Australian authorities have cancelled the passports of three Sydney men, who allegedly trained with a radical Islamic group linked to al Qaeda. A report in The Australian newspaper says the three trained in Kashmir with a group called Lashkar-e-Taiba, which it claims is also linked to a French terrorist suspect who was deported from Australia last year. Police have been unable to arrest the three because their alleged training took place before the government adopted new counter-terrorism laws. Instead, Foreign Minister Alexander Downer, acting on recommendations by the main spy agency ASIO, has cancelled their passports to prevent the trio from linking up with associates abroad.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
08/27/2004 12:32:42 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I would think that the idea would be to revoke their passports as part of a deportation process.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
08/27/2004 0:44 Comments ||
Top||
#2
The singular is alumnus. The plural is alumni. The singular for a female is alumna. At least they put the apostrophe in the right place.
#3
Gromky, I don't want to be picky, but I think if they'd shifted the apostrophe - alumni's - they would have been right. Same principle: women's (not womens').
Spain on Thursday released a Syrian man held in connection with the March 11 Madrid train bombings, Spanish judicial sources said. The sources said 41-year-old Safwan Sabagh, detained on August 20 on the orders of examining judge Juan Del Omo, would be required to report to police on a weekly basis and could not leave the country. Sabagh's finger prints were found in a car used by the bombers, as well as in Alcala de Henares, the point of departure of the trains bombed by suspected Moroccan extremists. His phone numbers were also found in the car following the coordinated blasts, which killed 191 people in Spain's worst terror attack.
During six days of questioning, Sabagh told the judge he gave his phone numbers to Allekema Lamari, a suspected member of Algeria's Armed Islamic Group (GIA). Investigators believe that Lamari could have died in the April 3 collective suicide of seven March 11 suspects at an apartment in the Madrid suburb of Leganes. One of the bodies found after the suspects blew themselves up during a police raid has yet to be identified.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
08/27/2004 1:04:46 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Judge Juan Del Omo: "As a condition of your release, you will be required to report to the police on a weekly basis and you cannot leave not leave the country. Is that understood?"
"Hokay, yer 'onor. No probelmo!"
And that is how you fight terrorism in Spain.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
08/27/2004 1:47 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Wasn't that the sweetheart deal that Jamal Zougam got before he perpetrated 3/11?
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
08/27/2004 1:51 Comments ||
Top||
#3
The family of one of the dead ought to go look him up and settle the score. Don't expect the socialist government of Spain to hold anyone to account.
Polish security experts confirmed on Thursday they had found traces of explosives on the clothes of a French photographer arrested earlier this month on suspicion of preparing a terror attack. "The result of the study will be presented during the day to the prosecutor in charge of the matter," security services spokesman Dariusz Bogaczyk told AFP. "Traces of explosives have been found," he said. "The only thing that I can say is that the chemical substance discovered are not on sale in shops," he said.
"I can say no more."
The suspect, identified as Michael Neyrolles, 23, was arrested while taking pictures of a gas pumping station. He is under investigation for "preparing actions which can endanger human life and destroy property", officials said. On Wednesday he was visited by the French consul in Poland.
A Florida trainee police officer was arrested on Friday for making a threat to kill President Bush before a visit by Bush to Tampa last month, prosecutors said. Joseph Chiejina Mazagwu, a 35-year-old Tampa resident, was indicted on Thursday on charges of making a threat against the president and making a false statement to a federal agent, the U.S. Attorney's Office in Tampa said. According to the indictment, Mazagwu made a threat to harm and kill the president on July 15. Bush visited the city the following day. Mazagwu made remarks to a clerk at a Tampa business and the clerk reported the comments to another police officer the next day, said Laura McElroy, a spokeswoman for the Tampa police department. Police and the Secret Service began investigating.
Mazagwu had completed police academy and had a badge and a gun but was doing field training with a supervising officer. Whether he had made the remarks or not, as a rookie he would not have been involved in presidential security when Bush visited, McElroy said. Mazagwu was suspended after the incident and is in the process of being fired, she said. He is also charged with making a false statement to a Secret Service agent on July 19. If convicted, he faces five years in prison and a fine of $250,000 on each count.
#1
This was so predictable, and this won't be the last incident. The hysterical rantings of the unhinged Left are going to get people hurt, possibly killed.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
08/27/2004 17:11 Comments ||
Top||
A captured al-Qaeda operative has told Canadian intelligence investigators that a Montreal man who trained in Afghanistan alongside the 9/11 hijackers was responsible for the crash of an American Airlines flight in New York three years ago. Canadian Security Intelligence Service agents were told during five days of interviews with the source that Abderraouf Jdey, a Canadian citizen also known as Farouk the Tunisian, had downed the plane with explosives on Nov. 12, 2001. The source claimed Jdey had used his Canadian passport to board Flight 587 and "conducted a suicide mission" with a small bomb similar to the one used by convicted shoe bomber Richard Reid, a "Top Secret" Canadian government report says.
But officials said it was unlikely Jdey was actually involved in the crash, which killed 265 people and is considered accidental. The fact that al-Qaeda attributed the crash to Jdey, however, suggests they were expecting him to attack a plane...Jdey, 39, came to Canada from Tunisia in 1991 and became a citizen in 1995. Shortly after getting his Canadian passport, he left for Afghanistan and trained with some of the Sept. 11 hijackers, according to the 9/11 commission in the United States. He recorded a "martyrdom" video, but was dropped from the 9/11 mission after returning to Canada in the summer of 2001. The planner of the World Trade Center attack, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, claims Jdey was recruited for a "second wave" of suicide attacks... Long article. Only pasted a bit. Boasting with no merit to the claim or is it the truth?
Posted by: rex ||
08/27/2004 12:53:32 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Boasting with no merit to the claim or is it the truth?
Does it matter?
Posted by: Rafael ||
08/27/2004 13:08 Comments ||
Top||
Three minutes after taking off and while in a climbing left turn, at 2,800 ft., parts of the plane, including the vertical stabilizer and rudder, fell from the aircraft. The crew soon lost control of the plane which nose dived and crashed into a residential neighborhood. After flying into the wake turbulence of two aircraft about two minutes into the flight, investigators believe a series of quick rudder swings by the copilot whipped the tail so severely that the fin broke off.
Posted by: Mike ||
08/27/2004 13:10 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I would like to know the degree of accuracy of anything else that came out in the friendly QandA. That would help me decide whether or not to believe it.
#6
Since this would suggest that Jdey, who is on the priority watch list, died three years ago, either the source is trying to kick up sand, or somebody seriously screwed up. I mean, why are we looking for Jdey if he hasn't been heard from in three years?
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
08/27/2004 13:27 Comments ||
Top||
#7
The more reason to be looking for him, if you don't know that he's dead. Foopie hadn't been heard from for about three years, either.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/27/2004 13:31 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Was he on the plane? Were there unidentified remains?
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
08/27/2004 13:34 Comments ||
Top||
#9
I mean, why are we looking for Jdey if he hasn't been heard from in three years?
To play the devil's advocate...maybe to confirm a suspicion that our own gov't has that perhaps Jdey indeed did down the plane. If we find him, obviously the claim was false. If we do not find him, then there might be some merit to the informer's claim. Perhaps there was some uncertainty about the cause of the plane crash, but coming so soon after 9/11, it was prudent economy wise to present an official cause of the crash as being "accidental."
Posted by: rex ||
08/27/2004 13:37 Comments ||
Top||
#10
...I say we believe them.
Nuke someone now.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
08/27/2004 13:40 Comments ||
Top||
#11
#2 Mike
The site makes a good point, but this wouldn't be the first time that authorities have bent over backwards to state for the record ANY possibility other than terrorism for various "accidents" worldwide.
I'm not saying that this is the case here (I have no evidence either way of course), but it's well worth considering. Example: The Russians have been working themselves into a pretzel over the last week trying to pin their multiple plane crashes as something other than terror, only to be forced back into reality by the most recent evidence.
Posted by: Chris W. ||
08/27/2004 13:46 Comments ||
Top||
#12
If I recall correctly, there were photos or videos showing the plane dropping out of the sky missing its vertical stabilizer. Hard to cause that to happen from your seat inside the cabin. More to the point, if it were a terrorist attack, I doubt you could have kept that fact secret had you wanted to. (And why would you want to?)
Posted by: Mike ||
08/27/2004 14:00 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Robert C:
My thoughts exactly. If it had been a Richard Reid-type operation, don't you wish the story had told us if this guy was in the wreckage? Or the fact this info was omitted means that we're supposed to infer he wasn't? Please help us, Mr. Editor.
Posted by: chicago mike ||
08/27/2004 14:04 Comments ||
Top||
#14
Like I said here a couple of days ago, I believe it was a bombing. I don't think this is idle boasting.
Furthermore, I believe many of the mysterious refinery explosions and wildfires are caused by AQ as well. And I don't beleive their claims of causing the blackout are idle boasts, either. But what the hell do I know?
If you need another example of the gov't bending over backwards to deny a terrorist event, search the rantburg archives for a bombing and a later shooting at a Texas BASF plant.
Why would they want to deny it? Because it's the official position of the Bush administration that we're all a bunch of children whe need to be shielded from the truth. After 9/11 Bush told us to go shopping.
Posted by: Pete Stanley ||
08/27/2004 14:13 Comments ||
Top||
#15
And, just so everyone here thinks I'm off my rocker, I also believe the gov'ts initial impulse on 9/11 was to cover it up. That's why Bush stayed in the school after the first plane hit. They already knew it wasn't an accident but they were trying to pretend that it was.
You remember that odd facial expression he had after Card whispered in his ear? It wasn't shock and surpise, was it? I think it was, "Oh, s**t, what are we gonna say now?" Because at that time, with the second plane, he knew they couldn't write it off as an accidient.
Ditto with the Russian planes. If it had been just one, it would have been blamed on some arcane mechanical faliure. But one that doesn't necessitate grounding the entire fleet!
Posted by: Pete Stanley ||
08/27/2004 14:24 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Lookee dat! A Serbian Lop-Eared Troll! And aww, isn't that cute, he's got a conspiracy theory, too. Haven't seen one of those since the Army of Steve chased Boris out.
Posted by: Mike ||
08/27/2004 14:49 Comments ||
Top||
#17
" I also believe the gov'ts initial impulse on 9/11 was to cover it up. That's why Bush stayed in the school after the first plane hit.
Pete, you are indeed off your rocker.
Just because Michael Moore sez it's so, and thousands of partisan hacks leap to echo him, does not make it true.
Posted by: Carl in N.H ||
08/27/2004 14:50 Comments ||
Top||
#18
Pete Stanley - you are a fu@king genius! I think you may have hit the nail on the head. I have long held that the Gov's MO in the war against Muslim fanatics was to try and rob them of credit for attacks. See OK City. See TWA 800. See anthrax attacks. See LAX El Al ticket counter attack. For some reason I had not made the connection to the 7 min gap in visible reaction form the Prez. but that fits.
By the way, while I do think that the MO of robbing the muslims of credit for their attacks led to one the size of 9/11, I am not sure that it was wrong to try. It may have been wiser to get Americans fighting this war out in the open, prior to 9/11. Although that would have required leadership, something neither party was exhibiting prior to 9/11.
I know that it is supposed to be about not letting the muslim terrorists have the power to change our way of life, but somehow we defeated fascists and communists, and manage the changes those wars brought about. Usually, we adapt pretty damn well. The Gov needs to have more faith in the people. They need to ask us to sacrifice (war bonds and the like) for the war effort. They need to publicize the allah damned war effort, and trust that we can handle it. After all, being American and enjoying the American way of life is not solely defined by my freedom to consume. It is defined by my desire to sacrifice to defend my right to consume if that is what the hell I want to do with my FREEDOM.
#19
Listen, jerk, I'm not a troll, and I resent the accusation. I read Rantburg alot but I rarely post. I've been trying to crack some of these problems for over a year, and my progress has been frustrated by the reality distortion field set up around people like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.
I'm trying to get to the bottom of a very murky topic. I don't mind intense criticism. Sometimes I take wild guesses and I'm wrong, but you've got to use your imagination here, because ALL of the sources we have to work with have lies impregnated in them. But I am not a troll.
And if you think I'm suggesting the US gov't was responsible for 9/11 then you need to brush up on your reading comprehension. It's just that the Bush administration thought they could finesse it with technology, but the bad guys beat them. Badly.
Posted by: Pete Stanley ||
08/27/2004 14:59 Comments ||
Top||
#20
You remember that odd facial expression he had after Card whispered in his ear?
You mean the one that conveyed calmness and not panic? Cool and collected under pressure? Yeah I remember that. It was awesome.
Posted by: Rafael ||
08/27/2004 14:59 Comments ||
Top||
#21
I will not be posting any further today, as I have to work until 1 am. Good day.
Posted by: Pete Stanley ||
08/27/2004 14:59 Comments ||
Top||
#22
I will not be posting any further...
Alright!
...today
Damn!
After 9/11 Bush told us to go shopping.
Yes. Not because he thinks we're children, but because the primary target of 9/11 was our economy. "Going shopping" meant we kept the economy rolling, instead of staying at home in fear and letting them achieve their goal.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
08/27/2004 15:10 Comments ||
Top||
#23
Which was good for me, 'cuz I really needed some new dish towels.
#24
Look, Pete, all flippancy aside, your theory just doesn't hold up. There's a lot of reasons why:
1. The cause of the crash is well-documented: the plane lost its rudder due to structural failure. There are pictures of the plane falling out of the sky sans rudder. Airbus 300s have a weakness in this area, and this is, unfortunately, not the first time this has happened.
2. How does a guy sitting in the main cabin detonate a bomb and make the rudder fall off? If a bomb detonated in the main cabin, it would split the fuselage in half. The fuselage was intact before the plane hit the ground.
3. I wish we had a government that could cover things up that well--because that would mean it would be a hell of a lot more effective at other tasks--but we don't. If it had been a bomb, and the FAA were trying to pretend otherwise, all it would take to blow the cover-up is for just one of the hundreds (if not thousands) of people who would have had to be in on the conspiracy to leak it to the press. And don't for a moment think the press wouldn't run with it. But no leak, no alleged leak, nowhere, not even (I think) in fever swamps like Indymedia.
4. Al-Qaeda did not crow about the "great victory" of flight 587. Say one thing for the enemy, they're not shy about taking "credit" for what they do.
5. Our policy pre-9/11 was not to try to deny the islamofascists credit; it was to treat the terrorism as "crime" rather than "war."
6. Given that our policy post-9/11 is to treat terrorist attacks as acts of war, and to activelky invade terror-sponsoring states with armies and depose governments, how does it advance that policy to cover up a terrorist attack?
Posted by: Mike ||
08/27/2004 15:18 Comments ||
Top||
#25
Whatever...it will be only a matter of days before some enterprising attorneys get wind of this story and file a brief in court to have the events of the AA disaster re-investigated. Consider that we taxpayers generously made instant millionaires out of the families of 9/11/01 victims. But the families of the 11/12/01 crash victims of AA fight 587 were not accorded the same taxpayer largesse. As soon as this story gets more exposure, lawyers will be tripping over each other to "uncover" the truth "on behalf of" surviving families. You betcha.
Posted by: rex ||
08/27/2004 15:19 Comments ||
Top||
#26
I dunno,sea, during WW2 we managed to do without everything from dishtowels(?) to new cars. The economy was sustained by the war effort - in fact it came close to overheating. Meanwhile weve been shopping for three years, and we cant manage to fully arm the Iraqi police, or to put marshalls on every flight, or to expand the army beyond 10 divisions. I dont follow the conspiracy stuff above, but this ISNT a serious way to lead a war for the survival of civilization.
#29
It's too bad that TV cameras weren't there live when Roosevelt was told of Pearl Harbor...
From what I read in Churchill's History of WWII, if there had been cameras on him when HE was told of Pearl Harbor, he would be one of the biggest villains in American history.
We can understand NOW why it made his day, but at the time his reaction would not have been taken well.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
08/27/2004 16:53 Comments ||
Top||
#30
but you've got to use your imagination here, because ALL of the sources we have to work with have lies impregnated in them. But I am not a troll.
Im hear with ya buddy most things are lies we just havent found out about them yet i am still wonder about this grants tomb affair i mean it could be lee grant does anyone have anyfirst hand info? if they say they do they either lying because people dont live to be 111 or then messing in places where they ought not to be all information is invalid unless i believe it and i dont so there
Our policy pre-9/11 was not to try to deny the islamofascists credit; it was to treat the terrorism as "crime" rather than "war."
You are first wrong and secondly right. They were doing both. The attitude was that these 'slims didn't have the power to make war against us, AND that we would deny them credit where we could. Again, see OK City. See Anthrax. See TWA 800.
#33
From what I read in Churchill's History of WWII, if there had been cameras on him when HE was told of Pearl Harbor, he would be one of the biggest villains in American history.
Robert - I think Churchill wrote something about sleeping very well that night. ~I slept the sleep of the Saved~ or somesuch.
Posted by: Laurence of the Rats ||
08/27/2004 18:17 Comments ||
Top||
#34
Mike, I'm not defending Pete's larger theory, if only because I never attribute to malevolence what can be attributed to simple incompetence. However, that tail section did not come off because of some "TopGun jet wash." If so, those sections would be popping off like champagne corks all around the world. The tail came off after the crew went full opposite rudder to a spin, induced by... would it be that engine with the air brake fully open? Note that they went full opposite rudder after increasing to max thrust in the engine opposite the spin--which was the engine with the brake full open. So essentially the plane was like a St Catherine's wheel, with two engines pushing the plane in a circle around it's center of lift, creating a flat spin. Full opposite rudder is called for, but that rudder is pushing against the full thrust of both engines. Small wonder there was a structural failure of tail section, but that failure wasn't the cause of the crash. As to what caused the failure of the brake without any cockpit indications to the crew, it can be simply accomplished (I am told) by a crimp in the hydraulic lines. As the fluid drains, the system will no longer hold back the brake, which then deploys as the aircraft accelerates and climbs.
Sorry to seem as if I'm jumping on you. I do think that terrorism is still a possibility for AA 587, not to be discarded easily. However, this sounds more like a red herring intended to throw us off Jdey's trail
#35
The one thing that Troll, Pete is right about is the LAX El Al ticket counter shooting. That was terrorism and it was swept under the rug. I have never seen the media deny terrorism like they did in that case. As for AA 587 and the Anthrax letters: I don't know what happened.
The Mirror. EFL. Hat tip: Damian Penny, Newfoundland's greatest son.
Here is a list of Jimmy Carter's favorite people the world's 10 worst living dictators as compiled by dictator-watcher David Wallechinsky in collaboration with Amnesty International, Freedom House, Human Rights Watch and Reporters Without Borders.
[1.] KIM JONG IL
Country: North Korea
Age: 63 In power: 10 yrs
Last year's rank: 1
THE only nation to earn the worst possible score for political rights and civil liberties for 31 straight years. An estimated 150,000 prisoners do forced labour. . . .
[2.] THAN SHWE
Country: Burma
Age: 71 In power: 13 yrs
Last year's rank: 5
GENERAL Than is sole leader of Burma's military dictatorship. . . .
[3.] HU JINTAO
Country: China
Age: 61 In power: 2 yrs
Last year's rank: Dishonourable mention
HU Jintao is Communist Party president and general secretary. China executes more people than the rest of the world put together - Amnesty International estimates 2,500 a year, others say 15,000. The party controls all media and uses 30,000 "internet security agents" to monitor online use. Don't forget the forced abortions and infanticides to enforce the "one child" policy, or the suppression of organized religion and the Falun Gong.
[4.] ROBERT MUGABE
Country: Zimbabwe
Age: 80 In power: 24 yrs
Last year's rank: Dishonourable mention
Once the darling of the West, . . . and still the darling of the Western Left . . .
Robert Mugabe has become increasingly dictatorial. His government has killed or tortured and displaced more than 70,000 people. The Supreme Court has carried out the dictator's strategy of silencing criticism and stamping on human rights, and has just blocked an official report on the massacre of 20,000 civilians. And then there's the famine.
[5.] CROWN PRINCE ABDULLAH
Country: Saudi Arabia
Age: 80 In power: 9 yrs
Last year's rank: 2
Abdullah has been acting leader since his half-brother, King Fahd, had a stroke in 1995. The country holds no elections whatsoever. Human Rights Watch has reported "slavery-like conditions" for the 8.8 million foreign workers in the Kingdom, and Saudi women are second-class citizens.
[6.] TEODORO OBIANG NGUEMA
Country: Equatorial Guinea
Age: 61 In power: 25 yrs
Last year's rank: 6
Although oil-rich, 60 per cent of the people in this tiny West African nation live on 60p a day. Obiang is believed to have a £500 million fortune and is in "permanent contact with the Almighty", according to state radio. He "can decide to kill without being called to account". Of course, everyone on this list can decide to kill without being called to account.
[7.] OMAR AL-BASHIR
Country: Sudan
Age: 59 In power: 15 yrs
Last year's rank: Dishonourable mention
Al-Bashir seized power by military force. The country is in the grip of a 20-year civil war that has killed 2 million and made 4 million homeless. Al-Bashir's army routinely bombs civilians and tortures and massacres non-Muslims. He has also been accused of "engineering famine" in the regions that oppose him.
[8.] SAPARMURAT NIYAZOV
Country: Turkmenistan
Age: 64 In power: 14 yrs
Last year's rank: Dishonourable mention
All government workers must memorize passages of Niyazov's book to keep their jobs. He's banned beards, gold teeth and circuses, renamed months of the year after his mum and created a public holiday to celebrate melons. So he's on the list for comic relief?
Last year he cracked down on religious and ethnic minorities. Still think he's overrated as a tyrant.
[9.] FIDEL CASTRO
Country: Cuba
Age: 77 In power: 45 yrs
Last year's rank: 9
The world's longest-surviving dictator has in the last few years carried out the biggest round-up of non-violent dissidents in more than a decade. He arrested 75 human-rights activists, journalists and academics, sentencing them to 19 years' jail on average. In the last six months he put a blind lawyer and nine activists on trial. Cuba is a one-party state and Castro runs the courts. Think he should be a few places higher on the list.
[10.] KING MSWATI III
Country: Swaziland
Age: 35 In power: 18 yrs
Last year's rank: Not listed
Educated in England, he has a reputation for lavish living with a fleet of BMWs, a host of palaces and a love of foreign trips, which contrasts with the plight of Swaziland's 300,000 drought-stricken farmers. So, in other words, he's a Mugabe wannabe.
I don't have a lot of respect for the "human rights" NGO industry these days, but they actually seem to have gotten most of it right this time. You'd think Arafat and the Iranian Mullahs should be on the list somewhere, but other than that, it seems pretty much spot-on.
The Moonbat Left will no doubt complain that Ariel Sharon and George W. Bush should be on the list somewhere.
Posted by: Mike ||
08/27/2004 8:35:52 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Still think heâs overrated as a tyrant.
It sez "The world's worst," not the world's best. Where's Assad? Where's Khamenei? Kadaffy's not on the list?
Posted by: Fred ||
08/27/2004 8:45 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Kadaffy slipped a few notches when he gave up WMD. Baby Assad's a bush-league wannabee. I do agree that Iran should be in the top ten, though.
Posted by: Mike ||
08/27/2004 8:55 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Okay, Saudi Arabia's no picnic but the Sudan has rape gangs and genocide going on and they rate only 7th while Saudis get 5th? I think they should be reversed at the very least.
#8
I said: The Moonbat Left will no doubt complain that Ariel Sharon and George W. Bush should be on the list somewhere.
Murat said: Bush can easily reach top 3, IMO WORLD TYRANT NO 1.
Thanks for validating my predictive genius, Murat.
Posted by: Mike ||
08/27/2004 11:02 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Kill an Armenian or Kurd today, hassol?
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/27/2004 11:08 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Looks like Murat has money on Bush to win the election.
If they do add us to the list, I want to see some land or resources to show for it. Not just a contested invasion like Iraq, but a full-blown conquest and appropriation. No sense acting civilized if we aren't going to get credit for it.
In all seriousness, though, Hu Jintao isn't a dictator at all. He's just in the #1 spot in a huge system. He definitely doesn't have unlimited power like the other fellows.
#12
that was uncivil of me, SW's correct. I apologize
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/27/2004 11:21 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Nah, Bush can easily reach top 3, IMO WORLD TYRANT NO 1.
Jeebus, and I try to defend you, Murat. C'mon buddy, open your eyes and re-read that list. Carefully. Twice. And then ask yourself whether George Bush is even capable of 1% of the depravity and evil that these ten men have manifested.
Hint: he isn't.
Posted by: Steve White ||
08/27/2004 11:21 Comments ||
Top||
#14
It seems to me if Bush were a tyrant he should probably be doing a little better than just a two point lead in the polls.
It also seems there wouldn't be a hundred million dollar industry that exists solely to accuse him of being a bad guy.
Maybe these point are too difficult to understand for some people.
#17
No sense acting civilized if we aren't going to get credit for it.
BH is funning here (er, I guess), but I wonder how long before many Americans feel this way for real. Or Westerners in general. Generally, NGO's and many on the Left treat minor lapses among the civilized as far worse than the business-as-usual horrors of the barbarians.
#19
I am partial to the south west corner of the Black Sea.
Posted by: ed ||
08/27/2004 12:41 Comments ||
Top||
#20
Gee, there seems to be someone missing from this top 10 this year. Who could that be?
Posted by: Dar ||
08/27/2004 13:08 Comments ||
Top||
#21
Saddam Hussein, retired 4/9/03.
Posted by: Mike ||
08/27/2004 13:11 Comments ||
Top||
#22
Murat, are you speaking on behalf of the women of Afghanistan or the Kurds of Iraq or the Bush-puppet Sistanni?
Posted by: Tom ||
08/27/2004 14:25 Comments ||
Top||
#23
Steve, you are speaking on behalf of the Americans, to you he (Bush) might not be that bad, but for the rest of the world he is. At the moment the mother of all tyrants.
Posted by: Murat ||
08/27/2004 14:36 Comments ||
Top||
#24
Murat, there is a difference between portrayal and reality.
#25
Murat-If you can make this argument without dragging Iraq into it (which will just cause a traffic mess on Fred's website, and cause epithets to be thrown at you), how is Bush "that bad for the rest of the world"? Please give specifics.
#30
Won't the guy in charge of Belarus be pretty teed off?
Posted by: Super Hose ||
08/27/2004 19:10 Comments ||
Top||
#31
Lefto-conformists still spout the "US supports all dictators just because they are anti-communist" meme, just as they believe that Augusto Pinochet still runs Chile.
Base ignorance is the stock in trade of lefty agitators.
On another message board, a group of British dhimmi-whores (no doubt bought with either venture capital or academic grants) are STILL trying to argue with me that the ancient Greek astronomer Eratosthenes was an Arab, apparently just because he was born in North fucking Africa, which is now "Arab" (2250 years later).
The government has dropped criminal charges against 185 Muslim separatist guerrillas blamed for the bombing of the Davao City International Airport and the Sasa wharf that killed 38 people in March and April last year, the military said yesterday.
It's a race to see who can appease Islamofascist killers quickest, and the Phillipines is in the lead.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) dismissed last week multiple murder and frustrated murder charges against the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) rebels led by its former chief Salamat Hashim, who died last year, in a bid to speed up peace talks, the military said.
#2
I'm upset about this as well, but from a purely self-serving point of view they are making themselves targets. Easy juicy targets which are more likely to be grabbed, stabbed, or blown up then the Yanks who take out entire countries when they get mad.
Thanks Philippines for taking the bullet for all of us, even if that wasn't your intent. You might as well redraw the political boundaries and give the southern islands away now, you might have a chance fighting a rearguard action on the big island.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
08/27/2004 12:09 Comments ||
Top||
#4
It looks to me like Arroyo is doing all the 'compromising' and the MILF is doing all the 'demanding'.
All the MILF has to do is to launch another 'splinter group' (along with Abu Sayyaf) to train the JI and keep their hands 'clean' and the Philippine Government will have lost.
Rex, I hope not, I have relatives there (in-laws). But I am not holding out much hope. Arroyo obviously follows the 'Peace at any cost' - she and the main families wont have to pay the price you can bet your ass on that.
This is actually quite interesting, even if perennially wrong-headed about the MILF ...
The unassuming young man who bought a ticket for Berth 51 on the 1,747-passenger SuperFerry 14 sailing from Manila to Bacolod and Davao on Feb. 26 called himself Arnulfo Alvarado. If security officials in the Philippines checked ferry-passenger liststhey don'tthe name would have set off deafening alarm bells. Arnulfo Alvarado, say Philippine officials, was the name of a member, now dead, of the Abu Sayyaf terrorist group. Two other Abu Sayyaf operators have used Alvarado's name to carry out previous attacks, according to Philippine intelligence officers. This Alvarado, whose real name was Redondo Cain Dellosa, hauled on board a cardboard box containing a television set. The TV, according to investigators, was packed with 3.6 kg of TNT. Making his way to the cheapest passenger section in the bowels of the ship, Dellosa carefully placed the box on his seat and slipped away just before the ferry cast off. An hour after its 11 p.m. sailing, just off Corregidor Island, an explosion tore through SuperFerry 14, starting a fire that engulfed the ship and killed a hundred or more passengers (some likely victims are still unaccounted for and may be missing). According to investigators, Dellosa, who was apprehended four weeks later, confessed that the explosion was triggered by a timing deviceand that he chose the cheap seats to maximize panic and loss of life.
From Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty
An Iraqi military spokesman announced on 26 August that a joint National Guard/police unit arrested one male and one female saboteur from Iran, Al-Sharqiyah television reported. The Iraqi unit raided a house in Al-Najaf that was the source of gunfire targeting Iraqi personnel. The Iranians were arrested and machine guns and other weapons were seized. The two Iranians entered Iraq three months ago, Al-Sharqiyah reported.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
08/27/2004 11:56:54 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
execute them - in public
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/28/2004 9:14 Comments ||
Top||
The bodies of two Turkish hostages shot dead have been found in Baiji in northern Iraq, Al-Jazeera television said Friday night in a news flash. Quoting its own unspecified sources, the Qatar-based satellite news channel said "the bodies of two Turkish hostages executed by gunfire have been found in Baiji," a key oil refinery town in the Sunni Muslim belt that stretches north and west from the Iraqi capital. It did not immediately give further details. The reported execution of the two Turks comes just a day after the killing of kidnapped Italian journalist Enzo Baldoni. Turkey`s NTV news channel on Wednesday aired footage of two Turks, Abdullah Ozdemir and Ali Daskin, both engineers kidnapped from their worksite at an unidentified location in Iraq. The video showed armed militants threatening to execute them unless their company withdraws from Iraq within 72 hours. Turkey`s Anatolia news agency later reported that the pair`s employer had announced it was ending operations in Iraq.
#1
Get out of Iraq now Murat! Leave! Tell your people to come home and live and be patient. Euros are on the way. You are loved by the Kurds, the Russ, the Greeks and most especially Bulgaria. Life is near utopia for Anatolia. The French have guaranteed Turkeys future, you are safe and soon to join the league of better nations.
#2
This is proof that there is no negotiating with terrorists: the company they worked for actually pulled out of Iraq. They're just blood-thirsty killers.
EFL- Hammorabi is the most consistently anti Wahabi of the Iraqi bloggers
Friday, August 27, 2004The Odds happened
The Wahabist slipped in the crowds in Kufa and attacked Kufa Imam Ali Mosque killing and injuring many.
Muqtada Sadr militiamen mixed with the aggregations entered Imam Ali Shrine in Najaf and escaped outside. This was the request of MS for Ali Sistani to save him a face. The most beneficiary one from Ali Sistani call and arrival was MS [he doesn't recognize the Tater nickname] because he utilized his call for that face save...
A man which an Al-Qaeda affiliated group claims to have slit his throat for being a US spy worked with Iraq correspondents for Polish daily Gazeta Wyborcza, the newspaper said on Thursday. The US State Department said on Wednesday said it could not confirm reports of the alleged killing, photos of which were posted on a radical Islamist website by a group called the Army of Ansar al-Sunna. Gazeta Wyborcza said the man, Jamal Salman, "had lived for 20 years in the United States". The newspaper, which on Thursday published a photograph and details about the man, said he had acted as a guide and translator for Gazeta Wyborcza journalists in November 2003 and earlier this year. "We worked together for nine weeks in Baghdad, in Falloujah and in Samara ... We became friends," Pawel Smolenski, one of the reporters concerned, said in the newspaper. "According to all the information at my disposal, to call him an American spy is a shameless idiocy," he said in an article.
According to the website, Islamic fighters abducted "a spy called Jamal Tewfik Salman, a naturalized American since 1980, who changed his name to Khaled Abdulmassih, and who confessed to having been recruited by US intelligence in Iraq to spy on the mujahedeen.". Five photos purporting to show a man in his forties having his throat slit were posted on the site. The Army of Ansar al-Sunna has claimed responsibility for a number of attacks in Iraq. On Sunday, it posted pictures of 12 men on its website it said were Nepalese taken hostage in Iraq.
Posted by: TS(vice girl) ||
08/27/2004 9:44:20 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The name "Abdulmassih" suggests that he became a Christian: it literally means "slave of the messiah," something that no Muslim would ever name himself, since it suggests that Jesus is God.
Posted by: mary ||
08/27/2004 10:20 Comments ||
Top||
#2
well, in their little brains, that alone would justify slitting his throat. Religion of Peace⢠my ass! Another victim for you, Gentle!
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/27/2004 10:40 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Crap. That sounds like CIA. I seem to remember that they aren't supposed to use cover involving American media, and thus sometimes claim to be working for foreign news services.
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
08/27/2004 12:58 Comments ||
Top||
Explosives of a kind used by Chechen rebels have been found in one of two airliners that crashed almost simultaneously, pointing to a terrorist attack, Russian investigators say. The FSB security service declined to comment on an Internet claim by an Islamist group that its followers had brought the planes down on Tuesday, killing at least 89 people, to avenge the killing of Muslims in Russia's rebel Chechnya province. But it said on Friday it had identified "a number of people with possible links to the terrorist act". Investigators were tracing the background of two passengers with Chechen surnames, one from each plane. But moderate Chechen rebels accused Russia's special forces of spreading misinformation and denied any connection with the Islamist group, which called itself the Islambouli Brigade.
The Tu-154, bound for Sochi on the Black Sea, crashed near the southern city of Rostov-on-Don less than four minutes after a Tu-134 flying to Volgograd crashed near Tula, south of Moscow. Both flew from Moscow's Domodedovo airport. "During the examination of the wreckage of the Tu-154 plane traces of explosives were found," said a spokeswoman for the FSB, entrusted by President Vladimir Putin with the probe. She said the explosive was of a type used in some previous attacks blamed on Chechen separatists, including apartment block bombings in Moscow and Volgodonsk in 1999 that killed over 200 -- attacks that Chechen rebels accused Moscow of staging. The head of the investigating commission said on Thursday night that the crew had activated a distress signal shortly before crashing, but failed to provide voice confirmation.
The Arabic statement from the Islambouli Brigade said five militants had hijacked each plane, according to the website. The statement, whose authenticity could not be verified, threatened more attacks. "Russia's slaughtering of Muslims is still continuing and will not end except with a bloody war," it said. An FSB spokesman declined to comment on the statement. News agencies said no relatives had come forward to claim the remains of one passenger, a 27-year-old woman who gave a Chechen surname when buying her ticket. A source at the investigating commission told Itar-Tass news agency that the presence of at least two Chechen surnames among the passengers "could not fail to raise suspicion". Moderate Chechen separatists said on their website www.chechenpress.com that they had no link to the crashes: "If we planned to hijack planes, we would not have to go to Domodedovo -- in the North Caucasus there is no shortage of airports ... We are pursuing a war, not terrorism."
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
08/27/2004 9:34:03 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Paging Mr Putin, Mr Putin, Reality Check for Mr. Putin....
Think he might want a bit more help from the US now?
#10
OK I'll drink Dutch and German beer and Russian Vodka tonight. I sure as heck wont be next friday. Damm uroloigist is going to do surgery (supposedly out patient.) I don't know Islambouli sounds like a serious illness and I 'll avoid it.
At least 25 bodies of executed civilians and police have been found in the basement of a religious court set up by rebel cleric Moqtadr al Sadr, according to AFP news agency. Some of the bodies had been mutilated or burned, according to the reports. The discovery comes after al Sadr officially handed over control of Najaf's Imam Ali shrine. A representative of Grand Ayatollah Ali al Sistani confirmed the handover as militia loyal to al Sadr handed in their weapons after a peace deal to end the crisis in Najaf. Thousands of Iraqi Shi'ites have been marching to the shrine to show their support for Ayatollah al Sistani. The ayatollah had returned to the southern holy city to negotiate the peace deal after medical treatment in London. Al Sadr agreed to Ayatollah al Sistani's call for his supporters to lay down their arms.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
08/27/2004 9:30:33 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
Where is this religious court? I can't tell from this article. Also, a crude question-How long have these bodies been dead? Seems like it might be pertinent.
This is problematic: Under the deal the Government agreed al Sadr would be "free to go anywhere he likes.If this Sadr gets off scot free, that tells me all I need to know about Sistani.
doesnt say for how long or under what circumstances. They cant arrest him now, but i dont think this is a permanent get out of jail free card.
As for Sistani he stood to lose the most if the forces went in - either Sadr won, or Allawi won, but in either case Sistanis (and the Hawzas) prestige would have declined. He was acting to stay alive as a player. Given that, I think Allawi can still salvage a partial victory out of this.
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/27/2004 10:08 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Good point Frank - "when we said youre free to go, we only meant we wouldnt pursue the al khoie warrant - this new discovery is de novo, and the prior commitment is no longer binding with respect to it"
#9
Wait! Stop! Don't buy the spin. This is a huge victory, even if we let the little thug free. You saw the pictures of the mosque - it is a fortress!!! Sure, we could have flattened it. We would have won the battle, but we would not have won the war. In fact, the Iranians were probably hoping beyond all hope that we would flatten it, or at least damage it, so they could cue the outrage.
Sure the media is spinning itself dizzy over the "victory" by the Shia majority. But it's all talk. "I'm a big boy, look at me!" "I'm tough, I'm bad". blah, blah blah. The reality is, it's not a victory at all.
Mr. I'm-Going-Go-Fight-To-the-Last-Drop-of-Blood left the mosque with his tail tucked between his legs. His aids were found with stolen goods. His fighters bullets were not guided by Allah.
So the thug goes free. Boo hoo. I'm sorry for the people who will be the victims of his future crimes. But we here in America went to win a war. From a cold-hearted, strategic perspective, Sadr is now next to irrelevant to those of us here at home.
The big Shia Revolution where the country would stand to fight off the American occupiers - was a complete and total failure. A dud. All the money and fighters that Iran sent - wasted. Sistani would be a fool to try the same tactics now - the people of Iraq showed they weren't interested in rising up. They are more interested in whose running for office.
Sadr is toast. His big call for arms has the stench of loser all over it. The gunpower is dampened by this humiliating loss. No spark can set if off now.
Look at 9/11. Bin Laden was a big man for a day - but his win was his ultimate loss. American commanders didn't make that mistake. Don't buy the spin. We won a huge, huge victory here. It's so big, we don't have to gloat.
Posted by: B ||
08/27/2004 10:18 Comments ||
Top||
#10
B-Why did we want Sadr so badly? Because he was holed up in a mosque?
#11
I'm not sure the mosque has anything to do with it other than if we had harmed it, it would have been a huge propaganda victory for anti-American sentiment. We didn't fall for it. Sadr was IMHO, Iran's tool to spark a Shia uprising. They sent him money and fighters. But they needed to cue outrage to get the ordinary folks to fight. It failed. Sadr and his fighters were humiliated. The Iraqi's didn't support him. The momentum is lost. We won.
Posted by: B ||
08/27/2004 10:29 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Sadr is not safe now among Iraqi's.That Iraqi assassination squad may get him this time.They have nailed some of his militia before.
#13
If Sadr is shown to be responsible for the torture and murder of 25 Iraqis in a hidden religious court, how is his release and "freedom to go wherever he choses" a victory? Is the formula basically: we will overlook/ignore 25 victims he tortured and murdered in exchange for a positive spin on an Iraq dominated by a Shia cleric-something that was unthinkable a year ago?
Wasn't stopping the torture and murder of civilians one of the best justifications for us having gone into Iraq in the first place? Have we ended up, in the complex culmination of this war, sanctioning behavior that was one of the reasons we went to war for?
#14
jules, I agree with you that it's terrible that Sadr is allowed to go free. But war is terrible. We didn't go to Iraq to find Sadr and put him in jail because he is a thug. Iraq is full of thugs.
We went to depose Sadaam Hussein and to provide some real estate in the ME where we could fight the war on terror. That's the war we are fighting, we aren't fighting to get common thugs off the street in Iraq.
The Iraqi's have their own government now. We aren't responsible for bringing every murderer/rapist in their country to justice - the Iraqi's are.
Posted by: B ||
08/27/2004 11:03 Comments ||
Top||
#15
We wanted Sadr because he went beyond the bounds of political dissent and started an armed rebellion.
Its doubtful that they were Christians. Unlike Christians, Muslims believe that there are some places which cannot be polluted by the presence of other religions. mecca and medina being the most obvious.
Najaf is not that strictly forbidden to outside pollutants but I doubt that any churches or Christian worship is allowed in the city. Therefore I doubt that there were many local Christians to cleanse from the city.
I could be wrong about this but I really doubt it.
In contrast, there has never been to my knowledge any major Christian shrine which is off limits to anyone of any faith.
#18
Mojo-Your reason of stopping an armed rebellion makes complete sense-except if we accepted the terms of Shia-dominated politics in Iraq as the terms to make it happen, since they both tend to produce violence. And how is it proposed that we stop Shia-dominated Iraq from merely turning into a clone of Shia-dominated Iran?
#19
peggy, so true! Along with the death penalty for those who stray from Islam, it reflects the shear puny weakness of their religion and society. If they were strong and confident of the power of Islam, they'd allow christians, jews, hindis, et all to openly practice. Cowards in teh arena of ideas....don't get me started on the inherent male weaknesses in Islam that lead to the subjugation of their women ;-)
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/27/2004 11:14 Comments ||
Top||
#20
And how is it proposed that we stop Shia-dominated Iraq from merely turning into a clone of Shia-dominated Iran?
beginning with the takedown of the mullahs...see late November '04
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/27/2004 11:15 Comments ||
Top||
#21
Frank G-I hope you're right, but that will be one heck of a PR job to pull off.
#22
On the plus side, the number of Iraqis who now want a religious government is in the single digits. And I agree, the prospect for a Shia rebellion has just dropped by a whole bunch--any future effort would be almost entirely an Iranian fifth column. Last but not least, the collapse in the south must be a major gut-punch to the Sunnis in the north--now realizing that their shinola is exceptionally weak.
#23
As for Sistani he stood to lose the most if the forces went in - either Sadr won, or Allawi won, but in either case Sistanis (and the Hawzas) prestige would have declined. He was acting to stay alive as a player.
Any cleric concerned about his "prestige" is not someone to be trusted.
#24
jules â I donât disagree with you, in fact, I agree with you. I also agree with other posters. I think we are all in line here. My point is that American goals were accomplished by making Sadr nearly-impotent. The mosque was not damaged by Americans, but by Sadr and his thugs. Itâs a huge victory. I too would like to see the Iraqis punish Sadr.
Posted by: B ||
08/27/2004 11:42 Comments ||
Top||
#25
they need public airings of the two Sadr aides that stole from the shrine, turn the pinheads from Shiite martyrs to common thieves in the people's minds - effective psyops
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/27/2004 11:48 Comments ||
Top||
#26
Just tie up Mookie Sadr in a room with the relatives of some of the folks his "religious" (kangaroo) court murdered.
In Najaf, Sadr's irrepressible spokesman Sheikh Ahmed Shaibani proclaimed victory.
"The Americans thought that they could exterminate the Mehdi Army, but our fighters are still here. They will be able to go back to their work whilst remaining an army.
"They will hide their weapons but will not hand them over to the police or to the army," he told AFP.
Militiamen busy stashing their heavy weaponry in safe houses confirmed they had no intention of ceding their arsenal to the Iraqi authorities.
Prime Minister Iyad Allawi has repeatedly urged the Mehdi Army to take advantage of a 30-day amnesty to hand over arms and escape prosecution. A senior government official repeated there was no place in Iraq for militias. "They have to give up their weapons... We have to rid this country of militias. But I really to think its too early to comment. This is a promising start," he said.
So how many weeks till whack a mole starts up again? And were does it happen?
#28
Sadr City works - no shrines, already a wasteland and rubble, plenty of targets
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/27/2004 12:14 Comments ||
Top||
#29
Much of his militia is dead. The momentum is lost. When he was at his strongest, he lost this battle. What makes you think, in his now-weakened position, that he will gain the strength to win the next?
Posted by: B ||
08/27/2004 12:26 Comments ||
Top||
#30
J187: Why did we want Sadr so badly? Because he was holed up in a mosque?
I'm not sure Sadr himself was particularly wanted. I understand that there's an impulse to go after the perceived leader, but the point of the operations was to go after Shiite militiamen who were massed around the mosque. These same guys had been laying mines and shooting off mortars. Killing them around the mosque en masse was preferable to having to go after them a few at a time.
As to evicting Sadr from the mosque, this actually had solid reasons behind it. The custodian of the mosque gains a lot of prestige, just as the Saudis get a lot of face from being the custodians of Mecca and Medina. The mosque itself is also a money machine, due to donations from pilgrims and the faithful. Evicting Sadr from the mosque was a way of keeping him from gaining either prestige or an independent (from the Iranians) source of financing.
#31
What makes you think, in his now-weakened position, that he will gain the strength to win the next?
Iran.
Posted by: Rafael ||
08/27/2004 12:36 Comments ||
Top||
#32
Because, B, he and his followers heve never let logic stand in thier way and, besides, Sadr City is still full of loonies with no other future.
Posted by: Tom ||
08/27/2004 12:37 Comments ||
Top||
#33
Tom: Because, B, he and his followers heve never let logic stand in thier way and, besides, Sadr City is still full of loonies with no other future.
You're buying into the idea that they're a bunch of recklessly brave people. You must not know any Muslims. The Muslims I know talk a good game, but prefer talking to fighting. Muslims have always talked a good game. But once you eviscerate the fighting elements, the rest is a hollow shell.
Najaf is also a potentially very important economic engine for the Iraqi economy. If it wasn't for that I would have said let the silly little man rot in that old dump. But a prosperous Najaf would be good for all Iraqis.
#35
It's politically incorrect to talk about how Muslims, despite their fiery rhetoric, are somewhat lacking in the motivation department in any great numbers. But it appears to be true. Note that Iran, with a population of 60m, sued for peace after losing less than 1m people during the Iran-Iraq War. During WWII, Germany lost 10m out of 80m people, and surrendered only after Allied troops dominated every square foot of Berlin, not to mention the rest of Germany. The Baathist Party and Islam in general are a pale shadow of the Nazi Party.
#37
Tom, I agree, but that is not my point. My point is that Sadr, once a symbol of resistance, is now a symbol of failure. Once, the KKK was a force to be feared. There are still individuals leading trying to lead a KKK movement in this country. Problem is, there are not enough people who sympathize with them to make them a serious threat â at least, not from a national standpoint. Like Sadr, the KKK and their sympathizers gave it their best shot. Both lost. It became clear that the majority did not support them. While they can still fight, itâs clear, even to those who support them, they donât have the numbers to win.
We are far better off, with Sadr alive and looking the fool; his grand revolution discredited.
Posted by: B ||
08/27/2004 12:52 Comments ||
Top||
#38
The article seems to have been updated with a down-grading of the number of bodies found to ten.
Gentle: article doesn't say. Presumably the bodies have been identified as missing Najafi civilians reported to have been taken by Sadrists?
The whole thing has a veritable hue of Hue, doesn't it? Murdered civilians found as the enemy is rolled back from the urban areas they temporarily seized.
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
08/27/2004 12:53 Comments ||
Top||
#39
If the bodies are burned, might they not be of Shiaas who have been shot by U.S. troops?
Why? Is burning bodies a burial rite for Muslims? Or are you thinking of that super-secret ammunition the US has been using, which burns the body immediately upon impact?
Posted by: Rafael ||
08/27/2004 12:55 Comments ||
Top||
#40
Yes. I was thinking of some kind of new weapon.
#41
Gentle, what makes you think Americans shot those people? And yes, that is exactly what you want to believe.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
08/27/2004 12:57 Comments ||
Top||
#42
What makes you think, in his now-weakened position, that he will gain the strength to win the next?
Because he now has time to re-arm and brainwash more dumbasses to fight for his cause.
My point is that Sadr, once a symbol of resistance, is now a symbol of failure.
Not really. You're making the same mistake as a lot of others; measuring Sadr by Western standards and values as opposed to the Muslim world's logic-challenged reality. The fact that some follower of Sadr's was able to proclaim "victory" means that some gullible people there (some meaning enough) are going to actually buy that bucket of hooey. Sistani could help out by calling Sadr on his BS, but in the end, such thoughts are only wishful thinking.
#45
note I didnt say Sadr would win, merely that the fight would start up again.
Sadrs people ARE hanging onto weapons, per press reports. This says to me they aim to fight again, despite the hopelessness. And it seems to me that the govt isnt going to tolerate them staying armed, and when the govt tries to disarm them they wont go easily.
How could this be after losing Najaf
1. "we lost in Najaf cause of all the sellout middle class locals in Najaf - it was a mistake to focus on the shrine - in Sadr City the PEOPLE are with us, and thats more important. IN Sadr city the PEOPLE will rise up, and that will trigger revolution across the country"
This thinking may be wrong, but it wouldnt be the first time in history a military or political figure and his followers engaged in wishful thinking.
2. Maybe some of them really are motivated by bravery, hopelessness or whatever. I mean these are mainly teens we're talking about, and the children of the conditions, economic, religious and political, of Sadr City - I dont know that you can generalize from mature, established leaders to them.
Re gentle - note the bodies were found at a court in the old city, NOT at the shrine. It seems unlikely that bodies were taken there. There are no reports of any new weapons, but plenty of reports of people disappearing while Sadrs folks ran the place. Still, it may be worth waiting for more information.
#46
Rex:
I do not think the americans shot them. I simply do not know who did.
I just wanted to point out a possibility that most of you seem to overlook.
That there are 2 suspects.
The facts may be enough for you to judge:
Us, muslims-who we hate-, and dead people.
Who dunnit?
The answer for you is simple.
We, however like to judge based on real facts.
#48
sighâ¦I think I make a valid point. Even if Sadr were to live to fight another day, which I agree he might, he has Far, Far, LESS momentum now than he did before. He didnât fight to the last drop of blood. Allah didnât guide the bullets. They didnât repel the infidels with giant spiders. And most importantly, the people didnât rise up.
Iâm guessing the fact that the Shia did not rise up en masse is a fact not lost on Sistani. I suppose if Sistani were to suddenly throw his support behind Sadr and a revolution, Sadr might redeem his status. Maybe â Maybe not. I guess time will tell.
Posted by: B ||
08/27/2004 13:22 Comments ||
Top||
#49
Sadr's thugs have been murdering yet again. No surprises here. And he'll probably escape justice yet again because of his status as a political animal. This has to stop if anything like the right sort of message is to be sent out.
#50
"Yes. I was thinking of some kind of new weapon." -- Gentle
Sarcasm, I hope. If not, you seem to have missed that the bodies included police (our allies) and were in some cases mutilated. Sounds more like a Sadr "court" than a new weapon. Sounds like a very old, conventional approach.
Posted by: Tom ||
08/27/2004 13:25 Comments ||
Top||
#51
Why did we want Sadr so badly?
An arrest warrant was issued for Sadr on charges of involvement in the April 2003 murder of al-Khoei, a rival cleric, who was brought to Iraq from exile after Saddam was removed from power. This cleric was viewed as pro-West.
But the Iraqi gov't never chose to serve Sadr with the arrest warrant until after April 06, 2004 when Sadr was officially declared an "outlaw" by Bremer and the Iraqi gov't for killing 9 coalition troops[8 of whom were American GI's] as well as 52 Iraqis. The fired up intent to arrest Sadr sort of fizzled out due to various cease fire truces that were negotiated and broken by Sadr.
Again on August 08/04, the Iraqi gov't tried to serve Sadr with an arrest warrent, but Sadr was not home.
Source: LA Times via Command Post In their first such move against Sadr, members of the Iraqi National Guard and police tried to arrest him at his home in Najaf near the Imam Ali shrine, the base from which he had urged followers to rise up and eject U.S. forces. But the militant leader was not at home.âWe surrounded the house, but he was not at home,â said Gen. Ghalib Hadi Jazaery, Najafâs chief of police.
Jazaery said his officers were serving an arrest warrant issued last year against Sadr in the killing of a rival cleric. U.S. troops tried to serve the warrant in April, igniting an uprising among his followers that lasted two months and left hundreds of Iraqis dead before ending in an uneasy cease-fire...
Posted by: rex ||
08/27/2004 13:26 Comments ||
Top||
#52
If you're found with a couple dozen corpses in your basement, who do you think is going to be blamed?
"Oh, those ain't our bodies. Somebody left 'em here."
Posted by: Fred ||
08/27/2004 13:26 Comments ||
Top||
#53
Gentle....facts? What facts do you have? You've got nothing. However we do have reports of some of the bodies being mutilated. Now whose work does that sound like? Of course, if some bodies were found with panies on their heads that's one thing, but the mutilation thingy is a muslim specialty. That's a big clue in my book.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
08/27/2004 13:30 Comments ||
Top||
#54
Fred: "they was here when we moved in"
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/27/2004 13:33 Comments ||
Top||
#55
Gentle: the full AFP article clearly quotes a police official as saying that some of the bodies were those of missing policemen. Unless you want to stand on your head and insist that the AFP is relaying American lies through a representative of the Najafi police, I think it's time for you to say "oops, I let my prejudices talk for me".
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
08/27/2004 13:33 Comments ||
Top||
#56
let's move on - Gentle's head is fully engaged in rectal exploration and facts like policemen abducted and killed after mutilation won't have an effect. I'm even tired of troll-baiting anymore
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/27/2004 13:37 Comments ||
Top||
#57
To 30 and 51-my question B-Why did we want Sadr so badly? Because he was holed up in a mosque? was pure sarcasm. I asked "Any military guys out there" in the hopes that someone would verify his part in the slaughtering of American GIs (that was the impetus in the hunt for al Sadr in the early days, as I recalled. I wanted to be sure my memory was accurate). Thank you for addressing my question.
#58
sorry julesâ¦I guess I should have recognized that.
Posted by: B ||
08/27/2004 13:55 Comments ||
Top||
#59
Sarcasm notwithstanding, thanks for bringing up the question, Jules(#57). This Sadr guy has slimed us so many different ways and on different occasions, that I myself forgot how it all started until I googled Sadr and the events all came together.
In addition to Sadr's direct contribution to a variety of murders, let's all not forget that Sadr's track record for observing cease fire, truce agreements is not stellar. His "peaceful" retreat from Najef, I suspect, is yet another sham promise.
Posted by: rex ||
08/27/2004 13:56 Comments ||
Top||
#60
BAR: Because he now has time to re-arm and brainwash more dumbasses to fight for his cause.
I don't see why "brainwashing" would work now when it did not work under Saddam's regime. Why were Sadr's father and siblings unable to brainwash enough people to fight to prevent themselves from getting killed by Saddam, a Sunni infidel? The reality is that there is a hard core of people motivated enough to do the fighting. Once Sadr's exhausts this supply of people, he's out of luck. The first time around, he lost thousands before backing off. Now he's backing off after losing hundreds. Like I said, the Muslim fervor you see on the streets is mainly cathartic - a way to shout out their frustrations instead of risking their lives.
#62
Even if Sadr were to live to fight another day, which I agree he might, he has Far, Far, LESS momentum now than he did before. He didnât fight to the last drop of blood.
Sadr may have lost momentum, but as long as he isn't dead, he potentially has time to reconstitute his forces, armament, and number of followers. Iraq isn't a U.S. where information is available at the drop of a hat, and even if that were the case, a lot of the people aren't disciplined enough anyway to bother separating the wheat from the chaff where information is concerned. If Sadr says he prevailed, then he prevailed. Yes, it defies logic, but logic has rarely ever applied where the Middle East (and Muslims, so it seems) is concerned.
And most importantly, the people didnât rise up.
Probably because the people actually thought they were going to get squashed like bugs by the U.S. military machine if they threw in their chips with Sadr. Hard to say what the sentiment would be now, being as how U.S. forces seem to be unwilling to crush a threat the first time it raises its head...
#63
BAR: Hard to say what the sentiment would be now, being as how U.S. forces seem to be unwilling to crush a threat the first time it raises its head...
Sadr isn't a threat. His lousy sense of timing and leadership have led him to defeat after defeat.* The men around him are. And they got beaten to a pulp this time around.
Sadr is radioactive, but he is useful. His continued existence deters some rival, more competent pole of power from rising (he'll have the guy killed). Sistani the troublemaker can't lay claim to being head honcho. Our guys are doing a balance of power maneuver in Iraq - there are no good guys, and we're balancing one power bloc against another.
* Unless you define victory for Sadr as having survived the attacks. By this measure, Rommel defeated the Allies in North Africa during WWII.
#64
We, however like to judge based on real facts.
Oh yeah, that would explain the predominance of stories told in the Islamic world recounting American atrocities which are authenticated by someones cousins best friend who "saw it with his own eyes and who has no reason to lie"
This is all that is needed for the majority of Muslims to believe a story. Someone muslim saw it with their own eyes. It is the MAIN way that news is spread among all muslims. If it comes to them from a muslim who swears that its true then it must be!
I don't think that I need to mention the "Divine Spiders of Allan" story do I? And then there is the ever popular one about some guy who swears he has proof that Jewish matza contains the blood of poor little muslim children blah blah blah
The muslim culture is the least fact based on the planet. They have to dumb down and redefine what the word "facts" means in order to be able to claim any adherance to the priciple of truth.
#65
PS. Much like the way they had to completely redefine the words "perfect" "just" "peaceful" "gentle" "successful" and "divine" in order to fit how mohammed actually lived.
In contrast, there has never been to my knowledge any major Christian shrine which is off limits to anyone of any faith
Not for many centuries, anyway. In the first centuries of Christianity, those who were not baptized had to leave the worship service before the communion portion. The Eastern Orthodox church preserves traces of this in the form of the liturgy (lais ergos = "work of the people") attributed to St. John Chrysostom, which is used in most Orthodox churces for most Sundays and holy days. After the preaching of the Word and the common prayers, but before the wine and bread are unveiled and consecrated, the priest says:
"The doors! The doors! Holy things unto the holy."
At that point in the early centuries the unbaptized had to leave the church and the doors were closed. The congregation then replies"
"One only is Holy, One only is Lord, Jesus Christ ..."
#68
Like I said, the Muslim fervor you see on the streets is mainly cathartic - a way to shout out their frustrations instead of risking their lives.
I would hope that is indeed the case, but with these Middle Eastern-types, it's kind of difficult to discern just what their wishes and intents are. I always figure that if I have a pessimistic outlook, I'm not likely to be surprised in a bad way.... :)
#73
BAR: I would hope that is indeed the case, but with these Middle Eastern-types, it's kind of difficult to discern just what their wishes and intents are. I always figure that if I have a pessimistic outlook, I'm not likely to be surprised in a bad way.
Numbers don't lie. If Muslims were such brave fighters, six million Jews would be in the sea, and what is now Israel would have long ago become the Islamic Republic of Palestine. And check out my comparison between Germany and Iran a few dozen comments ago.
#74
BAR: I sure as hell wouldn't. But Sadr's spokesman did
Just because he sez so doesn't make it true or any less laughable. It also doesn't increase the number of hard core guys ready to fight to the finish. Among the true believers who are limping home from this skirmish, they must be thinking with victories like this...
I believe that the mass is a different case in that it is at least reasonable to have only believers participate in our religions profoundest mystery. Under strict interpretation then noone would be allowed to just sit and observe it like it was some kind of pageant.
You yourself just said that the unbaptised were allowed in the church. They were just told to leave so the true believers could take mass.
This was not done under some idea that unbelievers polluted anything. If such were the case then unbelievers would have been banned from church all together since every church is considered consecrated ground and nothing vile or corrupt is supposed to be in there. The practice was just so that everyone present at the mass understood what was going on and could fully participate since mass is only done properly, according to some, in perfect unity of belief of all those present.
Contrast this or any temporary exceptions one might be able to dig up with the muslim commandment that no unbeliever is ever to be allowed to set foot in the whole cities of mecca and medina because they are so-called sacred ground. Unbelievers are not allowed because their very presence would disrespect the ground. There are no such places where Christianity is concerned unless the space is off limits to absolutely everyone except for a priest. There are some places like that like behind the altar in some confessions but its still an equal opportunity prohibition. This is still peanuts and rare excpetions compared to the islamic prohibition of other religions in their most holy places.
I didn't see the priests at the Church of the Nativity, the second holiest place in Christendom kick out the recent muslim occupiers on the sole basis that they were muslim and an outrage to the holiness of the place.
Then there is the example of the little church beside the WTC which gave itself over to filthy dirty rescuers for months on end regardless of creed. In the Christian way of looking at the world that little church is was more holy at that time than it ever had been before because it was answering the highest call that any church could ever answer, that is a call to healing and welcome no matter what without regard to any cleaness or uncleaness spiritual or physical. No exceptions. Not ever.
Thats the true meaning of welcome, of hospitality, of holiness for me. All of these only become greater not less by exposure to less than ideal conditions.
#76
There are no such places where Christianity is concerned unless the space is off limits to absolutely everyone except for a priest.
Er, LDS tabernacles??? Of course they consider all of themselves to be priests, no? And some dont consider them christians, but theyre close enough for me:)
#77
and btw, non muslims ARE allowed in al aqsa, which we have been told repeatedly is the third holiest place in Islam. Mecca is just different, I guess ;)
Yes they are an entirely different religion basing their beliefs both on the Bible and on a book that is entirely outside the 2000 year old Christian tradition.
They also believe that they are being perfected in this life in order to become gods in the next.
Pulease. Did you also not read that any exceptions that someone could dig up, in this case from a nominally Christian fringe group, wouldn't amount to a sacred commandment obeyed by all believers as it is in the muslim faith? It simply does not negate the point.
That would be because mohammed didn't command it as a holy obligation to bar them. The reigning principle is the presence of unbelievers would outrage the holiness of the religions holiest places. Not so with Christianity.
#80
You yourself just said that the unbaptised were allowed in the church. They were just told to leave so the true believers could take mass. This was not done under some idea that unbelievers polluted anything
That's true, Peggy, nor was I suggesting the two situations are equivalent. However, many moderns have trouble with the idea that anything could be holy, so it's worth remembering that that is not true for the historical church.
For what it's worth, the Hebrew root that is translated 'holy' means 'separate, set apart'. So it is not entirely beyond our traditions to suggest that holy things should be protected against defiling. The difference, of course, is that humans are not inherently considered to be unclean in our traditions based on their beliefs.
#81
I think the people on other blogs who are casting Sistani in a positive light are missing the point. The guy is waiting for Uncle Sam to bump off his enemies so he can blame us for killing patriotic Iraqis. This is why a Sadr who is crippled in all but name is useful to us - to keep Sistani from getting too big for his britches. This is why Fallujah hasn't been crushed - to keep Sistani on his toes. As bad as Sadr is as a military commander, Sistani appears to be worse - he can't even protect his people from Sadr. As long as Sistani has domestic enemies who can threaten him, he can't come right out and denounce the coalition presence.
The reason I don't have much faith in Sistani is because he could have improved our situation a long time ago by making it clear that all Shiites were to cooperate with American forces. Instead, he's tried to have it both ways - criticizing us when we started breaking down doors in Fallujah, and when we started moving against Sadr the first time around. The guy is basically hoping to use American forces as a stepping stone to political power - having us destroy his enemies while getting his enemies' followers on his side by blaming the destruction on the American infidels.
#82
LH - Just FYI. As someone who was momentarily a Mormon, I can answer the easy questions about them. The "tabernacles" -- you mean the temples. Definitely off-limits part of the Nagmificent Normans, as we kids used to call ourselves. No entry without an appointment - which is arranged through the chain of command beginning with your local "ward" leader, called a Bishop. From there up to the "stake" level, then to HQ in Salt Lake City. I've been in the Mesa, AZ temple - I was about 13 (which means I was Deacon). Deacon at 12, Priest at 16, after that it's appointed: Bishop, Stake Pres, then all sorts of things at the National level, even Apostles. I was excommunicated - by my demand. It was the only way their missionaries would stop coming around. I threatened a Peace Bond, hoping to run them off, but they said they'd have to come anyway. Poor kids (missionaries typically 18-22 and dead ernest) said they had no choice as long as I was on the rolls. They make a hash of everything, no?
#83
The reigning Christian principle is that all non-believers are welcome In every place where rank and file Christians are allowed. In most of the exceptional cases all except priests are barred from entry based on all others being spiritually unprepared to enter, not from some uncleaness based solely on a persons unbelief. Ideally, in these cases the priest whose whole life is directed towards being so prepared will confess his sins and further prepare himself with prayer and meditation.
The muslim principle is that in some cases God is outraged by the presence of unbelivers where muslim rank and file believers are allowed.
#84
thanks for the info dot com, several of my learned expositions are ending up in the sinktrap - someone is evidently tired of long discourses on obscure religions:) very well back to politics - so do you dot com think what happened in Najaf was a win or a loss for Allawi?
#85
I agree with you, ZF, re: not trusting Sistani. He is a self-serving opportunist. He is not a genuine ally of coalition troops. The main reason Sistani co-operated with coalition toops and Allawi this time round to broker an exit strategy for Sadr, is because of the loss of "pilgrimage" money from Iraqis, as Frank pointed out on another thread. With Sadr acting like a loose cannon in Najef, pilgrimage revenues had nose dived. Also Sistani is smarter than Sadr on how to accumulate power for the Shiites in Iraq. Sistani has openly counseled his Shiite flock to be "patient" until the elections take place and then the Shiites can flex their muscle at the voting booths. I would not trust Sistani as far as I could throw him.
Posted by: rex ||
08/27/2004 15:43 Comments ||
Top||
#86
Jesus wanted the unclean to come to him, to sit with him and eat with him.
mohammed laid down a whole code for determining who was clean and unclean and where and how and for how long blah blah blah For instance, a muslim woman spends x amount of time a month during and after her cycle in an unclean state during which time she is not to outrage the holiness of Allan by praying to him or touching his book, going to mosque etc. She is also unclean after giving birth! Add up the time she spends unwanted by her god. I did it once and it comes up to a pretty significant portion of her adult life. I told a muslim male friend this and he couldn't believe it and yet he couldn't defend it. He just changed the subject. After he brought it up in the first place how great muslim laws about cleaness were.
I never heard him praise muslim cleanliness laws in my presence again.
#87
rex: Also Sistani is smarter than Sadr on how to accumulate power for the Shiites in Iraq.
Yes and no. Sadr is a better administrator and commander than Sistani. He can kill Sistani's men at will, and scares the heck out of Sistani's followers. But Sistani is a better schemer and backstabber than Sadr. He also looks wiser because of his age despite being less competent at actually getting things done - kind of like a Yoda who spouts meaningless garbage all day long.
rex: I would not trust Sistani as far as I could throw him.
I agree. The guy's just another snake in the grass.
#88
For instance, a muslim woman spends x amount of time a month during and after her cycle in an unclean state during which time she is not to outrage the holiness of Allan by praying to him or touching his book, going to mosque etc. She is also unclean after giving birth!
judaism has laws regarding the ritual state of a woman every month and after birth. She is of course allowed to pray during this time and attend synagogue, but not to touch a torah scroll or to have relations with her husband. I can find some websites on the meaning many Orthodox women find in this practice if you wish.
And I wouldnt post this except Peggy is posting stuff about Islam.
#94
I think there's this misconception that all we have to do is pick the right guy to lead Iraq or Afghanistan, and we're home free. The reality is that we don't really know any of these people. We know some of their background, and we know what they're saying, but we don't really know what they'd do once they grab unchallenged hold of the reins of power. This is why we're keeping rival poles of power viable in both Iraq and Afghanistan - to keep the anointed power-holders in check. We don't want to make enemies out of every other faction, even while our anointed ruler co-opts their support against us. No - if this guy (Allawi or Karzai) wants to consolidate his power, he will have to move against them himself, or at least give the order.
#95
and btw, non muslims ARE allowed in al aqsa, which we have been told repeatedly is the third holiest place in Islam.
Really? Jews are allowed in the Al'Aqsa mosque? Odd -- I had the opposite impression, based on the Muslim habit of throwing stones at women and children who get too close.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
08/27/2004 17:05 Comments ||
Top||
#96
LH - Re #84 - no way! You're getting Sink Trapped?
C'mon Mods - is there a screw loose today?
As for your question, I do not have an answer - and what occurs to me to say about Najaf, Sistani, Tater drawing breath - the whole deal, would be perfect Sink Trap material. I'm just listening to you guys and waiting to see. I have my suspicions that Allawi lost, Tater tied, and Shitstani won big. But that's based on what I think they're thinking. After a few weeks let's see what the Iraqi bloggers are saying - and what the big players are doing. Meanwhile, I'm just vegetating and reading everyone else's take, lol!
#97
.com: I have my suspicions that Allawi lost, Tater tied, and Shitstani won big.
In the hierarchy of power, Allawi is on top, Sadr is in the middle and Sistani is at the bottom. It's hard to see how Sistani won big by getting back what was his in the first place. Every single day, Allawi gets stronger because of his control of Iraq's oil revenues, which brings in $80m a day (2m barrels, $40 a barrel, net of a few dollars a barrel of extraction costs), and enables him to hire and train enough security men to face down both Sadr's and Sistani's (less formidable) militias. On the basis of oil revenues alone, Iraq has a government budget of $29B per year. That's a hefty chunk of change. No way either Sistani or Sadr can come anywhere close to that kind of financial firepower, which buys a lot of guns and manpower.
#98
.com: I have my suspicions that Allawi lost, Tater tied, and Shitstani won big.
I think that Sistani is extremely weak - despite his supposedly greater following, he couldn't keep Najaf from falling into Sadr's hands. Note that Uncle Sam and Allawi had to defeat Sadr for him.
Neil: As he has shown on numerous occassions since the shutting down of his newspaper back in the Spring, he is not someone that will go quietly into the wind anytime soon
He's a lousy commander, and his forces have taken great casualties while inflicting few on US forces. The number of fighters willing to risk their lives for him is clearly dropping fast - he folded his tent after a few hundred KIA despite having held out until thousands were killed the last time around. Numbers are difficult things to get around. As long as Sadr's alive, he'll continue to make trouble, but each incident will be less than the last. But even with less men, he will still be able to threaten the weakling Sistani any time he wants.
Neil: This power held by Sistani, however, will have its limits.
Sistani is a weakling who whose followers are being slaughtered like sheep by Sadr's men.
Neil: The only reason why Sadr has any support amongst Iraqis is his diehard anti-Americanism.
Actually, the only reason he has any support is because the supply of Shiites willing to kill or die wasn't destroyed during the invasion, because we let Saddam's divisions run away rather than wipe them out (which would have cost more of our own dead up front, of course, and killed many of the men we are now recruiting for the Iraqi security forces). But our men are in the process of whittling down the warriors in the enemy's ranks. Based on past experience with Muslims, these ranks don't run all that deep.
Neil: With more than 4 months left until elections, and an on-the-ground situation that is not judgeable, it is likely that such confrontations will occur again, taking a toll on Sistani's credibility amongst Iraqis.
I don't think Sistani has any credibility left, since he couldn't prevent Sadr from taking Najaf from him. He had to run away to London while the fighting was taking place. Alexander he's not.
I wasn't talking about Judaism. Why are you bringing it up?
I was talking about some differences between Christianity and islam.
But since we are on the subject, at every point where Judaism and islam agree, if i criticize islam for it, I also criticize Judaism for it too. All Christians are opposed to laws like the ones we are talking about here for the same reasons. If a Jewish person brought the subject up with me I would make the same point with them as I made with my Muslim friend. (He gets a captial M :))
However, in the final analysis, Judaism comes out far more favorably than islam for reasons that would fill an encyclopedia. Whatever its drawbacks or holdovers (not all Jews observe the laws about a woman being unclean during her cycle), we owe everything to those people and their proper understanding of true morality. If they err, they err by degrees and not by kind. I would say the same for all other religions though they differ in greater degrees. islam happens to be at the bottom on the scale of difference. It is not entirely without merit. Its followers can be decent people as my friend is a decent person. It has a well developed apologetic for its beliefs, but in the end it just can't overcome its defects in logic and morality.
I look forward to respectfully detailing these ways in the future. I realize that i have gotten carried away in the past out of frustration and anger at this religion, but I am now repentant. I won't be doing that anymore if I can help it because I believe that my arguments are reasonable and that getting ugly towards muslims detracts from that and casts a bad light on my Lord.
I think every party here: the US, Sadr, Allawi and Sistani had a partial win and a partial loss.
The next week or two is crucial to everyone. Sadr will probably regroup his militia in Sadr City and they will be armed. What then will be the response of Sistani, Allawi and the US?
#103
ZF - I hear you, bro - and hope you're right. There's just so much weirdness that passes for thought / sense / rationality in Arabia that I'm waiting to see what some of those who are steeped in it have to say. This situation is too Arab for me (too many conflicting pieces for me to follow) and those were just my honest gut feelings about how the Iraqis would see it.
#106
shootâ¦I only have time to do a super skim of these comments. But I did want to throw out one thing before I have to goâ¦
someone said: âthere are no good guys, and we're balancing one power bloc against another.â
In my opinion, if we successfully balance one power bloc against another, we will have provided the Iraqis the best possible form of government we could provide them.
Posted by: B ||
08/27/2004 18:10 Comments ||
Top||
#107
It's a middle eastern thing defined by this word.
byzantine:
1. Of, relating to, or characterized by intrigue; scheming or devious: âa fine hand for Byzantine deals and cozy arrangementsâ (New York).
2. Highly complicated; intricate and involved: a bill to simplify the byzantine tax structure.
Those Byzantine guys were Orthodox Christains, go figure.
#108
.com: There's just so much weirdness that passes for thought / sense / rationality in Arabia that I'm waiting to see what some of those who are steeped in it have to say. This situation is too Arab for me (too many conflicting pieces for me to follow) and those were just my honest gut feelings about how the Iraqis would see it.
I think you're looking at it from a binary (either/or) perspective. There are many factions duking it out in Iraq. Taking principled positions means nothing to them. It's all about jockeying for advantage and winning. The fact is that none of these sides is really on our side. They're on their side. And we need to avoid being painted as the bad guy - i.e. prevent all factions from uniting against us. In the next few years, we need to set up and preserve a system such that another Saddam who monopolizes the power of the state never emerges. And the responsibility of American troops will be to see to it that Iraq's nascent democracy is preserved. Skirmishes like the one that just concluded at Najaf don't change anything. The Tet Offensive it wasn't.*
* The US lost 1500 men KIA and the ARVN lost 2,800 men KIA in just over 1 month while killing 45,000 VC.
#109
ZF, Sistani does not support US ambitions in the way, say, Allawi does. But Allawi doesn't support us blindly, either. Both Allawi and Sistani have the same goal here--to keep Iran out of Iraq. Sadr was an extremely blunt instrument of Iraqi policy, there are many others more keen to be dealt with, but ridding Najaf of Sadr effectively rids Najaf of Iraq. Sadr is now irrelevant, and Najaf is in the hands of Iraqis.
Shia self-determination is a larger goal of Sistani, because it will permit the free practice of their version of Islam. The regime in Iran is not Shia, it utterly lacks legitimacy according to Shia political theory, and again, the best bulwark against it in Iraq is a strong Iraq with its majority Shia invested in governing themselves civilly. Allawi's best hope for successfully establishing Iraqi authority is the support of a Shia majority dedicated to civil self-governance. And ultimately, that's the goal of the US as well--a legitimate (power derived from the consent of the people) government soundly established in Iraq, in the middle of the Arab world.
#110
longtime lurker: ZF, Sistani does not support US ambitions in the way, say, Allawi does. But Allawi doesn't support us blindly, either.
I don't know what they do or do not support. I am certain that they are for their personal survival and for the survival of their respective factions. As far as I'm concerned, imputing democratic impulses to these men is just wishful thinking. What I get from Allawi's and Sistani's actions is that they are hoping to get the US to destroy their enemies for them, while casting themselves as Iraqi patriots by criticizing American actions as genocidal. My point is that it is unwise to get emotionally- attached to these gonifs. You can count on them without question - to look out for number one.
#111
Darn, you guys ran Gentle off before I had a chance to ask her which Sura allows beer drinking in a holy shrine. http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_world/view/103518/1/.html An array of beer cans littered the ground and a national guardsman said: "Look with your own eyes -- they drank beer and then they killed."
BTW, they found the uncle of the police chief and a young boy alive. Maybe these two can shed light on who did what and when. MR (beerbelly) Sadr and his 'men' are mere drunken thugs.
#112
Those Byzantine guys were Orthodox Christains, go figure.
But they considered themselves the rightful heirs of the Roman Empire, which could go a long way towards explaining their love of intrigue, scheming, and deviousness.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
08/27/2004 18:39 Comments ||
Top||
#113
RC: But they considered themselves the rightful heirs of the Roman Empire, which could go a long way towards explaining their love of intrigue, scheming, and deviousness.
They were the remnants of the Roman empire. When Arabs talk about defeating the Romans, they are referring to the Byzantines. Scheming and deviousness wasn't particular to the Byzantines, but the interesting aspect is that all of it was recorded for posterity. The Romans on the Italian peninsula also squabbled as they were overrun by barbarians, but much of it was obscured by the Dark Ages. Byzantium fell in the 15th century to the Turks. The Western Roman empire had fallen many centuries earlier to barbarian conquerors.
#114
ZF, I agree that we shouldn't get too emotionally attached. I also heartily agree that they don't think and act like we do. But to restate the obvious--lose the Shia, lose Iraq; lose Sistani, lose the Shia. I'm not arguing that we can all be buds, not at all. I'm arguing that there is a common concern we all have, that of eliminating or at least containing Iranian influence in the new Iraq. In this at least, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. If Sistani's quietism ultimately quashes the Iranian efforts, keeps the Shia populace at large working toward Iraqi self-governance, and builds Allawi's and the government's credibility (perhaps not Sistani's first goal, but a means to it), then I think we can work this thing out.
#115
Tater is no longer a firebrand cleric, he is a disgraced thug, demoted to a free man, but a *ahem* person of interest. He has pissed off enought people that he will continuously have to watch his six, because some citizen may want to ventilate him with an AK-47.
.........in the stilllllllll of the Nighhhhhht...
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
08/27/2004 18:58 Comments ||
Top||
#116
They were the remnants of the Roman empire. When Arabs talk about defeating the Romans, they are referring to the Byzantines.
Yes, because the Byzantines referred to themselves as Romans. Sure, they were Christian, and mostly spoke Greek, but they considered themselves the last vestiges of the Roman Empire. The name "Byzantine Empire" didn't crop up until the 1800s:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
08/27/2004 19:01 Comments ||
Top||
#117
If Sistani's quietism ultimately quashes the Iranian efforts, keeps the Shia populace at large working toward Iraqi self-governance
But we need to watch Sistani VERY VERY closely near to and after the elections that he does not lead a Shiite power grab of Iraq vis-a-vis majority rule thingy. The Iraqi Shiites have the numbers majority and it was a bit worrisome to me to hear that Shiites in Najef were making nice with Sunnis in Fallujah. Those 2 groups were mortal enemies once upon a time. So the "enemy of my enemy is my friend" maxim could go badly for us and the Kurds if we do not keep Sistani on a very short leash.
And keep in mind that Allawi is a Shiite as well. So we've got 2 Shiites with a lot of power now. It could work out fine or...Here's a thumb nail bio. of Allawi. He also was a member of the Baath Party, though a Shiite. Strange.
Being one of the most prominent Iraqi political refugees abroad who cooperated with the Americans, Allawi was chosen as a member of the 25-member Iraqi Governing Council (IGC) after the US occupation of Iraq and then into the 9-member presidential body in the council. As head of the National Accord Movement, a powerful presence in the political arena in Iraq, Allawi was able to include many Baathists into his movement in the past year.
Born in 1945 to a Shiite family, Allawi is a surgeon and the grandson of a physician who was the health minister in Iraq's monarchy era.
Allawi was a Baath Party member for ten years (1961 - 1971)before he left for Beirut and London.
In 1991, he founded the Iraqi National Accord movement, which became one of the opposition political organizations against Saddam Hussein's regime and his Baath Party.
During the time that preceded the toppling of Saddam's regime,the movement took Amman, capital of Jordan, as a center for its political and media activities. It moved to Baghdad after the US-led coalition forces ousted Saddam in April last year. According to observers, one of the reasons for Allawi'snomination is that he is a Shiite.
Posted by: rex ||
08/27/2004 19:08 Comments ||
Top||
#118
Don't forget that Saddam sent his thugs to kill Allawi and his family. They were attacked with axes - and did succeed in killing his wife - but Allawi survived. How that affects his thinking is anyone's guess. Why he was ever a Ba'athist is probably pure pragmatism.
One thing I certain of, however, is that he's a tough sombitch and smart - that Sistani interlude in London was a planned gambit so that Allawi could call in his American henchmen to deal with Sadr's Iran Plan.
I do not pretend to know everything afoot, nor what the Iraqis think of it all, but I'm hoping against hope that Allawi's got a stronger will than Sistani - who tried to cut the constitution to shreds - wanting pure Shi'a Mob Rule rather than the Confederation which would allow the Kurds, at least, some autonomy. Many irons in many fires here.
#119
Rex, the axiom to apply is: follow the money. Where are the weapons coming from (hint: not Saddam's weapons dumps)? Where is the money to pay Sadr's thugs coming from? Look east. Allawi's not pure, but he doesn't stand a chance if the Iranians get their way.
#120
The US lost 1500 men KIA ... in just over 1 month..
Just to mention, I'll bet that the MSM is going to wail uncontrollably when the number of U.S. soldiers killed reaches 1,000, using words like "grim", and "milestone", etc. And they're not likely to impart any perspective to the situation by mentioning how long it took to reach 1,000 in WW1, WW2, or Vietnam.
#121
LL: Where is the money to pay Sadr's thugs coming from? Look east. Allawi's not pure, but he doesn't stand a chance if the Iranians get their way.
Iran pumps 4.2m barrels of oil a day. This means the government's annual budget is about $62B per year for 70m people, compared to Iraq's $29B per year for 20m people. Iran's oil revenues are less than $1000 per capita, whereas Iraq's oil revenues are over $1400 per capita. Iran has a huge weapons expenditure program going. I don't see how it can blow huge chunks of cash on Iraq.
The US spent $1B a year on the Afghan mujahideen. I have heard estimates that Iran is spending about the same amount of money per year in Iraq, but with pitiful results, compared with what the Soviets encountered in Afghanistan. Iran can't spare the cash to finance a more effective opposition, and there aren't enough Iraqis willing to risk their lives for an Iraqi version of the Islamic Republic, anyway. My point is this - where are all the jihadis? Many of them were probably killed off during the Iran-Iraq War, Desert Storm, Operation Iraqi Freedom and the clean-up operations that have occurred since then. Based on the numbers I'm hearing from military intel people, our boys are inflicting casualties at the rate of about 40 to 1. This means about 40,000 jihadis have bitten the dust. How many more can the Iranians drum up? Muslims aren't stupid. They know when they're being used and discarded like condoms. Muslims are cynical too - martyrdom is a maybe, whereas death is certain.
#122
And they're not likely to impart any perspective to the situation by mentioning how long it took to reach 1,000 in WW1, WW2, or Vietnam.
I wince anytime someone compares KIA rates GI's of this Iraq War to other wars in history as though we should be happy with such a low number of GI deaths or as if the nearly 1000 deaths are merely statistics not someone's son or husband or nephew or father. These 900+ deaths are 900+ too many, IMO.
You can try to blame the MSM for making a mountain out of a mole hill to hurt GWB, but I have no doubt that Americans would be similarly upset whether they heard the 1000 death mark through FOX News or by CNN. No one wants body bags coming home. That's a fact. MSM does not even have to embellish the announcement.
Also, you cannot ignore the conflicted feelings about the Iraq War that concern Americans today regardless of their political leanings. Yesterday I quoted the remarks of Wm. F. Buckley, the modern day champion of conservativism, who said on his retirement that in retrospect he would not have invaded Iraq. On Sunday, we had a spirited discussion about how Dr.Fuyakuma, a high profile neocon, now was having misgivings about the Iraq War.
Blaming left wing MSM is a pretty simplistic read of why there will be negative blowback to GWB's re-election campaign when the 1000 KIA mark is reached. It will be a "grim milestone," no doubt about it.
Posted by: rex ||
08/27/2004 21:05 Comments ||
Top||
#123
rex: I wince anytime someone compares KIA rates GI's of this Iraq War to other wars in history as though we should be happy with such a low number of GI deaths or as if the nearly 1000 deaths are merely statistics not someone's son or husband or nephew or father. These 900+ deaths are 900+ too many, IMO.
This is the typical liberal reflex. The reality is that one death is too many, whether it is through war, sickness or accidents. But the reality is that America must re-establish deterrence in Muslim (and other) minds through the credible threat of war. And the only way to establish this credibility is to fight them. Afghanistan was over too quickly to establish this deterrence. Iraq is going to prove that Americans have gotten over Vietnam, and will destroy regimes that threaten us, even if that involves casualties.
Rex, as usual, is putting the cart before the horse. The cost in Iraq and Afghanistan hasn't approached what we suffered on 9/11 alone, never mind the other wars we have fought. Why fight abroad? Because if we wait for the fight to reach our homes, 9/11 won't be the model for what we will suffer when that happens. Think of Dresden, Hamburg, Hiroshima, Nagasaki. A hundred years ago, when it took weeks to sail across the ocean, it made sense to be isolationist. The age of ballistic and cruise missiles and supersonic bombers no longer gives us the ability to wall ourselves off from our enemies.
#124
ZF: The age of ballistic and cruise missiles and supersonic bombers no longer gives us the ability to wall ourselves off from our enemies.
I left out the one ingredient that makes all these things ultra-lethal - nuclear weapons. Note also that our enemies are transferring nuclear technology through plausibly deniable means to third countries that have terrorist ties. Who do we nuke when some freighter detonates a nuke at the entrance to San Francisco harbor? Better to avoid the whole scenario by making clear that if this is what we do for 3,000 Americans, they don't want to find out what we will do to them for killing 1 million Americans.
#125
I see the situation as follows: We must kill Sadr A.S.A.P. He is embarassing us repeatedly. Muslims around the world are watching all this unfold and they see the pulling back of our troops as weakness. And I think the posts on this thread about Sistani are way off mark. Sistani was not a factor in this situation until her returned to Iraq. He ended the standoff within hours of returning to Iraq. He's like 80 years old people! He was in London for medical treatment. As soon as he entered the situation he changed the entire dynamic. I believe he helped Sadr though, allowing him & his followers to escape in the confused mass of "pilgrims" that swarmed Najaf on Sistani's orders. Sistani bailed out Sadr. We must crush Sadr. He WILL cause trouble again and the MSM will cry for Sistani to intervene, but we must CRUSH Sadr next time. Sistani has no gunmen people, so however said something to that effect: you're wrong. Sistani is like a father figure to Sadr. Sadr wants to attack Americans and he backs himself into a corner with his poor tactics & then daddy (Sistani) bails him out. Sistani has broad support amongst the people, though, & that's more powerful than Sadr's gunmen. But we cannot allow Sadr's daddy to bail him out anymore. & yes, Sistani's interest in the matter is that the Shiite "church" was loosing money because of the fighting in Najaf. Sadr won, Sistani won, we lost, the people of Iraq lost, Allawi lost, Najaf lost. I am outraged that our government allowed Sadr to walk away-AGAIN! This is bullshit. We have got to kill that guy.
#126
Right on, Zhang Fei!
I try to imagine the future if AQ has managed to nuke one of our cities:
"I remember when Boston was there...it was such a charming, historic city. When I visited my sister there, we would...(breaking down into sobs for the hundredth time)"
And of the 60,000 dead from Vietnam and the 50-60,000 dead from Korea and the 500,000 dead from WWII, they were someone's son and/or husband and/or nephew and/or father, too.
So what?
According to Kerry and his enablers, if a war is a "nothing" or "illegal" or "immoral" in the eyes of the Liberal Left, then so are the casualties, right?
These are the "peace at any price" crowd who thinks that Freedom is Free, yet want to ban books and have their political detractors silenced.
And Iraq ain't no Vietnam with 1/114th of the casualties and 1/10 the duration.
#127
KB: But we cannot allow Sadr's daddy to bail him out anymore. & yes, Sistani's interest in the matter is that the Shiite "church" was loosing money because of the fighting in Najaf. Sadr won, Sistani won, we lost, the people of Iraq lost, Allawi lost, Najaf lost. I am outraged that our government allowed Sadr to walk away-AGAIN! This is bullshit. We have got to kill that guy.
Relax. Muslims around the world don't matter. Really. The Muslim street is overrated. They're willing to talk about jihad but not actually willing to risk their lives. Cooperation from Muslim governments is holding up - if we were losing, they'd start freeing the jihadis again. Muslims are some of the most unmotivated warriors around. Just read some of the entries I've posted above.
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/27/2004 21:57 Comments ||
Top||
#129
KB, I'd say Mookie (Tater) pretty much embarrassed himself--"Daddy" had to come and rescue him.
He's not a player anymore.
And his little insurgency was a big, fat failure!
Nothing like finding your "holy shrine" full of the dead bodies of your "brothers" surrounded by beer cans!
Have it your way, dr. freud. Anyone with half a brain would see that the 1000 KIA is a benchmark and it will be perceived as such by most Americans regardless of their political stripe. MSM does not have to do much to frame it as a benchmark.
Better to avoid the whole scenario by making clear that if this is what we do for 3,000 Americans, they don't want to find out what we will do to them for killing 1 million Americans...
The Iraq War and the Afghan War are perceived as 2 different ventures. The Afghan War is more easily related to a consequence of 9/11. Not so the Iraq War. As well, the GI KIA figure in Afghanistan has been minimal, less than 200. Not so the war in Iraq. As well, the Afghans themselves seem to be more welcoming to coalition troops - or at least they are not getting in front of cameras deriding Americans like the Iraqis have done. Also, there's a clearer distinction of the bad guy Taliban interlopers in Afghanistan. In Iraq, it's rather fuzzy who the "enemy" from day to day because "liberated" Iraqis have done their share of killing GI's and contractors. It's not just been foreign fighters who have killed our soldiers.
#133
rex: You can mock me but it's you who is the person who is clued out. When the 1000 KIA in the Iraq War comes up, it will be a very bad day for GWB.
Rex, not everyone is as cowardly as you are. Save your cowardly BS for the Democratic Underground. If a draft comes about, and my number comes up, I will serve. You can go to Canada.
#134
rex: The Afghan War is more easily related to a consequence of 9/11. Not so the Iraq War.
What did North Africa have to do with Pearl Harbor? Why was Operation Torch carried out? What did Guadalcanal have to do with Pearl Harbor? Why did the US not launch an invasion of the Japanese homeland straight away? Or launch an invasion of Germany immediately? Because there obstacles along the way.
In the current instance, deterrence was lost and it needed to be regained. Rex doesn't seem to believe in deterrence. Most Americans do. Rex doesn't seem to believe that in international relations, we say one thing and do another. Many Americans do. Why do so many instinctively support the invasion of Iraq? Is it because they get a vicarious thrill out of hearing about American losses on a day-to-day basis? No - it's because we instinctively understand that Muslims in particular, and America's enemies in general, need to be sent a message. And the invasion in Iraq is broadcasting that message loud and clear - America is not to be trifled with.
#135
Old rex certainly seems to get his talking points from the DNC, doesn't he?
If you ask me--and while I mourn every fallen soldier in the WOT, including those of our allies in the Coalition--I'd say 1,000 killed in enemy action isn't too high a price to pay to stop and kill fanatical IslamoNazis whose "band of brothers" slaughtered 3,000 of our civilians on our soil in peacetime on a beautiful, clear September morning.
#136
"When the 1000 KIA in the Iraq War comes up, it will be a very bad day for GWB."
>In general I agree w/you - the MSM will prolly make it a bad day for GWB. Though I'm sure as the C-in-C as well as seeming to be a decent guy - any day an American serviceman dies is prolly not a great day personally for the Prez. However, as I've stated before, Iraq was an inevitability imho, we either dealt w/sammy or his progeny. I may have waited until December 2003 to kick it off to give Afghanistan more boots on the ground, but hindsight is always 20/20. We're not going to unfuck iraq in a year or even five. With education, literacy, and capitalism they will get better methinks. So stay the course people, this is going to get even more dirty, messy and frustrating - that's war. Stomach it now so our future generations are not fighting this again in 20-30 yrs.
#137
Old rex certainly seems to get his talking points from the DNC, doesn't he?
Attention, Ms. Doofus. If I were stealing talking points from the DNC, I'd do the following:
a) exaggerate the KIA figures greatly
b) not separate the Iraq War KIA figures from the Afghan War because one needs to promote the idea that figures in both wars are about the same
c) wring my hands about all the innocent Iraqi civilian deaths and inflate those figures as well
Too bad you can't pick up brain cells at the supermarket as easily as you do the National Enquirer to enhance your intellect, jen.
If you ask me--and while I mourn every fallen soldier in the WOT
a) Who asked you?
b) Why does your "sorrow" have such a tin ring as you glibbly string words together for effect?
I'd say 1,000 killed in enemy action isn't too high a price to pay to stop and kill fanatical IslamoNazis whose "band of brothers" slaughtered 3,000 of our civilians on our soil in peacetime on a beautiful, clear September morning.
How easy it is for you to talk about the 1000 KIA price tag being worth it, when you are not at the paying end.
Have you ever been a parent? I suspect not. I'd suggest you not embaress yourself any further by coming across like a superficial twit. When a child pre-deceases you, it is a horrible undescribable loss. Many of these young men KIA in Iraq are "babies" in their early 20's, some barely out of high school.
Furthermore, I'd suggest that before you start waxing poetic again about "the beautiful clear day in September", you get your facts straight about which war relates to 9/11. It's the Afghan War that was the result of 9/11. The Iraq War is a war of positioning as well as a war of regime change. Got it straight now, missy?
Posted by: rex ||
08/27/2004 23:28 Comments ||
Top||
#138
Yes, I'm a parent, rex.
And I've buried 2 members of my immediate family in the last 5 years.
So don't lecture me about losing people and grief!
And if my sorrow has a "tin ring" for you, that's just too bad.
I'm at the paying end of this war tax wise, I send things to our troops as I can such as gifts for their comfort, and I'd go suit up and grab a gun and join them if I weren't almost 50.
Anyone's death diminishes me, that is why our US military is working to keep casualties to a minimum.
Operation Iraqi Freedom is an integral part of the War on Terror just as our war on Iraq, which is next, will be, too.
Anyone who thought it was over when we deposed the pathetic Taliban in Afghanistan just isn't paying enough attention.
And there isn't going to be a draft, you coward rex!
#139
rex: Have you ever been a parent? I suspect not. I'd suggest you not embaress yourself any further by coming across like a superficial twit. When a child pre-deceases you, it is a horrible undescribable loss. Many of these young men KIA in Iraq are "babies" in their early 20's, some barely out of high school.
Have you ever had friends and colleagues killed by terrorist attacks? If not, I suggest you shut the f**k up, you f**king coward.
#140
yeah, well, but their book was part of the general looniness of 1840s upstate New York, which as far as IM concerned was very much the product of Christian civilization :-)
BTW, gentiles are NOT allowed in the Holy Temple, and I think thats where the LDS got the idea from. Course we aint had a Holy Temple in 2000 years, and we cant get one as long as the muslim shrines in Jerusalem (Domb of the Rock and Al Aqsa) are standing, and I sure as hell arent suggesting doing anything to said shrines, but still the principle is there in Jewish law, IIUC.
#141
yeah, well, but their book was part of the general looniness of 1840s upstate New York, which as far as IM concerned was very much the product of Christian civilization :-)
BTW, gentiles are NOT allowed in the Holy Temple, and I think thats where the LDS got the idea from. Course we aint had a Holy Temple in 2000 years, and we cant get one as long as the muslim shrines in Jerusalem (Domb of the Rock and Al Aqsa) are standing, and I sure as hell arent suggesting doing anything to said shrines, but still the principle is there in Jewish law, IIUC.
Traces of explosives were discovered during examination of fragments of a Siberia Airlines Tu-154 airliner that crashed on Tuesday, Federal Security Service (FSB) spokesman Sergei Ignatchenko told Interfax on Friday. "A study of the fragments of the Tu-154 aircraft discovered traces of an explosive substance. A tentative analysis indicated that it was hexogene," Ignatchenko told Interfax on Friday. Additional examinations are under way, he said.
Posted by: TS(vice girl) ||
08/27/2004 7:51:30 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
You are kidding, right?? Two Soviet airliners go down within an hour of one another, within a week of the Chechnyan elections, and, and..
Iraqi police cadet Meqdad al-Izzawi once served Saddam Hussein as a navy officer. Now, he says he is taking one of the most dangerous jobs in the new Iraq because he wants to serve his people. "My hope is to execute the law in Iraq and restore stability to the Iraqi people, because we never enjoyed security, even under Saddam Hussein," said the 28-year-old al-Izzawi, one of 1,559 Iraqi recruits attending basic police training at a U.S.-run camp in the Jordanian desert. Like al-Izzawi, fellow Iraqi recruit Abdul-Razzaq al-Qaissi signed up for the new police force because he was incensed by growing terrorism at home by insurgents and foreign fighters, including Jordanian militant Abu-Musab al-Zarqawi.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
08/27/2004 1:11:34 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
A policeman has been killed and another wounded in the latest clashes with suspected Islamist fighters, Algerian media report. The shooting follows a deadly ambush that left five more policemen dead on Monday. The latest attack occurred in the northern coastal town of Zemmouri on Tuesday afternoon, L'Expression reported on Thursday. The paper said two Islamists "wearing shorts so as not to arouse suspicion", blended in with the crowd of beach-goers and opened fire on the two policemen at point-blank range. One of the policemen died on the spot while the second was wounded to the neck and chest. A woman who was nearby was also injured. The assailants took advantage of the panic the attack had sown, stole the policemen's weapons and fled, L'Expression said.
The night before, the GSPC ambushed a convoy of soldiers and policemen not far from Zemmouri. Five soldiers and two policemen were killed in the ambush, which occurred on Monday night near Boumerdes, 50 kilometers east of the Mediterranean coastal capital Algiers. The ambush was the deadliest to target the security forces since June, when 14 soldiers were killed in an ambush in the Bejaia region, 260 kilometers east of Algiers.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
08/27/2004 1:02:57 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The terrorists must be on vacation. I thought they mostly lived in the interior, or south of the country...That's why I say that they must be on vacation to the beaches of the coast and while they're there they figure "What the hell! Might as well kill a few infidels while we're at it!"
I think the first four words of the headline are the F6 key on Russian word processors...
Investigators scouring the grassy fields where the two airplanes fell nearly 500 miles apart recovered flight recorders but found no signs of bomb blasts that might have downed the aircraft, officials said. While authorities did not rule out terrorism, they opened a criminal investigation into possible negligence and put the transportation minister in charge of the probe. The timing of the crashes, on the eve of Sunday's election in the rebellious region of Chechnya, raised suspicion that they might have been the latest in a two-year wave of terrorist assaults that has claimed more than 500 lives. A spokesman for the main rebel leader denied any rebel role in the disaster. Security forces at checkpoints in Chechnya and at Russian airports tightened screening.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
08/27/2004 12:48:06 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
CIA clueless, a freeking undersatement, followed by US Congress clueless about fighting real war against terror by refusing to support Russia in Chechen crackdown and putting pressure on Magic Kingdom to stop terror funding.
Over the last 24 hours, three members of illegal armed groups in Chechnya have laid down their arms. "Two active members of underground gangs turned themselves in to law enforcement agencies in the Vedeno district," federal forces spokesman Major General Ilya Shabalkin told Interfax on Thursday. The rebels said the gang's leader made them attack local police patrols and take part in bandit attacks against citizens of the Vedeno district while wearing military camouflage uniform and masks, Shabalkin said. Another member of an illegal armed group turned himself in to the authorities in the Achkhoi-Martan region of Chechnya, Shabalkin said. The rebel gave up his Kalashnikov rifle and ammunition, as well, he said.
"Not a problem, I've got plenty of spares at home!"
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
08/27/2004 12:42:19 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Are these guys insane, or what? Who would willingly do such a thing? Why don't they just bury their AK, leave town, and never look back?
#2
Gromky: There are several possibilities why the acted in this manner: 1. They're literally scared out of their minds. 2. They fear thier own death. 3. They have gotten a taste of life as a Chechen terrorist & they don't like it one bit. 4. They loathe death & killing. 5. They can't stand the constant anxiety of being a member of an illegal terrorist group that is constantly hunted by the Russians. 6. He wants out for the sake of a loved one (a kid, a wife/girlfriend, a parent, etc.) 7. He has angered someone in the terrorist group and is no longer safe with them. He could've ratted someone out, slept with somebody's wife, stolen from someone in the terrorist group, disobeyed an order, been a coward during an attack, disagreed with a leadership figure, etc. 8. His goals in life have changed. He wants to be a doctor. He wants to move to Mecca & be a priest. He wants to write a children's book, etc. 9. He is in conflict with someone involved in illegal activity and is going to spill the beans as a way of getting back at somebody. 10. He needs protection from the government. 11. He is sick/has a medical condition. 12. He woke up on the wrong side of the bed and decided "What the hell! I think I'll go turn myself in to the Russians!" 13. He has grown old. 14. He has grown sick of the life as a Chechen terrorist. 15. No such surrender ever took place. The Russians made it up for propoganda purposes.
#6
I agree with mucki and anti Kentucky man has an excellent imagination. KB ever thought about writing a thoughtful childrens book about getting married to your 55 year old cousin, and what a good idea it is? You could call it Fore! The Children. Or maybe It Takes an Uncle to Raise a Wife. I'm a fair hand with simple illustrations, let me know.
#8
Gromky, I'd give you a link to read so you could ponder how you became so stupid, but I fear the reading level would make you spew shit out your nostrils. I've been reading here quite a while and I can say I have not seen any evidence that Ship is a bigot. Show me otherwise, or just shut the fuck up and go blow your cat.
Posted by: Lil Dhimmi ||
08/28/2004 17:58 Comments ||
Top||
#9
LOL Gromky! Excellent Link!
Want to buy a clue from a poor redneck?
Posted by: Lil Dhimmi ||
08/28/2004 18:12 Comments ||
Top||
#12
On review I see I left out a comma,
it reads better this way....
agree with mucki and anti, Kentucky man has an excellent imagination. KB ever thought about writing a thoughtful childrens book about getting married to your 55 year old cousin, and what a good idea it is? You could call it Fore! The Children. Or maybe It Takes an Uncle to Raise a Wife. I'm a fair hand with simple illustrations, let me know.
The comment was aimed at our friend Gentle, trying to get KB to help write a kids book about islamo nuts.... KB if you took offense absolutely none was meant, it was poor grammar.
A Pakistani army convoy has been hit by a roadside bomb near the border with Afghanistan, killing two soldiers and wounding eight, Pakistani intelligence sources have said. The 20-truck convoy was headed for Shakai, in the tribal regions of northwestern Pakistan, from the border town of Wana when the remote-controlled bomb was detonated, intelligence sources told CNN. It was the latest in a series of attacks on Pakistani forces in the border region of Waziristan in the past week. On Monday, Pakistani security forces reported killing four suspected al Qaeda members and capturing two others in a raid in northern Waziristan. Pakistan's army reported intense fighting during the raid, with the clash lasting several hours. It said several suspected al Qaeda members escaped.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
08/27/2004 12:37:12 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Fug ged abou dit.
Its funny, to an intellegent person, to read the right wing attacks on a fat guy who sticks up for his hometown. As more and more of our hometowns deteriorate, I wonder if the right wing will focus on how skinny the next Michael Moore really is. You attack, but defence wins the super bowl. I'd hire a big dude like Mike to be nose tackle on a defensive goaline stand.
Every mornin at the mine, used to see'im in line, stood 6 foot 6 weight 245, kinda broad at the shoulders and narrow at the hips, and everyone knew y'didn't give no lip to big Mike.
Big John
Posted by: John D Nelson ||
08/27/2004 0:53 Comments ||
Top||
#5
What's up with all that? Does Michigan all of a sudden have designs to beat up on anyone outside of the Big Ten? Using Michael Moore?
I got a better idea. Dress Mikey up in a Texas Longhorn uniform, and let him play nose tackle in the Oklahoma-Texas Game. Raffle off dinner with the center who turns Mikey into a quadraplegic. Could make millions in Oklahoma.
#9
It's an article of faith to the socialists and commies. "Mike Moore took on the man." Me and Rodger, Bowling for Columbine, etc. Taking on GM and going after guns. He has to be a hero to them. They ignore the fact was a rich kid to begin with and is a millionare now. Hardly a man of the people. I am still trying to figure out how someone that freeking fat can wipe his own butt. I expect him to explode in a Pythonesque fashion one of these days.
#10
Look! Another Common Red Marxian! Dang, this troll-watching is 'way more fun than bird watching.
(The Roger Tory Peterson's Field Guide to the Trolls of Greater Rantburg & Vicinity is available at fine bookstores, gun shops, and neighborhood bars throughout greater Rantburg. All proceeds benefit the Army of Steve Charities and the Rantburg Animal ConTroll Department.)
Posted by: Mike ||
08/27/2004 8:52 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Troll clean up aisle one! John D. Nelson is a troll!
Lt. Col. Jim Rainey describes the battle here as "tackle football in the hallway, with no roof on the hallway." It's an apt analogy for urban warfare in sometimes extremely close quarters. But after 21 days of merciless battering by U.S. weapons, parts of Najaf have very nearly no hallway at all. Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, the most influential Shiite cleric in Iraq, negotiated a cease-fire Thursday, but not before parts of Najaf had been devastated. Pinpoint fire and tight restrictions on munitions assure that the gold-domed Imam Ali shrine remained all but unscathed. But the core of the city around it, a destination of longing for millions of Shiite Muslims, is so mauled that American commanders debate which famously ruined wartime cityscape Najaf now resembles most.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
08/27/2004 12:27:32 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"We actually had reports of âengage and destroy the donkey,â
Sounds like a good idea to me. Bet the troops loved the irony of the animal too.
Posted by: Charles ||
08/27/2004 0:46 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I like these two parts best:
"We actually had reports of âengage and destroy the donkey,â " said Maj. Tim Karcher of the 7th Cavalry Regiment. The animal appears to have died as another enemy casualty.
Perhaps the closest call came this week, when a grenade exploded in a basement room where Sgt. Varitogi Taetulli was wrestling an insurgent. The fight was a miniature version of the larger battle: Taetulli, from American Samoa, weighs 230 pounds. The militiaman weighed perhaps half as much.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
08/27/2004 0:53 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Allawi needs to get on TV, radio and in the newspapers all over the region announcing the rehabilitation of the area aroudn the shrine with Iraqi oil revenues, and US funds as well.
And while he's at it, announce that if the people of Fallujah and Sadr city will submit to the central government, they will get similar aid and reconstruction, and the jobs that come with it.
Let them know there are hard ways to get aid (Najaf) and there are easier ways of doing it.
#4
How the Arab world sees the damage is a question that field commanders said they had little time to ask themselves as they constantly changed battle plans. Several noted it was Sadr who brought the fight to the holy city, not them.
Allawi and the people in charge need to make this particularly clear, over and over, until it sinks into the brains of the local population.
#5
Several noted it was Sadr who brought the fight to the holy city, not them. Allawi and the people in charge need to make this particularly clear, over and over, until it sinks into the brains of the local population.
Don't count on it. I think you and me and other US taxpayers are on the hook for damage to "the holy city" according to the deal brokered by Sistani.
Hamid al-Khafaf, an al-Sistani spokesman, said the cleric and al-Sadr agreed on several points:
- Multinational forces are to leave both Najaf and Kufa, leaving security to local forces.
- Najaf and Kufa are to be weapons-free cities.[dream along with me]
- Compensation is to be paid to victims of the violence.[it ain't going to be Sadr picking up the tab...guess who's the deep pockets in this picture?
- Legitimate elections will be held.
Posted by: rex ||
08/27/2004 1:53 Comments ||
Top||
#6
I don't suppose Iraq could ask the Euros to have Iran pick up the tab on this one seeing how their pet mullah was responsible for this whole mess?
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
08/27/2004 2:02 Comments ||
Top||
#7
So what? We're big enough to pay for it. This is no time to be a skinflint. Afterwards, everyone will say, they didn't want to come, they fought anyway and kicked Sadr's ass, didn't damage the big mosque despite it being used as a base by Sadr, and then built everything up again after they left. What a people.
#8
Are we sure it wouldn't be better to spruce up around the Mosque itself but leave the Old City as is for 365 days so that all the pilgrims can get some pictures to take home with them. It's nice to rebuild but I don't want to erase the effects in such a way that the consequences of following an idiot like Sadr aren't abundantly clear. We need to clarify to the slower students that we are willing and able to bring Mogadishu to a neighborhood near you. I use the word Mogadishu for a reason. I want to re-associate Mogadishu in the Arab mind with an image of getting stomped. I think that's important to do.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
08/27/2004 2:34 Comments ||
Top||
#9
This is no time to be a skinflint.
Skinflint? Say what? Who is paying for Afghanistan's rehabilitation? Who is paying for Iraqis to take one step forward and 3 steps back?
Here's yet another reason why we need to lose the "occupier" status within 5 years. This is going to be a vicious circle. And any of you who don't think the Iraqis haven't pegged the US taxpayers as "money bags" and "owing them", you are living on another planet. We will be milked for all we are worth and we'll be nickel and dimed for the damages that occur everytime there is an insurrection. Here' how it will go down.
Sadr or a facsimile "cleric" takes over a town or part of a town. The Iraqi town folk give tacit aid and comfort to the "holy man". We are forced to bomb the heck out of the place on the town folks' behalf and then we are on the hook for "compensation." Then a few months later another "holy man" cruises into a local yokel dust bin town, takes over a mosque, blah, blah and it starts all over again.
Posted by: rex ||
08/27/2004 3:01 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Sounds like some Urban renewal projects that should take about a year to get started. Level everything leave nothing for Iranian propaganda. We are not on the hook to pay for anything. Some Iranian lackys can not make deals for the U S government.
#11
Here's an idea - don't rebuild around the shrine. Flatten what remains, and put in a nice, big, indefensible park. Re-settle the locals at a respectable distance from the shrine. Then the Iraqis will have a handsome religious precinct which won't look like perfect defensive terrain to the next group of would-be urban guerillas looking to make a point under the safety of an inviolable sacred dome.
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
08/27/2004 8:58 Comments ||
Top||
#12
The Iraqi town folk give tacit aid and comfort to the "holy man".
all evidence is that most of the people of Najaf hated Sadr.
#13
With all the people who visit the shrine it really needs a great big huge parking lot surrounding it. Replace the old city with a metered parking lot.
#17
rex, that's Sistani-country and the city's ecenomy was based on pilgrim tourism to the shrine....how would you think this upstart has support outside Sadr City when he's basically f&*ked up Najaf's economy and shrine for what will be years of repairs and rebuilding? If they disliked him before, they hate him now...remember the vigilante killings of his Mahdis?
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/27/2004 11:26 Comments ||
Top||
#18
Rex. from mainstream press, including folks with biases both ways, and from reports from US troops.
#19
...As well as the fact that the ordinary townspeople of An Najaf have formed a vigilante force (the Thulfiqar Army) to fight Sadr. An Najaf, like most holy sites, is essentially a tourist town whose residents' livelihood is directly connected to the influx of pilgrims for across the Shi'ite world. Sadr came into their town, established himself as the local strongman, and had his brownshirts dispensing Islamic law(TM) as they saw fit and looting like thieves. Entirely apart from the fact that they took over the city's primary religious site, which usually doesn't score points with the locals.
An Najafi tribal leaders even offered to raise levies to fight Sadr back when all of this first started.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
08/27/2004 12:14 Comments ||
Top||
#20
from mainstream press, including folks with biases both ways, and from reports from US troops.
What I read was not so clear cut anti-Sadr. MEMRI described Sadr as a brash young charismatic cleric, and that's why he was not being officially recognized at this time by Sistani and the older geezer clerics-he was too young. BUT they did recognize Sadr's appeal to the masses, because Sadr's father was hugely popular before he was assassinated by Saddam and that's why Sistani did not want any harm to come to young Sadr-fear of Shiite uprising. That tells me that young Sadr was not hated by all Shiites if the head honcho Shiite cleric wanted to ensure Sadr's personal safety. Sistani's brokering for peace was based on a self-serving interest-as Frank pointed out, money from the sites near Sadr's occupation. Sistani is not "on our side."
Btw, Sadr's "holy site occupation" in Najef was near the grave site of his father, which is still sacrosanct to most Shiites. Powerful symbolism there.
I tend to agree with Jules. We are trading one Shiite cleric for another. Sistani is just smarter than Sadr. Sistani has counselled patience to his Shiite flock-that they do not need to use weapons to gain and wield power in Iraq. Rather he has told Shiites that once the elections are set up, power will come to them through their majority vote.
I don't think the ending has been written to the Sadr story quite yet. And don't any of you forget that Sadr's militia was responsible for the ambush and murder of our GI's in the past.
Source: MEMRI 2/11/04
"Moqtada Al-Sadr: The Young Rebel of the Iraqi Shi'a Muslims"
...Unlike Al-Sistani, who has not left his home in six years and who has communicated with the outside world through intermediaries, Moqtada Al-Sadr is media savvy. While he does not shy away from conflicts, he is careful not to go overboard. With name recognition, thanks to his father, whose photographs adorn every store front in the Al-Sadr city, he is capable of attracting tens of thousands of followers from across Iraq. His greatest appeal is to the poor and the disenfranchised, and not a few of Saddam's former supporters who share his abhorrence of the Governing Council.Since the defeat of Saddam, the city named after him, Saddam City, has become Al-Sadr City, named after Moqtada Al-Sadr's father. [9] Inhabited by more than one million Shi'a loyal to Al-Sadr, the city has developed its own municipal, educational, medical, and social services. In addition, there are "courts" presided over by young judges, followers of Moqtada Al-Sadr, who adjudicate conflicts between people, and whose verdicts are carried out by "security committees." The courts follow the Shari'a (Islamic law), and those who refer to them accept their verdicts as binding. There are observers who compare these young student-judges to the students of the religious schools in Pakistan who later became the nucleus of the Taliban movement. As part of the Islamization of life in Al-Sadr City, Al-Sadr issued a Fatwa forbidding the sale of videos and of liquor...
Posted by: rex ||
08/27/2004 12:20 Comments ||
Top||
#21
I'm still thinking Sistani will be more accomodating of our POV. Especially after that wedge of C-4 was implanted in his chest during his angioplasty :-)
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/27/2004 12:22 Comments ||
Top||
#22
Does Sistani have his own game? Hell yes! So does Putin, Blair, Berlusconi Sharon, Allawi, and any other leader that the US ends up working with as part of the WOT. People have different agendas, but that doesn't prevent cooperation in areas of mutual interest. In this case, we have a common interest with Sistani in getting Sadr out of An Najaf as quickly as possible.
Regarding Sadr's popularity, my understanding is that he is popular among the Shi'ite inhabitants of Sadr City, which is basically Baghdad's ghetto. A large part of that popularity, I suspect, comes from his ability to provide cash and an outlet for Arab Rage(TM) to Sadr City's impoverished inhabitants by virtue of all the Iranian slush money has to hand out like candy.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
08/27/2004 12:36 Comments ||
Top||
#23
Three words, piece them together however you like:
Sadr
Iran
Stooge
A top Russian official acknowledged on Thursday what many citizens already suspected - that terrorism was the most likely cause of two jetliners crashing minutes apart, a feeling reflected in a newspaper headline warning that ``Russia now has a Sept. 11.'' Just a day after officials stressed there were many possibilities besides terrorism, presidential envoy Vladimir Yakovlev told Russia's ITAR-Tass news agency that the main theory ``all the same remains terrorism.'' He said the planes' flight recorders had not provided any clues to the disaster.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
08/27/2004 12:23:58 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
...The old Soviet-era surprise meter doesn't seem to be working here...*tapski*tapski*...
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
08/27/2004 0:33 Comments ||
Top||
#2
a possible link between the crashes and an explosion a few hours earlier at a bus stop on a road leading to Domodedovo airport, where the two doomed planes took off
Gee, ya think there's a link?? Or do bus stops spontaneously explode in the vicinity of airports in that part of the world?
Posted by: Rafael ||
08/27/2004 0:34 Comments ||
Top||
#5
The Russians will cover the investigation up to 'blind' the US to it's ineptitude and defense preparation levels. My guess would be that two 'shoe bombers' got through; revealing the limitations of they're scanning equiptment!
#6
I'll take malfunctioning air defense missle batteries for 2 Boris.
The give away is the "trouble" beacon sent out by both aircraft. This has sky jack writ on it. The destruction of the aircraft is AQ doing it's thing or the Rus taking them down before they could be turned into weapons as a saftey precaution. If it's the latter don't count on hearing about it. The explosives residue found on the wreckage is a pretty good indication of one or the other.
It can no longer be said that AQ and the Chechens are not hand in hand, this is an AQ MO.
#9
Ship-
Sure enough, that's what it says on the plate. Man, you'd think you could trust Socialist technology...
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
08/27/2004 9:20 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Sock Puppet: This has sky jack writ on it. The destruction of the aircraft is AQ doing it's thing or the Rus taking them down before they could be turned into weapons as a saftey precaution.
No way Russia's air defenses could have taken the aircraft down. These defenses were lousy (remember Mathias Rust) at the peak of Soviet power, and they can't have gotten better now, with the massive manpower, equipment and maintenance cuts the Russian military has gone through. The other reason that Russian missiles couldn't have done it is this - we'd know. Every aircraft that takes off and every missile that's launched is carefully tracked by US surveillance equipment. In that accidental Ukraine Black Sea shootdown of the Israeli charter plane, our guys were the first to come out with the conclusion that it was shot down by a SAM.
#12
C'mon Mike, that Soviet surprise meter is bigger than a breadbasket, and twice as heavy. How'd you pick it up to look at the plate underneath?
Nice thing about the Soviet model, though, is with all those vacuum tubes, it keeps you warm on a Siberian winter night.
Posted by: Steve White ||
08/27/2004 11:31 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Black boxes killed immediately, no comms other than the IFF squawk. Someone has a new MO for taking control of planes. Whether their plans included deliberately crashing them into targets, or just destroying them, we don't know--yet. Whether that MO is transferrable to other airlines, aircraft and security regimes is yet to be seen. Whether the testers are happy with the results is yet to be seen. But in any case, it appears again that the cockpits were stormed and the black boxes turned off because they don't want us to know how they did it. Stand by for further testing.
#14
Hmmmmm LL I think this was an operational failure not a test... I'd like to know how much fuel was on board and the range of the aircraft, was Athens within range? I've no clue.
#15
LGF has a post (Pravda - salt lick handy) that bombs in restrooms in tail sections brought em down
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/27/2004 18:15 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Shipman, concur, I think destruction was the goal, but was it of the planes only, or of the planes and other targets? An investigator I know noted that the wing box on the wreckage he saw was intact, which is unusual, but indicates the plane impacted in a flat spin with a loss of rudder control. Same scenario w/ the AA flight that plunged into the Bronx. Interesting, but I don't have any idea what it might mean, yet.
#17
These defenses were lousy (remember Mathias Rust) at the peak of Soviet power
Didn't Rust make his flight on "Border Guards Day" -- when the guards were likely more sloshed than usual? Or was that a cover story the Soviets made up to hide their incompetence?
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
08/27/2004 18:34 Comments ||
Top||
Boy scouts 'in trubbel'
Daily Nawa-e-Waqt condemned Pakistani scouts visiting Held Kashmir in a report. The report said that the scouts declared that Indian held Valley was jadoo nagri (utopian) and one scout in fact went as far as saying that Pakistan had no disputes with India. At Gulmarg the Pakistani scouts were found with their hands around the waists of Hindu women and they were also found dancing obscenely with them. They also sang songs with Indian women. The paper quoted Azad Kashmir leader Sardar Qayyum as saying that those who sent these scouts should be punished. He said no Pakistani could think of going to Held Kashmir and dancing with Hindu girls. A motion was registered against the boy scouts at the National Assembly.
Saint dishes out banknotes
According to Nawa-e-Waqt, a saint called Ashfaq Qalandar had stunned the city of Multan by distributing 100-rupee notes among all comers. The city was lining up in front of his house, a hired building where the saint lives with his nine children and a wife. He was asked by the police to stop the distribution but he refused. The police feared fraud but he said that he had been asked by his patron saint of Sehwan Sharif, Lal Shahbaz, to distribute money to the poor of Multan till they became rich and put the NGOs to shame. He said he reached out under his pillow and discovered 100 rupees every time a man or a woman approached him. At times he was seen giving out 10-rupee notes too. He would not say how the money got under his pillow. The people of Multan thought he was a saint come down to rid them of poverty. He had organised a Qalandar Force to keep discipline among the people standing in a mile-long queue outside his house.
Chinioti's triumph
Writing in daily Nawa-e-Waqt Maulana Mujibur Rehman Inqilabi stated that Maulana Manzur Chinioti was born in Chiniot in the Rajput tribe to one Haji Baksh in 1931 and grew up going to various seminaries, one Deobandi centre in Multan and then in Karachi as student of Maulana Yusuf Banuri. He was famous for challenging Qadianis to mubahila. One great mubahila took place in Nigeria where a Qadiani died under the spell of Chinioti's divine learning. After that one thousand Qadianis had converted to Islam.
Nowshehra to go pious
According to Nawa-e-Waqt the local government of Nowshehra in NWFP had decided to make the district pious. Special prayer committees were set up to ensure that namaz was observed five times a day. All business would stop five times a day to allow people to say namaz in congregation. Prayer committees would see that all Muslims said the namaz. In the beginning the inspection would be mild but later those not saying namaz would be publicly chastised.
Ghamidi on shahadat
Speaking to daily Pakistan, Islamic scholar Javed Ghamidi said that suicide bombing was not shahadat (martyrdom) because the man took his own life by planning and then ended up killing innocent people. He said shahadat was the dream of all Muslims but it could not be planned. It was more important for a Muslim to stay alive and work for the sake of Islam. He said only Allah would decide on the Day of Judgement whether Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and General Ziaul Haq were shaheed. He stated that people killed in the war in Kashmir and in Palestine were not shaheed either because Kashmir and Palestine were political issues and had to be resolved through a political campaign. He held that Islam did not allow violent action unless it was for self-defence. Islam did not allow war if it was totally unequal against the Muslims.
Posted by: Paul Moloney ||
08/27/2004 12:04:07 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
....So how come this Saint guy doesn't show up in MY neighborhood?
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
08/27/2004 0:32 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Ghamidi on shahadat, All very well but what about fridays, as "Islam does not allow war if it was totally unequal against the Muslims."
Posted by: Steve White ||
08/27/2004 1:15 Comments ||
Top||
#4
He was famous for challenging Qadianis to mubahila. One great mubahila took place in Nigeria where a Qadiani died under the spell of Chiniotiâs divine learning. After that one thousand Qadianis had converted to Islam.
So how many Muslims will abandon Islam if an imam dies during one of these "conflicts"
#6
At Gulmarg the Pakistani scouts were found with their hands around the waists of Hindu women and they were also found dancing obscenely with them. They also sang songs with Indian women.
That was SOP with Yukon women. Couldn't tell who or what they were in the winter except for the voice, account of all the winter accoutriments. Then someone put wood in the hall barrel stove and the joint warmed up. After a while, everyone removed their coats and only then would you find out who you had for the evening.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
08/27/2004 21:08 Comments ||
Top||
#7
well, AP, hopefully it was a woman!
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/27/2004 21:10 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Frank---That is where the voice came in. LOL! 90% chance of being correct, God help the rest, not that there was anything wrong with it! (with apologies to Seinfeldt)
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
08/27/2004 21:18 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Always! Always! Look for the Adam's Apple - that's been a motto of mine ever since that ugly night.....damn
Posted by: Frank G ||
08/27/2004 21:20 Comments ||
Top||
#10
10 Paki Rupees? that is 17 cents! A RICH saint. Mebbe he is that guy from 'Fiddler on the Roof"?
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.
