#2
This has to be stopped immediately. Kill the author of this blood libel and blow up any propaganda organs that dare print it. If it's blood they want, then blood they shall have.
Posted by: ed ||
12/23/2004 16:28 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Drat, I missed this, so sorry about the sort-of duplicate post.
Posted by: Phil Fraering ||
12/23/2004 16:35 Comments ||
Top||
#4
taste great
Posted by: less filling ||
12/23/2004 16:56 Comments ||
Top||
#5
The sad thing is that people believe this shiite . . .
Posted by: Jame Retief ||
12/23/2004 17:40 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Not only that, but from the millions who will read/hear about it, some will be incited to go on jihad. Lies like this cause people to die.
Posted by: ed ||
12/23/2004 17:44 Comments ||
Top||
#7
I wonder if any of the pansy ass diplomats we've got at State might have the guts to take Prince Bandar aside at the New year's Eve party and ask "what's up" with the newest Saudi blood libel?
Naw...won't happen.
Posted by: Mark Z. ||
12/23/2004 17:47 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Perhaps some of those nice diplomatic gentlemen at the State Department might recollect for whom they really work. I await their protestations at this libel, but I won't be holding my breath, meanwhile.
#9
....but we dare not provoke the Islamo-crazy masses any further by publicly discussing the Gideon/Phoenix option....
This is a good example of why the Left's favorite rationale for appeasement and surrender, the fear of inciting additional hatred, is so absurd and dishonest.
Our real actions cannot even approach what the Islamo-street and its dhimmis believe is already happening.
#10
The pioneer of activist media, Joseph Goebbels, and his wife killed themselves rather than face allied justice after WW2. Their final monstrous act was to take their innocent children with them.
Goebbels' propaganda colleague, Julius Streicher, lacked the nerve or the foresight to follow this example and had to face the rope after Nuremberg.
Their crimes were identical in many cases to what we are seeing today from the Islamic and fifth column media.
This kind of incitement is far beyond the Constitutional, common-law, and logical bounds of free expression, with only brainwashed media-dhimmis and red-diaper baby pop-culturists delusionally believing otherwise.
A tribunal on the pattern of Nuremberg is quite impossible today because of fifth column influence in the legal system. It may be possible in a few years, but we cannot wait for nuclear fire to focus the issues sufficiently for this to happen.
This does not rule out other options however, including the use of force.
I believe that something more subtle than direct attack is in order, but suppose we did put a cruise missile through the front window of Al Watan? What are the Sods going to do? Toss us out and demand UN protection? What would the outraged MSM do? Fabricate some more documents? Impeach Bush when their party is still a minority? The defense testimony in the Senate trial would make interesting reading.
OTOH, a showdown between the free press (so-called "New Media") and the institutional authoritarian media ("MSM") is inevitable. This being the case, a direct attack on foreign propagandists such as Al Watan would force the issue, and do so under circumstances that would place the MSM at a crushing disadvantage. The MSM and their vast array of allies and followers would be required to raise a howl, partly from habit and partly because of the implications for their own power and duplicity.
As such, they would be in the position of publicly defending monstrous and obvious liars. Free media would crucify them during the resulting uproar, the MSM would see it coming, yet they would have no choice.
#12
AC #11, LOL, although come to think of it I'm not sure you're joking.
Posted by: Matt ||
12/23/2004 20:37 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Thanks Matt. I'm not sure either.
From the story:
"These teams offer $40 for every usable kidney and $25 for an eye."
I call bullshit on this one. They're only $21.50 a pound and $10 a dozen, respectively, at Halliburton Gourmet Foods in Lubbock. They are said to be all the rage at those $12,000,000.00 a plate Republican fund-raising bar-be-cues; easier on the squeamish than mountain oysters and quite good battered and fried or smothered in onions with Ariel's special chili sauce.
#14
"Some were found without a head..."
This sounds more like the work of the "insurgents" than the U.S. Army.
Bandar needs to be told that he's on his way home soon if the Saudi government daily doesn't get its act together.
Posted by: Tom ||
12/23/2004 21:02 Comments ||
Top||
#15
A.C. - on a roll......LOL
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/23/2004 22:11 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Many thanks, Frank. I didn't get much sleep today, and I seem to be funnier when I am tired. I don't drink, so maybe fatigue poisons substitute for alcohol.
#17
Many thanks, Frank. I didn't get much sleep today, and I seem to be funnier when I am tired. I don't drink, so maybe fatigue poisons substitute for alcohol.
Azerbaijan Republic's President Elham Aliyev said in a meeting with Iran's visiting Defense Minister Rear Admiral Ali Shamkhani here Wednesday evening, "I sincerely hope defense cooperation between our two countries would expand to an unprecedented level." President Aliyev added, "expansion of ties between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Azerbaijan Republic is not only in the interest of our two nations, but a move aimed at boosting regional peace, security and stability."
Any dealings with Iran usually bring about just the opposite.
The Azeri president meanwhile wished success for the Iranian defense minister in his talks with Azeri officials. Aliyev considered president mullah Mohammad Khatami's state visit of Azerbaijan Republic earlier this year during which a number of cooperation documents were signed between the two countries' officials, quite successful and effective in boosting bilateral ties. He added, "presently the agreements reached between the two countries are being implemented properly and based on the pre-determined schedules." Referring to the continuous trips made by the two countries' officials to each others' capitals, President Aliyev said, "that is the best sign for excellent bilateral cooperation in all fields."
This can't be good, whatever it is.
Posted by: Steve ||
12/23/2004 2:16:55 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
IIUC, the iranians supported the Armenians (language trumping religion) while the Turks supported the Azeris. Azeris may be looking for insurance - on the order of contacts between India and China, Id think.
An explosion at a farmhouse in central China killed eight people and injured one early Thursday, the official Xinhua News Agency reported. The report said the cause was still under investigation but that police had ruled out a workplace accident, suggesting it might have involved a bomb or illegal fireworks. Bombs are often used in violent attacks motivated by personal feuds or business disputes in China, where most gun ownership is illegal but explosives are readily available for mining and construction.
#1
Sounds like somebody's meth lab 'shine still got away from them while cooking. Not that I would know, or anything.
Posted by: N Guard ||
12/23/2004 2:22 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Was uncle Wu mixing up some medicine? Or was it cousin Tangs vodka still? Rice clog up the pressure relief valve in the pressure cooker? I don't think they were mining in the house.
Posted by: trolling for allen ||
12/23/2004 6:45 Comments ||
Top||
#3
So! That still leaves 1 billion nine hundred ninety nine million nine hundred and ninety two other threats to America!
#4
Sorry; that was insensitve! I keep having these dreams of 100 million Red Communists paratrooping into America, starting an invasion! Got to stop looking at that movie "Red Dawn"!
Posted by: Sock Puppet of Doom ||
12/23/2004 14:19 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
What Greek police with EU human rights guidelines tortured poor muslims. We must have a UN commision. Where is Kofi Anan and the outrage? Many commisions must be formed to study this and bring focus on it. It must now be in the press everyday and any mention of the Greek nation in the press must include this forever.
#2
Oh lighten up. It's not like they put panties on the head of terrorists and prison rapists.
Posted by: ed ||
12/23/2004 17:37 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Torturing children is dispicable.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
12/23/2004 18:00 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Mrs. D, I doubt that the Greek police are randomly picking up kids and "torturing" them. If they picked them up, there was a reason behind it. FYI if you resist a Greek cop in public, bystanders are likely to kick your ass BEFORE the cops get a chance. Aris? Any bad cops on the Athens beat?
#5
Maria Kali, director of the Medical Centre for the Rehabilitation of Victims of Torture, described injuries sustained by the Afghans as consistent with torture.
She told the AFP news agency that she personally tended to five children aged 17, while others were treated by other charities.
Why isn't this getting Abu Ghraib coverage?
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
12/23/2004 19:12 Comments ||
Top||
#6
In these parts of the world, 17 years old are not children, they are probably war veterants
#7
D, I doubt that the Greek police are randomly picking up kids and "torturing" them.
Really? I wouldn't doubt it. The same way some rapists randomly pick rape-victims to rape, some torturers pick torture-victims to torture. How else would they get their pleasure?
Why isn't this getting Abu Ghraib coverage?
Because, unlike America, Greece hasn't been to the center of the world since the time of Alexander the Great.
So Hirsi Ali appears to many Muslims as the country's premier moral monster, and to many Dutch people as something like Joan of Arc. It is her position on women's issues that is potentially most explosive. Many European countries, notably France, are trying to recast arguments about the wearing of the Muslim headscarf as a matter of women's rights, as if that will somehow mollify fundamentalists by moving the discussion from a religious plane to a political one. But it risks doing something different: moving the discussion from an interpersonal level to a psychosexual one. It conveys that the West hopes to assimilate Islam by stealing its women out of the seraglio.
The Dutch minister for immigration and integration is Rita Verdonk, a woman, as it happens. In late November she went to the town of Soesterberg to speak about "Dutch values." There she was introduced to an imam named Ahmad Salam. He refused to shake her hand. In the hours after van Gogh's death, Verdonk had given a speech that had drawn fire from a representative of the radical, Antwerp-based Arab-European League, who likened her to Hitler. ("All she was missing," he said, "was the little moustache.") But that wasn't what bothered Salam. "I cannot shake hands with a woman," the imam explained.
"Well, then," Verdonk replied, "we have plenty to talk about."
The Spanish deputy prime minister has attacked the decision to free a controversial imam who was jailed for writing a book which advised readers how to attack women without leaving any marks. MarÃa Teresa Fernändez de la Vega strongly criticised release of Mohamed Kamal Mostafa, who was freed after only serving 20 days of a 12-month sentence... He was released and must go on a training course to learn about human rights. Legal sources said he was released early because his imprisonment would not help his reintegration into society. The course would be more likely to reform his ideas, they added [I suppose the chance of the sensitivity training working =0.00001% vs chance of jail working = 0.000005% but how about expelling him from Spain]
Posted by: mhw ||
12/23/2004 8:19:53 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Ummm... how about four days a month being the workout punching bag for the tough chick in the "everlast" tanktop and matching gloves?
I'd call that effective sensitivity training!
#6
I do not click on links that are labeled not safe for work... since I am, allegedly at work. She's come a loooooonnng way from the figure-skating days, no kidding.
#7
The link I referred to is the boxing photo shown, not the NSFW, so I am assuming that is Tanya Harding as she is now.
Posted by: ed ||
12/23/2004 17:32 Comments ||
Top||
#8
No ID link visible from where I am reading, Ed. I'll take your word that that is Tanya Harding, and not a member of the Bulgarian Women's Nationa Shot-Putt Team.
On an icy, black Sunday night, police officers brought terrible news to the rural idyll of Kevin McMullan's home: A relative had just been killed in a car crash, they said. It was a lie - and it launched one of the world's biggest bank robberies. Once inside, the phony officers put a gun to McMullan's head and tied him up, blindfolded his wife, Karen, and then took her away at gunpoint in her own car into the forest. They told McMullan, a senior executive at Northern Bank in his mid-30s, that he must get the gang into the bank's major cash vault the next night. If he or another abducted bank official, Chris Ward, refused to help or raised any alarm, their families would be put to death. Police said Wednesday that the gang got away with more than 22 million pounds, or about $42 million, more than originally estimated. And the 45-strong detective task force admitted it would be hard to track down a gang that left no apparent forensic evidence during their meticulously planned heist.
Police didn't learn of the crime until after 11 p.m. Monday, three hours after surveillance cameras recorded the gunmen's cash-packed van disappearing down Belfast's major highway. McMullan's wife - free of her blindfold but in soaking wet sneakers and suffering hypothermia in near-freezing temperatures - emerged from the forest to raise the alarm at a farmhouse.
Around the same time, on the edge of Roman Catholic west Belfast, gang members released the 23-year-old Ward's mother, father, brother and brother's girlfriend. "This was a carefully planned operation by professional criminals who obviously had done their homework," Detective Superintendent Andy Sproule said. Sproule said the gang took extensive precautions against leaving traces of their identities at either victim's house or the bank. "We have a long way to go before we have recovered the money or arrested the individuals," he said. The gang remained masked and gloved and wore workmen's overalls, which Northern Ireland paramilitary groups regularly wear on operations and then burn afterward. Police said they suspect the robbers also trimmed their hair short to reduce the chance of dropped strands. The gunmen burned McMullan's car to destroy DNA and other forensic traces.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: .com ||
12/23/2004 2:22:33 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Ohfergawdsake - Now he's supposed to be a fence?
#2
The capture rate for Bank robbers is something like 99.99%. Unless they have a really good fence that can wait for the payoff, they have millions of useless notes.
#3
The police reckon the gang comprised about twenty people. That's about £1m each. The bank (not its insurers - the cash wasn't insured) will probably offer a reward in the region of £2m, for information resulting in arrests and recovery of money. I think someone who wasn't invited to join the party is going to earn themselves a heftier sum than they would have got from being involved. Of course there aren't as many people prepared to rat out the IRA as there are prepared to rat out your average gang of bank robbers...
A federal judge on Wednesday lifted an order barring Proposition 200 from becoming law, clearing the way for state, county and municipal employees to immediately start reporting to immigration authorities suspected undocumented immigrants seeking public benefits. U.S. District Judge David Bury's decision allowed Gov. Janet Napolitano to issue an executive order enacting the controversial voter-approved legislation Wednesday afternoon. The decision left some municipal officials across the Valley and state scrambling to prepare workers who will be required to ask all who apply for public welfare benefits for proof of citizenship. Attorneys for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, the legal advocacy group that sued to stop the government from enforcing the initiative, plan to appeal the decision to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco today or Monday. But state officials vowed that the law will go into effect and said workers will be equipped to deal with the new reporting requirements.
Posted by: Steve ||
12/23/2004 12:11:33 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
So what if they ask if someone is a citizen before giving them welfare benefits? My husband gets asked that all the time for non-governmental services here in Arizona, and he doesn't bitch about it. (Try getting an apartment, power services, phone, etc without a social security number....)
#2
..clearing the way for state, county and municipal employees to immediately start reporting to immigration authorities suspected undocumented immigrants seeking public benefits.
The question is, will "immigration authorities" actually act upon these reports? Something's telling me the answer is a big "No".
#3
I am pleasantly surprised this wasn't lawyered to death like Prop 167(?) in CA. However, this won't affect one the biggest budget killers, illegal aliens crossing the border to use emergency hospitals. One step at a time. Put up the Friendship Fence and the Friendship Minefield.
Posted by: ed ||
12/23/2004 12:54 Comments ||
Top||
#4
What's this "proof of citizenship" crap? Legal resident non-citizens still have full benefits. This is only about illegally. But the MSM will spin this as anti-immigration bigotry.
In 1999, a year after the CIA's director declared war on al-Qaeda, the agency was still training its spy recruits in the art of working embassy cocktail parties and giving James Bond-esque classes in evasive driving, according to a book by a woman who spent five years in the CIA's clandestine service.
Even after the Sept. 11 attacks, wrote Lindsay Moran in her forthcoming book, Blowing My Cover: My Life as a CIA Spy, the CIA was slow to change espionage tactics. Sept. 11, she wrote, "sent everyone at Headquarters into a tailspin" trying to understand the intelligence failures that let the terrorist plot go undetected. But when Moran, then stationed in Macedonia, developed a source who claimed to know Islamic extremists, her overseers at the CIA's Directorate of Operations cabled her that because "Subject may at one time have had terrorist ties," Moran should "cease and desist from any further contact with Subject."
Two years later, after a stint working on Iraq issues before the U.S.-led invasion, Moran resigned from the CIA. She says she was frustrated with the crimp her career had put on her personal life and was disillusioned by CIA bureaucracy. Her account is the latest in a series of critiques that have portrayed an agency slow to respond to new kinds of threats in countries that don't have U.S. embassies and where cocktail parties violate Islamic law. "When I was in training in 1999, the agency was still using this paradigm for training that, so far as I can tell, was implemented sometime in the Cold War," Moran said last week in an interview.
Moran said she has friends at the CIA who have just completed training to be "case officers" for the Directorate of Operations. "I've asked them, 'Are they still using the same training model?' They say they are. We still have spy trainees who are being asked to troll the diplomatic cocktail circuit." Her year of training at "The Farm" — the CIA's field academy for clandestine officers at a base outside Williamsburg, Va. — included paramilitary exercises, mock ambushes and parachute jumps. It also had a section in evasive driving that students called "crash-and-burn" and an exercise in which students at a pretend embassy reception sought to recruit "foreigners" to spy for the CIA. She completed training in December 1999, a year after then-CIA director George Tenet, in a memo to his top lieutenants, declared that the CIA was at war with al-Qaeda. "I want no resources spared in this effort," Tenet wrote.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
12/23/2004 1:29:48 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Maybe they should have named it Bowling for Palestine. Bowlmor Lanes, a fixture in Greenwich Village for decades, was secretly bankrolled in part by the late Yasser Arafat, newly released documents reveal. Using a holding company, Arafat quietly sank about $1.3 million of Palestinian Authority funds into the hipster hangout in 2002, two years before his death.
Somehow, I wouldn't have picked Yasser as a bowling magnate...
The news, first reported in Bloomberg Markets Magazine, hit some Bowlmor patrons like a 15-pound ball taking down the headpin. "If I had known, I wouldn't have come, but I promised the kids," said financier Steve Saslow, 55, with his 4-year-old and 8-year-old in tow. It apparently also came as a surprise to Bowlmor's owners, a company called Strike Holdings, which runs the bowling alley called Strike in New Hyde Park, L.I., as well as lanes in Maryland and Florida. The firm said it was "shocked" to learn Arafat was behind the investment - and planned to return the money and sever any ties to the Palestinians.
Kinda late now, isn't it?
"This information was never disclosed to us previously, and had we known the source of these funds, which represents approximately 2% of our company's equity, we never would have accepted them," spokeswoman Marcia Horowitz said. "We do not endorse their values, and we do not want to be affiliated with them in any way."
"We were trying to figure why all the bowling balls had those fuses coming out the top..."
Bowlmor has been around since 1938, but it was sold in 1997 to entrepreneur Tom Shannon. Shannon happened to attend business school with Arafat's U.S. investment manager, Zeid Masri, who decided to park some Palestinian Authority cash in Bowlmor. The $1.3 million, funneled through a company called Onyx Funds, was just a small piece of a $799 million fortune that Arafat invested in companies across the Middle East and the U.S. Masri figured the stake would be a moneymaker, but it looks like a gutter ball for the Palestinian Authority, since Strike has not paid any dividends on the investment.
Posted by: Steve ||
12/23/2004 11:45:56 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Somehow, I wouldn't have picked Yasser as a bowling magnate...
Well, Arafart's head was about as dense and about as hard as a bowling ball...
(2004-12-20) -- Forensic DNA testing has revealed that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld did not personally lick postage stamps on letters to families of troops killed in Iraq.
"We're still looking for a positive DNA match on the stamp saliva," said an aide to Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-NE. "We've asked to swab the cheeks of dozens of Pentagon office staffers."
This new evidence of Mr. Rumsfeld's psychological detachment from the war in Iraq follows his admission that letters he wrote to families of soldiers and Marines included a facsimile of his signature, rather than a unique one done with his own hand each time.
Mr. Hagel could not be reached for comment, the aide said, because "the senator is busy handwriting a news release on the topic."
Posted by: Korora ||
12/23/2004 12:17:32 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Are you sure this is scrappleface?
When I heard that they were bitching because Rummy didn't personally sign each notification-of-death I just about had a accident in my truck as I exclaimed 'What the F--k!'.
Its shit like that which convinces me that the MSM is firmly and knowingly on the side of the terrorists.....
#2
I don't think the liberoids and the mediaiods were looking for Rummy to lick stamps, but their behinds.
Posted by: Capt America ||
12/23/2004 1:36 Comments ||
Top||
#3
At this point, he could lick their behinds and they still wouldn't be satisfied. They're out for an apology that includes a war crimes confession and falling on a sword. And they have about as much chance of getting it as Chirac has of getting a weekend of French cuisine and Laura in his bed at Crawford.
Posted by: Tom ||
12/23/2004 8:31 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Nothing would satisfy the lberaliods. They just lost an election and they need someone or something to vent their frustration. Look for them to go beyond the petty and look at who Rummy dated while he was in the Navy.
#5
Well, I happen to agree that Rummy should personally sign those letters. These families gave the ultimate sacrifice for freedom and for their country, and the SecDef should sign those letters by hand. Sorry, but it's not too much to ask.
I'm not willing to put his head on a pike for it, however. And the anklebiters are really grasping at straws.
#6
Seafarious: Well, I happen to agree that Rummy should personally sign those letters. These families gave the ultimate sacrifice for freedom and for their country, and the SecDef should sign those letters by hand. Sorry, but it's not too much to ask.
I think having Rumsfeld personally sign these letters is a misallocation of resources. Let's say it takes 15 minutes a day from his schedule. Is this really the best use of the Defense Secretary's time? If we want to honor those who died, the best way to do this is to increase survivor benefits. Rumsfeld's job is to win the war, not engage in pointless PR exercises. They're not fighting the war for Rumsfeld - they're fighting for the rest of us. Rumsfeld is merely the person we have deputized to manage the war.
#8
If, God forbid, it ever happened, I'd rather have a personal letter from his Captain or Sargeant or someone in his unit that a form letter (even if hand-signed) by a General or SecDef.
#9
ZF,
It's a measure of respect. It's been 3 years and we've lost about 1400 of our finest men and women. A signature takes less than 5 seconds. Take one minute once a week and do the right thing.
Posted by: ed ||
12/23/2004 11:19 Comments ||
Top||
#10
ed: It's a measure of respect. It's been 3 years and we've lost about 1400 of our finest men and women. A signature takes less than 5 seconds. Take one minute once a week and do the right thing.
It's a lousy idea because it might cause him to get depressed and lose heart. I don't care how the survivors feel about Rumsfeld's signature, as long as they're materially taken care of. I don't want the SecDef going into a blue funk because he's having to deal with signing his name to death notices all day. His job is to win, not emote. We have plenty of people for that.
#11
Ed, if you lost a loved one, the LAST thing on your mind is if the letter was signed by hand. Jakal is right that a more personal letter by the CO or comrade is applicable. This is on the same plain of thought that the President should attend the funerals of fallen soldiers. He has met with (or attempted to meet with) as many family members as possible, but let be reasonable here. I'll bet ANY letter sent by ANY member of congress (including those ranting now) was autosigned.
#12
ZF,
If signing condolence letters is enough to make a SedDef lose his balls then he shouldn't be there. We need harder men than that, and I believe Rumsfeld has the balls for the job. The letters already have his signature, although by machine. But condolence letters are not mass mailed Christmas cards. They symbolize the grief and appreciation of the country for the sacrifice of their husband, wife, or child. This is not WW2, where so many died that death notices were sent by telegram. If our leaders lose the respect of those who sacrifice to protect our country, if our citizens no longer think that our leaders care for those they lead, then we can all go home and wait for next city to be attacked.
As for depression, shouldn't we be more concerned about the company and battalion commanders who write personal condolence letters to the families of their men and women? After all, they are ones doing the actual fighting and knew their fallen comrades. We are much tougher than that, and it's a cop out to expect less from our leaders than we would expect from ourselves.
Posted by: ed ||
12/23/2004 12:33 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Sarge,
I agree with what you say. I am saying either sign the letters personally or don't send a letter at all with your signature. A form letter with a machine signature says that the deceased is not worth even a few seconds of thought. I find that disrespectful. It has negative value.
Posted by: ed ||
12/23/2004 12:44 Comments ||
Top||
#14
ed: As for depression, shouldn't we be more concerned about the company and battalion commanders who write personal condolence letters to the families of their men and women? After all, they are ones doing the actual fighting and knew their fallen comrades. We are much tougher than that, and it's a cop out to expect less from our leaders than we would expect from ourselves.
Toughness consists of ignoring unappeasable critics, not in signing condolence letters. Signing death notices is tough work - maybe you should read a few accounts of combat veterans who worked at notifying the next of kin, day in and day out, and quit relatively quickly.
ed: A form letter with a machine signature says that the deceased is not worth even a few seconds of thought. I find that disrespectful. It has negative value.
What I find disrespectful is the idea that the leadership's time is better spent signing letters and wallowing in sentimentality than prosecuting the war. If a few seconds of thought is all the time he's spending, then how does that differ materially from using the autopen? The whole point of the signature is to show that he thought about these men. If all he does is scrawl his name across the page, it's not materially different from using the autopen. You seem to be saying that Rumsfeld's signing of these letters while on autopilot is somehow more meaningful to the survivors than the autopen. I don't see it. If he's on autopilot, it doesn't mean anything. If he's not on autopilot, it's going to slow him down. Either way, it's a diversion from what we hired him for - to keep America safe from its enemies. (Heck - to show proper respect, maybe he should be one of the pall-bearers).
#16
Having lived throug the emotional rollercoaster that losing squadron-mates brings, I can tell you that our C.O. devoted many hours personnaly composing the letters to the families of those lost in a crash at sea. To watch him agonize over each word, trying to convey his exact meanings did not distract him from his others tasks: continue with the required level of operations to support the carrier battle group and to find out the real cause of the accident to prevent a recurrence. Was he sentimental? yes, these men were part of the 'family; but he never lost sight of the end game. And these were not conflicting goals.
#17
USN: Having lived throug the emotional rollercoaster that losing squadron-mates brings, I can tell you that our C.O. devoted many hours personnaly composing the letters to the families of those lost in a crash at sea.
Did he lose three or four men daily? Should Rumsfeld personally compose these letters, agonizing over every word, taking two hours out of every day? Should the president do this instead? Maybe the entire high command should spend every day writing letters to the survivors of our war dead. Wouldn't bring them back to life, or win the war, but it would sure make the survivors feel better. Or would it?
#18
My point is this - if we want to respect the dead, having Rumsfeld sign condolence letters is a waste. Give the children full scholarships to college, and the widows (or widowers) lifetime stipends. Rumsfeld did not send their spouses and parents off to war. We did. Our response to the sacrifice of their loved ones needs to be substantive, not tokenistic.
At the same time, we cannot let the survivors determine how the war is fought. We honor them because they fought the good fight. But we have our goals, and they have theirs.
#19
Ed, I disagree that it's disrespectful. To send nothing at all would be disrespectful. The rest of this argument is so over the top it boggles the mind. Would you suggest this if we had massive casualties? And at what point does the SecDef stop 'personally' signing each letter and let the machine do it? Rummy is doing a great job and this is just a weak attemp to attack him. Shame on you for falling into the LLL trap.
#20
Sarge,
The secretary should not do it when it interferes with his other duties. I am saying to honor our dead and console their relatives the right way without being prodded to do it. I'm not angry at Rumsfeld or calling for his resignation. Just do what is right. It does not need to be the SecDef that signs the letters. It can be the service heads, an under secretary, or high official who volunteered for the job. We should be proud of the way we honor our dead. If not, then put into place procedures that we can be proud of when exposed to the light of day. Consoling the relatives of our deceased is a man's job, not a machine's.
As for the WW2 method of informing relatives by telegram, it may have been practical given the level of casualties (200/day vs 1.5/day), but it did not make it right. The way we do it now, with an officer and chaplain personally visiting the family, is much more humane and respectful.
Posted by: ed ||
12/23/2004 17:28 Comments ||
Top||
#21
level of casualties (200/day vs 1.5/day)
Make that 300/day in WW2.
Posted by: ed ||
12/23/2004 17:40 Comments ||
Top||
#22
Ed, No it's not the place for the generals place to send letters of condolences (either). Rummy was showing respect by sending the letter, it isn't his place (or duty) to send one. The LLL are acting as if he sent the letter in some half hearted way. BTW it's the President (his duty) that sends personal letters of condolences (on behalf of the country) to the families and I will bet that those are auto-penned as well. Is that showing disrespect to the families? Where is the press on this matter? This is a totally made up story, plain and simple.
#23
The sad thing, IMHO, is the effectiveness of these faux issues - look at the thread... The other side, the socialist / fascist / moonbat coalition, is playing upon our decency and sense of honor to divide us. And it works because we have them.
#24
It's beginning to smell a lot like Vietnam, everywhere I read.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
12/23/2004 19:09 Comments ||
Top||
#25
As a very strong supporter and admirer of SoD Rumsfeld, not personally signing the letters gives a rather cheap and unfortunate gift to the liberoids and mediaoids. Just watched a segment of GoofHardball where an antiwar bereaved parent was paired against a bereaved parent who supports the war. Typical muckraking by the mediaoids.
Rumsfeld has been in Washington long enough to protect his back, and should have in this case. But the country needs SoD for four more years.
Posted by: Capt America ||
12/23/2004 19:28 Comments ||
Top||
#26
Rummy's the man, I don't care if he signed or licked those letters, he has bigger things to do: run a war, piss off the MSM, and ed as well, apparently
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/23/2004 19:28 Comments ||
Top||
#27
What would make more sense would be if 100 ordinary people, of all creeds and colors, signed these letters to thank the survivors for their sacrifice. After all, we, the people, sent them there.
#28
The gratitude that really matters is the implicit thanks expressed by the iraqi people when they elect their own leaders and taste real freedom as a result of our brave soldiers' sacrifice. By comparison everything else is, as ZF says, mere tokenism.
Let's keep our eye on the ball here. Winning is what matters. The MSM and pro-fascist hyenas are trying desperately but they cannot and must not distract us from this overarching task.
This is a link that will get passed far and wide... and well it should: Real American Heroes performing thankless tasks. Someday, even the Iraqi Arabs may come to realize the 24K gold opportunity handed to them by these brave selfless men and women. Excellent presentation. Worthy, folks, worthy.
Contrast and compare to the Moonbat Self Pity Orgy of last week. Unworthy comes to mind.
In a statement released in New York, Mr. Annan said "it is with very mixed emotions that I have accepted the long-standing request" of Mr. Riza, 70, to retire on 15 January. Mr. Riza, who has been Chef de Cabinet since 1997, has worked for the UN both at Headquarters in New York and in the field since 1978, when he joined the world body after spending 19 years with Pakistan's Foreign Service. He has held senior posts in the UN's peacekeeping and political affairs departments, and has worked in the field in Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Bosnia & Herzegovina. Mr. Annan said Mr. Riza "has always provided me with wise and trusted counsel" during his stint as Chef de Cabinet.
#1
Too bad it's not just "Annan announces retirement."
Or better yet, "UN announces dissolution."
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
12/23/2004 21:56 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Mr. Annan said Mr. Riza "has always provided me with wise and trusted counsel" during his stint as Chef de Cabinet
AKA - "he knows too much". Expect a fatal accident for Mr. Riza, before he can be subpoena'd
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/23/2004 22:18 Comments ||
Top||
#3
In this link (Riza, Annan, France, Belgium, & Clinton) lies proof from the jackass's own mouth that the U.N. had intelligence about the Rwandan massacre days before it started happening. All of these usless bastards have blood on their hands. This is the U.N that liberals want to hand the U.S over to. Here is a sample from the link.
Was this a normal kind of cable from the force commander?
" It was alarming. Now it had predicted that these killings would start in a matter of days. As weeks pass, the killings, yes, were occurring. There was an atmosphere of widespread violence, but there was no dramatic increase. What was predicted in this cable did not happen for several weeks, and I think we were all caught unawares when the situation just exploded on the 6th of April"
What did you tell your force commander to do about the informant that night?
"to see the three ambassadors who were very closely associated with the agreement and its implementation. That was Belgium, France, and U.S. They were actually given copies of the cable. And so the parties directly concerned in Kigali, which is the U.N. mission, the president, and three ambassadors, had this information and were closely monitoring events."
When the force commander wanted to go on arms raid in those circumstances, how did you react?
"We have to go by the mandate that we are given by the Security Council. It's not up to the secretary-general or the Secretariat to decide whether they're going to run off in other directions."
Do you think that was a mistake that cost lives?
"Obviously it did. It cost lives, but I'm not sure that it was the mistake itself. ... With all due respect, those who were responsible for the loss of lives were those who had planned the killing. They are responsible for the loss of life. We did not anticipate that this was going to happen. Yes, we made a mistake. We deeply regret it. We failed there. And in the first few days, no, we did not realize this was a genocide. We thought it was the breakdown of a cease-fire."
UN nuclear watchdog chief Mohammed ElBaradei is expected to be the only candidate when his post comes up for election next year but is not a shoo-in as Washington finds him too soft on Iran, diplomats said.
He'll be less of a shoo-in if they come up with an alternative candidate...
The deadline for submitting candidacies to become director general of the watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency falls December 31 but after that the IAEA's 35-nation board of governors must approve a candidate by a two-thirds vote. The United States wants ElBaradei replaced at the crucial Vienna-based agency since it feels he is not tough enough against an Iranian nuclear program which Washington charges hides covert weapons development, diplomats said. Washington officially says it opposes ElBaradei, a former Egyptian diplomat who has run the IAEA since 1997, getting a third four-year term, referring to the Geneva group of top 10 contributors to international organizations' policy that agency heads should not serve more than two mandates. The United States, however, is having trouble finding "a good competing candidate," a Western diplomat told AFP, and reportedly failed to convince Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer to put himself forward.
Tough to rally against a guy when you don't have your own candidate waiting in the wings.
Meanwhile, ElBaradei has solid support from non-aligned countries on the IAEA's board of governors and some European states as well. Diplomats on the board said they did not expect there to be other candidates besides ElBaradei, who put his hat in the ring in September, since neither the United States nor a possible Japanese choice wants to go up against him without being sure of winning, even if Japan was still mulling the matter ahead of year's end.
Big mistake. You can't win an election if you don't have a candidate. Find a respected neutral with good credentials and no history of offending anyone, and put him/her forward.
Posted by: Steve White ||
12/23/2004 12:11:50 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Title is misleading, unfortunately. I was hoping we would find someone who could at least pass the mirror test.
Posted by: Capt America ||
12/23/2004 1:34 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Rafsanjani, perhaps? Methinks certainly all of the so-called non-aligned shitocracies - led by the Pied Piper of Paris, of course, would cream their jeans to elect him.
Cos the people perpetrating the violence can't possibly responsible for their own actions...Oh, and it's also America's fault. Sure glad we've got researchers to point this out...
Posted by: Seafarious ||
12/23/2004 12:22:54 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Situation Normal. Rather clearly (something I witnessed there first-hand) the Thais have the same LLL Moonbat problem in their Academic circles. I can vouch for the fact that the English press (The Nation and The Bangkok Post) are, also, just to the left of Trotsky. They've both had it in for Toxin from Day One. And he'll ignore them, as he has from Day One, heh.
#2
Welcome to the club of goverment heads who persecute Moslems, Thaksin Shinawatra. Our membership (ranging from Aznar to Yeltzin) is the very picture of diversity.
Thailand charged on Wednesday that ringleaders of a Muslim separatist insurgency were hiding in neighboring Malaysia. Deputy Interior Minister Sutham Saengprathum reasserted that the government has obtained photographs of Thai rebels undergoing military training in Malaysia's Kelantan state and that several rebel leaders were also hiding in that state. A war of words between the neighbors was sparked after Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra first made the claim about the training camps last week. Malaysia has angrily denied the allegations.
"Certainly not! And we curse your mustache besides!"
Malaysia's Deputy Defense Minister Zainal Abidin Zin said Wednesday that Thailand should hand over the alleged photo evidence and questioned why the Thai government had kept the pictures from Malaysian authorities "all this while if they sincerely want our cooperation." Zainal said Thai leaders and security officials made no mention about such photo evidence in several meetings with their Malaysian counterparts this year. "We are puzzled about what is going on," Zainal said. "We have no problems in helping Thailand and have put more soldiers at the borders and beefed our intelligence ... we are doing all we can."
"We know nothing."
Sutham told Business Radio Wednesday that while the Malaysian government didn't assist the insurgents it didn't feel obliged to take measures to repatriate them to Thailand. He said the rebels may be assisted by some authorities and members of Malaysia's opposition party. "Several ringleaders and key members (of the insurgency) are hiding in Kelantan state. This is an open secret and everyone in the region knows where they are," Sutham said. He said photos of the training, which were taken by a Thai agent, would be used "for seeking cooperation with Malaysian counterparts."
Posted by: Seafarious ||
12/23/2004 12:05:02 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Article: Sutham told Business Radio Wednesday that while the Malaysian government didn't assist the insurgents it didn't feel obliged to take measures to repatriate them to Thailand.
Sounds like how the Taliban didn't assist al Qaeda but didn't feel obliged to hand them over to the US. A distinction without a difference.
The US is contemplating incursions into Syrian territory in an attempt to kill or capture Iraqi Ba'athists who, it believes, are directing at least part of the attacks against US targets in Iraq, a senior administration official told The Jerusalem Post. Assad, time for chit chat is up.
The official said that fresh sanctions are likely to be implemented, but added that the US needs to be more "aggressive" after Tuesday's deadly attack on a US base in Mosul. The comment suggested that the US believes the attack on the mess tent, in which 22 people were killed, may have been coordinated from inside Syrian territory. Straw that broke the camel's back, comes to mind.
"I think the sanctions are one thing. But I think the other thing [the Syrians] have got to start worrying about is whether we would take cross-border military action in hot pursuit or something like that. In other words, nothing like full-scale military hostilities. But when you're being attacked from safe havens across the border — we've been through this a lot of times before — we're just not going to sit there. In other words, Colin Powell won't save you this time.
"You get a tragedy [like the attack in Mosul] and it reminds people that it is still a very serious problem. If I were Syria, I'd be worried," the senior administration official said. Everybody stand back, there is no rhetoric to see here.
Another US official said that sentiment reflects a "growing level of frustration" in Washington at Syria's reluctance to detain Ba'athists and others who are organizing attacks from Syrian territory. The official cautioned, however, that whether to take cross-border military action is still a matter of discussion within the administration and that a military incursion is still "premature." The key words are "discussion WITHIN the administration" if this the case, Assad, it's your ass.
The senior official said US anger increased substantially after a prolonged incursion into Fallujah last month, which revealed "how much of the insurgency is now being directed through Syria." The US has not publicly detailed the evidence it has regarding the extent to which attacks are being organized from within Syria. But a report in The Times of London on Thursday suggested not only that Syria is becoming a base for Iraqis to operate, but that Syrian officials are themselves involved.
The newspaper said Iraq had confronted Syria with evidence that included photographs of senior Syrian officials taken from Iraqi fighters captured during the Fallujah offensive. It also said US marines in Fallujah found a hand-held global-positioning system receiver with waypoints originating in western Syria and the names of four Syrians in a list of 27 fighters contained in a ledger.
On Sunday, the Post reported that the US had provided Syria with a list of people it would like to see detained but that Syrian authorities have so far been unresponsive. What list? I know nothing about a steenking list. In other news, Syria will also be unresponsive when the U.S. hits them.
The Post quoted a senior government official predicting a confrontation with Syria "unless the Syrians reverse their policy." US forces already operate along the Syrian border with Iraq, conducting air and mobile patrols. No doubt, it will happen for sure this time.
This week, US President George W. Bush warned of possible new sanctions on Syria. "We have tools at our disposal, a variety of tools ranging from diplomatic tools to economic pressure. Nothing's taken off the table," he said. You have no clue about the tools we possess.
And in an interview with a Lebanese newspaper, Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage echoed the threat of new sanctions. In particular, Armitage said Washington wanted action taken against fugitive officials of the ousted regime, who remained at liberty in Syria and who "seem to us to be responsible for funding anti-US attacks in Iraq." "We want them to turn off this faucet," said Armitage, according to the paper's Arabic translation of his remarks. Armitage: "If you don't stop funding the attacks were going to...going to...threaten you 10 more times."
Syria says it is doing all it can to allow prevent insurgents from crossing the Syrian border into Iraq and insists it would need more help to confront the problem. It also says it is being unfairly singled out whereas Ba'athists and others feeding the insurgency are hiding in other countries in the region. Yes but, we only a small part of the overall problem. Can you pretty please bomb the other countries before you bomb us?
The Iranian military led by the air force has been ordered to stand ready to defend the country's nuclear sites in case of attack, army chief General Mohammad Salimi said yesterday. "The air force has been ordered to protect the nuclear sites, using all its power," Salimi said, quoted by the government daily Iran. "The air force has temporarily suspended all its manoeuvers and focused its means on patrolling the sky," he added. "All our forces including land forces, anti-aircraft, radar tactics ... are protecting the nuclear sites and an attack on them will not be simple," the general said. American newspapers and the regional Press have speculated over a possible US or Israeli attack on the nuclear sites of Iran. US and Israeli officials have denied any such plans.
Posted by: tipper ||
12/23/2004 9:36:54 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I sure as hell HOPE they defend them! Otherwise when we take them out we won't also be taking out as much of their military! So go ahead boyos, defend them using all your "power"!
#4
Well considering any air attack will be pre-empted by a cruise missle attack targeting their anti-aircraft batteries, they will probably pose a serious threat even if our aircraft show up just after the cruise missles.
But I doubt it will be a one raid type thing like the Iraqi reactor was. It would be cruise, strike fighters, B1's, then followed last by the the big boys carrying the moabs. And probably at several sites. I mean we are talking probably 4 or 5 individual locations.
Not an easy task, considering refueling etc. Gonna need some heavy Navy support as well as Air force. Then you got to exempt Israel from taking part, due to political stupidity. And B-2's flying all the way from Missouri, and it does seem like a difficult thing to pull off and actually do enough to take our their program. With them spreading it out to places you have no idea where.
My guess is that if they felt confident in taking out a big part of Irans nuclear program in one day, they would have done it already.
#5
BaR-
I trained with guys from the old Imperial Iranian AF in the late 70s, and they weren't overly sharp, but they were competent enough to do the job without killing themselves.
Having said that, any US first strike will be a wipeout. The IRAF will most likely be unable to leave its runways. If it can, there will be no one to tell it what to do, because the controllers will be dead in the rubble of their bunkers. Those few that get into the air will be outnumbered, outgunned, and outclassed (they don't get much actual training time - what little they get consists of taking off, flying around, and landing.)by even a single wing of F-15s. The biggest threat will remain SAMs and AAA, because it is damned hard to shut them off completely no matter what the book says. And to Jimbo - the B2s can by the book do it all. The catch won't be so much the timing as the little things that go wrong during those last few seconds of the bomb run. More than likely, the usual sequence will be reversed: F-117 and B-2 strikes THEN the cruise missiles to take out anything still standing.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
12/23/2004 12:46 Comments ||
Top||
#6
One question. How does one propose to keep the Persian Gulf, and especially the Straits of Hormuz, open after the airstrikes?
Posted by: ed ||
12/23/2004 12:49 Comments ||
Top||
#7
It has been discussed during and after every flare-up in the Gulf over the past twenty years, ed. No doubt that has been discussed this time as well.
As for traffic in and out of the Gulf, there are ways to minimize exposure to attack. Likely also take out known Silkworm sites and observation posts.
#8
How do you know there aren't mines already planted with several thousand pounds of explosives buried in the mud of the straits. Encase them in concrete and the sonar returns will look like that from rocks. All thats required to target a tanker is a team with surveyors tools to track it and break it's back. Sink a supertanker in 60m of water and you've closed the entire Persian Gulf for years. What about suicide boats and planes. What about artillery or Grads? Any of these will do quite a job on a loaded tanker. Do you think any military can find them all? I believe that to attack Iran will require a real war and we should be building the forces for it, not hoping that the mullahs will give up on the first hint of bombs.
Posted by: ed ||
12/23/2004 13:41 Comments ||
Top||
#9
There won't be a strike. Learn to live with it but keep in mind they can reach Paris a lot sooner than they can reach New York.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
12/23/2004 13:47 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Mrs. D, that is exactly what I think will happen. And because we won't do what is necessary now, it will set the stage for a future nuclear war.
Posted by: ed ||
12/23/2004 13:54 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Thank you for enlightening us with that penultimate argument. I now realize I have no chance to compete with such a shining intellect. You win any and all future debating points. I humbly concede and beg your pardon.
Posted by: ed ||
12/23/2004 14:01 Comments ||
Top||
#13
appreciate all the war-gaming ... very interesting and thought provoking
#14
I believe that to attack Iran will require a real war and we should be building the forces for it, not hoping that the mullahs will give up on the first hint of bombs.
For an all-out invasion, yes, but I suspect that at this time due to the current situation, any strike will be to cripple Iranian capability to do certain things. A limited strike using aircraft and guided missiles against stationary complexes of strategic value should accomplish that. (as opposed to Clintonian use of cruise missiles against terrorist training camps, where not much would be present in the way of expensive hardware that would be difficult and expensive to replace)
#15
We can bomb sites, all of which may have back-ups we are unaware of, can be replaced in 6 months and earn the undying enmity of the Iranian people, or we can work to overthrow the mullahs and get a more reasonable government that can be talked into doing a Khadaffi. Which seems the superior (not more satisfying) long term strategy?
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
12/23/2004 14:42 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Remember the Moon in your equations of a Persian invasion. An enemy force on the lunar surface could easily use the "gravity well" to drop reinforced concrete boulders on the Straits of Humas. Ha! Where would the concrete come from you ask? It would come from SLAVE MARTIAN MINERS who cling to the OWG goal of the CLINTONIAN-lizoid mindset.
#18
Perhaps Mr. Sharon will give them their first chance to protect their nuclear sites.
Posted by: Carlos ||
12/23/2004 14:45 Comments ||
Top||
#19
We can bomb sites, all of which may have back-ups we are unaware of, can be replaced in 6 months and earn the undying enmity of the Iranian people, or we can work to overthrow the mullahs and get a more reasonable government that can be talked into doing a Khadaffi. Which seems the superior (not more satisfying) long term strategy?
The question is, how "long" is long term, and does Iranian progress on their Bomb allow for it? As for earning "enmity" from the Persians, well, that has to be seen. A whole slew of doom-and-gloom predictions of this sort have been made already with regard to that part of the world and not many of them have turned out to be right on the money.
All the above having been said, the fomenting unrest approach is a very good one, and should have been put into motion a long time ago, if not being done now.
#20
whatever, general.
anymouse,
Comming so soon after my pessimistic comment, I assumed you meant that comment for me. I reread the article and I see where your comment may been directed at the Iranian general. If so, then I humbly apologize for my snarkiness toward you.
Posted by: ed ||
12/23/2004 15:29 Comments ||
Top||
#21
Your not gonna overthrow the Mullahs without military softening. Especially the rev guards or whatever they are called, and the militia thugs the mullahs use on the students.
Nor can you wait around. I think they will hit them next year, but they are hoping that the closer the Iranians get to a weapon the easier it will be to locate their true facilities.
I think if we blow up the reactors they have under construction, and Ukraine goes to the US side, as in joining NATO etc; the Russians will just hand them nuke material free of charge.
Then you have a situation where a nuclear power is arming a terrorist state, but all want us to deal with them at the UN like equals.
#22
As long as the US doesn't go into a bleeding heart sympathetic nation building initiative, we can destroy Iran "below zero" (ala Dresden), allowing the enemy only enough time to stabilize into anarchy! We only need, to keep them from escaping!
#23
I believe the Iranians have a deal to procure S-300 anti aircraft missiles from Russia. I have not been able to determine whether Russia quietly slow-rolled this deal as they have other agreements with Iran (possibly on our behalf). Anybody know? If the Iranians now have S-300s, then the equation changes significantly for the worse, though we have new systems too such as JASSM.
Regardless, they have the benefit of dispersal and concealment as well as an indigenous source of uranium ore so I tend to agree with those who doubt we'll strike the nuke sites. It's not that we lack the courage, but that a strike is a final resort given the odds and chance that other approaches still could work.
To me our best hope is to encourage the development a credible, unified exile force with a real leader as an alternative to the mullahs. He should agitate --- using the web and mass communications -- for a referendum on the continued veto power of the 'guardian council.' This should be done in conjunction with an effort gain sympathizers in Iran, particluarly the regular military and any independent minded RG officers there might be as well as intellectuals and the odd cleric. The Shah's son would likely play some role here.
This approach takes advantage of the fact that Iran has already loaded the 'software' for democracy but the Mullahs don't let them use it. Providing a concrete alternative way of governing using existing institutions (Parliament, etc.) would help inspire and focus the younger Iranians who supposedly respect America and are intrigued by the Shia democracy that's about to start in Iraq. Otherwise these kids are useless and easily contained by the thugs.
This would not be a 'velvet revolution' in that it's inconceivable that the mullahs can be shamed into relinquishing power but it's possible enough of the guys with guns will switch sides or sit it out for the good guys to prevail -- especially if the emphasis is placed on preserving existing governmental institutions. If things start happening, I would expect the US would help with air interdiction of military formations moving to put down the revolt.
A key question is whether we can wait beyond the date that Iran has nuke capability to allow this strategy to work. An argument can be made that we can accept a nuclear Persia as long as it's not run by mullahs. We have a nuclear Pakland after all. I am sensitive to the argument that the Persian nationalist pride would make it tough to get even a reasonable Iranian government to give up a functional nuclear force once obtained.
However, it is not clear to me that Iranians would rally around the government if it tested the nuke. It would depend on the incentive structure we emphasize through announced doctrine. I believe that a significant number of Iranians would be more inclined towards regime change once they realized that we would hold them accountable for any nukes that go off. They do not want the mullahs to get them killed. The timing and and details of announcing such a doctrine will be critical.
Also, we must consider the affects a Persian nuke would have in making the various Gulf players more or less open to a US presence. From what I read the big fear is a Saudi bomb in response, but it could be that we find it easier to stay in a stabilized Iraq and in the Gulf states as an American troop presence is a proven means of deterring regional nuclear powers.
Just thinking aloud. This is a tough nut to crack.
Before flaming, note that I'm not being naive. If we are sure the mullahs would go down in flames (or proliferate as a first option before even creating a real nuclear force), we'll have no option but to stop scheming and start bombing. My biggest fear is 'loose nukes' during any regime change. One big weakness with this concept is supposedly the CIA has little going for it in Iran, and the 'allies' who do are not up to a confrontational approach (no surprise). A wildcard is how the Euros will play it. They obviously want to appease, but we can potentially use them to slow down the program if we are crafty. A second wildcard is how things go in Iraq this coming year. Success there would free up our resources while emboldening any Iranian democratic movement. Of course, a surprise preemptive move by the mullahs is possible, but then these questions become academic and we show them what a real nuclear arsenal can do.
Iran's Sahar 1 TV station is currently airing a weekly series titled "For You, Palestine," or "Zahra's Blue Eyes." The series premiered on December 13, and is set in Israel and the West Bank. It broadcasts every Monday, and was filmed in Persian but subsequently dubbed into Arabic.
The story follows an Israeli candidate for Prime Minister, Yitzhak Cohen, who is also the military commander of the West Bank. The opening sequence of the show contains graphic scenes of surgery, and images of a Palestinian girl in a hospital whose eyes have been removed, with bandages covering the sockets.
In Episode 1, Yitzhak Cohen lectures at a medical conference on the advances being made by Israeli medicine regarding organ transplants. Later in the episode, Israelis disguised as UN workers visit a Palestinian school, ostensibly to examine the children's eyes for diseases, but in reality to select which children's eyes to steal to be used for transplants.
In Episode 2, the audience learns that the Israeli president is being kept alive by organs stolen from Palestinian children, and an Israeli military commander is seen kidnapping UN employees and Palestinians. In episode three, we see some medical treatments that the producers of this show underwent after their lips fell off
Sahar TV also broadcast an interview with the director of the series, a former Iranian education ministry official, who discussed his motivations for making a series "about children."
The following are excerpts from the first two episodes, and from the interview with the series' director. To view clips from the series, visit www.memritv.org. In the coming weeks, MEMRI will continue to monitor and translate future episodes of the series. It goes on to include part of the script for the first episode
Posted by: Korora ||
12/23/2004 12:33:17 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#3
Fizzle - News clip? Lol! I thought you were just trolling, but you really are challenged. Wow... So, um, being "special" you can probably answer something I've wondered about every time I've run into someone like you: How bad does it hurt when you try to think?
I realize you must minimize neural activity to keep the pain within manageable limits... so it must be good for you to be a tool, then. You don't have to engage your brain (just do what Dr Kareem sez) and blame everything on the Jooos! Simple life for a simpleton. Perfect fit.
#8
What's pathetic is that you posed it as you did - and now you pretend you're sincere. How charming. Think it up all by yourself, did you?
Disingenuous and pretentious drollery and trollery - that is your trademark.
*golf clap*
Find someone to tutor you in the concept of moral equivalency. Then, when you have mastered that, catch up a bit on current events. If you aren't an incorrible baiting asshole, you will have answered the "question" you posed all by yourself. And, of course, that's best, is it not? For it is knowledge, not merely information, when you've earned it.
Meanwhile, you're just a faux droll true troll. Not a very good one, mind you, but...
#9
The bad news is that Rather's heirs WILL be using these series as evidence in their "investigative programs" on "Middle East conflict".
The good news is that some Pali WILL take the episode as proof that Zionists disguse themselves as UN workers, and will kill some Kofi boys.
#17
The Jews haven't stolen the muslim's eyes. They've stolen their brains. My Joogle search tells me the anti-Christ will be an insane serb named Boris.
Posted by: ed ||
12/23/2004 10:52 Comments ||
Top||
#18
Too stupid to live should be a valid diagnosis.
Especially for these clowns.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
12/23/2004 10:56 Comments ||
Top||
#19
There are sure a lot of Streichers in the twenty-first century. That's OK, we have plenty of rope and we can always make more.
#22
The so called Jewism which is actually a religious cult has always been one-eyed. I think this is also the reason that they cannot see anyone other than their own self lol. This news clip reminds one of the famous one-eyed thug Moshe dayan! and google tells me that the Anti-Christ will also be one-eyed. How jewish!
A group of former members who deserted the terrorist Mujahideen Khalq Organization (MKO) returned to Iran on Monday in coordination with the International Committee of the Red Thingy Cross. According to Iran's Official News Agency (IRNA), these people separated from the group due to their problems with the leadership. A security official at Mehrabad International Airport said these people will be able to join their family after undergoing medical examination. Behrouz Soltani, one of the former MKO members who returned home, said the MKO is currently in a bad situation. "Some 600 members of the group have problems with the leadership and are waiting to return home," he saied. He expressed satisfaction for quitting the MKO and returning to Iran. Massoud Tanhaei, another former MKO member, said, "Currently 150 other members of the group have voiced their readiness to return home. We prefer to live in our own country instead of leading miserable lives with the MKO." Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi on Sunday appreciated the endeavors of the International Committee of the Red Thingy Cross for facilitating the return of disgruntled MKO members.
Leader of the DPRK Islamic Revolution Kim Jong Il Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei said on Wednesday the Songun Islamic system associates welfare with justice, scientific progress with psychological security as well as power with brotherly behavior. Addressing the graduation ceremony of the second group of Mt. Taesong Imam Ali (AS) Military Academy cadets, Ayatollah Kim Khamenei referred to knowledge as the key to power, KCNA IRNA reported. Turning to promotion of Juche courage as two major objectives followed by the national military academies, he said, "The glory and advancement of every nation depend upon its power, while the DPRK's Iran's courageous and popular armed forces are the fortification of the nation in tackling the inclination toward tyranny and hegemony." The leader referred to progress, welfare, seeking independence, freedom and justice as well as confronting hegemonic power-seekers as major objectives of every nation. "That's why the ideals of the Korean Iranian nation are known worldwide and these account for the respect paid to them by the people of various nations," he said. Ayatollah Kim Khamenei pointed to Imam Kim Il Sung Mahdi (AS) as a source of hope for humanity and underlined that this life-endowing promise makes man realize that the world hegemonic powers will fail to resist the basic concepts of truth and spirituality like a sea of fire foam floating on the water surface. The leader also paid tribute to the revolutionary martyrs of Islamic Revolution and reviewed the parade, had his picture taken with the cadets and presented them with a automatic rifle.
ONE of two French journalists freed after a four-month hostage ordeal in Iraq has described their captivity as being "immersed in Planet (Osama) bin Laden".
Christian Chesnot and Georges Malbrunot had spent their first day back in France recounting details of their ordeal to the foreign intelligence agency, DGSE.
"One of the lessons we drew from our captivity was that we were immersed in Planet Bin Laden, especially when we were in a cell of the Islamic Army in the north" of Iraq, Mr Malbrunot told France 2 public television.
"We really understood that these kidnappers were driven not by an Iraqi agenda, but by an agenda of Islamic holy war."
Mr Malbrunot also issued a stern warning to fellow journalists about the dangers of working in Iraq.
"We urge them to be very careful. Our kidnappers told us: Do not come back to Iraq, this is a land of war and we do not need you here. We want to settle our scores with the Americans."
"The country is crawling with armed men who are out fishing for Westerners."
In an interview with France Info radio, Mr Chesnot said "Iraq is a land at war and any foreigner can be seen as a spy".
The two men were flown from Baghdad to Paris yesterday, when they were greeted by President Jacques Chirac and reunited with their loved ones amid a national outpouring of joy and relief.
But the happy end to their ordeal was partly overshadowed by a row over an abortive attempt by a French deputy, Didier Julia of Chirac's Union for a Popular Movement (UMP), to negotiate their release.
A senior member of the DGSE told Le Figaro newspaper — for which Malbrunot works — that Mr Julia's intervention in September had gravely compromised official efforts to contact the Islamic Army in Iraq.
"The hostage-takers followed the Julia epic on television and obviously they accused us of trying to short-circuit them with a separate team," the unnamed official said.
"Suddenly we were in a void, confronted by silence."
Mr Malbrunot said he was "scandalised by (Julia's) behaviour — playing with the lives of two compatriots. It is beneath contempt."
Mr Julia reacted furiously to the criticism.
He accused Foreign Minister Michel Barnier of being "completely useless" and claiming to have documents that showed his mission was undertaken in good faith.
Meanwhile, the circumstances leading to the men's liberation remained obscure.
Government ministers maintain that no ransom was paid to the hostage-takers, nor had any other condition been met.
Several commentators expressed their doubts over this today, while conceding that some quid pro quo may have been unavoidable.
"There is no reason to take either the hostage-takers or the Government at their word," the left-wing Liberation newspaper reported.
According to other comment, the release of Mrs Malbrunot and Chesnot could have a liberating effect on French policy in the Middle East, which had been conditioned for four months by the need not to complicate negotiations with the extremist captors.
"The detention of the two Frenchmen... certainly meant diplomats had to walk on egg-shells and avoid any initiative that could be misinterpreted by any of the parties concerned," Le Figaro reported.
A Defence Ministry spokesman said that a team of 100 DGSE operatives had been mobilised since the start of the crisis, and the operation to free the men had been extremely dangerous.
U.S. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld (search) arrived here before dawn Friday amid tight security at an air base in northern Iraq where an insurgent's attack on a military dining hall killed 14 U.S. troops and eight other people earlier this week.
Hoping to raise holiday spirits and demonstrate compassion for soldiers' sacrifices, Rumsfeld landed in darkness and walked immediately from his plane to a combat surgical hospital where many of the bombing victims were treated. The most seriously wounded already have been transferred to a U.S. military hospital in Germany.
Rumsfeld's aides went to unusual lengths to keep his visit a secret prior to his arrival, with only a few reporters and one TV crew accompanying him on an overnight flight from Washington.
In an interview aboard the C-17 cargo plane that brought him to Mosul (search), Rumsfeld said he'd been planning to visit U.S. troops here long before the deadly attack Tuesday, believed to have been carried out by a suicide bomber.
"The focus of the trip is to thank the troops and wish them a Merry Christmas," he said.
#2
Don't drink the MSM and the pro-fascists' kool aid, smn. We hired Rumsfeld to win. If we defeat fascism in Iraq, then he's done his job well. If we fail to defeat fascism there, then Rumsfeld has failed. The brouhaha about his "insensitivity" is so much noise designed to distract us from the elections and the battles to come. Ignore it.
Iran's Sahar 1 TV station is currently airing a weekly series titled "For You, Palestine," or "Zahra's Blue Eyes." The series premiered on December 13, and is set in Israel and the West Bank. It broadcasts every Monday, and was filmed in Persian but subsequently dubbed into Arabic.
The story follows an Israeli candidate for Prime Minister, Yitzhak Cohen, who is also the military commander of the West Bank. The opening sequence of the show contains graphic scenes of surgery, and images of a Palestinian girl in a hospital whose eyes have been removed, with bandages covering the sockets.
In Episode 1, Yitzhak Cohen lectures at a medical conference on the advances being made by Israeli medicine regarding organ transplants. Later in the episode, Israelis disguised as UN workers visit a Palestinian school, ostensibly to examine the children's eyes for diseases, but in reality to select which children's eyes to steal to be used for transplants.
In Episode 2, the audience learns that the Israeli president is being kept alive by organs stolen from Palestinian children, and an Israeli military commander is seen kidnapping UN employees and Palestinians.
In the Saudi government daily Al-Watan, an article from Brussels written by Fakhriya Ahmad charges that, based on alleged secret European military reports, the U.S. military in Iraq is harvesting and selling human organs. The following day, the story was also published in the Iranian daily Jomhouri-ye Islami, as well as the Syrian daily Teshreen. The following are excerpts from the article:
"Secret European military intelligence reports indicate the transformation of the American humanitarian mission in Iraq into a profitable trade in the American markets through the practice of American physicians extracting human organs from the dead and wounded, before they are put to death, for sale to medical centers in America. A secret team of American physicians follow the troops during their attacks on Iraqi armed men to ensure quick [medical] operations for extracting some organs and transferring them to private operations rooms before they are transferred to America for sale.
Ask not for whom the blood libel rings. It rings for us.
Posted by: Phil Fraering ||
12/23/2004 4:21:31 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Cool, can I get a new liver? I kind of worn mine out over time and would like a replacement. If i get an Iraqi liver will I have to convert to Islam? While ther at it I could use some new peepers. That way I can ditch the glasses and get some cool raybands.
#2
Cyber Sarge
Good idea! The liver should be in perfect shape because it has not to purify the blood from alcohol, being as most Muslims don't drink. Could you put one on ice for me later - the liver not the drink, well, maybe both after all.
#3
You know, we have nutcases like that over here, but they are a lunatic fringe. Anyone care to guess what percentage of the population over there will takes this as gospel fact? I'm saying around 1/3.
The following are excerpts from an interview with London Islamist Turhan Nisban
Turhan Nisban: The Sunnis do not have "a source of authority" like a pope. Anyone understands that there are certain principles. If an enemy enters the country, you don't need a fatwa. I don't need to ask for permission from the sheikh and say to him: "Am I allowed to fight Jihad against an enemy who enters my home?" Nor does a wife need to ask for her husband's permission.
We are not talking about fighting an enemy. We are talking about massacres, slaughters, targeting civilians, even targeting foreign civilians. The term "civilians"⊠They don't even acknowledge the term "civilians."
Interviewer: Who decides what the term means?
Turhan Nisban: The religious legal authority. One reads in history⊠I have an historical religious source of authority. Islamic history has no term for "civilian" in the Western sense. This is a Western term. In our Islamic law rules of war, one can be a "combatant," a "non-combatant," or "protected by an agreement." A person can be a combatant even if he does not carry a weapon. In other words, a person who came to wash and cook for the American soldiers in order to free them to fight) - like the Nepalese such a person is considered a combatant.
#2
I think this guy has worn out his welcome in the west. I think he needs to return to his homeland.
I am sure he will be welcomed there with opened arms.
Hamid Karzai named a new Cabinet on Thursday, sacking the prominent defense minister and removing other warlords from top posts in a major reshuffle weeks after being sworn in as the nation's first democratically elected president. Karzai named a relative unknown, Habibullah Qaderi, to head the new Counternarcotics Ministry, which will be tasked with cracking down on a multibillion-dollar drug trade that is flooding the world with cheap heroin. Defense Minister Mohammed Fahim, a major Tajik warlord and the head of the northern alliance that helped the United States oust the Taliban in 2001, was replaced by his deputy, Abdul Rahim Wardak, according to a decree announced on state-run television. Wardak is a Pashtun who made a name for himself as a commander in the 1980s fighting Soviet occupation, then fled abroad as the country descended into civil war. The new Cabinet was announced on state-run television. But government officials leaked the list of Cabinet members to The Associated Press hours before the official announcement.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/23/2004 2:21:48 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Long article, but a nice roundup of what's going on:
December 23, 2004: The war on terrorist organizations gets a lot less media attention than does the war with terrorists. The terrorist violence in Iraq, Israel, Chechnya, Kashmir, Pakistan, Afghanistan, the Philippines, Indonesia and a few other places gets a reporters attention. But there are more important developments, with the terrorist organizations, that we hear little about. There's a good reason for that, as the war against the terrorist organizations is an intelligence operation. Espionage agents, informants, spy satellites and electronic eavesdropping are the principal weapons. The action, such as it is, takes place in the shadows, and doesn't make much noise.
Because of the secret war against al Qaeda, a lot is known about the organization. This is mainly because most of the members are not very well educated in areas like OPSEC (operational security, keeping the enemy from observing your activities). Email and phone messages are caught and recorded, while couriers, and what they are carrying, are captured regularly. Fallujah yielded a large haul of al Qaeda documents, as have raids in Pakistan and elsewhere. Hardly any of this stuff is leaked to the media, lest al Qaeda find out how much the infidels know. But despite their bumbling and amateurish efforts, al Qaeda members are out to kill. They get their act together from time to time and pull off a major operation. Until the movement dies out, which may take a generation, the war on terror will continue.
Al Qaeda is not one organization, like the CIA, MI-6 or Mossad. Al Qaeda is a coalition of over three dozen terrorist groups that cooperate, often loosely, in their war against the infidels (non-Moslems). At the moment, the most powerful branch of al Qaeda is the one operating in Iraq. And that's because there, al Qaeda has joined forces with the Baath Party, which is trying to return the Sunni Arabs to power in Iraq. This reaffirms an old truism in the terrorist world; you can't succeed without money and a population to provide support. Anywhere there are Moslems, you will find some who either approve of al Qaeda's goals (converting the world to Islam), or are willing to support al Qaeda operations. The percentage of approvers is large, often a third or more of Moslem populations. The percentage of supporters is much smaller. You can see this from the small number of al Qaeda terrorist operations around the world. With millions of Moslems in North American and Europe, there have been very few al Qaeda terror attacks. In fact, those two areas have seen just one in the past three years. It's a different story in Moslem countries, where al Qaeda goals also include replacing the current kings, dictators, or corrupt democracies, with better government. One thing that must always be kept in mind is that the Moslem world is, for the most part, poorly governed and economically backward. A lot of the support for al Qaeda is actually rage at the inability of Moslems to get their act together in the governance and economics department. Most Moslems recognize that al Qaeda is just one more bad idea to afflict Islamic nations. But for the moment, the al Qaeda crowd are winning the PR war. That will change over time, but for now, al Qaeda is killing people. Most of those being killed are Moslems.
The most active al Qaeda affiliates are in countries where there are other issues in play. For example:
Chechnya - The Chechens have been part of Russia for over a century, and have been fighting the Russians, on and off, most of that time. The current bout of violence is winding down, but has left in its wake a very effective, and bloody minded, group of Islamic terrorists. The Russians, as they have done so many times before, are in the process of killing all the Islamic terrorists in Chechnya, or driving them into exile. But this process still has another year or so to go.
Saudi Arabia - Al Qaeda's biggest financial supporters are here, as are one of the largest pools of recruits. Saudi Arabia is the source of the strict, violent and paranoid form of Islam (Wahhabism) that serves as al Qaeda's religious foundation. The family (the al Sauds) that rules Saudi Arabia also subscribes to Wahhabism. So the battle in this kingdom is over which Wahhabist faction will be dominant. The smart money is on the al Sauds, but you never know.
Afghanistan - The Taliban are sort of al Qaeda Lite. Real al Qaeda are operating in Afghanistan, but many of the Taliban factions are turning against them. The majority of Afghans care for neither Taliban nor al Qaeda. But at the moment, the Afghan al Qaeda are getting a lot of money and manpower from Pakistani, and other, al Qaeda organizations. This is largely because al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden is hiding somewhere along the Afghan/Pakistan border. So the Afghan al Qaeda will continue to be a minor problem until the outside support dries up, or bin Laden is caught.
Pakistan - Before al Qaeda came along, Pakistan already had a lot of Islamic terrorists. Most of their battles were with each other, the Pakistani government, or Indian police in the disputed border province of Kashmir. Current cooperation with al Qaeda is out of convenience. Al Qaeda itself is not popular, because many terror attacks have just killed lots of Pakistanis.
Indonesia/Philippines - Much of the al Qaeda fervor in this region is because of continued friction between Moslems and non-Moslems. The local governments are corrupt and incompetent, thus making it easy for al Qaeda to maintain some out-of-the-way camps. Most of the locals don't care for al Qaeda, but a minority does.
Europe - With some twenty million Moslems, this is a good area for fund raising, recruiting and hiding out. The recruits are usually born in Europe and have no first hand knowledge of the dark side of Moslem rule. But the whole al Qaeda bit is terribly romantic and inspiring to these lads. So they give money, and sometimes their lives, for the cause. The Europeans, usually tolerant to a fault, are growing impatient with these al Qaeda fans, and are cracking down.
Israel- The Palestinians turned to terror four years ago when they did not get what they wanted through negotiations. The terror campaign failed, but the terrorist groups that evolved in the meantime don't want to stop, even though most Palestinians do. The Israelis were successful at shutting down the terror attacks on Israelis, and it's feared that many of the Palestinian terrorists will flee to other parts of the world, and keep on killing after a Palestinian civil war to decide the future of the war with Israel.
Lebanon - The Shia minority, in order to repay Iran for aid during the 1975-90 civil war, allowed the terrorist group Hizbollah to set up shop in Lebanon. Hizbollah makes war on Israel as well, and has been aiding Palestinian terrorists. Allied with al Qaeda, Hizbollah sees itself as an "elder brother." Syria and Lebanon (and Israel) want to shut down Hizbollah, and send the survivors back to Iran. That may eventually happen.
Iran - Although most of the population wants nothing to do with Islamic terrorism, the current constitution gives the Islamic radical minority veto power over government actions. The Islamic radicals will fight to death if the majority attempts to change the constitution. Right now, most Iranians are not willing to fight for their freedom. Iranian Moslems are Shia, and al Qaeda considers Shia heretics (and has murdered many of them.) The Iranian Islamic radicals overlook this at the moment, because they, and al Qaeda both have the same goal, planet wide Islamic rule. Unfortunately, al Qaeda wants everyone to be Sunni Moslems. That will cause problems with the Shia Moslems in Iran, who want a Shia world. About five percent of all Moslems are Shia (most live in Iran and Iraq. ) So Iran provides some support for al Qaeda.
Central Asia - The al Qaeda leadership from this part of the world were killed in Afghanistan during the late 2001 fighting. But they are slowly rebuilding.
Algeria - Islamic terrorists have been fighting the government, and most Algerians, for over a decade. However, the Islamic radicals have been losing, and are dispersing to other countries. So you will see Algerian terrorists showing up in other countries more than in Algeria.
Somalia - The country has been without a government for over a decade. Some al Qaeda groups have set up shop here. But because of the chaos, there is not a lot they can do. American Special Forces and commandoes keep an eye on the situation, occasionally going in to take prisoners or stop something from happening. No press releases are issued about these operations.
Sub-Saharan Africa - Lots of Islamic radicalism here, but not a lot of enthusiasm for al Qaeda. Islamic radicals are seen as a bunch of ruthless killers, and treated as such.
South America - Moslem criminal gangs provide some support services for al Qaeda, but otherwise there is not a lot of support. Moslems are a very small minority down there, and they don't want to trigger an anti-Islamic attitude because of al Qaeda terrorism in the region.
Posted by: Steve ||
12/23/2004 10:15:22 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The Many Branches of Al Qaeda
Cutting them off one by one is the way to trim the tree.
#3
looks like somebody at strat page went to the same conference Dan Darling attended. His write-up is rather more sophisticated and insightful, and is up at Windsofchange.net
OMG! There's violins in Darfur!
Secretary-General Kofi Annan called on the U.N. Security Council Wednesday to urgently reassess its efforts to end nearly two-years of conflict and bloodshed in Sudan's western Darfur region, saying the current approach isn't working.
See, Kofi can be taught.
Both Annan and the council expressed deep concern Tuesday at the deteriorating security situation in the vast region where rebels and government-backed forces have repeatedly broken pledges to stop fighting and only 900 troops of a 4,000-strong African Union force have actually been deployed. But the secretary-general went further Wednesday, saying "quite frankly our approach isn't working."
But he'll still bang his head into the wall just the same.
The council on Tuesday condemned repeated cease-fire violations and warned it would consider "a full range of options" to pressure both sides to comply with council resolutions if fighting doesn't stop. But no further meeting has been scheduled this month.
That'll do it, by Gawd! If they don't comply, cancel the next meeting!
Two Security Council resolutions have threatened possible sanctions, but U.S. Ambassador Jack Danforth has said members won't consider such tough measures. China, which imports Sudanese oil, has been most reluctant, but China's U.N. Ambassador Wang Guangya said Wednesday his government would consider further action if both sides are targeted. "Whatever measure it is, we are going to study it, but it has to be targeted on both sides, not just on one side," Wang said. "Clearly the information from the ground is that both sides are making the troubles, not one side. So we need to take a balanced approach."
Yes, how dare the victims in Darfur try to defend themselves. It'd be so much more one-sided if they just bared their throats. Then the Chinese ambassador could feel more comfortable targeting a measure. After lunch.
And the ChiCom tune will be what everyone must dance to, cuz they have a veto. Yep, the UN works for me.
Posted by: .com ||
12/23/2004 2:14:05 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
12/23/2004 7:09 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Why Mrs D you know, the efforts of China to secure oil contracts and the EU3 to sell stuff. Those are the only efforts that have actually been made.
Palestinians in 26 municipalities across the West Bank headed to the polls on Thursday as they get the chance to vote for their councillors for the first time in three decades.
In a shocking coincidence, this comes on the heels of the death of Yasser Arafat. But the AFP reporter failed to notice that.
More than 140,000 electors will choose from 886 candidates, including 139 women, as they select local council officials for the town of Jericho and 25 villages in the West Bank.
They couldn't do this before Yasser croaked, because of the Zionist occupation, but now... ummm... uhhh...
A second tranche of elections will take place on January 27 in 10 other localities in the Gaza Strip. They are the first elections for councillors to be held in the Palestinian territories since 1976. Although vote counting would finish three hours after the polls closed, the final results would not be officially announced until Saturday, local election commission spokesman Firas Yaghi told AFP. The elections will mark the first time the radical Islamist terrorist group Hamas has participated in the Palestinian democratic process and will serve as a barometer of its support level beyond its Gaza stronghold. Hamas boycotted the first Palestinian general elections in 1996 and has also excluded itself from the upcoming election on January 9 to replace Yasser Arafat as Palestinian Authority president.
"Moose limbs don't need no damned elections! That's why we have holy men!"
Some candidates are from Hamas, some from the leftist terrorist groupPopular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), and others are running as independents, but the vast majority are members of the mainstream terrorist Fatah faction. Hussein al-Sheikh, a Fatah terrorist leader in the West Bank, was confident that the movement's candidates would do well in the first local Palestinian elections in 28 years.
"After all, we control the ballot boxes, don't we?"
"Internal polls that we have carried out predict that Fatah terrorists will get more than 70 percent of the vote," he told AFP. Hamas has voiced disquiet over the partial nature of the vote, and the fact the civil register is being used and not the electoral register which it argues opens up the process to fraud.
In Paleostine? Fraud? Oh, pshaw! Who can imagine such a thing?
Five terrorists election candidates have been arrested by Israeli forces in the run-up to the polls. Qaher Hamada, who is standing as a PFLP candidate, was detained at his home in the town's refugee camp in a pre-dawn operation last week.
"Soon's yer done kissin' that baby, you can stick 'em up, Qaher!"
Four Islamist terrorist candidates standing in the Dahariyeh area, near Hebron, were arrested the week before. The Palestinian Authority has agreed to a quota system that will see at least two women elected in every municipality.
Posted by: Steve White ||
12/23/2004 12:03:20 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
This may fit the thanks for nothing category.
Representatives of seven nations met in Ottawa this week to recruit international observers for the Iraqi elections and agreed to watch the vote, but from the safety of Amman, Jordan. They said it was too dangerous to monitor the voting in Iraq, meaning international observers are unlikely for the elections on Jan. 30 - making them the first significant vote of this sort recently with no foreign presence, United Nations officials say.
The United Nations, the European Union and many nongovernmental groups involved in election and democracy projects are helping to organize and administer the vote. As a result, they argue, acting as monitors would be a conflict of interest. The United States, a senior State Department official said, "will have as low a profile as possible during the election." Specialists and officials involved in foreign elections say international monitors are a crucial tool for ensuring that difficult elections are seen as free and fair, as shown recently in Afghanistan and Ukraine.
Foreign observers in Afghanistan diffused the controversy over the ink used on some ballots; some candidates had said the ink used for fingerprints could easily be removed. Foreign observers in Ukraine, including Senator Richard G. Lugar, Republican of Indiana and chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, countered the government's contention that its candidate had won the election, despite widespread fraud. When Canada agreed early this month to convene a group of nations - Canada, Britain, Indonesia, Mexico, Panama, Albania and Yemen - to examine the question of observing the elections, officials in Washington and at the United Nations were hopeful that the impasse on recruiting international monitors might finally be broken.
Posted by: Capt America ||
12/23/2004 12:03:53 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Representatives of seven nations met in Ottawa this week to recruit international observers for the Iraqi elections and agreed to watch the vote, but from the safety of Amman, Jordan.
Sounds suspiciously like a Jimmy Carter-esque arrangement...
#4
Don't worry, Mojo, they'll have no problem at all deciding who won, who committed fraud and whether we should accept the results. Nope, no problem at all, nope, nope.
Posted by: Steve White ||
12/23/2004 1:33 Comments ||
Top||
#5
So, does Jordan have cable TV and at least one 5-Star hotel?
They said it was too dangerous to monitor the voting in Iraq
But the Iraqi people - like the Afghans - seem to think it's not too dangerous to vote (or more likely intend to vote in spite of the danger - just like the Afghans).
I've got a suggestion for those international "observers": FOAD, you useless wussies.
And take Dhimmi Carter with you.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
12/23/2004 13:38 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Election observers from Mexico and Yemen: is this from Scrappleface?
Posted by: Capt America ||
12/23/2004 16:09 Comments ||
Top||
#12
It wouldn't be too difficult a question to ask of these "brave" countries: If it was a completely secure country, would there be any need at all for them to get involved?
Posted by: Capt America ||
12/23/2004 16:12 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
The Spanish deputy prime minister has attacked the decision to free a controversial imam who was jailed for writing a book which advised readers how to attack women without leaving any marks. MarÃa Teresa Fernändez de la Vega strongly criticised release of 
Maybe they should have named it Bowling for Palestine. Bowlmor Lanes, a fixture in Greenwich Village for decades, was secretly bankrolled in part by the late 
Thailand charged on Wednesday that ringleaders of a Muslim separatist insurgency were hiding in neighboring Malaysia. Deputy Interior Minister Sutham Saengprathum reasserted that the government has obtained photographs of Thai rebels undergoing military training in Malaysia's Kelantan state and that several rebel leaders were also hiding in that state. A war of words between the neighbors was sparked after Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra first made the claim about the training camps last week. Malaysia has angrily denied the allegations. 
Leader of the 
