Compact discs could be history within five years, superseded by a new generation of fingertip-sized memory tabs with no moving parts. Scientists say each paper-thin device could store more than a gigabyte of information - equivalent to 1,000 high quality images - in one cubic centimetre of space. Experts have developed the technology by melding together organic and inorganic materials in a unique way. They say it could be used to produce a single-use memory card that permanently stores data and is faster and easier to operate than a CD. Oh, great. Another format change, and I still have over 700 LPâs my wife wonât live without.
Posted by: Steve ||
11/12/2003 4:24:22 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I guess it's too much to ask that they hold off on improving music storage and concentrate on making better music.
#4
Bomb, This is how they will settle DRM and fair use. (as in we have all the digital rights management and you have fair use but you can't exercise it without violating the DCMA....). You can bet these memory tabs will be chock full of DRM and encryption features from the get-go.
#2
Let's start with the obvious: "the one (with the money -- the owner, or the ink -- the reporter/editor) to influence the many" is on the far end of the spectrum from democracy.
This would be scary, if it weren't said by such a pathetic dweeb as Gore.
Posted by: Carl in N.H. ||
11/12/2003 13:00 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Gore has gone off the deep end along with the rest of the Donks. Saying crap like this is the only way that he gets attention. The Demos are like a bunch of lemmings heading to the cliff. The more BS they spout and the more outrageous it is, the more that they believe it.
Posted by: remote man ||
11/12/2003 13:01 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Gore's idea of "democracy" is a society where all the right-thinking people (in other words, Gore and like-minded liberals) control the content and tone of the public discussion.
Posted by: Mike ||
11/12/2003 13:01 Comments ||
Top||
#5
"empowered the one to influence the many."
Uh... Al... you misspelled enslave...
I, myself would like to thank Fred for Rantburg and Zeyad for Healing Iraq and the countless other bloggers who give their own unique perspective on the world.
Without you we would still be enslaved to Al Gore and the media.
#6
Keep in mind that Gore started out as a newspaper journalist. No doubt he misses the "good, old days" when he and his ilk controlled public discourse. Blogs are democratic with a small "d".
#7
Here is what Al sed: Gore said democracy in America flourished at the height of the newspaper era, which "empowered the one to influence the many."
This is what Al really meant: Gore said democracy in America will flourish at the height of right now when conditions "empowers ME to influence the everyone who votes ."
That sure does smack of eliticism, doesn't it? And of course eliticism has a grand history of allowing the populace its self governance; except when the egomaniacle miniority was not trying to force its views on the majority. And since self-governance is the purpose of democracy, we can only come to the conclusion that Al Gore is a damned fool.
And will someone please tell that nitwit that he is trying to create his own liberal television program? He's thus arguing against the very thing he's trying to build. And people wanted HIM as our President?
Posted by: Matt ||
11/12/2003 13:12 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Having invented the Internet and run for president using a class warfare message, you'd think Shallow Al would be more enthusiastic about independent blogs than newspapers controlled by giant corporations.
Posted by: Tibor ||
11/12/2003 13:17 Comments ||
Top||
#10
William Randolph Hearst was often praised for his love for the little people, and the dream of a true democracy.
#12
By the way, a question for those Rantburgers better versed in communist history than me:
Wasn't a defining feature of the original Bolsheviks their idea that the policies of a country should be decided by small group of elites ?
Posted by: Carl in N.H. ||
11/12/2003 13:29 Comments ||
Top||
#13
He also says...Gore said a remedy to television's dominance may the Internet, a "print-based medium that is extremely accessible to the average person."
HUH?
TV is just about the most accessible medium EVER. Now if he is strictly refering here to controling content, he may have a point - but to hold up newspapers as the ideal is pure fantasy.
#14
Wasn't a defining feature of the original Bolsheviks their idea that the policies of a country should be decided by small group of elites.
Absolutely, except the Soviets, in 1984-speak dubbed it democratic centralism. The concept dates from Marx when he observed in the manifesto that even communists are a part of the ruling class.
democracy in America flourished at the height of the newspaper era, which "empowered the one to influence the many"
Ah, yes, that great champion of democracy, admirer and defender of the masses, William Randolph Hearst, who said, "You supply the pictures, and I'll supply the war." And he did.
Are all the Demo-Rats (besides Zell Miller) raving socialists, or just the ones who make the national press?
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
11/12/2003 14:21 Comments ||
Top||
#17
Bet he's kicking himself now for inventing a means for the many to talk back.
#18
Or was he just paraphrasing Mr. Spock (as he lay dying): "Jim, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."
Posted by: Michael ||
11/12/2003 14:34 Comments ||
Top||
#19
"Keep in mind that Gore started out as a newspaper journalist."
-His idea of being a reporter was spending 4 months in 'Nam lying about his exploits (i.e. taking point) and having a personal bodyguard w/him to keep him outta trouble paid for by his senator daddy....
#21
He likes newspapers better than TV - cause (i think this is what hes saying) its easier to start and run a paper than a TV network. That strikes me as rather exagerated, but hardly evidence of hidden fascism. And he seems to recognize that the internet improves things. Which shows hes on the right track. Now if only he'd mentioned blogs .....
#23
Actually, newspapers played a central role in both the Revolutionary War and the ratification of the Constitution. Of course, back then, each paper was controlled by its own printer/publisher. Ben Franklin had a paper in Philadelphia. One of the Adams (related to Samuel, who was a brewer) had a paper in Boston. Newspapers truly were the voice of the people in that era, as different (well-educated, mostly) people wrote about and commented on various aspects of the new government, the new Constitution, and their anger at the British. By the time of the Civil War, newspapers began to lose their independence, and their role in informing the "masses". First radio, and then television, killed the newspapers as 'champions of democracy', and they became panderers equal to television and radio. I glance through my morning newspaper to read the Assay cartoon (one of the best in the nation for political cartooning, IMO), see what they left out from Rantburg the day before, and to see what the pundits are lying about that day, then check out the letters to the editor. That's about it.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
11/12/2003 17:39 Comments ||
Top||
#24
Nobody hates democracy and free speech as much as the Democrats, these days.
#26
He is right about media magnifying words many times over. You could also look at Al's message in a different way. There once was a day that you coud say something ridiculous and not have your statement blasted to the width of the Globe for others to laugh at ... continuously ... for a long time. :-)
Posted by: Super Hose ||
11/12/2003 19:04 Comments ||
Top||
#27
I agree with Old Patriot about the import of papers & pamphlets to US history, hello Publius. But I don't think Gore was referring to that period as the heyday of newspapers, which - according to the article - was up until the advent of TV. The loss of the dominance of newspapers "leaves average Americans without an outlet for scholarly debate." This is pure revsionist bullshit.
#28
Truly, the blogosphere is the reincarnation of the independent newspaper of the Revolutionary period. That's one reason the UN wants to control the Internet. That's one reason the Dummycheats want to allow Internet "taxes", so they can control it (To be able to tax something is to control it - a proven maxim of virtually every dictatorial regime in history). As long as we have the ability to freely associate, freely communicate, and freely assemble, on the Internet and in person, this will remain a free nation. As soon as any entity gets control of any major portion of the Internet, that should be a call to arms for true believers in independence and freedom.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
11/12/2003 22:49 Comments ||
Top||
A South African air force pilot who was parachuting down after his fighter crashed in eastern South Africa Wednesday was killed when he slammed into the windscreen of a truck driving along a highway, police said. Under canopy, thinking everything is going to work out, when God decides to show you how a bug feels.
"The pilot hit the cab of the truck and was killed instantly," said police spokesman Mica Tlou. "We identified the plane as an Impala which had a pilot and co-pilot on board. Both the pilots died," Senior Superintendent Tlou told AFP. The second pilot in the Impala attack jet landed on a rocky patch of ground nearby, the police said. When your time is up, itâs up.
Posted by: Steve ||
11/12/2003 11:30:03 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I swear I remember this from a Simpsons episode.
#3
Thanking God for having someone invent the parachute, only to be splattered on a truck drivers windsheild.
" Damn, that's the biggest beetle I've ever seen! "
Posted by: Charles ||
11/12/2003 15:53 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Note to pilots - if you see ACME corporation stamped on your canopy, amd you're copilot goes by the nickname Wiley, say the follwing words repeatedly throughout the flight: "what'S up doc?"
Posted by: Super Hose ||
11/12/2003 19:22 Comments ||
Top||
Just finished watching "American Valor" on PBS, all about the Medal of Honor winners. All the men from the past, right up to Randy Shughart and Gary Gordon.
Oh my.
Posted by: Steve White ||
11/12/2003 12:25:23 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It was an amazing program. I was deeply moved by the corpman who's wife was killed by a drunken driver. May God have mercy on his soul.
#5
PBS??? Hmmm...I didn't see it, but I find it hard to believe that there wasn't a negative undercurrent running through it somehow, somewhere. Maybe they are just getting more subtle?
#8
i am surprised at the responses to PBS. This is an excellent station that shows unbiased programming. yes when they feature thier inhouse programming it can get out there - but overall very good programming.
Also a very amazing program, I def had my emotions shook up.
Posted by: Dan ||
11/12/2003 9:20 Comments ||
Top||
#9
PBS is a very mixed bag. Bill Moyers makes me want to projectile vomit at the screen, Frontline hits generally in the middle, but the liberals running PBS realize they have to appeal to their older (more conservative) audience too.
#11
Watched a good part of it. The brotherhood that these men felt for the other men in their units was a significant thread that tracked through each story even as the backdrops changed. It is eery to think that one of these guys could pass you on the streets.
The Nova episode on the fellahs building the Wright Brothers' Model B was also well worth the time.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
11/12/2003 19:49 Comments ||
Top||
An Afghan soldier opened fire on a coalition convoy at a checkpoint southern Afghanistan, killing one Romanian soldier and wounding another convoy member before escaping, a senior Afghan military commander said Wednesday. The commander, Gen. Said Mohammad, said the attacker was a veteran Afghan soldier who had acted alone Tuesday while other Afghan soldiers guarding the checkpoint were preparing a meal nearby to break their daily fast during the Ramadan holiday. Mohammad said Taliban and al-Qaida were not involved in the attack on the Romanians. Ah, then who was this "veteran soldier" working for?
But a Taliban spokesman, Mullah Abdullah Zabulwal, claimed responsibility for that attack and for a car bomb that exploded near two United Nations offices in Kandahar, southern Afghanistan, on Tuesday, wounding two people. Zabulwal, who spoke with The Associated Press by telephone from an unidentified location in Afghanistan, would not discuss the soldier involved in the Romanian assault, saying only that the men who had carried out both attacks had returned to their hideouts safely. Scurried back to their secret lair.
The attack on the Romanian convoy was first reported by government officials in Bucharest, who identified the fatality as Sgt. Maj. Iosif Silviu Fogorasi, 33, and said another Romanian soldiers also were wounded. Romania, a former communist country, has 450 troops serving in Afghanistan. Thank you Romania.
On Wednesday, Gen. Mohammad said the attack occurred when five Romanian armored cars were stopped at a roadblock about 50 miles east of Kandahar city while returning from Spin Boldak town near the Pakistan border. Earlier reports had said the Romanians returned fire and killed the assailant, but Mohammad said the attacking Afghan soldier, who was not immediately named, fled the scene.
Posted by: Steve ||
11/12/2003 9:09:38 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Ah, then who was this "veteran soldier" working for?
He was just caught up in the holiday spirit, apparently.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
11/12/2003 9:21 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Run and hide, Taliban-boy. The Gypsies never forget.
#5
If they bring in the related clans, they can make it a division. Kinda like my family in the south - theyre don't seem to be many, until you start listing all the related families. Then you know why I left the state to find a wife. It was either that or a cousin of one degree or another...
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
11/12/2003 17:49 Comments ||
Top||
#6
... expect the Romani...
As I was. Expect the ROMA to reinforce, etc.,. Not to mention, they shared space with the Italians in that building that was bombed in Nasariyah today. The gypsies are going to go apeshit on the islamofascists.
NATOâs European members need to increase the number of soldiers they each contribute to multinational missions, such as Afghanistan, the allianceâs outgoing secretary general warned Tuesday. NATOâs credibility will be shattered if it doesnât succeed in Afghanistan, Lord Robertson told several hundred delegates at a NATO Parliamentary Assembly. Yes it would, wouldnât it.
Failure of NATOâs mission in Afghanistan would result in increased terrorism, drug trading and refugees, Robertson told reporters after his address. ``If we fail, we will find Afghanistan on all our doorsteps,ââ he said. Robertson noted in his speech that the 18 non-U.S. NATO nations have only 55,000 soldiers assigned to multinational missions, although they have a total of 1.4 million soldiers in uniform plus about 1 million in reserves. ``Most of your countries plead that they are overstretched and can do no more,ââ Robertson said. ``That is quite simply unacceptable. It risks strategic failure in current operations.ââ Part of the problem is that, from everything Iâve read, a fair percentage of those 1.4 million soldiers just arenât up to modern combat operations: lack of equipment, logistics, training and leadership.
Robertson urged the delegates to use their political muscle at home to overcome constitutional constraints and budgetary hurdles limiting the commitment of soldiers to multinational missions. ``These are all political issues. So the ball is firmly in your court,ââ said Robertson, who will be succeeded as secretary general by Dutch Foreign Minister Jaap de Hoop Scheffer on Jan. 1. NATO took over command of the multinational force in Afghanistan in August from Germany and the Netherlands.
Posted by: Steve White ||
11/12/2003 12:42:26 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
the fact that France, etc. don't increase their role in Afghanistan, where they nominally supported the war should give pause to anyone who thinks that US unilaterism is keeping them from helping in Iraq.
I agree with Steve that part of the problem is that their armed forces aren't up to snuff but another part of the problem is the economics of it. The cost of fielding personnel overseas is high and much of Europe has stagnating economies
#2
On one hand, military inadequacy. On the other hand, economic problems.
On the gripping hand, they want us to fail.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
11/12/2003 8:28 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I agree with Steve that part of the problem is that their armed forces aren't up to snuff but another part of the problem is the economics of it.
That really doesn't apply to Afghanistan, since the cost is mainly of fielding light infantry, rather than heavy forces, which are more expensive to maintain. The sad truth is that the French would rather not help in any endeavor in which the US has a real stake.
#4
The cost of putting troops, even light infantry, on extended foreign deployments is expensive. Regardless, the traditional NATO countries are rich by any measure. They can afford to do this. The question as always is whether they have the will. Unfortunately, we know the answer to that one all too well.
Posted by: remote man ||
11/12/2003 13:09 Comments ||
Top||
#5
I'm certainly glad we never had to actually fight the Soviets with these marshmallow soldiers. War is not fun, but most of these nations have been occupied in the recent past. Guess it's that "short attention span" at work again.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
11/12/2003 17:56 Comments ||
Top||
Residents of the mainly Arab residential compound attacked by suspected al-Qaida suicide bombers said Wednesday they knew their Westernized lifestyle was under scrutiny — theyâd received a surprise visit from Saudi religious police suspicious that men and women were mixing at a party. Well, you canât have that.
The choice of target in the attack, which killed 17 people, mostly Arabs and Muslims, has baffled many in the region — and indicates al-Qaidaâs rage may be directed as much at Muslims seen as having slipped from the religionâs true path as at Western "infidels." No suprise here.
Saudi and U.S. officials have blamed Saturdayâs attack on al-Qaida, a sworn enemy of the Saudi ruling family, which it accuses of being insufficiently Islamic and too close to the United States. On Tuesday, a purported al-Qaida operative claimed responsibility for Saturdayâs bombing, saying in an e-mail that al-Qaida believed "working with Americans and mixing with them" was forbidden. The e-mail was sent to the London-based Arabic weekly Al-Majalla. Most of the residents of the al-Muhaya compound were Lebanese. Seven Lebanese were among the dead; other victims came from Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Sudan. Muhaya was typical of compounds housing members of the large contingent of foreign workers in Saudi Arabia: a place where non-Saudis could escape rules banning alcohol and mixing of men and women in public and requiring women to cloak and veil themselves when outside their homes. Muhaya had a coffee shop where residents of both sexes chatted over water pipes and watched foreign movies and other entertainment on a big screen television. It was located next to a pool where women swam in bikinis. The horror!
Agents of the Saudi religious police — the Committee for the Propagation of Virtue and Prevention of Vice — roam Saudi streets and shopping malls berating or even manhandling those who violate the social code. Its chief holds the rank of Cabinet minister in a kingdom where the royal family retains power in part with the support of conservative religious authorities. Seven bearded, robed religious police officers visited the Muhaya compound three months ago, saying they had reports of an "un-Islamic" party being held there, residents told The Associated Press on Wednesday. The religious police scuffled with compound guards who barred their entry until the compound owner arrived. During the delay, residents of both sexes slipped out of the complex coffee shop. The religious police were eventually allowed in and headed straight for the coffee shop. They left after finding it closed. "Weâll be back!"
The Associated Press placed several calls Wednesday to the religious police, but the calls were unanswered. Out looking for someone to beat
Muhaya residents said religious police had visited about four years earlier, also saying they had heard a party was being held. Residents said most compound parties are birthday gatherings for children. They said some residents may have alcohol in their homes, but it was never consumed in public. One resident, who gave only his first name, Rashid, said he always wondered whether compound activities were being watched from the surrounding mountains. Some residents of the compound, located in a ravine, believe the attackers came from the mountains. Saudi investigators say at least one attacker was in a bomb-packed vehicle, while others may have entered on foot.
Posted by: Steve ||
11/12/2003 4:44:33 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The Associated Press placed several calls Wednesday to the religious police, but the calls were unanswered.
There is something so Draconian about that line. It just reads like it came directly out of 1984. It's time to dismantle the kingdom. World wide terrorism will recede as a result.
Posted by: ISLAM SUCKS ||
11/12/2003 16:57 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Were the vice squad casing the joint,perchance?
Posted by: El Id ||
11/12/2003 17:07 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Those Taliban Religious Police really didn't have anything to do with tipping off Al Qaeda about the Coffee Shop of Sin or anything.
#4
al-Qaida believed "working with Americans and mixing with them" was forbidden.
Guess we'll have to shut down Islam and all its branches, then, 'cause we're not going to go without a fight. If al-Qaida believes they can drive us out by blowing up other Muslims, they must really be arrogant. Maybe it's time to melt some of those mountains on the Afghan-Pakistan border.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
11/12/2003 18:00 Comments ||
Top||
#5
You know the best way to deal with religious police?
Shoot them in the head, then douse them in gasoline and light them on fire.
No, it's not supposed to be a joke. Why did you think it would be?
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
11/12/2003 19:37 Comments ||
Top||
From Daily Star, Lebanon. EFL:
As the bodies of the seven Lebanese expatriates killed in Sundayâs blast in Riyadh are prepared for repatriation on Wednesday night, many are wondering why a mostly Lebanese compound was targeted. Since Sunday, the Lebanese Embassy in Riyadh has operated a 24-hour emergency center, accommodating the needs of families whose homes were destroyed and providing legal papers for those who wish to return to Lebanon. Seven Lebanese were killed in Sundayâs blast when a suicide bomberâs car exploded amid their houses inside the Al-Muhaya residential compound. Among them were three children. At least 35 others were wounded. About 120 Lebanese families live in the Al-Muhaya compound. They make up 60 percent of the households in the compound and most of their homes were located right next to the explosion site. Other residents were either Syrian or Palestinian, with a small number of Canadians. Yup, sounds like the Lebanese were the target
According to Alice Nassar, a Lebanese who has lived in Jeddah for over 10 years, an atmosphere of tension has seized the country since the incident. âWeâre not thinking of leaving yet because nothing has happened in Jeddah. But as soon as the slightest incident occurs, we will pack and leave. Thereâs no question about that,â she said. âThe streets are empty and so are shopping malls. Weâre scared; everyone is,â she said. Nassar said that the Lebanese Embassy is holding a party for Lebanese Independence Day on Nov. 22, âbut no one is going. We donât dare to.â When asked if she believed that Lebanese nationals were the target of Sundayâs murderous explosion she said: âIt really looks like it. Perhaps because we are reputed to drink and party too much. No one knows.â Canât have any of that partying in the Holy Kingdom.
Posted by: Steve ||
11/12/2003 2:34:43 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
Note to Alice: that's the idea of terrorism, Ma'am. All you need to do now is pressure the government into acquiescing to terrorist demands (naturally to preserve your good health), and presto, you have done your part to advance the terrorists' agenda.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
11/12/2003 15:13 Comments ||
Top||
#4
"Reputed" to drink and party too much? Well somebody knew.
Posted by: Michael ||
11/12/2003 16:58 Comments ||
Top||
#5
You have to kind of feel bad for the Lebanese. Tey even get bombed while they are getting bimbed in somebodyelse's country. We ought to make them honorary Americans.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
11/12/2003 18:53 Comments ||
Top||
EFL & Texture
Saudi clerics who have offered lotâs and lotâs of CA$H, even more this time to mediate between militants and the government say they believe fresh terror attacks are imminent. .... Saudi clerics who have been trying to mediate between the government and the unknown armed militants, Question: If they are "unknown" how then does one "mediate" with them?
have been unable to make a breakthrough. But the talks are said to be continuing. Unknown? Huh? Tip to the clerics: A quick scan of attendees of Fridayâs prayers should yield a few hints.
Our correspondent reports that according to one participant in mediation efforts, the unknown militants have made two demands:
-Immediate reform of the judicial system
Translation: Release all the terrorist fiends in custody... And here is the money demand...
-An end to "attacks on them" by the authorities. Ka-Ching! Translation: We desire to roam the earth freely enslaving infidels, murdering innocent Jews, and ramping up Honor Killings. So STOP ATTACKING US!!!
They're still trying to negotiate with the Bad Guys. Amazing... but not unexpected.
#1
Saudi clerics who have been trying to mediate between the government and the unknown armed militants, have been unable to make a breakthrough. But the talks are said to be continuing.
I wonder - has their harvest yet yielded a bitter taste? No? Then by all means, let the "militants" stage more and more attacks, until the clerics and the Saudi royal family understand.
#3
I would recommend an advanced mediation class for all Saudi clerics if the attacks continue. Don't mind the charred walls and smokey smell of the classroom, but the semester might be a long one.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
11/12/2003 19:13 Comments ||
Top||
DEBKA reporting, EFL:
The suicide bombing attack Saturday night November 9 that devastated Riyadhâs Muhaya compound and killed scores was the work of an al Qaeda Lebanese team , according to our intelligence and counter-terror sources. With this strike, Osama bin Ladenâs Lebanese arm made its debut on the stage of international terror. DEBKAfile has been reporting for more than a year that the Islamic network had built up three concentrations in Lebanon â in Tripoli in the north, Beirut and the Palestinian Ein el-Hilweh refugee camp in the south. Pointers to a Lebanese hit-team accumulated in the hands of Saudi intelligence and American counter-terror agencies in the Middle East 48 hours before the suicide bombers struck the Riyadh compound. The group was reported to be made up of al Qaeda operatives, Lebanese nationals and their Palestinian recruits.
Paleos hitting Soddy targets? But... but... Paleoterrorism is different, right?
In our 10 November on this page, we revealed the presence of Al Qaedaâs Nigerian cells secreted into the kingdom among the swarms of pilgrims visiting Mecca for Ramadan. One such cell was thwarted in its attempt to bring off a terrorist attack in the Muslim holy city. The Lebanese unit succeeded in its mission in Riyadh, but the wave of Islamic terror may not be spent. Security forces in Riyadh, Jeddah and Mecca are braced for further assaults while a top terror alert was extended Monday, November 10, to the Sudanese capital of Khartoum, where the US embassy decided to temporarily suspend operations until the peril had passed. Al Qaedaâs targeting of al-Muhaya and its Arab population at first puzzled Saudi and foreign counter-terror authorities â until it was realized that many of the casualties were Lebanese Christians and the assailants Lebanese Muslims. The terrorist network had very pointedly opted to sow death inside a focus of Christian habitation in the Muslim kingdom on the Muslim feast of Ramadan. Heard there were Lebanese victims, first Iâve heard that they were christian. Interesting, makes perfect sense, in a twisted islamic way, if true.
The same mind-set is behind the terror alert declared in Sudan Monday, November 10. Here, the Al Qaeda poses a threat not only to US diplomatic missions but to the peace talks between the Muslim government and the Christian rebels of the south. Notices appearing of late on al Qaeda-linked Websites call specifically for all possible action to abort Sudanâs conversion from âan Arab-Muslim state to a country ruled by Christians.â "Got to stop those damm Christians and their plan for world domination. They started out as Jews, you know."
More on this subject, from the Globe and Mail, via Jihadwatch...
As details emerge about the victims of last weekend's bombing, many observers believe their profile made them targets for the suspected al-Qaeda attack. Ms. Jibran, like her husband whom she married in July of 2002, was Christian. According to Arabic-language news reports, they had also received documentation to move to Canada. Elias Bijjani, a Toronto-based member of the Lebanese Canadian Coordinating Council, said many of the couple's neighbours were also Lebanese Christians. He speculated al-Qaeda was targeting Christian Arabs, rather than Muslims.
Daleel al-Mojahid, the Yahoo group that posted an early warning to Muslims to flee New York, Los Angeles, and Washington before an imminent al-Qaeda attack, is crowing about the terrorist attack in Saudi Arabia. Last night whoever runs the site posted this:
"alaah akbaar
"the mojahideen had struck the heart of a compound housing arab non-muslims
working for the CIA! the hit was a another slap on bush's face and more slaps
are coming to you face bush.
"this hit is not the hit that we issued a warning about this is a hit to start
cleaning up the dirty black stain of the CIA in the kinkdom.
"ofcourse you will here the saudi TV issue all kinds of false statments of who
was killed in the attack...i wonder why armitage is in saudi arabia meeting up
with the crown prince!! tell your american people who was there armitage!!
"alaah akbaar alaah akbaar and what is coming is greater."
Posted by: Steve ||
11/12/2003 9:49:51 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
i thought the assailants were Nigerians.
I kinda doubt this is the Lebanese civil war being played out in Riyadh - I think thats just a Debka obsession.
Strategic rationale for attacking the compound is pretty obvious - frighten away the foreigners who make Saudi society function, so that it collapses.
Remember these were the guys who targeted Bali, apparently attempting to destroy the Indon tourist industry - who previously waged a war on Egypts tourist industry - and who targeted WTC both for symbolic value and corpse count, but also thinking they could take down the US economy. These people may be crazy, but theyre not thoroughly stupid at the strategic level.
#2
Those jackoffs at Daleel al-Mohajid make my MOAB trigger finger very itchy. Not much point in reasoning with these scum. Fry em says I!
Posted by: remote man ||
11/12/2003 13:14 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Look, I don't know if there were Lebanese responsible for the attack, but I did think it strange that a compound peopled by Arabs would be attacked, unless the foreigners were...not Muslim.
So the premise that Leb Christians were victims simply because of their religion is at least credible. After all, if it's one thing I learned while in the Magic Kingdom, it's that a true Wahibist looks at non-Muslim Arabs (who should know better) a whole lot more harshly than the typical non-Arab kuffur (who are just plain lost)
Posted by: Michael ||
11/12/2003 14:53 Comments ||
Top||
#4
but AQ considers most muslims who support the established regimes to be Kufrs, IIRC.
#7
If Al Quida has no respect towards Christmas holidays in the USA, then the next Ramanand in the U.S. or Saudi Arabia then maybe someone will drop the bomb on these bunch of dam Sand Niggers..
I guarantee you, the next Ramanand there is going to be no "Chatter" just action.. KILL ALL SAND NIGER'S!! In the U.S. and abroad..
Posted by: Bayan Elashi ||
12/25/2003 1:15 Comments ||
Top||
Muslim militants planning attacks in Saudi Arabiaâs holiest city, Mecca, booby-trapped copies of Islamâs holy book, the Koran, to kill and maim pilgrims, a leading Saudi-owned newspaper has reported. The London-based daily Asharq al-Awsat on Wednesday quoted Saudi security sources as saying that this novel weapon was discovered in the arms caches police found after raiding militant hideouts in Mecca and the capital Riyadh in recent weeks. In Mecca, police said they had found tonnes of explosives and rocket propelled grenade launchers, which Interior Minister Prince Nayef bin Abdul Aziz said were to be used to attack pilgrims. In July, police searching militant caches in Mecca found souvenir clocks resembling the Koran that had been booby-trapped. July? And they didnât think is was a indication of trouble? Asharq al-Awsat said the militants had also stuffed explosives into water bottles, which pilgrims normally carry into the shrines, and that they were planning to dress up in wigs and womenâs clothes to become less conspicuous in public. Or maybe they just like to wear womens clothing.
Saudi Arabia has launched a crackdown on suspected al Qaeda militants after triple suicide bombings in Riyadh in May killed 35 people, mostly foreigners. Since then, Asharq al-Awsat said police had found a large number of meat cleavers and swords, which experts said indicated the militants were willing to hack their victims in the same style as Islamist radicals in Algeria. "Abu, you want the grenade or the AK?"
"Nah, Iâm a traditionalist. Hand me the cleaver"
The newspaper said the militants were also well-prepared to carry out assassinations and that they relied on surveillance cameras to avoid being caught.
Posted by: Steve ||
11/12/2003 8:46:26 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Islam: The Religion of Cross-dressing.
Posted by: Charles ||
11/12/2003 8:48 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I think we're going to have to spread around the world just how dangerous it is to pick up a copy of the Koran. You never know when you're going to get an exploding one, after all.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
11/12/2003 9:01 Comments ||
Top||
#3
....they were planning to dress up in wigs and womenâs clothes to become less conspicuous in public.
In my travels through Muslim countries I noticed the men like to hold hands with each other and kiss on the cheek. In these same countires the women are oftern covered head-to-toe. Hmmm, now they are wearing women's clothing. Draw your own conclusions.
#8
B-A-R Have any "moderate" Muslims stepped up to loudly condemn this?
Probably, but probably not as many that think the Jooos or the US is behind it.
by David Pryce-Jones in the Wall Street Journal. EFL; read it all.
[In Saudi Arabia,] 5,000 or more princes control all power and resources, sharing out ministries and governorships and oil revenues as they see fit. Their idea of democracy is to appoint an advisory council and religious leaders carefully vetted to provide a facade of legitimacy. Immemorial tribal custom and the local Wahhabi brand of Islam are defended and perpetuated to create the impression that this is the natural order of things. The Shiite minority forms about 20% of the population, but on the grounds that they are not Wahhabis they are arrested without trial, tortured and often disappear. Rights and the rule of law are only what the ruling family says they are. The Saudi family of course has a large and privileged security and police apparatus at its service. In other words, less like a government than a mob family.
No blueprint exists in any of the textbooks for successfully modernizing a society like this one. . . . Sept. 11 forced the U.S. and everyone else to recognize that Saudi Arabia has become a danger to itself and the rest of the world. Lest we forget, almost all the hijackers hailed from the kingdom. Individual Saudis, including some princes and their so-called charities, have sponsored—and continue to sponsor—terror groups, including their homegrown al Qaeda, in some 60 countries. Faced with the evidence, the ruling Saudis have preferred to prevaricate, often refusing to share intelligence, hampering investigations and the pursuit of justice. That only works for a while.
Those who gave money to al Qaeda were hoping to buy off Osama bin Laden, insuring themselves against him. But that's not easy. Bin Laden wants to return to a tribal Wahhabi society in its purest form. In his eyes, the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia was sacrilege, and he has been threatening to dethrone the Saudi royal family that permitted it. The relocation of U.S. troops elsewhere in the region removes that particular grievance but also leaves the country to its own devices. The ruling family, bin Laden, the Shiites, groups of dissidents and exiles, and everyone else are quite free to struggle for power as best they can without outside interference. "Last one standing gets to claim soverignty."
At this late moment, any suggestion of reform looks like weakness, which only invites more of the violence it aims to disarm. In aviation, that's known as a "graveyard spiral."
Evidently granting concessions under pressure, the ruling family recently announced that in principle elections could be held for 14 municipal councils. Another unprecedented step was a human rights conference held in mid-October in Riyadh. Hundreds of people took this opportunity to demonstrate, until antiriot police firing tear gas dispersed them. The conference called, among other things, for a greater role for women in a country where they are not allowed to drive a car or even to go out unaccompanied by a male member of the family. "They demand it," in the words of an editorial in an official English-language newspaper, "Saudi Arabia needs it."
There is no right of assembly, but at the same time hundreds of men and women, most of them young, took to the streets of Riyadh to demand democratic and economic reforms, and they called for the release from detention of other activists. Up to 150 protesters were arrested—the exact number of people already kept in jail on grounds of "security" is unknown, but it is in the thousands. "They are a small bunch," said Prince Nayef, who has been interior minister for most of his public life, adding like a true Bourbon. "This won't happen again." . . . . . . until the next time it happens.
Unlike the unfortunate Louis XVI, those 5,000 and more princes have a real stranglehold on power, as well as the will for self-preservation. Their security apparatus may well succeed in maintaining for a while longer the peculiar stagnation cherished by the ruling family. Not indefinitely, though. A revolt that becomes a revolution is an irresistible force that sweeps away what once seemed unmovable objects in its path. Faster, please.
Posted by: Mike ||
11/12/2003 6:25:25 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Can Riyadh reform in time to avoid their own destruction? I sure fucking hope not. They do not deserve to survive any of this shit that they have been funding and inciting around the world. They deserve to be buried alive, doused in gasoline and set on fire. Just my .02
Posted by: ISLAM SUCKS ||
11/12/2003 10:31 Comments ||
Top||
#2
But will the new rulers be better than the old ones? I doubt it. And a civil war will disrupt oil prices and supplies in a big way, especially if it happens before Iraq comes online again. Can you spell depression? (And it would get a lot harder to fight a war with money in short supply.)
What would be ideal? I hope for a democratic and friendly Arabia; but I don't see it happening.
As a fallback, how about partitioning S.A--the Shi'ites get the oil, the Jordanian Hashemites get the holy sites back, and the Saudis get the empty quarter. That won't happen either, unless somebody helps.
Posted by: James ||
11/12/2003 11:01 Comments ||
Top||
#3
The scent of revolution is in the air. How this all plays out will be of monumental significance. I'd say the die is cast and the kingdom is doomed. Hows that for appopolitic(?) blather.
But will the new rulers be better than the old ones?
No. They would be replaced by radicals that make the bigot saudi royals look like jew loving moderates by comparison. But that doesn't matter. After the royals fall, we can go in and kill the radicals in one of the capitals of jihad inc, AKA Arabia. And if the people that come to power in arabia after that are worse than the radicals, then topple them too. Keep doing it until they either begin to figure it out, or a thrown into such profound chaos, that they have no ability to focus attacks on us, rather they will be much more concerned with the difficult task of finding enough food to make it through the day.
Posted by: ISLAM SUCKS ||
11/12/2003 12:18 Comments ||
Top||
#5
I agree with IS. There will be chaos in that country when the revolution comes. First off, all the foreigners will skeedaddle, westerners, paks, phillipinos, everyone. This means that the plumbing won't work, the lights will go out, the cars won't get fixed and most certainly, the oil won't flow.
Hopefully we will let it descend into some chaos before we go in and restore order. I'm guessing that there will be more support for us on this one since countries like Japan, Korea and much of Western Europe depend on oil from the Soddys.
Their killing one another will be an interesting spectacle. No one deserves it more (Bad Bob in Zimbabwe does come in a close second...maybe tied with the black hats in Iran).
Posted by: remote man ||
11/12/2003 13:29 Comments ||
Top||
#6
If Suadi falls into chaos and the oil stops,who will be winners and losers?
Winner:Russia.All that Siberian oil Europe,Japan and China will pay anything for.
Winner:whoever gains control of Spratley(?)Islands and oil underneath.Contenders-China(one reason China is expanding navy),Phillipines and Vietnam(one reason Vietnam wants better relations w/US).
Winner:England.That North Sea oil is really gonna look good.Will have to guard against attempts to Euro-ize the oil.
Loser:Palestinian terror orgs.Losing all that Saudi funding is gonna hurt.
Loser:Islamic schools and "churches".See above.
Loser:Continental Europe.No local oil,no way to project power to grab some.
Push:Uncle Sam is really gonna be interested in who is running Venezuela,Columbia and Mexico.
Posted by: Stephen ||
11/12/2003 14:55 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Missed some key ingredients here: Can Nigeria keep from going totally fundamentalist Islamic? Will Libya waffle again? What will the black turbantops in Iran do? How about Azerbaijan and Georgia (lots of oil there, too, remember!)?
One key winner, if it's in place and stable enough at that time, will be a democratic Iraq. That will be the key to success or failure of the entire Islamofascist putsch. If Iraq can build and maintain a stable government, the Islamofascists lose, big-time.
Another winner will be Israel. Without Saudi money, the Paleos will dry up and blow away - literally. There is no economy to support them but the Israeli economy. There will be some MAJOR changes in the Middle East!
Another key question will be Egypt. If Egypt really stays out of the fray, the chance of major positive changes in the ME will be possible. If Egypt interferes, it will muddy the waters just enough to make everything take longer and cost more, includinng US lives.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
11/12/2003 18:43 Comments ||
Top||
Another version of the report from day before yesterday... [EFL]
A leading Saudi government cleric and author of the countryâs religious curriculum believes Islam advocates slavery. "Slavery is a part of Islam," says Sheik Saleh Al-Fawzan, according to the independent Saudi Information Agency, or SIA. In a lecture recorded on tape by SIA, the sheik said, "Slavery is part of jihad, and jihad will remain as long there is Islam." Al-Fawzan is a member of the Council of Religious Edicts and Research, the Imam of Prince Mitaeb Mosque in Riyadh and a professor at Imam Mohamed Bin Saud Islamic University, Saudi Arabiaâs main center of learning for the strict Wahhabi interpretation of Islam. His religious books are used to teach 5 million Saudi students, both within the country and abroad, including the United States. Al Fawzan is a member of the Senior Council of Clerics, Saudi Arabiaâs highest religious body. As for those who disagree with him:
[He] says Muslims who contend Islam is against slavery "are ignorant, not scholars." [They are] infidels ... their blood and money are therefore free for the taking by "true Muslims." Al-Fawzan, a leading opponent of curriculum reform, opposes elections and demonstrations as Western influences, is against Arab women marrying non-Arab Muslims and has issued a fatwa forbidding the watching of television. According to Saudi liberal writer and scholar Sheikh Hassan Al-Maliki, Al-Fawzan threatened him with beheading if he continued in his criticism of the extremist Wahhabi interpretation of Islam. Al-Maliki, who worked for the ministry of education, was fired after he wrote a 50- page paper criticizing Al-Fawzanâs book âAl-Tawheedâ. Ah yes, Islam, the religion of peace. Peace as long as you lock up the slaves and cut the tongues out of the infidels (after robbing them first). These guys make the Klan look liberal. And the Saudi Royal family prop these guys up and try to spread their close-minded hate around the world. When is the US going to get smart, and cut the source of the cancer in the middle east: the Wahabbi bigots and the bastards in Soddy that support them.
Posted by: OldSpook ||
11/12/2003 2:29:28 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It would be interesting to hear from the Louis Farrakhan on this.
Posted by: Ben ||
11/12/2003 4:32 Comments ||
Top||
#3
The institution of slavery was historically vital to the spreading of Islam. Since the Islamic children of slaves who convert to Islam can't be made slaves and non Islamic children of slaves remain slaves, it created an enormous incentive for conversion to Islam.
#4
The institution of slavery was historically vital to the spreading of Islam. Since the Islamic children of slaves who convert to Islam can't be made slaves and non Islamic children of slaves remain slaves, it created an enormous incentive for conversion to Islam.
#5
mhw -- I've occasionally wondered if the European views of slavery and servitude as "Christianizing" weren't adapted from Islamic practices. Not saying that pre-Islamic Europe was a paradise, just that the peculiar practices in the Americas and Africa, particularly those of the Spanish, might have had a touch of Moorish influence.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
11/12/2003 8:30 Comments ||
Top||
#6
"is against Arab women marrying non- Arab Muslims "
This may go over in saudi, but i suspect he'd be considered a heretic in Iran, Pakland, Indonesia, etc.
Could be something to this. Recent historic research has been examining the close working relationships between the European slave traders and the Islamic slave traders in Africa. There is enough on this to make a very good PBS special except that the subject isn't PC.
#10
liberalhawk.
For one thing the Iranians are Shiite and those not practicing Wahabism in SA are Sunni.
Also the Egyptians, if I am not mistaken, announced last week that they are not Arabs.
This soup is too much for me to swallow.
Posted by: Barry ||
11/12/2003 11:40 Comments ||
Top||
#11
mhw.
Maybe this link, if you have not already seen this, will prove interesting
Posted by: Barry ||
11/12/2003 11:45 Comments ||
Top||
#12
"their blood and money are free for the taking buy true muslims." Boy thats a mouthfull. Could it be so easy? Hey Hasan, you might want to act preemptively on ol' Al Fawsan on that beheading thing as he means it. Just pay some hit cash to a Somalli beggar, It's cool as it's allowed to be done by any "true muslim", whatever that means. Ramadama ding dong daddy.
Charles V of Spain forbade slavery in 1542. And now let's talk about the doctrine of predestination in Calvinism and how it makes easy to put it at the service of slavery and apartheid: "savages" are obviously abandonned by God otherwise they would be civilized, AFAIK the pro-apartheid South African churches were those of Calvinist obedience<.
#15
Another point is that the Western nations have never looked favorably on sexual relations with slaves (in ancient Rome it was punished by death): this has protected slaves against rape. On Islam they are recommended and many Arabic writings delight on describing how after taking a city "the pride of their women was shattered".
#16
To follow up on mhw's comments. Slavery in the West consisted mostly of putting Blacks on ships and sending them to the Americas to cut sugar cane, cotton, etc. In other words, for economic reasons.
From my readings over the years, many slaves in Arab-Muslim lands were the unfortunate folks who got captured in war. In other words, not for economic reasons. Those who were black, however, and converted or whose children became Muslim, pretty much kept their stations in life since their "stained" backgrounds made them lepers in the eyes of the Arab ruling classes. One can make the argument that they got double-whammied (former slave AND black)in their new lives. Think why the Alouite dynasty of Morocco always seems to have dark skinned folks working for the royals there. I can't link any photos to prove it, but the books I've read about that country seem to be frequently illustrated with engravings done by 18th and 19th century Euros showing black folks to be the ones fanning the sultan.
Hope al-Jubeir gets asked about Al-Fawzan the next time he's on the Sunday talking-head shows.
Posted by: Michael ||
11/12/2003 15:21 Comments ||
Top||
Iâll make a comment after I stop laughing.
THE Sydney woman who in September wed al-Qaeda operative and alleged terrorist Willie Brigitte after converting to Islam had been part of a Jewish gay group just 18 months earlier. Melanie Brown was photographed on the edge of a float in the 2002 Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras, wearing long lace-up Doc Martens. The float called "Twice Blessed" was built by Dayenu, a support group for Sydneyâs Jewish gays and lesbians.
The Daily Telegraph understands Ms Brown became part of Dayenu in 2000 and then worked to build its floats in both 2001 and 2002. A former member of Dayenu last night said that he and others in the group could not recall seeing her with a lesbian partner. Ms Brown is believed to have told members of Dayenu her Jewish heritage came from her mother, who had come to Australia from Romania. She also said she had been to Israel with the Australian army. Ms Brown is said to have formed strong bonds within the group but had a falling out over an anti-abortion e-mail that she sent to other members some time last year. "It upset a lot of people. Many people wrote back, voicing their anger. Then she left Dayenu," the former member told The Daily Telegraph last night. "I ran into her again in February this year. She looked exactly the same." She asked whether Dayenu was entering a float in the Mardi Gras and said that she had left the army.
Six months later, Ms Brown is believed to have converted to Islam, changed her name to Khadija and married Willie Brigitte in a Lakemba prayer hall after just five dates. "I thought she was a Jewish lesbian. Now I find out sheâs Islamic and married to Willie Brigitte," the stunned former Dayenu member said last night.
This incarnation is yet another stage in the life story of Ms Brown, a Hurstville girl who went to an Anglican school and dreamt of being an army general. She was awarded gold through the Duke of Edinburgh Award scheme in 1995 and went on to fulfil her military ambitions too. The Daily Telegraph has revealed Ms Brown worked as an assessor with the NSW Squadron Air Training Group, later joining the army and serving as a peacekeeper in East Timor, where she developed an interest in Islam.
The latest revelations from Ms Brownâs past emerged as close family members said news of her conversion to Islam and marriage to Brigitte - now being interrogated in a French prison - came as a surprise. "This has come as a complete shock to the family, her paternal cousin said yesterday. "Nobody in the family knows anything about it."
Posted by: tipper. ||
11/12/2003 2:21:45 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Another (very) confused John Walker-Lindh type? Or a spy! If so, which group was she spying for? It's hard to imagine an Islamist sleeper cell member going undercover as a Ozzie Jewish lesbian ;-> but not inconceivable.
On the other hand, an Ozzie Jewish lesbian with a military background could, in theory, try to get close to a terrorist suspect by pretending to be his convert/wife. Actually, I'd like to believe that. If it's true, our security/intelligence community is more creative than I thought!
Posted by: Tokyo Taro ||
11/12/2003 2:39 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Just another Jew who thinks radical Islam can be appeased to death.
Posted by: Charles ||
11/12/2003 8:44 Comments ||
Top||
#3
More from The Daily Telegraph: It is understood Ms Brown â who was an Anglican who became Jewish before turning to the Muslim faith and marrying Brigitte â attended the progressive Temple Emanuel synagogue in Woollahra but also more mainstream Jewish organisations including the Australian Union of Jewish Students (AUJS).
Ms Brown has had a varied background including a stint in the Air Corp, then the Australian Army as a signaller and Arabic interpreter before resigning and becoming a university mature-aged student of linguistics.
So she was a Arabic interpreter in the Australian Army before falling in with a terrorist? Now where have I heard that before......Oh, right.
Posted by: Steve ||
11/12/2003 15:16 Comments ||
Top||
#4
What we have here is a either very serious identiy crisis or an incredible cover. I vote barking moonbat.
Posted by: Frank G ||
11/12/2003 18:55 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Shipman - sounds like someone discovered some 'good stuff', and snorted it until there were no brain cells left connected. 'Barking moonbat' is too high on the intelligence scale.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
11/12/2003 20:47 Comments ||
Top||
New Zealandâs Minister of Immigration, Lianne Dalziel, addresses the Immigration & Refugee Law Seminar, refering to the case of Ahmed Zaoui, 5th Nov:
Finally I thought that I should also mention Part 4A of the Immigration Act 1987, which was passed into law in 1999, and which has been the subject of considerable media scrutiny of late.
This is the first time that a Security Risk Certificate has been issued in accordance with the Act, so it can be expected that there will be some anxiety about how the process will work in practice.
I am disturbed about the extent of the media coverage that has been involved in the individual case and the campaign that is being mounted in the media against the provisions that enable the Director of Security to disclose âclassified security informationâ to the Minister of Immigration. No one should know his name, no one should have seen his photo and no one should have seen him appearing in court. Section 129T is clear and for good reason. Publicity may expose a claimant to risk, whether they are removed from New Zealand or not, and other family members or friends may be exposed to risk. On the other hand, publicity may be generated by the person him/herself in order to shore up a claim for status.
The Minister objects to the level of publicity the case has received, referring to section 129T of the immigration act
I would suggest that much of the interest in the case has resulted from the way in which the Government has handled the case, including the transfer from Papakura Police Station to Paremoremo with full police escort (including a helicopter overhead) and imprisoning Mr. Zaoui in solitary confinement in one of our toughest prisons for 10 months.
Given how Mr. Zaouiâs case has demonstrated the failings and problems inherent in the current system, I am grateful that the process was not hidden away from the NZ public (as the Minister may have preferred).
Part 4A acknowledges that there will be circumstances where classified security information will be relevant for immigration purposes. It also makes it clear that there are competing interests â the public interest and the individual interest.
The individual rights sought to be protected are contained, in a New Zealand context, within the NZ Bill of Rights Act. Under that Act there is provision for all government Bills to be vetted for compliance with the Act. The Bill that introduced Part 4A was vetted for compliance. It met the test.
The Minister of Immigration states that the Immigration Act was âvetted for compliance with the NZ Bill of Rights Act. However, the Bill of Rights Act states:
Section 4 [Other Enactments]
No court shall, in relation to any enactment (whether passed or made before or after the commencement of this Bill of Rights),
(a) Hold any provision of the enactment to be impliedly repealed or revoked, or to be in any way invalid or ineffective; or
(b) Decline to apply any provision of this enactment by reason only that the provision is inconsistent with any provision of this Bill of Rights.
Or simply: Any other legislation can override the Bill of Rights. I am not aware of exactly what the âvettingâ process involves, but it is clearly not intended to make the legislation respect the rights described in the Bill.
From section 22 of the Bill of Rights reads almost as a list of rights the Mr. Zaoui has been denied:
âEveryone has the right not to be arbitrarily arrested or detained,
âEveryone who is charged with an offenceâŠShall be informed promptly and in detail of the nature and cause of the chargeâ
Section 25 [Fair Trial] is particularly relevant:
Everyone who is charged with an offence has, in relation to the determination of the charge, the following minimum rights:
(a) The right to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial court:
(b) The right to be tried without undue delay:
(c) The right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law:
(d) The right not to be compelled to be a witness or to confess guilt:
(e) The right to be present at the trial and to present a defence:
(f) The right to examine the witnesses for the prosecution and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses for the defence under the same conditions as the prosecution:
(g) The right, if convicted of an offence in respect of which the penalty has been varied between the commission of the offence and sentencing, to the benefit of the lesser penalty:
(h) The right, if convicted of the offence, to appeal according to the law to a higher court against the conviction or against the sentence or against both.
Essentially the ability of âan independent person of high standingâ, (in this case the Inspector General of Intelligence & Security), to review the Security Risk Certificate, including the classified security information upon which it is based, coupled with an appeal to the Court of Appeal on a point of law, are what protect the individualâs rights.
However the public interest lies in New Zealandâs ability to receive classified security information, and such information must remain confidential for good reason. If New Zealand does not treat the classified security information it receives as confidential, how much intelligence will we receive in the future? How will we be able to issue warnings to our citizens considering travelling abroad? How will we be able to become aware of the connections between people and groups that have implications for our own domestic security?
The Minister of Immigration speaks of it being in the âpublic interestâ for NZ to be able to receive classified security information. She asks how much intelligence we will receive in the future if this information is not treated as confidential. The implication is that people advocating for the fair treatment of Mr. Zaoui, would like the information to be broadcast publicly. This is not true â Although I am curious as to what the information is, there is no reason for me to see it . There is however, every reason for Mr. Zaoui and his lawyers to see it - and no reason that they cannot keep the information confidential.
To follow the Ministers conclusion to itâs logical extent â we could also lock up New Zealand citizens based on overseas intelligence, without revealing any charges â in case revealing them jeopardises our relationship with the intelligence community! It is not a big step to convicting people of local crimes without revealing the charges or sources of accusation, so that undercover officers and informants can continue operating (in the public interest).
The New Zealand Security Intelligence Service does receive information on a strictly confidential basis, and it is vital to New Zealandâs security that it can continue to do so.
If anyone needs a reason for the use of classified security information in this way, we only need to think about September 11 or, for something closer to home, the Bali bombing. The only real counter to terrorism is intelligence. Terrorism is not like conventional war â it is underground, it is long-term in its planning and its participants are not only not afraid to die, they expect to do so in the name of their cause.
The Minister refers to the events of September 11, and the Bali bombing as a justification for using classified security information. These two events were both a horrific failure on the part of the intelligence community. It is unlikely that these events were not detected because Intelligence organisations were unable to keep information classified. In referring to these two terrible tragedies, the Minister is appealing to our fear of the different and the unknown. These events may point to the need for reform of the Intelligence services worldwide, but they do not justify abandoning international Human Rights standards.
I have asserted that in this case the media have been used to mount a case in the âcourt of public opinionâ, but that is not an appropriate jurisdiction, because only one side can be presented. For example, during the weekend when the RSAA decision was being edited for public release, (a delay and process that was
agreed by everyone), the Sunday Star Times reported that they had been âallowed exclusive access to [the] file through his defence teamâ. The media couldnât even question an apparent inconsistency between the RSAA decision and comments attributed to the individual, because they didnât have the RSAA decision
The Minister refers to media coverage of the case saying that case is being mounted in the court of public opinion. This is a distortion of the work activists are doing. The main thrust of argument is not whether or not if Mr. Zaoui is a security risk, but whether it is acceptable to treat anybody (genuine security risk or not) in the manner in which the Government has treated Mr. Zaoui. Although it is inevitable that discussion of the case will also involve discussing whether or not Mr. Zaoui actually is a security risk, the phrase most repeated is âfreedom or fair trialâ not âZaoui is not a security riskâ
The website I run is called FreeZaoui.org â but the qualifier âor give him a fair trialâ is added.
The public have heard both sides of the discussion on whether it acceptable to treat an individual in this manner. It is the process that causes the most concern â and this leads to questioning whether the process that will determine whether Mr. Zaoui is a security risk is fair, trustworthy, and holds to Human Rights standards.
It is fair to say that some members of the public have become particularly anxious because of the length of time this has all taken. My preliminary decision to rely on the Security Risk Certificate was communicated to the individual in April this year. He appealed immediately to the Inspector-General, however, the matter was, with his consent deferred until after the RSAA decision was made.
I would be among the members of the public who are âanxiousâ over the length of time Mr. Zaoui has been detained. However it is the way in which he has been imprisoned that is of most concern. The solitary confinement at Paremoremo, and the fact that he has still not been charged with any offence.
It was, therefore, only when he was approved refugee status that the matter proceeded to be addressed by the Inspector General. I have no objection to this process. However, I have been receiving letters blaming me for the length of time he has been detained.
These letters would probably be sent to her because she is the person in charge of the system that has imprisoned him for this length of time. She cannot distance herself from Mr. Zaouiâs treatment, because as Minister of Immigration, she is responsible for the refugee process. To suggest she is powerless over this process is simply ridiculous.
Yet he is still the subject of a security risk certificate â the only difference is that he now has refugee status. The publicity centres on the latter not the former, and I cannot say why he is subject to the security risk certificate, because that is based on classified security information. I am caught between a rock and a hard place. That is why I have expressed frustration at the legal proceedings that are causing delays.
The Minister expresses frustration at âdelaysâ due to legal action by Mr. Zaouiâs lawyers. The main delay appears to be the wait for the RSAA hearing, which cannot be blamed on Mr. Zaouiâs lawyers. Given that Mr. Zaouiâs life may depend upon the outcome of the process here in NZ, It should be expected that every possible avenue be explored.
Part 4A of the Act did not envisage these delays. The Inspector General is required to conduct the review âwith all reasonable speed and diligenceâ. However there have been lengthy delays. I accept the lawyers have the right to pursue all legal avenues on behalf of their client, afterall it is the first case to test the law that was written in 1999. But he remains the subject of the Security Risk certificate â so I cannot sit back and accept criticism for the decision to detain him, when the matter could have been determined by now. I expressed my frustration during a Radio New Zealand interview a couple of weeks ago, and I want to make it clear that I did not intend to criticise or call in question the integrity of the legal team or their right to take the steps they have. But this is the consequence, which is not one envisaged by the Act, a matter that is reinforced by the fact that if the Inspector General upholds the certificate, I have to make my decision in three days.
Returning to the objectives of the special procedures in cases involving concerns, I believe that Mr Zaouiâs rights are protected by the appeal to the Inspector General who is a retired senior High Court judge and who has access to all the information including the classified security information and will hold a hearing. If he holds that the Security Risk Certificate was not properly made then the individual will be released.
In concluding the Minister states she believes Mr. Zaouiâs rights are protected by his appeal to the Inspector General. Many people and organisations in New Zealand and internationally would disagree - including Amnesty International, one of the most respected and trusted organisations in the world, who have launched a campaign calling for either a freedom or fair trial for Mr. Zaoui
Balanced against his individual rights remains the public interest. I personally believe that I speak for the majority of New Zealanders when I say that in this age of international terrorism, we have a right to know who is entering our country, where they are from and why they are here.
I agree with the Minister that we have a right to âknow who is entering our country, where they are from and why they are here.â However, I donât believe that we have the right to deprive these people of their basic Human Rights, incarcerate them in solitary confinement for 10 months, and then judge them without telling them what they are accused of. The questions can be answered within a proper framework of Human Rights, so it is inexcusable to operate outside of them for any reason â even in this âage of international terrorismâ
And if we are to have access to international intelligence to support us in that task and to protect New Zealandâs domestic security, we have to accept that both the source and content of classified security information must be kept confidential.
It is a matter of balance. Whatever decision the Inspector General reaches, and whatever decision I reach, if the matter comes back to me, I am confident that New Zealanders will want to retain a mechanism that enables us to utilise classified security information for immigration purposes, while ensuring that individual rights are protected to the greatest extent possible.
Yes, we do want to âretain a mechanism that enables us to utilise classified security information for immigration purposesâ â But we can do so completely within the framework of Human Rights. Basic rights as set down by the United Nations (and elsewhere) are not designed to shield real criminals from justice â but to make sure that a fair process is used to find out if they really are criminals.
It is, as with all immigration matters, a question of balance and overall I believe that the balance is right.
"If we do not believe in freedom of speech for those we despise, we do not believe in it at all." The same is true of Human Rights - To deny even one person of one right, is to undermine the whole framework. We cannot pick and chose which rights apply to who - All Human Rights apply to all people.
Posted by: Alex Davidson ||
11/12/2003 1:04:50 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Boy, I miss Mike Rogers, his wife Yuko, Stevey Robinson and the rest. Do we have a new Kiwi troll? Welcome!
Try to keep your posts a little shorter. (By the way, Aris and Murat are not trolls. They occasionally make good points, despite ideological blindness and occasional partisan shouting matches).
Mr. Davidson sounds a tad concerned about the erosion of basic rights. This Zaoui case hardly sounds like the first step down the slippery slope towards a Kiwi Police State. Do you really not care if he is a terrorist or not? Do you see no problem whatsoever with providing top-secret intelligence info. to him and his lawyer? I can just imagine what you would have to say about Guantanamo.
Posted by: Tokyo Taro ||
11/12/2003 1:50 Comments ||
Top||
The name Ahmed Zaoui is linked to terrorist cells that have carried out bombings, beheadings and throat slitting from Algeria to France.
The name crops up in connection with Osama bin Laden's suspected Southeast Asian army, and a book published this year links the name indirectly to suspects in the assassination of Afghanistan's Northern Alliance leader, Ahmad Shah Massoud.
Ahmed Zaoui's terror activities appear to have begun in the bloody and brutal Algerian civil war, which began in the early 1990s and has claimed 100,000 lives.
The militant Muslim is listed in various internet articles as one of the leaders of the shadowy Armed Islamic Group (GIA), although a BBC report said he had denied being part of this organisation.
The GIA was formed in 1992 after the Algerian military refused to accept the results of the first free parliamentary elections, won by the Islamic Salvation Front (FIS), and staged a coup.
While the West supported the military, political parties formed and split and extremists wreaked havoc.
The GIA is said to have carried out numerous assassinations, and not only of political figures.
Among their targets were journalists, intellectuals, a psychiatrist, a singer, priests, other Christians, foreigners and many more.
The 1995 issue of the Executive Intelligence Review said the trademark terror signatures of the organisation were throat-slitting and beheading. Mass attacks were usually carried out by bombing.
It listed Abou Houdhaifa Ahmed Essaoui as a leader, and said his alias was Ahmed Zaoui.
He went into exile after an Algerian court condemned him to death for supplying weapons from Europe to guerrillas in Algeria.
It appears Zaoui slipped out of Algeria in the early 1990s - he was reported to have been arrested in Belgium in 1995.
He was also reported to be not only the head of the GIA for Belgium but also for Europe.
Some reports say he fled from Algeria via Saudi Arabia to Belgium.
In 1995 a series of bombings in France, three at Metro rail stations, were attributed to the GIA, apparently in response to the arrests of militants.
That year Zaoui was given a four-year suspended sentence by a Belgian court.
In 1997, he slipped out of Belgium and into Switzerland, where he sought political asylum.
Switzerland deported him to the African state of Burkina Faso, allegedly because it was a safe country for him and because it had agreed to take him.
The Swiss Government is said to have paid for him and his family to live there.
A BBC report about his deportation from Switzerland said he was questioned in 1997 by a French magistrate in connection with alleged terrorist activity in France.
It said he admitted being a member of the Algerian Islamic Salvation Front, but not the GIA.
A report from the North Africa Journal in 1999 said he met with representatives of Amnesty International and complained he and his family had been treated like "rubbish" and were "buried" in Burkina Faso.
He claimed it was not safe, that his life was in danger and that he could be a target of Algerian special forces.
The report also said he was one of Algeria's most dangerous Opposition figures and had opposed a truce agreed to in the late 1990s: "He prefers a continuation of the conflict."
Last year, he was linked to Osama bin Laden and activities in Southeast Asia, allegedly fronting a new group called FIDA, or Sacrifice, and was being investigated in Malaysia.
FIDA is linked to a coalition of Islamic groups the Asian Post reported as being investigated for links to the September 11 attacks on the United States.
A book, Who Killed Massoud? published in France in May this year, links Zaoui to a man called Tarek Maaroufi who is said to be a supporter of the GIA and who was suspected of helping to plan the bomb attacks in France.
The book says Maaroufi is in turn linked to a man involved in the death of warlord Ahmad Shah Massoud in Afghanistan.
"Names and addresses of GIA members in Europe are found in his address book. When he is arrested he is with Ahmed Zaoui, a member of the GIA."
#4
I have to commend your website for it's willingness to engage in dialogue over this case. However, I believe and most of the posters are woefully under-informed on this case.
To those unfamiliar with this case - with all the 'facts' you hear about this case, you must remember that Mr. Zaoui is the subject of a dedicated campaign of misinformation by the Algerian military dictatorship.
This campaign has been very sucessful. It is ironic that a website that seems to be so hard-line on terrorism, is inadvertently aiding terrorism by repeating lies disseminated by a terrorist regime.
The information repeated by 'tipper' can be traced back to forged press releases, faked media statements. This information is then repeated through various media, including this website, and in the process the sheer volume seems to lend some kind of legitimacy to the information contained.
Although given the length of the RSAA report, I guess none of you will actually read it - I can assure you that if you read it, you will have to concede, that the very least, it raises serious questions about the allegations levelled at Mr. Zaoui.
I do care about whether or not Mr. Zaoui is a terrorist - Although it is not the key problem with the case. The information I have studied (including the allegations) leads me to beleive very strongly that he has always advocated peace over violence.
There are problems in revealing top secret information to the accused and his lawyers, but the NZ Government will not even reveal a summary of the accusations. Even so, if it is not considered OK to hide the charges in a criminal trial, why is it allright to do so just because the person is refugee?
To answer your remark on Guantanamo - I have not studied the case in enough detail to comment here, but Amnesty International has a major campaign.
This case is part of a slippery slope of 'security' legislation that is steadily increasing government control, and intelligence agency power. If we don't stand up at some point and object, they certainly won't stop.
To the person who complained - I will attempt to keep any future posts down in size - it looked smaller before I posted it.
Posted by: Alex Davidson ||
11/12/2003 3:21 Comments ||
Top||
#6
To answer your remark on Guantanamo - I have not studied the case in enough detail to comment here, but Amnesty International has a major campaign.
And AI is full of shit. The Gitmo detainees have no legal status, under any law or treaty.
But, hey, AI's all about funding, not human rights. You can bet their "worries" about Gitmo are more prominent in their brochures than any concerns over Castro's concentration camps, or the North Korean gulag.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
11/12/2003 8:35 Comments ||
Top||
#7
RC, the Gitmo detanees are having their case heard before the Supremes. Not one US citizen is among the defendants either.
Which is puzzling, because I wasn't aware Foreigners had the rights of a US citizen.
Posted by: Charles ||
11/12/2003 9:01 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Murat not a troll???????????? Have you seen any of his posts in the last two months?
Posted by: Dan ||
11/12/2003 9:24 Comments ||
Top||
#9
"Which is puzzling, because I wasn't aware Foreigners had the rights of a US citizen."
-Charles, their not supposed to but the ultra-left believes the constitution gives them the right while on U.S. soil. Bunch of b.s. "We the people" is for we, the citizenry of the U.S.
#10
charles - Of course foreigners have rights (though not the rights of citizens, like voting rights) on US soil. The question is what rights apply to foreigners detained on foreign soil. They do have rights (under the Geneva convention) the govt maintains (I think with some justification) that are being upheld in Gitmo. The question is not whether the detainees have rights, but whether US courts have jurisdiction in this situation - IE while the US has treaty obligations to respect the rights of foreigners abroad, thats for the Executive branch to self-monitor under the treaties - not for domestic judges to get involved in. IIUC the lower courts have all held that the judiciary has NO jurisdiction over foreigners detained abroad.
There is some controversy, IIUC, as to whether Gitmo is legitimately overseas, or is in fact US territory - I mean the bearded cigar smoker has for years wanted us out of there, and we havent left. Is Gitmo really Cuban territory?
Why is the SC stepping in?
1. They disagree with the lower courts, and will declare Gitmo IS US territory (for this purpose). The likely result is that the Gitmo detainees would have to be transferred to Bagram. Very inconvenient for DC based interrogators, but not fatal.
2. The agree with the lower courts, and feel this is important enough that the SC must affirm the lower courts.
3. They will basically agree with the lower courts, but are uncomfortable with the way things are handled at Gitmo, and they will try to press the govt to make SOME changes, but less than would be required if Gitmo were US soil.
#11
They do have rights (under the Geneva convention) the govt maintains (I think with some justification) that are being upheld in Gitmo.
Illegal combatants such as terrorists are not protected under the Geneva Conventions that the US is party to. They could all be shot at dawn tomorrow, and it would be perfectly legal.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
11/12/2003 9:56 Comments ||
Top||
#12
RC wrote: Illegal combatants such as terrorists are not protected under the Geneva Conventions that the US is party to.
The fly in the ointment is that one has to confirm that the people you're holding don't enjoy the protection of the GC's. That means a tribunal, and one can't delay that forever. As I recall the GC doesn't specify the elements of a tribunal, but most military folks know what it means so we can't try anything clever.
It may be that the USSC will order the President to convene tribunals, and that will be the extent of their involvement.
Posted by: Steve White ||
11/12/2003 11:41 Comments ||
Top||
#13
I would respectfully counter that AI is not "full of sh**" - The people released as result of their work might well agree.
As regards Guantanamo - My limited understanding is that people accused must either be treated as crimminals or under the Geneva Convention. Powell has been quietly pushing to have these men treated in accordance with the convention. The point is, if you don't apply the GC to the enemy, you should hardly be suprised if the enemy responds in kind.
Calling them illegal combatants is just convenient excuse to do what they like with them - under international law, many actions taken by developed countries could be viewed as 'illegal' and therefore their soldiers could be described as 'illegal combatants.' However, in all cases, human rights can be maintained while finding, judging and punishing criminals.
Posted by: Alex Davidson ||
11/12/2003 13:51 Comments ||
Top||
#14
Alex, you are quite simply wrong. You actually answer yourself with this:
The point is, if you don't apply the GC to the enemy, you should hardly be suprised if the enemy responds in kind.
EXACTLY!
Al'Qaeda violated the Geneva Conventions spectacularly on 9-11-2001. You might remember what happened that day; it was in all the papers. So, no member of al'Qaeda is due the protections of the GC. This is what "illegal (or unlawful) combatants" means -- someone who has violated the GC.
To give terrorists the protections due a lawful combatant is to say that an honorable soldier is no different than a thug that shoots a child in her bed. It's a lie, it's immoral, and it's dangerous. under international law, many actions taken by developed countries could be viewed as 'illegal' and therefore their soldiers could be described as 'illegal combatants.'
Only if you have a warped and incorrect idea of what the rules of war state.
However, in all cases, human rights can be maintained while finding, judging and punishing criminals.
This is not law enforcement; it's war.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
11/12/2003 14:48 Comments ||
Top||
#17
Re: Robert Crawford
Illegal combatants such as terrorists are not protected under the Geneva Conventions that the US is party to. They could all be shot at dawn tomorrow, and
it would be perfectly legal.
Assuming that enemy combatants have no right uhnder the convention this does not answer the question of who should decide their status.
If the military can detain and execute persons based only on its own say-so the protection afforded by the convention is meaningless.
United States citizens held on United States territory are protected by the Constitution, but the government alleges that its designation of persons as enemy combatants is essentially not reviewable by the courts. If the treatment of Jose Padilla is defensible, gone is due process and basically democracy.
Under the government's policy, where courts would have either no meaninngful power to review designations of persons as enemy combatants, the president would also have the right to designate members of the opposition party as enemy combatants. If this seems far fetched, remember that's exactly the government's position -- that it's constitutional to lock up persons without lawyers and due process.
Or could you suggest any limiting principle.
And no, the argument that we don't have to worry because the executive should be trusted on his own words is not tenable. The reason for amending the Constitution with a Bill of Rights was precisely distrust of government and the potential for abuse.
Posted by: John G. ||
11/12/2003 15:59 Comments ||
Top||
#18
"If the military can detain and execute persons based only on its own say-so the protection afforded by the convention is meaningless."
It depends what "its own say so" means. If they have a reasonable, standardized way to make the call (which, BTW, need not be the same as the military tribunals to determine crimes and punishments) Im not sure that isnt acceptable under Geneva.
In any case, IIUC, that is STILL not what is it issue in the appeal to the Supreme Court, but rather the question of jurisdiction.
#19
"If the military can detain and execute persons based only on its own say-so the protection afforded by the convention is meaningless."
-It's a little broader then that. If I get shot at while on a patrol by someone not in uniform, they can be construed as an enemy combatant. There's a couple requirements that need to be met (or anyone of them).
1) irregulars or combatants dressed as civilians 2) weapons on hand or in the vicinity
3) intent to harm U.S. personnel or aid & abet the enemy (i.e. old lady or young kid running an rpg to an enemy position).
4) Occuring on foreign soil or on U.S. soil by non-U.S. civilians.
-I'm not sure if Padilla falls into this last category. Was he a U.S. citizen, a former citizen who renounced his American citizenship, or dual citizen? I thought he was a Mexican national. I could be wrong. Some of you more familiar w/him may know. I think Walker-Lindh could've been seen as someone renouncing their citizenship. I will say this (& I'm not the only who feels this way) - if I am shot at by combatants dressed as civilians (i.e. illegal combatants), unless they can be reasonably detained for intel purposes - they're dead.
I'd have to read the formal jargon for the rest of the policy J.G. mentions, I'm not sure that it can be twisted as far as he says in order to allow opposition political party members to be arrested by the president.
#21
Adding to what Jarhead said: People who are not associated with a country, but wage war against the people of that nation, are not 'combattants' under the rules of the Geneva Convention, but criminal combattants, and may be shot. People fighting against a government in a rebellion or coup must meet three criteria before being accepted as "lawful combattants": They must wear a distinctive uniform, they must act in a lawful, military manner (I.E., no rounding up and shooting civilians, no looting and burning, etc.), and they must have a military organization that accepts responsibility for the actions if its members. Otherwise they're just a bunch of loonies with guns, and fair game for anyone with a gun. If captured, they are NOT protected by the Geneva Convention, which ONLY applies to "lawful combattants". Al-Qaida is a criminal organization, not an organization of "lawful combattants". Anyone captured as a member of Al Qaida can be treated just about any old way the capturer wishes, including milking them dry then hanging them. AI wants to change that. The proposed changes would significantly increase the ability of terrorists to operate, and hamper the ability of "lawful combattants" to engage them. Until AI can understand that some people just like to kill people, and need to be wiped from the face of the earth, they have no credibility.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
11/12/2003 21:07 Comments ||
Top||
Greek Jewish leaders came down on one of the countryâs best-loved composers, Mikis Theodorakis of "Zorba the Greek" fame, for calling Jews the "root of evil", and reproached government ministers for failing to react. Theodorakis "repeated in the 21st century opinions from the darkest Middle Ages and slogans used by Nazi Germany, fanning both inside and outside the country the winds of intolerance and racism," the Central Jewish Council of Greece charged in a statement. The composer was flanked by Culture Minister Evangelos Venizelos and Education Minister Petros Efthymiou when he made the comments at a November 4 reception for the publication of his autobiography, an event covered massively by the Greek media. Film footage showed neither minister reacted when Theodorakis said Greeks and Jews "are two peoples without kin, but they had fanaticism and self-knowledge and managed to prevail."
Greeks and Jews both?
"Today, we can say that these little people are the root of evil," said Theodorakis, 78, a committed racist leftist and political activist who was jailed under the fascist junta that held power in Greece in the late 1960s and early 1970s. Government spokesman Christos Protopapas sought Wednesday to distance the government from his comments, which despite the number of journalists present were only repeated in one small right-wing daily. "The government does not share and is not in agreement with the opinion expressed by Mr. Theodorakis," the spokesman said, but added that "despite the disagreement" the composer "is still held in high regard" by the government for his works. Speaks for itself... I used to think it was poverty that brought out the worst in people. But Europe is showing me that even the relatively well off have it in them to be scum if they get enough propoganda. Iâm an atheist but if there is a God then all I have to say to him is THANK YOU FOR AMERICA.
#4
I certainly hope we're augmenting our biathlon and marksmanship teams with some SEALs and Delta boys to provide security for the athletes. The olympics in Athens are going to be a disaster.
#5
If Israel cannot convince all the Jews to move there, perhaps we can make them welcome in the United States. I think we're large enough to absorb them with no problem, and they do have a history of being very capable of taking care of themselves financially.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
11/12/2003 21:12 Comments ||
Top||
By Robert Graham, Financial Times EFL
Stiff sentences were handed out on Wednesday to the three central figures in Franceâs biggest ever corruption trial involving the diversion of â¬300m from Elf [n/k/a TotalFina Elf], the former state oil group, for personal enrichment and bribes during the late eighties and early nineties. The sentences bring to an end an investigation stretching back over eight years and which has thrown light on the corruption rampant in the final years of the late Francois Mitterrandâs second term in office as president. A total of 37 people stood trial in this case, preceded by an earlier one involving corrupting charges - rejected on appeal - against former foreign minister Roland Dumas.
By Alan M. Dershowitz Heâs as provocative as ever. With this piece he could be a regular on Rantburg! Too long to reproduce in full, so just the first couple of paragraphs.
According to a new poll, Europeans regard Israel as a greater threat to peace than any other country in the world. Among the runners-up were the United States, North Korea, Iran and Iraq. Syria, Libya, Saudi Arabia and China were not even in the running. Sometimes a public opinion poll tells us more about those being polled than about the question at hand. This is such a case. Having been exposed for years to virulent anti-Israel media coverage and anti-Israel bias from their leaders, it is not surprising that so many Europeans have had their views poisoned. This bias is fed by an extraordinarily successful propaganda campaign that comes, perversely, from enemies of peace - people who engage in, or support, terrorism. More at the link.
Posted by: Steve White ||
11/12/2003 12:45:28 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Seems that 12 Italian soldiers have died, I wonder if the Italians will pull back their forces afer the UN and the red cross.
Posted by: Murat ||
11/12/2003 6:58 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I doubt it, unless they're gutless moral cowards like you, Wild Dumrul.
Posted by: Ernest Brown ||
11/12/2003 9:59 Comments ||
Top||
Iraq From the Other Side
By UNIVERSAL PRESS SYNDICATE/TED RALL
Dear Recruit:
Thank you for joining the Iraqi resistance forces. You have been issued an AK-47 rifle, rocket-propelled grenade launcher and an address where you can pick up supplies of bombs and remote-controlled mines. Please let your cell leader know if you require additional materiel for use against the Americans.
Make sure you have filled out the form with the name and address of your next of kin, whether you want any remaining body parts donated, and your advance directive (whether to keep you on life support should be lapse into a vegetative state).
You are joining a broad and diverse coalition dedicated to one principle: Iraq for Iraqis. Our leaders include generals of President Saddam Husseinâs secular government as well as fundamentalist Islamists. We are Sunni and Shia, Iraqi and foreign, Arab and Kurdish. Though we differ on what kind of future our country should have after liberation and many of us suffered under Saddam, we are fighting side by side because there is no dignity under the brutal and oppressive jackboot of the U.S. Coalition Provisional Authority or their Vichyite lapdogs on the Governing Council, headed by embezzler Ahmed Chalabi. "AHHH! FY LIFS!"
Since you are a Muslim, you are already well aware of the fact that your dignity is much more important than any concrete accomplishment. Think of your dignity when your are facing enemy fire and you want to wet yourself.
Because we destroyed our weapons of mass destruction, we were unable to defend ourselves against the American invasion. This was their plan all along. Now our only option is guerilla warfare: we must kill as many Americans as possible at a minimum risk to ourselves.
You may rest assured that in the unlikely event of your demise, you will be attended for all eternity by 72 doe-eyed damsels. In the slightly more likely event that you are horribly maimed, 36 doe-eyes earthly damsels are standing by to attend to changing your colostomy bag for the remainder of your days.
As the Afghan resistance to the Soviets and the Americansâ own revolution against our former colonial masters the British have proven, it will only be a matter of time before the U.S. occupation forces become demoralized. As casualties and expenditures rise, the costs will outweigh the economic and political benefits of occupation. Soon the American public will note that the anticipated five-year price tag of $500 billion, with a probable loss of some 4,000 lives and 10,000 wounded, is not a reasonable price to pay to get our 2.5 million barrels of oil flowing to the West each month. This net increase, of just 0.23 percent of total OPEC production, will not reduce U.S. gasoline prices. At an average of 35 attacks each day, an hour does not pass without an American soldier coming under fire somewhere in Iraq. Ultimately the American public will pressure their leaders to withdraw their harried troops from our country. Asshat!
It is inevitable. Our goal is to make that day come sooner rather than later. "Yeah! Go Islamofascism!"
It is no easy thing to shoot or blow up young men and women because they wear American uniforms. Indeed, the soldiers are themselves oppressed members of Americaâs vast underclass. Many donât want to be here; joining Americaâs mercenary army is the only way they can afford to attend university. Others, because they are poor and uneducated, do not understand that they are being used as pawns in Dick Cheneyâs cynical oil war. Itâs not an oil war you beauzeau!
Unfortunately, we canât help these innocent U.S. soldiers. They are victims, like ourselves, of the bandits in Washington. Nor can we disabuse them of the propaganda that an occupier isnât always an oppressor. We regret their deaths, but we must continue to kill them until the last one has gone home to America.
They, in their turn, will continue to kill and maim us, meaning you, unless something terrible goes wrong like it did for Uday and Qusay.
In recent months we have opened a second front, against such non-governmental organizations as the United Nations and Red Crescent. A typical response of the Bush junta to these actions was issued by National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice: "It is unfortunate in the extreme that the terrorists decided to go after innocent aid workers and people who were just trying to help the Iraqi people." Do not listen to her. True, many aid workers are well intentioned. However, their presence under American military occupation tacitly endorses the invasion and subsequent colonization of Iraq. Their efforts to restore "normalcy" deceives weak-willed Iraqi civilians and international observers into the mistaken belief that the Americans are popular here. There can be no normalcy, or peace, until the invader is driven from our land. From the psychological warfare standpoint, the NGOs represent an even more insidious threat to fight for sovereignty than the U.S. army. That last is an equivocation.
In this vein we must also take action against our own Iraqi citizens who choose to collaborate with the enemy. Bush wants to put an "Iraqi face" on the occupation. If we allow the Americans to corrupt our friends and neighbors by turning them into puppet policemen and sellouts, our independence will be lost forever.
#1
Rall is still around?! Ignore, don't feed the troll.
Posted by: Tokyo Taro ||
11/12/2003 16:56 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I can't believe this guy. It's a shame we aren't evil enough for him to put on a tablecloth and pick up an AK. I guess even the islamofascists need press agents.
#3
I'm more than willing to post the money for his plane ticket to Tikrit. Please live out your dream, because you're a brave man Ted I know you're a man of action, not just words. Make the lives of those poor Iraqi people better by joining the glorious fight.
Thank you for joining the American resistance forces. You have been issued an illegal bolt-action rifle, a drum of improvised explosive material and an address where you can pick up supplies of ammunition and fuses. Please let your cell leader know if you require additional materiel for use against the authoritarian left.
You are joining a broad and diverse coalition dedicated to one principle: freedom for America. Our leaders include generals of President Bush's secular government as well as fundamentalist Christians.
We are Christian and Jew and atheist, white and black, Anglo and Hispanic, native and immigrant, Democrat and Republican. Though we differ on what kind of future our country should have after liberation and many of us resented Bush, we are fighting side by side because there is no dignity under the brutal and oppressive jackboot of the People's Coalition Provisional Authority headed by the terror-apologist and traitor, Ramsey Clark; or their Vichyite lapdogs in the media, the academic community, and the elitist corporate foundations.
Because we destroyed our weapons of mass destruction after the disputed election and the Green Revolution of 2004, we were unable to defend ourselves against Iranian nuclear terrorism.
This was the Left's plan all along.
Now our only option is guerilla warfare: we must kill as many Leftists as possible at a minimum risk to ourselves."
A nice antidote to this other Fifth column article. (Hat tip to lucianne.com)
Iâm sitting in the L.A. airport as some nice looking fellow distributes leaflets comparing the educational qualifications of President George W. Bush and his top aides and those of his detractors in the movie industry. Lib-left members of todayâs so-called entertainment world spend as much time hurling slurs at Bush and his officials as they do making bad movies or records. Now, Iâve spent just about as much time in this airport as I spent with my ex-wife, so rather than kill even more time in the bars, I headed to an Internet outlet to check out the information on the leaflet and also research some of the movies these "stars" have appeared in.
Words such as "moronic" and "idioticâ leave the lips of the multi-millionaire stage hands when they talk about Bushâs team. So letâs carefully compare the academic qualifications of the Bush entourage and their often hysterical detractors in the entertainment world.
George Bush himself received a BA from Yale and MBA from Harvard. He served as an F-102 pilot in the Texas National Guard.
Vice-President Dick Cheney earned a BA in 1965 and an MA in 1966, both in political science, from the University of Wyoming.
Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld attended Princeton, one of the most prestigious U.S. universities, after winning a scholarship based on his intellect. He served in the U.S. Navy as an aviator between 1954-57.
Secretary of State Colin Powell came from an impoverished black immigrant family and was initially educated in New York public schools. He graduated from City College of New York with a BA in geology, later obtaining an MBA from George Washington University.
Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge was raised in a working-class family in public housing in Erie, Penn. He earned a scholarship to Harvard, and graduated with honours in 1967. After a year at the Dickinson School of Law, he was drafted into the infantry and awarded a Bronze Star for Valour in Vietnam.
National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice enrolled in the University of Denver at age 15, and graduated at 19 with a BA in political science in 1974. She obtained a masters from the University of Notre Dame in 1975, and a PhD from the University of Denver in 1981.
Now to the tarnished stars:
Singer and actress Barbra Streisand, whose best-known movies are A Star is Born and Yentl, managed to complete high school, as did Pretty Womanâs Julia Roberts.
Baghdadâs favourite son, Sean Penn, now starring in Mystic River, is also in that league, as is Ed Asner, of The Mary Tyler Moore Show and Lou Grant.
Martin Sheen, who actually plays the president of the U.S. in the TV show West Wing, flunked an examination to enter University of Dayton.
Actress Jessica Lange, who starred in the remake of King Kong and Crimes of the Heart, dropped out of college in her first year.
Actor Alec Baldwin, who starred in The Hunt for Red October and The Getaway, dropped out of George Washington University.
Susan Sarandon, famed for Thelma and Louise, got a degree in acting from Catholic University of America in Washington. No real academic qualifications.
Singer Rosemary Clooneyâs nephew, George Clooney, now starring in Intolerable Cruelty, dropped out of the University of Kentucky. Rosemary must be turning in her grave.
Director Michael Moore dropped out in his first year at University of Michigan. Moore makes "documentariesâ shown to contain as much fiction as fact.
Of the Dixie Chicks, their less than melodious voices and warped notes surely speak for themselves. Searching for academic assessment would be superfluous.
In short, the celebrities know how to act like theyâre smart, but theyâre not so good at actually demonstrating it...
Posted by: snellenr ||
11/12/2003 11:32:04 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Obviously the American educational system is not set up to recognize and reward brilliance and intelligence. [/sarcasm]
Hat tip LGF
YES, SHOW A celebrity an American, and that celebrity will show you an ignoramus. Too sweeping a statement? Perhaps. But what about this Michael Moore screed about Americans in the London Mirror earlier this month? âThey are possibly the dumbest people on the planet. ...We Americans suffer from an enforced ignorance. We donât know about anything thatâs happening outside our country. Our stupidity is embarrassing.â Until Michael Moore pointed it out, you probably didnât know how embarrassingly stupid you are. In fact, you probably have so little intelligence you didnât know that Moore isnât the only celebrity who thinks youâre dumb. Indeed, Moore has colleagues in the celebrity kingdom who think the same thing. I knew that.
So put on your well-worn dunce cap and check out what other celebrities say about your intelligence. And if the celebrities are correct in their analysis, youâre moving your lips as you read this. Johnny Depp said a few months back, âAmerica is dumb, is something like a dumb puppy that has big teeth that can bite and hurt you.â (Depp later claimed he was quoted out of context and offered: âI am an American. I love my country and have great hopes for it. It is for this reason that I speak candidly and sometimes critically about it.â But still, weâre like dumb puppies?)
Ted Turner once said this about television-watchers: âThe United States has got some of the dumbest people in the world. I want you to know that; we know that.â Speaking of Ted Turner, HanoiJane Fonda was in Canada this past April and said: âI donât know if a country where the people are so ignorant of reality and of history, if you can call that a free world.â Imagine how unphotogenic she is now that her lips have fallen off.
Also in Canada, Martin Sheen said recently: âEvery time I cross this border, I feel like Iâve left the land of lunatics. You are not armed and dangerous. You do not shoot each other. I always feel a bit more human when I come here.â Lunatics, ignorant people, dummies â even dumb puppies. Yes, we got âem all here. Theyâre people like roâDepp, roâMoore, roâTurner, roâFonda, etc.
Where does this superior celebrity intellect come from? Itâs actually part of a larger phenomenon, one involving the president. Celebrities sneer at President Bushâs intelligence. And then they think weâre all the same, just dumb Bush-boosters. For evidence of how much smarter celebrities think they are than the president, we start again with super-smart guy Michael Moore. A year ago, he told the London Mirror (he loves those British papers), âI really do believe Bush is dumber than s@?*. Whatâs odd about all this is that Blair is a smart guy. Whatâs he doing hanging out with a dumb guy? Back at school if you were smart, you hung out with the other kids that were smart.â
Sticking with the European press, earlier this year Larry Hagman told a German newspaper that Bush was a âsad figure: not too well-educated, who doesnât get out of America much.â And Sheen told the BBC after Bush became president: âGeorge W. Bush is like a bad comic working the crowd. A moron, if youâll pardon the expression.â Iâm not sure which expression we should be pardoning there, mind you. Maybe itâs because Iâm a moron-American (weâre such a hyphenated nation these days).
But the hits continue. In April, Edward Norton said of Bush: âAs an actor, I know in my mind, watching him, what a low-quality mind he has.â And during the 2000 campaign, Cher said, âI donât like Bush. I donât trust him. I donât like his record. Heâs stupid. Heâs lazy.â Youâre intellectually lazy, Cherry Pit.
Yikes! Stupid and lazy? Câmon, Cher! Snap out of it!
Also during the 2000 campaign, Rob Reiner said, âWe have the single most unqualified man running for president in our lifetime. Iâm not making this up! Iâm not making this up! The man has no experience, and worse than that, he has no intellectual curiosity.â Gee, he makes Bush sound like a, well, like a meathead.
No celebrity said it smarter than Sandra Bernhard. She asserted her intelligence and belittled Bush at the same time to the Washington Post in March 2002: âIâm an intelligent person from America. I was born in Michigan and raised in Arizona, and while I do reside in New York, I travel the country extensively. Any thinking person who lives in the world would be disturbed at whatâs going on right now. I think Bush is amateurish and self-serving, and, frankly, itâs disgusting.â I would offer a retort to Bernhard, but I canât think of anything smart to say. Iâve never been to Michigan. So how did I solve those brainteasers?
Posted by: Atrus ||
11/12/2003 10:52:13 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Big Al agrees: The "quasi-hypnotic influence" of television in America has fostered a complacent nation that is a danger to democracy, former Vice President Al Gore said Tuesday. Gore, speaking on "Media and Democracy" at Middle Tennessee State University, told attendees the decline of newspapers as the country's dominant method of communication leaves average Americans without an outlet for scholarly debate.
Which is why he's trying to set up a "liberal" television news network. Guess he's figured out that he'll need a lot more stupid people if he's to have any chance to get elected again.
Posted by: Steve ||
11/12/2003 11:02 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I am ashamed to admit it but I went to see Mystic River and even thought Tim Robbins was good in it.
#3
Clowning on celebs is one of my favorite pet projects. Especially actors. Moore otoh is a clown. I'd like to see that fat f*ck go up 3 flights of stairs w/out falling over.
I once took an acting class as an elective at a community college. The instructor was an old hippie but a real decent guy. He said candidly that actors make a living doing what kids do everyday - "playing pretend." I remember asking him why celebs feel the need to spew about politics like they know anything more then the average Joe. He said they get wrapped up in their own self-importance, figure people care what they think, and can't identify w/you or me anymore. Plus, the media perpetuates the crap over & over.
Maybe being an actor (for those that make it) makes them smarter then me in career choice, but I'd rather not take advice on politics or life from someone who "plays pretend" everyday for a living. As far as Bernhard goes, I'm from Michigan to. I feel bad for the citizens of New York but they can keep that skank, we don't want her back and hope the rest of the country doesn't hold her being born in our state against us.....
#4
Some day there will be a wtf tax placed on these loudmouths.
WTF is a wtf tax? It what happens when you tell people who are otherwise your chief customer they are dumb and word doesn't get to them until later. Then, when the prospective consumer reads or otherwise finds out about how dumb American supposedly are according to these folks, they will say to themselves "wtf was that?" Then they will look at that Johnny Dip DVD or that Dizzy Chicks CD, and buy something else.
#5
When I read about personal attacks on the President, I tend to think of the German submarine commander's lines about Churchill in the movie Das Boot:
"They say he's a drunk. They say he's a syphilitic. I must say, for a drunken syphilitic he's putting up a hell of a fight!"
Posted by: Matt ||
11/12/2003 11:29 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Don't feel bad mhw - Eastwood directed it and he's good to go. I liked Robbins in Shawshank as well. However, in light of recent comments Robbins makes himself look fairly silly. I just feel glad in knowing that Robbins has to go home everynight to that ugly-assed bug-eyed b*tch Susan Sarandon. Being married to that sanctimonious self-righteous ho would probably be enough to make one gay.....who says there isn't some justice in the world.
#9
Funny how actors will dump insults all over whomever they don't like. I assume most people have noticed the screwed up lives of most celebrity actors; the drugs, multiple marriages, assults, etc.
Always remember Alfred Hithcock when asked why he treated his actors like children - he replied of course, they live in a world of make believe, what else do you expect?
Posted by: John B ||
11/12/2003 12:14 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Let me try to put this in perspective. I would think Americans were dumb too, if I all I did was hang out with the Hollywood crowd and the likes of mike moore,tim robbins,susan saradon,ed asner, jane fonda, babra streisend, etc., etc. There's not a dumber, and more ignorant, bunch of bunnies on this earth than those arrogant s**theads. Fortunately, I read Rantburg so I know better.
#12
And yet, Keanu Reeves manages to keep his mouth shut on politics and make rational comments about the rumors of his homosexuality. Go figure.
Posted by: Ernest Brown ||
11/12/2003 12:59 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Oh, Stupid is when you don't know anything and smart is when you know lots of stuff? I keep getting those two backwards.Better tell Tim before he says something smart, I means stupid.
Posted by: Susan Sarandon. ||
11/12/2003 13:27 Comments ||
Top||
#14
According to Michael Moore Americans are stupid and ingnorant while Germans are wise and educted: they know how to manufacture Ziklon B.
#16
Martin Sheen-Apocolypse Now. Character executed wounded Vietnamese civilian; beheaded Brando at end of film.
Robbins/Sarandon-Bull Durham. Scenes of heavy sex between Sarandon, a groupie who "adopts" a player every season; get laid by two guys (not simultaneously, don't worry) in film.
Depp- Platoon Remember he was the interpreter in village scene where civilian got offed by the Evil sarge
Larry Hagman- Dallas J.R. is an adulterer, materialist, liar, shylock and general sleeze.
I'll stop there, for now. ALL of these folks (list could go on for days) are part of the reason US is so despised abroad and in Muslim-Arab lands. How many times in the past 25 years (17 in Arabia) have the Wahibi/Muslim Brotherhood/Antisemite fools pointed out to me that they hate Amreeka because of the blood/drugs/sex that is exported to their lands. Are they talking about real gangsters and porno stars? Hell no. It's all about what they see on TV and on movie screens. The damn Hollywood hypocrites. They are just so full of themselves that they cannot get past their dollars to see the damage their industry is doing to the rest of us in the eyes of those who, at best, do not have any interest in seeing America do well in war on Islamofascism. JUST CAN'T CONNECT THE DOTS. Then on top of that, the jerks' images get transmitted all over the world with their bitching and moaning about how Hitlerite and stupid the leadership is here.
My uncle was a director in LALA land in the 50's and had to get back to Chicago to become sane again. He had never seen before or since such a bunch of insecure, preening, worthless group than the Hollywood "moral authorities" That's a wrap.
Posted by: Michael ||
11/12/2003 16:01 Comments ||
Top||
#19
I don't know how a promotion tour translates into knowing a country. Making a moovie in a coutry doesn't qualify in my book either if there are psynchophants everywhere to cater to you.
I give Depp credit for speaking French and living a real life in France. I think its been quite a while since any of these clowns have truly lived in America, though.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
11/12/2003 19:36 Comments ||
Top||
#20
Sgt.DT, roger your last. Have not seen it. I'm a cheap bastard by nature so doubt I'll blow the $7+ to see Robbins or Penn. Sorry to hear Clint butchered it for you. Watch The Outlaw Josey Wales, Fistfull of Dollars, & High Planes Drifter and please find it in your heart to forgive Clint this one faux pas (well, yeah, maybe second faux pas if you factor in that piece o'shite Bridges of Maddison County as well) LOL.
#21
Hmmmmm, I'm dumber than rocks, or so Hollyweird says... Nice to know. Guess my selection to the Air Force Academy was based on my looks (NOT!). Guess the perfect score on an IQ test that sent shock waves through the local VA was just a fluke. Guess we'll have to discount the 18 years I spent OUTSIDE the United States, in places like Panama, Vietnam, Germany, England, and a dozen other countries - I don't know beans about any other country. The 200+ semester-hours of credit I've earned at college over the past 35 years is just eyewash - I'm really dummer than durt...
The Hollywood Hypocrites should take a tour of the United States without their glamour and make-up. They might be surprised at how many really INTELLIGENT people there are running around without a single film or television appearance to their credit.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
11/12/2003 21:46 Comments ||
Top||
Thankx to Chuck for the tip! FALLUJAH, Iraq â Paratroopers from the 1st Battalion, 505th Parachute Infantry Regiment, 82d Airborne Division successfully defended the Jordanian Hospital and Forward Operating Base Volturno Nov. 11 from an attack by Iraqi combatants. The soldiers were fired upon with automatic weapons from a stopped vehicle near the hospital. The soldiers returned fire forcing the attackers to flee. Another vehicle approached and the fleeing Iraqis attempted to get in, but were prevented from doing so by the paratroopers. A third vehicle subsequently approached at a high rate of speed and failed to slow after the paratroopers fired warning shots. The soldiers engaged the vehicle and killed the two personnel in the truck. Hostile forces then fired from a fourth vehicle at the U.S. troops, at which time the soldiers also engaged that automobile. In total the 82 AB "All-American" soldiers killed six aggressors and wounded four. The four wounded were evacuated for medical treatment. There were four other detainees as a result of the action. There were no injuries to coalition personnel and no damage to coalition equipment.
Four truckoads of maroons, 14 out of action, six permanently...
Posted by: Fred Pruitt & Steve ||
11/12/2003 17:03 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
fired warning shots
why??????????????????????????????????
Incidentally, this is what happens when you relax curfews to be 'nice' during Ramadan.
Posted by: Rafael ||
11/12/2003 17:07 Comments ||
Top||
#2
OO-fucking-rah.
I really wish we could see some body counts on the 'resistance'. I bet there is a reason the numbers are talked about. They are probably high.
#3
treatment of their injuries? Depends on how informative they are I hope.....otherwise let em bleed out in the gutter for the rest of them to see....
Posted by: Frank G ||
11/12/2003 17:14 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Islamists vs US soldiers in a stand up fire fight....you can pretty much guarantee the results. Paying attention Murat?
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
11/12/2003 19:07 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Rex, this just isn't their type of warfare. Suicide bombing, sniping, and terrorizing civilians are what Islamists excel at. They canât fight anyone who stands against them. The fact that Israel exists after all these years is proof enough.
#7
Stupid question -- why isn't this leading the news tonight?
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
11/12/2003 19:44 Comments ||
Top||
#8
'Sounds like the bad guys were very accomodating - they effectively self-established their own "receiving-end kill zone" in what was nominally a non-ambush scenario - and let our guys simply execute standard ambush tactics. 'Couldn't ask for much more - 'except maybe a replay tomorrow (we've probbaly got more 5.56 and 7.62 and 40 mm rounds than they have morons).
U.S. forces on Wednesday launched offensive attacks in Baghdad that blasted a meeting place or staging area for suspected pro-Saddam loyalists and destroyed a truck that fired mortar rounds at a U.S. facility. U.S. Army sources told Fox News the offensive was called Operation Iron Hammer but it was not clear if the term referred to one or both of the American attacks. In the first attack, units of the 1st Armored Division using Bradley fighting vehicles fired a series of about 15 blasts at the warehouse in southern Baghdad. The operation began around 9 p.m. local time and ended a short time later. There were no immediate reports of fatalities or injuries. Update on Fox News is they used a AC-130 gunship to level the place. There were snipers inside firing at our troops.
"Come out with yer hands up! We're gonna level the place!"
"You'll never take us alive, infidel dogs!"
"Hokay by me."
"The facility is a known meeting, planning, storage and rendezvous point for belligerent elements currently conducting attacks on coalition forces and infrastructure," the Pentagon said in a statement from Washington. "The destruction of this structure will deny enemy forces any use of it in the future." Now time to sift through the remains.
The second attack, which took place around 10 p.m. local time, came after a U.S. infantry unit on the ground spotted three mortar rounds being fired at a U.S. facility. The infantry unit called in aerial support and directed the operation, Army sources said. The aerial support consisted of at least one Army AH-64 Apache helicopter, which pinpointed the truck with a mortar on a Baghdad street. The helicopter opened fire at the truck, killing two Bad Guys insurgents and maiming wounding three others, sources said.
"Hiya, Mahmoud! Say! Is that a new colostomy bag? TrÚs chic!"
Infantry units on the ground then captured five surviving occupants of the truck. Officials said it may have been the truck that was used to launch earlier mortar attacks in the Green Zone, the two-square-mile coalition headquarters area in central Baghdad. Clever, mobile mortar unit, shoot and scoot. They were a little late on the scoot part this time. Good job, Army!
Posted by: Steve ||
11/12/2003 4:10:07 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"Drive Mahmoud Dammit!"
Posted by: Frank G ||
11/12/2003 16:12 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Now THAT'S more like it. Answer any attack with about 50-times more firepower.
Just saw a Foxnews update, that Jane Skinner is fine in 8 different ways, ain't she?
#3
Snipers vs an AC-130: Peace through Fire Superiority.
Posted by: Matt ||
11/12/2003 16:29 Comments ||
Top||
#4
the attack on the warehouse had to based on intel. Was this intell theyve just got (as Iraqis get pissed with the Baathists?) or intel theyve been sitting on, and decided to prioritize now cause of the Baathist attacks?
#5
I hope they waited till they knew the warehouse was full of jackasses before they pounded it.
Posted by: Laurence of the Rats ||
11/12/2003 16:51 Comments ||
Top||
#6
The part I like
â An American artillery unit fired 12 rounds of 155mm howitzers against an insurgent mortar team that had fired off a few shots in the direction of the "green zone,"
Posted by: Laurence of the Rats ||
11/12/2003 17:17 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Maybe those DARPA counter-battery gadgets they took over there a few weeks ago are working... I think this is the first time they've managed to bag a mortar crew "in the act" (so to speak).
#14
Friend of mine writes as "Spectre Gunner" on the USENET Newsgroup Soc. History War Vietnam (SHWV). He has some comments now and then about 'life aboard Spectre'. I'm glad we're finally getting serious about the crap in Baghdad, but I have to wonder - has Spectre been flying the borders? Could that be part of the reason we're not getting reports? Not much left after the Iron Hose passes by.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
11/12/2003 22:12 Comments ||
Top||
Hat tip LGF, EFL Bob Arnot, who rarely appears on NBC News programs, popped up Monday night on MSNBCâs Hardball with Chris Matthews to contradict the image of chaos in Iraq hyped by the media. Launching Hardballâs week-long series, âIraq: The Real Story,â Arnot recounted the challenges faced by troops in hostile areas, but countered the negative image of the Iraqi situation he knows Americans get from TV news. And part of the reason I read the warblogs.
Arnot argued:
âThe real question is, given all the death and destruction that you see on television in the United States, whatâs the real deal out here? The fact is in 85 percent of the country, itâs calm, itâs stable, itâs moving forward. You find a lot of places like Horia [sp?], where we were today, and Kadame [sp] where they actually like or even love Americans.â We rid the Iraqis of a vicious tyrant.
Touring a shopping area, Arnot relayed how, âfrom what you see on TV from Baghdad youâd think that, with the mortars and rockets, that this was a city under siege.â In fact, he contended, ânothing could be further from the truth in many neighborhoods.â Arnot sounded like a spokesman for the Baghdad Chamber of Commerce, MRC analyst Geoffrey Dickens observed, as he admired the selection of merchandise available: âThey also have here some of the latest fashions, they will tell you from Milan, Paris, and Damascus. Hereâs another store here, ladies clothing with jeans, the latest shoes, nice pocket books.â And a variety of philosophies and religions.
Arnot began with time in spent with some troops in an area where Americans are less welcome: âIt had all the ingredients for disaster. A Sunni town, home to over 100,000 former Iraqi soldiers, 1,000 generals and dangerous terror cells. From this battle command center, the Armyâs 101st Air Assault Division has engineered what many thought impossible: local elections within weeks of the warâs end; schools kept open; and Iraqi police training to get back on the street fast. Still while there was no major insurrection, there are now daily attacks on U.S. troops, with RPGs, improvised explosive devices, mortars, even rockets.â
Unidentified officer: âItâs been a tough couple weeks when you really look at it.â Arnot: âOn the front lines, light infantry soldiers make up Strike Force. This is something that you may not have seen very often. That is a dismounted patrol. Colonel Joe Anderson is the commanding officer of the Second Brigade of the 101st Airborne. It looks pretty dicey out here.â
Col. Joe Anderson, U.S. Army: âIt, it potentially can be, because you donât know, you donât know friend from foe. So itâs a lot of people and their primary focus is buying their stuff and getting on with business. But itâs certainly an environment where anybody can get in there and do what they want to. It would be a hard thing to react to.â Arnot: âThese patrols help keep the 101st engaged with the local population, a critical source of intelligence. Now, you have a lot of local support here. People turning in the bad guys. Why is that?â Col. Anderson: âI think, I think people want to, they see progress; theyâre getting a pretty good taste of what democracy, freedom is all about. Their quality of life has gone up. I think people like that. And I think they like not being oppressed. So the average person will cooperate. Itâs just those that are still die-hards, which I think are the clear minority. But then again, they are resourced, and that makes, that can have an impact.â Arnot: âDuring our patrol, Colonel Anderson stops multiple times to consult with his commanders, who have grim reports from other parts of the city....Then the colonel learns thereâs a plan to assassinate him today. Later, inspecting the jail, he reluctantly agrees to discuss it.â Colonel Anderson: âI think Iâd be a target for being kind of associated with a lot of the progress here based on our guys. So Iâm the guy that commands the outfit, but a very public figure in terms of television, radio, papers, public forums, etc.â Arnot: âUnfazed, the colonel and his strike force continue to patrol Mosulâs markets, on foot and far from help. Whatâs the real deal? Whatâs the real reality here in Iraq?â Col. Anderson: âI think you just gave the real deal. I think the real deal is the peopleâs quality of life here is better than it ever was. And theyâre enjoying it, and thereâs progress being made every day.â
Matthews inquired of Arnot: âBob, can our military locate, target and destroy our enemies over there right now?â
Arnot: âWell, they have a lot of help. They have been able to take 75 percent of the terrorists off the street in Mosul. What theyâre finding, especially after some of the big bombings like the RCIC, a lot more people are coming forward. Theyâre like their 9/11 there. They really hate a lot of these guys. You have a number of different elements. At the very top, you have the old regime. They took two generals off the street in Fallujah the other day. Tens of millions of dollars to spend. The ominous thing is that theyâre finding the really bad neighborhoods have a combination of the Islamists, Wahhabis, Ansar al-Islam and the old regime. Thatâs where you have the strange collusion thatâs sort of morphing into a quasi-Islamic revolution here. And at the bottom, just a bunch of bad guys.
I talked to a General Dempsey the other day. He says right here in Baghdad, you only have about 10 or 12 bad cells. Each of those cells may have 10 to 20 people in it. But you have probably 2,000 bad guys at the bottom that are the real mobsters. I met last night with some of the top commanders here in the 101st Airborne. They are bound and determined to get these guys. Theyâre getting a lot of good information. Theyâre getting them on the street. A lot of smart moves. Abu Gray, where they have little Mogadishu, where they shoot down on U.S. forces with rocket propelled grenades, put improvised explosive devices by the side of the road, they actually had the locals take down the local marketplace. And they gave them new money to build that in a safer area.
Chris, these commanders are absolutely in the fight of their lives. Theyâre using every last bit of brainpower they have. Itâs a smart fight out here. Itâs an insurgency that thereâs no real sort of command and control that they can see at this point. Lots of different people coming at them. Theyâre trying to win hearts and minds on the one hand. On the other hand, at night theyâre fighting these bad guys. Compound is not very far from here, Chris. These guys have eight to 10 mortars that come in every single night. They say itâs the toughest, most complicated battle that the U.S. military has fought in generations.â
Matthews: âBob, would more troops help the effort?â
Arnot: âI donât really think so. I think the bottom line is you want to get more and more Iraqis out on the front. Youâre gonna see it in a couple days a great story here I did with the 17th Field Artillery. What they did is they went out and they hired ex-Republican Guards. They put them into a private security company. They play the national anthem. They have Iraqi colonels back out there. They have a great deal of pride in it. The more Iraqis you get out there in front of American soldiers, the better, whether itâs the civilian defense corps or the police, theyâre training them. Thatâs the real solution, is to get more out there and have terrific intelligence....â
Matthews: âDo the Iraqi people themselves know who is fighting us? In other words, are they a clearly identifiable group of people? The remnants of the, the, the government, the new Jihadists who have joined them. Do the people of Iraq, if you had them under interrogation, would they be able to say, âThe Rover behind that corner around there.â Would they know that? The people themselves?â
Arnot: âYou know, a lot of people donât know that. I met last night one of the chief ayatollahs, one of the chief Shiah clerics here in the country and he said, âLook, there are three different groups here weâre concerned about. The Wahhabi, he basically believes thereâs command and control from Saudi Arabia. You have the ex-regime power brokers, as they call them right now. You have this sort of new Islamist morphing here, a very, very sort of fundamentalist movement....
But by and large, in neighborhoods here, they see somebody strange, they donât know who they are. Theyâre starting to report them. The bottom line is, get the Iraqi police and civil defense forces out there, because they know who the bad guys are. They recognize them. And they can turn them in faster than American forces can find him. But a huge, concerted effort here. Met with five colonels last night at their FOB, their forward operating base. And they are planning hard and fast to try and make this Bremer prediction not come true by getting these guys off the street.â
The Iraqi people seem to be a lot more optimistic than most American journalists. Arnot is the exception that proves the rule. A sensible reporter!
#1
Holy Cow! I can't believe this is going down very well at Rockefeller Center. I'm sure that fat worthless POS Nachman is out to get Arnot's ass right about now for not screaming 'VIETNAM!' in his piece. I just wonder how it got past the DNC censors. Don't they have editorial approval over any 'news' item, or am I thinking about CNN/CBS?
#2
Arnot's terrific, and an interesting specimen: medical doctor, pilot, Arabic-speaker, and now correspondent. For those who missed his live feeds with the USMC during the major combat phase, they were a real treat. The guy not only provides vastly superior straight reporting on the major issues he's covering -- in the middle of a live feed, he'd start asking locals in Arabic about medical or other problems, and help them out or vector in a Navy corpsman to do so. Reporter, doctor, interpreter, and diplomat in one. It's astounding -- and completely unsurprising -- that he's not very prominent in NBC's coverage. Instead, we get Andrea Mitchell's cartoon-ravings from DC, talking very stale inside State Dept. gossip and passing it off as insight. The contrast and the combined cluelessness and bias of editors and maangement couldn't be more clear.
By Shasta Darlington EFL
Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi vowed Italy would keep troops in Iraq to help U.S. forces despite a bombing on Wednesday that killed 15 military personnel and urged political adversaries to unite in national mourning. "No intimidation will budge us from our willingness to help that country rise up again and rebuild itself with self-government, security and freedom," Berlusconi told the Senate in an address broadcast nationwide. Fratelli dâItalia
LâItalia sâÚ desta
Dellâelmo di Scipio
SâÚ cinta la testa
DovâÚ la vittoria
Le porga la chioma
ChÚ schiava di Roma
Iddio la creò
Stringia moci a coorte
Siam pronti alla morte
Stringia moci a coorte
Siam pronti alla morte
LâItalia chiamò
Thank you, brave friends.
Posted by: Mike ||
11/12/2003 12:59:41 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
There's the answer to our gutless Turkish coward.
Posted by: Ernest Brown ||
11/12/2003 13:03 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Duh-Oh! Wrong category! Fred, please fix for me.
Posted by: Mike ||
11/12/2003 13:28 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Oriana F.. (last name escapes me) should be consulted as to her opinion on this tragedy. I hope her resolve has not been dented.
Posted by: Michael ||
11/12/2003 16:04 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Fallaci.
Posted by: Matt ||
11/12/2003 16:30 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Matt, Mille grazie!
Yes, La Divina ORIANA FALLACI it is!
If you haven't read her wonderful book "The Rage and the Pride," (banned in France!) do yourself a favor and do it!
Theres nothing like an Italian bellicose woman...! ;-)
#6
Oriana is one kick-ass lady! I loved the Rage and the Pride. The reason it is banned in France, is that the truth tends to enrage their huge muslim problem, I mean, population.
#7
I Googled for any comment on the attack by Ms. Fallaci -- nothing yet, but it's going to be a humdinger when it comes. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if she's on her way to Iraq already.
Italy = Ally
Posted by: Matt ||
11/12/2003 17:40 Comments ||
Top||
#8
PS -- She is 73, by the way, so I doubt she can take out more than 30 or 40 jihadis. The rest will just run too fast for her to catch.
Posted by: Matt ||
11/12/2003 17:43 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Okay, I take back any stupid joke I ever told about the Italian army.
Clearly, this is not your grandpa's Italian soldiers...
Posted by: Carl in N.H. ||
11/12/2003 18:08 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Well, granted attacking the Italians (rather than the germans) was a good idea 60 years ago in WW2, but not at this point. There were also about 100 Romanians in the building with the Italians. The Gypsies are going to be PISSED about this, on top of the talibanite opening up on their troops in Afghanistan.
Those are the lyrics of the Italian national anthem, "Inno di Mameli." The English translation is:
Italian Brothers,
Italy has awakened,
She has wreathed her head
With the helmet of Scipio.
Where is Victory?
She bows her head to you,
You, whom God created
As the slave [servant?] of Rome.
Let us band together,
We are ready to die,
Let us band together,
We are ready to die,
Italy has called us.
Posted by: Mike ||
11/12/2003 20:05 Comments ||
Top||
From Arabic News:
Jordanian intelligence officers kidnapped the Saudi political opposition Faisal Naji Hammoud al-Balawi who left the kingdom on the board of a plane high-jacked to Iraq accompanied by his colleagues Aesh Ali Hussein al-Freidi. Hijacking was in 2000, it appears.
A source close to al-Balawi, asked to stay anonymous, said that the Jordanian officers kidnapped al-Balawi from one of Baghdadâs streets in which he was living since the year 2000 and handed him over to the Saudi authorities. The source expressed fears over the life of al-Balawi who is now held in one of the kingdomâs prisons. Soon to be a head shorter.
Or toast. Literally.
News reports quoted two independent sources as saying that the government of Saudi Arabia financed the kidnapping operations exploiting the deteriorated security conditions in Baghdad and the absence of tightened security measures on the border between Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Jordan. One Saudi citizen lives in Iraq disclosed news on returning al-Balawi back home in October. Al-Balawi (29 year old) and his colleague al-Freedi — from the Saudi human rights center which takes London as a headquarters — who took part with him in hijacking the Saudi plane, earlier this year asked for the human rights center help to get political asylum in one of the west European states after the collapse of the Iraqi government and the deterioration of security conditions in Baghdad. If Bush hadnât invaded, poor Faisal would still be safe.
The director of the center Abdul Aziz al-Jhamis said in a statement he recommended the two Saudi opposition members to surrender themselves to any European country and that he had promised to give them support. But officers of the Jordanian intelligence kidnapped al-Balawi after he had given information about his residence and ways to contact him and smuggled him to Saudi Arabia. Sounds like you got a Saudi mole in your little organization.
Another source said that each Jordanian officer got USD 5,000 for their illegal services. It is not known yet if the Jordanian officers gave their services voluntarily or they were assigned to that mission at official directives from their government in collaboration with the Saudi authorities. Maybe assigned by a faction within the government
Al-Khamis also denied any Saudi-Jordanian cooperation at the official level, stressing that al-Balawi and al-Freedi are considered criminals, according to the international law. However, Faisal al-Balawi and Aesh al-Freedi entered into Iraq after they had high-jacked in October 2000 a Saudi Boeing 777 plane while heading for London. The two high-jackers asked the pilot to change the path of the plane to Damascus before they had changed their minds and forced him to land in Baghdad. The Iraqi authorities then were able to free all passengers and sent them sound and safe to Saudi Arabia while they gave political asylum to the two Saudi opposition members, at their own request. This is where they lose all "human rights" creditability.
The two men said then that they made this operation to attract the attention of the world public opinion over the human right violations in Saudi Arabia, as they alleged. Saudi Arabia is a major violator of pretty much every right youâd care to name, but when you hide out in a country full of mass graves, you deserve what ever happens to you.
Posted by: Steve ||
11/12/2003 12:38:37 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
He hijacked a plane from Arabia to Iraq to bring attention to human rights and then hung out in Baghdad for three years that included the violent overthrow of a violent regime that probably sposored you. There must be some room under teh big tent that Dean is building for this guy.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
11/12/2003 19:10 Comments ||
Top||
#3
There must be some room under teh big tent that Dean is building for this guy.
I'd recommend the second sub-basement...
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
11/12/2003 22:23 Comments ||
Top||
At least six people are reported to have been killed in a truck bomb attack on an Italian police base in the southern Iraqi city of Nasiriya. The casualty figure was given by General Guido Bellini of the Carabinieri in Rome, citing witnesses. The powerful explosion rocked the building at about 1040 local time (0740GMT), setting it on fire. Several people were reported to be trapped under rubble after the blast. The casualties are said to include Italian police and local Iraqis.
Posted by: Bulldog ||
11/12/2003 5:15:51 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Seems that 12 Italian soldiers have died, I wonder if the Italians will pull back their forces afer the UN and the red cross.
Posted by: Murat ||
11/12/2003 6:59 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Further attacks: 3 US soldiers killed, two in Bagdad one in northern Iraq.
Vehicle convoy of Turkish diplomats and ambasade personell attacked near the city of Samara, no casualties reported.
Posted by: Murat ||
11/12/2003 7:10 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I've been wondering how long it would be before they start to consistantly bomb the British,Italians and Poles.
Support for the war is a whole lot less in those countries than it is in the US, and if they are forced by pressure at home to pull out, that is going to greatly complicate things, not to mention embolden the head in the sand Islamofascist sympathizers here, oops I mean loyal opposition.
Posted by: Mike ||
11/12/2003 7:27 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Mike, that would indeed be a logical strategy, but I'm not convinced. I suspect this is just another case of pick a target, any target, and make it a soft one. IIUC, the Italians have been the most easy-going element of the coalition forces, and I suspect that their security precautions will have been perceived to have been less of an obstacle than others'. This an the other recent attacks in Basra may also indicate that things in Baghdad aren't as easy for the terrorists as they used to be. The day al Quaeda types employ a 'strategy' worthy of the name is the day I give up beer...
#5
Murat seems real pumped up by this news. Dead westerners really gets his blood pumping, eh?
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
11/12/2003 8:39 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Dead westerners and US "atrocities" are the only thing he likes to post about.
Posted by: Charles ||
11/12/2003 9:04 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Not the death of westerners, but the tactic used is quite intriguing yes. Chasing away the UN, then chasing away the red cross and now trying to chase away the Italians, Poles and the other nations, nasty but a smart move to create problems for the occupation forces. If they, Iraqis (terrorist-insurgents-baathists) manage to do that, it will become quite a headache for the US.
Posted by: Murat ||
11/12/2003 9:22 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Update: In Rome, Maj. Roberto Riccardi confirmed 14 Italians were dead: 11 Carabinieri paramilitary police and three Italian army soldiers. A coalition spokesman, Andrea Angeli, said by telephone from Nasiriyah that a truck bomb caused the explosion. Angeli said eight Iraqis died.
Angeli said the explosion occurred after a truck rammed the gate of the Italian compound and exploded in front of the Carabinieri building, which was the former chamber of commerce building. He said the force of the explosion was so strong that it blew out windows in another building across the Euphrates River. All the vehicles parked outside the stricken building exploded in flames. Angeli said secondary explosions from ammunition stored in the compound rocked the area moments after the main blast.
Riccardi said the building was in flames, and that some Italians may be under the debris, although details were difficult to come by because communication had been severed. "We cannot exclude the possibility that there are soldiers under the rubble," he said by telephone.
Posted by: Steve ||
11/12/2003 9:31 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Latest from Iraq, US soldiers fire at the car of a member of the Iraqi council Muhammed Bahr El-Ulum who is reported unhurt while the driver got wounded. His car came too close to a US military base according to US officials.
Posted by: Murat ||
11/12/2003 9:46 Comments ||
Top||
#10
The Poles havent left. Nor the Brits.
I hope the Italians dont.
Nevertheless we must be honest and indicate that there is trouble here. Yes, most Iraqis are glad we are there. And yes there is slow but steady reconstruction. And enlargement in the number of Iraqis fighting beside us. And no this is no Viet Nam, for about a dozen reasons.
BUT - the security situation is not improving, yet. Maybe it will improve when more Iraqi security forces hit the streets. Or maybe they'll only be able to keep it from getting worse as the number of US troops decreases. I dont know. And the security situation seems to drive alot of the lukewarm support for the US in the Sunni triangle, especially Baghdad. And the political situation is bogged down. The IGC seems to operating painfully slowly - so much so that Bremer has said he would give them more authority, if they had the energy to take it. And they are still squabbling over the process for selecting a constitutional convention. It seems some want to drag the process out, either to directly force hand over of sovereignty before elections, or to press for concessions in order to speed the process. Even Barzani, one of the Kurdish leaders on the IGC has complained about the IGC process. Something has to give, and soon.
The good news is the admin seems to realize this, and Bremer will be discussing just these matters with the NSC.
#11
"Dead westerners and US "atrocities" are the only thing he likes to post about."
Wild Dumrul has no other form of entertainment, being the idiotic moral chicken that he is.
Posted by: Ernest Brown ||
11/12/2003 10:11 Comments ||
Top||
#12
The Brits and Poles probably won't leave so easily, but what about the nations who have small forces in Iraq, for instance the Dutch who where so afraid for casualties that they fled Srebrenica leaving the Serbs a free hand in commiting a massacre. Would Japanese or Korean troops stay? And is it true that only 8 members of the Iraqi governing council stay in Iraq, the rest staying outside Iraq for fearing their live as some reports suggest?
Posted by: Murat ||
11/12/2003 10:14 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Whoopdeedoo, me and my mouth, Iâve spoken and already the Dutch ministry of defence reported to investigate whether As Samavah and Thalil where Dutch soldiers are stationed is save enough. Those Dutch are a real joke!
Posted by: Murat ||
11/12/2003 10:36 Comments ||
Top||
#14
God help the sunnis if indeed ROKs are coming to patrol the triangle. Those bastards are mean, cold, and effective - I love those mofos.
As for the Dutch, maybe their gov't is waning but don't discount them as a joke Murat. The Netherlands Royal Marines are some bad-ass dudes. More then capable fighters.
#15
I don't believe it's only the Sunnis who are fighting there, but also the wahabbi and the Shia. At least I have never heard of a war in which only the catholics fight while the protestants are only looking at. Nor did I ever hear about a war in which only the Sunni or the Shia where involved.
Don't you know that Sunni and Shia are the equivalent of Catholic and Protestant in the Islam Jarhead?
Posted by: Murat ||
11/12/2003 11:17 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Yes, Murat, I do understand the difference between the two denominations or sects if you will. Shia's are the Catholics of the two - so to speak. 80% of the country is pacified for the most part, sure you'll have outbreaks in the south and north from time to time but that's to be expected, especially in Tikrit. The Sunni Triangle is where 90% of the problems are coming from. Sunnis make up roughly 30-40% of the country and had it good under Sammie. That's where my point about bringing in the ROKs was probably lost on you.
The Shia's will bitch because we shot one of their leaders the other day when he was dumb enough to accost a U.S. guard. The bottom line is that a lot of the attacks are being caused by foreign born non-Iraqis. Wahabbis (foreign born & other) have proven themselves to be fanatics - no surprise if they have limited involvement as well. Making 'Nam analogies where there isn't one is amusing to me.
#17
Murat is on to something, folks: the fedayeen and jihadis have figured out through painful experience that standing up directly to Americans usually gets one killed (ZAP! Owwww!). So instead hit the softer targets and try to split off political support from the Americans.
While the UK, Italian and Dutch governments support us, we would be kidding ourselves if we didn't recognize that a substantial portion of their populations do NOT. Get them angry over the deaths of their soldiers and they'll question their governments as to why they've committed troops to Iraq. We know where that's going.
al-Q sometimes has the strategic insights of a lump of dirt. But sometimes they happen to get a strategy right. In Iraq right now, the weak link for us is the resolve the West has to see this through. Bush won't wobble, I'm convinced of that. But others might, and that creates political pressure. It might create pressure on the 2004 election, and if a Democrat (any of 'em except Liebermann) gets elected this sort of pressure will translate into "we won, we're done and we're coming home."
And al-Q and the Ba'athists will have won. It might not be a high percentage strategy, but it's one of the few these guys have, so they're playing it.
Posted by: Steve White ||
11/12/2003 11:54 Comments ||
Top||
#18
Re: Murat's Fraktured Fairy Tales
The Sunni/Shi'a schism isn't even remotely the "equivalent of" the Catholic/Protestant schism, since Protestents aren't followers of the six Apostles murdered by Peter and the other five...
(laughing heartily at Murat's cluelessness...)
Posted by: Ernest Brown ||
11/12/2003 13:03 Comments ||
Top||
#20
The strategy of driving out non-American entities is an obvious attempt to validate the Left's Goebbels-inspired Big Lie that this action is "unilateral."
This is another example of terrorists and media/academic fifth columnists working hand in glove toward a common goal.
ONE INJURED, SIX HOUSES DAMAGED IN MARTIAL ART GROUPS ATTACK ON DERU VILLAGE
Thursday, November 13, 2003 1:00:52 AM
DERU VILLAGE
Bojonegoro, E Java, Nov - At least 160 members of the Karate martial art group attacked Deru village, Sumberrejo sub-district, East Java, on Wednesday, injuring a resident, damaged six houses and inflicted a loss of about Rp3.5 million.
It was reported that the attack was only a show of solidarity of the "SH" Kareta group`s members who were angered by the attitude of a group of youngsters of Deru village who some days ago have manhandled their martial art instructor.
Itâd be really interesting to see what a tropical village looks like after 160 enraged karate practitioners finished venting...
#1
Reminds me of that Bruce Lee movie where the two Kung Fu schools beat the shit outta each other....Sign these lads up, I think we could find something useful for them to do in the sunni triangle......
#2
There seems to be a lot of groups like this in India. I saw a Sikh fesitval (Gurupurab I think is what they called it) when in India last year. In the parade there were a lot of what were described to me as "after-school clubs" with kids of various ages fighting with swords, spears and martial arts.
It was pretty cool, and I got the impression that a lot of kids did it (sort of like Boy Scouts), at least among the Sikhs.
Posted by: Laurence of the Rats ||
11/12/2003 23:01 Comments ||
Top||
#3
were angered by the attitude of a group of youngsters of Deru village who some days ago have manhandled their martial art instructor.
Don't forget these kids, Jarhead. Anybody that can "manhandle" a martial-arts instructor can't be all bad... The head of the local Tae Kwan Do academy took on a half-dozen skinheads a few months ago, and sent five of them to the hospital. She's only ranked third in Colorado Springs...
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
11/12/2003 23:01 Comments ||
Top||
Malaysiaâs main opposition party, the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS), has unveiled its plans for an Islamic state, ahead of elections expected within a year. The document includes plans for implementing strict Islamic Sharia law, but also commits the party to ending restrictive internal security laws. "Under Sharia, who needs any other laws?"
PAS has said that non-Muslims would not be answerable to Sharia law. "Since they wonât have any rights, they donât need to worry about laws."
The party leader Abdul Hadi Awang said that his party offered the alternative to Western-style democracy, which had led only to "endemic social decadences and rampant injustices". He said PAS would amend the federal constitution to create an Islamic state, if it wins power in the next election, which Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi is expected to call in early 2004. PAS controls two out of Malaysiaâs 13 states, and under its rule gambling is banned, as is dancing and public consumption of alcohol by non-Muslims. But I thought Sharia law didnât apply to non-muslims?
But the precedence of federal over state law has prevented PAS from introducing Sharia law in these areas. The government has characterised PAS as a Malaysian version of the hardline Islamic Taleban regime, which used to be in power in Afghanistan. But PAS is keen to play down allegations that it is extremist. "No, no, weâre nothing like them. Weâre, er, different."
In an interview with the BBCâs East Asia Today programme, the Secretary General of PAS, Nasharuddin Mat Isa, said: " I donât think this is something that is going to shock society at large... as far as Sharia law is concerned, it is only going to be implemented to Muslims, non-Muslims will not be forced to be under this law." "They can leave"
There has been speculation that the Islamist platform of PAS could cause a rift in the opposition front. Tian Chua, Vice President of the National Justice Party, who are opposition allies of PAS, described the unveiling of the plan for an Islamic state as "untimely". A Chinese-based opposition party, the Democratic Action Party, pulled out of the alliance in protest at PAS policies in 2001. Observers say there is little chance that PAS would win the upcoming elections against the government of the new Prime Minister, Abdullah Badawi. They only need to win once.
Posted by: Steve ||
11/12/2003 2:59:59 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Yeah, and if the jihadis lose, I'm sure that they will quietly retire to the countryside, never to be heard from again. Unless of course they decide to EXPLODE on the scene.
Posted by: ISLAM SUCKS ||
11/12/2003 16:48 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Wonder how many of the Malaysian special army group that destroyed the Communists are still around? Wonder if they've managed to train their children? Wonder if they'd mind extending their hatred of tyrants to the Islamofascists in Malaysia? Time will tell...
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
11/12/2003 22:37 Comments ||
Top||
Tip to RightNation
The director of the National Air and Space Museum yesterday rejected suggestions that the new display of the Enola Gay, the airplane that dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima, be altered to include information on the number of victims of the attack and a discussion of the politics of nuclear weapons. Gen. John R. "Jack" Dailey, the director of the museum, said he wasnât changing his mind that the spare placard, which provides vital statistics of the plane and a brief description of its historic role, was correct. (Finally! Someone in Washington with some stones!)
"To be accurate, fair and balanced, inclusion of casualty figures would require an overview of all casualties associated with the conflict, which would not be practical in this exhibit," Dailey said. Referring to an earlier exhibit of part of the plane, he said, "We are confident this approach, similar to one seen by nearly 4 million people, is the right one and, therefore, we have no plans to change the exhibit." (You want the truth? You canât handle the truth!)
The organizers of a petition asking Dailey to expand the information about the historic plane said the museum was squandering an opportunity. (To pander to yet ANOTHER left wing whacko group!)
"I was disappointed by the Smithsonian response," said Peter J. Kuznick, a history professor at American University, who organized the Committee for a National Discussion of Nuclear History and Current Policy. "I see this as a missed opportunity to educate the American people. Nuclear policy is a very important issue in our past and a critical issue now." (Peter, Peter, Peter You are the ONLY person who think this. The rest of us are concerned about TERRORISM!)
The museum has placed the huge B-29 Superfortress, totally restored for the first time in 43 years, in its companion museum, the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center at Dulles International Airport. That facility, which will eventually house 200 aircraft, 135 spacecraft and related artifacts, is scheduled to open Dec. 15. The museumâs description of the Enola Gay centers on its technical statistics and explains the advancements it represented in military aircraft. It treats its most notorious mission this way: "On August 6, 1945, this Martin-built B-29-45-MO dropped the first atomic weapon used in combat on Hiroshima, Japan. Three days later Bockscar (on display at the U.S. Air Force Museum near Dayton, Ohio) dropped a second atomic bomb on Nagasaki, Japan. Enola Gay flew as the advance weather reconnaissance aircraft that day." I would add: âAnd saved countless lives on both sides because the Japanese Islands did not have to be invaded. God bless Col Tibbits and crew!"
#3
I saw "Boxcar" at the Wright-Pat AF Museum. That whole museum is freakin' awesome for anyone interested in Mil aviation. I'm glad NASA didn't cave in to these loonies. Kuznick needs to find some other thing to use for his ajenda.......Next!
In a dispute over display of holiday symbols, New York City schools are allowing Jewish menorahs and Islamic crescents but barring Christian nativity scenes, alleging the depiction of the birth of Christ does not represent a historical event.
Christ, whether you're a Christian or not, was an historical figure. Presumably he was born...
In pleadings with a federal court in defense of the ban, New York City lawyers asserted the "suggestion that a crÚche is a historically accurate representation of an event with secular significance is wholly disingenuous." The Jewish and Islamic symbols are allowed, the district says, because they have a secular dimension, but the Christian symbols are "purely religious." So does this mean that the Jews and Muslems loose their âFreedom of Religionâ status? Thought not.... Robert J. Muise, who will challenge the school policy at a federal court hearing tomorrow in Brooklyn, told WorldNetDaily be believes most Americans donât see it that way. "The birth of Jesus is a historical event which serves as the basis for celebration of Christmas," Muise stated. "Itâs of importance for both Christians and non-Christians." Considering the impact Christianity had on Europe and even the Jewish and Islamic world... I think it is just a tad siginificant.
Muiseâs Michigan-based Thomas More Law Center filed a motion to temporarily restrain the city from enforcing its ban on nativity scenes. The center asserts New Yorkâs policy "promotes the Jewish and Islamic faiths while conveying the impermissible message of disapproval of Christianity in violation of the U.S. Constitution." If this isnât a direct violation of the 1st admendment I donât know what is...
The Michigan group says one public-school principal issued a memo encouraging teachers to bring to school "religious symbols" that represent the Islamic and Jewish religions, but made no mention of Christianity. Jewish menorahs adorned the halls of the school as part of the authorized displays, the More Center said, but students were not allowed to make and similarly display nativity scenes. A parent who wrote a letter of complaint to her sonâs teacher received a copy of the schoolâs "Holiday Displays" policy in response. Kate Ahlers, communications director for New York Cityâs law department, says schools can use things that are secular like menorahs, stars and snowflakes, but the crÚche is considered religious. "There is a separation of church and state that is part of the Constitution," she claimed. "Itâs a clear belief that people try to follow in schools and public office, and schools are saying they adhere to that belief." Classic Doublespeak.
If a menorah's not a religious symbol I don't know what is...
The point of schools, she added, "is not to debate religion; the point of schools is to indoctrinate teach children." then her lips fell off....
The federal civil-rights lawsuit was filed on behalf of Andrea Skoros and her two elementary-school children against the city of New York and several school officials. Skoros and her children are devout Roman Catholics. "Can Christianity be erased from a public school?" Muse asked in a statement. "Can âChristâ be removed from Christmas? We will soon find out." Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
11/12/2003 16:34 Comments ||
Top||
#2
i guess they were thinking of menorahs as equivalent to santa and trees, (not quite right, though not quite the same as nativity scenes either). I presume they allowed santas and xmas trees. On the whole Id prefer NO symbols - a paper menorah on a school wall doesnt do it for me, and isnt worth opening the door to creches and so forth. One Jewish group, chabad lubavitch, tends to oppose bans on creches, precisely cause they want the opening to menorahs wherever they can put them (its got special connotations for them) Most Jews I know of dont think much of this approach.
#3
This is total insanity. How can they claim that the story of Chanukah is a historical event, but the nativity isn't? It's all fictional bullshit. Remove ALL religious symbols from public land. Do it just at least to keep the KKKoran off of our public lands.
Posted by: ISLAM SUCKS ||
11/12/2003 16:41 Comments ||
Top||
#4
This is about the gayest story I heard. The Menorah is damn sure a religious symbol. It is from the Temple.
The Crescent moon is a symbol of Ramadan. So it may be a symbol of religion, or it may be a symbol of violence. Depends on your POV.
How anybody not see that the three are all religious is laughable. And you know what? They should allow all three.
#5
I'm beginning to believe the only legitimate argument against any of these 'anti-Christmas', 'anti-Christian' stories is to take the perps out and give them a dose of 12-gauge lead in the gut at close range. Let's see how much they start praying.
There is NO SUCH THING as the "separation of Church and State". The only single reference to this is in a letter from Thomas Jefferson, years after the Constitution (and the Bill of Rights) were ratified. The entire thing is the product of the ACLU and activist judges, and all of them should be hanged with a barbed-wire rope (shootin's too good for them).
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
11/12/2003 17:28 Comments ||
Top||
#7
penguin is correct that the seven candled menorah is from the temple, and the 9 candles menorah is in memory of events in the temple. Id say its somewhat more secularized today than creche (mainly cause jews dont have any equivalent of an xmas tree, and so menorah for many takes on that secularized role) but then id end up quibbling about the secularization of creches - which i as a non-Christian and voter SHOULD NOT be doing - thats the whole point of seperation, to keep discussion of such issues in the private sphere where it belongs. Ergo I think a valid case can be made for excluding menorahs and muslim symbols.
Its true Wall of seperation was not in the bill or rights, but it doesnt seem that unreasonable a reading of the no establishment clause. and hanging folks who take that reading with a barbed wire rope is a tad, well, extreme.
#8
Personally I think they should either allow all or ban all.
The 1st admendment, at least in my view, says that the state should not either promote a particular religion (or religions) or suppress them. It should leave them the fark alone. What the school district is doing is promoting the Jewish and Islamic faiths by allowing their religious symbols while at the same time suppressing the Christian faith by banning its symbols:
Displaying the menorahs or Islamic cresent in this way is a religious context and not a secular context.
The Michigan group says one public-school principal issued a memo encouraging teachers to bring to school "religious symbols" that represent the Islamic and Jewish religions, but made no mention of Christianity.
#10
Old Patriot wrote: "There is NO SUCH THING as the "separation of Church and State". The only single reference to this is in a letter from Thomas Jefferson, years after the Constitution (and the Bill of Rights) were ratified."
His point is valid -- there is no Constitutional provision requiring the separation of church and state -- but I think his history and understanding are a bit off. I recall from research years ago that the first reference was actually in a letter by Roger Williams of the Rhode Island Colony where he talked about the need to establish a wall protecting the "garden" of religion from encroachment by the state. The point he was making (as was Jefferson) was that there needs to be a wall of separation between church and state to protect the CHURCH from interference by the STATE. The ACLU and nitwits like Americans United for Separation of Church and State have turned the phrase completely on its head to mean that the STATE must be protected from encroachment by the CHURCH. The establishment and free exercise clauses --"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" -- square completely with the Williams/Jefferson notion. Most of the Framers, including Jefferson (but not John Adams, who was a visious anti-Catholic), the author of the Virginia religious freedom statute, had a healthy respect for the place of religion and established churches in society, even when they themselves were not members of any organized religion (Jefferson and Madison were Deists who believed in God but not belong to any particular church). To them, the notion that the state would be "establishing" a religion by permitting (or even sponsoring) a creche on public property would be absurd. Their understanding of an establishment of a religion would be an Act of Congress establishing the Church of the United States as the official religion of the U.S.
Posted by: Tibor ||
11/12/2003 18:36 Comments ||
Top||
#11
..New York City schools are allowing Jewish menorahs and Islamic crescents but barring Christian nativity scenes, alleging the depiction of the birth of Christ does not represent a historical event.
No problem. School can be in session on or around 12/25 of every year then. No use closing it for something with no historical significance.
Tip to NEWSMAX
A college student charged with plotting to bomb Coast Guard and Army National Guard stations has pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of trying to obtain explosives. Under a plea agreement disclosed Tuesday, Paul Douglas Revak, 20, hopes to be home by Christmas, said his attorney Thomas W. Hillier II. "I donât think Paul has a mean bone in his body. I think he was expressing his frustration with how the administration was dealing with the Iraq situation and got a little carried away," Hillier said. So the ânaturalâ thing is to plan to bomb a U.S. installation?
Revak was arrested in June after investigators said he tried to get another student to help him bomb the Coast Guard station in Bellingham. He was also accused of talking about obtaining or making C-4 explosives and bombing other military installations: Whidbey Island Naval Air Station near Oak Harbor and the Washington Air National Guard and Army National Guard stations near Bellingham International Airport. Sounds like a clear case of espionage if I ever seen one.
According to court papers, the Western Washington University student described himself as an anarchist and gave another student a "manifesto" in which he declared war against the government. He was arrested outside a department store after purchasing a pellet gun. And with this pellet gun I will take over the government!
Federal agents later found camouflage hats, face paint, black gloves, a ski mask, a walkie-talkie and bolt cutters in his dormitory room, but no explosives, according to court documents. Those were just for his sexual antics, not harm intended.
He could have faced up to life in prison if convicted of threatening to use a weapon of mass destruction and solicitation to commit a crime of violence. Which is what the little brat deserves.
Except that regular bombs aren't "weapons of mass destruction."
Instead he pleaded guilty to attempted receipt of explosives, which carries a maximum prison term of 10 years. He likely will be sentenced to six months to a year and a half, Hillier said, which means he could be released as early as Dec. 5. If the judge gives him this light sentence he should be disbarred.
"Mr. Revak is only 20, with no prior offenses. Most of what he did was just talk," assistant U.S. attorney Andrew Hamilton said. "We felt that he was culpable, but we had to look at all the factors and what would be the just result." Is this guy for real? The guy had motive and (based on what he had in the dorm room) was planning to do something. Do we really need this guy walking around free? I say throw him in the darkest dankest hole we can find for the FULL 10 years. Better let the Coasties take him for a scenic cruise and give him the ole deep six. I am not kidding this guy obviously has some screws loose and does not need to be out writing manifestos. BTW: What are they teaching at his college? Terrorism 101?
We live in a strange and wonderful country. Sometimes it's a lot more strange than wonderful.
#4
Where can I find my copy of THE JOY OF ANARCHIST SEX.
p.s.
Robert,the bolt cutters come in handy if you get too stoned to find the handcuff keys.
Posted by: Stephen ||
11/12/2003 15:01 Comments ||
Top||
#5
The problem here is that there is no established past criminal activity on which to draw conclusions from. What's more, despite being charged with plotting to bomb some facilities, no explosives were found. Now had the guy been in possession of dynamite or C4, things would probably have turned out very differently.
#6
I hope this story is missing something, like he's going to be tossed into a nut-bin for a while or something. Did Ramsey Clark spring for his lawyer?
#8
Sounds like a conspiracy charge at least....wonder how long the probation will be?
Posted by: Frank G ||
11/12/2003 16:16 Comments ||
Top||
#9
LOL Jarhead! I hadn't thought of that aspect of the punishment. I am sure their are lots of friends young Paul will make in prison. They will probably show him how to âplace a shaped chargeâ, âbreach an obstructionsâ, and use some âtools of the trade.â I am sure he will come out a better bitch man after prison.
#11
I don't understand this at all. According to NewsMax (*ahem*), the feds aren't saying a thing about the case, and the Coasties have 'no comment'. Did this little 'Peace Activist' rat somebody else out or something?
#12
We're winning the WOT in Iraq but not on American campi. I kept looking for the place where the article said he got kicked out of school but then I came to my senses. I but they awarded him a doctorate at a special graduation. He will now chair his own department the first semester that he is granted work release.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
11/12/2003 18:49 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Hmmm
You'd probably get about 2000 years for plotting to blow up some enemy installations, say, the LA Times or the Department of Womyn's Studies at Berserkely.
U.S.-led coalition forces launched a military operation in Baghdad late Wednesday, setting off a series of explosions that rumbled through the center of the Iraqi capital. In Washington, a Pentagon official confirmed the operation but gave no details about exact location or reason. "At this time, I can say no more."
Up to a dozen detonations were heard about 9:15 p.m., apparently centered away from the heart of the city. The operation came hours after a deadly suicide bombing at a headquarters for Italian forces in Iraq in the southern city of Nasiriyah — the heaviest assault on American allies since the U.S.-led occupation. Gloves are off, time for "Plan B".
Posted by: Steve ||
11/12/2003 2:14:01 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
From Fox, CENTCOM says US forces raided warehouse on south side of Baghdad that was being used as staging area for attacks. Seems like the warehouse ain't there no more.
Posted by: Steve ||
11/12/2003 14:17 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Behold the power of Old Patriots suggestions
Posted by: Yosemite Sam ||
11/12/2003 14:21 Comments ||
Top||
MAMUDIYAH, Iraq â U.S. soldiers and Iraqi police arrived at the sprawling three-family farmhouse just after 4 p.m. with orders for the 15 or so people still living there: Grab what you can in the next 30 minutes, and then leave. Your house is about to be bombed.
Two hours later on Monday, a pair of F-16 warplanes screamed overhead and dropped 1,000-pound laser-guided armaments on the boxy, concrete structure. The bombs left a deep crater strewn with smashed furniture, broken concrete and other debris. The lawn, shed and date trees around it remained intact.
U.S. military authorities said the bombing of the Najim family house was a prime example of a firm new response to those who plant roadside bombs, hide weapons or carry out ambushes that kill or harm American soldiers, and they want the people in these parts to know about it. It was the third fixed-wing bombing in a week across Iraq, pointing up a re-escalation of the war by the U.S. in response to heightened insurgency.
"The message is this: If you shoot at an American or a coalition force member, you are going to be killed or you are going to be captured, and if we trace somebody back to a specific safe house, we are going to destroy that facility," said Maj. Lou Zeisman, a paratroop officer of the Army's 82nd Airborne Division deployed here from Fayetteville, N.C. "We are not going to take these continuous attacks."
More at link. They found these moaks with the goods, arrested them, and destroyed the location.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
11/12/2003 14:39 Comments ||
Top||
#6
They found these moaks with the goods, arrested them...
I just don't understand the rules they're operating under... why are these guys still breathing? Why are they giving time to grab anything before they march them out of the house and destroy it & all its contents?
The bad guys are getting the message that as long as they're not caught in the act of firing, they will just get arrested and taken to the slammer. The rules ought to be simple -- if you're caught with an RPG or IED materials, summary execution. If you're traced to a house, it's "everyone out, NOW", destroy everything, take the kids and let them grow up with someone civilized, etc.
I know it's easy for me to say, but it seems as though these troops think that they're in a "police action", when it's really a widescale meeting engagement with the old Iraqi Army, Fedayeen, and jihadis.
#7
Looks like we're borrowing another page from the Israeli handbook on how to deal with Terrorists.
Can't wait to hear from the "Apologists".
Posted by: Daniel King ||
11/12/2003 15:09 Comments ||
Top||
#8
It would seem to me that cutting some sniper teams loose would make some sense. Carrying an RPG or AK? Bam! Digging holes on the side of the road for a mine? Bam! Let the boys do what needs to be done. I also think the troops are entirely too roadbound. What the hell is GPS for if you can't move around in the desert? Stay off the roads and sneak up on the assholes! Afterall, if you ain't on the road, you can't be a sitting duck and be 'ambushed'. Stupid officers probably set up a schedule for the patrols to follow, just like security guards. Fools.
#9
Why are they giving time to grab anything before they march them out of the house and destroy it & all its contents?
Exactly my sentiment. For too long, our forces seemed to be exhibiting "sensitivity" (how I HATE that word). It's kill or be killed, and quite frankly, it's way past time to get on with the serious business of maximizing enemy casualties.
#10
Because we're not Tikrit Thugs, guys. The good guys have to do things that the bad guys wouldn't.
Just wondering. Since we attacked that wharehouse in the middle of the night, do you suppose we waited until it had a few visitors before attacking? Wharehouse districts often need pest control.
#11
"The rules ought to be simple -- if you're caught with an RPG or IED materials, summary execution. "
three problems
1. No chance to interogate
2. possibility of innocents caught with such materials
3. Likely to piss off the fence sitters. Who probably make up a very large part of the Sunni arab population.
This is the test guys. Do we have the stomach for a hearts and minds game, where we have to be more restrained than the thugs, while we watch our people get killed? If not we might as well declare some friendly Iraqi president now, hand out weapons to the Kurds and Shia, and leave right away. Theyll be effective at going after the thugs, our troops can come home, and if it means that the new regime isnt really democractic, well thats inevitable anyway if we play this way.
If we're really trying to reshape the region, we cant play like the thugs. And if we're not, we might as well get out.
#12
...then we might as well get out now. This is going to get worse, not better. Unless we do some major pounding. Anybody see the CIA report out today?
Posted by: Rafael ||
11/12/2003 17:03 Comments ||
Top||
#13
The sentence was death in Germany thru 47 for having weapons. But actually I agree with you LiberalHawk that killing isn't the answer. I believe it would be just as effective to arrest all men of fighting age in the area. We could then question and identify everybody. But I would also include with this a Zero-Tolerance policy against mobs. I would allow "NO" public gatherings and that if groups do not disperse they will ALL BE ARRESTED. Anybody fighting back and not following orders will dealt with, and yes I do mean shooting them. Order needs to be established and respect for authority "i.e. the gun" must be enforced. As for the theory this will create more fighters why has this never been the case when Saddam was in charge. Why didn't people rise up against Saddam while his cronies were throwing soldiers off the top of buildings? Fear works.
Posted by: Patrick ||
11/12/2003 17:17 Comments ||
Top||
#14
One of the major problems in Iraq is the code of ethics of Islam: a guest is a guest, and must be offered respect, safety, and honor. What we're doing by giving them time to get their essential valuables out is to tell them, "We know you harbored a person, or hid property, we deem a danger to us. We understand your culture. Now understand that if you harbor the wrong guest, store the wrong thing, act as an agent for the wrong people, you will suffer. You must refuse them, you must turn them away, or you will face the lost of almost everything you own." Sooner or later, it'll sink in. May take awhile, but it WILL sink in. People will learn the cost of protecting the old regime is too high, and that protection will end. If you just kill them, you've become the new opressor, no different from the old opressor.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
11/12/2003 22:30 Comments ||
Top||
#15
If we're really trying to reshape the region, we cant play like the thugs.
The people that U.S. military personnel are going after would almost certainly have no reservations about slitting the throats of soldiers they would capture. If captured terrorists and Baathist sympathizers are mowed down by gunfire or blasted into a million pieces by 1000 pounders, I'm sure as hell not going to cry over them, and precious few others will either.
No amount of captured enemy combatants is worth the life of even ONE U.S. soldier.
The Japanese Navy says itâs spotted a Chinese attack submarine off its coast. The 2,000-ton Ming-class vessel was traveling on the surface through a strait about 25 miles off the southern coast of Japanâs main island. It was in international waters but itâs the first such sighting so close to shore. Japan said it doesnât know what the sub was up to and hasnât said whether it plans to seek an explanation from China. Humm, The Ming is a remodeled Romeo class boat based on the German Type 21 U-boat of 1944. The Chinese have about 19 in service. Seems a odd place for a coastal defense sub to be.
Posted by: Steve ||
11/12/2003 11:16:36 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Let's see. As I recall, you can get through the anti-sub nets at the mouth of Tokyo Bay by hiding underneath a freighter as it passes through the mine fields and the net. Getting out is tougher.
Nah, getting out is easy. You wait for the bombing raid, then scoot out when they open the nets to let the fleet escape. That's when you get the shot at the carrier.
Posted by: Steve ||
11/12/2003 12:55 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Any sub that displaces 2,000 tons isn't likely to be a coastal boat. That puts you square into pelagic territory. Consider these subs, past and present, with their displacements:
USS Balao class: 1,526 tons
(US fleet subs ranged all over the Pacific)
German Type IXC: 1,540 tons
(Used during 'Paukenschlag' to attack as far south
as Florida)
German Type XXI: 1,819 tons
(Precursor of the Romeo's)
Finally, considering that the Mings have a range of 8,000 miles (see: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/row/plan/ming.htm ), and that southern Honshu is only about 600 miles from the Chinese mainland, the only surprising thing is that they haven't found them sooner.
Posted by: Bill ||
11/12/2003 14:08 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Hope the seas get rough. Then you'll see whether the thing can still submerge. If they plan to deploy it, they will have to make arrangements to refuel it. Hope it doesn't disappear without a trace.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
11/12/2003 19:26 Comments ||
Top||
#5
France immediately surrendered to the PRC upon hearing the news.
Hamas, a Palestinian faction that has spearheaded a suicide bombing campaign against Israelis, joined international condemnation on Wednesday of a suicide attack in Riyadh that Saudi Arabia blamed on al Qaeda. "Hamas condemns the bombing attack...which led to the killing of innocent children and women and other civilians," the Islamic militant group said in a statement on a pro-Hamas web site. As opposed to the Israeli women and children they kill.
It said the Riyadh bombing "aimed to harm the security and stability of an Arab and Muslim country that represents a fundamental part of our funding nation." Hamas has sought to distance itself from al Qaeda, saying that unlike Saudi-born Osama bin Ladenâs global network it limits its attacks to Israel and the occupied territories. The statement said Hamasâ suicide attacks were "legitimate ones through which we defend our land and people" while the Riyadh bombing "contradicts religion and the principles of Hamas." Since the statement was on their website, I couldnât tell if their lips fell off.
Saudi Arabia has provided Palestinians with financial and diplomatic support during more than 50 years of conflict with the Jewish state, including their uprising for independence that erupted in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in September 2000. Israeli military sources say Hamas, sworn to Israelâs destruction, receives $10 million a year from Saudi sources. Thatâs why Hamas is concerned, any change in the status quo might upset their income.
Posted by: Steve ||
11/12/2003 10:03:06 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Hamas Condemns Riyadh Bombing as Harmful to Islam
Translation: legitimate Islamic targets for bombings - infidels and Jews.
#2
Put this one in the "Honor among Thieves" file.
Posted by: Dar ||
11/12/2003 10:27 Comments ||
Top||
#3
The PR machine in Hamas must not be working so well. It took them 72 hr + to come up with a statement; evidence that there must have been quite a fight over the language of the announcement (some people probably wanted commas, others wanted semicolons and knives were drawn).
#4
The PR machine in Hamas must not be working so well. It took them 72 hr + to come up with a statement; evidence that there must have been quite a fight over the language of the announcement (some people probably wanted commas, others wanted semicolons and knives were drawn).
They just can't call or fax anymore; not with Israeli attack helos, primed and ready to engage.
#5
What they fail to realize is that ALL of the Muslim mass murder sprees are very bad for Islam. Soon they will be smacked down in a very big way I'm sure.
Posted by: ISLAM SUCKS ||
11/12/2003 15:54 Comments ||
Top||
Criticizing President Bushâs efforts, Democratic presidential candidate Wesley Clark says he would press Saudi Arabia to provide commandos to accompany U.S. troops in the hunt for Osama bin Laden and other al-Qaida leaders. Clark, a former four-star Army general, says although the Bush administration did the right thing by going after al-Qaida after the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, it failed to finish the job it started. Of course, according to Weasley, the WOT is already over.
"They still havenât found Osama bin Laden. And every day, Americans live at risk because of this failure," Clark said in remarks prepared for delivery Wednesday. Clark campaign spokesman Matt Bennett outlined Clarkâs speech and 3-point plan for capturing bin Laden hours before the candidate was to deliver the remarks at Dartmouth College in New Hampshire. First, Clark said he would pressure Saudi Arabia to contribute to a joint U.S.-Saudi commando force to scour the Afghan-Pakistani border where bin Laden is thought to be hiding. This would only drive them to their buddies in Pakistan. Hasnât Weasel read history — Geronimo (who was famous for fleeing into Mexico) and all that?
Clark said since many of the leaders of al-Qaida come from Saudi Arabia and many of the attacks are aimed at targets in Saudi Arabia, the country has a vested interest in stepping up cooperation with the United States in capturing bin Laden. But instead of ferreting out al-Qaida, the Bush administration has focused its energy and resources on Iraq, Clark said. Maybe because this is a war on Terrorists (in general) and not OBL in particular.
"Theyâve downplayed more serious threats in other parts of the world," he said. "In fact, itâs been months since Mr. Bush has even mentioned Osama bin Laden. These days, the only name we hear is Saddam Hussein, and the only country we hear about is Iraq." Perhaps because Iraq is now the main battlefield on the WOT..... (Would you have sent your army to S. America to fight WW II?)
Second, Clark proposed reassigning some of the intelligence specialists, linguists, and special operations forces now searching Iraq for weapons of mass destruction to the hunt for bin Laden. Then, of course, the donks can claim there there are no WMD. No political agenda here... move along....
Third, he said the United States needs to repair relations with allies and friends. Which we are doing. But without âsurrenderingâ as Weasel would like.
"With his unilateral march into Iraq, President Bush has scorned many of our key allies, preventing the necessary cooperation to destroy al-Qaida," Clark said.
Posted by: CrazyFool ||
11/12/2003 9:37:56 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Cause the Soddis are doing so well in their own country?
#2
Usual leftist confusion. Someone should ask Clark and others who whine about OBL whether the failure to find Hitler means WWII was a failure. Yes, it would be nice to catch them and fry them, but it's not necessary.
Heck, we let the Japanese emperor GO -- does that make the war in the Pacific a failure, to?
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
11/12/2003 9:59 Comments ||
Top||
#3
"With his unilateral march into Iraq, President Bush has scorned many of our key allies, preventing the necessary cooperation to destroy al-Qaida," Clark said.
Who of our "allies", aside from the U.K., was going to help us out? France? Germany? Had UN approval been a requirement to proceed, who really believes that the UN would actually have given its blessing to an action that would have REMOVED Hussein from power?
#5
We will paint a fake cave, and when he runs into it we will drop and anvil on his head!
I am sorry, but I doubt the CIA has plants in pakistani hospitals, where the leads are going to show up - what consumables are used for kidney dialysis? Those are the things you track.
#7
So let's get the good general's thoughts in order. We have the best trained special forces units in the world converged on Afganistan (US, Britain, Australia, Germany, Italy, even France), but this is not good enough. What will really put us over the top in finding OBL is a yet untrained unit from Saudi Arabia.
How did this dopey fool get an officer's commision let alone four stars?!?
Posted by: Matt ||
11/12/2003 12:38 Comments ||
Top||
#8
My brilliant cousin Wesley's plans will work perfectly, and he'll catch that nasty roadrunnerterrorist, as long as he buys all of his supplies from Acme.
#9
Saudi Special Forces: That's my cousin, he just looks like Bin Laden. He's not Al Queda. Let him go please.
US Special Forces: Sure looks like Bin Laden, but I'll trust you, Saudi Arabia is our friend after all. What about this one eyed guy, looks like Mullah Omar.
Saudi Special Forces: That is my sister, we rarely let her out of the burqa.
#12
This is so deep. I'm voting Clark. Wow. Pressure the Saudis, shuffle some folks around some offices, and perform a Lewinsky on Jacques and Gerhard.
And this guy was first in his class? Should I be laughing or crying?
Posted by: Michael ||
11/12/2003 16:11 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Hey, Wesley is a smart guy! They don't admit dummies into Star Fleet Academy.
Posted by: Steve ||
11/12/2003 16:18 Comments ||
Top||
#14
It would be most helpful to have some Saudi troops along because our troops don't speak Pashtu ....
Posted by: Super Hose ||
11/12/2003 19:39 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Why in the HELL would you want to give some al Qaeda wahhabists Saudi 'commandos' the chance to get intel on our special ops? Don't we have enough problems with the Pakistanis tipping off the taliban? THAT is a dead-end idea.
I served under Clark, 3rd bde 4th Inf. We didn't do much soldier-type training, but we sure did wash vehicles and march real pretty. Stood around in formation alot, too. 2 years and I didn't qualify with my M16 the entire time, in fact never fired it while stationed there. I trust this guy as a wartime commander as far as I can spit.
From Yahoo Australia and NX EFL Jessica Lynch Book Fails to Excite on First Day a little 19 year old girl survives a horrific ordeal at the hands of terrorists and Yahoo finds it in their hearts to write this headline?
Despite a media blitz, the biography of Americaâs best-known soldier from the Iraq war, Jessica Lynch, appeared unlikely on Tuesday to translate into big cash as the first day of sales fell short of expectations. Whose expectations? Compared to what?
After days of magazine covers, TV movies, tabloid tales and television interviews, first-day sales of her authorized biography, "I Am a Soldier, Too: The Jessica Lynch Story," fell well short of other high-profile books like Sen. Hillary Rodham Clintonâs memoir, which had buyers lining up around the block. Are we are going to compare this widely discredited, already told, over-hyped, over-promoted story of a self-proclaimed non-hero â who admits that her only heroic feat was to survive â to similar celebrities, like Elizabeth Smart, or JonBenet Ramsey? Noooo...the measure will be Hillary Clinton, whose PR machine would have no doubt mobilized the party faithful to come forward and then prepositioned TV cameras to record the "excitement".
Not a copy had been sold by midday on Tuesday, Veterans Day, at a Barnes & Noble store on Chicagoâs North Side, said an employee who declined to be identified. The store would not disclose how many of the books sold The sample population...one store in the entire US.
On online bookseller Amazon.com, the book ranked 21st in sales, well short of top-selling novel "The Da Vinci Code" and the latest get-slim-quick fad, "The South Beach Diet." Ok...so how many copies of these books did this same B&N Store sell in their first four hours after their release?
Public relations expert Lou Colasuonno, who handles celebrity crisis management, gave Lynch high marks for trying to dispel myths about her capture and rescue. Now thereâs a public relations expert that I want to hire. Debunk the myth that success of the book is based on and expect sales to skyrocket.
"She stood up and said she thought she had been used, that her story had been manipulated," Colasuonno said, referring to charges the Pentagon used the story of her rescue to bolster patriotic feelings during the war in Iraq. All hit pieces predictably repeat the obligatory lie (discredited by the WP reporter who broke the story) that it was the Pentagon responsible for spreading the Rambo hype.
They just canât stand the fact that the Jessica Lynch story provided a likeable war hero...even if her only heroic feat was to survive. They will do all they can to destroy it. If that means writing hit pieces against a 19 year old war POW, so be it. That Yahoo would highlight this shameful piece of reporting propaganda says volumes about the mean-spirited executives at Yahoo.
Posted by: B ||
11/12/2003 8:03:13 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Not to mention that the Democrat's favorite pornographer, Flynt, has declared he has nude photos of Lynch. Of course, to "honor this hero", he's not going to publish them.
Issue press releases and give interviews about them, yes, but not publish them.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
11/12/2003 8:38 Comments ||
Top||
#2
RC, he also accused Bush of using Lynch and her story too manipulate public opinion on the war. This was right after he announced the photo's and said he wasn't going to publish them.
Posted by: Charles ||
11/12/2003 8:55 Comments ||
Top||
#4
It's amazing to me how the media is counterspinning by saying Lynch feels she was used. Yes, she said that. But if you watched the whole interview last night, you'd have heard her say things like she was proud of her fellow soldiers. She never said the war was wrong, and never slammed the U.S.A.
Anyways, as of now the book is ranked number 13 on Amazon.
#5
If the book does great - good for Lynch. If not, oh well - I'm sure she'll do okay. I won't buy it as I caught the jist of it over the last 3 months. These Yahoo guys (perfect ironic name) are confused into thinking that if the book doesn't sell like hot-cakes it's some sort of indictment against the war or what Lynch went through....morons. I wish her the best and am glad she thanked the spec ops guys involved in her rescue. The topless photograph angle from Hustler is par for the course (sadly) w/today's celebrity obsessed culture. I find Flynt amusing but of no credible authority to say anything coherent about Iraq.
#6
It's amazing to me how the media is counterspinning by saying Lynch feels she was used.
I only saw one or two excerpts from the interview. What caught my attention was that she said she didn't know why the rescue was recorded and that it was wrong to do so. If she wasn't aware why the operation was recorded, how can she know that it's "wrong"?
For some reason, her puzzling reaction to that aspect of the rescue bothers me.
#7
B-A-R, I posted the other day my theory of the video camera. I believe they didn't know if she was alive or dead or where her fellow soldiers were (if still alive). Heck, she even admits they couldn't of know for sure if she was still alive. Also, if there were too many bodies for them to extract out they could at least get the footage and proof of life or death. They could also get footage of anything else they wanted in the hospital. I'd bet one of the Army intel guys probably already briefed her on this, if not, miscue on their part.
OTOH - it bothers me that after a successful operation she questions her higher command's intent. If she's still in the Army she needs to shut up. None of her business what their reasons were - you got out baby Jessica - now just be thankful and shut your soup-cooler. As we say, you're a f*cking private, know your role. When she's a full civilian she can run her suck & second-guess them all she wants.
#8
Lets see, she doesn't remember anything of consequence so the book would be interesting why? She's going around saying she's a survivor not a hero so the book would be intesting why? I'm not knocking her, but the publishing company that rushed this to press was foolish.
#9
Saw the book at B. Dalton on my lunch hour, and like Yank, I am wondering how on earth they managed to get so many pages out of a nineteen-year old clerk, along for the ride through a war zone, who barely survives--- doesn't seem to have taken an active role in defending the convoy, spent much of the time unconscious, and can't remember much else... and there is a whole book in this? The ghostwriter must be a genius at making bricks without straw.
#10
Granted, she's not the most well-spoken of girls, being only 19, but the yahoos like d. sawyer are putting ALL KINDS of words in this poor girl's mouth. I was bored enough to watch most of the interview, and the quotes are taken dramatically out of context [almost mado-like in their cherry picking and editing].
This poor girl was unfortunate enough to have a platoon leader who couldn't read a map in a storm, and lucky enough to survive her injuries. That's pretty much the whole story (and that maint unit commander needs ass kicking for that fuckup).
For the a-holes in the press to be putting her up as refuting the entire 'Iraqi Adventure' and condemning America, Bush, and the Army is bullshit. Likewise, for Bush and the Army to be pushing her as some kind of heroic GI Jane is also bullshit.
Hopefully she banked a hefty check and can go back to living quietly, or wildly, or however she chooses, without either party trying to use her anymore.
#11
The media are the enemy, their real interests are served by terrorism at home and totalitarian rule overseas. For the truth about the Hollywood/Madison Avenue Cultural Axis and how it profits from inciting terror and crime, see Thomas M. Franks' The Conquest of Cool.
Like the advertising industry they serve, the denizens of the media culture are a mass of pathologically greedy prostitutes, having nothing in common with the noble traditions of the free press, and everything in common with professional con-artists and common criminals.
EFL & Texture
Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat called on Wednesday for an end to three years of violence, saying that Israel has a right to live in peace as his legislature prepared to approve the new Palestinian Cabinet. As he spoke a wink was detected. It has yet to be determined if this was a result of his recent stroke he recently suffered.
PALESTINIAN PRIME PUPPET MINISTER Ahmed Qurei also called for an immediate and comprehensive cease-fire with Israel and a return to peace talks based on President Bushâs vision for two states. And then his lips fell off.
âOur fate is to push all Israeliâs off the map live together on this land for us and our dreams, for our sons and grandsons ... instead of violence and terrorism,â Qurei said. âThe Israeli government says and spreads lies that we donât want peace,â he said. âI want to talk here to the Israeli people to say in public and in Arabic that this is not true.â
Arafat began his speech with a scathing attack on Israel. Hmm, nothing starts off a good cease fire like some good old school hate filled rhetoric.
He harshly criticized Israelâs targeted killings of Palestinian militant terrorists leaders, Jewish settlements and an Israeli security barrier being built in the West Bank. âThe goal of the Israeli government from behind this war ... is not hidden from the world,â Arafat said. âIt is a dangerous goal of preventing our people from blowing up innocent people enjoying a slice of pizza their land, their rights and an independent state.â He said the dozens of Palestinian attacks against Israeli civilians over the past three years were in response to the things we teach our children Israeli military aggression against Palestinians.
Nonetheless, the Palestinian leader said the violence must end. Read: All of the foriegn aid my money is now hidden in Europe and there is not much capital left for funding my homegrown nut cases.
âInstead of total destruction of our people and land, the time has come between us and you Israelis, and listen to me Israelis, to get out of this cycle of destructive war,â Arafat said. Translation: Just wait until the next series of explosions!
Also keep in mind that Israel's quit screwing around with the little fish and they're going after the head cheeses, with Yasser publicly put on the list. When things get personally dangerous it must be time for a ceasefire...
Posted by: Dragon Fly ||
11/12/2003 7:45:45 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Another Transalation: Out of Boomers, be back in a month.
Posted by: Charles ||
11/12/2003 8:46 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Everything Yasshole says is a lie. He just wants a break to recruite and re-supply.
#3
Arafart and Korei can demonstrate that they're serious - by dismantling Hamas and IJ (which incidentally is a condition of GWB's "roadmap"). While they're at it, they can disband Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, too.
(Note: holding one's breath is not advisable here)
No it isn't. Not after the PLO arab attempted Genocide. Now the PLO arab fate is to leave all of Israel, and return to egypt, jordan, syria, and lebanon, or what ever genocidal arab CUNTry they come from.
Posted by: ISLAM SUCKS ||
11/12/2003 10:39 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: Matt ||
11/12/2003 11:20 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Re comments:
Israel has right to live in security, fate to live together, etc.
What this crucially leaves is out is the following: fate is live together in TWO states (not just to live together in palestince) and Israel has the right to live as a JEWISH state - IE 2 states, one Pal and one Jewish, not 2 Pal states via the right of return.
But lets accept for the moment that the Pals wont give up the Right of Return outside of a final agreement, so this is the best they can do. Still its words. What is required is not words but actions. Querie has given in to Arafat on control of interior - he has proved weaker than Abbas, who at least resigned rather than go along with Arafat. So know arafat has COMPLETE control of Pal forces. Its up to HIM to disarm Hamas (which i doubt he will do) or face the consequences.
Now on Sharon - he seems to be making gestures and concessions toward Qurei, who is CLEARLY unwilling to stand up to Arafat. If these make sense at all, wouldnt they have made more sense for Abbas, who, though too weak, was tougher than Qurei?
Time to look past old Fatah leaders? Negotiate with a West Bank/Gaza native instead of the exiles - Bargouti, Dahlan, etc. But to pull that off major concessions might be needed. Will Sharon do that? OTOH can Labor, which would make concessions, manage to stick to a boycott of Arafat?
Negotiate with a West Bank/Gaza native instead of the exiles
Negotiate what? Israel should simply lay down the law. If a PLO arab can show beyond doubt that they are a direct descendant of a displaced Israeli arab who did not take up arms against Israel at any time in the past, they can stay in Israel if they want. Anywhere in Israel, be it Tel Aviv, the west bank, or Gaza. Any part of Israel where land is available. The Israeli gov, without displacing anyone, should even help with the costs, as a very generous gesture. All of the rest of the PLO arabs, and it would be the majority of them, should be immediately repatriated with their CUNTries of origin, whether the home CUNTries want them back or not. For the PLO arabs who's homes were originally in the area that is now Israel, but have taken up arms against Israel, and lost their land as a result of that action, should be shipped off to Jordan.
Posted by: ISLAM SUCKS ||
11/12/2003 16:32 Comments ||
Top||
#10
IS, that's out of order. LH makes some good points (as is usual), either address them or ignore them, but don't use them to go postal.
Rantburg has some truly excellent insights here, and I've learnt loads from the people that post here such as Fred, OP, .com, JFM (even including when he rightly took me to task over a silly thing I said), LH. SH and many more. Don't go barmy ok?
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
11/12/2003 21:13 Comments ||
Top||
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.
