"Nope. Nope. Just a figment of your imagination. Go back to sleep."
Yemen's ruling People General Congress party said Tuesday the al-Qaida network does not exist in Yemen, brushing aside Israeli accusations as "nonsense." The party said on its Web Site "no dormant or non-dormant cells existed in the country," stressing Yemen is an international partner in the war against terrorism.
"Just a few nuisance attacks here and there, nothing to speak of, really..."
It was responding to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's claims al-Qaida activists in Yemen and Saudi Arabia could be behind the bombings of Taba, in which dozens were killed and wounded. Sharon said he ordered the Israeli intelligence, Mossad, to dispatch agents to Yemen and Saudi to liquidate the alleged al-Qaida operatives. "These are stupid and nonsense allegations," the ruling Yemeni party said in a statement. "These leaks and claims are too light and unreasonable to be taken seriously, especially since Yemen is a partner in the international war on terrorism and facts prove that no cells for the evil al-Qaida network exist in Yemen," the statement added. "Such Israeli allegations cannot shake Yemen's international standing especially that it is a country that has suffered from terrorism, combated the evil and defeated it."
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
10/13/2004 2:46:54 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
Al-Qaeda ut Jihaad translates: Base of Holy-War. That group was always an emulation movement, which wanted to build a superstructure on the base, which began in 1989 mosque consultations among Abdullah Azzam, Osama bin Laden and the rest. They are not well connected, but cells dedicated to the al-Qaeda ideology - as stated in the "Fatwah Against Jews and Crusaders" - are everywhere. I believe that most members of the Muslim Students Association, are al-Qaeda supporters and members. Genocide of 5,000,000 Israeli Jews has general support among Muslim Americans of Arab-Pakistan background. I advocate shooting on sight, anyone proven to have either supported or participated in terrorism.
About 700,000 Colombians have taken part in nationwide protests against President Alvaro Uribe. (Uribe is a man who has been working closely with the White House countering Colombian narco-leftist terrorists, and making considerable headway, thus the strike.)
Demonstrators came from trade unions, civic groups and opposition parties, all complaining about different things. Their banners were directed against unemployment, Mr Uribe's plans to raise taxes and to change the constitution to allow for his re-election. Hospitals in many cities were only offering emergency services and law courts were closed. Many classes across the country were cancelled as teachers joined the protest.
The root of the discontent is economic, even though the economy is growing. The growth of the security forces to cope with the rebels has come at a cost. Taxes have been raised, but the government needs still more and with half of the population living in poverty, many are struggling to make ends meet. Mr Uribe is in a tight spot. The fiscal deficit is climbing, but his security policy needs more money to consolidate the gains in combating the violence.
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
10/13/2004 3:57:15 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
A picket was held in support of the Chechen separatists outside the Russian Embassy in Tallinn on Wednesday. The picketers carried posters reading "Freedom to Chechnya!" and "Stop the genocide in Chechnya!" They distributed leaflets calling for peace in Chechnya and an end to murders there. Sirja Kiin, an activist with the Peace to Chechnya movement, told reporters the picket was intended "to exert pressure on Russia to fulfill its international commitments, including the beginning of a peace process in Chechnya, which it promised when it entered the OSCE." Russia should begin talks with Chechen separatist leader Aslan Maskahdov, she said. "If it is true that Shamil Basayev was behind the act of terrorism in Beslan, he should be punished. But I have no evidence that the statement posted on the Internet belongs to him. I have reasons to doubt it," Kiin said. The first picket of the kind was held two weeks ago in Uppsala, Sweden, she said. Several other European cities have joined the movement, she said. "We plan to hold them every Wednesday. So far we have permission for three weeks, because city regulations do not allow issuing permits for a longer time, but we will be asking for a prolongation of the permit every time," Kiin said.
Geez, I've almost forgotten how to post these things.
On September 5, two days after the Beslan school hostage crisis descended into carnage, a young man with bloodshot eyes knelt beside the coffin of one of the victims, 35-yearold Timur Tsallagov, as it was lowered into the ground. Throwing dirt onto the coffin, the man made a vow: "I promise I will have my revenge on those who killed you." He was not alone. In the days after the massacre — in which more than 330 people, including scores of children, died — talk of vengeance was everywhere on the streets of Beslan, Russia. Many men were already cleaning their guns and promising that at the end of the traditional 40-day mourning period, those responsible would pay. Whoops -- that's today.
So as residents of Beslan yesterday marked the last day of official mourning by lighting candles and saying prayers inside the gutted gymnasium that was the center of the tragedy, fear was mounting of the possibility of revenge killings. Russian press outlets reported that residents of North Ossetia were coming together in informal groups to plan revenge attacks against the rival Ingush ethnic group. Many Ossetians blame the Ingush, a predominantly Muslim group closely related to the Chechens, for the attack on the school. At least nine Ingush were among the hostage-takers. The Ossetians, an overwhelmingly Christian group with strong historical ties to Russia, fought a 10-day war with the Ingush in 1992 over land rights along the border. Hundreds died in the fighting and the region remains awash in weapons. Almost every family has at least one gun in its home; in some cases, families are armed with machine guns and explosives. Sounds like a good idea in that area. But more trouble seems imminent... RTWT.
#3
For what those animals did to those children, I"m not gonna pass judgement on the Ossetians. Yer right murra, gonna be real messy.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
10/13/2004 12:33 Comments ||
Top||
#4
No doubt the MSM will fully document the 'horrors' of the 'senseless' killings of the Islamists just as much as they all-but-ignored the rape and murder of the innocent children and hostages.
All to advance the goals of their (the MSM's) terrorists allies.
#5
CrazyFool - you're right. I can just see the comments now, "Who would've thought that this revenge, in the 21st Century, can happen to innocent people..... They should just talk it over....." Blah, blah, blah. I don't want to see it happen, either, but I certainly can't blame the Ossetians.
#7
Do people here know the difference between "i can understand X" and "i cant blame X". IF (and it aint happened yet" people massacre innocent ingushetians, i most certainly can and will blame whoever does the massacres, just as I blamed the childmurderers.
The Ossetians are Christians, so I hope they look to their faith, instead of towards revenge. If they do kill, I hope they only kill those who have blood on their hands and avoid the innocent. Nothing is gained by senseless killing.
#10
LH, that's all well and good if you believe that Islamic terrorism is the work of a few misguided souls. I don't. What we call terrorism is simply the most aggressive branch of a larger campaign of "religious" totalitarian expansionism. The enemy isn't bin Laden; the enemy is Islam. Any person serving as a host for this ideology is fair game. Period.
No wonder it took so long! Guess that's why I saw nuh-zingk.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/13/2004 13:58 Comments ||
Top||
#13
If they want to help, infultrate the Chechens networks. Then they can help stop those idiots there, and get info for us on Al qeda. I'm sure we'd pay for the info, as would the Russians.
#14
LH, that's all well and good if you believe that Islamic terrorism is the work of a few misguided souls. I don't. What we call terrorism is simply the most aggressive branch of a larger campaign of "religious" totalitarian expansionism. The enemy isn't bin Laden; the enemy is Islam. Any person serving as a host for this ideology is fair game. Period. Happy hunting, Ossetians.
Good job, you've practically quoted Hamas rhetoric word for word, except they use "Zionism" where you've used "Islam".
You've pretty much justified 9/11, Beslan and every other act of terrorism, mass murder or even genocide that has ever happened on the face of the earth. Those Ossetian children must have after all been "hosts" of the meme of Russian imperialism, right?
Liberalhawk> "Do people here know the difference between "i can understand X" and "i cant blame X"." Most people here don't. Apologia and indifference about crimes against *innocent* Muslims has been the status quo for a very large partion of Rantburg's participants. You are one of the few exceptions, and I am sure you recognize your ideas are usually at the fringe of Rantburg mainstream (though not as much to the fringe as mine).
And didn't you promise never to come back to Rantburg?
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
10/13/2004 16:03 Comments ||
Top||
#17
Aris, is your claim that Islam is a benevolent ideology?
I've read the Koran (because of 9/11) and I can't say I find it benevolent -- whether it be towards women, Jews, non-believers, and apostates. On the contrary, I find Islam as preached by the Koran to be an oppressive, bloodthirsty ideology similar to Nazism and Communism in terms of consequences: hatred of liberty, slavery for most, and violent death as a natural method.
#18
Good job, you've practically quoted Hamas rhetoric word for word, except they use "Zionism" where you've used "Islam".
Yep. Makes much more sense that way.
You've pretty much justified 9/11, Beslan and every other act of terrorism, mass murder or even genocide that has ever happened on the face of the earth. Those Ossetian children must have after all been "hosts" of the meme of Russian imperialism, right?
This is the part, I presume, where I'm supposed to say, "Gawrsh! I sound just like them! I must be a monster or a hypocrite, or maybe both!"
It must be nice to live with such a simplistic viewpoint, where everybody is equally right and every conflict can be turned into an infinite series of "whatabouts". But you know what? Derrida is f*cking dead. Said is f*cking dead. Your stoner logic is worthless.
#19
Kalle> "Aris, is your claim that Islam is a benevolent ideology?"
I don't think that it's an "ideology" at all. It's a religion from which several different ideologies have sprung, as different to each other as modern-day Catholicism is from the Catholicism of the Spanish Inquisition.
The prevailing ideology of Islam in the Middle-east is reactionary and repressive, yes. But do you think that everyone calling themselves Muslims share in that ideology? And even more so do you think that they share in the particular fringe ideology that would justify the death of children in Beslan?
Communism and even more so Nazism, didn't have one and a half millenium to splinter off into different interpretations. It's very easy to say what a Nazi believed -- the Nazi party lasted in a particular point of time. It's only slightly harder to say what a Communist believes-they've had what a century and a half? to splinter off into directions. For a Muslim (even one who actively believes not simply someone who was raised in the tradition), if you limit it further than "They believe in one God, and that a person called Mohammed was his prophet" you are bound to have overgeneralized.
Robert Crawford> No, Robert, I didn't "promise" it, I had simply mentioned it as a statement of intent -- I'm reasonably sure that I never made any promises about it. And then I changed my mind, which I believe I was still free to do.
lex> Thank you. But I wouldn't call myself "enlightened" as much as simply someone who still believes there's a difference between the light and the dark.
#21
BH> "the part, I presume, where I'm supposed to say, "Gawrsh! I sound just like them! I must be a monster or a hypocrite, or maybe both"
No, dearie, that's the part where you are supposed to mock me for supposed moral equivalency because I treat all murders of innocents as being murders of innocents, instead of first inquiring about the race, ethnicity or religious faith of said innocent.
You've unfortunately acted the part I expected of you.
"It must be nice to live with such a simplistic viewpoint, where everybody is equally right"
Oh, no, my viewpoint is that I am MUCH more right than *you*. And my viewpoint is that people who don't commit or advocate genocidal warfare or mass murders tend to be MUCH better than the people who so commit or advocate it.
I'm a moral absolutist you see -- unlike your brand of apologia.
#22
BH> "the part, I presume, where I'm supposed to say, "Gawrsh! I sound just like them! I must be a monster or a hypocrite, or maybe both"
No, dearie, that's the part where you are supposed to mock me for supposed moral equivalency because I treat all murders of innocents as being murders of innocents, instead of first inquiring about the race, ethnicity or religious faith of said innocent.
You've unfortunately acted the part I expected of you.
"It must be nice to live with such a simplistic viewpoint, where everybody is equally right"
Oh, no, my viewpoint is that I am MUCH more right than *you*. And my viewpoint is that people who don't commit or advocate genocidal warfare or mass murders tend to be MUCH better than the people who so commit or advocate it.
I'm a moral absolutist you see -- unlike your brand of apologia.
#23
But I wouldn't call myself "enlightened" as much as simply someone who still believes there's a difference between the light and the dark.
It's a matter of nuance and missing capacitors usually. But in this climate it all looks EuroGray.
Posted by: John Lucas ||
10/13/2004 16:45 Comments ||
Top||
#24
Aris,
Please answer my very specific question: do you claim that the body of injunctions called Islam is benevolent? (doesn't matter whether you want to call it religion or ideology, I only care about the message)
In particular, is Islam benevolent towards women, Jews, non-believers (such as Hindus, Buddhists, and atheists), and apostates? is Islam pro-individual freedom as guaranteed by the republican form of government limited by a bill of rights?
You're invited to cite the Koran to establish the benevolence of Islam in those particulars. Thanks.
#25
No, dearie, that's the part where you are supposed to mock me for supposed moral equivalency because I treat all murders of innocents as being murders of innocents, instead of first inquiring about the race, ethnicity or religious faith of said innocent.
Well that's just silly, since "religious faith" is clearly a factor in this. We didn't go about WWII saying, "Look! There's a Nazi!" "Well, yes, but that doesn't necessarily mean that he's a psychopathic, Jew-killing socialist. Let's wait and see what he does."
You've unfortunately acted the part I expected of you.
Ouch! The bitter sting of moral righteousness! Make it stop! Make it stop!
Oh, no, my viewpoint is that I am MUCH more right than *you*.
Yes, but your viewpoint is sh*t. I thought I mentioned that.
And my viewpoint is that people who don't commit or advocate genocidal warfare or mass murders tend to be MUCH better than the people who so commit or advocate it.
And my viewpoint is that any ideology that professes the elimination of me and mine is an ideology that must itself be eliminated.
#26
Yes Aris, we are all the Good Lord's little children and I believe the children are our future and the future is bright only if this little light o' mine gonna shine let it shine blah blah blah.
I'm a liberal, I don't believe in God or the devil, and don't particularly care for anyone's religious war, but I come to Rantburg primarily for the same reason my fellow anti-jihadists do: because it's fun. It's a community of like-minded folks who care passionately about winning this war. If you want koombayah, then go to your local church.
And not just fun but absolutely necessary. This is war. As in every war, if you're to keep up your fighting spirit, the enemy needs to be objectified to some degree. Hence "redcoats" and "lobster-backs" in the Revolutionary War, "yankees" for southerners during the Civil War, "huns" in WWI and "jerries" and "krauts" in WWII for you-know-who, "gooks" in Vietnam etc etc etc. Soldiers do it to let off steam.
And after reading about and watching scenes of children being tortured, raped, forced to drink their piss, blown up, shot in the back, tossed into mass graves etc etc etc, soldiers, ex-soldiers and non-soldiers alike feel a similar need to let off some steam. Better through some harmless online chatter than with the rather formidable home arsenals I gather many Rantburgers (starting with Old Spook and his mahdi pistol) possess.
#27
I meant, southerners used "yankee" to objectify the Union forces. See, you come here and learn plenty about US history, society, culture and folkways; we come here to pick up something about PakistanSudanAfghanistanIraqIranIroll.
#28
I don't condone what they are about to do but I surely understand the revenge angle. The Ingush have chosen sides and I don't remember them giving up names or places where they can find the terrorists. It's kind of like the left in this country, they don't root openly for the terrorists, but they don't support measure to expose or dismantle their ability to operate. Kind of like they don't care either way how the WOT turns out. They would have been great slaves in ancient times.
#29
Interesting in that after the Beslan atrocity, the Ingush KNEW they would be targeted, yet took little effort in distancing themselves from what happened, which they could have done given the large number of foreign jihadists involved. But, they didn't. Could it be that they actually agreed with what was perpetrated on the Ossetians? If they truly tried, I missed it.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
10/13/2004 17:51 Comments ||
Top||
#30
Aris, Please answer my very specific question: do you claim that the body of injunctions called Islam is benevolent? (doesn't matter whether you want to call it religion or ideology, I only care about the message) In particular, is Islam benevolent towards women, Jews, non-believers (such as Hindus, Buddhists, and atheists), and apostates? is Islam pro-individual freedom as guaranteed by the republican form of government limited by a bill of rights? You're invited to cite the Koran to establish the benevolence of Islam in those particulars. Thanks.
If you are comparing the laws of Koran to the laws of modern-day democratic governments limited by a bill of rights, then *NO* Islam as a whole is not "benevolent" (or to put it in another way it is repressive and reactionary, words I've used already).
It might be "benevolent" compared to the Aztec religion though. Or the Catholic Inquisition, perhaps.
But my point was that you don't know which people calling themselves Muslims believe in which laws. Few Jews nowadays believe in stoning adulterers, even though that's part of the body of injuctions called "Judaism".
BJ> We didn't go about WWII saying, "Look! There's a Nazi!" "Well, yes, but that doesn't necessarily mean that he's a psychopathic, Jew-killing socialist. Let's wait and see what he does.
Actually we didn't go about WWII caring about whether the Germans facing us were specific members of the Nazi party or followers of the Nazi ideology or mere innocent conscripts at all. When a person is on the enemy army about to fight you, you don't have the luxury to care about their ideology or their motivations.
And at the point that we *did* have the luxury of caring about the ideology of people (meaning after the end of the war), we decided that were many millions of Nazis that *wouldn't* be killed just because they had once been members of the Nazi party, that executions of Nazis would indeed have to do only with specific crimes, not for believing in an ideology.
Well that's just silly, since "religious faith" is clearly a factor in this.
So was "race" in the time of slavery. Would you have supported black people killing all white children just because they are white?
On my part I'd have supported only the deaths of the adult slaveholders, not all white people. Same way that I can now only support the death of the terrorists, not all Muslims.
#31
Lex> Let them objectify the *enemy* as much as they want. But when they extend the word "enemy" to cover all muslims (BH didn't care to specify age either, so please feel free to see his words about legimate targets and happy hunting apply to little Muslim children also btw -- anyone else got a good visual imagery of BH killing little Muslim children with as much gusto as Serbs did in Bosnia?), that's when I'm gonna be raising my voice in dispute.
#32
Thanks. Now that we agree Islam is NOT benevolent to e.g. women, Jews, non-believers, and apostates, the question on the table becomes: why should we tolerate Islam in any form? Nazism and Communism have been defeated, not tolerated.
My opinion is that Nazi Germany had to be defeated, just as Bushido Japan had to, and Soviet Russia had to. Now the Islamist "Umma" must be defeated. If what it takes is massive killing of the enemy, so be it. They have been deliberately attacking the West for 1400 years. The time has come to destroy them, as thoroughly as Carthage was destroyed.
If some Moslems are killed, they may start asking themselves why they hate non-Moslems. And they may ask themselves why their leaders keep preaching conquest and slavery, including the destruction of both Israel and the USA. Until they do this and explicitly renounce their creed, it is legitimate to consider them inimical and as dangerous as wild beasts -- and to use deadly force against them.
In other words, not only is islam NOT benevolent, it is virulent and deadly -- and consequently Islam must be eradicated.
They shout "Death to America" -- and we need to take their threats seriously.
#33
Aris,
I don't claim to be a moral absolutist. I believe do unto others as they do unto you. The muslim religion states that it the moral duty of each muslim to convert or kill the infidels and conquer the world for islam. In respnse, I say kill or convert to Chrisianity all the muslims. Submit or die, it's only fair. The muslims have attacked and destroyed the center of the US's major city, so I say blow up muslim cities and those in it. Chase them into the desert and hunt them down like they did to the millions of Christian and animist Sudanese. They have taken hostage, killed and raped men, women and children. Blow up muslim men, women and children where ever the are. Take their land and riches and use it against them. No mercy. No regrets.
You live in peace Aris, and I will live in peace. You do me evil, and I will do you the same to you. Only the amount will vastly differ. To do otherwise is watch my civilization slowly bleed to death, like so many before that the muslims have destroyed. Before that happens, I will send you and all those to wish that to hell.
Posted by: ed ||
10/13/2004 18:20 Comments ||
Top||
#34
anyone else got a good visual imagery of BH killing little Muslim children with as much gusto as Serbs did in Bosnia?
What, you want us to leave them all homeless orphans? Jeez, what a heartless bastard.
#35
They have been deliberately attacking the West for 1400 years.
Most of those 1400 years, the so-called "West" has not been particularly "benevolent" either. Had Byzantium not heavily oppressed the Copts of Egypt, the Copts wouldn't have welcomed the invading Arabs as "benevolent" liberators.
why should we tolerate Islam in any form? Nazism and Communism have been defeated, not tolerated.
First of all Communism hasn't been defeated yet, more than a billion people live under its rule.
Secondly, mass-murdering communists just because they happen to be communists would be as bad as mass-murdering muslims just because they are muslims. It's called freedom of opinion and freedom of religion, without which my civilisation ISN'T worth defending -- without which my civilisation ISN'T my civilisation, given how I define what constitutes "the West" by the existence of these freedoms.
But by all means I agree with you with the need of the destruction of the Sharia *forms of governments* -- countries like Iran and Sudan and the Taliban Afghanistan.
The same way there'd be need to destroy any theocratic *Christian* tyranny that would have existed.
They have taken hostage, killed and raped men, women and children.
So have Christian Serbs in Bosnia against Muslims, and Russians in Chechnya. Would that, according to you, justify a Muslim taking hostage and killing Christian people, just because they are Christians?
You live in peace Aris, and I will live in peace. You do me evil, and I will do you the same to you.
The problems comes with you desiring to group all Muslims together, which is as wrong as grouping all Christians together when jihadis calculate the "punishment" that non-believers must receive.
The muslim religion states that it the moral duty of each muslim to convert or kill the infidels and conquer the world for islam.
And most Muslims believe in that as much as the Jews believe in stoning adulterers. The problem is there is a strong fringe element in Islam that does believe in it.
#36
When I saw there were 35 comments to this story (and counting), I just knew Aris was involved.
I must be psychic. ;-p
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/13/2004 19:06 Comments ||
Top||
#37
As for Bosnians and Serbs raping and killing each other. I say fuck 'em. They have been fighting for the 700 years, with Serbs on the receiving end for most of the time. Either separate, or keep on killing each other until one side wins. It matters not to me. And as for Christian partisianship, I live in a Christian country and much of my values comes from those societal norms, but don't assume I am one. How Euro centric of you. Next you will assume I am white.
When muslims target mark all Christians, non-muslims, kaffirs for death or conversion, I have no qualms at all about marking all muslims for the same. It is other muslims who encourage, preach in the mosques, supply the recruits, finance and shelter those who are doing murdering, raping, and destruction. If the muslims do not support it, then they can take care it themselves, or point them out and we will kill them. It is not you or I that can separate the fringe groups from islam. But instead, you find them dancing in the streets and eagerly awaiting the next atrocity porn. They call it jihad. I call it a brutal war targeting civilians and I ask the same be done to them.
And Aris, muslims are the only people still stoning adulterers, at least the female ones anyway.
Posted by: ed ||
10/13/2004 19:22 Comments ||
Top||
#38
ed> "And as for Christian partisianship, I live in a Christian country and much of my values comes from those societal norms, but don't assume I am one. How Euro centric of you.
Um.
1) When did I assume you were a Christian? I am rereading my comments and I can't find any such assumption. I'll be awaiting a response on this.
2) If you're not a Christian why did you favour specifically converting all Muslims to Christianity? I've heard very few people demand conversions on some *other* religion than their own.
When muslims target mark all Christians, non-muslims, kaffirs for death or conversion, I have no qualms at all about marking all muslims for the same. It is other muslims who encourage, preach in the mosques, supply the recruits, finance and shelter those who are doing murdering, raping, and destruction.
Yeah, like it was other Christians that encouraged the murders that the Bosnian Serbs did.
*Some* of Group A targetted *all* of Group B, therefore you feel it makes it okay for people of Group B to target *all* of Group A. Once again the same question: would the murder of all white people have been justified in slave-era America?
And Aris, muslims are the only people still stoning adulterers, at least the female ones anyway.
So, at which point in human history do you think that Judaism or Christianity should have been wiped out same as you are advocating to be done on Islam now? How about the time when Islam allowed the existence of Christians within its borders while Christian nations did not? At the time when Islam was more tolerant than Christianity, would you have supported the extinction of *Christianity*?
#39
More to the point, Aris, would the murder of *SOME* of the white people in slave-era America have been justified? Would it matter that they were slave-holders, or not, as long as they "benefitted" from slavery by way of being part of the slave-owning class?
Or are you saying that the murder of *NONE* of the white people would be justified?
#40
There is some good reading at www.prophetofdoom.net basically making the case that Muslims per se are not generally a danger, since most seem to very little of Islam. No need to kill them all to solve our problems. Islam as defined by the words and work of Allan and Moho is pretty nasty business, at least in this presentation, and his basic theme is that the more of Islam you believe, the more like terrorists you become. It is not as good as say Bertand Russell's stuff on Christianity, but an interesting read nevertheless. Click on "Prophet of Doom" in the Books section, the whole book is online for free.
#41
Asedwich> I've already justified the death of the slaveholders themselves, but both "benefitted from slavery" and "slave-owning class" feel too vague wordings for me -- both feel as nothing but an excuse for mass racial killings. Perhaps a bit similar to the usage of "bourgoisie" by the communists. If you mean the specific people who engaged in slavetrade or oversaw slaves, then yeah, I'd definitely justify it. More widely than that (e.g. the teacher who taught the slaveholders children, or the grocer who sold him vegetables) and that'd be a definite no, IMO.
At the point where you are targetting people not because they participated in the wrong, but because they felt indifferent to your plight... well that's a very good line not to come even near crossing. We'd all end up guilty in such judgements.
#42
In a muslim society, I would be marked for death. This is now, not the past, and hopefully not the future. That is the crux of the matter. So yea, convert the muslims to Christianity. I live in a Christian (some say Judeo-Christian, some say secular) society, not discriminated against, and do well. Islam says to the faithful to convert or kill the infidel, or if an adherent to the bible, to live as a dhimmi under severe discrimination and eventual extinction. All is permitted to that end. I could also live in a Buddhist or Shinto country and prosper, but I don't see these societies actively in the fight. Why should they get the converts if they don't do the work?
And Aris, what would you do when Greeks are bombed, beheaded and enslaved? Do you believe it is better to surrender and be a slave or convert, as many in the Balkans did? Do you think you would handle it as a police matter when the muslims destroy your cites and massacre your people? This is a definite possibility for Greece and Europe in your lifetime, so please give an honest answer. Do your mother and sister feel the same way?
So have Christian Serbs in Bosnia against Muslims, and Russians in Chechnya. Would that, according to you, justify a Muslim taking hostage and killing Christian people, just because they are Christians?
That's exactly what the muslims are already doing today. Do the same to them. Otherwise die a slow extinction. Many in Europe may welcome extinction, but I do not. Let those who by doctrine want to kill me, die instead. And have the muslims been attacking the Christian (and Jewish, and Buddhist, and Hindu) world for the past 1400 years or not?
Secondly, mass-murdering communists just because they happen to be communists would be as bad as mass-murdering muslims just because they are muslims.
But the US was willing to mass-murder 200 million communists just to keep them from invading western Europe. But I can see it was all a mistake now. All that money and all those millions of man-years wasted when Americans could have built bigger homes and fancier swimming pools. Let Americans never again be deluded in such and adventure in western Europe.
So, at which point in human history do you think that Judaism or Christianity should have been wiped out same as you are advocating to be done on Islam now?
Judaism and Christianity are for all practical purposes wiped out in the muslim world. Before Islam, most of the Middle East and North Africa was Christian or Jewish, including much of Arabia. But through invasion, periodic massacres and dhimmitude discrimination (e.g. the first Dhimmi farmers had 1/2 of their goods confiscated, so his family starved), there are almost no nonmuslims left. The few left live in areas where European colonialism held sway for 200 years.
Muslims were never a factor in Christian lands. Shall we bring out competing statistics on the numbers of Christians and Jews killed by Muslims in their conquests and the number of Muslims killed by Christians in the re-conquest of Spain or Jerusalem? If you want parity in dead bodies, then I think Christiandom has a big score to settle. Would you care to comment on the 60 million Hindus and Buddhists that I read were killed in the Moslem conquest of Central Asia. FYI, 60M was 20% of the world population. Do the Hindus now owe Islam 1.5 billion dead bodies? Or shall we forgive and forget and concentrate on the mayhem Islam is causing today?
Christianity came close to being wiped out in Europe, thanks in much to the stupidity of the Byzantines and the Greek Orthodox church. All the Poles had to do was stay home and the whole of northern and central Europe would have opened up for conquest.
Yeah, like it was other Christians that encouraged the murders that the Bosnian Serbs did.
What are you talking about? It is muslims who are participating, funding, and sheltering muslims in jihad against the west. It is muslims who take perverse pleasure in seeing falling towers, beheaded infidels, bombed jews, and dead Russian school children.
*Some* of Group A targetted *all* of Group B, therefore you feel it makes it okay for people of Group B to target *all* of Group A. Once again the same question: would the murder of all white people have been justified in slave-era America?
That's the definition of war. *Some* Japanese targeted American in 1941. Americans targeted *all* Japanese until absolute surrender, 2M Japanese were dead, and Japanese emperor worship and Bushido were destroyed. Sometimes the enemy doesn't even have to attack Americans, just a declaration that they will is enough. Witness Germany.
It was mostly white people fighting each other in the civil war and doing the killing. The southern salves did not revolt, though when the Union army tokk over parts of the South, a lot ran away and joined the army. In Haiti, where the slaves did revolt, the French men, women and children were killed. I have no problem with that.
So I have responded to many of your questions, why don't you do the same, and respond to the questions asked of you on this thread.
Posted by: ed ||
10/13/2004 21:06 Comments ||
Top||
#43
Do you think you would handle it as a police matter when the muslims destroy your cites and massacre your people?
I'm already handling it as a WAR matter. And I quite understand that when you are bombing enemy cities in a war, occasionally your bombs go astray and innocents are killed.
Which is something quite different to intentionally digging through cellars, dragging out hiding innocent 12-year old Muslim boys and girls, and shooting their brains out if they refuse to convert to Christianity, which you and BH still seem to me to be advocating.
"If you want parity in dead bodies, then I think Christiandom has a big score to settle. "
No, I don't want parity in dead bodies. That's just sick of you.
"Before Islam, most of the Middle East and North Africa was Christian or Jewish, including much of Arabia. "
And before Christianity, most of Europe was pagan, and most of the Americas likewise, blah blah blah...
It is muslims who are participating, funding, and sheltering muslims in jihad against the west. It is muslims who take perverse pleasure in seeing falling towers, beheaded infidels, bombed jews, and dead Russian school children.
And just like I said, it was Christians that supported the Bosnian Serbs in Bosnia. And now it's Christian who are ready to take a perverse pleasure in the death of innocent muslims.
So what? Why should you consider *all* Christians or *all* Muslims guilty because of what *some* of them do?
would the murder of all white people have been justified in slave-era America? That's the definition of war.
No. War and murder are two different concepts.
But the US was willing to mass-murder 200 million communists just to keep them from invading western Europe. But I can see it was all a mistake now.
No, dearie -- given the nuclear exchange that might take place, the point was that the US was willing to destroy the *whole of the world*, not just 200 millions, in order to keep them from invading western Europe. I'll let others decide whether such a high-risks gamble (betting everything on whether the other side would be sane enough to consider you insane enough to go ahead with it) was a good one. It turned out for the best because those 200 millions *didn't* have to be killed, only threatened to be killed.
But I'd not want to live in a world, where the bluff was called and my children would be born with two heads and a tail. So don't use such an argument please, it's not your best one by far.
#44
Hmm. Is Western Civilization monolithic? Is there one core set of ideas, beliefs, and practices, adherence to which makes one a member of it, while departure (apparently) from one of those ideas makes one a non-member (as Aris seems to imply)? How far and upon whom do those ideas, beliefs, and practices apply? Is the actual set open to debate?
Here, I'd once drawn a map when I was bored: http://users.otenet.gr/~katsaris/misc/global-map.gif (though it's clumsy at spots)
In the legend, the bits and pieces that I consider "the West" and "Western civilisation" are the four blue-lettered groupings. Or you can call them "good guys". Or "the Free world". Whatever suits your fancy.
My own usage of "West" and "Western civilisation" I think owes more to the Cold War, and the protection of liberties in the chief leading countries of the so-called "West" which weren't found in either the Eastern bloc nor the Third World.
I'm not particularly interested in those definitions of "West" that seem instead to be used as synonyms for "Christendom". If Byzantium or the Papal states were "West", then no affection or loyalty on my part towards *those*.
#46
So when the muslims go digging through your cellars, dragging out innocent 12-year old Greek boys and girls, and shooting their brains out if they refuse to convert to Islam, you will handle it in a cool and Oh So Continental manner and maybe fight the terrorists/jihadis? Even if you win that battle, others will come, and massacre many more of you in you homes than you can kill of them. Without taking the fight to their homes and destroying the religion that will destroy you, you have acceded to the conditions of slow genocide.
And before Christianity, most of Europe was pagan, and most of the Americas likewise, blah blah blah...
And did Christian Crusaders conquer most of Europe with the sword? With the consent and approval of the Pope, did they sack the city you live in, kill the men, enslave and convert the children, and carry off the women for their sex slaves?
And just like I said, it was Christians that supported the Bosnian Serbs in Bosnia.
And just who were those Christians yelling for muslim heads? Were they in Europe, whose only action was inaction? Where were the Crusader Legions marching to vanquish the Bosnian muslims? Were they in the US, who eventually bombed the crap out of the Serbs? If the situation was reversed, can you think of any muslim country who would have come to the Serbs rescue?
would the murder of all white people have been justified in slave-era America? That's the definition of war.
No. War and murder are two different concepts.
Don't mix part of your question with the beginning of my response. That's sloppy.
But I'd not want to live in a world, where the bluff was called and my children would be born with two heads and a tail. So don't use such an argument please, it's not your best one by far.
You are right. You and your people would have been much better off standing in line all day for toilet paper and dreaiming one day to own a Trabant. And without external help from the US and other western democracies, that is where you would have been. Let me apologise to all who think like you: You were not worth it. Next time Greece or Old Europe is threatened, I will be on the picket lines protesting to stay the hell away from people like you. Let us part, and go our separate ways. May the new world and the old world never meet again.
Don't call me dearie. Makes you look gay. And in that case, I won't worry about you having children, two heads and a tail, or not.
Posted by: ed ||
10/13/2004 22:16 Comments ||
Top||
#47
ed, you are a genocidal murderer at heart who keeps on urging for a "final solution" -- I've gotten that already. You think that religious conflict must be solved through religious genocide, you had no problem with racial conflict being solved with racial genocide, and I am not particularly interested in how many other genocides for different types of conflicts you are gonna be advocating in the future.
So, let me put it clearly so that you get it: I'm quite willing to go to war for my country's freedom but I'd DIE rather than commit genocide against innocents. So, if that's your best argument, that supposedly it's inevitable that "us" will have to kill all of "them" or "they" will kill all of "us", then even granting this assumption (which I'm not), your argument remains not good enough: Because I'd rather be among the innocent murdered rather than among the guilty murderers.
If accepting your murderous ideology is my only chance of survival, then why not accept the murderous ideology of the jihadis instead? Your counteroffer sucks as much as theirs.
Clear enough for you yet?
And as for your maniacal rantings they are simply *boring*. Yeah, yeah, we ungrateful Euros who don't see genocidal extermination as a good thing anymore, we don't bloody deserve you having helped us even if you were also helping yourselves in the process. Etc, etc, etc.
You are right. You and your people would have been much better off standing in line all day for toilet paper and dreaiming one day to own a Trabant.
Rather than incinerated you mean? Yes, I dare say that alive and with a chance at future rebellion might be better off than dead or radioactive.
#49
Just a quick comment on the whole "Convert or die" thing.
Early in 1492 A.D., King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella of Spain celebrated the final unification of all of Spain under Christian rule. One of their first acts to secure the security of their vastly expanded realm was to present the Mulsims and Jews with the choice, "Convert or die." I don't know about the Muslims, but the Jewish population split: part accepted the Cross, and became known to their new fellow religionists as New Christians, or more familiarly as Marranos (pigs); part refused to abandon their religion, and were expelled from the Iberian peninsula even as Chris Columbus was sailing toward the edge of the world.
The presence of the Marranos permently weakened Spanish society and religion. Because the Jews had converted under threat, their faith was (rightfully, in many cases) questioned. Their alliegence to the Crown was (rightfully) questioned. Their goals in interactions with their Christian overlords was (rightfully) questioned. Whereas in the past Spanish nobility had happily married Jewish beauties, now they became obsessed with the purity of their Christian lineage. The Inquisition was welcomed by the Old Christians as an instrument to root out false Christians, who secretly continued to hew to the beliefs they had not freely chosen to give up. And, incidently, rewarded monetarily the State which inherited the wealth of those convicted of impure belief, and rewarded those who turned them in -- increasing the oppression of the developing police state. The Church hierarchy itself was suspected (rightfully) of being tainted, as the clever converts joined priestly and monastery ranks, and turned their Talmudic argumentative techniques on Christian belief and traditions. In the end Spain, which had been given half the world to rule by the Pope, fell in on itself, driven off the cliff by the poison of American gold combined with the legitimate suspician that a good portion of the population was untrustworthy due to anger over being forced to convert in order to live.
Forcing conversion does not achieve changed mindset. For the overall society, the price is too high for the temporary comfort achieved by apparent removal of a real threat.
Sorry, I went on a good deal longer than a brief comment. But I hope you'll find these many words worth chewing over.
#50
If you're really interested in the "Christian" position on all of the above, go read the Sermon on the Mount (Bible, Matthew 5-7). Revenge isn't in there anywhere.
Reasonable law endorcement is in the Bible: "Submit yourselves to every ordinance of Man for the Lord's sake, whether to the king as supreme or to governors, as to those who are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of those who do good." 1 Peter 2:13-14 Every government is charged with the preservation of public order.
A story from the Liberian War of 1990: Mano and Gio tribesmen rebelled against the Krahn tribesmen currently in power. The Mano attacked a Krahn village and killed a number of people. A Krahn in Monrovia learned of the death of his family members in this raid, and when the Krahn officers ordered retaliation against Mano and Gio, this man went and shot his Mano neighbor and the neighbor's 9 month old son. Gee, didn't make him feel any better. He joined the Krahn militia and killed more Mano and Gio. Gee, now he really didn't feel better. In a refugee camp in Cote D'Ivoire, he found his tent was across the road from the widow of the neighbor he killed. At a camp church he asked the woman forgiveness, and she granted it.
The actions of an ethnic group that attends a particular church are not necessarily the actions of a Christian. The Serbs and Croats proved that point. Too often religious affiliation is simply another way of dividing "Us" from "Them." The protestants and Catholic goons in Northern Ireland have long since reduced their faith to a meaningless label.
Trailing Wife's description of Ferdinand and Isabella above shows that the Spanish Church and the Spanish Royal family lost sight completely of the teachings of Christ in their zeal to combine ethnic and religious conformity. Not faith--conformity.
Islam reeks of forced conformity. Maybe some of that rubbed off on the Spaniards during the Moorish occupation.
Let us defend ourselves reasonably. THis means military action to put Saddam out of business. This means military action to root out terrorist. It does not include going to your neighbor and shooting him.
#52
ed, you are a genocidal murderer at heart who keeps on urging for a "final solution" -- I've gotten that already. You think that religious conflict must be solved through religious genocide.
Nice try Aris, but no cigar. I call for the same treatment of Islam as Islam treats others. I am not a Euro-sheep who will go quietly into that abattoir of Islam. I have no problem with Buddhism, Confusianism, paganism or voodoo. If Islam had a live and let live attitude, I would have the same feelings for Islam as I have for Buddhism. But Islam is calling for the conversion or destruction (for me the only option) of the infidels, which are you and I. When muslim imams entreat for the destruction of the infidel each Friday. When the most revered muslim scholars, citing the cumulative works of Islam, call for the genocide of the monkeys and pigs. When muslim warriors slaughter populations in the most brutal way. When the muslim faithful cheer their barbarity and offer their children to suicide martyrdom as a gesture of religious piety. That is not a religion that one can peacefully co-exist with. So I call the same for them. You are a smart guy, so can understand symmetry.
Here are the options:
1. Islam suddenly reverses 1400 years of religious teachings and preaches that non-muslims are OK and have as much a right to live as muslims.
2. Islam continues its brutal form of warfare with non-muslims and wins.
3. Islam is destroyed and itâs adherents converted to another religion.
4. Continued warfare in the short term that will end up draining resources and taking thousands each year. Within a generation, nuclear warfare.
2 and 4 are not acceptable end states for me. The power to decide to live in peace with others rests wholey within the Islamic world. But what is their incentive for 1? Where are the imams calling for peace and brotherhood with the infidels? Where are the learned men of Islam calling for understainding of the lives and customs of the infidel? Islam are on the march and expanding territory with little opposition. Why give up a good thing? So I do not expect Islam to change their tune and call for peaceful co-existence until, just like Germany and Japan, much of it is destroyed and their belief systems forcibly changed. I am a pessimist in this regard.
Rather than incinerated you mean? Yes, I dare say that alive and with a chance at future rebellion might be better off than dead or radioactive.
You make the common mistake of either choosing the extremes of living under domination or dying. I, and many of countrymen, would rather fight and destroy the evil. Just as my fore fathers would not live under Nazism or Communist domination, I wonât live Islamic tyranny. But Greeks are used to living under domination. So go ahead and do nothing. Europe is already well on its way to muslim domination. If you and your kids survive the march of Islam into Europe, then maybe in 100 years our descendants will meet on the field of battle, yours under the flag of Islam.
Don't call me dearie. Makes you look gay.
Tough, sweetcheeks.
So you admit it.
Posted by: ed ||
10/14/2004 0:18 Comments ||
Top||
#53
Nice try Aris, but no cigar. I call for the same treatment of Islam as Islam treats others
No, you called for the same treatment on Muslims as the most violent form of Islam calls on others. Which according to you does indeed mean religious genocide, as you spent two pages detailing.
Islam is calling for the conversion or destruction (for me the only option) of the infidels,
And you echoed their calls for conversion or destruction of the infidels word-for-word (except not allowing dhimmitude). That makes you a convert.
Where civilisational value is concerned, you are already a convert to the most aggressive and genocidal form of Islam there is, ed. There are hundreds of millions of muslims out there that are far less "Islamic" and far more tolerant in attitude about religious freedom than you are.
So you admit it.
Admit what? That I "look gay" to you? I am *really* not interested in how I look to you, dearie.
The rest is still just babble about how innocent Muslim children are not really innocent Muslim children after all: No matter how you detail the supposed need for the genocide, you've still not been able to deny the fact that what you describe does indeed entail dragging little children and shooting their brains out if they refuse to convert. Or perhaps some sort of gas chamber can be devised. Just don't ask what they've been burning to produce all that dust in the windowsills.
#54
Destroy Islam in the same way Nazism was destroyed. The fate of Islam will be the same as the fate of Nazism, dead and buried. Why were Nazi leaders executed and their subordinates jailed? Why were any professing loyalties to Nazism jailed in the west and executed in the east? Why were any signs of Nazism erased and suppressed for 50 years, and the people converted to democracy or communism? Why wasn't the structure of Nazi Germany left in place? Was it because the ideology itself was evil, and left alone, the ideology would reconstitute itself through propaganda, intimidation and brutality, much as Islam does today?
But unlike the harsh fate of Germans of 1945, I would give the muslims today the choice to profess that non-muslims have a right to live and then change their religion doctrine to act upon it. Those millions of muslims you speak of that are far less "Islamic" wonât have a problem declaring non-muslim have a right to live. Will they? The mullahs wonât mind stopping the cries for the blood of the infidels. Will they? Restructuring the religion to allow others to live, shouldnât kill them? Should it? As for the rest of the mullahs and those who follow them? They can die in battle and fulfill their religious obligations. As for the children? They believe what they are taught. Currently they are taught muslims are superior to all and infidels are sheep for the slaughter. They can be taught a better religion.
You can cry about future genocide or the historical slaughter such as Hamburg, but the only gas chambers belonged to the Nazis and the only genocide in this fight belongs to Islam and the slaughter of 100s of thousands of women and children prisoners at Jumna and Jajnagar, the cities completely depopulated and the inhabitants skulls stacked into heeps, or the modern day slaughter of millions by muslims.
And I donât see Old Europe doing much to stop it. Instead I see Europe selling nuclear and missile technology to Iran, who has flat out declared they will commit genocide of the Jews and won't hesitate to use them on the Americans. But you would choose to lay in the same bed with those who seek to kill you. Do you think by doing nothing, they will spare you, at least until you are the last? Good night and Sleep light.
Posted by: ed ||
10/14/2004 2:36 Comments ||
Top||
#55
I'm sure Aris realized how "dangerous" my thoughts were, and so decided to only answer the question of geographical extent, rather than the above-cited question that related to the corpus of ideas that make up "Western Civilization", behavior contrary to which is supposed to destroy the foundation Western Civilization, rendering it unfit and unworthy of Aris' support
Ptah, at this point you are wanking again: If you had actually read my posts again you'd see I answered you with individual liberties as the crucial ideological point I mentioned.
But the rest of your post about the difference between ed and me is more accurate, though I would describe it differently: I'd say that Ed is all about the collective ("they" collectively did something bad so "we" have the right to collectively punish "them"), while I am all about the individual. There is no collective "them" over the whole of Islam that did something bad.
Preemption or lack of preemption has little to do with the concept of individual liberties. But the presence or lack of genocidal warfare *does* have to do with it -- people who believe in collectives where individuals are nothing but object-instances (to use a programmatic term) of their races/nations are definitely more eager to genocide, same way they are more eager to nationalistic insults. That's ed's lasting attitude: he's several times resorted to grouping me with either the Euros or the Greeks in this threads, same way he's grouped all Muslims together. That's the only way his mind can work.
On my part I will never accept to group all Muslims into a single "they" when talking about blame attributed for crimes. I'm *all* about the individual.
"How does that jive with the western ideal of tolerance for different ideas?"
Because I am not asking ed to be jailed or executed for his genocidal opinions, *that's* how it jives with the western ideal of tolerance.
ed> You are still maniacal and you are still babbling.
Those millions of muslims you speak of that are far less "Islamic" wonât have a problem declaring non-muslim have a right to live. Will they?
No, those *millions* individually won't have such a problem. The problem is that you demand that the whole religion collectively changes before you allow even one of them to live. That's what makes you a genocidal murderer in your ideology.
An individual that proclaims your right to live but nonetheless doesn't manage to change his fellow billion of believers, should still die according to you.
You are still all about the collective.
Ptah> "Does Aris hold that despite such a "code of silence", all Inguishians who adhere to that code are NOT GUILTY by cooperation, support, and association?
Can you find *which* Ingushetians are guilty of adhering to this code, or are you again for collective punishments?
If he cites past history happening to them as "justification", why does citing history somehow NOT JUSTIFY what other people do?
Somehow I fail to remember a single incident of me ever citing history as "justification" for any terrorist act. That would oppose the very core of my belief system.
In fact, I've gone back and looked more closely at your points, and I see where my problem with you is, and it IS my fault entirely: you use a lot of counterfactual reasoning and arguments with little preface, making me believe you AGREE with them.
Okay, you may think I'm bullshitting you or making fun of you, but I'm not, honestly: I apologize, and confess that I have misunderstood you. My very poor excuse is that I skim too much in an attempt to cover as much internet ground in the little time I have, and for penitence, if I object to something you have said, I'll re-read it, repeat it back, and ask for clarification before I say anything.
If you're skeptical of my sincerity, well, I don't blame you a bit, and you have every right to expect that my actions should prove my words. Time will just have to tell based on opportunity.
#57
I'm with Ed and Ptah. Aris is a whiner. Nothing out there is "fair," and he'll never be happy. The water is too wet, the air is too gassy, and there's no way to fight a "fair" war because the tendency of self interest has always lead to wars of "some" or "few" against "many" or "all."
Life's a bitch; suck it up and accept reality instead of expecting some sort of world that works according to "moral absolutes." Or else, just admit that your entire conceptualization of the universe is that of a perfect distopia.
Or, as usual, you could just admit you believe it's all America's fault. That little anectode about a one-nation nuclear arms race was a little telling. And yes, I think Ptah's right about the counterfactual reasoning and argument against conclusion.
It's a little like shitting in bed and pushing it down with your feet.
#58
Ptah> This is gracious of you. I'll believe you and consider the slate wiped clean, if you do the same about any insults I may have sent your way in the past. Thank you, and apology more than accepted.
Asedwich> I don't know what "argument against conclusion" means and I only figured the meaning of "counterfactual reasoning" through context and a bit of googling -- but I think I understood Ptah's last post better than you did.
#59
Thanks Aris. Everyone else may think I've gone off the deep end, but I think you understand that I'm not blanket agreeing with you, but merely saying that I may have misunderstood you. We very likely will disagree, because there are cultural factors between us that will motivate us to choose different solutions, but it is better that we disagree based on a true understanding of each other's position, rather than misunderstanding each other and waste our precious time taking ill-advised potshots at scarecrows and other straw men.
A small South Korean navy vessel sank overnight in bad weather but the accident was not linked to a possible intrusion by North Korean submarines, the Defence Ministry said on Wednesday. One sailor was rescued but the other four crew members were missing from the training ship that sank about 40 km (20 miles) off the port city of Ulsan on the south coast of South Korea, ministry spokesman Nam Dae-yeon told reporters. The vessel had been returning to port after an overnight exercise. It was not immediately clear what caused the accident.
Bad weather?
Asked whether there was any link between the loss of the South Korean vessel and reported North Korean submarine activity, he said: "That has nothing to do with the sunken ship. Even the locations are far apart." Earlier, Yonhap news agency reported the US military had advised South Korea about two suspected North Korean submarines operating in South Korean waters on Monday. "We have not found or detected anything," Nam said.
How hard did you look?
He said the military was carrying out a routine additional search, but declined to give any details.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/13/2004 12:23:45 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I suspect Gulf of Tonkin type activities will begin to 'chew' at the US's resolve and the nerve of the S. Koreans, until the inevitable 'must respond' situation developes. Question is...will we pull back on the tier one defenses, or present a formidable show of force?
#2
I was under the impression that the NORK SSK's weren't even capable of leaving dockside, much less killing anything. Having said that, the ROK Navy is VERY good, and the USN may just start doing ASW exercises in the area. If there's a boat there, they'll find it.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
10/13/2004 9:46 Comments ||
Top||
Australians might be divided over the Iraq war, but the election result proved most backed plans to keep troops there, Prime Minister John Howard said today. Mr Howard said that while he did not believe Iraq was a major election issue, most people supported his view that Australia should stay in Iraq until the job was done. The opposition also failed to turn the Iraq war into a major issue, despite its pledge to bring Australian troops home from Iraq by Christmas if it won government, he said. "There was divided opinion in Australia on whether or not we should have gone into Iraq," Mr Howard told CNN.
"But the overwhelming majority of Australians believe very strongly that having gone there, we should stay and finish the job. ... "They rejected the notion of the premature withdrawal of our forces until their job has been completed. ... "That is, of course, a view that I put very strongly."
Mr Howard's comments were backed by Foreign Minister Alexander Downer, who said in the Asian Wall Street Journal that Australians had made clear foreign policy choices at last Saturday's election. In an article for the newspaper, Mr Downer wrote that most Australians realised it would be folly for Australia to withdraw its troops from Iraq now just as the country was on the brink of democracy.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
10/13/2004 5:20:24 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Beautiful--thank God the Aussies demonstrated the majority feel the same way as Howard and aren't head-in-the-sand Antiwar types that think this terrorism "nuisance" will just blow away if we ignore it long enough--up until the last non-Islamofascist is beheaded.
Posted by: Dar ||
10/13/2004 10:20 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I always loved the Aussies....
Posted by: jawa ||
10/13/2004 11:18 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: Mike ||
10/13/2004 13:05 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Thank god for the Aussies. And for the other Asian democracies. Time to develop a closer alliance with Australia and start involving exploring ways to involve the Indian military as well.
#8
Wouldn't it be shorter to bore through and pull Australia through the earth's core?
Posted by: ed ||
10/13/2004 18:01 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Give them enough beer, Ed, and they'll fold up nicely. Give them a little more, and they won't even notice the heat ;-) Besides, JFM, if we pull them directly across the Pacific, think how many tropical islands they'll sweep up along the way. We don't want to be greedy; after all, we already have Hawaii.
French President Jacques Chirac said Tuesday his country is "entirely committed" to taking part in an international conference on Iraq next month.
Who asked you?
Chirac called on foreign ministers to work out the details and participants for the conference, which Iraqi leaders have recommended and U.S. officials support. "France is entirely committed to participating," he told reporters during a brief stop in Hong Kong. He said the conference "was proposed by France and Russia together a year or year and a half ago."
Which means they were planning the confab right about the time we were pulling down Sammy's statue. Hopefully they have the menu finished and the linens all picked out.
Egypt plans to host the conference in late November, and participants are to include Iraq, its neighbors, plus China, the European Union, the United Nations, the Arab League and the Organization of the Islamic Conference.
I can't wait to see duly elected Afghan President Hamid Karzai stride into the room and look the members of the dictators' club right in the eye.
France was one of the leading opponents of the Iraq war and has refused to send forces into the country after the ouster of Saddam Hussein. In Paris, a French Foreign Ministry spokesman said France had not yet received an invitation for the conference.
"You have the invitation, Marvin?"
"Right here, Mr. Secretary."
"Nice work. Put it in a safe place."
Oh, we sent out the invitationas, all right. But the French postal service was prolly on strike.
Former UN chief weapons inspector Hans Blix believed the Government's controversial Iraq weapons dossier actually understated the case against Saddam Hussein, according to documents released today by the Foreign Office. He suppoerted the case against Saddam before he came out against it.
The papers released by the FO in time for the election in the US?
show that British officials at the United Nations in New York showed a draft of the dossier to Dr Blix in September 2002, two weeks before the final version was published. A note from one official, Adam Bye, said that Dr Blix had liked the section on chemical, biological and nuclear weapons as he believed that it did not exaggerate the facts. According to the note, Dr Blix said that the dossier even risked understating Iraq's ability to produce weapons of mass destruction — particularly the lethal anthrax virus. He also described the claim that even if Iraq was able to acquire fissile material from abroad, it would still take at least two years to build a working nuclear bomb as "modest".
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
10/13/2004 5:17:00 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Blix defintley seems to be on both sides of the issue here. Whats the deal? Is he looking for a job?
State Rep. Craig Fitzhugh (D-TN): "Democrats in a race for a state House seat in District 82, are circulating a flyer that shows a retarded child with President Bush's face running in a track race. The headline says: 'Voting for Bush Is Like Running In The Special Olympics: Even If You Win, You're Still Retarded.' The flyer is being distributed by Democrat Craig Fitzhugh." (Tradition Values Coalition Website, "Tennessee Democrats Compare Republicans To Special Olympics Children."
OK. Lets take a look at this. Not only is this cruel to the retarded kids who participate in the Special Olympics, but show the typical lack of class of all liberals.
This time it's personal. My cousin Shirley married an Australian Goverment bureaucrat. She moved to Australia, and they had 3 kids. The oldest daughter, who is autistic, participated in the Special Olympics there. In fact she participated the Paralympics held in Atlanta in 1996 and Sydney in 2000, and won medals. So I get a little pissed when I see shit like this.
#3
I guess today is a Bush: the retarded monkey boy day. Which means tomorrow will be a Bush: evil genius puppetmaster on his way to enslaving the world day.
Talk about a comeback kid.
#8
Dave - if this crap keeps up, I might too but it won't be regulation size (how wide is a normal hallway anyway?) and certainly won't be authorized!!!
#11
Talk about brain trusts... that's exactly what you want to do on the day of a presidential debate - suggest your opponent is retarded. Way to reduce expectations, you geniuses, you.
Hey, I'm heading out to get some PA volunteer time right after this. See y'all tomorrow.
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
10/13/2004 16:49 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Tennessee Legislature
State Representative Craig Fitzhugh (D.-Ripley)
House District 82
#15
I called Rep Fitzhugh's office and his support staff said that he had nothing to do with the ad and will issue a press release denouncing it within the next hour.
#16
I am from Tennessee. I hope that people don't judge the rest of us by this pea brain idiot. Tennessee really is a great place. The billboard was really despicable. The only thing good that can be said is that such sleaze will drive voters towards "W."
Posted by: A. Bungfodder ||
10/13/2004 19:27 Comments ||
Top||
#17
Don't worry Bungfodder--we get it.
The guy who did this is dispicable and, unfortunately, all too typical of many who populate the Democratic party these days.
P.S. Kerry sucked tonight. "W" ruled--except on legal "reform." I think insurance companies have pulled the wool over the Republicans' eyes on that one. (Just a for instance--suppose the retarded kid, whose picture was stolen (above), had had his brain damaged by a doctor's negligance. The kid and his family ought to be able to sue for loss of quality of life and for needed medical care throughout the boy's lifespan. The insurance companies take the risk as businesses, per se. That's their choice. And the doctors who malpractice SHOULD have higher insurance rates. Duh.)
The other day, a friend mentioned that a fellow Muslim had declared that we should be careful about condemning the recent massacre of innocent schoolchildren in Russia by so-called "Islamic militants" because "some scholars" have issued "fatwas" (non-binding legal opinions) that such operations are sometimes acceptable under Islamic Law.
As I've mentioned before, any idiot can issue a fatwah, and many do...
They then referenced part of a Qur'anic verse which basically means, "⊠then whoever transgresses the prohibition against you, you transgress likewise against him." (Qur'an 2:194). Essentially, this is the age old "an eye for an eye" legal maxim that dates back to not just the Old Testament, but to the Code of Hammurabi as well. While this maxim might be rightfully employed in individual cases of justice, using it to justify mass murder and collective punishment is quite a stretch.
Using it to massacre schoolchildren is definitely a stretch.
Being informed that a Muslim in my community adhered to such shoddy logic rather shocked and disgusted me even though I'm well aware of the half-baked and ethically shallow justifications of suicide bombing espoused by some Muslims. In spite of that, being ambivalent about the massacre of innocent schoolchildren seemed to expose a moral depravity that's sunk to all new levels.
Either that, or a simple lack of morality, an utter lack of a soul. There's not even anything there to go to Hell when he dies...
#1
If Islam is ever to reform, it's going to need more guys like this, writing essays like this, to be willing to take the risk. There are people out there quite willing to behead the author in order to shut him up. God protect him.
Posted by: Mike ||
10/13/2004 12:23 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Want to see what some clearly intelligent Muslims have to say about current events, then go to http://abbaskadhim.blogspot.com/. It ain't pretty, but you've seen it before. All deflection, blame America, blame the Joooooos, etc. I go over there for a laugh, but in the end it is sadly educational. I sure hope that there is change amongst the peoples of the Ummah.
Posted by: remote man ||
10/13/2004 16:38 Comments ||
Top||
U.S. security officials are investigating a recent intelligence report that a group of 25 Chechen terrorists illegally entered the United States from Mexico in July. The Chechen group is suspected of having links to Islamist terrorists seeking to separate the southern enclave of Chechnya from Russia, according to officials familiar with intelligence reports. Members of the group, said to be wearing backpacks, secretly traveled to northern Mexico and crossed into a mountainous part of Arizona that is difficult for U.S. border security agents to monitor, said officials speaking on the condition of anonymity. The intelligence report was supplied to the U.S. government in late August or early September and was based on information from an intelligence source that has been proved reliable in other instances, one official said.
A second U.S. official said the report is being investigated, but said it could not be determined whether the group of Chechens actually entered the country, as the intelligence source reported. "We don't know whether or not that report is true," this official said. A spokesman for U.S. Customs and Border Protection confirmed that the intelligence report was provided by another government agency, but said Border Patrol agents were unable to verify its accuracy. It could not be learned whether the reported infiltration is related to the recent Education Department warning to school officials to examine security in the aftermath of the attack last month by pro-Chechnya Muslim terrorists on a school in Russia, in which more than 300 people were killed and some 700 wounded. U.S. officials believe the Beslan terrorists included some al Qaeda-linked foreign terrorists.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
10/13/2004 2:51:25 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
The Buffoonish Sen Mark Dayton Dimecrat of Minnesota was probably afraid of this, so he evacuated DC.
His ancestor, Johnathon Dayton, who signed the Declaration of Independence is probably spinning in his grave at his wayward descendent.
Sen Dodo Dayton is a long, long, long way away from, "Pledging his life, fortune, and sacred honor" by running like a coward, and giving in to these Islamofacist whack jobs.
Pakistanis die hitting anti-tank mine with hammer ISLAMABAD (Reuters) - Two Pakistani villagers were killed in an explosion on Wednesday when they tried to break open an anti-tank mine with a hammer to use the casing for a stove to fry snacks, police said.
#3
AT mines are much more tasty when broiled in an oven at 500 degrees.
Posted by: ed ||
10/13/2004 16:01 Comments ||
Top||
#4
"Latif wanted to use the casing to make a stove to cook pakora, a type of fried snack popular during the Muslim fasting month of Ramadan that starts this weekend, he said."
Wanted to start the holiday off with a bang, huh?
Posted by: Dave D. ||
10/13/2004 16:01 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Huuuuuwheeee! Dis is what we gonna did. We gonna make a cooker outa uh annie taahnk mahn. But first we drink some whan. Den we separate duh pieces with dis here hammuh lahk dis: ***Tap tap tappity tap***. Notees that Ah be real gentle lahk because of the detenator is sennnnnnnnnnnnnsitive. Garohnteed! Next we drink some wahn to fo'teefie ouah spirits.
***oops, dropped hammer***
KABOOM!
***echos of booms bounce off mountain walls***
And that, folks ends this edition of Cajun Cookin' Afghanistan style. See you next time in Fallujah!
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
10/13/2004 22:25 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Ah think it would work better with Emeril.
"...and Bam! you add some pepper! And Bam! some minced garlic! And now you set off the mine..."
BAM!
Posted by: Phil Fraering ||
10/13/2004 23:24 Comments ||
Top||
#12
And BAM! That aftershock could be felt in Teheran!
Those Israelis who endured the routine Palestinian terror attacks that Saddam so lavishly rewarded might disagree rather pointedly with Blix's idiotic statements.
UN officials have an ability to make completely self-contradictory pronouncements that go well beyond mere stupidity or typically ingrained political bias. Once and for all time, the UN's dithering and limp-wristed posturing over Darfur has shown these overpaid and underworked drones for what they truly are. Namely, blood-sucking parasites who shamelessly feast upon abject human misery as they prostitute themselve to terrorist Arab anti-Semitism.
If the UN's entire diplomatic corps were to perish amidst unspeakably agonizing and hideously brutal slow torture, I probably would still find it within myself to applaud with great vigor. Especially so if Kofi Annan headed the queue. These leeches have supped upon human flesh with their grotesque mockery of international peacekeeping. May they one and all rot in firey hell.
#8
Well, considering that Blix hasn't been right about anything for more than 10 years.
What with Iraq's many and sundry varieties of WMDs being dismantled while Hans was busy taking bribes. And shipped to the Bekkaa weeks before Shock & Awe.
I have trouble adding to his credibility streak right now.
Jack.
Posted by: Jack Deth ||
10/13/2004 2:23 Comments ||
Top||
#9
I always wondered how much Hans Blix was paid since so many others at the U.N. were on Saddam's payroll and demanded Bush not remove Saddam for 'diplomatic' reasons....of course.
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
10/13/2004 5:16 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Not only didn't he get the Peace Prize, but apparently no Oil for Food bribes either. Irrelevent and poor -- a bad, sad combination!
#12
Rafael-
Naw, we'll all just join Hans and sing...
"Kumbayah, my Lord, kumbayah..."
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
10/13/2004 9:56 Comments ||
Top||
#13
This from a man whose very name has become synonymous with expressions meaning "To screw up", "To be wrong on every count", "To be hopelessly mistaken". As in, "You really stepped on your Blix."
#14
Naw, we'll all just join Hans and sing... "Kumbayah, my Lord, kumbayah..."
Would Hans Blix even call upon the Lord for anything at all? Is he religious?
Posted by: Steve from R ||
10/13/2004 12:29 Comments ||
Top||
#15
But Hans... the Iraq War did put Col. Qaddaffy off his nuclear ambitions. That's not too shabby considering NO ONE KNEW he had them in the first place.
Time magazine's recent cover story on Islam, "The Struggle Within," has alerted us to some of the mistakes made in the Iraq war. One of those mistakes, rectified by the new Iraqi interim government, was allowing the Arab television network Al-Jazeera to broadcast from Iraq.
Under normal circumstances, we don't interfere with press and broadcast activities, even if they're not on our side, an extension of the idea of free press to the rest of the world. Al Jizz takes this courtesy and abuses it. If all they did was report from the other side, there would be no real problem. By actively taking sides they cross the line.
The Time magazine article, written by Bill Powell, has several references to how images of the conflict have fed the fires of the terrorist assault against our troops and the people of Iraq. American news organizations have broadcast the same images, but they were given more power and authority through Al-Jazeera, known as a mouthpiece for al Qaeda.
Al Jizz has broadcast quite a few images that the American news organizations wouldn't touch with a 12-foot pole. Americans don't have the fascination for pictures of corpses, mutilation and murder that Arabs seem to.
Sheik Khale, an Imam in Cairo, is quoted as saying, "Most of the pictures we see are of Iraqi heads stepped on by American Army boots." Musdah Mulia, a Muslim scholar in Indonesia, says that "moderates" in the religion "are finding it more difficult to discuss issues like human rights and democracy when photos of Americans torturing Iraqis keep appearing."
I'd call that mere evidence that human beings tend to zero in on what supports their own side. Images of Iraqi heads stepped on by American boots are outnumbered by pictures of infidels having their heads lopped off.
That's what I love about Moose limbs: they're so tolerant of other people, so easy to get along with, so non-violent...
Thousands of Muslim students and activists held protest demonstrations in various cities nationwide on Wednesday in a bid to pressure the government and businesspeople to close all nightspots and gambling dens during Ramadhan. The protesters said the closure must be done out of respect for Muslims, who are required to fast during the daylight hours for a month beginning on Friday. The protest in the West Sumatra capital of Padang nearly turned into brawl when a group of some 150 Muslim protesters faced off with another group of people who support an alleged local gambling den baron, Rudy Iskandar, during the protest on Wednesday. A similar protest was also held in the Central Sulawesi capital of Palu, where dozens of Muslims rallied in front of the office of the Central Sulawesi provincial council. Calling themselves the Ramadhan Care Movement, the activists demanded the Central Sulawesi governor to close down all nightspots and gambling houses during Ramadhan. In Palembang, South Sumatra, dozens of students again hit the streets on Wednesday, pressing their demand for the government to crack down hard on entertainment center operators, who planned to stay open during Ramadhan.
Former Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamed urged Asia's leaders yesterday to stop "kowtowing" to Westerners, warning continued subservience would lead to domestic uprisings and terrorist attacks. Mahathir, whose anti-Western rhetoric often caused controversy during his 22 years in power, told a university lecture in Singapore on democracy and Asian leadership that Asian minds were still "colonized" by Western influence. "Asian leaders and Asians in general have yet to achieve freedom of thought, freedom to look critically at the ideas and ideologies coming from outside Asia," Mahathir,79 , said. "They are still beholden to the ethnic Europeans. They are still Euro-centric. Many are apologetic because they believe they have fallen far short of the standards that the ethnic Europeans expect of them."
I think his beef is that the ideas and ideologies come from outside Asia. If something works, what does it matter where it originated? And not all the Asian states have fallen far short of the standards that Europeans expect of them. Burma has. Cambodia and Laos have. Vietnam has. Malaysia's done very well so far, thanks to its industrious Chinese and Hindu minorities and the example of Singapore, also a Southeast Asian state. Thailand's doing very well, from what I understand. The enemy of the Philippines and Indonesia isn't foreign ideology, but native corruption. Vietnam and Laos are held in stasis by the adherence to Communism, and Cambodia will be generations recovering from its own peculiar experience with the Commies.
Mahathir said Asians were "waiting for a leader, a credible leader from a credible nation".
"Send us a man on horseback!" Paging General Boulanger!
"Those who kowtow too much to the ethnic Europeans should not be surprised if their people will rise against them, will commit acts of terror, or whatever," he said. "Asian leaders have a choice. Assume and assert true leadership, seize the initiative in terms of ideas and thoughts, and restore self-respect. Or face the humiliation of foreign hegemony and the contempt of their own people."
I'd say ASEAN's done a lot more for Asians than any number of leaders with tin hats. If Asian leaders spent less time worrying about the humiliation of foreign hegemony and more time on the provision of goods and services and infrastructure to their populations, they'd be better off. Like Singapore is.
Mahathir peppered his speech and ensuing question-and-answer session with pro-Asian, anti-Western references, such as: "Asians were civilized long before Europeans were civilized. They should learn from us."
Actually, Malaysia was always pretty much a cultural backwater, much of it peopled by Negrito woods tribes that have mostly been hunted down and killed by the later arrivals. Such Asian civilizations as there were grew up in Java, Bali and Sumatra, Cambodia, present day South Vietnam, and later in Thailand and Burma. All were based on an almalgam of Vedism (predecessor to Hinduism) and Lesser Vehicle Buddhism, with their roots in India. The Javanese, Sumatran and Cham (South Vietnamese) civilizations declined dramatically when Islam was introduced, the Cham civilization actually winking out of existence. Perhaps Mahathir should take a lesson from the Asians himself.
The fact is, the Asians really weren't civilized long before Europeans were. Chinese civilization presumably what he's referring to arose at about the same time as civilization in Iraq and Egypt. Prior to those, and probably influencing them through trade, there were flourishing proto-civilizations in Asia Minor (Catal Huyuk, for instance) and present-day Israel (Jericho, for instance), perhaps dating as far back as 8000 BC. The roots of the Cretan civilization were probably in these areas, with influence from Egypt as well. The Cretan A culture probably dates to around the same time as the Shang and Chin dynasties. The earliest Indic states of Southeast Asia date from around the beginning of the Christian era both the Romans and the Chinese traded with them.
#6
Hey, my pal Jeff Ooi's "Screenshots" website is being threatened with prosecution by the Malay-Sucks government, because a commentator allegedly "blasphemed" the Muslim terror cult. Boycott Malaysian products
If you use the word "tRoLl" your teeth will fall out, if they haven't already.
#2
I'll bet they shut up entirely when 'W' wins re-election, smm.
Unless they want a great glassy smoking holes where their Enrichment Facilities are now standing.
Jack.
Posted by: Jack Deth ||
10/13/2004 2:35 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Ditto on Nov 3rd. The W countdown for the mullahs really gets underway.
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
10/13/2004 3:31 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Ladies and Gents,
As a sequel to "AllaHateMe" I would now like to introduce "AllahNukeMe(TM)" to all of you.
Where the heck did I put my Geiger Counter ??
Posted by: Elder of Zion ||
10/13/2004 11:48 Comments ||
Top||
Note that Rooters calls it Falluja.
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq's interim prime minister warned the rebel-held city of Falluja on Wednesday it must hand over foreign militants, including America's top enemy in Iraq, or face a major operation to root them out. More at link.
Posted by: BA ||
10/13/2004 2:55:11 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"Root them out"? Please. The only thing that's going to happen is more negotiating.
THIS SOUNDS LIKE GOOD NEWS: "BAGHDAD, Oct. 12 -- Local insurgents in the city of Fallujah are turning against the foreign fighters who have been their allies in the rebellion that has held the U.S. military at bay in parts of Iraq's Sunni Muslim heartland, according to Fallujah residents, insurgent leaders and Iraqi and U.S. officials. . . . "If the Arabs will not leave willingly, we will make them leave by force," said Jamal Adnan, a taxi driver who left his house in Fallujah's Shurta neighborhood a month ago after the house next door was bombed by U.S. aircraft targeting foreign insurgents. . . . Several local leaders of the insurgency say they, too, want to expel the foreigners, whom they scorn as terrorists. They heap particular contempt on Abu Musab Zarqawi, the Jordanian whose Monotheism and Jihad group has asserted responsibility for many of the deadliest attacks across Iraq, including videotaped beheadings." (Emphasis mine)
By Lee Kuan Yew / The Straits Times / 10-13-04 This article, by Singapore's Minister Mentor, appears in the current issue of Forbes magazine.
THIS year's presidential election in the United States has special significance for East Asia. A Pacific Ocean diminished in size by technology has linked East Asia's economic future with America's. Any slowdown in the US spells problems for Asia. Although intra-East Asian trade has grown by double digits yearly since the 1990s, the end destination for about 25 per cent of the region's manufactured products is still the US. Asia needs a US administration that supports free trade and is able to restrain domestic pressures to protect American jobs by restricting outsourcing.
AMERICA'S FRIENDS TARGETED
OF EVEN greater concern to Asia, however, is the Islamist terror threat. Because globalisation has brought about a planet-wide focus, suicide bombers now target Americans and America's friends in Asia. In Iraq, besides Americans and Britons, terrorists have taken Italians, Egyptians, Turks, Nepalese, Indians, Pakistanis and many others hostage. When the Italian government refused to withdraw its troops from Iraq, terrorists killed the Italian journalist they were holding. They had expected the Italian government to yield in the same way that the Philippines had in order to save its countryman. Terrorists in Iraq have also beheaded one Nepali, two Bulgarians, one South Korean and three Americans, besides killing many others. The 'Islamic Army in Iraq' went beyond demanding the withdrawal of foreign forces; it threatened to kill two French journalists if France didn't rescind its ban on the wearing of headscarves by Muslim girls attending French state schools.
Some believe that if the US had not attacked Iraq, the terrorists would not have become so numerous and so barbaric. Escalating terrorist outrages both inside and outside Iraq show a dynamic independent of what's going on there. Every new horror is quickly copied, including coordinated suicide bombings, hostage-takings and intimidation through the posting of videos of beheadings on the Internet. Disparate terrorist groups outdo one another in extremes of savagery. They are eager to die and take with them as many victims as possible. Islamists consider an attack on Muslims anywhere as a crime against all Muslims. Their websites tabulate massacres of Muslims in Chechnya, Bosnia, Kosovo, Kashmir, Mindanao, Ambon, Poso and Palestine, citing all as atrocities against the Muslim ummah (community). To influence Indonesia's presidential elections on Sept 20 and Australia's elections on Oct 9, Islamic jihadists exploded a huge car bomb on Sept 9 at the Australian Embassy in Jakarta, killing nine and injuring 182. To their credit, Indonesians and Australians have not allowed this attack to influence their elections.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
10/13/2004 5:40:01 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
A PRE-EMPTIVE Israeli strike against Iran's nuclear installations would be fraught with risks and difficulties, but it would set back significantly Tehran's development programme, a respected think-tank in Tel Aviv said yesterday. However, the bombing of Iran's facilities — a possibility that appeared to increase with the revelation last month that the United States had agreed to sell Israel "bunker buster" bombs — should be the last resort, said researchers from the Jaffee Centre for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University.
After news that Israel would take delivery of the precision-guided bombs capable of destroying underground targets, some analysts argued that the diversity of Iran's facilities and poor intelligence would make a raid impossible. Yet despite the problems of such an operation, Ephraim Kam, the Jaffee Centre's deputy head, said that it would put the programme back for a year or more and should not be ruled out if diplomatic pressure failed to halt Iran's research.
Israel regards Iran as its biggest strategic worry. Intelligence sources estimate that Tehran will acquire nuclear weapons by 2007 and defence chiefs have hinted at a first strike similar to the one on the Osirak facility in Iraq 23 years ago, which thwarted Saddam Hussein's atomic designs. Israel's alarm has acquired new urgency after Major-General Giora Eiland, its National Security Adviser, said that Iran would reach the "point of no return" by late November, rather than next year, when it would require no further outside aid to bring the programme to fruition.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
10/13/2004 4:30:42 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Mark,
If Kerry gets elected I have a feeling you can forget about any American foreign policy which requires the "Iron Testicle Technique".
In such a case (and maybe even earlier) I guess
we will have to take care of this ourselves.
Posted by: Elder of Zion ||
10/13/2004 11:37 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Elder, of course Kerry would do something - he'll send in the Keystone Cops - but only after thousands are killed and France and the U.N. give their permission (Global test).
#3
CF,
in order to perform "Holy Castration (TM)" procedure on said Mullahs you need:
1) True understanding of the situation.
2) Loyalty to all American citizens,
3) The ability to hold your opinion for more than 15 minutes.
I doubt Kerry actually possesses any of the above
characteristics.
Therefore, I suspect if he gets elected, we (meaning the old Zionists and JOOOOS) will be left with all the dirty work.
Anyhow, we must do this simply because we cannot
under any circumstances afford a nuclear Iran.
Now I must go search for my Geiger counter and my inertial guidance systems :)
Aloha.
Posted by: Elder of Zion ||
10/13/2004 13:06 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Israel âshould attack nuclear sites in Iran if diplomacy failsâ
It didn't succeed with Kimmy, so why would anyont think Iran would be any different?
..some analysts argued that the diversity of Iranâs facilities and poor intelligence would make a raid impossible.
"Poor intelligence"? Heh, this is Israel that we're talking about here.
#5
"...We shall soon see after the election. Most likely any major move will be made after November 16th, the end of this yearâs month of Ramadan. Itâs not nice to upset terrorists prior to wacking them..."
I would suggest that if the factories and or facilities do not go null during this period, we should feel free to hit them post haste anyway!
#8
Elder, if the unthinkable were to ever happen, (I had a hard time typing that last bit ;)
But let's say Lurch begins lurking in the White House, (what a horrid thought)
Elder how are you at teaching others Hebrew? Since it would seem the ONLY logical place for me to depart to is Zion itself, were the majority fully understands the jihad enemy and how to deal with him..
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
10/13/2004 18:20 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Mark, Israel has a program called "Ulpan" for all immigrants to learn Hebrew. It goes quite quickly -- full immersion -- and you'll come out able to read, write and speak fluent conversational Hebrew well within 6 months. Probably by the end of the first month you will be able to function well enough to go out on your own. Don't worry, this is the same program that brought the illiterate Falashas of Ethiopia up to speed. And the dialogs and illustrations are very cute (My Hebrew School used them for the Jr. High years. Then we went on to write essays about the poetry of Amos Oz, and the literary devices used in the book of Job. Great fun!)
However, if you want to get a head start, try the "Learn Hebrew for Free" site (http://foundationstone.com.au/FoundationStoneNoFrame.html). Enjoy!
#11
Mark,
The only way to learn swimming is to jump into the water.
As trailing wife says, Ulpan is quite good and anyhow 95% of Israelis speake reasonable English.
Dont worry, if the worse happen in the US and you end up joining us in ZION i'm sure you'll manage.
Right now, what reaaly matters is to go out and convince the wavering to vote GWB !
Posted by: Elder of Zion ||
10/14/2004 6:34 Comments ||
Top||
Israel Police will most likely restrict the number of Islamic worshipers permitted onto the Temple Mount this Friday, the first Friday of Ramadan. The reason is the documented structural compromise of the area known as Solomon's Stables. The situation is the result of illegal Wakf construction on the Temple Mount, which has weakened the are and left it in a precarious state. Police were warned by engineers that too many persons in the area may result in catastrophe, a total collapse of the area. (Over the years the Muslims would not stop the foolish construction, nor pay attention to many Israeli warnings about Muslim triggered weakening of one portion of the Temple Mount area which will effect the entire Mount. One medium size earthquake could bring about a pile of rubble on the Muslim side of the Temple Mount plus cause general damage. The Muslim leaders in turn will naturaly blame 'Israel' for the earthquake's resulting damage. With these people one can not win either way.)
Wakf Authority officials reject the engineering assessment, and are accusing Israel of seeking to limit the number of worshipers attending Ramadan services. Wakf officials insist Jordanian engineers have inspected the area and have found it to be structurally sound. Police will probably restrict the number of visitors to the Mount on Friday to 50,000-60,000. (That remains very large mob of Jihad driven trouble makers)
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
10/13/2004 4:08:57 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I think I'll stock up on water before Friday...just in case :-)
#2
I would not restrict the number of mooselimbs allowed,they apparently know better, so let's test who's right.
Maybe... I would restrict the number to a hefty margin above the number assumed to trigger structural damage.
Plausible ya know what...
Salem Hameed has lived in his tin-and-wood hut at the foot of the red mountain range for most of his 42 years. Asked where he's from, his answer is not Egypt or Sinai or Taba, but al-Karadma -- the name of his clan. Many Bedouins on the Sinai Peninsula are shedding their historically nomadic ways, like Hameed, whose desert wandering always takes him back to his hut for the nearby water and electricity -- and now for his television set. They are now more likely to be running hotels, groceries or souvenir shops than herding goats. But their loyalty remains to tribe over country and, along with their intimate knowledge of the desert, that makes them natural suspects in drug-running, people-smuggling and weapons trafficking -- and now in three deadly car bombings targeting Israeli tourists.
No formal arrests have been made in the attacks, which killed at least 34 people, including Egyptians, Israelis, two Italians and a Russian, as well as others whose nationalities have yet to be determined. They came at the end of a Jewish holiday, when thousands of Israelis were vacationing in the area. But investigators have said about 30 Bedouins were detained for questioning shortly after the attacks. One of them has acknowledged selling explosives that could have been used in the strikes, investigators told The Associated Press.
Hameed, who works as a guard at a government-operated fuel station, said some Bedouins work in illicit trades, but that others work with the government, either as informers or in posts like his. Harming tourism in Sinai benefits none of them, he said. A Bedouin, he said, "can sell a cigarette of marijuana. This won't bother the government, it is to earn a living. But something that harmful, no. It has ruined many (Bedouins') homes."
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
10/13/2004 3:42:08 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
Germany might deploy troops in Iraq if conditions there change, Peter Struck, the German defence minister, indicated on Tuesday in a gesture that appears to provide backing for John Kerry, the US Democratic presidential challenger. In an interview with the Financial Times, Mr Struck departed from his government's resolve not to send troops to Iraq under any circumstances, saying: "At present I rule out the deployment of German troops in Iraq. In general, however, there is no one who can predict developments in Iraq in such a way that he could make a such a binding statement [about the future]."
Posted by: True German Ally ||
10/13/2004 2:51:46 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Very, very interesting.
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
10/13/2004 3:29 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Don't hold your breath. That being said, I strongly suspect Germany has been extremely helpful under the table. I wonder how much of the anti-war stance has been for public consumption?
Posted by: N guard ||
10/13/2004 7:22 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Yesterday on CSPAN radio i heard the French ambassador saying they would NOT send troops to Iraq, because more foreign troops would make things worse, making it more of an occupation, whats best is to train Iraqis. Which kind of misses John Kerrys point, which is that when French (or German) troops come in, US troop levels would go down. I think France and Germany are caught between a rock and hard place - the desire to help Kerry, who i think they do prefer of Dubya, versus their domestic (and esp in the case of France, international) reasons to stay out of Iraq.
Like N guard, i wont be holding my breath. But i do find the maneuvering interesting. Thanks for the info, TGA.
#6
John Edwards, in an answer on Russert's(?) show, mentioned that (paraphrasing): 1) the French and Germans might come in if the Iraqis forces had been trained. 2)The US should make training Irqis a priority.
Don't know if the two comments were independent or Struck built on to Edward's, but it is an interesting coincidence.
What Struck said was a sort of "Versuchsballon" (test balloon), to test German public opinion. That's why he chose the Financial Times, to let it slowly filter in. Should there be a public outcry... well he left himself all the wiggle room he needs and can always claim to have been "quoted out of context". Should the outcry be moderate (it has been for now), get ready for the next move.
Of course, don't hold your breath. But German troops would never have played a major role in Iraq, even with a most Bush-friendly Germany. Thios was always about symbolics (Kerry foolishly misses that point.
What is Struck's message about? Germany wants a stable Iraq, Germany doesn't want a failed Iraq just to weaken the U.S. (which is what the French want). Of course Germany also wants its part in the reconstruction.
Germany has already pledged to do more for the stability in the Middle East, it will do more in Afghanistan and it will try to help in Iraq.
Germany doesn't believe in ideology and vain multipolar dreams, it believes in Realpolitik.
#10
TGA I don't expect that Germany do much. Germany doesn't have the military structure to help much at all. It would be nice if German would put some more visable distance between France and Germany on this issue. As you note all France is interested in is damaging the United States. Germany needs to point this out in public. France can't retailate is needs German markets.
#11
TGA's probably right, but frankly, this is far too little, far too late, and I seriously doubt that anyone in America really cares anymore. The truly critical actions in Iraq are underway right now in Fallujah, Ramalla etc. What France or Germany might do many months from now with a handful fo troops simply is of no consequence to anyone besides the Kerry campaign spinners.
#17
TGA, Being from California under Gray-out Davis, I can sympathize. We only waited about 6 months to decide it made a mistake and bring in the Governator. Perhaps Germany should hold a recall and start a bidding war.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
10/13/2004 19:43 Comments ||
Top||
#18
You were lucky to have this choice in California. And from what I hear Arnie has exceeded any expectations, right?
Unfortunately the German opposition isn't looking very well, either.
#21
I don't expect that Germany do much. Germany doesn't have the military structure to help much at all
True enough if you mean deployable troops and equipment. But there were German troops protecting bases in Germany and Schroeder made a big point of announcing they would be withdrawn - in order not to take any pressure off of the US army's strength elsewhere.
Anyone know how that has played out?
Frankly, I'm not sure that existing German troops would in fact respond well in a combat situation ... events in e.g. the Balkans suggest they wouldn't do the job when the job needed doing if conflict was involved - as it tends to be on occasion, even in peacekeeping roles.
Note: I'm not saying that with glee, but rather with resignation.
Posted by: Robin Burk ||
10/13/2004 20:39 Comments ||
Top||
#22
Yup. Right. Totenkopf Division being transferred from the Eastern Front I suppose...
#23
RB, It is astounding to me that fighting ability of the German soldier is so low. How, when and why did that happen?
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
10/13/2004 20:47 Comments ||
Top||
#24
TGA - Arnie has far exceeded expectations and would win re-election by 70% vote, I can assure you. Like other politicians (hint, hint) he has been misunderestimated
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/13/2004 21:40 Comments ||
Top||
#25
Arnie offers the combination of social liberalism and fiscal intelligence, combined with a healthy disdain for the reactionary elements in both parties (Dem unions + trial lawyers, Repub fundamentalists), that is the path to political dominance in this country.
A Giuliani/Schwarzennegerite Republican party would command 60%+ of the national popular vote and at least 300 electoral college votes.
They've been there for thousands of years. I guess they will be.
When Mohamed Latey shot dead the local police lieutenant and stole his truck, he believed he was fighting for the freedom of his fellow nomads in the Sahara. It was the height of the Tuareg rebellion in the early 1990s, a four-year insurgency by a pale-skinned minority in remote northern Niger who felt sidelined and persecuted by a black elite governing from a capital 1,000 km away. Its fighters have long since handed over their mortars, anti-tank mines and grenade launchers, but resentment is still strong in a region synonymous with banditry and smuggling. "The state hasn't kept its promises, so some ex-fighters decided to go and find money for themselves," said Latey, 31, his face lit by the moon as he poured a glass of sweet tea. "For them, banditry and rebellion are one and the same. Someone who has no money, who has had nothing in his pocket for months, is going to go where he can find some."
The United Nations has tightened travel restrictions for its staff around Agadez, an ancient Saharan trading town, and Niger's army is about to deploy a special U.S.-trained company of 150 soldiers to fight outlaws in the region. Washington fears the history of poverty and rebellion makes fertile recruiting ground for what it says are terrorists. Some see the Sahel region on the southern fringe of the desert as a secondary front in its war on terror, drawing parallels with Afghanistan. "We have noticed patterns of trafficking, illegal activity -- there is potential interaction between various groups," said a senior U.S. official in the capital, Niamey. "Up to this point they have mostly been isolated cases of banditry, but the situation provides the potential for other kinds of action."
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
10/13/2004 2:36:16 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[9 views]
Top|| File under:
Osama bin Laden's feelings, like his whereabouts, remain a mystery. But if he were to suddenly surface tomorrow to deliver a State of the Jihad speech, it might sound something like this:
"Fellow members of Al Qaeda - Islam is in mortal danger from the West. Americans are the new Mongols, successors to the infidel hordes who sacked Baghdad and other Islamic capitals in the 13th century. They represent both a physical and a spiritual threat, as their materialistic ideology, their emphasis on the individual and the secular, can seduce believers away from the true path of Islam. Jihad is the antidote to this poison. As a real war, it offers an opportunity to strike the infidels. As a state of being, it offers participants a way to prove their worthiness before God."
Three years after the attacks of Sept. 11, the United States is still struggling to identify its main adversaries in the war on terrorism. The US knows their identity, of course. They are the members of Al Qaeda and its associatedjihadist groups around the globe. But knowing who they are, in terms of grasping the way they look at the world, their philosophies, their hopes, and their plans, is another story.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
10/13/2004 2:32:47 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I prefer AQ graves to look at.
Posted by: Capt America ||
10/13/2004 8:54 Comments ||
Top||
#2
If we can't have AQ graves, then putting their heads on poles will suffice as well. Hell, you could even take that on the road--I'd pay to see bin Laden on a stick.
Posted by: Dar ||
10/13/2004 10:51 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Osama bin Ladenâs feelings, like his whereabouts, remain a mystery.
The latest edition (#23) of the Al-Qa'ida-related journal Sawt Al- Jihad includes an article by Abd Al-Rahman Ibn Salem Al-Shamari praising the beheading of an Egyptian citizen in Iraq. The author emphasized that a Muslim is obligated to be loyal to his religion only, and not to his national identity or to his country, and therefore all non-believers are the same, regardless of whether they are Arabs.
"'May your hand be strengthened!' - so said all those who saw the video that showed the slaying of the Egyptian spy in service of the American army in Iraq I mean all those of the true faith. You are wrong if you think that it was only the Egyptian spy who was slain. No, for among those who fell to that happy dagger were a mighty infidel tyranny and an idol who is worshipped instead of Allah; did you not see this as he was slain?!
"A spy has been slain, one spy among others, and the Jihad fighter [who slew him] has come closer to Allah by way of his [the spy's] blood. Yet what is the novelty in this lowly spy whose slaying we have seen these very days? The novelty, and we ask of Allah that there be more [like him], is that a spy has been slain, and this spy looked like an Arab, had an Arab name, and spoke Arabic! The novelty lies in the triumph of the faith in the one God and in the raising of the banner of 'There is no God but Allah' over and above all other allegiances, be they of ethnicity, language, identity, or nationality."
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
10/13/2004 2:29:51 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Check out the burkha-babe centerfold--you can almost make out an ankle!
Posted by: Dar ||
10/13/2004 10:29 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Come closer to Allah - drink the blood of a spy !
I wonder how low they can get.
Posted by: Elder of Zion ||
10/13/2004 10:49 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Awfully poetical, though. Drunk on language, someone once said.
Local insurgents in the city of Fallujah are turning against the foreign fighters who have been their allies in the rebellion that has held the U.S. military at bay in parts of Iraq's Sunni Muslim heartland, according to Fallujah residents, insurgent leaders and Iraqi and U.S. officials. Relations are deteriorating as local fighters negotiate to avoid a U.S.-led military offensive against Fallujah, while foreign fighters press to attack Americans and their Iraqi supporters. The disputes have spilled over into harsh words and sporadic violence, with Fallujans killing at least five foreign Arabs in recent weeks, according to witnesses. "If the Arabs will not leave willingly, we will make them leave by force," said Jamal Adnan, a taxi driver who left his house in Fallujah's Shurta neighborhood a month ago after the house next door was bombed by U.S. aircraft targeting foreign insurgents.
#4
He's tossed in the HTML for a 4000-wide table just before his comment in order to louse up the site formatting.
Posted by: Steven Den Beste ||
10/13/2004 8:37 Comments ||
Top||
#5
He tries to do that at least once a day, in the wee hours when the editors are nitey-nite.
Guess we'll have to set up a night watch.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/13/2004 8:51 Comments ||
Top||
#6
WaPo as a source of optimism about Iraq is the second by-line in this story.
Posted by: Capt America ||
10/13/2004 8:53 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Jamal Adnan, a taxi driver who left his house in Fallujah's Shurta neighborhood a month ago after the house next door was bombed by U.S. aircraft targeting foreign insurgents
We left the next-door neighbors house standing? That doesn't sounds like us "Evil" Americans at all.
Posted by: Charles ||
10/13/2004 8:55 Comments ||
Top||
#8
One of the foreign guerrillas killed by local fighters was Abu Abdallah Suri, a Syrian and a prominent member of Zarqawi's group, whose body was discovered Sunday
dancing raisins, or popcorn? Popcorn, I think.
Oh, and the bit about ancestors graves. Making a big deal about graves is a pre-islamic custom i think, and is big to Sufis. The Salafis wont have it at all, not even gravestones. This alienated muslims in Bosnia from the Salafis, and seems to be having an effect in Fallujah, where evidently not everybody is wahabi.
So what we did was let the folks there live under their Salafi "liberators". till the locals got sick of the jihadis.
Let the plan continue.
Posted by: Dan ||
10/13/2004 11:10 Comments ||
Top||
#10
capt america:
Theres been a difference of tone among the different arms of the WaPo. Editorial page is straight liberal hawk - pretty close to my positions. The National Bureau reporters, with a couple of exceptions, seem to have it in for Bush, and have been farther left on Iraq related issues. The Baghdad bureau has been somewhat in between - they lean "quagmire" but have a knack for insightful stories. If they print something positive like this, it doesnt mean the worlds turned upside down (since they arent "on the enemy side") but its a pretty good indication SOMETHING real is happening, since they are lean towards the negative.
#11
only a matter of time before the subtle cracks became fissures. The locals may not like us being around, but I think they are learning that a secular U.S. doesn't give a flip if they pray on a grave or on a palm tree.
#12
Local insurgents in the city of Fallujah are turning against the foreign fighters who have been their allies in the rebellion that has held the U.S. military at bay in parts of Iraq's Sunni Muslim heartland, according to Fallujah residents, insurgent leaders and Iraqi and U.S. officials.
My memory serves me that this was avoided b/c of politics. Love the WaPo's "the rebellion that has held the U.S. military at bay..." HOGWASH!
Posted by: BA ||
10/13/2004 11:53 Comments ||
Top||
#13
You might be right BA, maybe the IGC wanted us out of fallujah because they figured in the long run the locals and the foreign arabs would run afoul of each other. Let them waste each other over religious disputes and eventually the masses will want order and will turn to the IGC and U.S. to provide it. At the time I did not predict this but maybe there was a logic to it after all.
#14
#13, JH: I submit to you...you are probably correct. My gut instinct tells me to wipe 'em off the face of the planet and sort things out after, but there may be some logic in this. I'm sure the civilian population are tiring of these fights on their streets and I've read where many want us to come in and run these goons out.
Posted by: BA ||
10/13/2004 14:29 Comments ||
Top||
Afghanistan was set to start counting votes on Wednesday from a historic presidential election after several candidates backed off from declaring the poll illegal. The ballots poured into collection centres across the country, brought by donkey, road and helicopter, with officials expecting to start counting sometime on Wednesday.
US Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad has been influential in persuading several rivals of frontrunner President Hamid Karzai to abandon a boycott of Saturday's landmark poll over what they said were fraud and irregularities. The Afghan-UN Joint Electoral Management Body (JEMB) is setting up a panel to investigate. Privately, election officials say few votes were fraudulent and would have no major effect on the poll. Karzai's chief rival, Yunus Qanuni, on Monday withdrew a boycott call, issued after suspicions emerged of illegal multiple voting after a mix-up at some polling stations over the type of ink used to mark voters' fingers. Another main candidate, Uzbek general Abdul Rashid Dostum, came to Kabul and met Khalilzad, but there was no immediate word on the outcome of the meeting. Agreement by Dostum to recognise the election, joining Qanuni and Hazara leader Mohammad Mohaqiq, would signal the collapse of the boycott that had undermined a vote in which millions of Afghans turned out despite threats of attacks by Islamic fundamentalist Taleban insurgents.
These guys have to learn how to lose gracefully. Come to think of it, so do a lot of Democrats.
#4
I did not read the comment as a reference to the 2000 election but as a reference to the sacking of Republican offices and other acts of violence that have been characteristic of only one party in this country in the current election.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
10/13/2004 9:25 Comments ||
Top||
#5
then why the reference to "lose" - nobodys lost the 2004 general election yet.
I hope whoever loses does so gracefully. I see plenty of signs of absence of such grace on both sides.
The Taleban's failure to violently disrupt Afghanistan's first presidential election will demoralise the militia and impact its efforts to attract new followers, officials said on Tuesday. For months Taleban leaders warned they would mark Saturday's polls with bloodshed and chaos, but the threats turned out to be hollow. Attacks were limited to isolated landmine blasts and minor clashes.
My guess is that activity's waned because of the pressure on them in Pakistan. I think the "Taliban" anymore is a 95% Pak phenomenon, a point we should be pushing in our propaganda...
A large fuel truck loaded with rockets and explosives was stopped on the outskirts of southern Kandahar on the eve of the election by Afghan security forces, while the Taleban in fact suffered the biggest casualties over the election period when 24 insurgents were killed in central Uruzgan province in a US airstrike that same day.
The son of Libyan leader Muammar Gadhafi proposed a new plan for general reforms in which he said his country will move away from the Middle East and reduce spending on the military. "Libya has decided to separate from the so-called Middle East," Seif al-Islam Gadhafi said at the opening session of a Tripoli conference for business leaders from Western countries. Gadhafi said he is proposing a new reform plan that will include major cuts in military expenditure. "There is no need anymore to continue spending on the military field," he said. "Instead, we will direct such spending to development."
The conference opened a day after the European Union ended 12 years of sanctions against Libya and eased an arms embargo to reward the North African country for giving up efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction. Gadhafi said the decision heralded "a new era for the Libyan-Western relationship."
Posted by: Fred ||
10/13/2004 12:03:11 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
i'd feel better about this if his name didn't translate to "sword of islam"
Posted by: SON OF TOLUI ||
10/13/2004 0:08 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Actually jr. appears to have a brain and some common sense. He was the one who pushed papa to join the world of reality in the first place.
Posted by: Capt America ||
10/13/2004 9:01 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Do we have any photos of his body guards?
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
10/13/2004 9:07 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Nice choice they have. Be part of the middle east, or Africa. Not a choice I'd want to make. Poor little LIbya with all their oil, hoping Egypt and Algeria don't notice them and gobble them up.
If I was Gadhafi I'd keep the anti Middle East Talk down and work on a very loose alliance with all of the North African Arab nations (Chad, Sudan, Niger, Mauritania, Morroco, etc) and call i the United Arab Republic. Even if the alliance is on paper only, and composed primarily of losers, it would give them all prestige.
#6
Hey. The Old Ghadaffi wasn't the evildoer that everyone thought he was. He actually passed commands that forced Libyan men to treat their women with respect and equality. Kind of cool.
#7
a real humanitarian! Spemble brains dissembles again!
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/13/2004 14:25 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Yeah, if it wasn't for that little Lockerbie thing, he mighta got, like, his own sitcomn or something, right, kid?
Real barrel of laughs Mo was back in the day.
#9
[Qaddafi] actually passed commands that forced Libyan men to treat their women with respect and equality.
Also had great respect for women's fashions. A true pioneer in the field of cross-dressing.
Rolled up the entire Iraqi army in ten days, with minimal casualties — so let the nay-saying and fault-finding begin...
Front-line U.S. troops often lacked access to surveillance and intelligence data during the invasion of Iraq because of computer glitches, Technology Review magazine reported on Tuesday, citing a largely classified report by Rand Corp.
I think I'll go bang my head against the wall for awhile. It'll feel so good when I stop. We had tighter integration of intel and recon than any army's ever had before, but it wasn't perfect, so there must be fault to be found...
One battalion commander told the magazine he had almost no information on the strength and position of Iraqi forces after his division took control of a key bridge south of Baghdad on April 2, 2003. Lt. Col. Ernest Marcone said he was told to expect one Iraqi brigade advancing south from the Baghdad airport, but instead was forced to battle three separate Iraqi brigades advancing from three directions, the magazine reported. What ensued was the largest counterattack of the Iraq war. U.S. troops won because of their superior weapons, greater firepower and air support, but not because they had any real insight into enemy positions through new technology, the magazine said. "Next to the fall of Baghdad, that bridge was the most important piece of terrain in the theater, and no one can tell me what's defending it," Marcone told the magazine. "Not how many troops, what units, what tanks, anything. There's zero information getting to me." Marcone's experience was typical, according to a largely classified report being prepared for the Pentagon by the Rand Corp, which concludes that front-line commanders often did not benefit from cutting-edge technologies. These were aimed at moving toward a smaller, smarter fighting force connected by advanced communications systems.
... and he apparently didn't have them. But he did have other communications, that went two ways. So older-fashioned means were used to save his bacon...
Walter Perry, a senior Rand researcher, told the magazine the report uncovered a "digital divide" that allowed division commanders to get a good view of the battlefield, but left front-line commanders basically in the dark. The problems preventing effective relaying of crucial data included lengthy download times, software failures and lack of access to high-bandwidth communications. Pentagon officials highlighted the success of networked forces during the Iraq war, including the case of a U.S. radar plane detecting Iraqi troops during a blinding sandstorm and ordering in bombers using satellite-guided bombs. But the report found that ground forces had serious problems getting access to vital intelligence and surveillance data. In three cases, U.S. vehicles were attacked when they stopped to receive data on enemy positions, it said.
Look hard enough and you can always find something to criticize. I imagine the problems are being worked out.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/13/2004 11:26:51 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
One battalion commander told the magazine he had almost no information on the strength and position of Iraqi forces after his division took control of a key bridge south of Baghdad on April 2, 2003.
Isn't that what patrols are for? And isn't it a manuever battalion commander's duty to see to it intel is gathered in this time honored way? Are operational commanders now relying solely on information they are given from above?
Lt. Col. Ernest Marcone said he was told to expect one Iraqi brigade advancing south from the Baghdad airport, but instead was forced to battle three separate Iraqi brigades advancing from three directions, the magazine reported.
Sounds like at least one of the briagdes were found, the other began movement later. The Iraqi commander controlling those units must have staggered their movement.
What ensued was the largest counterattack of the Iraq war. U.S. troops won because of their superior weapons, greater firepower and air support, but not because they had any real insight into enemy positions through new technology, the magazine said.
I guess you can sit and become knowledgable about the enemy's intentions as they manuver closer to you up to point but sooner or later you gotta fight.
"Next to the fall of Baghdad, that bridge was the most important piece of terrain in the theater, and no one can tell me what's defending it," Marcone told the magazine. "Not how many troops, what units, what tanks, anything. There's zero information getting to me."
This doesn't sound like a US commander talking. It seems to me this guy may have been grossly misquoted to make this article work. Every battalion commander in every army worldwide knows the best intel is from patrols. You may have satellites and you may have STARS, but when its time to fight, the best info is obtained through patrols and scouts.
Following Gulf War I (you know, the one with the "grand coalition" in which the US performed exactly the same percentage -- most -- of the actual fighting as the recent Iraq war, but which was largely paid for by Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and a few others -- for which the elder Bush's admin. was admonished for going "cup in hand" to the world in an unseemly way ...) the WaPo had a front-page article on bomb accuracy. The story basically tried to build itself on the hook that post-war BDA assessments had shown direct hit percentages less than the public must have believed from viewing the dramatic video of smart bombs hitting targets. Can't recall the figures, but the story presented the preliminary stats as showing that the hit percentage was "only" such-and-such -- a number that was multiples of any hit percentage achieved in any previous war since the invention of the aircraft.
Perhaps others here will be able to confirm/debunk this, but I also recall the post-Gulf War non-story to follow up on literally years and years of negative reporting on the Maverick missile. I believe "whistle-blowing" stories on that system were a staple of 60 Minutes and even the defense press for eons. But in Kuwait, there was this odd phenomenon of Iraqi (Soviet design, mostly) armored vehicles/tanks being found flipped upside down (or their turrets popped off). With a shallow crater along side. Seems the over-budget, over-schedule, seriously flawed, hopelessly ineffective Mavericks had achieved kinetic kills on the vehicles (their penetration was so good) and the warheads had exploded underneath when they hit the ground, flipping some of the vehicles over.
And of course we all knew the Abrams couldn't operate in the desert, because the dust would screw up the turbines, right? I do recall taunting a few deserving types after the Gulf War by asking them if they thought the Iraqi generals were believers in the US hardware that had been maligned and nitpicked to death during the 80s buildup ....
#3
Yeah we won easy. against a third world army subject to years of sanctions, and largely unwilling to fight. This is NOT to disparage the courage or efficiency of our troops, or the qualities of weapons, intell, etc. But IF we go to war with a "worthy adversary", say China, its gonna be too late to do post-mortems then. This is the chance after a real war to nit pick ANYTHING that might have gone wrong. Seems like a good thing to do.
#4
Fault finding and lesson learning is why we have the best military in the world likely to increase its qualitative superiority against its challengers. It's also the way contractors sell more goods and services to the DOD. Private vice becomes a public virtue.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
10/13/2004 9:12 Comments ||
Top||
#5
There's a difference between doing a post-mortem to improve your process and conducting a hunt for a scapegoat. The press is incapable of doing the former, and will simply treat any attempt at it as the latter.
I'd think you'd have realized that by now, LH. The press is not on our side.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
10/13/2004 9:19 Comments ||
Top||
#6
"the press" didnt do the postmortem. Rand did. And was quoted in Technology review, where the concern of readers is probably less with Bush vs Kerry than with "are there procurement opportunities for my systems integrations business?". Rooters headline may be a bit overdone, but its hardly a scapegoat hunt. Some folks need to thicken their skins just a bit.
#7
LH is right. The benefits of free speech vastly outweigh its costs. And there are costs; the curent drumbeat of negativity being one of them. But the boomers will soon be gone from power in the unacountable estates like the press and academe.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
10/13/2004 9:28 Comments ||
Top||
#8
I just want to know how they manage to keep any computerized units functioning in that environment without overheating or gunked up by that powdery sand.
Posted by: Dar ||
10/13/2004 10:33 Comments ||
Top||
Lt. Col. Ernest Marcone is mentioned quite a bit in the paper as is an analysis of tech used in the conflict. I find the Army to be one of the few very large organizations willing to show public displays of introspection. Which is one of the reasons they are so damn good.
#10
PH--Wow--great link! Thanks--the history in this alone is fascinating. Very encouraging for a civvie like me to see yet another demonstration of how professional our professional military is.
Posted by: Dar ||
10/13/2004 11:20 Comments ||
Top||
#11
The first step in learning from mistakes is to acknowledge mistakes were made.From there you can try to figure out how to fix the problem.
Which is something Kerry is unable to see.The US military learned from its experience in Viet Nam and the Soviets' in Afghanistan how not to fight a lightly armed foe in difficult ground.Evidently Kerry wanted the US to line up the Army shoulder to shoulder and march thru the Afghan hills while the First Armored Div. cruised the streets of Kabul.
Altho I find it disturbing that a lack of recon info getting to the sharp end has persisted from the Gulf War to the Iraq War.(I found it astonishing how often written accounts of Gulf War stated US troops encountered Iraqi forces unexpectantly-considering we had complete control of air and @ 10% world's helos in theatre.)Hopefully the US Army is in midst of changing recon data going directly to Div.HQ,then being dispersed downstream,to data being collected by combat battalion assests and then being sent to higher HQs.I suppose the Army may prefer the data being sent to everyone at once,but I would rather the local recon assets be at Batt. level.
Posted by: Stephen ||
10/13/2004 13:00 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Altho I find it disturbing that a lack of recon info getting to the sharp end has persisted from the Gulf War to the Iraq War.(I found it astonishing how often written accounts of Gulf War stated US troops encountered Iraqi forces unexpectantly-considering we had complete control of air and @ 10% world's helos in theatre.)Hopefully the US Army is in midst of changing recon data going directly to Div.HQ,then being dispersed downstream,to data being collected by combat battalion assests and then being sent to higher HQs.I suppose the Army may prefer the data being sent to everyone at once,but I would rather the local recon assets be at Batt. level.
The basic problem in battlefield reconnaisence is the concept of space and time. You can get a complete picture of a battlefield from a variety of means, and develop faster and better ways of conveying the information to battalion commanders, but after that process is done, the only thing you have is a snap shot of the battlefield. It may be accurate at the time it was taken, but computers cannot mesh through the acquired the data, and humans are required to sort through and make the assessments. You will have errors in either case.
You add to that passing the information amoungst command levels, from a theatre recon team to an army/corps command to operational HQs and then getting the info to the warfighters, company and platoon commanders, and it all may be information they just don't need to win a fight.
I suspect this electronic recon is best applied to logisticians making sure combat units get the fuel, beans and bullets they need to win a fight, Doctrine, training and battalion-acquired recon will win the tactical battles.
#14
Didn't read any of these particular articles in question but since I have to write how our guys use this stuff for a living, this is my two cents worth. We do tend to dig the peanuts out of our crap to the point of over reacting in the wrong direction, that being said, we could not have fought this war to the level we did without the same systems that are being criticized. That was a major part of the problem was that because we outperformed the old fashioned stuff so well, we didn't have any choice but to overload the systems to get the job done.
As far as the patrolling aspect mentioned most of these units were running to fast to conduct recon in the traditional fashion. There are far too many cases of us over running units before they could stand to as they got word of our approach.
Take all this with a grain of salt, we got it, we are working it.
U.N. nuclear inspectors are welcome to return an Iraqi minister said on Tuesday in response to concerns of an "apparent systematic dismantlement" of Saddam Hussein's once-vigorous nuclear program. Science and Technology Minister Rashad Omar was responding to an International Atomic Energy Agency report on Monday that neither Baghdad nor Washington appeared to have noticed the disappearance of nuclear equipment and materials once closely monitored by the agency. "The locations that belong to the Science and Technology ministry are secure and under our control," Omar told Reuters. He said nothing had gone missing since a looting spree after last year's U.S.-led invasion, which the United States and Britain said was to rid Iraq of weapons of mass destruction. Both countries now admit Saddam had no banned weapons. Omar said Tuwaitha, a vast compound south of Baghdad that included Iraq's main nuclear facility, was being turned into a science park. "The IAEA came back one month ago, they inspected the plant and others and didn't say anything. "We are transparent. We are happy for the IAEA or any other organization to come and inspect," he said, adding he had not seen the agency's report to the Security Council.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/13/2004 11:17:51 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
IAEA/US = penis envy
Posted by: Capt America ||
10/13/2004 8:57 Comments ||
Top||
Investigators have conducted their first scientific exhumation of Iraq's "killing fields," discovering hundreds of bodies which they hope will help convict Saddam Hussein of crimes against humanity. They say nine trenches in a dry, dusty riverbed at the Hatra site in northern Iraq contain at least 300 bodies, and possibly thousands, including unborn babies and toddlers still clutching toys. "It is my personal opinion that this is a killing field," said Greg Kehoe, a U.S. lawyer appointed by the White House to work with the Iraqi Special Tribunal. "Someone used this field on significant occasions over time to take bodies up there, and to take people up there and execute them. I've been doing grave sites for a long time, but I've never seen anything like this, women and children executed for no apparent reason. It's a perfect place for execution."
The victims are believed to be minority Kurds killed during 1987-88. One trench contains only women and children, apparently killed by small arms. Another contains only men, apparently killed by automatic gunfire. Kehoe said the women and children had been taken from their villages with their belongings, including pots and pans, shot -- often in the back of the head -- then bulldozed into the trench. Some of the mothers died still holding their children. One young boy still held a ball in his tiny arms. A thick stench hangs over the site, as well as at a makeshift morgue nearby.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/13/2004 11:20:40 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
300 found. Now to find the 180,000 more Kurds killed during the Anfal.
Posted by: ed ||
10/13/2004 1:51 Comments ||
Top||
#2
It's happening again in Sudan. We'll all say "never again" and feel all righteous, but not actually do anything until we have another Wyoming's worth of the dead people. Then we'll move in and say "never again" again.
It's time to do that now. The country's relatively pacified and they've had their election. We can move on to the next problem, while maintaining a force to hunt for al-Qaeda. Looks like Bush has an exit strategy in mind...
... and he'll be blamed for it too ...
Posted by: Fred ||
10/13/2004 11:23:29 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"RELATIVELY" pacified. While the election went off well, Im not sure that things are quiet in the rural areas of the Pashtun provinces. This sounds a tad premature, even if its a smart way to push the Euros to relieve overstretch.
#2
This is a well conceived strategy to keep NATO's skin in the game, so they don't go limp or cut and run -- their first instinct.
Posted by: Capt America ||
10/13/2004 8:59 Comments ||
Top||
#3
LH, If it goes south, it's NATO's fault. If NATO's ineffective, replace it with bi-lateral agreements with alies and let France and the rest join China and turn Muslim. That seems like motivation to NATO to get it right.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
10/13/2004 9:07 Comments ||
Top||
#4
NATO is ineffective is not a binary thing, Mrs D. Nato is effective at SOME things. In afghanistan its done a decent job patrolling Kabul, and a couple of other places. Its NOT effective at aggressive actions in the mountains against the Taliban. At least not AFAIK. I dont think its worth it taking risks in Afghanistan to try to prove some point about NATO.
#5
If NATO cannot engage in military operations other than being heavy policemen, we should get out. By the 2005-2006 time frame, things should be pretty tame. If the Taliban & Co. return, we can too. Time for the Euros to share the burden here or show their true colors.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
10/13/2004 9:22 Comments ||
Top||
#6
NATO was designed to engage in military operations in EUROPE. And the North Atlantic. NOT to engage in counter insurgency ops several thousand miles from Europe. That theyve done as well as they have in Afghanistan is a good thing. Maybe they need to refocus. Saying here, take this NOW, or we get out is shortsighted in the extreme.
BTW, its JUST what the French want. They want Euro interventions overseas to be under the EU, NOT Nato. To reduce US influence. UK isnt keen on that approach. If we are wise, we will continue to discourage that, and support Nato.
As for being able to return if the Taliban does, thats not a good idea. There are folks in Afghanistan whove taken risks for us. If the Taliban takes control of an Afghan city for one week, alot of our friends will pay with their lives. When we come back we may find some reluctance to help us.
Things should be pretty tame by 2006? I hope so, but like Rummy says, war is by its nature unpredictable.
#7
Nato is effective at SOME things. In afghanistan its done a decent job patrolling Kabul, and a couple of other places. Its NOT effective at aggressive actions in the mountains against the Taliban
Fine, then let's keep 1,000 or so special forces in the mountains and the border regions to the south. The bigger point is that the really labor-intensive tasks-- like policing Kabul and other cities-- should be done by NATO, allowing us to move thousands of troops elsewhere.
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.
ISLAMABAD (Reuters) - Two Pakistani villagers were killed in an explosion on Wednesday when they tried to break open an anti-tank mine with a hammer to use the casing for a stove to fry snacks, police said.
The latest edition (#23) of the Al-Qa'ida-related journal Sawt Al- Jihad includes an article by 
Local insurgents in the city of Fallujah are turning against the foreign fighters who have been their allies in the rebellion that has held the U.S. military at bay in parts of Iraq's Sunni Muslim heartland, according to Fallujah residents, insurgent leaders and Iraqi and U.S. officials. Relations are deteriorating as local fighters negotiate to avoid a U.S.-led military offensive against Fallujah, while foreign fighters press to attack Americans and their Iraqi supporters. The disputes have spilled over into harsh words and sporadic violence, with Fallujans killing at least five foreign Arabs in recent weeks, according to witnesses. "If the Arabs will not leave willingly, we will make them leave by force," said Jamal Adnan, a taxi driver who left his house in Fallujah's Shurta neighborhood a month ago after the house next door was bombed by U.S. aircraft targeting foreign insurgents.
