At the heart of America's failure lies the administration's refusal to recognize that the contemporary roots of Islamic terror are to be found in American policies.
... rather than in the Koran.
...senior American officials and particularly the neoconservative 'friends' of Israel among them angrily reject any such link. For them, hostility to the US is the product of backward Muslim societies, failed states and an inherently violent religion.
Since Muslim societies are for the most part backward, failed states, and since the wahhabi brand of Islam is inherently violent and the Shiite brand as peddled by Iran is equally so, that seems a reasonable assumption...
It has nothing to do, they argue, with America's wars or Israel's brutal occupation.
When members of inherently violent religions seethe, they eventually try to take their frustrations out on members of civilized societies. So it does have something to do with those wars and brutal occupation though in the writer's mind effect -> cause. I think the fallacy's called "post propter hoc."
More effort should be made, they say, explaining American values to Muslim opinion! The committee investigating the Sept. 11 attacks recommended that the US government provide much larger resources to support broadcasts to Muslim audiences, rebuild scholarship and exchange programs, help fight high illiteracy in the Middle East, do more to encourage economic development and trade in fact do every thing except change American policies!
That's because they're making the assumption, which seems pretty much proven, that many Muslim states are backward, failed states, dominated by a brutally violent religion. On the other hand, there's no American animosity toward those Muslim states, such as Morocco and Tunisia, who're trying to break out of the mold, only toward those stubbornly clinging to it.
Not only is this approach fundamentally wrong headed, but it provides the US with an alibi for not addressing the 'roots of terror' that is to say the anger, desperation and rampant political grievance which cause men and women to want to hit back against their tormentors, even at the cost of their lives. For example, instead of stopping Israel's infamous wall and its expanding settlements as it alone could do the US is doing the exact opposite!"
That was after expending time and resources being pureed in the peace processor. Eventually we tired of the game and moved on to more productive approaches.
Every Muslim today is of the writer's opinion that calls for reassessment and change in US policies toward the Middle East. Efforts to prevent terrorism should address the root causes of conflicts that are enraging innocent civilians in the Muslim world.
The Muslims planted the seeds of the root causes. Let them prune the resulting growth. Those aren't our countries, not even when we have to invade them.
#3
Here is the article, My guess is they can't figure out that dropping skyscrapers, blowing up
embassies and beheading innocents has anything to do with it.
The often-heard complaint from the Western world is that the entire Muslim community does not condemn the acts of violence that are being perpetrated today in the name of Islam. No matter how many times Muslim organizations or Muslim states condemn terrorist acts committed by militants who do not represent the majority of the Muslim world the Western media does not convey these condemnations to the readers. As a result the public is kept uninformed and continues to perceive all Muslims as enemies and a threat to the Western world. Every Muslim today is being blamed for the crimes of a minority whose acts are rejected and abhorred by the majority of Muslims adhering to the true principles of Islam. There is no true Muslim in the world that condones the acts of the terrorists who claim to be followers of the faith. The fact is Muslims are a peaceful people who have been victimized in the past and are being demonized today.
The media in the US and the West claims that the entire Muslim community remains silent and indifferent to the violence that is being committed by a deviant minority in the name of Islam. That is far from the truth. Muslims all over the world have condemned and condemned over and over again through official statements by governmental and nongovernmental organizations. The media and satellite channels in the Muslim world continue to air programs that express the views of the majority of the public that condemn terrorist acts and reject the extremist views of militants in the Muslim world. Religious scholars and spiritual leaders continue to preach tolerance and give guidance to Muslim youth who remain devastated and disappointed in the whole world â disappointed in their leaders who have allowed them to be humiliated; disappointed in the injustices committed against their people while the whole world watches; disappointed in the international legal system that is inactive; and above all disappointed by the actions of the few that has tarnished their image and has given Islam a bad name.
The conflict in the Middle East, the war on terror and the clash of civilizations have been the focus of the media since the Sept. 11 2001 attacks against the US. The biased views and analyses as well as the negative coverage against all Muslims continue to fuel the Westâs sentiments against the Muslim community. Of the many articles that I have read there is one that I believe has summarized the whole situation clearly and gives a lot of justice to the demonized Muslims of today.
The author of the article that I am referring to is the British writer Patrick Seale. I will conclude with an extract of his analysis.
âBut events have shown that military means alone are unable to quell a shadowy, stateless organization such as Al-Qaeda or a nationalist insurgency such as the US is battling in Iraq. No effective strategy for either type of conflict has yet been devised by the US. Instead, Bushâs doctrine of preventive war â which favors armed intervention over containment and seeks to impose Americaâs will unilaterally â has driven a coach and horses through international legality. It has estranged some of Americaâs main European allies, triggering a crisis in trans-Atlantic relations, which will take years to heal. It has also enraged the Muslim world.
At the heart of Americaâs failure lies the administrationâs refusal to recognize that the contemporary roots of Islamic terror are to be found in American policies. ...senior American officials â and particularly the neoconservative âfriendsâ of Israel among them â angrily reject any such link. For them, hostility to the US is the product of backward Muslim societies, failed states and an inherently violent religion. It has nothing to do, they argue, with Americaâs wars or Israelâs brutal occupation. More effort should be made, they say, explaining American values to Muslim opinion! The committee investigating the Sept. 11 attacks recommended that the US government provide much larger resources to support broadcasts to Muslim audiences, rebuild scholarship and exchange programs, help fight high illiteracy in the Middle East, do more to encourage economic development and trade â in fact do every thing except change American policies!
Not only is this approach fundamentally wrong headed, but it provides the US with an alibi for not addressing the âroots of terrorâ â that is to say the anger, desperation and rampant political grievance which cause men and women to want to hit back against their tormentors, even at the cost of their lives. For example, instead of stopping Israelâs infamous wall and its expanding settlements â as it alone could do â the US is doing the exact opposite!â
Every Muslim today is of the writerâs opinion that calls for reassessment and change in US policies toward the Middle East. Efforts to prevent terrorism should address the root causes of conflicts that are enraging innocent civilians in the Muslim world.
Patrick Seale is one of many writers with a conscience. Pat Buchanan, Robert Fisk, Noam Chomsky, John Pilger, Jonathan Power, Linda Heard, and other Western writers have been advocates of peace and are brave enough to speak out in defense of the Muslim world. However a lot more needs to be done to stop the increasing prejudice against Muslims in the West that is threatening world peace.
America please listen. No more wars. Give peace a chance.
#4
"Efforts to prevent terrorism should address the root causes of conflicts that are enraging innocent civilians in the Muslim world."
And Thailand's part in the Middle East conflict for which the muslim terrorist are killing Thais is?
Posted by: Don ||
10/05/2004 11:13 Comments ||
Top||
#5
There's no pathetic, excuse-making whiner like an Arab: try googling the phrase, "1.2 billion helpless Muslims" and see what comes up.
If these worthless shitheads would put just half the effort into fixing their ailing, sick-puppy culture that they put into complaining about how unfair we're being to them, the world would be a paradise.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
10/05/2004 11:27 Comments ||
Top||
#6
If Mormons, Scientologists, Branch Dividians, fans of Justin Timberlake or the KKK were beheading "non believers" or creating cowardly acts of chaos, America would find a way do more than "condemn" the perps.
Despite being a democratic culture, the will of the majority would come down hard in defense of civilization. Clash of civilizations? No, it is a clash of Civilization versus Barbarians.
Pick your side, "billions of peace lovers", and stop whining. Until Islams billions reign in their fanatics, the task is left up to "infidels".
Posted by: Fred ||
10/05/2004 12:38 Comments ||
Top||
#8
War is to liberals as sex is to ultra-conservatives - denial of human nature.
The liberals who attempt to cling to the 60's "what if you had a war and no one showed up" is as brain crushingly stupid as the idea that you can stop prostitution or drugs by just saying no.
Jersey Mike...go join your Salvation Army protests and bang a drum. You look just as stupid.
#14
now our enemies have had the last 25 years to fight agaisnt us...it is only fair we get a few years to return the favor...
Posted by: Dan ||
10/05/2004 14:23 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Samar, habibti, let's not beat around the boosh
1. What is your definition of terrorist acts? Do Zarqawi bombings in Iraq constitute terrorism?
2. Have you read the Chritian Science Monitor article posted yesterday on why 3 free thinkers (as their "crimes" are so petty, I won't even dignify them as "dissidents") are rotting behind bars?
3. Have Arab govts. done enough to change policies so that discussions without fear can take place in al-watan al-arab?
4. Did you attend the conference in Jeddah re how the Arab/Muslim world needs to influence and bamboozle outsiders so they see you as victims?
5. Do you really think that the US has not changed its policies toward your part of the planet?
For 1, you roundly condemn terrorism and you plead with us to understand that your country and other Muslim countries condemn it also. What, however, if you believe it's OK to kill infidels in the name of jihad and THAT is not terrorism but legitimate resistance? BTW, I'm so glad that the preachers who speak in front of the Kaaba on Fridays are moderate in their approach.
If your answer to second part of 1 is yes, then the govt. of Algeria is responsible for the more than 100,000 deaths that have taken place since 1992 in that Godforsaken land. Plus these deaths are justifiable. You know, suppression breeds violence and all that. Then you also have to believe that the bombings and violence in the MK are also justified. You know, humiliation breeds hate and all that. What other methods do the suppressed have if delegitimizing means of expression are part and parcel of the political landscape or your region?
For 2, Your fellow citizens languishing in the slammer would no doubt see the irony in your blaming the Great Satan and its Zionist entity buddy for problems in your region. I imagine they don't blame the usual suspects for their enforced stay; rather, they blame Prince Naive, the Min. of Interior. What bombs and bullets have their fingerprints? Fingerprints are only on their pens.
For 3, if you answer no, be pro-active and make sure that you revise your commentary so it reads like a look- into-the-mirror piece. Send it to Okaz or Medinah Arabic lang. papers. Then pack your bags and get ready for a stay behind bars. If you dare.
For 4, if you did, then you paid entirely too much attention (and money) on the drivel that participants were spouting. You also spout only drivel. Pure template. "The Other is the cause of my misery." Why didn't you just look up one of Chomsky's articles and save money?
For 5, the US has turned a new leaf in its policies toward ME. You folks have remained inert. It's called cerebral calcification and your public figures, just like the Left here, can only function in this state. I can only hope Boosh, Rummy, Wolfy, Condi, and Cheney come out on top to finish the changes. If not, then don't worry about a thing. The State Dept. may even have you visit the Land of the Free and Home of the Brave on its own nickel to scold us for our insensitivity.
Posted by: chicago mike ||
10/05/2004 15:22 Comments ||
Top||
#17
...senior American officials â and particularly the neoconservative âfriendsâ of Israel among them â angrily reject any such link. For them, hostility to the US is the product of backward Muslim societies, failed states and an inherently violent religion...
No, hostility to the US is due to many Muslims' fixation on finding a savior for a leader, rather than promoting non-religious leadership qualities in each individual in the societies. When they seek saviors in suicide bombers, jihadi executioners, and Wahabi governments and their lives don't change for the better, they become filled with envy, shame, and a propensity for finding scapegoats.
Posted by: Capt America ||
10/05/2004 19:16 Comments ||
Top||
#21
Brave Jihadi's always look for an out when they're getting their asses kicked. "Look for the root causes" is right up there at the top of the list.
#22
I pulled up behind a car with California tags and the bumper sticker "War is not the answer". I have to agree - war isn't the answer, if there's a choice. But as I said on my blog, we didn't start this war. We were attacked, not once, but over and over. We finally have a president that understands that if we don't do something about these attacks, they will continue. It takes all sides to wage peace - it only takes one side to wage war. The only alternative to defending ourselves is surrender, and that's not a very good things, even for baby ducks and small kittens.
IF the Arabs want peace, they must learn to act in peace. If they continue to follow that idiotic cult of the crazy 7th century pedophile they have elevated to someone holy, then they may find life getting very difficult for them in the coming years.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
10/05/2004 23:02 Comments ||
Top||
Arsenal have signed a £100m deal with Emirates Airlines, which will see their new 60,000-seater ground at Ashburton Grove named the Emirates Stadium. The company have also agreed a contract to become the Gunners' shirt sponsor for eight years - starting in 2006-07. The stadium, which should open in the same season, will take on its new name for the next 15 years.
There goes another part of British life. The money-chasing whores at Arsenal know no shame. The ground was long touted to be called 'Ashburton Grove' after its locality. But no, they've named it after a bunch of ragheads, GRAND.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
10/05/2004 6:32:34 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
So what they are going to be renamed the Turbans now?
#3
With separate male and female seating sections.
Posted by: ed ||
10/05/2004 7:52 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Halal pies at half-time. No golf umbrellas but ceremonial swords welcome. Players face mecca before kick-off. A minaret at each corner of the pitch. Bitches.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
10/05/2004 8:04 Comments ||
Top||
#5
The oil-rich are systematically buying the western world using oil payments from the western world.
Posted by: Tom ||
10/05/2004 8:21 Comments ||
Top||
#6
I don't think things went RoP at Oxford after they moved into the Kassam Stadium, did they?
Posted by: Howard UK ||
10/05/2004 8:35 Comments ||
Top||
#8
I suggest that Arsenal get the money up front. There are several football stadiums in the US that were initially bankrolled by Princes of the Desert...pitches were laid, seating constructed and balls purchased...then the "letters of credit" fell through. OUCH!
Hey, they only needed three goals to have beaten Bristol Rovers on Saturday. If Arsenal started performing like that, it'd be good news for English football.
#11
IIRC the former Oxford's former ground was a major threat to public safety - they need the money more than Arsenal. Arsenal were named after the famous British munitions factory at Woolwich and are a major ambassador for English football abroad. Says to all and sundry they/we've sold out to the a-rabs. Does it have anything to do with their proximity to Finsbury Park?
Posted by: Howard UK ||
10/05/2004 8:55 Comments ||
Top||
#12
What's the relative geography of the stadium, Finsbury Mosque and Mecca? If Finsbury is east of the stadium that'll fit, because they can face the Finsbury mosque and pay homage to it as well as they bow down to Mecca before each game.
Then they can change their name from Arsenal to Arsehole, which will also fit because their arseholes will be pointing to the West and at a disgusted British public.
#13
"No, no, no! I told you to purchase a arsenal, not buy Arsenal!"
"Sorry boss"
Posted by: Steve ||
10/05/2004 11:11 Comments ||
Top||
#14
Who does Chelsea put on their strips now? Didn't it use to be Emirates? Hey, I have a great idea for the great north-south London derby - have El Al sponsor Chelsea!
POLISH PRESIDENT SLAMS KERRY AFTER DEBATE SNUB
Polish President Aleksander Kwasniewski has slammed Dem president hopeful John Kerry for not recognizing Poland's contributions and sacrifice to the war in Iraq. "It is sad that a senator with 20 years of experience does not recognize Polish contribution. This is immoral," Kwasniewski told FACTS in an interview commenting on the US Presidential Debate. "It is sad that a senator with 20 years of experience underestimates Polish sacrifice, this is sad."
The Polish President added however that one should consider this was a part of the ongoing electoral campaign. "I do not think this was out of ignorance," the president emphasized on the TVN Facts. "There is one thing which should be stated clearly: this coalition is not just the United States, Great Britain, Australia alone; it also involves participation of Polish, Ukrainian, Bulgarian and Spanish soldiers who have died. It is immoral not to recognize the involvement we contributed based on our conviction that there should be unity in fighting terrorism, that there was a need to display international solidarity and that Saddam Hussein was a dangerous individual of this world." "President Bush acted like a real Texan gentleman, he made sure to show appreciation for other countries' involvement in the coalition," Kwasniewski pointed out.
Posted by: Steve ||
10/05/2004 11:35:35 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
For what it's worth, compliment Poles in your city on the job GROM(special forces) did in making sure oil fields didn't go up in smoke when we invaded. Thank them for their steadfastness in WOT. Want to really impress them? Thank them for Polish II Korps taking Monte Cassino in WWII. You'll have a friend for life.
I know Bush's remark telling Kerry not to forget Poland would resonate. It doesn't take much to make Poles feel appreciated.
Posted by: chicago mike ||
10/05/2004 15:34 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Thank them for Polish II Korps taking Monte Cassino in WWII
And thanks for the Enigma machine
Wow. Somebody does know and remember. I'm impressed! Chicago mike, you're right on the mark!
Posted by: Rafael ||
10/05/2004 21:06 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Chicago mike, you're right on the mark!
...regarding the friend for life bit.
Posted by: Rafael ||
10/05/2004 21:07 Comments ||
Top||
#7
the Poles have been America's friend barring a Soviet boot on their neck. I welcome their introduction to NATO and Western markets. The EU is NOT their friend
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/05/2004 21:13 Comments ||
Top||
#8
the Poles have been America's friend
Correct...in the past tense (but I hope I'm wrong). Today Poles are looking more towards Europe than America. Even Kwasniewski said so in his EU accession speech. The apt analogy is a boat in the middle of the Atlantic.
Posted by: Rafael ||
10/05/2004 21:24 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Don't forget the insane bravery of a Calvary unit attack on dug-in machine guns.
#10
Young Poles, unfortunately, are increasingly Der Spiegelized. We should be funding thousands of Marshall Scholarships and other exchange programs to bring young Polish leaders-to-be to US universities. We're really dropping the ball on this, and the next generation of Poles is not likely to be anywhere near so pro-American as the current generation of Polish leaders.
#11
Don't forget, the Brits took every Polish aviator and sailor they could get their hands on, as well, in 1940. And remember Popski's Private Army in Europe.
Posted by: richard mcenroe ||
10/23/2004 21:34 Comments ||
Top||
#12
"We should be funding thousands of Marshall Scholarships and other exchange programs to bring young Polish leaders-to-be to US universities."
If we want them to be pro-US, then bringng them to our universities might not be the best idea . . .
#14
Also don't forget King John Sobieski, who saved Vienna from the Turks in 1683.
Posted by: Paul ||
10/23/2004 23:35 Comments ||
Top||
#15
...and don't forget what the French were up to in 1683.
"King John Sobieski III of Poland, a veteran of the wars against the Turks, was willing to lead a contingent in support of the Habsburgs. But he had to have the unanimous approval of the Polish Diet. Louis XIV's agents tried to bribe key members into vetoing the proposal."
(The Seige of Vienna, review)
Posted by: Mr. Oni ||
10/24/2004 0:57 Comments ||
Top||
#17
#16 Mr Oni: that's a new & original wrinkle (to me anyway) on a current theme. Simply outstanding. My compliments!
#9 Raptor: You mean the oft-repeated tale of Sept 1939 era Polish horse cavalry charging invading German tanks? (not dug in machine guns -- that's presumably trench warfare stuff from WWI).
It's my understanding that this story (repeated so often that it's become a "warhorse") has never actually been historically substantiated with a specific example as to an exact locale, time, unit etc.
Posted by: Paul H. ||
10/24/2004 9:41 Comments ||
Top||
#18
#19 Read the fine book "Bitter Glory" it's a fine account of the wasted potential of Poland. Very few people are aware that Poland kicked Russia's arse militarily between the World Wars.
No wonder Stalin conspired with Hitler to bring them down.
Posted by: Bill ||
10/24/2004 9:53 Comments ||
Top||
#19
Gunter â Yeah, I found that out. Okay, then, substitute Sosabowski's para brigade at Arnhem.
Posted by: richard mcenroe ||
10/24/2004 10:40 Comments ||
Top||
#20
But who the heck is Serveeo Belluskony? Wasn't Bush talking about not denigrating our allies? Allies like Silvio Berlusconi? What did Serveeo have to say about Bush denigrating his name?
#21
Serveeo is the ally Little Lord Kerry has deemed that the US has bought and paid for. Just keep rackup up those allies BS.
Posted by: ed ||
10/24/2004 12:05 Comments ||
Top||
#22
"We Polish soldiers
For our freedom and yours,
Have given ours souls to God,
Our bodies to the soil of Italy
And our hearts to Poland."
-Inscription on the Polish memorial at Monte Cassino
It's worthwhile to remember that no people have ever fought harder for freedom than the Poles. I wish Americans appreciated that fact a bit more. In fact, I think Poland deserves the title of our oldest ally more than France does.
Posted by: Dan Goodpasture ||
10/24/2004 12:38 Comments ||
Top||
#23
I worry a bit that we're going to take them for granted again, and lose them to the anti-American EU. I consider the betrayal of Poland after WWII to be the most shameful episode in our history.
Why, when we give billions to those who hate us, and even more to our fairweather friends, do we leave one of our few true allies to struggle in its own poverty? I don't understand this.
It's an old story in American foreign policy, I guess. Screw your friends and coddle your enemies.
Dan
Posted by: Dan Goodpasture ||
10/24/2004 12:58 Comments ||
Top||
#24
#24 - Dan Goodpasture:
I completely agree that the betrayal of Poland was one of the worst things to have happened after WWII. But is it any surprise that we now learn from the declassified Verona Project that FDR advisor who suggested "giving" Poland to good old "Uncle Joe" was on the Soviet payroll? In my personal opinion FDR was an aweful president. He was warned many times over and never headed any of the concerns that there were Soviet agents in the US government, and that maybe his advisor was one.
#25
As an American, I have been very impressed by the skill and professionalism of Polish special forces. Those guys kick some serious ass, and everyone is lucky to have them involved in the war on terror.
Poland also seems to "get it" concerning the danger of totalitarian governments (considering Poland's history, that's unsurprising) and the need to be aggressive in preventing such threats from manifesting.
I'm still stunned by Jacques Chirac's public attack on eastern European countries last year after they signed an open letter supporting the United States in Iraq ("They missed a good opportunity to keep quiet.") I think Poland's reply was the classiest -- possibly the most diplomatic "sod off" I've seen yet.
Plus, you had the good sense to choose the F-16 over French jets for your military. :)
Posted by: Anne Haight ||
10/24/2004 14:26 Comments ||
Top||
#26
re: Poland looking to Europe v. U.S.
Note that the incremental cost of shipping an additional ton of material over water is near zero (the wonders of standardized containers.)
So free-trade associations like NAFTA need not be adjacent physically. I think we (the coalition of the willing) should start doing lots of stuff together. Trade, currency union, military, education, foreign-policy, maybe some type of truly democratic larger nation.. Show the EC how it could be done if they were not so dominated by their (mostly non-believers in democracy) elites.
Posted by: Ari Tai ||
10/24/2004 17:47 Comments ||
Top||
#27
Ari, bring it on! - If Bush wins another term, he could damage the EU mightily simply by offering nations *another* trading bloc, ie NAFTA, *as well as* the EU. Although, I think he'd have to offer it to the newer EU joiners rather than places like the UK (Blair would have a blue fit, and the Tories are too stupid to realise the benefits)
There would be no hint of sweeteners, subsidies etc. - just honest, wholesome trade that benefits both parties.
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
10/24/2004 18:07 Comments ||
Top||
#28
Offer them a trading block or statehood. And offer our EU enemies unlimited greencards based on IQ and net worth.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
10/24/2004 18:11 Comments ||
Top||
A question I answered today at an appearance before the Council on Foreign Relations regarding ties between Al Qaeda and Iraq regrettably was misunderstood. I have acknowledged since September 2002 that there were ties between Al Qaeda and Iraq. This assessment was based upon points provided to me by then CIA Director George Tenet to describe the CIA's understanding of the Al Qaeda-Iraq relationship. Today at the Council, I even noted that "when I'm in Washington, I pull out a piece of paper and say 'I don't know, because I'm not in that business, but I'll tell you what the CIA thinks,' and I read it."
The CIA conclusions in that paper, which I discussed in a news conference as far back as September, 2002, note that:
* We do have solid evidence of the presence in Iraq of al Qaeda members, including some that have been in Baghdad.
* We have what we consider to be very reliable reporting of senior level contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda going back a decade, and of possible chemical and biological agent training.
* We have what we believe to be credible information that Iraq and al Qaeda have discussed safe haven opportunities in Iraq.
* We have what we consider to be credible evidence that al Qaeda leaders have sought contacts in Iraq who could help them acquire weapons of mass destruction capabilities.
* We do have one report indicating that Iraq provided unspecified training relating to chemical and/or biological matters for al Qaeda members.
I should also note that the 9/11 Commission report described linkages between Al Qaeda and Iraq as well.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
10/05/2004 12:42:08 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
the problem is, that Rummy is actually a pretty nuanced guy, and the MSM cant deal very well with nuance.
#2
Set up play for the 3 pointer Cheney will land tonite. I just hope Mr. Ponyhair gets into this with his pecan-pie charm and finds out he is not debating some other attorney in a malpractice suit but one savvy, ornery, sob from Wyoming! Go Cowboys!
#4
Has Richard "Ever" Clarke read the commission report? Any comment Dick?
Posted by: chicago mike ||
10/05/2004 15:30 Comments ||
Top||
#5
LH, they understodd exactly what he said. In the story from the Scotsman that was posted yesterday, the "journalist" peeled away all context and turned the quote into a bold new admission and a change in Administration Policy. You would have thought that a newsperson would have been better served to ask for a clarification. They did the same thing to Bremmer at another speaking engagement.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
10/05/2004 16:56 Comments ||
Top||
Iraqi oil officials have accused a United Nations inspector of taking almost £60,000 in bribes from Saddam Hussein's regime as his henchmen and foreign business partners siphoned millions from the UN's oil-for-food programme, it was reported yesterday. An inquiry by officials in the State Oil Marketing Organisation - a body which, under Saddam, was a key player in schemes that allegedly diverted billions in oil revenues from the UN-run programme - accused an inspector contracted through the Dutch company Saybolt of falsifying documents in return for bribes, the Wall Street Journal reported.
Saybolt was one of two Western companies hired by the UN to provide inspectors to help monitor the oil-for-food programme. A second company, Cotecna Inspection Services of Switzerland, has come under fire from Congressional Republicans, after it emerged that it employed Kojo Annan, the son of the UN secretary-general, as a consultant, after being awarded an oil-for-food contract. A UN review of Mr Annan's employment found no conflict of interest.
Senior executives from Cotecna and Saybolt were yesterday summoned before the United States Congress to help to explain how Saddam managed to divert money from the oil-for-food programme. The witnesses also included a senior manager from BNP Paribas, the French bank that controlled the escrow accounts into which oil revenues were paid. Cotecna, Saybolt and BNP Paribas deny any wrongdoing. Saybolt told the Wall Street Journal: "Our inquiries both at the time and subsequently do not confirm the allegations of a bribe. But we're prepared to look into it further, given the new details."
Saybolt's managing director, Peter Boks, who was due to appear late yesterday, submitted a vast quantity of correspondence showing that Saybolt inspectors had repeatedly complained to Iraqi officials and the UN about apparent abuses. The United States government representative at the hearing, Ambassador Patrick Kennedy, said that "voluminous oil-for-food documents are now being safeguarded" in Baghdad and the US embassy was working to gain access to them. Mr Kennedy, of the American mission to the United Nations, directly blamed the "self-serving national economic objectives of certain key member states" on the Security Council for inhibiting British and American efforts to clamp down on oil-for-food corruption. The statement appeared to be aimed at France and Russia, which sought to have sanctions against Saddam lifted.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/05/2004 10:23:26 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
A UN review of Mr Annan's employment found no conflict of interest.
Interpol has compiled a database of 6,000 suspected terrorists and 4 million stolen travel documents that could be used in terror activities, Interpol Secretary General Ronald Noble told law enforcement officials Tuesday. His comments came at the start of a weeklong meeting of police officials from around the world at this Mexican resort, a gathering aimed at finding ways to hunt down international terrorists and halt their attacks. Speaking to representatives of at least 175 of Interpol's 181 member countries, Interpol President Jesus Espigares said terrorism was the main concern of both security services and private citizens around the world because of the "disastrous effects that indiscriminate attacks cause. We must exploit all of our available resources and reduce the areas where the terrorists hide."
Posted by: Fred ||
10/05/2004 8:35:18 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
A number of jazz and classical music concerts in Iran have been cancelled by the authorities because of their "corrupting" influence, diplomats say. The concerts had been arranged by foreign embassies in Tehran. Two jazz performances organised by the Italian mission were called off last week only hours before they were due to start. Diplomats say the reform-minded culture ministry is being squeezed by anti-Western hardliners. "The culture ministry cancelled the concerts fearing there may be some attacks on the concert hall by hardliners," a foreign embassy official told Reuters. The Swiss embassy was due to sponsor some classical music soirees this week, but they too have been ordered to be cancelled. Musicians had to cancel their trips from Switzerland at the last minute. The French and German embassies are pushing ahead with plans for concerts later this week.
The conservative Jomhuri Islami newspaper said last week: "Our religious people are against such concerts which help to spread corrupt Western culture." Diplomats said some audience members were detained at the end of a recent classical concert which had been organised to raise money for victims of last December's earthquake in Bam. Most forms of Western music were banned following Iran's 1979 Islamic revolution, though restrictions have eased since reformist President Mohammad Khatami was elected in 1997. Classical music and jazz are broadcast on state radio, and the country held its first "Islamic pop" festival in 1999 - though women are banned from singing to men, and the audience is not allowed to dance. The alternative rock group 127 was recently allowed to play at Tehran's art university. But conservative MPs have accused the culture ministry, which is run by reformists, of being too lax.
Posted by: Mack Daddy ||
10/05/2004 2:09:43 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
the country held its first "Islamic pop" festival in 1999 - though women are banned from singing to men, and the audience is not allowed to dance
Ennyvon smiling vill be severely dealt viz.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
10/05/2004 9:18 Comments ||
Top||
#2
the Islamic Mind Police⢠- gurding an empty vault
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/05/2004 10:38 Comments ||
Top||
#3
gurding? Jeebus! PIMF
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/05/2004 10:38 Comments ||
Top||
#4
When Allan created the universe, two of his main ideas were that nobody should listen to Italian jazz music or to Swiss classical music.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
10/05/2004 11:42 Comments ||
Top||
#5
At least Beduin Blues guitarists and the market for camel chittlins remain uneffected.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
10/05/2004 17:05 Comments ||
Top||
Iran now has missiles with a range of 2,000km (1,250 miles), former Iranian President Hashemi Rafsanjani has said. Mr Rafsanjani's comments came in a speech to the Aerospace Research Institute in Tehran, and were reported by the Iranian news agency. Correspondents say this is a substantial addition to the previously announced range of Iranian missiles. It puts Israel and US bases in the Middle East in range, although Iran says it would only act in self-defence. Mr Rafsanjani said Iranian experts could now achieve "all subsequent stages" in the missile production process. In August, Iran was reported to have fired a new version of its Shahab-3 missile. The old version was known to have a range of 1,296km (about 800 miles). [snip] Guess who's next for a bitch-slapping?
Posted by: Howard UK ||
10/05/2004 7:20:51 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Let's just hope it's not President sKerry.
Posted by: Tom ||
10/05/2004 8:15 Comments ||
Top||
Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi considers Israel a threat to his nation's nuclear facilities. "When there is a threat, you have to take it into consideration and be prepared to react. We are prepared," Kharrazi told Newsweek in an interview. When asked if Iran will use its Shihab missiles, Kharrazi replied only that "There are capabilities that we will use. Shihab missiles are well developed and made in Iran, and we are proud of having them." The magazine also asked Kharrazi whether Iran supports the two-state solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He replied that if that is what the Palestinians decide that they want, then it will not upset Iran. However, he added, "we are for a one-state solution." Kharrazi also claimed that Iran's nuclear enrichment program "is solely for producing fuel needed in our power plants. It is not for producing nuclear weapons."
Posted by: tipper ||
10/05/2004 12:09:53 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Ready to react? Like what? Saying "Oh Sh*t" when he goes up in flames as they strike the command structure?
#3
Kharrazi needs to lay off on the kool-aid and stick to decaff as well. If there is an attack it's not going to look like it did when Iraq had it's French supplied reactor taken out. Iran may well be left with no means to respond.
#5
Any chance that U.S. forces will add insult to injury when Israel's pilots do their job? I'm kind of thinking along the lines of a rain of Tomahawk missiles to finish off what was started....
#6
Zen - You've got a selective and flawed memory, son. I was advocating a decap well over a year ago - long before you showed up on RB. Here's one that's almost exactly a year old, for example. I don't keep links to all my comments, but this was was kept because it was, IMHO, a clear cassis belli for dealing with the Mad Mullahs.
When I challenged you to help me develop a real plan for how to take down Iran - and you responded with a bunch pf utterly pointless political diatribe - I gave up. Remember, now?
"tick... tock..."
That was often my closing byline on comments regarding the Black Hats... long ago.
Y'know, life on Earth did exist, and RB was blowing and going strong before you or I showed up, heh.
#8
Y'know, life on Earth did exist, and RB was blowing and going strong before you or I showed up, heh.
.com, glad to know it, but I just wanted to make sure you and I were reading from the same page. It's not like my own order of battle against the Iranians would have been utterly ineffective. Iran's mullahs need to be given the Yassin treatment right away. While you may not like my own style, your own "fry 'em up" sentiments gain strength every day this world must continue to endure the thundering silence that is Muslim disapproval of terrorism.
#9
I hate to say it, but that "fry 'em up" sentiment gets stronger within me everyday. And I do believe it's coming. Sad. I am very glad the internet is here, now, documenting this slow, but steady, evolution towards an inevitable showdown. Left to the MSM, our grandchildren would be presented with a load of total crap about how and why we came to have only annihilation or dhimmitude as options. Heavy Sigh. I don't much care about history, but I do care about what those kids will think of me, us.
I don't think we're on separate pages, regards Iran or even Islam, just domestic politics - and the fact that I can't follow the ABB BS when people say they want action. He's the only one with the stones to deliver. He's flawed, no doubt, but he "gets it" regards Islamofascism far far better than any other US politician. Hell, they don't even have the stone to talk honestly about it - he does shit. His recent statement that we would not allow the Mad Mullahs to have nukes, in combination with the fact that Congress (lol!) has already authorized him to use "'all appropriate means' to end Iranian nuclear weapons development" is why I'm sleeping well, these days. Like it or not, he's the man for the job, heh.
#10
What form of reacting will those nuke happy mullahs undertake when Israel feels the situation is very dangerously close to becoming on a direct nuclear threat by Tehran's leadership of 7th century mindset wackos.?
Cry to North Korea to help build another nuke weapons plant with the assistance of former Soviet nuclear scientists among others, or option two, scream, yell and rant but nothing more since they already know one little mullah missile launched at Israel from Iranian territory will result in many mullahs being greeted by Hitler, Stalin, Khomeini & other mass murderers like 9-11's Atta all saying, "What took you crumb bums so long?"
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
10/05/2004 2:23 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Providing Iran with enriched uranium under an IAEA inspection regime could be an answer to calm the Mullahs down and promote stability in the region. At least we could begin a dialogue if we offered this plan. After we win their confidence (say only 5-10 years) and they see that we are sincere, then Rosie and I will be willing to put up a few homes in Bam. And supervise Iranian elections. Golly, look at the job my team did in Venezuela. I'll talk to Kofi and see what he says.
All the best,
Jimmah
PS: Rosie is polishing my noble pride, I mean prize, right now in celebration of my 80th birthday. Sheeit! Amy, what did you do with that Masters and Johnson book? Damn, can't you just leave my books alone and stick to your own? You know how that got me ridiculed before and I don't want to get ridiculed by your mamma!
Posted by: chicago mike ||
10/05/2004 15:58 Comments ||
Top||
#12
and this is what the 7013 th time they have said this in the last year?
Comparing himself to South Africa's Nelson Mandela, Palestinian Authority President Yasser Arafat said in an interview published Tuesday that he will step down from office after he has ruled an independent Palestinian state. Arafat, in an interview with the London-based newspaper Asharq al-Awsat, compared himself to Mandela, 86, who became South Africa's first black president in 1994 and stepped down five years later to assume the role of an elder statesman. Mandela shared a Nobel Peace Prize with F.W. de Klerk in 1993, a year before Arafat shared the same prize with late Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres. "I am ready to be Nelson Mandela," Arafat said in an apparent reference to Mandela's withdrawal from political office. "I agree, but (only) after the Palestinian state is established and I am its president. Then I leave it to others."
That'll be several days after you're dead, Yasser...
No date has been set for the legislative and presidential elections Arafat announced last month, but he said he would respect the decisions of Palestinian leaders. "What the Palestinian leadership decides, I commit to," he said.
"Then I'll ignore it, just like I always do..."
"In the end, I won't impose myself." However, Arafat has repeatedly sidelined any potential challengers to his authority and consolidated his power base. Few believe he would step aside in the elections. The interview was conducted last week on the fourth anniversary of the Palestinian uprising. Thursday was also the day Israel launched an open-ended offensive in the Gaza Strip, which the army says is aimed at stopping Palestinian militants from firing rockets at Israeli towns close to the Strip.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/05/2004 8:36:51 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#5
No Hellfire for Yasser. At this point, Paleostine is so impotent under his expert leadership that it's to the Israelis' advantage to keep him in power...
Posted by: Fred ||
10/05/2004 22:12 Comments ||
Top||
#6
let him corrode in place like an ill-used D Cell
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/05/2004 22:20 Comments ||
Top||
EFL.The Iraqi version of the "standing head". He must be getting his ass kicked. Again. See you in a couple of weeks when Tater changes his mind.
Interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi said negotiators on Tuesday hammered out the basis for an agreement to end fighting with followers of radical Shiite Muslim cleric Muqtada al-Sadr. U.S. forces have been daily attacking the vast Baghdad slum of Sadr City to knock out the cleric's militia and pressure him to lay down his arms in favor of negotiations. Oh, puh-leeze...
"Fortunately, there are positive signs in some areas. I met with some brothers in Sadr City and we laid the basis for an agreement to end all their armed manifestations and to give up all their arms," Allawi told the National Council, a watchdog over his interim government. Suuuuuuure you have...
His people met with some of Sadr's people and agreed to the shape of the table to hold a meeting to discuss a agreement. Sadr will most likely disagree and they'll start over.
Al-Sadr's militia, known as the Mahdi Army, staged an uprising in April, sparking fierce fighting in Sadr City, the southern holy city of Najaf and other areas. A peace deal was brokered following heavy fighting in Najaf in August, but clashes in Sadr City have continued. Overnight, U.S. warplanes pounded the slum after an American patrol came under small arms fire, the military said Tuesday. Hospital officials said at least one person was killed in skirmishes between U.S. troops and al-Sadr fighters.
Allawi did not give details on the agreement. Al-Sadr has been under pressure top dissolve the Mahdi Army militia and instead turn his movement into a political party. Al-Sadr has seesawed about whether he will enter the political arena. Want a lasting peace deal with this clown? Send him to hell.
Seemingly contradicting earlier comments by his own spokesman, al-Sadr said in a television interview Monday that he will not participate in elections because "these are American elections, not Iraqi elections. I want free and honest Iraqi elections." The cleric also called for international supervision of the balloting in an interview with Al-Manar Television of the Shiite extremist group Hezbollah. Ooooooooooooooh, Jimmah...
#2
dont need a LASTING peace deal, just a ceasefire long enough for US and Iraqi forces to deal with the SUNNI insurgency, then turn back and deal with Sadr later. Why should only the bad guys get to play the Hudna game. Hell, im reading a history of the 30 years war, and european christians were pretty good at that game too.
So far the truce then kill strat with Sadr seems to be working.
#7
Guys, I just read a Stratfor briefing that says we're doing it again in Fallujah -- a cease fire deal, that is. No more bombing of Zarqawi. All I can say is WTF?
Posted by: V is for Victory ||
10/05/2004 18:03 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Achilles Tendon... snip.... never be able to properly putt again.
#9
WTF? Well it's Stratfor!
It's gonna be hell.
It's gonna be heaven.
It's gonna be negotiated between the devils and the angels.
Sending in the Marines.
Sending in the Social Workers.
#10
BAR: Then we keep shooting his successors until a "promotion" results in someone that understands the message being sent.
Sadr is a terrible leader. He could be doing much better - like Zarqawi's or Saddam's men. There is a clear difference between him and the Sunni leaders, who are the A-Team. The measure of their skill is that both Zarqawi and al-Douri are still at large despite huge bounties on their heads. We could kill Sadr any time we want to - this means he's a loser.
If someone like Zarqawi replaces Sadr, and uses the Shiite zealots working for him more effectively, more GI's will die. Note that it is the Sunnis who are killing the most Americans, not the Shiites, who can't even tie their own shoelaces. If Sadr's followers get a better leader, that could change. Like I said, don't kill that one - they might replace him with someone who can shoot straight.
Follow up to this previous article. Unfortunately it is mostly backpedalling. Edited for brevity.
Israel Defense Forces chief of operations Yisrael Ziv did not confirm Tuesday evening whether or not the army was justified in its accusation that Palestinian militants had loaded a Qassam rocket into a United Nations ambulance in the Gaza Strip. Ziv spoke at a press conference convened following a storm of controversy sparked by the release of video filmed from an IDF drone aircraft in which, Israel claimed, Palestinian militants in Gaza were loading a Qassam rocket into a United Nations Relief and Works Agency ambulance. The UN agency claimed the object was a stretcher. The IDF was reevaluating its claim - an apparent climbdown in a high-profile confrontation - and Ziv emphasized the IDF "is not free of mistakes." On Tuesday, the IDF removed from its Web site the military drone's video footage. When he was asked whether the object in the film was a Qassam rocket or a stretcher, Ziv said: "I suggest we don't deal with the object but rather with the context." He said that, regardless of what the filmed object actually was, UNRWA employees "are exploiting the organization's vehicles in order to support terror-related activities." He added that the presence of an UNRWA ambulance in a location where explosive devices had just been planted was also suspicious.
Professionals from air force intelligence are adamant they have the expertise and the necessary equipment to properly identify images the Israel Air Force camera recorded. They have said a Palestinian was carrying a Qassam rocket, or at least an anti-tank missile, into an UNRWA ambulance in the Jabalya refugee camp in Gaza. But in the wake of media pressure, the IDF has slightly modified its assessment, saying it still believes the object in the ambulance was a weapon but that it can't completely rule out the possibility that it was actually a stretcher. "The Israel Defense Forces is reviewing the original analysis of the footage, in which UNRWA vehicles are seen involved in suspicious activity in the combat zone in Gaza," an IDF statement said Tuesday. IDF officers said Monday night that "it's impossible to swear" the object wasn't a stretcher.
Posted by: Dar ||
10/05/2004 2:55:49 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I saw the vid and I couldn't tell for sure - dark, grainy
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/05/2004 15:07 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Maybe it was one of those new Paleo Rocket Stretchers...
Bwaaahahahahaha!
The Air Force expects planes will be able to fire non-lethal microwave rays at enemy ground troops with the help of a new superconducting generator system developed at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base after about 25 years of research. Heavy, inefficient generators have been a hurdle to the development of airborne microwave weapons, which create a disabling burning sensation. Microwaves could be used to control large groups of enemy fighters without killing them or disable electronics-dependent enemy weapons, said Philip Coyle, senior adviser for the Center for Defense Information. The Air Force is preparing to award a $22 million contract to a private contractor to construct and demonstrate the new electrical generating system by 2009. . . .
Aside from paralyzing potential attackers or noncombatants like a long-range stun gun, the weapons could disable the electronics of missiles and roadside bombs or even disable a vehicle in a high-speed chase, developers say. The weapons emit a pulse of energy and can destroy semiconductors with a surge of volts. . . . Erno said the system would probably be used on cargo planes such as C-130s.
#2
That would seriously inhibit a major fire-fight, assuming it would be used for CAS, and not just as some anti-SAM toy. But given how much the AF hates to do CAS...
#14
Again, the bureaucratic government and big business just take too long. 2009! Damn. How about next year? Copy the X-Prize and have an airborne generator prize. No money up front. Winner takes all.
via Fox News, NY Post
Cable channel Showtime is quietly at work on a new series about the personal lives of an Islamic terrorist cell in the United States, The Post has learned. The series — to be called "The Cell" — will be told from the view points of a group of European and American converts to Islam who are plotting terror attacks here. That's the last time I watch anything on Showtime then.
Showtime says it realizes it is walking into a potential minefield by portraying terrorists sympathetically without pulling punches about their violent aims. HBO's "The Sopranos" and "The Wire" have found success doing that with mobsters and drug dealers. "We're trying to look into the minds of these [terrorists] and the issues driving them, beyond a black-and-white portrayal," says Showtime entertainment president Robert Greenblatt, who will decide next month whether to commit to a series. Imaginary stories about the supposed exploits of mythical mobsters is not the same thing as glorifying terrorist scum who CHOP OFF AMERICAN HEADS FOR ALL THE WORLD TO SEE.
"The leaders of the cell look like nice, normal , cute and cuddly people you would encounter in everyday life and never know were quietly putting together a power base," he says. "Our only hesitation was sensitivity to the subject matter, which was very scary. Several plot points have already come to pass." In fact, one scene was so prophetic and volatile it had to be cut from the original script. It depicted a captured serviceman being beheaded on videotape, months before it happened in real life. And you didn't pull the plug right then because... hello? Is this thing on? Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Chris W. ||
10/05/2004 10:25:16 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Of course, if they really showed a true picture of a islamic terrorist cell, CAIR would pitch a fit about stereotyping.
Posted by: Steve ||
10/05/2004 11:16 Comments ||
Top||
#2
You know, I at first thought the premise of a mobster seeing a shrink was interesting. But by the time Pussy was executed, I'd had enough. The end result of the show was to glamorize truly perverse violence, lives built around dehumanizing violence, warped lives that distorted the lives of anyone else they came across, like black hole of evil. I can't watch the Sopranos anymore. In a similar vein, I've found Islam to be much like the mob--you can get in, but you can't get out, not without something like a witness protection program. You will conform, or you will pay, first with limbs and then with your life. All allegiance is owed to the Ummah, who gives you life and protection. And family connections trump everything, including religious obligations.
#4
Bwaaahaaaahaaaaa. Only in Hollywood would they create a series that finally calls a muslim a terrorist, while trying to remain "PC" by not making them Arabs. It's like producing a series on Nazis, just not the German ones. That's so absurd that it is funny!
Posted by: The Spitblogger ||
10/05/2004 13:45 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Will they show Friday prayers, with the imam praying for the deaths of all Americans? Will they show the suicide bomber taking his boom vest to the tailor? Will we see the jihadi wannabees watching hours of kill pr0n, snuff films and gun sex? Will they show the late-night phone calls to Yemen, Teheran, and Saudi Arabia?
No.
They'll show a bunch of wankers sitting around whining about how unfair it all is and seething, and somehow I'll be expected to "understand".
#8
I foresee a Dr. Phil episode where the good Dr. is called in by the parents of a boomer want-a-be and Dr Phil sez:
"Do you realize that your son exhibits fourteen of the seventeen characteristics of a suicide bomber? My suggestion to you is that you have him stock up on viagra cuz the 72 virgins will be waiting.â
#9
Great idea! But they need to take it a step farther - combine the new terrorist show with Dan Rather's news broadcast, and add in John Edwards (no, the other one) Crossing Over show. The ratings will go through the roof! Although, the whole concept does seem vaguely familiar.
Posted by: A Jackson ||
10/05/2004 22:57 Comments ||
Top||
Militiamen fighting under the banner of radical Muslim cleric Muqtada al-Sadr are pumping themselves up with drugs before confronting coalition forces, according to U.S. military reports and State Department and Iraqi sources. Tater's tots, faithful emulators of Muhammed's examples.
Although quelled in Najaf in August, the Mahdi's Army militia is still active around southern Iraq and continues to largely control the Baghdad slum known as Sadr City — the target of repeated U.S. military air raids and tank patrols. "They give their suicide bombers barbiturates, and the amphetamines are for street fighters who are facing off with the U.S.," a State Department analyst said. Most schools of Islam believe that the prohibition of alcohol in the Koran is applicable to other mind-altering substances, including narcotics.
An Iraqi engineer, incredulous at reports of drugs being bought and sold by the militia inside Sadr City mosques, sent a member of his staff to purchase a sample. "She brought me capsules filled with powder — heroin — that they are selling everywhere in Baghdad and financing their fight from this trade," said the engineer, who asked that his name not be used. He said the heroin was entering the capital through the southern Iraqi cities of Amara and Basra — both Mahdi militia strongholds — from Iran.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: dennisw ||
10/05/2004 6:22:22 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Islamic Tweakers Heroesâ¢!
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/05/2004 9:26 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Heroin and amphetamines do wonders for shooting accuracy. Keep it up, brave Sir Robin Lions of Islam.
Posted by: ed ||
10/05/2004 9:34 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I hope we introduce LSD and MDMA into this mix. Fry their brains for them. A different type of chemical warfare to be sure.
#4
I recall seeing a very similar story months ago (maybe during the initial Fallujah problems?). And so it makes me think this might not be that accurate. Especially the bit about "heroin in capsules." Heroin, most likely, would be in baggies or something. It's a powder, not a pill, meant to be smoked or snorted or injected. These guys are wasting their time filling gelatin capsules with very pure heroin? I doubt it.
Also, didn't Jihad Unspun or one of those wishful-thinking sites have some story about US soldiers on drugs that helped them KILL, KILL, KILL?
I also can't find info on any hallucinogen named "Arteen."
I wouldn't doubt that some of these guys are doped up, but I do doubt it's reached epidemic proportions.
#6
I read news articles of heroin use during the Fallujah fighting (April/May). There was an article with a photo showing discarded syringes and heroin cooking paraphenalia. Also there was a Rantburg article some days ago mentioning heroin use by the Madhi army in Najaf. I remember commenting on it, but my Rantburg search did not find it. No mention if the heroin was distributed in capsules or other form.
From a rantburg article (6/3/2004) linking thegreenside.com (letters from Maj. Bellon): Equally astounding is evidence that these "holy warriors" are taking drugs to get high before attacks. It true, as we pushed into the town in April many Marines came across drug paraphernalia (mostly HEROIN). Recently, we have gotten evidence of them using another drug BZ that makes them high and very aggressive. Cowards and hypocrites. They donât have the nerve to fight without calming their fear with drugs. Between highs, they are robbing people and raping young girls. Some jihad.
Posted by: ed ||
10/05/2004 11:23 Comments ||
Top||
#7
"Yeah, sarge. We been shootin' reds and yellows all day!"
#8
I can't imagine that heroin would be useful in getting them riled up to fight. The US commander they quoted said that they use amphetamines to get them to fight. This article is, typically, poorly written - but if one sufferes through it, it appears that they use the heroin to raise funds, amphetamines for the fighters and "reds" for the suicide bombers.
#12
#5--- And the words "hashish" and "assassin" come from the same word; a (really) medieval Islamic sect that specialised in political assasinations. Their HQ was a castle on a mountaintop in Syria, and their leader was know as "The Old Man of the Mountain". A chemically induced fighting mood has a rather long history in the Middle East.
#14
According to the State Department analyst, gunfights have broken out between members of the Mahdiâs Army fighting over their share of the drugs. "There was a firefight in a mosque where two factions of Sadr guys shot each other to pieces over amphetamines," the analyst said, citing eyewitness reports
Saddam Hussein now seems to have found faith in the democratic process. Saddam's lawyer has told a Danish newspaper that the ousted dictator will run in Iraq's elections with the view to become president again, media reported. Giovanni di Stefano has reportedly said that there is no law preventing Saddam from taking part in the election for the interim National Assembly. Mr Di Stefano has been quoted as saying, "Saddam has no chance to be tried before the elections." He adds, "No international law prevents him from coming forward."
The elections, which are scheduled for January, are parliamentary implying that Saddam would not have to run nationwide. It is presumed that Saddam, if allowed to take part, would choose Tikrit, his home town, to fight election. In Iraq, Saddam's popularity seems to be staging a comeback. He is revered as a hero who sought to challenge Israel and the West. Di Stefano backed his claim citing a recent poll which indicated that 42 per cent of Iraqis wanted Saddam back.
Posted by: tipper ||
10/05/2004 4:55:04 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
By Andrew North 10-5-04 BBC correspondent in Kabul
Threats on women by the Taleban and warlords are undermining their participation in Afghanistan's upcoming elections, a human rights group says. The US-based Human Rights Watch says in a report that very few women have registered to vote on Saturday in areas where the Taleban are active. The report says even campaign workers have received death threats for raising women's issues. More than 40% of Afghanistan's 10.5 million registered voters are women.
The other 60 percent live in Pashtun areas...
The US government has claimed that the rights of Afghan women have improved after the Taleban were removed in 2001. The Human Rights Watch report offers little hope from Saturday's election.
"Nope. Nope. It'll never work. Nope."
It says very few women are expected to turn out to cast their ballots on polling day. The report highlights instances where campaign workers have been harassed and received death threats for raising women's rights issues, such as making it easier for them to divorce. Such an issue remains highly sensitive and most of the candidates running for the election, including President Hamid Karzai, have done their best to avoid it.
There is no doubt that life has got better for Afghan women with the removal of the Taleban and their harsh restrictions. More than a million girls are now at school. Many are working, all of this underpinned by a new constitution enshrining equal rights with men. But for many women, things have barely changed. Many are still not allowed to work by their families, while many suffer violence at the hands of husbands and other relatives. Far too often, they find the authorities unable or unwilling to protect them because of deep-rooted social attitudes. Afghanistan's Women's Affairs Minister Habiba Sarabi says stronger laws are not enough. "Education is also very, very important. It's a fundamental thing. Changing attitudes of men, rather than women, because this is a male-dominated country and men should change their minds towards the women," she says.
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
10/05/2004 3:59:38 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The solution is for these women to start killing all male children at birth. That will show the men who is boss.
#3
Just doing my part for Afghan womens rights. When the womem out number the men they will get rights. Oh and they can poison the imams tea too. That will help speed it along.
#4
They are outnumbering men. Usually it is 51% to 49%, in countries where war was or is going on the ratio is even more skewed in favor of women. So, have some other ideas?
Killing infants of either gender is always a bad idea. I think you should know. For some reason, I always knew that and thought everyone else does too.
#5
this article deserves the bull graphic. It's just political posturing attempting to deny GW any credit for improving the stauts of Afghan women.
I guess the 10.5 million women who reigstered to vote just signed up for the hell of it - and none of those 10.5 million will be at the polls. BBC - give yourself a DOH!
Even if 2 of them showed up to vote, it would be an improvement in the rights of women - but to imply, that with 10.5 MILLION registered , they won't show and impact the election is just pure BBC wishful thinking.
#8
Killing infants of either gender is always a bad idea. I think you should know. For some reason, I always knew that and thought everyone else does too.
We can make an exception for Islam. Seems like everybody else wants to make exceptions for them.
#9
This is old news. Women political activists have had their lives threatened ever since they began taking part in the new Afghani parliment.
They can still poison the imams tea though.
D@mn straight. Works just fine for me.
Another solution I'd like to suggest is long term female contraceptives like Norplant. If women avoided early pregnancy, they could make a more viable start in life and thereby have at least some degree of better control over whom they get married to. While arranged matches are probably still the norm, women might be more likely to leave men who they find to be abusive if there were no issue from the marriage.
As Winston Churchill said:
"The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property - either as a child, a wife, or a concubine - must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men."
#10
Oh woe is us, the plight of women in Afghanistan!
According to the BBC, that is. I wonder if they've noticed that women no longer are being executed in soccer stadiums in that unhappy land.
The election, as imperfect as it will be, is light years ahead of what that country has experienced in the last 30 years, and coincidentally ahead of anything the Master Race has managed to do in the Magic Kingdom.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/05/2004 12:41 Comments ||
Top||
Relief agency spokesman says 'I don't see that as a crime'It was the same deal(s) with Saddam
The United Nations agency that provides assistance and food aid to Palestinian refugees admits it has hired members of the terrorist group Hamas to help in its efforts. Peter Hansen, commissioner-general of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for palestinian refugees (UNRWA), told the CBC he believes it likely that Hamas members receive paycheques from his organization. "Oh I am sure that there are Hamas members on the UNRWA payroll and I don't see that as a crime. Hamas as a political organization does not mean that every member is a militant and we do not do political vetting and exclude people from one persuasion as against another," Mr. Hansen said. "We demand of our staff, whatever their political persuasion is, that they behave in accordance with UN standards and norms for neutrality."
Canada contributes roughly $10-million annually to UNRWA. Canadian officials did not offer any immediate comment on the specifics of the CBC report, saying the UN agency has a long record of humanitarian service in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and that the organization should speak for itself. "But I would say that as far as Canada's concerned, Hamas is a terrorist organization," said a spokesman for Foreign Affairs Minister Pierre Pettigrew. The federal government designated Hamas as a terrorist group in 2002, and several North American charities linked to the group have since been outlawed.
The uproar concerning the UN's rumoured ties to groups like Hamas and Hezbollah -- which also provide food, welfare and schooling to Palestinians -- erupted this past week when the Israeli Defence Force released a pair of videotapes they claimed as proof that UN ambulances have been used to ferry munitiions and gunmen throughout the occupied territories. The Israeli government is also insisting Mr. Hansen, who is one of the UN's top officials in Gaza, be immediately stripped of his duties and fired. Israel has previously accused Foreign Affairs Mr. Hansen of ''blatant anti-Israel bias'' and turning a blind eye to Palestinian militants' use of UN ambulances. The Foreign Affairs spokesman added he wasn't aware whether the Israeli government had asked for Canada's support in pressing their claims to the world body.
The revelations come amid a renewed offensive by Israeli troops against terrorist targets in Gaza. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon vowed yesterday Israel will keep troops in Gaza indefinitely to prevent Palestinian rocket attacks on Israeli towns. At least seven more Palestinian fighters were killed -- bringing the total to 60 since the start of Operation Days of Penitence. Mr. Sharon told Israeli radio the Israel Defence Force action had no time limit. "I have directed the Defence Minister to do everything possible," he said. "The IDF is taking needed measures to ensure the peace of Israel's citizens. That's what it has to do, and that's what will be done." Last week two Israeli toddlers were killed when rockets landed in the western Negev town of Sderot, an attack that sparked the operation.
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
10/05/2004 3:48:46 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
repeat from yesterday
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/05/2004 10:25 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"Members of UN on Hamas payroll" would be news.
Arab nations demanded in a draft U.N. Security Council resolution Monday that Israel immediately halt its incursion into the northern Gaza Strip, where fighting has left at least 68 Palestinians dead.
This ought to be entertaining.
The draft resolution, submitted to the 15-nation council in an emergency meeting convened at the request of Arab nations, calls for an immediate halt to a major Israeli offensive in the northern Gaza Strip. It also urges Israel and the Palestinians to immediately implement the internationally backed road kill map peace plan. Algeria's U.N. Ambassador, Abdallah Baali, the only Arab member of the council, requested the open meeting following the nearly weeklong Israeli offensive - the largest of its kind launched by Israel in four years in Gaza. Baali said he hoped for a vote on the draft by Tuesday at the latest. "Taking into account the gravity, the urgency of the situation, the seriousness of the situation, we need to have the Security Council take a decision quickly," Baali said.
Why don't we take this in order of priority -- first, Darfur.
U.S. Ambassador John Danforth said Monday that another Security Council resolution was not the answer and admonished the council, which he said "acts as the adversary of the Israelis and cheerleader to the Palestinians." However, British Ambassador Emyr Jones Parry, whose country is president of the council this month, said "there's a strong support in the council for the resolution."
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/05/2004 1:23:26 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The world's statesmen, like Bill Clinton, compete to take Yasser Arafat to their bosom because each wants to go down in history as the one who resolved the Middle East conflict.
And the Palestinian terror continues.
They clamour for the privelege of wading through the Ramallah rubble to kiss Arafat's stubbly cheeks.
And the Palestinian terror continues.
They pump money into Arafat's pocket Palestine, draw up road maps, pass UN resolutions....
And the Palestinian terror continues.
Israel builds the wall/fence.
Palestinian terror grinds to a halt in the areas where it's built
Palestinians fire one too many Kassam rockets over the old Gaza fence.
The IDF goes into Gaza, killing dozens of terrorists in a few days.
The Palestinians offer to stop firing rockets (terror) if Israel withdraws.
Legally, speaking it's an Excursion. I don't know of any laws in the Useless Nations concerning excursions. Since it's legal, I say Israel should continue.
#5
U.S. Ambassador John Danforth said Monday that another Security Council resolution was not the answer and admonished the council, which he said "acts as the adversary of the Israelis and cheerleader to the Palestinians"
He's a good choice for that thankless job
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/05/2004 14:06 Comments ||
Top||
#6
'Snorong Clort5744' is me.
Where in the hell are all these weirdo names coming from????
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld on Monday portrayed the retaking of the Iraqi city of Samarra over the weekend by U.S. and Iraqi forces as a model for military action he said is likely to be needed to reestablish government control elsewhere in Iraq. "What has to be done in that country is what basically was done in Samarra over the last 48 hours," he told an audience here at the Council on Foreign Relations.
With Sunni insurgents operating with virtual impunity in a number of areas in central Iraq, U.S. and Iraq officials have warned of a series of coming military offensives to restore order in advance of of national elections scheduled for January. Rumsfeld outlined a series of steps for dealing with these strongholds of resistance, starting with diplomacy, followed by threatening force and finally using force. "That's what happened in Samarra," Rumsfeld said. "And my guess is that what you'll see in that country is the government of Iraq systematically deciding that they are not going to accept the idea of safe havens and foreign terrorists and former regime elements running around threatening and killing people."
Rumsfeld's remarks came during a lengthy question-and-answer session that touched on a range of issues, though most were related in some way to the conflict in Iraq. Among the highlights:
⢠Rumsfeld said Iran is doing "a lot of meddling" in Iraq and is clearly intent on affecting the upcoming elections. "They're sending money in, they're sending weapons in, and they're notably unhelpful," he said.
He also spoke of Iran serving as a haven for al Qaeda operatives, although he described the relationship between the country and the terrorist network as "a funny one." He noted that "a lot of" senior al Qaeda members have moved in and out of Iran "over a period of time" and some apparently are there now. "But there is at least an impression that they're not fully free to do anything they want at the moment," he added.
⢠He called Syria "unhelpful" as well for refusing to release frozen Iraqi assets and for allowing movement of foreign terrorists across its 450-mile border with Iraq.
A delegation of senior Pentagon and State Department officials traveled to Damascus last month to press U.S. concerns about the border. Some U.S. officials have expressed the hope that the discussions would lead to greater military cooperation along the border. But Rumsfeld made it clear he is reserving judgment on whether the talks will make much difference.
⢠On possible connections between al Qaeda and the former government of ousted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, Rumsfeld said he had "not seen any strong, hard evidence that links the two." But he also said he had seen intelligence on that question "migrate" in the past year "in the most amazing way," adding that intelligence differences persist.
Last night, saying his remarks had been "misunderstood," Rumsfeld issued a clarification. He noted that as far back as September 2002 he had acknowledged "ties" between Iraq and al Qaeda based on a CIA assessment. That assessment cited, among other things, the presence of al Qaeda members in Iraq and "senior-level contacts" stretching back a decade.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
10/05/2004 12:44:22 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
...theyâre notably unhelpful," he said.
A classic Rumsfeld understatement! I like it.
Posted by: Alaska Paul in Fairbanks, AK ||
10/05/2004 1:27 Comments ||
Top||
THE United States did not have enough troops in Iraq immediately after the removal of Saddam Hussein and "paid a big price" for it, the former head of the US occupation there said. L. Paul Bremer said he arrived in Iraq on May 6, 2003, to find "horrid" looting and a very unstable situation. "We paid a big price for not stopping it because it established an atmosphere of lawlessness," Mr Bremer said during an address yesterdat in White Sulphur Springs, West Virginia, to an insurance group, which reported his comments. "We never had enough troops on the ground."
But Mr Bremer said he was "more convinced than ever that regime change was the right thing to do". Despite the daily reports of violence, "I am optimistic about the future in Iraq", he said. In a statement last night to The Washington Post, Mr Bremer said he fully supported the Bush administration's strategy in Iraq. "I believe that we currently have sufficient troop levels in Iraq," he said in the e-mailed statement, according to today's edition of the Post. He said references to troop levels related to the situation when he first arrived in Baghdad "when I believed we needed either more coalition troops or Iraqi security forces to address the looting".
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: tipper ||
10/05/2004 12:28:50 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Bremer is a jackass - he screwed things up by disbanding the divisions the Iraqi Army was ready to turn over to US command - divisions that could have secured the borders and provided cadre to the new Iraqi Army after they had been properly vetted. If nothing else they could have at least transferred their weapons and ammo to secured areas instead of leaving it out for anyone that wanted it.
Bremer screwed the pooch - and like a typical state dept weenie, he points the finger at the military.
#2
Old Spook, I am hardly a Bremer fan, but it looks to me like this news agency have mined a long address for the best anti-Bush nugget they could find. In the short term I agree that the Iraqi army would have been helpful, but in the long term I think the Iraqis are better with the guys they are getting who are being grown from personnel that are being battle-tested against the insurgency.
As for the "we needed more troops" crowd, there were no more troops. Can you imagine the death toll if we had dumped green draftees "in country" with all the kooks running about?
Posted by: Super Hose ||
10/05/2004 0:51 Comments ||
Top||
#3
OS: Bremer is a jackass - he screwed things up by disbanding the divisions the Iraqi Army was ready to turn over to US command - divisions that could have secured the borders and provided cadre to the new Iraqi Army after they had been properly vetted.
You mean like the units in Fallujah? And the general who was recently arrested for working with the insurgency? I think we need to break with cookie cutter prescriptions from WWII. The situation was completely different in so many ways, it's difficult to keep count.
#4
The unit in Fallujah was bad - and it was NOT one of the divisions that was surrendered. It was a composite from local shieks, controlled by an old Saddam commander.
Plus, the difference is in deployment - Saddam did have one thing right - he never deployed a unit near the home towns from which it was raised. That stops the tribalism that cost the Fallujah unit its effectiveness.
Placing them ON THE BORDER (pay attention to what I said - details matter) would have effectively removed them and provided better security than the complete absence of it. And the vetting could have provided weaponry and troops that would ahve been useful in the cities after retraining.
As for the "General", he was equivalent in span of command to a Major in the US Army. Remember, Iraq, as do other Arab armed forces, grossly inflate ranks, and shrink the span of command. UNits that woudl typically be led by NCOs in the West are usually headed by Captains or Lieutenants in the Arab armies. Likewise their Colonels are not commander of much anything larger than a partial battalion in many cases, and their Generals seldom if ever command anything larger than a battalion combined arms team.
So, yes, Bremer screwed up, and no, you cannot brush off the utility of the 4 regular army divisions that were disbanded without any care to securing their weapons or men, instead of being sent to the Iranian and Syrian borders.
#5
Fully agree with Old Spook. Put them under U.S. pay, send them to guard the border in the desert while weeding out those with real blood on their hands. Most of the army members were young men who didn't have a choice but to serve, neither Saddam fanatics nor Islamists. Give them a good cause and decent remuneration and they are with you.
But to send them packing, jobless, moneyless, humiliated, with a galore of unsecured weapon caches, was simply not a bright idea, period.
I would go further (and maybe Rantburgers won't agree here). Iraq's economy had a downright socialist structure (almost everyone worked for the government and performance did not matter much. Bremer wanted to solve that problem with a libertarian capitalist shock therapy. That may look good in theory but you need to take people along with you. If not done carefully, many people lose their jobs and existence... and they will not blame it on the previous administration but on the Americans. This is a development you can even see in East Germany... and their "shock therapy" was so much milder and sugarcoated with a transfer of about a trillion (!) Euros from West to East in 15 years (of course parts of it flowed back to the West).
#6
Bremer had to work within Powell's insane alliance with the Sunni clerics. Bush's "faith based" theocracy butchered every secular movement in Iraq, and created a power vacuum that Wahabi and Khomeni clerics filled. Future generations, will treat Bush like the American Quisling that he is. Bush screwed up!
#7
OS: The unit in Fallujah was bad - and it was NOT one of the divisions that was surrendered. It was a composite from local shieks, controlled by an old Saddam commander.
That makes no sense at all. Anyone who wants to join the Iraqi military can join. They just can't join under the aegis of their old units. Germans who served in the Waffen SS weren't allowed to join the new German army under their old unit designations.
OS: Placing them ON THE BORDER (pay attention to what I said - details matter) would have effectively removed them and provided better security than the complete absence of it. And the vetting could have provided weaponry and troops that would ahve been useful in the cities after retraining.
These portions of the border would have been sieves through which weapons and foreign guerrillas flowed without any interruption. Vetting does no good when the whole carcass is corrupt. You are saying that the units that surrendered and disbanded are the units that are fighting us. I am saying that the units that are fighting us are the units that did not so much surrender as reconfigure themselves into irregular combat units. If these people want to serve in the new Iraqi military, there is nothing stopping them from signing up. The problem is that even the *subset* of these people that are signing up are proving to be politically unreliable. Can you imagine having to vet out an entire unit that is this way? They'd kill anyone who was pro-coalition and blame any problems on him.
#8
A4336: Bremer had to work within Powell's insane alliance with the Sunni clerics. Bush's "faith based" theocracy butchered every secular movement in Iraq, and created a power vacuum that Wahabi and Khomeni clerics filled. Future generations, will treat Bush like the American Quisling that he is. Bush screwed up!
#9
TGA: Fully agree with Old Spook. Put them under U.S. pay, send them to guard the border in the desert while weeding out those with real blood on their hands. Most of the army members were young men who didn't have a choice but to serve, neither Saddam fanatics nor Islamists. Give them a good cause and decent remuneration and they are with you.
The guys in Fallujah were being paid $220 a month. They ended up fighting on the side of the guerrillas. Sending entire units of these guys into the desert would have given them another source of revenue for turning a blind eye as terrorists slipped by unnoticed.
TGA: But to send them packing, jobless, moneyless, humiliated, with a galore of unsecured weapon caches, was simply not a bright idea, period.
Anyone who wants to join the Iraqi security security forces is free to do so. But they cannot remain en masse with unit designations intact. That makes it impossible to vet them (i.e. figure out who the good guys are).
TGA: I would go further (and maybe Rantburgers won't agree here). Iraq's economy had a downright socialist structure (almost everyone worked for the government and performance did not matter much. Bremer wanted to solve that problem with a libertarian capitalist shock therapy. That may look good in theory but you need to take people along with you. If not done carefully, many people lose their jobs and existence... and they will not blame it on the previous administration but on the Americans. This is a development you can even see in East Germany... and their "shock therapy" was so much milder and sugarcoated with a transfer of about a trillion (!) Euros from West to East in 15 years (of course parts of it flowed back to the West).
The tiny fraction of former Iraqi troops that are now fighting US forces can sign up with the Iraq security forces any time. But the privileges they once had are gone, forever. We are handing control over a democratic Iraqi government in 3 months. That government has the power to boot US forces out. We cannot afford to have Iraq's security beholden to entire units of Saddam's former military.
#10
ZF, I'm not talking about Fallujah (that's another story), I'm talking about March/April 2003.
Remember what Patton wanted to do. Enlist the remaining Wehrmacht and march on to Moscow...
Now that wasn't possible, but it worked very well with German police. The U.S. let them do their work and only pulled out the worst apples they could find. Germany didn't sink into chaos because of that.
But ZF, with all respect. "We are handing control over a democratic Iraqi government in 3 months".
Sorry, but this is wishful thinking for now. And didn't the U.S. "hand over power" already? /sarcasm off
Even if Iraq somehow manages to stage some sort of elections in three months, the new government's "power to boot the U.S. out" will be a theoretical one. The U.S. cannot let Iraq sink into chaos just because the next Iraqi government prefers this to U.S. presence. If Iraq ever was about U.S. security (and I think it was), it will not be the Iraqi government to decide on that security.
#11
BTW, keeping the regular Iraqi army enlisted does not mean keeping them in the same units as before... with the same commanders.
Anyway, those guys could have been controlled easier than disbanding them, sending them home humiliated, penniless and frustrated, with access to huge weapon caches.
#12
TGA: BTW, keeping the regular Iraqi army enlisted does not mean keeping them in the same units as before... with the same commanders. Anyway, those guys could have been controlled easier than disbanding them, sending them home humiliated, penniless and frustrated, with access to huge weapon caches.
This is a bogus argument. They could have joined and continue to be able to join the Iraqi security forces any time they want to. The only thing they cannot do is remain within their old units.
As to those huge weapons caches, I don't see it - why aren't they able to inflict more casualties on US troops if they have these huge caches? More weaponry means more IED's. Supply convoys run every single day. They don't even have to attack the base camps. Why only two or three American KIA daily? Surely, they should be able to detonate dozens of artillery shells against American units passing by instead of the onesies and twosies they're able to trigger today. (This was partially how so many men were lost daily in Vietnam - supply convoys were ambushed all the time).
#13
Vetting does no good when the whole carcass is corrupt.
Come on ZF - nothing is ever all or nothing. And it is ridiculous to conclude that you could not have used the opportunity to "vet" them on the borders. Apparently by your logic - the bad apples who allowed them to slip through the border would be less effective than there being no one there at all. At least they could have limited the open access and forced the rats to used friendly trails - making it easier to see which units actually managed to stop the flow and which did not. Plus - the intelligence information that could have been gathered by monitoring the units that did allow the rats through, would have been a gold mine.
#14
BH: Come on ZF - nothing is ever all or nothing. And it is ridiculous to conclude that you could not have used the opportunity to "vet" them on the borders. Apparently by your logic - the bad apples who allowed them to slip through the border would be less effective than there being no one there at all. At least they could have limited the open access and forced the rats to used friendly trails - making it easier to see which units actually managed to stop the flow and which did not. Plus - the intelligence information that could have been gathered by monitoring the units that did allow the rats through, would have been a gold mine.
I am obviously not getting through to you. Like I mentioned earlier, any one of Saddam's army who wants to join up with the Iraqi security forces is free to do so. No one is stopping them.
But having entire units serve is a waste of time. It did not work in any of the cities in which it was tried, it did not work in Palestine (where the entire PLO structure returned from exile) and it wouldn't have worked in Iraq. The paymasters and the senior officers need to be clean. Saddam's units were chosen for their personal loyalty to him.
The entire Iraqi army isn't fighting against us. They are inflicting 2 or 3 military dead a day on our men. In Vietnam, it took perhaps 100,000 Vietcong to kill about 2 dozen GI's a day. If you do the math, it looks like there are no more than 10,000 to 20,000 guerrillas in Iraq (allowing for the inferiority of Iraqi guerrillas compared to their Vietcong counterparts, who had decades of experience fighting the French).
#16
TGA, Bremmer's plan for introducing capitalism into Iraq interests me. Although I'm sure that your right about his plan being half baked, I think that introducing true capitalism into the Middleast is as critical as introducing democracy. I find Walter Williams' argument that property rights are more important to prosperity than democracy to be most convincing.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
10/05/2004 22:28 Comments ||
Top||
Grain of salt - no open corroborating evidence. Is this the first "October Surprise"?
CNSNews Exclusive: Iraqi intelligence documents, confiscated by U.S. forces and obtained by CNSNews.com, show numerous efforts by Saddam Hussein's regime to work with some of the world's most notorious terror organizations, including al Qaeda, to target Americans. They demonstrate that Saddam's government possessed mustard gas and anthrax, both considered weapons of mass destruction, in the summer of 2000, during the period in which United Nations weapons inspectors were not present in Iraq. And the papers show that Iraq trained dozens of terrorists inside its borders.
One of the Iraqi memos contains an order from Saddam for his intelligence service to support terrorist attacks against Americans in Somalia. The memo was written nine months before U.S. Army Rangers were ambushed in Mogadishu by forces loyal to a warlord with alleged ties to al Qaeda.
Other memos provide a list of terrorist groups with whom Iraq had relationships and considered available for terror operations against the United States.
...
A senior government official who is not a political appointee provided CNSNews.com with copies of the 42 pages of Iraqi Intelligence Service documents. The originals, some of which were hand-written and others typed, are in Arabic. CNSNews.com had the papers translated into English by two individuals separately and independent of each other.
There are no hand-writing samples to which the documents can be compared for forensic analysis and authentication. However, three other experts - a former weapons inspector with the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM), a retired CIA counter-terrorism official with vast experience dealing with Iraq, and a former advisor to then-presidential candidate Bill Clinton on Iraq - were asked to analyze the documents. All said they comport with the format, style and content of other Iraqi documents from that era known to be genuine.
Posted by: OldSpook ||
10/05/2004 12:06:35 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The Iraq War was unfinished business. Even leaving alone WMDs, Saddam committed gross acts of war against the US and its allies, by abrogating the ceasefire agreement and by ordering his AA units to fire on our aircraft. This was a war that has been a long coming. I believe there are WMDs in Iraq or elsewhere and I believe in time they will be found. All to the good, but far, far more importantly, W finished this piece of national business in conjuction with the WOT.
I hope this news, if true, gets disseminated far and wide. It will completely wreck the credibility of the antiwar element in American politics, and could well pave the way to further more dramatic successes in the war on terror.
#2
OS - I recall reading a story by some embed waaay back during the taking of Baghdad that there were rooms full of boxed documents from several former Saddam ministries - all awaiting translation. This was from some poor Infantry officer whose men had seized much of it in building clearing operations. I hope this is some of the take, and you're dead right - it certainly could be the tip of a huge iceberg of revelations...
This story deserves the popcorn graphic, Fred, heh.
#3
There is of course a big caveat. It's damn hard to authenticate Arab documents. And even if you can prove that these docs are in line with what the Mukhbarat produced in this time, this still will not help enough.
The Iraqi goverment controls Saddam's intelligence now, and they would certainly be able to "produce" very authentic looking documents.
Dan Rather may have given such a bad example that the production of "documents" will be questioned much more severely... even if genuine.
I still believe that the reason for this war was not the contacts Saddam had before 9/11... but the ones he was much more likely to have AFTER 9/11. After all Al Qaeda had shown him a way to payback.
After 9/11 he knew the U.S. would put a lot of pressure on him. So he decided to hide is WMD very well (Syria?), then hoped to play the inspector game. The inspectors would find nothing... and the logical consequences would have been: Lifting the sanctions (and frustrated U.S. looking elsewhere). THEN he would restart his WMD program and who knows, using terrorists for his goals. He probably thought that the U.S. would never start a full blown invasion... some heavy bombing which he had survived before.
Unfortunately the CNS documents, should they be authentic, will come too late for this elections. The Kerry campaign will just question their authenticity and the issue is too complicated for the U.S. public to form an opinion quickly. These are not easy to debunk MS Word texts, this is Arabic scribble coming from a controlled source that has interest to help Bush. So they can be as authentic as can be, they will always be looked upon as partisan.
#4
Old Spook, I was disturbed a while back when I read that the FBI (I think) had one contractor doing translations that believed that most of the other contractors she was working with held anti-American views. She was, of course, let go almost immediately - no whistleblower protection for contractors. Are we really that bad off?
Posted by: Super Hose ||
10/05/2004 2:01 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Saddam's WMD went to Syria and Lebanon but only after the election (Bush wins of course) will more data be brought to light.
#6
30 years later and it's just now sinking into the publics' consciousness that we won Nam. I firmly believe we will be vindicated in the future, but the world will still hate US because we were right once again.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
10/05/2004 10:05 Comments ||
Top||
#9
In speaking with numerous returning soldiers that were in the initial rush to Baghdad and cleared palaces and ministries, truck loads of documents were gathered and sent to the rear, in addition, documents with Saddam's letterhead, or embossed/stamped were kept by soldiers and newspaper types for souvenirs.
It would be good to recover theseâ¦just in case! Ya neva Know!
1. One of the AQ affiliates mentions is Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, in afghanistan. The immediate reply to this will be a "so what, didnt we support Hekmatyar in the '80s?"
2.Better not to have used Laura Mylroie as one of their 3 experts
3. Why leak to CNS, rather than to say Fox News?
4. #11 does raise my eyebrow.
#11
Remember, the FBI (and probably the CIA, too) refused to hire all those Iraqi/Arab world Jews who volunteered after 9/11, because it would upset their Muslim employees. If this stuff goes up on the internet, there will be a great many non-partisan native speakers who will be able to make exact translations. Woo hoo for the Brave New World of the internet -- harnessing the abilities of all Mankind ;-D
#12
the issue wont be translation, but authentication of the document. which will get into papers, inks, etc. Wont be doable over the net. I dont think so , anyway.
Posted by: Steve ||
10/05/2004 11:35 Comments ||
Top||
#14
According to John Loftus, the docs came from a senior US official in Iraq (not a political appointee) who was frustrated at the slow pace of examining the tons of documents recovered from Saddam's files. He says the docs have been examined by a former DIA guy who was skeptical about the Iraq/al Qaeda connection and declared to be authentic. The CNSNews reporter also showed the docs to Laurie Mylorie, who concurs (that's no surprise). Loftus said he got the docs from the CNSNews reporter and sent them to his US and UK intelligence contacts who are evaluating them now. If forgeries, they would be extremely clever because the contain cross references to documents in other files that presumably could be checked.
Very interesting . . . .
Posted by: tibor ||
10/05/2004 11:49 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
terrorist targets in Gaza. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon vowed yesterday Israel will keep troops in Gaza indefinitely to prevent Palestinian rocket attacks on Israeli towns. At least seven more Palestinian fighters were killed -- bringing the total to 60 since the start of Operation Days of Penitence. Mr. Sharon told Israeli radio the Israel Defence Force action had no time limit. "I have directed the Defence Minister to do everything possible," he said. "The IDF is taking needed measures to ensure the peace of Israel's citizens. That's what it has to do, and that's what will be done." Last week two Israeli toddlers were killed when rockets landed in the western Negev town of Sderot, an attack that sparked the operation.
