assets to Libya, even if an appropriate value was agreed. Cuts into their vigorish.
Another official said: "These are critical national assets which must be under the control of Zimbabweans. Giving them to anyone is like putting control of your green shirts army to foreigners." Those who did not want the assets to be mortgaged to Libya said they should be sold to local consortiums of Zimbabwean businessmen over whom the government could exercise control. But they conceded that the consortiums did not have the foreign currency to help the government import fuel. No one does other than Bob, and he needs that for the upcoming shopping spree in Gay Paree.
Tamoil halted fuel supplies to Zimbabwe after Noczim accumulated a $67m debt. The debt remains unpaid and Zimbabwe has failed to supply agricultural commodities it had promised to Libya to offset the debt. Colonel Gaddafi is said to want Zimbabweâs oil facilities as part of his plans to supply fuel to other southern and central African countries such as Zambia, Malawi, Botswana, Swaziland and Mozambique. The pipeline from Beira has been his prime target. Awfully mercantilist for a socialist.
The latest problems with Libya have forced Noczim to abdicate its responsibility to import fuel for the whole country, leaving it to private importers. But the private importers sell the oil on the black market at market exorbitant prices, leaving most motorists unable to run their cars. Officials said Noczim was only importing and selling small amounts of fuel for specific government sectors such as the army and the police and a few public limo transport operators. The day the apparatchiks canât get around by car is the day Bob leaves.
Posted by: Steve White ||
07/20/2003 12:36:58 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
North Korea has moved heavy artillery closer to the tense border with South Korea, and last year deployed more missiles that are capable of reaching Japan, South Korea said. Wouldyas look at dat -- the lil Nimrods are gettinâ feisty!
The report came amid a flurry of diplomatic efforts led by China to seek a peaceful resolution to a standoff over North Koreaâs suspected development of nuclear weapons. For decades, North Korea has deployed much of its conventional military force close to the border, and would be capable of inflicting devastation on Seoul in the early stages of any conflict. U.S. and U.N. officials are now watching for signs that Pyongyang has begun reprocessing plutonium, a process that emits a kind of krypton gas that U.S. sensors can detect. The New York Times said on its Web site Saturday that American officials confirmed that sensors on the North Korean border have detected elevated levels of krypton 85. Hence the move of the artillery tubes, just so everyone knows theyâre holding Seoul hostage.
The Times also reported that American and Asian officials say there is strong evidence North Korea has secretly built a second plant for producing weapons-grade plutonium. White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan told The Associated Press he would not discuss intelligence matters and, therefore, would not confirm the story. But he pointed out that North Korea ``stated publicly last year that it did have a covert nuclear weapons programââ and added that ``they have taken a number of escalating steps in recent months, including expelling IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) inspectors and restarting their nuclear facilities.ââ The South Korean military did not alter its alert posture in response to the report on the North Korean artillery and missiles, indicating that a major escalation of tension was not imminent. North Korea ``has increased the threat on South Koreaâs capital by moving forward 170mm and 240mm long-range artillery,ââ the South Korean Defense Ministry said in a policy report Friday. It did not say when the redeployment occurred, nor how many guns were shifted. The South Korean Defense Ministry also said the North in June last year deployed a ``battalionââ of Nodong missiles, which can hit targets as far as 810 plus or minus 810 miles away, including Japan, a U.S. ally. But it did not say how many missiles were in the battalion, nor where they were deployed. So howâd they know it was a battalion?
It was unclear why South Korea released what seemed to be old intelligence about the North Korean missiles at such a sensitive time on the Korean Peninsula. The Defense Ministry sometimes appears hawkish on North Korea in comparison with other government ministries, which espouse abject appeasement reconciliation with their northern neighbor.
Posted by: Steve White ||
07/20/2003 12:13:19 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
If the South Koreans won't protect themselves why should the USA? What does the USA need w/ South Korea? Another slap in the face?
Posted by: tim ||
07/20/2003 0:24 Comments ||
Top||
#2
The NorKs are always playing chicken. One day they will lob some shells south by accident or design, and then they will become a glowing hole. While on their way to hell, they will take many with them, but in the end they will still be in hell. If the SKors start more appeasement, we need to pull out.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
07/20/2003 0:46 Comments ||
Top||
#3
To keep the insane NorK babble in perspective, here are a few excerpts from the StatFor Geopolitical Diary: Wednesday, July 16, 2003:
"To begin with, having plutonium does not mean the North Koreans can make a weapon, and making a weapon doesn't mean they will have a deliverable weapon. Having a deliverable weapon doesn't mean they will want to deliver it, or that the United States will give them the chance to think about it." and
"For the North Koreans, their nuclear capabilities -- real, potential or fabled -- represent bargaining chips in negotiating processes with the United States. If they really intended to carry out a nuclear strike and were concerned that the United States would launch a pre-emptive strike -- which they should be -- then the last thing they would do is let U.S. officials know they had plutonium. It would be the most important secret, because they would want every edge for striking without being detected and pre-empted. Telling the United States they are thinking about nuclear war is the dumbest thing they could do if that was their actual plan. If, on the other hand, they simply wanted to scare the pants off the United States, Japan and South Korea, they'd make absolutely certain those countries knew they were planning to build nuclear missiles. When you think about this as a game, a real war plan requires secrecy; a negotiating ploy requires publicity." and
"There is one scenario in which North Koreans would use these weapons -- if they collectively are insane; individual insanity wouldn't do it. But there is no evidence of insanity in North Korea -- merely interesting neurosis. The North Koreans have been using the nuclear threat for years in efforts to extract concessions from the West. They have an entire business model built on this." and conclusion...
"The North Koreans, whose actual weight in the international system is somewhere around Chad's, actually have maneuvered themselves into the great power game, with world leaders speculating on their next move."
Have noted that the NK is all but begging us to attack Pyongyang. They seem a might upset that we have NOT launched a pre-emptive strike against them, to start the war. They seem desperate for a war, and with their economy in the toilet, assuming they have toilets in NK, it makes a twisted kind of sense.
SK is getting really worried it looks like. They seem to think we are willing to abandon them. Hmmm.... They have made it known they do not want us there.
Posted by: Be ||
07/20/2003 3:48 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Be - I wish I had written it! I only have one quibble, and that's with the line: "if they collectively are insane; individual insanity wouldn't do it"
We already know that "Dear Leader" is either insane or near enough as to make no odds. I only wonder about whether StratFor really believes that if Dear Leader ordered it, the NorK Militray Machine wouldn't follow through, though that seems to be the (unattributed) author's contention.
#6
Prudence would dictate that if a known criminal says he has a gun in his pocket and he is going to kill you,then you have 2 choices run away or kill him first.
I favor option #2.
If you go with option #1 then you will just have to deal with him agin at a later date,agin with only 2 options on how to deal with him.
#7
raptor - the fact that he rants and raves, I think, is described just about right in the piece. I consider his official utterances as purest entertainment - worthy of a flatulence tax, in fact.
As long as he's posturing, the parents of this shitforbrains creation, China and Russia, should be held to account to change his diaper. We didn't create him or nuture him or support his corrupt little joke of a nation for 50 years - they did. We have large levers to use, if needed, to force them to wipe his nasty little ass. I believe we should do so. Unilateral talks is an absurdity equal to the plotline of The Mouse That Roared.
The fact that he might sell
the bullets (or the powder and lead) he's trying to make to some bad actor like the Black Hats of Iran, now that is worthy of the 3 different war plans that have recently been updated by the Pentagon. And if the Pakis have been peddling rocket technology to this little troll, as some evidence has detailed, well now, you've got a serious case for making at least two smoking holes.
Make it three if the Black Hats successfully cling to power long enough to throw the switch to start up a reactor. It would be sad, indeed, if we had to pre-empt the brave Iranian people in their laudable effort to free themselves - but self-preservation must come first.
#8
This is what I can't figure. All that video of Kimmy and the boys review thousands of marching troops in the square in the capital. They pick a bright sunny day to do this, usually some calendar event celebrating Daddy's birthday. Like we couldn't pick this up by satellite reccon? And how quick could you place a good size nuke right in the middle of the bunch? Sure, we'll take a lot of heat, less than they would in an instant, but the problem is solved. Solve the problem or wait for something stupid which cost others their lives and in the end the result will be the same. Do ritualistic behaviors of cultures demand that thousand of innocent civilians be sacrificed before you kill the mad dog?
Posted by: Don ||
07/20/2003 10:53 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Don - Only an American would think this way... and I agree wholeheartedly with you - though I'd use a Daisy Cutter or MOAB, instead of a nuke.
Y'know we could explain the logic process, and what's behind it, until the end of time - and almost no one else (from any other society, that is) would be able to understand. But I get it - and you're right. I'm sure the "answer" to your question is "political coverage" - nothing more.
Why do we care? Why don't we go ahead and toss off the yoke of pretense and posturing (UN, etc.) that others now believe to be reality? Well, it's not quite ripe, yet, but I think we're headed toward that moment, dragged kicking and screaming by external events. I'd say that the Islamozoid problem will eventually be the catalyst that tips the majority to this conclusion.
Hey, everybody can mouth the nice socialist multilateralist words, but when the heat is on and it's you or your family on the line, then the words fall by the wayside and hard choices are made by gut reactions to the threats. Some will have the balls - and some won't. We'll survive because America doesn't yet castrate us as we grow up. And that is the internal threat we can't lose sight of, either.
#10
In some ways, the US is a victim of its own success. Since 9-11 the government has been taking steps to systematically remove the terrorist threat and terrorist sympathizers. People working very hard and for long hours have rounded up suspects, done investigations, performed financial squeezes, boomed bad guys, and have gathered intelligence. In doing so we have undoubtedly prevented additional 9-11s. It is like preventative maintenance of infrastructure: how many catastrophies and injuries did we prevent today---not very glamerous. Now we are in the long haul, and since the left is so warm and fuzzy, safe and comfy, they are doing what they do best, and that is to tear down. That is the internal threat the PD so aptly points out. We can't go nuke NorK now, though in some ways we should. We need to take each situation and make lots of plans and select the one that will serve us best. Bush only has so many political chips so he must use them wisely. I am sure that he is working for a NorK implosion. If he cannot do that, then he will hang the Nork albatross on the neck of the Chicoms and SKor. Leadership during these times takes a strong constitution and a stout heart.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
07/20/2003 13:54 Comments ||
Top||
#11
I think PD's analysis is right about on target. The DPRK's talk is just that - talk. They are under the impression that by convincing the United States and its allies (in the case of South Korea, I use the term "ally" in its loosest sense) that Kim Jong-il is one crazy mo-fo, they can mask just how weak their hand really is. But there is way too much method to their madness to suggest insanity - the North Korean leadership is just willing to take risks that most national leaderships are unwilling to take. Besides, I pointed out somewhere else that the boyz up in Pyongyang read the American press like everyone else, and have therefore come to the conclusion that the Americans will cave before they do - just compare the editorial sections of the NYT and the Rodong Shinmun. PD is definately right about China - Great Powers have to keep their allies in line - even the loose cannon ones. Both the US and the Soviet Union did it during the Cold War (not always successfully, but the effort was there), and if China wants to be part of the Big Boy Club, it needs to behave like a Big Boy. Heck, the South Koreans tried to build nuclear weapons in the 1970s (and unlike the North Koreans, they actually needed them back then), and we put a stop to that (at the cost of possibly getting the SKor president killed). If China is unwilling to assume the diplomatic costs associated with arm-twisting Pyongyang, the United States shouldn't continue to shoulder the responsibility of keeping Japan and Taiwan out of the nuclear club. It's that simple.
Posted by: The Marmot ||
07/20/2003 19:28 Comments ||
Top||
#12
I think it would be accurate to say that Kim is a one-trick pony. It's a pretty good trick, but once you've seen it, well...
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.
