Britain's generosity is being "abused" by asylum seekers who cost the country £2 billion a year, Michael Howard, the Conservative leader, will say today. His decision to step up the Tories' demand for an annual limit to be imposed on the number of refugees entering Britain coincides with a YouGov poll in The Telegraph today showing strong public support for stricter controls.
In a speech in Kent, Mr Howard will say that town hall spending on asylum has risen thirty-fold since Tony Blair became Prime Minister. In 1997 councils spent £13 million on asylum support but that has soared to £398 million in the past year. When other costs of supporting asylum seekers are added, the total cost to the country since 1997 is £3 billion — the equivalent of £140 per household in England. Mr Howard will say that the British people are tolerant and always ready to help those in genuine need. But many people now feel that their tolerance, their sense of fair play and their desire to help others is being abused. "Fair play matters," he will say. They want a government that upholds the rules, not one that turns a blind eye when they are bent and abused. And let us be clear: our asylum system is being abused - and with it Britain's generosity."
He will be making his speech 24 hours after the Holocaust commemorations but will strongly deny that racism is behind his demand for Britain to withdraw from the 1951 United Nations convention requiring it to take unlimited numbers of people fleeing persecution. Recalling that his grandmother died in Auschwitz with millions of others, he will say that he is determined that Britain should take its fair share of the world's genuine refugees.
YouGov shows that Mr Howard's decision to put immigration at the heart of the Tory election campaign has given the party a lift after months of stagnation. The Conservatives have gained two points since the middle of last month and have narrowed the gap with Labour to one point. The poll puts Labour on 35, the Tories on 34 and the Liberal Democrats on 22. Labour has been stuck on 35 per cent for three months - seven points down from the 42 per cent share of the vote it gained at the 2001 general election. The Tories are onto a winner here.
Posted by: Bulldog ||
01/28/2005 5:59:09 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It still amazes me that countries would forego their sovernity in favor of a Supra bureaucracy.
Will the EU Constitution let the Brits know which hand to wipe their asses with?
Posted by: Duke Nukem ||
01/28/2005 13:13 Comments ||
Top||
A proposal by French President Jacques Chirac to tax countries which retain banking secrecy has caused controversy in Switzerland. The Swiss finance minister and banks attacked the suggestion, while non-governmental organisations welcomed it. At the opening of the World Economic Forum meeting in Davos on Wednesday, Chirac put forward a set of "experimental measures" to finance the fight against Aids. He called for at least $10 billion (SFr12 billion) to be spent annually on combating the disease instead of the $6 billion currently spent. Among the measures was a proposal that countries which retain banking secrecy — including Switzerland — be charged for income lost through tax evasion. He also called for a tax on international financial transactions.
Swiss Finance Minister Hans-Rudolf Merz said Chirac was out of his mind had no right to interfere in what was an internal matter. "It's an interference in the internal policy of our country," Merz told the media. "The French president has the right to express himself about these issues, but he has to accept the fact that we have our own policy rules and a clear policy on banking secrecy. These issues can be raised in bilateral negotiations at which we will continue to defend banking secrecy." Swiss banks were also critical of the "bizarre" suggestion and denied that banking secrecy was responsible for a flight of capital.
Damn! I had to check the original to see if Anonymoose had forgotten to hilite the snarky editorial comments.
But Swiss NGOs welcomed Chirac's ideas as a sign that politicians were taking up the ideas of opponents of globalisation. "It's a very good idea," commented Andreas Missbach of the Berne Declaration. He said that countries like Switzerland that had banking secrecy swallowed up the tax money of other countries, and it made complete sense to impose a special tax on them. The Tax Justice Network said many multinationals managed their business in such a way that they avoided paying taxes in the countries in which they operated. According to the NGO, this tax evasion costs developing countries around $50 billion a year. Next, he plans to announce proposals for a world tax on tea, pasta, vodka, sushi, and hamburgers.
#2
Could somebody take Jacques aside and remind him that he's supposed to be what passes for a conservative, at least by European standards?
What's with this sudden blizzard of supranational taxation schemes? Has he decided that since that-bastard-Bush has downgraded the importance of national sovereignty, that it means that Europeans can tax *other countries*?
Well, I suppose if Europeans think that they can exercise universal criminal jurisdiction, it therefore follows that they can arrogate universal tax authority to themselves.
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
01/28/2005 13:11 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I found Chirac's discourse....well, taxing.
Posted by: Duke Nukem ||
01/28/2005 13:15 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Anything Chirac says is to keep his ass out of a French court room. He has no politics besides staying elected until he dies. Saying things that the Euro elites want to hear furthers his goal.
#7
--That is the great buzz phrase around Davos, the Phrase of 2005 â "silent tsunamis." These are said especially to take place in Africa, and they include hunger, resentment, and disease, particularly AIDS.--
#9
"The youth of Africa, Asia, and Latin America is rightly demanding its entitlement to a future. These populations will put their energy and talent at the service of the future, if they are given the means to do so. If this prospect is denied them, however, then let us beware of the risk of revolt."
In other words
1) They are ENTITLED to assistance from outside.
2) Taxes from outside will pay for assistance.
2) That means outside (other governments) are obligated to pony up.
3) If those someones don't pony up, they are asking for revolt (violence).
Just another politician saying that those who don't hand over their money are asking for violence to be done against them.
#14
"Tax evasion and capital flight are symptoms of internal problems in a country and are not caused by the existence of banks in, for example, Monaco or Switzerland. A far better idea would be if the oh-so-pious French were to impose a tax on nasty tin-pot dictators who purchase real estate on the Côte dâAzur, topped up with a tax on French bank loans and arms sales to countries with brutally repressive regimes."
French militants who join the fight against U.S.-led forces in Iraq could one day return to strike terror in France and elsewhere, the defense minister warned Thursday in an interview with The Associated Press. The warning followed the detention this week of 11 people in Paris as France's domestic counterterrorism agency moved to break up a network suspected of seeking to funnel young French Muslims to Iraq. Ten suspects remain in custody; one woman was released Wednesday. French officials have said the arrests were aimed partly at ensuring that suspected would-be militants do not receive combat training and experience in Iraq that could make them a threat at home if they survive. "These French citizens who are prepared to carry out suicide attacks in Iraq are people who could one day carry out suicide attacks elsewhere," said Defense Minister Michele Alliot-Marie. "That worries us. There are movements, groups, that can threaten our territory as well as others."
Alliot-Marie suggested that some Muslim imams, or prayer leaders, provide the fervor for battle. "A certain number of youths in the movement of some imams receives religious training, until the day when they are moved into the stable of candidates for suicide-bombings," she said. France has been cracking down on imams who preach a radical brand of Islam, expelling at least five last year.
Alliot-Marie said she did not know how many French citizens were involved in the insurgency in Iraq. At least three French Muslims have been killed fighting with insurgents in Iraq. While the number of French-born fighters appears small - perhaps a dozen or more - anti-terror officials in France worry that some of the men of mostly North African descent will return home with combat skills to wage jihad, or holy war.
Alliot-Marie, who has been defense minister for the last two years, is considered a rising star of French politics and media have speculated that she could one day become prime minister - a prospect she declined to comment on. The defense minister spoke to the AP ahead of a Feb. 9-10 meeting of NATO defense ministers in the Riviera city of Nice. Issues such as the alliance's role in Afghanistan and Kosovo and its prospects for training Iraqi soldiers are likely to be discussed there. France "cannot be happy" about continued violence in Iraq, Alliot-Marie said, reiterating France's willingness to train Iraqi police outside the wartorn nation. France was a leading opponent of the U.S.-led war that toppled Saddam Hussein and repeatedly has said it does not plan to send troops there.
Relations between Paris and Washington deteriorated after France expressed opposition to the war. But Alliot-Marie said she has had a frank and "very cordial" relationship with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. "It allows us to have a relationship of trust, even if we do not always agree." She said that President Bush's new administration has "extended its hand" to Paris "and we wish to extend our hand back."
The U.S. State Department said Thursday that Condoleezza Rice, the newly installed U.S. secretary of state, will visit France on a swing through the Middle East and Europe that begins next week - her first foreign trip as the top American diplomat. In other areas, Alliot-Marie said France remains "concerned about seeing Iran have a nuclear program that could lead to a nuclear weapon," but would not give up on diplomatic efforts France leads with Britain and Germany to prevent that from happening. She said France opposes integrating NATO's mission in Afghanistan and a separate U.S.-led coalition searching for remnants of the al-Qaida terror network and the deposed Taliban regime. At a meeting of NATO defense ministers in Romania in October, France and Germany spoke out against U.S. plans to put the alliance in charge of military and reconstruction efforts in Afghanistan. However, U.S. officials said NATO was to develop plans to merge the missions. At the end of its six-month term next month, France is to hand over leadership of NATO's 8,000-strong International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan to Turkey.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
01/28/2005 12:21:09 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
French militants who join the fight against U.S.-led forces in Iraq could one day return to strike terror in France and elsewhere, the defense minister warned Thursday in an interview with The Associated Press.
Not if we kill them first. And doing the Phrench a favor isn't the reason why we would.
#5
She said that President Bushâs new administration has "extended its hand" to Paris "and we wish to extend our hand back."
I call bullshit. Why talk about "wishing" to extend their hand back if Bush HAD extended its hand? Why not say "and we have extended our hand back?" Wish not, but do.
#6
The French could stop these terrorists and prevent them from going to Iraq but it still poses a fundamental problem - they are still terrorists! They will pick their spots and attack infidels. This is what these people do. They don't work, play or enjoy their lives. Their religon has made them enjoy only misery and wish simply to die for a cause. To put them in prison is to delay the inevitable. They will attack, just like the nuts at GTMO. These people are relentless and want us dead or converted. PS you'll have to kill me first. Perhaps the French should set up their own smuggling network, recruit as many jihadi's they possibly can. Package up the nut bags and deliver them right into the line of fire of a jdam. Their not doing anyone any favors detaining them. See to it they find their way to battle and quickly have the opportunity to meet Allah.
#8
No Phrawnch nationals should be killed. They are our ally. We should repatriate them immediately via Marsailles. Drop them in the sea 3 miles from shore and tell them to swim north.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
01/28/2005 18:10 Comments ||
Top||
#9
1/28/2005 Europe
French defense minister concerned by French jihadis in Iraq
Why? Is she afraid they might get a widdle boo-boo and she won't ge there to kiss it and make it all better?
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
01/28/2005 18:54 Comments ||
Top||
#10
I call bullshit. Why talk about "wishing" to extend their hand back if Bush HAD extended its hand? Why not say "and we have extended our hand back?" Wish not, but do.
geez, and they call US talmudic:) Sure youve never been to yeshiva, Ptah? Or been to a Jesuit University (like Georgetown grad, master of the word "is", Bill Clinton)
Fred is a big believer in SIGINT, IIRC ... The surveillance scheme was working perfectly: German intelligence operatives were watching and listening to two terror suspects living in their country for more than two years. The eavesdropping was yielding a plethora of detail on the cells' desires, plans, and unusual source of funding. The hope was the spying would go on for a long time - long enough to grab others involved in the network. Instead, according to a European official knowledgeable about the operation, the two terror suspects suddenly made plans to move to the Netherlands. The German agents - unsure if they would lose contact - moved in and had them arrested this past weekend. "The arrests weren't planned," says the European source. "This story from the intelligence and law-enforcement sides now, sadly, is over."
In the end, the surveillance operation offers an inside look at some of the problems and progress of those on the frontlines of the war on terror. For one thing, it shows that successes are occurring: In addition to the two suspects arrested in Germany - and the information gleaned during the surveillance operation - two other high-level terrorists were apprehended this week in Iraq. Second, it illustrates how difficult it is to tap into terrorist cells and gather enough information to stop a specific attack or round up all those involved. Third, it highlights how contentious the relationship can be between intelligence agencies and local police, which often have different mandates and goals. "My former service was in the business of letting people run in order to scoop in as many as possible," says Stella Rimington, the former head of MI5, Britain's domestic intelligence service. "But we have to work with the police, and they are of course anxious to bring things to a conclusion without taking too many risks."
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
01/28/2005 12:13:51 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"My former service was in the business of letting people run in order to scoop in as many as possible," says Stella Rimington, the former head of MI5, Britainâs domestic intelligence service. "But we have to work with the police, and they are of course anxious to bring things to a conclusion without taking too many risks."
This is what I think has been wrong with our FBI. They lost balance on this aspect of their job. They just let them run in order to collect more information - but in so doing, they allow them to grow and recruit. Both sides benefit from the time and connections.
I'm beginning to think that's what went wrong with the first WTC bombing. The FBI set them up to watch them but the bad guys were sophisticated enough to take advantage of that opportunity.
Maybe that's why he got his "Basit" passport so he could fly out on the day of the bombing, and the FBI wouldn't notice.
I can't thank all of you enough -- the Daily Kos community, and the blogosphere as a whole -- for all of your effective work during the recent debate over Condoleezza Rice's nomination. Your support and participation in this critical debate meant so much to me.
More than 94,000 Americans from across the country signed my petition and stood together to demand the truth from Condoleezza Rice. It was truly an overwhelming response -- much more than I could have anticipated. You helped to get our message out to millions of Americans -- I couldn't have done it without you.
And you made a difference. You gave me the voice I needed to ask the tough questions during Dr. Rice's confirmation hearings. And you gave the entire United States Senate the voice it needed to take its "advice and consent" responsibility seriously. In fact, Condoleezza Rice received 13 votes against her confirmation -- the most votes against any Secretary of State's nomination since 1825.
Two weeks ago, who would have thought that Condoleezza Rice's nomination would allow us to have a full debate about our policy in Iraq? Who would have thought that we'd have the chance to truly expose all of the misstatements and misjudgments that led us into that conflict and continue to plague this Administration to this very day?
The Republican Senate leadership intended to easily approve Dr. Rice's nomination in a routine voice vote last Thursday afternoon, after President Bush's Inauguration and before the Inaugural balls got into full swing.
But you didn't let them ram this nomination through the Senate. You forced the Republican leadership to give us the debate we wanted on the floor of the United States Senate, and you gave us the opportunity we desperately needed to hold Dr. Rice and the Bush Administration accountable for their failures in Iraq and in the war on terrorism.
The American people deserved no less.
As you and I both know, this is just one more of the many battles we'll be having as we fight for our nation's future. It started with contesting the Ohio vote, it continued with the debate over Dr. Rice's confirmation, and it will certainly continue over the Gonzalez nomination and on many other looming issues. We're going to need to keep working together to make our voices heard and build a better America.
I enjoyed the dialogue we started over the past few weeks, including the chat I had with Armando and DavidNYC on the eve of the committee hearings, and I look forward to future interactions with the Daily Kos community. I hope to have the time to drop by here and participate in the discussion from time to time -- I value your input, and I thank you for caring so much about the future of our country.
Thanks again for all of your hard work. I can't tell you how much I appreciate your continued support. And I look forward to standing with you in the days, weeks, and months ahead.
In Friendship,
Barbara Boxer
Posted by: Korora ||
01/28/2005 12:00:32 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#5
she's from Marin county - the descent will be unnoticeable to her neighbors
Posted by: Frank G ||
01/28/2005 10:33 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Your support and participation in this critical debate meant so much to me.
"It *sniff* showed me that I wasn't the only lunatic out there . . ."
Posted by: The Doctor ||
01/28/2005 10:42 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Does she matter? No.
Californians be bold, dump this dip shit next time she runs for reelection. She is a total embarassment to your state and our country.
Posted by: Duke Nukem ||
01/28/2005 11:41 Comments ||
Top||
#8
"You like me! You really like me!"
(Cue "Wind Beneath My Wings" in the background....)
Dear sweet God, is this what the Democrats have become? Lord save us all...
#9
Ca's would like to dump her - but the Republican party always insists on some putz that is less palatable to Californians than Boxer is. She'd be easy to beat with the right candidate - but the Repubs don't want any more RINO's diluting the purity of their party - so we get wacko Boxer.
#10
She'll win again. There is no Republican party in Califronia. The four safest seats in America are the Senate seats in CA and MA. NY, VT, CT are in close for third.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
01/28/2005 11:59 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Despite popular belief, the majority of people in CA are not loon birds who sit in hot tubs, but normal people who have families. What is different in CA is that they are more socially liberal. They support environmental issues, mass transit, and are more socially liberal on issues such as abortion, gays etc. Thus, the candidates who support ideas such as fiscal conservatism, curbing illegal immigration, family values (other than abortion) are unwanted by the Republican party and don't get on the ticket.
It's the same suicide that the Dems are doing now at a federal level - pushing the moderates out in favor of the pure.
#12
I sent Babs an email expressing my disapointment of the "Election Debacle" resolution that she was the only one to vote for. She responded by sending me the entire speech! I know it was some staffer on her behalf but they reallly don't get it. I responded with the following:
Dear Senator Boxer,
Since you were the ONLY Senator to vote in favor of your kooky resolution, you might think that maybe, just maybe, in was seen as the act of a sore loser than someone seeking voter rights. If someone in one of those counties felt 'disenfranchised' why didn't they file a formal complaint with the election commission? To date there are no complaints filed with any equal rights, civil rights, or voter rights commission.
As a retired service veteran I find your linkage to our troops in harms way and your conspiracy rants on the Senate floor particularly offensive. Please stop it you embarrass their service and your state. If your statements can't pass the giggle test in the Senate don't drag our servicemen and women with you.
Finally, nobody needs a civil rights lesson from you or anybody of your ilk. There are not white-robed conservative roaming downtown Cleveland stopping people from voting. Ask your esteemed colleague from West Virginia how that little trick works because it's not something coming from Republicans. In fact IF there were long lines or too few voting machines the blame the Democratic leaders in those districts because they are responsible for voting methods and machines. FYI they didn't file any complaints as well.
God Bless and watch over you,
P.S. Nice call having a Klan member hold up the vote on Dr. Rice. I can't wait for the vote on Gonzales.!
Oh--Senator Boxer! Surprised to see you here in Rantburg. Fred! Quick, get the troll net! Have you been to the Convention & Visitors' Bureau Welcome Center yet? They've got a really nice published Visitor's Guide and--
"Stop that inane civic boosterism, young man, you've no business imitating a PR flack when I have a serious complaint. You commented on my thank-you letter to Daily Kos and said, quote, 'Moonbats of a feather flock together', did you not?"
Well, yeah.
"That's totally wrong."
How so, Ma'am? It's a play on an old saying which is a metaphor for the fact that people of like ideology tend to congregate.
"I know that, you fool, I'm a highly educated member of the cognitive elite."
And, well, ma'am, um, you and the Kos crowd are of like ideology.
"Of course we are!"
And they are--well, not to put too fine a point on it--moonbats. Barking moonbats, actually.
"I suppose."
So where have I gone wrong?
"You fool, you're too stupid to see it! It's really quite simple: Bats! Don't! Have! Feathers!"
Posted by: Mike ||
01/28/2005 13:23 Comments ||
Top||
#14
"More than 94,000 Americans from across the country signed my petition..."
Gee whiz! Out of (dig, dig) the 122,267,553 people who cast votes, y'mean Babs?
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
01/28/2005 21:38 Comments ||
Top||
#16
She'd be easy to beat with the right candidate - but the Repubs don't want any more RINO's diluting the purity of their party - so we get wacko Boxer.
So run a third candidate against both of them. Or run more moderate people in both primaries. Or vote with your feet and leave the freaking state.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
01/28/2005 21:59 Comments ||
Top||
#17
Cyber Sarge, I called her office to thank her. I told her staffer that Boxer's antics re: certifying the election and approving Rice had finally made up my mind -- I am taking my money and my energy over to the Repubs, and switching my party registration.
The staffer hung up on me LOL. BUT ... I also called Harry Reid's office, told them he's a disaster and I was switching. THEY caught their breath before they hung up ... I guess they're getting fewer calls than the obnoxious nose/hair lady ....
WASHINGTON (al jazeera Reuters) - The United States should start to withdraw militarily and politically from Iraq and aim to pull out all troops as early as possible next year, Sen. Edward Kennedy said on Thursday after he slugged down a 1/2 quart of Wild Turkey. After Sunday's Iraqi elections, Kennedy said President Bush should state he intends to negotiate a timetable with the new Iraqi government to draw down U.S. forces. Where the heck has he been? In a drunken haze? (I answered my own question)
At least 12,000 U.S. troops should leave at once, Kennedy said, "to send a stronger signal about our intentions to ease the pervasive sense of occupation." Teddy the Lesser, foreign policy expert. That's right Teddy...let's help further destabilize the situation and endanger the US troops on the ground. Damn...that's exactly what you pushed for in Vietnam. And look how many more soldiers and marines died because of it you treasonous pig?
The Massachusetts Democrat, who opposed the U.S. invasion of Iraq, became the first senator to lay out a plan for Bush to start withdrawing troops a day after the Pentagon warned lawmakers that strikes by insurgents may increase after Sunday's elections. What's he running for...lifeguard at the Chappaquiddick??
Besides ending its military presence, Kennedy said the United States must stop making political decisions in Iraq and turn over full authority to the United Nations to help Baghdad set up a new government. Is this the whiskey talking or is he really that stupid?
He said an international meeting led by the United Nations and Iraq should be convened immediately in Iraq or elsewhere in the Middle East to start that process. Will it be as effective as the meetings held for the Israel-Paleo "peace" process, or the Sudan?
"We now have no choice but to make the best we can of the disaster we have created in Iraq," Kennedy in a speech to the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. "The current course is only making the crisis worse." Ted is f***ing idiot and is endangering the lives of soldiers and marines who have sworn oaths to protect his sorry a**.
He said the indefinite presence of U.S. troops is "fanning the flames of conflict" in what has become "a war against the U.S. occupation." Talk to the troops you drunken skunk. Talk to the troops.
The Republican National Committee criticized the Senate's leading liberal for delivering "such an overtly pessimistic message only days before the Iraqi election." He's guilty of sedition and treason...Vietnam redux.
"Kennedy's partisan political attack stands in stark contrast to President Bush's vision of spreading freedom around the world," RNC spokesman Brian Jones said. What he said.
Kennedy emphasized that Bush must also make it clear that the United States does not intend to have a long-term presence, and announce that it will dramatically reduces its embassy in Baghdad, which is the largest in the world. While many in the Republican-led Senate have expressed dismay as the death toll of U.S. troops stands at more than 1,400, Kennedy is the first to lay out a plan for a troop withdrawal, his office said. The same kind of cowardly plan that left Mary Jo in an overturned car to die.
In the Republican-led House of Representatives, 24 Democrats this week introduced a resolution calling on Bush to begin an immediate pullout. Once again democraps pushing politics over the welfare of the troops in harm's way. Vietnam Protests Redux.
The administration has refused to offer a timetable for pulling troops, and Bush on Wednesday said the United States would remain until the new government can defend itself. We lay out the timetable after we eliminate the bad guys and give the fledgling democracy a chance to survive.
Democrats like Kennedy have been the strongest critics of the war but many Republicans are also concerned, in part because Iraq is costing more than $1 billion a week and has put a great strain on America's military and its budget. Yes, it has. But we are there, and to win anything less than complete and total victory would be a greater travesty than Vietnam. Walking away would embolden the islamo-cockroaches. Ultimately they would spread their infection to the rest of the Middle Eastern governments, and threaten the Western World.
I dunno. I know that Pres. Bush has been a bit overwhelmed and undertaffed lately, while the good senator was expediting his Cabinet nominees, and I'm delighted that the senator also found time to help draft our foreign policy without even being asked. In fact, the Senate needs a few more go-getters like Kennedy.
Posted by: anymouse ||
01/28/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Ted "Killer Rapist" Kennedy would be bitch slapped and thrown in the basement if his brothers were still alive. JFK would use a 9 iron on his adams apple...
#2
what can you expect from a pos son of a bootlegger--his father took he same tact re the appeasement of hitler as this drunken twit does against islamofascism--who's next at johns hopkins--chimpsky--the wolf must be frothing at his former colleagues for letting this red nosed dunce do his LLL peacenik jig at his former U.
Posted by: SON OF TOLUI ||
01/28/2005 2:37 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Thanks anymouse, i couldn't have editorialized as well as you did. Everytime see or hear Mr. traitor my blood boils.
Posted by: please stick a fork in him ||
01/28/2005 5:45 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Now, Kennedy said, the United States and the insurgents are both battling for the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people and the U.S. is losing.
This is like saying the KKK was just trying to win the hearts and minds of the people it was brutalizing. I really can't decide if he's gone completely insane or if he wants to hurt the Bush Administration so bad he doesn't care how many people die in order to do it. Either way, he's gone lower than I ever thought he would.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
01/28/2005 7:19 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Sounds as though someone's getting their money's worth.
#7
...At least Joe, John, and Bobby wore their country's uniform. All Teddy did before he hit the Senate was to get 86'd out of Harvard for cheating.
By the way, is he setting a timetable for letting us know how Mary Jo died? Just asking.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
01/28/2005 7:26 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Like Father like Son. Teddy's Pa blamed Roosevelt for Joe's death, not Hitler. If he had had his wish we would be Hieling today.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
01/28/2005 7:29 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Ted Kennedy is a socialist. A socialist will do or say anything to advance a socialist agenda. It doesn't matter if his words encourage an armed enemy of the USA, it doesn't matter if a US military gets kill by a suicide bomber who decided to become a suicide bomber becuase of Kennedy's speech. The only thing that matters is the agenda.
If Kennedy gets Americans killed, then that is a price he is willing to make others pay. If he stands atop a pile of dead Americans he thinks he really is taller and better than anyone else.
As I have said before:
Liberals love dead Americans, espeically dead US Military.
#10
Teddy is just like his pappy, Joe Kennedy was a huge Hitler appeaser.
Posted by: Duke Nukem ||
01/28/2005 7:48 Comments ||
Top||
#11
badanov, I'm not so sure Teddy is a true Socialist. He seems to espouse socialism with "the government's money" and In wanting more and more Government controls on our everyday lives as long as those same controls don't apply to him and HIS money. I lived in Boston for two years (1991 and 1992) and it amazed me the degree of resignation the people had about the state and local government control over everything. I had spent the two previous years in Portland, Oregon and the contrast was startling. I hadn't really known just how much influence the Kennedys had over Massachusetts politics until I lived there. The take I got was, "Yeah he's a sonofabitch but he brings a lot of Federal money to the State".
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
01/28/2005 8:59 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Not such a bad idea, Ted! Think how much shorter World War II could have been if we declared we were only going to fight the fascists for a year and after that, the hell with it!
#14
well its interesting to see Ted does NOT agree with McCain and other Rumsfeld critics. McCain et al think weve had too few troops in Iraq. Ted thinks we have too MANY.
#15
Sounds like Teddy dried out dusted off one of his old Hamburger Hill speeches.
He was an ignorant prick then, and he's still an ignorant prick now.
#19
James Taranto comments on "the malignantly magniloquent Massachusettsan" in the WSJ's "Best of the Web" (emphasis added):
John F. Kennedy's presidency is hard to evaluate because it was so brief, but he is best known for the soaring rhetoric of his 1961 Inaugural Address . . . Kennedy's brother Ted, whose 15,423 days of service make him the second most senior U.S. senator, is best known for driving off a bridge and leaving a young woman to drown. His attitude toward America's role in the world is the opposite of his brother's; it's best summed up as an inversion of FDR: We have nothing to offer but fear itself. . . .
. . . Ted Kennedy is, as The Wall Street Journal puts it today, "cheerleading for America to fail" because his ideology leaves him unfit to cope with American success. If he has his way, democracy in Iraq will suffer the same fate as Mary Jo Kopechne.
Posted by: Mike ||
01/28/2005 15:55 Comments ||
Top||
#20
after he slugged down a 1/2 quart of Wild Turkey after he slugged down a quart of Wild Turkey (and once again became a wild turkey).
#22
I'm telling you the Gonzales vote is going to be soooo funny. If you think Black leaders are mad about the Condi vote, wait until Latino leaders see the display next week.
#23
JQC - are you trying to ruin my taste for Wild Turkey?
Posted by: Frank G ||
01/28/2005 19:58 Comments ||
Top||
#24
I personally feel that he is attempting to set up for the (very distant) possibility that just such an announcement will be made.
If it was made, it would set prop up his drunken ass presidential hopes.
Political posturing. Why couldn't we trade him out for Robert? I'll have to go speak with my connections on the far side of the veil . . .
Posted by: Jame Retief ||
01/28/2005 20:09 Comments ||
Top||
#25
I'm torn about him shutting up. On one hand he is giving aid and comfort to the enemy. In the long run this will be his legacy in history. He'll be remembered for this like Rather will be remembered for the Burkett docs.
The American military's continued presence in Iraq is fanning the flames of conflict, and signals the need for a new detailed timeline to bring the troops home, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy said Thursday. Just three days before the Iraqi people go to the polls to elect a new government, the Massachusetts Democrat said America must give Iraq back to its people rather than continue an occupation that parallels the failed politics of the Vietnam war. "The U.S. military presence has become part of the problem, not part of the solution," Kennedy said in remarks prepared for delivery at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies. "We need a new plan that sets fair and realistic goals for self-government in Iraq, and works with the Iraqi government on a specific timetable for the honorable homecoming of our forces." Is there any doubt that Teddy Kennedy is totally nuts?
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
01/28/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
"Is there any doubt that Teddy Kennedy is totally nuts?"
Yes, there is. There's two other possibilities, stupidity and dishonesty. I think it's dishonesty: he knows damn well that an abrupt pullout would be a disaster, a victory for the jihadis a thousand times greater than Mogadishu, and irrefutable proof that bin Laden was absolutely right about America when he said we don't have staying power, and that if you bleed us enough we will eventually give up and go home.
I think Ted Kennedy knows perfectly well that what he is advocating would constitute abject surrender to militant Islam, and he doesn't care.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
01/28/2005 6:12 Comments ||
Top||
#5
I know the SOB has been re-elected umteen times .... but can someone have this wretch committed or something ? What the hell is wrong with the voters of Massachusetts ?
#7
I lived in Boston for two years (1991 and 1992) and it amazed me the degree of resignation the people had about the state and local government control over everything. I had spent the two previous years in Portland, Oregon and the contrast was startling. I hadn't really known just how much influence the Kennedys had over Massachusetts politics until I lived there. The take I got was, "Yeah he's a sonofabitch but he brings a lot of Federal money to the State so we'll keep voting for him".
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
01/28/2005 9:03 Comments ||
Top||
#8
# 7 you are right about the family name - having money = power etc. I think the U.S. has to re think a strategy with that country. I know that many spouse's and loved ones back home- NO LONGER CARE and want their sons and daughters, wives, husbands, BACK HOME. Especially all the children who have parent's that are serving in the military. SO once again, there are two sides to the coin. **
Andrea
Posted by: Andrea ||
01/28/2005 9:36 Comments ||
Top||
#9
I think we'd all like to have everybody home. What Teddy is calling for is the complete abandonment of the Iraqi people to totalitarianism. He says the insurgents are fighting for the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people same as we are. That's absolute bullshit and he knows it. That's the same as saying the KKK was only trying to win the hearts and minds of the people they brutalised. He hates George Bush so much he doesn't care how many people die in order to achieve his aim of destroying the President. He has just given hope to the terrorists that if they can hold out a little longer we will pull out and they will win. I think he knows that and doesn't care. I have very dear friends in Iraq and have lost some already and if any more of them die or are maimed because of this sonofabitch's political grandstanding I will forever hold him responsible. He's lost influence in the Senate and he knows it. He's becomming increasingly irrelevant and I think he's throwing a tantrum for the attention and to hell with who it hurts.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
01/28/2005 10:08 Comments ||
Top||
#10
"That's absolute bullshit and he knows it."
DB, agreed it is bullshit, but the scary thing is, that asshole Kennedy might actually believe it.
#14
DB, he absolutely believes it. That's why it is not unreasonable to say he is insane. The reality distortion field this guy has been in for the last 40 years would screw up anybody's mind. That's why we dumped hereditary monarchy.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
01/28/2005 17:09 Comments ||
Top||
#15
# 9 D.B. I see your point of view. History will only repeat itself in Iraq and its people- whether we intervene or not. I think we are fighting a losing battle. I can't count the death toll, neither can Kennedy and does not care.
I can not think of any government official elected or appointed that should be in office for 40 year's***
Andrea
Posted by: Andrea ||
01/28/2005 17:31 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Xbalanke,I didn't mean to portray ALL of the State's residents as taking off the Federal dole. I met some truly great people there and other than the political scene with "the enlightened" who couldn't comprehend that other parts of the country are pretty well educated and politically savy as well, I had a great time. The State income tax in Mass is very high in order to pay for all the social services there and a lot of people really bitched about it but until the Liberals are voted out there really isn't much they can do about it.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
01/28/2005 19:40 Comments ||
Top||
#17
Last week it was the The Bag Lady's turn to get it hole and dig. This week it's Teddy's turn.
Dig, dig, dig, Democrat boys and girls. Deeper and deeper and deeper...
#18
Yes, Andrea, History will repeat herself. Iraq is just a larger, slightly more civilized Afghanistan -- two years later. But try this experiment: write to the soldiers to whom you are sending calling cards and other people's magazines, and ask them for their response to your little idea. And do report back to us, dear, on the replies. We really care.
James Woolsey is Chairman of Feedom House. This report is the first step in an effort to contain the destructive ideology being proliferated by the Wahhabis within the American homeland.
Posted by: Duke Nukem ||
01/28/2005 12:21:04 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
A brief glance leads me to the conclusion Woolsey thinks we're going to have to deal with the Soddies and the sooner the better.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
01/28/2005 13:55 Comments ||
Top||
#2
This is a powerful indictment of the Saudi regime. What makes it particularly credible is:
1. it is not the product of some fringe group with a predetermined agenda
2. it is brimming with documented evidence and does not make unsubstantiated claims
I only hope it gets traction. I fear it won't, though.
#3
I forgot the history from 1979, when the fanatics took over Mecca and the blood bath ensued. So focused on the Iranian hostages.
Look at what the Soddie Royals' "bargain" has led to? Wahhabism with global reach.
Posted by: Duke Nukem ||
01/28/2005 20:59 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Ya know, because of freedom and speech and freedom of religion, they're perfectly able to distribute this crap. And I *really* don't think we should try to stop them.
However, there's no reason for the local mosque to *accept* or *distribute* this crap. For as long as this shit is passed out at mosques, we have every right to look funny at Muslims.
Look at it this way -- if you knew a certain denomination of (self-proclaimed) Christians were likely to have white supremacist literature available in their churches, then when you encounter a member of that denomination, you're likely to wonder if that person is, himself, a white supremacist. It really wouldn't be out of line, or bigoted, or even a bad conclusion to make: they distribute that crap, so they must have some level of agreement with it.
So if Muslims want people to stop looking at them oddly, they'd damned well better clean up their own houses of worship. Three years after 9-11, with the spotlight on them, that they still have this garbage on hand says a lot of bad things about them.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
01/28/2005 22:08 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Sounds like the Islamic version of KKK.
Posted by: Duke Nukem ||
01/28/2005 22:27 Comments ||
Top||
SAMIR VINCENT WAS VISITING BAGHDAD when Saddam Hussein ordered the invasion of Kuwait on August 2, 1990. He had not lived in his native Iraq for some three decades, having left in 1958 for the United States and a track-and-field career that would later land him in the Boston College Athletic Hall of Fame. Maybe Vincent's presence in Iraq was simply bad timing.
Although Americans were not exactly hostages in the tense days after the invasion, they were not free to leave Iraq. So when Vincent, a naturalized citizen, and Illinois businessman Michael Saba managed to escape by taking a taxicab eight hours to the Jordanian border and hitchhiking the remaining 50 miles to Amman, their adventure was news.
Washingtonians who read Keith Kendrick's Washington Post article about the trip, published August 15, 1990, probably gave it little thought. In hindsight, however, the story seems to offer the first clues to the events that culminated last week in Vincent's admission that he had accepted millions of dollars to work as an agent for Saddam in the United States.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
01/28/2005 12:47:23 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
August 1990, right after the invasion of Kuwait,...... Vincent approached Col. Carl Bernard, USMC Ret., and former CIA director Richard Helms with an offer from Saddam Hussein. But the first Bush administration rejected these and all other overtures, insisting on an unconditional Iraqi withdrawal from Kuwait.)
Here's what I don't understand...one does not deliver a message re: terms of war without being one's "agent". So, regardless of whatever sugar-coating is put on top of it, it was clearly known back then that he was a foreign agent working for Sadaam. Right?
So how is it that he was able to work these deals on oil-for-food with out anyone realizing what was going on, for so long?
Our press, for all of it's bluster about how the blogosphere doens't have "reporters", may have "reporters", but they completely missed the biggest events of the latter 20th Century. The rise of Islamism, with a HUGE Jihad army forming world-wide .... UN Oil for food scandal - biggest scandal of the century and it operated right under their nose and all's they did was publish Saddam's press releases about how it was hurting "the children"TM. They are worse than dupes, they are tools.
The possibility that al-Qaeda or its sympathizers could gain access to a nuclear bomb is the greatest danger facing the United States in the war on terrorism, Attorney General John Ashcroft said Thursday.
U.S. officials "from time to time" uncover evidence terrorists are trying to develop nuclear capability, Ashcroft said without providing any specifics. It is not clear whether they have made any progress, but the United States must take the threat seriously, he said in an interview with The Associated Press.
"If you were to have nuclear proliferation find its way into the hands of terrorists, the entire world might be very seriously disrupted by a few individuals who sought to impose their will, their arcane philosophy, on the rest of mankind," he said.
Ashcroft made no apology for his actions, saying he has enjoyed full support from President Bush.
"The president understands that this is almost mission impossible, to keep winning every day," he said. "To be always the winner and never be the loser is a very difficult task. The world is not absent terror. But the United States has been absent terror."
His greatest failure, Ashcroft said, was in not fully explaining to the American people early on just how the Patriot Act has helped in that war. Time will prove that the law has not been the threat to the Constitution seen by some, he said.
"Rights have not been infringed. Human dignity has not suffered. It's been enhanced and it has not carried a cost or toll on the civil liberties of America," Ashcroft said.
More than 375 people have been charged in terror-related prosecutions in the United States since the 2001 attacks, with 195 either convicted or entering guilty pleas. Yet Ashcroft said officials continue to receive reports of "individuals who are sympathizers" with al-Qaeda or other terror groups coming into the United States after meeting with people overseas with links to terrorism or attending events that include "inappropriate extremist or terrorist instruction."
"We have to remain on guard. America, as open and free as it is, is going to have to pay a price in terms of understanding and being vigilant about potentials that freedom and openness are associated with," he said.
Ashcroft also said the Justice Department deserved praise for handling some 400 corporate malfeasance cases, helping drive the nation's crime rate to 30-year lows and making strides in civil rights prosecutions — all while dealing with the terror threat.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
01/28/2005 12:11:44 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
The package -- approved December 22 for $168 million over three years -- is aimed at keeping Navy SEALs, Army Green Berets and other troops trained to fight terrorists from taking lucrative positions with security contractors or other government agencies, the officials said. The incentives are directed at troops with a good deal of wartime experience and highly specialized skills that take considerable time and money to replace. Only "operators" -- troops on the ground conducting missions -- are targeted, not everybody in the 49,000-person special ops community, the officials said.
More at the link(cut and paste source,sorry)...great idea, I only wish all pro players would get their over-paid salaries cut in half to pay these tough guys...
Posted by: FWTB-DLTR ||
01/28/2005 00:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
A wonderful plan! We should be fanning these guys with palm leaves and feeding them grapes! But most importantly, let's not hang them out to dry if a mission is compromised or failed; like we did when our valiant troops at Abu Graibe prison became photo exposed! Ohh, and save a few extra bucks for the Mercenaries and Bounty Hunters we employ off the record.
#2
Nothing like a little market based realism. You can't pay these warriors enough for what they contribute. Duty, honor, valor.
Posted by: Duke Nukem ||
01/28/2005 7:53 Comments ||
Top||
#3
But most importantly, let's not hang them out to dry if a mission is compromised or failed; like we did when our valiant troops at Abu Graibe prison became photo exposed!
It's spelled 'Graib'. If you're attempting to make a point, even a half thought-out or regurgitated one, at least try to get the the spelling right.
Somalia, Lebanon, and the Iranian hostage-rescue mission are more realistic examples of "hanging the troops out to dry".
Ohh, and save a few extra bucks for the Mercenaries and Bounty Hunters we employ off the record.
Contract personnel get hired because the missions don't get reduced and Congress, in their infinite wisdom, decides not to authorise or fund additional personnel.
#4
Thanks Pappy for the correct spell; the three other operations are dead on, as examples of what I hope would not happen, in this future new recognition package!
A coalition of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) in mainly Muslim Malaysia, headed by a son of former premier Tun Mahathir Mohamad, is running a series of television advertisements denouncing terrorism as un-Islamic.
'Violence dishonours faith,' say the clips, produced by the coalition known as Peace Malaysia, which was set up in January 2003 ahead of the US' invasion of Iraq.
A baby boy is featured in one of the segments aired on private channel TV3 during primetime news bulletins. It shows him growing up and graduating from university, turning to militancy and dying in conflict.
Islam tells its believers not to kill children, women, the elderly and people in places of religious worship during combat, says another advertisement.
'Our objective is to promote global peace. It is a reminder to us here that we are living in peaceful conditions. Other countries are not so lucky,' said Peace Malaysia coordinator Mukhriz Mahathir.
'We want to promote diplomacy,' said Mr Mukhriz, whose father was a strong critic of the US invasion of Iraq, warning that it would spawn more Islamic militancy.
Mr Chandra Muzaffar, political analyst and adviser to the group of more than 100 NGOs, said: 'It is in line with Peace Malaysia's goal of pursuing peace, we are committed to non-violence as it is against Islam. 'The emphasis is against violence as embodied in Islam. The killing of civilians in any battle or war is against what is integral to Islamic thought and philosophy.'
But Mr Mukhriz said the advertisements were not triggered by fears of a rise in militancy.
'Our grouse is mainly with Western leaders. They still can't sit down and discuss things in a peaceful manner.'
Terrorism is a 'topical subject right now. The occupation of Iraq is still big news. Now there's talk of Iran', he added.
'In Malaysia, we are lucky. Politically, we may have different perspectives but everyone shares a tolerant viewpoint. Malaysia has been described as a 'beacon of tolerance' and we want people to realise this.'
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
01/28/2005 12:29:08 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
BS disinformation from the Malaysian big names islamic apologists....paving the way for Al'Jazeera which is about to set up a regional hub from Malaysia.
âThe emphasis is against violence as embodied in Islam. The killing of civilians in any battle or war is against what is integral to Islamic thought and philosophy.â
But Mr Mukhriz said the advertisements were not triggered by fears of a rise in militancy.
âOur grouse is mainly with Western leaders. They still canât sit down and discuss things in a peaceful manner.â
Just an anti-war message for suckers who still wonder what happens if you have a war and no one shows up - (answer: rape, murder, genocide by one side, which is unhindered by the other).
#3
The problem with M'sia is that Wannabe-ism cum sneaky islamisation. The supremistic trust of that reinforces discrimination which is officially driven for the majority. This ensures loss of economic competitiveness overall and an impossibility to get anywhere close to being an egalitarian state.
These people like Muzaffar(or Farish Noor), intellectuals, as they're regarded, never dare confront this directly but beats about the bush, trying to point fingers. Mukhriz is just the son of the ex-PM. He should only boast of M'sia being a âbeacon of toleranceâ when there is no islamic anti apostasy existing and no under the counter discrimination of other faiths merely to make islam supreme. Ask them how many new churches have been built lately and how many mosques mushrooming all over all the time? Just becoz they don't burn down the same does not qualify these boaster cocks to claim tolerance.
#4
The problem with M'sia is that Wannabe-ism cum sneaky islamisation. The supremistic thrust of that reinforces discrimination which is officially driven for the majority. This ensures loss of economic competitiveness overall and an impossibility to get anywhere close to being an egalitarian state.
These people like Muzaffar(or Farish Noor), intellectuals, as they're regarded, never dare confront this directly but beats about the bush, trying to point fingers. Mukhriz is just the son of the ex-PM. He should only boast of M'sia being a âbeacon of toleranceâ when there is no islamic anti apostasy existing and no under the counter discrimination of other faiths merely to make islam supreme. Ask them how many new churches have been built lately and how many mosques mushrooming all over all the time? Just becoz they don't burn down the same does not qualify these boaster cocks to claim tolerance.
#6
I think I know what Duh is getting at. Mukhriz is the son of anti-semitic moonbat extraordinaire Mohammed Mahathir. It's unlikely that the apple fell all that far from the tree.
#8
Heheh, hardly 2b. Actually trying to point out the disinformation from that place. Something lots of people know about but little made known openly unless you care to visit some of their local blogs. When you do, you'll realize the real facts better. Thanks to the Internet, this and a lot more info became possible. M'sia boasts a lot.
#9
My brother would beg to differ with that "Malaysia is a beacon of tolerance" crap. He told me stuff from the local papers in Kuching about the Indonesians that would be considered racist here if we said that about the Mexicans. And I don't think the Chinese necessarily sleep peacefully surrounded by the rest of the population.
The minute their economy goes in the toilet is when this "toleration" disappears. Al-Qaeda was and is still present there.
#10
DB: He told me stuff from the local papers in Kuching about the Indonesians that would be considered racist here if we said that about the Mexicans.
The US is one of the most politically correct places around. I can tell you that most Europeans I've encountered are shockingly (to me) blunt about their prejudices - about Indians, Jews, et al. I have no doubt the non-Western world tends to speak with even more candor.
MILITIAMEN in Basilan Island are "intact and all accounted for," the military said Wednesday amid reports that they have joined the Abu Sayyaf bandit group. This was revealed after Colonel Apolinario Alobba, commander of the Army's 18th Infantry Batallion based in the island province conducted an accounting of Citizen Armed Forces Geographical Unit (CAFGU) upon orders from Army chief Lieutenant General Generoso Senga. "They are all on high morale and fully under the control of the Army Battalion commander," Army spokesman Major Bartolome Bacarro said in a statement. "The circulating news stemmed from the statements of some CAFGU whose services were terminated due to various offenses committed," Bacarro said.
The dismissal of some CAFGUs was due, among others, to failure to report for duty, refusal to take refresher courses, drug abuse, and old age, Bacarro said. Other CAFGUs on the other hand resigned from the service due to low pay.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
01/28/2005 12:26:43 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
The Tamil Tiger rebels on Friday backed away from a demand to be able to directly receive international funds for tsunami victims, and said they were putting their independence struggle on hold to deal with the disaster.
"The international community need not deliver aid direct to LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam)," said the rebels' top peace negotiator Anton Balasingham.
I think my surprise meter just pegged.
The LTTE have consistently demanded they be given access to some of the foreign aid that has poured into the island since the tsunami struck one month ago. The Sri Lankan government has said aid disbursement should be centralized in its hands for greater efficiency. The Tigers, however, have said insufficient aid was reaching territories under guerrilla control. Norway, which brokered a truce between the two warring sides three years ago, has been mediating efforts to bring them together to coordinate tsunami relief and reconstruction. Hans Brattskår, Norway's ambassador, also was expected to participate in the closed-door meeting. If an agreement is reached, it would mark a significant step: the first collaboration on a political level since peace talks collapsed in April 2003. The rebels began fighting in 1983 to create a separate state for Sri Lanka's 3.2 million Tamils, accusing the country's 14 million Sinhalese of discrimination. A 2002 Norwegian-brokered truce appeared increasingly tenuous before the tsunami that dealt equal devastation to both sides of the conflict.
#1
I am not that surprised : LTTE are very attuned to Western propoganda opportunites. This will play out as a major concession on their part - even though there was no hope for aid deliveries to what most countries now define as a terrorist group. It will act as an additional "sign of flexibility" for the LTTE in the next series of three-way talks and put pressure on Sri Lanka.
President Bush's second term has barely begun, and Iran is already shaping up as its most serious diplomatic challenge. But conflicting pronouncements by Mr. Bush and his national security team have left Iran frustrated and angry about the direction of American policy, and the Europeans more determined than ever to push Washington to embrace their engagement strategy.
It's called strategic ambiguity.
To the outside world, the administration seems divided over whether to promote the overthrow of Iran's Islamic Republic - perhaps by force - or to tacitly support the approach embraced by the Europeans, which favors negotiations and a series of incentives that would ultimately require American participation.
"You need to get everybody to read from the same page, the Europeans and the Americans," said Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, in an interview in Davos on Friday.
"This is not a process that is going to be solved by the Europeans alone," he added. "The United States needs to be engaged. If you continue to say they are going to fail before you give them a chance, it will be a self-fulfilling policy."
France's foreign minister, Michel Barnier, echoed those remarks in an interview in Paris on Friday. "I cannot explain American policy to you," he said. "That would be French arrogance and I am not someone who is arrogant. But I think that the Americans must get used to the fact that Europe is going to act. And in this case, without the United States we run the risk of failure."
Psst: This is Euro-speak for "we are writing checks to Iranian Mullahs we can't back up without the US."
Posted by: Duke Nukem ||
01/28/2005 10:48:20 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
by Richard Sale, UPI Intelligence Correspondent
New York (UPI) Jan 26, 2005 Intel correspondent? Had not heard of that one before. Wonder if he has to call the anonymous sources or they call him?
The U.S. Air Force is playing a dangerous game of cat and mouse with Iran's ayatollahs, flying American combat aircraft into Iranian airspace in an attempt to lure Tehran into turning on air defense radars, thus allowing U.S. pilots to grid the system for use in future targeting data, administration officials said.
Overall an interesting read. Maybe some fire works by the end of the year?
Posted by: domingo ||
01/28/2005 10:15:19 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The US and Israel are setting up a covert action infrastructure in Iran, that's for sure. Maybe they're arming and supporting underground student groups or rogue Iranian army elements. It's good to see that CIA/SOF are using the Kurds as surrogates -- they're a useful asset. My wild-ass guess: Perhaps an armed uprising by midyear, or whenever the next major Muslim occurs, and almost certainly an attack on at least some of the Iranian nuclear sites by Kurds/CIA/SOF/Iranian exiles.
Posted by: Jonathan ||
01/28/2005 12:24 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Vince Cannistraro? Isn't he a longtime ex-CIA blowhard? Like, out-of-the-CIA-since-forever ex-CIA? Why is he retailing all of these stories? He isn't in a position to have official or first-hand knowledge of any of that, although the article's writer does his best to leave the opposite impression. Who's he fronting for?
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
01/28/2005 13:19 Comments ||
Top||
#3
It's good to see that CIA/SOF are using the Kurds as surrogates -- they're a useful asset.
I dunno, personally, I think that surrogates are more a tool than anything, and the Kurds are definitely not that.
#4
I don't see the Kurds as surrogates, and there are plenty of native Iranians for which to collaborate.
The only reason for combat aircraft flyovers is to pinpoint defensive positions and target cites. The only reason to be accelerate these activities now is that the "red line" is soon to be crossed.
Posted by: Duke Nukem ||
01/28/2005 21:10 Comments ||
Top||
#5
The use of the MEK for U.S.-intelligence-gathering missions strikes some former U.S. intelligence officials as bizarre. The State Department's annual publication, "Patterns of Global Terrorism," lists them as a terrorist organization.
According to the State Department report, the MEK were allies with Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein in fighting Iran and, in addition, "assisted Saddam in "suppressing opposition within Iraq, and performed internal security for the Iraqi regime."
After the U.S. invasion of Iraq in March 2003, U.S. forces seized and destroyed MEK munitions and weapons, and about 4,000 MEK operatives were "consolidated, detained, disarmed, and screened for any past terrorist acts, the report said.
Shortly afterwards, the Bush administration began to use them in its covert operations against Iran, former senior U.S. intelligence officials said.
"They've been active in the south for some time," said former CIA counterterrorism chi ef, Vince Cannistraro.
The MEK are said to be currently launching raids from Camp Habib in Basra, but recently Pakistan President Pervez Musharaff granted permission for the MEK to operate from Pakistan's Baluchi area, U.S. officials said.
Asked about the Musharaff decision, Laipson said: "Not a smart move. The last thing he (Musharaff) needs is another batch of hotheads on Pakistani soil."
I call bullshit on the MEK in Pakiland
Posted by: Frank G ||
01/28/2005 21:18 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Bush will want sufficient intelligence to preclude the breakdown on Iraq WMD intelligence.
Plus, he will need to convince an already cynical Congress and world body (to the extent that matters).
Posted by: Duke Nukem ||
01/28/2005 21:18 Comments ||
Top||
The West must play its role in promoting sustainable development in order to eliminate poverty, deprivation and the other causes of terrorism, said President Musharraf on Friday. He was talking to a Norwegian parliamentary delegation led by Tharbjorn Jagland, chairman of the standing committee on foreign relations of the Norwegian Parliament, which had called on him.
Why don't you try throwing all the holy men in jug, freeing your society, and alleviating your own damned poverty.
The president underlined the importance of eliminating the root causes of terrorism and explained his concept of 'Enlightened Moderation'. President Musharraf said he was satisfied with the bilateral relations between Pakistan and Norway and stressed the need to strengthen trade and economic ties and welcomed the increasing cooperation between the countries in telecommunications. The Norwegian team praised Musharraf's role in the war against terrorism and were confident that ties between the two countries would improve.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/28/2005 10:13:04 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
Former US president Bill Clinton called Thursday on Iraq's Shiite majority to reach out to the nation's Sunni minority if they win this weekend's election. Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, he also said he was "totally against" the notion of setting a timetable for the withdrawal of US troops.
Take that, Teddy!
Sunday's election is expected to legalise Shiite dominance after decades of repression under Saddam Hussein, when Sunnis ruled the roost. Clinton said the worst case scenario would be zero voter turnout in mainly Sunni areas and a higher turnout in Shiite and Kurdish regions. If it happened, he said, the victors should reach out to those "who didn't show up in the polls because they didn't want to be blown away." "Then, I think there'll be an enormous moral obligation on the Shiites and the Kurds and the others who are elected in the areas where there's no problem to make sure that the constitutional system they set up fairly represents all the religious and tribal groups of Iraq," he said. "The people who win should feel a moral obligation to do that." The former president said the new constitution should reflect the views of all groups in Iraq so they "will have a chance to feel that they're a part of the future." In a wide-ranging armchair debate at this meeting of political and business leaders in the Swiss Alps, Clinton did not directly criticise George W. Bush, his successor as president. "We are where we are," he said diplomatically. He said Iraqis needed to be trained and armed to defend themselves "because we need to get out of there, but we don't need a timetable. "I'm totally against setting a timetable, I would be against it if my party tried to impose it on the president."
"My name is Bill Clinton, and my wife approves of this message"
"We've got to stay and do the job," he added, but warned that if US troops stayed too long, the United States would be accused of imperialism and of only being interested in Iraq's oil. Bush has promised troops will leave Iraq "as quickly as possible," although senior US officials have so far refrained from announcing a time scale. The idea for an "indicative timetable" has been mooted recently by British officials, according to Britain's Times daily, while Prime Minister Tony Blair -- Bush's biggest ally on Iraq -- talked in an interview earlier this week of vague "timelines."
Posted by: Steve ||
01/28/2005 10:29:43 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
IMO, they (Shiites and Kurds) fully intend to do so.
#2
Bill "it's all about me" Clinton. Not much distant between him and Jhimmy Carter.
Posted by: Duke Nukem ||
01/28/2005 11:27 Comments ||
Top||
#3
grom is correct.
What Bill said is correct, and absolutely appropriate. About he time he went on record and took the role of Dem spokesperson away from Kerry and Kennedy.
If a Muslim or Arab family is slow to respond to a note sent home by a school or is running late for a teacher conference, school officials should not feel snubbed but should understand the cultural influences behind that behavior. That's been the message delivered this week to about 250 Jefferson Parish public school teachers and administrators as part of a four-day workshop designed to help them work better with Muslim and Arab families in the school system.
The seminar, which comes after an incident last year in which a teacher was accused of using religious slurs against a Muslim high school student, focused not only on religious tenets but also on the geographical and cultural aspects of Muslim life. "I want them to be able to better understand their Arab and Muslim students and their families," said Audrey Sabbas, a nationally known speaker on Middle Eastern culture who ran the workshop Wednesday for about 50 teachers and principals.
Sabbas, who is married to an Arab man and converted to Islam decades ago, discussed a list of values that guide Muslim life, including family-based support systems, a need to build trust with those with whom they work and a strong respect for authorities, especially educators and doctors. Those values can affect practical, everyday matters, Sabbas said. Because Muslims like to build trust, verbal communication tends to get better results than written documents, she said. Correspondence sent home by schools is the "least effective" way to communicate as opposed to a phone call or visit, Sabbas said. "They want to develop a sense of you before getting down to business," she said.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: tipper ||
01/28/2005 1:45:23 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
there is nothing wrong with this - they do it for all cultures. In schools where the population of ESL students is high, it's very helpful for a teachers to know what makes them and their parents tick. Of course, the stupid lobby will misuse it to pander rather than educate, but ..hey...what can you do?
#3
where I went to school in metro-Detroit there were plenty of muslims & we never had this sort of problem as I recall. Everyone pretty much respected each other & racial slurs toward arabs/blacks/whites were not tolerated though incidents would occur on occasion between students. If this Mix guy did do what that muslim students claims, then I agree, that's pretty stupid. OTOH, the premise that you should be sensitive to a culture that does not respect or seem to understand the prevailing mores of the society it has emigrated into is moronic. "When in Rome" is a good motto methinks. As grom said, dhimi 101 indeed.
#4
Motar twice failed to show up in court to testify.
*snicker* The defense probably paid some of her friends or relatives to drop by on the day of court. Looks like that sensitivity training paid off afterall.
#7
This one's worthy of Scrappleface (ironic name for a school kow towing to mooselimbs):
Preston Gassery, principal of the West Bank Community School, echoed that sentiment. "You have to understand how to talk to these kids," he said, adding that the workshop could help guide teacher evaluation and staff development programs at his school.
"They want to develop a sense of you before getting down to business," she said.
And so did the 9/11 highjackers, eh?
Posted by: BA ||
01/28/2005 13:38 Comments ||
Top||
#8
2b's right about schools doing this frequently for ESL families. The problems occur when, AFTER the school's norms have been related to the families, the families do not always abide by what has been communicated. So if registration starts at 1 and you tell the families that, they come semester after semester at 2:30 or 5 or 7 or on the wrong day. Or you tell them they can't bring their children to the adult classes, but they keep doing it. It's a generational difference, I think. In our parents time, when immigrants were trying to fit in their neighborhoods, they did they best they could of what was expected. Now there is little incentive to assimilate because someone will always be there as a net for them, explaining it again, "rescuing" them again, overlooking it again, etc. In our school, we had a lot of these kinds of problems with students from Somalia and Bosnia. I think consistent, firm and communicative direction from the school is what works best, but sadly, I think we are in a time where some immigrants feel they don't HAVE to assimilate.
#10
it's very helpful for a teacher to know the cultural forces behind a child's thinking. How else can you effectively manipulate them :-)
Seriously - it's good to know these things and it's good to teach them. but jules is right - the problems come when the immigrants start demanding additional resources because they simply don't want to cooperate - or they want to use them as excuses for bad behavior.
One experience that sticks out in my mind was "coining". In Asian cultures, when a child is sick a resperatory illness?, their mothers lovingly put a hot quarter on them to do exactly what, I'm not sure. No, they aren't being branded with a scalding hot quarter. It apparently doesn't hurt - but it leaves bruise marks. They've been doing it for centuries without any apparent problems and they all turn out ok.
As a volunteer, I was freaked out by my first experience of a child with what appeared to be little circular bruises all over his chest. Rather than hauling his mother in for abuse, we were quickly able to determine that mom had just been giving TLC.
Don't tell me it's abuse - until you try it yourself. The bruises disappear after one or two days. There's no need for thousands of teachers, each seeing it for the first time, to be accusing mommy of abuse - clogging social services with new case loads etc when it's just a harmless, loving, cultural practice.
#12
"If a Muslim or Arab family is slow to respond to a note sent home by a school or is running late for a teacher conference, school officials should not feel snubbed but should understand the cultural influences behind that behavior."
Oh, I understand perfectly the cultural influences behind that behavior, all right.
Posted by: Mark E. ||
01/28/2005 23:34 Comments ||
Top||
The United States and Britain have privately agreed on a way of withdrawing their troops from Iraq, the Guardian newspaper reported Friday. US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and his British counterpart Geoff Hoon on Monday agreed on a so-called exit-strategy based on doubling the number of Iraqi police trainees and setting up Iraqi paramilitary units, it said. The pair were acting on recommendations from retired US General Gary Luck, who was sent to Iraq by the Pentagon last month to look at the failings of Iraq's security force.
The more aggressive police force is designed gradually to replace the 150,000 coalition troops and will form the centerpiece of plans for Britain and the US to quit Iraq, the Guardian said. Britain has made a phased pullout its top priority, although British sources say no deadline has been set for withdrawal, partly because it may encourage the insurgents. "Everything the defense secretary is working towards now is an exit strategy, but without a public timetable," according to a British military source quoted by the Guardian.
Spanish and Italian forces could be asked to help train the Iraqis, a British defense source was quoted as saying. Thousands of troops from the multinational force would back up the Iraqi police, which, at present, have a reputation for desertion in the face of the insurgency. Although the United States and Britain would like to pull out as soon as Iraq is stable, General Luck said it could be years before the Iraqi police was ready. The Pentagon expects to maintain 150,000 troops in Iraq for at least the next two years. Britain said it would send 220 more soldiers to Iraq to help fill a gap left by the Netherlands, which is pulling out in March.
Posted by: tipper ||
01/28/2005 1:28:13 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This is news?
The exit strategy has always been (1) setting up an autonomous Iraqi government, and (2) establishing a capable Iraqi military and security force.
Posted by: Duke Nukem ||
01/28/2005 7:55 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Al Guardian is trying to create an impression of panicked Americans fleeing in disarray. The reality, of course, is that Uncle Sam has other missions for the ground forces.
#4
Hello, anyone home. The American administration said they were beefing up numbers for the election. When it passes, there will be a gradual draw down to a lower operating number. Nothing new here. Even the pathetic spin by AL Guardian is old news.
Despite the Iraqi Sunni boycott, al-Zarqawi's imprecations against the general election, and the unprecedented level of bloodletting, an certain number of the 40,000 polling stations across the country will almost certainly open on time Sunday, January 30.
That was one of the starting points on which Gregory Hooker, chief analyst of CENTCOM, the American command running the war in Iraq, presupposed his detailed forecast of election results.
This forecast, commissioned by CENTOM commander General John Abizaid, was first revealed by DEBKA-Net-Weekly 190 on January 21.
The second premise was that orderly vote-counting would likewise take place notwithstanding threats of sabotage.
The Hooker forecast is essentially a simulation exercise based on US and Iraqi intelligence data gathered in the last six months, together with estimates of opinion openly canvassed in towns up and down the country.
The level of participation and the results of this pivotal election will bear strongly on the Bush administration's second term Iraq policy, the tasks facing US armed forces, the chances of the elected national assembly taking up its responsibilities, including the drafting of a new national constitution, and the prospects of an elected government exercising authority.
Altogether 111 political entities — parties, individuals or coalitions — are running for the 275 National Assembly seats.
⢠A total of 7,785 candidates are registered on the national ballot
⢠Eligible voters in Iraq: 14.27 million
⢠Eligible voters outside Iraq: 1.2 — 2 million (only one-quarter of whom registered).
⢠More than 130 lists were submitted by the December 15, 2004 deadline for registration. Nine were multi-party coalition blocs while 102 were lists presented by single Iraqi parties.
⢠There are two major political blocs — Shiite and Kurdish:
The Shiite Unified Iraqi Alliance list submitted 228 candidates representing 16 Iraqi political groups including the dominant Shiite factions. Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq — SCIRI, heads this list, followed by Ibrahim Al-Jafari, head of the al-Dawa Party.
⢠The two Kurdish parties headed by Masoud Barzani and Jalal Talabani decided to run together on the Kurdish list.
⢠Both the Iraqi interim prime minister Iyad Allawi and Iraqi president Ghazi al-Yawar submitted their own lists of candidates. Allawi's party, the Iraqi National Accord — INC, submitted a 240-candidate coalition, while al-Yawar leads an 80-member slate representing the Iraqi Grouping.
Projected Results
For elections held now, Hooker projects the following figures:
The Shiite Unified Iraqi Alliance list — 43.8% = 120 national assembly seats.
The Kurdish list — a surprising 36.4% (more than twice their 16-18% proportion of the general population) = 100 seats.
The Iraqi National Accord — 8.1% = 22 seats. (A formula is being actively sought to retain him as premier even if his showing is low.)
The Iraqi Communist party (the best organized) — 1.6% = 5 seats.
All the Assyrian, Turkomen and Yazdi minorities together — 4 seats.
All the rest — 5 seats.
The first conclusion reached by our analysts is that, while the leading Shiite UIA bloc can expect to be the big winner of the election, the real victor will be the Shiite cleric who assembled and founded the alliance, Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani and his inner circle. The slate he drew up of candidates to the legislature reflects his political aspirations and cunning: of the 120 registered, the first 60 are independents with no parties behind them and will therefore be totally dependent on Sistani himself for support.
Al-Hakim's SCIRI will get no more than 14 assembly seats, while al-Jafari's al Dawa must be content with 12. The former rebel cleric Moqtada Sadr's following will match al Dawa with 12 places in the legislature.
The slate he assembled also pushes pro-Tehran and Iran's chosen men down to the unrealistic bottom.
Sistani wants to see non-clerical ministers in the post-election government but will insist on incorporating Islamic law as the basis of the national constitution.
The Kurds owe their projected big win to three prime causes:
1. The union of the two principal lists, which will help them carry districts in which each faction is fragmentary, like Iraq's second largest town of Mosul and certain quarters of Baghdad.
2. Major concessions by Sistani in Kirkuk, where he endorsed the transfer of tens of thousands of Kurdish voters into the city. Quietly underway at this moment is the largest demographic transformation in Iraq since the war began, an abrupt reversal of the population displacement conducted by Saddam Hussein. Sunni families are being pushed out of Kirkuk to the Sunni Triangle and replaced by incoming Kurds. Turkomen, Assyrians and Yazdis gnash their teeth but have not the power to interfere in the Kurdish takeover of the mixed city.
3. Another key Sistani concession was his consent to local elections taking place in Kurdish regions for a Kurdish national assembly at the same time as the general election. In return, the Kurdish leaders have granted Sistani a powerful tool of government, a promise to join his Unified Iraqi Bloc in a coalition administration.
The Shiite cleric has little to fear from this alliance. He knows the Kurds are only interested in expanding their own self-government and will therefore not muscle in on the central administration with power-sharing demands. Their backing, however, provides insurance for stable Shiite-dominated government in the long term.
The Sunni Muslim minority can hardly be expected to sit still as the Shiites and Kurds split up the post-war spoils of power.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
01/28/2005 12:42:40 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
If the Sunnis do Boycott, they deserve what they are going to get. But then again pay back is a bitch and I can not think of a better bunch of assholes to get force fed revenge than the Iraqi Sunnis..
#2
You blog paraplegics morons what is the need to mention debka as a sorce of information? Is your pro
I, have a Russian relative just emmigrated to Izra or your, I belive in the superioty of well info by a retired ISF electrician.
Your site is PATHETIC >>>>>FRED>
Posted by: YOUUOR SITE IS PATHETIC ||
01/28/2005 4:01 Comments ||
Top||
#8
I am Engalish speak! 2 days Aligers! ISF is OWG!
Posted by: Manuel ||
01/28/2005 8:25 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Target aquired. Proton torpedos locked on. Standing by.......
Posted by: Steve ||
01/28/2005 8:54 Comments ||
Top||
#10
The union of the two principal lists, which will help them carry districts in which each faction is fragmentary, like Iraqâs second largest town of Mosul and certain quarters of Baghdad.
But the national election is NOT by district, its nationwide proportional representation.
2. Major concessions by Sistani in Kirkuk, where he endorsed the transfer of tens of thousands of Kurdish voters into the city. Quietly underway at this moment is the largest demographic transformation in Iraq since the war began, an abrupt reversal of the population displacement conducted by Saddam Hussein. Sunni families are being pushed out of Kirkuk to the Sunni Triangle and replaced by incoming Kurds. Turkomen, Assyrians and Yazdis gnash their teeth but have not the power to interfere in the Kurdish takeover of the mixed city.
Transfering Kurdish votes to Kirkuk will impact local council outcome there - doesnt effect national result, since the same voters are just shifted around.
3. Another key Sistani concession was his consent to local elections taking place in Kurdish regions for a Kurdish national assembly at the same time as the general election. In return, the Kurdish leaders have granted Sistani a powerful tool of government, a promise to join his Unified Iraqi Bloc
Yes, thats a big concession, but does NOTHING to explain the national outcome.
Take this with even more salt than usual. While its possible many non-Kurds will vote for the Kurdish parties, id be very surprised if they do that well. OTOH, I expect the Iraqi communist party to do much better than suggested above.
#18
Did you see that all three American TV news anchors have gone to Iraq for the elections? As reported on CBS last night, exit polling will show that John Kerry will win by an overwhelming majority.
#19
Oh, wow. Look's like #2's just graduated from the English As An Eighteenth Language program. Musta needed it to get his ISF electrician's union card.
#20
chuck - kinda silly of them, dont you think? IIUC the IRaqis will be using paper ballots, which will take awhile to count. Also, IIUC, the counting will be done centrally, not at each polling place and being called in, like is done here. There really WONT be any returns for several days, and I would consider exit polls (yes, I know you were joking) worthless here. At most theyll be able to report turnout.
#24
11A5S - One son starting working at a Frys. His main complaint? "Dad, most of these guys are really stupid." Me ... "Son, most people are stupid... deal with it. Oh, and, by the way, most are earning more than you are."
#25
I expect the Iraqi communist party to do much better than suggested above.
I hope you are wrong. lh.
Well it didn't take long for one bad element to rear its evil head once the lid's come off the garbage can. The Communist Party is evidently the oldest party in Iraq, which I had not realized until today. Saddam forced the party to go under ground while he was in power.The Communist Party's slogan is:"A free country and a happy people." It makes me want to throw up. And I thought there was a danger posed by a Shiite theocracy - ha, ha -communism, just what Iraq needs in its government -like a cancer on the body politic.
The communists have 275 candidates on its slate with over 90 being women. Sad.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200412/s1263114.htm
#26
actually latest poll I saw says Iraqi Communist Party will not do all that well. But theyre actually rather moderate - they are firmly supportive of democracy and elections, and very opposed to the insurgency. They are also firmly secularist and moderately socialist. They apparently learned quite a bit in their years of persecution by Saddam. Iraq could do far worse than them. They have already had a minister in the Allawi govt, and he served responsibly, IIUC.
#27
If a larger percentage of the Iraqi electorate vote - how will the MSM spin it?
It will somehow turn into a Sunni tragedy story. Never mind the relative peaceful 80% of the country that were suppressed by the Sunnis for the past three decades finally get to participate in democratic election - lets pay attention to the people that hate Bush. Hating Bush is the true story for the MSM.
A scientist considered the father of Iraq's nuclear program said Thursday that his nation would have developed atomic weapons in the early 1990s had Saddam Hussein not ordered the invasion of Kuwait.
The invasion sparked the U.S.-led Operation Desert Storm in 1991, which drove Iraq out of Kuwait and marked the end of Baghdad's nuclear and biological weapons program, said Jafar Dhia Jafar, the scientific head of Iraq's nuclear weapons program.
"By the end of 1990, about 8,000 people were involved directly or indirectly in the nuclear program," said Jafar, presenting his new Norwegian-language book, "Oppdraget", which means The Assignment, describing the program.
"We were three years away, give or take a year," said Jafar, who fled Iraq during the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.
In the book, Jafar describes being picked up in 1981 after 18 months in jail and brought to see Saddam, who, standing behind a desk in military uniform, instructed him to build an atomic bomb.
"From today, that is our goal," Jafar recalled Hussein saying.
The British-educated scientist, with a doctorate in physics from the University of Birmingham, said the quest for nuclear weapons began with Israeli warplanes bombing the legal Iraqi nuclear reactor at Tuwaitha, near Baghdad, where he had worked, in June 1981.
"It was not illegal because it did not violate the NPT (the nonproliferation of nuclear weapons treaty)," he said. He said the program became top secret in 1986, when nuclear efforts moved beyond the terms of the treaty.
Jafar said Iraq sought to build all industrial and technological equipment needed to develop weapons on its own, sometimes importing equipment through oil or other industries.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
01/28/2005 12:36:10 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
The invasion sparked the U.S.-led Operation Desert Storm in 1991, which drove Iraq out of Kuwait and marked the end of Baghdadâs nuclear and biological weapons program, said Jafar Dhia Jafar, the scientific head of Iraqâs nuclear weapons program.(Jafar )is considered the father of Iraqâs nuclear program. The British-educated scientist, with a doctorate in physics from the University of Birmingham.
It seems this guy has enough credentials to earn money in his field without peddling lies. Why disbelieve him, considering that no WMD were found in Iraq this time round. I'd say that is evidence enough that he is not lying. He lived in Iraq right up until the US invasion in 2003.
Doug Feith is lucky he is not being prosecuted for criminal negligence. What a screw up he turned out to be.
#3
Well 2x is you read a little further he exposes himself for what he truly believes. "The British-educated scientist, with a doctorate in physics from the University of Birmingham, said the quest for nuclear weapons began with Israeli warplanes bombing the legal Iraqi nuclear reactor at Tuwaitha, near Baghdad, where he had worked, in June 1981."
So you see, according to Jafar Dhia Jafar, it is the Jews fault Sadam started a nuclear weapons program.
#4
So you see, according to Jafar Dhia Jafar, it is the Jews fault Sadam started a nuclear weapons program.
Huh? Maybe in your paranoid mind Jafar said it was the "Jew's fault." Perhaps it might be helpful if you read articles in their entirety and with a modicum of objectivity and reason without using your it's the Jew's fault default button.
Jafar said that Iraq started the illegal development of nuclear weapons in earnest after the Israelis bombed the Iraq nuclear reactor at Tuwaitha, which he says did not violate the non proliferations of nuclear weapons treaty at the time of Israeli bombing in 1981.
Now I'll grant you that Iraq may very well have moved along in that direction anyways. Saddam is a certifable crazy, but all Jabar is saying is that as of June 1981, it represented a turning point, to his mind, when Iraqi leadership could rationalize to their scientific community why the NPT should not be observed and in fact he fully admits that by 1986 the nuclear weapons program had become top secret and moved beyond the terms of the NPT.
How does Jafar lose credibility for simply recounting the historical sequence of events? He goes on to say that Gulf War I stopped Iraq dead in its tracks from emerging as a fully armed nuclear power with a biological arsenal as well, which he feels would have happened by 1993 or 1994.
What you are not fully comprehending, because you insist on focusing on the stereo typical navel gazing it's all about the Jews, is that this head honcho of Iraq's former nuclear and bio WMD program is saying that our Mr. Dumbest Person in the World Feith led Congress and the WH into a war based on his idiotic analysis of WMD in Iraq when no such programs existed after Gulf War I according to the scientist who lived in Iraq up until 2003. What you are choosing to ignore is that Jafar is fully admitting culpability in Iraq's quest to establish itself as a nuclear weapons power in the years from 1981-1990, but that Iraq's goals were smashed by the invasion of UN coalition countries in Gulf War I and that Mr. Dumbest Person in the World Feith's incompetent analysis of Saddam's WMD program was grossly erroneous.
You don't see a need for someone to be held accountable for this egregious error in judgement?
One of the major reasons the American public approved our invading Iraq was because of the threat from WMD, yet the American team of weapons inspectors could find anything to sustantiate the this WMD claim.
How would you like it if a physician said that he needed to remove your testicles or breasts, (depending on your sex) because of cancer threatening your life. Then later the biopsy showed perfectly healthy organs. Would you just say, oh well, an honest mistake, better safe than sorry, maybe in the future I might have developed cancer in these organs, who knows. I'll bet 100% of you would sue the pants of the MD and even try to put him in jail for criminal negligence.
And let's think about the penalty the GI's got for putting panties on the heads of POW's,many of whom were bad guys anyways, oh the outrage at such stupidity, such embaressment for oyur nation. And yet no one thinks there should be any consequences for Feith's gross negligence that has contributed to considerable loss of US military lives and US capital. He is allowed to shuffle off into the sunset with a full retirement package while Garner spends 10 years in Leavensworth for the unthinkable crime of putting panties on the heads of Iraqi insurgents.
#5
2xstandard: How would you like it if a physician said that he needed to remove your testicles or breasts, (depending on your sex) because of cancer threatening your life. Then later the biopsy showed perfectly healthy organs. Would you just say, oh well, an honest mistake, better safe than sorry, maybe in the future I might have developed cancer in these organs, who knows. I'll bet 100% of you would sue the pants of the MD and even try to put him in jail for criminal negligence.
The appropriate analogy is not that of a patient being operated on. We did not go into Iraq to rescue the Iraqi people. Iraq was like a known felon wanted on multiple murder counts who was holding what appeared to be a gun. We could have trusted what he said, which was that he wasn't holding a gun or that the gun wasn't loaded. Or we could have chosen to take the gun away from him. We chose the latter, and discovered that he either wasn't actually holding a gun, or that he had hidden the gun somewhere else. If the weapon in question (a nuclear bomb) had been detonated in Manhattan, hundreds of thousands of people and hundreds of billions in infrastructure would have been vaporized. The question is whether we should have trusted Saddam's goodwill, or acted based on our instincts and the fact that the political clock was running out.*
Besides, we did not go into Iraq exclusively or primarily because of WMD's - that's just what the media has chosen to focus on, because it opposes the invasion of Iraq. The irony is that if Iraq had nukes, we wouldn't have invaded. That's the reality, and a key reason why we haven't attacked North Korea.
We went into Iraq for the same reason we went into our other wars (including WWI and WWII) - to preserve American security interests - a key aspect of which involves deterring Muslim countries from tolerating or actively backing anti-American terrorists. However, I have no objection to Muslim countries thinking that the WMD claim was a lie - this enhances the deterrent effect, showing Muslim countries that the US will invent any pretext to retaliate against Muslim countries that are suspected of harboring terrorists.
* The political clock has to do with the length of time after 9/11. If Saddam had developed a weapon unmolested and detonated it in NYC six years after 9/11, would it have comforted the victims' loved ones for them to hear that Saddam couldn't be attacked because the political clock had run out?
#6
I beg to differ with you, ZF. There were a number of countries that were more clearly known to be ticking time bombs,dangerous to American interests. Iraq in fact was probably less the ticking time bomb of all of them. You can argue the merits of the different reasons that Iraq was selected, but you are fooling yourself if you think anything other the threat of WMD was the tip factor for ordinary citizens on the street. You think Saddam breaking UN reolutions got ordinary Americans on the street up in arms? Most Americans have zero respect for the UN anyways - they see it as a corrupt bureaucracy that gets their tax $ for doing nothing and has its butt pasted to valuable real estate in NYC to boot.
WMD was what caught the attention of the majority of American citizens. Don't kid yourself or me.
My point is the man who produced the flawed analysis about the WMD threat should be held accountable for his gross negligence. If Feith were in private industry, he would at the very least be summarily fired for his incompetence. If he were a physician who showed impaired judgement, he would be sued at the very least if not tried for criminal negligence as well.
I believe Feith should be summarily fired and perhaps even prosecuted in the same way that the gov't followed through on soldiers' errors in judgement, unprofessional conduct. Instead Feith is being allowed to fade away into the sunset, when it is becoming more obvious each day that he is directly responsible for a gigantic screw up. He was hired and paid by taxpayer's money to perform certain services. There was an assumption of competence. The DOD is not a family business where all is forgiven if Aunt Mamie forgets to pay the electricity bill. This is not an oops incident on Feith's part.
#7
I suppose Feith convinced Tony Blair too, all by himself.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
01/28/2005 19:34 Comments ||
Top||
#8
I suppose Feith convinced Tony Blair too, all by himself
How is that relevant to Feith's negligence while in the employment of US taxpayers? Focus, please, mrs. davis.
Perhaps you'd like Mr. Stupidist a** in the world Feith to get awarded a Medal of Honor? Hey why not, the other incompetent doofus got one. Maybe it's the latest fad in America - reward incompetence, don't punish it. Incompetence is what makes nations great after all.
On the other hand, Tenet didn't do much damage after snoozing thru 9/11, but Mr. Stupidist a** in the world Feith is said to be applying his infamous analytic skills yet again by evaluating the nuclear threat that Iran poses to US interests. Oh yes, this bodes well, I'll say.
A message recently in circulation on Jihadist message boards asks "How can you become a member of al-Qaeda?" In answering the question the message explains that al-Qaeda by its very existence is an open invitation for Muslims to join the jihad:
"Today, al-Qaeda is no longer simply an organization that works on fighting the Jews and the Crusaders only, it has become an "invitation - Da'wa" that calls upon all Muslims to rise for the support of Allâh's religion.... If you answer this call, you will be considered to belong to al-Qaeda whether you like it or not; and if you are a true believer, you have no other choice but to answer the call within the extent of the ability that Allâh has given to you. The minimum level of answering the call is to talk yourself into the Jihad and the conquest."
The message further explains that all who hear al-Qaeda's call have a duty to respond, even if that response is only at the level of moral support, vague cooperation and spreading al-Qaeda's message:
"We are going to introduce the identity of the organization, its ideology, and goals, to those who are not familiar with them. Those who are, have no excuse to keep out of it. The least you can do is love the Mujahideen, defend them, spread their message and cooperate with them as much as you can."
However, the message also gives four broadly worded conditions for becoming an al-Qaeda member:
"Firstly: Know the identity of the Tanzeem, its ideology, and goals.
Secondly: Know what the conditions [reasons] are, rely on Allâh, and be confident of victory.
Thirdly: Steadfastness, patience, and adherence to the Book and the Sunnah in every matter.
Fourthly: Be truthful and Allâh will be truthful with you."
The message also warns that jihad will not be easy:
"If you are seeking the Jihad, you must know that it is not a promenade or a vacation trip. It involves losing money, relatives, and abandoning friends, companions, and home. This requires patience [for] hardships, and adherence to the principles."
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
01/28/2005 12:17:27 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Secondly: Know what the conditions [reasons] are, rely on Allâh, and be confident of victory.
Also be confident that you will sh*t your pants when you are ordered to walk into a US Military ambush.
Thirdly: Steadfastness, patience, and adherence to the Book and the Sunnah in every matter.
This is the intellectual equivilence of surrender. When your Al Qeda buddies tune you up on coke, or crank and then send you to battle, you won't need any of the above where you're going.
Fourthly: Be truthful and Allâh will be truthful with you.
And if you really listened at Allan, he would be begging you like an unpaid whore not to go.
The message also warns that jihad will not be easy:
Not for Jihadists anyway.
âIf you are seeking the Jihad, you must know that it is not a promenade or a vacation trip. It involves losing money, relatives, and abandoning friends, companions, and home.
And your life.
This requires patience [for] hardships, and adherence to the principles.
Wamid Nathmi, head of the small Pan-Arab Nationalist party, is boycotting Iraq's first democratic elections on Sunday. But unlike many Sunni politicians, he dismisses gloomy predictions that the vote will spark sectarian warfare. "I don't know what all the fuss is about; I don't see why there's all this talk of civil war," he says. "It's an election for a national assembly that will only be there for one year."
A secular Arab nationalist, Mr Nathmi is also spokesman for the Iraqi National Council, an opposition movement that includes both Sunni and Shia political groups. The boycott by many Sunni Arab parties and the expected low turnout in Sunni provinces has raised fears of a more bloody insurgency. The Shia are set to emerge as the biggest winners in the elections while the Sunni, who dominated the old regime, will feel disenfranchised. But the boycott is not purely sectarian. Mr Nathmi points to the absence of the Shia movement led by Moqtada al-Sadr, the firebrand cleric who revolted against US troops last summer. Facing pressure from top Shia clergy and from the US, Mr Sadr has not campaigned against the election, in spite of his opposition to it. He has also allowed some members of his movement to stand as candidates.
Mr Nathmi's Iraqi National Council has the same demands as the armed insurgents - namely the withdrawal of US troops - but has pledged to work peacefully towards this goal, and has been seen by western diplomats as a political opposition that could be negotiated with. The Council has developed good ties with both the Sadr movement and the influential Council of Sunni Muslim scholars. The Sunni-Shia movement had considered taking part in the poll. But the conditions it set - including a declaration of ceasefire across Iraq and the withdrawal of US troops from main cities - were rejected. Shortly after the movement issued its demands late last year, US troops launched a massive offensive in the Sunni town of Falluja, further undermining the group's willingness to participate in the poll. But Mr Nathmi says the weekend vote should be put in perspective: it is only one step in Iraq's postwar transition. The main task of the national assembly will be to draft Iraq's constitution. Sunni opposition leaders, even if unelected, could still be involved in constitutional committees.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
01/28/2005 12:09:48 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"Some View Sunni Boycott, Farcical Demands About US Withdrawal as Trivial"
The Sunnis' dance is amusing. First all fire and belligerence, then backsliding towards participation, then the comical "conditions" regarding US forces, now "it's no big deal". Actually the joker is right about that -- in some ways it is a massive deal just to have the election and seat the assembly, but it is only the beginning of the process. The Sunnis who are reasonable will likely have the chance to interact with the assembly on the new constitution -- and of course all Sunni voters will have the chance to vote up/down on the new constitution next fall.
Hmm, smells like victory. Influencing national policy through non-violent means, through democratic structures, is exactly the situation that US policy aims at. Of course I wouldn't expect the august gentlemen of the Pan-Arab Nationalist Party or the Council of Scholars to be pleased with that observation ...
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.
Britain's generosity is being "abused" by asylum seekers who cost the country £2 billion a year, Michael Howard, the Conservative leader, will say today. His decision to step up the Tories' demand for an annual limit to be imposed on the number of refugees entering Britain coincides with a YouGov poll in The Telegraph today showing strong public support for stricter controls.
French militants who join the fight against U.S.-led forces in Iraq could one day return to strike terror in France and elsewhere, the defense minister warned Thursday in an interview with The Associated Press. The warning followed the detention this week of 11 people in Paris as France's domestic counterterrorism agency moved to break up a network suspected of seeking to funnel young French Muslims to Iraq. Ten suspects remain in custody; one woman was released Wednesday. French officials have said the arrests were aimed partly at ensuring that suspected would-be militants do not receive combat training and experience in Iraq that could make them a threat at home if they survive. "These French citizens who are prepared to carry out suicide attacks in Iraq are people who could one day carry out suicide attacks elsewhere," said Defense Minister 
The surveillance scheme was working perfectly: German intelligence operatives were watching and listening to two terror suspects living in their country for more than two years. The eavesdropping was yielding a plethora of detail on the cells' desires, plans, and unusual source of funding. The hope was the spying would go on for a long time - long enough to grab others involved in the network. Instead, according to a European official knowledgeable about the operation, the two terror suspects suddenly made plans to move to the Netherlands. The German agents - unsure if they would lose contact - moved in and had them arrested this past weekend. "The arrests weren't planned," says the European source. "This story from the intelligence and law-enforcement sides now, sadly, is over."
WASHINGTON (
The American military's continued presence in Iraq is fanning the flames of conflict, and signals the need for a new detailed timeline to bring the troops home, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy said Thursday. Just three days before the Iraqi people go to the polls to elect a new government, the Massachusetts Democrat said America must give Iraq back to its people rather than continue an occupation that parallels the failed politics of the Vietnam war. "The U.S. military presence has become part of the problem, not part of the solution," Kennedy said in remarks prepared for delivery at Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies. "We need a new plan that sets fair and realistic goals for self-government in Iraq, and works with the Iraqi government on a specific timetable for the honorable homecoming of our forces."
The Tamil Tiger rebels on Friday backed away from a demand to be able to directly receive international funds for tsunami victims, and said they were putting their independence struggle on hold to deal with the disaster.
The West must play its role in promoting sustainable development in order to eliminate poverty, deprivation and the other causes of terrorism, said President Musharraf on Friday. He was talking to a Norwegian parliamentary delegation led by Tharbjorn Jagland, chairman of the standing committee on foreign relations of the Norwegian Parliament, which had called on him.
Former US president 
If a Muslim or Arab family is slow to respond to a note sent home by a school or is running late for a teacher conference, school officials should not feel snubbed but should understand the cultural influences behind that behavior. That's been the message delivered this week to about 250 Jefferson Parish public school teachers and administrators as part of a four-day workshop designed to help them work better with Muslim and Arab families in the school system.
Wamid Nathmi, head of the small Pan-Arab Nationalist party, is boycotting Iraq's first democratic elections on Sunday. But unlike many Sunni politicians, he dismisses gloomy predictions that the vote will spark sectarian warfare. "I don't know what all the fuss is about; I don't see why there's all this talk of civil war," he says. "It's an election for a national assembly that will only be there for one year."
