Seven Christians, arrested for their faith, were released on the condition that they renounce religious practice, which they carried out privately in their homes. Of the seven released on Wednesday, six were part of a group of Protestants, who were arrested on May 28 in a raid by the muttawa, or religious police, in Riyadh.
Think Mike Isikoff will be all over this one?
The seventh Christian released is Indian evangelical Samkutty Varghese, who was jailed last March. Police used his address book to track down the other Christians. Two other Christians are still being held for 'further investigation', authorities said. According to AsiaNews sources close to Indian citizen Vijay Kumar (45) of Tamil Nadu, one of the freed prisoners, their release took place after having signed a document in which they renounced the prayer sessions and religious practices they had been carrying out in their homes. In Saudi Arabia, only Islam is allowed public expression.
Up to a few years ago, "a Christian was not even allowed to pray in private," said Father Bernardo Cervellera, director of AsiaNews. He added that now, because of international pressure, the Saudi royal family is allowing non-Muslims to practice their religion in the privacy of their homes. "Unfortunately, however," the priest explained, "the police and a considerable part of Saudi society do not accept this liberalisation, so Christians are arrested."
And beaten. And tortured. And executed.
Meanwhile, there's another unconfirmed report that an MP at Gitmo handled a Qu'ran with one gloved hand instead of two ...
Posted by: Steve White ||
06/13/2005 00:23 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Wow, what a modern, progressive, healthy society they have themselves over there. Those sandy assholes are not our friends, they still live in the 9th century, but they want our money. We have got to get out from under the heel of their boot and find some real alternatives to oil.
#2
Just five days ago the Magic Kingdom was denying .... "allegations that the kingdom has arrested and tortured Christians, saying such actions run counter to Islamic tolerance"link. ...."the allegations 'don't go with the principals and values of the kingdom and above all our tolerant Islamic belief which guarantees the rights of Muslims and residents of different religions and ethnicities alike'."
Seems that someone forgot to properly inform the Muttawa of this NEW policy. SA policy is residents of different religions are guaranteed rights but nothing in that statement implies EQUAL rights. In fact the rule is: Members of other religions in the conservative Islamic kingdom generally are allowed to practice their beliefs in private but are prohibited from seeking converts or holding organized religious gatherings. Now there's a story for NEWSWEAK if they wish to follow up on it.
#3
Big Jim, are you familiar with the fact that most of SA oil production is centered in a narrow (15 km) strip on the eastern coast? Odder still the area is mainly inhabited by Shia! Weird no? There's a fine post about this in the archives.... anybody have it handy?
Were any "Korans" looked at with a sour face during this? That is what's important.
Who cares if a few mud-people get tortured, raped, and executed? We want to know of any muslims could have been offended while burning and pissing on Bibles and Torahs....
The Omani government has said there are now no political prisoners in the country after a general amnesty granted by Sultan Qaboos ibn Said to 31 citizens convicted of plotting to overthrow the government through an outlawed organization. Lt. Gen. Malik ibn Sulaiman Al-Maamari, inspector general of police, said the convicts, mostly in their 30s, were released soon after the royal pardon on Wednesday. Al-Maamari said those arrested during protests seeking the release of the 31 people have also been freed. "There are no political prisoners in the country whatsoever."
Sheikh Ahmed ibn Hamed Al-Khalili, the Grand Mufti, has welcomed the royal pardon, urging the youth to understand Islam in its truest spirit." Deputy Prime Minister Sayyid Fahd ibn Mahmouud Al-Said said the pardon was aimed at "reforming erring citizens to serve society" in keeping with Oman's age-old traditions.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/13/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - South Korea's government is likely to seek an extension of its deployment of more than 3,000 troops in Iraq, the defense minister said Monday. Yoon Kwang-ung said he believes Iraq will need multinational forces until the middle of next year before its own security forces can take over. Asked whether the government plans to seek lawmakers' approval to extend the deployment, Yoon said: "At the moment, there is a big possibility it will go in that direction toward the end of this year."
South Korea deployed nearly 3,600 troops in northern Irbil late last year to help with reconstruction. In December, the National Assembly approved an extension of the mission through 2005.
Posted by: Steve ||
06/13/2005 09:05 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Well, lookie here - the Koreans are looking to extend their Iraqi vacation in the Kurdish sector.
#2
Appreciated none the less. 3,000 troops can handle the entire Kurdish region. Plus the Koreans and PeshmergaNew Iraqi Army can do lots of joint training exercises.
Posted by: Steve White ||
06/13/2005 9:29 Comments ||
Top||
#3
It's interesting that Korea is such a good ally here, yet is being annoying where the NorKs are concerned.
Don't let him in. He should never be allowed to set foot in this country.
Charles Jenkins, a U.S. soldier who deserted his Army unit 40 years ago and fled to North Korea, and his Japanese wife left their home in northern Japan on Monday for his first visit to the United States since he turned himself in late last year. Jenkins was scheduled to fly to Washington D.C. on Tuesday after spending a night in Tokyo. He has said he has no plans to move to the United States, but has repeatedly said he wants to see his 91-year-old mother, who lives in a nursing home in Roanoke Rapids, N.C. He was expected to stay in the United States for about a week.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/13/2005 00:15 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Jenkins is 65 years old, in poor health, and he lost 40 years of his life in N. Korea. He wants to visit his invalid mother who is 91. I for one have no problem with Jenkins being given some consideration to visit his mother in the USA for humanitarian reasons alone. During the Korean War, 1.5 million American men were conscripted. Perhaps Jenkins was one of the 1.5 conscripted, and in my opinion no country has the moral right to enslave young men to fight in the military against their will. Also, there were 80,000 draft dodgers in the Korean War who got off scott free, not to mention that we allowed countless numbers of Vietnam draft dodgers to come back to the USA and re-start their lives with no penalty. What's the big deal about keeping Jenkins away from his country of birth in his old age?
#2
Yer half right there Thotch...but I take umbridge at the consription = slavery; at least as far as the U.S. is concerned. Draft dodgers only got off "scott free" thanks to Jummuh. Did you for him? Something tells me you love draft dodgers...so get bent.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
06/13/2005 2:03 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Did you for him? Something tells me you love draft dodgers...so get bent.
Sorry to disappoint your pop-psych analysis of who I am. Draft was/has never been a threat to me. I'm a menopausal female. But I don't think one needs to be a male draft dodger to recognize the un-democratic underpinnings of conscription. Most civilized Western countries have done away with conscription and for good reason. You can't call yourself a free country if you force people to do risky things at your bidding against their will.
First do a maintance check on the tinfoil and repair as needed...as the radio waves and exotic beams may interfere with the following concept.
I don't care what you imagine a "free country" is or what you think a draft, a citizen, a republic, a democracy, or rights and responsibilities are.
/btw Thotch you're on my list.
Posted by: Red Dog ||
06/13/2005 3:29 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Well then I must be half suicidal to take on a "menopausal female" but what the heck. We can argue about conscription...I would say that conscription in defense of the US Constitution is not slave, and again, I would hazard a wager that you would disagree. And, what makes you think I ever said the draft was a threat to you? I said no such thing. My mistake was assuming you're a US citizen. My bad.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
06/13/2005 3:33 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Whatever, red dog. I doubt your type of pseudo macho man has ever "fought" in anything other than computer games. Dream on.
Yes, I'm a US citizen, rex mundi. And I'm not alone in viewing conscription as a negative - the military itself has no use for conscription either so I guess I'm in good company. I've found that most people who believe in conscription have never served on the front lines of battle themselves. They just want others to do so against their will. The Vietnam War, which heavily used conscripts, did not affect my freedoms one way or another, but it certainly took away freedoms from the young men who were draftees. The military profession should be chosen voluntarily, not be handed down as an edict.
#7
I've read that Jenkins enlisted on his own right out of high school well after the end of the Korean War. His defection was in the early 60's..
Still, I agree that he ought to be left alone. He's done hard time in Nork land and his attitude has been nothing but forthright, remorseful and repentant. In all his public utterances he has admitted that he made a huge mistake and has not tried to make excuses or ask for understanding - only lenience in light of having already suffered 40 years of slavery. While he may have a hard time resisting the temptation of the money for the inevitable book-deal, so far he has not sought to draw attention to himself through interviews, the talk-show circuit, left-wing anti-military groups, etc. - a refreshing change compared to the current crop of traitors like Pablo Paredes, et al.
Posted by: John in Tokyo ||
06/13/2005 5:03 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Whatever, red dog. I doubt your type of pseudo macho man has ever "fought" in anything other than computer games. Dream on.
...Said the person who can't change her name in a dialog box.
Lissen, everyone's not only got a right to an opinion, but to have an opinion on other people's opinion. YOURS is noted, weighed, and found wanting in the light of the vast majority of draftees that DIDN'T desert. (Which draft, by the way, DEMOCRATS have been trying to bring back.)
#9
Most civilized Western countries have done away with conscription. TG, you'll go far at Rantburg, saying France, Germany, Italy and at least a dozen other European countries are not civilized. http://www.nationmaster.com/red/graph-T/mil_con&int=-1 is UN.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
06/13/2005 7:27 Comments ||
Top||
#11
I agree about letting him in to visit, but I must take umbrage with "The Vietnam War, which heavily used conscripts, did not affect my freedoms one way or another". Sorry. The Vietnam war is connected, via history, to everything that came after - good and bad - including Watergate, Jimmy Carter, Iran Hostages, fall of the Berlin Wall, collapse of the Soviet Union and end of the Cold War. Didn't CAUSE all that stuff, but is connecected to it. Had there not been a Vietnam War, the world - yours included - would be different. Some things might be better, some would be worse, but see if you can figure out which things might be worse. Too bad you can't eliminate history.
Posted by: Bobby ||
06/13/2005 7:42 Comments ||
Top||
#12
During World War II after the initial rush by motivated ment to enlist there was a shortfall of manpower in the military. By the war's end somewhere around 86% of all military personnel were draftees. It is my view that if a person refuses to defend or support a state he/she should have no rights to protection by that state.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
06/13/2005 9:04 Comments ||
Top||
#13
I'll go along with TG in saying that in usual circumstances there should be no draft. Our military agrees.
In an all-out dog-fight such as WWII, the draft is necessary. If the survival of your country comes into question, you pick up a rifle and defend it.
As to Jenkins, I have to agree with Fred. He may be repentant but I don't want him in the country. Do a video-link with his Ma.
Posted by: Steve White ||
06/13/2005 9:33 Comments ||
Top||
#14
#7 John in Tokyo, good point. I would add: (1) In today's Kool-Aid climate, conscription should be flatly avoided. The drain on cohesion and morale would require a draconian disciplinary system, making life seriously un-fun for the volunteers who want to be there. (2) However, when the very survival of the nation is on the line, a draft is entirely appropriate, and in fact, I'd make the right to vote and other privileges of citizenship contingent on honorable service.
As for being civilized, I'd also note that conscription, of men and women alike, is part of the reason Israel remains a civilized country, rather than a Judenfrei Islamist shithole paradise.
Posted by: ST ||
06/13/2005 9:45 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Hienlin's"Starship Troopers"has a pretty good take on who should be a"full"citezen.
#16
Thotch - The man had some fairly easy choices to make and he made some pretty poor ones yet doesn't want to live with the consequences. He turned his back on his mother a long time ago when he betrayed his comrades and went to live in a piss hole ruled by a nasty troll, and then the son of a nasty troll. He turned his back on his country of birth and his peers (like my Father who actually fought in the Korean War when it was far from certain what the end would be!) who gave some of the best years of their lives to serve the country that had provided so much to them. I feel sorry for his mother but to allow him into our country is an incredible insult to alot of people living as well as those who died over 50 years ago in Korea serving our country. He should take the time to apologize amidst his globetrotting.
#18
Thotch Glesing2372 "the un-democratic underpinnings of conscription"
Actually they are very democratic, just a bit dated. Let me walk you through. The 'draft' or 'conscription' is actually the activation of the Federal Militia. For the United States since it founding, the Constitution, Article I, Section 8 gives the Congress the authority to organize all land and naval forces to include the militia. The Federal Militia is defined under Title X U.S.Code. Section 311: Militia: Composition and classes is that instrument. Besides the National Guard all males at least 17 years of age and no older than 45 years of age are members of the unorganized militia, para.(b)(2). Considering that in 1789, women, slaves and indians where not considered full members of the politicial body, all males therefore were part of the militia. The incorporation of all male rather than the reservation of authority and bearing of arms limited to a knighty class and its retainers marks a keen historical transition from rule by a few to rule by the many. That part that hasn't caught up yet, is that all citizen should carry the same burden.
#20
Actually they are very democratic, just a bit dated. Let me walk you through...That part that hasn't caught up yet, is that all citizen should carry the same burden.
You contradict your own argument. Conscription is highly selective, unfair, and the burden is not shared by all.
Someone suggested that voting should be dis-allowed without military service - I would agree with that concept. Then most of us on Rantburg, myself included, would lose our vote.
Another poster said that Jenkins was not a draftee. I did not know that. An account I read did not mention his status but said that he drank up to 10 beers on the night he deserted because he was so scared. He was inebriated, not thinking clearly, on the night when he made his decision to desert. I'm sure many a lawyer has used this type of defesnse to get scoundrels off worse charges than desertion stateside and we've tolerated it. No outcry. Also what I read was that Jenkins had intended to turn himself in after he deserted during the night but because he was so drunk he got lost and walked into the hands of the North Koreans. In other words he had not intended to go over to the enemy.
I'm a coward. I admit it. I hate scary rides. I would never join the military even if it meant I had to give up my vote. I don't see myself as being less a productive citizen than a military warrior. I am productive because I have other skills than warrior skills. Therefore, I have sympathy for other people - like Jenkins - who lose their heart to risk their lives as warriors. Not every person is meant to be a warrior, and that's why it's so laughable when a hear some of you think that it's perfectly sane to demand that every male in age group 18-25 be an instant warrior at your command, not that you have been warriors yourself - perhaps only a handful have at most.
Jenkins meant to do the right thing by turning himself in to US military authorities to face consequences, but he was drunk and everything else went wrong for him. What's the point of punishing him at age 65? He has already served 30 days in jail. As I said 80,000 cronscriptees avoided the draft in the Korean War. Did they lose their citizenship? The Vietnam War had even higher numbers of draft dodgers, draft avoiders who "hid" stateside in the reserves or in college or behind marriage and childbirth certificates or actually ran off to Canada. What was their punishment? Some sit in high political office representing both political parties. How were they punished? Jenkins did what many Americans did after him, he like they, did not want to die, but Jenkins was clumsy about making his get-away.
He committed a military crime, called desertion. He chose to go over to NK. He was free to make any choice he wanted. He chose wrong but more importantly he deserted not the US Army but his unit and his buddies. He has yet to pay his debt for that action. If NK was a poor choice and he later recognized that - well that was his alone to make not ours or his units, or his buddies or the command structure of the US Army. He is the worst kind of soldier who deserts his unit. The only consolation was it wasn't under fire in which he would be sentanced to death most likely.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
06/13/2005 15:15 Comments ||
Top||
#22
Uh ohh.... I'm getting soft.
I find some of TGs arguments fairly persuasive. But no book.
No, its an obligation shared by all able bodied men. Therefore it was equal when it was first initated upon the country's founding since those excluded were not considered part of the political body [women, slaves, indians]. What is selective is the call-up process which is why before its termination it was known as 'selective service'.
[What has become unequal is that women now enjoy full benefits of the body politics, but don't carry the obligation. Slaves being done away with in 1865 and the independent or sovereign indian nations being incorporated by the end of the 19th century.]
You have selective activation of the militia because you only take on as much as you need [or can support] for the threat. You still need [literaly] manpower for the economy [tax base upon which it will all have to be paid from] and sustainment of the society from which the militia is drawn.
#24
Wonder when he'll be hitting up the Army for 40 years worth of back pay?
All pay and time in service stopped when he was declared a deserter.
Then again, I once helped on a case of a seaman- apprentice who jumped ship - in 1929. Fast forward 60 years, he's in a rest home, senile. Wife remembers him mentioning being in the Navy and checks with VA to see if she can get help paying his medical bills. VA can't find his records, so they send the case to us.
Turns out he was never declared a deserter. What do you do with an 82-year old sailor still listed as active? Sooo... he gets 60 years of back pay as an E-2 and has to be medically retired.
#25
EU, I think you're dancing around the fact that conscription remains unfair, unequal, by being focused on one gender and on one small range of age groups to risk their lives, and that's why today conscription has become such a negative concept. To say that other taxpayers foot the bill of wars, so it's fair that young men's choices for their futures be summarily taken away is pure nonsense. Conscription is always the cheap screw politicians' and taxpayers' choice for waging war. How does paying taxes stateside equal the value of an individual's life or future? Given that choice I'm sure that many 18-25 males would be more than happy to work at 2 civilian jobs at a time so ages 26-33 able bodied men AND women could be shipped off to war fronts around the world. And depending on when a war is declared age groups 18-21 have not even had a chance to vote even once. There's a saying that most wars are declared by stupid cowardly old men and there's good reason for that saying because the ones least likely to be affected by death on the battle front are the ones who merrily see nothing wrong with thrusting others to face death.
There would never be a need for conscription if military warriors were paid the true market value salaries as what their jobs are worth. But the electorate is too cheap to pony up the money it would take to pay for warriors. The politicians realize this and so they dally with the concept of conscription - cheap labor for work no one else wants to do. That's why Democrats were the party in power in recent years to mandate conscription -they are the elites who always want to save social programs for the "poor and disabled" state side but place no value on what true warriors should be worth. Conscription is not only unfair but it's dangerous to true warriors, but once again the elites have rarely fought for anything other than bargains at Macy's White Sales, so what do they know about how dangerous it is to have a unwilling comrade in arms covering your back? That Jenkins recognized that he was scared and had lost his heart for waging war and tried to leave the battlefield actually saved his comrades' lives then if he had stayed and frozen in the heat of battle and put comrades in jeopardly who might have counted on his support.
#26
I have/had a blacksheep uncle who deserted the USMC in the late '30s. It took Roy Geiger (then a Col.) to to keep his ass out of serious slam, Fleet Marine Force Pacific instead.
#27
Don't the Swiss have two years mandatory national service? I missed Vietnam, not by much, but would've enlisted before being drafted. Younger son just got back from six months in Iraq with the Marines. Freedon isn't free, and somebody has to pay the piper. Ask the Swiss!
Posted by: Bobby ||
06/13/2005 21:26 Comments ||
Top||
#28
Basic Swiss military service is 4 months plus 12 times 3 weeks spread out until the age of 40 (iirc). Their doctrine is very limited: call in 600,000 men in 24h (they have their weapons at home so they can fight their way to assigned positions if necessary), withdraw into the Alps, make it very expensive for potential invaders attempting to occupy the country. Not sure it would work in a modern world.
Sweden has a different approach. They've gone from 1-2 years of service and able to raise 800,000 men in 24h -- thus destroying the economy, but not allowing the Red enemy to spend more than a few hours on Swedish territory -- down to soon a mere 3,000 people left for... UN missions.
The suspected leader of al Qaeda in Spain traveled with Sept. 11 hijacker Mohamed Atta aboard the Barcelona metro in the summer of 2001, a witness has testified. The testimony last week was the first to directly link lead defendant Imad Eddin Barakat Yarkas with Atta, the Egyptian believed to have piloted the first hijacked jetliner into the World Trade Center. Syrian Barakat Yarkas is one of 24 men on trial for belonging to al Qaeda and one of three charged with mass murder for helping plan the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
Atta traveled in Spain from July 9 to 16 of 2001 for what investigators believe was a final planning session with Ramzi bin al-Shaibah, currently in U.S. custody. "I am completely, absolutely sure I saw them, without a doubt, the three of them," the witness said, referring to Barakat Yarkas, Atta and bin al-Shaibah, in a video of his testimony reviewed by Reuters on Monday. The witness, a university professor, appeared in court on Wednesday. The prosecutor had not met the witness until that morning and his testimony was unexpected. The court ordered his identity be withheld for his protection.
The professor said he saw Atta, Barakat Yarkas and Ramzi bin al-Shaibah on the Barcelona metro in June 2001. The three men raised suspicion because they were wearing brand new matching black leather jackets during hot weather, and the witness said he spent the next three metro stops studying them. In the days following Sept. 11, the witness said he recognized Atta's picture because the two had spent that metro ride staring at each other. "I discovered that he was looking at me, very intently. ... When I see someone looking at me aggressively, I keep staring back. The look he had was exactly the same as in the photograph," the man said. "I kept looking at him. We didn't like each other," the witness said.
This article starring:
IMAD EDIN BARAKAT YARKAS
al-Qaeda
MOHAMED ATTA
al-Qaeda
RAMZI BIN AL SHAIBAH
al-Qaeda
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
06/13/2005 16:12 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
Europe's troubled constitutional treaty will be ditched by EU leaders at their crunch summit later this week.
"It's dead, Jean-Claude"
Without any formal announcement of its demise, the treaty will be allowed to slip quietly into infamy, according to senior EU sources preparing for the Brussels gathering on Thursday and Friday. After talks with fellow EU foreign ministers in Luxembourg, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw also delivered a clear signal that the treaty is effectively dead, saying: "The indications are, I think, that there is a general consensus that decisions on whether to proceed with ratification or not should be left to individual member states."
Until now, all 25 EU governments have permitted themselves to ratify the proposed new document - either by parliamentary assent or through referendum votes - by November 2006. Now, in the wake of the devastating treaty rejections in France and the Netherlands, this week's summit declaration will make no reference to the deadline. Instead the summit language will make clear that governments can make their own decisions in the wake of the double setback to the prospects of the treaty ever coming into force. EU officials are also considering a more concrete declaration of a "freeze" in the ratification process. That would let Luxembourg's prime minister Jean-Claude Juncker off the hook - as his nation prepares for its own treaty referendum later this month with odds growing of a third rejection. Whatever words are chosen at the summit, the effect will be the same. "The whole thing is being kicked into some very long grass indeed," said one official. "You could say it is effectively dead."
Another nod to the "no" voters, particularly in the Netherlands, is a decision to make no direct reference at all to Turkey in the summit declaration.
"Turkey? Never heard of them"
Dutch voters expressed concern about the pace of the enlargement and particularly the prospect of Turkey joining the EU. "The 'T' word will not be featuring now, but that does not mean any backsliding on the pledges of full negotiations with Turkey on EU membership," explained an official.
"No, no, certainly not."
The diplomatic manoeuvrings over the treaty in Turkey cannot be used to wish away the row over the future EU budget and the growing tensions over the British rebate. With British and French government ministers toughening the rhetoric over the rebate almost hourly, the scene is set for a major clash, with little prospect of agreement on spending.
Posted by: Steve ||
06/13/2005 14:21 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
We should at this point befriend turkey. They will be looking for a pal and we can use them to drive a wedge right through europe. That would provide hours upon hours of entertainment for me and probably millions of others.
#3
bigjim-ky - Nice idea, but I don't trust Turkey not to stab us in the back again the moment that whore France bats their eyes at them again.
Posted by: Laurence of the Rats ||
06/13/2005 15:53 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Let's not befriend Turkey. Instead, let's remind them quietly that this is what happens when they stab a true friend in the back. Then remind them that should they ever have a good friend again in the future that they should take better care.
Posted by: Steve White ||
06/13/2005 16:39 Comments ||
Top||
#5
This smacks of Europhile propaganda. It's a 'C' word, for starters... Those using the 'T' word are those who would slip the contents through without putting it to the public vote,
#6
Let's not befriend Turkey. Instead, let's remind them quietly that this is what happens when they stab a true friend in the back. Then remind them that should they ever have a good friend again in the future that they should take better care.
Turkey occupies a strategic position geographically, with regard to scarce water resources and at the edge of the Islamic ex-Soviet republics we are courting. They also control the Bosphorus.
Trust, but verify.
Posted by: too true ||
06/13/2005 19:44 Comments ||
Top||
#7
I think they are all made for each other. We should do what we can to make life more complicated for all of them. Act like a friend when it suits us, but avoid entangling alliances...I vaguely recall an older and more astute generation suggesting that.
#8
First item on the summit agenda will be the lecture, 5 sneaky ways to ratify treaties without the consent of the people. 2nd up will be a moving and nostalgic look at Adolph. Next up, lunch, of course! Jacques is up with a speech entitled, We Shall Eat Cake...after our lobster bisque, filet mingion, and shallot potatoes with curly carrots julianne.
#4
It's because we keep an eye out for you Bigjim.
Posted by: John Law ||
06/13/2005 17:43 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Muslim and civil liberties activists disagree. They argue that authorities are enforcing minor violations by Muslims and Arabs, while ignoring millions of other immigrants who flout the same laws.
Ok by me. Lets enforce it against all ILLEGAL ALIENS - including those who violate or overstay their visa and deport them as a matter of course. We can build detention centers to temporarily house them until we can ship their asses back to wherever-the-hell they came from.
And no, this is not based on RACE (besides Islam isn't a race) but on legal status.
From the Associated Press...
TUCSON, Ariz. — Humanitarian groups setting up emergency camps in the desert to try to save some of the illegal immigrants who die trying to cross the border said Thursday that Border Patrol surveillance will hinder their efforts. Churches and humanitarian groups have set up camps dubbed "Arks of the Covenant" — one in Arizona and one in northern Sonora, Mexico — to provide food, water and medical help to immigrants who otherwise might die in the desert's summer heat.
But the Rev. John Fife of Southside Presbyterian Church in Tucson said stricter Border Patrol surveillance will stop immigrants from seeking help because many immigrants will not enter a camp if they see a Border Patrol agent parked nearby.
Because, unlike the good Rev. Fife (a particularly unfortunate choice of name), the illegals are not stupid.
The Border Patrol has increased patrols and agents recently, especially in California and Texas, making Arizona the busiest point along the Mexican border for illegal crossers. Michael Nicley, who took over as interim chief of the Border Patrol's Tucson sector last August, said he has told officials that "there are no free zones in the Tucson sector. There is not an avenue of ingress where Border Patrol agents do not patrol."
He actually sounds like he wants to do his job.
He added that he had "no interest in keeping them from providing humanitarian aid. Quite the contrary." He said people who need help "time and time again" seek out Border Patrol agents and the presence of an agent within shouting distance is the quickest way to get an immigrant emergency medical care.
The Border Patrol said 172 migrant deaths in Arizona last fiscal year, while critics said at least 221 people died, many because of heat as summer temperatures in the desert rose up to 110 degrees.
The camps are part of a larger campaign by a coalition of human rights groups and churches called No More Deaths. The group is trying to draw attention to what it says is flawed immigration policy and urge reform.
#2
...Hey, by all means set up 'Arks Of The Covenant'. Remember what happened the LAST time somebody opened one of those:
www.foggydoggy.com/RAIDERS.gif
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
06/13/2005 7:42 Comments ||
Top||
#3
How about setting out signs in northern Mexico saying "Stay Home"?
#4
But the Rev. John Fife of Southside Presbyterian Church in Tucson said stricter Border Patrol surveillance will stop immigrants from seeking help because many immigrants will not enter a camp if they see a Border Patrol agent parked nearby.
#6
Your right Crazy, these people are illegal immigrants. They are breaking the law. If you assist them in doing that, you are breaking the law. Moreover the good reverand will probalbly rethink the whole issue the next time he has to drive his wife or little girl 120 miles to a hospital since they have all closed down near the border, because only 50% of their clients pay for services.
#8
What a bunch of crap. Try getting into Ecuador or Costa Rica illegally and see what happens.
The side bar to this is a very interesting question:
Normally politicians and these high profile human rights groups play to their constituency. If the people coming into the US are here illegally, why are they being considered a constituency? Me thinks that this is all a big ploy for massive voter fraud at some point or there is some oddball underground movement to have the Southwestern US returned to Mexico.
I for one do not understand why politicians are pandering to a group of people who THEORETICALLY do not have the write to vote and are here in the this country illegally.
Someone throw me a bone, I am completely clueless on why we have so many elected officials kissing the ring of the illegal alien business.
#9
Rev. John Fife of Southside Presbyterian Church in Tucson should set up assistance points SOUTH of the border. Enjoy your stay. BTW, in accordence with the Mexican Constitution, they can toss your ass out without cause.
Cause there are many in the Latin community who are loyal to their raza/race, sangre/blood rather than the greater identity of citizen of the United States of America. Since the practice worked so well for so many decades in the Black community, the politicians are playing the same game in the Hispanic community. Not withstanding the political and social cul-de-sac much of the black leadership has gotten their communities into, there are the same leadership types in the Hispanic community following the same game plan which demands homage to their idenity which in this case manifests itself in tolerating criminal activity, illegal immigration.
June 13, 2005: The U.S. Army continues to have problem attracting recruits for its non-combat jobs. All the other services are exceeding their recruiting goals this year, but the army is coming up short. The current fiscal year is eight months gone, and the army is 17 percent short of its annual recruiting goals. But all the other services met or exceeded their goals, putting overall recruiting short eight percent. That's some 8,000 troops, in a force of 1.4 million. The reserves are doing better, with an overall shortfall of a few thousand recruits in a force of 1.2 million.
In May, the army was 25 percent short in recruits for the active force, and has been short just about every month since January. There's no shortage of warriors, it's the 85 percent of the jobs that involved clerical or maintenance tasks that not enough people want. The marines, which put their "combat" role up front when recruiting, are getting all the people they need. Despite the fact that the marines have a higher casualty rate than the army in Iraq, marine recruiters challenge potential recruits to find out if they are good enough to be a marine. But the army has long stressed the "career" aspects of army service. This made sense, as only about 15 percent of army jobs involve combat. Since the 1970s, somewhat to the army's surprise, there has never been a shortage of recruits for these dangerous jobs. And until recently, there were plenty of recruits for the non-combat jobs. But when Iraq was invaded in 2003, and non-combat troops were attacked frequently, the word got around. Parents, and many of the recruits, no longer saw the army as a safe place to go for a few years, to learn skills, get education benefits, and some good stuff to put on the resume.
While casualties are low in Iraq, the lowest the army has ever suffered in wartime, a disproportionate number of the killed and wounded are non-combat troops. Decades of army recruiting, and training, that played down the danger angle for non-combat troops. This has now become a major recruiting problem. While the army never hid the fact that everyone in the army was, well, in a combat organization, the training and leadership over the last two decades has played down the possibility of combat, and combat injuries, for non-combat troops. As a result, the potential recruits feel, well, deceived. It's, like," "hey, dude, you didn't saying anything about getting shot or blown up."
The army has added to the shock by hastily revising training for combat support troops. Now non-combat troops get the kind of intense combat training they have not received for over a decade. Back in the early 1990s, the army created a separate basic training systems for combat troops, because political pressure forced them to mix male and female recruits in basic training units. Since the women could not keep up with the men in the standard, very intense, basic, the "non-combat basic" was toned down so the female recruits could handle it. This change has gone unnoticed outside the army, but NCOs and officers know the problem well. The discipline of non-combat troops declined after basic training was watered down. It became pretty easy to tell the difference between combat and non-combat troops, even when they were out of uniform. The combat troops carried themselves like soldiers, while many of the non-combat types appeared to be civilians in uniform. This became a serious problem when many non-combat troops got shot at in 2003, and their lack of discipline and preparation for combat made them more likely to get hurt.
The army is not having any problems getting current troops to stay in, and plans to solve the recruiting problem by keeping the more intense training for non-combat troops, and offering more financial incentives for specific skills it is looking for. Army recruiting ads now stress the fact that we're at war, and its dangerous out there. More non-combat jobs will be replaced with civilians, and, slowly, the army will retool its image to the way it used to be. The new doctrine is that everyone in the army is a soldier, and everyone must be ready to deal with combat. Eventually, army recruiters will have the same kind of success the marines currently have. The marines have always made it clear that every marine must be ready for combat at all times.
Posted by: Steve ||
06/13/2005 10:16 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
AHHH the TRUTH finally comes out!!!
So its not the combat branches that are coming up short. The Army is not missing goals because people do not want to fight, its because most of the enlistees WANT to fight hence the shortage in the "clerk and jerk" category.
Boy it gives you a glimpse into how the news is being spun when you read an article like this after hearing the local radio shows and the op ed pages blast away that Iraq is Viet Nam.
Can we just BURN the LA times and the Washington Post to the ground and lynch their editorial staff? Boy I wish.
#2
I did a scene in an up-coming movie a few weeks back where we trashed a newspaper editor's office and then tarred and feathered him and his assistant. I'm not a violent person so I just kept thinking of the New York Times, et al.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
06/13/2005 11:56 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Again, enlistment is economy based.
The Army had recruiting problems in the 80's and 90's when the economy was going good. Note how this is never addressed in MSM. It doesn't match the bigoted template.
Note how many job specialities which are having 'shortages' are basically the same as civilian base jobs.
The army is not having any problems getting current troops to stay in...
Retention is affected by the war and operational tempo.
The army has added to the shock by hastily revising training for combat support troops. Now non-combat troops get the kind of intense combat training they have not received for over a decade.
To a certain extent the CS [combat support] and particularly the CSS [combat service support] units never in the 70s, 80s or 90s received much in the form of combat training beyond basic or just deploying to field training. This has always been a disaster waiting to happen. Fortunately the damage has been kept to a few units before the GO corps got its head out of its rectal orifice.
Iran has for the first time expressed its support for the re-election of International Atomic Energy Agency Director Mohamed Baradei, hailing what it said was a "consensus" against the United States. "We hope that he is elected again because there is a consensus about him and America has been isolated," Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi told reporters. Since February 2003, Baradei has been leading a probe of Iran's nuclear program, and Tehran was subsequently forced to acknowledged it had hidden its sensitive activities from the UN's nuclear watchdog for close to two decades. Baradei, 62, has said the "jury is still out" on whether Iran is secretly developing nuclear weapons, resisting pressure from the United States which insists the country has been using an atomic energy drive as a cover for weapons development.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/13/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Baradei, 62, has said the "jury is still out" on whether Iran is secretly developing nuclear weapons...
#2
United States which insists the country has been using an atomic energy drive as a cover for weapons development.
We need better evidence of Iran's atomic weaponry development than what we used for Iraq's WMD program ie. ex-patriates who have not been home for 30 years (Chalabi style grifters).
#3
We need better evidence of Iran's atomic weaponry development than what we used for Iraq's WMD program
Agreed. Let's send USMC/CSI in to get it.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
06/13/2005 7:33 Comments ||
Top||
#4
How much evidence is enough, TG? Some of the Nazi evidence just surfaced this year. Saddam fooled everyone, including his own sons. Read the WMD report - the son charged with throwing back the infidels went to Saddam and asked him to release the chemical agents.
Posted by: Bobby ||
06/13/2005 7:56 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Immaterial whether Baradei or even Sean Penn is the director. Do you all really think we are going to depend on the UN to tell us whether Iran has a nuclear weapons ambition, program and testing protocol? Hell, no! Only if Kerry had been elected President was that even a remote possibility.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
06/13/2005 9:10 Comments ||
Top||
#6
This IAEA situation was mishandled, IMO. There should've been an alternative candidate offered since ElBaradei is utterly useless and, quite likely, complicit / compromised.
TG, did you draw the Troll lot for today in your Coffee Coven for the Current Events Challeneged?
#7
This should tell us all that we need to know about ElBaradei - he is an enabler for Islamofascist nukes. The Moslems know it. Kofi knows it. We keep ignoring it at the cost of future nuke explosions in Israel and the USA.
#8
TG, did you draw the Troll lot for today in your Coffee Coven for the Current Events Challeneged?
Okay, genius, let's pretend... you be the President and present to Congress and to the American people all the assorted types of evidence you have that Iran is developing nuclear weaponry and also where Iran has these WMD. Keep in mind that you have already gone once to the same people with the claim about Iraq and WMD which was later found to be based on faulty intel - not your fault- but Congress and the Amerocan people are "once bitten twice shy" as the saying goes...Go ahead, pretend you're Prez and give us all the evidence you've got to invade another nation, all the while that you are conducting 2 wars already abroad. Let's hear your untroll-like genius for sequential thought...how do you get from A to Z? "A" being feelings, intuitions, payback for the Iranian Revolution to "Z" outright invasion of Iran's sovereignity all the while keeping the faith of your allies, whose help you desperately need to keep the other 2 war fronts going....and let's not forget, currently 6 out of 10 Americans have doubts about the Iraq War and your party is facing re-election in 2006, so some Republicans like Lindsay and Jones and Martinez and Hagel and others have already bolted to the "questioning" side... let's hear you make a persuasive argument to invade yet another country ....
#9
TG - You repeated yourself there, oh Master Of Doom - with a Minor in Attempted Sarcasm.
Invasion? You believe that is the only option? Sigh. There are, at least, five. Where to begin? Ah, at the beginning, of course.
Y'know, this may surprise you, but Rantburg was here before your showed up. So were many other sites which pay close attention to important events. Many many stories and comments have passed into the archives. If you'd like to know what's going on, you could start reading. Better make it a nice comfy chair - you're about 2-3 YEARS behind the curve. Many have speculated exactly how Iran would be "handled", but it's only speculation, although based upon military experience (in many cases), knowledge that we do, indeed, have limited resources, and common sense. You seem to be hobbled by your lack of two of those.
There are other approaches, other means, other plans. You could start here, if you'd like - and think that those who post here can't possibly know more about it than you.
You could learn about the "Sense of the Congress", too. See Senate SCON 81 and House HCON 308. The resolution is quite clear, was recognized by cognizant beings well before your bedtime, and is already on the books.
HAND*
* Have A Nice Day. And fuck the fuck off - it's not my duty to educate you, it's yours.
Higher Education Minister Datuk Dr Shafie Salleh said the Saudi Arabian government is ready to sponsor more Malaysian students to further their studies at several universities in the Kingdom. He said this year Saudi Arabia would take 40 students for several courses related to Islamic studies, which was double the number offered previously. "Most of them study at the Riyadh, Medina and Mecca universities and the new intakes this time around will also be offered to do other courses like medical and engineering besides Islamic studies," he told reporters after a welcoming ceremony for Malaysian students from Saudi Arabia here Sunday. He said the number of students (40) was just one per cent of the total number of foreign students studying in Saudi Arabia.
Shafie said with the readiness of the Saudi government, the Malaysian government was also reciprocating by offering to sponsor their students to study in this country, although it was still at the discussion level. Asked whether the Malaysian government had sponsored Malaysian students to study in Saudi Arabia, he said: "No. Most of our students are studying in Cairo and at the moment, we have more than 300 students there." On the memorandum issued by the Umno Youth movement to review the meritocracy system, he said the system would not be amended immediately but the proposals would be studied first. Meanwhile, he also asked corporate bodies and private companies to perform their social responsibilities by sponsoring outstanding students to further their studies at the local and foreign universities.
#1
To study what? Terrorism?
Has anyone here seen a Saudi University Curriculum? At least four hours are dedicated to the study of Islam and the rest of the hours to incredibly mediocre study of the core subjects.
Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council Hassan Rowhani said here on Sunday that no Saudi member of the Al-Qaeda terrorist group has been kept in Iran.
"Certainly not! They're honored guests"
Talking to Saudi reporters at the Riyadh airport, the SNSC secretary added Iran had previously handed over a number of detained Saudi nationals to their home country.
He further pointed to his talks with Saudi officials on Iran's nuclear program, saying Iran carries out legal and healthy activities since its nuclear program is within the framework of international regulations and under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Referring to his talks with the high-ranking officials of the four states, Rowhani said that he had outlined Iran's nuclear program to make it clear that "Tehran has nothing to hide" in the field of its nuclear activities.
As for his talks with Kuwaiti officials, the SNSC secretary said that the two sides discussed implementation of a security agreement previously signed by the two capitals as well as Kuwait's call for Iran's gas and fresh water. Turning to his talks in the UAE, Rowhani said that the two sides reached a general agreement to sign a security deal in the future and to prepare the necessary ground to this end.
While in Yemen, said the SNSC secretary, he discussed Tehran's peaceful nuclear program with the Yemeni officials as San'a is a member of the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Well, that's reassuring
The two sides also exchanged views on security issues as well as some certain domestic developments in Yemen and the way that Western media were trying to attribute the developments to foreign states, Rowhani said. He noted that in his meetings with the Saudi officials, Rowhani discussed Tehran-Riyadh security cooperation as well as regional security arrangements and the war on terror.
Regional crises including developments in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Middle East as well as Tehran-Riyadh defense cooperation and Iran's nuclear program were among other major topics that Rowhani discussed with the Saudi officials. The SNSC secretary expressed hope that his Riyadh visit would pave the way for boosting bilateral security cooperation. Rowhani left Riyadh for Jeddah on Sunday evening.
The SNSC secretary and his entourage are due to pay a visit to Oman on Tuesday and meet with senior Omani officials including Sultan Qaboos.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
06/13/2005 16:09 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
Iran may not have the largest number of insurgents in Iraq, but what it lacks in quantity, it makes up for in quality, Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Pa., said Sunday. Weldon, appearing on NBC's "Meet the Press," said Iraqi officials have told him "Syria may have the largest number (of insurgents) from outside of Iraqi country, but Iran overwhelmingly has the quality behind the insurgency."
That's because Syria's Iran's vassal state...
Weldon -- Vice Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee -- said U.S. military brass told him there isn't much that U.S. forces can do to control the flow of insurgents from Iran. "One of our commanding officers looked to Iran on a map and said, 'It's a black hole. We just don't have the intelligence that we need about Iran's involvement,'" said Weldon. "That's, to me, absolutely outrageous." Weldon said Iranian leaders are major players in the insurgency. "Ayatollah Khomeini is the problem, and he has as separate council of nine that's been fomenting unrest in Iraq during this entire time," said Weldon, "and that's what's increasing -- that's what's increasing dramatically as we attempt to stabilize the country." Weldon said Iran's long-term plan is to force any government that takes hold in Iraq to eventually become a partner with Iran.
Posted by: Steve ||
06/13/2005 09:10 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
We just don't have the intelligence that we need about Iran's involvement,'" said Weldon. "That's, to me, absolutely outrageous."
And were you in office, Rep. Weldon, when your associates decided we didn't need human intelligence, cut the funding, and then decided we shouldn't talk to guys with "blood on their hands"?
It IS outrageous, but what are YOU gonna do about it?
Posted by: Bobby ||
06/13/2005 12:17 Comments ||
Top||
More on the story posted by Fred; different source; EFL.
BEIRUT - Anti-Syrian Christian leader Michel Aoun, who returned from 14 years' exile only five weeks ago, appeared poised to hand other anti-Syrian opposition groups a surprising defeat in Lebanese parliamentary elections, denying them the majority they had hoped to muster in their drive to end Syria's political control. A senior opposition leader, Walid Jumblatt, conceded late Sunday that the opposition had suffered losses, as did several other main opposition candidates.
Sounds like they'll have to make a deal.
With no official results expected before at least midday Monday, preliminary results and campaign estimates, as well as polls by TV stations, showed Aoun and his allies leading or winning in several districts in Mount Lebanon and in the eastern Bekaa Valley. In some areas, his allies were already celebrating with fireworks. A strong showing by Aoun, whose Free Patriotic Movement has waged an anti-corruption campaign, could make him a key player in the fight over Syrian control in the new Parliament.
The fiercely contested vote on Sunday in central and eastern regions of the county is deciding nearly half the legislative seats up for grabs in Lebanon's four-stage elections.
Going into Sunday's race, the opposition had the 19 seats it gained in the first stage of the elections held in Beirut May 29, and needed another 46 to win a majority in the 128-member legislature. But in races that were already clear among the 58 seats contested Sunday, Aoun appeared to have clinched at least 14 seats, at least temporarily thwarting the opposition's quest for a majority. By early Monday, many of the races had yet to be decided, but 10 seats in a region in the northern part of the Bekaa were expected to go to a ticket backed by the pro-Syrian Shiite Muslim militant group Hezbollah. Hezbollah and its allies swept the 23 seats at stake in southern Lebanon in the second round on June 6.
The opposition, however, still has a chance to gain the parliamentary majority when the final stage of the elections is held in the north on June 19, when 28 seats are up for grabs.
Jumblatt, speaking by telephone to Lebanese Broadcasting Corp. television, said Aoun, who broke opposition ranks and challenged his former allies with the help of pro-Syrian groups, was winning in contested constituencies. Jumblatt accused Aoun, a former military commander and fierce anti-Syrian who returned May 7 from exile in France, of being brought in by Damascus to undermine the opposition and claimed he was promoting extremism. Aoun fought and lost a 1989 "war of liberation" against Syrian forces that led to his exile. "Michel Aoun is a small (Syrian) tool," Jumblatt said. "True he succeeded, I concede that."
He'd be a curious tool, but stranger things have happened.
In his first comments late Sunday, Aoun said he was willing to talk with other factions in the new parliament and, if there were no agreement, he and his allies would be in opposition "carrying out our duties."
Unofficial turnout tallied by media and various campaigns put the turnout at a relatively high 54 percent in Mount Lebanon and 49 percent in the Bekaa. About 1.2 million men and women over 21 were eligible to vote in Sunday's round. About 100 candidates competed for Mount Lebanon's 35 seats, allocated to different sects according to Lebanon's power-sharing political system. In the eastern Bekaa Valley near the Syrian border, 119 people were competing for the region's 23 seats.
Posted by: Steve White ||
06/13/2005 00:04 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
senior opposition leader, Walid Jumblatt, conceded late Sunday that the opposition had suffered losses
Gee, Wally...you're a loser.
/s/
the Beav
#3
Well hell. The way the washington post told it, Syria and Hamas had this thing tied up. Another bad call from people who don't really believe in freedom.
You just have to love the conventional wisdom keeping their fingers on the pulse of world opinion. Geez, first its the voter turn out in Iraq and now we have this. Can't those people get it right? They are supposed to be a bunch of oppression loving xenophobes.
Dang, I wonder how this is going to play over in Foggy Bottom at the Lebanese desk. Boy he is going to have hell to pay at the club today, he told the press that the election was in the bag for the jihadists.
Polling stations in Lebanon have closed with initial results showing former general Michel Aoun winning fierce electoral battles against rival anti-Syrian opposition groups in key districts. At stake in the third round of parliamentary elections are 35 seats representing the central Mount Lebanon district and another 23 for the eastern Bekaa Valley. Preliminary results indicate a sweeping victory for electoral tickets backed by Aoun in Mount Lebanon's mainly Christian Kesrwan-Byblos and Upper Metn districts. Aoun, a former general who spent 14 years in exile in France following a failed "war of liberation" against Syrian troops in 1989, returned to Lebanon on 7 May, shortly after Syrian forces withdrew from the country.
Counts conducted in 278 of 336 polling stations in Kesrwan-Byblos showed that Aoun maintained a substantial lead over opponent candidates, winning at least 55,000 votes. Opposition alliance candidate Mansour al-Bon, was trailing with 27,000 votes by the latest count. Aoun's list comprises prominent pro-Syrian politicians including Druze leader Talal Erslan in the Baabda-Aley district, former minister Elias Skaff in the Bekaa's Zahle district and former interior minister Suleiman Franjieh, who will be running in the last round of elections in the north next week. A coalition of Christian groups, including the Christian Lebanese Forces, headed by jailed Christian leader Samir Geagea, and Christian Qornet Shehwan Gathering, embraced by Maronite Patriarch Nasrallah Butros Sfeir, ran against Aoun's ticket in the Kesrwan-Byblos district. Other members of the coalition included the Phalange Reform Movement, headed by former President Amin Gemayel and the Future Movement, headed by Saad al-Hariri. In the Upper Metn, the list backed by Aoun and pro-Syrian former interior minister Michel Murr also won with only one seat going to an opponent candidate, MP Pierre Gemayel of the Phalange Reform Movement.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/13/2005 00:01 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I haven't followed this enough - so I probably shouldn't comment - but I kind of hope this guy gets a seat. It doesn't seem like he can consolidate enough power to become a tyrant - and he's really the only one with any fighting spirit against the Syrians. The others Jumblatt, etc. just strike me as the type that will get cozy with Syria while claiming to be For The People (TM). They will all wink and nod, and issue a document after lunch that said that progress will take place...soon.
This guy will be a real thorn in their side because he will actually be Against Syria. The people might benefit from him questioning their anti-Syrian credentials.
#2
boy, does Aoun ever have guys around here taken. From what Ive seen, this guy turned and cut a deal with the pro-Syrian groups, and deliberately divided the opposition - note he went against Gemayel, Geagea, Hariri (the son) as well as Jumblatt. Aoun fought the Syrians in '89 - with the backing of none other than Saddam Hussein. Y'all may not like Wally cause of antiUS things he said and did back in the '80s, but I think thats leading us to misjudge Lebanese politics.
#3
I wish I understood all of the underlying connections, loyalties, rivalries, et al, but I don't.
Personally, I don't trust any of the players who've been around long enough to remember pre-Syrian Lebanon. Warlord Wally and Aoun both strike me as an almost guaranteed return to the old chaos. Hariri - or somebody new on the political scene who isn't an Iranian toady or a Syrian toady (same thing, prolly) and hasn't made his bones by killing members of the other factions is needed. Someone who can put the past behind and pull the Lebanese together - and convince them to throw off all of the ancient baggage.
Of course, assuming Hariri was something along that line or near enough, anyway, there's no wonder he was killed.
Can it still be done? I don't know. Is there anyone left who could do it if it were possible? I don't know. The ethnic, religious, tribal, yadda3 differences, all trivial and pointless in reality, are insanely magnified by certain societies. Lebanon is doomed until someone can pull it off. This is truly sad. A golden opportunity will likely be missed here.
Iran's main armed opposition group denied that it had any hand in a wave of deadly bombings that rocked Tehran and the south-western city of Ahvaz on Sunday. The Iraq-based People's Mujahedeen "strongly condemned" what it described as "efforts by the Iranian regime and its agents to blame" it for the blasts, in a statement received by AFP in Nicosia. "These claims are sheer lies," a spokesman said. "The mullahs' objective in churning out these lies is to create mischief between the People's Mujahedeen Organization of Iran and the Iraqi government.
Oh, thanks a heap. Now I don't know who to believe: the terrorists, or the ayatollahs. How about if I judiciously cease caring who dunnit?
Posted by: Fred ||
06/13/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Mujahadeen E khalk is ethnically Parsi, no? While its possible they planted a bomb in ethnically Arab Ahvaz, it could have been locals. The first steps toward democracy in Iraq have to be particularly tempting to the Arabs of the Iranian province of Khuzistan.
No schadenfreude - civilians were killed, terror is terror.
But I heard a long story on ferment in Iran on NPR yesterday. Talked about a protest by several hundred women at the gates of Teheran Univ, and the massive efforts of the security forces to contain and keep folks from joining. If even National Palestinian Radio has taken notice, things must REALLY be on the boil there.
#2
Iran seems to me to be like Saudi Arabia or china. The modern world is knocking on the door and if the govt. doesnt let changes take place they are not going to like what happens. You never see the moderate side of Iran, but I suspect about 90% of the country would rather be happy and make a living than be a fundamentalist. I remember that day that the soviet union started falling apart on the news, it made for good viewing. I'll enjoy watching the guardian council deposed.
Voters flocked to the polls in Lebanon yesterday for the third round of elections hotly contested by rival anti-Syrian candidates as the shadow of its powerful neighbor loomed large. The election in eastern and central regions of the country was held as a UN special envoy met Syrian President Bashar Assad amid US claims that Syrian intelligence agents remained in Lebanon despite its troop pullout in April. No final turnout figures were immediately available when polls closed at 6 p.m. (1500 GMT) but three hours earlier Prime Minister Najib Mikati said it varied between 20 percent and 50 percent depending on the constituency. Mikati said no disturbances had been reported during the polls, and hailed what he called the "democratic atmosphere" of the voting for 58 representatives from the Bekaa Valley and Mount Lebanon. The premier predicted the final turnout would be "high because of the tightness of the races." Unlike the first two rounds which saw clean sweeps by the anti-Syrian opposition and the pro-Syrian Shiite movements Hezbollah and Amal, respectively, yesterday's vote witnessed a real election battle.
The fiercest contest pitted retired Christian general and former exile Michel Aoun and his Free Patriotic Current against opposition Druze leader Walid Jumblatt and his anti-Syrian ticket. Christian politicians are also odds with each other after Aoun, who was kicked out of Lebanon by Syrian forces after the 1975-1990 civil war, decided to forge an unlikely alliance with pro-Damascus candidates. Jumblatt, who allied himself with wartime foes the Christian Lebanese Forces, accused Aoun of trying to divide the anti-Syrian opposition, which expects to win the majority of seats in the 128-member Parliament. LF organizer Georges Tawil told AFP the alliance with Jumblatt was intended to "turn the page on the civil war". The four-round elections are the first free of Syria's 29-year-long military presence and follow the February killing of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri which plunged Lebanon into turmoil. "He's an extremist and we will not let him steal our victory," Jumblatt said of Aoun.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/13/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Elections! Two choices! High turnout!
Ain't it grand!
Posted by: Bobby ||
06/13/2005 12:52 Comments ||
Top||
#2
If I read Beirut Daily Star correctly, this is the part that wasn't fixed.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/13/2005 16:11 Comments ||
Top||
The suicide bomb blast that injured four U.S. troops Monday fueled worries about the spread of a deadly terror tactic that, until recently, had been little seen in Afghanistan.
A driver in a taxi stuffed with explosives rammed into a U.S. military vehicle about six miles west of the southern city of Kandahar, an unsettled area long a bastion of Taliban support.
The attack was at least the third suicide blast since May in a country that has largely been spared the kamikaze tactics used across Iraq against American soldiers and, increasingly, Iraqi civilians.
Until May, just five suicide blasts had hit Afghanistan in the more than three years since U.S. forces ousted the Taliban from power. Four of those had targeted NATO-led forces.
The latest hit "suggests that an alarming development may be under way: the importation of insurgent techniques from Iraq to Afghanistan," Carl Robichaud, editor of Afghanistan Watch, wrote Monday.
A Taliban supporter claimed responsibility for the latest incident. Witnesses told reporters at the scene that the dead bomber appeared to be an Arab.
A U.N. engineer and an Afghan were killed May 7 when a suicide bomber struck an Internet cafe in the capital, Kabul. On June 1, a lone bomber blew himself up at the entrance to a Kandahar mosque where a funeral for a slain anti-Taliban critic was under way. At least 19 people were killed and 50 wounded in that attack.
Fighting in Paktika province, near the border with Pakistan, has killed five American troops recently, including two who died June 8 in a mortar attack on a firebase.
Largely out of the global limelight, Afghanistan has registered an uptick in violence in the past few months. Experts point to a stew of possible perpetrators: restive warlords, criminals, competing politicians, drug traffickers, as well as foreign Islamic terrorists.
U.S. and Afghan officials interpret the apparent trend as an effort to destabilize the country in advance of the September parliamentary elections.
Experts on Afghanistan say it is not yet clear if there is a concerted push by al Qaeda or Taliban terrorists to embrace suicide attacks in Afghanistan and use them against civilians as well as soldiers.
"It is perhaps surprising that suicide bombs have been so rare in Afghanistan, since the tactic would seem well suited to the Taliban's relatively unskilled but highly motivated insurgents," Robichaud wrote. "If Iraqi tactics are imported to Afghanistan it could ignite a bloody second front against an American army that is stretched perilously thin."
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
06/13/2005 16:14 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The latest hit "suggests that an alarming development may be under way: the importation of insurgent techniques from Iraq to Afghanistan," Carl Robichaud, editor of Afghanistan Watch, wrote Monday.
I'd be interested to know if this correlates with a small rise in people coming into Afghanistan. If it does,.....
#2
I think it's been more than a "small rise of people" returning to Afghanistan. I remember reading that Mushareff reached an agreement with the US to start re-patriating hundreds of thousands of Afghans who have been hiding in Pakistan, some or many of whom may have been Taliban/AQ jihadists who scattered to Pakistan when Afghanistan was invaded by coalition forces.
Some men want to walk without crutches, and some women want to get pregnant. A few Romeos stand in front of the graves and ask for love. Others pray for the souls of the dead.
Everyone has a wish at this Al Qaeda cemetery.
"I have an ache in my left leg," said Khanema, who like many Pashtuns has only one name. "I have a backache. Sometimes it hurts so much, I can't sleep. So I came here to pray to the martyrs. I came from Pakistan only for this shrine."
The men buried here at Martyrs shrine and another shrine nearby were killed in late 2001 during the U.S.-led war against the Taliban. On the second night of Ramadan, the fasting month for Muslims, U.S. forces bombed a mosque in the southeastern town of Khost. Dozens of Taliban and Al Qaeda members were killed.
The mosque has been rebuilt, light green and peach, with large windows and a sunlit prayer room. But the two shrines for the dead and another in eastern Afghanistan have turned into pilgrimage sites, almost tourist attractions featuring Al Qaeda dead.
Villagers sometimes travel for hours to go to these shrines to pray. They stop as they return home to Afghanistan from Pakistan, where they had been living as refugees. They visit every day, or once in a lifetime.
The shrines show the logic of some people in the new Afghanistan, particularly those in the south and southeast, where the influence of the Taliban and Al Qaeda has been strongest. Those who come here do not necessarily support terrorists. Many say they do not hate the Afghan government or the U.S. forces. They welcome the upcoming elections and do not want war.
But these people are often desperate, for whatever reason, and they believe the dead men might help them. The visitors call the dead "martyrs" and the U.S. forces who killed them "infidels." But they mean that in the nicest way. They see no contradiction.
"People love the shrine, and I love it," said Marjullah, the Martyrs caretaker, adding that he helped carry the bodies of the dead to the shrine. But he says he also likes the Afghan government. And he says the U.S. forces should stay as long as they help rebuild the country.
At the shrine, there are 39 graves in two rows, starting with No. 1, "This is the leg of an Arab," and ending with No. 39, "The grave of Holy Korans." All told, there are 12 Arabs, eight Pakistanis, eight Afghans, nine unknown people and two graves for Korans destroyed in the blast.
Ropes are strung over the graves, and people have tied colorful flags and scarves to the ropes, providing some relief in the mundane beige landscape. One visitor has hung up an embroidered white sheet with "God is great" and a duck, a candle and a butterfly. "Congratulations on your pilgrimage, Asil Khan," proclaims a painted banner on the front of the shrine. The graves are covered with bright yellow flowers and weeds.
Visitors park in the dust outside, just off the main highway leading north from Khost, a town near the border of Pakistan. They taste a pinch of salt for good health, and some put money into the wooden donation box in front; money will be used to build a roof over the brick walls.
People then walk up and down the aisle of graves, pausing maybe in front of No. 3, "Martyr Paradise," or No. 34, "Hamidullah from Badakhshan."
Khanema, who does not know her age, ties knots in the scarves hanging over grave No. 16, marked simply "Arab." She unties others, in a ritual she hopes will end her pain.
"The people who are deaf, who cannot talk, who are sick, who are paralyzed, they come here and they are made better," said Ajab Noor, 27, who sometimes visits the shrine to pray. "This is not a place for lovers who come to pray for sweethearts."
"Why not?" countered Gulab, who said he was 29 or 30. "I have come more than 50 times, believe me, for two years. I am in love. But I have got nothing. I am drowned in the water.
"Many people have come, and it has worked. I don't know why my prayer is not accepted."
A minute later, he asks for help in finding a wife.
Others have had more luck.
Gulwali Shah, 18, prayed at the shrine six times. "God, give me the one I love," he thought to himself. Finally, a year ago, he married his sweetheart, after both families agreed. Still, Shah comes to the shrine to see the graves.
"They were both devoted Muslims and Al Qaeda," Shah said. "Some of them fought for nothing. Some of them fought for the sake of God."
The nearby Al Qaeda shrine, called Arabs Family Shrine, is smaller, a large grave plot where many people are buried. Besmellah, the caretaker, insists that these victims are women and children, although visitors say they are Al Qaeda and Taliban members.
As Besmellah talks, a dozen women and girls walk in, stand by the mass grave and then leave. Besmellah said he believes the women may want to get pregnant, but he would never ask them, as the conservative culture does not allow it.
He said many people come here and are cured.
"I have seen lots of these cases, I don't want to lie to you," said Besmellah, who is about 45. "People who could not walk came here. On the way out, they walked away. People who could not talk came. When they left, they started speaking."
He is still waiting. He limps here every day on his artificial leg, leaning on his crutch and walking carefully in his Adidas tennis shoes. He lost his lower leg in a land-mine explosion. But he is a practical man. Unlike some others who visit these shrines, he knows there are some things even prayer cannot fix.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
06/13/2005 16:13 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
another fricken holy site...I have a headache.
Posted by: Red Dog ||
06/13/2005 18:36 Comments ||
Top||
Police continue to search for three men in connection with the shootings of two Kirtland Air Force Base airmen Saturday night. Police found the two men at a Nob Hill coffee shop after they stumbled in looking for help. Kirtland officials say one of the airmen was shot multiple times and the other suffered minor injuries. Witnesses say they heard several gunshots and saw the two men bleeding. "I couldn't tell where he was shot or where he was dripping from," recalled witness Georgia Whitson, "but it was like all over his face and it was all coming down his shoulder. He didn't look too good."
Police say the airmen were in an SUV at the time of the shooting. Police are looking for three Hispanic men who were in a red SUV in the area during the shooting. "The motivation for the shooting in unknown at this point," said APD spokesman John Walsh.
#1
Three Hispanic men! You're practically acusing a minority of commiting a crime! Racist! Racist! Call the ACLU! Call Amnesty! Call People for the American Way! or maybe call the INS and deport those Assholes to a mexican prison.
#4
Additional background.
That portion of Central Avenue in Albuquerque is a trendy small boutique shopping area near the campus, not the usual gun gallery. For over two weeks on the other side of the tracks near the Old Town district off of Central, the gangs have been firing each other up lately. Its a local quagmire that the mayor (D) and the police have failed to get on handle on. The gangs favorite current mode of transportation is a SUV. It appears that these airmen were just in the wrong model vehicle at this time. Meanwhile, the local papers which frontpage the traditional MSM swampwater from Iraq are not giving this similar play. The local politicos are Dems and the papers are fronts for the DNC. May also have something to do with BRAC - as in let's pull the troops out. Time for the local and national MSM to be pillored on their own words and behaviors.
I'm so confused, I thought the joos did it!... Btw, nice to see Thierry Meyssan's work is bearing its fruits in the arab world, thanks to the Zayed institute... At least, a successful frenchman!
Egyptian Historian on Saudi Iqra TV: The Vatican's Mission of Destroying Islam was Delegated to the U.S. — Which Carried Out 9/11 on Assignment by the World Council of Churches
The following are excerpts from an interview with Egyptian historian Professor Zaynab Abd Al-Aziz, which aired on Saudi Iqra TV [1] on May 26, 2005. [To view this clip from MEMRI TV visit http://memritv.org/search.asp?ACT=S9&P1=708]
Abd Al-Aziz: "The decision to impose one religion over the entire world was made in the Second Vatican Council in 1965."
Host: "Huh?"
Abd Al-Aziz: "Yes. A long time ago."
Host: "They decided to Christianize the world?"
Abd Al-Aziz: "Yes. The decisions of the 1965 Vatican Council included, first of all, absolving the Jews of the blood of Christ. This decision is well known and was the basis for the recognition of the occupying Zionist entity - Israel. The second decision was to eradicate the left in the eighties. I believe we've all witnessed this. The third decision was to eradicate Islam, so that the world would be Christianized by the third millennium."
Host: "Why is America hostile to Islam, although we never had and never will have the same conflict with them we had with Europe?"
Abd Al-Aziz: "Well, do you remember what we just said about the Second Vatican Council in 1965 and about Christianizing the world? It was agreed upon and pre-arranged. John Paul II prepared a five-year plan, on the eve of the third millennium, Christianize the world. His address in 1995 was based on the assumption that by the year 2000, the entire world would be Christianized. Since the plan was not accomplished, the World Council of Churches assigned this mission to the US in January 2001, since the US is the world's unrivaled military power. They named the decade between 2001-2010 "the age of eradicating evil" — "evil" referring to Islam and Muslims.
"The Crusader war is ongoing, because it has been a religious war since the dawn of Islam. Later, colonialism, missionaries, and Christianization were introduced. The Crusader war is ongoing. The Inquisition courts exist to this day. As I told you, the pope who was appointed a few days ago, headed the Inquisition Court, which is now called the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
"When in January 2001, the World Council of Churches delegated this mission to the US - what did the US do? It fabricated the show of
is it September 9 or 11?"
Host: "11. Please explain this to me."
Abd Al-Aziz: "Yes, of course
"
Host: "You mean to say that the World Council of Churches delegated the mission of Christianizing of the world to the US."
Abd Al-Aziz: "Yes. And how could the US win legitimacy for this without anyone saying that they are perpetrating massacres and waging a Crusader war? It fabricated the 9/11 show. I call it a fabrication because much has been written on this. We are also to blame. Why do we accept a single perspective? Countless books were written, some of which were even translated into Arabic, like Thierry Meyssan's 9/11 — The Appalling Fraud [2] and Pentagate. "Pentagate" like Watergate
He brings documents to prove that the method used in destroying the three (sic) towers was "controlled demolition.
"This is an architectural engineering theory, which was invented by the Americans. They teach it in their universities. They make movies and documentaries about it. They incorporated it in movie scenarios and then carried it out in real life. Why do we accept this?"
Host: "My God, doctor. This is unbelievable! You're saying that this destruction
"
Abd Al-Aziz: "...was a controlled demolition. The building collapsed in its place, without hitting a single building to its left or right. The three towers fell in place."
Host: "In the same method they use in movies and plays?"
Abd Al-Aziz: "Yes, Exactly like that. That is how the US won international legitimacy. You could sense the (9/11) operation was pre-planned because many things were revealed in the days that followed. For example 4,000 Jews caught influenza on that exact day. They set a timer, and all 4,000
"
Host: "By God, you crack me up! They all set a timer and got influenza on the same day. So the building was completely empty of Jews."
Abd Al-Aziz: "Much has been written about this. 150 Congressmen demanded an inquiry."
#1
Wow! I didn't realize we were so powerful. And the Pope! Incredible! And then there's "The second decision was to eradicate the left in the eighties. I believe we've all witnessed this."
Somebody better tell Mikey, and Howie, and JFKerry, and George Soros, and ... oh, my ... the eradicators missed a whole bunch of them!
Posted by: Bobby ||
06/13/2005 12:44 Comments ||
Top||
#2
It fabricated the show of… is it September 9 or 11?
#3
See, he got confused by our "shorthand" - 9-11 for September 11th. He must of thought it was 9/11, with the slash meaning 'or' - like, 9 or 11.... Snicker.
Posted by: Bobby ||
06/13/2005 12:54 Comments ||
Top||
#4
ROFL! I doubt this idiot realizes that the Roman Catholic Church is not part of the World Council of Churches (to do so would give too much recognition to Protestants). Besides, The decision to impose one religion over the entire world was made in the
7th century by the mooselimbs!
#2
It's jus tlike in thie country, where the "silent majority" ignores the Left Leaning Liberal Losers. Except Mikey Moore doesn't advocate exploding things. Yet.
Posted by: Bobby ||
06/13/2005 14:37 Comments ||
Top||
June 13, 2005: After three years effort, an American-Afghan intelligence effort has concluded that there are between 1200-1800 armed organizations in the country, each with five to 300 men. Many of these "gangs" are temporary organizations, brought together by outside events and local opportunities. In the Afghan tradition, anyone with a fast mouth and persuasive proposition can get a bunch of his buddies to grab their guns and go off to fight, or just steal. Ancient traditions and all that. Many of these armed groups in turn follow a more powerful leader, often referred to as a warlord. As long as the warlord can supply his followers with gifts (cash, food, weapons, whatever), they will remain loyal. When the gifts dry up, so does the loyalty, and the warlord "army" melts away.
The UN backed DDR (Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration) program, begun in October 2003, and ending at the end of June, has disarmed over 58,000 former fighters who had registered with the Defense Ministry. DDR was basically a bribe, paying fighters to go home, and turn in heavy weapons. DDR will be replaced by DIAG (Disbanding Illegal Armed Groups), which will be run by provincial officials and, in a year, hopes to disarm another 100,000 of these organized fighters. Like DDR, DIAG is organized bribery, paying the gunmen to forsake their gang leaders and warlords and go home. However, aside from surrendering heavy machine-guns, mortars and such, the gunmen can quickly organize themselves into new groups and find another warlord to follow. Tradition.
Posted by: Steve ||
06/13/2005 09:57 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Iraqi political forces began preparing for general elections, slated at the end of the year, leading to the formation of Iraq's first elected government. Former Prime Minister Ayad Allawi announced Monday he is seeking to establish a new political front of democratic and secular forces to compete against the Islamic political forces. Also two political parties -- the Iraqi Umma Movement led by Mithal Aloussi and the Movement of New Iraq under Tarek Maamouri -- announced that they will merge, with the new party to be known as the Democratic Iraqi Umma Movement. A joint statement said the new party will be headed by Aloussi, a former member of Ahmed Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress. He was expelled after visiting Israel last September. The statement said the new party will be a liberal and reformist movement whose objective is to prevent sectarian and ethnic confrontations.
Posted by: Steve ||
06/13/2005 09:20 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Gasp - secularism in Iraq! Where is War on Islam? Where are you, half-wit? Did you get replaced by TG? Is it all part a newly established Visiting Hemmoroid program?
AIR AMERICA's Al Franken became "The Guest Who Wouldn't Leave" after receiving an award at a talk-radio convention in New York over the weekend. NY POST's John Mainelli reports Monday: The liberal talk-show host was finally forced off the stage -- amidst shouts from supporters and detractors -- after an acceptance speech became a nearly half-hour rant against Bill O'Reilly and the Iraq war. "Al, hurry up," said Michael Harrison, publisher of TALKERS mag, the convention sponsor.
"It's freedom of speech," said Franken, referring to the Freedom of Speech Award he'd just been given by the magazine.
"It's not freedom to kill everybody's evening, so why don't you wrap it up," Harrison argued.
"I'm talking about the war in Iraq and I have about two pages left, and I think the people in Walter Reed [Army Medical Center] who've been injured deserve the last two pages of my speech," Franken countered.
"It's for the little people!"
"There are people walking out," said Harrison. "We gave you the award and it's time to leave."
"Everyone who wants to leave can leave," said Franken, addressing hundreds of talk-show hosts and radio execs at a cocktail reception in a downtown hotel.
"Now don't leave!" Harrison urged the attendees. "We honored you. Now honor us. Don't kill our party."
With that -- while some shouted "keep going, keep going" and "let him finish" -- the Air America star wound down his rant by talking about his visits with Iraq-war vets. "The soldiers were so magnificent," Franken said, appearing to suppress sobs.
Developing...
Posted by: Steve ||
06/13/2005 09:01 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
The words "Al Franken overstays welcome at . . ." could start nearly every sentence about Franken. "Al Franken overstays welcome at Arby's free fixin's bar." "Al Franken overstays welcome at marital bed, claims Mrs. Franken." "Al Franken overstays welcome at public eye." "Al Franken overstays welcome at Earth, returns to home planet fatter, still not funny."
Posted by: Tibor ||
06/13/2005 10:24 Comments ||
Top||
#3
He's definitely overstayed his 15 minutes by now, at any rate.
Posted by: Dar ||
06/13/2005 10:46 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Al Franken and all of his genetic lineage should not be allowed to ever have children. Talk about gene pool pollution!!
Big Al is the poster child of the angry spoiled brat frat boy left that thinks that name calling and pie fights is what made America great. Have you ever seen him go off on some one who wants to discuss facts and figures instead of opinion? Have you ever seen him show any respect for the opinions of anyone but himself? For that matter when was the last time you ever saw a liberal with any respect for dissenting opinions against their world view.
If Al Franken was President it would be the Soviet Union all over again. We would have the thought police and the Black Marias cruising the streets at night.
Heaven forbid that anyone would want to go to church either. Gasp!! a person with a faith based moral ethical base.
Remember that Hitler, Mussolini, Pol Pot and Joseph Stalin were SOCIALISTS.
#5
I know a couple of guys who stayed at the Walter Reed center and would have hobbled off their beds, flown to New York to beat this idiot to death with their crutches.
For the soldiers my ass. Cheap political swipe is what it is from this asswipe.
#6
I saw a car the other day plastered with moonbat bumper stickers. Two stood out as a wonderfully unintentional irony: "Somewhere a village is looking for its idiot" next to one promoting alfranken.com.
#8
Anyone seen the rating for Err Amerika lately? I know they must be piss-poor or CNN would do a live simulcast to celebrate any good ratings. You would think that the guy does enought ranting/raving during his show and could turn it off in this setting.
This is not quite the Second Amendment, of course...
Palestinian Foreign Affairs Minister Nasir al-Qidwa has repeated his stand on the right of Palestinian resistance movements to keep their arms. Al-Qidwa was commenting after the Israeli reaction to his earlier comments on issues including disarming the resistance, Fatah's vision of not targeting civilians, a reciprocal ceasefire and the guaranteeing of the right to resist occupation. Al-Qidwa said the resistance groups should not be disarmed as long as the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land exists. Speaking on public television on Saturday, al-Qidwa said any move to disarm would be inconceivable at this time. He described the possession of weapons during an occupation as legal. "Keeping our weapons is a strategic option," he said.
This article starring:
Palestinian Foreign Affairs Minister Nasir al-Qidwa
Posted by: Fred ||
06/13/2005 00:05 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
And Israel has the right to go after terrorists being sheltered on Paleo territory. End of story.
Can't expect to find a juror in Iraq who's never heard of him and doesn't have an opinion, now can you?
Posted by: Fred ||
06/13/2005 00:08 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Hell, in Europe Di Stefano could turn this into a let's-blame-Bushitler showcase trial. I still claim there's a chance that Sammy will walk.
Posted by: Rafael ||
06/13/2005 0:43 Comments ||
Top||
#2
He also suggested the defence team had received guarantees Saddam would not face the death penalty. "The Americans, the British, the Italians will not allow that, they will not allow the death penalty to be imposed, and the president of Iraq has confirmed to us he will be signing no warrant of execution as would be required under Iraqi law."
This is bad, if true. Why shouldn't Saddam face the death penalty per Iraqi law? What right does America, the UK, or Italy have to give "guarantees" that Saddam will not pay with his life for his crimes against his own and other peoples? Are any Americans, Italians, or Brits in the mass graves in Iraq?
#3
My Thotch....how ummmm, blood thirsty. I like it. I like it a lot. Not to worry, Sammy's gonna fry. I've got a magnum of J reserved for the occasion. Cheers!
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
06/13/2005 3:39 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I belive it is Amnesty International that's against the death penalty.
#5
What this guy is claiming is that Saddam has so many witnesses against him, they can't find a jury which would give him more than a 50-50 chance of walking free (i.e. let him, the lawyer, win).
A trial is not an lottery granting a chance to a criminal to go scot free, but a means to determine the truth and apply the law in the light of that truth. This kind of legal maneuvering is a testimony of there being so much evidence against Saddam, that 80% of the country are credible witnesses against him.
#6
What Sammy needs is justice, which is getting what you deserve and he deserves the death penalty for his crimes. In a fair trial in Iraq he can get justice. A trial in front of EUro lefties would not be justice, since he wouldn't be getting what he deserves.
#7
There's nothing Saddam is guilty of which Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld are not also guily of. Who supplied the mustard gas in the first place? Did they think it was going to used as dressing on burgers?
#8
Oooh! Oooh! Lemme guess! The Soviet Union? La Belle France? Samoa?
A reasonably bright but sufficiently dull high school student can brew up mustard gas in his basement, dumbass.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/13/2005 9:01 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Grearong: well, logically, look at the countries that worked the hardest to save Saddam (France and Russia), and that they were also his major conventional-weapons suppliers, and the ones who gave him nuclear plants, and one might conclude that those are the ones who have the most to hide in other areas.
(Plus, the Dutch are trying someone there for supplying a lot of chemical precursors for nerve agents...)
Posted by: Phil Fraering ||
06/13/2005 9:07 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Grearong: "There's nothing Saddam is guilty of which Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld are not also guily of."
Aaaaooogaha! Aaaaooogaha! FOOL ALERT!
Posted by: Tom ||
06/13/2005 9:25 Comments ||
Top||
#11
He also suggested the defence team had received guarantees Saddam would not face the death penalty.
#12
Grearong Elmurong9235: Are you saying that Bush, Cheny, and Rumsfeld gave Saddam mustard gas back in the 80's and 90"s? Wow! Bush, Cheny, and Rumsfeld have orderd the exection of 300,000 (approx) Iraqis and burried them in mass graves? Your logic escapes me.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
06/13/2005 10:39 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Aaaaooogaha! Aaaaooogaha! FOOL ALERT!
Keyboard and monitor alert, Tom! LOL!
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
06/13/2005 10:49 Comments ||
Top||
#14
As for the gassing of the Kurds, I'd let the Kurds themselves state who THEY think is really guilty.
The worst the US did was sell dual use helicopters that Saddam's army diverted from their stated use as sprayers of insecticide to their use as sprayers of humanicide. After that, the United States ceased to deal with Saddam, while the French and Soviets plunged right in to supply him with his arms, KNOWING WHO THEY WERE DEALING WITH.
GE, you'd would be more credible if you added the French and Soviets to the list you cited. I'll pay you NO attention until you explain why you are not morally incompetent by turning a blind eye to the French and the Soviets. Ditto to Thotch.
There's nothing Saddam is guilty of which Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld are not also guily of. Who supplied the mustard gas in the first place?
Well the Israelis were pretty bitter during GWI when Scuds rained over Tel-Aviv about German grand-fathers who manufactured gasses for Auschwitz, German youngs supporting the PLO and German middle aged people providing gasses and other WMDs to Saddam. Remember about the discoveries of German firms who had been traficking in WMD material for Saddam?
BTW: Don't you think that if the USA had helped Saddam it would have insisted in him buying American instead of filling Russian, Chinese and French pockets? Can you show me a single photo of an Iraki soldier carrying an M16? A single photo of an Iraki M1 or M60 tank? A single photo of an Iraki F16 or of an Iraki F/A 18 fighter planes? What was America providing to Saddam? Donuts?
1982-1988. Defense Intelligence Agency provides detailed information for Iraq on Iranian deployments, tactical planning for battles, plans for air strikes and bomb damage assessments. [4]
November, 1983. A National Security Directive states that the U.S would do "whatever was necessary and legal" to prevent Iraq from losing its war with Iran. [1] & [15]
November, 1983. Banca Nazionale del Lavoro of Italy and its Branch in Atlanta begin to funnel $5 billion in unreported loans to Iraq. Iraq, with the blessing and official approval of the US government, purchased computer controlled machine tools, computers, scientific instruments, special alloy steel and aluminum, chemicals, and other industrial goods for Iraq's missile, chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs. [14]
October, 1983. The Reagan Administration begins secretly allowing Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Egypt to transfer United States weapons, including Howitzers, Huey helicopters, and bombs to Iraq. These shipments violated the Arms Export Control Act. [16]
November 1983. George Schultz, the Secretary of State, is given intelligence reports showing that Iraqi troops are daily using chemical weapons against the Iranians. [1]
Donald Rumsfeld -Reagan's Envoy- provided Iraq with
chemical & biological weapons
December 20, 1983. Donald Rumsfeld , then a civilian and now Defense Secretary, meets with Saddam Hussein to assure him of US friendship and materials support. [1] & [15]
July, 1984. CIA begins giving Iraq intelligence necessary to calibrate its mustard gas attacks on Iranian troops. [19]
January 14, 1984. State Department memo acknowledges United States shipment of "dual-use" export hardware and technology. Dual use items are civilian items such as heavy trucks, armored ambulances and communications gear as well as industrial technology that can have a military application. [2]
March, 1986. The United States with Great Britain block all Security Council resolutions condemning Iraq's use of chemical weapons, and on March 21 the US becomes the only country refusing to sign a Security Council statement condemning Iraq's use of these weapons. [10]
May, 1986. The US Department of Commerce licenses 70 biological exports to Iraq between May of 1985 and 1989, including at least 21 batches of lethal strains of anthrax. [3]
May, 1986. US Department of Commerce approves shipment of weapons grade botulin poison to Iraq. [7]
March, 1987. President Reagan bows to the findings of the Tower Commission admitting the sale of arms to Iran in exchange for hostages. Oliver North uses the profits from the sale to fund an illegal war in Nicaragua. [17]
Late 1987. The Iraqi Air Force begins using chemical agents against Kurdish resistance forces in northern Iraq. [1]
February, 1988. Saddam Hussein begins the "Anfal" campaign against the Kurds of northern Iraq. The Iraq regime used chemical weapons against the Kurds killing over 100,000 civilians and destroying over 1,200 Kurdish villages. [8]
April, 1988. US Department of Commerce approves shipment of chemicals used in manufacture of mustard gas. [7]
August, 1988. Four major battles were fought from April to August 1988, in which the Iraqis massively and effectively used chemical weapons to defeat the Iranians. Nerve gas and blister agents such as mustard gas are used. By this time the US Defense Intelligence Agency is heavily involved with Saddam Hussein in battle plan assistance, intelligence gathering and post battle debriefing. In the last major battle with of the war, 65,000 Iranians are killed, many with poison gas. Use of chemical weapons in war is in violation of the Geneva accords of 1925. [6] & [13]
August, 1988. Iraq and Iran declare a cease fire. [8]
August, 1988. Five days after the cease fire Saddam Hussein sends his planes and helicopters to northern Iraq to begin massive chemical attacks against the Kurds. [8]
September, 1988. US Department of Commerce approves shipment of weapons grade anthrax and botulinum to Iraq. [7]
September, 1988. Richard Murphy, Assistant Secretary of State: "The US-Iraqi relationship is... important to our long-term political and economic objectives." [15]
December, 1988. Dow chemical sells $1.5 million in pesticides to Iraq despite knowledge that these would be used in chemical weapons. [1]
July 25, 1990. US Ambassador to Baghdad meets with Hussein to assure him that President Bush "wanted better and deeper relations". Many believe this visit was a trap set for Hussein. A month later Hussein invaded Kuwait thinking the US would not respond. [12]
August, 1990 Iraq invades Kuwait. The precursor to the Gulf War. [8]
July, 1991 The Financial Times of London reveals that a Florida chemical company had produced and shipped cyanide to Iraq during the 80's using a special CIA courier. Cyanide was used extensively against the Iranians. [11]
August, 1991. Christopher Droguol of Atlanta's branch of Banca Nazionale del Lavoro is arrested for his role in supplying loans to Iraq for the purchase of military supplies. He is charged with 347 counts of felony. Droguol is found guilty, but US officials plead innocent of any knowledge of his crime. [14]
June, 1992. Ted Kopple of ABC Nightline reports: "It is becoming increasingly clear that George Bush Sr., operating largely behind the scenes throughout the 1980's, initiated and supported much of the financing, intelligence, and military help that built Saddam's Iraq into [an aggressive power]." [5]
July, 1992. "The Bush administration deliberately, not inadvertently, helped to arm Iraq by allowing U.S. technology to be shipped to Iraqi military and to Iraqi defense factories... Throughout the course of the Bush administration, U.S. and foreign firms were granted export licenses to ship U.S. technology directly to Iraqi weapons facilities despite ample evidence showing that these factories were producing weapons." Representative Henry Gonzalez, Texas, testimony before the House. [18]
February, 1994. Senator Riegle from Michigan, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, testifies before the senate revealing large US shipments of dual-use biological and chemical agents to Iraq that may have been used against US troops in the Gulf War and probably was the cause of the illness known as Gulf War Syndrome. [7]
August, 2002. "The use of gas [during the Iran-Iraq war] on the battle field by the Iraqis was not a matter of deep strategic concern... We were desperate to make sure that Iraq did not lose". Colonel Walter Lang, former senior US Defense Intelligence officer tells the New York Times. [4]
This chronology of the United States' sordid involvement in the arming of Iraq can be summarized in this way: The United States used methods both legal and illegal to help build Saddam's army into the most powerful army in the Mideast outside of Israel. The US supplied chemical and biological agents and technology to Iraq when it knew Iraq was using chemical weapons against the Iranians. The US supplied the materials and technology for these weapons of mass destruction to Iraq at a time when it was know that Saddam was using this technology to kill his Kurdish citizens. The United States supplied intelligence and battle planning information to Iraq when those battle plans included the use of cyanide, mustard gas and nerve agents. The United States blocked UN censure of Iraq's use of chemical weapons. The United States did not act alone in this effort. The Soviet Union was the largest weapons supplier, but England, France and Germany were also involved in the shipment of arms and technology.
#19
Grearong: Let's accept, just for purposes of argument, your premise that the U.S. was one of Saddam's major supporters.
Therefore, we inflicted him on Iraq and Iran.
Therefore, we are morally responsible for mitigating the harm inflicted.
The logic is therefore unassailable--we had a duty to take Saddam out and to see that he is properly punished* for his offenses. Therefore, Operation Iraqi Freedom was a completely just war and you should be praising Bush and Rummy to the rafters.
*"Short drop and a sudden stop."
Posted by: Mike ||
06/13/2005 12:54 Comments ||
Top||
#20
That's right, Mike, just trying to clean up our mess.
Posted by: Bobby ||
06/13/2005 13:02 Comments ||
Top||
#21
Sure, try him in Europe. No skin off the Iraqis' noses. But they'll have to wait their turn.
Just as soon as Iraq has tried, convicted, and executed Soddom Insane, Europe can have him for their own trial. No problem.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
06/13/2005 14:25 Comments ||
Top||
#22
Europe?
Sure, how about Belgrade, I'm sure they'd love to try a Muslim war criminal.
After careful analysis, the only question that leaps to mind is - So what?, the world is not a static place, things change.
In the 80's containing Iran with a strong Iraq seemed to be a reasonable policy.
Who knew?
#25
Playing Iraq against Iran was a stellar example of realpolitic, it kept two bloodthirsty fascistic expansionist regimes occupied exhausting each other instead of decimating the rest of the ME.
NO, do not let the Hague get hold of this trial! Isn't the Slobo trial entering it's 5th year?
At 8:00 PM on 17 March 1987, a Mirage F-1 fighter jet took off from Iraq's Shaibah military airport and headed south into the Persian Gulf, flying along the Saudi Arabian coast. An Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) plane, in the air over Saudi Arabia and manned by a joint American-Saudi crew, detected the aircraft. Aboard the USS Stark, a Perry-class frigate on duty in the gulf, radar operators picked up the Mirage when it was some 200 miles away; it was flying at 5,000 feet and traveling at 550 mph. Captain Glenn Brindel, 43, commander of the Stark, was not particularly alarmed. He knew it was fairly common for Iraqi and Iranian warplanes to fly over the gulf. Earlier in the day, Iraqi jets had fired missiles into a Cypriot tanker, disabling the vessel. But no American vessel had been attacked.
In keeping with standard procedure, Captain Brindel ordered a radio message flashed at 10:09 PM: "Unknown aircraft, this is U.S. Navy warship on your 078 for twelve miles. Request you identify yourself." There was no reply. A second request was sent. Still no answer. Brindel noted that the aircraft's pilot had not locked his targeting radar on the Stark, so he expected it to veer away.
At 10:10 PM, the AWACS crew noticed that the Mirage had banked suddenly and then turned northward, as though heading for home. What they failed to detect was the launching by the Iraqi pilot of two Exocet AM39 air-to-surface missiles. The Exocets had a range of 40 miles and each carried a 352 lb. warhead. For some reason, the sea-skimming missiles were not detected by the Stark's sophisticated monitoring equipment. A lookout spotted the first Exocet just seconds before the missile struck, tearing a ten-by-fifteen-foot hole in the warship's steel hull on the port side before ripping through the crew's quarters. The resulting fire rushed upward into the vessel's combat information center, disabling the electrical systems. The second missile plowed into the frigate's superstructure.
A crewman sent a distress signal with a handheld radio that was picked up by the USS Waddell, a destroyer on patrol nearby. Meanwhile, the AWACS crew requested that two airborne Saudi F-15s pursue the Iraqi Mirage. But ground controllers at Dhahran airbase said they lacked the authority to embark on such a mission, and the Mirage was safely back in Iraqi airspace before approval could be obtained.
As fires raged aboard the Stark, Brindel ordered the starboard side blooded to keep the gaping hole on the port side above the waterline. All through the night the fate of the stricken frigate was in doubt. Once the inferno was finally under control, the Stark limped back to port. The Navy immediately launched an investigation into an incident that had cost 37 American seamen their lives. The Stark was endowed with an impressive array of defenses -- an MK92 fire control system that could intercept incoming aircraft at a range of 90 miles; an OTO gun that could fire three-inch anti-aircraft shells at a rate of 90 per minute; electronic defenses that could produce bogus radar images to deceive attackers; and the Phalanx, a six-barreled gun that could fire 3,000 uranium rounds a minute at incoming missiles. Brindel insisted that his ship's combat system was fully operational, but Navy technicians in Bahrain said the Stark's Phalanx system had not been working properly when the frigate put out to sea. (Brindel was relieved of duty and later forced to retire.)
A C141B Starlifter carried 35 flag-draped caskets to the Stark's home base at Mayport, Florida. (Two of the crewmen were lost at sea during the attack.) President Reagan and the First Lady were on hand to extend condolences to grieving families. Reagan was under fire from Congress and the press for putting American servicemen in harm's way on a vaguely defined mission. "We need to rethink exactly what we are doing in the Persian Gulf," said Republican Senator Robert Dole. The Senate overwhelmingly passed a resolution, sponsored by Dole and Democratic Senator Robert Byrd, that demanded the president explain to Congress the strategy and goals of the Persian Gulf mission -- and the risks involved. Congress was also unhappy with Saudi Arabia for what it viewed as a lackadaisical response to the request to pursue the Iraqi Mirage -- so unhappy, in fact, that the administration thought it wise to delay submission of a proposal to sell new F-15 fighter jets to the Saudis.
The strife in the gulf had started in 1984 when Iran and Iraq, at war since 1980, began attacking each other's ships. Inevitably, the vessels of third countries became targets. Over 200 ships had been attacked in the past three years. The Iranians were particularly keen to target the ships of Iraq's ally, Kuwait. Even though only 7% of American oil supplies came from the region, the Reagan administration insisted that U.S. strategic interests required a naval presence in the gulf. Critics complained that Western Europe and Japan, which acquired 25% and 60% of their respective oil needs from the gulf, weren't doing their part in keeping the sea lanes open. In fact, certain Western European nations had become major suppliers of military hardware to both Iran and Iraq. Damage done to the Stark had been caused by French-built missiles fired from a French-built aircraft.
The administration argued that to withdraw from the gulf would be to surrender America's role as leader of the free world, and that if oil shipments were disrupted, prices would soar, adversely affecting the U.S. economy. As one Western diplomat put it, if the U.S. backed out, it wouldn't "have enough credibility to float a teacup." Furthermore, the Soviet Union had increased its naval presence in the gulf, and the fear was that if the U.S. faltered, the Soviets would gain the upper hand in the region -- and growing Soviet influence in the region would pose a long-term threat to the West's oil supplies. "We will not be intimidated," said Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger. "We will not be driven from the gulf." He described the attack on the Stark as a "horrible error," and Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was quick to apologize for the "unintentional incident." Evidently, the Mirage pilot had mistaken the Stark for an Iranian tanker. Iraq promised to pay compensation to the families of the 37 slain seamen, and reparations for damages to the frigate. Officially the United States was neutral in the Iran-Iraq conflict, but the administration had decided that geopolitic considerations required that Iraq not lose the war. In the aftermath of the Stark incident, the rhetoric coming out of Washington was of a forgiving nature where Iraq was concerned, while growing increasingly hostile in reference to Iran.
The White House was resolute. "The use of the vital sea lanes of the Persian Gulf will not be dictated by the Iranians," said President Reagan during a press conference. "Those lanes will not be allowed to come under the control of the Soviet Union. The Persian Gulf will remain open to navigation by the nations of the world." The U.S. naval presence was increased from six to nine ships. Air cover would be provided by a carrier stationed outside the gulf. The American warships would escort convoys of Kuwaiti tankers every ten days or so. Iran vowed to continue attacking Kuwaiti tankers regardless of whether they flew the Stars and Stripes.
Congress objected to the open-ended nature of this commitment. Memories of Vietnam -- and of the Lebanon peacekeeping debacle in the early 1980s, during which 241 Marines were killed in their barracks by a suicide bomber -- prompted many solons to insist on knowing what rules of engagement the U.S. Navy would be operating under while escorting oil tankers in the gulf. The answer: A U.S. warship could fire on any aircraft that came within 20 miles of it, on the authority of the captain.
Unfortunately, the U.S. was so concerned about Iranian Sidewinder missiles being placed so as to control the Strait of Hormuz that it neglected to sweep the approaches for mines, one of which damaged an escorted tanker in July. The incident was egg on the face of the Navy, accused of sloppy mission preparation, and embarrassed the administration, which, while presiding over an unprecedented peacetime military buildup, had only three operational ocean-going minesweepers in service. But on 21 September 1987, the military redeemed itself by conducting a successful raid involving U.S. Navy SEALS on an Iranian vessel caught laying mines. Five Iranian seamen were killed. That same week, Iran attacked a British-flagged tanker; Britain responded by shutting down Iran's London-based arms procurement office. (By this time, British, French, Belgian, Dutch and Italian warships had joined the Americans and Soviets in patrolling the gulf.) The American raid gave some senators an excuse to push for invocation of the War Powers Act; they claimed the U.S. was clearly engaged in hostilities. The law required that the president obtain congressional approval of military action extending beyond a period of 60 days. But the Senate voted 51-40 not to invoke the law.
Following the September 21 raid, Iran amassed 60 gunboats and directed the flotilla toward Khafji, a Saudi-Kuwaiti oil facility. The USS La Salle, flagship of Rear Admiral Harold Bernsen, commander of the U.S. Navy Middle East Force, moved to intercept the gunboats, which turned back after being buzzed by Saudi warplanes. Another encounter involved an Iranian warship that locked fire control radar on a USN destroyer, the Kidd; warned off by the Kidd's skipper, the Iranian ship sailed away. Then, on October 8, Iranian gunboats fired at a U.S. Army helicopter, missing the target but attracting the attention of two U.S. AH-6 gunship choppers, which sank one of the gunboats and damaged two others. Iran responded by firing Silkworm missiles at the U.S.-owned Liberian supertanker Sungari and the reflagged Kuwaiti tanker Sea Isle City, damaging both vessels. There were no fatalities, though the American skipper of the Sea Isle City, Captain John Hunt, was blinded.
Few doubted the U.S. would retaliate. Two weeks later, four U.S. destroyers fired over one thousand rounds of 5-in. shells into Iran's Rashadat oil-loading platforms in the Persian Gulf -- after giving the platform crews twenty minutes to evacuate. Ninety minutes of continuous shelling left the platforms smoldering ruins; SEAL commando teams exploded the pilings and sent the rubble plunging into the sea. The Iranians answered by firing another Silkworm at Sea Island, Kuwait's deep-water oil-loading facility, destroying the loading dock. "We're not going to have a war with Iran," said President Reagan. "They're not that stupid." But it certainly seemed as though an undeclared war was already underway. A public opinion poll revealed that while 68% of Americans expected a "military exchange" between the U.S. and Iran, 60% were in favor of stronger retaliatory action against the Iranians.
The situation remained tense throughout the winter, but not until April 1988 did violence erupt once again in the Persian Gulf. Ten seamen were injured when the USN frigate Samuel B. Roberts struck an Iranian mine on April 14. Being careful to consult with Congress this time, President Reagan ordered a retaliatory strike against two Iranian oil platforms in the southern gulf -- platforms that served as bases for Iran's intelligence service. While one platform was shelled by the frigates Simpson and Bagley, Marines helicoptered to the second, seized it, planted explosive charges, and destroyed it. A few minutes later, the Simpson sank an Iranian patrol boat that had fired a missile at the USN guided-missile cruiser Wainwright. (The Wainwright defended itself by dispensing aluminum chaff in the air, which deflected the missile.) Meanwhile, near the Strait of Hormuz, two Iranian frigates and several gunboats were sunk by American warships and an F-14 Tomcat from the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise. During the day-long battle, a Cobra helicopter carrying two American crewmen was shot down by the Iranians.
This defeat at sea, coupled with grave setbacks in the land war with Iraq, persuaded Iranian leaders to seek improved relations with the West. The Ayatollah Khomeini agreed with Hashemi Rafsanjani, Speaker of the Iranian Parliament, on the need to pursue a new foreign policy that would defuse tensions in the Persian Gulf. As for the United States, its resolve in the gulf in 1987-88 improved its standing with allies, not only in the Middle East but also around the world.
Egyptian authorities yesterday released 163 members of the banned Muslim Brotherhood who were among hundreds detained in a crackdown on the opposition movement during May protests, a judicial source said. Police arrested hundreds of Muslim Brotherhood members during the protests for political reform and then jailed hundreds more in later demonstrations calling for the release of those held. An Interior Ministry source said 486 people were still being held for ties to the Brotherhood.
They include leading members of the group, which like other opposition groups says recent political reform by the government aims to secure power for the incumbents rather than allow more competition. The Brotherhood says a constitutional amendment replacing the old referendum on a single candidate for the post of president with a system allowing multi-candidate elections in fact aims to bar it from fielding a candidate.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/13/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
The Kurdish Parliament in northern Iraq yesterday elected veteran leader Massoud Barzani as president of the region, giving the group greater autonomy after decades of oppression under Saddam Hussein. Adnan Al-Mufti, speaker of the Kurdish Parliament, told a news conference that parliament unanimously elected Barzani, whose longtime rival Jalal Talabani, of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, became Iraq's president earlier this year. Barzani, head of the once rival Kurdistan Democratic Party, will be formally sworn in tomorrow because poor weather prevented officials from flying to the region from Baghdad for a ceremony yesterday, officials said. After months of wrangling following an election at the same time as national voting on Jan. 30, the show of support for Barzani in the new post strengthens the Kurds' grip on the north of Iraq and may bolster their bid to ensure they maintain their autonomy once a new constitution is drawn up in Baghdad.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/13/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I'm not sure what this means for Iraq's future. Talabani and Barzani, the Kurds' 2 major political leaders, reconciled their parties' differences in time for the Iraq elections so the Kurds were able to generate extraordinary attendence at the polls and have influence over the formation of the new government. Barzani is more of a separate Kurdistan type, whereas Talabani is more a federalist all one Iraq type. I wonder if the Barzani-Talabani co-operation will last for too much longer.
#2
Sheesh. Are you paying attention, TG? Methinks not.
They did precisely what you would expect of two intelligent leaders of factions within a cohesive whole. They compromised with each other, worked out who would be put forward for each position (one on the national scene and one in the regional scene), and followed through with a strong bilateral effort to ensure their political power.
Got out the vote.
Got Talabani into the Pres chair on the strength of their election showing.
And Barzani will head up the Kurdish Parliament.
What, pray tell, gives you the notion that Talabani and Barzini are at odds in any significant way? This Arab News article saying there was wrangling going on? Give me a break. Consider the source and consider that, with Talabani in Baghdad, Barzini is a shoo-in for the top position in the Kurdish regional political structure. Mebbe there was wrangling about who would be his deputies, but that would be the limit of it. What you have seen transpire is precisely the opposite of Talabani and Barzini "vying" against each other - it has been almost perfect collaboration for the good of their community.
The Kurds are the perfect example of a people who deserve the shot at freedom and self-rule that they are getting, courtesy of the US / Bush, and making the most of it within the circumstances. They are doing just about everything right.
My only quibble, thus far, is with Talabani allowing his personal views on the death penalty to override his obligation to represent Iraq as a whole and to support and abide by its laws.
The opposite of the model group is the Sunnis, of course.
#3
I agree that Kurds have two things in their decided advantage. First is that they have people who are intelligent, western-educated, and very politically astute; second is that they respect those qualities in their leaders. Both of those guys are totally committed to their country in whatever form, will not sell out, and will not double cross their own people for their own personal benefit.
#4
three things - they don't seem to have the Arab knack for victimization, whining, and seething. They get up, dust off, and move ahead
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/13/2005 14:31 Comments ||
Top||
#5
I agree with you .com on all your points. My comments were not meant to criticize the Kurds - far from it. They are very well organized people who have taken good advantage of all the options open to them. My point was: now the Kurds have positioned 2 leaders in powerful offices who hold 2 diametrically opposed ideas about the Kurds' future - as being part of a single nation called Iraq or as being an independent Kurdistan. They are poised to go either way. I'm wondering which direction the Kurds will end up taking, say 5 years from now. Especially if Turkey and the US mend their fences, will this reconciliation make the Kurds nervous and cause them to follow Barzani's lead rather than Jalabani's? I think the Kurds are not taking any chances about relying on the good faith of their coalition allies or their fellow Iraqis, that's for sure.
#6
"who hold 2 diametrically opposed ideas about the Kurds' future"
Ah, so THIS is the crux of where your thoughts originated? Funny, I've read shitloads of info, many interviews by them, and have never seen this declaration. Can you provide something to back that assertion up?
Personally, I believe they are completely in-synch: they want an independent Kurdish nation. Period. It is the understatement of all time to say they've been patient. It's hard to imagine a cohesive people who have been shat upon more times - and screwed in the breach as thoroughly. Funny, but I think the odds are in the neighborhood of 50-50 they'll get it, too -- but that's purely my own speculation, no more.
It's based upon living among the Arabs for years and watching the process in Iraq. That Iraq, as an entity, is yet another Yugoslavia, is self-apparent. The Sykes-Picot "treaty" was where it was born and is about as "valid" and "legitimate" as Stalin's creation, too. The interesting thing, to me, is how somewhere recently it seems that the international view of countries as "inviolable" entities was set in cement. If you were a people who hadn't yet "gotten yours" - well, it's suddenly just tough luck.
Bullshit, of course. I hope the Kurds get their chance. I know they won't waste it if they do. I just hope they can hang on until it comes "naturally" - as the Middle East shakes out and many new opportunities present themselves. Syria, Turkey, Iran - all are in for some rude shocks. The Kurds might be one of the truly significant beneficiaries of Bush shaking the tree. As I said, this is just my speculation.
The much-hyped peace talks between Naga rebels and the Indian government to end a bloody revolt have virtually collapsed because of New Delhi's refusal to redraw provincial borders in the troubled northeast. Intelligence officials fear the breakdown of the talks will stoke the embers of violence. They said that separatist guerrillas will go on the rampage particularly after July 31 when the eight-year-long cease-fire between Nationalist Socialist Council of Nagaland and Indian security forces expires.
Nagaland, where more than 25,000 people have lost their lives to insurgency since India's independence from Britain in 1947, is a majority Christian state of 3.5 million. On Saturday, NSCN General Secretary Thuningaleng Muivah said that he is so disappointed with the lack of progress in peace talks with Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Home Minister Shivraj Patil that he is returning to Amsterdam on June 24.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/13/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Troops have taken control of Pakistan's telecommunications facilities and netted scores of trade union leaders yesterday after they called a strike against privatization next week, sources said. "We have deployed troops, (paramilitary) Rangers and police at 150 PTCL (Pakistan Telecommunications Company Ltd.) installations," Inter-Services Public Relations chief Maj. Gen. Shaukat Sultan said of Saturday's move. The deployment of troops and police officers follows the government's announcement on Saturday that bids would be invited to invest in 26 percent of Pakistan the PTCL on June 18.
The government had earlier postponed the privatization of the country's largest telecoms company to end a 10-day standoff with 55,000 PTCL workers. Military officials said security forces had taken control of key PTCL installations in major cities while police and paramilitary rangers were posted to check on the law and order situation.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/13/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
The seventh Christian released is Indian evangelical Samkutty Varghese, who was jailed last March. Police used his address book to track down the other Christians. Two other Christians are still being held for 'further investigation', authorities said. According to AsiaNews sources close to Indian citizen Vijay Kumar (45) of Tamil Nadu, one of the freed prisoners, their release took place after having signed a document in which they renounced the prayer sessions and religious practices they had been carrying out in their homes. In Saudi Arabia, only Islam is allowed public expression.
The suspected leader of al Qaeda in Spain traveled with Sept. 11 hijacker 
Europe's troubled constitutional treaty will be ditched by EU leaders at their crunch summit later this week. 
Iran has for the first time expressed its support for the re-election of International Atomic Energy Agency Director 
Higher Education Minister Datuk Dr Shafie Salleh said the Saudi Arabian government is ready to sponsor more Malaysian students to further their studies at several universities in the Kingdom. He said this year Saudi Arabia would take 40 students for several courses related to Islamic studies, which was double the number offered previously. "Most of them study at the Riyadh, Medina and Mecca universities and the new intakes this time around will also be offered to do other courses like medical and engineering besides Islamic studies," he told reporters after a welcoming ceremony for Malaysian students from Saudi Arabia here Sunday. He said the number of students (40) was just one per cent of the total number of foreign students studying in Saudi Arabia.
Iran may not have the largest number of insurgents in Iraq, but what it lacks in quantity, it makes up for in quality, Rep. 
Polling stations in Lebanon have closed with initial results showing former general Michel Aoun winning fierce electoral battles against rival anti-Syrian opposition groups in key districts. At stake in the third round of parliamentary elections are 35 seats representing the central Mount Lebanon district and another 23 for the eastern Bekaa Valley. Preliminary results indicate a sweeping victory for electoral tickets backed by Aoun in Mount Lebanon's mainly Christian Kesrwan-Byblos and Upper Metn districts. Aoun, a former general who spent 14 years in exile in France following a failed "war of liberation" against Syrian troops in 1989, returned to Lebanon on 7 May, shortly after Syrian forces withdrew from the country. 
Iraqi political forces began preparing for general elections, slated at the end of the year, leading to the formation of Iraq's first elected government. Former Prime Minister 
AIR AMERICA's 
Egyptian authorities yesterday released 163 members of the banned Muslim Brotherhood who were among hundreds detained in a crackdown on the opposition movement during May protests, a judicial source said. Police arrested hundreds of Muslim Brotherhood members during the protests for political reform and then jailed hundreds more in later demonstrations calling for the release of those held. An Interior Ministry source said 486 people were still being held for ties to the Brotherhood.
The Kurdish Parliament in northern Iraq yesterday elected veteran leader Massoud Barzani as president of the region, giving the group greater autonomy after decades of oppression under Saddam Hussein. Adnan Al-Mufti, speaker of the Kurdish Parliament, told a news conference that parliament unanimously elected Barzani, whose longtime rival Jalal Talabani, of the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan, became Iraq's president earlier this year. Barzani, head of the once rival Kurdistan Democratic Party, will be formally sworn in tomorrow because poor weather prevented officials from flying to the region from Baghdad for a ceremony yesterday, officials said. After months of wrangling following an election at the same time as national voting on Jan. 30, the show of support for Barzani in the new post strengthens the Kurds' grip on the north of Iraq and may bolster their bid to ensure they maintain their autonomy once a new constitution is drawn up in Baghdad.
