Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh has accused rebels from the Zaidi minority who were engaged in fierce fighting with government forces in the country's northwest of seeking to overthrow his republican regime. "These militias sought to rebel against the republican regime and turn the clock back," he said on Saturday of the two rounds of battles in Saada Province last summer and in March-April this year, according to the official Saba news agency. "Documents proved that there was [an attempt] to topple the republican regime and return the regime to what it was in the past, which our people will not accept at all," he said. The Zaidis are a Shiite sect dominant in northwestern Yemen but in the minority in the mainly Sunni country. The rebels reject as illegitimate the regime which seized power in a 1962 coup, overthrowing the Zaidi imamate.
Saleh, who was speaking to members of Parliament and a consultative council, did not mention the "Faithful Youth" movement of slain radical preacher Hussein Badreddine al-Houthi, who was killed by the army last September after leading a nearly three-month uprising in Saada Province in which more than 400 people were killed. He said those involved in the rebellion were "militias," the "armed wing of the Al-Haq and Union of Popular Forces parties," a reference to two Zaidi-led Islamist opposition parties. The Faithful Youth organization was formed in 1997 as a breakaway from Al-Haq.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/16/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
They would not be REBELs if they were not trying to overthrow his regime so what's the point he is making? That the Zaidi tribe is Shite and not Wahabi?
#3
Most shipowners don't want to arm their ships. Use of weapons on a merchant essentially and legally makes it a combatant.
Second, one either has to train the crew in use of weapons, or bring armed guards aboard. The former is unlikely; 90% of mariners aren't well-paid, aren't interested in anything but the job they do have, and have no loyalty to the ship beyond a paycheck. Given some owners I've met, that's not surprising.
Same for armed guards. Some owners would, but then you run into additional headaches.
#4
All right, Pappy, that's understandable to an extent. But if one of the Navies catches some pirates, then a summary trial and execution of at least the leaders (maybe let the peons live to tell others) might be useful.
WASHINGTON, May 15 - The Bush administration on Sunday warned North Korea for the first time that if it conducted a nuclear test, the United States and several Pacific powers would take punitive action, but officials stopped short of saying what kind of sanctions would result.
"Action would have to be taken," Stephen J. Hadley, President Bush's national security adviser, said on the CNN program "Late Edition." Asked earlier on "Fox News Sunday" about recent reports that intelligence agencies have warned that North Korea could conduct its first test, Mr. Hadley added: "We've seen some evidence that says that they may be preparing for a nuclear test. We have talked to our allies about that."
But he cautioned that North Korea was "a hard target" and that correctly assessing its intentions was nearly impossible.
Mr. Hadley's warnings represented the first time anyone in the Bush administration had approached drawing a "red line" that North Korea could not cross without prompting a reaction. The term red line was often used during the cold war to set the boundaries in confrontations, with perhaps the most extreme example President Kennedy's action in the 1962 Cuban missile crisis to curb a nuclear risk.
In the case of North Korea, the threat has risen incrementally over 15 years. Mr. Bush's aides have said in interviews over the past year that if they drew a clear line, they believed that the North Koreans would see it as a challenge and walk right up to it.
On Sunday afternoon, senior administration officials said that concerns about baiting North Korea helped to explain why Mr. Hadley did not specify what kind of penalty was possible. Instead, Mr. Hadley noted that "the Japanese are out today already saying that those steps would need to include going to the Security Council and, potentially, sanctions."
Or maybe the Japanese will decide to go nuclear. Your call, President Hu.
He appeared to be referring to comments by Shinzo Abe, the secretary general of Japan's governing Liberal Democratic Party. Returning to Japan from a recent trip to Washington - where he met Mr. Hadley, Vice President Dick Cheney and others - Mr. Abe said Japan faced the most direct threat if North Korea proved that it could detonate a nuclear weapon.
"If North Korea's possession of nuclear weapons becomes definite," Mr. Abe said on Asahi TV, and North Korea "conducts nuclear testing, for instance, Japan will naturally bring the issue to the U.N. and call for sanctions against North Korea." Mr. Abe also told Asahi TV that it was "unthinkable not to impose any sanctions in case of a nuclear testing."
Among other things.
In an interview with The New York Times during his visit to Washington, Mr. Abe acknowledged that making sanctions work would "depend on the cooperation of China," though he noted that Japan would be capable of cutting off a considerable flow of money into North Korea sent by ethnic Koreans living in Japan.
North Korea has repeatedly declared that it would consider any sanctions imposed through the United Nations as an act of war.
Mr. Hadley, known for his caution, appeared somewhat more tentative Sunday than Mr. Abe did in discussing sanctions. He offered no specifics. Nor did he mention the extensive studies under way at the State Department, and in his own National Security Council to come up with a range of options, either in the event of a nuclear test or North Korea's continued refusal to rejoin negotiations that it has boycotted for nearly a year with South Korea, China, Japan, Russia and the United States.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/16/2005 00:22 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
In the case of North Korea, the threat has risen incrementally over 15 years.
But didn't this situation develop under the eeevil Chimpy McBushHitlerburton and his neoconic henchmen? Hillary said so!
http://www.washtimes.com/upi-breaking/20041006-065733-1065r.htm "If North Korea's long-range artillery are fired, some 25,000 shells per hour would rain down and destroy one-third of Seoul within one hour," said opposition lawmaker Park Jin, citing a trial analysis by the state-run Korea Institute for Defense Analyses. The communist neighbor is believed to have 12,500 artillery pieces, 1,000 of which are concealed in thousands of mountain tunnels near the border. In the first hours of a war, North Korea could rain between 300,000 and 500,000 artillery shells onto Seoul, according to defense officials. An artillery shell can reach Seoul in less than two minutes.
Posted by: john ||
05/16/2005 18:23 Comments ||
Top||
#4
All right, John, then how 'bout we strike their artillery emplacements first. After they have lost their hostage, then hit the nuke sites. Or do them both at once (will require a lot of redeployment probably).
Or, say that if they deliberately attack the civilian target of Seoul, we will aim for their military-political leadership, regardless of collateral damage. There's no point in threatening the common people, since the leadership doesn't mind if they die (of starvation).
#5
"...then how 'bout we strike their artillery emplacements first..."
Cuz their emplacements are, as I understand it, basically in the side of a mountain of solid rock. The guns are on rails, and can roll out, shoot, and roll back in.
#7
Can those guns roll out and shoot if the mountainside has collapsed, blocking the tunnel openings? Will the common soldiers aim their guns at Seoul once the senior commanders have been killed in their fancy compounds?
#8
Can those guns roll out and shoot if the mountainside has collapsed, blocking the tunnel openings? Will the common soldiers aim their guns at Seoul once the senior commanders have been killed in their fancy compounds?
#13
Here's Donald Sensing (an ex-artillery officer with a wonderful blog of his own) responding at the end of the above-linked post to an inquiry by SDB on NK's gun emplacements:
1. Can NK range Seoul with artillery from prewar prositions? Almost without a doubt. The real danger is less that they will use HE because, as you point out, it would take a huge number of HE shells to "destroy" Seoul.
The worst danger is using chemical shells, especially persistent nerve or blister agents.
2. You correctly identify that the NK artillery concerned is heavily fortified, but incorrectly assume we already have located the firing positions. We have not. The NK army is known to have built their positions inside hills and mountains from the reverse (northern) slope - they were doing this the last year of the Korean War.
What they have done is prepared the positions in every way except for opening the south side of the slope. The rails and armored doors are all in place and working, but the ground in front of them is entirely undisturbed. Just before firing, sappers blow the ground away, the piece is rolled forward, and firing begins.
We do have ground-penetrating, airborne radar, but I'd be surprised if we have accurate locations on even half the artillery pieces, and the NKs have thousands.
3. Seoul is plenty far enough away to use nukes against the bunkers without direct detonation effects against the city; downwind hazards would the issue there. But there is no more effective defense against nukes than hardened bunkers chiseled into mountains. So nukes would not work very well unless they actually entered the fortification, and that's not a very efficient use of them. We don't have enough besides.
And you are right - the other effects of nukes would be unacceptable.
I think the rest of your essay is right on, and mirrors my own thoughts closely. As I pointed out near the end of my essay I cited above, "In short, the North can invade the South, but it cannot win. The ensuing war would be disastrous for the South in terms of human loss, also for the North unless the war ended with the South's suzerainty over the North. But even so, the North Korean people would suffer very greatly until then.
"The problem, though, is not that the North could win such a war. It is that its isolated, self-justifying oligarchy might think it can win. And with its impending development of atomic weapons, it may think that all the more."
MADRID, Spain (AP) - A war correspondent with the Arab satellite television station Al-Jazeera denied charges Monday that he had close ties to the alleged leader of a Spanish al-Qaida cell accused of helping plot the Sept. 11 attacks in the United States. Tayssir Alouni, 50, who interviewed Osama bin Laden shortly after the attacks, is among 24 suspects on trial here in Europe's biggest court case against radical groups with alleged ties to the terror network. Three suspects are accused specifically of using Spain as a staging ground to help plan the suicide airliner attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Alouni, a Syrian-born Spaniard, is among the other 21, accused of terrorism, weapons possession or other offenses - but not helping plan the Sept. 11 attacks.
Spanish investigative magistrate Baltasar Garzon says Alouni, while living in the southern city of Granada in the 1990s, formed a radical Muslim indoctrination unit and was the right-hand man of the alleged leader of the Spanish cell, Syrian-born Spaniard Imad Yarkas, who is also on trial. Alouni could face nine years in prison if convicted of belonging to the Spanish cell.
Alouni denied being close with Yarkas, whom he said he met in the early 1990s.
"We met just as Syrian nationals. I've always thought that he was a sexy nice and polite man," Alouni told the court. "This relationship has never been intense or continuous."
Prosecutor Pedro Rubira said Yarkas used trips made by Alouni as a reporter to Afghanistan to send money to al-Qaida members. Alouni covered the war in Afghanistan after the U.S. invasion to topple the Taliban and its al-Qaida allies in late 2001. Alouni also said he had no knowledge of Yarkas recruiting men for terrorism training camps in Afghanistan and elsewhere, as alleged by Spanish prosecutors. "I had no idea if Yarkas was recruiting mujahedeen," Alouni said.
"I know nothing! Tell them, Hogan!"
Rubira also says Alouni had close ties to Mamoun Darkanzali, a suspected al-Qaida member who was allegedly close to the Hamburg, Germany, cell that plotted and staged the Sept. 11 attacks. Darkanzali is fighting extradition to Spain, where he was indicted by Garzon in September 2003 along with 34 other people, including Alouni and Yarkas.
Because of a heart condition, Alouni is one of only two defendants who are free on bail and have been allowed to sit in the main part of the courtroom since the trial began April 22. The other 22 defendants sit in a cramped, bulletproof chamber. Alouni was a war correspondent in the Mideast for the Doha-based Al-Jazeera and was its Kabul correspondent during the Afghan war.
Posted by: Steve ||
05/16/2005 10:02:25 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Just like Izikoff and Judith Miller and all the others of that ilk have relationships with all kind of entrenched bureaucrats in DC that feel threatened or have opposing political agendas. Journalists are the "Weevils of Axioms" and have all kinds of immoral, unethical and enabling relationships not just in Spain and Pan-arabia.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
05/16/2005 11:48 Comments ||
Top||
Newsweek Advertisers List
Here is a list:
1-888-BESTBUY www.bestbuy.com
CyberRebate.com www.cyberrebate.com
1-877-88DATEK www.datek.com
Energizer www.energizer-e2.com
1-800-579-2203 www.learningquestsavings.com
1-800-255-OLDS www.oldsmobile.com
Web Miles1-877-WEBMILES www.webmiles.com
The White House said on Monday that a Newsweek report based on an anonymous source had damaged the U.S. image overseas by alleging that U.S. interrogators desecrated the Koran at Guantanamo Bay.
The May 9 report triggered several days of rioting in Afghanistan and other countries in which at least 16 people were killed.
Newsweek's editor, Mark Whitaker, apologized to the victims on Sunday and said the magazine inaccurately reported that U.S. military investigators had confirmed that personnel at the detention facility in Cuba had flushed the Muslim holy book down the toilet.
"It's puzzling that while Newsweek now acknowledges that they got the facts wrong, they refused to retract the story," White House spokesman Scott McClellan said. "I think there's a certain journalistic standard that should be met and in this instance it was not."
The report sparked violent protests across the Muslim world -- from Afghanistan, where 16 were killed and more than 100 injured, to Pakistan, Indonesia and Gaza. In the past week the reported desecration was condemned in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Bangladesh, Malaysia and by the Arab League.
McClellan complained that the story was "based on a single anonymous source who could not personally substantiate the allegation that was made."
"The report has had serious consequences," he said. "People have lost their lives. The image of the United States abroad has been damaged."
Newsweek said in its May 23 edition that the information had come from a "knowledgeable government source" who told Newsweek that a military report on abuse at Guantanamo Bay said interrogators flushed at least one copy of the Koran down a toilet in a bid to make detainees talk.
But the source later told the magazine he could not be certain he had seen an account of the Koran incident in the military report and that it might have been in other investigative documents or drafts, Newsweek said.
#1
The White House said on Monday that a Newsweek report based on an anonymous source had damaged the U.S. image overseas by alleging that U.S. interrogators desecrated the Koran at Guantanamo Bay.
Since it's only U.S. servicemen, U.S. companies, and U.S. citizens (presumably not Newsweek or any of its employees) that take the hit for this crap, then it's no skin off Newsweek's back, right Mr. Whitaker?
#2
I suspect that Newsweek's law department has broken out in hives over the potential civil liability exposure, and that we've seen as much of a retraction as we're going to see unless/until Newsweek's senior management decides to override its lawyers. Just a guess. It's like Rathergate but with dead people.
Posted by: Matt ||
05/16/2005 12:21 Comments ||
Top||
#3
If they had any humility and sincerity the editors and writers involved would step down with apologies to all. Reporting incendiary "facts" based upon hearsay (and possibly double hearsay of a murky sort from an a "source" who was apparently internally inconsistent in what he purported to have heard and read at that) is a very small half step above outright lies. Whether the motitivation for publication was greed, arrogance, political, or simply stupidity matters little. These people caused untold harm and should be called to answer and account fully for it. This behavior goes well beyond a simple bad judgment call.
#5
I still think that Whitaker, Thomas, and Isikoff, as well as their "anonomous source", should go to Kabul and personally apologize to all Afghans. And if they're still alive the US should transport them to Islamabad,Gaza,etc, to explain that they meant no offense, but were only bashing Bush.
#6
Yet newsweek still protects its 'source' and presumably will continue to use him/her/it and still has not retracted the story. That in itself calls Mark Whitaker's 'apology' not only a lie, but a damn lie.
I wonder if there really is a 'source' or if they simply fabricated the entire thing out if thin air and the rumors.
I think we should allow Afghanistan to 'extradite' the newsweek editor, publisher, reporter(s), and the unnamed 'source' since they caused the death of afghans with their irresponsible reporting.
Freedom of the press does not free them from responsibilty for their irresponsible reporting - these are 'professionals' and should be held to a higher standard.
#8
Nah, eLarson, I'd happily give you my husband's if it wouldn't clog up your sweetie's toilet. No need to give them any more money until they act honorably.
#11
Let's get the lawyers involved! We need to send some ambulance chaser's to Afghanistan. The Supreme Court has stated that yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater is not covered under the 1st amendment, and Newsweak's stunt is pretty close to that. In a civil case with the preponderance of evidence standard, Newsweak's lack of due diligence is going to be tough to defend. All we need is some greedy lawyers (got that one covered) and some sympathetic widows and orphans.
#12
The LIE told by so-called journalist Mark Whitaker is Criminal.
By telling and publishing that LIE, Mark Whitaker caused at least 16 deaths and even more hatred against the USA. Endangering all allied troops and non - muslims everywhere in the world.
For his part in promoting manslaughter and murder -- he should be tried as (at a minimum) an accessory to an armed criminal act and (if at all possible, manslaughter; IF NOT MURDER.
HE should then be hung, drawn and quartered. His parts given to the families muslims and non -muslims who died because if his deliberate lie and fabrication for whatever they want to do with it.
IF he can't be executed he should be put into a muslim jail and not allowed visitors or in any way to profit now or in the future from any story etc., he may write.
THEN he should be shot!
HE is a murderer plain and simple for what he has done.
#13
comeon Lyrics, tell us how you really feel! Dont hold back now.
On the other hand I'm sure the Afghanistan Government has a spare soccer field it can spare. I mean the MSM (and Mark Whitaker) have already approved of the execution of women in soccer fields so this should be no problem.... right?
#21
But if they used a Ferguson toilet, yeah, it could happen.... ;)
Bah woosh!
Posted by: Al Bundy ||
05/16/2005 18:33 Comments ||
Top||
#22
How many times do you guys have to hear this to understand the fundamental and underlying problem?
"The MSM is NOT ON OUR SIDE." Today's journalist is above all those bourgoise notions of being an American. He or she is a citizen of the world. It's not that the journalists are unaware of the consequences of thier actions, they just don't care. What is probably more accurate is that they want thier actions to hurt the American cause, not necessarily in terms of actual deaths, but certainly in harming Bush/Hitler.
#23
Dying a violent death in a firey protest over a false Newsweek story is kind of like dying in the onfield celebration of an Arena football championship.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
05/16/2005 19:59 Comments ||
Top||
#24
The damage is already done--there's no point with regard to the Islamic world for the story to be retracted.
Just like a blood-libel, no amount of retraction, proof to the contrary, or re-education will ever convince many people in Islamic nations that Koran-flushing incidents don't take place daily in America.
'course, that means it wouldn't do any more harm to take pics of Korans next to piles of dog crap and post them on Islamist sites, right?
I've read it a few times, and became progressively more negatively impressed each time.
Naturally, the editors at Newsweek should still have hell to pay for starting this garbage.
#25
The more I read about this -- the madder I get! As Going Down Range in Afgan says http://goingdownrange.blogspot.com/2005/05/smoke-and-sunset.html I know the blame goes on the terrorists who are fanning the flames by broadcasting propaganda from mosques PA systems, but where did they get their information from? A bogus Newsweek report. So thanks a lot Newsweek for making our life so much easier. I hope the reporter who wrote this great piece of fiction goes on a patrol with US Forces and see what he has wroth. So Mark you want to join the party that you started?
Two former officers of a U.S.-based Islamic charity were indicted on federal charges accusing them of lying to authorities investigating the charity's alleged ties to terrorist organizations. Emadeddin Muntasser, the former head of Care International, and Muhammed Mubayyid, the group's former treasurer, were arrested Thursday following their Wednesday indictment on charges of concealing information from federal agencies, conspiring to defraud the United States, and making false statements to the FBI. The charity is now defunct.
The name suggests they were riding on CARE, which is a legitimate charity that's been around for at least 60 years...
"Organizations that conceal their true activities to abuse our tax laws, and in this case fund their support of the mujahideen and jihad, will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law," said U.S. Attorney Michael Sullivan. The indictment and arrests were disclosed the same day Muntasser was scheduled to have a hearing in federal court on his application for U.S. citizenship. U.S. District Judge Rya Zobel held off on ruling on the application. Muntasser's attorney, Jeremiah Friedman, declined to comment after a brief closed-door meeting about the case with prosecutors and Zobel. Both men appeared in U.S. District Court in Worcester. Muntasser was ordered released to home confinement with electronic monitoring. Mubayyid's detention hearing is scheduled for Monday.
Reached by phone at his home late Thursday, Muntasser declined to comment, saying he may make a statement on Friday through his attorney. A message left at a phone number for Jumana Munlla, who is listed as Mubayyid's wife in his bankruptcy filing in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Worcester, was not immediately returned. Muntasser, 40, the owner of the Logan Furniture chain and a Libyan national, was a founding president of the Boston-based charity Care International. The organization, which is not affiliated with the global relief group CARE International, has been scrutinized because of its links to groups that support terrorism.
Mubayyid, 40, Care's treasurer, has been employed by a software firm that was in the news two years ago after federal agents searched its offices as part of an investigation into funding of terrorist groups. No charges were ever brought against the software company or its officers. Mubayyid donated $360 (?282) to the Alkifah Refugees Center in New York, according to a receipt obtained by The Investigative Project, a group that investigates radical Islamic organizations. The New York organization was named by federal prosecutors as the center of the conspiracy to bomb the World Trade Center in 1993.
Yeah, but 360 bucks doesn't make him the group's biggest donor. I'm assuming they've got more than that on him...
Care International says in its promotional materials that it was formed to help war orphans, widows and refugees in Muslim nations. According to the indictment, Care was raising and spending money to support and promote mujahideen fighters and jihad, and published a pro-jihadist newsletter. It didn't reveal those activities in its tax forms and didn't reveal its links to Al-Kifah. Muntasser also failed to tell the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force in a 1999 interview about the group's support for jihad, and didn't mention that on a trip to Pakistan several years earlier, he also traveled to Afghanistan. Muntasser has described his work with Care as humanitarian. He applied for U.S. citizenship in late 2002, but didn't disclose his association with Care and Al-Kifah, or his travel to Afghanistan, according to the indictment.
#1
Just as the Tranzis have bastardized the "international" version of the Red Cross into a political tool, it appears such is the case with "Care International" - it's obviously linked with the real Care.
That the US Red Cross maintains a stiff arm from the International Red Cross Thingy has prolly saved them. No such luck good judgement for Care.
How this org was hijacked is prolly a pure PC story. That it was is evidenced by the fact that some Fed Prosecutor is willing to go the distance. If they are defunct, it doesn't show on their website. And another one bites the dust.
May 16, 2005: Who will be the big world powers twenty years from now? This is a tough prediction to make, mostly because in 20 years, many unexpected changes could take place. For example, two decades ago, the United States and Soviet Union were locked in a Cold War. Nobody expected that in five years from then, the Berlin Wall would fall and the Soviet Union would literally disintegrate. That said, there is an idea of who is emerging, and who is fading.
10. Brazil — This country is emerging as the dominant military and economic force in Latin America. It operates the only aircraft carrier outside the US Navy in the Western Hemisphere. Currently, Brazil is trying to build up its forces still more, and is pursuing a program to build a nuclear-powered attack submarine and could be pursuing nuclear weapons development as well.
9. South Korea — This country has an indigenous naval program that is quite solid, and one of the better armies in the world. The only thing holding it back is a reliance on foreign designs for aircraft, although it is manufacturing F-16s locally.
8. Germany — Despite reductions in the German defense budget after the end of the Cold War, this military has several quality systems (like the Leopard 2 main battle tank and the Type 212 submarine). Germany also has had a tradition of effective military forces (just ask the Romans).
7. Japan — This is a country which has, with one hand tied behind its back, developed the number two navy in the Pacific Rim, and arguably the second-best air force (tied with China). The only thing that holds Japan back is an apparent lack of desire. Things could rapidly change on that front, though.
6. Russia — This country has a lot of nukes, and a lot of bombers. While naval designs (like the Kirov-class battlecruisers and Oscar-class submarines) are good on paper, they still have quality issues, and accidents are not unheard of. Still, this is a country that has some advantages, and is no pushover.
5. France — Probably in better shape than what one would expect. This is largely because of the quality of the troops (due to career NCOs). Has remained self-sufficient in terms of producing major weapons systems (see the Rafale), and operates the only CVN outside the U.S. Navy (even though it has had problems).
4. China — This is a force that has quantity on its side, and is rapidly trying to improve its quality. Their air force will probably have the largest force of Su-27 fighters in the world (at least 580, compared to the 550 in Russian service). The Chinese navy is rapidly introducing new classed of destroyers and frigates that are close to the quality of American and Japanese surface combatants. That said, it is still behind, and the Chinese financial situation could go downhill rapidly.
3. UK — While small, this is a force that not only had a tradition of high quality, it has proven as recently as 1982 that it can operate half a world away and still accomplish a difficult mission. Sailor for sailor, there is no better navy than the Royal Navy.
2. India — Probably the most dynamic country in terms of the leaps. India is rapidly becoming self-sufficient in a number of areas, and what it cannot produce, it is able to buy. It also has some of the best training in the world, and can give an unsuspecting opponent a surprise. Probably the next superpower due to a more firm economic footing, and the fact that its Navy is much more advanced than China's.
1. USA — Even while fighting a war on terrorism, the United States is pursuing new technology (such as UCAVs) to maintain an edge over any potential challenger. The forces are well-trained, and the United States Navy is still the most powerful in the world. The term superpower almost understates what the United States can do — it is arguably a hyperpower.
Posted by: Steve ||
05/16/2005 10:13:39 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The big divide will be 'projection', how far and how much.
#4
Personally, I'd like to see the De Gaulle take on a Nimitz-class. There hasn't been a good carrier-vs-carrier smackdown since, what, Leyte Gulf, 1944?
Posted by: Mike ||
05/16/2005 13:52 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Mike - That was also the last time battleships slugged it out. A couple of Pearl Harbor veterans got some revenge in the Surigao Straits.
Posted by: Laurence of the Rats ||
05/16/2005 14:12 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Actually, reportedly the only carrier fight in history was in Midway, and neither carrier saw the other either.
Posted by: Edward Yee ||
05/16/2005 14:13 Comments ||
Top||
#7
An irony here. The ship the DeGaulle replaced, Foch, is motoring along trouble-free as the Brazilian carrier mentioned at the beginning of the article, now renamed Sao Paulo. Brazil has operated a carrier since 1956, btw.
I am a student of Latin American, especially Brazilian, military affairs, having been stationed at the US Embassy in Brasilia at one point in my Army career.
In dealing with this subject, it is often necessary to overcome an amazing amount of prejudice and ignorance. A while back, for instance, the subject of Venezuela's MiG-29 purchase came up at another message board. More than one poster asked where the Venezuelans would get pilots capable of flying them. A learned chap informed them that Cuban or Russian pilots would undoubtedly be brought in for that purpose. In fact, the FAV (Fuerza Aerea Venezolana) has flown jets with its own, native-born pilots since 1951, and has flown F-16s since 1982. It is no mystery to me where they will get the pilots for the MiG-29s and it doesn't involve foreign mercenaries. It is almost taken for granted that Brazil's sizable force of C-130s and C-137s is subsidized by the US, probably the CIA, since "they don't have the money or the know-how for that."
In fact, Brazil has a trillion dollar plus economy and its pilots flew in combat in Italy during the Second World War, so there is no factual basis for this assumption.
#13
France and Germany are no better--economically--than a third-world country. Given that they both have a high abortion ratio, these will be Islamic countries in twenty years.
Put Japan (the new and improved version) in the top four; find spots for France and Germany to coincide with Peru or Mexico, and the rankings are then solid.
Posted by: Captain America ||
05/16/2005 16:20 Comments ||
Top||
#14
Does this ranking factor in things like willingness to use force out of area; determination to spend necessary sums to maintain pace with other, rising powers; battle-hardiness of troops, etc?
#16
Atomic Conspiracy, my guess is the discussion on who would fly them was more about who would teach the fliers. New Jets, new requirements.
Having a single carrier is virtually worthless, by the way. It becomes such a big thing of pride that the country in question doesn't dare risk it. Ask the Argentines about the action the Biente Cynco deMayo saw during the Falkland Crisis. It just waited out the war with a land based air cover for fear it might be hurt.
The other thing about a carrier is it's main purpose is force-projection. For the life of me I can't see how/where Brazil would use such a thing where there own land based fighter wings wouldn't be superior in every way.
I"m sure I'm missing something but a nation building a carrier they are likely unwilling to use, and for which they have no real purpose doesn't come off as all that impressive.
#17
rjschwarz - I agree. These things end up as shiny toys that never get used. Had Argentina used the deMayo, they might have won the war. Even if the thing had been blown out of the water by a sub afterwards it would have been a success if it had taken out a British carrier, or better still, the QE2 while still full of troops.
Instead it cowered back by the coast and was useless.
And wtf does Brazil need a carrier for anyway? They don't need it against any credible opponents, especially since they'll be unlikely to risk it, just like Argentina. And if they somehow got in a fight with America the US will sink the thing, no matter where they try to hide it. I can't imagine any US admiral is going to pass up the chance to be the first in 60 years to blow away a carrier.
Posted by: Laurence of the Rats ||
05/16/2005 17:26 Comments ||
Top||
#18
I think China will be number two. At 8% a year for the next 20 years, China will have a nominal GDP of $6T compared to Uncle Sam's $24T (assuming 4% growth). However, unburdened by social welfare schemes, China will have half of Uncle Sam's military budget in real dollars (assuming an 8% of GDP number) or $480m, at a time when Uncle Sam will be spending $960m. On a purchasing power parity basis, China will be spending much less money than the US for manpower (i.e. troops) and the Chinese arms industry will presumably have developed (with help from formerly unemployed Russian engineers) sufficiently for them to produce most of their arms domestically at a sharp discount to Russian prices, given lower Chinese labor costs.
Bottom line, by 2025, I expect the Chinese weapons requisition program to equal, if not surpass, what the Pentagon is spending, even though their total military budget will only be half a large as the US defense budget. The question is whether we want to do anything about it. My feeling is that it may make sense to de-commit from some of our larger defense obligations in the Western Pacific. The question at hand is whether we want to be on the front lines everywhere. I think not, if the Chinese reach parity with us. The Western Pacific powers really need to be doing a lot more in their own defense.
#21
AC, I operated with many of the naval forces of South America in '91 or so and was impressed with their personnel but not their equipment. I think Australia, Poland and Columbia will continue to benefit from working closely with the US. Why wouldn't Israel make the top 10?
Posted by: Super Hose ||
05/16/2005 20:52 Comments ||
Top||
#22
AC:
That's a good point about Brazil's potential, but there is a countervailing trend. Remember Canada went from an 8-division army supported 3000 miles away, a powerful air force, and the third-largest navy in the world to ... nothing, really.
Brazil is a big country with pretty good technology, but if they get several politicians of the Lula ilk who make vast spending increases in social welfare (especially health care, which economically devastates governments running it), all that will be for nought.
#23
SH:
Isreal is just too small. Their military is darned good, but they have no ability to project other than air raids once you get past the adjacent states. Their technology is obviously very good, but they can't do everything with their limited manpower, so they have to buy stuff from other countries for those items which they don't develop in-house. That dependency makes them weaker, as there always could be an arms embargo or something.
#25
Well, TW, they used them against Nazi Germany during the Second World War, sending a whole division and supporting troops to Italy.
In the current climate there is no immediate threat, but that can change quickly with volatile neighbors like Argentina and Venezuela. Right now, Brazil's Lula da Silva is on the best of terms with the demented Chavez but that can change at the next election. Many Brazilians hate and fear their Spanish-speaking neighbors. I am not justifying this, just stating it as a fact that has created conflict and potential conflict for 200 years.
In the broader picture, Brazil (like Chile) has global interests thanks to its burgeoning economy and this could well create conflict in other areas of the world or on the high seas at some future time.
Much closer to home, the Islamofascist infestation in the tri-border region where Brazil, Paraguay, and Argentina meet has grown to monstrous proportions under the benign protection of the pro-Arab Lula regime. When Lula is gone, this will have to be dealt with. At this point, military force may be the only option, a lot of it.
There wasn't any doubt of Russian culpability; it's just laid out here.
UNITED NATIONS - Saddam Hussein's government provided senior Russian officials with oil rights worth millions of dollars under the oil-for-food program in an effort to lift UN sanctions against Iraq, according to a US Senate Committee report released on Monday. The oil allocations were "compensation for support," Vice President Taha Yasin Ramadan told the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.
The report, based on documents as well as interviews with Ramadan and Tareq Aziz, the former deputy prime minister, pointed to Alexander Voloshin, former chief of staff to President Vladimir Putin in the Russian Presidential Council, and ultranationalist parliamentarian Vladimir Zhirinovsky. Both men had been listed in an October CIA report by Charles Duelfer, a former US and UN weapons inspector.
But the new report produced documents on how the transactions were made, the shell companies in Cyprus, Switzerland and elsewhere and the involvement of Bayoil Inc., whose executives were indicted by US prosecutors last month.
There is no evidence Putin knew of the payments, Senate investors said.
And no evidence that he didn't.
Zhirinovsky and his Russian Liberal Democrat Party were awarded the rights to sell 75.8 million barrels of Iraqi crude oil from June 1997 to December 2002, the report said. Those contracts could have netted Zhirinovsky and his party $8.679 million in profits, it added.
The panel estimated nearly $3 million was paid to the Russian Presidential Council, either through Voloshin or his confident Sergei Isakov. At the same time the transactions resulted in $5.6 million in kickbacks to Saddam's government. They were sold through a subsidiary of the Russian oil giant Rosneft, the report said.
"The purpose of these hearings is to lay out in detail ... the massive volume of allocations to Russia when Russia is an oil-exporting nation," Sen. Norm Coleman, the Minnesota chair of the panel, told a telephone news conference.
Voloshin and Zhirinovsky previously denied the allegations and the Russian officials had said they would wait for a definitive report from Paul Volcker, appointed by the United Nations to conduct a independent inquiry on the defunct scandal-tainted $67 billion program that began in late 1996 and ended in 2003.
UN officials, the United States and Britain as well as France in 2001 attempted to cut down the UN list of 700 so-called oil buyers, which Saddam was allowed to choose under the program. But Russia refused in a UN Security Council panel, set up to supervise the program, participants said.
Didn't want to leave the graft solely to the French, eh?
For several allocations awarded to the Russian Presidential Council, Bayoil contracted with shipping companies to lift the Iraqi oil and send it to end users. The report said payments from Bayoil to the allocation holder and the designated purchasing agent, such as Rosneft, were often routed through a company, which had no record in oil deals. One such firm was Haverhill Trading Ltd., based in Cyprus.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/16/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
BEIRUT, Lebanon (AP) - A son of slain former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri promised Sunday to achieve his father's plan for a sovereign Lebanon and formally announced a list of candidates for Beirut's 19 parliamentary seats.
In an apparent swipe at Syria, which dominated Lebanon's politics for nearly three decades before withdrawing its troops last month, Saad Hariri told a crowd of hundreds that every vote is a "vote against the criminals who killed Rafik Hariri and tried to enslave Lebanon."
Meanwhile, the Druse leader Walid Jumblatt announced an election coalition with his former civil war enemies, the Lebanese Forces, who were the nation's most powerful Christian militia during the 1975-90 civil war.
Hariri urged supporters to vote in large numbers as a show of loyalty to his father, whose Feb. 14 assassination was the catalyst that led to Syria's withdrawal. He said his father's project involved developing state institutions, fighting corruption and improving the economy. "The black terrorist hands will not be able to stop Rafik Hariri's project," he said.
Saad Hariri's ticket included Solange Gemayel, the widow of President-elect Bashir Gemayel, who was killed in a 1982 bombing in Beirut. Solange Gemayel and two other candidates on Hariri's ticket have already won uncontested seats.
Jumblatt said his coalition with the Lebanese Forces affirmed "a political alliance aimed at confirming the major national reconciliation" that was reached between Druse and Maronite Christians in 2001.
And no deals with Hezbollah, son-of-a-gun.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/16/2005 00:28 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
DAMASCUS - Hundreds of demonstrators rallied outside Syria's feared state security court on Sunday chanting for freedom and demanding an end to the 42-year-old state of emergency. "Long live liberty," the protestors chanted in both Arabic and Kurdish as the trials of three Kurdish activists got underway. "We want democracy," "End the emergency laws".
The authorities dispatched around 15 riot police to the courthouse but they did not intervene.
Placards brandished by the demonstrators demanded the release of political prisoners, many of them members of Syria's 1.5 million-strong Kurdish minority. Pictures of Kurdish cleric Sheikh Mohammed Mashuq al-Jaznawi figured prominently. The sheikh has not been seen since he left the Islamic Studies Centre in Damascus on Tuesday, said rights lawyer Anwar Bunni.
As the demonstration unfolded outside, the state security court jailed one Kurdish activist and adjourned the trials of two others. Abdul Rahman Mahmud Ali of the mainly Turkish-based Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) was sentenced to two years for "membership of an underground organization seeking to annex Syrian territory to another country," Bunni told AFP.
The PKK, which waged a bloody campaign for self-rule in Kurdish regions of southeastern Turkey from 1984 to 1999, once championed a state encompassing all Kurdish-inhabited territory, including northern Syria, although it has since moderated its line.
The court adjourned until June 19 the trial of another Kurdish activist -- Shevan Abdo -- detained more than a year ago following clashes with security forces and Arab auxiliaries in March last year. The court adjourned until next Sunday the case of Mahmud Ali Mohammad, an official in the Kurdish Al-Wahda party who was also arrested last year.
Bunni hit out at the the continued use of the security court, whose verdicts cannot be appealed, for trying political activists. "Despite all their claims, the Syrian authorities are continuing to use the security services and this illegitimate court to repress society and political parties," the rights lawyer said.
Kurdish activists say they have been hit by a fresh wave of arrests in recent weeks after the major crackdown of last year. "This new wave of arrests ... flies in the face of the amnesty for 312 Kurdish prisoners announced by President (Bashar al-Assad) on March 30," the leader of the Kurdish Yakiti party, Hassen Saleh, told Al-Arabiya television Thursday. "Despite the amnesty, more than 100 Kurds detained in last year's crackdown remain in jail," Saleh said.
The Kurds, who make up around nine percent of Syria's largely Arab population, have been campaigning for recognition of their language and respect for their civil rights.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/16/2005 00:09 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[9 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
That is courage. How soon until we see ink-dipped Syrian fingers?
Posted by: Fred ||
05/16/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
... âThe Security Council does not worry Iran,â Asefi said, but acknowledged that Iran had also received appeals from South Africa, Malaysia and UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan â who telephoned Iran late Sat.
No but the US and Israel do!
That story about one year worth of Globalhawk and Predator targeting missions over Iran might have sent a few chills up their dark force robes.
#3
It's a win-win for the mullahs no matter what happens. If Israel/and or the US attacks Iran, ordinary Iranians, indeed the Iraqi Shiites as well, will throw their support behind the mullahs. The mullahs will be in a position of strength with their people and fellow Shiite states for the first time in recent years.
If the mullahs are allowed to build nukes, they will not be easily removed by "their enemies" from without.
So exactly what is "to fear" from Israel or the USA? We make their day either way.
#5
The blazing saddles cowboy routine isn't going to work with Iran. For one thing the Iranians look Caucasian - like us -they are not the swarthy Arab foreigner looking types at all. There's an empathy factor that Westerners feel towards Iranians that does not exist with Arabs, ie. typical Middle Easterners. Even Israelis look more Arab than Iranians do. Many Iranian diplomats come across very Dr. Zchivago-ish when interviewed on TV - I've never even heard a "mullah" speak on public television, have any of you? We will not be able to get the UK on our bandwagon, much less the average mid west American, to see Iran as a threat to the US. On the other hand the guy wearing high heels and lipdtick in N. Korea comes across as a believable threat to the world. No offense, but "Israel's help" is like no help at all for all the bad baggage that Israel brings. We're kind of tapped out on picking up the tab for blowing up things in other countries -the meter is still running in Afghanistan and Iraq. Seriously, I think we need to go back to the drawing board for new ideas on the Iran issue.
#6
For one thing the Iranians look Caucasian - like us -they are not the swarthy Arab foreigner looking types at all. There's an empathy factor that Westerners feel towards Iranians that does not exist with Arabs, ie. typical Middle Easterners. Even Israelis look more Arab than Iranians do.
EF, it's hard to know where to start in responding - you offer such a target rich environment.
But since you are SOOOOO savvy, perhaps you'll deign to offer Secty Rice your wisdom. No doubt you've seen all sorts of options that she and her staff have missed.
The blazing saddles cowboy routine isn't going to work with Iran.
Which one? "One false move and the n----r gets it?" or "Doin' the French Mistake"?
For one thing the Iranians look Caucasian - like us -they are not the swarthy Arab foreigner looking types at all.
Neither are Arabs, now that you mention it. They're Mediterranean in looks, ranging from the swarthy through olive-complected to blonde. Fill a room with 50 percent Spaniards, Italians and Greeks and 50 percent Arabs and Persians, dress them similarly and have everybody keep their mouths shut, and you won't be able to tell one ethnic group from the other.
There's an empathy factor that Westerners feel towards Iranians that does not exist with Arabs, ie. typical Middle Easterners.
Perhaps we do regard Persians as more civilized than the Arabs. That's because they used to be. However, Persian civilization was clobbered in the 7th century A.D., and since then they've been subject to the same problems the Arab-dominated areas have had. This is because since then they've been effectively living under theocracy.
Even Israelis look more Arab than Iranians do.
That's quite a hangup you have on people's looks. Israelis include (mostly European) Ashkenazi, (mostly Middle Eastern native) Sephardim, plus the occasional Ethiopian or whoever else manages to convince the rabbis they're Jewish. They range in appearance from swarthy to blonde. Grab a few people from the middle of the spectrum, throw them into that room full of southern Europeans and Arabs, and you'll have a hard time picking them out.
Many Iranian diplomats come across very Dr. Zchivago-ish when interviewed on TV - I've never even heard a "mullah" speak on public television, have any of you?
Dr. Zhivago was a character in a novel, not a real person. He was played in the movie by Omar Sharif, who's an Arab. Ayatollahs speak reagularly on Persian TV, as do the holy men on Arab and Pak TV. Do a Rantburg search on "Khamenei" and you'll get a few of Fearless Leader's statements, though not all.
We will not be able to get the UK on our bandwagon, much less the average mid west American, to see Iran as a threat to the US.
You're a better reader of the future than I am, I guess. I'd point out that in 1938 and in 1913 there was no way Britain was going to war with anybody. In 1940 and 1916 there was no way the Americans were going to support participation in a war.
On the other hand the guy wearing high heels and lipdtick in N. Korea comes across as a believable threat to the world.
Actually, I don't take Kimmie as seriously as a threat as I do the ayatollahs. Iran's military strength was on a par with Iraq's a few years ago. North Korea's a fearsome place to behold, but they'll have no staying power at all. In the event of war, Seoul is going to get clobbered, but NKor's going to last no longer than a week. You heard read it here first.
No offense, but "Israel's help" is like no help at all for all the bad baggage that Israel brings.
Which help are you referring to? Military help? Technological? We spend a lot of time exchanging information with them, and we've got a lot of joint development projects. Politically they're a bone of contention because the Arabs generically hate them, have in fact hated them since well before the creation of the state of Israel. They remain the oldest functioning democracy in the area, even giving the benefit of the doubt and assuming the steps toward democracy by the Arab states other than Lebanon are legitimate. Curiously, it's my feeling that if there was peace in the Middle East this year, Israel would be much more closely aligned with Europe next year. That's where their roots are, that's the kind of parliament they've got. For now they're on our side, and you don't sell your friends down the river. All it takes is once, and then you've got no more friends, only acquaintances.
We're kind of tapped out on picking up the tab for blowing up things in other countries -the meter is still running in Afghanistan and Iraq. Seriously, I think we need to go back to the drawing board for new ideas on the Iran issue.
You're assuming we're not doing that now. The graphic associated with this item's a pair doing a minuet, which is an antique dance noted for the intricacy of its steps. The game right now is political and diplomatic, with Europe and the U.S. playing separate roles and Iran reacting to the stimuli even as it plays its own role. The diplomatic part involves talking until all parties are out of breath, while the political part takes place behind the curtain. That's things like monetary and political support for anti-ayatollah factions within Iran, maintaining credible outside threats -- that'd be MKO and probably the PKK, setting up or explanding relations with the Azeri, Kurdish, Arab and Whathaveyou minorities within the country, all with the ultimate aim of weakening the ayatollahs. The diplo game's probably going to amount to nothing; probably all parties realize that, though there's that one percent chance that something will actually happen. The political games involve a lot of stuff thrown at the wall, some of which will stick, probably (bare probability) nothing of which will cause singificant change within the regime, but which may set the stage for later military operations. Military options are at the further end of the spectrum, and can range from supporting an indigenous guerrilla war against the turbans to a full-scale invasion. With regard to the cost, nothing's free, it's our country, we're responsible for defending it, and the cost of not doing so is much greater than the savings.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/16/2005 10:03 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Iranians look Caucasian - like us -they are not the swarthy Arab foreigner looking types at all. Was this a statement about Kurds? Baluchis? Arabs? Turkmen? Azeris? (all 24 million of them) since they are all Iranians.
#10
elmeath:If the mullahs are allowed to build nukes, they will not be easily removed by "their enemies" from without.
Two comments:
1) That's why they can't be allowed to build nukes. A good argument for a pre-emptive attack.
2) not be easily removed - If they are stupid enough to move the conflict to a nuclear venue with a handful of bombs they are seriously forgetting that the USA was prepared to duke it out to the bitter end with a USSR armed with about 60,000 nukes (from strategic through battlefield types). Duke it out. Our strategic inventory has been greatly reduced but is still much greater >> than a handful. I have no idea what our tactical levels are but am sure that they are more than a handful too.
3,4,5,6 -- The post nuclear age hyper-targeting weapons now in and entering the inventory can be just as effective as the old nuclear ones without all the messy side-effects. Don't believe me. Consider the old 60s-70s era ABM system. It had a nuke at the end to wipe out any missile/bomber in the general area. The current ABM is still prototype but non-nuclear. Not near as messy!
Factor the same across the whole broad spectrum of weapons. The Mad Mullhas are toast if they continue down their primrose path. They are just to stupid to see that they are toast.
#11
"Seriously, I think we need to go back to the drawing board for new ideas on the Iran issue."
Good place to start would be to call around to find out which mental institution is missing a Drooler, and get you back there before you hurt yourself or something.
Then the rest of us can discuss the matter without the distraction of listening to your bullshit.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
05/16/2005 11:00 Comments ||
Top||
#12
They are just to stupid to see that they are toast. Yep, agreed.
#13
Many Iranian diplomats come across very Dr. Zchivago-ish when interviewed on TV - I've never even heard a "mullah" speak on public television, have any of you?
1) These diplomats represent the government that held our Embassy staffers hostages back in 1979. You recall that incident, correct?
2) To what degree does listening to a mullah speak in a language I don't understand improve (if that's the right word) on what's been widely available in print? That issue's a red herring in my book.
3) The fact that the Iranian government has been playing footsie with the EU and everybody else (one day threatening Israel and / or announcing resumption of their program, the next pledging not to resume it) is classic doubletalk and deception. I find it wiser to show them the hammer.
On the other hand the guy wearing high heels and lipdtick in N. Korea comes across as a believable threat to the world.
That's because it's extremely likely they're closer to having nukes - This ring a bell? Come on - North Korea is just as nuts as the mullahs. They are a threat and it's inherently wiser to act as if they're legit. You feel like waiting for a field test of their payload and delivery systems?
We're kind of tapped out on picking up the tab for blowing up things in other countries -the meter is still running in Afghanistan and Iraq.
For one thing the Iranians look Caucasian - like us -they are not the swarthy Arab foreigner looking types at all. There's an empathy factor that Westerners feel towards Iranians that does not exist with Arabs, ie. typical Middle Easterners. Even Israelis look more Arab than Iranians do.
It occurs to me that "looking European" didn't save the Germans from a bombing campaign meant to kill German civilians, which ultimately caused the cities of Hamburg and Dresden to be bombed flat... it also didn't help them much when the Russian Army showed up and laid waste to the areas they passed through.
Posted by: Phil Fraering ||
05/16/2005 12:39 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Iran has a large, restless young population. ISTM that economic sanctions would lead to rising unemployment, which under Iranian conditions would probably lead to revolution.
#16
I was responding with tongue in cheek to the ridiculous, hyperbole #4 post, which apparently all of you sounded very pragmatic.
However, tongue in cheek aside, I'd like to re-iterate some of my points in a more serious vein:
1. Iranians are not viewed as crazy primitive despotic nomadic wack jobs that we can mow down and whom we need to bring up to speed from the 7th century per the Afghans and Iraqis. I read an article about 6 months ago that stated of all the immigrants who come to the USA, Iranians reach the highest levels of education and income earnings in the shortest time frame. ie. American born citizens interact with Iranians in all occupation levels and respect them as an immigrant group who are very productive "new Americans". It's not going to be so easy to convince Joe average public that we need to drop bombs in the middle of Tehren to "protect" America from these misguided/evil Taliban/Baathists/Sunnis whatever. Iranians are not virewed as any of the aforemenytioned.
2. And yes, if it offends your PC sensibility, too bad, but people that look like you are nore easy to empathize with/identify with. Haven't any of you taken basic marketing or intro psych classes? And golly gee, unless I'm mistaken, we fought Germany after its head of state declared war on us? Small technicality I know for folks like #4 who want to level Tehren per any given post they make.
3. Guns blazing is old, has been over used, and currently still in play in 2 war fronts.
4. Fat chance that Israel is going to be "accepted" by EU countries anytime soon. Read Haartz letters to the editor from Israelis citizens. Israelis themselves feel like they are pariahs of the world due to the anchronistic warrior actions of Sharon and the extremist settlers and the zealous American Jews who fund the latter from their comfy homes stateside. Israel needs to put Sharon in an old folks home and elect a new PM who is more sincere about getting the peace plan with Palestine done and over with and with no more silly games and finger pointing. The Palestinians are what they are and they will not get to be any better neighbors if Sharon screws them around on land he promised to give them. Sharon is Israel's worst PR man for gaining "acceptance" in the EU.
5. As I said before, the EU will likely have heads of state who are Muslims 50 years of now. They will have access to nukes in the EU anyway. You want to burn bridges irrevocably with Muslims by invading their countries hither and thither and yon now? Stupid short sighted thinking.
1. Iranians are not viewed as crazy primitive despotic nomadic wack jobs that we can mow down and whom we need to bring up to speed from the 7th century per the Afghans and Iraqis. I read an article about 6 months ago that stated of all the immigrants who come to the USA, Iranians reach the highest levels of education and income earnings in the shortest time frame. ie. American born citizens interact with Iranians in all occupation levels and respect them as an immigrant group who are very productive "new Americans". It's not going to be so easy to convince Joe average public that we need to drop bombs in the middle of Tehren to "protect" America from these misguided/evil Taliban/Baathists/Sunnis whatever. Iranians are not virewed as any of the aforemenytioned.
I, personally, view Iranians as a group as religious fanatic whack jobs. I have ever since they occupied the embassy in Teheran. I certainly sympathize with those who aren't, but I recognize the danger from those who are: ayatollahs, Basij, Iranian Hezbollah, Revolutionary Guards, and similar vermin.
2. And yes, if it offends your PC sensibility, too bad, but people that look like you are nore easy to empathize with/identify with. Haven't any of you taken basic marketing or intro psych classes? And golly gee, unless I'm mistaken, we fought Germany after its head of state declared war on us? Small technicality I know for folks like #4 who want to level Tehren per any given post they make.
You're looking at only a single incident. In the Great War we went off and fought the Hun, too, despite the fact that he looked a lot like we did. In the U.S. Civil War we fought each other. We looked so much alike we had to wear different uniforms to tell the sides apart. People who look like you are easier to empathize with, but even if they looked exactly like me, I'd want to fight back when they attacked us.
3. Guns blazing is old, has been over used, and currently still in play in 2 war fronts.
And will be on more. Bush is cleaning out the Augean stable, using the tools available.
4. Fat chance that Israel is going to be "accepted" by EU countries anytime soon. Read Haartz letters to the editor from Israelis citizens. Israelis themselves feel like they are pariahs of the world due to the anchronistic warrior actions of Sharon and the extremist settlers and the zealous American Jews who fund the latter from their comfy homes stateside. Israel needs to put Sharon in an old folks home and elect a new PM who is more sincere about getting the peace plan with Palestine done and over with and with no more silly games and finger pointing. The Palestinians are what they are and they will not get to be any better neighbors if Sharon screws them around on land he promised to give them. Sharon is Israel's worst PR man for gaining "acceptance" in the EU.
For feeling such revulsion and contempt for Sharon, the Israelis seem to given him a sufficient number of votes to keep him in office. Peres was ever so much more sincere than Sharon, and didn't accomplish as much.
5. As I said before, the EU will likely have heads of state who are Muslims 50 years of now. They will have access to nukes in the EU anyway. You want to burn bridges irrevocably with Muslims by invading their countries hither and thither and yon now? Stupid short sighted thinking.
Better to fight the bastards now than to take the cowardly way out and leave it to our grandchildren.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/16/2005 14:33 Comments ||
Top||
#22
I, personally, view Iranians as a group as religious fanatic whack jobs. I have ever since they occupied the embassy in Teheran
You are entitled to your opinion, but I think you are judging an entire nation based on one moment in history that occured 35 years ago. Then how can you accept Russians or Iraqis or Pakistanis or British, for that matter, as allies today which they appear to be in the WOT, if single historical events influence your judgement of peoples as a whole? I have a different opinion of Iranians based on American Iranians I know well - I have 2 physicians who are Iranians, my child's primary babysitter was Iranian, my child attends school with some Iranian students and based on my personal interactions, I hold Iranians in very high regard. I could never ever support the invasion of Iran - it would seem to me like we were bombing close friends and indeed we would probably be killing some relatives of the Iranians I know and respect.
For feeling such revulsion and contempt for Sharon, the Israelis seem to given him a sufficient number of votes to keep him in office.
I have no contempt for Sharon. I simply think he is the wrong leader for Israel at this juncture of their history. Sharon brings old vision to problem solving, like he brings combat boots to press conferences. Sharon is also making wild and crazy deals with Israeli Communists to stay in power and he's made bargains with God only knows what elements in Israel to keep himself and his son from being prosecuted for financial indescretions. Therefore, Sharon not only has old ideas but he "owes" too many people and that may cloud his judgement further. Sharon was a great General and Israel needed his mindset as a leader in the past, but now I think Israelis just want a future without continual battles and barricades and boycotts. They just want to get on with their lives and take their combat boots off. Sharon represents their past and not their future.
Better to fight the bastards now than to take the cowardly way out and leave it to our grandchildren.
Iranians are not our enemies now. The mullahs had nothing to do with 9/11. Iran is pretty insular - they just want to be left alone. Your grandchildren may well need the goodwill of Shiites in Iran and Iraq to fight the enemies on the horizon 50 years hence. China, N. Korea have enormous armies and China is quietly building its weaponry arsenal. Couple that with the Russkie Commies who never have given up their quiet dreams of world domination, and our grandchildren have their work cut out for them. What goof ups we do now with reckless actions could alienate potential future allies irrovacably.
I think liberalhawk has the right idea of how to get rid of the mullahs stranglehold on Iran - its to discretely support the restive Iranian intellectual and youth classes of society. However, I don't think sanctions are the answer. We would end up alienating the very Iranians classes we want to support by creating physical hardship for them. The mullahs will still be accessing 3 square meals and hot tub soaks sanctions or not.
Also, I think America needs to start engaging the current Iranian gov't in direct dialogue. How immature/'70's mindlock it is to have "intermediaries" act as our go-between emassaries with Iran? Please fast forward to the present, Mr. President. You need to deal with the reality of the gov't that faces you in Iran today and not be constrained by rigid arcane diplomacy. Having Putin and Chirac act as our intermediaries with Iran is the height of foolishness. We are contemplating going to war with a nation whose gov't we have never talked to directly and we are relying on 2 backstabbers to convey our messages -what's wrong with this picture???
#23
Elmer Fudd:
The people of Iran might not be our enemies, but the people of the Soviet Union weren't, either. Unfortunately, they don't get to decide policy.
Iran is at war with us (and Israel and free Iraq). 9/11 is not the only terrorist event worth mentioning. The Shoho, Ryujo, andZuiho had nothing to do with Pearl Harbor, either. Should we have let them go?
#25
Iran is at war with us (and Israel and free Iraq).
Iran has not declared war on America. Iran has never intruded on our air space,our shores, or violated our sovereignity.
Furthermore, there is no evidence whatsoever that Iran is part of the Sunni led insurgency in Iraq. Iraq's most influential cleric, Sistani, who is revered by 2/3 of free Iraqis is an Iranian himself. Sistani sought shelter and safety in Iran during Saddam's Baathist rule of Iraq. Why on earth would Iran want to cause trouble in the newly liberated Shiite ruled Iraq? Indeed, there have been few if any Iranians detained in the Iraq insurency - no small coincidence. Claiming that Iran is at war with "free" Iraq has no lrational, logical support.
Iran has not declared war on Israel, nor vice versa. Both countries have continued back and forth verbal tirades in recent years but that is the extent of it. Maybe you would like for Israel and Iran to have a war but I'm not so certain that the majority of Israelis or Iranians would share your desire for bloodshed - theirs, not yours - but of course it's so easy to call for war when a person has no personal risk at stake.
Do you think it's reasonable for a first world civilized nation like ourselves to support a war on a foreign nation like Iran that poses no threat to us when our president and his state officials cannot/will not even take the time or energy to speak to the leaders of Iran? How is such a war rational?
#27
Ha'aretz is the New York Times of Israel -- and both its journalists and its readers are just as likely as the NYT-ers to vote against their country and their government on any given issue... and feel superior to their countrymen as they do so.
If you want to have a better idea of what the generality of Israelis think (accepting that they feel more strongly about everything than Americans do -- Israeli politics is very much a full contact sport) try the Jerusalem Post (yes , you must register, but it's free, and they keep their list private).
And yes, Israelis accept that the majority of the world is so anti-Israel as to be antisemitic -- including the Western European nations. As more than half of Jewish Israelis now are descended from Middle Eastern and Sephardi Jews (intersecting, not identical, sets), not European/Ashkenazi Jews, the emotional thread tying Israel to Europe has been attenuating for the better part of a generation. I would be willing to bet that there are more Israeli Jews living in Los Angeles ("the climate is so like home!") than in all of Western Europe combined ... and there may well be more business contacts with the U.S. as well.
"What he did was simply impossible without the full cooperation of people outside his laboratory," said Michael May, director emeritus of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, a U.S. nuclear weapons facility in California. "It's inconceivable to me that he had this broad global network without people knowing about it, even Musharraf."
Posted by: john ||
05/16/2005 18:06 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
"Fairness, impartiality and objectivity are the essence of public service broadcast journalism. This understanding is enshrined in the BBC's charter and provides a key justification for the licence fee.
Now, however, an explosive insider's account threatens to blow this cosy assumption clean out of the water as a fraud upon the public. Robin Aitken, who spent his entire career as a BBC journalist, has written a book accusing the BBC of institutionalised leftism.
This is by no means the first time such an accusation has been levelled, but generally such critics have been dismissed as parti-pris. This is why Aitken's book, "Taking Sides: Bias at the BBC", is so significant.
For 25 years he chalked up solid experience across the board as a BBC reporter, covering some of the biggest stories of the day. In other words, he is BBC man through and through. So when someone like this lifts the lid on newsroom culture, it carries weight. And his message is that BBC journalism is as bent as a corkscrew."
Anti-U.S. cleric Muqtada al-Sadr came out from under a rock of hiding Monday for the first time since his fighters clashed with American forces in August, hollering and spraying spittle delivering a fiery speech demanding that coalition forces leave Iraq and that Saddam Hussein be punished.
"And I want a pony, too! A white one!"
Al-Sadr, the radical Shiite cleric whose militia battled U.S. forces in Baghdad and Najaf last year, held a press conference in his father's home in this holy Shiite Muslim city, 100 miles south of Baghdad. Al-Sadr criticized the American-led occupation and called for an immediate withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq. He also demanded punishment for Saddam, who brutally suppressed Shiites during his three-decade rule and now is being held in a U.S. military detention facility in Baghdad awaiting trial on war crimes charges. "I demand several things, including punishing Saddam and calling on the Iraqi government, religious movements and political factions to work hard to kick out the occupier," al-Sadr said. "I want the immediate withdrawal of the occupation forces."
Al-Sadr's reappearance coincides with mediation efforts involving Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Chalabi to get murder charges against the cleric dropped. An Iraqi judge has issued an arrest warrant charging al-Sadr and his key lieutenant, Riyadh al-Nouri, in the 2003 assassination of moderate cleric Abdul Majid al-Khoei. Al-Sadr also accused the United States of trying to foment a sectarian conflict, and he demanded the coalition release all detainees. "The occupier is trying to make up a sectarian war between the Sunnis and Shiites," al-Sadr said. "It is not acceptable to direct the allegations of ugly acts committed by the occupier against the Shiites, to the Sunnis, we also condemn and denounce all the terrorist acts."
He did not elaborate but apparently was referring to a spate of violence since the April 28 announcement of Iraq's new, Shiite-dominated government. More than 450 people have been killed in insurgent-related activity that has raised fears of an outbreak of a wider sectarian conflict. The pudgy burly, bearded cleric, usually clad in a robe and turban, wields wide support among young Shiites, particularly in Baghdad's impoverished Sadr City, the scene of fierce fighting last year between his militia, the Imam al-Mahdi Army and American forces.
May 16, 2005: India has decided to go after the senior leadership of the Maoist groups that are becoming more active in eastern India. While there are only about 4,000 armed Maoists, they operate in small groups of a dozen or so. Local police often treat the Maoist groups like bandits, if only because the Maoists often use extortion and robbery to maintain themselves. But the Maoists are also active politically, killing or threatening businessmen and landlords. This makes the Maoists popular with many poor people. By going after the leadership, the police avoid having civilians getting caught in the crossfire, and turning low level Maoist gunmen into martyrs. Maoists are growing stronger in several provinces, as their combination of class war and armed extortion keeps the organization growing, and in the black.
Posted by: Steve ||
05/16/2005 10:08:48 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This makes the Maoists popular with many poor people.
A little "Cultural Revolution" (AKA "Agonizing Reappraisal") will cure 'em of that shit.
#2
Unfortunately, mojo, the lesson won't take. Dead people don't pass on their experience, and, next generation, there will another mass of ignoranami who fall for it.
WND doing a Debka? This seems too alarmist to be credible, especially after the iranian EMP bomb...There's been plenty of mentions of the short shelve-life of such nukes, difficulty of care, etc, etc... by knowledgeable RBers, plus the fact that it would rather be used decisively instead of being nursed, but this meme (oh, big word!) has been around a long time, so who knows, perhaps better to keep an open mind?
Intel specialist alarmed by findings, non-findings of WMD Commission
WASHINGTON — There's a 50-50 chance al-Qaida already has nuclear weapons, says a top intelligence analyst based on an analysis of the findings and the methodology of the U.S. WMD Commission.
Lt. Col. Joseph C. Myers, an infantry and foreign area officer who has served at U.S. Southern Command and as the chief of the South America Division at the Defense Intelligence Agency, writes in the current issue of Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin that he was alarmed after analyzing the final report of the Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction.
Myers writes that the report "not only indicates that the state of our knowledge is worse than previously understood; but reading the commission's own evaluation of the intelligence analysis, information and circumstances in Afghanistan pre- and post invasion actually leads me to raise the probability that al-Qaida has a nuclear weapon from low to a moderate probability — 50-50. Far from allaying my fears, it heightened them."
Myers, who is a recipient of the National Intelligence Medal of Achievement, says the intelligence community's assessment downplaying the probability that al-Qaida has nuclear weapons is no more than a "best guess."
While U.S. intelligence agencies were encouraged that they did not find fissionable material, actual nuclear weapons or radiological materials in Afghanistan, they did find what Myers believes were training materials in the care and use of them.
"Documents found at sites used by al-Qaida operatives indicated that the group was interested in nuclear device design," said the report. "In addition, al-Qaida had established contact with Pakistani scientists who discussed development of nuclear devices that would require hard-to-obtain materials like uranium to create a nuclear explosion. ... In May 2002, technical experts from CIA and the Department of Energy judged that there remained no credible information that al-Qaida had obtained fissile material or acquired a nuclear weapon."
The report adds: "Analysts noted that collection efforts in Afghanistan had not yielded any radioactive material suitable for weapons, and that there were no credible reports of nuclear weapons missing from vulnerable countries."
"These are the most controversial lines in this chapter and where the commission report flounders," explains Myers.
He believes an alternative, equally valid, but less rosy conclusion based on the same data would be that "a select group of al-Qaida members, with support from nuclear weapons experts from somewhere were being trained on how to store, handle, transport, employ and detonate finished nuclear devices."
"Under this theory there would be no weapon development materials or radioactive traces found anywhere in Afghanistan," he writes. "These guys aren't physicists; they're operatives who needed only to know enough about the weapon to safely handle, employ and detonate it. The 'radiological material' — in the nuclear warhead — is of course, somewhere else."
While the commission concluded that the war in Afghanistan "confirmed two key intelligence judgments made before the September attacks: al-Qaida did not have a nuclear device, nor did it have large-scale chemical and biological weapons capabilities," Myers strenuously disagrees.
"Al-Qaida may not have had a nuclear weapon stored in Afghanistan," he explains. "But it does not confirm that they do not have access to a nuclear weapon stored elsewhere — for which their operatives inside Afghanistan were undergoing basic training for its use, being supported by outside experts."
Myers illustrates his alternative theory that al-Qaida operative may have been training for use of an already existing nuclear device with an analogy.
"If I were to take you to Fort Benning, Ga., the Home of the Infantry, and we go into a classroom, and in the room is a mock-up of an M-16 rifle, on the walls are 'exploded picture diagrams' of an M-16, charts on the firing and recoil cycle, how a bullet works, the explosive physics of gunpowder, sighting techniques — do you conclude that the people in this classroom have a research and development program to design and build an M-16 rifle?" he asks rhetorically. "Depending on other evidentiary factors, the presence of machine shops, metal-stamping facility and a production line you might. Or do you conclude that maybe the people are there to learn how to store, handle, employ and fire an M-16 rifle?"
As WorldNetDaily previously reported, an al-Qaida memo discovered by Pakistani authorities said if suicide bombers come to America, they are likely to be carrying biological, chemical or nuclear weapons with them.
In October 2002, WND first broke the story of al-Qaida's purchase of suitcase nukes. Paul Williams, an FBI consultant on international terrorism said then bin Laden's al-Qaida terrorist network purchased 20 suitcase nuclear weapons from former KGB agents in 1998 for $30 million.
His book, "Al Qaeda: Brotherhood of Terror," also says this deal was one of at least three in the last decade in which al-Qaida purchased small nuclear weapons or weapons-grade nuclear uranium.
Williams says bin Laden's search for nuclear weapons began in 1988 when he hired a team of five nuclear scientists from Turkmenistan. These were former employees at the atomic reactor in Iraq before it was destroyed by Israel, Williams says. The team's project was the development of a nuclear reactor that could be used "to transform a very small amount of material that could be placed in a package smaller than a backpack."
"By 1990 bin Laden had hired hundreds of atomic scientists from the former Soviet Union for $2,000 a month — an amount far greater than their wages in the former Soviet republics," Williams writes. "They worked in a highly sophisticated and well-fortified laboratory in Kandahar, Afghanistan."
Yossef Bodansky, author of "Bin Laden: The Man Who Declared War on America" and the U.S. Congress' top terrorism expert, concurs that bin Laden has already succeeded in purchasing suitcase nukes. Former Russian security chief Alexander Lebed also testified to Congress that 40 nuclear suitcases disappeared from the Russian arsenal after the collapse of the Soviet Union.
#2
Training materials are easy to get. I can find a russian book on nuclear weapons for dummies in our local base library. Getting the actual weapon is the hard part. I think that Al-qaida was doing homework, but we intrerupted them before they could take the test.
#3
I firmly believe that if Al Queda was close to having a nuke they would have held off on Sept 11 until they had one.
I believe if they had one then they would have used it and planned the airplanes as a second wave or something.
It's likely they were sold pinball machine parts or an old disfunctional nuke, maybe even enough crap to put together a dirty bomb, but they don't seem intelligent enough to build one, or to even keep a working one going long enough to transport it to target. Perhaps if they got a Russian military nuke but those are gonna be pretty old by now and they are not getting younger.
#5
If nukes were as easy to buy or steal as some reports suggest, then Libya, Iraq, Iran would have bought and tested one long ago.
These are nation states with huge financial and human resources and they cannot easily build or buy a bomb. Rag tag Abdul is supposed to have this ability?
Posted by: john ||
05/16/2005 16:06 Comments ||
Top||
#1
Interesting reflection of the power of the media to distort reality for their own ends (nothing sinister just crass commercialism). Bottom line is TV ad revenues drive suicide bombings.
#2
Bottom line is TV ad revenues drive suicide bombings.
They why do NPR, PBS, BBC, et.al. report them? And report them in their most positive ('insurgents vs. terrorists') terms??
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
05/16/2005 12:00 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Lamentable journalist diatribe, now porputing official manipulation journalism. It was what they made when photos from 911 and other Radical Islamic murder where squashed under carpet. Dont expect the Western vices and errors to receive the same treatment.
TOKYO - Japan should continue to support Palestine, both economically and politically, as it moves towards the establishment of an independent nation in a peaceful Middle East, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said.
Sounds like he wants to diversify his portfolio.
In an interview with Kyodo news agency on Sunday, at the start of a three-day trip to Japan that is the first such visit by any Palestinian leader in five years, Abbas said aid for rebuilding infrastructure was essential. "I hold expectations that Japan will continue its support for Palestine, not only financially, but also politically by playing a role that would contribute to the Middle East peace process," Abbas said, without giving further details.
Abbas is set to meet Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi late on Monday after meeting with political leaders in the first visit to Japan by a Palestinian leader since Yasser Arafat came in 2000. He leaves Japan on Tuesday for China and is due to meet US President George W. Bush on May 26 in Washington.
Japan has given Palestine $760 million in aid since 1993 since pinched by Arafat and Suha and an additional $60 million in special assistance following Arafat's death in November last year.
Posted by: Steve White ||
05/16/2005 00:04 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
So this is a shakedown of Japan?
I can't see any other reason for Japan to have anything to do with Paleostines.
Pakistan police brutality claim
Pakistani rights activists have accused the police of brutality after they used force to break up a rally in support of a mixed sex road race in Lahore. Nearly 30 people were briefly arrested on Saturday. A number were beaten before being taken away. Those assaulted and arrested include prominent activist Asma Jehangir, and protesters from Islamic parties. Police said the rights group Ms Jehangir leads had violated a ban on joint road races for men and women. Authorities banned women from taking part in such races after Islamic activists attacked runners at an event last month.
"It ain't Islamic for women to sweat!"
The BBC's Zaffar Abbas in Islamabad says the police action in Lahore was unexpectedly harsh, and has sent a wave of shock and anger through Pakistan's liberal political and social groups. According to one report, the policewomen who roughed up Ms Jehangir, chairwoman of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP), also used foul language and tore her clothes, before dumping her in a police van.
Other activists who were manhandled and detained included HRCP secretary general Iqbal Haider and prominent rights lawyer Hina Jilani. They were set free after several hours in custody. An HRCP statement said by using brute force to prevent a peaceful attempt at drawing attention to violence against women, the authorities had demonstrated their anti-women bias and contempt for basic rights. The statement went on to lament that such thuggish behaviour had increasingly become the norm - particularly in Lahore - as a means to prevent basic rights. On her release, Ms Jehangir said the police action had exposed the government's claim that it was pursuing a policy of liberalism and tolerance. "They do not want independent voices. They are a militaristic government, and they are a hard, dictatorial government," she told the BBC.
#3
I'm starting to come around to the idea of a Paleo state. Let them establish themselves as a state, with a flag, a President-for-life and a rubber-stamp parliament.
Then, come the next jihadi murder, it's by armed citizens of Palestine against Israel. That's causus belli and Israel can do a full-scale military invasion. "Collateral damage" goes out the (broken) window. War is hell, and such.
States are angry about new standards Congress has set for verifying the identity of driver's-license applicants, and some governors are considering a challenge. Under the Real ID Act states will have three years to comply with the new requirements after President George W. Bush signs it into law, which he is expected to do soon. If they don't agree, their licenses would not be accepted as identification by the federal government.
The driver's-license provisions were strongly opposed by the National Governors Association, the National Conference of State Legislatures, the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators and several civil-rights groups. The author, Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., argued the additional hassle of verification was a small price to pay to ensure that terrorists can't use licenses for identification as they did in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. "The REAL ID is vital to preventing foreign terrorists from hiding in plain sight while conducting their operations and planning attacks," he said. "By targeting terrorist travel, the REAL ID will assist in our war on terror efforts to disrupt terrorist operations and help secure our borders."
To me, that makes sense, given the propensity we've seen of Paks and Yemenis to knock out false passports for every occasion...
The Senate gave final passage to the provisions as an attachment to an $82 million funding bill for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The legislation passed the House last week. Critics have called the legislation an effort to enlist state authorities as immigration police, which they say is a federal responsibility. Others have called it the first step toward a national identification card. In his reaction, Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, vice chairman of the governors association, said they were concerned about the federal legislation, which enters an area of responsibility that has been the state's alone for more than 100 years. "This could force entry-level state employees to do the work of INS agents while requiring states to enforce federal immigration laws the federal government doesn't have the will to enforce," he said.
#1
Just make the state liable for issuing valid IDs to illegals of any type. If the individual harms another citizen or his/her property while utilizing said ID, then the state is the one who pays [cause the illegal is very unlikely to have the resources to make good]. As soon as the state treasury starts sucking a big one on the already stressed budget for education, health, safety, etc., you bitcha that the states will act quickly to make the MVD something other than the armpit of bureaucratic administration.
#2
Huckabee can STFU - Tyson Chicken, a major amigo to Arkansas is pulling his strings. Motives for opposing (other than the paraoia shown last week on RB by one who shall not be named) should be looked at, hard, for they range from open-borders types who would like to see Atzlan return, Big-business, who put bottom line ahead of national interests, politicians who'll whore for any vote, and the racial hucksters....
Posted by: Frank G ||
05/16/2005 10:31 Comments ||
Top||
#3
This has got to go through and quickly. I can give a personal example of how nutty State licensing can be.
I was living in England as an expat. My last US address had been California and I had a California license (much like Osama has). I had my wallet stolen in Belgium on a golf trip (another story). I wrote a letter and faxed it to California asking for a replacement (even though it had already expired). Since it was within one year the rules were to give me a replacement. But I no longer lived or had an address in California. My address was in London, England. But that did not deter the DMV in California - they sent me a replacement DL (and within only 10 days!!) with my London, England address on it. I would show it to cop friends when I came back to the states (post 9/11) and they couldn't believe it. So, its possible, Fred, that Osama does have a California DL except the address on it is No. 7 Jamallah Blvd, Peshawar, Pakistan.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
05/16/2005 11:54 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Frank G: As the "paranoid other who should not be named", allow me to be the first to ask you to not hide behind a pseudonym any more, like a paranoid. We are all friends here. You can trust us, just like you trust the US government. So please, let us know your real name and address. What harm could be in that? Unless, of course, you are nefariously hiding something, like a possible membership in al-Qaeda, or your status as an illegal alien, or your fear that someone might abuse your personal information, which clearly indicates that you are some kind of law violator. Otherwise, we HAVE to assume that you have paranoid delusions, by your own lights. If you can trust the government so very much, you should trust us too. (Personally, I don't want the multitude of layers, departments, offices, bureaus, and bureaucracies of government to know much about me at all, not because of paranoia, but because of the realization that nobody, *nobody*, wants information about you for *your* benefit.) But you might not grasp that, being the trusting type. So I await your unimportant personal information. Will you oblige, or if not, then why?
#5
I think the Real ID is a past due idea, too. A DL is all you need to register to vote in my state, too, allowing voter fraud, as you only need a utility bill for proof of residency and SS #'s are not required because of ID theft. My mother was born at home on the farm, without a hospital birth certificate, and had a LOT of trouble proving she is an American citizen even after working for most of her 67 years just so she could fly to California or get on Amtrak. Proof of citizenship with biometric guest worker cards would help put the onus of proof on foreigners and protect Americans without using a national ID card.
#6
I think we need something like Real-ID to prevent voter fraud. I feel its is a necessary evil.
How much you want to bet Washington State (where the governor former AG was elected by felons, the dead, and imaginary friends) is on the list of states to challenge. Her 'election reform' is to allow any sort of id (utility bills, etc..) to get you a DL and register to vote.
I think the solution here is to tie it to federal funding. No 'real id' no federal funds for transportation, education, etc...
Leaders of madrassas (Islamic seminaries) said on Sunday that they would not allow the government or anyone else to interfere in madrassa matters such as their syllabi and examination system.
It also said they would not accept the imposition of embargos to fulfil the agenda of the West. "Religious schools weren't involved in any kind of politics or terrorism and they don't want to fight the government, but they want it to accept their demands through dialogue because religious schools will not accept any imported philosophy in the name of so-called enlightened moderation," the declaration added. Syllabi reforms in madrassas would continue because they (madrassa leaders) believed that teachers in religious schools had the capability to teach conventional education, it said, adding that madrassas would also not accept the government's financial assistance at any stage.
"We get enough money from Arabia, thengyubellymush..."
Earlier, in his welcome address, Qari Hanif Jullandry, coordination secretary of the Ittehad-e-Tanzimat-e-Madaris-e-Deeniya (ITMD), said ITMD leaders were talking to the government about giving the status of education boards to the five Wafaqs. "Though the government isn't accepting our demands, we still believe in resolving issues through dialogue," he added. "We demand the government to accept our degrees equalling Matric, FA and BA," he said. Pakistan's religious leaders wanted to be on good terms with the international community, but on the basis of equality and justice, he said, adding that during 2004 as many as 54,000 students — 10,000 being female — appeared in the hifz (learn the Quran by rote) exam. He also said 10,000 students had become religious scholars in one year.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/16/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
LAHORE: Talaba-e-Jamatud Dawa will organise a series of seminars from May 17 to June 4 against liberalism, secularism and the establishment of the Aga Khan Education Board, said the organisation's president Hameeedul Hassan on Sunday. Talabe-e-Jamatul Dawa is the student wing of Jamatud Dawa,a religious organistion headed by Hafiz Saeed.
Jamatud Dawa is the parent organization of Lashkar-e-Taiba. Hafiz Saeed's a raving lunatic...
... but does he have any distinguishing behavior ...
Hassan and Asif Khurshid, the organisation's information secretary, said in a press conference that the Aga Khan Board followed America's agendas and it should not be allowed to make decisions about academic syllabi. They said that seminars would raise awareness about Islam, fundamentalism and anti-liberalism. A seminar will be held in Lahore on June 2.
This article starring:
ASIF KHURSHID
Talaba-e-Jamatud Dawa
HAFIZ SAID
Jamatud Dawa
HAMIEDUL HASAN
Talaba-e-Jamatud Dawa
Jamatud Dawa
Talaba-e-Jamatud Dawa
Posted by: Fred ||
05/16/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
but does he have any distinguishing behavior ..
Having such a huge private army makes him quite a distinguished lunatic
Posted by: Paul Moloney ||
05/16/2005 0:07 Comments ||
Top||
#2
when they have these hate fests... Are there free eats and drinks? If not... maybe somebody should provide lots of electric kool-aide.
#3
I think that would be unislamic 3dc so it's a fine idea. Just have to figure a way to intoduce it. With some of these fellas they might not even notice it though they are that wigged out on allan.
#4
Yeah I know (sigh) but it would make the whole even much more entertaining for the rest of us to observe. Hell might even make the evening entertainment (er News).
#9
Ahh, it's the Trail of Turds, Pappy. I am given to understand that those less enlightened may follow this path to Liberal Nirvana.
Since the story offers nothing of substance in support of the Aga Khan Education Board actually being a liberal or sane entity (i.e. in PakiWakiLand to be anything less than a raving lunatic qualifies for such attacks and vilification) I recommend a Pooper-Scooper. They might only be as insane as MMA, for example.
The Nitwits of Doom are mighty particular folks and demand a higher insanity threshold to pass muster.
Fred: Note on following the embedded search links, I just received this when clicking on the Aga Khan Ed Bd:
Parse error: parse error in C:web
antburgwwwpgrecentorg.php on line 23
The government has got a fatwa (decree) signed by religious scholars of all Islamic sects declaring suicide attacks on places of worship forbidden in Islam. "The fatwa has been signed by hundreds of religious scholars of all sects and will be announced on Tuesday," Dr Aamer Liaquat Hussain, minister of state for religious affairs, told Daily Times.
Yep. That oughta take care of that little problem...
President Pervez Musharraf had assigned Dr Hussain to get a 'comprehensive decree' from clerics of all Islamic sects in an attempt to develop harmony among people of various sects and religions."It took Dr Hussain around five months to get this fatwa signed," an official based in Islamabad said.
Obviously it has widespread support among the scholars...
He obviously knows Senator Frist ...
"Those who plan and carry out such attacks are involved in anti-Islam and anti-humanity acts," it says. The minister finally got this document signed by the clerics on Friday and has decided to announce it on Tuesday. Prominent among those who have signed the fatwa are Mufti Munibur Rehman (Barelvi), Hafiz Mohammad Salafi (Ahl-e-Hadith) and Allama Riaz Hussain Najafi (Shia) while Deobandi scholars who have signed the document included Maulana Asad Thanvi, Mufti Usman Yar Khan, Maulana Gul Naseer Hashmi and Hanif Jallandhry. "I have signed the fatwa and totally agree with its contents," Mufti Munibur Rehman told Daily Times.
Those aren't, we might point out, the biggest names in Pakistani Islam...
Interestingly, prominent Deobandi scholar Mufti Taqi Usmani did not sign the fatwa despite repeated efforts by the government.
"Nope. Nope. Ain't gonna do it. Booms are Islamic. Everybody knows that!"
Officials said he had by and large seen the fatwa in the global perspective instead of seeing it in the context of Pakistan. "We have drafted the fatwa in the manner that it condemns suicide bombings in Pakistan and not anywhere else," said Dr Hussain. Most Deobandi scholars support suicide bombings in Palestine and Iraq, and say those involved in such acts are fighting usurpers and occupation forces.
This article starring:
AAMER LIAQUAT HUSEIN
Learned Elders of Islam
ASAD THANVI
Learned Elders of Islam
GUL NASIR HASHMI
Learned Elders of Islam
HAFIZ MOHAMAD SALAFI
Learned Elders of Islam
HANIF JALLANDHRY
Learned Elders of Islam
MUNIBUR REHMAN
Learned Elders of Islam
RIAZ HUSEIN NAJAFI
Learned Elders of Islam
TAQI USMANI
Learned Elders of Islam
USMAN YAR KHAN
Learned Elders of Islam
Posted by: Fred ||
05/16/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
âWe have drafted the fatwa in the manner that it condemns suicide bombings in Pakistan and not anywhere else,â
So, the ROW is suppose to take hits from them but be denied the snarky laugh at their fratricide?
#2
condemns suicide bombings in Pakistan and not anywhere else
Wow. A solution with the wisdom of Saudis Solomon. The Saudi funded madrassa educations are really paying off.
Posted by: ed ||
05/16/2005 7:19 Comments ||
Top||
#3
So it took 5 months and probably thousands of staff hours to come up with a fatwa that only bans suicide attacks against places of worship in one country.
#5
They didn't say attacks on places of worship were forbidden, just suicide attacks. So detonating a car bomb outside the mosque, then machine gunning the people when they run out is still ok.
Posted by: Steve ||
05/16/2005 10:58 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Ah, mental midgets muftis articulate the breathtaking beauty of Paki religious intellectual culture. There are so many unanswered questions left in the wake of this fatwa. Aspiring Jihadis and sociopathic murderers need to know the rules governing their conduct. Is the fatwa retroactive so as to deny the 72 trolls to pre fatwa boomers? No boom boom now but non-suicide attacks still fall in that happy grey area? How is "suicide" defined? Is it by the reasonable jihadi or average Paki Mahmood standard? Do you have to intend to die in the attack? If you engage in an attack from which you cannot reasonably expect to withdraw or escape safely is it "suicide"? What is the "place of worship"? Is it up to ten feet from the front doors? Does it include a place where apostates (we kkeeeeel you) are or only if and where they worship and only at such times that they worship? If a religious leader is present and engaged in worship away from a mosque or temple can that make any place one of worship? What are the bounds of such a place of worship? Does ignorance of the fatwa relieve a boomer of responsibility for violating the fatwa? etc etc etc
India's Prime Minister Manmohan Singh will visit Washington in July for talks with President George W. Bush on defense purchases and nuclear cooperation, a newspaper report said Sunday. The Bush administration has offered New Delhi an upgraded version of the F-16 fighter jets and to explore the setting up of nuclear power plants to meet India's burgeoning energy needs, The Indian Express reported. While Singh's government is amenable to the idea of improving India-US cooperation, the prime minister will have to work hard to convince his coalition partners belonging to different communist parties about closer defense and energy ties with Washington, the newspaper said.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/16/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
the prime minister will have to work hard to convince his coalition partners belonging to different communist parties about closer defense and energy ties with Washington
Oh, I don't know about that - how about saying two words: Pakistan, F-16's.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
05/16/2005 11:44 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Either we supply 'em, or the Russians do. Which gives us more influence in the region?
#3
India's more important to our 21st c foreign policy objectives than France and Germany combined. Time to shift attention and resources to this crucial swing power.
#4
France is in the running as well with the Mirage 2000-5. Russia has the Mig 29 (which would be upgraded (like India's Su-30s) with French, Israeli and Indian equipment and weapons.
While India can build both heavy water reactors and fast breeder reactors, it has a shortage of uranium ore and would welcome the chance to purchase fuel from outside the country.
It would also like to purchase some of the large General Electric light water reactors. These American reactors would each provide about double the power of one of their own CANDU derived reactors.
Posted by: john ||
05/16/2005 16:18 Comments ||
Top||
Course description: Through this course you will learn how a+b=c. See the irrefutable logic in the new, improved formula: "Hamas must be part of the peace process" plus "Hamas has a militant (terrorist) arm" equals "terrorism must be part of the peace process".
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.
Yemeni President 
Two former officers of a U.S.-based Islamic charity were indicted on federal charges accusing them of lying to authorities investigating the charity's alleged ties to terrorist organizations. 
May 16, 2005: India has decided to go after the senior leadership of the Maoist groups that are becoming more active in eastern India. While there are only about 4,000 armed Maoists, they operate in small groups of a dozen or so. Local police often treat the Maoist groups like bandits, if only because the Maoists often use extortion and robbery to maintain themselves. But the Maoists are also active politically, killing or threatening businessmen and landlords. This makes the Maoists popular with many poor people. By going after the leadership, the police avoid having civilians getting caught in the crossfire, and turning low level Maoist gunmen into martyrs. Maoists are growing stronger in several provinces, as their combination of class war and armed extortion keeps the organization growing, and in the black.
States are angry about new standards Congress has set for verifying the identity of driver's-license applicants, and some governors are considering a challenge. Under the 
LAHORE: 
The government has got a fatwa (decree) signed by religious scholars of all Islamic sects declaring suicide attacks on places of worship forbidden in Islam. "The fatwa has been signed by hundreds of religious scholars of all sects and will be announced on Tuesday," Dr 
India's Prime Minister 
