Teenage criminal gangs in south London are calling themselves the Muslim Boys and claiming to espouse Islam in an attempt to gain street credibility and trade on false perceptions about links to terrorists.
The gangs, who specialise in robbing local drug dealers, are alleged to have forced some members to convert at gunpoint and to pray before going out to commit crimes. Community leaders are worried about escalating violence and the number of young with access to high-calibre guns.
But Metropolitan police chiefs and Muslim leaders say the youths have no genuine Islamic affiliations, nor any associations with al-Qaida linked groups.
Police chiefs say most belong to existing gangs inspired by black American ghetto culture and are using the Muslim tag because they think it is a new way to strike fear in the community. They also believe it will get them better treatment and nicer food in prison.
Many gang members have access to automatic and semi-automatic weapons and Detective Chief Superintendent John Coles, who heads Operation Trident, the Scotland Yard unit that targets gun crime in the black community, thinks they are responsible for several murders, attempted murders, and a series of robberies in the past few months.
Hook-handed Abu Hamza has been viciously attacked by a fellow jail inmate, it emerged last night. The fanatical Muslim cleric, 47, was thumped inside London's top-security Belmarsh prison, a jail source said.
DID you whack Hook? If so call The Sun on 020 7782 4105. And by the way, WELL DONE!
Posted by: Bulldog ||
03/07/2005 9:09:27 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Was it a black eye?
I also heard that Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman was viciously attacked by a fellow jail inmate as well.
#2
part of my rehabilitation program for inmates should be the whacking of selected "problem" inmates.
Posted by: Frank G ||
03/07/2005 9:25 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Maybe The Sun can start a contest. Call it the "Patriotic Prisoner Who Deserves A Second Chance" contest. In which The Sun runs a profile of a prisoner who coincidentally has beaten the pluperfect snot out of a terrorist type, and offers to forward letters of support, encouragement and best wishes from the public. SOLELY in the hope that it may inspire the prisoner to not give up hope in his rehabilitation and eventual return to society.
Is the Chicago Tribune toeing the Kim Jong-Il line in its reporting on North Korea?
.
OPINION - Subscribers to the Los Angeles Times, and their parent company the Chicago Tribune, should reconsider their subscriptions. The Tribune Company's willingness to actively promote the party line of Kim Jong Il on its front pages speaks loudly to the lack of trust that can be placed in their credibility as news-reporting outlets.
Hugh Hewitt has been deservedly ballistic about this recently.
Such a betrayal should be cause for a horrific blog-swarm and truly objective broadcast outlets should be equally attentive. The question of whether or not they will be is entirely a different matter.
Why am I so vexed?
The Tribune Company felt it was necessary to print a story on Thursday under the guise of "news coverage" by Barbara Demick, a staff reporter. In this front page news feature, Demick reportedly interviews "Mr. Anonymous" whom Demick claims to be North Korean, with close ties to the North Korean government. The headline read, "North Korea without the Rancor."
Barabra Dimwit. Consider the source.
What unfolded in sentence on top of paragraph was a disgusting display of propaganda that would make even Eason "Baghdad" Jordan proud.
Mr McCullough understands what goes for "news" in Pravda West, and Pravda Heartland. i.e., LA Times, and Chicago Tribune
Demick spins the innocent meetings she had with the source1 as an honest conversation and she represents what the source says as patently true - no fact checking, no aggressive follow-up questions!
Mr. Anonymous, spins a tale of "all is well" and "life is normal" as though there is no moral or qualitative difference in the lives of Americans and North Koreans.
Or as the replacement announcer said after the massacre at Tienanmin Square; "Nobody die, everybody happy!"
There's never been a positive article about North Korea, not one," he said. "We're portrayed as monsters, inhuman, Dracula ... with horns on our heads."
And?
She allows him to tee-off unchallenged with charges against America.
Because he speaks for her too.
For basic life, we can live without America, but we can live better with it," he said. "Now that we are members of the nuclear club, we can start talking on an equal footing. In the past, the U.S. tried to whip us, as though they were saying, "Little boy, don't play with dangerous things."
Anonymous? Deep Throat he ain't!
She sat there 2as Mr. Anonymous championed the idea that it was America's fault for the breakdown of talks between the two nations.
Ms. Dimwit remembers this?
I don't think so.
"We were hoping for change from the U.S. administration. We expected some clear-cut positive change," the North Korean said. "Instead, Condoleezza Rice immediately committed the mistake of calling us an outpost of tyranny. North Koreans are most sensitive when they hear that kind of remark."
Aww, poor baby did the mean "Sheriff W" and "Deputy Rice" hurt your prescious wittle feelings? Awwww.
And, of course, when Mr. Anonymous got around to discussing human rights, America was doubly to blame. First, he claimed an equivalency in human rights between North Korea and the United States. Then, he followed up with blaming President Bush for North Korea's problems in lacking basic necessities to live:
"Is there any country where there is a 100 percent guarantee of human rights? Certainly not the United States," the businessman said. "There is a question of what is a political prisoner. Maybe these people are not political prisoners but social agitators ... Electricity is a real problem. We have only six hours a day," said the North Korean, who lives in an apartment in a choice neighborhood of Pyongyang, the capital. "When you are watching a movie on TV, there might be a nice love scene and then suddenly the power is out. People blame the Americans. They blame Bush."
With a little help from pee-wee.
"Say US bad or be political prisioner!"
She even tried to ruefully play off the presence of what had to be a North Korean government monitor. A colleague, a 55-year-old man also visiting from North Korea, nodded.3
Demick even allowed him to have the last word in the story.
"There is love. There is hate. There is fighting. There is charity ... People marry. They divorce. They make children," he said. "People are just trying to live a normal life."
Children play in fields of green while parents dance in the meadow. There is a heavenly chorus even though we are an athiest state.
The insanity of allowing such blather to spew forth on the front pages of the Tribune Company's most visible pages is sickening. Demick is no more a journalist trying to find and report news than Donald Duck is a serious candidate for president in 2008.
"What's he talking about. I was born in Hollywood, CA, and am over 35. I Beat Hillary in Iowa and New Hampshire, and I have the Democratic nomination wrapped up!"
Demick might have done herself well to interview one or two people who were actually from North Korea, but did not have the "close ties with the North Korean government" - nor the friendly, nodding, government monitors tagging along.
But she learned about fair Reporting from reading all those books by Peter Arnett. What more can you ask?
Regardless, seeing Kim Jon Il's propaganda is something one might become accustomed to in North Korean papers where journalists die if they dispute the government line. But I am not prepared to - nor will I - suffer another laughable paragraph from the Tribune Company in trying to convert themselves into the world's most maniacal leader's dogma pages.
But we have a great sports section. Please don't cancel...
#2
A Fisking with images inserted--impressive. I believe that's a Rantburg first. Of course if you get .com started on that Fred's gonna need to put up an adults only warning.
Posted by: Matt ||
03/07/2005 18:34 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Powerline has been all over this. Not sure I buy her line that says she was letting her interviewees have enough rope to hang themselves, but she has clearly been coorectly harsh on Kim Jong make me Ill in previous stories.
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - The top U.S. negotiator for the North Korea nuclear dispute will visit Washington and Tokyo this week to seek ways to lure Pyongyang back to the negotiating table, the U.S. Embassy said Monday.
Leave a trail of Reese's pieces?
Christopher Hill will meet Kenichiro Sasae, director-general of the Japanese Foreign Ministry's Asia-Oceania bureau on Thursday, the embassy said. In Washington, Hill is expected to hold consultations on the six-party talks and give a speech at the Brookings Institution and return to South Korea. The White House said Friday it was nominating Hill as head of the State Department's East Asia and Pacific bureau. The appointment must be approved by the Senate.
Posted by: Steve White ||
03/07/2005 12:13:45 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Just a per diem trip. Total waste of money and time. Unless there are other things on the table to talk about.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
03/07/2005 10:04 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Leave a trail of Reese's pieces?
Short
Bug-Eyed
Speaks in an Infantile way
Obviously Seperated at birth!
MADRID, Spain - Terrorism experts and heads of state and government will tackle some of the core questions in the war on terror during a four-day conference beginning Tuesday and timed to coincide with the anniversary of the deadly train bombings in Madrid. The gathering will consider whether countries are cooperating enough to fight terror, whether the flow of terrorists' money can be stopped, and the role of the media. After a series of panel discussions, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan will make a policy statement Thursday.
What, did the UN finally come up with a definition of terrorism? Didn't think so.
About two dozen presidents, prime ministers or kings are to join 200 experts from 50 countries who will present research on extremism and religious-based violence. The meeting ends Friday — a year to the day since the attacks in Madrid killed 191 people — with recommendations on how governments could work together to curtail the threat of terrorism.
Among those scheduled to attend are Afghan President Hamid Karzai and Algerian President Abdelaziz Bouteflika, as well as the head of Russia's National Security Council, Igor Ivanov, and U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Pakistan's President Gen. Pervez Musharraf and former President Bill Clinton may also attend, said a conference spokesman, Andrew Hazell.
That's a lot of high value targets, well, most of them..
The conference brings together countries that have suffered major attacks, such as Spain and the United States, and others where political violence is part of daily life. In Algeria, an Islamic insurgency has raged since 1992.
Spanish participants said last week that governments must address the causes of terrorism to defeat it, rather than lashing out as the United States did in Afghanistan after the Sept. 11 attacks on New York and Washington.
If we had just "lashed out", as you call it, Riyadh would still be glowing..
The United States attacked Afghanistan in late 2001 because the Taliban regime was sheltering Osama bin Laden, whose al-Qaida network carried out the Sept. 11 attacks.
"The consensus ... is a 'soft' power approach based on prevention — not like the United States has in mind, but (rather) with engagement with North African Muslim nations, economic development, assimilating and integrating immigrants into host nations," said Charles Powell, a history professor at San Pablo-CEU University in Madrid.
Discussions Tuesday and Wednesday will focus on political, economic, religious and cultural explanations of terrorism, and appropriate police, intelligence and military responses. The Arab-Israeli conflict will be a key topic, along with democracy-building in parts of the world with authoritarian regimes.
"I believe (the conference) is going to support the European style and not put force first; rather, only as the last resort," said Andres Ortega, director of the Spanish edition of Foreign Policy magazine. Haizam Amirah Fernandez, an analyst at the Real Instituto Elcano think tank, said that is because Europe is geographically close to the Middle East, has historical ties and significant immigration from Muslim countries, and — unlike the United States — has relatively little military power. "Europe is looking for more stability while the United States is less fearful of change," even if that involves great risk, Fernandez said. "The value systems don't always coincide." About 33 former heads of government will attend.
Countries sending top-level representatives include Croatia, Lithuania, Serbia-Montenegro, Slovenia, Nigeria, Senegal and Mauritania.
A real group of global powerhouses
Key panelists include the former longtime director of Interpol, Ray Kendall, Nobel Peace Prize laureate Shirin Ebadi of Iran and Amnesty International Secretary-General Irene Khan. Financier George Soros; the head of the United Nations' anti-terrorism committee, Javier Ruperez; the co-founder of the medical relief group Doctors Without Borders, Bernard Kouchner, and dozens of police and intelligence experts, religious figures, academics and journalists also will take part.
Posted by: Steve ||
03/07/2005 2:41:00 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I bet it won't be as entertaining as the conference they had in Saudi Arabia.....
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
03/07/2005 15:35 Comments ||
Top||
#3
"The consensus ... is a 'soft' power approach based on prevention â not like the United States has in mind, but (rather) with engagement with North African Muslim nations, economic development, assimilating and integrating immigrants into host nations,"
In other words, let the muslims in and pay them to take over Andalusia. This time the conquest won't be as quick, but it will be more complete. Better a western European country fall sooner than later so as to act as a example and warning to the rest.
Posted by: ed ||
03/07/2005 15:40 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I hear one of the seminars will be: "Just Say Yes to Terrorism".
#10
--Terrorism experts and heads of state and government will tackle some of the core questions in the war on terror during a four-day conference beginning Tuesday and timed to coincide with the anniversary of the deadly train bombings in Madrid. --
Il Manifesto, the U.S., and the death of Calipari
ERNESTO GALLI DELLA LOGGIA
In an Italy under shock at the death of Nicola Calipari, emotions are prompting people to say and write many things that perhaps in a few days may look overstated, if not embarrassing. Of course, the writer is the first to understand, and up to a point even share, what lies behind those emotions. Take the anguish of Giuliana Sgrena, abducted by the very people she thought she was defending. For one month, she was a hostage to fear and the unknown, then only one step away from death, saved at the last by the sacrifice of one of the men who freed her. We are well aware that the anguish was not merely hers. It was shared by her many close companions. But when understandable emotion produces unequivocal, crudely polemical statements such as those we are currently reading in Il Manifesto newspaper, and which are echoed less assertively elsewhere, then it is permissible to put one or two - we think - not unreasonable questions.
We'll begin with the crucial one, which is this: is it true, as the self-styled "Communist Daily" headline puts it, that the death of Nicola Calipari was a "preemptive" and therefore premeditated, homicide? Is it true, as Rossana Rossanda writes, that the Americans were shooting "to kill," and that Calipari's death was "an assassination?" Can we really subscribe to the picture painted by Ms Rossanda of arrogant Yankee roughnecks, beardless and/or whisky-soused, complying with the "American maxim, 'shoot first, ask questions later?,' and obeying without objection the order 'when those Italians arrive, eliminate them'?" Must we really trust Giuliana Sgrena's feelings when she tells us that her abductors were very probably right when they told her, "the Americans don't want you to go back," adding her own comment that they - the Americans again - "don't want our work to show what Iraq has become with the war, despite the so-called elections." (As if the U.S. media publishes whatever the Pentagon says or, if that's how things stand, as if all American journalists were also in mortal danger; as for the Iraqi elections that shouldn't be called elections, what does Ms Sgrena think they should be called?).
To continue, what might be the "information" in Ms Sgrena's possession that, according to her life partner Pier Scolari, could justify an assassination by the Americans determined not to see it published? Finally, are we really to believe that the Italians' car was hit by "400 bullets, a storm of projectiles" (Mr Scolari)? Are we really to believe Giuliana Sgrena when she says that she personally picked "handfuls of bullets" off the seat, but that, in this premeditated rain of fire from an armored vehicle against an automobile with no armor plating, only one passenger actually died?
To us, at least, these look like reasonable questions. It seems to us equally reasonable to wonder in conclusion that if Washington had been determined that the Italian journalist should die, why - for her and our good fortune - did she survive? What caused the plot to abort? And why were two Italians actually left alive to bear witness to the attack? Let it be clear that it is quite possible that each of these questions has a satisfactory answer. But if that is the case, we hope that today, when heads are cooler, politicians and commentators from all parties will devote their attention to finding those answers. Because if we want to engage in a trial of strength with the U.S., we certainly can, but in the knowledge that it will not be won for us by emotions and strong words.
Posted by: Steve ||
03/07/2005 1:36:47 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Because if we want to engage in a trial of strength with the U.S., we certainly can, but in the knowledge that it will not be won for us by emotions and strong words.
Oh ABSOLUTELY. You are free to engage in a trial of strength with the U.S.. Your right entirely.
Whether you would WIN such a trial of strength with the U.S. is an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT MATTER.
#2
Ptah, I believe he's saying that her story smells like fine, ripe fish and the Italians should cool off and wait till the facts come out before hurling accusations.
Posted by: Steve ||
03/07/2005 15:21 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I was wondering what happened to Peter Scolari.
#4
If you are going to lie, don't exaggerate at the same time. It really hurts your credibility.
Otherwise if there is some truth to the 'handfuls of bullets inside the car' they couldn't possibly be spend rounds fired from outside. They must be shell casings from someone firing from inside the vehicle.
#5
Just once I would like to see one of these dimwits say "We Fcked Up!". Instead they have to invent a conspiricy for everything. In that the satire here approaches but doesn't touch the real issues.
But, officer, the light wasn't red when I looked. A space alien swiched it just after I looked. Its a conspiricy I tell you!
EFL
ROME -- Italian agents likely withheld information from U.S. counterparts about a cash-for-freedom deal with gunmen holding an Italian hostage for fear that Americans might block the trade, Italian news reports said yesterday.
The decision by operatives of Italy's SISMI military intelligence service to keep the CIA in the dark about the deal for the release of reporter Giuliana Sgrena, might have "short-circuited" communications with U.S. forces controlling the road from Baghdad to the city's airport, the newspaper La Stampa said. That would help explain why American troops opened fire on a car whisking the released hostage to a waiting airplane, wounding Miss Sgrena and killing the Italian intelligence operative who had just negotiated her release.
Thousands of Italians yesterday congregated on the Altar to the Fatherland in Rome's vast Piazza Venezia to view the coffin of Nicola Calipari, the 52-year-old head of SISMI's international operations department.
Miss Sgrena, a reporter for the Communist daily Il Manifesto, charged yesterday that U.S. forces might have deliberately targeted her because Washington opposes Italyââ¬s policy of dealing with kidnappers.  "The United States doesn't approve of this [ransom] policy and so they try to stop it in any way possible," the veteran war reporter, 57, told Sky Italia TV.
Lady, if we wanted you dead, you'd be dead.
Miss Sgrena, whose newspaper ardently opposes Italy's deployment of 3,000 troops in Iraq as part of the U.S.-led coalition, offered no direct evidence to support the charge and toned down the suggestion in a later interview with Reuters. "If this happened because of a lack of information or deliberately, I don't know, but even if it was due to a lack of information, it is unacceptable," she said from her hospital room.
"It's all their fault! It has to be!"
There were conflicting reports on the extent to which Italian authorities had informed their American counterparts about the operation, in which a reported $6 million was paid for the journalist's release. Mr. Calipari and another senior SISMI operative concluded the deal for her release on Friday in Abu Dhabi and then flew to Baghdad aboard a secret service Falcon executive jet to collect her, La Stampa said. At the airport, they met an Italian military liaison officer and U.S. military authorities issued them passes allowing them to travel around Baghdad carrying weapons, the newspaper said citing SISMI sources.
The sources said the Italians explained "the terms of the mission" and "the exact nature of the operation" to U.S. officials at the airport. Sources also said an American officer was instructed to wait at the airport for Mr. Calipari and the freed hostage. But La Stampa also quoted diplomatic sources saying vital information was withheld from the Americans. "Italian intelligence decided to free Sgrena paying a sum to the kidnappers without informing American colleagues in Iraq who, if they had known about this, would have had to oppose it, to have impeded the operation," sources said.
"If this was the case, it could explain why American intelligence had not informed the American military commands about the operation and thus the patrol did not expect the car with the Italians."
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
03/07/2005 6:50:14 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
3 things ...
1. NEVER negotiate with terror .
2. NEVER speed towards an armed checkpoint in a war zone .
3. NEVER DO 1 or 2 , let alone both together .
On the one hand killing commies is a good thing once they take up arms, but on the other hand killing them simply becasue they are lying weasels without an ounce of honor, while seeming to be a good idea, is really not.
Far better to let the commie shoot their mouths off without fear of anything more severe than an ass whupping, than for some good intenioned fella/gal to kill one and remove a perfectly good public urinal. :o)
#9
What has not been said is that in the mid-1990s the Italian Communist Party formed common cause withe Muslim terrorists. What began as an Islamic Jihad/HAMAS relationship grew in the new millenium expanded to include the Islamist jihadists including Al Qaeda and the Algerian crazies. The question that no one is answering is who paid the ransom? If it was Berlusconi's people one should ask why!
#10
The Italian secret service engaged in an operation within a friendly nation that resulted in the transfer of over $10 million U.S. to the terrorist thugs trying to overthrow that friendly government. In other times, that would be an act of war.
#11
Tancred in the mid 1980s the United States formed common cause with Muslim terrorsits in Afghanistan.
As to the source of the ransom, the article says "That money reputedly came not from the state, but from the personal fortune of Mr. Berlusconi, a media magnate who is Italy's richest man." No doubt he did it to make himself a hero. Unfortunately, his agents thought they wer flying solo. Too bad for them.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
03/07/2005 9:46 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Is this some kind of southern European thing I'm not supposed to understand? The paying ransom money when it should be against your principles, that is.
#13
Well, maybe the Italian mafia ought to consider a re-launch of its domestic kidnapping industry, since the Italian authorities are paying so well in Iraq.
#14
This pinko beeyatch is also claiming that the US forces fired "hundreds" of rounds at the car. The pictures of the car that Mad Ogre posted on his site contradict this statement quite handily.
Posted by: Dar ||
03/07/2005 10:31 Comments ||
Top||
#15
At best, the Italian government is weak, at worst, they are terrorist sympothizers. This is blood money and will kill many more innocents and soldiers in the future. Fook the damn Italians and get them out of Iraq before they kill more people.
#17
The people accusing us of unjustly firing on an unknown car that ignored signals to stop are probably the same ones who were outraged that historical sites and relics were looted in the collapse of Saddam's government. They need to get a strategy and stick to it: either necessary force should be used to stop unknown persons from going where they aren't supposed to go, or no force can be ever be used against such people and responsibility for all unintended and sometimes violent consequences is therewith accepted. They can't have it both ways.
This was very predictable. More lack of ethics and magical thinking on the part of Europe.
#18
Fabrizio Quatrocchi showed us all how Italians die. Giuliana Sgrena is showing us all how some Italians lie.
Posted by: Matt ||
03/07/2005 11:46 Comments ||
Top||
#19
The same things were going on in the Philippines wrt the initial Abu Sayyaf kidnappings in 2000. The Euros and Khadaffi ended up financing the Philippine terror organizations via ransoms, and re-started the Muslim insurgency there. There is a lot of blood on their hands.
#20
Have there been any reliable American sources confirming the following statements made by the sources in the article?
There were conflicting reports on the extent to which Italian authorities had informed their American counterparts about the operation, in which a reported $6 million was paid for the journalist's release. Mr. Calipari and another senior SISMI operative concluded the deal for her release on Friday in Abu Dhabi and then flew to Baghdad aboard a secret service Falcon executive jet to collect her, La Stampa said. At the airport, they met an Italian military liaison officer and U.S. military authorities issued them passes allowing them to travel around Baghdad carrying weapons, the newspaper said citing SISMI sources.
If there is an American fingerprint of involvement anywhere in this ransom paid to terrorists story, watch out for huge domestic political fallout.
#21
Pappy--Sheet, I didn't know! I'll contact Mad Ogre and inform him to take it down or correctly refer to it. Thanks for the pointer.
Posted by: Dar ||
03/07/2005 12:11 Comments ||
Top||
#22
We should be calling the Italian ambassador for a conference or even recalling our ambassador in Rome. That $6 million is going to get our soldiers killed. End of story! If the Italians didn't inform the US they were coming down that road and didn't slow down for the road block, then they got what they deserved. Assholes!
#24
CL
1) Many?
2) I don't know either. No one with a shred of ethics left, not to mention with a soul or a brain inside. I am hoping that this part of the story is a lie-I doubt it would be the first lie that this "Italian journalist" has told.
#25
"That would help explain why American troops opened fire on a car whisking the released hostage to a waiting airplane, wounding Miss Sgrena and killing the Italian intelligence operative who had just negotiated her release..."
Or, as we like to say in the American Conspiracy biz: "who had just delivered the multi-million dollar boodle to her so-called kidnappers."
Send the crazy paleo-commie bint back, and this time shoot her ass for real.
The Democrats are getting their own talk show -- in cyberspace. Two Democratic political consultants are preparing to launch a weekly online political talk show that will showcase the party's message, lambaste Republicans and, they hope, open a new front in the ongoing media wars. It's called DemsTV.com, and each Tuesday, beginning tomorrow, the Web site will feature 20 minutes or so of talking-head chatter from a rotating cast of young Democratic operatives. "The primary focus is on politics, and, frankly, a heavy focus is on pointing out the foibles and scandals and dirty little secrets of Republicans that we think don't receive as much coverage in the mainstream media as they might," said Dan Manatt, one of the producers. One-half of "Crossfire" is just plinking.
#1
a heavy focus is on pointing out the foibles and scandals and dirty little secrets of Republicans
Great. Like they needed another place to say Jeff Gannon's gay.
*yawn*
When the Democrats dedicate themselves to liberty and individuality, let me know, OK? Until then, let them sink into the cesspool they've created for themselves.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
03/07/2005 13:57 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Actually, if they do rants like on DU, actual video is alot more legally actionable in regards to them making terrorist threats and wanting to kill people. I say let me go full bore, then pounce.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President George W. Bush has nominated John Bolton, a longtime critic of the United Nations, to be the new U.S. ambassador to the world body.
Bwahahahahahaha!!!!
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, announcing the nomination at the State Department, said on Monday: "The president and I have asked John to do this work because he knows how to get things done. He is a tough-minded diplomat." Bolton, a leading hawk against Iran and North Korea as the top U.S. arms control policies diplomat, has complained U.N. bodies fail to take strong enough action against such nations and has strongly criticized some international treaties.
Bolton's nomination, which shocked some diplomats at the United Nations, must be confirmed by the U.S. Senate, where Democrats were expected to bring up previous harsh criticism Bolton has aimed at the world body.
More good news, let's see who stands up to support the UN. And get it on tape.
Bush clashed with the United Nations in his first term and launched a war against Iraq despite failing to secure support from the 15-member Security Council.
Since the invasion, the United States has worked more closely with the United Nations -- especially over Iraqi elections -- but it has been less supportive of Secretary-General Kofi Annan than other major powers during a scandal over the Iraq oil-for-food program. Bolton would take up the U.N. post that was left vacant when former Sen. John Danforth resigned in December.
Several officials from U.N. Security Council member states expressed astonishment that Bush would name someone they believed had a known antipathy towards the United Nations. From 1989 to 1993, when Bolton was an assistant secretary of state dealing with the United Nations and other international bodies, he irritated diplomats who felt he lectured them what to do rather than negotiated with them.
But one senior council envoy, speaking on condition of anonymity, also spoke of the value of Bolton's high standing in the administration. "It's like the Palestinians having to negotiate with (Israeli Prime Minister) Ariel Sharon. If you have a deal, you know you have a deal," he said.
Bolton, 56, has a reputation for speaking bluntly -- a style that at times has caused friction with allied diplomats. State Department officials sought to allay concerns his style could create similar problems at the United Nations.
"Both (U.S. political) parties have had strong personalities as U.N. ambassadors before. Sometimes these people have been controversial, sometimes not -- but it is important the president has someone who will strongly support his agenda," one of the officials said.
One potential flashpoint is over Bolton's leading role in U.S. efforts to oust Mohamed ElBaradei as head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency. Bolton has spearheaded the Bush administration's criticism that he could acted more toughly against Iran's programs but the Egyptian is generally well-regarded around the world for his work.
Bolton, who is admired by American conservatives, often clashed with former Secretary of State Colin Powell as he resisted his boss' efforts to negotiate with North Korea over its suspected nuclear weapons development, according to U.S. officials. Bolton represented a wing in the first term of the Bush administration that advocated confronting and isolating nations such as Iran and North Korea with U.N. sanctions if necessary. He complained that to offer them incentives in talks would be rewarding bad behaviour, according to U.S. officials.
Posted by: Steve ||
03/07/2005 1:51:29 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It's almost like there's a message there.
Posted by: Matt ||
03/07/2005 14:12 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Condi good cop....Boulton bad cop
Posted by: john ||
03/07/2005 14:18 Comments ||
Top||
#3
It's exactly what's needed, but also exactly what will aggravate. If he is resilient, tenacious and clever in the face of opposition, then well done, President Bush.
#12
This is an inspired pick. A big F you to the UN. I agree that the Repubs will be videotaping his confirmation hearings to document which Dems stick up for the UN. The campaign commercials will be processed and in the can for whichever Repub candidates need them in '06, '08 and '10. Sometimes I think Bush may be this super-genius playing 3D chess with a bunch of opponents who haven't quite mastered checkers. I hope he can bring the same skills to bear on the judicial confirmation fights.
Posted by: Tibor ||
03/07/2005 17:20 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Barbara, I'd take it a step further, to "bad cop, worse cop." Of course, that's only when Condi Rice is wearing those wonderful boots. ;-)
#17
Mrs. D we think alike. Even though Mr. Moynahan was a Democrat he was a very good Ambassador.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
03/07/2005 19:09 Comments ||
Top||
#18
DPM was an American first and Democrat second - today's donks seem to have forgot the order and in some cases, thrown their second (American) out if it satisfies their grubby power needs - see Boxer, Waxman, Schumer, Lautenberg, Reid, Rangel, et al
Posted by: Frank G ||
03/07/2005 19:19 Comments ||
Top||
#19
#13 TW - LOL! ;-p
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
03/07/2005 19:50 Comments ||
Top||
#20
The confirmation hearings, according to Donk Paid Apologists, will be long, loud, and bloody.
#21
hmmmm - pass the popcorn - let the American people see whether the Donks represent them or the corrupt anti-American organization on Turtle Bay. Hope it's live on all channels
Posted by: Frank G ||
03/07/2005 22:43 Comments ||
Top||
#22
Bolton is a polarizing figure. And that's a good thing.
In the first substantial shift of public opinion in the Muslim world since the beginning of the United States' global war on terrorism, more people in the world's largest Muslim country now favor American efforts against terrorism than oppose them.
In a stunning turnaround of public opinion, support for Osama Bin Laden and terrorism in the world's most populous Muslim nation has dropped significantly, while favorable views of the United States have increased. ÃÂ The poll demonstrates that the reason for this positive change is the American response to the tsunami.
Key Findings of the Poll:
For the first time ever in a major Muslim nation, more people favor US-led efforts to fight terrorism than oppose them (40% to 36%). ÃÂ Importantly, those who oppose US efforts against terrorism have declined by half, from 72% in 2003 to just 36% today.
For the first time ever in a Muslim nation since 9/11, support for Osama Bin Laden has dropped significantly (58% favorable to just 23%).
65% of Indonesians now are more favorable to the United States because of the American response to the tsunami, with the highest percentage among people under 30.
Indeed, 71% of the people who express confidence in Bin Laden are now more favorable to the United States because of American aid to tsunami victims.
The Terror Free Tomorrow poll was conducted by the leading Indonesian pollster, Lembaga Survei Indonesia, and surveyed 1,200 adults nationwide with a margin of error of ñ 2.9 percentage points.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
03/07/2005 12:27:27 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
hmm... with the UN screwing up the aid so bad to the tsunami areas, maybe they will start hating that corrupt organization.
We can only hope....
#2
Everyone gets it except Democrat ex-US Presidents...
BILL CLINTON at Davos, Switzerland Jan 30,2005.
I know it is not popular for an American ever to say anything like this, but I think it's true [applause], and I apologized when President Khatami was elected. I publicly acknowledged that the United States had actively overthrown Mossadegh and I apologized for it, 1 and I hope that we could have some rapprochement with Iran. I think basically the Europeans' initiative to Iran to try to figure out a way to defuse the nuclear crisis is a good one.
I think President Bush has done, so far, the right thing by not taking the military option off the table, but not pushing it too much.2 I didn't like the story that looked like the military option had been elevated above a diplomatic option. But Iran is the most perplexing problem ... we face, for the following reasons: It is the only country in the world with two governments, and the only country in the world that has now had six elections since the first election of President Khatami. [It is] the only one with elections, including the United States, including Israel, including you name it, where the liberals, or the progressives, have won two-thirds to 70 percent of the vote in six elections: two for President; two for the parliament, the Majlis; two for the mayoralities.3
1Mossadegh was in league with the Soviets, and so he apologised. 2I have top but cover so I won't be called a traitor by giving Bush a backha=nded complement 3 I know the magic mullahs veto any candidate they like but I am sucking up to the tyrants 'cause I want to be UN Secretary General after Kofi.
JIMMY CARTER interview with CNN Feb 9, 2005
"Iran is a signatory of a [nuclear] nonproliferation treaty," Carter said. "Israel, for instance, is not. Iran still claims -- as backed up I think by the international commission on nuclear weapons -- that they are in compliance with the nonproliferation treaty.1
"I don't know what the facts are, but I think that's going to be increasingly important for the world to ascertain," he said.
"And it may be that through the United Nations Security Council, the United States, the Europeans and others will continue to put increasing pressure on Iran ... to help reveal exactly what is the status of Iran's policies."2
Carter pointed out that Iran does have a right, under the nonproliferation treaty, to develop a nuclear power program and to dispose properly of the program's waste.3
"Whether they're doing it legally at this point, I don't know," said the former president and Nobel Peace Prize winner. 4
1 âThere he goes againâ â Ronald Reagan 2 I won the Nobel (Ap)peace(ment) prize. I have to talk like this. My reputation is at stake! 3I donât care that they have a large reserve of oil and thus nuclear programs might be suspicious. Donât you know? Kerry has 3 purple hearts, and I am a Nobel Prize winner. 4And CNN Does not want ANYONE to forget it either...
#4
and to think, it's all Bush's fault 'cause he spent the first 24 hours relocating the Navy's Pacific fleet, instead of coming before the cameras, biting his lip, with tears in his eyes!
NATANZ, Iran (AP) - An Iranian official confirmed Monday a uranium enrichment plant in central Iran is underground as a protection against airstrikes, but insisted that is not a sign the program aims to produce nuclear weapons. U.S. officials have said building nuclear facilities underground is inconsistent with Iran's contention its atomic program is intended only for the generation of electricity. The Iranians deny Washington's accusation that they are trying to build nuclear weapons. Ali Akbar Salehi, a nuclear affairs adviser to the foreign minister, said U.S. and Israeli threats forced Iran to take precautions to protect its technology, including the string of centrifuges used to enrich uranium - a process that can produce fuel for nuclear reactors that generate electricity but also make material suitable for atomic warheads. ``To protect the safety of equipment against possible danger of aerial attack, a major part of the plant has been constructed underground, especially where thousands of centrifuges need to be located,'' Salehi told The Associated Press. It was the first public confirmation by Iran that the Natanz facility is underground.
On Saturday, Iran's top nuclear negotiator, Hasan Rowhani, confirmed Iran is building a tunnel next to another nuclear facility in Isfahan. He said that the tunnel, under a mountain, will be used to store unspecified equipment and that air attacks would not be able to destroy it.
The central cities of Natanz and Isfahan house the heart of Iran's nuclear program. The conversion facility in Isfahan reprocesses uranium ore concentrate, known as yellowcake, into uranium hexaflouride gas. The gas is then taken to Natanz and fed into the centrifuges for enrichment. The facility at Natanz is at the foot of a mountain in an otherwise barren desert some 200 miles south of the capital, Tehran. Some of its buildings, which are believed to be administrative offices, are visible from the main road running from Kashan to Natanz. There are military bases not far from the facility. Travelers who stop on the road close to the facility are approached by security officers in plainclothes and asked to leave.
Iran began its nuclear program in secrecy, and now says it has achieved proficiency in the full range of activities involved in enriching uranium.
Iran's former president, Hashemi Rafsanjani, said Sunday that Iran initially developed the program in secret and bought nuclear materials on the black market because of U.S. sanctions and European restrictions that denied Iran access to advanced civilian nuclear technology.
He said that Iran has been very open about the program since 2002, when secret aspects of its nuclear activities were revealed, and that it is cooperating with the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. nuclear watchdog. The government argues it is entitled to work on civilian uses of uranium enrichment under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
Iran suspended enrichment-related activities last year to create confidence during negotiations over its program and avoid the U.N. Security Council considering sanctions. But it says maintaining the voluntary freeze depends on progress in talks with Britain, Germany and France, which are negotiating on behalf of the European Union.
Posted by: Steve ||
03/07/2005 2:12:23 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
so who is going to volunteer to work in this underground nuclear tomb plant?
#2
I would assume that they are moving their "baby food" and "children's aspirin" factories underground as well. Maybe that will keep them safe from the "evil Americans"...but I doubt it!
#4
"..air attacks would not be able to destroy it..." Even if we summon forth the black Jinn of Alaa Deen, who visage is so terrible that it causes the eyes to melt from the head and the bowels to turn to water? He be bad. Plus, I hear we have a space cannon that can put a 500kg ceramic projectile through a mile of solid rock. Golly, you never know what those boffins will think of next. Nuclear weapons are so mid-20th Century.
I am standing here in front of the Ayatollah Khomeni Formula Factory which provides nusishment to millions of Persian Children. President Rafsanjani assures me personally that there is no nuclear enrichment being done here as the radiation produced would contaminate the milk, and would make many babies ill.
Posted by: Peter Arnett ||
03/07/2005 17:10 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Every facility has entrances and exits, and any facility that is not above ground has even less of them.
#7
Administrative offices and especially shops and warehouses can serve as entrances to the Tunnel of Doomâ¢. Long term monitoring of the facility from the air and from space will establish the patterns of where things go. The rest is targeting details.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
03/07/2005 18:54 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Oh yes it's all for "peaceful purposes."
I also have some fine ocean front property in Arizona to sell you.
ISRAEL is hoping a Syrian pullout from Lebanon will force the departure of Iranian Revolutionary Guards embedded with the Hezbollah militia north of Israel's border. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and his Lebanese puppet counterpart Emile Lahoud were meeting in Damascus last night to work out details of the withdrawal of the 14,000 Syrian troops. The move comes in the face of intense international pressure on Syria to end its domination of Lebanon, which started 29 years ago when Damascus sent in its troops after the start of the civil war.
Late last night, Australian time, witnesses reported seeing Syrian soldiers packing up equipment at several positions in the Lebanese mountains east of Beirut, ahead of the expected pullback of Syrian forces to eastern Lebanon. Soldiers in positions in Mdairij, Soufar and Aley were dismantling communications equipment or loading personal belongings and light military equipment on to military trucks at the bases.
Israeli leaders and officials have pointed out that the UN resolution ordering the withdrawal of armed forces from Lebanon is not limited to the Syrian soldiers. "The UN has called for the departure from Lebanon of all foreign elements, and Syria is not the only foreign element there," Ephraim Halevy, former chief of the Mossad secret service, told Israel Radio.
In contacts with the US and France, which are at the forefront of international pressure for a Syrian pullout, Israel claims that if Lebanon is to reclaim its sovereignty, such a withdrawal will be incomplete without the departure of the Iranians. Although there are only a few dozen Iranian guards in the border region, they represent an Iranian strategic arm that Israel takes seriously.
Thousands of rockets supplied by Iran have been deployed in southern Lebanon by Hezbollah. Israel believes the Iranian guards posted to Hezbollah have trained the militiamen on how to use the rockets and have been involved in deploying the weapons. The rockets, some of which can reach the northern Israeli city of Haifa, are seen by Tehran as a deterrent against long-range Israeli strikes at Iranian nuclear centres. But they are also available to Hezbollah for the militia's use. A few months ago, an Iranian-made drone launched from southern Lebanon overflew northern Israel on a reconnaissance mission before crashing into the sea. Iranian sources later suggested that drones filled with explosives could be sent as well.
Israeli officials expressed hope at the weekend that a Syrian withdrawal would permit the Lebanese Government to post its troops along the Israeli border, curtailing the presence there of Hezbollah fighters. However, the withdrawal could have the opposite effect, with Hezbollah's disciplined forces moving into the vacuum left by the Syrian departure, and Hezbollah becoming an even more powerful element in Lebanon, where it has come to play an increasingly important political role.
But Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Shimon Peres said that if Syria were to withdraw fully from Lebanon, the way would then be open for direct peace talks to take place between Israel and Lebanon.
Posted by: Steve ||
03/07/2005 2:00:00 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
LET'S do the Salsa!" is one of the refrains chanted by Lebanese demonstrators who have vowed to occupy the streets of Beirut until Syria ends its occupation of their country. But the Salsa they are referring to is not the Brazilian style of sexy dancing. It refers to the Syria Accountability and Lebanon Sovereignty (Restoration) Act (SALSA) — passed by Congress over a year ago, and seen as a signal that the Bush administration was determined to extend its quest for status quo change in the Middle East beyond Iraq into the Levant.
And Lebanon's Cedar Revolution —while far from complete —could, and must, become a prelude to the liberation of Syria from half a century of despotic rule. There is as much pent-up energy for change in Syria as there is in Lebanon. "We, too, want to do the SALSA," says a senior Syrian economist with years of experience at the World Bank. "The Assad regime is at an impasse, and, as the Lebanese revolution shows, our 'emperor' has no clothes."
Syrians watched with a mixture of awe and admiration as millions of Afghans and Iraqis queued up to vote in their first-ever free elections in recent months. Meanwhile, a majority of the Palestinians have chosen electoral democracy as the way to statehood. More than a dozen Arab countries have held elections, though not as free as Iraq's. Even Saudi Arabia, the most conservative of Arab states, has accepted limited local elections, and will this week appoint 36 women to diplomatic posts for the first time. The only two despotic regimes still in denial in the region are Syria and Iran. The Lebanese revolution could trigger the mechanisms that exist for change in Syria.
That change could come in two ways. The first is through violence. The Syrian regime is based on the Alawite community, some 11 percent of the population, and deeply resented by the Sunni Muslim majority. At a moment of desperation, that majority might try to use violence to assert its rights. This in turn could provoke a bloody repression. The second way — the way to bring about change in Syria without massive bloodshed — requires a direct U.S. commitment with support from key Arab countries such as Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Egypt.
An "Arab formula" is already under discussion to help the emergence of a transition government in Damascus with the aim of leading Syria to free, multiparty elections within a year or so. Such a government could be led by someone of stature within the regime who could be acceptable to the Sunni Muslim majority ââ¬" perhaps Vice President Abdul-Halim Khaddam, who has close ties to both Egypt and Saudi Arabia. For such a formula to succeed, the Bush administration should provide the big-power support needed to encourage advocates of change within the Syrian regime to make a move. The situation is too delicate to be left either to the United Nations or to the Europeans, whose natural instinct is to preserve the status quo with minor modifications.
President Bush should send a senior envoy to Beirut and Damascus as soon as possible. In Beirut, the envoy would assure the emerging democratic leadership of Washington's support. In Damascus, he would tell the Syrian leaders that the Middle East has to change, that the era of one-party rule based on an ideological cocktail of tyranny and anti-Americanism is over. Assad's desperate attempt at forging an alliance with the mullahs of Tehran to stop the march of freedom in the Middle East can produce nothing but disaster for Syria. It is time for Syria to join the new emerging Arab mainstream and allow its people the right to choose their government as we saw in neighboring Iraq and shall soon see in Lebanon. "We need direct communication with Washington," says a pro-reform member of the Syrian ruling elite. "The image of Syria as a bastion of anti-Americanism does not reflect the reality."
There are several prominent Americans, some of them of Syro-Lebanese origin, who could serve as Bush's special emissary to Beirut and Damascus at this time ââ¬" such as John Sununu (Sr.), who served the first President Bush as White House chief of staff; former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell, or former Secretary of State James Baker III. Peaceful regime change is still possible in both Lebanon and Syria and the opportunity created by the Cedar Revolution must not be missed.
DEBKA, so add salt. They are better at reading the tea leaves in Lebanon and Syria than they were in Iraq.
Syrian ruler Bashar Assad gave nothing away on Lebanon in his unscheduled address to parliament in Damascus Saturday, March 5. Repeatedly contradicting himself, he said: "We will not stay one day if Lebanese consensus asks us to leave". He then added: but we cannot desert the Lebanese president to whom we have a commitment.
Assad's decision to redeploy Syrian troops eastward to the Beqaa Valley up to Syrian border sidestepped the issue. The Syrian ruler did not promise to pull a single Syrian troop or secret agent out of Lebanon. He also declared for good measure that Syria's role in the country would not end with a military withdrawal (which he did not promise.) Assad joked about the international and Arab clamor to quit Lebanon: "I know that the minute I finish this speech, they will say it is not enough. So I say it now: It is not enough." He burst out laughing and the chamber roared with him.
The "Laughter" sign went on
Disappointed Lebanese opposition leaders predictably rejected Assad's statement. We want him to "redeploy" on the other side of the Syrian border, they said. Even for the relocation of the Syrian army in the east, he has set no timetable; nor has he mentioned the removal of his secret agents.
DEBKAfile's Washington sources reveal the Bush administration's decision to act for Syria's total international isolation. US National Security Council head Stephen Hadley notified European Washington-based envoys of moves to cut off Damascus' international banking ties and the flow of international funds to and from Syria through Lebanese banks. The volume of these transfers is such that it could bankrupt Syria. Hadley told the Europeans that UN Middle East envoy Terje Roed-Larsen would take off Sunday on a 12-day tour of Europe, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Gulf emirates to finalize the US-Arab-European consensus on international sanctions against Syria.
On March 17, Larsen will visit Damascus to give Assad his last chance to implement Security Council resolution 1559 in full, or else face up to UN sanctions. Chirac has already ordered French ties with Damascus severed at all government levels. DEBKAfile's Middle East sources account for the Syrian president's confident bearing when he sidestepped all demands to remove Syria's overbearing presence from Lebanon by the fact that he was acting out a pre-planned strategy. On February 25, DEBKA-Net-Weekly 195 exposed the key move he had set in motion to help him stand up to any military threat. Realizing he could not count on Arab support, Assad furnished himself with an alternative ally. Guess who?
Sunday, February 20, as US Air Force One was ferrying President George W. Bush between meetings with European leaders, Iranian military transports were putting down in Damascus military airport. They were the tail end of the biggest military airlift Iran has launched in the Middle East to date. Its objective was to set up shared Iranian-Syrian safeguards against attacks on the Islamic Republic's nuclear installations and/or Syrian strategic targets. DEBKA-Net-Weekly's military and intelligence sources obtained some of the details of the new hush-hush deployment.
Satellite photos, radio intercepts, spies on the ground, etc. This is Israel's backyard.
The fleet of Iranian military transports secretly offloaded complete elite units for operating, maintaining and guarding a sophisticated system of Iranian electronic warning stations, radar networks and anti-aircraft missiles to be deployed in Syria and Lebanon. More than 1,000 Iranian soldiers and technicians and 600 Revolutionary Guards commandos took up positions on the South Lebanese border with Israel, along the Syrian-Israeli Golan frontier to the south and up Syria's Mediterranean coastline to the west. They also spread out along Syria's northeastern frontier with Iraqi Kurdistan and its southern border with Iraq's al Qaim and al Anbar provinces.
Nice of them to bring them within range.
The incoming Iranian forces quickly assumed the command and control of electronic and radar systems at Syrian early warning stations in Syria and Lebanon, supplemented by elements of Signal Intelligence and Human Intelligence. Stationed alongside Syrian units, they have undertaken shared operational responsibility. The two chains of command have been merged except in units where Iranian officers have taken command.
Gee, it almost sounds like a coup. Maybe the Iranians decided Assad didn't have the backbone and was going to cave in. So they stepped in and took control.
Assad believes he is gaining on the United States in their duel over Lebanon and holds winning cards.
People have played poker with "W" before, they normally end up busted.
1. The things he left out of his speech to parliament were significant. In announcing the redeployment of his troops on the Syrian border, he omitted mention of the disposition of Syrian intelligence agents and even more pointedly of the early warning stations and the Iranian units who will stay on to man them in Lebanon. With Iranian backing and the presence of Iranian Revolutionary Guards in the south, Syria will retain its grip on Lebanon.
2. Assad saw no need to mention the mixed Syrian-Iranian units scattered in Lebanon since President Bush has only called for Syrian personnel to leave the country.
Because we consider them one and the same.
3. Should the US or Lebanese governments decide to get rid of Iranian forces, they will have to turn to Tehran and the Hizballah. Damascus will be off the hook.
Buzzzzzzzz!!...sorry, wrong answer. But thank you for playing, Johnny, do we have any parting gifts for President Assad?
4. The Syrian ruler exploited American pressure on the Lebanon issue to invoke his secret military cooperation pact with Tehran and quietly install Iranian forces, including intelligence units, on the borders of Israel, thereby upgrading Syria's and the Hizballah's defenses and bolstering the Iranian umbrella over Hizballah's missile emplacements facing Israel. This strengthened structure also signaled the spreading Palestinian opposition to Mahmoud Abbas' leadership that aid is available from a strong Syrian-Syrian-Hizballah across the border.
5. No Israeli response was forthcoming to the new Iranian deployment in Syria and Lebanon, aside from intelligence messages speeding from Tel Aviv to Washington. This has left the Assad regime cock-a-hoop with a sense of achieving yet another coup after pulling off the February 14 assassination of the primary threat to Syria's domination of Lebanon, Rafiq Hariri.
Posted by: Steve ||
03/07/2005 9:10:55 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
since nobody answered me on the other thread, I'll try again here:
Look at this photo from Instapundit today ...notice the guy in the middle link
now look at this one: (scroll down to last picture, guy on the left link
don't they look like the same guy?
PS..I used the troll hat so I could get a little attention here!
2b
Posted by: Bush Sux ||
03/07/2005 10:54 Comments ||
Top||
#2
There certainly is a strong resemblence, BS.
Assad, on the other hand, is playing his culture's final card -- loud bluster proclaiming invincibility. But, being the poor relative, he doesn't have a Baghdad Bob spokesman, and has to do his own blustering.
#3
Gosh, yes 2b. They do look alike, though one looks a bit younger than the other and appears to have a more beakish nose. But what they both seem to have in common is their mood, it doesn't quite seem to fit the circumstances - almost as if they were photoshopped in. No, I'm not saying they were photoshopped, only that it looks like a normal guy in the wrong spot. As Glenn Reynolds said, the one in the middle looks like he wishes he were with the hot chicks instead.
No doubt a coincidence, but thanks for sharing.
Posted by: so pathetic ||
03/07/2005 11:19 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Looks like proof enough to me of Syrian interference in Iraq. Same guy ...
#7
Keep an eye on Iraq. If you start to see large numbers of Army troops being rotated into Iraq, but MARINE units either not being rotated out, or being rotated to EUROPE, you know Bush has made up his mind to get rid of Assad. Consider: the US has 135,000 military troops in Iraq. The 6th Fleet is still in the Med. Virtually every troop ever assigned to a warfighting unit has gotten ground experience in Iraq or Afghanistan. Syria can import 100,000 Iranians, and it still won't make a difference. If the word is passed to "go", Assad is going to have that "a" in the middle of his name changed to an "e".
Syria will be a little more difficult to destroy than Iraq, and will definitely need a preliminary barrage of airstrikes prior to an attack. The three SA-5 sites in Syria will definitely have to be taken out first. After that, the coastal anti-ship batteries will have to be destroyed. Then the Marines can land just south of Beirut and just north of Latakia, and join up with the 3rd ID from Iraq in Damascus.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
03/07/2005 15:38 Comments ||
Top||
#8
OP, how about if we see Iraqis taking over control of Baghdad, cauz they're ready?
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
03/07/2005 15:42 Comments ||
Top||
#9
OP, why would the Marines be rotated to Europe before attacking Syria?
#10
TW - so they can ride in behind the air shield of the 6th Fleet aircraft carriers and make a beach landing in Lebanon and Syria. It saves the expense of taking them all the way back to the States and then bringing them back to Europe for staging.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
03/07/2005 18:53 Comments ||
Top||
#11
The visual of the Marines making an actual landing enroute to kicking ass would be worth wonders when it comes time to threaten some other jerks around the world.
Syria'd have the Marines to the west, the Israeli's to the south and the US army behind them.
Posted by: Laurence of the Rats ||
03/07/2005 21:49 Comments ||
Top||
By Scott Wilson
Washington Post Foreign Service
Monday, March 7, 2005; Page A01
BEIRUT, March 6 -- The leader of Hezbollah, the militant Shiite Muslim movement that for weeks has stood on the sidelines of Lebanon's political upheaval, called Sunday for national demonstrations against what he characterized as foreign influences seeking to expel Syria, a key sponsor of the party, from the country.
Hassan Nasrallah, a Shiite cleric who serves as Hezbollah's secretary general, was critical in particular of the United States and France. His announcement dashed the hopes of Lebanese opposition leaders that the large, disciplined movement would join their cause to drive Syrian troops and intelligence services from Lebanon.
This will make Hizbollah more unpopular amongs the Druze, Maronite, Orthodox and Sunni groups which is why Nasrallah frames it as a 'anti US' rather than a 'pro Syria' event. We'll watch the arab media over the next few days to see if this scam works. In the meantime, Hiz needs Syria to deliver weapons. Without weapons, which are mostly paid for by Iran, Hizbollah becomes less powerful over time. Also Syria has been the one supplying tech assistance for the Hizbollah surface to surface rocket force. However, Syria really needed Hizbollah support in the 48 hours after Hariri's death and I think Syria is ticked at Hizbollah for being neutral at that critical time.
Posted by: mhw ||
03/07/2005 8:47:42 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
problem is, we'll be going in under the flag of France.
#2
Hopefully, they will protest in the traditional way and blow themselves to bits. That'll save us the cost of ammunition.
Posted by: Chris W. ||
03/07/2005 12:28 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Anyone want to bet on a violent outcome from this? No doubt they are going to push for a confrontation. I kind of suspect that Hizbullah will be surprised at the lack of support they have with the general population.
#5
Good point Mojo! If they are having a demonstration then maybe we should have an aerial bombing demonstration and see who comes out on top? A great opportunity to drain the swamp of unwanted fecal matter.
#7
No wait a minute, here! Has Hezb-allah been official termed a terrorist organization by the UN? If they are just a charity and political organization, they can't be struck.
Translation: "Where's the money?"
Iranian officials criticised the European Union yesterday for demanding that Teheran abandon its nuclear fuel work. The nuclear negotiator Hossein Moussavian complained that Britain, France and Germany had so far "not shown any seriousness" in their talks with Iran, according to the state news agency IRNA. Iran was "seriously doubting their capacity" to strike a deal, he said. The former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani also told a nuclear technology conference in Teheran that "three months have passed and we have seen nothing yet". He added: "We are waiting for them to make marked progress in the coming days." He also said that Iran viewed its suspension of uranium enrichment as only a six-month halt and that the country still wanted to resume nuclear fuel work.
Posted by: Bulldog ||
03/07/2005 4:25:08 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The Mullahs, Kimmie, Chavez and to a lesser extent Assad remind me of a kid poking a tiger in a cage with a stick thinking the tiger is safely behind the bars and not realizing the bars are just along on side and the tiger can walk out any time it likes.
#2
Hell, the MMs are just having fun rubbing the E3 noses in the dirt. As far as the US and Israel are concerned, they are messing with the tiger on the other side of the cage, like phil_b sez. The showdown will come between the US, Isarel, and the MMs. The rest is a well lit sideshow.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
03/07/2005 10:13 Comments ||
Top||
#3
For once, the US and Iran can agree on something.
Posted by: Tibor ||
03/07/2005 15:06 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Anyone else think OBL is in Iran or in the vicinity if he's not goo?
#4
aka "VOTE HILLARY FOR POTUS", and ditto CHELSEA later. "All your lands, money, food and women belong to the People's Waffen SS Red Army and the Global Government" - HYPERREGULATION, TAXATION, and SOLYENT GREEN is the absolute right and privelege of all Amerikans of the USSA, as honest injun as you have the right to be treated like a slave without being told by your Government that you are a slave. Support your local Warlord, Mafiosi, Bandit Raider, Selfish Profiteer and General, d *** you, give give GIVE until it hurts with every drop of your blood, not theirs!?
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
03/07/2005 10:15 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Bandit Raider, Selfish Profiteer
Greed is good. Greed works.
Posted by: Gordon Gekko ||
03/07/2005 12:56 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Joseph, you are one far out dood. Been watching your posts for a while now. We'll have to get together sometime for beers, or shrooms, or whatever it is that makes it work for you.
DAMASCUS - Syria's President Bashar al-Assad and Lebanese counterpart Emile Lahoud were to hold a summit in Damascus on Monday to mark the start of a pullback of Syrian troops in its tiny neighbour.
Lebanon's outgoing Defence Minister Abdel Rahim Mrad said Sunday that the Syrian military would start the much-awaited troop redeployment to the Bekaa Valley of eastern Lebanon after the summit. A Lebanese presidential spokesman said the meeting of the Syrian-Lebanese Supreme Council, with Lebanon's outgoing premier, Omar Karameh, and parliamentary speaker Nabih Berri also taking part, was due to start at midday (1000 GMT).
On Saturday, Assad said the supreme council would "approve the withdrawal plan and then we will have fulfilled our obligations under the Taef accord and under (UN Security Council) Resolution 1559." The Syrian president has not made clear whether the troops would cross over into Syria once they had reached the border, prompting calls from Washington and Paris for an unambiguous pledge for an immediate and full withdrawal. The United States said it would keep up the pressure for a complete Syrian withdrawal in line with Resolution 1559, which was passed last September.
The offer made so far by Assad was "half-hearted" and in "complete contradiction" to the Security Council resolution, White House director of communications Dan Bartlett said Sunday. He urged the Syrian government "to withdraw its troops and, more importantly, or just as importantly, withdraw its security secret services as well".
However, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, head of Lebanon's Shiite movement Hezbollah, said Sunday after a meeting of pro-Syrian groups that they opposed an immediate withdrawal as Lebanon was still in a "state of war" with Israel.
"And those Israelis could kill me!" he added.
Assad, in an interview with Time magazine released Sunday, insisted he should not be compared to Iraq's ousted president Saddam Hussein and said that he wanted to cooperate with international demands. "Please send this message: I am not Saddam Hussein. I want to live cooperate."
Posted by: Steve White ||
03/07/2005 12:30:38 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Israel on Sunday accused Damascus of being involved in terrorism and reiterated demands for a total withdrawal of Syrian troops from neighbouring Lebanon. "The Syrians are dangerous. They have always been involved in terrorist attacks on Israel on the one hand, and on Americans in Iraq on the other," Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom told public radio. "Syria is doing everything it can to not implement United Nations Security Council resolution 1559, which calls for a total withdrawal of its troops from Lebanon... The redeployment announced by (Syrian President Bashar) Assad is purely a cosmetic measure. It is unacceptable."
Assad announced in parliament on Saturday the withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon to the eastern Bekaa valley and then to the Syrian frontier but gave no timetable for the redeployments. "Assad did not breathe a word about Syrian secret agents who, in plainclothes, also occupy Lebanon," Shalom added before leaving for talks in the United States. "Lebanon has the right to be free, democratic, sovereign and independent," Shalom said. "That would be the guarantee of better relations between Lebanon and Israel, even a peace treaty." He indicated that Israel was "ready for a dialogue with Syria and has engaged in discreet contacts in this respect" but peace was impossible as long as Syria supports terrorism and protects drug trafficking in Lebanon.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/07/2005 11:12:36 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Jordan's King Abdallah wrapped up a brief visit to the Saudi capital yesterday evening after holding wide-ranging talks with Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Fahd and Crown Prince Abdullah. The talks focused on the latest developments in the Arab world after the killing of Lebanon's former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and Saturday's announcement of a Syrian troop pullback from Lebanon by President Bashar Assad. "The talks between Saudi and Jordanian leaders covered the whole gamut of regional and international developments with special reference to the Syrian announcement of troop withdrawal from Lebanon," said Arab diplomatic sources here.
Saudi Arabia and Jordan, which reaffirmed their commitment to peace and security in the region, support a Syrian troop withdrawal in compliance with the Taif Accord of 1989 and UN Security Council Resolution 1559. The talks were attended by Interior Minister Prince Naif and Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal and, on the Jordanian side, by Premier Faisal Al-Fayez and Prince Hashim ibn Al-Hussain.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/07/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"reaffirmed their commitment to peace and security in the region"
They've finally dropped the bogus "stability" canard, I see. First sign of "progress" amongst the Kingy Thingy Krowd in the M.E. - the real progress has been over their soon-to-be dead bodies...
#2
I'm astounded that the descendant of the former rulers of Mecca and Medina could stomach even being in the same room as that upstart Saudi. I like to think that both were on edge looking for the hidden knife in the other's hand.
#4
I have to wonder what the Hashemites will do to the whabbists if and when that day comes? The Saudis will do anything to stay in power and spread their brand of Islam. Why is is the King of Jordan doing about that besides that great big Flag?
#5
SPoD, Hashemite is handicapped at the moment he does not have oil and oil=money. I suppose that he does what any crowned head would do in his place--he schemes. Of course, his hope is that the current ME upheaval may cause some effects, one of which may be dissolution of Saudi entity (nothing's eternal). He also presumed that he may become a king of post-Saddam's Iraq (which would provide some supply of oil and thusly moolah), so far that did not pan out, I think he overestimated Iraqi interest in the matter. He waits. If not him, his son or a grandson.
Iraq's newly-elected National Assembly holds its first session in Baghdad in nine days time, to embark on the road to democratic institutins - a new president, deputy presidents, prime minister, government and constitution. However, Iraq's Kurds and their Turkomen neighbors have been moving forward with plans of their own, as DEBKA-Net-Weekly disclosed in an exclusive report on February 25.
Kurdish leaders Jalal Talabani and Massoud Barzani termed a proposition put before them recently by the heads of the Turkomen community " extremely interesting and worth pursuing." The pursuit has gained headlong momentum.
DEBKA-Net-Weekly's sources reveal that Saad e-Din al-Kidj, chairman of the Turkmen Supreme Council essentially proposed the introduction of self-rule for the Turkoman homeland of Turkmeneli which abuts and often overlaps the Kurdish region and the oil-rich lands of northern Iraq (See attached DEBKAfile Special Map) and promises it will act as a buffer between Kurdistan and other parts of Iraq.
The Turkomen, predominantly a Muslim Turkic nation, represent Iraq's third ethnic minority, whose interests and safety are closely protected by Ankara.
The plan for Turkomen autonomy has come up before. In 2002, about a year before the US-led invasion of Iraq, CIA agents and undercover US troops floated the proposal while preparing the military and intelligence infrastructure for the war in the autonomous Kurdish region. The heads of the far larger and more powerful Kurdish community angrily rejected the plan as a political and security threat to their interests.
But much has changed in three years. Suddenly an autonomous Turkoman belt along their southern border looks to the Kurds like an asset to be welcomed - a shield against any Arab military threat from the south and east and a better-than-good insurance policy against Turkish military steps to stop the Kurds' advance toward independence and domination of the mixed town of Kirkuk. Irbil is already rubbing its hands at the prospect of bilateral economic and military cooperation with Ankara.
So keen are Talabani and Barzani on the Turkomen independence scheme that they have counter-offered the Turkomens a 25% share in the oil revenues of Kirkuk. This offer was made without a by-your-leave from the interim government in Baghdad headed by Iyad Allawi and certainly not from the post-election administration due to rise.
Most Iraqis in high places find the notion of the Kurdish-Turkomen oil grab hard to believe..
But the momentum is hard to stop. Ankara has been informed that the Kurds will pocket 75% of the northern oil revenues and grant the Turkomen 25% to support their self-ruling enclave.
This deal augurs a reshaping of the map of northern Iraq. The Turkomen strip runs transversely from Tel Afar near the Syrian border in the west up to a point south of Kurdish Halabja near the Iranian border to the east. Its population, estimated at between two and three million, centers on the two main towns of Tel Afar and Kuz-Khrumatu.
The oil receipts will finance a new army whose Turkish officers will supply the weapons and training.
This will be the first time in modern history that the Turks will have gained a military foothold in northern Iraq in a region that commands the Sunni Triangle north of Baghdad.
Ankara will have no more need to establish a military presence in northern Iraq. It will have under its command 50-60,000 Turkomen troops, which the Turks and the Kurds are certain will be fully trained and combat-ready much sooner than the Iraqi army the Americans are building further south. This army will be backed by the 100,000-strong Kurdish army.
This signal development should not only dispel Ankara's fears of a Kurdish independent state but bring forth is firm support.
By the end of this year or early 2006, the central government in Baghdad may therefore find itself staring at an army of 160,000 trained soldiers to the north. This force, not subject to the federal government's orders, will be the best trained and disciplined of any force in the country.
The Turkomen-Kurdish deal has an important ethnic aspect.
Their coalition in the new national assembly, 102-105 deputies strong, is committed to voting against the new constitution proclaiming Iraq an Arab republic. Sections of the dominant 140-member Shiite United Iraqi Alliance may go along with this position. It is therefore very possible that, for the first time in two centuries, a democratically-elected majority will take a former Arab state out of the Arab bloc.
DEBKA-Net-Weekly's sources in Kurdistan report that Kurdish leaders have been showering lavish concessions on the Turkomens to make sure they do not have a change of heart. Areas once hotly contested are now opened up to them and not entirely out of the kindness of Kurdish hearts; they reckon that if the Turkomen expand into all parts of Kurdistan and are awarded equal rights, they will sink a part of their share of oil profits in Kurdistan and so invest in independent Kurdistan's development and prosperity.
This week, therefore, Kurdish leaders invited all the Turkomen driven out of Kirkuk (where they used to account for one-third of the population) to return and reclaim their property with Kurdish government's guarantees for their safety.
In a few short weeks, the seedlings of two independent non-Arab Iraqi states have begun sending out strong shoots.
#2
Phil, well, if I were a Turkoman, I would have been indoctrinated since I barely crawled about lazy, no-good arabic scum. Sooo ... despite some misgivings about Kurds as well (troublemakers), I think my choice would be somewhat predetermined.
#3
I regularly check out the Turkish press, and while there is a fair amount of seething over the Kurdish issue, there is also a strong real-politik thread that says Turkey should have friendly relations with the Kurds. Turkey may even be quietly pushing this.
#4
Questions that need to be answered: would this mean that Kurdistan and the Turkomen enclave would remain in Iraq? And if so, would it just be the Kurds recognizing the Turkomen enclave, or would they be a separate federal district recognized by the central government? Second, I suspect there being no direct land route between the enclave and Turkey is very intentional. But at the same time, there is a Syria to Iran connection. Is this solely to act as a buffer against the Arabs of the South, or do the Turkomen share interests in these two countries too? Third, does this so totally disconnect northern Iraq from the South that it creates two separate nations? If the central government has no influence left in the North, and the Kurds no longer fear the threat of Turkey, what compels them to continue to be part of Iraq?
#5
That this is even being discussed neatly defangs Turkey's posturing. After all, their original position was based on protecting their tribal cousins, and if they push the Kurds too hard, the turkmen will lose Kurdish protection. Well done -- it this is indeed real. ;-)
#6
Anonymoose, let's say that at the moment it is in a process of fermentation.
It can be, though, probably separated in phased elements.
1. Kurds and Turkomans will join forces in the federal context. In other words, the Kurdish area would be expanded to include the Turkoman areas.
In return, Turkomans would have their representation guaranteed in the Kurdish local government.
2. I do not want to peer in a crystal ball, but some major shifts are likely to happen in ME in the near future. Syria may not survive in its current incarnation and I tend to believe that Turks may go along with some scheme of split up where Kurds may get a nice strip reaching from the current Iraq-Syria border to Mediterranean. It would be a good exchange for Turkish territorial integrity. This may happen gradually, there is still issue of Iran and until that is resolved, any sudden moves may make the region highly volatile.
3. In the post-ME-shakeup, Kurds will gain independence. Their state would include the current Kurdish Iraq, the northern Syrian strip and less likely--some parts of north-western Iran.
This would be underwriten by Turks with a provision that any Kurdish claims on the Turkish territory are invalid. As for Iraqi Turkomans, they may be better off to tie their future with Kurds than opt for independence, because their strip has little to offer as resources go. It is also possible that some degree of population exchange would be arranged between Turks and Kurds, it would make a good sense.
As a consequence, the rest of the Iraq is likely split as well, along sunni and shi'a lines, albeit sunnis would be smarter not to let that happen--they would be a snack for anyone, unless they form some alliance with either Jordan or whatever is left over from Syria.
#7
I doubt in a Syrian carve up that the Kurds will get access to the sea but they will get north east Syria. Kurdish direct access to the sea lessens their dependence on Turkey and not in Turkey's interest.
#8
Sobiesky: Okay, let's throw the deck of cards up in the air. If Syria collapses, I can well imagine a northern slice becoming part of Kurdistan, along with the assumption of power by the Sunni majority over the Alawite. Lebanon almost has to purge its foreign-backed radical element, Hizbullah, or it will become a divided nation. However, the BIG issue is Iran. If Iran becomes unstable, for whatever reason, there is a large chunk that is ethnically Kurdish (see ethnic map http://tinyurl.com/6tpmp), and would be irresistable to a greater Kurdistan, if the Iranians could not protect it. However, if any partitioning of Iran happens, the whole country could be Balkanized overnight, much like what happened to Yugoslavia.
#9
If a Turkish enclave in Iraq is to have any viability and security, it has to link physically with Turkey.
So take the west end of the Turkmen enclave on that map, and punch it northwest to Turkey. Oops, that goes through Syria. Wotta shame. The northeast of Syria goes to the Kurds, the north central to the Turkomens (mebbe to the Med), the Damascenes keep their part of Syria, and maybe the Turks decide to be real gents and let the Turkish Kurds join an independent Kurdistan.
Well okay that last part doesn't happen, but the rest is intersting speculation.
Posted by: Steve White ||
03/07/2005 18:50 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Phil, the portion of the coast that would fall into Kurdish sphere is rather narrow (25km, north of Lakatia) and underdeveloped, just beaches. Turks probably have nothing to worry about, and as the pipelines go, they are already routed through north.
Anonymoose, yes, Iran is an unknown. Azeris and Kurds have some claim beef, Azeris would gain an especially big chunk. The other minorities are fragmented except Pashtun on the eastern frontier, so it would be a bit harder for them to have some leverage.
#11
My scenario for an Iranian breakup starts with Iraqi Shiias invading Khuzestan (formerly called Arabistan) to protect their Shiia Arab kin. Oman exercising its historic claim to the north shore of the Straits of Hormuz would be an unlikely but very nice bonus. Then of course there are the Baluchis.
#12
Steve, ye'r probably right that Turks may try to connect the Turkoman areas to Turkey. The question is how that would resonate with EUros (Turkey's membership in Holy EU Empire). I think they may be ambivalent as there is really no Turkish minority to speak of in Syria.
#14
The Kurds wouldn't want the Turkomen involved directly with the Turks. That would inevitably result in their trying to grab the Kurds' oil. If the Turkomen and the Turks are separate, then the Turks are motivated to be nice to the Kurds, and the Kurds are motivated to be nice to the Turkomen. The Turks would even have to guarantee Kurdistan from Arab invasion, because that would have to cross the enclave to get there. That is why, if Syria changes hands to be ruled by the majority Sunni, there is a bit of a problem, in that the Kurds will have to choose which they dislike more, exposure to a Sunni threat, or exposure to a united Turkey and Turkoman threat. I would guess they would feel less threatened by Syrian Sunni than Iraqi Sunni. N.B.: The Iraqi Sunni and the Syrian Sunni might kiss and make up, creating a third problem...
#15
Sobiesky: There may not be a Turkish presence in NE Syria, but there is a Kurdish one there. Mostly along the border with Turkey, where the old RR line ran (runs?). If that area gets pulled off, I think I know who is going to claim it.
#16
Just found this negotiating paper prepared by American lawyers for the Turkomen. It was written pre-election and rather foolishly assumes Turkomen would get a majority in Kirkuk. However, it did remind me that in a federal state, the states (provinces) control natural resources.
Here is a good map of Iraqi ethnic groups. It shows the Turkomen in 5 or 6 separate pockets. I very much doubt you could create a contiguous territory from them.
This document released by the Ministry of the Interior of the Netherlands' is twelve pages long but worth the read if your serious about understanding the Saudi role in furthering Islamo-fascist terrorism around the world. They have some other interesting reports on their web-site. I did some time working with the Dutch military and they aren't all dope-smoking hippie freaks. Links between the Salafist mission, radicalisation processes and Islamic terrorism
The past few years have given cause to questions about the involvement of Saudi citizens, non-governmental organisations and persons in authority in the propagation among Muslims of strong anti-Western ideas, which could incite to radicalisation and perhaps even to terrorism. This issue has become topical since the attacks of 11 September 2001. Fifteen of the nineteen hijackers were found to have the Saudi nationality. In particular in the United States these attacks focused much attention on a possible, direct or indirect, responsibility of inspirators or sponsors from Saudi Arabia for Islamic radicalism and terrorism. In the US, but also in other Western countries the question was also raised whether certain persons and organisations, based in Saudi Arabia and combining aid with the propagation of a highly orthodox and at the same time anti-Western view of the Islam, might be linked to certain radicalisation processes within Muslim communities and the promotion or even support of terrorist violence.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the AIVD this question was cause for a profound investigation into the other side of the religious-ideological manipulative activities and financing flows from Saudi Arabia. At issue in this context are in particular the role that these possibly play in the Netherlands in the propagation of anti-integration views, the increase of sentiments aimed at a confrontation with Dutch society among small segments of the Muslim communities in our country, and in the long term even the development of endogenous, violent tendencies (which, for example, may lead to terrorism) among some groups of Muslims in the Netherlands.
This report describes the state of affairs regarding the investigation at this moment. It is clear from the text that this concerns an issue which is still developing. On the one hand, this is a consequence of the noticeable willingness of the Saudi government, partly influenced by increasing terrorist threats in Saudi Arabia itself, to take strong action against individual extremists and networks that until recently, for the benefit of their own radical Islamic agenda, were able to misuse Saudi government institutions or semi-governmental organisations. On the other hand, we also notice shifts in those segments of Muslim communities in the Netherlands that have shown to be susceptible to manipulative activities deployed from Saudi Arabia.
This memorandum will first elaborate on the nature of Salafism in Saudi Arabia and in the Netherlands. Subsequently it will discuss the Salafist mission and the relationship with radicalisation processes in the Muslim communities in our country. Finally, recent developments in both Saudi Arabia and the Netherlands are described.
This is my first post, hope it is as informative for you as it was for me and makes as much sense!
The long, twilight struggle against Islamo-fascism requires Civilization to deploy numerous weapons against this implacable foe. As usual, these will include intelligence, covert operations, and high-tech armaments. But another vital tool is language. How Americans and our allies speak and write about this conflict will influence when and how victory will come....Language can lull Americans to sleep in this new war, or it can keep us on the offense and our enemies off balance.
Here are a few ways language can keep Americans alert to the danger Islamic terrorism poses to this country:
September 11 was an attack, not just a string of coincidental strokes and heart failures that eliminated thousands of victims at once.
Recall some of the words that soon followed the September 11 atrocity. Kinko's, for instance, placed in its copy shops some very colorful posters with the Stars and Stripes emblazoned across the lower 48 states. That graphic included this regrettable caption:
"The Kinko's family extends our condolences and sympathies to all Americans who have been affected by the circumstances in New York City, Washington, D.C. and Pennsylvania."
Circumstances? That word describes an electrical blackout, not terrorist bloodshed.
Similarly, September 11 was tragic, but far more, too. "The September 11 tragedy" misses the point: Tornadoes cause tragedies, but they are not malicious, as America's enemies were that day, and still are.
Victims of terrorism do not "die," nor are they "lost." They are killed, murdered, and slaughtered.
Likewise, many say that people "died" in the Twin Towers and at the Pentagon. No, people "die" in hospitals, often surrounded by their loved ones while doctors and nurses offer them aid and comfort.
The innocent people at the World Trade Center, the Defense Department, and that field in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, were killed in a carefully choreographed act of mass murder.
Specify the number of human beings who terrorists destroy.
— "3,000" killed on 9-11 sounds like an amorphous blob. The actual number — 2,977 — forces people to regard these individuals as men and women with faces, stories, and loved ones who miss them very much.
— The precise figures are 2,749 killed at the World Trade Center, 184 at the Pentagon, and 44 in Shanksville, Pennsylvania...
...Terrorists do not simply "threaten" us, nor does homeland security merely shield Americans from "future attacks." These things are true, but it is more persuasive to acknowledge what these people have done and hope to do once more: Wipe us out...
...Quote Islamo-fascist leaders to remind people of their true intentions...
...Khomeini, ever the comedian, said this in 1986: "Allah did not create man so that he could have fun. The aim of creation was for mankind to be put to the test through hardship and prayer. An Islamic regime must be serious in every field. There are no jokes in Islam. There is no humor in Islam. There is no fun in Islam. There can be no fun and joy in whatever is serious."
— Asked what he would say to the loved ones of the 202 people killed in the October 2002 Bali nightclub explosions, Abu Bakar Bashir, the al-Qaeda-tied leader of Indonesia's radical Jemaah Islamiyah, replied, "My message to the families is: Please convert to Islam as soon as possible."...
...Is this a war on terror, per se? A war on terrorism? Or is it really a war on Islamo-fascism? It's really the latter, and Americans should say so.
Daniel Pipes of the Philadelphia-based Middle East Forum believes terror is a tactic, not an enemy.
Calling today's conflict "a 'War on Terror' is like America in 1941, after Pearl Harbor, declaring a 'War on Surprise Attacks.' We really are engaged in a war on radical Islam."
Jim Guirard runs the TrueSpeak Institute in Washington, D.C. He has thought long and hard about terror and the English language.
He recently informed me, to my horror, that more than three years into the war on Islamo-fascism, the State Department and the CIA have not produced a glossary of the Arabic-language words that Middle Eastern Islamo-fascists use, as well as the antonyms for those words. Such a "Thesaurus of Terrorism" would help Civilization turn this war's words upside down.
Why, for instance, do we inadvertently praise our enemies by agreeing that they fight a jihad or "holy war?" Instead, we correctly should describe them as soldiers in a hirabah or "unholy war."...
March 7, 2005: The U.S. Army is speeding up its efforts to get more UGVs (unmanned ground vehicles) into the hands of the troops. Over the last few years, hundreds of small UGVs have been used by American troops for checking out caves and buildings. Some of these lightweight (under a hundred pounds) robots are being equipped with weapons. The next class of UGVs will be heavier, weighing 1-3 tons. These include the much anticipated "mule" UGV. This critter will carry the troops equipment, bring up supplies, and move wounded troops. As more gadgets are invented for the troops, the weight they have to carry keeps increasing. One solution is a UGV that can accompany troops, carrying a lot of this load (otherwise, each soldier is going to be carrying about a hundred pounds of gear, which is hardly "fighting weight.") There's one problem, a major one, and that is the building of a sensor/software system that would allow the mule UGV to move along the ground without a human driver. So far, this has proved to be a major obstacle. It is possible to have a remote human operator control a UGV. That keeps people out of harms way, and the military is using operators half way around the world to operate UAVs. This "reachback" technique is possible because of cheaper and more abundant satellite communications. No reason it could not be done for UGVs. And this may be the interim solution until a smart enough UGV navigation system is built. This would be a big help for the troops, as they would have the benefit of these UGV drivers, but these troops (they could even be civilians), would be out of harms way, and would not consume supplies in the combat zone.
Once the mules are with the troops and working, and this may happen in the next few years, you will quickly see armed mules, some of them armored and weighing up to ten tons. Without a human crew, a ten ton armored mule would look like a miniature tank, but would be carrying a 25-30mm automatic cannon and 2-4 Javelin missiles. These vehicles would also carry day/night vidcams, thermal imagers, "ears" (acoustic sensors) and a nose (chemical sensors). The combat mules can also talk, using embedded foreign language systems (like the hand held versions troops have been using), or human translators (again, these could be back in the United States, and could even be civilians.) The advantage of these armed mules is that they can destroy enemy armored vehicles, while being harder to detect (as they are about the size of small sports car). No friendly troops are risked when these vehicles are hit, and their sensors and human operators (some of whom are far to the rear) are more alert, over longer periods of time, than human crews in current armored vehicles. You'll be seeing pictures of the prototypes in the next year or two. The laboratory prototypes are not very impressive to look at. The use of a mix of local troops and operators back in the United States will be a big "force multiplier" until software is developed that is smart enough to maneuver the armed mules, and decide when they can use their weapons.
"Bolo Brigade, reporting for duty!"
There are already civilian robotic security systems. But their software moves a vehicle around a known course, with limited navigation ability, and only enough smarts to alert a human operator that the droid has encountered something that is not supposed to be there. A combat UGV that will be allowed to decide when and where to fire is possible now. But there is reluctance to turn these loose. The first such autonomous weapons of this class were the landmines developed in the 1930s, and widely used during World War II. Torpedoes and naval mines are the same type of weapon. But at sea, it's much easier to keep track of where you are, where you're going and what the target is. Land warfare is a lot messier, and requires much more "intelligent" software to operate effectively. But it's not a matter of "if" these autonomous war droids are going to appear, but when. It's possible that the next generation of American combat vehicles will be largely unmanned versions.
Posted by: Steve ||
03/07/2005 10:01:07 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
The tendency is to over "bell-and-whistle" the things. Optimally, their design should be like a cross between an APC and a light tank, if possible, a Humvee-like design of multiple configurations. You *don't* want something as useless and maintenance heavy as the infamous Gamma Goat, which is all-too-soon forgotten. Other than that, it has to be very resistant to RPGs and IEDs. A "war wagon" concept would be good, a place where infantry could hide behind armor and still shoot. But you don't want to pack it full of stuff besides the infantry load it carries and maybe one 'medium' weapon. In other type vehicles, remember to keep an open mind for robotics. Anything from a high-speed armored motor (motorcycle) tricycle to a low-altitude "fanwing"-type carrier aircraft (a fanwing aircraft is stronger and quieter than a helicopter, and I could imagine a square fanwing with four farm-harvester-like lift propellers, in effect creating a flat, flying gun platform.)
#6
Lots of cool stuff on the way, no doubt about it. Getting it to the field and gaining needed experience takes guts, especially with systems that can fight. That would currently be lacking IMO.
#7
Listen. And understand. That terminator is out there. It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.
#10
Cleamp Ebbereling9442: a similar idea, except that by using a fanwing lift, you avoid the instability of a rotor. A fanwing is quieter, has a heavier lift ability, and can be shielded from ground fire. So instead of a single person lift, imagine a four-person or cargo-lift of around 2000lb, to upwards of a squad-lift, 10,000lb platform that can carry all kinds of equipment and can land on any surface the size of the platform--no special landing area required. With an armored bottom able to take a hit from an RPG, these systems could be much like a dedicated infantry company helicopter. And there would be a heck of a lot less maintenance than for a helicopter. www.fanwing.com
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
03/07/2005 13:59 Comments ||
Top||
#13
RC, Bun Bun the Sheva (aka giant 7000 ton artillery platform that fires nukes), robo-Bun Bun (aka the robot terminator easter bunny), or the actual Bun Bun? I mean they're all pretty much fatal to your health but we gotta be specific here.
#17
Thatn where biology comes in Phil. Should be some sorta X prize for someone who can engineer the brains of a Missouri Mule and build them in a factory.
Posted by: Francis ||
03/07/2005 17:13 Comments ||
Top||
#18
I think their appreciation of Computer Vision (CV) is dated. I saw a demo 6 years ago that was nearly good enough. There's commercial stuff out there that's close, too (Aibo, etc.).
#2
It was a set up from the beginning. If the commies directly passed money to the hate-America allies in Iraq they knew they could be picked up and hammered, in Italy or the US, for assisting the terrorists. However, they got one of their own to fake a hostage situation so funds would have a legit cover in transfer. Someone raised a point about this all being fishy back on a post many days back when the news id'd the lady as a reporter for the Italian communist paper.
#4
First off I believe the Communists part in Italy is not the Major party and does not represent a large portion of anybody. The fact that after shooting there were only 100 demonstrators outside the U.S. Embassy shows you their true political power. I am betting that at lease half of those were rent-a-dupe and cared not for the communists party. I think that if we knew they were paying a ransom wqe would have tried to stop it, but I still believe that this idiot was a willing participant (on some level). Again this might be a simple crime for money gig since the elections didn't go well for the insurgents. A little cash to go melt away.
#1
ABBAS: It was individuals. We arrested five. If you ask me who is responsible, the Israelis are responsible. The bombers came from the suburb of Tulkarem to Tel Aviv, crossing the wall. So who is responsible? The wall and the Israelis.
It achieves the ambitions of Iraqis for sovereignty = 73.12%
It satisfies ambition of certain Iraqi groups = 12.90%
It helps legitimise the American occupation = 13.98%
Posted by: Steve White ||
03/07/2005 12:08:39 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Whoa. A poll of Arabs taken by Arabs and this is the result? Wow. They've come a long way in 2 years. I'm stunned. I hope this is legit - it's 10x more impressive regards their Grabbing a Clue than I had any right to expect. I guess the Wahhabists I was surrounded by were off the scale, relative to these people. My complements to the Iraqi Kurds and Shi'a. The Sunni responses are remarkably identifiable in the numbers. Congrats, Iraqis. Keep going - it gets better and better the further you go.
#2
These people had to smell the propaganda and false news of the Baathists and Saddam so long that they have excellent BS detectors.
The UN resolution questions answer is surprising. I would think they would naturally distrust anything UN at all.
The support the government against terrorists has it truly awesome. That level of support speaks volumes against the Bull Shit the media, LLL and others spew.
Tension has been building at different points along the Indo-Bangladesh border over the push-in of Bengali-speaking Indians and erection of barbed wire fences by the Border Security Force (BSF) of India. Thousands of people have started fleeing their homes to safer places fearing that skirmishes could break out at any moment. The Bangladesh Border Rifles (BDR) has been kept on red alert in the borders of Lalmonirhat, Chapainawabganj and Khagrachhari districts. The border forces of both countries have exchanged gunshots at Ramgarh border points in Khagrachhari district over erection of barbed wire fence there. Both border guards have reinforced their forces.
India is building the fence along its 4,000-km border with Bangladesh, saying it has been fed up with smugglers and rebels crossing the frontier. India and Bangladesh had a longstanding agreement that neither country would build any structures within 150 meters of the border, a BDR official said. A report from Lalmonirhat said, more than 1,000 families of two villages, Singimari and Burosarodubi, had left for shelters as the BDR announced a red alert at the Singimari border point under Hatibandha sub-district. Many other families are also on a move to leave the villages due to the tense situation at the border points.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/07/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
So, just curious here, but what's India's stance on the fence Israel is building?
Posted by: Laurence of the Rats ||
03/07/2005 0:21 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Looks like fence building is taking on a momentum of it's own.
Pakistan's president yesterday said he would not allow Uzbek terrorists to use his country's territory to launch attacks on the ex-Soviet nation. Radical groups that the government have linked to Al-Qaeda have targeted Uzbekistan in recent years. More than 50 people died last year. One group, the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, is believed to have found shelter in Pakistan's largely lawless border areas.
Visiting Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf signed an agreement with this ex-Soviet country on fighting terrorism. "I have assured President (Islam Karimov) that Pakistan will not allow the use of its soil by any terrorists from Uzbekistan ... and we will act against them," Musharraf said during a visit to the Uzbek capital Tashkent. Musharraf also signaled that Pakistan would be ready to extradite any alleged Uzbek terrorists captured in Pakistan. "We ought to have a very effective extradition treaty which will ensure an institutional arrangement on extraditing any terrorists from each other's countries to our respective countries," he said. Uzbekistan last year saw a series of attacks that killed more than 50 people that authorities blamed on radical groups based in Pakistan.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/07/2005 10:36:35 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
The Interior Ministry has asked the provinces including the administration of the federal capital and chief secretaries of the Northern Areas and Azad Jammu and Kashmir to compile data of officials allegedly involved in supporting elements of defunct religious outfits, sources told Daily Times on Sunday. These officials had allegedly leaked information to such outfits about the measures the government was taking against them, sources added. The orders were issued in light of reports by intelligence agencies stating that a majority of raids conducted by law enforcement agencies against elements of banned outfits were unsuccessful because of information leaks, they said.
That'd be Mahmoud the Weasel, still hard at work...
The reports also stated that as law enforcement agencies had planned these raids, only government officials could have been involved in the leaks, sources said. All provincial police officers and the federal capital inspector general of police were also asked to form teams consisting of police and district government officials at the district level to compile reports on the links of government officials including officials of law enforcement agencies with banned religious organisations, sources added. They were also asked to get information on the relatives of officials involved in sectarian violence and who were supporting armed religious groups, they said, adding that the reports would be sent to the Establishment Division and other concerned departments for examination. Officials would be terminated from service if proven guilty in this regard, sources claimed.
Law enforcement agencies had raided several locations countrywide to arrest elements of defunct religious organisations after sectarian violence in Gilgit, but most elements managed to escape at the last moment. Elements who had threatened Kashmir Affairs Minister Faisal Saleh Hayat also managed to escape because information about the raid had been leaked to them. Brig (r) Javed Iqbal Cheema, director general of the National Crisis Management Cell, was not available for comment.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/07/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Hook-handed Abu Hamza has been viciously attacked by a fellow jail inmate, it emerged last night. The fanatical Muslim cleric, 47, was thumped inside London's top-security Belmarsh prison, a jail source said.
The Democrats are getting their own talk show -- in cyberspace. Two Democratic political consultants are preparing to launch a weekly online political talk show that will showcase the party's message, lambaste Republicans and, they hope, open a new front in the ongoing media wars. It's called DemsTV.com, and each Tuesday, beginning tomorrow, the Web site will feature 20 minutes or so of talking-head chatter from a rotating cast of young Democratic operatives. "The primary focus is on politics, and, frankly, a heavy focus is on pointing out the foibles and scandals and dirty little secrets of Republicans that we think don't receive as much coverage in the mainstream media as they might," said Dan Manatt, one of the producers.
DAMASCUS - Syria's President Bashar al-Assad and Lebanese counterpart Emile Lahoud were to hold a summit in Damascus on Monday to mark the start of a pullback of Syrian troops in its tiny neighbour.
Israel on Sunday accused Damascus of being involved in terrorism and reiterated demands for a total withdrawal of Syrian troops from neighbouring Lebanon. "The Syrians are dangerous. They have always been involved in terrorist attacks on Israel on the one hand, and on Americans in Iraq on the other," Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom told public radio. "Syria is doing everything it can to not implement United Nations Security Council resolution 1559, which calls for a total withdrawal of its troops from Lebanon... The redeployment announced by (Syrian President Bashar) Assad is purely a cosmetic measure. It is unacceptable."
Jordan's King Abdallah wrapped up a brief visit to the Saudi capital yesterday evening after holding wide-ranging talks with Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Fahd and Crown Prince Abdullah. The talks focused on the latest developments in the Arab world after the killing of Lebanon's former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and Saturday's announcement of a Syrian troop pullback from Lebanon by President Bashar Assad. "The talks between Saudi and Jordanian leaders covered the whole gamut of regional and international developments with special reference to the Syrian announcement of troop withdrawal from Lebanon," said Arab diplomatic sources here. 
March 7, 2005: The U.S. Army is speeding up its efforts to get more UGVs (unmanned ground vehicles) into the hands of the troops. Over the last few years, hundreds of small UGVs have been used by American troops for checking out caves and buildings. Some of these lightweight (under a hundred pounds) robots are being equipped with weapons. The next class of UGVs will be heavier, weighing 1-3 tons. These include the much anticipated "mule" UGV. This critter will carry the troops equipment, bring up supplies, and move wounded troops. As more gadgets are invented for the troops, the weight they have to carry keeps increasing. One solution is a UGV that can accompany troops, carrying a lot of this load (otherwise, each soldier is going to be carrying about a hundred pounds of gear, which is hardly "fighting weight.") There's one problem, a major one, and that is the building of a sensor/software system that would allow the mule UGV to move along the ground without a human driver. So far, this has proved to be a major obstacle. It is possible to have a remote human operator control a UGV. That keeps people out of harms way, and the military is using operators half way around the world to operate UAVs. This "reachback" technique is possible because of cheaper and more abundant satellite communications. No reason it could not be done for UGVs. And this may be the interim solution until a smart enough UGV navigation system is built. This would be a big help for the troops, as they would have the benefit of these UGV drivers, but these troops (they could even be civilians), would be out of harms way, and would not consume supplies in the combat zone.
Pakistan's president yesterday said he would not allow Uzbek terrorists to use his country's territory to launch attacks on the ex-Soviet nation. Radical groups that the government have linked to Al-Qaeda have targeted Uzbekistan in recent years. More than 50 people died last year. One group, the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, is believed to have found shelter in Pakistan's largely lawless border areas. 
