happy fifth anniversary to our eccentric blogger! Never fails to amuse, entertain, and confuse
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/16/2008 19:41 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
should've posted a taste, plus he has his top 25 posts linked: Hey, how 'bout that? This joint is now five years old.
I started this blog with a simple goal in mind: to attract gullible millions into a worldwide online cult and then bilk them of their life savings. Five years, 450-odd posts and almost that many pageviews later, my actual market appeal has proven somewhat more selective. Extremely more selective. Still, it's much more than I deserve, and I'd like offer my very sincere thanks for your patronage. I sure hope you had 1% of the fun reading the junk I post here as had typing it, even if (especially if?) you don't see eye-to-eye with me politically. If any of it annoyed you I hope that deep down, were also a tiny bit amused.
This being a semidecicentennial and all, it seemed like an occasion for a retrospective of some sort. Like on "Happy Days" when the cast would sit around and say "remember the time that Potsie dressed up like a cheerleader and ended up heavy petting with Fonz at the submarine races?" and then the screen would go wiggly and the rest of the episode was filler from older programs. That's basically what's below the fold here: annotated wiggly flashbacks to the 25 Iowahawk episodes over the past five years that I think generated the most positive reaction from readers. Or, at least, the stuff you told me stunk less than normal.
Yes, I know that "Happy Days" eventually had so many flashback retrospective episodes that they started having meta-retro-retro-flashback-on-previous-flashback episodes. My promise to you: this is the last maudlin narcissistic flashbacking you'll see here for the next five years, or 60,000 miles. And, as is my blogiversary tradition, I am temporarily opening the comments for your suggestions, insults, knock knock jokes, Vi*gra spam, etc. Have at it!
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/16/2008 19:48 Comments ||
Top||
Just weeks after President George W. Bush signed the Order creating a new US military command dedicated to Africa, AFRICOM, events on the mineral-rich continent have erupted which suggest a major agenda of the incoming Obama Presidency will be for the son of a black Kenyan to focus US resources, military and other, on dealing with the Republic of Congo, the oil-rich Gulf of Guinea, the oil-rich Darfur region of southern Sudan and increasingly the Somali pirate threat to sea lanes in the Red Sea and Indian Ocean. The legitimate question is whether it is mere coincidence that Africa appears just at this time to become a new geopolitical hot spot or whether it has a direct link to the formal creation of AFRICOM.
What is striking is the timing. No sooner had AFRICOM become operational than major new crises broke out in both the Indian Ocean-Gulf of Aden regarding spectacular incidents of alleged Somali piracy, as well as eruption of bloody new wars in Kivu Province in the Republic of Congo. The common thread connecting both is their importance, as with Darfur in southern Sudan, for Chinas future strategic raw materials flow.
#1
What is striking is the timing. No sooner had AFRICOM become operational than major new crises broke out.
Without a hammer a nail is as interesting as a large splinter. With a hammer, a nail is an opportunity for action.
But I thought AFRICOM had been operational for several years. Was it that the work had been done under another command until now? Will those at the receiving end notice a difference?
The government of independent Bangladesh in its first decision banned five communal outfits including Jamaat-e-Islami, which not only opposed the nation's independence but also actively helped Pakistani occupation forces commit genocide and other war crimes.
Thirty-seven years into independence, those who won freedom of Bangladesh through a nine-month bloody war are waging another fight against the defeated anti-liberation forces in a battle of vote.
The leading veterans including the living commanders of the Liberation War have launched a unified battle to wake up people once again to stand against Jamaat and alleged war criminals contesting the national polls.
Prior to the celebration of Victory Day today, the sector commanders and other Liberation War forces have already identified 14 candidates as war criminals in the BNP-Jamaat alliance.
The banned parties including Jamaat were given the green light to do politics during the rule of late president Ziaur Rahman after the assassination of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in 1975.
After victory on December 16, 1971 the first issue of newspapers of the new nation carried the government's decision to ban five communal parties on December 18.
The Morning News run the report reading, "The government of the peoples' republic of Bangla Desh has banned four communal parties with immediate effect. These four political parties are Muslim League and all its factions, Pakistan Democratic Party, Nezam-e-Islam and Jamat-e-Islami. In addition to these the government has also banned the Pakistan People's Party. The announcement was made by the Bangla Desh government in a radio broadcast."
The Liberation War forces are waging the fight against Jamaat and war criminals as the long-standing demand to restrict participation of war criminals in the polls has failed.
A ray of hope, however, shimmers in the dark as the Election Commission for the first time decided to debar war criminals from polls and included a provision in the Representation of People (Amendment) Ordinance, 2008.
The provision states: "A person shall be disqualified for election as or for being, a member, if he has been convicted as war criminal by any national or international court or tribunal."
But the move to debar war criminals from polls falls flat on its face as the government has not initiated a move to officially identify them.
Former army chief Lt Gen (retd) M Harun-ur-Rashid told The Daily Star: "The government has neither initiated any move to identify war criminals nor even informed the Election Commission about them though the government has many old records and documents in this regard."
"The Liberation War ministry could have done the job on behalf of the government," added Harun, also coordinator of the Sector Commanders' Forum, which would launch a campaign soon in the constituencies of candidates belonging to anti-liberation forces.
Besides conducting door-to-door campaign against war criminals, they will also publish posters and leaflets making voters aware why these elements should not be elected.
The leaflets and posters will feature credentials and roles of the respective war criminal candidates during the Liberation War.
Committees to resist these elements will also be formed in those constituencies in addition to carrying out regular rallies and processions to be attended by the sector commanders and freedom fighters.
Ekattorer Ghatak Dalal Nirmul Committee, a forum for secular Bangladesh and trial of war criminals, will carry out simultaneous campaigns.
Acting president of the forum Shahriar Kabir told The Daily Star: "We ran such campaigns ahead of polls in 1996 and 2001 with the slogan 'We want Razakar-free parliament'. We also distributed posters, leaflets and pamphlets containing credentials of war criminals in their respective constituencies during those campaigns."
Meanwhile, the Qur'an Sunnah Research Institute, Jhikargachaa, Jessore, and Sachetan Nagorik Samaj have already published posters and leaflets against Jamaat this time.
The publication contains some statements of Jamaat founder Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi that appear contradictory to Islam.
"Had we got expected response from the political parties regarding our appeal of debarring war criminals from polls, the fight need not be launched," Gen Harun said.
When the Sector Commanders' Forum moved to hold a dialogue with political parties with the appeal, BNP did not response. The party rather formed an alliance with anti-liberation force Jamaat.
Even Jamaat was not supposed to get registration with EC but allowed the registration to bring all parties in polls.
Just six days ahead of victory in 1971, incumbent Jamaat Secretary General Ali Hasan Mohammad Mojaheed, who was then president of its student wing Islami Chhatra Shangha, was active to foil the Liberation War.
Mojaheed addressed a rally organised by Al Badr on December 10.
The Daily Azad covered the rally and reported on December 11: "President of East Pakistan Islami Chhatra Shangha Al Mujaheed urged people to deal a deathblow to expansionism of Hindustan. He said, "We cannot accept existence of Hindustan. It has become an indispensable task to eliminate Hindustan for the sake of ensuring security to Pakistan."
Posted by: Fred ||
12/16/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under: Jamaat-e-Islami
I had not been to Mumbai before this year, and, aside from two weeks in Goa a decade ago, had never set foot on Indian soil. That in itself is not surprising; for Pakistanis, India exerts a compelling but complex fascination. It is the enemy in cricket, in two wars and in the long rumbling dispute over the contested territory of Kashmir and yet it is also the ancestral homeland with a shared language and history. My fascination with India was not because it offered a tantalising taste of the exotic other the appeal to those westerners who come to find themselves but because it was so close to Pakistan, the land of my parents, the country where I was born.
Earlier this year I was invited by the Kitab book festival to visit Mumbai. I arrived on a searing February afternoon and took a taxi to my hotel, the Taj, in Colaba on the southern tip of the city. From my window I could see the Gateway to India, the giant stone arch through which the last British troops to leave India passed 60 years ago. Born in Lahore, I was slightly nervous about being in India; I had a faint suspicion that my Pakistani heritage would be instantly identifiable to every passerby. The truth was, of course, that I blended in as well as any other person who did not truly belong; I spoke Urdu to the street vendors and they replied in Hindi, which is practically the same; I ordered saag aloo, which my mother makes for me at home; and everywhere I inhaled the citys wild, chaotic energy. And as I sat in the back of a speeding rickshaw and soaked up the sight of Hindus and Muslims and Sikhs living in the city, I kept wishing I could take my mother to Bombay.
Like my late father, my mother was born Indian in what 14 years later became Pakistan under the 1947 Partition. I wondered how she would feel about being in India and whether it would feel like home. She left Pakistan in 1974, bringing me and my siblings to join my father, who had come to Britain 11 years earlier. For second-generation British Pakistanis, home is a complicated question. I see my generation as the casualties of a double fracture: ripped out of India and then torn from Pakistan. The enmity that is meant to lurk inside every Pakistani towards India has therefore always seemed ridiculous to me; it is like being asked to hate ones own past. It seems natural that my best friend of the past 20 years is a British Indian Sikh: what is different is so much less important than what is shared.
Last month (November) I returned to India for a six-week trip. I was back in Mumbai, working on a Radio 4 documentary. My producer and I had a free Saturday morning, and I showed him the Taj. It was Saturday 22 November. As we walked through the metal detectors I remember thinking they were not in position on my previous visit. We sat briefly by the pool before returning to the heat and noise, wandering past the Leopold cafe, where I had eaten stuffed parathas nine months earlier. The next morning I flew to Bangalore and at the airport I picked up a newspaper. The front-page headline was a quote from the Pakistani president, Asif Ali Zardari, talking of the links between India and Pakistan. Quoting his late wife, Benazir Bhutto, the president said, there is a little bit of India in every Pakistani. The words appeared to usher in a new era of Indo-Pakistani relations, in which the tensions, suspicions and hostility of the past were finally put to rest.
You know what happened next. Within hours, it was reported that Pakistan, or Pakistanis, were implicated in the Mumbai attacks; Mr. Zardaris remarks already felt overtaken by appalling events. Muslims in Mumbai, fearful that the attacks would incite hatred against them, were quick to show their solidarity with the rest of the country. The citys largest Muslim graveyard refused to bury the nine slain gunmen who carried out the attacks and last weeks Eid celebrations were appropriately muted, with some of Bollywoods leading Muslim stars wearing black armbands to express their sadness. Meanwhile, polling across India revealed an unambiguous suspicion that Pakistan was behind the attacks, with more than two thirds of Indians wanting to sever all ties with its troublesome neighbour.
The attacks were inevitably dubbed Indias 9/11 and there has been talk of a war on terror against the Lashkar-e-Taiba, the Lahore-based outfit thought to have carried out the killings. But this second war on terror seems as ill-conceived as the first. The danger is that it distracts from the truth of how much the two countries share. I am convinced that the attacks are further evidence that the partitioning of India and Pakistan has proved a tragic mistake. It was prompted for laudable reasons to protect Muslims from Hindu dominance but it caused the death of millions in the greatest migration in human history, and 60 years on what has it achieved? Two nations three including Bangladesh, which gained independence in 1971 whose leaders have shed blood and spent billions fighting each other while their people have starved and suffered. But in loving India I do not hate Pakistan. I find myself agreeing with the Delhi street vendor who, when I told him I was originally from Pakistan, said with a wave of a hand, India, Pakistan, it is all one. Pakistan is like a severed leg, hacked from the body and expected to run on its own.
The Mexican author, Carlos Fuentes, described the border between the U.S. and Mexico as an enormous bloody wound, a sick body, mute in the face of its ills, on the point of shouting, torn by its loyalties, and beaten, finally, by political callousness, demagoguery and corruption. The words strike me as sadly all-too appropriate to the India/Pakistan border, another bloody wound that can only begin healing when we acknowledge the personal and political tragedy of Partition.
Posted by: john frum ||
12/16/2008 10:55 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[9 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
But this second war on terror seems as ill-conceived as the first. The danger is that it distracts from the truth of how much the two countries share.
India's point, if I'm not mistaken, is that it no longer wishes to share some of those things.
#2
This reminds me of the old Mexican complaint that the US stole the part of Mexico that had all the paved roads.
Pakistan was India but then they got independence and made a mess of it. Perhaps they should look and see what they did differently. Perhaps Madrasses instead of Engineering schools was not a successful game plan.
Every visitor to Pakistan has seen them: 20-foot tall roadside replicas of a remote mountain where, a decade ago, Pakistan conducted its first overt nuclear tests. This is what the country's leaders -- military, secular, Islamist -- consider their greatest achievement.
So here's a modest proposal: Let's buy their arsenal.
A.Q. Khan, father of Pakistan's nuclear program (and midwife to a few others), likes to point out what a feat it was that a country "where we can't even make a bicycle chain" could succeed at such an immense technological task. He exaggerates somewhat: Pakistan got its bomb largely through a combination of industrial theft, systematic violation of Western export controls, and a blueprint of a weapon courtesy of Beijing.
Still, give Mr. Khan this: Thanks partly to his efforts, a country that has impoverished the great mass of its own people, corruptly enriched a tiny handful of elites, served as a base of terrorism against its neighbors, lost control of its intelligence services, radicalized untold numbers of Muslims in its madrassas, handed the presidency to a man known as Mr. 10%, and proliferated nuclear technology to Libya and Iran (among others) has, nevertheless, made itself a power to be reckoned with. Congratulations.
But if Pakistanis thought a bomb would be a net national asset, they miscalculated. Yes, Islamabad gained parity with its adversaries in New Delhi, gained prestige in the Muslim world, and gained a day of national pride, celebrated every May 28.
What Pakistan didn't gain was greater security. "The most significant reality was that the bomb promoted a culture of violence which . . . acquired the form of a monster with innumerable heads of terror," wrote Pakistani nuclear physicist Pervez Hoodbhoy earlier this year. "Because of this bomb, we can definitely destroy India and be destroyed in its response. But its function is limited to this."
In 2007, some 1,500 Pakistani civilians were killed in terrorist attacks. None of those attacks were perpetrated by India or any other country against which Pakistan's warheads could be targeted, unless it aimed at itself. But Pakistan's nuclear arsenal has made it an inviting target for the jihadists who blew up Islamabad's Marriott hotel in September and would gladly blow up the rest of the capital as a prelude to taking it over.
The day that happens may not be so very far off. President Asif Ali Zardari was recently in the U.S. asking for $100 billion to stave off economic collapse. So far, the international community has ponied up about $15 billion. That puts Mr. Zardari $85 billion shy of his fund-raising target. Meantime, the average Taliban foot soldier brings home monthly wages that are 30% higher than uniformed Pakistani security personnel.
Preventing the disintegration of Pakistan, perhaps in the wake of a war with India (how much restraint will New Delhi show after the next Mumbai-style atrocity?), will be the Obama administration's most urgent foreign-policy challenge. Since Mr. Obama has already committed a trillion or so in new domestic spending, what's $100 billion in the cause of saving the world?
This is the deal I have in mind. The government of Pakistan would verifiably eliminate its entire nuclear stockpile and the industrial base that sustains it. In exchange, the U.S. and other Western donors would agree to a $100 billion economic package, administered by an independent authority and disbursed over 10 years, on condition that Pakistan remain a democratic and secular state (no military rulers; no Sharia law). It would supplement that package with military aid similar to what the U.S. provides Israel: F-35 fighters, M-1 tanks, Apache helicopters. The U.S. would also extend its nuclear umbrella to Pakistan, just as Hillary Clinton now proposes to do for Israel.
A pipe dream? Not necessarily. People forget that the world has subtracted more nuclear powers over the past two decades than it has added: Kazakhstan, Belarus, Ukraine and South Africa all voluntarily relinquished their stockpiles in the 1990s. Libya did away with its program in 2003 when Moammar Gadhafi concluded that a bomb would be a net liability, and that he had more to gain by coming to terms with the West.
There's no compelling reason Mr. Zardari and his military brass shouldn't reach the same conclusion, assuming excellent terms and desperate circumstances. Sure, a large segment of Pakistanis will never agree. Others, who have subsisted on a diet of leaves and grass so Pakistan could have its bomb, might take a more pragmatic view.
The tragedy of Pakistan is that it remains a country that can't do the basics, like make a bicycle chain. If what its leaders want is prestige, prosperity and lasting security, they could start by creating an economy that can make one -- while unlearning how to make the bomb.
Posted by: john frum ||
12/16/2008 07:03 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I think buying their nukes is a trap, simply fuse it before handover, and get as far away a you can before it goes off, or get a dedicated boomer to stay for appearances.
Posted by: Rednek Jim ||
12/16/2008 13:36 Comments ||
Top||
It is essential that we exploit this base and strike and crush Pakistanis, enemies of Jews and Zionism, by all disguised and secret plans.
- David Ben Gurion, the first Israeli Prime Minister.His words, as printed in the Jewish Chronicle,9 August 1967
Could this quote be true and accurate? I decided to investigate. I discovered that the London Jewish Chronicle (now called "The JC", the only possible candidate for the "Jewish Chronicle" mentioned in the "quote" wasn't even published on the given date - it is published weekly - and an internet search of their archive for 1967-1974 using the search term "Pakistan" fails to reveal...
I did not anticipate the huge response my inbox received for the article slamming Pakistan. Many of those who wrote in have sought concrete steps to tackle the Terror Central.
The terror attack on world citizens at Mumbai has created revulsion and outrage all over the world. It is imperative that India seize the opportunity provided to destabilise Pakistan.
A stable Pakistan is not in the interest of world peace, leave alone India. Army controls the country and owns its economy.
A significant portion of its GDP is due to army-controlled entities (See: Military Inc - Inside Pakistan's Military Economy, by Ayesha Siddiqa; OUP; 2007). One can easily say that Pakistan economy and its Army/ISI are synonymous.
Unless this elementary fact is internalised, we are not going anywhere. This implies we should stop talking of a stable Pakistan since a stable Pakistan means multiple attacks on many more cities of India by that rogue organisation ISI, which is the core of the Pakistan Army and the heart of Pakistan's economy.
Let us not even assume that Zardari is in control. Poor man -- he did not trust his own investigators to probe his wife's assassination -- he wanted Scotland Yard to do the job. Now he blabbers that if his investigators are satisfied, then he will initiate action against terrorists sitting inside Pakistan.
Periodically, the Pakistan Army likes to present some useful idiots (as Lenin would have called them) as elected representatives and we swoon over such events.
India should take the following steps to destabilise the economy of Pakistan:
1. Identify the major export items of Pakistan (like Basmati rice, carpets, etc) and provide zero export tax or even subsidise them for export from India. Hurt Pakistan on the export front.
2. Identify the major countries providing arms to Pakistan and arm twist them. Tell Brazil and Germany (currently planning to supply massive defense items to Pakistan) that it will impact their ability to invest in India. Tell Germany that retail license to Metro will be off and other existing projects will be in jeopardy.
3. Incidentally, after the arrival of Coke and Pepsi in China, the human rights violations of China are not talked about much by US government organs. Think it is a coincidence? Unless we use our markets to arm-twist arms exporters to Pakistan, we will not achieve our objectives.
4. Tell American companies that for every 5% increase in FDI limit for them, their government needs to reduce equipping Pakistan by $5 billion. That is real politics, not whining. Let us remember that funds are in desperate search of emerging markets and not the other way about. Let us also remember that international economics is politics by another name.
5. Create assets to print/distribute their currency widely inside their country. To some extent, Telgi types can be used to outsource this activity. Or just drop their notes in remote areas.
6. Pressurise IMF to add additional conditionality to the loans given to them or at least do not vote for their loans.
7. Create assets within Pakistan to destabilise Karachi stock market - it is already in a shambles.
8. Cricket and Bollywood are the opium of the Indian middle classes. Both have been adequately manipulated/ controlled by the D-company since the eighties. Chase the D-company money in cricket/ Bollywood and punish by burning D-assets in India instead of trying to have them auctioned by the IT department when nobody comes to bid for it.
9. Provide for capital punishment to those who fund terror and help in that. We have the division in the finance ministry to monitor money laundering, etc. It is important that terror financing is taken seriously and fully integrated into money laundering monitoring systems and this division is provided with much larger budget and human resources. And it should coordinate with RAW.
10. Encourage and allow scientists/ academicians/ elites of Pakistan to opt for Indian passport and widely publicise that fact since it will hurt their self-respect and dignity. There will be a long queue to get Indian passports -- many will jump to get our passport -- since they will not be stopped at international airports. It is rumoured that Adnan Sami wants one. Do not give passports to all -- make it a prized possession. Let it hurt the army- and ISI-controlled country. This one step will destroy their identity and self-confidence.
11. Discourage companies from India from investing in Pakistan, particularly IT companies, till Pakistan stops exporting its own IT (international terrorism).
12. In all these, it is important that we do not bring in the domestic religious issues. The target is the terror central, namely Pakistan, and if there are elements helping them here then they also should be punished -- irrespective of religious labels. If Pakistan is dismantled and the idea of Pakistan is gone, many of our domestic issues will also be sorted out.
Will the Indian elite go for the jugular or just light more candles and scream at the formless/ nameless political class before TV cameras?
It is going to be a long haul and may be in a decade or so, we can find a solution to our existential crisis of being attacked by barbarians from the West. We need to combine strategy and patience and completely throw to the dustbin the 'Gujral Doctrine' by that mumbling prime minister about treating younger brothers with equanimity. The doctrine essentially suggests that if we are slapped on both the cheeks we should feel bad that we do not have a third cheek to show.
He, according to security experts, seems to have dismantled our human intelligent assets inside Pakistan, which has resulted in the gory death of thousands of Indian citizens in the last few years.
Such is our strategic thinking in this complex world since our political class is not adequately briefed and the elite don't think through issues. Better to be simple in our talks and vicious in our actions rather than the other way.
Hopefully, this November attack will create a new vibrant India capable of taking care of its own interests.
The author is professor of finance and control, Indian Institute of Management-Bangalore
Posted by: john frum ||
12/16/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I like the way this guy thinks: Use India's buying power to twist arms and put the screws to Wakiland.
Let the market handle it.
That's our secret, we let the market do all the work.
#3
If you're not in finance the world still turns. And don't make it seem like we have been in the great depression for 13 years now, everything was hunky dory until sometime around september. The market is going back up, not down. Stock prices are rising, home prices are falling. Lets not start jumping out of windows at this point.
#5
Jim my point was that we in the USA now have something that is no longer a free market. It's a hybrid where regulation, litigation and bureaucratic decisions choose winners and losers to at least as great, and in my opinion greater, degree than consumer choices in the market and the business acumen of folks in the private sector.
#6
Yeah, but look at every other country in the world with a stock market and gasp in horror. Ours isn't perfect, not even close, but how would you like to watch your 401k in the Russian RTX go down 80% or more? It could be worse guy.
Despite incontrovertible proof provided by its media about 26/11's surviving terrorist Ajmal Amir Kasab's Pakistani nationality, the Pakistani establishment remains in denial mode and continues to claim that the perpetrators of this heinous act of terror are 'stateless actors'. It also remains unmoved by the clinching evidence gathered by Indian security agencies from satellite and mobile phones left behind by the terrorists and Kasab's confessional statement detailing the training given by Lashkar-e-Tayyeba mentors to them.
It is indeed sad to see a country with such a large Army and an equally huge army of warmongers among its citizenry lacking the gumption to face the truth or to own up its actions. But those who have tracked events in the sub-continent since the painful birth of Pakistan on August 14, 1947 are certain to say that it is living up to its reputation of encouraging violence against India and when caught in the act, blaming it all on 'stateless actors' or 'non-state actors'.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: john frum ||
12/16/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
They ARE state actors - the state is Islam, aka the Caliphate.
Seventeen blown apart shopping in Istanbul; eight children gunned down at a Jerusalem school; 58 slaughtered in front of the Indian Embassy in Kabul. These are just some examples of the terrorist atrocities that plagued the world in the past year. Yet NGO superpower Human Rights Watch, winner of this year's UN Prize for Human Rights, did not find these incidents of mass murder and violations of the most sacred of human rights, the right to life, significant enough to merit a single comment. Instead, it spends millions attacking Western democracies for doing their best to protect civil liberties and fight terror in an age where its perpetrators have no respect for human life and are driven purely by hate and religious fanaticism.
HRW's website lists 38 reports attacking counterterrorism efforts around the globe, but only three on the brutal impact of terrorism on civilians. HRW released three reports in May immediately condemning Israel for the accidental death of a Reuter's cameraman whose equipment looked strikingly similar to a shoulder-fired rocket launcher. It took the organization more than two years and hundreds of suicide bombings, shootings, and missile attacks to issue a report of any significance on the Palestinian terror campaign against Israeli civilians. HRW's statement on the Mumbai massacres is entitled "India: Respect Rights in Hunt for Mumbai Conspirators," and more than half of its only two-paragraph condemnation of 9/11 (as opposed to its more than 600 pages of reports reproaching Israel for committing "war crimes" in Lebanon during its war with Hizbullah) was used to attack the Bush administration. Moreover, HRW has been an active supporter of "lawfare" against US and Israeli officials but remains silent when it comes to the genocidal incitement and terrorist machinations of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Khaled Mashaal, Hassan Nasrallah, and Osama Bin Laden.
MOST STRIKINGLY, as HRW rails against Israel, the US, and other democracies for their "violations of international law," their "impunity," and their "abuse of human rights," it encourages violations by these same countries of international treaties to fight terror and stop its financing. Israel, for example, is obliged under international law to "prevent the movement of terrorists or terrorist groups by effective border controls and controls on issuance of identity papers and travel documents." Yet, HRW lobbied on behalf of a "human rights defender" for the "right to travel" even though he was denied exit visas by Israel and Jordan for his alleged ties to the PFLP.
December 2008 marks the 60th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) - enacted to remedy the "disregard and contempt for human rights" that resulted in "barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind." In the spirit of the UDHR, it is time for this hugely influential organization to stop the selective application of human rights and to take a firm stand against terrorist atrocities. Such acts of horrific violence will never come to an end so long as the perpetrators know that HRW, and other "human rights" NGOs will spend more time lobbying against the West than protesting the murder and wounding of tens of thousands simply going about their daily lives.
The writer is the legal advisor of NGO Monitor and the author of NGO 'Lawfare': Exploitation of Courts in the Arab-Israeli Conflict.
Posted by: john frum ||
12/16/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
Ralph Peters points out how the MSM has misrepresented the shoe incident.
If an Arab journalist had thrown his shoes at Saddam Hussein or one of his guests, the tosser would've been beaten, then tortured, then killed.
Bush won. Even if shoe-thrower Muntadar al-Zaidi (who works for an Egypt-based media outfit) walks out in his stocking feet and becomes a hero to dead-enders, he unwittingly showed what a great thing has been accomplished in Iraq.
Other than Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, what Arab head of government holds free-wheeling press conferences? "President" Mubarak of Egypt? Assad of Syria? The Saudi king? Qaddafi?
The only countries in the Middle East where a journalist could survive after such behavior are Iraq, maybe Lebanon - and Israel. Even Jordan doesn't allow such freedom.
The media have been having a ball with the video of the Great Baghdad Shoe Toss. But they've missed the point completely. Our sacrifices let that pathetic reporter muster the courage to hurl his shoes at our president: He knew he could get away with it.
Posted by: Frozen Al ||
12/16/2008 12:47 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
He's not out of the woods yet.
Seems the Iraqis beat the bejesus out of him for it.
But he is alive and the author is right, if he did that to Saddam they would have taken him out the back door and put one in his ear.
#3
I'm just a lowly civilian but I gotta get this off my chest.
I watched the video of this incident in Baghdad. That the muzzie perp was able to throw the SECOND shoe at President Bush without getting a bullet put into his head by the Secret Service has given me pause for concern.
If I'm out of line for thinkng this way go ahead and tell me. I'm a big boy. I can take it.
Oh, and by the way, if you believe I'm wrong to think this way, please explain to me how utterly impossible it is to contruct a shoe bomb with sufficient explovsive material that if coud kill or harm someone.
#4
The question is whether a shoe bomb could have gotten through the scanning and shoe inspection that even the TSA would do, let alone what must have occurred there. I suspect that's why, unless you want to have nude press conferences, and if Megyn Kelly were in the room it might not be a bad idea, you always have the potential for some article of clothing, or a notepad, or camera, being thrown. They're the press, after all.
The real point is the one Peters makes. It's what makes us different. If the Iraqis and the rest of the ME want to get on board, great. If they want to go back to the way things were in Saddam's days, that's OK, too. They're about to let us know which it is. I'm not optimistic, but I'm willing to wait a bit before concluding that they should all glow in the dark.
#6
Personally, I think it's rather comical that the guy was 5 yards away and he missed... TWICE! I think that's what you call an epic FAIL. Only in the ME could a guy become a folk hero for missing his intended target from such a close range. The truth of the matter is that this incident exposes the irony of the anti-American mindset and the persistently immature and adolescent behavior that seems to be the norm in the ME. They are like a bunch of impetuous 12 year-olds arguing with their wiser parents. "You ruin everything! I hate you! Why won't you just leave me alone... hey, can I borrow the car and $20 to go to the movies?"
#7
Well, here were the secret service guys, playing pinocle in the back room? Color me unimpressed, and the nutcase world encouraged, by their non-response to an assault on our president.
Posted by: regular joe ||
12/16/2008 16:29 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Some one should cook up a video for Youtube showing Bush as Neo dodging bullets. He did it with a level of grace I did not expect.
#11
Why should the Secret Service go nuclear over an idiot throwing his foot coverings? Were there a real weapon involved it would be different, but according to a press conference I saw this morning with a Secret Service spokesman, all those present had been examined before being permitted into the room.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
12/16/2008 20:04 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Tw is right, but if they did that in Kentucky the reporter would be a dead man. We spend billions liberating that countey, billions more on Egypt, and they throw shoes at him. The insult and their rejoicing reminds me on a smaller scale of the joy of 9/11 in the Arab streets. We have missed the mark on dealing with the Arab world.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
12/16/2008 20:24 Comments ||
Top||
#14
I wish W had caught the thing in mid-air and chucked it back at the asshole.
#15
Fu@K the arabs world. Young Americans are dieing there and they disrespect our president, think its funny, and treat the reporter like a hero. Would he do it to Mubarak, hell no!!!
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
12/16/2008 20:50 Comments ||
Top||
#16
The Secret Service should go nuclear over any assault on our president. No assault is acceptable, not so much as a spitball. Lest we encourage similar behavior in the future and the POTUS becomes a tool for every two-bit hooligan in the world to use as a way to get attention. These people DO NOT get to share a stage with our president.
Posted by: Mike N. ||
12/16/2008 21:23 Comments ||
Top||
#17
Imagine some nutcase tossing his sneakers at Bambi after 1/20: do you really think the S.S. will let him off as easily? the first one might catch them unawares, but the second one, i doubt they will have the time to stop and analyze what their eyes are registering; with any luck they will draw and shoot.
New crime: Death by Wingtips.
#1
Frenzy and panic are present. But I wouldn't say Boomers are supporting Bambi. It's clearly blacks and under 40 generation who are kneeling to the Messiah. They are aided and abetted by a few wealthy in the Boomer crowd however, like the little fag Katzenburg and his Hollyweird cronies.
That's as far as I could go into this piece. What a moron. Y2K was not a sham. It was a real problem and if boomers like me hadn't dealt with it as efficiently as we did there would have been chaos because all of the software written before 1995 would have gone off the rails. There was a lot of that software in production at the time and it all had to be upgraded or replaced. It wasn't easy. It took a lot of training, hard work, brains and ingenuity but it was done.
So sorry I was born in the post war period. I didn't have much control over that. I've done the best I could with the situation the way I saw it. I'm sick of idiots like Victor Davis Hanson laying all the blame on me. I don't see myself as being hysterical even though I'm part of the first generation that grew up with the threat of nuclear holocaust. I did not invent racism, communism, smog, islamic fundamentalism, nuclear weapons, AIDS, global warming or bank runs. I had nothing to do with the conditions that led to these problems. They were all started before I was even born by people in previous generations which Hanson appears to think he represents. I'm just trying to deal with it.
Posted by: Abu Uluque ||
12/16/2008 17:53 Comments ||
Top||
#1
He puts out a lot of old news, but his assumptions are not the best.
The subprime collapse is soon to be more than doubled by the ARM and Alt*A mortgage collapses, and while Obama might try to nationalize the US debt, there is no conceivable way for him to do so to all US credit supplies.
Even Obama cannot order banks to l*an money they don't have, to support imaginary leverage accounts. That is, proportionally, demanding that a casin* worth $10M cover the bet of a poor gambler for $100B. Not going to happen.
#3
Yes, a bit high on drama. Hopelessly bleak as it is, and lacking anything more difinitive from the gov't, I'll give his assessment some credence. Examining or at least being made aware of potential worst case scenarios is always a wise approach.
#4
The bad news about ARMS is nothing recent. That news is so old it's forgotten. Which makes it useful to panic about all over again.
Run for the hills. There's no banks or birds there.
Posted by: Mike N. ||
12/16/2008 10:19 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Dump Gold Nao!
When TSHTF you will want Whiskey, FishHooks, and small hand wipes tastefully done. Also remember to stock up on Hollerith Cards, these are no longer made because of the high cost associated with there use, but in a bad situation, nothing can beat the real deal of non-virtual data storage. This is not some leveraged data thing off in no-where land... this is honest, hold it in your hand BYTES!
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.
