The Czech government announced on Wednesday it had approved the deployment of a special anti-terrorist unit in Afghanistan. "The operation will be a lot like that of 2004," said Ministry of Defence spokesman Andrej Cirtek, referring to the six-month mission of a special forces unit in Afghanistan during the "Enduring Freedom" campaign.
Perhaps this will embarrass the Dutch enough to get them to move.
The Czech force should leave for Afghanistan during the first half of this year, Cirtek added. The operation still requires the go-ahead from both chambers of the Czech parliament.
The deployment of the Czech special forces unit in Afghanistan was suggested by Defence Minister Karel Kuhnl when he met with his US counterpart Donald Rumsfeld in Washington at the end of 2005.
Posted by: Steve White ||
01/12/2006 00:20 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#4
Looking at the image a bit closer, they are definitely eyeing each other.
Sadr has that sort of "lean fat and hungry look", if you ask me. A case of throne envy, if ever there was one. Sad thing is, both are about equally competent to rule.
Zensters Fourth Law:
Those who find power most attractive are usually the least competent to administer it.
Muslim pilgrims rushing to complete a symbolic stoning ritual on the last day of the hajj tripped over luggage the Keystone pilgrims?
Thursday, and an unknown number of people were killed in the ensuing stampede, the Interior Ministry said. The Al-Arabiya network said dozens died.
The stampede occurred as tens of thousands of pilgrims filed past al-Jamarat, a series of three pillars representing the devil that the faithful pelt with stones to purge themselves of sin. The ritual has seen deadly stampedes in the past, including one in 1990 that killed 1,426 people and another in February 2004 that killed 244. movin', movin', movin', keep them doggies movin' RAWHIDE!
#8
This happens in cultures where people have not a thought for others. It's just ME, ME, ME, I'm the most important person on Earth. China's like that, too, people think nothing of pushing and shoving. Although, I don't think they have stampedes like this.
#9
Now up to 345. This is why my feelings on "Holy Sites" and all the other trappings of a lot of religions are rubbish. What's important is what's in a person's heart, not some place or particular thing.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
01/12/2006 11:03 Comments ||
Top||
#10
No, what's important is the profitable pillar of Islam that forces millions of the faithful to spread billions of dollars worth of baksheesh across the Arabian Peninsula every year. And if a few get squished each year, that pleases Allan and makes the whole thing more mystiqy...
#14
I agree with the Deacon: although this is an annual event peculiar to Islam (and as predictable as spring following winter), I remember several deadly stampedes when the Pope visited Africa, not to mention those at some of the monstrously large Hindu festivals.
What's important is what's in a person's heart, not some place or particular thing.
Right. That really hit home when I visited Jerusalem (I'm Christian) and found the crowds to be oppressive, demeaning, and just a bit frightening.
#17
So do they have to sort the pile out before the holy men decide if this is "punishment of the wicked" or "martyrdom of the faithful"?
My bet. Both.
#18
it's the stupid sheets...can you imagine trying to run in a burqa or thobe...how about high-jumping luggage a la OJ Simpson in the old Hertz airport terminal commercials :-0)
Posted by: Frank G ||
01/12/2006 12:14 Comments ||
Top||
#19
Muslim pilgrims rushing to complete a symbolic stoning ritual on the last day of the hajj tripped over luggage
#20
You realize, of course, that this would not have happened, had they been Unitarians...
Allen Tallen knows best.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/12/2006 12:58 Comments ||
Top||
#21
How many feet on the luggage? And was a scrawny fellow with a pointed hat labeled "WIZZARD" seen nearby?
Google Earth is your friend. I'm looking at the luggage right now via the satellite. Zooming in... It doesn't seem to have any feet... but it's staring at me.
Posted by: Phil ||
01/12/2006 13:09 Comments ||
Top||
#22
It just moved out of frame. Something must be wrong with the satellite, I didn't see anyone push it or anything...
Posted by: Phil ||
01/12/2006 13:25 Comments ||
Top||
#23
And now I can't connect to the satellite.
Posted by: Phil ||
01/12/2006 14:01 Comments ||
Top||
#24
Symbolism is all well and good most times (see Carl Jung: Man and His Symbols) but when a people can't tell the difference between symbolism and reality is when the shit usually hits the fan. Seems to me most of that stuff is just for show, anyway.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
01/12/2006 14:13 Comments ||
Top||
#25
DB - You mean throwing pebbles doesn't wash away sin / kill the Devil / whatever the fuck it's claimed to do?
*slaps forehead*
Sheesh! Why, that makes this whole pilgrimmage thing nothing more than the scheme of a failed merchant who now controlled Mekkah and would reap a fortune if he could get enough rubes to do it! Go figure, huh?
#26
The funny thing is we all were joking about this last week because we knew it was a certainty. I believe somebody set the Over/Under line at 1000. I'm betting the over.
#28
I think we have our own pilgrimage of stupidity. Its called New Year's Eve in Time Square. A bunch of faithful (drunks) [or is it faithful drunks?] stand around in the cold and watch a ball fall and cheer.
Bars have TVs ( to view the falling ball) and its warmer inside. And closer to the refills.....
#31
.com for all I know it might but I have my doubts. I do believe this "Holy Shrine" rubbish is just a way for the "Holy men What Am In Charge" bunch to make a shitpot of money off the Pious Faithfull. Nothing more, nothing less.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
01/12/2006 14:59 Comments ||
Top||
#36
Yeah, the last guy to declare a fatwa on sapient pearwood vanished mysteriously.
Posted by: Phil ||
01/12/2006 15:59 Comments ||
Top||
#37
#27 Question, if you die in Islam's holiest place does that give you a special chance to get into Heavan? Posted by rjschwarz 2006-01-12 14:42
basically the answer is 'yes' - one who dies during hajj is a martyr but if you go on hajj with the intent of dying or if you commit a severe sin during the hajj then no martyr status for you
The consistencey with which these stampedes tramplings occur would make it seem as though going to the hajj literally ensures death. Besides, if the curly-toed slippers don't get you the semtex vest will.
#40
If they get that excited about the opening of a ritual stoning just imagine if I were to have one of my Spring White Linen Sales in Riyad...hmmm.
Posted by: Martha Stewart ||
01/12/2006 18:46 Comments ||
Top||
#41
These ignorant bastards do this every year. They are incapable of learning. We need to encourage a weekly Haj, then they can exterminate themselves.
Sheikh Abd Al-Aziz Fawzan Al-Fawzan, a professor of Islamic law at Al-ImamUniversity, who frequently appears on Saudi TV recently made anti-Christian comments on Saudi Al-Majd TV. He told his audience to hate anyone "who worships Christ, son of Mary" and added that "whoever says 'I don't hate him [i.e. a Christian]' is not a Muslim..." He went on to explain that such an attitude "is not racism" since the Christian is not hated "because of his color, gender, blood, country, or because he is American, European, Chinese, or Asian," and stipulated that this hatred should be "positive hatred" that guides and reforms. TO VIEW THIS CLIP, VISIT: http://www.memritv.org/Transcript.asp?P1=992
[...]
Muslims Must Hate Christians With "Positive Hatred" - December 16, 2005, Al-Majd TV
Al-Fawzan: "Someone who denies Allah, worships Christ, son of Mary, and claims that God is one third of a trinity - do you like these things he says and does? Donât you hate the faith of such a polytheist who says God is one third of a trinity, or who worships Christ, son of Mary?
"Someone who permits and commits fornication - as is the case in Western countries, where fornication is permitted and not considered a problem - don't you hate this? Whoever says 'I don't hate him' is not a Muslim, my brother."
[...]
"This is not racism, my brother. We don't hate a polytheist because of his color, gender, blood, country, or because he is American, European, Chinese, or Asian. They are our partners in humanity. An American Muslim may be better in Allah's view than all the Arabs."
[...]
"But if this person is an infidel - even if this person is my mother or father, God forbid, or my son or daughter - I must hate him, his heresy, and his defiance of Allah and His prophet. I must hate his abominable deeds. Moreover, this hatred must be positive hatred. It should make me feel compassion for him, and should make me guide and reform him."
The name itself might partially explain the extreme, unhinged anger in the Magic Kingdom.
Imagine if your name was Harry Bush or Craven Buttholtz? Now imagine if we had the name-structures of the Soddies -- Harry Bush Al-Bush or Craven Buttholtz Al-Buttholtz. You'd be pretty pissed off too. Praise be Allan!
#10
"There's lots to criticize about this guy and his pronouncements without resorting to elementary school playground kinds of taunts about names."
In case you missed the train, it happens that fun and taunts are part of what makes Rantburg so enjoyable.
As for forgetting ancestral languages, it's call evolving and moving beyond a primitive association with a rural, peasant, pre-modern form of existence.
Read Barrington Moore, Jr. on the "Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy: Lord and Peasant in the Making of the Modern World." After you're done, come back and talk about playground taunts.
#12
"Positive Hatred" is that like a Progressive thing?
Posted by: ed ||
01/12/2006 12:04 Comments ||
Top||
#13
"Someone who permits and commits fornication - as is the case in Western countries, where fornication is permitted and not considered a problem ..."
As opposed to the ME where pedophilia and camel-doinking are common and approved?
"This is not racism, my brother. We don't hate a polytheist because of his color, gender, blood, country, or because he is American, European, Chinese, or Asian.
Yes, we're equal opportunity haters here as attested to by the EHOC.
Let's all hope that, somewhere, this name is being penciled in on the dance card of a hunter-killer team.
Again, why is this administration sitting still for state sponsored propaganda bile like this being spewed by the Saudis? No wonder they feel free to sh!t all over us in the Middle East. By now they must think we like it so much that we eat sh!t sandwiches for lunch each day.
Saudi Arabia needs to begin finding a major price tag attached to this horrendous hatemongering.
#15
Yup, 'abd' means 'servant' or 'slave' and 'bin' means 'son'. (And 'Abu' means 'father' ....)
Typed faster than my brain was working .... LOL
And yes, HF, the name embeds tribal identity. My point is that there are far more substantive things to criticize than the fact that he uses a name in the form of names common to his country and ethnic identity.
As do most of the people in our society as well.
But if that's the level at which you can critique him, fire away.
#16
"Moreover, this hatred must be positive hatred. It should make me feel compassion for him, and should make me guide and reform him."
I believe that the professor's Islamic "positive hatred" is a very twisted cousin to what Christians call "love" -- hate the sin but love the sinner; punish the sin but forgive the sinner. Jesus loved everybody that could be saved. Islam hates everybody until such time as they submit. Makes for a very ugly world.
Posted by: Darrell Bin Gordon ||
01/12/2006 15:58 Comments ||
Top||
"And yes, HF, the name embeds tribal identity. My point is that there are far more substantive things to criticize than the fact that he uses a name in the form of names common to his country and ethnic identity.
As do most of the people in our society as well.
But if that's the level at which you can critique him, fire away."
Ummm... I'm not the Happy Fliegerabwehrkanonen today. Sometimes I am, but today, I'm the Angry Fliegerabwehrkanonen since my 88mm has been misfiring. Damn those B-17s!
Ever since the car accident, my critiquing skills have been reduced to ethnic humor.
P.S.: I lived in Saudi (Jeddah) and worked for Saudis for three-and-a-half years, so yes, I do know about names and such.
The US administration Monday disapproved of any military intervention in Bangladesh as a horrible idea despite debilitating political disputes on election issues, but urged both BNP and Awami League to act responsibly putting interest of the nation above all else, reports UNB. "No, I do not. Military intervention would be a horrible idea, and I believe that your military knows that," said Steve Engelken, Director of the office of Bangladesh and Pakistan Affairs, during an INTERNET chat with some Bangladesh journalists on Monday evening.
"Are you nuts? Solve your own damned problems!"
"Democracy takes constant effort by all, if it is to be maintained. We call on both major parties to act responsibly and put the interests of the nation ahead of everything," he said, adding: "Bangladesh''s international friends, including the United States, support broad participation in next general election which should be free and fair."
"Sort of like our country, which has Republicans and .. um .. well, some crazy folk."
He observed that the people of Bangladesh struggled hard for democracy and made sacrifices for it that few Americans today can imagine. However, democracies require constant effort by the people if they are to be maintained. "Bangladesh''s international friends, including the United States, support your efforts to maintain democratic governance. It is, therefore, extremely important that the next elections enjoy broad participation and be free and fair," Engelken said.
But we're not going to do the heavy lifting for you.
On the question of formal cooperation between the USA and Bangladesh in dealing with rising militancy and terrorism like that of India and Pakistan, he said the Bush administration would consider it seriously if Bangladesh government so wanted. "We maintain a regular dialogue with the Government of Bangladesh on terrorism issues. If the Bangladeshi Government wanted to make these discussions more formal, we would consider that request seriously," he said.
About the government''s anti-JMB operation, the US State Department official said, "Many known terrorist leaders still remain at large. We would hope the Government will not rest until it has pursued all leads in this investigation and has arrested the ringleaders behind the recent bombings."
"We note with interest something called the Rapid Action Battalions, and would use the phrase, 'faster please'."
However, he noted, Bangladeshi government has made significant progress in its investigation of the recent terrorist attacks. It is notable that some weeks have passed since the last bombing. It is too early, however, to say that Bangladesh has turned the corner.
About President Bush''s possible visit to Dhaka, Engelken could not say with certainty about the US President''s trip. "Our New Year''s resolution is to visit Bangladesh more often. I think you will see more American visitors this year. Whether or not that will include President Bush I cannot say for sure."
Posted by: Steve White ||
01/12/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
IOW, sky's the limit on SPECOPS, Delta, Advisors, econ specialists, contractors, CIA DIA and NSA, etc. - the Chicoms are working to militarily and econ influence and destabilize the region, and are dev peripheral contigencies for just-in-case.
No way that Dubya, CHeney, and Rummy will leave, nor can leave, the regional states alone to fend for themselves.
ON CHRISTMAS EVE, Venezuela's President Hugo Chávez's Christian-socialist cant drifted into anti-Semitism. "The world is for all of us," he said, "then, but it so happens that a minority, the descendents of the same ones that crucified Christ, the descendents of the same ones that kicked Bolivar out of here and also crucified him in their own way over there in Santa Marta, in Colombia. A minority has taken possession all of the wealth of the world . . . "
¡Una persona, una nación, un lÃder! ¡Victoria del granizo!
These sentiments were not new and Chávez, for his part, has long associated with anti-Semitic figures. . . . most seriously, Chávez has established an alliance with the Islamic Republic of Iran, which has long been the leading state sponsor of terrorism internationally and against Israel. When then Iranian President Mohammed Khatami visited Caracas in March 2005, Chávez voiced his support for Iran's nuclear program and awarded Khatami Venezuela's highest honor, the Order of the Liberator. (There is a Simon Bolivar Street in Tehran.) During this visit the two countries signed 20 agreements to cooperate on economic development projects. These warm relations have continued under the new Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has explicitly called for Israel's destruction.
No wonder Jimmy Carter likes him so much.
Chávez's anti-Semitism is not restricted to rhetorical support for others, though. In late 2004, after a state prosecutor (and Chávez ally), was assassinated in a car bombing, the state-run television darkly referred to Mossad links to the killing. Venezuelan security forces raided a Jewish private school in Caracas as the school day was beginning. . . .
"I know, el Jefe! We'll call it 'The Night Day of Broken Glass Lunchboxes!' (That Spongebob, he's a Mossad agent, you know.)"
Chávez also expanded on these broader ambitions in his Christmas Eve address. According to Chávez, Jesus was "the first socialist of our era . . . and for that they crucified him." He exhorted Venezuelans to be ready "to sacrifice ourselves for others, for the country, for the collective . . . that is how we will save our country and we will help save the world from here."
Megalomaniac dictator promises to build a workers' paradise, blames the Jews for everything, expects his subjects to be fanatical followers who will willingly sacrifice their lives for him. Ever seen that one before?
Most tellingly, he called for the building of a utopian paradise on earth:
To leave the room of poverty is to arrive at a life of dignity, where there is no misery, nor poverty is the Kingdom of God that Christ came to tell us, the Kingdom of Equality, of love, of justice. We have to build that kingdom here, because it is totally false that this Kingdom is in the clouds and that one goes there when one dies. Lie! . . . No, heaven and hell are here among us.
". . . and I've hot the 'hell' part nailed down."
THE LANGUAGE AND SENTIMENTS are distressingly familiar.
Understatement of the week.
But Chávez appears determined to initiate his Utopian revolution and buoyed by record oil prices, he has the resources to pursue this vision in Venezuela and to export his revolution throughout the region. . . .
Posted by: Mike ||
01/12/2006 06:54 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
He's certainly fashionable, no? What a list of accomplishments - whew! Working up a Latino Anti-Semitism screed, sportin'a a spiffy sash with schprockets and doo-dads, got the Cahtah Dictatocratic Squeel of Appoovul, hobnobbing with Castro enroute to The Workers Paradise, making mucho macho faces at the US, reach-arounds and kissy-face with Belafonte. Yep. Got it all cookin' now, baby. Hell, they'll invite you to join the EU any day, now. Right after Turkey.
#2
Let's get the border wall up before all the Venezuelans stream out of Chavez's paradise.
Posted by: ed ||
01/12/2006 7:49 Comments ||
Top||
#3
A minority has taken possession all of the wealth of the world . . . "
For us there are only two possiblities: either we remain German Venezuelan, or we come under the thumb of the Jews. This latter must not occur; even if we are small, we are a force. A well-organized group can conquer a strong enemy. If you stick close together and keep bringing in new people, we will be victorious over the Jews.
#5
Most tellingly, he called for the building of a utopian paradise on earth...
He might start by building some more roads betwen Caracas and the coast. The main (and for all practical purposes, the only) highway had to be shut down.
A Georgian man accused of attempting to kill George Bush by lobbing a hand grenade towards him at an outdoor rally in the ex-Soviet republic of Georgia last May has been sentenced to life in prison. The defendant, Vladimir Arutyunyan, "is sentenced to the highest form of punishment - life in prison", the presiding judge in his trial said on Wednesday. "He was found guilty on eight charges from the criminal code and four of them demand the highest form of punishment," Judge David Dzhugeli said.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/12/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The investigators said DNA found on a handkerchief in which the grenade was wrapped matched that of Arutyunyan. One of the FBI investigators, Brendan Shea, told the court: "The probability that a match could occur at random is one in 24 quadrillion."
Special Agent Shea meet Mark Furman and Marcia Clark. Mark Furman and Marcia Clark, please meet Special Agent Brendan Shea.
#2
If the grenade would have exploded, it would have killed and wounded dozens in the packed crowd. In addition Arutyunyan also killed the chief of the Georgian Counterterrorism unit in a shootout. Too bad Georgia got rid of the death penalty.
Posted by: ed ||
01/12/2006 8:03 Comments ||
Top||
SHANGHAI, China (AP) - The whereabouts of North Korean leader Kim Jong Il remained unclear Thursday, with a Hong Kong-based television network speculating he may be headed for the south Chinese city of Guangzhou, while other reports put him in Beijing or Russia.
Phoenix Television reported that three major hotels in Guangzhou known to be used for VIP visitors were largely empty and requiring guests to check out by tomorrow. A sales department employee at Guangzhou's famed White Swan hotel confirmed that they were expecting a ``a very important visitor'' beginning on Friday. She would not give her name, since she was not authorized to speak publicly. ``From January 12th-15th, we won't accept any new bookings. Some guests may have to move,'' said the hotel's assistant general manager, Janet Xie, without giving a reason.
That's the Cindy Sheehan entourage.
A staffer at the hotel's publicity department, meanwhile, denied that Kim was expected to visit.
Local officials said they were in the dark. ``I've never heard of this,'' said Shi Lishi, a spokesman for the Guangzhou city government.
"I know nothing! Tell them, Hogan!"
U.S. and Chinese officials said they could not confirm various reports, mostly by South Korean media, saying that Kim entered China by special train earlier in the week and traveled either to Beijing, Shanghai or Russia. In Washington, U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said he had seen the news reports, ``But I can't confirm or deny them.''
On Wednesday, officials in Shanghai also disavowed any information about Kim's whereabouts. ``I have not received any information whatsoever about this,'' Jiao Yang, the city government spokeswoman, said at a regularly scheduled news conference.
"I can say no more!"
In the past, visits by Kim to China have been reported only after his departure. The Chinese Foreign Ministry said Tuesday that Kim planned to visit China, but would not give the exact timing. Kim last visited China in April 2004.
Posted by: Steve White ||
01/12/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#11
Why would anyone go to Guangzhou who didn't absolutely have to? The city is a highly polluted, industrialized wasteland of a city. Granted, they have an international school there now for the ex-pat offspring, and I've heard about an ex-pat suburb (so they can live in real houses instead of 2 connected rooms over the Hard Rock Cafe -- with a hotplate to cook on!), but even so. Guangzhou is the kind of city for which oxygen bars were invented.
#13
When I first heard that Kimmie was mising and his whole train too the first thing that came to mind was that old movie "The Cassandra Crossing"
Bbe a good way for the Chinese to "Vanish" a serious embarrasment.
And would also explain why he's been so determined to get N Korea Nuked, to hide all the embezzlement evidence.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
01/12/2006 19:56 Comments ||
Top||
#14
His Macao bankers can sneak there without much effort and, besides, Guangzhou is paradise compared to anywhere in North Korea.
WASHINGTON'S former administrator in Iraq Paul Bremer has warned the Dutch they could face economic penalties That's that there Consequenses thingy that I heard so much about, ain't it! in the US if they fail to send troops to Afghanistan.
NATO has also turned up the heat on the Dutch, ooooh! Solidarity! while the fate of a 200-strong provincial reconstruction team Australia wants to send to Afghanistan hangs in the balance because it is relying on the Dutch to provide security.
"I assume from time to time decisions must be taken by the US Government and Congress which affect Dutch economic interests," Mr Bremer, a former ambassador to The Netherlands, told Dutch newspaper De Volksrant. "It is not difficult to imagine that decisions will be made that are not in the best interests of The Netherlands. Is he being subtle there? What is NATO about if our allies are not prepared to stand shoulder to shoulder with us?"
US Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Daniel Fried said the US was perplexed by the Dutch hesitation.
Dutchman and NATO chief Jaap de Hoop Scheffer has also called on The Hague to back the deployment. "We shouldn't grant the Taliban or al-Qa'ida victory, we should go on supporting the Karzai Government," the NATO chief said on Tuesday.
Increased attacks from Taliban and al-Qa'ida fighters have prompted NATO to boost its forces in Afghanistan from 10,000 to 16,000 troops, which will free up US troops to mount a more aggressive offensive along the border with Pakistan.
But while Canada and Britain have agreed to send more troops, the Dutch parliament has yet to approve its deployment of up to 1400 troops, F-16 fighters and Apache helicopters. Dutch Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende has backed the move, but public fears the troops could face heavy casualties have delayed parliamentary approval. I suspect they wouldn't face heavy casualties if they were properly armed and ammunitioned, and if their rules of engagement said something like, "When in doubt, shoot first." But that's my civilian ignorance showing, I s'pose.
Australian Defence Minister Robert Hill said he believed the Dutch would give the mission the go-ahead. "NATO believes that the Dutch deployment would be the one that worked best with the type of contribution Australia wants to make," Senator Hill said. He announced on Tuesday that Australia would send two Chinook helicopters, 110 support crew and some special forces troops to reinforce the 190 Australian SAS troops already in southeast Afghanistan. The new deployment means Australia will have 500 troops in Afghanistan by mid-year, although the entire complement is scheduled to be withdrawn before the end of the year. Getting them properly trained for that drawdown through Iran?
Afghan Defence Ministry spokesman Major-General Mohammad Zahir Azimi yesterday thanked Australia for its new contribution. He told the ABC that Afghanistan would require the support of international troops until it was powerful enough to take responsibility for its own security.
#2
The Dutch don't think it's their war. Fair enough. When the Dutch-muslim civil war happens, it won't be America's war, and the US won't have to send a hell of a lot more than 1,400 troops.
Posted by: ed ||
01/12/2006 22:38 Comments ||
Top||
Via Western Resistance
The dust has yet to settle from the conflict caused by the publication of cartoons insulting to the Prophet Mohammed in the Danish newspaper Jyllands Posten, and a newspaper in Norway publishes the caricatures as well.
The weekly Magazinet, Kudos to Magazinet which focuses on Christianity in general, on publishing the mentioned caricatures experienced a backlash by the Church Assistance Organization in the country. Other newspapers in Norway interpreted the publication as a "paradox" since the paper, as an advocate of Christian values, attacked the holy values of Islam.
Magazinet Editor in Chief Vebjorn Solbekk said they did not intend to insult Muslims, but wanted to point out a âsecret erosion" in freedom of expression that has been going on for a while.
The Norwegian paper published the 12 caricatures named "Faces of Mohammed" that the Danish paper published on September 30, and former Prime Minister Kjell Magne Bondevik fiercely reacted against Magazinet. Bondevik said in the Norwegian capital Oslo during an opening ceremony for a human rights center that they, as the believers of a faith, are perfectly aware of what belief means for others. Therefore, one should not fault in respect for the beliefs of others. Religion plays a key role in solving intersociety problems; freedom of expression should definitely exists, but respect for the beliefs of others should also exist. Rest at link.
Posted by: ed ||
01/12/2006 20:37 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
since the paper, as an advocate of Christian values, attacked the holy values of Islam.
No, no, you foolish people: God is holy, assuming you believe. Values are either good or bad, effective or ineffective. In this case, I suggest that this particular value of Islam is both bad and ineffective.
Al-Qaeda's deputy leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri says Turkeyâs Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan was not Islamist. Al Zawahiri further argued that Erdoganâs links with Islam are âso-called connectionsâ. According to Al-Qaeda, the United States grants power to Erdogans party in Turkey because the Ak Party behave secularist.
The latest Al Qaeda video-tape broadcasted by the Al Jazeara TV show the vivid gap between Al Qaeda and Turkeyâs governing party AK Party (Justice and Development Party). Ayman Al Zawahiri, the second most important figure in Al Qaeda, strongly critiqued AK Partyâs and Turkeyâs leader Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
Al Zawahiri also condemned Muslim Brotherhood (Ihvan) in Egypt because the group joined the latest Egyptian elections.
Interestingly the Turkish intellectuals agree with Al Qaedaâs latest statements. Dr. Sedat Laciner, head of the Ankara-based International Strategic Research Organisation (ISRO) says Erdogan was not Islamist but Muslim-Democrat:
âWrongly the Western press has named Erdogan Islamist. Mr. Erdogan never names himself or his party Islamist. He is not a cleric or a spiritual leader. He is conservative and religious man, but not a religionist man. He could be defined as Muslim-Democrat. AK Party is like a Christian Democrat party in Europe, and definitely very different than Al Qaeda.â
Dr. Laciner also said that Al Qaeda is Islamist and religionist, but not Islamic:
âIslamic means that something is according to Islam, something which is good for Islam. Under this definition Al Qaeda is not Islamic. The Western media including BBC; CNN and many others, use âIslamic terrorismâ term. There is no terrorism which is acceptable by Islam and Quran. So, there is no Islamic terrorism, but religionist terrorism. Al Qaeda and terrorist have no power in representing Islam and Muslims. Only the elected Muslim politicians and religious leaders can represent the Muslims. That is why Al Qaeda and his men are not happy with the Muslim politicians in Egypt and Turkey. Turkey is a model country and antidote of the Al Qaeda understanding.â
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
01/12/2006 01:14 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Al-Qaeda's deputy leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri says Turkeyâs Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan was not Islamist. Al Zawahiri further argued that Erdoganâs links with Islam are âso-called connectionsâ. According to Al-Qaeda, the United States grants power to Erdogans party in Turkey because the Ak Party behave secularist.
[...]
Al Zawahiri also condemned Muslim Brotherhood (Ihvan) in Egypt because the group joined the latest Egyptian elections.
#2
C'mon Zawahiri. Stick your pointy li'l beturbanned head up from your hidey hole. You *know* you want to. You're not getting Allan's message out clearly enough....
The Turkish assailant who shot Pope John Paul II in 1981 will be released from prison this week and now wants to work towards world peace. A court decided to free Mehmet Ali Agca, 48, on parole, saying he had completed his prison term in Turkey.
Agca was extradited to Turkey in 2000 after serving almost 20 years in prison in Italy for shooting and wounding the Pope in St. Peter's Square in Rome in 1981. Agca's lawyer Mustafa Demirbag said: "He says, 'I want to extend the hand of peace and friendship to everyone. I want to engage a struggle for democracy and culture'. Agca has received no special treatment, he is just benefiting from current laws."
Posted by: Fred ||
01/12/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Mehmet Ali Agca
"He says, 'I want to extend the hand of peace and friendship to everyone.
#2
It didn't work for Tookie, so why's this rotter getting a second chance? While extremely slow moving, this still has a whiff of "revolving door" to it. We'll see what sort of reception this guy gets in his home town and how he accepts it. That'll make things a lot more clear.
Mehmet Ali Agca was freed from prison Thursday nearly 25 years after he shot Pope John Paul II, with supporters welcoming him with flowers but Turkey's justice minister ordering a review of his release amid mounting criticism.
Agca, now 48 and with white hair, served 20 years in prison for attempted murder in Italy, where John Paul forgave him in a famous visit to his cell in 1983. He was extradited to Turkey and was freed after five years in jail for the murder of a Turkish journalist.
He was driven through the gates of the high-security Kartal Prison as dozens of police officers stood guard. His ultranationalist supporters showered the car with red and yellow flowers â¦
Many Turks were outraged at the decision to free Agca, approved by local courts, and Cicek apparently was responding to widespread criticism of the release after Agca served only five years for murdering Turkish journalist Abdi Ipekci â¦
Cicek said a military court had ordered Agca's execution in 1980 for murdering Ipekci but the sentence was commuted to life in prison in 2002, after Turkey abolished the death penalty. The life sentence was translated into 36 years â¦
"He is a family friend. We love him," Mustafa Akmercan, one of two Turks who hijacked an Air Malta jetliner in 1997 to demand Agca's release, told The Associated Press outside the prison. "We're very happy."
An outpouring of hearts and flowers, an overjoyed highjacker brother, membership in ultranationalist cadres. All the ingredients of a cheap spy novel, except it's reality.
Former CIA General Counsel Jeffrey Smith will testify in House hearings that there is no legal basis for President Bush's controversial National Security Agency domestic surveillance program, ABC News has learned.
ABC News has obtained a copy of a 14-page memo Smith wrote to the House Select Committee on Intelligence in which he argues that the wiretaps are illegal.
In his memo, however, Smith argues "it is not credible that the 2001 authorization to use force provides authority for the president to ignore the requirements of FISA."
He said that if the president's arguments for the wiretaps are sustained "it would be a dramatic expansion of presidential authority affecting the rights of our fellow citizens that undermines the checks and balances of our system, which lie at the very heart of the Constitution."
Smith is a Democrat who worked at the CIA in the Clinton years and as general counsel to the Senate Armed Services Committee under Sam Nunn, then a Democratic senator from Georgia.
Smith is now in private practice. He plans to testify before the House Judiciary Committee on Jan. 20.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
01/12/2006 01:18 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Glad this turd is a "former". I wish lies like this were prosecutable.
The NSA does what the President directs. Five, count 'em: 5, court decisions have already held and confirmed that the Constitution gives the President the power to order surveillance in areas of national security. That he did it is to his credit. That he limited the scope is to his credit. That the fuckwits are in a lather, yet again, meming for all they're worth is icing on the cake.
Papa John's?
Yeah, I want a medium regular crust Italian Sausage with mushrooms, onions, green pepper, black olives and double cheese. Gate code is 195.
35 minutes? Cool.
Lol.
Fuck off Dhimmis, cowards, BDS Rangers, and Moonbats.
#3
I'm not a lawyer, but my understanding is that the law exists to prohibit certain activities. If it is not prohibited then it's allowed. I have not seen any language in quite a number of sources quoting and interpreting the laws that even recognizes the possibility of something like data mining. So clearly the existing laws are not intended to prohibit data mining. You might argue that the language of the laws could be interpreted to prohibit some aspects of data mining, but that's for the courts to decide. But again my understanding is when in doubt, courts rely on the intent of the law.
So all these arguments are based on 'Were the framers of the laws aware this were possible then they would have prohibited it.', an extremely flimsy argument.
Redacted by moderator. Comments may be redacted for trolling, violation of standards of good manners, or plain stupidity. Please correct the condition that applies and try again. Contents may be viewed in the sinktrap. Further violations may result in banning.
#6
"..affecting the rights of our fellow citizens.."
Jeff 'the Weasil' Smith may be a partner in the Ramsey Clarke wing of the Usefull Idiots Club...after the testimony, who gets his expense report?
#7
Phil_b, in the US laws prohibit activities for people. But we theoretically have government of limited powers delegated from the sovereign people. Thus the things the government may do are limited only to those stated in the Constitution.
The issue is not data minimg. I suspect most would agree that phone calls legally intercepted may be mined. But the question is whether they were legally intercepted. We'll see.
A second issue is the potentially treasonous behaviour of some in revealing secrets about what is arguably the strongest weapon in our intelligence arsenal. That is a matter that should be taken far more seriously than it is.
#8
God I loved Google! Ok gang you have to look at some material that Jeff and his buddies are publishing and the Markle task Force. I am not a conspiracy theorists and I am not an expert on LLL groups but the published material from this groups sounds awfully close to moonbat publication but with official type cover. For instance they are very much against a National IDs because they are too hard to make tamper proof. So I guess anyone can publish a Visa, Mastercard, or Amex at will? Why do they continue to issue individual cards? Just my two cents, but after reading a couple of the articles I had no doubt that any of the members (which include Weasly Clark), would support wiretaps on anybody except if they had neon sign hanging over them proclaiming: âI am a terrorists and I want to kill Americans.â But like I said it is just my two (ok three) cents.
#9
after reading a couple of the articles I had no doubt that any of the members (which include Weasly Clark), would support wiretaps on anybody except if they had neon sign hanging over them proclaiming: âI am a terrorists and I want to kill Americans.â
Democrats are the party that believes it's OK to wiretap their political opponents, hand around the FBI files of their political opponents, and obtain the credit reports of their political opponents, but it's illegal to listen to a phone number you found in the posession of a terrorist.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
01/12/2006 13:16 Comments ||
Top||
#10
I don't know Jeffrey Smith, but often these Senate Democrat staffers are some of the most partisan guys you'll ever run into. Usually more to the left than the Senators they work for. His stint at the CIA gives him no special status to comment on this subject any more than the thousands of other liberal Dem lawyers running around DC.
LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) - President Bush said Wednesday that he isn't bothered by congressional hearings into his domestic spying program as long as they don't aid the enemy. ``That's good for democracy,'' Bush said, provided the hearings don't ``tell the enemy what we're doing.''
In Louisville, Bush hosted a casual, town hall-type event reminiscent of his campaign stops. Bush paced, with microphone in hand, like a talk show host in front of signs that left no doubt about the administration's message of the day: ``Winning the War on Terror.'' After his opening remarks, Bush fielded about 10 questions from the audience of invited groups. White House press secretary Scott McClellan said the questions were not prescreened. Bush said no topics were off-limits, and even invited a question about Iran, but nobody asked one.
Instead, the audience wanted to know about the war, terrorism and a host of domestic issues, including health care, education and immigration.
Bush acknowledged differences over Iraq. ``Whether you agree with me or not, we're doing the right thing,'' Bush said, adding that terrorists or insurgents fighting democratic reform in Iraq are ``not going to shake my will.''
A 7-year-old boy's question - ``How can people help on the war on terror?'' - gave Bush an opening to score some political points against his critics and try to keep Democrats from using Iraq as an issue in this year's midterm elections. ``It's one thing to have a philosophical difference - and I can understand people being abhorrent about war. War is terrible,'' Bush said. ``But one way people can help as we're coming down the pike in the 2006 elections is remember the effect that rhetoric can have on our troops in harm's way, and the effect that rhetoric can have in emboldening or weakening an enemy.''
It was the second day in a row that Bush warned his critics to watch what they say or risk giving comfort to U.S. adversaries. On Tuesday, before a gathering of Veterans of Foreign Wars, he said Democrats who do will suffer at the ballot box in November.
Bush appeared in a Kentucky district where Andrew Horne, an Iraqi war veteran who opposed the invasion, is hoping to unseat Republican Rep. Anne Northup, a strong Bush supporter.
Posted by: Steve White ||
01/12/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Bush paced, with microphone in hand, like a talk show host in front of signs that left no doubt about the administration's message of the day:
#3
Bush appeared in a Kentucky district where Andrew Horne, an Iraqi war veteran who opposed the invasion, is hoping to unseat Republican Rep. Anne Northup, a strong Bush supporter.
Forget to mention Horne's party affiliation? I'm sure it was just a mistake.
#4
"But one way people can help as we're coming down the pike in the 2006 elections is remember the effect that rhetoric can have on our troops in harm's way, and the effect that rhetoric can have in emboldening or weakening an enemy.''
You know, this is a talking point that virtually every Bushite keeps repeating over and over and over and over..
It just strikes me as totally illogical for them to keep saying this because it doesnt make a lot of sense.
U.S. troops, as i am so often reminded by right wingers, are over in Iraq to complete a mission and to finish a job, so I doubt very seriously if they all that concerned with dissenting opinions about why they are over there. I would think they are too busy with survival in a hostile environment.
I would have to ask President Busy how do you emoblden a enemy that is alread emboldened.
Apparently he doesnt read the daily reports of
death and carnage that the insurgents are inflicting on the U.S. military and Iraqi citizens. Is Bush detached from reality or what?
#5
"I would have to ask President Busy how do you emoblden a enemy that is alread emboldened."
You need to lay off the role playing games. This isn't something where a little star appears above a Jihadi's head indicating they are "emboldened" and therefore immune to discouragement.
When senators (falsly, to my mind) compare US troops to terrorists, they encourage and embolden those fighting against us. Similarly, those who call for an immediate pullout also encourage the terrorists. They (the terrorists) believe that they are near victory, and so will keep on fighting, fighting more than they would if they believed theirs was a lost cause. Encouragements are, by definition, encouraging. Not too hard for someone who wants to understand. Conversely, it is impossible for someone who purposefully wants to stay an ignorant troll.
Posted by: Mark E. ||
01/12/2006 12:57 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Okay BirdDog, let me make it easy for you. When the opposition party in this country make statements that undercut the conduct of the war and offer the enemy hope of eventual political success, regardless of their level of military success against us, it emboldens them. Don't want to believe me? Fine, ask General Giap about that very issue since he personally stated that American political statements after Tet convinced him and the NVA Generals to NOT ask for a ceasefire and prisoner exchange. Giap has stated that Tet was a military disaster for the NVA and VC but a POLITICAL victory, based on what the media and the Democrats had to say about it.
You, repubs/cons or Prez bush and all those who keep echoing that bs mantra, have absolutely no proof that insurgency attacks increase based off of criticism of his policies or calls for a phased our withdrawal.
The insurgents are going to keep attacking regardless and it is naive and foolish, to think they are basing what they are doing on american rhetoric as the president says.
What Bush and his minions are actually doing with this mantra is to try to mute dissenting opinions of his policy which are dropping his poll #s in support of the Iraq War. Its just more of his
propaganda that his brainwashed followers parrot in their ignorance to reality.
#8
"You, repubs/cons or Prez bush and all those who keep echoing that bs mantra, have absolutely no proof that insurgency attacks increase based off of criticism of his policies or calls for a phased our withdrawal."
Yes I do. My personal military experience and training, as well as my knowledge of history tell me that that is empirically true. Only someone with no knowledge of either the military or the history of the human race would say the above.
Disputing the obvious; that encouragements are encouraging, is not a winning argument.
"brainwashed followers parrot in their ignorance to reality..."
...and as far as this statement insult goes, FOAD, troll.
Posted by: Mark E. ||
01/12/2006 13:38 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Yeah, it's all bullshit, BirdDog.
Bui Tin, who served on the general staff of the North Vietnamese army, received South Vietnam's unconditional surrender on April 30, 1975. In an interview with the Wall Street Journal after his retirement, he made clear the anti-war movement in the United States, which led to the collapse of political will in Washington, was "essential to our strategy."
Visits to Hanoi by Jane Fonda and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and various church ministers "gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses."
America lost the war, concluded Bui Tin, "because of its democracy. Through dissent and protest it lost the ability to mobilize a will to win."
That is a bs non response to my post. Show me the numbers based off of what youre saying.
What you and bush are saying is nonsense. You claim that the Insurgents are sitting around monitoring the American Media and basing their attacks in Iraq off of what is going on in the
Anti-War movement. Then prove it, show me the numbers.
The Insurgency is already emboldened. They know
they cannot defeat the U.S. military so their goal is to kill as many U.S. soldiers and Iraqi supporters as possible before they U.S. leaves.
To further disprove your point, if the Insurgency really wanted the U.S. to pull out of Iraq early,
all they would have to do is stop fighting now and wait.
I dont think that the anti-war movement is based off of "showing weakness or resolve" that leads to "breaking the will of the american people.
The anti-war movement is about people that were opposed about going to war in the first place.
The anti-war movement is not a overnight phenomenon, it was there from the very beginning.
#14
You've proven nothing. You've merely asserted your opinions and demanded others do more than that. They have, yet you are either disingenuous or simply stupid in your responses.
Have you hit the tip jar with a substantial donation, yet, or are you still a mere parasite spouting DU Talking Points Without A Clue?
And this was written in 1943, when the Germans had little positive to think about. Yet they fought on.... Don't you think it would have been worse and the Nazis would have fought even harder had the party in opposition in Congress constantly comparing the Nazis to our Founding fathers?
How about this little missive striaght to the Z man himself concerning the present case?
I ignore it because i dont think it applies to what President Bush is saying.
President Bush is saying that anti-war rhetoric emboldens the enemy and increases attacks, he says it undermines the troops.
I say that the enemy is already emboldened and attacks regardless of what is being said. I also
say the military is doing their job regardless of what is being said.
I'm saying prove it with numbers linking anti war rhetoric with increased attacks and numbers showing the troops are demoralized by anti-war rhetoric.
Redacted by moderator. Comments may be redacted for trolling, violation of standards of good manners, or plain stupidity. Please correct the condition that applies and try again. Contents may be viewed in the sinktrap. Further violations may result in banning.
Redacted by moderator. Comments may be redacted for trolling, violation of standards of good manners, or plain stupidity. Please correct the condition that applies and try again. Contents may be viewed in the sinktrap. Further violations may result in banning.
#25
un-effing-believeable. Is this what we turn out in our schools today?
As for the correlation you require: Have attacks against the coalition forces gone up since the end of the invasion? Yes. Has anti-US and anti-war rhetoric increased over the same time period? Yes. Correlation established. QED.
Now for the real question that you missed; Is there causation? Check out any of the letters either to or from Zarqawi, and his soldiers; He himself says it.
If you don't think foreigners respond to what is said here, what about those riots in Pakistan when newsweek printed the false story re: the Koran desecration. As I recall, people there seemed to hang on every word.
Posted by: Mark E. ||
01/12/2006 15:17 Comments ||
Top||
#26
BirdDog, you are without a doubt the the biggest idiot I've ever witnessed on this site..except maybe for Antiwar (spit). Quit with the "So when tid yo stop beating your wife arguments" YOU are the one who needs to back your talk up - and as you demonstrate daily, you've only got your own ignorance to fall back on. Noone is stifling dissent - there's plenty of it from both parties. What the likes of Murtha and Pelosi offer is not dissent - it is surrender. Being a good little LLL moonbat in good standing, I'm sure you can understand the nuance.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
01/12/2006 15:46 Comments ||
Top||
Redacted by moderator. Comments may be redacted for trolling, violation of standards of good manners, or plain stupidity. Please correct the condition that applies and try again. Contents may be viewed in the sinktrap. Further violations may result in banning.
Redacted by moderator. Comments may be redacted for trolling, violation of standards of good manners, or plain stupidity. Please correct the condition that applies and try again. Contents may be viewed in the sinktrap. Further violations may result in banning.
Redacted by moderator. Comments may be redacted for trolling, violation of standards of good manners, or plain stupidity. Please correct the condition that applies and try again. Contents may be viewed in the sinktrap. Further violations may result in banning.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
01/12/2006 17:06 Comments ||
Top||
#34
Bird Dog -- I've made no response on any thread where you have been involved, 'cause all that you say, I have already read in my daily newspaper, or from some article from the NYT or WaPO that someone quotes. In fact, I don't read much of anything you post. But glad you have had so much time and fun here, practicing your skills of cut, copy and paste.
#36
Redacted... good deal. We've had a few idiots wander through Rantburg over the last few years, but this BirdBrain/Cassini/LeftAngle character is uncommonly stupid. Jeez!
Posted by: Dave D. ||
01/12/2006 17:19 Comments ||
Top||
#37
hey! is it dark down there in the sink trap? Moldy? Cold? Smelly? Just like a DU thread....buh bye
Posted by: Frank G ||
01/12/2006 17:27 Comments ||
Top||
#38
President Bush is saying that anti-war rhetoric emboldens the enemy and increases attacks, he says it undermines the troops.
I say that the enemy is already emboldened and attacks regardless of what is being said.
Apparently, the enemy doesn't need to know whether their tactics/attacks are working. They just keep on anyway.
Yeah, right. Even nutbags blindly following their beliefs need to know whether their efforts are producing results.
#39
.com said it best: "WTF is this cretin doing here, wasting bandwidth, posting childish Kool Aid Kiddies drivel, refusing to give .01% as good as it gets?"
Damned good question.
When and if I ever feel like debating witless, left-wing, BDS-afflicted submorons-- and I don't-- I can damn well go over to DailyKos or DU or Huffington's site and do it; there's no need to let clueless idiots like this BirdBrain/Cassini/LeftAngle asshole clutter up Rantburg with their brainless bullshit.
There's plenty of room for argument on HOW the GWoT should be fought, and what it will take to win it; and there's no danger whatsoever of Rantburg becoming an "echo chamber" if fools like BirdBrain are quickly shown the door.
So far, the only argument he's been able to present to anyone who's tried to engage him, is an accusation that we're "parroting rep/cons talking points." But it apparently hasn't yet penetrated his dim little doggie brain that there are more than a few of us here at Rantburg-- maybe even a majority-- who are VERY dissatisfied with how GWB is managing the war (not aggressively enough), dealing with the UN (far too deferential), dealing with the menace of Iran (hello, George, anybody home?), and dealing with the treasonous opposition at home (Lincoln had the right idea).
Sorry, but this BirdBrain jerk isn't tall enough to go on this ride. Ban him, so the rest of us can get back to proper Ranting.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
01/12/2006 17:59 Comments ||
Top||
#40
Thank you, DD! If you look at Bird Dirt's comments, they use the same style and words as LA and Cassini. Nothing new - maybe the same person - or maybe just shared DU/KOS Kidz fever dreams. Have any us ever really had any success engaging the moonbats? A waste of time and energy. At least Aris brings an original perspective to the discussion.
I don't fault BD/LA/Cassini. We are the ones who are fulfilling his need to disrupt. If we didn't respond, his fun would be gone. If we waste our time trying to argue with moonbats, CW II comes closer.
#41
"If you look at Bird Dirt's comments, they use the same style and words as LA and Cassini."
The moderators can view the IPs of commenters here, and IIRC, several of them have said those three are indeed one and the same: same IP, same idiot, same idiocy.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
01/12/2006 18:48 Comments ||
Top||
#42
I don't have documented evidence of increased attacks in Iraq after some Senator or Representative gave a speech or spoke negativley about our war effort but there is some annecdotal evudence. I have talked to several soldiers who returned here recently who told me in person they felt betrayed and "sold out" by those people.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
01/12/2006 19:41 Comments ||
Top||
#43
Rex Mundi-Mark E.,
I think exactly the same way about you people
in here. the positions you take are absolutely
absurd, let alone ridiculous.
The notion that anti-war rhetoric in the U.S. is fueling the Insurgency is ridiculous. Those people are out to kill as many americans soldiers and Iraqi supporters as they can regardless of what is being said in the U.S.
Of course the attacks in Iraq increased after the initial invasion, but it had nothing to do with anti-war rhetoric in the U.S.. Did not thousands of recruits surge into to Iraq with the express purpose of killing americans? duh...
According to charts I am reading the Insurgency averages 60 to 70 attacks a day in Iraq. The only time there have been lulls are when the Iraqis went to vote.
So if we accept your Bush's stupid mantra on anti-war rhetoric, why wasnt there a huge surge in attacks when Con. Murtha denounced the war and republicans lost their damn minds and started this bs about "aiding the enemy and demoralizing troops?
Bush supporters are repeating this bs mantra because he wants to stiffle dissent and because Bush is losing support on the Iraq war THAT is why they are saying these things.
Furthermore, Bush keeps saying the anti-war rhetoric "emboldens the enemy because they want to break our will to accept defeat and leave Iraq"
that comment is even more absurd, because if the insurgency really wanted the U.S. to leave all they would have to do is stop fighting at this very moment and wait.
As far as thos Zarquarwi letter are concerned, did you happen to read this:
"The authenticity of the letter -- which the military said American troops found Thursday in a raid in Baghdad -- could not be independently verified"
I'm done here. people on the right in here are brainwashed beyond all hope.
#47
Lets all get behind President Bush and back him
in the Iraq War. The democrats are anti-american
treasonous traitors who are aiding abetting and emboldening the enemy with their anti war rhetoric. President Bush has removed a brutal
dictator and made us all safer here in the U.S.
because he was connected with Al Qaeda was going to sell wmd's to terrorist who are going to attack the U.S. The President has the right to
wiretap anyone he wants without the authority of
Congress or the Courts because it is backed by the
Constitution. The MSM deliberately slants the news against President Bush and the Republicans
because they are all liberals who hate them,
want to make look bad and influence elections against them.
We Republicans stand for truth justice and the american way.
THE North Korean-born businessman accused of trying to bribe top UN officials in the Oil-For-Food scandal holds a British passport and planned to use a British bank account, US authorities say.
Tongsun Parkâs British nationality emerged at a bail hearing in Houston when a FBI agent expressed fears that he might use his British passport to escape if released.
Mr Park, a central figure in the âKoreagateâ bribery scandal in Washington in the 1970s, was travelling on his South Korean passport when he was apprehended in Mexico on Friday and flown to the United States.
Mr Park is charged with acting as an unregistered foreign agent for Saddam Husseinâs Iraq in targetting two top UN officials for bribes in setting up the Oil-For-Food programme, which allowed Iraq to export oil to fund essential imports while under sanctions.
There have been dramatic scenes at the Guantanamo Bay detention facility in Cuba, where a Yemeni detainee has boycotted a military commission set to try him for alleged terror offences.
"No! You can't make me go in there!"
"Leggo the door sill, Ali!"
Ali Hamza al-Bahlul, who is accused of making propaganda videos for Al Qaeda, unleased a 10-minute diatribe shortly after his preliminary hearing began. The Yemeni said the US was the enemy of Muslims, corrupting their religion and stealing their wealth. Speaking calmly and referring to notes, al-Bahlul said the commission was an illegal military trial, then declared he was boycotting proceedings and removed the headphones through which he was receiving translations.
"Take that, infidels!"
Al-Bahlul said he should be treated as a prisoner of war and his true day of judgement would come before the tribunal of God. The detainee's military-appointed lawyer then moved to withdraw from the case, a request firmly denied after much legal argument by the commission's presiding officer, Colonel Peter Browback.
"Yes, Counselor! We realize he's a nut. But he's gotta have a lawyer!"
"But why does it have to be me?"
The hearing has been adjourned to resolve a number of legal issues. The boycotting has come on the fourth anniversary of Guantanamo Bay prison's operation. Yesterday, al-Bahlul's lawyer said his client stood no chance of receiving a fair hearing.
"Nope. None. Might as well just let him go."
Al-Bahlul had wanted to represent himself and his military-appointed lawyer, Major Tom Fleener, who called the tribunal a "wholly illegitimate process", said he must not be denied this right. "Mr al-Bahlul's desire to guide his own case is a universally recognised, fundamental right," Major Fleener said. He said he suspected the request had been refused "essentially because it is inconvenient". Under the tribunal rules, defendants are not allowed to be present when evidence that is considered classified is presented.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/12/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"The Yemeni said the US was the enemy of Muslims, corrupting their religion and stealing their wealth..."
Stealing their wealth!? Yemen has wealth? Who knew!
Villagers on the Bangladesh border say the fence will cut them from their homeland
TO REACH the baked earth of his mustard field each day, Mohammed Safiqual Biswas must pass coils of barbed wire and armed guards and show his identity card at a security check.
The problem is not where Mr Biswas has come from, but where he is going to. His fields lie 60 miles east of Calcutta, right in the no manâs land between India and Bangladesh.
Next month India plans to fence off this area of West Bengal as part of a little-known £600 million project to erect a steel barrier right along its 2,500-mile border with its much smaller Muslim neighbour. As a result Mr Biswas and his village of 2,000 people will be sealed off from their own country.
âWeâll be fenced out of India,â the 30-year-old farmer complains. âWhat if thereâs an emergency and we have to go to the mainland? What if thereâs no one at the gate to let us out? Weâll be completely cut off.â
India is 30 times the size of Bangladesh and the two nations share South Asiaâs longest border. But despite Indiaâs help during Bangladeshâs War of Independence in 1971 against what was then West Pakistan, relations between the two countries have deteriorated in recent years.
While the worldâs attention has been focused on the Israeli security barrier sealing off the West Bank, India has been building a far longer fence to keep out Islamic militants, thwart cross-border smuggling and stop human trafficking.
More than 1,300 miles of the barrier has been erected in the six years since building began. Snaking through jungles, rivers and the villages of five states, Delhiâs floodlit, 12ft double fence packed with razor wire will render India a fortress against her neighbour.
The problem India faces is that 100,000 of its citizens live and farm on a 150-yard patch of land hugging the international border known officially as âthe zero lineâ, and they live on the wrong side of the fenceâs designated path.
Entire villages, including schools, temples and mosques lie in what will effectively become no manâs land. Although Bangladeshis and Indians along the border have lived cheek by jowl for decades, and share the Bengali language and culture, relations between them are strained by suspicion.
The Indian villagers fear that once the fence is built they will be harassed by Bangladeshâs security guards. They say that locked away from Indian guards their fields and homes could be looted with impunity by Bangladeshi farmers.
Rabreya Bachhri, who lives in Jayantipur, the same village as Mr Biswas, says: âEven now the Bangladeshis cross over at night from their side and steal our cooking utensils and cows. Weâre very worried about our future. India has to look after us and keep us inside the fence or it will make us Bangladeshi.â
Sandwiched between two nations, the villagers say that they get a raw deal from both countries. The Indian and Bangladeshi security forces accuse them of colluding in smuggling and illegal immigration.
Officers from Indiaâs Border Security Force say that Bangladeshis claim they are entering India for medical treatment but do not have the required travel documents. One senior officer said: âEven those who come with documents donât go back. The number of people coming into India is less than the number returning.â
Officials say that the fence has already stemmed the flow of illegal Bangladeshi immigrants attempting to cross into India from about 65,000 annually a decade ago to just 10,000 this year.
Shivajee Singh, a border security force inspector-general, said: âWhen the fence was put up the numbers came down.â
But Delhi is increasingly concerned about infiltration by militants from a country with a large, poor Muslim population that was scooped from India by partition. It accuses Bangladesh of harbouring insurgent groups fighting for accession from India from its northeastern states of Assam, Tripura and Manipur.
There are also concerns about the rise of radical Islam after the spate of bombs and violence in Bangladesh. âMilitancy is a new dimension,â Mr Singh said. âEarlier people came for employment. Now weâre getting reports that theyâre coming for terrorist activities.â
India has consequently accelerated the barrierâs construction, hoping to complete it by spring next year. It will also increase the number of troops along its border with Bangladesh from 45,000 to 53,000. In a move to bring villagers such as Mr Biswas inside the barrier, India has asked Dhaka to permit it to build the fence within the zero line, an area that both countries promised to keep free from defence structures in an agreement made 30 years ago.
Delhi claims that its request has so far been refused. However, a senior official of the Bangladeshi Embassy in Delhi said that talks between the two nations were continuing. âWeâre always open to discussion with friends and neighbours,â he said. âBut the agreement canât just be changed by wishful thinking.â
Posted by: john ||
01/12/2006 17:24 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
That ain't nothing! We are going to build two 3,000 mile ones.
German spies in Baghdad helped U.S. warplanes strike at least one target during the 2003 Iraq war despite Berlin's statements it was not involved in the conflict, German media reported on Thursday.
The Sueddeutsche Zeitung newspaper and NDR television said two agents of Germany's BND foreign intelligence agency remained in Iraq throughout the war, supplying U.S. counterparts with information.
"They gave us direct support. They gave us information for targeting," NDR quoted a former U.S. military official as saying in a preview of a programme to be broadcast later on Thursday.
He cited a April 7, 2003 air raid on a Baghdad suburb where Saddam Hussein was thought to be staying that had been conducted after a BND officer confirmed limousines were parked outside a building. At least 12 civilians were killed in the attack.
The allegation, if confirmed, would be an embarrassment to German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, who as chief of staff to then Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder had oversight of the security services at the time.
Sueddeutsche Zeitung quoted unnamed security sources as saying approval of the BND's cooperation was a "political decision" taken by Schroeder's government after talks between the BND and the chancellery.
NDR said Steinmeier declined to be interviewed for the programme. It said the BND confirmed two agents remained in Iraq but denied they had been involved in helping to establish targets for bombing raids.
But the reports could help Chancellor Angela Merkel, who makes her first official visit to Washington later on Thursday on a mission to mend ties strained by Schroeder's opposition to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.
Sueddeutsche Zeitung said the BND spies had been based in French diplomatic quarters because Germany's embassy was closed on March 17, 2003 â three days before the war started. France supported Germany's opposition to the war.
The newspaper said one of the tasks of the BND spies was to follow up a request by the United States to locate hospitals and embassies that should not be bombed.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
01/12/2006 12:18 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Sire is a lot of Good German nedws coming over the wires. Angela must have her PD guys working OT.
#3
He cited a April 7, 2003 air raid on a Baghdad suburb where Saddam Hussein was thought to be staying that had been conducted after a BND officer confirmed limousines were parked outside a building. At least 12 civilians were killed in the attack.
Leaking? I'm not so sure. This sounds more like Schroeder was trying to embarrass us with bogus information that left civilians dead, but Merkel's in power now. Did Germany pass us this info through Joe Wilson?
#4
But the reports could help Chancellor Angela Merkel, who makes her first official visit to Washington later on Thursday on a mission to mend ties strained by Schroeder's opposition to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.
Wishful thinking on ABC's part. If it helps, it won't help much; Merkel playing Schroeder-lite pretty much wiped out any benefit.
Excerpt:
"If they do not accept key amendments to the country's new constitution, including the regions issue, then let them work alone and divide the country, as for us we do not accept this," al-Mutlaq told The Associated Press by phone from Amman, Jordan.
Posted by: ed ||
01/12/2006 09:43 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Reality is simply a bridge too far for the Sunnis.
#3
If the Sunnis do not rein in their gunnies soon, the Shiaa will have no incentive to not bring back the death squads in the police and military. The head of the Wolf Brigade got dismissed but that was window dressing - the liquidation teams can be reconstituted quickly and the deaths can be hitting impressive numbers very quickly. If someone is too stupid to take advantage of all the opportunities that the Sunnis have be offered, then their existence is not certain.
BAGHDAD, Iraq, Jan. 11, 2006 â Soldiers representing 10 Iraqi Army Divisions stood alongside high-ranking officers and dignitaries to commemorate the country's Armed Forces Day at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier Jan. 6. "Nobody has forced us to be in the Army like before. We are like one hand, all of us are brothers."
Organized by the Iraqi Ministry of Defense in the International Zone, the event was described by officials as the largest affair orchestrated here since the inception of the war, marking a milestone in the progress of the country's security forces and symbolizing the unity of Iraq's Army.
A wreath placed at the centerpiece of the tomb marked the 85th anniversary of the Iraqi Army. Iraqi Minister of Defense Saadun al-Dulaim stood before a battalion of sharply-dressed Iraqi soldiers as trumpeters played a military salute after the laying of the wreath.
The ceremony also featured readings from the Quran and prayers for the souls of unknown soldiers, a marching band and a unit of Iraqi Honor Guard soldiers. Several battalions of soldiers marched in front of tanks and armored personnel carriers from the 9th Iraqi Army Division (Mechanized). Other vehicles used by the armed forces were also on display.
The ceremony continued off the tomb site and on the parade field surrounding the monument, where al-Dulaim reaffirmed the Iraqi Army's mission to serve their country in a speech to soldiers, leaders and dignitaries.
Hundreds of soldiers from various units responded by reciting the Iraqi Armed Forces Oath. "I swear in the name of God and on my honor to protect the land of Iraq and its people from all aggression and to be loyal to the principles of the Constitution," they roared in unison.
Soldiers and other members of Iraq's Security Forces said they believe they are carrying on a proud tradition of military service and take pride in knowing they serve the people of Iraq. They said the tomb holds special meaning for them.
"It's the face of our country," said Ali, a member of the Iraqi Special Forces. "I am happy to be serving my country. If we do not protect our country, then who will protect it?"
Soldiers and others are encouraged by the growth of the Iraqi Army and its increasing role in providing security. They also see more cohesion within the ranks. "There are Sunni, Shi'ite and Kurdish soldiers here," said a Kurdish soldier who did not give his name for security reasons. "It makes no difference, we are one army."
The soldier said the strength and unity of the army is better now than before and that he and other soldiers have volunteered to protect all of the Iraqi people from terrorists.
"Nobody has forced us to be in the Army like before," the soldier said. "We are like one hand, all of us are brothers."
Posted by: Bobby ||
01/12/2006 09:38 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The birth of Esprit de Corps - excellent.
When all of them can honestly agree with the Kurdish soldier's view, that they are all Iraqis, not Shi'a, Sunnis, Kurds, etc., another major milestone will be passed.
When they can acknowledge that the coalition forces have fought to protect their country, creating the pocket of time they needed to achieve professionalism, and feel not shame for needing that selfless assistance - but pride in taking over the job, then they will be there.
The most influential politician in Iraq issued a veiled warning Wednesday to Sunni Arabs that Shiites would not allow substantive amendments to the country's new constitution, including to the provision that keeps the central government weak in favor of strong provincial governments.
Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, the leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, or SCIRI, said in an address in honor of the Islamic holiday of Eid al-Adha that provincial governments will remain strong in the constitution, which can be amended after the next government is installed.
"The first principle is not to change the essence of the constitution. This constitution was endorsed by the Iraqi people," he said.
Sunni Arabs place great stock in their ability to change the constitution, one of the reasons Sunni politician urged the minority to turn out in large numbers during the Dec. 15 parliamentary election.
They want a stronger central government because the constitution now bestows most power â including control over oil profits â to provincial governments.
The Shiites in the south and the Kurds in the north control most of Iraq's oil. There are few oil reserves in central Iraq, where Sunnis live.
To win their support for the new constitution, which was approved in an Oct. 15 vote, Sunni Arabs were promised they could propose amendments to it during the first four months of the new parliament's tenure. The new parliament is expected to be seated around the end of February. Amendments need two-thirds approval in parliament and a majority in a national referendum.
There was limited violence Wednesday. A roadside bomb exploded next to a police patrol outside Samarra, about 60 miles north of Baghdad, killing two policemen, police Capt. Laith Mohammed said.
Iraqi police found seven bodies shot in the head, their legs and hands bound, in a sewer in eastern Baghdad, 1st Lt. Mohammed Khayon said.
Meanwhile, health officials in northern Iraq, which shares a border with Turkey, have started taking measures to prevent possible cases of bird flu from entering the country. Preliminary tests have shown that at least 15 people in Turkey have been infected with the deadly H5N1 strain of the flu. Two children have died.
Doctors, veterinarians and other health ministry officials met Sunday in northern Iraq's Kurdish enclave to discuss bird flu, the region's minister of agriculture said Wednesday.
"A campaign will start on the borders of Turkey and Iran to prevent the importation of any kind of bird," Shamal Abid Waffal said. "No living birds are allowed to be sold in the markets. Even the frozen birds are not allowed to be taken from one city to another without medical tests."
There have been no reported cases of bird flu in Iraq.
Iraqis nationwide celebrated the opening of the four-day Eid al-Adha celebration on Tuesday with visits to relatives, food and sweets. Lambs were slaughtered and food was distributed to the poor.
Eid al-Adha â one of Iraq's biggest holidays â concludes the pilgrimage to Mecca and is celebrated by Muslims worldwide. It commemorates Abraham's readiness to sacrifice his son in God's test of the patriarch's faith. At the last moment, God substituted a sheep for the son.
The story is shared by the three "Abrahamic" religions â Islam, Judaism and Christianity â although Islam says the son in question was Ishmael, while Judaism and Christianity maintain it was his brother Isaac.
Shiites and Sunni Arabs also called for an end to the bloodshed that has wracked Iraq since last month's elections.
"This Eid is a happy day for all Muslims, especially Iraqis. But it comes after painful events that happened in Karbala and Ramadi," said Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari, a Shiite.
He referred to the killings of more than 120 people in suicide bombings last week in the Shiite holy city of Karbala and at a police recruiting center in Ramadi.
On Monday, homicide bombers infiltrated the heavily fortified Interior Ministry compound in Baghdad and killed 29 Iraqis â an attack claimed by Al Qaeda in Iraq, a group with an avowed aim of starting a sectarian war.
Violence has increased since the Dec. 15 elections, with at least 498 Iraqis and 54 U.S. forces killed.
Al-Jaafari said despite the violence, Iraq had made significant advances in 2005, citing a large turnout in Dec. 15 elections as one of the biggest achievements.
About 70 percent of Iraq's 15 million voters, including large numbers of Sunni Arabs, participated in the elections, although some Sunni Arab groups complained the vote was tainted by fraud â delaying the release of results.
Al-Jaafari's governing United Iraqi Alliance emerged with a large lead in the elections, far ahead of a Kurdish coalition and Sunni Arab groups but without the majority it will need in the 275-member parliament to avoid a coalition.
With final results expected next week, the Shiites, Kurds and some Sunni Arab groups have been talking about forming a broad-based coalition government.
Al-Hakim, the leader of the United Iraqi Alliance, urged Sunni Arabs on Tuesday to stop complaining and accept the results.
In Washington, President Bush, speaking at a gathering of the Veterans of Foreign Wars, also urged Iraqis to put aside their differences to form a government of national unity, warning that the country "risks sliding back into tyranny" if it dwells on old grievances.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
01/12/2006 01:20 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
Because of the considerable historical importance of this stunning recent development, the contractor who obtained and reviewed these tapes plans to release them to the public on February 17, 2006 at the Intelligence Summitsm, a non-partisan, non-profit conference open to the public, scheduled to be held at the Hyatt Regency Crystal City Hotel in Arlington, Virginia that weekend.
[..]
In regard to these highly confidential audiotapes, Attorney John Loftus, President of the Intelligence Summitsm, recently stated that, "Saddam's secret office recordings continued well into the year 2000. In all, they contain at least 12 hours of totally candid discussions with his senior aides. Clearly, after these tapes have been verified and corroborated, they will be able to provide a few definitive answers to some very important-and controversial-weapons of mass destruction questions." Loftus went on to say that the contractor who found and recovered the tapes has requested that his identity remain anonymous until he makes his presentation.
[..]
#3
Loftus went on to say that the Halliburton contractor who found and recovered the tapes has requested that his identity remain anonymous until he makes his presentation.
#4
I can't imagine these tapes have not been transcribed yet.
Posted by: ed ||
01/12/2006 8:06 Comments ||
Top||
#5
I look forward to the day when the major media finally has to admit that Saddam had wmd's that were moved prior to the war.
Way back when, I got in a big huge flame war with some guy on frontpage, who though he was reasonably intelligent, fell for all of the drivel. I called him an idiot and said I would save the posts and make him eat his words. I've been waiting ever since. I've had to be patient though, because, for reasons not exactly clear to me, the Bush administration has been more than happy to give the Dems lots of rope to hand themselves on this one. At first they were cautious, but later became emboldened and are now completely ensnared in their own web of lies and deception.
This is and always has been a no-brainer. I wish I really had save those posts and could remember who that idiot was when it comes time to say I told you so.
Change the references from Iraq to North Africa, Italy or France, and it reads like Montgomery criticizing Eisenhower.
A senior British officer has criticised the US army for its conduct in Iraq, accusing it of institutional racism, moral righteousness, misplaced optimism, and of being ill-suited to engage in counter-insurgency operations.
The blistering critique, by Brigadier Nigel Aylwin-Foster, who was the second most senior officer responsible for training Iraqi security forces, reflects criticism and frustration voiced by British commanders of American military tactics. What is startling is the severity of his comments - and the decision by Military Review, a US army magazine, to publish them.
American soldiers, says Brig Aylwin-Foster, were "almost unfailingly courteous and considerate". But he says "at times their cultural insensitivity, almost certainly inadvertent, arguably amounted to institutional racism".
It's a long way from being insensitive (and I'd argue even that) to being racist. I think the good man is projecting.
The US army, he says, is imbued with an unparalleled sense of patriotism, duty, passion and talent. "Yet it seemed weighed down by bureaucracy, a stiflingly hierarchical outlook, a predisposition to offensive operations and a sense that duty required all issues to be confronted head-on."
As opposed to the British army, which isn't any of these things?
Brig Aylwin-Foster says the American army's laudable "can-do" approach paradoxically led to another trait, namely "damaging optimism". Such an ethos, he says, "is unhelpful if it discourages junior commanders from reporting unwelcome news up the chain of command".
I haven't served, but as I understand it, the after-action reports are unsparing in criticism and in making sure the higher command hears what's happened.
But his central theme is that US military commanders have failed to train and educate their soldiers in the art of counter-insurgency operations and the need to cultivate the "hearts and minds" of the local population.
Which is working so well in Basra, where the Brits pretty much handing the Sadrists the keys to the place.
While US officers in Iraq criticised their allies for being too reluctant to use force, their strategy was "to kill or capture all terrorists and insurgents: they saw military destruction of the enemy as a strategic goal in its own right". In short, the brigadier says, "the US army has developed over time a singular focus on conventional warfare, of a particularly swift and violent kind".
Well yeah, 'military destruction of the enemy' is pretty much our goal each time. Works, too. And while one could argue that our Army hadn't trained up in counter-insurgency at the start of the Iraq war, it didn't take long for us to realize that mistake, and we've been correcting it with good results.
Such an unsophisticated approach, ingrained in American military doctrine, is counter-productive, exacerbating the task the US faced by alienating significant sections of the population, argues Brig Aylwin-Foster.
The Brits have been calling our guys 'unsophisticated' since Algiers and Oran.
What he calls a sense of "moral righteousness" contributed to the US response to the killing of four American contractors in Falluja in the spring of 2004. As a "come-on" tactic by insurgents, designed to provoke a disproportionate response, it succeeded, says the brigadier, as US commanders were "set on the total destruction of the enemy".
We do get upset when American citizens are being killed.
He notes that the firing on one night of more than 40 155mm artillery rounds on a small part of the city was considered by the local US commander as a "minor application of combat power". Such tactics are not the answer, he says, to remove Iraq from the grip of what he calls a "vicious and tenacious insurgency".
Handing the south of the country over to Iranian-backed militas isn't the answer either.
Brig Aylwin-Foster's criticisms have been echoed by other senior British officers, though not in such a devastating way. General Sir Mike Jackson, the head of the army, told MPs in April 2004 as US forces attacked Falluja: "We must be able to fight with the Americans. That does not mean we must be able to fight as the Americans."
Yesterday Colonel William Darley, the editor of Military Review, told the Guardian: "This [Brig Aylwin-Foster] is a highly regarded expert in this area who is providing a candid critique. It is certainly not uninformed ... It is a professional discussion and a professional critique among professionals about what needs to be done. What he says is authoritative and a useful point of perspective whether you agree with it or not." In a disclaimer he says the article does not reflect the views of the UK or the US army.
I agree with Darley: get it out in the open and talk about it. Now then, some enterprising one or two-star general needs to write a piece for one of the Brit military journals.
Colonel Kevin Benson, director of the US army's school of advanced military studies, who told the Washington Post the brigadier was an "insufferable British snob", said his remark had been made in the heat of the moment. "I applaud the brigadier for starting the debate," he said. "It is a debate that must go on and I myself am writing a response."
The brigadier was deputy commander of the office of security transition for training and organising Iraq's armed forces in 2004. Last year he took up the post of deputy commander of the Eufor, the European peacekeeping force in Bosnia. He could not be contacted last night.
Posted by: Steve White ||
01/12/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Nigel Aylwin-Foster this is an upper class English snob name if I ever heard one. The military is used as a hammer. Hammers are not used to repair brioken pottery. Aylwin-Foster wouldn't know this since he and his family hire out the under class to do that kind of work.
Racist? I think you need to ask General Colin Powell about that racism thing. How many Black generals does Her Royal Highness have in her Mitilary?
Oh yea hows that giving Basra over to Iran thing going?
#3
I read the article. The good brigadier makes the racism charge up front and then never addresses it again. It must be some kind or Euro (I know, here I go picking on those poor souls again) Tourette's syndrome: every time you mention America, you must spout out racist or cowboy or some other lame epithet.
He makes some good points. He makes some really bad points. Not every furriner's a de Tocqueville, I guess. It's funny how the Brits always flog us with Malaysia but never bring up the Huk rebellion and our successful suppression of that little conflict during the same time frame. Read the article. It's not that long and it beats the hell out of the WaPo's interpretation of it. Plus you get the added bonus of seeing once again how the MSM distorts everything!
Yet it seemed weighed down by bureaucracy, a stiflingly hierarchical outlook, a predisposition to offensive operations and a sense that duty required all issues to be confronted head-on
And this is why we succeed. Despite the bureaucracy.
Brig Aylwin-Foster says the American army's laudable "can-do" approach paradoxically led to another trait, namely "damaging optimism". Such an ethos, he says, "is unhelpful if it discourages junior commanders from reporting unwelcome news up the chain of command
Workstyle conflict with a bit of projection--he obviously has not sat in on a PLT/company/BN AAR. We tend to handle problems at low level, and let the BDE/DIV/CORPS echlons worry about big picture issues. I would add that he may simply be unable to process that we are actualy succeeding in our AO.
As for the bit about our reaction to Falluja, he missed 1 minor detail: at the end of the exercise, there was a heap of dead jihadis, and none of the survivors since has seriously attempted a city takeover in Iraq since.
in conclusion, I have to concurr with steve. This was projection provoked by one of two things- , he got chopped up in an AAR, or he was feeling the heat from home over the mess in Basra, and didn't care for the experince at all. All in all, a Monty-esqe performance, without the class.
Posted by: N guard ||
01/12/2006 0:39 Comments ||
Top||
#5
I'd like to note that it is fine for the British to bash the our army in a public manner, but if we returned fire, then we'd be called crass cowboys lacking in tact and nuance.
Besides, we were guilty of institutional racism, moral righteousness, misplaced optimism, and of being ill-suited to engage in counter-insurgency operations back when we kicked his great X10 ancestor Nigel Aylwin-Foster home to mamma - so what's his point?
#6
First impression comment: Here we go again. Some dippy ponce asshole UK officer having ago at the Americans - must be linked to the school tie or bad teeth genes. Why do they just go off like that? You never hear the US Mil slinging shit on them - and you know there have got to be moments when...
Posted by: ed ||
01/12/2006 7:39 Comments ||
Top||
#10
American soldiers, says Brig Aylwin-Foster, were "almost unfailingly courteous and considerate". But he says "at times their cultural insensitivity, almost certainly inadvertent, arguably intentional, amounted to institutional racism". a refreshing sense of realism.
#12
The British point of view has long been to engage Arabs, no matter how wacky and hostile their viewpoints. I suspect that this was a sea change for them, from having a far more aggressive approach at the time of General Gordon, which changed to fascination because of T.E. Lawrence.
The British public suddenly romanticized everything Middle Eastern, and their perception of Arabs jumped from "heathen brutes" to "cultured bedouins". This had a major impact in British foreign and military policy after WWI.
Perhaps the best comparison to their mood would be the guilty feelings many American liberals have towards African-Americans. Translating into both an utterly patronizing attitude, yet one that is utterly forgiving of their social trespasses.
Americans, however, are totally objective to Arabs. We notice their cultural traits, but we still treat them as individuals, not as a "people" with stereotypical behavior hard-wired into their brains. We miss many subtleties of their behavior, but have a certain clarity because we do not factor in such eccentricities.
Our relations with them are thus simplified, and with the expectations that they are just as capable of reaching out to understand us and our ways, as we are to them.
So, the General's mistake is in thinking that we, like the British used to think, see them as unthinking brutes, whose must be punitively supressed as a people; when in fact, we use a "carrot and stick" approach on the assumption that the vast majority of them would far rather live in peace, prosperity and democracy than subjugation, colonialization and oppression. And are quite capable of telling the two apart.
So, ironically, what the General sees as racism, is in fact his own cultures racism, past and present.
#13
11AS5 has it right. A-F cites as a benefit the fact that the British Army is always looking to minimize conflict. IMHO, the British military does this because they are afraid, and have been since Suez in 1956, that HMG's political will won't stand up in a prolonged or severe crisis. I'm sure they were grateful for the Thatcher era; she has been the only British PM since Churchill to really show any courage in office. And you can bet your last pound that the officer corps, particularly the senior members, doesn't trust a Labour government any further than you could throw Big Ben. The British military is, for good reason, always wary of being stabbed in the back by its own government.
Posted by: mac ||
01/12/2006 10:42 Comments ||
Top||
#14
"A predisposition to offensive operations and a sense that duty required all issues to be confronted head-on" is a bad thing for an army??? I thought that was a prerequesite!
Shame on the US Army to be made of gung ho, agressive (bureaucratic, lol, I heard this one is true) warriors!
What you need is, well, something more in line with the belgian army... elite paratroopers-hairdressers...
This is weird, I'm always irked by the US stereotypes about suave, nuanced, sophisticated, and ultimately irrelevant and ineffective euros, but this gentleman proves them right.
I'm very conflicted, I think I'll take an aspirin.
#17
We must be able to fight with the Americans. That does not mean we must be able to fight as the Americans.
If Britain does not start investing in systems, especially communications, they will be able to fight neither with nor as Americans but only as Europeans. When that has happened, the British Army will become our most reliable peacekeeping force. Perhaps then we can hand off the ball from our racist combatants to the Euro-sensitive, beret-wearing Brits to peacekeep. Probably a better division of labour and so much more likely to minimize racial tensions.
#18
Heh, Nimble - the first thing that came to mind after reading your comment was Fred's "We will smite them with soft power!" classic.
I'm afraid that, militarily, they are devolving into chew toys. It was fairly apparent from the MoD document that was posted on RB about 6-8 weeks ago (?) that the political leaders / MoD leaders have decided to opt out of compatibility with the US - and join the EU RRF.
#19
The old WWII refrain that the Yanks were over paid, over sexed, and over here. To which the boys replied that the Brits were underpaid, undersexed, and under Monty. Monty couldnât take Massena on schedule, couldnât take Caen on schedule and couldnât take Arnham on schedule leaving the airborne out to hang. Now Patton didnât let the airborne down at Bastonge.
12 The British point of view has long been to engage Arabs, no matter how wacky and hostile their viewpoints. I suspect that this was a sea change for them, from having a far more aggressive approach at the time of General Gordon, which changed to fascination because of T.E. Lawrence.
The British public suddenly romanticized everything Middle Eastern, and their perception of Arabs jumped from "heathen brutes" to "cultured bedouins". This had a major impact in British foreign and military policy after WWI.
Which brings to mind another point... I'm under the impression that in most or all middle eastern countries, the Bedouin are mostly a powerless minority, kind of like gypsies in Eastern Europe. Why does the west keep trying to understand the Middle East via Bedouin culture?
Posted by: Phil ||
01/12/2006 16:20 Comments ||
Top||
#22
What, we have too many black soldiers for the Brigadier's taste?
Posted by: Scott R ||
01/12/2006 17:14 Comments ||
Top||
#23
Well, one cahn't win a battle or a war by killing all of the enemy, now, can one?
The most influential politician in Iraq issued a veiled warning yesterday to Sunni Arabs that Shiites would not allow substantive amendments to the countryâs new constitution, including to the provision that keeps the central government weak in favor of strong provincial governments. Abdul Aziz Al-Hakim, the leader of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, or SCIRI, said in an address on the occasion of Eid Al-Adha that provincial governments would remain strong in the constitution, which can be amended after the next government is installed. âThe first principle is not to change the essence of the constitution. This constitution was endorsed by the Iraqi people,â he said.
Sunni Arabs place great stock in their ability to change the constitution, one of the reasons Sunni politician urged the minority to turn out in large numbers during the Dec. 15 parliamentary election. They want a stronger central government because the constitution now bestows most power â including control over oil profits â to provincial governments. The Shiites in the south and the Kurds in the north control most of Iraqâs oil. There are few oil reserves in central Iraq, where Sunnis live.
To win their support for the new constitution, which was approved in an Oct. 15 vote, Sunni Arabs were promised they could propose amendments to it during the first four months of the new Parliamentâs tenure. The new Parliament is expected to be seated around the end of February. Amendments need two-thirds approval in Parliament and a majority in a national referendum.
Golly. My heart's breaking for them... No... Wait. That's the brussels sprouts. I knew I shouldn't have eaten so many...
Posted by: Fred ||
01/12/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This wasn't wise. the Sunnis can propose and put forth as many amendments as they want. however, being a MINORITY, alas, they have to get the others to VOTE FOR THEM. If they vote "no", well too bad...
Hamas's most prominent leader in Gaza and the West Bank, Mahmoud Zahar, said Wednesday that his faction would still refuse to recognize Israel or disarm even if it won in the Palestinian elections this month.
"The calmness has ended," Mr. Zahar said, referring to the truce under which Palestinians agreed not to attack Israel through 2005. But he left open the possibility that Hamas might refrain from attacks on Israel "if not provoked."
The elections will be Hamas's debut in official Palestinian politics, a process it has boycotted since the formation of the Palestinian Authority in 1993. Since the group's founding in Gaza in 1987, its focus has been to fight Israel, and it has often used suicide bombers. Its long-term goal is to establish an Islamic theocracy over Israel, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
In a wide-ranging interview in English at his home, which was rebuilt after an Israeli missile attack in 2003 and is already scarred by bullets from recent skirmishes with his Fatah rivals, Mr. Zahar, 60, laid out his vision of the Palestinians' future.
He said that if Hamas won the election on Jan. 25, it would not recognize agreements between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. But Hamas would work with Fatah in forming a new government, he said.
"We do not want to replace Fatah," said Mr. Zahar, enveloped in a rust-colored woolen Bedouin robe and wearing rubber sandals in the marble-tiled reception room of his four-story home. On a table beside him stood a photograph of his eldest son, Khaled, who was killed in 2003 in an Israeli airstrike on their home.
He added that even if Hamas won overwhelming support- which polls say is unlikely - all Palestinian factions would be invited to join a coalition government. "It will not be Hamas alone," he said.
Mr. Zahar, who earned a medical degree in Cairo and ran a clinic in Gaza before helping to found Hamas, skirted the question of whether his group would change its long-standing goal of destroying Israel. And he dismissed warnings by the European Union's foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, that the union might cut off aid to the Palestinian Authority if Hamas became a part of the government and refused to recognize Israel's right to exist.
Mr. Zahar said Hamas would try to develop direct trade with the world, cutting out Israel as intermediary, as is now required by an economic protocol signed in 1994 in Paris. He described that agreement as a disaster for the Palestinians, using the cost of gasoline as an example: it is five times more expensive when imported through Israel than if purchased directly from Egypt.
When asked to speculate about the effects of the illness of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, he refused, saying whoever leads Israel bears the same message. "They can put the poison in the honey to give it better taste," he said with a smile. But he added, "All of them are poison."
He said that Hamas would not give up its weapons, as demanded by international peace mediators, but that as a partner in government, it would support the inclusion of all militias in a unified army that would disarm Palestinian clans fighting among themselves. He said a Palestinian army focus on protecting against what he described as Israeli incursions, like its recent shelling of northern Gaza to create a buffer zone.
"If the aim is to protect the Israeli border, and to put all the guns in the Palestinian factions who are not ready to confront Israel, this will not be acceptable by anybody," he said. "But if the aim is to put all of the Palestinian guns on the border to protect our institutions, to protect our lands, I think that would be acceptable."
Nor did he exclude the possibility of renewed attacks inside Israel. He said that Israel had failed to uphold its end of the nearly yearlong cease-fire by assassinating the leaders of other Palestinian factions that have continued attacks, and that it had not met other conditions of the truce.
"For this reason the calmness has ended," Mr. Zahar said, sipping a cup of dark Arabic coffee. "We have the right to self-defense and to protect our people."
Mr. Zahar said Israel's withdrawal from Gaza had vindicated Hamas's policy of violent attacks, including the use of suicide bombers. "They escaped from Gaza," he said of the Israeli withdrawal. "This was not an Israeli gift."
But he appeared to have tempered his often fiery talk ahead of the elections, just as Hamas's military wing, the Qassam Brigades, has tempered its activity. He said "resistance is not about guns alone," and he cited the building of self-reliant industry and education as other forms of resisting Israeli control and making the Palestinians strong.
He said that there could well be factional violence on Jan. 25 but that Hamas would work to avoid civil war, which many people in Gaza fear will follow elections. "The only winner would be Israel," he said.
Mr. Zahar rejected what he described as recent efforts by Israel to draw a connection between Hamas and Al Qaeda. "Al Qaeda is not present here," he said. "We are focused on the occupation. We run no operations outside of Palestine, outside of the occupied territories, so we are completely different from Al Qaeda."
Hamas's social programs in education and aid for the Palestinians' most fragile classes had demonstrated the faction's credentials to govern, and won it support as an organization that could be trusted to clean up a corrupt Palestinian Authority, he said.
But "our project is not to replace Fatah with Hamas," he said. "Our project is to change the corrupted system, the corrupted regime, to purify the regime."
During the course of the interview, the leader of the Palestinian Authority and of Fatah, Mahmoud Abbas, telephoned to ask Mr. Zahar what he thought of a speech Mr. Abbas gave Monday evening.
"Great man!" Mr. Zahar bellowed when he answered the phone. He told Mr. Abbas the speech "was positive and acceptable."
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
01/12/2006 01:17 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Hamas's most prominent leader in Gaza and the West Bank, Mahmoud Zahar, said Wednesday that his faction would still refuse to recognize Israel or disarm even if it won in the Palestinian elections this month.
Way to go, Zahar-baby. Continue to marginalize your cause. As you climb the ladder of international diplomacy, you're going to meet a lot of other people that dislike falling from their own particular heights. These people often dislike hamfisted violent thugs who are likely to bring the whole construct crashing down.
Feel free to delude yourself in terms of how warm the welcome will be for a bunch of gun-toting genocidal gangsters in the midst of this tenuous framework. We'll patiently wait for your shock and surprise when all of your international aid packages shrivel and wither in the light of your adamant hatred.
The slow poison you've spent decades secreting into Palestinian society is now attaining its cumulative effect. At your very moment of conquest, such bilious hatred and xenophobic mentality will only serve to isolate and quarrantine the festering scum you call "followers." Maybe then you'll finally realize that your fraternity of fellow Jew-hating hoodlums are going to be out in the cold while the future passes you by.
Fear not, I'll not only wave as I go by. I'll also be sure to laugh and point.
#2
According to David Ignatius, editorialist for the Washington Post, Ehud Olmert is the architect of Ariel Sharon's consolidate-behind-the-wall policy.
He writes , in today's Wall Street Journal (free, but registration req'd): Mr. Olmert played a trailblazing role three years ago in proposing a unilateral withdrawal from Gaza and the West Bank. At the time, Israelis were reeling from a failed peace process, a wave of suicide bombings and a growing sense of despair about the country's political future. Mr. Olmert argued in a November 2003 interview with Haaretz that to survive and prosper as a Jewish state, Israel must pull back from its settlements in Gaza and most of the West Bank. If Israel tried to hold on to the territories it occupied in the 1967 war, Jews would soon be outnumbered by Palestinians and Israel would lose its soul.
Mr. Olmert didn't mince words in his 2003 interview: "There is no doubt in my mind that very soon the government of Israel is going to have to address the demographic issue with the utmost seriousness and resolve," he said. "In the absence of a negotiated agreement -- and I do not believe in the realistic prospect of an agreement -- we need to implement a unilateral alternative."
Mr. Olmert stressed that to make disengagement work, Israel would have to pull back far enough to maintain an 80-20 ratio of Jews to Arabs within its borders, and that it would have to pull out of some Arab neighborhoods in East Jerusalem. These were issues that Mr. Sharon fudged, to the day he was rushed to the hospital.
And it's starting to look like an Olmert-lead Kadima will be the one to form the next government, despite the loss of Sharon. Voting Hamas into power will guarantee a quick end to Palestinian hopes for anything.
Ariel Sharon's party and his likely successor Ehud Olmert received a boost Wednesday from polls showing they would easily win Israel's March election even without the incapacitated prime minister at the helm. The latest surveys put Sharon's centrist Kadima Party well ahead of its rivals, though campaigning has been frozen since the 77-year-old leader suffered a massive stroke a week ago.
Kadima, which Sharon formed to capitalize on broad backing for Israel's Gaza pullout in September, already had been widely favored to win a sweeping victory in the March 28 election. But after the January 4 stroke, many political analysts had questioned whether the party, largely seen as a product of the force of Sharon's personality and shifting approach to the Palestinians, could survive. However, polls in the Haaretz and Maariv dailies found that Kadima led by interim Prime Minister Olmert, Sharon's deputy, would take 44-45 seats in Israel's 120-seat Parliament, its strongest showing so far. The polls predicted the center-left Labor Party under Amir Peretz would get 16-18 seats while the rightist Likud, led by Benjamin Netanyahu after Sharon's defection, would fall to third place with 13-15 seats.
Labor secretary general Eitan Cabel dismissed Kadima's rise in the polls as an "expression of public sympathy" for Sharon and predicted the effects would wear off. Even Kadima's campaign manager, Cabinet minister Tsahi Hanegbi, voiced surprise, saying: "Some of this is certainly an emotional vote." Many Israelis doubt Olmert, 60, a former Jerusalem mayor and Sharon loyalist who has served in the prime minister's shadow, has the stature and charisma to take bold steps with the Palestinians that Sharon may have envisioned. Much of Sharon's popularity in Israel stems from a belief that he could take diplomatic action that no one else could get away with, given his background as an archetypal hawk.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/12/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Kadima will do well for several factors. First of all, Israel has long been in need of a centrist party that is not swayed by either its extremist factions, as are Labor and Likud; nor is in a balance with the other party so equally matched that tiny third parties control the agenda.
This means that Kadima shoots to be the "silent majority" party, focused on majority, not minority issues.
Second of all, Kadima has a minimal platform and no political baggage. By standing for only a few things, its "negatives" are very low, it hasn't pissed off the voters as have the older parties who have both made unpopular decisions in the past.
Third, of the little parties in Israel, those with a centrist leaning have a strong motive to join with Kadima, in the hopes of evolving its eventual platform in their direction. Or at least getting some of their favored issues to the forefront.
Fourth, by winning big, lots of pork projects to the other parties will be put at risk. This means that everybody invested in these projects will want Kadima to continue with their cut, so they will have to both support and strongly lobby Kadima.
Doctors are preparing to carry out fresh tests for brain activity on Ariel Sharon on Wednesday after declaring the Israeli premier out of immediate danger from the huge stroke he suffered last week. The 77-year-old Sharon remains in intensive care after suffering massive haemorrhaging, but medics have indicated that his condition is no longer life-threatening. "The prime minister's condition is serious but there is no immediate danger to the prime minister's life," Sharon's chief anaesthetist Yoram Weiss said at Jerusalem's Hadassah hospital on Tuesday afternoon.
"In recent days there has been a significant change in the prime minister's condition but we still have a long way to go and we all have to be patient. Since yesterday the prime minister has been breathing spontaneously. He is on a respirator but he is the one who is operating the respirator," he said.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/12/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
The latest media created military scandal revolves around accusations of inadequate body armor for the troops. What these breathless accusations missed was that combat troops are already carrying too much weight in combat. Weight is a matter of life and death. Even the most fit troops are slowed down by trying to fight while carrying up to a hundred pounds of gear.
Sounds implausible? Letâs do the math. The boots and basic clothing are less than ten pounds. This includes goggles, knee pads and the like. But then you have 24 pounds for current armor (protective vest and helmet), another 4-5 pounds of water (mostly water) and food (usually quick energy munchies for guys who may be facing twelve hours or more dodging bullets and bombs). At this point, you are carrying nearly 40 pounds. But to fight, you need weapons, equipment and ammo. Each trooper usually carries seven magazines, thatâs nearly twenty pounds, plus another 12-15 pounds for the rifle, bayonet, flashlight, first aid kit and some grenades. Weâre up to seventy pounds. Kind of makes you feel tired just thinking about it. When the temperature is over a hundred degrees, just standing around in all this will get you down.
But thereâs more. The fire teams, of four troops, are based on a light machinegun carried by one of the men, which goes into action with about a thousand rounds of ammo (70 pounds worth for a 7.62mm, half that weight for 5.56mm.) This load is split between other members of the team. So everyone is carrying another 10-20 pounds worth of munitions. Now weâre up to over 80 pounds, and weâre not finished yet. You also have the night vision equipment and other weapons, like rocket launchers (for blasting buildings the enemy is holed up in), mortar rounds (if there is a mortar attached to your unit), a tripod for a machine-gun, a night sight for a machine-gun, spare barrel for the machine-gun, breeching tools, and so on. You might also be carrying a radio, GPS. We are now over a hundred pounds and climbing. Or not climbing. Even a well conditioned young guy has a hard time jumping around, much less climbing, with that load. People in vehicles have it a little easier, as they donât have to carry all the ammo and extra weapons. But they are still going to be jumping out of a truck wearing fifty or more pounds of stuff. As a practical matter, troops try to drop as much weight as they can before getting into a fight. But, as you can see, there's not much stuff you can do without. So running around, under fire, carrying 50-60 pounds, is pretty common, and exhausting.
To the troops running around and fighting with all this weight, every ounce counts. Their opponents are carrying 30 pounds (clothing weapons and ammo) at most, and are more nimble as a result. While the armor is a lifesaver, the Department of Defense is buying new armor that saves a few pounds. New assault rifles will be a little lighter. But thereâs not much you can do about ammo, for thereâs often not enough when the going gets rough. The weight problem is an old one, and only gets a lot of attention when thereâs a war on. This time around itâs worse, because there is finally body armor that will stop rifle bullets. This armor is heavier, and the troops donât mind that kind of weight, up to a point.
What the pundits and politicians are getting into, are new forms of body armor that offer more protection. For example, you can add arm and leg protection (from pistol bullets and bomb fragments) for another ten pounds. You can add another ten pounds if you want some more protection for the torso. But for an infantryman running and shooting, the need is for less weight, not more. Special Forces troops will sometimes go into action without body armor, because they know speed and nimbleness will protect them more effectively.
Hereâs what maximum armor looks like (add all the ammo, water, grenades and so on for the combat zone version). This armor rig weighs nearly fifty pounds, and will save lives. From 10-20 percent of the troops killed would have survived with more armor. But commanders have to consider how many would be killed because of the added weight. Those who have not run around in the heat, carrying weapons and trying to stay alert, cannot comprehend what a difference weight can make. This is why so much effort has gone into making the armor lighter and more flexible. The current protective vests have played a major role in keeping combat losses down. These casualties are the lowest of any campaign in military history. For example, the loss rates are less than half those of Vietnam, where protective vests were first widely used (and widely not worn because of the weight and heat).
Keeping casualties down is an emotional issue, and body armor is seen as the key solution to saving lives. It isnât. Training, leadership and the physical capabilities of the troops are more important. And these physical capabilities are enormously constrained by weight carried. This is not a sexy subject, and historians and journalists rarely pay any attention to it. But when you ask the troops, especially those fighting in a hot climate, weight matters.
Posted by: ed ||
01/12/2006 11:11 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"The latest media created military scandal..."
Word. Meme Scream. From Strategy Page, no less. Heh.
Lt. Josh Suthoff, 23, of Jefferson City, Mo., said he already sacrifices enough movement when he wears the equipment. More armor would only increase his chances of getting killed, he said.
"You can slap body armor on all you want, but it's not going to help anything. When it's your time, it's your time," said Suthoff, a platoon leader in the brigade's 1st Squadron, 33rd Cavalry Regiment. "I'd go out with less body armor if I could."
Listen to the men who do the fighting, not some bloviating windbag Senator who has never carried a rifle and despises those who do.
#4
The obvious solution here is to encase our fighting troops in large spheres of the recently developed transparent, bulletproof aluminum oxynitride. Just like those tranparent plastic balls you can put your pet hampster in to let him roam around the house.
Inside their bulletproof spheres, our troops will be protected from bullets, shrapnel and RPG rounds. An IED blast will simply send them rolling across the countryside. Fighting will be problematic since if bullets can't get in, they can't get out either. But our guys will be protected, and that's the whole point, right? As opposed to raining death and destruction down upon the enemy?
#10
It's part of the new battle plan. Female soldiers (and select hunky boys) will wear the transparent armor plates with nothing underneath. Then while the jihadis are masturbating too furiously to shoot, they will be mowed down like the idiots they are.
Posted by: ed ||
01/12/2006 19:01 Comments ||
Top||
In a very significant speech here on Monday, United States ambassador Jeffrey Lunstead warned the LTTE saying that if it returned to war, it would find the cost to be "high". Lunstead said that the rebel group would be facing a US-assisted, "stronger, more capable and more determined Sri Lankan military."
"Through our military training and assistance programmes, including efforts to help with counter-terrorism initiatives and block illegal financial transactions, we are helping to shape the ability of the Sri Lankan Government to protect its people and defend its interests," Lunstead told the American Chamber of Commerce (AMCHAM). "Let me be clear, our assistance is not given because we anticipate or hope for a return to hostilities. We want peace. We support peace. And we will stand by the people of Sri Lanka who desire peace."
"If the LTTE chooses to abandon peace, however, we want it to be clear, they will face a stronger, more capable and more determined Sri Lankan military."
"We've chosen sides, and we're not on the side of the terrorists," he added.
"We want the cost of a return to war to be high," the envoy stressed.
While slamming the LTTE, he congratulated the Sri Lankan government for its continued restraint in the face of provocations by the terror group.
The US ambassador charged the LTTE of misleading the Tamils and said that instead of leading the community to peace and prosperity, it was blocking their path to peace and development. He questioned its legitimacy. "The LTTE's current actions call into question its leadership of the Tamil people. What kind of leaders block their people from realising their most fundamental democratic aspirations?"
The kind who want power for themselves.
"What kind of leaders allow their people to continue to suffer from a lack of investment and industry?"
"What kind of leaders continue to pursue violence when the clear benefits of peace are obvious?" Lunstead asked. "These are not acts of leadership. They directly undermine LTTE claims to legitimacy and they keep the aspirations of the Tamils bottled up," he said.
"We are helping to shape the ability of the Sri Lankan government to protect its people and defend its interests," he asserted.
The envoy then went on to invite the LTTE to participate in Sri Lanka's development in a peaceful atmosphere. But he made it clear that first, the group will have to abjure violence and return to the negotiating table.
Having wielded the stick, he now dangles the carrot.
"There can be a role for the LTTE in the future development of Sri Lanka, but only if it returns to the peace table, renounces terrorism in word and deed and becomes a responsible participant in Sri Lanka's future. And this will lead to a better life for the Tamils and all Sri Lankans in the North and East," Lunstead said.
Posted by: Steve White ||
01/12/2006 00:06 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
Any sanctions imposed on Iran over its nuclear programme would not target the Iranian people, the Bush administration said on Thursday in a scathing attack on the Islamic republicâs leadership. Condoleezza Rice, US secretary of state, gave assurances that scholars, musicians and athletes â a reference to Iranâs World Cup soccer team â would not be penalised, as the US joined the three leading European powers in announcing their determination to refer Tehran to the United Nations Security Council over its plan to begin uranium enrichment. Ms Rice would not be drawn on what kind of UN sanctions the US was considering. There was a âmenu of possibilitiesâ, she told reporters in Washington.
The Bush administration, which is looking at ways to support the Iranian opposition, made clear it wanted to target the leadership. Condemning the anti-Israeli comments of Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad, Iranâs president, Ms Rice said: âHe has increased Iranâs isolation every time he has opened his mouth."
Ms Riceâs statement came after foreign ministers from France, Germany and Britain declared that efforts by the so-called EU3 over the past two years to negotiate with Iran over its nuclear ambitions âhad come to a dead endâ.
Kofi Annan, the UN secretary-general, said that Ali Larijani, Iranâs chief negotiator, told him yesterday that Tehran remained interested in âserious and constructive negotiationsâ. But it wanted talks âwithin a timeframeâ, as âthe last time they did it for two and a half years with no resultâ, Mr Annan said He initiated the telephone call, which lasted 40 minutes, but a senior UN official played down suggestions of an independent initiative by the secretary-general. Mr Annan urged Iran to exercise restraint. âIt is part of his continued efforts to keep the diplomatic process on track,â said a UN official. Mr Annan was due to brief the EU3, the US and Russia last night.
But speaking in Berlin after a meeting of the countriesâ foreign ministers, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, representing the hosts, said an extraordinary meeting of the board of governors of the International Atomic Energy Authority, the UNâs nuclear watchdog, would be convened âwith a view to referring the issue to the Security Councilâ. The step follows Tehranâs decision this week to resume a âpilot projectâ to enrich uranium â the process that can lead to making weapons-grade material. Some diplomats describe Iranâs activity as a âsmall production lineâ, but Tehran has not yet begun enrichment, which takes time to set up.
Philippe Douste-Blazy, French foreign minister, called on Russia and China, which have both been reluctant to involve the Security Council in the past, âto show greater awareness of the increased unityâ in the international community. China called for Iran to return to talks and urged all parties to exercise restraint, while Russia urged Tehran to freeze its activities. Senior EU3 diplomats are to meet counterparts from China, Russia and the US in London on Monday. Other meetings were likely to follow, before the IAEA meeting was convened âwithin a few weeksâ, diplomats said. takes time to line up the caterers
Posted by: too true ||
01/12/2006 21:16 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
Our exclusive Iranian sources report Iranian defense minister Mostafa Najjar warned the Gulf oil emirates in exceptionally aggressive terms to beware of Iran's great strength and not place its trust in the American navy. He threatened major action against any party assaulting Gulf security.
Former president Hashemi Rafsanjani, head of the council for the preservation of the constitution, declared Iran's absolute resolve to continue its nuclear development, adding "And we shall reach our desired goal! We are determined to ignore all prohibitions. Iran will not tolerate colonial policies practiced by any nation or institution in the world."
A recent research project by the IAF has determined that in the summer of 1981 Israel did not have a clear picture of the impact a strike on Iraq's nuclear reactor would have, but chose to attack anyway.
Prime minister Menachem Begin ordered the bombing, condemned by the world at the time, thus inaugurating what became known as the "Begin Doctrine," Israel's policy of launching a pre-emptive strike to prevent any of its enemies acquiring nuclear weapons.
It is the Begin Doctrine which repeatedly has been invoked lately regarding Iran and Israel's response to its suspected efforts to produce nuclear weapons. The internal IAF research paper shows that the feasibility of a successful military operation need not be total in order for Israeli leaders to order such a strike. This appears to abate a recently published US army report that claims Israel has no viable military option against Iranian nukes.
According to a senior Air Force officer who was privy to the IAF paper, the intelligence available at the time of the June 1981 strike on the Iraqi reactor at Osirak was only partial and it was unclear whether the planned air raid would be effective.
"At the time, there was no firm information on either the extent of the damage that the strike could cause or whether it would have a fatal impact on the Iraqi nuclear program. The information he had was very partial, even to the extent of the physical damage we could do to the target and how much it would delay the Iraqi program," said the senior officer.
But that was history and today it is Iran and its nuclear program that weighs heavy on their minds. The IAF officer said that Iran is increasingly fearful of attack. "But they are limited in their ability to create an effective air defense," he said.
According to intelligence, Iran has beefed up its air defenses around various nuclear sites as a precaution against a possible pre-emptive strike by US or Israeli forces. The source described the present Iranian air defenses as "good." It is known that Iran has deployed Soviet-origin anti-aircraft systems around the 1000-megawatt Bushehr nuclear reactor.
Iran's air defense contains Russian SA-2, SA-5, SA-6 as well as shoulder-launched SA-7 missiles, according to The Military Balance published by the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies. They also have aged US-made Hawk missiles and have been seeking to purchase the sophisticated S-300P from Russia.
One war game scenario played out by the IAF was an American attack on Iranian nuclear sites. In this case, it was believed the US would give Israel a prior warning of "perhaps a day, nothing significant." "There is no way the Iranians would believe that it was the Americans and [they] will seek to retaliate against Israel," a senior officer said.
The officer declined to say whether there were key targets in Iran that, if destroyed, would seriously set back their nuclear program.
"I will have to provide targets to the generals so that they can offer various options to the government," the senior officer said. "We have to be able to provide answers all of the time for potential targets."
Ironically, the Israeli F-16s that bombed Osirak were actually built for the Iranians. Israel received them instead after the Islamic revolution toppled the shah and the US imposed an arms embargo on Teheran. Today, the IAF has a new generation of F-16s custom built for striking Iran.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
01/12/2006 11:50 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
So, how good are these air defenses at taking out 450 cruise missiles? This reminds me of the startup of Gulf War II, in which Richard Meyers and others had described our strategy as "Shock and Awe." During one particularly striking barrage, a Pentagon reporter asked "Is this it? Is this the shock and awe." The reply (I don't know who made it) was: "If you have to ask, it's not shock and awe."
#2
So they have a bunch of cold war crap pointed at the sky. They would invariably hit something if they shot enough, but stealth bombers are probably not what they were made to defend against.
#3
You may recall that al Guardian, al Independent, etc all lauded Saddam's military before each of the last two wars. They'd count up all the toys -- x many tanks, y many howitzers, etc -- and conclude that our military just wouldn't be a match. We all know what happened, and why.
Now it's happening with the Iranian military. Oooooh, they have air defense guns! The USAF can't possibly fly through the wall of lead that they'll put up! We're doooomed!
What rot. The first moment the Iranian air defense crews on those missiles see anything will be the moment a HARM ruins their day.
Posted by: Steve White ||
01/12/2006 14:45 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Do the Chinese have an embassy there? No, seriously! - that's where all the Mullahs will be hiding.
#6
None of their air defence capabilities are a viable threat to our missle systems when supported by countermeasures. There are less than 20 sites that are believed to be weapons related facilities. A strategic strike would be fairly easy and with very high probability of total success, destroying all sites and very few aircraft over Iran.
We must be careful of the assymetrical threat Iran can activate in the area, their conventional forces are a joke. We know the Qud are supporting Hezbollah and Hammas and have capabilities world wide. Iran understands clearly the impact of an attack on shipping in the Straights of Hormuz (sp). I always joke of Nuking Iran, but we have time and we should hold until we have a bit more stability in Iraq.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
01/12/2006 19:18 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Iran understands clearly the impact of an attack on shipping in the Straights of Hormuz (sp).
Which is why a simple Riot Act⢠needs to be read to Iran concerning how any attempt to blockade the Straits of Hormuz will result in the complete destruction of Kargh Island terminal.
I purposely advocate partially crippling this vital tanker filling terminal specifically so that there is more damage to be done if Iran proves non-compliant. First we sever all input pipes to the terminal. Should Iran prove agressive, we then demolish the entire structure, a devastating economic blow to Iran.
A scenario might be as such:
a) Destruction of all nuclear facilities plus limited damage to their military.
b) Iran retaliates by mining the Straits.
c) Crippling of Kargh Island.
d) Limited naval engagement with commercial traffic in the Straits.
e) Full destruction of Iranian military capacity. (and)
f) Threat to obliterate Kargh Island. (upon further Iranian action)
g) Thorough rubble-bouncing of all major military infrastructure.
This one is for all the marbles and we'd better act like it. Half measures won't cut it.
The British, French and German foreign ministers said Thursday that negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program had reached a "dead end" and the Islamic republic should be referred to the U.N. Security Council.
The ministers did not specify what action should be taken by the Security Council, which could impose sanctions. They called for a special session of the International Atomic Energy Agency to decide the referral.
The action came two days after Iran broke U.N. seals at a uranium enrichment plant and said it was resuming nuclear research after a two-year freeze. Enriched uranium can be used as a fuel for both nuclear energy and nuclear weapons. Iran says its nuclear program is only for fuel.
In a joint statement, the diplomats cited Iran's "documented record of concealment and deception" and charged that its government seems "intent on turning its back on better relations with the international community."
"From our point of view, the time has come for the U.N. Security Council to become involved," German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said after meeting with his French and British counterparts and the European Union's foreign policy chief, Javier Solana.
The Bush administration, meanwhile, arranged to have Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns go to Britain, France and Germany next week to coordinate strategy. Burns also will hold talks in India, said a senior U.S. official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the State Department was not ready to issue a formal statement. While Burns will be consulting in Europe, Solana plans to be in Washington to coordinate with Bush administration officials.
Steinmeier said the three countries would inform the board "that our talks with Iran have reached a dead end." Solana said the EU and national governments were left with no choice but to call for Iran's referral. But he would not rule out a new round of negotiations with Tehran.
Steinmeier stressed that the Europeans remain ready to solve the problem "diplomatically, multilaterally and by peaceful means."
Iran's president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has vowed to press ahead with a nuclear program that Iran says is designed to produce civilian energy.
"Unfortunately, a group of bullies allows itself to deprive nations of their legal and natural rights," he said Wednesday. "I tell those superpowers that, with strength and prudence, Iran will pave the way to achieving peaceful nuclear energy.
Iran's move increased worries in the United States and other Western countries that Iran intends to produce nuclear weapons, while Russia, a longtime Iran ally, indicated it could reverse its opposition to bringing Tehran before the Security Council, which could impose sanctions.
Russia and China, both members of the IAEA board that would have to approve referring Iran to the Security Council, have previously opposed the idea.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Russia, the United States, the European Union and China would discuss the issue in London next week.
He told Ekho Moskvy radio that Iran's latest move did not violate international law — but also said that Moscow did not exclude the possibility of turning the Iranian dossier over to the Security Council.
"It causes concern that Iran is opting out of its moratorium in the absence of answers to questions, serious questions" from the IAEA, Lavrov said. "Our main task is to persuade Tehran through joint efforts to return to the moratorium."
China on Thursday urged more talks, without saying whether it would back taking Tehran to the Security Council.
China "hopes that all parties concerned can exercise restraint and resolve this within the IAEA framework and through peaceful negotiations," Foreign Ministry spokesman Kong Quan said in Beijing. "We firmly believe this serves the interests of all parties concerned."
#1
'"Unfortunately, a group of bullies allows itself to deprive nations of their legal and natural rights," he said Wednesday. "I tell those superpowers that, with strength and prudence, Iran will pave the way to achieving peaceful nuclear energy"
At some level, this is a compliment to the French. Being called a "superpower" :-)
But good for the Euros. Meeting next week to make sure the Russkis and Chinese stay on the reservation. What happens at the UNSC is anybodys guess (though my bet is that theyll take their time, and the first UNSC resolution wont even mention sanctions)
#2
and more important, maybe, is that the US and the Euros are finally 'singing from the same page' a blow to those who claimed Bush had permanently distanced us from Europe.
#3
This is probably the same thought that goes through Ahmanidgit's mind but, so what? What difference does it make if one branch of a worthless organization refers Iran to another branch of the same worthless organization. Who on this planet could possibly care what the UN thinks about anything? They. won't. do. ANYTHING.
#5
I'm sure that the Euros, Russians and Chinese will go along with sanctions just like they did with sanctions on Iraq. After all how long has the OFF scam been shut down? Think how much moolah the MMs can sink into bribery.
#6
What's really sad about this situation is that:
a) Europe really does not want a nuclear Iran even if it suspects the US and Israel will be the first targets.
b) Europe knows that if the West stands together to compel Iran to comply with the rules, the issue will be resolved relatively quickly by policy change, internal regime change or force of arms. In practice this means that if the Nato countries all sent even token forces to the region to support a US carrier battle group the likeliehood of a peaceful ending would go way up and as would the likliehood that a military ending would be effective if it became necessary.
Yet the euros are incapable of acting in such a willful manner and therefore the chances of a military conflict are higher, not lower.
#8
In a joint statement, the diplomats cited Iran's "documented record of concealment and deception" and charged that its government seems "intent on turning its back on better relations with the international community."
And this BGO (Blinding Glimpse of the Obvious) was not apparent until after exactly how many years of this precise pattern of deceit? Europe's fascination with futile nuanced negotiations makes rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic look like productive and worthwhile effort.
#9
Europeans Say Iran Talks Reach 'Dead End': Call for Negotiations to Move to UNSC
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
01/12/2006 13:08 Comments ||
Top||
#10
So even the EUniks agreed that negotiating with Iran is like pissing up a rope. If the matter goes to the UNSC, we will be burning up another 6 months minimum, with no assurance that anything will come of it. The Russians and the Chicoms will always veto.
The problem is that we may not have the luxury of that much time before Iran gets to its nuclear capability.
The situation calls for action. The EUniks will not move to action. So that leaves the ball in the court of the US and Israel. Covert or overt. That is how I see it.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
01/12/2006 18:34 Comments ||
Top||
Interesting tidbit:
On December 15th, there was an attempt to assassinate Iranian president Muhammad Ahmadinejad. The Iranian government has said little about the incident, which resulted in the deaths of several of Ahmadinejadâs security team. This has led to considerable speculation about the attack. Some conspiracy-mavens have been asserting that it was a deliberately staged incident, like Hitlerâs âReichstag Fire,â which would result in the accrual of even greater power to Ahmadinejad and the religious extremists who run Iran. Others have pointed to Israelâs Mossad, the CIA, or perhaps even Iranian liberal dissidents. Then the real story began to come out.
Near the end of December, Notani, one of the leaders of the Baloch (Baluchi) Liberation Army (BLA), announced that the BLA had been behind the attempt on Ahmadinejadâs life. First heard of around the end of 2003, the BLA (sometimes known as the Baloch Liberation Movement, BLM), has been primarily active in Pakistan, where it has been linked to about two dozen bombings. It is one of several groups fighting for an independent Baluchistan.
Posted by: ed ||
01/12/2006 11:15 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The Baluchis are Sunni and have been persecuted by the Shia. They have also faced ethnic persecution in Pakland (confiscation of property, destruction of monuments, discrimination in govt service, etc.)
They have also claimed to have kidnapped Iranian soldiers.
#3
This is another tribal group like the Kurds that has ill-defined boundaries in more than one country. Such a group is very useful when stirring up trouble with troublemakers, especially when they can see what we {US} gave the Kurds as a reward for service. It is seems as though someone has dusted off the old Indian warfare manuals and is rediscovering the utility of setting tribe against tribe, with tangible physical and political rewards for the friendlies being given.
#4
The other day I was wondering if the plane-crash that killed all those Iranian Flags was payback for the assaination attempt on Ahmadinejad. I guess this story puts that theory in the trash.
#5
Imagine if we'd have ensured and independent Kurdistan the Kurds, Baluchi, and Shia Arabs in Iran would have been clamoring for their own states as well. Would have been nice to see.
Probably wouldn't have been well taken by the Turks or Indians or Paks though.
#6
All the same... it coulda be some Baluchi sympathizers?
I mean, why would you need such a purging to begin with? Unless he's gone mad and got rid of them for being incompetent, but they were too dangerous to relieve of command?
#7
Aren't Ramzi Yusef and Khalid Sheik Muhammed supposed to be of Baluchi descent?
Posted by: Tibor ||
01/12/2006 14:42 Comments ||
Top||
#8
The last-before-final stage of the Glorious Revolution is when the competent are replaced by Loyal Henchmen. After which the regime falls because nobody can figure which end of the gun it is out of which the bullets come.
Tehran, Iran, Jan. 4 â Iranâs state-run media gave unusual prominence to a historically confused news report claiming that former Saudi King Abdul-Aziz, the father of the current Saudi monarch, objected to the existence of Israel and told United States President Franklin D. Roosevelt to relocate the Jewish state to Europe. Mehr news agency, which first carried the report that was later picked up by the countryâs state-run radio and television and a number of government-owned dailies, wrote on Tuesday that in 1954 Abdul-Aziz, the father of present Saudi King Abdullah, met with President Roosevelt and protested the existence of the newly-founded state of Israel.
âThe Jews must return to the lands they were driven out of and compensation must be paid to them by those who committed the crime and not those Arabs who were foreign spectators of this episodeâ, the Saudi King purportedly said, referring to the Holocaust during which some six million Jews were massacred in Nazi death camps.
âWhat harm have the Arabs done to the Jews of Europe? The Christian Germans were those who took away their homes and lives, so let the Germans pay back for thisâ, Iranian state media quoted Abdul-Aziz as saying.
The Iranian media gave extensive coverage to the report and quotations from King Abdul-Aziz were used to defend the recent statements by Iranâs President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The Iranian president has described the Holocaust as a âmythâ and called for Israel to be âwiped off the mapâ. His comments have drawn international condemnation and have twice been rebuked at the Untied Nations Security Council. But...
There is, however, one significant problem with what the Iranian media have been reporting; in 1954 both Roosevelt and Saudi King Abdul-Aziz were dead. The two leadersâ meeting was in 1934, not 1954, and at the time Israel did not exist. Contrary to Tehranâs version of history, Abdul-Aziz could not have possibly asked FDR to relocate the state of Israel to Europe.
Not to mention that Hitler's "Final Solution" was only an odd construction project in 1934.
Make haste Ranters, there are still a few seats left for the Spring Semester World History seminar series at the University of Tehran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad Center for Global Awareness and Friendship.
#2
"in 1954 Abdul-Aziz, the father of present Saudi King Abdullah, met with President Roosevelt and protested the existence of the newly-founded state of Israel.
#4
From :the Council on Foreign relations The [Yalta] summit ended on February 11, 1945 and FDR departed for a rendezvous at the Great Bitter Lake, a waypoint along the Suez Canal in Egypt, with Saudi Arabia's King Abdulaziz bin Abdulrahman Al-Saud. The King, known as Ibn Saud, sailed from Jeddah aboard an American warship to the meeting with FDR. The two leaders' focus was shaping the future relationship between the United States and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
and from an interview with Rachel Bronson: The big issue they talked about was Palestine. FDR realized that Palestine was an emerging problem and he wanted King Abdulaziz's help.
"In his talks with Roosevelt, Eddy wrote, the king did not even hint at any desire for financial assistance. "He traveled to the meeting seeking friends and not funds," and that is what he got, despite the arguments about Palestine and Jewish immigration. The king's view was that if the suffering of the Jews had been caused by the Germans, Germans should pay the price for it; let the Jews build their homeland on the best lands in Germany, not on the territory of Arabs who had nothing to do with what happened to them. The most he could get from Roosevelt was a promise that the president would "do nothing to assist the Jews against the Arabs and would make no move hostile to the Arab people." The king taking this as a commitment from the United States and not just from Roosevelt personally, was furious to discover three years later that Harry Truman did not consider himself bound by it. "
Very interesting articles-thanks, Spot, for the links. This excerpt above, however, does not address Arab (Muslim) complicity in mistreatment of Jews decades, centuries before WWII--mistreatment that continues to this day. That Arabs identify themselves as innocents in the what happened to Jews in WWII only reinforces the American view of them as cognitively challenged. There is history aplenty to prove Arabs have been ill-willed towards those of other religious beliefs. Only by honestly facing their own culpability in the unrolling of events leading to the Holocaust can Arabs improve the American view of Arabia.
Most ridiculously, to read this, one would think that there was no such thing as a Jew native to the lands of Palestine-a blatant and provocative lie.
Nor did the creation of the state of Israel have to be viewed as "against the Arabs"; had Muslim Arabs treated Jews as equals in law and in spirit, had they ceded .025% of total Middle Eastern lands to Jews to help create peace and stability in the region, as wise leaders might have, then this Israel-Palestine problem might have turned out differently. Instead, greed and bigotry against Jews had a karmic price for Muslim Arabs that continues to this day.
#6
And if all of the Arabs were so against the Jews in Israel, why is it that the Bedou and Druze are not only elected members of the Israeli government, but are among the most commonly recruited members for the elite tracking and LRRP units of the Israelis? The smart Arabs saw the benefits of a new state that was democratic and jumped onboard at the very beginning.
#8
Tommorrow in Mehr. Chapter Two: Roosevelt gives King Abdul-Aziz a ride in the Top Secret Time Tunnel to 1954, where they talk about wiping Israel off the map and the New York Mets chances in the 1955 World Series.
#9
Shieldwolf-you have a point-they were smart. Didn't hurt that they had a strong instinct for self-preservation, either. But in regards to your comment about the Druze, doesn't that say more about the acceptance of Jews than it does about the tolerance of Muslims in "Palestine"?
No one says "all Arabs", but to deny that a large segment of Muslims Arabs have persecuted and continue to persecute Jews across Arabia FOR CENTURIES shows an unwillingness to acknowledge wrong where wrong exists. Just as Christians had to face some ugly truths about their history and themselves in facing what happened in the Holocaust and the Inquisition, Muslims now have some uncomfortable truths to face about themselves with regard to how they have treated and continue to treat Jews today. Deliberately killing civilian Jews, keeping for stories like Protocols of Zion at the top of bestseller lists, and favoring anti-Jewish militant groups like Hamas in elections don't convince me that Muslims Arabs are taking responsibility for their share of the troubles in the Israel/Palestine conflict- Druze or no Druze.
But why stop at Arabs? Persian Muslims have this chain around their neck for their bigotry against Jews-and their preseident presents the greatest threat to Jews in our time. So there is plenty of blame to go around-to those that need to face it.
#11
1. jews where there for 1000's of years before crossing into reurope and the rest of the world.2. Israel is still in better shape than most the arab countries in the first place. 3. didn't most the middle east side with the nazis' in WW2
Iranâs hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Wednesday that the Islamic Republic would obtain nuclear capabilities in the ânear futureâ. âIn the near future, full nuclear energy for peaceful purposes will be at our disposalâ, Ahmadinejad told a gathering in the southern port city of Bandar Abbas.
Ahmadinejad dismissed international criticism of Iranâs decision to resume nuclear research and development related to uranium enrichment at the sensitive site in Natanz in central Iran. Tehran on Tuesday broke the seals placed by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
The hard-line president said that the major powers did not want other countries to be equipped with modern-day technology. âThe Iranian nation is not afraid of such ballyhoos by world powers, and I donât doubt that our youths will progress even more enthusiasticallyâ.
Ahmadinejad called for an end to âforeign troop presenceâ in the Persian Gulf region.
Posted by: ed ||
01/12/2006 08:29 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[9 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"full"
Say no more, say no more. Know what I mean? Nudge, nudge...
#2
Iranâs hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Wednesday that the Islamic Republic would obtain nuclear capabilities NFD in the ânear futureâ.
Commitment Is Cited by Officials Pressing for IAEA Vote
The Bush administration, working intensely to galvanize international pressure on Iran, has secured a guarantee from Russia that it will not block U.S. efforts to take Tehran's nuclear case to the U.N. Security Council, American and European officials said yesterday.
The commitment, made in a Tuesday night phone call between Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, will likely help the United States and its European allies win support from key countries weighing a tougher line in response to Iran's resumption of sensitive nuclear work.
Vice President Cheney and British Prime Minister Tony Blair suggested yesterday that Iran now faces the possibility of U.N. economic sanctions if it does not halt nuclear enrichment research it began Tuesday.
According to three senior diplomats who were briefed on the call, Lavrov told Rice that Russia would abstain, rather than vote against U.S. efforts to move the issue from the International Atomic Energy Agency to the Security Council. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack confirmed to reporters that Rice had spoken with Lavrov and other foreign ministers but did not divulge details.
Russia's pledge was good only for when a vote takes place inside the IAEA. U.S. officials said they remain uncertain as to how Moscow, a traditional ally of Iran's, would react if the issue gets to the Security Council, where Moscow is one of five countries with veto power.
Still, Bush administration officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity saw the Russian decision as a victory and said they would spend the next several weeks lobbying China for a similar commitment. "We spent much of our time working on the Russians, but we're now moving the focus to China," said one administration official who would only discuss the backroom diplomacy on the condition of anonymity.
The White House is hoping the IAEA board will refer Iran's case to the Security Council before President Bush delivers the State of the Union address at the end of the month, according to two senior administration officials. Rest at link.
Posted by: ed ||
01/12/2006 07:39 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It's a DictaCommie tag-team thingy. This time PuttyPutz pretends to be the good guy and the ChiComs play the assholes. Next time they'll flip. Just part of the strategy worked out for the MMs. Fun for the whole "ist" family.
#4
The White House is hoping the IAEA board will refer Iran's case to the Security Council
Why exactly?
Who wants to sit through another bout of America berating by Europussies and assorted despots, before China puts the kabosh on the whole damn thing?
And even if the Chicoms don't, what differance does it make? The Iranians have their goal in sight and won't be bribed or dissuaded.
We should pop one of our smaller nukes over one of their "research" facilities, and tell them they ought to be more careful in their handling proceedures - that shit is dangerous.
Russia agreed last month to sell Tehran £700m-worth of advanced SA-15 Gauntlet mobile missile systems.
C a n ... y o u ... s a y ... cog ... ni ... tive ...... dis ... son ... nance ?
Very good, I knew you could!
Whenever Russia begins to wonder why their country is spiraling around in the porcelain receptacle with a bunch of brown-stained wet tissue, they need only look at the above.
RasPutin is so busy playing both sides of the street that his "John" is picking up his whore with the net result of him f&%king himself. I am beginning to hope that some terrorist atrocity directly attributable to Iran takes place in Moscow. The Russians deserve nothing less.
The US has accused Syria of blocking the United Nations (UN) inquiry into the killing of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Hariri and is threatening UN Security Council action against it. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice says Syria is creating an "atmosphere of fear" in Lebanon to maintain its influence. "The United States has grave and continuing concerns about Syria's destabilising behaviour and sponsorship of terrorism," she said.
Ms Rice says Syria has failed to implement five Security Council resolutions over the assassination of Mr Hariri in February 2005. "Syria must cease obstructing the investigation into the assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Hariri and instead cooperate fully and unconditionally, as required by UN Security Council resolutions," she said. "We call upon the Syrian regime to respond positively to the requests of the UN Independent International Investigation. We intend to refer this matter back to the Security Council if Syrian obstruction continues."
Ms Rice has also reaffirmed calls for the implementation of UN Resolution 1559, which includes the disarmament and disbanding of Hezbollah and other militias. "Syria's continuing provision of arms and other support to Hezbollah and Palestinian terrorist groups serves to destabilise Lebanon, makes possible terrorist attacks within Lebanon from Lebanese territory and impedes the full implementation of Security Council resolutions," she said. She says assassinations of Lebanese opponents of Syrian domination, including journalist and former MP Gebran Tueni, create "an atmosphere of fear that Syria uses to intimidate Lebanon"
Posted by: Fred ||
01/12/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Cool! Rice demonstrating excellent mastery of the "Double Monkey Paw" technique.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
01/12/2006 19:32 Comments ||
Top||
European foreign ministers will meet in Germany to decide what action should be taken about Iran's decision to resume nuclear activities. Iran has ended a two-year suspension of nuclear fuel research, renewing concerns that the country is trying to build an atomic bomb. It says it has broken United Nations (UN) seals at a uranium enrichment plant in order to produce electricity. British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw along with ministers from France and Germany, will hold talks in Berlin. British Prime Minister Tony Blair says he is aiming to get international agreement to refer Iran to the UN Security Council.
"We will discuss how we take this forward now but the decision by Iran is very serious indeed," he said. "I don't think there is any point in people, or us, hiding our deep dismay at what Iran has decided to do." He has told Parliament economic sanctions will be considered. "A reference to the Security Council is entirely in line with what the Atomic Energy Authority itself decided some time ago," he said.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/12/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The EU apparently thinks "Or Else" is undiplomatic.
#3
This is the second time in our history that there has come back from Germany to Downing Street peace with honour. I believe it is peace for our time, said Neville Chamberlain Jack Straw.
#4
France and Germany warned Iran this week not to pursue their nuclear research program. In fact, France and Germany warned Iran that if they didn't stop their program they would, you know, warn them again.
Jay Leno
#5
The only thing that's going to make a difference in Iran is someone(Bush, Israel) calling their bluff. That means telling them that either they "cease and decist, under verification", or they become the new Sodom and Gomorrah. I hope George Bush has the stones to do that. If not, I hope the Israelis will do that, with US backing. The only way to deal with a bully is to break his teeth. Nothing else works - nothing. Personally, I'd hate to have the last thing a lot of good people in Europe or Israel think is "oops - that didn't work" - as their eyeballs melt.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
01/12/2006 23:18 Comments ||
Top||
The recently released video message from al Qaeda's number two leader is part of a pattern that signals a countdown to a major terrorist attack within the next 30 days, warns a Washington D.C.-based analyst.
The new video was aired by the Qatar-based al-Jazeera satellite network on Jan. 6. In it Ayman al-Zawahiri portrays U.S. government discussion of troop withdrawal from Iraq as a victory for Islam.
"If your forces with all its aircraft, missiles, tanks and fleets are moaning, bleeding and looking for an escape from Iraq, then will the hypocrites, conspirators, infidels (the Iraqi government) resist what the 'greatest power in the world' has failed to resist?" al-Zawahiri asked.
But it is not the content of the video that is a sign of a possible imminent strike, said terrorism expert Christopher L. Brown. Instead, it is the timing of the video that is consistent with previous patterns. Brown, a researcher with a Washington think tank, has briefed members of Congress and senior administration officials on key threats, and he has prepared testimony and briefing materials for officials at the Department of Defense, State Department, CIA, National Security Council and the White House.
The pattern Brown observed is that each Zawahiri video appears to be part of a pair, with the second video followed by a significant attack within 30 days, outside of the major combat zones of Iraq and Afghanistan.
The videos released on Sept. 9 and Nov. 9, 2004, were the first "set" and were followed by the Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, bombings on Dec. 6, 2004. The second "set" of videos was released Feb. 20 and June 26, 2005, followed by the July 7 London bombings. A third set of videos was released Aug. 4 and Sept 1, 2005, followed by the bombings in Bali, Indonesia, on Oct. 1, 2005.
A Cybercast News Service exclusive report on Sept. 8 of last year detailed Brown's warning regarding an impending October attack.
The fourth set of videos, according to Brown's theory was released on Oct. 23, 2005 and last week -- Jan. 6.
"This pattern has held for at least three of al Qaeda's last large-scale attacks," said Brown, "This most recent video is likely a signal that a large-scale operation is about to be launched within the next 30 days. The question is where."
A clue may be found in the Internet postings of the enigmatic Abu-Hafs al-Masri Brigades, said Brown. The brigades appear to be 'green-lighting' coming attacks prior to the release of the second video of each pair, Brown said.
The video that preceded the London bombings was itself preceded by a post by the "European division" of the brigades under the title, "Letter to mujahedeen in Europe." The posting stated in part, "We now call on the mujahedeen around the world to launch the expected attack." The message appeared on an al Qaeda-linked Internet forum.
Brown believes the larger pattern of two videos sandwiching an Internet posting by the Abu-Hafs al-Masri Brigades was repeated when a November web message declared that the upcoming attack would occur in the "land of the Romans," widely seen as a reference to Italy.
The Internet posting, under the name of al Qaeda's reputed military commander Saif al-Adel, mentioned future attacks involving unidentified poisonous substances and surface-to-air missiles procured from Chechnya. Brown notes that the Abu-Hafs Al-Masri Brigades are overseen by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the top al Qaeda terrorist in Iraq who is also known to have ties to Chechnya.
"It is even more interesting to note that Western intelligence officials believe that al Qaeda has had some of the most advanced Russian man-portable surface-to-air missile systems (the SA-18) within Europe for at least one year."
On Oct. 29, 2005, the London Telegraph reported that Abu Atiya, an al Qaeda operative close to al-Zawahiri, revealed to French authorities that a group called the "Chechen network" entered France with the missiles and chemical and biological agents such as botulin, ricin and cyanide. The missiles were reportedly purchased in 2002 and eventually smuggled through Georgia and Turkey to be used in a planned attack against French airliners in 2004.
Following the London bombings the brigades posted a communique on the Internet, stating: "We are in Italy, and not one of you is safe as long as you refuse [Osama bin Laden's] offer. Get rid of the incompetent (Prime Minister Silvio) Berlusconi or we will truly burn Italy."
A July 19, 2005, story in Italy's Corriere della Sera newspaper indicated that Italian intelligence feared the statement was a coded message activating known cells in Italy, which had previously been providing only logistical support.
Three more messages from the Abu-Hafs al-Masri Brigades were posted in July, promising to "burn Italy down.
"We will raze the cities of Europe to the ground and you will be the first, Berlusconi!" one of the messages declared. On July 31, the brigades claimed to be "calling up all our cells in Rome and other Italian cities for this war ..." Another Internet message followed in August.
However, the November reference to the "land of the Romans" could be misdirection Brown said, since al Qaeda is known to use coded language in many of its communications. The Global Islamic Media Front (GIMF) has indicated that al Qaeda intentionally labeled Italy as its target, prior to the London bombings.
If the "land of the Romans" doesn't refer to Rome, what might it refer to? Dan Darling of the Manhattan Institute believes it could be a reference to the United States. "It could just as easily apply to the U.S. -- America as the new Rome," said Darling.
Brown also believes the al Qaeda threat could apply to the U.S. and that America is the likelier target.
The "land of the Romans" could be a symbolic reference to the "countless examples of Romanesque architecture in Washington, D.C.," said Brown.
The missiles reportedly obtained from Chechnya have not been located and Brown believes it is possible that some of the weapons have been smuggled into North America since individuals involved in the "Chechen network" who procured the missiles were allegedly involved in the 1999 conspiracy to bomb Los Angeles International Airport.
About Brown's theory of a timing pattern and imminent strike, Dan Darling said "I definitely think there's something behind this theory. One of my earliest observations about al Qaeda is that when people look for patterns they tend to forget to include events in places like Kashmir, Chechnya, Iraq. "
Darling also noted that analysts often fail to take into account thwarted attacks. "Italy has arrested several members of GSPC cells intent on attacking Italy or U.S.-related installations," said Darling. The GSPC is also known as the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat, an Algerian group linked to al Qaeda. Italian officials announced on Dec. 23 that the suspected terrorists had plans to carry out attacks against the U.S. that would have surpassed 9/11.
Terrorism expert B. Raman told Cybercast News Service that Brown's theory is "fascinating" but that he was not in a position to agree or disagree with it.
"I personally feel that while the London explosions were externally inspired from Pakistan, the timing and the modus operandi used were decided locally. I would have difficulty in connecting it to Zawahiri's second message," said Raman. He also believes that Zawahiri's importance as an operational head tends to be over-estimated by many Western analysts.
"I also feel on the basis of my reading of the situation that there is a very high probability of a terrorist strike against Italian lives and interests this year," said Raman.
"In Europe, Al Qaeda's next targets in the order of probability are Italy (its Prime Minister is closely identified with Bush), France (ban on head scarves, its interior minister is hated in the Islamic world) and Germany (its role in Afghanistan)."
Raman is the former head of the counter-terrorism division of the Research & Analysis Wing in India's external intelligence agency and director or the Institute of Topical Studies, Chennai, India.
Italy has been bracing for possible attacks targeting the February Winter Olympics in Turin or the April 9 general elections. Italian Interior Minister Giuseppe Pisanu told media last month, "The global resonance of the Games, and the coincidence with the election campaign could be of great interest to terrorist organizations, which carry out major attacks in order to rock public opinion and influence political stances."
The CIA has declined to comment on Brown's theory. "We don't comment on our own analysis. And we can't comment on Mr. Brown's theory either," said the spokesman.
Regarding the video release pattern, "once can be an interesting anomaly, twice could be a coincidence, but three times is a pattern," Brown said, indicating "that in all likelihood al Qaeda will launch a major attack sometime in the next month."
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
01/12/2006 01:11 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#4
Why do I get a picture of my 3rd Base Coach pulling his cap, tapping his nose, rubbing his jaw, then back to the nose, then back to the hat, then wiping it all off on his right arm (Oooo! Big Juju!) and then patting his left arm, then... All of which boiled down to take the next pitch. Of course, I'd swing away. I had a .790 slugging percentage and I'd get laid by Buffy if I nailed it. Silly coaches had no clue what mattered. Heh.
#5
Three comments.
(1) Does it count when Al Jazeerah accidentally replays an old tape? (2) If the French set up a think tank in Washington DC would it be a Washington Think Tank? (3) You gotta love brilliance of making demands they know will eventually happen so they can take credit for it (US troop withdrawls, eventual loss of Italian Prime Minster).
#7
I've often wondered if the day of the release represents an area or numbered cell that is being communicated to... or some such combinations thereof. Only the individuals in the cell would know what their number is.
The Interior Department yesterday agreed to open about 400,000 acres on Alaska's North Slope for exploratory oil drilling. Officials said they would lease acreage in the northeastern corner of the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska to oil companies to provide access to domestic oil supplies.
"We recognize . . . the energy needs of this nation," said Susan Childs, an official with the Bureau of Land Management. "So, hopefully, this will alleviate some of the pressure."
Government officials said that the area of the preserve opened yesterday has significant potential for oil development. They estimate it contains about 2 billion barrels of oil that is economically recoverable, along with 3.5 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. The United States consumes more than 20 million barrels of oil per day. Much of the 23.5 million-acre petroleum reserve already is open to oil development. The reserve, created in 1923, is located west of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, long a flashpoint in the debate over allowing oil drilling versus protecting the environment.
The Bureau of Land Management proposed opening the area a year ago. But it was not until yesterday that an Interior Department official, Deputy Assistant Secretary Chad Calvert, approved a modified version of that plan.
The area near Teshekpuk Lake was put off limits to drilling during the Reagan administration. The Clinton administration expanded the restricted area. But the Bureau of Land Management says technological advances in oil drilling allow drilling to occur without the impact previously feared. Drilling will be allowed about a quarter-mile from the lake.
Bureau officials said they would conduct further study on the impact to molting geese before allowing permanent drilling.
#1
is this more productive than teh ANWR opening? I'd ram them both through during heating oil price rises and let Schumer, Kennedy(s) et al explain their opposition. Do a documentary of teh real site and real conditions. Explain that "teddy bear" is a fiction and doesn't reside there, drinking coca cola with elk, caribou and especially, not penguins, regardless of the propaganda and sheer lies from enviro nuts
Posted by: Frank G ||
01/12/2006 21:56 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I think Bush will get to open ANWR right after the strikes on Iran when oil goes to $100 a barrel because Iranian shipments have stopped.
#4
Nimble __ sequence is wrong - he's opening this one now to offset the expected rise in oil prices when Iran is hit. This is the first real clue that he may actually do something about the the mullahs
High-quality counterfeit U.S. $100 bills, most likely printed in North Korea, were discovered in Las Vegas casinos in recent months, a South Korean news agency has reported, citing U.S. Secret Service officials. The report comes amid escalating tension between the United States and North Korea over the counterfeit currency. There have been "sporadic activities" in which the "supernotes," were discovered in Las Vegas casinos, said Gregory Marchio an official in the Secret Service's Las Vegas field office, according to a Yonhap news service dispatch from Washington.
"No more than two or three notes a month" have been discovered since six months ago, Marchio said. It has been only in the last six months that these fake dollars were spotted at casinos and entertainment venues of the city, he said. The fake bill's characteristics were similar to those traced to North Korea. "I don't know if they came directly from North Korea or they've been in circulation in the United States. But the characteristics are similar to those that ... are being manufactured in North Korea," he said.
Yonhap also reported that a U.S. Secret Service delegation will travel to Seoul later this month to discuss North Korea's counterfeiting issues with South Korean officials. U.S. officials said North Korea is believed to have begun making counterfeit U.S. dollars in 1989, and the total amount of fake bills circulated by the North so far is estimated at $50 million.
The Seoul-based Korea Exchange Bank also said last month that the number of counterfeit U.S. dollars uncovered in South Korea increased last year. The bank said it had found 842 bogus U.S. bills totaling $83,790 during the first 11 months of the year, up from $26,150 in all of last year. Most of the counterfeit currency was in fake $100 bills.
On Monday, North Korea officially denied that it has been counterfeiting U.S. bills and vowed to stay away from multilateral nuclear talks unless U.S. financial sanctions against it are lifted.
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.
Muslim pilgrims rushing to complete a symbolic stoning ritual on the last day of the hajj tripped over luggage 
A Georgian man accused of attempting to kill George Bush by lobbing a hand grenade towards him at an outdoor rally in the ex-Soviet republic of Georgia last May has been sentenced to life in prison. The defendant, Vladimir Arutyunyan, "is sentenced to the highest form of punishment - life in prison", the presiding judge in his trial said on Wednesday. "He was found guilty on eight charges from the criminal code and four of them demand the highest form of punishment," Judge David Dzhugeli said.
SHANGHAI, China (AP) - The whereabouts of North Korean leader Kim Jong Il remained unclear Thursday, with a Hong Kong-based television network speculating he may be headed for the south Chinese city of Guangzhou, while other reports put him in Beijing or Russia.
The Turkish assailant who shot Pope John Paul II in 1981 will be released from prison this week and now wants to work towards world peace. A court decided to free Mehmet Ali Agca, 48, on parole, saying he had completed his prison term in Turkey.
LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) - President Bush said Wednesday that he isn't bothered by congressional hearings into his domestic spying program as long as they don't aid the enemy. ``That's good for democracy,'' Bush said, provided the hearings don't ``tell the enemy what we're doing.''
There have been dramatic scenes at the Guantanamo Bay detention facility in Cuba, where a Yemeni detainee has boycotted a military commission set to try him for alleged terror offences.
The most influential politician in Iraq issued a veiled warning yesterday to Sunni Arabs that Shiites would not allow substantive amendments to the countryâs new constitution, including to the provision that keeps the central government weak in favor of strong provincial governments. 
Doctors are preparing to carry out fresh tests for brain activity on Ariel Sharon on Wednesday after declaring the Israeli premier out of immediate danger from the huge stroke he suffered last week. The 77-year-old Sharon remains in intensive care after suffering massive haemorrhaging, but medics have indicated that his condition is no longer life-threatening. "The prime minister's condition is serious but there is no immediate danger to the prime minister's life," Sharon's chief anaesthetist Yoram Weiss said at Jerusalem's Hadassah hospital on Tuesday afternoon.
Any sanctions imposed on Iran over its nuclear programme would not target the Iranian people, the Bush administration said on Thursday in a scathing attack on the Islamic republicâs leadership. Condoleezza Rice, US secretary of state, gave assurances that scholars, musicians and athletes â a reference to Iranâs World Cup soccer team â would not be penalised, as the US joined the three leading European powers in announcing their determination to refer Tehran to the United Nations Security Council over its plan to begin uranium enrichment. Ms Rice would not be drawn on what kind of UN sanctions the US was considering. There was a âmenu of possibilitiesâ, she told reporters in Washington.
The British, French and German foreign ministers said Thursday that negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program had reached a "dead end" and the Islamic republic should be referred to the U.N. Security Council. 
Tehran, Iran, Jan. 4 â Iranâs state-run media gave unusual prominence to a historically confused news report claiming that former Saudi King Abdul-Aziz, the father of the current Saudi monarch, objected to the existence of Israel and told United States President Franklin D. Roosevelt to relocate the Jewish state to Europe. Mehr news agency, which first carried the report that was later picked up by the countryâs state-run radio and television and a number of government-owned dailies, wrote on Tuesday that in 1954 Abdul-Aziz, the father of present Saudi King Abdullah, met with President Roosevelt and protested the existence of the newly-founded state of Israel.
The US has accused Syria of blocking the United Nations (UN) inquiry into the killing of former Lebanese prime minister 
European foreign ministers will meet in Germany to decide what action should be taken about Iran's decision to resume nuclear activities. Iran has ended a two-year suspension of nuclear fuel research, renewing concerns that the country is trying to build an atomic bomb. It says it has broken United Nations (UN) seals at a uranium enrichment plant in order to produce electricity. British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw along with ministers from France and Germany, will hold talks in Berlin. British Prime Minister Tony Blair says he is aiming to get international agreement to refer Iran to the UN Security Council.
