#1
There is some suspicion that the Saudis were involved with some multi-national nuclear development a while back. Money + free time + inferiority complex = trouble.
Yemen is trying to convince northern rebels to surrender to avoid more clashes, which have cost more than 700 lives, the foreign minister said on Tuesday.
Foreign Minister Abubakr al-Qirbi told Reuters that state troops were in "full control" of rebel areas in the mountainous north of the Arab state and that the situation was stable.
"I hope they surrender because we do not want more bloodshed as a result of this futile conflict which is being instigated by old-fashioned ideas about rules and government in Yemen," he said on the sidelines of a meeting in Qatar.
Yemen says rebels loyal to slain Shi'ite cleric Hussein al-Houthi want to install clerical rule and preach violence against the United States and Israel.
Last month, Yemen's president said Houthi's father, who is blamed for the new round of fighting, agreed to a peace deal, but there have been some small clashes since then.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
06/14/2005 16:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
CARACAS, A Colombian drug trafficker wanted in the United States has escaped from the headquarters of Venezuela's security police. Jose Maria Corredor reportedly escaped over the weekend with the help of Venezuelan security officers, Venezuela's Information Officer Andres Izarra said Monday. Corredor was arrested in Venezuela earlier this year at the request of the United States, El Nacional newspaper reported Monday. He is accused of shipping hundreds of pounds of cocaine from Colombia through neighboring nations and onto the United States, Africa and Europe.
Posted by: Steve ||
06/14/2005 09:08 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Drop by Hugo's house. He probably having breakfast while Hugo makes sure the wire transfer went through.
BUDENNOVSK, Russia, June 14 (UPI) -- The town of Budennovsk in Russia Tuesday observed the 10th anniversary of the deadly raid by Chechen fighters led by Shamil Basaev. During the raid, Basaev and his men held about 1,800 people hostage for six days. The incident ended with the deaths of 147 people and the wounding of more than 400 people.
The 10th anniversary was marked by a prayer service and a demonstration by young people in the center of town under the slogan, "We remember," Radio Free Europe reported.
Basaev continues to play a leading role in the fighting in Chechnya and has claimed responsibility for such major terrorist incidents as the 2002 hostage taking at a Moscow theater and the 2004 hostage taking at a school in the North Ossetian town of Beslan, the report said.
Still killing, after all these years
The separatist Chechen Web site chechenpress.com hailed the Budennovsk operation as having "forced the Russian authorities to heed the Chechen resistance and to begin the process of peacefully regulating the Russian-Chechen conflict of 1994-96."
Yeah, that worked out well.
Posted by: Steve ||
06/14/2005 15:40 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
They pay off Iranian mobsters and Tajik border guards, buy forged passports and visas for $300 a pop and rely on the whispered advice of an international network of Muslims who help militants slip undetected across borders from Afghanistan to Uzbekistan. Former members of the al-Qaida-linked Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, who gave themselves up in exchange for amnesty, said they used the terrorist trails to return home to Uzbekistan -- routes easily traveled nearly four years after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
Hasan Satimov, 30, used the clandestine network as recently as September 2004 to return from Afghanistan to Uzbekistan via Iran. He first used the Silk Road militant routes when he slipped across the Afghan border to Iran soon after Sept. 11 but within a few months returned to Afghanistan because he ran out of money. He finally went home to Uzbekistan after Uzbek authorities guaranteed him amnesty.
Satimov's home is in Namangan, in the religiously conservative Fergana Valley, the most populous region of Central Asia, where Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan meet. Namangan is the native city of the two founding members of the IMU: political leader Tahir Yuldash and Jumabay Khojiyev, known as Juma Namangani after his hometown. He was believed killed in Afghanistan during the 2001 U.S.-led assault on the Taliban.
Continued on Page 49
This article starring:
HAMID ASQAROV
Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan
HASAN SATIMOV
Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan
JUMABAI KHOJIYEV
Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan
JUMA NAMANGANI
Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan
Rashid Dostum
TAHIR YULDASH
Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan
Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
06/14/2005 15:35 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
First, the good newsRice-transplanting Finished in Main Paddy Areas
Pyongyang, June 13 (KCNA) -- Rice-transplanting has been finished in the main paddy areas of the DPRK. It has been wound up in the paddy fields except the first-crop fields and some highland areas of Jagang, Ryanggang and North Hamgyong provinces thanks to the patriotic and devoted work of the agricultural workers, KPA soldiers, government employees, working people and youth and students who turned out in response to the militant appeal of the Workers' Party of Korea to concentrate and enlist all efforts in agricultural production.
The farms all over the country had hurled themselves into rice-transplanting in right time after making full preparations for spring farming such as repair and readjustment of tractors, rice-transplanting machines, etc. Rice-transplanting surged into a high tide with the powerful support of the whole party, army and people. When it entered a full-fledged stage, millions of supporters rushed to the cooperative fields every day and gave sincere help in farming. Transplanting was finished successfully in time in the west coast granaries such as Yonbaek, Jaeryong, Yoldusamcholli and Onchon plains in South Hwanghae and South Phyongan provinces.
Officials made it possible to wind up rice-transplanting in time by giving intensified technical guidance coupled with mobile organization of work and frontline-style economic agitation on the cooperative fields astir with transplanting. Now the cooperative fields are animated with unabated strivings of agricultural workers and assistants tending transplanted rice seedlings with all care. Now, the bad news Abnormal Weather in Korea
Pyongyang, June 13 (KCNA) -- Abnormal weather has been continuing in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea in the spring and summer, exerting an adverse effect on farming. Kim Si Chon, a section chief of the Technical Research Center for Agricultural Information under the Academy of Agricultural Sciences, told KCNA that cold air has blown into the Korean peninsula owing to the intensified Siberian high air pressure and northwest wind. It had delayed the spring season a week over the normal year and 10-15 days over last year, he said, and continued:
The spring sowing, therefore, was delayed in the country as a whole.
From April, the temperature largely changed due to the periodically alternate high and low air pressure. The rate of sunshine duration has been recorded as lower than the preceding years.
On April 4, 16, and 30 the temperature rose and lasted for consecutive days and on April 13, 20 and May 6 the high temperature fell and continued for some days in Pyongyang and other west coast areas, the granary of the country. They adversely affected the growth of crops.
Rarely strong winds blew in Kangwon Province and different northern areas, hindering preparations for rice-transplantation. The June average temperature is 1 2.2 degrees centigrade lower than last year's. the amount of rainfall in the first ten days of the month is 35-60 millimeters, a 30 percent higher than that of the normal year. And it is envisaged that the average rate of sunshine hours for the month is 41 percent slightly lower than the normal year's.
Kim Si Chon said that this summer the temperature throughout the country might be low, rainy season might come earlier than the preceding years, torrential rains might be recorded to cause flood and cold-weather damage might occur in some areas of the east coast.
Posted by: Steve ||
06/14/2005 11:58 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
But surely, since "the cooperative fields are animated with unabated strivings of agricultural workers and assistants tending transplanted rice seedlings with all care" they will overcome the imperialist-controlled weather.
Posted by: Bobby ||
06/14/2005 12:31 Comments ||
Top||
#2
And here's Biff Jong Il with the weather. Take it away, Biff.
Well, Jack, it doesn't look like we'll be eating anytime soon...
DESPITE his denials, UN chief Kofi Annan was apparently told of efforts by his son's employer to win an oil-for-food contract with Iraq in 1998, according to a memo written by an executive of the company, The New York Times has reported.
The discussion allegedly took place a few days before the contract was awarded to Cotecna Inspection Services.
The New York Times said it obtained a copy of a memo written on December 4, 1998, by then Cotecna vice-president Michael Wilson — whom the daily said was a friend of Kojo Annan and a family friend of the UN chief — describing a meeting in late November 1998 during the 20th summit of Francophone leaders in Paris.
"We had brief discussions with the SG and his entourage," the memo states. "Their collective advice was that we should respond as best as we could to the Q&A session of the 1-12-98 and that we could count on their support."
"1-12-98" referred to a meeting Mr Wilson and a delegation of Cotecna officials had in New York on December 1, 1998, with senior UN officials who were considering which of three companies to select for the inspection contract that Cotecna won 10 days later, the daily reported.
While the memo did not state that Kojo Annan was present at the meeting between Mr Wilson and Kofi Annan — who has denied any involvement in the selection of Cotecna or having discussed the contract with his son — it continued with a description of "courtesy greetings" on behalf of the Geneva-based contractor with presidents of several African countries held by a person identified as "KA" at the summit meeting.
Asked for comment by the daily, a consultant for the company said it appeared that Mr Wilson was referring to Kojo Annan in the memo.
His involvement in Cotecna, which won a $US10 million-a-year contract, and the UN secretary-general's possible conflict of interest in the deal are under investigation by a UN panel and several US Congressional committees.
Under the UN oil-for-food program, Iraq was allowed to sell oil under UN supervision between 1996 and 2003 to buy humanitarian goods to alleviate suffering of the Iraqi people resulting from international sanctions against Saddam Hussein's regime.
The program had a total value of about $US64 billion dollars during its operation. Experts say that several billion dollars was diverted back into Saddam's coffers.
A UN investigation headed by former US Federal Reserve chief Paul Volcker said no evidence was found that Kofi Annan had sought to use his influence to direct contracts to Cotecna, his investigation into any possible conflict of interest had been inadequate.
It has also said "serious questions" remain about the business dealings of Kojo Annan.
The memo was discovered by accident three weeks ago during a search of company archives in its efforts to account for all of Cotecna's payments to Kojo Annan, said the consultant, who also confirmed the memo's authenticity for The New York Times.
"No senior Cotecna officials initially had any memory of the e-mail or of such a meeting, and the memo appears to contradict what the company has said," the company's consultant, who declined to be identified, said.
Cotecna has acknowledged its owners held at least two private meetings with Kofi Annan before the oil-for-food contract was awarded, but it has denied the company's effort to win UN business was discussed at those meetings, or that any Cotecna executive lobbied Kofi Annan for the contract, the daily reported.
It's impossible for him to get any dirtier than we think he was/is. The bottom layer of a garbage dump isn't as dirty as this wanker.
He needs a permanent change of address - to the Graybar Motel.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
06/14/2005 17:20 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Who cares!
A friend of a cousin of a brother of a mother-in-law of a good buddy of a person who thought he heard Natalee Holloway name about six months ago has this exciting newsflash! Lets have a flash news station break right now!
(FYI - Natalee Holloway is the name of the blonde white women who disappeard in Aruba which the MSM has been beating its meat about for the past couple of weeks here in the US..)
Federal prosecutors announced upgraded charges yesterday against a Defense Department analyst accused of disclosing government secrets, saying for the first time that Lawrence Franklin conspired to give classified information to a foreign government. An indictment filed in U.S. District Court in Alexandria charged that Franklin met with a foreign diplomat last year at a coffeehouse in the District and provided classified information about a Middle Eastern country's activities in Iraq. Court documents do not identify the diplomat or the country, but sources familiar with the case said he works for the Israeli Embassy in Washington.
The indictment, filed May 26 and unsealed yesterday, revealed that another Defense Department employee is involved in the investigation into whether classified U.S. information was provided to the government of Israel. The employee, the indictment said, was present at a separate meeting at which Franklin is accused of disclosing national defense information to two people, identified as former employees of a pro-Israel lobbying group. It is unclear if the Defense employee is also a target of the probe.
Yesterday's charges mark an escalation of the government's case against Franklin, an Iran specialist who was first charged in Alexandria last month with disclosing classified information related to potential attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq. Court documents did not reveal who received the information, but federal law enforcement sources have said it was Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman, two former officials of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, an influential lobbying organization. Under the original charge -- a single count of disclosing classified U.S. national defense information to a person or persons not entitled to receive it -- Franklin could have received up to 10 years in prison. If convicted of the six new counts in the indictment, which include conspiracy to communicate classified information to an agent of a foreign government, he faces up to 55 years in prison.
In a related case, Franklin was charged last month by federal prosecutors in West Virginia, where he lives, with possessing classified documents concerning Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda and Iraq.
Franklin was arraigned yesterday on the indictment filed in Alexandria and pleaded not guilty. A judge set a trial date of Sept. 6. Franklin's attorney, Plato Cacheris, declined to comment but has previously described Franklin as a patriotic American who did nothing improper.
Rosen and Weissman have been notified that prosecutors are preparing to charge them with disclosing classified information as well, sources familiar with the investigation have said, but the timetable remains unclear. Lawyers for Rosen and Weissman attended yesterday's hearing but declined to comment. A Pentagon spokesman referred calls to federal prosecutors, who declined to comment. David Siegel, an Israeli Embassy spokesman, said Israeli diplomats "conduct themselves in full accordance with established diplomatic practice and did not do anything that would contravene these standards.''
The indictment hints for the first time at Franklin's possible motives, alleging that he was seeking "to advance his own career" and "his own personal foreign policy agenda." It says Franklin arranged a series of meetings with two officials at a Washington lobbying organization, at which he disclosed classified information. The officials are identified only as unindicted co-conspirators. Sources familiar with the case said they are Rosen and Weissman.
According to the indictment, one of the two co-conspirators initiated the relationship with Franklin in August 2002. The indictment said this conspirator called a Pentagon employee asking for an Iran expert and was given Franklin's name. Franklin called him back a week later, and Franklin began meeting with both conspirators in 2003, according to the indictment.
Posted by: Steve ||
06/14/2005 10:39 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The indictment hints for the first time at Franklin's possible motives, alleging that he was seeking "to advance his own career" and "his own personal foreign policy agenda."
Yet Sandy Berger -- who destroyed unique documents out of the same motivations -- is walking free and is under a "punishment" that simply barred him from access to classified information until after the next presidential election(*).
Berger should be spending his remaining days in a Federal prison. That he's free and Franklin's facing charges is a farce, and just more evidence that laws simply are not applied to Democrats.
(*) Unless someone grants him a waiver. In which case he has his access back.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
06/14/2005 12:48 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I suspect its cause there was no one else implicated in the Berger case.
Franklin was clearly accused as part of an FBI attempt to get either someone farther up in DoD, or somebody at AIPAC. That theyre charging Franklin means either he wouldnt turn, or there simply wasnt anything to get. Having threatened him, they had to follow through.
Believe you me, there are plenty of registered Dems who are very concerned about the investigation of Franklin. At least in the pro-Israel community.
June 14, 2005: The U.S. Marine Corps has agreed to turn over a force of 2,500 specially trained marines to SOCOM (Special Operations Command.) Bowing to pressure from the Department of Defense, and SOCOM, the marines are the last of the services to make such a contribution to SOCOM. Created in 1987, SOCOM gained control over army Special Forces (including Civil Affairs, Psychological Warfare and special helicopter units), navy SEALs and air force commandoes and special aviation units. But the marines said they had nothing to offer. The marine SOCOM force will consist of 400 marines trained to provide military instruction for foreign armed forces. This has long been a Special Forces chore, and will still be. But the addition of marine training troops will take some of the pressure off Special Forces to provide this service.
The marines will also provide over a thousand marines trained as "special operations-capable." The marines have been training some of their troops to be "special operations-capable" for over a decade. But SOCOM has different standards, and skill requirements. Once the "special operations-capable" marines are turned over to SOCOM control, SOCOM will provide additional training. As part of this deal, the SOCOM marines will be available for Marine Corps operations when SOCOM doesn't need them. It's likely that once SOCOM gets control of these marines, they will keep them busy indefinitely. Finally, the marines will provide some support units. These will include stuff like dog handlers (and dogs trained for military tasks), some logistical units and an Air Naval Gunfire Liaison Company.
SOCOM will also keep control over Special Operations Detachment 1, a force of 86 marines trained as commandoes. SOCOM originally wanted as many as 4,000 marines, and the final deal may result in the marines giving up more than 2,500 troops.
Posted by: Steve ||
06/14/2005 09:34 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This is just my $.02. While I have to admire the Corps for trying to maintain an element of independence given some of their mission requirements such as MAUs they also have to remember who they work for. Its not the Commandant, the Chief of Navy Operations or even the Sectratary of the Navy. They work for the Secratary of Defense who in turn works for the President. Some time I wonder just how much money we waste on duplication of capabilities or equipment (the fiasco IMO with the Air Force camo work uniforms as an example) simply in the name of tradition
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/14/2005 10:13 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Important thing for you non-military types (and military types who have nto worked closely with Marines):
One of the most important distinctions about the Marines is: Every Marine is a Marine.
They try to make sure there are no distinctions, no special treatment, no divisions, no differences in the way any Marine is treated by other Marines, nor by the outside world. Doesnt matter if you are a pilot, a cannon cocker, or a cook: the important thing is that you are a Marine.
This will be a severe test of that "way of life". SOCOM (and its predecessors) has its own way of doing things. As an example: From the Army side of things there was the way things happened there, and then there was "Back in Army" (and sometimes the Big Army if you were a ranger) -- SOCOM is definitely NOT the Army. And its Definitely NOT the Marine Corps.
This will be interesting to see if they SOCOM assigned Marines get passed over for promotions or have difficulties when they return to the "regular" Marines. The Marines can be such a clannish bunch.
#4
Well, look at the experiences of "China" Marines, or embassey Marines, or Roosevelt's Commandos. I don't know the answer but I would suspect it's in that bunch.
#5
SOCOM better watch it's back or the Marines will take over.
Posted by: Steve ||
06/14/2005 11:34 Comments ||
Top||
#6
The Marines are doing fine. A Marine now leads our NATO forces, Strategic Command and, shortly, the Joint Staff.
The cost is that they've gotta play with the others. ;-)
Posted by: too true ||
06/14/2005 14:44 Comments ||
Top||
#7
I expect you're right Chuck, perhaps it'll be like the old Seagoing Marines (not Marine force) the ones that enforced the Captains will on a sometimes hardheaded crew.
A Republican congressman has called for a deadline to pull out US troops from Iraq, while other members of President George Bush's party have urged his administration to revamp Iraq policy. Republican Walter Jones, a North Carolina conservative, said on ABC's This Week on Sunday that he would offer legislation this week setting a timetable for the US withdrawal from Iraq. "I voted for the resolution to commit the troops, and I feel that we've done about as much as we can do," said Jones, who coined the phrase "freedom fries" to lash out at the French for opposing the Iraq invasion.
I was talking to somebody at work today about what kind of course the WoT was going to take. Our general concensus was pretty pessimistic. I think the national attention span's been overwhelmed by Ben and Jen, Britney's bosom, Michael Jackson, and a host of other frivolities du jour. Time's passed and the national revulsion at 9-11 was receded, such dead as were found long buried. Politix as usual has set in, first with the Dems adopting their now traditional antiwar stance, now with weak-kneed Publicans getting ready to move on to more pleasant subjects, like fund-raisers. There hasn't been another atrocity on U.S. soil, and not that many — save a few beheadings — effecting Americans. The pols are talking about shutting Guantanamo down because it offends people. Islam's still the Religion of Peace™, despite all evidence to the contrary. We're more worried about Koran abuse than murder most foul.
I'd guess that despite Howard Dean's best efforts, the Publicans are going to lose the next presidential election as the nation slips back into the comfortable 9-10 mode where occasional terrorism is, as John Kerry put it, an occasional irritant. So an embassy gets blown up now and then. Nobody's targeting Des Moines. We'll go through four years of Mrs. Clinton or whomever else the Dems throw up. Meanwhile, the Soddies will continue pouring money into their terror machine and the Paks will continue supplying muscle. At some point the forces of Evil will get their nuclear weapon, probably courtesy of Pak back channels or from Iran, and they'll use it as soon as they get it. Washington will be no more, possibly me with it. Then we'll have another four years of war, until the bodies are cold and long since buried and whoever's filling Britney's and Michael Jackson's and Paris Hilton's shoes ten or fifteen years from now overcomes what will and determination we possess as a nation.
For the first time since 9-11, I'm feeling pessimistic. I don't want my children and grandchildren to wear turbans. I don't want their wives to be breeding stock. In something of a mirror of Howard Dean, I'm coming to hate the Democrats and the Republican pols who're looking at polls and not at the national interest. Those, like that dipshit troll we had yesterday, who're so caught up in their Blame Bush syndrome that they can't see the danger from international Islamism disgust me. I try to keep Rantburg open to a range of opinions, but I just wish they wouldn't post here. I wish they'd go away, slither back under their rocks, never to be seen again.
I don't want to see us lose this war, but I'm coming to the conclusion that we will. Worse, I'm coming to the conclusion that we deserve to lose it.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/14/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[23 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
Fred.
Its because George has been too goody two shoes esp. with regards to his friends the Saudis.
Look at this quote from Michael Ledeen, writing in the National Review:
more time has passed since 9/11 than transpired between Pearl Harbor and the surrender of the Japanese empire, and our most lethal enemies are still in power and still killing our people and our friends.
It is good that the desire for freedom is now manifest among the oppressed peoples of the Middle East and Central Asia, and it is very good that dramatic strides toward self-government have been taken by the Georgians, Kyrgistanis, Ukrainians, Iraqis, and Lebanese. But it is not good enough. Indeed, it is shameful that we have yet to seriously challenge the legitimacy of the terror masters in Tehran and Damascus, who represent the keystone of the terrorist edifice.
Our enemies know this, because, to their delight and perhaps their surprise as well, they are still in power throughout the Middle East. Until and unless they are removed, the terror war will continue, our friends in the region will be killed, tortured, and incarcerated, and the president’s vision of regional democratic revolution will go down the memory hole.
#3
Well then Bush and the Pubs in congress better grow a couple of balls and start acting like they won the election last November.
Thye can start by telling the Dems in congress: "F-U! We are the majority and we'll nuke judicial nomination filibustering. Quit ya bitching and start governing this country asswipes."
The tell CAIR, the ACLU, and the U.N. "F-U! If we flush, piss on, mishandle the koran too farking bad - grow up and get a real God who can defend his own holy book. We are not going to apologize to asshats who deliberately target and murder innocent civilians. We are going to start enforcing the Geneva Convention to-the-letter and start shooting illegal combatants in the field like they deserve."
Then tell the Media, "F-U! We are not going to apologize to you. We are not even going to talk to you unless you start telling the *whole* *truth* and quit working with the enemy."
Then tell Mexico, "F-U! Clean up your act and keep your people on your side of the border. We are going to start patroling the border and shipping illegal aliens back to Mexico City and leave them there.
#4
I don't want to see us lose this war, but I'm coming to the conclusion that we will
I'd say slightly more than half of the US population, and a sizable number of their international supporters, would disagree. You'd have to make us disappear first. Things have changed after 9-11. Dhimmitude? NFW! over my dead body
Posted by: Rafael ||
06/14/2005 0:48 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Posted by CrazyFool 2005-06-14 00:35|| Front Page|| Comment Top
#6
A new scene is about to appear that will make everyone feel better.
The Iraqi people are now about to put Saddam on trial.
Let me repeat that.
The Iraqi people are now about to put Saddam on trial.
The press will HAVE to cover this and the 12-14 counts are trully horrendous.
America will look like Marshal Dillon, this will get your moral back up guys. It will also put a seriously bad light on on-going terrorism.
AND the Iranian women are acting up becuase they see thier sisters in Afghanistan on one side and their sister in Iraq on the other side with freedoms. They are now being very vocal about wanting those same feedoms in major demonstrations this weekend.
#7
muck - that wasn't my virtual march (oh yeah... that will show-em! Only a LLL could think of that!).
RG, I hope so. But I am afraid the media will focus on such stupid things as 'How Saddam looks' and 'Oh, he scratched his left buttcheek! He must have been tortured!' and anything else *but* the charges and evidence.
Thank God for blogs (Thanks Fred!) and the Internet.
#8
Darkest before the dawn? RG is right, CHIN UP! We know this is a 2 front war. I say it's high time to switch focus to the home front and clean house of the scum that honestly do want to see us lose. I have felt for a long time that there is a sick faction of the left wing that sees our defeat as their quickest, surest way back to power. They would actually serve gladly, knowingly, the very masters that would slit their throats. It wouldn't matter at all - as long as they were in power for a that brief moment.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
06/14/2005 1:12 Comments ||
Top||
#9
The term "Freedom Fries" shows how deep this farkwitt is. One reason I am not registered as a Republican is Guys like this. No going back and no tossing in the towel. Perhaps he should move to France.
#10
This is a fight that we cannot walk away from. This is a fight to the death. I understand Fred's pessimism---I feel the darkeness around me, too. I think that it will get worse before it gets better. This whole madness is building up to something---a great shock. Nuke perhaps? Maybe. Something big to shake up the whole world. Europe cannot keep going the way it's going without disintegrating. The US is strong, but it is divided. The ChiComs are planning for the long term. We need leadership and common purpose.
Here we are as a nation, being wacked around by the LLL over a bent Koran and a prison full of madmen and murderers that should have been blown to bits by B-52s in Konduz. How far we have fallen.
Yes, I believe that it is going to take a great shock to bring this country out of its malaise. This is a fight to the death for the soul of this great nation. A lot of people know this already. A lot more need to know.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
06/14/2005 1:30 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Howard Johnson Badanov is right! GWB seems to be MIA right now. But Fred is also correct - its up to us to hold our politicians' feet to the fire or we deserve what we get. All that I can hope is that we're in a lull similar to the one before the Iraq invasion, where we were all driven to near madness by the endless months of UN crap. Bush has made it clear that an Iranian nuke is unacceptable and so far he's kept his word on other stuff. But if we get to '08 and nothing has been done, I think we're really screwed.
#12
C'mon Fred, Robert Spencer re-ups his "I told you so" post, everytime the let's-democraticize-the-Islamofascists mentality is released from the spin-bag. Read my lips: one cannot be a slave-of-Allah and a circumspect elector. One cannot promote US safety, by subsidizing competing Sunni-Shiite Islamofascisms in the Iraq territorial-demographic dog's breakfast.
http://www.insightmag.com/main.cfm?include=detail&storyid=393129
It is a fact that Bush pronounced "Islam is peace," after Oval Office consultation with AMC, ISNA, and other US jihadi fronts that still receive State Department consultation fees. Imagine the problem of conducting WW2, if FDR pronounced "Fascism is peace," 6 days after Pearl Harbor. Read some of Ralph Barton Perry's famous WW2 letters to the New York Times, in defense of the war, for a dose of the noble realism that is lacking in our spin-dystopia.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010917-11.html
I suspect that GWB's worst apologists never made the trip to the top of the WTC, as I did in 1990. If they had, then they would want bloody pacification. That will happen because it has to happen. Cut the head off the snake, and the body dies. Nuke Mecca!
Posted by: War on Islam ||
06/14/2005 2:56 Comments ||
Top||
#13
just thinking;
Didn't our fearless pols scramble for their lives just the other day when a flying instructor got *lost* over Washington DC and buzzed the capitol.
[what an inspiring lot of dismal asshats they are...jezbus]
Confronted with non stop drivel from foggy bottom, Congress and the MSM I think a sane person should feel a little low now and again.
But Inspite of the slime, jellyfish & 5 columinsts, in some ways we are in a better position now to have some effect on our fate than we were not very long ago, when the professinal critters had total control of the public square [w/the exception of a few books].
I guess that begs..will it be enough?
Rantberg and the Regulars have really helped me crytalize my thinking about the present and future danger our country and faces.
It doesn't by any means take all the people to stop the slide into Dhimmitude, it just takes Americans with grit. (and help from our 'ferigner' friends also)
Speaking of real grit and inspiration, if you haven't read, A Narrative of a Revolutionary Soldier by: Joseph Plumb Martin, it's a real treat.
Posted by: Red Dog ||
06/14/2005 4:08 Comments ||
Top||
#14
The press will HAVE to cover this and the 12-14 counts are trully horrendous.
Sure they have to cover it.
But they don't have to cover it fairly, accurately, or in any way resembling the truth. We're talking about the greatest enemy the US has ever had -- the modern press.
Every charge against Saddam will be accompanied by a "Why the US Didn't Stop Him" editorial, or a "More Abuse at Gitmo: Detainees Given Cheap Toilet Paper" story. Then they'll find a Democrat working at State who's willing to feed them anonymous tips about how the Iraqis are blowing it, how the whole trial's a farce and the whole country will collapse if he's convicted, blah, blah, blah.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
06/14/2005 7:31 Comments ||
Top||
#15
I agree with Fred. A little less than half the country is still stuck in 1968. These people (including Swillary) never grew up. Now they are in power. The harder they push, the more crazies they bring out, and I'm not all that far from being one myself. I find that I no longer even care to discuss the issues with the LLL, because we live in different universes. We no longer share a common language as words do not mean the same thing to me as they do to them.
#16
Walter Jones isn't a North Carolina conservative - he is a North Carolina "moderate". His ADA liberal quotient (LQ) is 30 - the average North Carolinian Republican Congressman has an LQ of 5. (Heck, there are North Carolinian *Democrats* with lower LQ's than Jones's). McCain's LQ, for example, is 35. Zell Miller's was 5. The media calls Jones a conservative for one of two reasons, (1) compared to reporters, Jones is probably a conservative or (2) as usual, they are deliberately being deceitful, in order to foster an image of conservatives in retreat.
#17
Hmm...with the confidence in the newspapers and televsion down to 28%, you really think they're molding American opinion? Still stuck in 1968? Only they are. Yet with all the negative press on GWB he still beat Kerry. Now you're buying into their constructed myths. You actually buy their polls. I have a bridge in San Francisco I'd like to sale you. Just sit there an whine. Pity yourself. You give them so much power.
There's something out there no one, and unfortuately that includes the old tire hacks of the Republican machine, is paying attention to. When those same confidence polls rate the military, they come out at the top, in the 70 percentiles. Guess who's coming home now? Bright, motivated young men and women who while tired in the labors in Iraq have seen the 'good news'. Who burn inside because they don't want the sacrifices of their brothers to be wasted. Who know and chaff at the lies of the MSM. These gentleman, like our fathers returning from WWII, are a new generation to take their skills and dedication and place it in the political arena. Time to kick your local party official and tell them in no uncertain terms, they'd better be greeting and recruiting these servicemembers not for a vote, but for a job to represent their district, their state, their nation. Regardless of the party, if there is a defeatist sitting on the seat right now, its time for a new replacement. The time to start is now.
#18
You can sit around and cry about it if you want. But ask yourself what are you doing? Call your representatives and have your friends do the same. Furthermore, get involved with supporting the troops through various websites. Letters to the editors. etc etc.
#19
AND ... take on the idiotarians when you encounter them. We CANNOT AFFORD to agree with one another here but be silent when we're among them ... or among those who might be undecided.
We know what the imams and mullahs are preaching. We know what is being done to women and children in the Muslim world. We KNOW the involvement of France and other countries in abetting tyranny and hatred.
It's time for us to insist that that story get out publicly. Because it is NOT being portrayed in the MSM. People may not trust the MSM a lot, but it's the only source of info for many. It's time that WE step up to challenge the assumptions of many who will vote in this country.
Don't wait for Dubya or any other politician. Take back our country and public opinion now ... while we still have some sliver of a chance of doing so.
Posted by: too true ||
06/14/2005 8:58 Comments ||
Top||
#20
fred dont be so pessimistic. Not ALL dems are antiwar, not even wrt staying the course in Iraq. Hilary, whom, you mention, has remained staunchly committed to seeing a victory in Iraq. The antiwar folks hate her for that. (the holywood cultural left crowd is also nervous about the family values noises shes made, the things shes said about violent video games, and the like) Y'all may think of her as a socialist cause of healthcare, but the Hollywood left and the Upper West Side parlor pinks dont care about healthcare, being wealthy themselves. The 2008 Dem primary campaign is likely to brutal - if Hilary can beat the Deaniacs that will be a very good sign.
#21
Why this is even worser than TET!
Shit, get a gripe, this is going to be a long war than ends suddenly in victory. My bet is another 36 months, by then 3 other regime changes.
"Now, Israel is not only, however, a friend and ally for us, it is a beacon of what democracy can and should mean. It is, after all, a pluralistic democracy. It is, as many of us know from personal experiences, a very dynamic democracy with many points of view, and those are expressed with great frequency and vigor. So if people in the Middle East are not sure what democracy means, let them look to Israel, which has been and remains a true, faithful democracy.
But we know that the goal, the important, essential goal of a democratizing Middle East is complex, and it is not without risks. A few months ago, I went for the second time to Iraq and Kuwait and Afghanistan and Pakistan, and I returned home with hopefulness about what I had seen and learned, but also with a sense of caution about how we should proceed. In Iraq I saw firsthand the daily challenges confronting the Iraqi people. I met with a number of our troops, the brave young men and women who are on freedom's frontlines in Iraq. I met with our civilian representatives in the embassy and other agencies who are also risking their lives to help the Iraqi people.
And I met with representatives of the former interim Iraqi government and the newly elected Iraqi government, as well as private Iraqi citizens.
Now I came away with several overwhelming impressions. First, no matter what one thinks about events that have unfolded in Iraq, there is no doubt that the American military has performed admirably, with professionalism, and that every young man and woman who wears the uniform of our country deserves our support, whether they be active duty, guard, or reserve troop.
You know, it is on trips like that -- despite the often dangerous circumstances, I wish I could bring every one of my constituents -- all 19 million of them and any others who could come -- to see firsthand. I flew from Baghdad to Fallujah in a Blackhawk helicopter; met with the Marines who had liberated Fallujah from the insurgents and terrorists.
I met with many others of our Marines and soldiers who are committed to their mission to try to bring freedom to the people of Iraq. They, as well as the troops I saw in Kuwait and in Afghanistan, are committed to this fundamental belief that people deserve the right to be free, deserve the right to select their own government, deserve the right to plot and plan for a better future for themselves and their children.
I hope that each of you, as you travel through your states and communities, will make it a point to thank these young people, because they're paying a very high price: 1,600-plus lost their lives; thousands and thousands have returned home grievously injured. Because of the advances in battlefield medicine and the new body armor that our troops wear, many are surviving injuries that would have left previous generations of young men and women dead. "
#24
Somebody name for me an anti Viet Nam war congressman, who, in 1968, was talking about liberating towns from the terrorist VC. Heck, were pro-war congressmen talking like that?
#27
Hilly said that? She's not a chameleon, she's a changling!
Some good stuff up above, Fred. Take heart. And you are playing a role here, doing your part, working for the good guys!
Posted by: Bobby ||
06/14/2005 9:44 Comments ||
Top||
#28
RC: so, RC, can YOU name me an antiwar congressmen who went to VN in 1968 and came back talking about Marines who had liberated villages?
Hillary's a Senator with presidential ambitions who's never been overtly anti-war. Note that she's voted for every military appropriation in the war on terror. Prior to her trip, she had consistently *talked* about how the war on terror was a good thing. She's still *talking* that way. Now that the polls appear to be going in reverse, it will be interesting to see what Hillary says next. In any case, it's not what Hillary says on her way to a presidential nomination that matters - it's what she did. We don't need another Carter in the White House.
#29
Of course Hillary's voted for the use of the military - she's gonna want that track record clean when she deploys them domestically ;-)
and yes, I know about Posse Comitatus
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/14/2005 10:02 Comments ||
Top||
#30
Fred, go re-read your wonderful post on the opinion page. What you wrote really helped me regain perspective when I was beginning to despair about the whole situation. Next, seriously, your seratonin levels may have dropped a bit. Take your lovely wife and whatever grandkids happen to be around, and go for a brisk walk -- at least 20 minutes. Fresh air, sunshine, and sustained aerobic exercise do wonders for the seratonin levels in those with normal metabolisms. Then get a good night's sleep. Inadequate sleep, especially of the critical REM stage, leads to a drop in seratonin levels and mental confusion. (Trust me on this one. I'm an expert!)
And finally, in this little housewife's opinion (an opinion, it must be admitted, informed by what I've learned at your site), we will not lose this war. If, as you fear, a Democrat lands in the White House next election, there will indeed be a slackening of the anti-Islamist effort. As a result, there will be An Incident. And the President (D), will fry 'em up, in .com's oft-used phrase. Not the way we want to win the war, true, but definitive nonetheless. And the following denizen of the White House will be a Republican, chosen to clean up the mess, while the Democratic Party dissolves into guilt-induced hysteria (legitimate, for a change) and mutual recriminations, to be replaced by the Libertarians in the role of Loyal Opposition.
And finally, remember that in all consumer surveys -- unless very carefully worded -- the answer is predicated in the question. So don't take the reported number of Americans against continuing in Iraq seriously. There is a television show about welcome home parties for individuals coming back from the war -- and every single one of those people will hear the truth from their own personal troop. Those poor anti-Bush, anti-war journalists haven't a chance!
(P.S. Feel free to notice that your mood has been lifted by my amusing naivete'. I won't mind.)
#31
I still don't like her and I don't think she would make a good president but she did tell Kerry that voting against appropriating the 89 billion dollars would be a grave mistake politically. She was right.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
06/14/2005 10:10 Comments ||
Top||
#32
Remember:
These are the same pollsters who had Kerry soundly winning the election, who said that Daschle was safe in his senate seat, and who skewed every poll by asking leading questions.
They wanted a result that would hurt Bush by screwing the war effort, so they went out and made one. Notice how the articles all lead off with some reference to Bush and try to make him a failure because of a poll result. This is all about the MSM's hatred of GWB, and their desire to get him even if it harms the nation.
Asking the real folk, those of us out here in fly-pver land, that would produce completely different answers - adn the MSM woulndt want that to get out, now would they?
As for what Bush needs to do: Bush needs to start using the Bully Pulpit, and do the things Reagan did: go over the heads of the press and the craven congresswimps, and talk directly to the American people. Engage the people, tell them of the need for hard work to get hard rewards, tell them of the successes our sacrifices in Iraq have brought, tell them of the things the MSM refuses to talk about, give them a living breathing example of it (i.e. a US servicemember who is well spoken and in Iraq to tell of the Iraqis who he has helped and how now help others).
As for us: keep spreading the good word. Read Cherenkoff. And the repeat one or two items in passing at work, especially to those co-workers who are more concerned with American Idol and the latest Michael Jackson news. "Hy Bob, I saw this where they are doing X in Iraq, and the people there are... WOnder why the news isnt covering it?"
Grass roots have to start someplace. Start with yourselves. Luckily for me, I dont have to worry about this in my office.
#33
Chin up Fred. We all get down at times. To paraphrase Bluto from Animal House: my recommendation is to drink heavily! Go to the O-club and Pappy will hook you up. As usual, we'll sign your chits. Cheers!
#35
"If, as you fear, a Democrat lands in the White House next election, there will indeed be a slackening of the anti-Islamist effort. As a result, there will be An Incident. And the President (D), will fry 'em up, in .com's oft-used phrase. Not the way we want to win the war, true, but definitive nonetheless. And the following denizen of the White House will be a Republican, chosen to clean up the mess, while the Democratic Party dissolves into guilt-induced hysteria (legitimate, for a change) and mutual recriminations, to be replaced by the Libertarians in the role of Loyal Opposition"
#36
"If, as you fear, a Democrat lands in the White House next election, there will indeed be a slackening of the anti-Islamist effort"
an anti war dem wont win, as long the war is an issue. A prowar dem like Hilary might actually intensify the effort - maybe allocating resources to match the rhetoric.
#38
LH: A prowar dem like Hilary might actually intensify the effort - maybe allocating resources to match the rhetoric.
Well, lookie here - another liberal looking to throw taxpayer money at a problem that isn't susceptible to monetary solutions. That's what I love about liberals - any problem in the world can be solved with more taxpayer dollars.
#39
wrt the polls - look, people react to whats happening. January 30 was the elections, people felt good. Since early April bad stuff happened in Iraq. Seriously bad. Whatever Chrenkoff, Wretchard etc say. No matter how much folks want to blame the media. So folks react. When things show signs of progress again (which they WILL) people will buck up again.
Take a look at Winston Churchills words during WW2, or FDR's. They sure werent defeatists, but they also didnt go around saying Germany was in death throes, or that the axis was defeated, even AFTER decisive victories like Midway, El Alamein, Stalingrad. WSC - this is not the end, nor even the beginning of the end, but it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning. Thats where we are now. The Iraqi forces have probably at least 2 or 3 years go to be a quality force. And even if we peel off a chunk of the insurgency politically, it will remain strong until the Iraqi forces are strong enough to not need US help. So we're at the end of the beginning, maybe the midpoint(looking at Iraq alone, not the broader WOT). It would behoove the admin and those who support the war in Iraq to be upfront about that. Imagine, if, after El Alamein, WSC had announced that the Germans were now finished? What then would have been the public response to the Germans retaking Kharkov, to the troubles of the North Africa campaign, etc??? Level with people, and you'll do better in the long run then making airy fairy everythings going great.
#41
I can understand Fred's frustration and level of anxiety over our committment to the WoT. All you have to do is read the NYT's each day as I do and watch the MSM networks from time to time and then spend some time around a very liberal but ex-patriotic community as I do in the summer. It is all there - anti-patriotism, pro-liberal values (gay marriage, abortion, free borders, etc.)anti-religion, anti-bush, anti-america. No one believes it will ever happen again and even if it does it will be Bushes fault which is all these lily-livered whiners want anyway - find fault - not fix problems. It can be pretty depressing. Then you crawl up to your little crow's nest in the attic and sit down to your computer and link up to Rantburg, Jihad Watch, LGF, Austin Bay, etc. and your life picks up a little optimism. So, Fred, cure thyself - read the burg thoughts and comments and understand that you are not alone, there is hope (unfortunately with that you usually die in shit)and that something big is going to happen to refocus all this energy where it belongs. I think that is what is bringing you (and me at times) down - that something big is going to happen and we haven't done enough to keep it from happening.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
06/14/2005 11:05 Comments ||
Top||
#42
You know, Liberalhawk, I'm having a hard time imagining FDR limiting war expenditures to 25% of government spending during WW2.
In fact I wouldn't be suprised to find out that total government expenditures were roughly the same then as now.
It's nice of y'all that y'all have found a new way to expand government power by pretending y'all are hawks.
But are _you_ willing to do something that might seriously crimp your power or political base to win the war?
I'm specifically thinking of the mainstream democratic party _stopping_ thinking of the domestic oil exploration industry as a Class Enemy. If y'all had done it four years ago, the country would be farther ahead than it is now.
The same goes for nuclear power.
Posted by: Phil Fraering ||
06/14/2005 11:09 Comments ||
Top||
#43
"Level with people, and you'll do better in the long run then making airy fairy everythings going great. "
points a few posts up
LH, thats pretty much what I said Bush needs to do. Notice what I put first?
Engage the people, tell them of the need for hard work to get hard rewards, tell them of the successes our sacrifices in Iraq have brought, tell them of the things the MSM refuses to talk about, give them a living breathing example of it
Sometime GWB frustrates the hell out of me because he waits too long to use the publicity powers of the Presidency. Clinton was popular because he knew how to do it. Reagan was a master of it, bringing a conservative revolution when both parts of Congress where held by Democrats. Even JFK knew how to use it to inspire and motivate the American people.
Bush has the MBA mentality, and is a solid manager and leader, in a corporate sense. And when he bothers to get out there, he does very well (Remember the bullhorn at the 9/11 site?)
Every good CEO knows how to sell - its part of the job. Somone needs to tell him "George, its time for the salesman part of your job as CEO of the USA". Plan an information campaign that puts this squarely in front of the American people: We are winning, the MSM is not telling you the whole story. Much like World War 2, there are battles along the way that we have won, and more for us to win - and like WW2 those battles have casualties. There have been sacrifices, while not on the scale of thousands dying in a few days, as in Iwo Jima or Bastogne, and there will be more to come. But they are well worth while, and these are the results.. Ask the soldiers. Go ask the Marines.
I think that Americans will respond to a challenge. At least the ones who matter will respond. The craven political asses in the MSM will respond predictably, and you can prepare for that by making sure that the campaign in the USA is just as dogged and sustained against the MSM's biased coverage as is the campaign in Iraq against the Baathists, Wahabbists and Salafists.
This is now a 2 front war, and one of the most important fronts is being ignored, or at the least, not being given sufficient resources and attention.
#44
"You know, Liberalhawk, I'm having a hard time imagining FDR limiting war expenditures to 25% of government spending during WW2.
Mainly because he so dramatically increased defense spending.
"In fact I wouldn't be suprised to find out that total government expenditures were roughly the same then as now."
Im sure thats incorrect. Total non-government spending was very small. Hardly any private consumer durables were sold during that time, few houses except in places were war industry booms created housing shortages, etc.
"It's nice of y'all that y'all have found a new way to expand government power by pretending y'all are hawks."
Its nice of you to judge my motivation without knowing me.
"But are _you_ willing to do something that might seriously crimp your power or political base to win the war?"
Just supporting the war in Iraq endangers the unity of my party. Dramatically. I think thats enough of a crimp.
"I'm specifically thinking of the mainstream democratic party _stopping_ thinking of the domestic oil exploration industry as a Class Enemy. If y'all had done it four years ago, the country would be farther ahead than it is now."
Not all dems are opposed to expanded exploration for oil, or to nuclear power plants. Just as not all republicans are opposed to measures to conserve energy.
But ultimately this isnt about oil. The jihadis are a danger to us even if we're self sufficient in oil, and they can be beaten even if we're not.
#45
BTW, if you check out leftie blogs, like Kevin Drum, theyre going on about how poor Howard Dean was done in by the MSM.
Id say Bush would be advised NOT to go on about the MSM - it reeks of blaming the messenger - and good news does get out - a lot of the positive stories posted here actually come from the MSM. And I wouldnt go on about victories -let generals do that, or better, Iraqis, or congressmen who go to Iraq. Focus EXPLICITLY on warning how long and hard a slog its going to be - within that you can subtly mention victories "despite the progress Iraqi forces have made, they have a long way to go ...." that sort of thing.
That might actually lower his ratings in the short run. But Cheney seems to be trying to buy short run ratings at the expense of long term gains.
#46
Ya'all rememeber in 1990how the left convinced a tax increase was in order or the economy would shell out. Bush went for it, went against his promise, went against his base. Look what happened to Bush
This is the same thing. The left in GOP friendly states are pressuring GOP politicians to knuckle under knowing full well if they do the right stays home in 2006 and likely 2008.
If Bush and Frist want to stave off a potential distaster, it is time for Bush to take the lead and reiterate his support for the war and all we are doing, stating without equivication that nothing less than a military victory is a successful outcome in Iraq, and part and parcel of that is a free, capitalistic, democratic Iraq. Nothing less will do for me.
Bush ought to damn well state: We won in 2004. We control the agenda now.
#48
i agree it's a two front war and we've lost it badly on the home front.
I don't think we will wind up wearing turbans, but I do think we will lose NY or someother US city to a nuke or other type of WMD.
It would be great if we could put all of those who said we needn't worry into one town and let them go up in smoke, but like drunk drivers, their cavalier carlessness only ends up killing others.
If I was a general, I'd be fighting back in the culutre war. If the pen is mightier than a sword, then maybe it's about time that our generals need to acknowledge that and act accordingly.
#50
OK, so who has written a letter to the editor, or an op-ed piece? Some of you are very erudite (I just know a few 25-cent words). Certainly getting "our" point of view across to the NYT, LAT, or WaPo will not be easy, but there are other forums, no? And persistence, or numbers, might eventually pay off in the less-friendly media....
Posted by: Bobby ||
06/14/2005 12:14 Comments ||
Top||
#51
it's a good point bobby - but I've given up on NYT WAPO etc. I fight back by ignoring the papers, treating them as the litter that they are, and I believe that is the most effective way to hastent their demise.
And when I do refer to them, to my friends who are true believers, I simply note that I don't bother with papers, they are too slow, too doom and gloomy and inferior to the product I get online. Oh, sure, I miss the local section and all that, but quite frankly, NYT and WaPo and all the other old media are just not good enough for me, better quality online.
#52
and you know what hurts the WAPO and NYT et al the most when I do that? It's that it's TRUE!
Truth hurts, babee. The truth hurts. Rantburg is a better "paper" than the NYT when it comes to WOT. If USA today is McDonalds - WAPO and the NYT are Denny's, or at best, a stuffy steak house. Rantburg is that really that really good ethinic restaraunt down the street. When I want WOT, I come here. And rantburg has a pretty good politics and page 3 on their menu too.
Hey WaPo and NYT...you guys suck. Better stuff on line. Learn to deal with it.
#53
I think that is what is bringing you (and me at times) down - that something big is going to happen and we haven't done enough to keep it from happening.
What brings me down is the prospect that over the course of the next few years the LLL will have framed the thoughts of the general public sufficiently that we just lose our will and focus. They're trying hard to do just that right now and so far as I can tell, are succeeding.
Posted by: too true ||
06/14/2005 14:50 Comments ||
Top||
#54
I live in the UK and get the piss taken out of me by close friends for investigating Islam. Watching as the Palistinians celebrated 9 - 11 made me check out who these nutters were that rejoiced death in the name of their God. The more I read, I realised that we are going to face another world war in our generation. The new enemy can twist and turn the statements in their holy book to justify just about anything, look at Zarquawi saying muslims are fair game in his latest statement. Their ultimate goal must be to obtain Nukes to cause as much devastation as possible and it must be only a matter of time when the enemies of the US, like Pak and N Korea pass on material to terrorists. I am feeling very pessemistic about the future too. It winds me up to see our governments do nothing when people who want us dead burn our flags on our streets. Most of them live off the state go to their mosques and are plotting our doom. What is going to make us start deporting the enemy within? Another Madrid? Bali? New York? What are we waiting for???
#55
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the galleys, heard in the very hall of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor—he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and wears their face and their garment, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation—he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city—he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared" (Cicero)
#56
Its nice of you to judge my motivation without knowing me.
Well, I have been watching the majority leaders of your party for about twenty-five years now. I watched Hillary fall into lockstep behind Hanoi John once he became the party nominee.
"But are _you_ willing to do something that might seriously crimp your power or political base to win the war?"
Just supporting the war in Iraq endangers the unity of my party. Dramatically. I think thats enough of a crimp.
Not really. There's a double-standard involved in that a leftist politician can stand up and says he supports the war and the left-wing pacifist branch of your party will support him under the understanding that either he doesn't really mean it or he's just doing it to expand the party's power. John Kerry had both the votes of the pacifist wing and those who thought he'd be better because he could show how he was a much better hawk than Bush, after all he fought in Vietnam, and testified in Congress, and helped create our marvellous victory there where Vietnam's freedom was secured. (What, it wasn't? Oh, it wasn't really possible anyway, and it took a _smart_ hawk like Kerry to realize that. Never mind that Vietnam was the war where the rest of the world had it demonstrated that _terrorism worked_, because even when it lost the battles, it could gain political victories, and the Arabs today are trying to obtain the sort of victory John F'cking Kerry gave to North Vietnam. Which is why I keep bringing that point up.)
"I'm specifically thinking of the mainstream democratic party _stopping_ thinking of the domestic oil exploration industry as a Class Enemy. If y'all had done it four years ago, the country would be farther ahead than it is now."
Not all dems are opposed to expanded exploration for oil, or to nuclear power plants. Just as not all republicans are opposed to measures to conserve energy.
No, but the people who've controlled the national democratic party for the last thirty years have been opposed to both of those, despite their attempts at running candidates in LA and TX to say they're really not. ANWR didn't pass until the Republicans got something like 65% of the Senate, and ANWR is a small part of what we _need_ to be doing.
Posted by: Phil Fraering ||
06/14/2005 17:47 Comments ||
Top||
#60
Pappy and 3dc there are thousands and thousands of minimum wage jobs in Florida that depend on an unobstructed view of the Gulf of Mexico. It's much to painful to contemplate the end of the motel economy, slot machines are looking good tho.
#61
my answer? "I'll pull out when I'm done, Dammit"
should be interesting to watch the interview responses...for kicks
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/14/2005 20:28 Comments ||
Top||
#62
What? A bunch of piss ant whimps. We go through this shit every six months. First it was Sey Hersh saying we were going to lose in Afganistan-- the day before we kicked the ficking AQs and Talibunnies out. So much for insightfulness from Sey.
Then we have the aftermath of a spendid Iraq invasion. Mom, is it over with yet? was the wail from lilly livers for several months post invasion.
Then there was the Iraqi election. Then everyone was back on the bandwagon -- for a couple of weeks. Now we have the cowards crying to set a timetable. Couriously, most of the same idiots that are crying about Gitmo (oh, those poor little terrorists).
We will leave when victory is assured, and not before. No grabbing defeat from the jaws of victory. God bless our troops.
Posted by: Captain America ||
06/14/2005 23:51 Comments ||
Top||
UNITED NATIONS, June 14 (UPI) -- U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan does not recall a 1998 meeting in which an executive reportedly claims he was assured of an Iraq oil-for-food contract.
The "I can't recall" defense. Can't be charged with lying about a bad memory, someone might come up with real evidence to prove otherwise if you say "I wasn't there"
The chief spokesman at U.N. World Headquarters in New York Tuesday also said records do not reflect such an encounter and neither does a "trip coordinator" who attended the Franco-African summit in Paris Annan was attending at the time.
Fancy that.
Coincidentally, Annan was in Paris Tuesday.
The Independent Inquiry Committee into the U.N.'s Oil-for-Food Program said earlier in the day it was "urgently reviewing newly disclosed information concerning possible links between ... Annan and representatives of Cotecna Inspection Services."
"Crap, how did we miss shredding that document?"
The Swiss contractor bid for and won contracts under the oil-for-food program while the secretary-general's son, Kojo Annan, was a consultant in 1998.
The statement followed a report in Tuesday's New York Times saying a memo written by a Cotecna executive discussing efforts to win the contract said he met with Annan and his "entourage" and the executive was told, "We could count on their support."
Posted by: Steve ||
06/14/2005 15:43 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
You mean maybe I was there?
This is most discomforting. Remind me to issue myself a stern reprimand. In the strongest terms!
Now... what's the dinner menu look like?
Posted by: K. Annan ||
06/14/2005 16:43 Comments ||
Top||
#3
If he can't recall the meeting, then obviously nothing important happened in it. So we should all just move along, there's nothing to see here, nothing at all...
A memo written by someone who was then an executive of a major contractor in the United Nations oil-for-food program states that he briefly discussed the company's effort to win the contract in late 1998 with Secretary General Kofi Annan and his "entourage" and that the executive was told that "we could count on their support." The secretary general's son, Kojo Annan, was employed by Cotecna Inspection Services, a Swiss contractor based in Geneva, and the nature of that relationship is among the issues being investigated by a panel appointed by the United Nations and several Congressional committees.
Kofi Annan has said several times that he did not discuss the contract with his son and was not involved in Cotecna's selection. A United Nations panel headed by Paul A. Volcker, a former chairman of the Federal Reserve, concluded in March that Mr. Annan had not influenced the awarding of the $10 million dollar-a-year contract to the company.
But the memo appears to raise questions about the secretary general's role.
UNITED NATIONS — Eight former U.S. ambassadors to the United Nations (search) sent a letter on Tuesday urging congressional leaders to reject a bill that would link reform of the world body to payment of American dues, warning that the legislation could actually strengthen opponents of reform. The letter, coordinated by a nonprofit group that promotes United Nations causes, said there is consensus for U.N. reform, but argued that holding back dues would plunge the United States back into the type of bitter fight with fellow member states that broke out when dues were withheld through much of the 1990s.
"Withholding our dues to the U.N. is the wrong methodology," the letter said. "When we last built debt with the U.N., the United States isolated ourselves from our allies within the U.N. and made diplomacy a near impossible task." The letter was signed by eight former ambassadors, from both Republican and Democratic administrations: Madeleine Albright, John Danforth, Richard Holbrooke, Jeane Kirkpatrick, Donald McHenry, Thomas Pickering, Bill Richardson and Andrew Young. The Better World Campaign, which organized the appeal, said the only two other living former U.S. ambassadors to the U.N. were not asked to sign — former President George H.W. Bush because of his ties to his son, President Bush, and John Negroponte because he is still in government, as national intelligence director.
The Better World Campaign (BWC) is a project of the Better World Fund, which was created with support from entrepreneur and LLL philanthropist Ted Turner
Representative Henry Hyde, R-Ill., has proposed legislation before the U.S. House of Representatives that would require the United States to withhold up to 50 percent of U.S. dues if the United Nations doesn't implement a range of reforms. The bill is scheduled to come up for a vote before the House on Thursday. Hyde argues that reform will be impossible without the threat of withholding dues. The bill's chances of becoming law in its current form are not clear because President Bush has said he opposes the tactic and there is no identical bill before the U.S. Senate. The United States is the biggest financial contributor to the United Nations, paying about 22 percent of its annual $2 billion general budget. After the U.S. government fell millions of dollars behind in arrears in the late 1990s, the United States almost lost its voting rights in the General Assembly.
The letter said that withholding money again would "create resentment, build animosity and actually strengthen opponents of reform." "The fact is reforms cost money and withholding dues impair the U.N.'s ability to make the changes needed," it letter said.
Posted by: Steve ||
06/14/2005 10:28 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#4
Better to set a new base contribution level. Use US population as a percentage of the world (4.5%). Same for the 25-40% US contribution to UN agencies. This will most likely start a race toward the bottom as other high contributors quit subsidizing this Mecca of despots and corruption.
Posted by: ed ||
06/14/2005 11:35 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Jeane Kirkpatrick signed? She must be getting senile then.
#8
So the people who pay my salary can't stop paying it and get rid of me just because they've found out I'm corrupt, steal millions from them and never do my actual job?
Sweet deal. Where can I get one of those?
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
06/14/2005 15:02 Comments ||
Top||
#9
It must be like the Mafia. Once your in, your in. And never take sides against the family...
#19
Madeleine Albright did such a fine job managing North Korean nuclear ambitions that I'm sure we all want to heed her advice on U.N. management. gag gag
Posted by: Tom ||
06/14/2005 20:16 Comments ||
Top||
#20
Use US population as a percentage of the world (4.5%). Same for the 25-40% US contribution to UN agencies.
The Indians and Chinese will just love that plan...
An attack by Indonesian pirates on a Malaysian tanker was foiled Tuesday when a quick-thinking crewman from the vessel leapt into the robbers' boat and sped off in it to fetch the police, officials said.
The tanker, which was carrying diesel from Malaysia's Port Klang to Myanmar, was boarded before dawn by 10 pirates off the northern island of Langkawi in the Malacca Strait.
"All the suspects got up on the tanker and they left their boat beside the tanker ship. Then one of the crew of the tanker ship just stole the boat," an officer with the Langkawi marine police base told AFP.
Leaving the pirates stranded on the 4,629-tonne tanker, owned by Malaysian company Netline, the crew member raced to the marine police base and raised the alert.
Police arrived at the scene a little after midday and managed to persuade the suspects, all of whom are Indonesians, to give up about three hours later.
"The pirates threatened to blow up the boat during negotiations but the police finally got them to surrender," Noel Choong, head of the International Maritime Bureau's Piracy Reporting Centre, told AFP.
All 19 crew members on board the tanker were safe, although the captain is believed to have sustained a light head injury, said a northern region marine police officer.
KUALA LUMPUR, June 13 (Bernama) -- The Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency will begin operations in November with 20 ships and patrol boats. An agency source said Monday the vessels were part of the 72 ships and boats that would be taken over by the agency in stages from the various existing maritime agencies.
Of the 20 ships and boats that would be taken over next month, nine belonged to the Royal Malaysia Police, six Royal Malaysia Navy and five Royal Malaysia Customs. In total, the police would supply 15 ships and boats, navy 19, Fisheries Department 12, Marine Department 21 and customs five.
Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak was reported to have said in mid-May that for a start, the government had approved 4,035 posts to meet the operational needs in five regions which would cover 17 districts and nine bases.
On the purchase of 25 new patrol boats to beef up the agency, it is understood that the tender had been issued.
The agency, headed by a director-general appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, will be responsible in ensuring the security of the country's maritime zones and protect the maritime interests of Malaysia and other countries. The agency, under the purview of the Prime Minister's Department, would report directly to Najib, who is also Defence Minister. It will be responsible in enforcing federal laws in the country's maritime zones and airspace... ensure peace in Malaysia's territorial waters, involve in search and rescue operations and combat piracy.
#1
November? And it's mid June? WFF? Shipping need security now. Oh, I see. Gotta go through the bid process. Sorry, my bad.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
06/14/2005 1:38 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Malaysia and Indonesia had a standoff in January this year over an island on the maritime border both claimed. Indon launched possibly the world's first act of internet warfare by hacking Malaysian government websites, posting the Indon flag with messages of pride and nationalism.
Bristling with Asian pride and anger these countries are.
#3
Indon launched possibly the world's first act of internet warfare
Not even close to the first. The Red Lion virus was launched in 2003 by Chinese hackers with government approval and support and there were others before, and since.
Posted by: too true ||
06/14/2005 10:29 Comments ||
Top||
Head of Iranian AEC: "I do have information that some years ago through intermediaries we recieved centrifuges..." Head of IrAEC says Dr Khan was the go-to guy.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
06/14/2005 18:24 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
A big f*ckin' DUH! Every nuke-wannabee got stuff from Khan (actually the ISI). We need to put some panties on his head, of course Pak would never allow that. Some freakin' "partner".
That's politics I guess
Michel Aoun, who returned from exile in France to split the anti-Syrian opposition by winning a stunning victory in parliamentary elections Sunday, emerged yesterday as an unexpected power broker in Lebanon. "This is a country that should be built on sound foundations, the first of which is combating corruption in the state. But this was what turned everyone against us," said Gen. Aoun, who battled Syrian forces in 1990 and later fled to exile. Switching sides, the general allied with pro-Syrian elements for the elections and took 21 of the 58 seats contested in the central and eastern regions, Interior Minister Hassan al-Sabei said.
The main anti-Syrian opposition alliance, led by Druze leader Walid Jumblatt and the son of assassinated former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, had 19 seats going into the third round of voting and needed an additional 46 for a majority in the 128-seat parliament. But Mr. Jumblatt's ticket picked up only 27 seats Sunday, giving it a total of 46, which was far short of a majority. The anti-Syrian bloc still has a chance to clinch a majority in the fourth and final round of voting this Sunday in the north, where the remaining 28 seats will be decided.
The Syrian withdrawal this spring allowed Gen. Aoun to return from exile, but he failed to join the main opposition coalition. Instead, he formed an improbable alliance with some pro-Syrian Christians while claiming that the move did not reflect a change in his stance on Syria. Aoun supporters were quick to note that the general refused to sign or accept the 1990 Taif Accord, which ended the civil war and was signed by all major Lebanese groups, including Mr. Jumblatt, the Lebanese Forces and others, which allowed Syria to remain as an occupier. Even if the Hariri-Jumblatt opposition does not need Gen. Aoun's Free Patriotic Movement for a parliamentary coalition, the former leader has positioned himself for a run at the presidency, should President Emile Lahoud resign or be forced from office.
Posted by: Paul Moloney ||
06/14/2005 02:08 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
As an observer from the cheap seats - it's tough to see what's going on, but I can't help but wonder if this isn't a good result. There really was no one person who had what it took to lead Lebanon to independence from Syria's influence.
Wally was too cozy with Syria. He's your typical liberal who uses the poor to stand on their backs, promising he will tell the world of their problems and they will go away. Then just talk,talk,talk,blah,blah,blah, identifying problems all day long, or working on the BIG SOLUTION, they'll let you know what it is right after lunch. But be assured...when they are done with it, you can count on this: no child will be hungry, no one sick and lemonaide will spring where the blue-bird sings....lalalala. Peace and kumbaya. In short, Wally was milk-toast.
Hariri was a bit too slick for me. Though we'll never know what the father could or could not have done. But he certainly had enough power and money to do something. He's son strikes me as an overpolished pretty boy - but regardless, I don't think he had the experience or power base to make things happen.
Aoun would quickly become a tyrant. But one thing he does add to the mix is that Syria won't get the cozy, let's wink and make a deal relation ship, for the people, that they would have gotten if the others had gotten a clear lead.
So in short (ha, ha, as if this was short)I think it's good there is no clear majority. I think they will be forced to appeal to the people. No chance of anyone getting to cozy with Syria now, and no one group that Syria can just assasinate or corrupt.
Maybe I'm over optimistically looking for a silver lining, but given the players, I think this was a better result than any other.
#3
The sad thing is for all the talk of a Cedar Revolution and a new Lebanon, in the end it is still the same names bandied about that were there two decades ago, and the people still vote for the old names and the old slogans.
As long as the Jumblatt's and Hariri's and Phalangists and Hezbollah are around, there doesn't seem much chance of Lebanon going anywhere.
Posted by: Paul Moloney ||
06/14/2005 9:18 Comments ||
Top||
#4
are we all on the same planet? Jumblatt's dad (IIRC) was killed by the Syrians, hes been anti-Syrian for years. Aoun, OTOH, just DID do the wink and deal thing with the pro-Syrian groups. You cant keep looking at this through the prism of 1984.
Which is wrong. Even if the opposition had won, no individual opposition leader could have dominated the others. Jumblatt, Hariri, and Geaga (whom you overlooked) would balance each other. The only purpose of Aoun here was to advance himself BY keeping the Syrians in the game.
Oh, and you did some kind of silly comparison of Jumblatt to American liberals. Which has little to do with the realities of the Druze in Lebanese politics. But its always best to see things throught the lens of American politics, isnt it?
Sorry to be as harsh sounding as this, but Lebanese politics is VERY complex, and has very deep roots, and using it to make a cheap (and off topic) point about American liberalism is sad.
#7
granted I made a cheap point about American liberalism. But I'm not necessarily wrong because of it.
Using an American lens to make a comparison, with which I think you will agree, we here at home benefit from the argument between those who argue for more control by the state and those who argue we need less of it. It's been an ongoing argument since our founding fathers.
There is no clear leader in Lebanon right now who could take them where they want to go. They are better off continuing the argument until someone rises from the ashes who can lead. Jumblatt, much as I'm sure you like him, is not the man who could make it happen. It's clear he doesn't have what it takes to move them forward. The voting results prove my point. Nor did anyone else.
Saying it's too complicated is a smoke screen. Of course it's complicated. Just like it is in Iraq. Finding a balance between competing interests is often the best way to move forward. The result that they achieved will force that to occur.
Anti-Syrian Christian leader Michel Aoun has handed other anti-Syrian opposition groups a surprising defeat in Lebanese parliamentary elections. According to results announced by Interior Minister Hassan al-Sabei on Monday, Aoun and his allies clinched a total of 21 of the 58 seats contested on Sunday, at least temporarily thwarting the opposition's quest for a majority in their drive to end Syria's political control. Meanwhile, the Shia Muslim Hezb Allah resistance group and its allies swept 10 seats in the eastern Bekaa Valley while Druze leader Walid Jumblatt's list won in central Mount Lebanon.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/14/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
Posted by: Fred ||
06/14/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I just want Elbaradei and the entire IAEA Traveling Circus to be in Tel Aviv (the Israelis can invite them for "talks" about their nukes and a pretense of inspecting facilities) when the Mad Mullah's nuke pkg comes online*.
Then keep them all there - by force. Invite Coffee and his UN Politburo to come and negotiate their release. Hold them, too. Then offer to negotiate everyone's release with all the Arab "Leaders"... in Tel Aviv, of course. Make sure the Head of The Int'l Red Cross Thingy comes by, personally, to check on the well-being of the hostages and, well, you get my drift.
There are certain advantages to being an outlaw.
* In the extremely unlikely event we don't take them out first, of course.
The militant al Qaeda network should be dismantled and sustainable democracy achieved in Afghanistan within 10 years, allowing foreign troops to leave, Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf said on Tuesday.
Musharraf told Reuters in an interview that a sustainable democracy with a central authority needed to be achieved in neighbouring Afghanistan, its militia removed and a strong Afghan army created, before foreign troops could leave.
"All this is do-able in 10 years and I am very sure that the way we are going we will be able to dismantle the al Qaeda organisation totally (within Afghanistan in 10 years)," Musharraf said during the first visit by a Pakistan president to Australia.
"I think in 10 years we should be able bring a semblance of democracy that is sustainable, ensuring the integrity of Afghanistan."
U.S. and Pakistani officials say they don't know where bin Laden is, but their best guess is somewhere along the rugged border between Afghanistan and Pakistan.
"We have broken (al Qaeda's) cohesion, their lateral and vertical cohesion (in Pakistan). That's a great achievement because they cease to exist as a homogenous body able to execute operations in a command and control environment," Musharraf said.
"But ultimate dismantling, ultimate elimination (in Pakistan) will take time."
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
06/14/2005 15:58 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
Protesters are locking horns with police in pacifist-packed Marin County [California] for fining drivers who honk for peace. Officers have been pulling over motorists who honk as they drive by a weakly weekly peace demonstration. Protesters say police are squelching freedom of expression. "We have been picketing for a long time. All of a sudden the police are out there trying to stop the honks," said peacenik Melvin Fiske, a corporal in the Marines during World War II. "We assume honking is as American as (apple) pie. If people want to applaud our actions it is their right to do that." Tiburon police Capt. Dave Hutton said excessive honking is an "unlawful use of horn" and officers are simply doing their job. So far, officers have issued three citations and nine warnings. Five to 10 protesters typically participate in the hourlong Friday peace vigils. Protester William Rothman said about four weeks ago police began "lying in wait" for motorists. As soon as a driver honked, police pulled the car over. One neighbor who lives near the protest site said the honking "annoys the hell out of me." Time for the neighbors to identify the regulars, visit their houses at all hours of the night, and give them a dose of their own medicine.
Posted by: Dar ||
06/14/2005 12:52 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Oh, dear! The old conflict between freedom of expression and peace and quiet. Why can't supporters wave if they want peace? Why can't they flash their lights? Mail a postcard? Log into a website? Why is "applauding actions" always better if it annoys someone else?
Posted by: Bobby ||
06/14/2005 13:09 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I'm all for "Heart attacks" for peace from these jokers.
#3
Fiske, a corporal in the Marines during World War II. "
And we can all be sure that the AP checked to be sure he was indeed in the Marines in WWII. Hmmm...what's an old geezer like that doing behind the wheel anyway?
#7
Americans in general have the right to honk in support of demonstrators' causes but no one ever has the right to deliberately block, obstruct, and or stop traffic for long period(s) of time. Its a matter of personal and public safety. Typical Lefty complaint BS - they wanna usurp and take all credit for the achievements of the Right, and while silently/quietly admitting that Rightism is superior, even to argue that Leftism inversely results in Rightism, yet they still have to pretend that Leftism is wholly unique, differentiated, and separate from the Right. Lefties draw PC scalpels thru everything and anything depending on the PC and politics of the nano-moment. Their movements leadership proclaims to be for America and Americanism while standing next to and fostering the contrary. and the only reason they're innocent is because they themselves prob don't remember what they stood for for/against last week or yesterday - they likely need Regulatory Socialism/Centralism just to keep their private sanity before they go on that proverbial barbarian/bandit rampage.
JERUSALEM (AP) - The planned withdrawal from the Gaza Strip this summer will be difficult if Palestinian militants wage attacks on Israeli forces trying to evacuate the settlements, although the army will still accomplish its mission, Israel's military chief said Tuesday.
Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz said the delicate job of having unarmed troops forcibly evacuate resistant settlers while trying to defend against Palestinian attacks would be complex and dangerous. In that situation, the army would have to deal with the militants before it could proceed with the withdrawal, he said. "There won't be disengagement under fire," he told a news conference.
However, he did not specify how much violence Israel would be willing to absorb before suspending the pullout to attack the militants.
Not a lot, I'm thinking
"(It) depends on how much fire, what kind of fire, where the fire is. But in principle, there can be no fire," he said.
The Israeli government has expressed concern that the militants, wanting to create the impression that their attacks are driving Israel out of Gaza, will take advantage of the pullout to attack the troops and settlers. Top Israeli officials have been working to coordinate the pullout with Palestinian leaders to prevent militant attacks during the evacuation and the Palestinian Authority has promised to give militant groups a voice in pullout plans in exchange for a promise to refrain from violence. Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas are scheduled to meet June 21, in part to discuss the withdrawal.
Palestinian Foreign Minister Nasser Al Kidwa said Tuesday that Abbas' priority in the meeting will be to reach agreement on the pullout, the implementation of a Feb. 8 cease-fire agreement, and an Israeli pullback from Palestinian towns in the West Bank. The cease-fire has brought a noticeable lull in fighting after more than four years of bloodshed. However, sporadic violence, including Israeli arrest raids and Palestinian mortar and rocket attacks, has continued.
Posted by: Steve ||
06/14/2005 08:55 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Top Israeli officials have been working to coordinate the pullout with Palestinian leaders to prevent militant attacks during the evacuation..
Just issue one warning: any attack as Israelis depart will meet with an intense bombardment of the attackers' positions, location and collateral damage be damned.
..and the Palestinian Authority has promised to give militant groups a voice in pullout plans in exchange for a promise to refrain from violence.
Translation: The PA has little, if any, control over "militants", and is forced to resort to pleading and appeasement in order to get something done.
BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - The Shiite-dominated government of Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari received a vote of confidence Tuesday in the Iraqi National Assembly. Al-Jaafari's 37-member government, announced on April 28, and its program were overwhelmingly approved by a show of hands in the 275-member parliament. "It's obvious that it's almost unanimous. Thank you," deputy parliament speaker Hussain al-Shahristani, a Shiite, said after presiding over the quick vote.
Shiites have 140 of the 275 seats in the National Assembly, while Kurds have the second-largest bloc with 75 seats. Sunni Arabs have only 17 seats in parliament, largely because many boycotted the Jan. 30 elections or stayed home for fear of attacks at the polls.
"Today's vote is a sign of support to the government's policies and to al-Jaafari. This shows the unity between the legislative and executive authorities," said Saad Jawad a legislator in the prime minister's United Iraqi Alliance. The government has made security its top priority but has been criticized for its seeming inability to halt an insurgency that has killed more than 1,000 people since its inception and to bring order to Iraq. "It is a step aimed at boosting the al-Jaafari government's efforts to achieve security," alliance legislator Jalal al-Din al-Shagir said.
Posted by: Steve ||
06/14/2005 08:39 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"The government has made security its top priority but has been criticized for its seeming inability to halt an insurgency that has killed more than 1,000 people since its inception"
Could that be because the minority party uses car bombs to express themselves? Makes having Howie run off at the mouth seem like a small price to pay, and even Mikey's "bombs" are only flops, not explosive devices.
Posted by: Bobby ||
06/14/2005 9:57 Comments ||
Top||
Pakistan last year was in a 4-way tie for the coveted 132nd position on the Transparency International corruption list. Tied with Cameroun, Iraq, and Kenya, Pakistan is assessed as more corrupt than Niger, Sudan, or Bolivia, but not quite as corrupt as Angola, Democratic Republic of Congo, and Ivory Coast.
Sindh Governor Ishratul Ibad collected 1,000 pounds a month in income support, plus other benefits, from Britain's social security system for 10 months, after he was named to his lucrative post, the Sunday Telegraph newspaper reported. The weekly paper said Ibad, a doctor by training, "lives in a mansion in the state capital while being waited upon by servants and chauffeured in Mercedes limousines". Back in London, however, Ibad continued to receive 1,000 pounds a month in income support, from the time he was appointed governor in December 2002 until October the following year, the newspaper said. In addition, it said, he received taxpayers' money to cover the 1,057 pounds monthly rent on his semi-detached home in northwest London. His wife, meanwhile, got benefits for having been diagnosed with a stress disorder, enabling Ibad to claim payments as her care-giver, it said.
Khan had come to Britain in 1992 as an asylum seeker, The Sunday Telegraph said. Seven years later he was awarded refugee status, enabling him to tap into a range of social security benefits. He returned to Pakistan, however, to be appointed governor of Sindh in December 2002 by President Pervez Musharraf, who had assumed the office of head of state the year before after taking power in 1999 in a bloodless coup. Confronted by The Sunday Telegraph, Khan - a one-time Pakistani housing minister - said he had repaid "a few hundred pounds" and that he was keen for any outstanding money to be reimbursed. Andrew Dinson, a member of parliament for Prime Minister Tony Blair's Labour Party, whose Hendon constituency includes the Khan's house in London, called for an immediate inquiry. "I would be very surprised if the rules allowed this," he was quoted as saying.
The transitional president of Somalia has landed in Djibouti, after leaving Kenya for his home country. After a lavish send-off ceremony hosted by Kenyan leader Mwai Kibaki, Somali president Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed boarded a plane on Monday for Somalia but overflew his home country. An AFP correspondent in Djibouti confirmed Yusuf's arrival there, which Somali officials in Nairobi explained as a technical mishap.
"I ain't goin' there! You can't make me go there!"
"You're the president fergawdsake! You gotta go there!"
The officials blamed darkness and a lack of facilities at the airport in Yusuf's alleged intended destination, the town of Jowhar, and insisted the incident would not compromise the government's long-awaited return to Somalia. "The president was not ending exile in Kenya by going to another country," one official said. "This was purely a technical issue ... there are no political complications as such to his landing in Djibouti."
Posted by: Fred ||
06/14/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"The transitional president of Somalia..."
Is that like the Queen of Bartertown?
Posted by: Dr August Balls of Nice ||
06/14/2005 12:06 Comments ||
Top||
#2
But with more violence and less pig manure.
Posted by: ed ||
06/14/2005 12:30 Comments ||
Top||
#3
dark at the airport? Wonder if there was a reception party armed to the teeth?
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/14/2005 13:40 Comments ||
Top||
Aljazeera.net has received a statement from the Arab Commission for Human Rights alleging security surveillance of pro-reform protesters in Egypt. The Paris-based commission said in the statement women who were beaten and sexually harassed while protesting against Egypt's referendum vote of 25 May, have been receiving threats to drop complaints they filed against their alleged aggressors. The referendum sought popular support for a constitutional amendment suggested by the government and approved by the parliament. The Commission, which is an international NGO (non-governmental organisation) in special Consultative Status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations, considered the alleged attacks on protesters an "insult to human rights and Arab and Islamic values". The statement urged "all honourable men and women in the Arab homeland" to support the victims and put an end to such "barbarian practices".
Posted by: Fred ||
06/14/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
"About two thirds of us think Miller Lite tastes great; the rest say it's less filling. We've sent word to Ask an Imam; loser has to buy the first round of goats."
Palestinian National Security Adviser Jibril Rajoub has denied that the postponement of Fatah's general conference is indicative of a serious internal division within the organisation.
"No, no! Certainly not!"
Speaking to Aljazeera on Monday, al-Rajoub acknowledged the existence of differences among Fatah members on the issue, but argued that these had not developed into a serious internal division within the secular, nationalist organisation. He said Fatah's decision to end its monopoly on political authority was a strategic move that would not be reversed, adding that legislative elections would be held in due course of time. Al-Rajub said the postponement of the election was due to legal reasons. "Political pluralism and government change via the ballot box is a Fatah article of faith. It is a guarantor of national unity and our national vision, and one that will lead us safely to the establishment of the Palestinian state," he said.
Yeah, yeah. And then his lips fell off. I'm sick of listening to these people lie out their anuses.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/14/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
al-Rajoub acknowledged the existence of differences among Fatah members on the issue, but argued that these had not developed into a serious internal division within the secular, nationalist organisation.
He means the sniping in the council chambers is still only verbal. For now.
#2
..al-Rajoub acknowledged the existence of differences among Fatah members on the issue, but argued that these had not developed into a serious internal division within the secular, nationalist organisation.
#4
"Political pluralism and government change via the ballot box is a Fatah article of faith. It is a guarantor of national unity and our national vision, and one that will lead us safely to the establishment of the Palestinian state," he said."
well of course its not a Fatah article of faith.
They were pulling for the USSR, when that was still a real possibility. But theres only one superpower now, and IT wants democracy, and SOME pals are able to read the writing on the wall, post Arafat Mortuum.
I dont look for honesty in international politics - i look for pragmatism, esp when the pragmatism leads my way.
When the armed struggle in held Kashmir was at its zenith, Information Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed set up a camp where around 3,500 Jihadis were trained in guerrilla warfare, revealed Yasin Malik, the Jammu & Kashmir Liberation Front (JKLF) chairman, at an exhibition of 1.5 million signatures by Kashmiris demanding their involvement in the dialogue process. "Sheikh Rashid has played a great role for Kashmir's liberation. He used to support the frontline Jihadis, but very few people know about his contributions," the JKLF chief informed the audience. The JKLF leader praised Rashid for his contribution to the armed struggle, but the minister refused to comment when journalists approached him.
This article starring:
Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed
YASIN MALIK
Jammu
Jammu
Posted by: Fred ||
06/14/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
but the minister refused to comment when journalists approached him
I bet he did.
It doesn't make much sense that the Information Minister would have the kind of power to set up and run a training camp, but maybe he was the front for the people who did.
Posted by: Paul Moloney ||
06/14/2005 2:13 Comments ||
Top||
In a deft attempt to divert adverse attention following comments by JKLF leader Yasin Malik that he organised camps to train militants to fight in Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistan's Information Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed today said the separatist leader may have been referring to some other "Sheikh" and not him.
"I do not know which Sheikh he is referring to. There are so many Sheikhs in Rawalpindi," Rashid told PTI here in response to Malik's remarks made during the inauguration of a photo exhibition organised here by the JKLF leader yesterday to mobilise signatures to involve Kashmiris in Indo-Pak talks.
Posted by: Paul Moloney ||
06/14/2005 8:04 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Ahah! The old "wudn't me" defense...
Posted by: Fred ||
06/14/2005 9:40 Comments ||
Top||
Investigators have traced the masterminds of a suicide attack on the shrine of Hazrat Bari Imam killing 20 people and injuring several others, sources told Daily Times on Monday. Sources said that an investigation team by the Punjab Crime Investigation Department Police, Federal Investigation Agency and the Intelligence Bureau found that Asif Chhota and Bara Usman from the Qari Group, a dissident of the banned religious outfit Lashker-e-Jhangvi, masterminded the attack.
Oh, gee. Somebody boomed a Shiite shrine. After intense investigation, it's deteermined it was Lashkar e-Jhangvi. WHO THE HELL DID YOU THINK IT WAS?
They said the two were included in the most-wanted list and the Punjab Police had put Rs 1 million head money on each.
Yeah. That tactic certainly works well, doesn't it? I'll bet the tips are just oozing in...
The investigation team also traced the calls made to the cell phones of Asif Chhota and Bara Usman during the explosion at the Bari Imam shrine, sources said. One investigation team member told Daily Times that Bara Usman said that Usman bought explosive material from the tribal area and made a bomb within two hours. The member, who asked not to be named, said that Asif and Usman were in Islamabad two weeks before the Bari Imam incident and instigated suicide bomber Mohsin Ali to launch the attack. Sources said the two had also planned suicide attacks on various Shia mosques on the outskirts of Islamabad, sources said.
Most of us are capable of pulling off, at most, one suicide attack...
The investigation showed that there was disagreement between the supporters of the two factions of the defunct Tehrik-e-Nifaz-e-Fiqh Jafria group — one headed by Hamid Musvi and the other by Allama Sajid Naqvi. Sources said that the two groups wanted to take control of the Bari Imam shrine.
But neither of them boomed it.
This article starring:
ALLAMA SAJID NAQVI
Tehrik-e-Nifaz-e-Fiqh Jafria
ASIF CHOTA
Lashker-e-Jhangvi
BARA USMAN
Lashker-e-Jhangvi
HAMID MUSVI
Tehrik-e-Nifaz-e-Fiqh Jafria
Tehrik-e-Nifaz-e-Fiqh Jafria
Posted by: Fred ||
06/14/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
New Delhi will not agree to a solution of the Kashmir dispute that is acceptable to the Kashmiris, said Qazi Hussain Ahmed, Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) president and Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) ameer, on Monday.
And who knows better than Qazi what Kashmiris will find acceptable?
Addressing a five-day long workshop at Mansoorah, Ahmed condemned the attitude of the army generals and said that they were accustomed to luxurious lives and amassing wealth through the real estate business. The MMA leader criticised the army taking over the PTCL for security reasons and questioned the arrest of the protesting employees of the PTCL. He said that the PTCL had been handed over to US General Zinni in order to please the US. He feared that privatisation of profitable units like PTCL would cause instability.
I'd say there's a lot more instability caused by Qazi's thugs roaming the streets and breaking things than by the privatization of an occasional industry.
Qazi said that the troika of Washington, Tel Aviv and New Delhi had united against Muslims and the US had categorically declared war against Islam. He said that they were paying millions of dollars for a 'moderate and enlightened' Islam, which was actually a scheme to brush aside the real Islam.
As we've pointed out in these pages a time or two in the past, the "real Islam" is neither enlightened nor moderate. In fact, it makes a fetish of ignorance and brutality. It's adherents are incapable of controlling their least impulse toward violence. I, for one, am gladdened by the fact that Washington, Tel Aviv, and New Delhi have united against Muslims of Qazi's stripe. The only unhappiness I feel, in fact, is that so far none of them has invested the minimal amount of cash that would be required to hire someone to put a large caliber round through Qazi's turban.
He said that Gen Musharraf had allowed the creation of Aga Khan Board to revise the contents of text books in order to please the US.
Yeah. The Ismailis aren't believers in All Islam, All the Time. They must be declared apostate and hunted down and killed, right Qazi?
Qazi said that the nation had been divided on the basis of religion.
And he's been at the forefront of the movement...
He said that the MMA had proposed to observe 'Hurmat-e-Quran Day' every year in May to condemn the sacrilege of the Quran in Guantanamo Bay detention camps.
Good idea. I pledge to observe 9-11 day every year, too...
He said the West and its local agents had tried to malign Islamic movements by spreading a wave of terror in Karachi by setting KFC on fire and carrying out a bomb blast at Madinatul Ilm, following the murder of MMA leader Aslam Mujahid.
It's not a bunch of wild-eyed, spittle-spewing, AK-waving Islamists who're conducting a wave of terror in Pakland, it's the West, trying to malign religious movements in Pakistan that most of us never heard of before the WoT.
Malik Mohammad Asharf, JI deputy secretary general, also spoke on the occasion. Jamaat workers from across the country attended the meeting. Speakers from various walks of life and seasoned trainers will lecture the participants on various aspects of religion, politics and morality during the workshop.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/14/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[10 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Qazi's turban? I thought he wore one of those fez-looking thingies<:-)
#2
4 retiring early 688 class subs, all the OHP class frigates they can handle, any excess LSDs and anything else that will scare the shit out of the pakis, givem to India.
#4
I was idly wondering today what the reaction would be if we burned the black flag of Islam in front of the soddy embassy. You know, the flag in all the beheading videos.
The Department for International Devolvement (DFID), the organ of British government responsible for promoting development and reducing poverty across the world, will give Pakistan $500 million in three years for poverty reduction projects.
That's approximately $3.85 per person in Pakland, assuming a population of 130 million. That oughta take care of the problem...
DFID chief in Pakistan Yusaf Samiullah disclosed this at the launch of communication strategy with regard to Pakistan Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PSRP) on Monday. Samiullah said that all Pakistani parliamentarians, government officials, businessmen and other stakeholders will get a cut should be briefed on the PRSP so that they could play a pivotal role in reducing poverty. He said that there was an information gap among the stakeholder over the PRSP which needed to be filled.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/14/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#3
You could probably hand the money over in cash to the first 50 damaged homeless wheeley bin pushing shamblers in London and get exactly the same effect on poverty in pakiland.
#4
Samiullah said that all Pakistani parliamentarians, government officials, businessmen and other stakeholders should be briefed on the PRSP so that they could play a pivotal role in reducing poverty.
#8
The Department for International Devolvement (DFID), the organ of British government responsible for promoting development and reducing poverty across the world, will give Pakistan $500 million in three years for poverty reduction projects.
Fine by me. Let the Poms drop their pounds into a black hole for once.
#9
Terrorism is damn good business. Instead of hitting Pakistan with a punitive expedition for creating, sponsoring and directing the Taliban rulers and sheltering and using bin Laden and AQ to attack the Pakistani governments internal and external enemies, the US rewarded Pakistan. US aid to Pakistan after the Sept. 11 attacks have been running over a billion dollars per year and will do so for at least the next five years. The Bush admin has also forgiven at least $1.5 billion in Pakistani debt. Pakistani economic growth has now gone from negative to 5% annual growth.
Instead of invading, kicking the Saudis out and seizing all their assets, oil revenues to the terror sponsoring nations have doubled. The Saudis and Iranians are now flush with cash to buy and develop any weapons they wish. Stagnant economies are now growing at 10% a year due to massive growth of oil revenues and economic aid. Afghanistan and Iraq are getting tens of billions of development each year and are now growing 40-50% a year. If any of the muslim countries could have predicted the US reaction, they would have happily attacked us years ago.
Posted by: ed ||
06/14/2005 22:01 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Where's Retief of the Corps Diplomatique Terrestrienne when we need him?
And they'll eventually get their way and live to regret it...
Posted by: Fred ||
06/14/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[9 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I am always reminded by poll articles of a scene in Dudley Moore's Crazy People where someone asks the asylum inmates of his therapy group how many of them want to be advertising executives. A few raise their hands. Then he asks, "And how many of you want to be Fire Engines!" and all of the hands go up.
#3
Scru that! The headline is "41% of Americans want to kick @$$!" I'll stack that 41% up against all. What...no takers? Thougt so.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
06/14/2005 1:19 Comments ||
Top||
#4
What we need are poll internals. How many Republicans and how many Democrats. My guess is that they oversampled Democrats.
As to living to regret it, I really doubt that. Muslims aren't going to repeat the mistake of 9/11. Did we live to regret the withdrawal from Vietnam? No. Who will live to regret our withdrawal? Non-Islamist Muslim opposition movements everywhere. Iraqi Shiites and Kurds will regret it. But that's really their problem, not ours. Note that there are other ways of destabilizing Muslim countries, including spending large sums of money subsidizing and arming the opposition, a la Afghanistan. I don't think a withdrawal from Iraq would be the end of the world. The side benefit is that we'd stop losing soldiers.
And if the jihadis kill 10,000 people in NYC as a response to what they consider Americans on the run? Well, it is primarily people in blue regions like NY and so on who want the war ended. As they reap, so shall they sow.
#8
nothing wrong with wanting the war over - I just want it on our terms. Dems and Liberals want to appease and withdraw, sticking their heads back n the sand, anything to damage W.
Ward Churchill, huh LH?....weak
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/14/2005 9:39 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Even now the US Army is sending out the AIDS blankets.
Posted by: W Churchill ||
06/14/2005 9:40 Comments ||
Top||
#10
LH: Ah, the Ward Churchill of Rantburg.
Liberals have this talent for inept analogies. For the record, I don't think blue-staters are little Eichmanns. I think that if you get in the way of the fireman trying to put out the flames burning down your house, you get what you deserve. No more, no less.
I am describing a worst case scenario, not what I think should happen - the bottom line is that Democrats are targets because they are concentrated in urban areas. Why do terrorists target urban areas? Well, Willy Sutton targeted banks because that's where the money was. Terrorists target urban areas because that's where large numbers of Americans are concentrated. No matter what Michael Moore might will, terrorists will continue targeting urban areas.
#11
we need to spend all the money and credit we can get until we end up like the former soviet union, totally broke.
Posted by: bk ||
06/14/2005 10:02 Comments ||
Top||
#12
wow - nice plan bk....idjit
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/14/2005 10:04 Comments ||
Top||
#13
EU has it right - All the rest are constructs of the media to manufacture or manipulate the public.
The article notes 59% "want a full or partial pullout". If I was not so paranoid about MSM spin, I'd say we are ready to start reducing troop levels, but the MSM spins that thought into "withdrawal". Reduction, O.K.; withdrawal - even Hilly says no!
Posted by: Bobby ||
06/14/2005 10:05 Comments ||
Top||
#14
I don't think a withdrawal from Iraq would be the end of the world. The side benefit is that we'd stop losing soldiers.
We are absolute fools if we do not stay until we have achieved the objectives: a multi-ethnic, fairly secular representative government with a functioning economy whose presence pressures the other surrounding states to make deep changes.
Posted by: too true ||
06/14/2005 10:26 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Ah, farkit. I say we take over Syria and sell it on eBay...
#16
bin Laden thought we didn't have the guts to fight. I sometimes worry that he was half right. Do we have the attention span to stick it out?
To be fair, we don't/can't announce our long range goals (suppress Wahhabism and Khomeiniism); and if all people hear about is Iraq they'll think that's all there is, and wonder why we aren't done.
Posted by: James ||
06/14/2005 11:09 Comments ||
Top||
#17
Of course, what's not mentioned is this - what if Iraq's leaders ask us to stay?
#18
"you get what you deserve. No more, no less. "
Theyre not little eichmans, but they nonetheless deserve it if they get killed in a terror attack. IE chickens coming home to roost, like the man said. You got your reason they deserve it, he had his. Your reasons are different. They are both vile. People dont deserve to be killed cause of their political beliefs, even if theyre mistaken. Whether that belief is opposition to certain aspects of the war, or opposition to Wards views on social justice in the third world.
"I am describing a worst case scenario, not what I think should happen - the bottom line is that Democrats are targets because they are concentrated in urban areas"
you do realize that New York City probably has the highest percentage of pro-war Democrats and prowar liberals in the country?? For reasons that are not unrelated to my own confluence of beleifs?
#20
I think Frank only meant that if 10,000 HAD to die, they might as well be New Yorkers.
But I am (sorta)ashamed of myself for saying it!
And I live in arguably the largest target, working halfway between the Capitol and the White House.
Posted by: Bobby ||
06/14/2005 12:28 Comments ||
Top||
#21
Actually, Zhang Fei, there needs to be the WILL to even continue those means. Unless you've got cells of clandestine operators ready to destabilize multiple countries no matter how leftist this country's political leadership becomes ...
Posted by: Edward Yee ||
06/14/2005 12:38 Comments ||
Top||
#22
LH, quoting ZF: you get what you deserve. No more, no less.
Liberals aren't only good at inept analogies, they specialize in taking words out of context - i.e. lying. The full quote was: I think that if you get in the way of the fireman trying to put out the flames burning down your house, you get what you deserve. No more, no less.
#23
ZF - I think that if you get in the way of the fireman trying to put out the flames burning down your house, you get what you deserve. No more, no less.
Ward Churchill, on the victims at the WTC - paraphrased - I think that if you are responsible for the conditions that led to a fire, you get what you deserve. No more, no less.
We (everyone on the right and center, and most on the center left) rightfully denounced Ward C. Not over the issue of whether trading bonds actually contributed to the causes of terrorism - probably wrong, but not beyond the bounds of reasonable debate - but because he was morally blind enough to suggest that this in ANY WAY made 9/11 somehow morally fitting - "IE chickens coming home to roost" Guys who trade bonds, (and janitors, secretaries, etc) who are killed by a terrorist bombing are NOT getting what they deserve. The only guys who get what they deserve when killed by violence are those who COMMIT crimes of violence. Which is why i will glady join y'all in laughing at terr "work accidents", cheering for terr groups to fight each other, etc. But to state, or imply, that folks who opposed one WOT policy or another somehow "get what they deserve" is vile.
Perhaps youre misled by your analogy. Standing in front of the fireman. Do you honestly think most New Yorkers would go and physically obstruct US soldiers on the battlefield??? No, its opposition to certain policies that you are talking about. Its as if someone who opposed buying a new firetruck has their house burnt down. It may have been a mistake to oppose the new firetruck, but its not moral culpability that makes someone deserving of dying in a fire.
We've really got to be careful about the metaphors we use - or we'll end up no better than the director of Amnesty International.
#26
LH: Ward Churchill, on the victims at the WTC - paraphrased - I think that if you are responsible for the conditions that led to a fire, you get what you deserve. No more, no less.
Ward Churchill said that Americans (little Eichmanns) were responsible for terrorists striking at the US because of Uncle Sam's policies, which he likened to that of the Nazis. My point is completely different - that if urban-dwelling liberals prevent Uncle Sam from killing America's enemies, the consequences they may suffer are only predictable - you get what you deserve. Only a liberal would confuse the two points. In Churchill's example, predatorial Muslim terrorists are out on the hunt, and America's little Eichmanns should stay out of their way by accommodating themselves to the terrorists' wishes. In my example, predatorial Muslim terrorists are on the hunt, and America's city-dwelling liberals should stay out of the way of our soldiers so they can wipe the terrorists out, failing which the latte-drinkers may fall victim to the terrorists. In Churchill's example, we must submit. In my example, we must make them submit. Liberals agree with Churchill, not me - they truly believe that Americans are the little Eichmanns described by Churchill - this is why submission comes so easily to them.
#27
Do you honestly think most New Yorkers would go and physically obstruct US soldiers on the battlefield?
Oh, the people trying to obstruct the US military don't actually go out to the battlefield -- that's too dangerous -- instead they endlessly whine about minor matters (Abu Ghraib), try to impose unrealistic and utterly idiotic standards (treating terrs as lawful combatants), endlessly nitpick on imperceptable flaws in treatment that's a million times better than any other nation in the world would offer (Gitmo), and quite often outright lie (any story by Sy Hersh). It's much easier to obstruct the military from the homefront than the battlefront.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
06/14/2005 14:33 Comments ||
Top||
#28
In Churchill's example, we must submit. In my example, we must make them submit.
and in both cases it is claimed that folks deserve to die in a terror attack because of their political beliefs.
#29
LH: and in both cases it is claimed that folks deserve to die in a terror attack because of their political beliefs.
Are you saying that there should be no consequences to our political beliefs? Wishful thinking LH. Our political belief affect us because we vote into office those who share it and demand the government represent it. That their are consequences too our political beliefs are part of what America so great, that we HAVE the choice in our lives. If a LLL who demands we pull out of Iraq, soldiers be put under the ICC, and that we apoligize/release those in Guatonamo Bay, then ends up dead in a cafe because of a former Guatonamo Bay detainee trained further in bombs by terrorists in Iraq, I'm not going too say that he didn't "Reap" the consequences of his actions. It's horribly sad that he died, yes, but he made the choices that directly contributed too his death.
Posted by: Charles ||
06/14/2005 15:13 Comments ||
Top||
#30
We gotta finish the attitude adjustment now. We need to beat them there in Iraq; stay after the rascals elsewhere, flush them out and then beat them too. If we don't stay on course, if we let ourselves get distracted, we'll have to kill multiple millions more of them, and that will only be after one of those f-ers nukes a city here. The only humanitarian thing to do is kill them now in smaller numbers, and thereby save lives.
#31
LH: and in both cases it is claimed that folks deserve to die in a terror attack because of their political beliefs.
What is it about liberals and compulsive lying? Churchill believes that Americans deserve to die because they will not submit. I believe that liberals deserve to die if they will not take the necessary precautions to have the enemy killed, i.e. if they submit. These positions are polar opposites - it's like saying that the allies and the fascists were both morally equivalent because they both struck out at civilian populations. That's what I love about liberals - lies and distortions are their stock in trade.
#32
LH: These positions are polar opposites - it's like saying that the allies and the fascists were both morally equivalent because they both struck out at civilian populations.
That should have read: These positions are polar opposites - it's like LH is saying that the allies and the fascists were both morally equivalent because they both struck out at civilian populations.
#33
"Are you saying that there should be no consequences to our political beliefs"
Not death.
The difference between the allies and the Axis is that the axis murdered civilians deliberately, while the allies killed civilians unintentionally in the course of bombing strategic targets. The terrorists, who deliberately try to maximize civilian deaths, are like Himmler, NOT like LeMay.
#34
I'm with Hank. It's gotta be done now to save all kinda lives and if it means fighting a short attention span like James sez, and maybe lose an electin so be it. This war is not going away because we quietdown/muffle Iraq. Iraq's not even a front, it's a battle.
#36
The Germman Nazis and thier Jap friends raised the stakes to the point where killing civilians was deemed necessary to end the killing sooner. It wasn't like innocent civilians (like 6 mil Jews) and tens of thousands of our soldiers weren't getting killed by the Nazis and Japs. The Allied strategy worked. No one seriously questioned it on a moral basis then, but only because the stakes had been raised so high. Now 6o years later, folks seconds guess and make invalid and simplistic comparisons. Don't kid yourself, the stakes can be raised again to where hard decisions like that get considered and made again. One successful terrorist attack with WMD is all it will take, and strong measures would once again be necessary to prevent mass killing of innocent Americans, Europeans, whoever, or to preserve the free world.
RAMALLAH: The Palestinian Authority will not disarm militants until Israel ends its occupation of the West Bank and Gaza as stated in a US-backed peace plan, Foreign Minister Nasser al-Kidwa said on Monday.
Of course, they weren't disarmed before the occupation, either...
"Under international law, the Palestinian people have the right to resist this occupation and defend themselves," Kidwa, the former Palestinian envoy to the United Nations, told Reuters in an interview. "When occupation ends, it becomes a different matter. It would have to come to a national position to start disarming everybody, everybody but the security apparatus," he said, referring to Palestinian Authority security forces. A spokesman for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, who declared a ceasefire with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in February, could not be reached for comment on whether the Palestinian leader agreed with Kidwa's remarks.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/14/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The Palestinian Authority will not disarm militants until Israel ends its occupation of the West Bank and..
#2
"When occupation ends, it becomes a different matter. It would have to come to a national position to start disarming everybody, everybody but the security apparatus,"
Ledger's comment on the Lemay moment is Right on Target!
Michael Ledeen, writing in the National Review, said:
more time has passed since 9/11 than transpired between Pearl Harbor and the surrender of the Japanese empire, and our most lethal enemies are still in power and still killing our people and our friends. It is good that the desire for freedom is now manifest among the oppressed peoples of the Middle East and Central Asia, and it is very good that dramatic strides toward self-government have been taken by the Georgians, Kyrgistanis, Ukrainians, Iraqis, and Lebanese. But it is not good enough. Indeed, it is shameful that we have yet to seriously challenge the legitimacy of the terror masters in Tehran and Damascus, who represent the keystone of the terrorist edifice.
Our enemies know this, because, to their delight and perhaps their surprise as well, they are still in power throughout the Middle East. Until and unless they are removed, the terror war will continue, our friends in the region will be killed, tortured, and incarcerated, and the president's vision of regional democratic revolution will go down the memory hole.
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.
CARACAS, A Colombian drug trafficker wanted in the United States has escaped from the headquarters of Venezuela's security police. Jose Maria Corredor reportedly escaped over the weekend with the help of Venezuelan security officers, Venezuela's Information Officer Andres Izarra said Monday. Corredor was arrested in Venezuela earlier this year at the request of the United States, El Nacional newspaper reported Monday. He is accused of shipping hundreds of pounds of cocaine from Colombia through neighboring nations and onto the United States, Africa and Europe.
BUDENNOVSK, Russia, June 14 (UPI) -- The town of Budennovsk in Russia Tuesday observed the 10th anniversary of the deadly raid by Chechen fighters led by Shamil Basaev. During the raid, Basaev and his men held about 1,800 people hostage for six days. The incident ended with the deaths of 147 people and the wounding of more than 400 people.
DESPITE his denials, UN chief Kofi Annan was apparently told of efforts by his son's employer to win an oil-for-food contract with Iraq in 1998, according to a memo written by an executive of the company, The New York Times has reported.
Protesters are locking horns with police in pacifist-packed Marin County [California] for fining drivers who honk for peace. Officers have been pulling over motorists who honk as they drive by a 
Palestinian National Security Adviser Jibril Rajoub has denied that the postponement of Fatah's general conference is indicative of a serious internal division within the organisation.
The Department for International Devolvement (DFID), the organ of British government responsible for promoting development and reducing poverty across the world, will give Pakistan $500 million in three years for poverty reduction projects.
