Hi there, !
Today Fri 08/03/2007 Thu 08/02/2007 Wed 08/01/2007 Tue 07/31/2007 Mon 07/30/2007 Sun 07/29/2007 Sat 07/28/2007 Archives
Rantburg
531696 articles and 1855971 comments are archived on Rantburg.

Today: 79 articles and 432 comments as of 13:24.
Post a news link    Post your own article   
Area: WoT Operations    Non-WoT    Opinion    Local News       
Taleban kill second SKorean hostage
Today's Headlines
Headline Comments [Views]
Page 2: WoT Background
1 00:00 Blackbeard Fleamble1158 [3] 
5 00:00 Iblis [3] 
0 [3] 
0 [3] 
17 00:00 Zenster [4] 
8 00:00 Palfrey [3] 
0 [4] 
9 00:00 BA [3] 
8 00:00 BA [3] 
1 00:00 Frank G [3] 
14 00:00 Old Patriot [3] 
1 00:00 USN, Ret. [3] 
1 00:00 Glenmore [3] 
0 [3] 
0 [3] 
0 [3] 
12 00:00 Sigmund Freud [4] 
0 [4] 
14 00:00 gromgoru [3] 
6 00:00 Palfrey [3] 
5 00:00 JDB [3] 
1 00:00 Jack is Back! [3] 
0 [3] 
Page 1: WoT Operations
0 [4]
7 00:00 Zhang Fei [4]
0 [3]
6 00:00 Zenster [4]
16 00:00 Tony (UK) [3]
4 00:00 Jack is Back! [3]
7 00:00 Palfrey [3]
18 00:00 Pappy [4]
6 00:00 Pappy [6]
0 [4]
3 00:00 Old Patriot [3]
0 [4]
1 00:00 Glenmore [3]
7 00:00 Ptah [3]
6 00:00 3dc [4]
Page 3: Non-WoT
4 00:00 JosephMendiola [4]
3 00:00 GK [3]
10 00:00 Anonymoose [4]
18 00:00 Broadhead6 [4]
0 [3]
3 00:00 Seafarious [3]
3 00:00 USN, Ret. [3]
1 00:00 anonymous5089 [3]
8 00:00 AzCat [3]
18 00:00 Pappy [5]
0 [3]
14 00:00 trailing wife [4]
29 00:00 OldSpook [4]
4 00:00 sofia [3]
0 [3]
4 00:00 USN, Ret. [3]
2 00:00 Skunky Glins5285 [3]
0 [3]
18 00:00 Tony (UK) [3]
1 00:00 trailing wife [3]
5 00:00 Alaska Paul [3]
0 [3]
Page 4: Opinion
6 00:00 eLarson [4]
0 [3]
2 00:00 Zenster [4]
5 00:00 Ptah [3]
6 00:00 trailing wife [3]
Page 5: Russia-Former Soviet Union
4 00:00 Xenophon [4]
3 00:00 USN, Ret. [3]
2 00:00 JosephMendiola [4]
3 00:00 Sigmund Freud [4]
11 00:00 xbalanke [3]
1 00:00 Spats Gligum8420 [4]
2 00:00 bigjim-ky [3]
14 00:00 Zenster [5]
2 00:00 Pappy [4]
11 00:00 Parabellum [3]
8 00:00 tu3031 [3]
14 00:00 DepotGuy [3]
7 00:00 bigjim-ky [3]
2 00:00 Besoeker [3]
Africa Horn
Eritrean Gummint sending missiles to Somalia
(SomaliNet) According to a UN monitoring group on consistent violations of an arms embargo, huge quantities of arms are reaching Islamic insurgents in Somalia such as surface-to-air missiles from Eritrea. UN’s recent report to its Security Council, published by the United Nations, says Somalia is awash with more arms than at any time since the early 1990s when dictator Mohamed Siad Barre was overthrown and the northeast African country was thrown into anarchy.

According to a report, most weapons have been brought into Somalia via clandestine routes and many have reached the Shabab, the fighting wing of the militant Islamic Courts Union. "Huge quantities of arms have been provided to the Shabab by and through Eritrea," the report said, adding the Islamists had "an unknown number of surface-to-air missiles, suicide belts and explosive with timers and detonators."

Eritrea has denied sending the weapons, particularly the surface-to-air missiles. But the report showed pictures from a video of the fighters carrying SA-18 missiles, which were used against a Belarus aircraft that had made an emergency landing in Mogadishu, the capital.

The monitoring group in April also showed a Security Council sanctions committee, headed by South African Ambassador Dumisani Kumalo, a video of the actual firing of the missile, which it said was part of a consignment of six SA-18s that had been delivered by Eritrea.

Eritrea is the archrival of Ethiopia, and diplomats say the two have been waging a proxy war in Somalia since last year when Asmara backed a hard-line Islamist movement against the country's fragile government. Ethiopia sent in troops to support the government and dislodge the Islamists from Mogadishu.

The monitoring group said a chartered Boeing 707 cargo plane, owned by Aerogem Aviation Ltd, based in Ghana, had made at least 13 trips from Asmara to Mogadishu, sometimes filing false flight plans. But the flights were confirmed by the International Civil Aviation Organisation, the report said.

A letter in the report by Eritrea's UN ambassador, Araya Desta, said the accusations were "fabricated" and part of a "subtle disinformation campaign" to cover up Ethiopian "adventurism."
"Lies! All lies!"
Ethiopia is also not exempt from the arms embargo, even though the United Nations and the African Union support the government. Ethiopia, in its letter, said its weapons were legal because it "has been involved in Somalia at the invitation of the legitimate and international recognised Transitional Federal Government."

Despite defeats by the Ethiopians, Shabab, which attacks Ethiopian and government troops regularly, has hidden weapons caches for future use and has scattered their fighters, the report said. Other weapons have found their way through arms dealers operating in a large arms market in Mogadishu, which sells to warlords scattered in central and southern Somalia and "is doing a brisk and lucrative business in arms sales."
Posted by: Steve White || 07/31/2007 00:00 || Comments || Link || [3 views] Top|| File under: Islamic Courts


Africa North
Gadhafi's Torture Prison
Long, but well worth the read; rape, torture, forced confessions,... and that loon used that to actually get himself rewarded by the EU and sarko???

What's infuriating is that twice gaddh'af'fi (or whatever you spell it)'s sons were caught red-handed by the police in France, one after DUI-ing the wrong way on the Champs Elysées, his bodyguards brawling with the cops, and one in an hotel after the police was called in because he was beating on a girlfriend, with illegal guns being found in the rooms... and twice, they got away scot free, despite having no diplomatic immunity at all. So, ghad'affhy's spawns are above the law, but that petty dictator of that miserable, failed, arabo-socialist sh*thole of a country gets to bully kufrs at will. Damn.

Posted by: anonymous5089 || 07/31/2007 11:22 || Comments || Link || [3 views] Top|| File under:


Arab body urges Bulgaria to respect Libyan accord
"Do as you are told, kufrs!"
CAIRO (Rooters) - The Arab League urged Bulgaria on Monday to respect a deal with Libya after the European country released six innocent medics wrongly jailed by Libya for infecting hundreds of children with the HIV virus.

Libya on Saturday called on other Arab League members to review their ties with Bulgaria for pardoning and releasing the medics on arrival there, a step which it said violated bilateral accords.

The Arab ministers demanded that the Bulgarian government "meet its commitments and pledges based on the judicial accord between the two countries", said Abderraouf Basti, the head of the Tunisian delegation, reading from the final communique of a meeting of Arab foreign ministers. The ministers also expressed their "regret that such a human tragedy which must not be repeated and whose perpetrators must be punished ... is being politicised".
A reasonable person might read that as a criticism of Libya, but I'm comfortably certain the Arab ministers didn't mean that.
Libya had commuted death sentences on five Bulgarian nurses and a Palestinian doctor to life in prison after the families of the victims were paid $1 million each in bloodmoney ransom a settlement financed by an international fund.

In a subsequent deal, the European Union promised closer ties with Libya in exchange for custody of the five Bulgarian nurses and one Palestinian doctor, who were flown to Bulgaria this week and immediately pardoned and freed by the president. Bulgarian officials said the pardon was legal.
Posted by: anonymous5089 || 07/31/2007 08:53 || Comments || Link || [3 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Arab body urges Bulgaria to respect Libyan accord

Maybe a little more torture would bring them around. It seems to have worked for the nurses.
Posted by: SteveS || 07/31/2007 9:30 Comments || Top||

#2  yeah, straightens em right up.
Posted by: bigjim-ky || 07/31/2007 10:58 Comments || Top||

#3  Oooh, the Arab League's "demanding".
It's so cute when they do that. Like a 2 month old puppy barking at you.
Posted by: tu3031 || 07/31/2007 11:07 Comments || Top||

#4  Pushing the Bulgars sounds like a bad idea to me.
Posted by: mojo || 07/31/2007 11:38 Comments || Top||

#5  Now, assuming those children actually were infected, how did the infection really happen? Because I'm having a hard time believing it was caused by Bulgarian nurses. Are we entirely certain they weren't set aside so Q'Daffy and his boyz could use/abuse them? Just asking.
Posted by: Abu Uluque6305 || 07/31/2007 12:10 Comments || Top||

#6  French doctors and other investigators determined the HIV pandemic started well BEFORE the medics even set foot in lybia, based on DNA testing of the virus, and believe the spread was due to the horrible lack of hygiena in lybian hospitals (re-used needles, aids-tainted blood for transfusions,...). Also, don't forget that while this is a taboo, aids is quite present in north africa, if only in part due to the sexual repression (many young girls engaging in prostitution, pedophilia havens in morocco, prevalence of unprotected anal sex among teens to preserve virginity, closet homosexuality).
Posted by: anonymous5089 || 07/31/2007 12:22 Comments || Top||

#7  I wonder what it would take to infest the Arab League with HIV? Sounds like a winner to me.
Posted by: Jack is Back! || 07/31/2007 16:54 Comments || Top||

#8  I sense the presence of Dave D.
Posted by: Palfrey || 07/31/2007 18:57 Comments || Top||


German opposition to French-Libyan nuclear deal unabated
German opposition mounted Saturday to French President Nicolas Sarkozy's new venture on the world stage in agreeing to build a nuclear reactor in Libya, despite efforts by Paris to reassure Berlin. The French government on Friday had sought to allay German fears of "recklessness" by assuring Berlin that all guarantees had been taken with regard to nuclear non-proliferation.

The French-Libyan accord, which envisions building a nuclear reactor for a water desalination plant, is "a bitter pill for the EU."
The French-Libyan accord, which envisions building a nuclear reactor for a water desalination plant, is "a bitter pill for the EU," said Ruprecht Polenz, conservative head of the foreign affairs committee in the lower house of the German parliament, the Bundestag, in the newspaper Tagesspiegel am Sonntag.

Polenz said the deal that Sarkozy signed Wednesday in Tripoli would weaken the European Union's ability to take action in foreign politics. In addition, Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi, "a dictator with unlimited powers", remains a "security risk for all those who have anything to do with his country," Polenz said.

The German lawmaker added that in light of the ongoing conflict with Iran over its nuclear programme, it was "very naive to now give Kadhafi such an advantage, compared to Tehran."

The only guarantee "that uranium will not be used for military purposes in the country" is that Libya is supposed to return to France all used fuel, he said.

German officials were also opposed to the deal on environmental grounds, as Germany has a strong anti-nuclear lobby and plans to phase out nuclear power by 2020.

Before finalising the deal with Libya, "France must immediately consult with the European Union, Germany and the IAEA," referring to the UN nuclear watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency, said German Eurodeputy Elmar Brok in the Frankfurter Rundschau newspaper.

Sarkozy signed the memorandum on building a nuclear reactor the day after Tripoli freed six foreign medics from jail after an eight-year ordeal. Sarkozy's wife Cecilia had participated in the final negotiations. Brok also commented on that saying the medics' release "was not due to the work of the Sarkozy family alone but also the concerted effort of all the European Union."
Posted by: lotp || 07/31/2007 00:00 || Comments || Link || [3 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Sarkozy has gone off his rocker in only his first few months. Why would he want to impress Libya and depress everyone else (EU, USA, etc.) not to forget Israel. Of all the nut cases out there who absolutely, positively doesn't need a nuke is Mohamar Qaddafi. When its finished I wonder if Sarkozy will give us fly over permission for our B2's to bomb the damn thing?
Posted by: Jack is Back! || 07/31/2007 16:57 Comments || Top||


Maghreb countries 'agree joint strategy' against al-Qaeda
Algiers, 30 July (AKI) - The countries of the Maghreb - Algeria Tunisia, Morocco, Libya and Mauritania - appear to be overcoming the divisions between them that have hampered the development of a region-wide strategy to combat al-Qaeda . Algerian interior minister, Noureddin Zarhaouni, told Algerian state radio that a joint security initiative involving all the countries has been agreed to. The aim of the plan is to fight the newborn "al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb" - a formation which claims to unite groups across North Africa that are loyal to the terror network's agenda - and prevent new terrorist attacks in the region.

The organisation claimed responsibility for the 11 April bomb attacks that killed 30 people in Algiers and of 19 other attacks in Algerian territory between April and June. Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb was formed earlier this year from the ashes of the old Salafite Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC) .

The news was given by the interior minister on the sidelines of a weekend visit by the Algerian president Abdelaziz Bouteflika, to the province of Mustaghanim, 400 kilometres west of the capital Algiers. The accord, of which no details have been provided, follows the threats issued via the Internet by the self-proclaimed leader of al-Qaeda in the region Abu Musab Abdel Wudud, of a series of suicide bomb attacks in the region.
Posted by: || 07/31/2007 00:00 || Comments || Link || [3 views] Top|| File under: al-Qaeda in North Africa


Arabia
Bush faces stiff opposition to Saudi arms deal
might as well get some of those oil revenues back in US coffers, I suppose ...
Posted by: lotp || 07/31/2007 00:00 || Comments || Link || [3 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Opposing this arms deal is the most idiotic thing we could do. This is a perfect example of Americans having their heads squarely where the sun doesn't shine.

First of all, if WE don't give them the weapons, someone else will and second of all, they already HAVE billions and billions of dollars worth of US weapons. They are practically US armed from head to toe anyway.

If we need help against Iran, I want people with the best arms available on our side.
Posted by: crosspatch || 07/31/2007 1:38 Comments || Top||

#2  Have a look at what Iran is looking to buy from Russia.
Posted by: crosspatch || 07/31/2007 2:47 Comments || Top||

#3  Your point is well made, crosspatch. However, I would rather not have the Saudis in possession of recent upgrades to our more sophisticated weaponry. Keeping them addicted to American hardware is just fine. Allowing them to hawk off our latest arms designs to the highest enemy bidder is another matter entirely. Do you trust the Saudis not to?
Posted by: Zenster || 07/31/2007 5:55 Comments || Top||

#4  It's hard to get warm fuzzy feelings about the Saudis. Nearly all of the 911 terrorists were from SA. My reservations center around the Saudis luke warm efforts towards the WoT and the degree to which they are allies. Moreover, the house of Saud is corrupt and duplicitous. Strategically, it might be a good move to sandwich Iran; I'd just like to see more from them.
Posted by: JohnQC || 07/31/2007 9:37 Comments || Top||

#5  It comes down to balance-counter balance. Do you believe we can counter Iran and the Shia of the world by ourselves and allies in the west (i.e. UK, Australia) or do you believe we need some Arab/Turkish help? Of course, Israel is nervous about this but look at Gulf War One - the Saudi's let us in and supported uprooting Saddam. Sunni against secular Sunni. I believe we need to get the Saudi's firmly on our side vis a vis Iran and their form of political theocracy. Saudis have done terrible harm with their promoting wahabi-ism don't get me wrong but sometimes you have to lay down with dogs to get fleas.
Posted by: Jack is Back! || 07/31/2007 17:03 Comments || Top||

#6  Perhaps the cousins could see fit to sell a carrier to Jordan, this would even things up and provide much chew meat. If not a carrier, why then several Spruances.

Are you familiar with the Barbie Doll Bomb? It is often wise to send your hated neighbor a basic Barbie. Many hugs you will get, and bills for them.
Posted by: Palfrey || 07/31/2007 19:01 Comments || Top||


Down Under
Mohamed Haneef 'was told to flee in webchat'
Posted by: Oztralian || 07/31/2007 18:24 || Comments || Link || [3 views] Top|| File under: Takfir wal-Hijra

#1  He even looks like a chicken thief.
Posted by: Blackbeard Fleamble1158 || 07/31/2007 19:49 Comments || Top||


Australian Indian community demands Govt. apology over Haneef case
Posted by: Oztralian || 07/31/2007 00:00 || Comments || Link || [3 views] Top|| File under: Global Jihad

#1  Lemme see, when was the last time the australian community (that is, white, at least nominally christian and not foreign born) in Australia demanded govt apology after a botched arrest? Why should there be double standards, with some "communities" (barf) having some privileges others don't enjoy? Oh, I forget, this is tranzi playbook, with minorities rule and victimhood-based demands. I hope they get a resounding "sod off, mates".
Posted by: anonymous5089 || 07/31/2007 3:14 Comments || Top||

#2  Dr. Mohamed Haneef ain't no Snow White. Some very curious chat room exchanges preceded his attempt to flee Australia with a one-way ticket.
Posted by: Zenster || 07/31/2007 5:20 Comments || Top||

#3  Probably trying to cow the government into not even thinking about arresting a terrorist unless he's already blown something up.
Posted by: gorb || 07/31/2007 5:41 Comments || Top||

#4  "Piss off." was the first thought to spring to my mind.

BTW the Indian community in my neck of the woods is Sikh and I reckon they'd say the same thing. After all they were pretty pissed off with being mistaken for muslims after 9/11
Posted by: Gladys || 07/31/2007 6:28 Comments || Top||

#5  Any chance the guy really is 'innocent', and the whole deal was something he cooked up in the wake of the British attacks in order to get himself arrested so he could proclaim his, and all Islam's, 'victimhood?'
Posted by: Glenmore || 07/31/2007 7:13 Comments || Top||

#6  Yo, Glenmore, read the other article I posted about Haneef's chat room activities. Be sure to hit all the links.

"The brother added that 'auntie' told him that brother Kafeel used it in some sort of protest over there," Andrews said, in a reference to the UK bombing accused Kafeel Ahmed.

Evidently, Dr. Haneef is related to one of the Glasgow airport attackers. Given how terrorism runs in the family, I'd bet the farm that this maggot is guilty as sin.

Posted by: Zenster || 07/31/2007 14:25 Comments || Top||

#7  Haneef and the one he gave his SIM card to are close cousins, Zenster, and their families live near one another back in India.
Posted by: trailing wife || 07/31/2007 18:12 Comments || Top||

#8  *stomp*

And a Pony TOO, dam#it!

*stomp*
Posted by: BA || 07/31/2007 21:13 Comments || Top||


Europe
Immigrant fined for insulting the Dutch queen
A magistrate in Amsterdam sentenced 47-year-old Regilio A. on Monday to a fine of EUR 400 for seriously insulting Queen Beatrix and a police officer. It is the first time in years that someone has been taken to court and penalised for insulting the monarch.

The man will also have to serve a seven-day prison sentence he was provisionally imposed earlier. The justice department wanted him to be sentenced to an additional two weeks in prison for his insulting comments. The maximum sentence for lèse majesté is five years in prison.

He spoke insultingly of the monarch using sexually explicit language and racist comments.
A. got into an argument with police officers on bicycle in Amsterdam on 7 June. He performed a Nazi salute, called a police officer a "rotten bastard," and called out "I hate your queen. The queen of the Netherlands is a whore." He then spoke insultingly of the monarch using sexually explicit language and racist comments.

The man's lawyer says that A., originally from Surinam, was confused and under the influence of alcohol and drugs, and that he did not insult the queen personally but as representative of the Dutch people.
Oh, so that makes it better?
"His feelings of revenge and hate towards white people put him under such pressure that he could not help but utter those words."
Why the poor dear! See what you nasty Euros his revenge and hate made him do!
I'm sure he'd do well on a plane back to Surinam ...
The court felt that authority figures should be somewhat thick-skinned in cases like this. "The queen as well." But the sexual insinuations make it clear that the man was not uttering commentary of a socially critical nature, the court found.
So just stay free of the crude sexual insults and you can say pretty much whatever you want, A ol' buddy ...
There have been few cases of penalties for insulting the monarch. There have been a few verdicts pronounced over the last years convicting individuals for insulting the crown prince, however. In 2003 two people were fined EUR 250 each for jeering at Crown Prince Willem-Alexander on the day of his wedding to Máxima the year previous. One had called the prince "dumb," the other had thrown a bag of paint at the royal carriage.
Posted by: lotp || 07/31/2007 00:00 || Comments || Link || [3 views] Top|| File under:

#1  A. got into an argument with police officers on bicycle in Amsterdam on 7 June. He performed a Nazi salute, called a police officer a "rotten bastard," and called out "I hate your queen. The queen of the Netherlands is a whore." He then spoke insultingly of the monarch using sexually explicit language and racist comments.

Exile the bugger to the island of Texel and to duties as a live target on the commando machine pistol range. Sheep beware of the newcomer.
Posted by: Besoeker || 07/31/2007 1:29 Comments || Top||

#2  Why does anyone care what some drunk says about some queen anyway? Lots of people around here say deragatory things about the queens, and call them whores (of course a lot of them really are.)
Posted by: Glenmore || 07/31/2007 7:11 Comments || Top||

#3  Off with his head!
Posted by: Howard UK || 07/31/2007 8:45 Comments || Top||

#4  Insulting the monarch of a country you're a citizen of is a pretty stupid move. Most royalty these days are just figureheads, used to promote the country and instill a sense of loyalty to the nation. The last time I checked, Surinam was still a prefect of the Netherlands, along with the Netherlands Antilles. To me, it seems pretty clear that sending back to Surinam would only shift the problem from one place to the other. I'd much prefer he be sent to Indonesian-controlled Papua, where he'd be misidentified as a Christian missionary and decapitated.
Posted by: Old Patriot || 07/31/2007 16:25 Comments || Top||

#5  Surinam's answer to Mel Gibson?

The coppers should have beat him unconcious and kicked the spokes of his bike out.

Hup Holland!
Posted by: JDB || 07/31/2007 16:52 Comments || Top||


Fifth Column
Fasting Against America
Muslim Groups in the U.S. have joined with left-wing Protestants and Catholics in planning an “interfaith fast” on the upcoming “day officially known as ‘Columbus Day,’” according to fast organizers. Called “From Conquest to Community, From Violence to Reverence: An Interfaith Fast to End the War in Iraq,” the day of October 8, 2007 will conveniently synchronize with Islam’s “Night of Power” during Ramadan.

The fasters include officials from the Islamic Society of North America, the National Council of Churches, the Council on American Islamic Relations, the Catholic Maryknollers, Sojourners, the United Methodist Board of Church and Society, and the Quaker Fellowship of Reconciliation.

What better way to draw religionists together than to transforming the sinister day of conquest formerly known as Columbus Day into a Ramadan fast devoted to opposing American imperialism?!

The interfaith fasters are calling on “all armed forces and militias to ‘fast’ from killing at least for one day, reminding them that Ramadan calls for a fast from violence as well.” They also want to exploit the fast so as to “educate people in our religious communities about electing a president and representatives who are committed to ending this war.”

It’s nice that al Qaeda and other insurgents in Iraq are also invited to join the interfaith fast. Maybe there will be a spontaneous Ramadan soccer game among all the contending parties in Iraq, as during the famously unofficial Christmas Truce between British and German troops in World War I.

“American culture, society, and policy are addicted to violence at home and overseas,” the interfaith fasters explained. “In our time, the hope of a decent future is endangered by an unnecessary, morally abhorrent, and disastrous war. Ending this war can become the first step toward a policy that embodies a deeper, broader sense of generosity and community at home and in the world.”

The interfaith fasters hope to “end the shattering of Iraqi and American lives by offering American generosity and support – but not control – for international and nongovernmental efforts to assist Iraqis in making peace and rebuilding their country, while swiftly and safely bringing home all American troops.”

Calling upon a long religious tradition of abstaining from food for spiritual purposes, the interfaith fasters cited the Prophet Isaiah, Jesus, Gandhi and Cesar Chavez as potent fasters who “changed the course of history.” Strangely, Muhammad is not specifically mentioned in the litany of admirable fasters. Perhaps his own record as a military conqueror makes his inclusion slightly inappropriate on a day meant, in part, to bemoan Christopher Columbus’s “conquest” of America, not to mention modern America’s “conquest” of Iraq.

The interfaith fasters want to condemn all conquest and war. Their underlying assumption is, of course, that the presence of United States forces in Iraq is the sole cause of war there. The departure of U.S. forces will automatically precipitate peace in Iraq, they seem to assume, in an assumption common throughout the Religious Left.

“Today we call for an end to this war, an end to our reliance on violence as the first, rather than the last resort, an end to the arrogant unilateralism of preemptive war,” typically insisted a recent declaration from the 1.1 million member United Church of Christ. The Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) also recently pronounced that it is, “conscientiously opposing the war in Iraq as an action inconsistent with the teachings and example of Jesus Christ.”

What the Religious Left is denouncing and fasting against is in fact not the war in Iraq per se, but only U.S. participation in that war. These indignant prelates prefer to assume that the war as a whole can be turned off like a car ignition, as soon as the American President decides, or Congress forces him to do so. To acknowledge that the war in Iraq would continue, or expand, absent U.S. participation would be to admit that the U.S. presence is not exclusively responsible for the conflict. For the Religious Left, this admission is unacceptable.

These interfaith fasters have suitably targeted Columbus Day for their time of protest. America’s discovery by the European adventurer marks the start of cultural genocide and Western imperialism, in the minds of Religious Left activists. For them, the Iraq War is simply the latest sinister episode in four centuries of Western and America, aggression, for which Christianity is ultimately responsible.

The interfaith fasters and their various Religious Left allies have little genuine interest in ending the war in Iraq or in the welfare of Iraq’s people. They were not concerned about Iraqi suffering under Saddam Hussein, except as victims of U.S.-supported sanctions. And the interfaith fasters will have no interest in Iraqi suffering under an Islamist regime or under an expansive civil war, if the U.S. does as the Religious Left desires and departs Iraq precipitously.

For the Religious Left, the war in Iraq is an urgent cause only because the United States is the perceived villain. And for the Religious Left, reflexively opposing the United States, wherever it is active, is a theological and cosmological imperative.
If there was ever any place that truly needed a massive terrorist truck bomb, this is it.
Posted by: Anonymoose || 07/31/2007 09:38 || Comments || Link || [4 views] Top|| File under: Global Jihad

#1  Peace through superior firepower.
Kumbaya, ya dirty hippies...
Posted by: tu3031 || 07/31/2007 10:31 Comments || Top||

#2  On that day I will stuff myself on $1 McDonalds Double Cheese Burgers, Jim Beam 7yr, and go fishing. That will be my show of faith.
Posted by: bigjim-ky || 07/31/2007 10:55 Comments || Top||

#3  I hereby declare October 8 to be "Official Three-Course Lobster Dinner Day," and shall observe it enthusiastically.
Posted by: Mike || 07/31/2007 11:29 Comments || Top||

#4  I will pray the fast is very, very, very long and very, very, very disciplined.
Posted by: JohnQC || 07/31/2007 12:19 Comments || Top||

#5  ...paging Ward Churchill...Ward Churchill, please pick up the white courtesy phone.....
Posted by: Spats Gligum8420 || 07/31/2007 12:39 Comments || Top||

#6  The interfaith fasters want to condemn all conquest and war. But clearly not dhimmitude.
Posted by: Icerigger || 07/31/2007 13:08 Comments || Top||

#7  Go for 2 months, guys. Anything less than that is a show of weak faith.
Posted by: DarthVader || 07/31/2007 13:08 Comments || Top||

#8  JohnQC, I think they need to totally fast through at least Thanksgiving to show their sincerity. None of this Muslim 'pig out at sundown' fasting, or even Catholic 'skip one meal' fasting - come on folks, show everyone how much better you are by REALLY fasting!
Posted by: Glenmore || 07/31/2007 13:08 Comments || Top||

#9  Some religions use fasting to purify their bodies, right? These guys should get really pure.
Posted by: Bobby || 07/31/2007 15:00 Comments || Top||

#10  The fasters include officials from the Islamic Society of North America, the National Council of Churches, the Council on American Islamic Relations, the Catholic Maryknollers, Sojourners, the United Methodist Board of Church and Society, and the Quaker Fellowship of Reconciliation.

The ultimate marriage of the far-left and the jihadis is finally official! Of these groups, the ONLY 1 I see that has a sincere meaning in this is the Quakers. The others are either jihadis themselves or are about as "Christian" as big-Mo himself.

As for this Southern Baptist, I hereby declare it to be Columbus Day (again) and "Lock n Load" day!
Posted by: BA || 07/31/2007 15:31 Comments || Top||

#11  If there were ever a group of idiots that don't get the message of God, it's the ones mentioned in this article. May God Himself refresh their memories. I'd prefer it be painful, but I'll accept whatever He decides to do (maybe salmonella from the after-fast pig-out?).
Posted by: Old Patriot || 07/31/2007 16:28 Comments || Top||

#12  The Maryknollers are the hard left of the Catholic Church; they ran a pro-Sandanista group in Nicaragua call Witness for Peace. Everyone in the diocese used to call them Witless for Peace. This is nothing new for the Maryknollers, if it is anti-American, they will join it.
Posted by: Shieldwolf || 07/31/2007 16:38 Comments || Top||

#13  I've known plenty of lefties and plenty of Muslims and, unless these douchebags do some serious 'self-censoring', that's going to be one tense evening.

Just for kicks, ask the Imam what he thinks of Rosie O'Donnell's "R'Families" lezzie cruise...
Posted by: JDB || 07/31/2007 16:41 Comments || Top||

#14  I guess they'll keep their tops on as a show of respect for their Muslim masters friends.
Posted by: mrp || 07/31/2007 17:44 Comments || Top||

#15  Columbus Day?
That's wrong.

Remind them to be um... what that word, um disacreet.
Posted by: Don Corleone || 07/31/2007 19:04 Comments || Top||

#16  Anyone want to bet this is a Cindy Shithan Fast?
Posted by: CrazyFool || 07/31/2007 19:37 Comments || Top||

#17  The fasters include officials from the Islamic Society of North America, the National Council of Churches, the Council on American Islamic Relations, the Catholic Maryknollers, Sojourners, the United Methodist Board of Church and Society, and the Quaker Fellowship of Reconciliation.

Ah, yes. The Lion Wolf finally lays down with the Lamb. As Woody Allen so tartly observed, "The lamb ain't going to get much rest." I wonder if these Christian groups understand the concepts of reconnaisance and stalking.
Posted by: Zenster || 07/31/2007 22:48 Comments || Top||


Donk Whip Clyburn: Positive Report by Petraeus "a real big problem for us."
House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) ...
So we're starting with a guy who's Pelosi's whip. Not an enviable position. Sort of helps one understand why he might have trouble expressing himself.
... said Monday that a strongly positive report on progress on Iraq by Army Gen. David Petraeus likely would split Democrats in the House and impede his party's efforts to press for a timetable to end the war.
Nothing like good news to create a split in the Democrat party.
Clyburn, in an interview with the washingtonpost.com video program PostTalk, said Democrats might be wise to wait for the Petraeus report, scheduled to be delivered in September, before charting next steps in their year-long struggle with President Bush over the direction of U.S. strategy.
He was looking for the Master of the Obvious graphic when he said that.
Clyburn noted that Petraeus carries significant weight among the 47 members of the Blue Dog caucus in the House, a group of moderate to conservative Democrats.
The rest of the House donks could care less what a dummy like Dr. Patraeus has to day.
Without their support, he said, Democratic leaders would find it virtually impossible to pass legislation setting a timetable for withdrawal. "I think there would be enough support in that group to want to stay the course and if the Republicans were to stay united as they have been, then it would be a problem for us," Clyburn said. "We, by and large, would be wise to wait on the report."
Duh.
Many Democrats have anticipated that, at best, Petraeus and U.S. ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker would present a mixed analysis of the success of the current troop surge strategy, given continued violence in Baghdad. But of late there have been signs that the commander of U.S. forces might be preparing something more generally positive.
I've been looking forward to something like "We've been taking names and kicking asses. But some of the donks might take that as a threat.
Clyburn said that would be "a real big problem for us."
I somehow suspect this will end up in the first half hour of Rush's show tomorrow.
Clyburn noted that while overall approval ratings of Congress are low, people still rate Democrats higher than Republicans. "People feel good about the Democratic Party, they just don't feel real good about the Congress itself. That's why we seek to implement policies likely to increase cognitive dissonance."
Posted by: Nimble Spemble || 07/31/2007 00:00 || Comments || Link || [4 views] Top|| File under: Iraqi Insurgency

#1  Clyburn said that would be "a real big problem for us."

So success for America is bad for the Democrats, eh? Words fail me.
Posted by: SteveS || 07/31/2007 0:39 Comments || Top||

#2  "The Democrat Party Owns Defeat."
Rush Limbaugh
Posted by: doc || 07/31/2007 6:34 Comments || Top||

#3  Not only does it not matter what Petraeus says - because we won't believe him anyway - it doesn't even matter if there is undeniably a lot of real progress in Iraq. The war is lost. I said so. So let it be written. So let it be done.
Posted by: Sen. H. Reid || 07/31/2007 6:37 Comments || Top||

#4  I don't know what's the bigger problem for them: that their party's success depends on their country's defeat, or that they're admitting this on the record.
Posted by: Mike || 07/31/2007 6:58 Comments || Top||

#5  Clyburn, in an interview...said Democrats might be wise to wait for the Petraeus report, scheduled to be delivered in September, before charting next steps in their year-long struggle with President Bush over the direction of U.S. strategy.

In other words, how do we turn victory into defeat and hang it on the Prez?

Clyburn noted that overall approval ratings of Congress are low-- "People just don't feel real good about the Congress." [some editing]

No kidding. Might have something to do with the dhimmi part of Congress' constant, despicable and traitorous attempts to lose the war; or the underhanded attempts to sell out our military and the people of Iraq.
Posted by: JohnQC || 07/31/2007 9:01 Comments || Top||

#6  I question their patriotism.

Posted by: eLarson || 07/31/2007 10:39 Comments || Top||

#7  You can question their patriotism,if you want.
I have no questions WRT their patriotism. I just question their narcicism(sp?).
Posted by: N Guard || 07/31/2007 13:42 Comments || Top||

#8  OK, now that this is officially on the record, I've gotta ask....WHY is the elect Obama linky on RB now? Fred, please bring back Grace!
Posted by: BA || 07/31/2007 15:01 Comments || Top||

#9  You should read the WaPo comments. They can't decide if Petraeus is a a BushCo pawn, a strictly booksmart chickenhawk general, or Julius Ceasar.
Posted by: tu3031 || 07/31/2007 15:09 Comments || Top||

#10  I question their ability to do what is right for America and I believe that they are putting their own interests in front of everything else making the country less safe.

I also believe that they are traitors in the purest sense of the word and should be tried and shot.
Posted by: DarthVader || 07/31/2007 15:33 Comments || Top||

#11  #6 I question their patriotism.
Posted by: eLarson 2007-07-31 10:39


I question their sanity. I thought it required at least a MINIMUM level of intelligence to serve in the House, but I guess not. And these mental morons wonder why their approval ratings are headed for single digits.
Posted by: Old Patriot || 07/31/2007 16:31 Comments || Top||

#12  Rush said it best a few years ago:

"Good news for America is bad news for the Democrats. In Iraq, they are invested in defeat."
Posted by: Sigmund Freud || 07/31/2007 22:24 Comments || Top||


India-Pakistan
Pakistani Journalists Blame Government in Lal Masjid Showdown
Posted by: anonymous5089 || 07/31/2007 12:44 || Comments || Link || [3 views] Top|| File under: Taliban


ATC releases 18 people
The Anti-Terrorism Court on Monday released 18 out of 65 people who were arrested for disturbing law and order when Lal Masjid opened for prayers on Friday. The ATC extended physical remand of 47 accused for two days and directed the investigation officer to produce them again in the court on August 1. The investigation officer told the ATC that 18 people were innocent and they were no more required in this case.

The investigation officer had sought seven days physical of the 47 accused but Hashmat Habib, defence counsel, opposed the application. He said that police had implicated innocent people in the case. He requested the court to release all the accused. Habib said that police were misusing Anti-Terrorism Act and implicating innocent people in false cases under this act.
Posted by: Fred || 07/31/2007 00:00 || Comments || Link || [3 views] Top|| File under: Taliban

#1  When I first read the headline I thought Air Traffic Control and figured the FAA Fashion Police fiasco finally had run its course....
My bad.
Posted by: USN, Ret. || 07/31/2007 14:47 Comments || Top||


Security forces killed Mehsud, claims cousin
Abdullah Mehsud did not die in a suicide blast but was shot dead by security forces who should now refuse the support of the US in FATA, South Waziristan, North Waziristan, Khyber, otherwise bomb blasts will occur all over the country and especially in Karachi.
Did that statement make sense to anyone? Anyone? Bueller?
This was stated by a man claiming to be Abdullah Mehsud’s cousin, Major (retd) Muhammad Zaman Mehsud, also chief of the Mehsud tribe in Karachi. He held a press conference on Monday at the Karachi Press Club. Zaman said that Abdullah was sleeping in the house of Sheikh Alam Mandukhel when some informer tipped off the security forces of his whereabouts. They raided the house and shot him.
"It's true! I seen it!"
Zaman said that after this, the ISPR’s Major General Waheed Arshad appeared on television and said that the Taliban leader Abdullah Mehsud had blown himself up during an operation.

Zaman said that Mehsud took part in the Afghan jihad and that he also lost his leg while fighting. He added that Abdullah was satisfied with the peace agreement between the government of Pakistan and the tribals.

Zaman asked how Abdullah’s body could have survived if he had indeed blown himself up. Why did the government not have a postmortem conducted and bury him “in silence”. Zaman claimed that Abdullah did not belong to Al Qaeda but was a Taliban leader. His family had been freedom fighters and one of his brothers is in the Pakistan Army, Zaman claimed.

Zaman, who is a member of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), was questioned on the fact that party chairperson Benazir Bhutto had no objection to the operation in the tribal areas. He replied that Bhutto was not in the country and hence did not know what exactly was going on.
Posted by: Fred || 07/31/2007 00:00 || Comments || Link || [3 views] Top|| File under: Taliban

#1  It' wasn't a suicide blast - his bomb vest just went off accidentally when the Spec Op embedded in the Security Forces shot him.

Or, an even better story, he was shot and killed by a mole very high up in the Taliban organization. Omar's right hand man, I think. Or maybe his left.
Posted by: Glenmore || 07/31/2007 7:18 Comments || Top||


Jirga to discuss Taliban action
The political administration on Monday convened an all-Mohmand tribes jirga for Tuesday (today) to discuss the “birth of the Taliban” in Mohmand Agency, as a militant leader warned of suicide bombings if security forces launched an attack.

Local militants on Sunday seized the shrine of freedom fighter under British rule Haji Sahib Tarangzai and named it Lal Masjid. “Around 200 all-Mohmand tribes’ elders will meet in Ghalanai to discuss the Sunday incident and devise a future course of action under the tribal tradition,” a local administration official told Daily Times. “We will meet tomorrow to take a collective decision (against the Sunday action of the local militants) and to shoulder the territorial responsibility under the Frontier Crimes Regulations,” tribal elder Muhammad Ali said. A Haleemzai tribe jirga told the administration that they would help the Saafi tribe only if they could not tackle the militants in their areas.

“The Haleemzai tribe is ready to help the Saafi tribe if it asks for support,” the Haleemzai tribe jirga said. Militant leader Umar Khalid, meanwhile, warned of suicide attacks if the government attacked them. “We will use suicide bombers in self defence,” he told Daily Times. He tried to distant himself from Al Qaeda and the Taliban and denied his group was staging attacks across the border. He said they would welcome a “foreign guest if he comes to our areas”. “We are locals. There is no single non-local in our ranks. Our struggle is to carry on the Ghazi Abdur Rashid mission.” He spelled out a plan to “Islamise” Mohmand tribes, saying, “gradually the people will be guided through a vice and virtue force.”
Posted by: Fred || 07/31/2007 00:00 || Comments || Link || [3 views] Top|| File under: Taliban


MMA Supreme Council grills Qazi for resigning from NA
Qazi Hussain Ahmad on Monday offered to step down as president of the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) after three members of the MMA Supreme Council, including Maulana Fazlur Rehman, criticised him for resigning from the National Assembly (NA), sources told Daily Times. Qazi later agreed to the council’s demand that he withdraw his decision to resign, said the sources. At the start of the council meeting, which Qazi presided over, Allama Sajid Naqvi questioned his resignation from the NA without prior approval of the council. MMA Secretary General Maulana Fazl said Qazi should have consulted him or the council before submitting his resignation, and his unilateral action had embarrassed the alliance of religious parties, according to the sources. Another member of the council, Dr Abu Al Khair Zubair, also criticised Qazi. Qazi reacted by saying he was prepared to step down as president of the MMA immediately if the council members had lost confidence in him. The members of the council said that they did not want his resignation.
Posted by: Fred || 07/31/2007 00:00 || Comments || Link || [3 views] Top|| File under: Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal


Iraq
Kurds arrested for flying the Iraqi national flag
Erbil, 31 July (AKI) - Kurdish security forces in the northern autonomous Kurdistan region of Iraq have arrested 50 young people who were waving the Iraqi national flag to celebrate the country's victory in the Asian Cup football.

A police officer in the Dohuk province said those arrested were predominantly Christians or members of the Yezidi minotiry, a religious community which passes on its beliefs via oral tradition.

For the autonomous Kurdistan region, the flag is a particularly sensitive issue. Security forces in the three northern provinces of Dohuk, Erbil and Sulamaniya have been ordered by the government to arrest anyone displaying the Iraqi national flag - considered a symbol of Arab nationalism and a reminder of the repression of Kurds under the regime of Saddam Hussein

The regional president Massoud Barzani last year replaced the national flag with a regional flag.
Posted by: mrp || 07/31/2007 08:45 || Comments || Link || [4 views] Top|| File under:


GOP seeks to curtail Iraq mission
From the Associated Press:

WASHINGTON - Republicans increasingly are backing a new approach in the Iraq war that could become the party’s mantra come September. It would mean narrowly limited missions for U.S. troops in Iraq but let President Bush decide when troops should leave.

So far, the idea has not attracted the attention of Democratic leaders. They are under substantial pressure by anti-war groups to consider only legislation that orders troops from Iraq.

But the GOP approach quickly is becoming the attractive alternative for Republican lawmakers who want to challenge Bush on the unpopular war without backtracking from their past assertions that it would be disastrous to set deadlines for troop withdrawals.

“This is a necessary adjustment in the national debate to reintroduce bipartisanship, to stop the ‘gotcha’ politics that are going on that seem to be driven by fringes on both sides and change the terms of the discussion,” said Rep. Phil English, R-Pa.

English is among the more than 40 Republicans in the House and Senate who are sponsoring legislation intended to shift the mission of U.S. troops. Several other GOP lawmakers, facing tight elections next year and a strong anti-war sentiment in their districts, say they are considering this approach.

“Settling Sunni-Shiite rivalries over who occupies what street in Baghdad is not in the vital interest of the United States,” said Rep. Heather Wilson, R-N.M., who said she is considering her options. “And we should only have Americans in harms’ way where there are U.S. interests at stake.”

Waiting on Petraeus’ report

Bush’s top military commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, is expected to tell Congress in September that more time is needed to determine whether a massive U.S.-led security push initiated in January is working.

The message is unlikely to be well received on Capitol Hill. Democrats have criticized the strategy as escalating a failing war; Republicans say they want to see progress made by fall. GOP support has proved crucial to Bush in stalling anti-war proposals in the Democratic-run Congress. Legislation ordering U.S. troops out of Iraq has passed repeatedly in the House only to sink in the Senate, where Republicans threaten a filibuster and Democrats fall short of the 60 votes needed to cut off debate.

House Democrats plan to try again this week with a bill that would begin a pullout this fall, and Republicans are expected to overwhelmingly oppose it. However if Bush cannot convince GOP lawmakers by September that he is on the right track, more Republicans are expected to demand change.

Forcing Bush’s hand

But many of them, long on record as opposing an end date for combat, say it makes sense to focus on the mission instead. Yet this approach would amount to a de facto mandate for troop withdrawals because of the large number of forces assigned to combat missions.

The goal, they say, is to end the U.S.-led daily patrols in the streets of Baghdad and restrict troops to fighting al-Qaida terrorists and training Iraq security forces.

“If you do that you’ve greatly reduced the loss of life, which is what matters most,” said Rep. Mike Castle, R-Del.

The idea of forcing such a change gained prominence last December when the Iraq Study Group concluded Bush should do more to hand over the combat mission to Iraqi forces. The bipartisan commission envisioned an ambitious and new diplomatic push, with U.S. troops remaining in the region primarily to supply and train the Iraqi army and to target terrorist cells.

Since then, some 40 Republicans and 31 Democrats have signed on to legislation by Rep. Mark Udall, D-Colo., and Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., that urges Bush to embrace the commission’s recommendations.

‘Set the stage for ... withdrawal’


A much smaller, though growing number of Republicans supports requiring that Bush submit to Congress a detailed, new military strategy to change the mission of U.S. troops.

In the past week, Castle and English agreed to co-sponsor the legislation by Democratic Reps. Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii and John Tanner of Tennessee.

Sens. John Warner, R-Va., and Richard Lugar, R-Ind., have proposed similar legislation.

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, a co-sponsor of Salazar’s legislation on the Iraq Study Group, wants to go further: binding legislation that would order Bush to restrict the mission of U.S. troops to counterterrorism, training Iraqis and protecting U.S. assets.

The goal, she says, is to “set the stage for a significant but responsible withdrawal of American combat troops over the next year.”

For most of these lawmakers, their decision to embrace change is colored by politics.

Collins is seen by Democratic challengers as particularly vulnerable in the 2008 elections because of the overwhelmingly anti-war sentiment among Maine voters. English faces an anti-war, anti-incumbent sentiment among Pennsylvania voters, who in 2006 ousted four GOP House members and Republican Sen. Rick Santorum. Wilson’s fellow Republican from New Mexico, Sen. Pete Domenici, recently broke with Bush on Iraq and embraced Salazar’s proposal.

Castle was among a dozen lawmakers challenged in an ad campaign in May featuring three retired generals saying politicians cannot expect to win re-election if they support Bush’s Iraq policy.

The Associated Press
Posted by: Sherry || 07/31/2007 01:22 || Comments || Link || [3 views] Top|| File under: Iraqi Insurgency

#1  Either we train war-makers or peace keepers. The latter is a loser's option.
Posted by: McZoid || 07/31/2007 5:17 Comments || Top||

#2  Can Congress do this? It doesn't seem right to limit the CinC's powers. Why stop at "limited missions"? Why not limit it to the point they can't do anything? Who is going to decide where you cross the line? The idea seems to be DOA to me.
Posted by: gorb || 07/31/2007 5:39 Comments || Top||

#3  Only Lieberman seems to have the chutzpa to stand his ground. The rest a running like rabbits from Soros, Pelosi, and Reid.

Not Stonewall Joe Lieberman.
Posted by: Bobby || 07/31/2007 8:14 Comments || Top||

#4  Our enemies (in their several guises) are playing to win; we appear to be playing "not to lose".

Those are not the same things.
Posted by: Seafarious || 07/31/2007 8:54 Comments || Top||

#5  A strong element of strategy is to convince your enemies to use their resources to get something you were already planning to concede.

In this case, the military has long been planning and executing turn overs of authority to Iraq army and police, which inherently "narrows" their mission. When the surge is completed, many or most of the surge forces will be redundant, having completed their mission.

So what this amounts to is not just bringing the excess troops home, as they were going to anyway, but forcing the democrats to use their political capital in the process.

The republicans can then claim compromise, while the democrats don't get anything they want. The public are happier with the republicans, because they see (a fraction of) "the troops coming home."

Meanwhile, the Moonbats continue to seethe, as Iraq gets better and better.
Posted by: Anonymoose || 07/31/2007 9:13 Comments || Top||

#6  we appear to be playing "not to lose".

Some are playing to lose.
Posted by: Gary and the Samoyeds || 07/31/2007 9:20 Comments || Top||

#7  Can Congress do this?

Con Law was never my specialty but I don't believe they can. The military acts at the direction of the Executive Branch while Congress plays an oversight role and is limited to utilizing the rather blunt instrument of refusing funding in order to impose its will. It's entirely possible, and in my opinion very likely, that it would be unconstitutional for Congress to attempt to micromanage a military action by funding, for example, patrols in Anbar province while refusing to fund patrols in Baghdad. The ultimate arbiter would be the Supreme Court though I believe the matter is fairly well-settled already.
Posted by: AzCat || 07/31/2007 13:59 Comments || Top||

#8  How many of these dimbulbs are doing this even knowing what Clybourne said about a positive report from Petraeus being problematic for the Dems?
Posted by: eLarson || 07/31/2007 14:00 Comments || Top||

#9  A much smaller, though growing number of Republicans supports requiring that Bush submit to Congress a detailed, new military strategy to change the mission of U.S. troops.

Names and Districts, please, WaPo.

And, I'd be willing to bet dollars to doughnuts, AzCat, that you're right. Everything I read in the Constitution states that the Prez is Commander-in-Chief, and thus, decides tactics, strategies and the like. Congress should put up or shut up w/ an up or down vote on the funding issue. From what I can tell, that's about the only "hook" they have to "bring the troops home." Of course, just because it's written in Plain English in the Constitution, doesn't mean the courts won't find it "Constitutional," if you catch my drift.
Posted by: BA || 07/31/2007 15:25 Comments || Top||


Soldier Enters Pleas in Rape-Murder Case
FORT CAMPBELL, Ky. (AP) - A Fort Campbell soldier accused of acting as a lookout while his colleagues attacked and killed a 14-year-old Iraqi girl and her family pleaded guilty to some lesser offenses Monday as his court-martial began on rape and murder charges. Pfc. Jesse Spielman pleaded to conspiracy to obstruct justice, arson, wrongfully touching a corpse and drinking.

He still faces trial on the more serious charges in the March 2006 attack on Abeer Qassim al-Janabi and her family. Under military law, a soldier present when a crime occurs can be found guilty if prosecutors can establish that the soldier had prior knowledge.
If he's guilty, hang him.
Three other soldiers have pleaded guilty for their roles in the crimes and received sentences as long as 100 years. Another soldier was discharged from the military before he was charged and could face the death penalty if found guilty in federal court in Kentucky.

Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Steve White || 07/31/2007 00:00 || Comments || Link || [4 views] Top|| File under: Iraqi Insurgency


Maliki pushing us out of govt: Sunni Arabs
BAGHDAD - Iraq’s biggest Sunni Arab group accused Shia Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki on Monday of pushing it out of the government by failing to consult it on key issues, escalating a row that threatens reconciliation efforts.

The Sunni Accordance Front has threatened to pull out of Maliki’s shaky coalition government this week unless he meets a list of demands, including a greater say in security matters. It comes at a time when Washington is pushing Iraq’s leaders to work together to push through a package of reforms aimed stabilising the country and reconciling Iraqis. Parliament decided on Monday to go on summer recess until early September.

“He (Maliki) is simply closing the doors on reforms and therefore the Front will be excused if it goes ahead with its plan to withdraw from the government in the time it has set,” the Front said in a statement.

The war of words has become increasingly personal, with the Front accusing Maliki, rather than his ruling Shia Alliance, of marginalising Sunni Arabs and acting unilaterally. The fallout has further damaged a government weakened by the pullout of fiery Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr’s political bloc, also one of the biggest groups in parliament.

Relations between Maliki and Sunni Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi, a leader of the Accordance Front, are also famously frosty, with Hashemi frequently complaining that Maliki doesn’t listen to him.

A Sunni Arab lawmaker and a government official revealed what they said was the main reason for the Front’s decision last week to suspend the work of its six ministers in the government. They said the decision was sparked by a tense meeting between Maliki and the Iraqi presidency council, which includes Hashemi. When the Sunni politician asked to discuss security matters, Maliki refused and then walked out.

A spokesman for Maliki was not immediately available to comment on the report.

The increasingly acrimonious verbal exchanges saw government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh accuse the Front on Friday of obstruction and blackmail following its threat to pull out of the government if its demands were not met. But the Front said Dabbagh’s comments represented Maliki’s views, not those of the government. It said Shia and Kurdish factions within the government were sympathetic to its demands.

“The prime minister is ignoring those who are concerned and is sidelining them by not consulting them on sensitive issues,” the Front said. “Maliki is acting unilaterally. He does not share with us any sensitive matters, as if we are not a part of this process. We are fed up with that,” a Sunni Arab official told Reuters.
Posted by: Steve White || 07/31/2007 00:00 || Comments || Link || [3 views] Top|| File under: Iraqi Insurgency

#1  Only an idiot would be surprised by this. Maliki's a Shiite and getting revenge on the Sunnis—even at the cost of paralyzing the nation he is sworn to lead—comes first. This is why Maliki needs to get his ass capped along with Moqtada Sadr.
Posted by: Zenster || 07/31/2007 2:41 Comments || Top||

#2  Zenster, any alternative candidates?
Posted by: gromgoru || 07/31/2007 5:56 Comments || Top||

#3  Zenster, any alternative candidates?

Absolutely. Someone younger, not as well-connected and less contaminated by the politics-as-usual process. Much the same can be said for American politicians. Term limits have begun to winnow out the hardcore pols here. Bullets will most likely have to do the job abroad.

High context societies thrive upon the sort of influence and corruption that Nour al-Maliki trails in his wake. However drastic it might sound, we need to scrape away an entire tier of MME (Muslim Middle East) leadership that is incapable of transcending the usual internecine tribal bloodshed and usher in an era of more enlightened individuals who are willing to reach some sort of negotiated compromise.

I do not care if this requires ousting or eliminating every government officer and employee in the MME who is above age 45 and earning more than 50K$-100K$ per annum. The West is suffering endless terrorist attacks due to their mere existence and all our hopes for rehabilitating the MME are being thwarted by these same exact same ossified, hidebound and recalcitrant individuals. They are too happy to play the role of warlord and Somalia should have already taught us the worth of their sort.
Posted by: Zenster || 07/31/2007 6:38 Comments || Top||

#4  Zenster, let me tell you a secret.
Since there isn't actually an Iraqi Nation, there's nobody in Iraq who gives a f*ck about Iraq. More that that, there's nobody in Iraq capable of foresight & enlightened self-interest. Which means, nobody in Iraq whom USA can trust without a gun stuck to his head.
Posted by: gromgoru || 07/31/2007 7:14 Comments || Top||

#5  I suspect much could be learned about our future course by talking to a man named Alowi.
Posted by: Besoeker || 07/31/2007 8:26 Comments || Top||

#6  Maliki won't talk to them about security matters because he thinks the secretly support the Sunni insurgents. Remember the suicide bombing in the green zone? It was carried out by the bodyguard of a sunni politician.
Posted by: Apostate || 07/31/2007 8:57 Comments || Top||

#7  Since there isn't actually an Iraqi Nation

Is there really a lot of NATIONS, outside of western countries (though some could argue that, say, Belgium is not or hardly a Nation), and a number of asian countries with long-standing national identities? Couldn't many, many african and arab "Nations" be instead termed artificial constructs out of tribes? I'm serious, I'm really asking that so a more-thoughtful/knowledgeable person will input his reflexion.
Western Nations are busily being deconstructed, top-down by transnational ideologies, and down-top from massive immigration from alien cultures, and the ideas of Nation and Identity are something I like to think about, not always with great results, to try and make sense of it all.
Posted by: anonymous5089 || 07/31/2007 11:51 Comments || Top||

#8  there's nobody in Iraq capable of foresight & enlightened self-interest.

Then we should declare Iraq a failed state and make it—like the Philippines in the early 1900s—into a suzerain or protectorate. Install our own Western led government at gun point. Then pump out enough oil to compensate us for wasting our bloody time and use them as a forward operating base to crush political Islam.

Which means, nobody in Iraq whom USA can trust without a gun stuck to his head.

That can be just as accurately applied to all Muslim majority countries.
Posted by: Zenster || 07/31/2007 14:08 Comments || Top||

#9  Zenster, any alternative candidates?

It won't matter, in the long run, because any alternative candidate would still be Muslim as well as the populace he would be charged to lead. Muslims aren't capable of effective self-government--the proof lies in every shithole in which they hold power.
Posted by: Crusader || 07/31/2007 14:50 Comments || Top||

#10  Actually, I think we would do well to recruit a Kurd to be PM of Iraq : the whole of Kurdistan is much better than anywhere else in Iraq. And several of the top politicians in Kurdistan have shown political maturity, even embracing old blood enemies for political advantage.

Besides, I think people are trying to push the Iraqis too far too quick. Think of Iraq like Chicago in the 1930s : the people don't begrudge a politician a little honest graft, as long as he get the job done. What they don't want is a corrupt politician - one who takes the money and then the streets don't get cleaned, the sewers don't get fixed, etc. As long as the politico is just bumping the contracts up to 103% of true cost and pocketing a chunk of that, the people will be happy as long as the items get built, the garbage is picked up, etc.
Posted by: Shieldwolf || 07/31/2007 17:19 Comments || Top||

#11  we would do well to recruit a Kurd to be PM of Iraq

The one real virtue in that is how everybody else would be unhappy with such a solution. That certainly speaks very well for the idea in general.
Posted by: Zenster || 07/31/2007 18:30 Comments || Top||

#12  #7 In lieu of more-thoughtful/knowledgeable person, here's my 2 cents worth.
Nations are Nations, tribes are tribes---the differences are unmistakable. Sometimes Nations die. And sometimes tribes become Nations (the ancestors of current day west Europeans were tribesmen a 1000 years ago). Since the conquests of Muhammad's successors, Arabs had 1200 years to evolve Nations---they evolved bobkes.
Posted by: gromgoru || 07/31/2007 20:07 Comments || Top||

#13  #7 In lieu of more-thoughtful/knowledgeable person, here's my 2 cents worth.
Nations are Nations, tribes are tribes---the differences are unmistakable. Sometimes Nations die. And sometimes tribes become Nations (the ancestors of current day west Europeans were tribesmen a 1000 years ago). Since the conquests of Muhammad's successors, Arabs had 1200 years to evolve Nations---they evolved bobkes.
Posted by: gromgoru || 07/31/2007 20:07 Comments || Top||

#14  Sorry about double posting.
Posted by: gromgoru || 07/31/2007 20:08 Comments || Top||


Israel-Palestine-Jordan
Resistance™ is 'legitimate right™': Palestinian PM
Palestinian prime minister Salam Fayyad insisted that resistance™ is “legitimate right™” after militants criticised the word’s omission from his cabinet programme, Egyptian state media reported on Monday. “We are an occupied nation and resistance™ is the legitimate right™ of the Palestinian people”, the official MENA news agency quoted Fayyad as saying in Cairo late on Sunday.

Radical groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad on Sunday slammed Fayyad’s failure to mention resistance™ in his cabinet programme as abandoning “the mother of all principles of the Palestinian people, accepted and recognised by everybody.”

Fayyad, a respected economist and former employee of the World Bank, was appointed to head the Palestinian cabinet after the Islamist Hamas movement overran the Gaza Strip in a bloody takeover on June 15. But while Fayyad repeated the Palestinian right to resistance™, he also said that “what happened in Gaza was unacceptable as it was a coup against legitimacy.” His cabinet programme, which was published over the weekend, does not contain the term “resistance™,” used by the Palestinians to describe armed struggle™ against Israeli occupation. The term was included in the programme of the previous Palestinian cabinet headed by Hamas premier Ismail Haniya.
Posted by: Fred || 07/31/2007 00:00 || Comments || Link || [3 views] Top|| File under: Palestinian Authority

#1  Radical groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad on Sunday slammed Fayyad’s failure to mention resistance™ in his cabinet programme as abandoning “the mother of all principles of the Palestinian people, accepted and recognised by everybody.”

Which changes not one whit in how the Israelis should still rightfully blow your damned terrorist asses straight to everlasting hell at every single opportunity.
Posted by: Zenster || 07/31/2007 0:19 Comments || Top||

#2  Surprize meter?
Posted by: gromgoru || 07/31/2007 5:38 Comments || Top||

#3  Isn't it about time to arrest some more Hamas clowns government officials?
Posted by: gorb || 07/31/2007 5:46 Comments || Top||

#4  they have the right too resist bitch cry and all other types of shit as long as they don't lift a finger too work or make their lives or lansd a better place too live
Posted by: sinse || 07/31/2007 7:52 Comments || Top||

#5  Resistance, they've done squat for the last 50 years, save resistance. Their precious resistance accounts for their entire national identity and goals in life. What would they ever do with out their resistance? There truly would be nothing left for them if peace broke out.
Posted by: bigjim-ky || 07/31/2007 8:03 Comments || Top||

#6  Where was their Resistance when they lived under their muzzie brothers from '48-'67, without representation, opportunity, and ghettoized?
Posted by: Procopius2k || 07/31/2007 8:33 Comments || Top||

#7  So is Ethnic Cleansing(tm) of a violent, aggressive and murderous minority.
Posted by: Anonymoose || 07/31/2007 9:14 Comments || Top||

#8  ...resistance is “legitimate right”...

So is our blasting your stupid asses to kingdom come.
Posted by: DarthVader || 07/31/2007 9:54 Comments || Top||

#9  Damn straight. And look what it's gotten you...
Posted by: tu3031 || 07/31/2007 9:58 Comments || Top||

#10  Resistance to an Unlawful Resistance (I.e. Resistance not carried out in accordance to the Geneva Conventions) is a Legitimate Right also. Of course, it must be carried out Lawfully.

Posted by: Ptah || 07/31/2007 10:04 Comments || Top||

#11  Being a loser is a legitimate right!
Posted by: Omavinter Scourge of the Sith || 07/31/2007 10:10 Comments || Top||

#12  There truly would be nothing left for them if peace broke out.

I have a sneaking feeling that this is precisely why peace does not break out.
Posted by: Angie Schultz || 07/31/2007 11:19 Comments || Top||

#13  I think I know what their problem is. They all try to resist in parallel. If they'd do it in series, they'd get a much more resistance for the same number of people!
Posted by: Rob Crawford || 07/31/2007 11:40 Comments || Top||

#14  Hey dummies: you are waging a war against Israel. Every member of every family, whether Hamass or FatalH, regardless of age or sex, is a "warrior" against the State of Israel. Israel therefore has the RIGHT as a nation under attack to wipe your hairy a$$ off the face of the earth - in fact it has a responsibility to its citizens to do just that. It ain't genocide, it's WAR, and you will all be "war casualties". The sooner Israel gets this straight and begins destroying you, the better the whole world will be.
Posted by: Old Patriot || 07/31/2007 16:49 Comments || Top||


Olde Tyme Religion
Harry Potter a global zionist conspiracy (and darfur, too, but we already knew that)
Posted by: anonymous5089 || 07/31/2007 14:17 || Comments || Link || [3 views] Top|| File under:

#1  I knew it!
Posted by: tu3031 || 07/31/2007 15:24 Comments || Top||

#2  I thought it was internet pr0n that was a zionist conspiracy to "Disrupt young minds".

Oh well, learn something new everyday.

Back to being "Disrupted".
Posted by: DarthVader || 07/31/2007 15:28 Comments || Top||

#3  Can they get any loonier?
Posted by: anymouse || 07/31/2007 15:43 Comments || Top||

#4  #3 Can they get any loonier?
Posted by: anymouse 2007-07-31 15:43


Yeah. Just watch.
Posted by: Old Patriot || 07/31/2007 16:50 Comments || Top||

#5  Book 7 sucked.
Posted by: Iblis || 07/31/2007 18:01 Comments || Top||


Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Gemayel and Aoun supporters clash in Mount Lebanon
Supporters of former President Amin Gemayel clashed with Gen. Michel Aoun's followers in the streets of Metn region of Mount Lebanon, using sticks, fists and feet, only days ahead of the by-elections. The brief fight late Sunday in Broummana and Baabdat of Metn region northeast of Beirut erupted after demonstrators from both sides roamed the streets of the two major resort towns campaigning for their favorite candidates .

Friction between the two camps has been heating up since Aoun, who heads the Free Patriotic Movement, announced that he and his allies -- the Tashnag Party and MP Michel Murr -- will jointly contest the Metn seat that became vacant as a result of the assassination of Amin Gemayel's son, Pierre Gemayel.

Lebanese army troops quickly stepped in and dispersed the feuding sides. Following the clash , the Phalange Party , headed by former president Amin Gemayel issued a statement in which it denounced the harassment of its supporters by the followers of the Free Patriotic Movement , headed by general Aoun and accused FPM of provoking the supporters of Gemayel and initiating the fight.
Posted by: Fred || 07/31/2007 00:00 || Comments || Link || [3 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Aoun is a disappointing sellout to Syria and Hezbollah - Lahoude Jr.
Posted by: Frank G || 07/31/2007 0:10 Comments || Top||



Who's in the News
50[untagged]
7Taliban
6Global Jihad
6Iraqi Insurgency
2Takfir wal-Hijra
2Islamic Courts
1Palestinian Authority
1al-Qaeda in Iraq
1al-Qaeda
1al-Qaeda in North Africa
1Fatah al-Islam
1Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal

Bookmark
E-Mail Me

The Classics
The O Club
Rantburg Store
The Bloids
The Never-ending Story
Thugburg
Gulf War I
The Way We Were
Bio

Merry-Go-Blog











On Sale now!


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.
Click here for more information

Meet the Mods
In no particular order...
Steve White
Seafarious
tu3031
badanov
sherry
ryuge
GolfBravoUSMC
Bright Pebbles
trailing wife
Gloria
Fred
Besoeker
Glenmore
Frank G
3dc
Skidmark

Two weeks of WOT
Tue 2007-07-31
  Taleban kill second SKorean hostage
Mon 2007-07-30
  ISAF: Chairman of Taliban military council banged in Helmand
Sun 2007-07-29
  Perv to retire as Army Chief, stay as President, Bhutto to be PM
Sat 2007-07-28
  New PA platform omits 'armed struggle'
Fri 2007-07-27
  50 Iraq football fans killed in car bombs
Thu 2007-07-26
  Iraq: Khalis tribal leaders sign peace agreement
Wed 2007-07-25
  U.S., Iranian envoys meet in Baghdad
Tue 2007-07-24
  Abdullah Mehsud: Dead again
Mon 2007-07-23
  Summer Offensive: More than 50 Talibs killed in Afghanistan
Sun 2007-07-22
  N. Wazoo Peace Jirga Rocketed
Sat 2007-07-21
  Afghan Talibs kidnap 23 S. Koreans
Fri 2007-07-20
  6 dead in rocket attack on Somali peace conference
Thu 2007-07-19
  Hek declares ceasefire
Wed 2007-07-18
  Qaida in Iraq Big Turban Captured
Tue 2007-07-17
  Bombs kill at least 80 in Kirkuk

Better than the average link...



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.
3.82.3.33
Help keep the Burg running! Paypal:
WoT Operations (15)    Non-WoT (22)    Opinion (5)    Local News (14)    (0)