The number of Turks, mostly truckers, who were blatantly murdered by so-called "resistance fighters" in Iraq, mostly in the Sunni triangle or in and around Baghdad, has reached 64.
Just a six and a four put together for some perhaps, but these were our beloved ones who risked and lost their lives not to provide a luxurious life or wellbeing for their families but just to keep them alive and lead a decent life.
How, in a country with such rampant unemployment, can Turkish truckers turn down orders from their bosses and refuse travelling to Iraq? The Foreign Ministry keeps on issuing warning after warning for Turks not to travel to Iraq. Complying with these warnings is easily said than done for poor truckers.
According to reports from Iraq and statements from members of the families of slain truckers, most of them risked their lives for a second or third time pledging to their families and vowing on their most sacred honor not to undergo the same ordeal again. Still, how could a father opt to return home at the end of the day empty handed even though he would risk his life there for an employment opportunity that would enable him buy some food to help his family survive?
In a country where one man's life has become riches for terrorists -- because of the bounty -- insisting on adequate security measures be taken for our truckers must be a legitimate demand of the Turkish government.
If we are to put the record straight once again, the responsibility for the security of Turkish truckers travelling to Iraq lies primarily with the government in Baghdad, even if it is an interim one, as well as the American-led occupation forces and the government in Ankara. Turkey cannot brush aside the Iraqi market -- and the market beyond -- nor can Iraq's trade with Turkey be interrupted.
Establishing "guarded" convoys has proved to be an efficient security measure. But, if it is taken into consideration that almost all fatal attacks on Turkish truckers have taken place on their return to Turkey, one could understand that Turkish truck convoys were well-protected until they have unloaded the goods they carry but left to their own destiny from then on. The Ankara government must tell our American allies, as well as the interim government in Baghdad that the lives of our truckers are more valuable than the goods they carry.
MICHAEL SCHEUER, head of the CIA's bin Laden unit and until recently a senior analyst, said something remarkable last week on Hardball with Chris Matthews. Scheuer told Matthews that he "happened to do the research on links between al Qaeda and Iraq," and Matthews asked him, "and what did you come up with?"
"Nothing."
It was a strange and troubling response. As Thomas Joscelyn points out, Scheuer argued in his 2002 book, Through Our Enemies Eyes, that Iraq and al Qaeda worked together regularly. His claims were unequivocal. A few examples:
[Bin Laden] "made a connection with Iraq's intelligence service through its Khartoum station." (p. 119).
In Sudan, Bin Laden decided to acquire and, when possible, use chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) weapons against Islam's enemies. Bin Laden's first moves in this direction were made in cooperation with NIF [Sudan's National Islamic Front], Iraq's intelligence service and Iraqi CBRN scientists and technicians. He made contact with Baghdad with its intelligence officers in Sudan and by a [Hassan] Turabi-brokered June-1994 visit by Iraq's then-intelligence chief Faruq al-Hijazi; according to Milan's Corriere della Sera, Saddam, in 1994, made Hijazi responsible for "nurturing Iraq's ties to [Islamic] fundamentalist warriors. Turabi had plans to formulate a "common strategy" with bin Laden and Iraq for subverting pro-U.S. Arab regimes, but the meeting was a get-acquainted session where Hijazi and bin Laden developed a good rapport that would "flourish" in the late 1990s. (p. 124)
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
11/22/2004 1:31:10 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Try Scheuer for treason. Find out who else within the CIA is aligned with him.
There is something very serious going on around that man. Scheuer failed to get Bin Laden, he now praises him, and he accuses Israel of being the root of all problems in the Middle East.
#2
I'd never heard of Mike Scheuer before this current bruhaha, and I worked counterterrorism in Washington in 1980 and in Germany in 1987-89. The photo intel was excellent, and we had good information on who was running what, where, especially in Libya, Lebanon, and Jordan. Syria was harder, but there was less direct terrorist information available. Egypt was in the mess, but tangentally. There was little in the way of physical training camps in Algeria, and what there was mostly consisted of the group trying to protest the Moroccan absorbtion of parts of the former Spanish Sahara. Terrorist training, including terrorist training camps, took off with a fluorish in Iran in the early 1980's, and in Iraq beginning about 1984 (Salman Pak). We considered any terrorist activity in Afghanistan to be the work of anti-Soviet forces, and ignored it. Pakistan was so muddled, it was hard to discern terrorist training from anything else in that mixed-up nation.
The bottom line is, we had excellent intelligence of terrorist training facilities and activity through 1989. The folks I talk to who still work the area say we're still keeping track of the same areas, and that some things have changed, others haven't. The information is mostly going into a black hole, and never getting past the senior "leadership". Goss needs to move harder, faster, to undo the mess that has grown during the last ten or twelve years. Scheuer is just one of hundreds that need to be canned, slapped with that same "70 year non-disclosure" statement I had to sign, and punished for his arrogance and outright lies and distortion of American intelligence operations.
This isn't the first time the CIA has been in the middle of an intelligence battle. There were several times during the US involvement in Vietnam where other intelligence agencies wouldn't share information with the local CIA chief, because there were too many leaks in his office. I was there during one of those incidents.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
11/22/2004 14:06 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Can't be reformed, only replaced. Raze it now. Start over.
#4
This guy is so strange. Is CIA full of these types?
What I remember from the interview while listening to car radio: "We've built up OBL into a mythical figure; everybody in Islam loves him. Our fault" Then, "we should have vaporized him while he was meeting with the Emirati sheiks. Kill 'em all. They're all guilty. Hell with collateral damage and whatever propoganda coup that would be for AQ."
Truly bizarre. An old guy tolk me many years ago that 30% of the CIA was full of Mormons. Linguists, anit-commies, don't drink, don't smoke, totally reliable. I guess I know what the other 70% consisted of.
Posted by: chicago mike ||
11/22/2004 14:29 Comments ||
Top||
ON NOVEMBER 14, 60 Minutes aired a segment with Michael Scheuer, who made headlines after resigning from the CIA to pursue his second career as a critic of the war on terror and the war in Iraq. Scheuer was the head of the CIA's bin Laden unit (codenamed "Alec") from 1996 to 1999. With the publication this past summer of his "anonymous" book Imperial Hubris, he became a media star, giving countless interviews as "one of the CIA's foremost authorities on Osama bin Laden." Out of government, he appears poised to become a regular pundit. His appearance on 60 Minutes was followed two days later by appearances on Chris Matthews's Hardball on MSNBC and Aaron Brown's NewsNight on CNN.
During his appearance on 60 Minutes (and his follow-up interviews), Scheuer warned that al Qaeda's detonating a weapon of mass destruction on American soil was "pretty close to being inevitable." When asked what type of weapon al Qaeda could detonate, Scheuer responded that it would be "a nuclear weapon of some dimension, whether it's actually a nuclear weapon, or a dirty bomb, or some kind of radiological device . . . it's probably a near thing."
Such dire predictions call to mind warnings that both Presidents Clinton and Bush have made about the dangers of WMD in the hands of terrorists. Scheuer says also that within the first year of the "Alec" unit's existence, he learned that bin Laden and al Qaeda "were involved in an extraordinarily sophisticated and professional effort to acquire weapons of mass destruction. In this case, nuclear material, so by the end of 1996, it was clear that this was an organization unlike any other one we had ever seen."
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
11/22/2004 1:28:28 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
In fact Scheuer was fired as the anti-Bin Laden team leader in 1999, that is to say by Clinton. Probably it was because of Scheuer mental unfitness and ego.
#3
Sounds to me like he's completely over his head and out of his league. He shot his mouth off, got canned, and is sinking ever deeper in the bullshit that he's been spreading.
Posted by: Tibor ||
11/22/2004 14:50 Comments ||
Top||
#4
How many others are there like him at the Company?
#5
Any one who says "sir" and the end of every freakin' phrase he mutters is a pint short in my estimation. Moreover, this guy contradicted himself so many times yesterday on Russert, no wonder we had 9/11.
Posted by: Capt America ||
11/22/2004 17:05 Comments ||
Top||
LAST week, I had an in spiring conversation with a Muslim-Ameri can. An immigrant from Pakistan, he hadn't yet been granted citizenship, but he had more faith in America than our native-born elite does. "I write to my brothers and sisters," he said, "And I tell them that they do not know true Islam. If you want to see true Islam, you must come to America."
He meant the social justice and the respect for the individual, rich or poor, prescribed by the Koran. He had not found those qualities in the land of his birth. Nor do they prevail in any Muslim state between Casablanca and Karachi. Islam sets high standards for the daily behavior of its adherents — but all too often the Koran's calls for fairness, charity and common decency are rejected in favor of social strictures misinterpreted by bitter old men and fanatics. The oppression of women, terrorism and the police states of the Middle East were not part of the Prophet Mohammed's vision.
My Muslim friend had recently found yet another reason to believe in America — in a place the rest of us would overlook. Coming from a land where the rich can even murder with impunity, he was thrilled that Olympic swimmer Michael Phelps had to face drunken-driving charges. "Seven gold medals!" my friend said. "He is a hero, sir! And still he must face the court! It is not hidden away because he is powerful. This is very good, this is Islam."
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: tipper ||
11/22/2004 9:55:29 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Yeah. Sure. Let's see how he feels after a few of our ladies tell him to "drop dead" or "get lost". Let's see how fast he starts calling for sharia when the women fail to recognize their place as property.
#2
Ralphie, baby, you're painting with the same broad brush that you finger-wag others not to use. Unless you know this man's soul and are fast friends, you've just been had. I'm glad you have a new pal. Great. BUT... My first-hand experience tells me your first-hand experience is simplistic and insufficient and shallow - and you have no more valid grounds for such a sweeping conclusion than a single occurrence of the opposite experience. I won't bank my life on your giddy and childish assessment, regardless of how it's couched in verbiage, thanks. HAND.
I think Peter's assessment is even worse than you are grading it.
Words on a page are fine, but to assess without regard for the cultural framework is madness. I haven't read the entire Koran, but I'm told that no where in its pages does it say that women are property. Nevertheless, where in the Muslim world are women treated with anything resembling respect? I don't mean equality because we in the West don't have such a sterling record on that either, but there weren't any Elizabethan burqas.
I'd also like to ask Peters' friend if he is willing to discuss whether the Koran is really the direct word of God and whether Mohammed was his prophet. That one issue alone demonstrates the intellectual stultification of the Muslim world in a nutshell. Most places in the Arab world, discussing that topic is an invitation to a gunfight, and since most of the governance in the Muslim world is based on Islamic law (even if it isn't actually sharia), if you can't even discuss the underpinnings of your society, how can you ever reform?
As far as I'm concerned, Islam has brought the world nothing but sorrow and poverty. Kind of like communism.
#5
Dreadnought - Utterly agreed. I have given Peters more credence than I now believe he deserves - he dropped this little bomb with nothing to justify it.
I note that Peters glosses over the man's automatic reference to how things relate to Islam. He's a Muslim first and foremost and his own words make this crystal clear. The man doesn't expound on freedom and the virtues of it, merely how it would allow this or that flavor of Islam to be followed, or so he thinks. He is merely superficially Western - a trap that snares us all occasionally and the majority constantly. The lesson I brought back from LalaLand is that they are not us and never will be. Period. Lifelong indoctrination runs deeper than we imagine.
Hell, lol, one stern glance from a real bloody jihadi and this guy would fold like the good little Muslim he is - and cooperate. And Ralphie would be toast if that's what the jihadi demanded.
When I hear of the Mythical Moderate I see an untapped jihadi resource. Money, sanctuary, cannon fodder - whatever the real Caliphatist demands. Moderate and amenable and civil - until called upon. No one has ever pointed out where I can find the "Fighting Moderates Brigades"... Methinks they are missing in inaction because they don't exist. When I see Muslims of both schools, Shi'a and Sunni, build an army to fight the Caliphatists - no matter what flavor, I'll be more than pleased to retract every word and apologize. The closest thing you and I may ever see is when nationalism, such as the Iraqi Commandos who are actually fighting alongside our Marines and Army, trumps terrorism. I'll wager there is a strong element of Kurd / Shi'a vs. Sunni in their cooperation, heh.
The moderate Muslim. Same critter as the Russian that loves his children. In the end, so what? They profess a collectivist mentality that cannot tolerate our individualistic outlook on life, but nonetheless enjoys the fruit of our creativity.
I guess the lesson of the irony that only in the US can they lead a truly "Muslim" life must be too overwhelming for them to bear.
#8
Have any of you folks known an immigrant from Pakistan or India? I worked for one once and he was as American as anyone I ever met. They all aren't but most are. That's why they come here. That's Peters' point and also the reason we haven't had the Dutch violence.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
11/22/2004 13:42 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Compare Peter's Lemming rant to the gal who bolted islam with her Grandfather. One is profound and sobering the other just sweet crap.
I'm not going to say that once muslaminted you can't be a great human being, we all can be. But look at the confused nature of many of the converts and also those that preach jihad.
#10
If this guy's genuine then great. When he's actively supporting his children to join the U.S. military and put their "collective asses" on the line for their adopted country then I will be sold. I had many latino & asian lads down at Parris Island who did just that. Real good recruits to.
Indeed I do. They run the gamut. Some are extremely happy to be able to have a beer without someone breathing down their neck. Others grumble about how immoral this place is. The more deeply held the religious belief, the less they like it. One even complained to me that they were disgusted that churches were everywhere. Still, none of them are planning on leaving.
I actually think the main reason that we are not facing what the Dutch and French are is that it is extremely difficult and expensive for a poor Muslim immigrant to get here, as opposed to slipping into Europe. The Muslims we get tend to be educated and professional.
Nonetheless, Dot's original point still stands: the gentleman interviewed appears to see the U.S. through the prism of Islam, instead of seeing Islam through the prism of the 1st Amendment.
#12
The moderate Muslim. Same critter as the Russian that loves his children. In the end, so what? They profess a collectivist mentality that cannot tolerate our individualistic outlook on life, but nonetheless enjoys the fruit of our creativity.
You're right concerning Russia, which was a prison state that forced obedience from its subjects. I married a Russian but have never felt the slightest hesitation in supporting our efforts to tear down the state in which she grew up, including arming jihadists so they could kill her countrymen in Afghanistan.
But the war with jihad today is different from the Cold War, and religion really is not the issue here. We're fighting a movement, not a state, and this movement, while aided by islamic institutions in many ways, must be viewed in political not religious terms.
Decent muslims are no less victims of this movement than we are. In fact the number of muslims slaughtered by the jihadist fascists is far greater than the number of non-muslims slaughtered by them.
What we need to do IMO is to stop muddying the waters with all the talk-- whether from right or left-- about Islam, Islamist doctrine, the Koran etc and focus on the essence of this movement, which is the same kind of death cult/nihilist-warrior cult that sustained european and japanese fascism. This is not to make moderate muslims feel better, or to indulge in PC rhetoric about the "ROP", but to see the problem very clearly and recommend an appropriate solution.
Which is to utterly destroy this new fascism the only way one can: by crushing it ruthlessly, with overwhelming violence wherever possible overseas and with every legal weapon possible domestically. Any muslim who shares our comitment to democracy and freedom will of course support this effort. Those who do not will have shown that they are on the side of the fascists and will receive scrutiny and close surveillance just as any neo-nazi would.
#14
I propose that the PC idiotarian MSM cease referring to them as muslim "extremists" or "militants", and that we likewise cease referring to their muslim "faith." It's fascism, period. This is purely and simply a fascist death cult that has utterly no interest in any political or economic program. It exists solely to slaughter people, and like the SS, the blackshirts, Japan's kamikazes and the Spanish Loyalist fascists who yelped "Viva El Muerte!" during the 1930s, it puts a high premium on self-slaughter as well.
Or if you like, call it jihadi-fascism. Regardless, the point is that the core of this death cult has f-all to do with the Koran or the islamist beliefs of a billion people on this planet. And destroying it is not a matter of winning hearts and minds-- though treating it and describing it as fascist will certainly help in this regard-- but of crushing it militarily wherever it arises around the world.
#15
Why have there not been jihadist atrocities all over Dearborn, jarhead? Why are Turkish muslims in Germany demonstrating now to show their repulsion at Van Gogh's murder?
#16
Let me be clear: I don't have any skin in this game. I don't care for any religion. I simply want us to win this war. It's about seeing the threat clearly and recommending the appropriate solution: absolutely no compromise with the fascists or their sympathizers, anywhere, and a helping hand extended to those muslims who reject fascism.
#17
I don't know about Turk muslims in Germany, you can site any isolated instance you like but it doesn't represent the whole. As for Dearborn, the underlying tension is still there, always has been. I know, I lived 10 min's from the place. Tacit approval after 9/11 was there, I saw it while on f*cking leave x-mas 2001. There were even some picked up in connection w/ 9-11 and muslim charities involved w/terrorism.
Most are content w/owning most of the gas stations/party stores/ & 7/11s in the area and making good on immigrant tax breaks. I don't have a problem w/the pursuit of capital or hapiness by any immigrant, but let's be honest - they have a cash cow so are not going to piss in their own cereal. You said no compromise with facists or their sympathizers - is tacit approval the same as openly supporting facism? You tell me. Are all of them jihadists, obviuosly not, but the basic premise is the same. They are Americanized enough to love the attainment of wealth but don't have much use for our open society. In fact most of the ones I know despise our culture. My hope is that their children and grand children become more enamored w/American culture then they do w/their past culture. I don't see them embracing integration as the past Irish, Germans, Poles, Scots etc did.
Scamming U.S. institutions is also highly encouraged. They bring over older family members who've never paid a cent into the soc sec system and start drawing it here. They also have no compunction on taking life insurance out on each other and the family member in question dies mysteriously in the M.E., a forged death certificate is filed and they draw the benefit. Then said member returns w/slightly different name. Never underestimate the incompetence of our gov't but it doesn't make it right. Most of them don't refer to themselves as American, they are Iraqi, muslim, Saudi, Pak, whatever you want. Saw this crap everyday in Detroit. I remember in H.S. how the word "American" was uttered w/contempt from them. They dislike Blacks even more, even though Blacks are their biggest customers. So no Lex, no one's blowing up busses in Dearborn, one because we have shitty city transpo and two because they know most Detroiters are gun owners and would not put up w/the shit & the threat of retribution would take place immediately. They understand & respect those who are willing to use force very well. Same can't be said for morally superior Europe.
A vicar in the Anglican Church once told me that he considered communism and nazism to be atheistic religions. The state itself is the church, the leader its god, and the citizens had to have faith in its policies. To me, Islam is a theistic political system. The church itself is the state and God is the leader.
I'm not fighting against Al-Qaeda because I don't want to go on hajj or don't feel like praying 5 times a day. If that's what someone wants to do, go for it. This is not a theological fight, as you correctly note. However, the problem with Islam is that just like Communism, its demands on the state's apparatus clash inherently with our notions of separation of powers. What would a moderate communist or nazi have looked like? As Hayek pointed out in the Road to Serfdom, these utopian schemes require utter ruthlessness to enforce otherwise folks opt out. People want to own private property. Shoot enough and they'll get the message: no private property. People want to drink. Behead enough and they'll get the message: no drinking.
Your comments straddle both sides of the argument. Aggressively confront the bad guys; encourage the good. If only it were that simple. No doubt there are Muslims in the ME who are just sick and tired of the mullahs, just like there were Germans who hated the Nazis and Russians who have liked nothing better than to put a bullet in Stalin's skull. None of them is motivated enough to do something about it without our considerable help. The Muslim world has had about 1300 years to get its act together and has failed miserably. Actually, failed is the wrong word because I'm not sure one can even say that there has been an attempt at reform. There is no equivalent of John Locke in Muslim literature. Are they simply incapable of self-criticism? The Muslims I do know are utterly convinced of their moral superiority.
So, I'll decline your suggestion to refer to them as fascists. All these thugs use the same tactics, but I prefer to understand and state what motivates them. And what motivates our jihadi friends is control of your life and the blueprint to get you into heaven is found in the Koran.
#19
Good points, dn and jh - wasn't aware that the Dearborn arabs had so much contempt for America and Americans. My experience ahs been with chaldeans, who are of course not muslims, so perhaps you're right.
Still, from a purely strategic POV, I don't want to be in a war with Islam because I don't have confidence we can win that war. Too many of them, and too many little martyrs being born every day. That's why I'd rather have more narrow and precise aims than what your approach implies, which is essentially converting them. For example, our role as to Islam's backwardness should be to spark a civil war within Islam and then support the anti-fascists, or modernists if you like, to the max.
#20
lex: My experience ahs been with chaldeans, who are of course not muslims, so perhaps you're right.
And my experience is with Coptics, Maronites and Armenians from the Mid East. Completely different group of people from Muslims. This is why Bush has any Arab American support, because they are Arabs in name only, having been the original inhabitants of the Middle East before onset of Arab imperialism.
#21
It has also occurred to me that some of the Christian Mid Eastern minorities might have stopped identifying themselves as Arabs. Do Kurds call themselves Arabs?
#22
Lex, I know many Chaldeans as well. Their hatred for the muslims was deep as I recall. Many Chaldeans owned mom & pop groceries, super markets, etc. The muslims predominantly had the gas station racket.
Divide and conquer vis a vis civil war within Islam is definitely one tactic to pursue, I agree. We must promote capitalism, free markets, and open society at all costs. I believe as they attain more wealth and capital and higher standards of living, that can only help us. If they know that they could lose that property & wealth by supporting and betting on a losing situation such as armed jihad then we would only be benefited. The problem is - how do we (if it is us) open up economic prosperity in *their* countries?
Another critical vulnerability is the muslim female. The quicker we can push higher standards of living and education of them the better imho. I've never lived in the M.E. so I'm not sure the feasibility of which I'm suggesting, they are only ideas I've come across from other authors.
#23
teaching independence and ambition (and self-defense arts) to muslim females would do three things:
1) Undermine the Islamic male's superiority facade
2) Raise the standards of living and education
3) upset the whole Islamic applecart...
I like it
Posted by: Frank G ||
11/22/2004 20:46 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
