Source is the Frontier Post, so take with a grain of salt...
The Taliban supreme leader Mulla Omar and two sons of Osama bin Laden were arrested in southeastern Afghanistan while intensified search continues for the most sought after man Osama Bin Laden in a joint operation involving US forces sources informed. The news of arrest of Osamaâs two sons Saad, 23 years old and also bin Ladenâs eldest son is also on the American most-wanted list and Hamza was disclosed by the Balochistan Home Minister Sanaullah Zehri in Quetta on Friday. The brothers were captured in the Rabat region in the extreme southwest of Afghanistanâs Nimroz province where the borders of Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan meet. Sources said that the joint forces were sure that they have captured an important Taliban figure Mulla Omar but his identity was yet to ascertained by the top intelligence high command in Pentagon. I'm a dolt. I didn't even think about Mullah Omar. And that caravan would be his style...
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
03/08/2003 03:34 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Anonona - you gotta get 'em quick, before the check comes back.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/08/2003 19:13 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Let's pass the hat around Rantburg and pay up their ISP for the Frontier Post so we can keep the ramp juice comin'in. Maybe Omar is trying a Great Escape motorcycle sequence like Steve McQueen.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
03/08/2003 22:32 Comments ||
Top||
#3
The last time I checked out the Frontier Post'page, their Internet Provider was complaining about not being paid!!!
The American commandos have launched a hunt for Osama bin Laden in Kunar province of Afghanistan bordering Chitral. Sources from across the border confirmed the mobilization of US forces, with tanks, armoured personnel carriers, helicopters and jet aircraft aiding them. House-to-house search is being conducted to catch the most wanted person on earth in Barikot, Shingal and Asmar areas. Speculation is also rife about the presence of Gulbadin Hekmatyar and his two commanders, Mulla Rustam and Mulla Sadiq, in the Afghan province. The Arandu border stands sealed for cross-border movement. If Binny's in Balochistan, er... Nimruz, then it wouldn't do much good to look for him in Kunar, even if the light is better there. I'd guess they'd like to snag Hek in this one...
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
03/08/2003 02:56 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
U.S. forces hunting Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda followers in Afghanistan said today they had detained seven men suspected of planning attacks on coalition forces. They were detained with bomb-making instructions in their possession by Special Forces on Friday near Spin Majid in the southwestern province of Helmand, U.S. military spokesman Colonel Roger King said. Bad time to pop your beturbanned little head up over the terrorism background noise, isn't it?
He added no units of the U.S.-led coalition force were in action in Ribat, in Nimroz province on the Iran-Pakistan border, where according to a Pakistani official two sons of bin Laden may have been wounded and captured on Thursday. King said, "We don't have any forces operating in the area of Ribat at this time. We have had people pass through from time to time; as far as I know we have not had any forces (there) in the last 72 hours." The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation are also hunting for bin Laden and other al Qaeda figures, but are not part of the coalition task force.
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
03/08/2003 02:51 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
An explosion has killed an interpreter working for international peacekeepers in Afghanistan and lightly injured a Dutch soldier. The blast hit the men in Baghrami district, about 15 kilometres (nine miles) south of the capital, Kabul, the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan said, adding that it was not immediately clear whether it had been a terrorist attack.
Could have been a leftover mine. There are enough of them...
Both were airlifted from the scene as Isaf troops blocked off the scene of the incident on a street lined by shops and mud houses. Spokesmen would not say if the explosion had been an attack on its patrol or what kind of device was detonated. The injured man is a 23-year-old corporal with the 11th Air Mobile Brigade, Isaf said. Isaf's German commander, Lieutenant General Norbert van Heyst, warned earlier this week that Islamic extremists might launch attacks on Isaf if the United States attacked Iraq.
Or even if it doesn't...
US troops are currently leading a coalition force to track down Taleban and al-Qaeda Islamic militants in Afghanistan, but Isaf's role is confined to policing the capital.
Posted by: Bulldog ||
03/08/2003 07:10 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
The US has no legal basis for holding members of the Taliban at Guantanamo Bay, the organisation Human Rights Watch said in a letter to the American defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld. The intervention comes amid growing calls for access to prisoners held by the US following September 11 and the war in Afghanistan. The group, which with Amnesty International has been monitoring the situation of prisoners, said yesterday that there were three types of prisoners at the US camp in Cuba, who should be released. And a couple types who need to stay.
They were "Taliban soldiers who were detained in the now-concluded war between the US and the government of Afghanistan, unless they are being prosecuted for war crimes; civilians who have no meaningful connection to al-Qaida or the Taliban and probably should never have been sent to Guantanamo in the first place; and suspected terrorists whose detention had nothing to do with the war in Afghanistan, unless they are charged with a crime and prosecuted". I actually have no problem with the low-level Taliban grunts being sent home, preferably to the north and the tender mercies of the Uzbek or Tadjik warlords. And the civvies? Sure, no sweat. But the "suspected terrorists"? Nah, we keep those.
The small fry weren't the ones who were sent for a Caribbean vacation. Anybody who was sent by mistake should be released, but they all say it was just a big mistake, don't they? How do you tell which ones really were?
"There are people being held at Guantanamo who shouldn't be there,"said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch. "The US cannot simply hold the detainees for as long as it wants." Attempts to provide legal representation for those held at Guantanamo Bay have so far been unsuccessful.
That's because it's not a cops and robbers situation. If you get caught being a terrorist, your mouthpiece shouldn't be able to get you off...
Human Rights Watch claims the Taliban soldiers captured during the war should have been repatriated following the formation of the government of Hamid Karzai. Send the soldiers to Kabul and put them on trial there. Could be entertaining.
Mr Roth suggested that, under the Geneva convention, the US should release those soldiers unless they are being charged with war crimes or other criminal offences. The US has released some prisoners from Guantanamo Bay but says that others are providing useful intelligence. The Red Cross has been allowed to visit them. Something neither the Taliban nor Sammy have ever bothered with for their prisoners.
Under the Geneva Conventions, POWs are released when hostilities are over, on conclusion of a peace treaty. Anybody heard of one lately? The war on terror isn't over yet, and terrorists should be detained until it is.
Posted by: Steve White ||
03/08/2003 07:17 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Great idea, Steve! I've been wanting to see Nuremburg-style trials after the invasion myself, but you're spot on with shutting out the UN and the ICC, televising the trials, and showing the world the evidence as graphically as possible.
Oh, that it will only come to be!
Posted by: Dar Steckelberg ||
03/08/2003 18:09 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Mojo---Re: "Foxtrot Oscar".....Thanks for the elequent summary of the first three quarters of my comments. But, hey! Its Rantburg, and I was ranting.
Steve White---I really like your idea. All sarcasm and bitter ranting aside, we (the US and those with us) must take these years of horror and human degredation and make something good come out of it. The people under the islamofascists must see what their world has become. The media is extremely powerful. They use it, weasels use it, all to their advantage, so why not us? These trials and documentaries, proceedings, what have you could be the most powerful way to make positive change in the Middle East. An old contractor told me of a lesson he learned after experiencing the Alaska Earthquake of 1964. He said that every disaster is a new opportunity. Well, most of the time....
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
03/08/2003 22:44 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Wonder if Amnesty International has ever sent Saddam Hussein a letter.
Posted by: Ralph ||
03/08/2003 6:47 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Why protest to someone who won't even pretend to listen?
Under the Geneva convention, unless they were captured in uniform, they were unlawful belligerants. And thus not protected by the Geneva convention. By all accounts, they should be put up side a wall and shot. Whatever treatment they are getting, is better than they deserve, and far better than they are legally entitled to.
Posted by: Ben ||
03/08/2003 7:11 Comments ||
Top||
#5
The small fry weren't the ones who were sent for a Caribbean vacation.
Good point, and I forgot to make it last night. Not just anyone gets a Caribbean vacation at Uncle Sam's expense!
Posted by: Steve White ||
03/08/2003 10:48 Comments ||
Top||
#6
When we get done with Iraq, we need to sift through the mountains of govt paperwork there, make SERIOUS and detailed interviews with victims, and shove the documented violations of human rights in the face of every one of these "human rights" outfits, and Germany, and France, and Belgium, and every other grandstanding self-righteous s.o.b. including a forum in the UN and say "here is what 12 years of appeasement and dithering has done to real people." Then challenge the UN reform itself, and if they do not (WHICH IS A FOREGONE CONCLUSION), then take those courageous countries that signed letters of support recently and all the others that stood by us in this WOT and get together and do some real good for people in this world. Leave the rotting carcass of the UN behind and let the buzzards clean it up. We're moving on.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
03/08/2003 11:18 Comments ||
Top||
#7
The concept of "fuck off" doesn't need all that elaboration, Paul.
A follow-up to your idea: after we go through all the paperwork, we need to have some war crimes trials. We point-blank refuse to let the UN or the International Criminal Court have any role whatsoever. But we bring in the best, brightest, most experienced American, British, Aussie, Spanish, etc. jurists and prosecutors, run proper trials that we televise (Arab subtitles), buy time on al-Jeezera to advertise the trials to the Arab people, and publicize the results throughout the world. Allow the Iraqi people to attend the trials (proper decorum as for any legal proceeding). Let them see what the brutalizers did. Journalists accredited from any legitimate news organization can attend. In short, Nuremburg ca 2003.
Imagine what it will do to Muslim people throughout the world when they see the graphic evidence of the tortures, the rapes, the setting people on fire, all the brutality. Most Muslims are reasonable people; they're going to be horrified when they see what Saddam has done. And those who might be tempted by Wahabbist or Salafist philosophy will get to see what's in store for them.
Imagine how it will yank the chains of the Weasels. The French, Germans, Belgians, all get to see just what their governments were supporting. Buy a channel on Eurosat and broadcast the trials over the entire continent. Buy advertising space in Le Monde. Subtitle the trials in French and German. Make sure that the Iraqi officials who bought WMD goodies from European companies get put on trial. Issue subpoenas for the officers of those European companies. The Euro governments won't honor them, of course, but let the European people see the subpoenas.
Posted by: Steve White ||
03/08/2003 15:41 Comments ||
Top||
Cut short
The mosque where Abu Hamza, the Muslim cleric, preached will need extensive repairs and could be closed for another year. The new trustees of Finsbury Park mosque, in north London, claim the imam neglected the building so badly during his five-year occupation that at least £70,000 will be needed to bring it back into use. The damage includes a crack in the dome, wrecked toilets and general disrepair.
Mr Hamza and around 30 of his followers took over the mosque in 1997, four years after it was built. He was initially invited in to help remove another trouble-making group, but he never left. Allah akhbar! Those guys must've been some ugly SOBs...
During the next five years it was claimed he and his supporters took over the mosque, turning it into a hotbed of extreme Islamic views and opposition to Britain, America and non-Muslims. Despite numerous attempts in the courts costing thousands of pounds, trustees found it impossible to break his stranglehold on the congregation.
Mohamed Moreea, 63, a newly-elected trustee, said: "It is not that Hamza deliberately damaged the building, it is just that he failed to carry out any basic maintenance." "He's a hook-handed t***, but he'll come round and smash my toilet if I cuss him too bad."
Abu Aziz, spokesman for Mr Hamza, dismissed the claims. "This is a load of rubbish," he said. "These trustees are meaningless and worthless. They have proved that by closing the mosque down and forcing people to worship in the street." "If you meet them on the street, kill them and take their money - yeah, yadda yadda yadda."
#1
Its apparent that he had his mind more on Jihad than taking the responsibilities of running a Mosque seriously. I've been a board member of a church before, and was never more serious about making sure the Church was better off when I left than when I arrived.
To me, this is a serious shirking of religious responsibility that was not in keeping with any kind of religous faith. The Finsbury Park muslims learned the bitter lesson that fanaticism and devotion are not always the same.
Spain yesterday said five suspected Islamic militants arrested on Friday were believed to have helped finance Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda network. The Interior Ministry did not say whether they were linked to the truck bombing of a synagogue in Tunisia last year — an attack claimed by Al Qaeda in which some 20 people were killed. Spain currently holds 40 Al Qaeda suspects, detained since the September 11, 2001 hijacked airliner attacks on the United States which Washington blames on the group. Court sources said the suspects were believed to have played a role in the bombing of the El Ghriba synagogue on the southern Tunisian island of Djerba last April. Fourteen German tourists were among those killed. The Interior Ministry said the suspects were also believed to have helped deploy and hide members of Al Qaeda. Civil Guard agents on Friday arrested four Spanish citizens in an operation assisted by French and German police and investigators from Tunisia, the US, Switzerland and Portugal. The fifth suspect detained was a junior Arab Pakistani national.
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
03/08/2003 07:09 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
"Pakistan will not allow anybody to use its soil for terrorism." This was stated by Foreign Minister Mian Khurshid Mahmood Kasuri while speaking at the oath taking ceremony of the Tax Bar Association here on Friday. Does that mean all Pakland's terrorism is going to be for domestic consumption now?
Mr Kasuri said Pakistan was one of the front line countries in the global war against terrorism. That was why, it was facing terrorism itself, he added. He said the country could defend itself against any kind of terrorism. "We will continue our cooperation against the terrorism and not allow anybody to create a law and order situation in Pakistan." "We've got enough of that already, by gum!"
He said there was no reality in the news that Pakistan would be the next target of America after Iraq. Of course not. Pakland's really much further down the list...
If something would happen, then Pakistan would stand as a reasonable nation and would fight. They're just not sure how...
Mr Kasuri said Pakistan wanted peaceful solution to Iraq issue, as, in case of war, the whole region would be affected.
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
03/08/2003 03:02 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
A man arrested with top al-Qaeda suspect Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was remanded into further police custody by an anti-terrorism court today. "He has been charged with possession of arms and there is no mention of his alleged association to al-Qaeda," Ahmed ("Dum-dum") Qadoos's lawyer Shamshadullah Cheema told AFP, shortly after the hearing. Qadoos was brought to the anti-terrorism court headed by judge Malik Safdar in Rawalpindi amid tight police security. Witnesses said the man was handcuffed and his face covered. "The court has remanded Ahmed Qadoos in police custody for three days, dismissing police plea of five days' custody," Cheema said. Betcha he walks...
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
03/08/2003 02:48 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Pakistani and U.S. forces were searching for Al-Qaeda members on Friday in a mountainous area near the borders with Afghanistan and Iran amid persistent reports that Osama bin Laden could be in the vicinity. Residents in the remote region said leaflets were dropped there on Thursday offering rewards for the capture of Bin Laden and other Al-Qaeda leaders. Seems a prudent thing to do...
President Pervez Musharraf said Bin Laden seemed to be alive but added he was unlikely to be in Pakistan, where suspected September 11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was arrested last weekend. "Nope. Nope. Couldn't be here. Khalid wasn't, either."
Officers of Pakistan's Paramilitary Frontier Corps told Reuters Pakistani forces had launched an operation on Thursday, involving a few Americans, in pursuit of Al-Qaeda suspects in the Ribat region, where the borders of Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iran meet. But, Pakistani and U.S. officials rejected reports that a new operation was under way specifically targeting Bin Laden. Guess they're not getting their hopes up...
The arrest of Mohammed raised hopes that interrogators could get leads on the location of the world's most-wanted man, who has evaded U.S. forces since a U.S. bombing campaign against Al-Qaeda and Taleban forces in Afghanistan in late 2001. U.S. officials said this week they believed Bin Laden was hiding in the rugged tribal borderlands between Pakistan and Afghanistan. Musharraf told CNN in an interview broadcast on Friday Pakistani intelligence agencies were active all over the country tracking down any leads they could get, including in border areas with Afghanistan. But he said Bin Laden could not be in Pakistan. "He wouldn't be hiding alone or with one person...he seems to be alive," he said. "He would be moving with a large number of bodyguards. He can't be in Pakistan." Either that, or he's in Fazl's guest house, writing a fatwah and chuckling, while everyone scurries around looking for him. Like Khalid was...
A Pakistani Frontier Corps officer said the operation in Ribat involved "lots of Pakistanis and very few Americans". Colonel Roger King, a spokesman for the U.S. military in Afghanistan, said U.S. forces based in that country were not involved in any major new operation on the Pakistani border. "We are performing our normal duties, regular patrols, but nothing, there is no special big operation along the border."
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
03/08/2003 12:31 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
An unexpected 'ambush' was how London's Daily Telegraph described it. British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, who launched an impassioned tirade at French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin and his country's position on Iraq, was the starring act of the latest instalment of the Security Council drama, said the BBC. Staring Mr de Villepin in the eye, Mr Straw called him repeatedly by his first name, a not-so-subtle putdown in international diplomacy. Laughter erupted the first time Mr Straw referred to Mr de Villepin as simply 'Dominique'. First, you stick your thumb in his eye. If he's good, you pull it out...
Citing Mr de Villepin's speech, Mr Straw heaped scorn on the logic of countries - especially France — that are set on giving Iraq more time. 'Dominique, you said that the choice before us was disarmament by peace or disarmament by war,' Mr Straw said. 'Dominique... with due respect to my good friend and colleague, I think it's gone the other way around. Dominique, that's a false choice.' Dominique, you been dissed...
Mr Straw's tirade drew murmurs, and eventually, applause from ministerial staff members in the balcony. Mr de Villepin, by far the most charismatic spokesman for the anti-war camp, had no option but to sit through his reprimand, said the Daily Telegraph. But the report noted that the expression on his face — and its colour — betrayed rage at the treatment.
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
03/08/2003 07:01 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
GAwd, that is delicious! Wasn't it Vill-er Dominique, who didn't hesitate to shaft Rumsfield in a NATO forum when the latter was not in a position to respond? If so, then bully for the British for covering our backs!
#4
He could have quoted Dominique's confusingly written drivel on Napoleon if he had really wanted to heap scorn. Another good way to rub it in would be to give the statistics for the decline in French as an international language.
#5
Well Napoleon and diplomats...
The Emperor called Talleyrand, the father of all weasels: "A piece of shit in silk stockings"
Sums it up nicely, right?
Renowned Islamic scholar Sheikh Youssef Al-Qaradawi warned Arab leaders that they risk being cursed by both history and their peoples if they side with the U.S. in its looming war on Iraq, urging the Muslim nation to stand united in the face of war. Delivering the sermon of Friday, March 7, at Omar Ibn Al-Kahttab mosque in the Qatari capital Doha, Al-Qaradawi issued a Fatwa (a religious edict) that it was not permissible for Arab and Muslim countries to let the United States use their airports, harbors and territories as a launching-pad for striking Iraq. âResisting the invaders is an individual duty on all Muslims. If the enemies invaded a Muslim country, the people of that country should resist and expel them from their territoriesâŠIt is an individual duty on all Muslims, men and women,â he stressed. "So go out there and get yourselves killed. I'll be right here, dropping blessings all over you..."
âIf they succeeded in forcing the enemies out, it is alright⊠But if they did not, it is incumbent on their Muslim neighbor countries to defend them,â ruled the renowned scholar. Asked what does Islam say about participation in al-Jazeera Shield Force formed by the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries and whether it is permissible for such troops to be deployed in Kuwait, Sheikh Al-Qaradawai said it is only permissible for them to defend Kuwait should it come under attack, but it is absolutely Haram (impermissible) for them to take part in any attack on Iraq. This does illustrate a part of our problem, and the biggest part of the problem of the Muslim world. It's forbidden by this interpretation for any infidel, anywhere, to overthrow a Muslim potentate for any reason, to include grossly unjust rule. The Muslim state can do anything it damn well pleases to any neighboring infidel state, and all Muslim states are obligated to defend it, regardless of the justice of the infidel state's cause or the lack thereof of the Muslim state's. It makes Islam a closed system, in contact with the rest of the world only on its bloody border, with jihad incumbent on the Muslims, self-defense forbidden to the infidels. All regime change would have to come for inside, and one thing Islam does resist is regime change â it's never until the 20th century been a political affair, but was always a family affair. Even when it's been an internal political affair, once the government's established it's apparently there forever, by divine right, regardless of what it does, because the religious establishment becomes integrated into it. That seems to apply even to theoretically secular states like Sammy's Ba'athist Iraq. The function of the learned elder of Islam becomes to exhort the citizen to accept his crappy lot in life, even while blaming us infidels for the corruption of governments in the Muslim world in the abstract. Notice it's never a specific regime that's mentioned. It's a classic "us versus them" situation, that cuts out all room for compromise.
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
03/08/2003 06:43 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Hummm...
This brings to mind Orson Scott Card's postword in "Children of the Mind", regarding 'edge' cultures versus 'center' cultures. Center cultures absorb outsiders (like the Chinese did with the Mongols), while edge cultures try to hold them away (like Card's own Mormons).
Increased communication and interaction tends to make center cultures stronger, whereas it eats away at edge cultures.
In the long run, the free flow of ideas will slowly overrun the extremists.
In the meantime, they're rather like a cornered animal and downright dangerous.
#2
Fred, keep in mind that both the Pope and Anglican Church have also disavowed the war, albeit with less inflamtory language. So both Islam and Christendom would support tyrants and murderers.
Posted by: john ||
03/08/2003 22:19 Comments ||
Top||
#3
John, bear in mind that neither the Pope nor the Archbishop of Canterbury speak for anything like all of Christendom. . . .
Posted by: Matt ||
03/08/2003 23:49 Comments ||
Top||
#4
--It is an individual duty on all Muslims, men and women,â he stressed.--
Oh, sure, Now women are equal. It's OK to be bantha poodoo.
As the longtime deputy chairman of the Iraqi National Olympic Committee, Aseel Tabra was known by former athletes as the trusted lieutenant to whom Uday Hussein turned to carry out many of his orders, even when those directives involved the imprisonment and torture of athletes and coaches.
To Uday, apparently, loyalty only counts for so much. Tabra, whom the International Olympic Committee will likely want to speak to in its ethics probe, has been sent recently to one of Iraq's toughest prisons, according to the Iraq Press, a publication run by exiles from the Middle East nation and funded by the U.S. government. Uday, president of the Olympic committee since 1984 and the eldest son of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, placed Tabra and several other senior aides in the notorious al-Radwaniya detention center on the outskirts of Baghdad following "revelations of large-scale embezzlement and fraud" in the Olympic committee, the Iraq Press reported. Apparently Uday didn't get his cut? Good way to get to sleep with the fishes
The IOC Executive Board, headed by president Jacques Rogge, endorsed Feb. 21 a formal investigation of the Iraqi Olympic committee, which former athletes and associates say is a front for Uday's wide-ranging criminal business operation. Another task for international inspectors... right now might not be a good time
"Let (Tabra) go to hell," said Issam Thamer al-Diwan, a former national team volleyball player and coach who alleges he was twice tortured on orders of Uday. "Sooner or later, Tabra would have been killed anyway by the Iraqi people. He is Uday's protector." Kharma - what comes around, goes around
The exact reasons for Tabra's apparent punishment remain unclear, although former national team athletes familiar with the Iraqi Olympic committee suspect Tabra in some in way angered Uday, who is an a nut, and capable of snapping over anything
whose mood swings and reputation for violence are legendary. They doubt Uday had blamed Tabra for the charges of torture that the IOC Ethics Commission is now starting to look into, as Tabra only acts on behalf of Uday, they say. Maybe Tabra didn't torture hard enough?
"As a person, he was a nice guy to me," said Sharar Haydar, a former national team soccer player. "But if you work with Uday, you have to be evil." and not almost-evil, you have to be really evil
The former players say Tabra is from a wealthy family in Iraq and was recruited by Uday to the Olympic committee for his polished manner. As a top Olympic official, he has often been used to greet and meet foreign delegations interested in lifting the United Nations embargo that has been in place since Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in 1990. In May 1998, the Hussein family sent Tabra to the United Arab Emirates "for discussions on bilateral relations, issues of mutual concern and conditions of the Iraqi handicapped and ways of helping them," according to a press release by the UAE Ministry of Information and Culture. In October 2000, Tabra was the Iraqi official selected to welcome a plane from Tunisia carrying doctors, soccer players and humanitarian aid to Baghdad, The Associated Press reported. The next month, Tabra, again ostensibly in his role with the Olympic committee, greeted a plane from Syria that arrived at Saddam International Airport.
Indict, a human rights group, submitted this photo of Karzan Muhammed Latif, a Iraqi table tennis player who claims he was tortured under orders of Uday Hussein, in its report to the International Olympic Committee. Former athletes and associates of Uday told ESPN.com in a December report that the real purpose of the Iraqi Olympic committee is not to serve athletes, but to steer black-market business to Uday, who allegedly has made money off cigarettes, oil, stolen cars and other goods, some of which have been stored at the Olympic headquarters in Baghdad. "Tabra is very important," Thamer said. "He's one of the criminals."
Amid concerns about the logistics of investigating allegations of torture at a time when the U.S. is preparing for a war with Iraq, the IOC last month began seeking the contact numbers and addresses of former Iraqi athletes and associates of Uday. Some of them filed affadavits with Indict, a London-based human rights group funded by the U.S. government, while others had shared their stories with ESPN.com in its report. The ethics commission appears to be moving cautiously with its probe, to the disappointment of former athletes who have offered their testimony. "I haven't received a letter or a call," Haydar said. "They must not be serious people."
Meanwhile, other former Iraqi athletes are coming forward for the first time to share their accounts. Najem Alekabi, a former heavyweight wrestler, said he was shot in the torso in 1988, a year after winning the national championship. A Shiite Muslim, he said he was attacked by one of Saddam's commando units for praying too often (the Hussein family is Sunni Muslim, a rival sect in Iraq considered more moderate in its religious beliefs). Alekabi, who now lives in the San Diego area, said he was not tortured as an athlete but knows of others who were. One fellow wrestler on his club team was executed, he said. He also claims Uday abused sports facilities such as the lone Olympic swimming pool in the nation, where he filled the water with emptied liquor bottles from personal parties. "Where was the IOC on that?" he said.
On the Iraq Press Web site, Saad Qeis, a top Iraqi soccer player in the 1990s, wrote an extended first-person account of his experience of being tortured in 1997 after a 4-0 defeat against Turkmenistan. Uday was "furious" with him for getting ejected from the game, he wrote. "Upon arrival in Iraq, I was immediately driven to the headquarters of the Olympic commission and after warnings, threats and censure I was sent to Radwaniya," he wrote, of the same prison Tabra allegedly was placed in. "There they put me in a room with an array of canes mounted on the shelves on the wall. They ordered me to strip to the waist and lie on the ground. They flogged me. I bled profusely and fainted."
Confirming what Haydar told ESPN.com in December, Qeis said a two-day probe into the rumors of torture by the world governing body for soccer was flawed by the players' inability to speak honestly with investigators. FIFA, the governing body, later announced it had found no evidence of torture. "I was there when the FIFA investigators came to Baghdad," Qeis wrote. "They asked athletes questions about whether they were tortured or not. No one (sic) of us could have admitted to torture and stayed alive. Nobody dares to tell the truth of what happens while he is in Iraq." Deja Vu all over again
That veil of silence has slowly been lifting in recent years, and particularly in the past three months. Among the personal accounts Indict says it has shared with the IOC is an affidavit signed Sept. 2 of last year by Karzan Muhammed Latif, a national team table tennis player whose identity Indict had not disclosed originally to the media. In his affidavit, acquired by ESPN.com, Latif alleges he was struck with a cable and made to crawl on hot asphalt after being accused â falsely he says â of insulting Uday Hussein. Indict also submitted photos showing scars on the athlete's back and arms, which allegedly are the result of being tortured.
The IOC ethics commission has said Uday will be given an opportunity to respond to the charges. Haydar doubts his former Olympic chief is taking the IOC probe seriously â and not just because the U.S. is gearing up for war against the Hussein regime. "Uday laughs at the IOC because he knows they can't do anything to him," he said. Nice photo on the link showing the table-tennis player's torture scars
Posted by: Frank G ||
03/08/2003 02:40 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Ever since seeing Forest Gupp I've been in favor of torturing table tennis player. Lets face it they can't be trusted.
U.N. military observers on the Iraq-Kuwait border said on Saturday they were withdrawing civilian staff to Kuwait city for their own safety in view of a possible U.S. invasion of Iraq. Tick Tick Tick
"We are doing this as a protective measure for their safety in view of the situation," said Daljeet Bagga, spokesman of the U.N. Iraq-Kuwait Observer Mission (UNIKOM). He told Reuters that UNIKOM had begun removing on Saturday some of its 230 civilian U.N. staff from their residential quarters in the demilitarized zone that runs the length of the 130 miles land border. Shook up by the Marines cutting the fence, huh?
He said more of them would go on Sunday. He said UNIKOM's 195 observers and its 775-strong Bangladeshi military support units would stay in place. Hopefully they'll get the word on safe gaps to avoid the blitz
Posted by: Frank G ||
03/08/2003 02:31 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
Australia has expelled an Iraqi diplomat because of security concerns. Foreign affairs minister Alexander Downer says Ibrahim Aares has until Wednesday to leave Australia."We have reason to believe that he's associated with the Iraqi Intelligence Agency and he is assessed by our agency as an Iraqi intelligence officer. His activities are incompatible with a status of a diplomat," Mr Downer said. "We do have real security concerns about his activities and our decision is based in particular on an assessment made by ASIO (Australian Security Intelligence Organisation)." The diplomat has been based in Australia's capital, Canberra, since late last year.
Now he can go home and help defend Tikrit...
Meanwhile, Prime Minister John Howard has refused to rule out committing Australian troops to a war against Iraq, with or without UN backing. Speaking before leaving for New Zealand for diplomatic and trade talks, Mr Howard said he did not want to pre-empt any decision by the UN Security Council. "For me to rule anything in or out at the present time is patently absurd and robs this country of the flexibility it ought to have to take decisions when all the known facts are available to the government," Mr Howard said. The Australian government has sent 2,000 troops to join US forces preparing for a possible war in the Gulf, but has not yet committed them to military action.
Howard's got guts. He can also remember that Australians were attacked, just like Americans were...
Saddam Hussein has called on the UN to lift the sanctions imposed on Iraq at the end of the Gulf War, twelve years ago, reports Israel Radio. OK, nothing to see here, go about your business, especially you - Pierre and Dieter
According to Hussein, UN chief weapons inspector Hans Blix and IAEA chief Muhammad el-Baradei vindicated Iraq's position that it has fulfilled its obligations to destroy its weapons of mass destruction in their reports to the UN Security Council Saturday. Um - their translation must've been different than mine
In a statement released in Baghdad, Saddam called on the Security Council to renounce what he termed the lies of the US and Britain, and to disarm Israel from its weapons of mass destruction. ... and after that they should disarm the cowboy Bush
Saddam also called on the Security Council to compel Israel to withdraw from the West Bank and Gaza strip. The French, Belgians and Germans immediately asked for a resolution with deadlines and strict coercive inspection regimen: "We have always supported such a regimen, ever since....today"
Posted by: Frank G ||
03/08/2003 10:25 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I think the best comment I have heard about this is the following:
"If the Arabs put down their arms there will be peace. If Israel puts down its arms there will be no Israel"
A REPORT declassified by the United Nations yesterday contained a hidden bombshell with the revelation that inspectors have recently discovered an undeclared Iraqi drone with a wingspan of 7.45m, suggesting an illegal range that could threaten Iraqâs neighbours with chemical and biological weapons. A new use for a Mig-29?
US officials were outraged that Hans Blix, the chief UN weapons inspector, did not inform the Security Council about the drone, or remotely piloted vehicle, in his oral presentation to Foreign Ministers and tried to bury it in a 173-page single-spaced report distributed later in the day. The omission raised serious questions about Dr Blixâs objectivity. "Quick, Ethel, my pills!"
âRecent inspections have also revealed the existence of a drone with a wingspan of 7.45m that has not been declared by Iraq,â the report said. âOfficials at the inspection site stated that the drone had been test-flown by a couple of Palestinians. Further investigation is required to establish the actual specifications and capabilities of these RPV drones . . . (they) are restricted by the same UN rules as missiles, which limit their range to 150km (92.6 miles). Colin Powell, the US Secretary of State, told the Security Council in February that Washington had evidence that Iraq had test-flown a drone in a race-track pattern for 500km non-stop. But never more than 150 km away, eh Blixie?
In another section of the declassified report, the inspectors give warning that Iraq still has spraying devices and drop tanks that could be used in dispersing chemical and biological agents from aircraft. âA large number of drop tanks of various types, both imported and locally manufactured, are available and could be modified,â it says. This won't work for them. The drone is too small to carry enough anthrax or VX to be more than a nuisance for our guys. But it'd be right dandy for attacking the Kuwaiti civilians.
General Powell resorted to reading passages from the paper out loud in the Council chamber. He pointed out that it chronicled nearly 30 times when Iraq had failed to provide credible evidence to substantiate its claims, and 17 instances when inspectors uncovered evidence that contradicted those claims. But his draft copy, dating from a meeting of the inspectorsâ advisory board last week, did not contain the crucial passage about the new drone.
And those who refuse to be convinced won't be convinced, regardless of anything he says anyway, so why waste precious breath?
The decision by Dr Blix to declassify the internal report marks the first time the UN has made public its suspicions about Iraqâs banned weapons programmes, rather than what it has been able to actually confirm. âUnmovic has credible information that the total quantity of biological warfare agent in bombs, warheads and in bulk at the time of the Gulf War was 7,000 litres more than declared by Iraq. This additional agent was most likely all anthrax,â it says. The report says there is âcredible informationâ indicating that 21,000 litres of biological warfare agent, including some 10,000 litres of anthrax, was stored in bulk at locations around the country during the war and was never destroyed. And this isn't a causus belli because ...
Posted by: Steve White ||
03/08/2003 07:26 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
New progress reports presented by the chief UN weapons inspectors yesterday offered no reason for the anti-war axis of France, Russia, China and Germany to drop their stiffening opposition to an early US-led attack on Iraq. Hans Blix and Mohamed El Baradei's verdict of mainly improved cooperation from Baghdad and demand for more time to finish their job bolstered the weasels sceptics, three of whom are veto-wielding UN security council members.
Nobody doubted that would happen....
The US president, George Bush, on Thursday warned security council members the time had come to "show their cards on Saddam". These cards a pair of deuces, a four of hearts, a six of clubs and a nine of diamonds were displayed yesterday in the countries' responses to Mr Blix's statement, as their foreign ministers reiterated broad opposition to swift military action ever.
And no one's in the least surprised...
France
The French foreign minister, Dominique de Villepin, implicitly threatened to use France's veto to block a new resolution giving the green light to war. He also rejected setting any deadline for Iraqi compliance with UN resolution 1441, saying that would be a pretext for war. "The reports tell us that for a month, Iraq has been barely actively cooperating with a gun to its head," Mr de Villepin said. "Why should we now engage in war with Iraq? Why smash the instruments that have just proved their effectiveness?"
Because we don't intend to keep this up until Doomsday...
Baghdad presents "less of a danger to the world" than it did before the Gulf war in 1991, Mr de Villepin said, adding that while Paris was prepared to accept an "accelerated timetable" for the weapons inspections, it "cannot accept an ultimatum as long as the inspectors are reporting progress. That would mean war". "And we always think the inspectors will make progress."
As a veto-holding security council member, France "will not allow a resolution to pass that authorises the automatic use of force", the foreign minister said. He suggested instead that the inspectors draw up a "hierarchy of tasks for disarmament" and give a new progress report every three weeks for the next three years, and called for world heads of state to meet at the UN to "make the choice between war and peace". There's a good idea. I'd love to have a picture of Chiraq with his hand up, voting 'non'. Ditto for Putin and Schroeder. Those would be mighty useful.
France is working hard to ensure the new resolution drawn up by the US, Britain and Spain will not win a majority on the 15-member council. Mr de Villepin will visit Angola, Cameroon and Guinea - all council members who are undecided over Iraq - next week, diplomatic sources in Paris said. I hope Colin Powell is working just as hard to get these countries to our side.
Russia
Igor Ivanov, the Russian foreign minister, appeared less forceful than his French colleague and avoided using the word veto. He hardened his position against Iraq, admitting for the first time that it could have cooperated better with inspections, and calling for Baghdad to be set a list of disarmament tasks to perform. Cats-paw; that's the set-up for the French to have a never-ending list.
But Mr Ivanov said the chance of disarming Iraq peacefully "really did exist". He warned of the dangers of war, demanded international law be adhered to, and called on the security council to "emerge from the Iraq crisis not divided, but united and strong". The SC is broken. Get used to it.
However, he was noticeably less determined about opposition to the proposed second US-UK resolution, saying that "we all face a difficult choice". Mr Ivanov said that inspections were "progressing" and that access to sites had been "immediate" and "unimpeded". But he also demanded the "Iraqi leadership must more actively assist" inspections. Is that the sound of the back door I hear opening?
I think he's just being even-handed. I think Russia will sit it out and let France say "no."
China
Efforts should persist to secure a political solution, the Chinese foreign minister, Tang Jiaxuan, said, but he made no threat of the veto in his response. He added: "We need resolve and determination and more importantly patience and wisdom. The road to peace has not been exhausted." Chinese commentators say that whether to use the veto or abstain on a second resolution will be a difficult question for Beijing. While China supports the Russian-French-German statement opposing war, it is anxious not to be left exposed if any or all of the three should modify their position. Naked self-interest. I can respect that.
Germany
The German foreign minister, Joschka "the Red" Fischer, gave an impassioned "no" to war. While conceding that Baghdad had not cooperated as readily as it might have done, Mr Fischer argued that to abandon the inspections now would be "incomprehensible". It's certainly incomprehensible to you.
I find it comprehensible. But then, I've never beat up a cop...
He urged the inspectors to take up a suggestion, made by Germany, France and Russia, to specify and prioritise the outstanding problems, then setting precise time frames for their resolution. But if the Iraqis don't meet the time frames, the Weasels will just vote to extend them. Cats-paw.
Posted by: Steve White ||
03/08/2003 10:21 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I've been wondering for a while now if the Russians are actually doing us a favor. Their presence on the "veto" side gives cover to the French. This increasingly paralyzes the Security Council, which ultimately refuses to uphold its own resolutions. Whereupon the UN's credibility goes bye-bye. That doesn't bother us. My bet is it wouldn't bother Putin much either. Unlike the French, Russia does have actual power as well as the will to use it. Neither we nor the Russians really need the UN. Maybe Vladimir and George are playing a deeper game than we think.
Posted by: David Hines ||
03/08/2003 17:40 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I think scrappleface.com pretty well sums it up for me:
U.N. Delegates Await Translation of Bush Remarks
(2003-03-06) -- Most United Nations delegates withheld comment on U.S. President George Bush's news conference tonight, preferring to wait for a printed translation of his remarks.
"It's not that we didn't understand his words," said Secretary-General Kofi Annan, "Most of us speak English. But we are confused because his remarks were almost totally lacking in nuance and subtlety. We're waiting for someone to give us a more complicated version of it."
Mr. Bush said that Saddam Hussein should disarm or the U.S. and her allies would disarm him, and that the U.N. should vote yes-or-no on whether Iraq has complied with Security Council Resolution 1441.
"We at the U.N. are not accustomed to hearing people say what they mean," said Mr. Annan. "This will take us some time to digest and interpret. Perhaps a committee-of-the-whole could examine the transcript for several months."
Posted by: Tom ||
03/08/2003 20:21 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Why is MB's nose twitching and quivering very badly every time the name Blix is written or spoken. She has a very keen nose which seems to indicate to her that something is badly amiss with that man.
#5
Look at GW's dead face on Thursday night. Listen to the personal tirade from Straw to deVileweasel. Is what we are seeing classic Texas high stakes poker? Somebody with a light hand is bluffing. And he keeps calling.
Or this is all a broken play. Payback for Schroeder's election dissing of America, Rumsfeld's "Old Europe" comments, Chirac's outbust on Bulgaria. The diplomacy could of broken down weeks ago and all we are seeing now
is recrimination.
GW has already told them that he reserves the right to send in the troops. So the diplomacy must be for another goal, something that France was fighting for. Something that was more important than the sacrifice of EU solidarity, NATO integrity, UN credibility.
I am at a loss.
Posted by: john ||
03/08/2003 23:01 Comments ||
Top||
#6
True German Ally---I appreciate your comments on Russia. Would like to discuss further off site. Please email, thanks.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
03/08/2003 23:06 Comments ||
Top||
#7
F&%k it. Give them what they want. Give 'em all the time they want, then declare Iraq has disarmed. But the next time Saddam poisons his people then drop a nuke on Chiraq's & Schroeder's ass. Bastards.
#8
I wonder if the Russians understand the magnitude of the opportunity they are losing here. Between the space station, reforms and other events recently, most Americans were feeling a sense of camaraderie and shared purpose with the Russians as they emerged from a repressive regime into a country that we cheered on as our new found friends.
Most Americans, like myself were cheering them on as they made their way creaking into the 21st Century. But all of that was wiped away in an instant as we watched Ivanov spew lies yesterday. Gone - poof! Instantly Americans were reminded that the Russians - at least the government, really are fundamentally very different than we are. You can't buy that kind of goodwill and once squandered, as it was yesterday, it can not be restored. What a shame that Putin was so small as to let pride and an overnight stand get in the way of what would have been a beautiful and long term relationship. I wonder if Putin really grasps the long-term damage he has done to US/Russian relations?
#9
The biggest liability in this process is Hans Blix. He should never have been chosen for that job. I remember how he handled Chernobyl, he was deeply discredited in Germany because of his Russian ass kissing.
Its like asking someone whether the sky is blue, yes or no, and he keeps saying yes but there are little white dots.
If Blix had been saying that Iraq is in material breach (and breaking up a few missiles doesn't change anything about it) the nay-sayers would have been forced to reconsider their stance. Everybody could have saved face.
Frankly, the biggest weasel in all this is Blix.
The biggest U.S. mistake was to openly telling the world that it would go it alone if the SC didn't vote in its favor. That sparked a lot of the opposition. Going it alone was something the U.S. should have had as a secret, not a public Plan B.
It is clear by now that even a gun to Saddam's head doesn't work. If under these circumstances a dictator doesn't comply, what else except a war would?
I hope that the rift between America and parts of Europe can be healed. We cannot throw 50 years of friendship and alliance out of the window because some countries happen to have selfish and stupid leaders. The Germans will kick Schroeder out of office in 2006 (hopefully earlier, he only has a very thin majority). And while Germany will not participate in this war it will surely help with rebuilding Iraq.
The war against terror and rogue states has only begun. America will need help. And in a year we'll have a clearer view of what this is all about. And hopefully we can avoid the mistakes we made this time when the next dangerous foe has to be tackled.
I've greatly appreciated your comments here lately. You're a good guy.
Now let me tell you something: if Germany votes 'nein' in the UNSC, the odds of it being allowed to help with the reconstruction of Iraq are virtually zero. GSB simply will not let the Weasels back in once we're done there. Germany has helped (considerably) with Afghanistan and we appreciate it, but that represents GWB's last olive branch to Schroeder.
The French, Germans, Belgians, and Russians should consider whether they want the US to shift fundamentally against them, because that is what is going to happen if they vote 'no.' GWB keeps a scorecard.
Posted by: Steve White ||
03/08/2003 10:55 Comments ||
Top||
#11
I still cannot figure out the Russian position on the UN resolutions. Unless they figure by throwing in their lot with the AOW they are going to be on the winning side, economically. The Iraqi regime owes them $8Bn, I would think that Bush would give them so much on the dollar to stay out. Then they may be able to play post-Saddam. Just from a practical standpoint, I cannot understand their position, so is it irrational or what?
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
03/08/2003 11:06 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Steve, I think it's never wise to shut doors forever. To isolate a country that basically shares the same values as the U.S. is not a good policy, even when this country is plagued with a government making a wrong decision just to save its ass. If Schroeder were able to destroy the German-American friendship with his stupid politics then questions about what this friendship was all about for half a century are legitimate.
Remember: The UK population probably is as much anti-war as the German or French one. The difference is that Tony Blair stands up to his beliefs against his voters if need to, Schroeder does not stand up for anything.
It's also true that both sides have put themselves into corners rather unnecessarily. Even Bush-friendly commentators will concede that the president has treated Europe with an unnecessary heavy hand. As for Schroeder, he can't vote for the war, it would be immediate political suicide. So the best we can hope for is abstention. But if the French and the Russian do veto, Schroeder can't abstain. It's a big diplomatic mess.
I think Powell has at least tried to keep the doors open.
Shutting Germany out of Iraq to "punish" it would not be a wise move. After all the reconstruction and humanitarian aid need will first of all cost us all money. Billions probably. I doubt that anyone will make a big profit in Iraq for the next years to come.
If you want to keep scorecards, then not just the last year can be taken into account. As I said Iraq is just a first step. War against terrorism cannot be won without a close alliance between the U.S. and all of Europe. Both sides cannot afford to get huffy about this all forever.
Lets count the losses and move on. The job is bigger than Iraq.
#13
Alaska Paul, let me weigh in here.
I believe that the economic factor in the relations between Russia and USA is overrated right now. Looming trade disputes, a sharply falling dollar (Russians used to think of the dollar as a safe haven) haven't helped, nor has NATO expansion that Russians have only accepted grudgingly. The "Silk Road Strategy" is also of great concern to them, too.
The Russians would be too happy to counterbalance US influence in Asia and Europe. And with the recent rift between key European states and the U.S. they think they can.
The relations between Germany and Russia have never been better. Putin speaks German and obviously is a friend of Schroeder.
The Russians feel that they can play with Europe at eye level while with the U.S. they would always remain a "junior partner" at best.
If the U.S. turns against Germany and France the Russians will be all too happy to fill the gap. They badly need European investors to explore the natural ressources they have, to rebuild their rotten economy more and more dominated by mafiosi networks. And don't forget the nationalistic factor. You'll find way more anti-american Russians than anti-European ones.
Right now Russia thinks it may regain its influence in Europe. That could be more important to them than excellent relations with the U.S.
And I know the Russians. I spent three years in a Russian Gulag for "anti-Soviet propaganda". And I was extremely lucky to get out that early.
Time was never a concern for Russians. They are patient. They know America can turn against some smaller states but it cannot ignore Russia.
#14
TGA, I don't think France or Germany or Russia really understand the GWB mentality. Call it what you want (cowboy, Texan, fundamentalist Christian, etc.), it values honest, straight talk and loyalty. When GWB goes so far as to say "you're either with us or against us," he means it to an extent that you don't seem to appreciate. There WILL be a stiff price to pay for snubbing American interests and, judging by the Democratic Party line-up, France at the very least may be paying that price for the next six years. And lest you think GWB is acting alone, I for one am behind him 100%.
I can see how you Germans might view Russia as a wonderful future source for resource development and markets, but if you think that alignment with Russia is in your best interests, God help you. For someone who lived in East Germany and spent three years in the Gulag, you seem to have a short memory. Cultures change extremely slowly. I am reminded of the age-old advice to potential brides and grooms: don't go into marriage with any illusions that you will be able to change your spouse for the better.
Posted by: Tom ||
03/08/2003 12:45 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Tom, I tried to explain the Russian position, certainly not mine.
I think its certainly in the interest to maintain good relations with the Russians. I would trust them far less than you trust the French.
But one thing, Tom. It's exactly because we understand what GWB means we are worried. Because a friend, as important as he may be, needs to listen to the concerns of others. And GWB doesn't give the impression that he listens to others a lot.
The best friends are those who tell you when they think you are wrong. They may be wrong with their opinion but they are entitled to it.
And thats what got lost the last year.
If Europe and the U.S. drift apart, there will be a stiff price to pay. But on both sides. And this is something GWB doesn't seem to understand.
Nobody is an island. If the world turned against the U.S. all military force would not prevent a meltdown of the U.S. economy. And nobody would want to pay that price.
#16
I'm with Tom on this one. The real damage in relations was done not between the governments of our countries but between the people who support Bush and our European partners.
It was not anything the US said that made France & Germany adopt their current stance but rather a fundamentally different attitude towards Iraq, based on self-interest or whatever. Inasmuch as you say that the US peeved the Europeans by telling them they will attack Iraq anyway, I can also say that it was obvious from the very start that the Europeans were not going to be serious about disarming Iraq, and the war option was never going to be an option. I can understand Bush's eagerness to get rid of Saddam and resolve this thing once and for all, but I cannot frankly understand the European willingness to drag this out forever. All I can deduce is that everyone is working in their self-interest, and that's fair enough. But every choice has its price, and I cannot ignore the utter dislike I feel for Chiraq & Schroeder (to put it mildly) and hence will have nothing to do with France & Germany as long as they are in government.
Apropos the statement "with us or against us". At the time this was said, I honestly did not think that this was aimed at governments who were friendly already, but at regimes such as those that existed in Afghanistan at the time. Frankly, it is a shock to me that Germany has to consider this question. You were already with us!
#17
I don't think the relationship between the US and Germany will suffer. Germany is doing what it feels is right, assisting where it can and is simply opposed to a war. France, on the other hand is trying a power play and will suffer in the long run.
Posted by: Jim in the US ||
03/08/2003 14:43 Comments ||
Top||
#18
If they want to simply oppose the war then they could also do it by abstaining. Their vehement opposition is something else entirely.
#19
Regarding TGA's: "If Europe and the U.S. drift apart, there will be a stiff price to pay."
TGA, I never have evisioned Europe and the U.S. drifting apart -- just France/Germany and the U.S. drifting apart. In fact, France has already drifted so far away that French products are no longer welcome in my house and a local restauranteur has removed everything French from the menus and wine lists of his two up-scale restaurants. Again, I think France in particular underestimates the consequences of her slap in our face. Many average Americans will remember this for a long, long time.
As for GWB "not listening" to France/Germany, I disagree. He listened. He's just not willing to make the concessions that he's hearing requested.
Not that GWB is God, but we have an old saying here: "God hears all prayers, but sometimes the answer is 'NO'."
Posted by: Tom ||
03/08/2003 15:24 Comments ||
Top||
#20
I think the fundamental difference between the French and German positions is one of internal politics. The Schöder-Fischer alliance represents the segment of Germany that thinks Red, not only the old-line commies, but also the junior commies, like the "radicals" who infested Berlin's Free University when I was there in the 70s. They have a fundamentally anti-American worldview that the commies helped to foster during the 60s, 70s and 80s, and that's never worn off because they got it young. There's an opposing pro-American view to be found in the CSU/CDU, whether we agree with them on all points or not. It's more like our conservative/liberal split, with the "liberals" shading more into the Red than our own.
France, on the other hand, represents the Guallist view, and I think it's more deeply rooted than the "radical" mindset in Germany. It takes de Gualle's desire to have France remain a great power in the teeth of the evidence that it's not, and then stretches it even beyond that point and ties it to an incestuous relationship with French business. There isn't much of an identifiable pro-American faction within France because the underlying assumptions are different.
When Germany holds new elections, we'll probably see the two countries move closer together again. When France holds new elections and throws the crooks out, it'll be to replace them with another set of people we can't identify with, and who don't identify with us.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/08/2003 16:20 Comments ||
Top||
#21
Yes, thats pretty close to it. I think though that Fischer has changed more than his clothes over the last decades. He is a realist and probably would not have steered Germany into that mess. German press reported that he was rather furious at Schroeder's fundamental (and opportunistic) anti-war stance. Remember that in 1999 he had to convince his peace loving Green party to accept the Kosovo War, and in 2001 he took a more hawkish position in the Afghanistan case than Powell.
I found an article at www.aei.org about Fischer that has since disappeared (still in google cache though). Allow me to post in full. How things change...
"Our Most Surprising Ally
By Jeffrey Gedmin
Consider two foreign ministers. The first wants âto destroyâ the Taliban; the second to work with âmoderate Taliban leaders.â The first warns repeatedly that a key terrorist aim is âthe destruction of Israel.â The second seeks, even now after the assassination of a government minister, to increase pressure on the Jewish state. The first defends American sovereignty and U.S. leadership: Missile defense, he says, is âa purely national decision of the U.S.â; regarding NATO, he argues that to âenforce peace in Europe,â it is necessary for âthe United States to take the lead.â The second worries about losing the coalition if the president makes Iraq the next target. If âthe coalition felt it was necessary to go after terrorist groups in other countries, this would be a matter for the coalition to discuss,â reports the second ministerâs deputy.
The second voice is that of U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell; the hawkish first voice, that of Germanyâs foreign minister, Joschka Fischer, leader of his countryâs left-wing Green party. Itâs an odd state of affairs when the U.S. secretary of state in a Republican administration starts sounding more European than the Europeans themselves, especially when compared with Fischer.
Of course, the Europeans adore Colin Powell. He counts as the reasonable moderate of the Bush administration--a lover of coalitions, with strong allergies to the use of force. The secretary of state generally seems to get full credit, moreover, for the comprehensive strategy that has emerged in the weeks since September 11. As one German columnist says of our war-mongering president, if George W. Bush had his way, diplomat âPowell would be unemployed.â
It is tempting, of course, to see this as a transatlantic match made in multilateral heaven. But the European position is one of ambivalence. Sure, the allies like the big hug of coalition building. It brings them into the fold and increases their leverage vis-a-vis the United States. And the Europeans celebrate Powell for his constant pursuit of a stable coalition, treating him like a savior for doing battle with the antichrists at the Pentagon.
But Europeans also understand that in the war against terrorism anything that diminishes American strength and freedom for maneuver may run counter to their own interests. On the subject of preemptive strikes down the road, for example, says one senior German military official privately: âThe U.S. should just do it--and tell us about it afterward.â This same ambivalence toward American power thwarted Warren Christopherâs 1993 Europe trip. When given the opportunity, the allies were happy to reject Bill Clintonâs plans for a more muscular approach to Bosnia; so the war raged on, and Europeans were shocked by the lack of American confidence and resolve.
Which means if President Bush is true to his word that the United States will make no distinction between the terrorists and the states who assist them, and Iraqâs number will be called sooner or later. When this day comes, Joschka Fischer could help stiffen the spine of Europeans and even help get the Russians on board--or at least out of the way.
Such a scenario oozes with irony, of course. In earlier days as a radical, Fischer clashed with police, protested Vietnam, and flirted with Palestinian extremism. From the left, a decade ago, he opposed the Gulf War (which put him in line with Powell), though he was clearly frustrated by some of the company he was keeping. It was then that Fischer ripped into party chairman Hans-Christian Strobele for anti-Israeli remarks, calling the Greensâ leader a âbeadle of Saddam Hussein.â And then Fischer turned hawk. He discovered the goodness of America, the utility of force, and, slowly, the marriage of values and interests. It may be a bit much to call him a neoconservative--but he tends in this direction, as Vice President Cheney was heard to whisper to him when the two met in Washington earlier this year.
Bosnia was a turning point in Fischerâs thinking. He eventually stood against his own party and sided with Margaret Thatcher, for example, in supporting a U.S.-led intervention. Powell was on the other side, angrily rejecting Lady Thatcherâs advice and chiding those who had not understood the âlessons of historyâ in a New York Times op-ed.
Fischer again faced down his own party--and the harsh criticism of the French, the Russians, and the Arab world--when he supported the U.S. and British bombing of Iraq in February of this year. Saddamâs âbloody regimeâ was responsible for the airstrikes, he said at the time. Fischer was also the one who first delivered the message about U.S. missile defense plans to Russian president Vladimir Putin. The message was in effect: âDear Vlad, save your breath. The Americans are going ahead,â according to American and German sources. No Schaukelpolitik here--that great German tradition of playing West against East.
As calls for a bombing pause in Afghanistan have increased--with even the Italian foreign minister under pro-Bush prime minister Silvio Berlusconi chiming in--Fischer has not moved one inch. To the humanitarian Left, Fischer says only the end of Taliban rule will ultimately help the people of Afghanistan. As for his own dovish and potentially mischievous foreign ministry, he keeps reminding them, to their dismay, that what the Americans are conducting is, after all, a war.
Thereâs no reason to get carried away. Fischer can get as prickly as the next guy in Brussels about unrestrained American hegemony, and he remains, like all Germans, a devout multilateralist. But there is much work that he could help us accomplish. While the United Kingdom is Americaâs number one ally in this war, the Germans have more influence on the continent, especially with the French and Russians. Germany also has military bases that could come in handy. During the Gulf War, the United States used Germany to deploy to Turkey and Saudi Arabia and commanded from the Federal Republic a task force, which included Patriot batteries in defense of Tel Aviv and Haifa.
What if the United States really made the case for going after Saddam Hussein? âDonât be surprised by the positive responseâ you might get, says a senior German Social Democrat. Fischer in particular rejects the moral relativism that finds such hospitable lodging in Europe. For this reason, at crucial moments, he may have the bearings to stay the course if the war turns toward Saddam. Maybe it will then be the German foreign ministerâs turn to tell his American counterpart not to go wobbly."
#23
--But one thing, Tom. It's exactly because we understand what GWB means we are worried. Because a friend, as important as he may be, needs to listen to the concerns of others. And GWB doesn't give the impression that he listens to others a lot.
The best friends are those who tell you when they think you are wrong. They may be wrong with their opinion but they are entitled to it.--
Always we have to listen to Europe's concern, but are they listening to ours?
And we are being multilateralist. Germany could have joined in, but chose not to.
--. War against terrorism cannot be won without a close alliance between the U.S. and all of Europe. Both sides cannot afford to get huffy about this all forever.--
With Europe's fifth column, I wonder if we'll again be fighting there.
It's not just Schroeder's gov, it's the population.
#24
"We at the U.N. are not accustomed to hearing people say what they mean," said Mr. Annan. "This will take us some time to digest and interpret. Perhaps a committee-of-the-whole could examine the transcript for several months."
Edited for length.
The United Nations chief weapons inspector, Hans Blix, tried yesterday to forestall war by offering his most positive assessment yet of Iraqi disarmament. Although he is supposed to have a neutral, civil servant role, providing objective facts, he tried to secure more time for his inspection teams and delay the onset of conflict, in direct opposition to the US-British rush towards war. Wow. The Guardian calls Blixie out? Quick, Ethel, my pills!
He stressed that Iraq had made "substantial" progress in destroying the Samoud 2 missiles, that no evidence had been found of biological and chemical weapons and that some documentation, apparently of limited value, had been handed over by Iraq. "Yep, we can't find nuttin', and he's handed us a big steamin' pile o' dogpoop, but I figger we're makin' progress!"
Taking up the challenge posed by President Bush that Iraq was in breach of its disarmament obligations, Mr Blix reluctantly concluded that Iraq had failed to move "immediately" to begin disarmament. He tried to soften this admission by saying that Iraq had moved forward in complying elsewhere. "He ain't moved much, but that there George feller moved him an inch or so, and I figger that's good 'nough!"
The first report by Mr Blix in January was critical of the Iraqi government's slowness to cooperate. The second, last month, was on balance inappropriately more favourable towards Iraq and critical of the intelligence claims put forward by the US. While there were many areas where Iraq was still falling short, he yesterday produced the most doveish assessment yet. Blixie's getting worried about his pension, I think.
In the most positive language of his report, Mr Blix said Iraq's agreement to destroy its Samoud 2 missiles constituted "a substantial measure of disarmament — indeed, the first since the 1990s". He added pointedly: "We are not watching the breaking of toothpicks — lethal weapons are being destroyed." And more are being made.
Mr Blix said that while at first resisting the destruction of the missiles, Iraq had now accepted that they should be destroyed. The issue of the missiles is significant. Mr Blix used strong language in criticising what he called the proscribed missiles in his report. The Iraqi deputy henchman prime minister, Tariq Aziz, described their destruction as unacceptable, and the British and US governments described the issue as an important test for Iraq. London and Washington have accused Iraq of secretly constructing new missiles behind the inspectors' back. Mr Blix did not refer to those claims yesterday. Of course not. He didn't find them, so they don't exist.
Mr Blix said that he had found no evidence yet of hidden arsenals of VX nerve gas in spite of using radar to search for underground arsenals. The tone in his verbal report to the security council was softer than a written report he provided that set out a long list of VX, anthrax and other chemical and biological weapons that were still missing. Andy Oppenheimer, a specialist in nuclear, biological and chemical weapons at Jane's Terrorism and Security Monitor, said: "They have not found a smoking gun. That is what makes it so difficult to carry out further action. We know there is some deception but we can't prove it. We can only go on what the inspectors say." Mr Oppenheimer described the missing anthrax and VX gas as the crux of the matter. "This is the material that has to be sorted out. They still have not found them. There is supposed to be a great network of these sites. They need intelligence and cooperation to find them. Biological and chemical weapons are so relatively easy to hide, it is difficult to establish whether Iraq still has them." Right. We don't have cooperation, we can't verify that the Iraqis have destroyed the stuff, but it's all okay to Blixie.
Iraq has provided access to scientists, engineers and chemists involved in weapons programmes but these have been of limited value because few of them have been in private. Conscious of reprisals against those being interviewed and their families, Mr Blix finally said yesterday he will ask shortly for such interviews to be conducted abroad, either in an Arab country or in Cyprus, the temporary headquarters of the inspectors. And it only took what, eight months to decide to interview them elsewhere?
British and US intelligence agencies say they have provided Mr Blix and his team with valuable information - including the existence of the Samoud 2 missiles - which, they say, would not have been discovered or admitted to by the Iraqis without their help. Mr Blix yesterday made no reference to this. Instead, he questioned the value of the intelligence provided to him. Not only incompetent, but ungrateful.
He said inspectors had been unable to verify some claims about hidden Iraqi weapons and he asked again for more information about suspect sites. He referred to "intelligence claims" about mobile biological weapons laboratories. He said his inspectors had found mobile food testing and seed processing equipment but no evidence of proscribed activities. Stalin used to have the NKVD disguise its paddy wagons as "bread trucks." A Red Cross visitor remarked that she'd never seen a city, Moscow, so well supplied with bread.
Making the case for more time, Mr Blix said he expected to begin night inspections using Russian planes and improve overhead surveillances by using German drones. We could loan him some Predators, but we get to fire the attached Hellfires.
To the extent that the US and Britain seem to be intent on war, Mr Blix's assessment was a sideshow to be ignored. But it mattered in that he did not provide a casus belli, and helped the case of those arguing for the inspectors to be given more time. His assessment will not have helped to persuade sceptical members of the security council, who will be asked next week to vote for a resolution setting an ultimatum that could lead to war. His mission was to ensure he didn't help anyone. Mission accomplished.
Posted by: Steve White ||
03/08/2003 11:35 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
MB wrote the following to the post immediately above, not realizing this post was here, but it bears repeating:
Why is MB's nose twitching and quivering very badly every time the name Blix is written or spoken. She has a very keen nose which seems to indicate to her that something is badly amiss with that man.
Rooters uses quote marks all the time, why can't I?
The republican guard, President Saddam Hussein's brutal shock elite forces, are concentrated around the outskirts of Baghdad in preparation for a siege, according to western military analysts. They predict that, contrary to optimistic assumptions made by the US administration about a speedy collapse of the Iraqi army, at least some of them will put up a fight and are gearing up to engage US forces in the streets of Baghdad.
Last time it was the Fourth-Largest Army in the World™. We'd never seen anything like it, and they were gonna kick our collective tail...
For several weeks, Saddam Hussein has been appearing on television almost nightly with his commanders or other military men, trying to bolster morale, telling them that the US technological advantage can be partially neutralised by drawing the Americans into street-fighting. He said the US had aircraft carriers but asked: "Does this aircraft carrier have wheels that enable it to come to Baghdad? The decisive factor in battle will be a soldier marching on his feet and tanks and mobile or fixed artillery." We got those too.
The republican thugs guard, which is better paid and better equipped than regular troops, has three armoured divisions, one mechanised and two infantry round Baghdad. Amatzia Baram, one of the world's experts on the Iraqi army and a professor at Haifa University in Israel, said yesterday: "Right now, most of them are between 15 and 20 miles from Baghdad. All the better for us to deal with 'em.
"When the US moves in, they will withdraw to Baghdad. They will fight them at the border of Baghdad. These tanks will be fighting behind street corners that will be problematic for the US." An Iraqi tank fighting behind a street corner is known as a "target".
He added: "Saddam will want the US drawn in. There will be civilian casualties and the BBC and CNN can see it and public opinion in the world will be outraged. The republican guard is no match for the US but will be a problem." Some public opinion will be outraged, but they're outraged already. Screw 'em.
Iraq has acquired little new military equipment since the Gulf war in 1991 and has had to make and mend from existing supplies.
That won't make it more effective. And they weren't real good on maintenance even when they had parts and supplies. Maintenance is boring, not fun, like shooting off your gun into the air and making faces...
The special republican guard will also be in Baghdad: defence of Saddam the capital is the reason for their existence. The role of most of the rest of the Iraqi army is primarily to delay the US-led advance for a day or two. The regular army, which is massed on the southern border, tends to be demoralised and many will seek to surrender as soon as possible. The US will almost certainly destroy the Iraqi command and control centre in the first 48 hours. The Iraqis have ordered their regular army units to fight on independently in the hope that pockets of resistance can delay the US-led forces. The hundreds of thousands of prisoners will also present the US with a problem and could contribute to delay. The Gulf states forces should help in this regard.
A British-based analyst said that while he expected Basra, the main southern city, to fall quickly, he noted that it had never fallen in spite of repeated Iranian attacks during the 1980-88 war. He suggested that President Saddam also might try to flood the marshlands again to make tank movement difficult. Unlike the Iranians, we're not going to send 14 year old boys in mass wave suicide attacks. So just maybe, possibly, Mr. Reporter, this is a bad analogy, ya think?
Although the Iraqi leader promised in an interview that he would not fire the Iraqi oilfields, he could still do this and blame the Americans. He could, according to one of the analysts, evacuate places like Basra and leave behind germ material. Some of the preparations for delaying the US-led advance can already be seen from the border of Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq. At Dollabakir, the last Kurdish checkpoint before entry into Saddam Hussein's Iraq, Kurdish commander Saeed Hassan pointed out where the Iraqi army had been digging trenches. "They have come up with a new plan," he said, gesturing towards the Iraqi frontline 500 yards away. "The trenches are full of crude oil. They intend to set them on fire to confuse US troops."
To use them as smokescreens...
The Kurdish guerrillas also watched as Iraqi soldiers buried hundreds of Italian-made mines in the mud. The five-pronged Valmara mines are connected together by a thin wire. They are lethal, killing people up to 50 metres away. On either side of the smooth road that runs to Kirkuk, the northern oil capital and along which US forces are expected to advance south, TNT has been dumped, ready to detonate should American tanks roll past. Italian? Where'd Sammy get those?
Cmdr Hassan said yesterday: "The Iraqi soldiers are terrified. We don't expect anybody to fight except for members of the Ba'ath party."
And them not very well. Having a soldier suit and a gun isn't the same thing as being a soldier...
The growing military tension over the past few weeks has led to fresh skirmishing, with Iraqi troops encamped in the opposite village of Kaybashi bombarding Kurdish positions with mortars. The Kurdish guerrillas have responded with heavy fire from an antique Russian-made Dushka machine gun.
See what I mean?
The first two obvious targets of a US-led attack from the north would be Kirkuk and Mosul, both of which could fall relatively easily. More difficult will be the next town on the way to Baghdad, Tikrit, President Saddam's birthplace and home of much of the ruling elite. The Bavarian Redoubt.
In the last fortnight observers have seen Iraqi forces pulling back from the border and regrouping round Tikrit. The British analyst said one option for US forces would be to bypass Tikrit and continue on to Baghdad, leaving Saddam's heartland to be mopped up later. We parade Sammy's head on a stick, and Tikrit will fall quickly and quietly.
It's only worth wasting time and effort on if it has some strategic value...
Posted by: Steve White ||
03/08/2003 11:44 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Actually Vea Victis, you're possibly thinking of the "De Gaulle", which had wheels and euro-gauge railroad carriages installed inasmuch as it's had so much trouble with salt water and such (corrosion issues, don'tcha know...). Those clever French - always thinking ahead...that's why they're so superior
Posted by: Frank G ||
03/08/2003 17:58 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I am sure the US air commander is heartened to know he will have all his targets in a nice concentrated place. It wouldnt'nt do to make his air recon staff work overtime to find the IRGs. Sure makes the jobs of his pilots a lot easier, too.
#3
"evacuate places like Basra and leave behind germ material."
Or not evacuate,release the germs,thousands of civilians die.And it's the U.S.'s fault for attacking.
#4
Actually there is nothing in Tikrit to cause the US to want to go there. Baghdad is the nerve center of the country. That is provided that SH hasn't put his stock of CBW in Tikrit's neighborhood and seizing that might be critical.
Posted by: Tom Roberts ||
03/08/2003 7:53 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Ha, he actually believes that our aircraft carriers don't have wheels.
The force of 25,000 British troops which has been building up in Kuwait since January will be fully ready by Wednesday at the latest, the army's senior officer, General Sir Mike Jackson, said yesterday. Gen Jackson, who commanded the Nato force which entered Kosovo in 1999, said the British division was still waiting for a few last pieces of equipment to arrive. But the troops were ready for action now, he added. The ticking is getting louder.
"There's a couple of ships yet to come in," he said during a visit to British soldiers in a desert camp north of Kuwait city. "I would have thought four or five days would pretty much complete the whole logistic piece, but even if it [military action] were today, we're pretty much good to go." Being ready did not mean the division would go to war soon, or at all, he said. "We can wait here for quite a long time if required. The heat is a difficulty, but it's not impossible. The dreaded Iraqi summer. Some a/c and some sunscreen will do wonders, eh Saddam?
"I do not think war is inevitable." Keep pushing the disinformation for the next few days while we finish putting the ribbon on the package.
Gen Jackson's comments are the clearest indication yet of the end point of a British military build-up which began stealthily and is still surrounded by a thicker screen of secrecy than the parallel, much larger US effort. Downing Street is still anxious to shield the public's eyes from the fact that British troops are very much preparing to fight, and are not simply waiting in the desert to see what happens in the diplomatic arena. They aren't trolling the beach looking for girls.
The media has not been allowed access to British forces carrying out live firing, to British tanks or to exercises involving infantry dismounting from helicopters and amphibious landings. After meeting hundreds of soldiers from the Royal Irish regiment, including a number of Gurkhas who have been attached to the Irish, the general dismissed reports that troops had been suffering as a result of shortages of supplies like toilet paper. "If anything, I'm a little concerned it may be too comfortable," he said, turning his deeply lined face to the questioner. "If they are required to do a dangerous and hard mission, they need to train for a dangerous and hard mission. Any soldier who doesn't have a loo roll in his bergen isn't a very good soldier in my view. I really don't want to get bogged down in minutiae. No pun intended. Question is, since he's a general, did everyone there laugh?
"It's worth remembering that in six weeks, since the end of January, we have moved well over 17,000 soldiers, hundreds of vehicles, including heavy fighting vehicles, and thousands of tonnes of stores into a bad desert. It's a remarkable achievement."
It's a crummy place to sit around waiting, burning time and training rounds, but there are more lousy conditions than there are pleasant conditions...
A convoy of between 300 and 500 Turkish military vehicles, including tanks, personnel carriers and jeeps, headed towards the Iraqi frontier yesterday despite a warning on Turkish television from the US under-secretary of state, Marc Grossman, against entering northern Iraq unilaterally. Turkey has said it will set up a 9km buffer zone inside Iraq to host camps for refugees fleeing Saddam Hussein's forces. I though Kirkuk and Mosul were a bit further down the road.
Posted by: Steve White ||
03/08/2003 11:51 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
9km is where the Turkish cops are. The Army is already down the road.
Posted by: Tom Roberts ||
03/08/2003 7:55 Comments ||
Top||
The mastermind of the Rizal Day bombings in 2000 was also behind the explosion that killed more than 20 people at the Davao City airport on Tuesday, according to intelligence officials of the military and the National Bureau of Investigation. Armed Forces officials identified the mastermind as a certain Mukles, an explosives and bomb-assembly expert believed to be working for the Moro Islamic Liberation Front. They said Mukles was seen recently in an MILF camp in Cotabato City. The Armed Forces report was confirmed by a source at the NBI which is conducting its own investigation into the Davao bombing. Mukles reportedly planned the bombing of a Light Rail Transit coach at the Blumentritt station that killed scores of passengers. Mukles and an Indonesian, Fathur al-Ghozi, were charged in a Philippine court with illegal possession of explosives, firearms, multiple homicide and frustrated murder for their part in the LRT bomb attack. A joint police and military antiterrorist team arrested al-Ghozi in Manila early last year. He was extradited by Indonesia. Mukles and al-Ghozi are suspected of having links with Osama bin Ladenâs al-Qaida network. Any surprises there?
The NBI source said the information on Mukles is âA-1ââhighly reliable and provided by a deep-penetration agent. The information on Mukles bolsters the governmentâs allegations that the MILF, and not the Abu Sayyaf, was behind the bombing of the Davao airport. And its genesis is Gloria's surrender ultimatum...
The source said Mukles was actively involved in planning the Davao blast, and trained the MILF members who carried out the attack. âOur contact told us that Mukles came to the MILF camp some three months ago and appeared to be training recruits in basic bomb and explosives handling,â the source said. Another NBI official said Mukles is skilled in converting 81mm mortar rounds into powerful remote-controlled devices. He reportedly visits every MILF camp to teach new recruits. Mukles learned to assemble bombs as a mujahid or Muslim guerrilla, during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the source said.
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
03/08/2003 06:50 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Mukles the Clown?
Posted by: Frank G ||
03/09/2003 6:21 Comments ||
Top||
Time via Drudge:
Saturday, Mar. 08, 2003
With war in Iraq looming and North Korea defiantly pursuing its own nuclear program, the last thing President Bush needs is another nuclear crisis. But that is what he may soon face in Iran. On a visit last month to Tehran, International Atomic Energy Agency director Mohamed ElBaradei announced he had discovered that Iran was constructing a facility to enrich uranium â a key component of advanced nuclear weapons â near Natanz Oh so surprising due to their riches in natural gas and petroleum.... But diplomatic sources tell TIME the plant is much further along than previously revealed. The sources say work on the plant is "extremely advanced" and involves "hundreds" of gas centrifuges ready to produce enriched uranium and "the parts for a thousand others ready to be assembled." "Calling the IDF? Oh, I'm sorry, be busy for a couple weeks? oh? ready after that for an emerging opportunities? why yes, thank you"
Iran announced last week that it intends to activate a uranium conversion facility near Isfahan (under IAEA safeguards), a step that produces the uranium hexafluoride gas used in the enrichment process. Sources tell Time the IAEA has concluded that Iran actually introduced uranium hexafluoride gas into some centrifuges at an undisclosed location (and how would they know that without Israeli or American spies?) to test their ability to work. That would be a blatant violation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, to which Iran is a signatory. blatant yes, punishable while the French exist? not......
The IAEA declined to comment. A senior State department weasel official said he believed El Baradei was trying to resolve the issue behind the scenes before going public. But experts say the new discoveries are very serious and should be handled in public. "If Iran were found to have an operating centrifuge, it would be a direct violation [of the non-proliferation treaty] and is something that would need immediately to be referred to the United Nations Security Council for action he said with a stupid grin...," says Jon Wolfstahl of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Iran insists that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes and told elBaradei that Tehran intends to bring all of its programs under IAEA safeguards per the North Korean precident . U.S. officials have said repeatedly they believe Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons.
The new discoveries could destabilize a region already dangerously on edge in anticipation of war in Iraq. Israel â which destroyed an Iraqi nuclear plant in Osirak in a 1981 raid â is deeply alarmed by the developments. "It's a huge concern," says one Israeli official. "Iran is a regime that denies Israel's right to exist in any borders and is a principal sponsor of Hezbollah. If that regime were able to achieve a nuclear potential it would be extremely dangerous." Israel will not take the "Osirak option" off the table, the official says, but "would prefer that this issue be solved in other ways." "We hate to listen to the recriminations from the nations who illegally sold the technology to the Persian Mullahs - and then bitch about the fallout when we defend ourselves"
The revelations come at a particularly bad time for Washington, which is locked in a battle to gain U.N. approval or see who the Tessios are for an attack on Iraq and to build consensus among its allies for a multilateral approach to the crisis in North Korea. Critics of the Administration Democrat ankle biters say Bush's hard public line against the so-called "Axis of Evil," combined with the threatened war with Iraq, have acted as a spur to both Iran and North Korea to accelerate their nuclear programs. "Of course, without the words of encouragement we wouldn't spend these hundres of millions to defy international agreements to development these weapons to kill Jews and Merkins" "If those countries didn't have much incentive or motivation before, they certainly did after the Axis of Evil statement," says one western diplomat butt boy familiar with the Iranian and North Korean programs. The Administration counters that both programs have been underway for many years. Wake up Idiots!
Posted by: Frank G ||
03/08/2003 09:08 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Well, Time mag, everyone has known about Bushehr reactor for over a year. We have been downloading satellite const progress images for over a year, 2.5 megs at a throw. So there is your source of Pu239 when it comes on line. It has been common knowledge that Iran has uranium deposits, so there is the U235 source. Well better late than never, now you know why Bush calls em a member of the axis of evil. Are these writers special ed or do they have their heads up their collective asses or what?
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
03/08/2003 22:58 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Sources tell Time the IAEA has concluded that Iran actually introduced uranium hexafluoride gas into some centrifuges at an undisclosed location (and how would they know that without Israeli or American spies?) to test their ability to work.
Actually the IAEA laboratory at Seibersdorf (near Vienna) can measure micron size particles of uranium hexafluoride from swipe samples taken on or around the centrifuges. No country is currently advanced enough to clean up a used centrifuge to have it pass a swipe test of this kind.
Isn't science fun.
Posted by: Russell ||
03/09/2003 4:18 Comments ||
Top||
The nephew of Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf was released late on Friday by US immigration officials after being held for 16 days for violating his visa. Aamir Javed Musharraf's six-month visa was issued in 1994. Musharraf was detained on February 19 when he went to register at an immigration office in Memphis, Tennessee. He was required to register under an anti-terrorism programme that targets male citizens of a number of countries including Pakistan. "He reported ... on February 19 as required by law and he was detained because he had overstayed his visa," said Bill Strassberger, spokesman for the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Musharraf was released but his case is still being decided. He could be deported back to Pakistan or allowed to stay in the US.
Posted by: Fred Pruitt ||
03/08/2003 08:07 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
1994???? 6 month visa??? Pervez' brother is a dr. who lives in Oak Brook, IL.
An Argentine judge has asked Interpol to arrest four Iranian officials accused of being involved in a deadly bomb attack on a Jewish centre in Buenos Aires in 1994. Judge Juan Jose Galeano ordered their arrest after Argentine intelligence services linked the officials to the bombing, in which 85 people were killed.
Iran's former Intelligence and Security Minister, Ali Fallahijan, and the former cultural attache at the Iranian embassy in Buenos Aires, Moshe Rabbani, are among those named in the arrest warrants. Israel and the United States have always said they suspect Iranian-backed Arab militants of being behind the attack.
Tehran has always denied any involvement, as has the Lebanese guerrilla group, Hezbollah. The judge based his ruling on a new report by the Argentine intelligence services which has yet to be made public.
It is the first time an official Argentine body has drawn conclusions on the international leads in the bombing of the Argentine-Israeli Mutual Association (Amia), the worst in the country's history. In his 400-page ruling Judge Galeano is reported to have cited "responsibility in the attack on the Amia of radical militant elements in the Islamic Republic of Iran". Leaked versions of the intelligence report published in the Argentine press, say that in the days leading up to the attack, there was an unusual movement of Iranian diplomats in and out of Argentina. There were also said to have been many telephone calls between Buenos Aires, Iranian Government offices and the Paraguayan city of Ciudad del Este, which has a large Arab community on the Brazilian and Argentine border.
The explosives used in the blast were reportedly brought from this tri-border area - frequently alleged to be the scene for fundraising for Islamic militants. The order to blow the Amia building up was given by Iranian Government officials and Hezbollah leaders, security services are reported to have concluded.
Argentine security officials are said to be concerned that Judge Galeano did not ask for the arrest of Hezbollah members, according to the Clarin newspaper.
Hezbollah was first blamed for the attack by the government of Carlos Menem, in office at the time of the blast. But in the past nine years, the case has been plagued by disappearing witnesses and unexplained delays. Last year, the New York Times quoted a key witness accusing Mr Menem himself of receiving a $10m bribe to cover up the Iranian connection to the Amia attack. The former president denies the allegations.
Argentina 300,000-strong Jewish community is the largest in Latin America, and has been the target of other attacks. A 1992 bomb attack on the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires in which 29 people were killed also remains unsolved.
The North Korean fighter jets that intercepted an unarmed American spy plane over the Sea of Japan last weekend were trying to force the aircraft to land in North Korea and seize its crew, a senior defense official said today. One of the four North Korean MIG's came within 50 feet of the American plane, an Air Force RC-135S Cobra Ball aircraft, and the pilot made internationally recognized hand signals to the American flight crew to follow him, presumably back to his home base, the official said. The American crew members ignored the gesture commands, aborted the surveillance mission in international airspace about 150 miles off the North Korean coast, and returned safely to their home base at Kadena Air Base in Japan.
They wanted a repeat of the incident with China and the P3 shortly after Bush took office — combined with elements of the Pueblo incident, of course...
The official offered no explanation as to why the North Korean fighters did not take further action once the American plane aborted its mission and turned back toward its base.
Because shooting it down in international waters could likely have initiated hostilities then and there...
Details about the intercept, which came to light after military officials interviewed the flight crew, suggest that the more than 15 Americans aboard faced greater peril than was previously known.
Some of us guessed, though...
Ignoring a fighter pilot's order to land, even in international airspace, could have led to the plane's downing, military officials said today. "Clearly, it appears their intention was to divert the aircraft to North Korea, and take it hostage," the official said.
#1
We need to make clear that we interpret their actions as provocative and next flight the accompanying fighters are weps free - let Kimmy back down or face the humiliation of his "army-based" air force policy. No backing down for these bastards....it would also be nice if they decide to lob a test missile over Japan to take it down immediately with an Aegis just to put reality back on the table
Posted by: Frank G ||
03/08/2003 18:09 Comments ||
Top||
#3
The NKors better realize soon that they are tickling the dragon's tail. We put up with alot of abuse before we act, but when we are really provoked, like shooting down a plane in international waters, ground temps may skyrocket.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
03/08/2003 23:12 Comments ||
Top||
Alarmed South Korean officials said Friday that Washington had ignored them in suggesting a realignment of U.S. forces in Korea and demanded that American troops stay. where they are at least until resolution of the North Korean nuclear issue. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said Thursday that the United States was studying ways of either withdrawing 37,000 U.S. troops from the Korean Peninsula or moving them farther south from the Demilitarized Zone. Getting a little alarmed now are we?
Edited for relevance
An Israeli missile attack on a car in Gaza has killed four members of the Islamic militant group Hamas, including one of the organisation's military leaders and founders. Hundreds of angry Hamas supporters
Anybody ever heard of a placid Hamas supporter? Me neither...
have gathered at the Gaza City hospital where Ibrahim al-Maqadma's body was taken. The helicopter attack came hours after two Israelis were shot dead by Palestinians who infiltrated the settlement of Kiryat Arba, near Hebron in the West Bank. The military wing of the Palestinian militant group Hamas claimed responsibility for the settlement raid late on Friday. The two gunmen were shot dead by troops. Eight other people, including a number of soldiers, were also wounded in the attack.
See? Cause... Effect. Simple, huh? If you send people to murder people, someone will try and kill you. Chances are they'll succeed.
Witnesses said two Israeli helicopters fired on the militants' car, which was reduced to a charred wreckage. "One fired, then the other fired. They fired at least four missiles," Gaza resident Hana Abu Musa said. Several people were reported to have been injured in the attack, one of them in critical condition, Palestinian hospital officials said. After the Gaza missile attack, Israeli helicopters remained overhead, causing schoolchildren to leave their classes and rush home.
Puppies, kittens, and baby ducks were all terrified. Anguish counselors have been called in.
It was the latest of a number of Israeli strikes against Hamas in Gaza, where for the past three weeks the Israeli army has been conducting a major operation to crush the militants. Last week, Israeli forces captured a co-founder of the Hamas movement, Mohammed Taha, during a raid on Gaza, in which several civilians were killed. Confirming the death of one its military leaders on Saturday, Hamas vowed revenge.
That's mostly what they do, isn't it? Dire Revenge®, I mean...
"The assassination of Ibrahim al-Maqadma will launch a new stage of war against the Jews," senior Hamas official Abdel-Aziz al-Rantissi told Reuters news agency. "All Israeli leaders will be open targets for Hamas," he said.
Don't sign your own death warrant there, Abdel-Aziz. Why do you think you're not dead yet?
In recent days, Qassam rockets have been launched from Gaza across the boundary into Israel. Three of the home-made rockets slammed into the town of Sderot on Thursday â there were no casualties. Early on Friday, Israeli troops reoccupied part of the northern Gaza Strip, in an operation to stop such attacks. An army spokesman said the operation â in which dozens of Palestinians are reported to have been wounded â was open-ended. Friday's attack on the Kiryat Arba settlement occurred after the beginning of the Jewish Sabbath. According to eyewitnesses, the gunmen slipped into the settlement disguised as Jewish seminary students. After the gunmen entered a family home and opened fire, troops rushed to the scene and exchanged fire before the two Palestinians were killed.
Posted by: Bulldog ||
03/08/2003 07:37 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"After the Gaza missile attack, Israeli helicopters remained overhead, causing schoolchildren to leave their classes and rush home."
As a teacher here in the US, post-Columbine, we are told never to let children out or even near the windows if there is a "shooter" outside.
This makes me think the Paleos actually want to add confusion to the street scene in the twisted hope that one of these little fellas gets plonked with an Israeli bullet--the Paleo adults are truly the most sick and cynical people on earth right now.
The man considered North Korea's unofficial spokesman has warned that the communist country will soon have the capacity to rain missiles down upon most cities in the United States. Time to park an Aegis-class cruiser just off the Korean coast?
The United States and South Korea are currently holding massive war games near the demilitarised zone that divides the Korean peninsula. Pyongyang says the exercises prove Washington is planning a military strike on its nuclear reactor at Yongbyon. If and when we do that, buddy, you'll never see it coming or going.
Kim Myong-Chol, a man well connected to the North Korean regime has warned that North Korea will retaliate if attacked."North Korean missiles can reach any part of the United States of America. There is no shelter for Bush," he said.
American missiles can reach any corner of North Korea, and in the event of an attack on the U.S. there wouldn't be any shelter, for anyone...
Kim Myong-Chol says Pyongyang wants to reunify the two Koreas and expel US troops from the South more than economic aid. But they'd take the oil and food too.
Sounds like he's thinking in terms of swarming south again, and living off the loot for another fifty years...
He also predicts Mr Bush will be in Pyongyang by the end of the year looking for peace in the region. Washington is presently refusing to hold one-on-one talks with Pyongyang. I agree; the NKors can't hold out much longer.
"This year, most likely by the end of this year, I predict Bush will be in Pyongyang pushing for peace," he said. Kim Myong-Chol says North Korea is about to start building nuclear bombs, a development that will force Washington to the negotiating table. It'll force us to do something, allright.
Posted by: Steve White ||
03/08/2003 12:10 pm ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Here's another link. It's at the end of this article, under the heading 'No shelter for Bush'.
#2
the Auz link is bouggered. Delete this when fixed.
Posted by: Tom Roberts ||
03/08/2003 7:57 Comments ||
Top||
#3
The problem here is not the North Koreans, but China and the South Koreans. China refuses to keep the North in line, and the South seem intent on undermining American policies towards Pyongyang. If you want to solve this problem, here's what you do - pull our troops out of South Korea and Japan, and let it be known to Beijing that we will actively assist Tokyo in developing both its own nuclear deterrent and its blue-water fleet. Then watch China drop the "disinterested player" routine and start twisting more than a few North Korean arms to get them to behave.
Posted by: The Marmot ||
03/08/2003 12:18 Comments ||
Top||
#4
The site's taken it down. Drudge has the same link, and it doesn't work, either. If I find it someplace else, I'll freshen it.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/08/2003 14:30 Comments ||
Top||
The United Nations on Friday ordered the dependents of its international staff members in Jordan to leave the country for security reasons. There was no immediate explanation of the concerns but Jordan borders Iraq and could be affected by a large influx of refugees in the event of a war. A cable from U.N. Security Coordinator Ton Myat, obtained by The Associated Press, said U.N. officials had made the decision ``in view of the prevailing security situation in Jordan.''
'Nother words, they expect the local Islamists might try to whack some infidels when the festivities begin...
Jordan is also adjacent to the West Bank and there are also concerns that an Iraqi conflict could lead to greater unrest among Palestinians. Last month, the United Nations reduced its humanitarian staff in Iraq to simplify an evacuation in case of military action. Looks like the UN staff lacks the requisite confidence in the French stalling efforts. Wonder why?
Posted by: Steve White ||
03/08/2003 07:28 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I can see how this whole thing may lead to "greater unrest among Palestinians" -- they've burned most of their bridges and it's becoming open-season on all terrorists. All they need now is to have some of their terrorists attacking U.S. interests in a big way and the'll be having more Americans in town and lots of free "Carribean vacations" for qualifying surviving combatants.
Posted by: Tom ||
03/08/2003 13:04 Comments ||
Top||
Teenage sniper suspect Lee Boyd Malvo will be confined to his cell for two days and fed only a vegetarian loaf his attorneys had said made him ill because he used a pen to write ``Muhammad'' on the cell floor and on his shoes. Further confirmation that this young lad isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer.
It was not immediately clear whether ``Muhammad'' was a reference to fellow sniper suspect, John Allen Muhammad. Might have been a reference to Marvin Muhammad who's in the next cell doing time for a domestic altercation.
A hearing officer sentenced Malvo on Friday to two days of segregation, which means he will stay in his cell all day. The 18-year-old also lost 15 days of recreation privileges and was put back on a vegetarian loaf diet. Defense attorney Michael Arif said he told Malvo not to talk during the closed hearing. Arif said he would not appeal the ruling. What's the point?
Malvo was cited for defacing state or county property after deputies found ``Muhammad'' scrawled in blue felt tip pen on the floor of his cell and blue pen on his shoes. On Feb. 24, a deputy also reported hearing Malvo say to another inmate, ``I would like to cut her throat,'' and laugh. Fairfax County Sheriff Stan Barry said no charges were filed in that incident. Anybody got the idea that maybe Malvo is a little touched in the head?
Posted by: Steve White ||
03/08/2003 07:19 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
When I was in Junior High, I wrote my girlfriends' name on my stuff too.....
Posted by: Frank G ||
03/08/2003 9:28 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I think they used to serve us that vegetarian loaf in my high school cafeteria. Now that is cruel and unusual punishment.
A county Republican chairman under fire for publicly condemning a U.S. war with Iraq said Friday his critics have called a special meeting to consider ousting him. Well no one saw that coming!
Boone County GOP Chairman Jack Walters said the critics are nominating candidates to fill party committee vacancies, which could produce the two-thirds majority necessary for his ouster next Tuesday. ``I'd say it's likely there would be a motion to replace the chairman,'' said Bruce Cornett, one of seven members of the county Republican Committee who signed a petition last week to bypass the embattled chairman and call the special meeting. Walters first publicly mentioned his opposition to war with Iraq during a newspaper interview last month. He has since been publicly teased by the emcee at a GOP banquet, and criticized and commended in letters to the editor. I can imagine the pain in Alec Baldwin's hand as he wrote to support a Republican. That alone almost makes this worth it!
At a sparsely attended committee meeting Feb. 20, Walters asserted the White House wants war to gain control of Iraqi oil. Critics say Walters shouldn't express public opinions that differ with President Bush if he is being interviewed as a local Republican leader. They say his stance has caused tension and given Bush's critics ammunition.
If you're leading Republicans, it bothers people when you talk like a Dummycrat. "Not in our name," y'know?
Proposed committee member Russ Duker said Walters should consider resigning. ``These divisions hold us back from moving forward on our beliefs and the conservative agenda,'' Duker said. Cornett said the meeting wasn't called to kick out Walters. Instead, he said it was to fill committee vacancies because new townships were added to Boone County in January. There are 56 seats on the committee, but only about half are filled. Convenient.
Walters questioned why he wasn't asked as chairman to call the meeting if the intended business was ``supposed to be so innocuous? Of course it's an attempt to expand the committee so they can get the two-thirds vote,'' Walters said. ``This meeting is going to be extremely ugly.'' It might be extremely short.
Walters said he was considering stepping aside ``because I cannot support the Republican position on expanding hegemony in the Middle East.'' "Ya can't fire me. I quit!"
``But then I remember that we are all entitled to freedom of speech and to disagree with the president,'' Walters said. Sure. And the local Republicans are free to choose a new chairman.
Posted by: Steve White ||
03/08/2003 07:22 am ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Is this guy so stoopid he's can't find the damn door?
#2
Has he appeared as an extra in a local Used Car TV commercial and it's now gone to his head?
This guy has it bass-ackward...FIRST, become a movie star or pop music sensation THEN criticize the President with some unimaginative whine of "No Blood For Oillllll!"
Bet he's wondering why Hollywood's STILL not returning his calls.
#3
My guess is that this guy's been reading one too many copies of Pat Buchanan's American Conservative. Of course, the Missouri Republican Party are not the brightest group of people in the world; I should know because I live here. Last year, their candidate for state auditor was a convicted felon. Makes me wonder how they managed to get control of the General Assembly last election for the first time in 50 years.
Posted by: Christopher Johnson ||
03/08/2003 16:35 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
