After Sudan ordered UN Special envoy for Sudan Jan Pronk earlier this week to leave the country after he was considered a "threat" to its national security, Secretary-General Kofi Annan and Khartoum worked out a compromise by which Pronk will remain in his post until December but will travel back to Khartoum in November to organize an "orderly" handover to his deputy, UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric told the daily press briefing on Friday. "The Secretary-General has now confirmed that Jan Pronk will continue to serve as his Special Representative in the Sudan until the end of the year, when his contract is set to expire. Following ongoing consultations with the Sudanese authorities, it is expected that Mr. Pronk will return to Khartoum during November to organize an orderly handover to the officer-in-charge of the UN mission, before returning to New York for debriefings and the completion of his mission," Dujarric said.
He added that Annan has made it clear that he alone can decide on Pronk's tenure. However, "he also realized that at a critical time in the Darfur negotiations, it is important that we preserve a good working relationship" with the Sudanese government, and he is "certain the officer in charge Taye Zerihoun will be able to provide this."
#1
These frickin retards are still "negotiating" with Sudan? Are there any black muslims left in the Darfur to negtiate over? What is this, the 3rd year this has been going on? I remember when it flared up, pretty much the entire world telling us to stay out of it, let the UN take care of it. No sweat off my sack, but damn! They don't seem to be making much headway. Maybe they should inform Khartoum how important they are, especially in Brussels. They may not have realized it in Sudan.
Thousands of refugees are escaping Somalia by making the dangerous crossing to Yemen. Channel 4 News has uncovered disturbing new evidence of ill treatment from people smugglers and authorities. The United Nations has warned the situation is a tragedy. It has described the people-trafficking industry as "murder at sea". Yet we have evidence that the international efforts to protect and house the Somali refugees are proving woefully inadequate.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/28/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11127 views]
Top|| File under:
Eritrea rejected a United Nations accusation that its recent movement of troops near the border with Ethiopia represented a "major breach" of a cease-fire agreement between the two countries, the country's U.N. ambassador said in a letter released Friday.
"Wudn't us."
U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan called on Eritrea last week to immediately withdraw 1,500 troops and 14 tanks from a buffer zone established on the border in 2000 after Eritrea fought a 2 1/2-year war with Ethiopia.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/28/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11127 views]
Top|| File under:
I'll let the Mods work this one over - it's ripe, lol.
I'd work it over but I can't improve on Zenster's comments. :-) AoS.
RIYADH, 28 October 2006 Islam spread through its teachings and the examples of its followers rather than through the sword, Islamic scholar Sheikh Abdulrahman Al-Eidan said speaking at a two-day conference held under the auspices of the Ministry of Islamic Affairs Call and Guidance.
Some 2,000 people, including delegates from India, attended the event organized by the Saudi National Islahi Center as part of the Eid Al-Fitr festivities here.
Earlier, Manager of Air-India Central Province Rattan Ghosh gave away prizes to the winners of the Quran knowledge contest. SriLankan Airlines, Atlas Jewelry, Mix-Max Fleeriya, My Own Garments and Malila Trading were the other sponsors of the event.
The conference was held with an aim of countering the negative information that is being circulated by the Western media at the global level that Islam preaches violence and hatred against the followers of other faiths.
This argument was challenged by all of the speakers who cited historical examples to prove that violence has never sustained the momentum of any faith, including Islam.
Earlier, Sheikh Abdul Aziz Al-Shaikh, the grand mufti of Saudi Arabia, greeted the audience in a live broadcast in which he congratulated the Indian community on its initiative to promote peace and unity through Islam.
In his keynote address, Sheikh Abdulrahman Al-Eidan stressed the need for a campaign to remove distortions about Islam.
He said history is witness to the fact that Islam gained adherents throughout the world on the strength of its teachings. The best examples were the companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the successive Caliphs who practiced what they preached in their conduct of affairs. The sense of compassion and justice, which they brought to bear in their rulings, brought about conversions to Islam. There was no element of compulsion; the change of heart was voluntary.
Elaborating on this point, P.V. Ashraf, Saudi National Islahi Center spokesman, said Keralas first contact with Islam was in the first century of Hijra when Malik bin Dinar and his companions landed in Kerala from Hadramaut in Yemen. This period coincided with the life and time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).
He added that these Arabs, who came as traders, built a mosque in Kodungalure in Kerala.
In his recorded speech, Sheikh Abdullah Al-Jibreen, the former mufti of Saudi Arabia, called on people to understand Islam from its original sources i.e. the holy Quran and the life and teachings of the Prophet (pbuh). He said the Quran, as a source of divine guidance for mankind, sheds light on the right path for their success in this life and the hereafter.
Special invitees from India included A.P. Abdul Khader Moulavi, general secretary Kerala Nadvathul Mujahideen, and Abdul Rahman Salafi, K.N.M. Kerala called on Muslims to follow the true teachings of Islam the religion of peace and compassion.
Speaking on the main theme of the conference Islam for mercy, not for mutiny M.M. Akbar, director of Niche of Truth (Kerala) and a well-known speaker on comparative religion, highlighted the personality of the holy Prophet and his compassionate attitude toward the nonbelievers of Makkah on the occasion of the historic Makkah victory over them.
He showed mercy and unconditionally forgave even the murderers of his closest companions and relatives.
He also noted the growing anti-Muslim sentiments recently in the media controlled by forces hostile to Islam. He also answered questions from the audience, which included a large number of non-Muslims.
Dr. Saad Al-Araifi, professor at the King Saud University, called on Muslims to open dialogue with other religions to remove misconceptions about Islam and strengthen religious harmony and peace. Dr. Mohamed Ashraf from the Islamic University of Madinah spoke on the subject Death, the Door to Eternal Life.
Inaugurating the womens conference, Sheikha Sultana Al-Shaikh, a noted scholar, reminded people that the propagation of the message of Islam was the duty of every Muslim.
She also stressed the importance of acquiring knowledge and drew the attention of the audience to the scholarly achievements of Ayesha, wife of the holy Prophet.
Sheikh Abdullah A. Al-Shaikh from the Ministry of Islamic affairs, Director of Call and Guidance Center in Batha Sheikh Nooh Bin Nassir, Shaikh Abdul Rahman Al-Jibreen, Zubair Peedikakkal, Abdussalam Madeeni, Dr. Umer Farooq, Iqbal Gopakumar, Muhamad Rakhesh, Abdul Rahman Solahi, Abdul Qayyom Bustani, Dr. Shoukathali, Abdul Latheef Sullami, Abdullah Jamali, K. Imbichikkoya, N.V. Salim, Hameed Naha, Abdul Razak Solahi, Sufiyan Abdul Salam, P. Noushad Ali and P.V. Ashraf also spoke.
Abdul Razak Koduvally, the national secretary, welcome [sic] the gathering and Abdul Razak Baqawi, secretary of the Islahi Center in Riyadh, proposed a vote of thanks. And then they kissed each other's robes and swapped a little spit.
#2
I'll let the Mods work this one over - it's ripe, lol.
Im not a Mod, but I play one on TV.
Islam spread through its teachings and the examples of its followers rather than through the sword, Islamic scholar Sheikh Abdulrahman Al-Eidan said speaking at a two-day conference held under the auspices of the Ministry of Islamic Affairs Call and Guidance.
Lessee here, I believe the usual repartee is, And then his lips fell off.
Earlier, Manager of Air-India Central Province Rattan Ghosh gave away prizes to the winners of the Quran knowledge contest.
How many lines in the Quran refer to killing Jews?
Ermm all of them?
Ding, Ding, Ding We have a winner!
The conference was held with an aim of countering the negative information that is being circulated by the Western media at the global level that Islam preaches violence and hatred against the followers of other faiths.
This aim is otherwise known as Killing all the infidels.
This argument was challenged by all of the speakers who cited historical examples to prove that violence has never sustained the momentum of any faith, including Islam.
Then all of their lips fell off.
Earlier, Sheikh Abdul Aziz Al-Shaikh, the grand mufti of Saudi Arabia, greeted the audience in a live broadcast in which he congratulated the Indian community on its initiative to promote peace and unity through Islam.
Of course, his speech was entirely uncontaminated by any mention of Pakistan or the ISI .
In his keynote address, Sheikh Abdulrahman Al-Eidan stressed the need for a campaign to remove distortions about Islam.
This campaign is otherwise known as jihad.
He said history is witness to the fact that Islam gained adherents throughout the world on the strength of its teachings.
Conspicuously absent were any references to car bombs, chemical agents and nuclear weapons.
The best examples were the companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the successive Caliphs who practiced what they preached in their conduct of affairs.
Taqqiya and takfir featured prominently on his list.
The sense of compassion and justice, which they brought to bear in their rulings, brought about conversions to Islam.
The swords had nothing to do with it.
There was no element of compulsion; the change of heart was voluntary.
Those who argued against this felt a distinct change in their heart.
He showed mercy and unconditionally forgave even the murderers of his closest companions and relatives.
Right before killing them in their sleep.
He also noted the growing anti-Muslim sentiments recently in the media controlled by forces hostile to Islam.
Haaretz, The Jerusalem Post and Debkafile were not available for comment.
Dr. Mohamed Ashraf from the Islamic University of Madinah spoke on the subject Death, the Door to Eternal Life.
His accompanying exhibit of various bomb belt styles won over the audience with thundering applause.
Inaugurating the womens conference, Sheikha Sultana Al-Shaikh, a noted scholar, reminded people that the propagation of the message of Islam was the duty of every Muslim.
Even if you have to beat your wife senseless twice a day.
hilarious, the clear panic when she realizes she's caught. A MSM interviewer who pulls no punches. Awesome. This is the women who wouldn't remove her veil so the children learning english could see her mouth movements
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/28/2006 11:50 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11134 views]
Top|| File under:
#12
I find that this kind of veil accentuates, exaggerates every eye movement; were she being 100% honest, the eyes would still look shifty. I think I'm beginning to see one of the reasons why Muslim men think women cannot tell the truth.
Course, the whole authorized beating thing could give Muslim women a whole 'nother reason to lie.
#13
You can bet your ass she (or any other idiot) would not wear a veil to an interview. Which in a way tells you exactly how "devout" they are to Islam and Allan.
#14
Deceitful little turdette. Once she's insinuated herself into her employer's location, suddenly then the veil becomes a life or death issue. Welcome to pure unadulterated taqqiya. It's this sort of shit that is going to force Western culture to ban Islam and rightfully so.
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - South Korean military officials have observed activities at the North's suspected nuclear test site that may be preparations for a second test, news reports said Saturday. Yonhap news agency, citing several unidentified military officials, said Seoul is keeping a close watch on the movements of trucks and soldiers at the Punggye-ri site in the country's remote northeast.
"It is clear there are movements at Punggye-ri after the (previous) nuclear test," one military official was quoted as saying. "We are closely monitoring to see if these are preparations for a second nuclear test."
Another official confirmed activities at the site, but said another test "is not believed to be imminent," according to Yonhap.
Meanwhile, more unidentified South Korean government officials said they are trying to confirm whether a new facility that has been built at the site could be part of preparations for a second nuclear test, the JoongAng Ilbo newspaper reported Saturday. South Korea's Defense Ministry said it could not confirm the reports, and the U.S. State Department refused to comment. A Pentagon spokesman, Air Force Maj. David Smith, said: "We don't discuss intelligence issues as a matter of policy."
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/28/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11129 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
If the world sits back and let the Norks test three times (the first test being that Huge mysterious under mountain explosion in September 2004 [the trigger mechanism]), they might as well shut the books on sanctions, they'd have perfected their mechanism and only would need to marry The Bomb to a delivery system by shrinking its containment parameters.
How ironic if history showed all three tests occured during the "W" Bush administration, when the 'buck' was obviously stopped at each occasion!
Australia's top Muslim cleric defied mounting pressure to step down for comments comparing women without head scarves to "uncovered meat," and suggested Friday that President Bush was more deserving of criticism for the bloodshed in Iraq.
Government leaders warned that by remaining mufti of Australia, Sheik Taj Aldin al-Hilali was dividing Australia's Islamic community, many of whom reject his suggestion that women who dress immodestly will be eaten by cats invite rape.
"He's driven a wedge within the community and the Muslim community itself is demanding that he be sacked."
"He's driven a wedge within the community and the Muslim community itself is demanding that he be sacked," government spokesman on multicultural issues, Andrew Robb, told Nine Network television news.
But Toufic Zreika, an administrator of Australia's largest mosque in Sydney where the Egyptian-born cleric gave his sermon last month, said dismissing al-Hilali could also divide Muslims. "The problem is we risk dividing the community further and that's my main aim, to keep this community together," Zreika, president of the Lakemba Mosque Association, told Ten Network television news.
In a concession to broad outrage from Muslim and non-Muslims alike over his comments, al-Hilali agreed to abstain from preaching for three months while he makes a pilgrimage to Mecca, said his friend Keysar Trad, president of the Islamic Friendship Association of Australia. "He's going to have time to reflect about he's said, for which he has apologized,
"The grass roots (Muslims) are certainly not going to overlook all the hard work he's done for the community in the past and condemn him for these comments."
and the grass roots (Muslims) are certainly not going to overlook all the hard work he's done for the community in the past and condemn him for these comments," said Trad, who also acts as the cleric's spokesman.
The furor erupted Thursday when The Australian national newspaper reported translated excerpts of al-Hilali's lecture, which his supporters suspect had been secretly tape-recorded by a rival Islamic group. Scores of worshippers attended Friday prayers at his mosque, but, in accordance with the ban, the 65-year-old al-Hilali did not deliver a sermon. Asked if he would resign, al-Hilali, surrounded by a police guard outside the mosque, told reporters, "After we clean the world of the White House first." He did not elaborate. The statement brought cheers and applause from the supporters who surrounded him.
Trad later explained on al-Hilali's behalf that the cleric was making a point that Bush's foreign policy and invasion of Iraq were more deserving of criticism than a sermon. The cleric was a vocal opponent of the Iraq war and has previously described Bush, British Prime Minister Tony Blair and Australian Prime Minister John Howard - the three leaders who declared war on Saddam Hussein's regime - as an axis of evil.
But some Muslim leaders have called for the resignation of the cleric who was to become a unifying figure when he was appointed national mufti in 1989 by the top Islamic body, Australian Federation of Islamic Councils. Islamic Council of Victoria state executive Sherene Hassan told Ten news that
"99.99 percent of Muslims do not support what he's saying and he certainly does not represent the majority of Muslims."
"99.99 percent of Muslims do not support what he's saying and he certainly does not represent the majority of Muslims."
Howard said Australia's Muslims would be perceived as supporting al-Hilali's views if he remained a religious leader. "What I am saying to the Islamic community is this: If they do not resolve this matter, it could do lasting damage to the perceptions of that community within the broader Australian community," Howard told Southern Cross Broadcasting.
The controversy comes amid tense relations between Australia's estimated 300,000 Muslims and the rest of the 20 million population who predominantly come from a Christian background. In December 2005, Sydney was gripped by riots that often pitted gangs of white youths against youths of Middle Eastern descent. Howard recently offended parts of the Muslim community by singling out some Muslims as extremists and saying they should adopt liberal attitudes to women's rights.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/28/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11133 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Who cares whether he's accepted by the Muzzies or whether he cares what they think. The issue is his behavior in Australia and it is up to the Ozzy Govt to decide if he's worthy to stay in their country. The citizenship of any imigrant can be revoked for cause. If he's a bad apple - then flush his ass. Sound like many Muzzies will not miss him and are getting the message - there might be a "come to Jesus" moment in here.
#2
The Australian Muslims are missing a golden opportunity to impress everyone involved by just capping this pathetic shit's sorry ass and getting on with it. I doubt even an all-Muslim jury would convict.
#3
But Toufic Zreika, an administrator of Australia's largest mosque in Sydney where the Egyptian-born cleric gave his sermon last month, said dismissing al-Hilali could also divide Muslims.
Get rid of this guy, too.
Both of them know what was said was wrong, but they just want to hold onto power. As usual.
Mentioning Bush is just a time-honored diversion for terrorists.
Al-Hilali's pennance of not preaching for three months sounds like a vacation to me.
What hard work for muslims? Sounds like he's working hard at chipping away at moderate values to me.
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/28/2006 9:20 Comments ||
Top||
#6
"The problem is we risk dividing the community further and that's my main aim, to keep this community together," Zreika, president of the Lakemba Mosque Association, told Ten Network television news.
Dividing your community further is exactly what's needed. Weed out and exterminate these vermin and their followers.
#7
Behold the force of the Modern Moderate Muzzie Man. Head Imam in Oz forced to go to Mecca, take 3 month vacation. Fierce bastards these moderate muzzie men.
#8
Ummmm .... not to throw cold water on a good rant, but this son of a bitch has NEVER been called moderate, to my knowledge. At the time he could have been deported, were it not for the left in Australia, I recall him being fondly called a "firebrand" by the left.
But if I've missed others calling him moderate, please let me know. I do try to track those who claim to be but aren't.
#10
Sheikh Taj Din al-Hilali said If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street . . . and the cats come and eat it, whose fault is it, the cats or the uncovered meat?
& he is quite right, ANIMALS have no moral restraints or education, on the otherhand humans do. Unless I am mistaken & Sheikh Taj Din al-Hilali is actually proposing that Muslims are animals without any self control, moral restraints or education, I fail to see the relation he makes between red meat and a lady in a street, be she a prostitute or a typical teenager.
#12
Lol, Zen - I've reached a state of Zen today which has, thus far, allowed me to laugh and play, and yet hasn't hampered my ability to perform PM on my 1911 A1, a legacy of my Grandfather's tour in WW-I, lol.
Peace... Oooooooooooohms to High Voltage Sparky, lol.
#13
Well fooey. He ain't a modern moderate muzzie after all. I stand corrected. Cut me some slack, this MM sighting isn't easy. I'm off to the upper Chotchawhatchee to seek out an Ivory Billed Woodpecker, I loves a challenge.
#16
I expect your moderate muzzie is easier to spot because of the prayer call thing they do. An Ivory Bill pretty much minds his/her/dammit own business. Fools for olde pines tho, rarely carry bombs.
I just worry that we lose sight of the fact that we ALL develop mantras - and so many cling to them long after their truth and utility have been surpassed by reality. Believe it or not, and I'll make no bets which, lol, I do try to evolve my ideas and opinions. Fucking truth, lol, gums up my gears and smears my viewscreen. ;->
#22
Burry nakes an interesting point re: the Imam's view of his followers.
So we are all agreed that this Imam is no moderate, but has in fact, been portrayed as one ?
I am.
Moderate or Lunatic he is "Australia's top Muslim cleric ".
Really doesn't say much for the moderation of those beneath his toppiness.
#26
Thanks for link CO. What I noticed in the other photo, is that Aussie Mooselimb bitches have started a new trend. Instead on the traditional one piece burka bag, they've transitioned to 2 piece costume. Pantaloon lowers with overhanging upper. Better to run in during riots ?
#27
"Here in the US when we have a male cat that cant control himself we cut off his balls so he wont be trying to hump everything in sight. Maybe thats what we should do for young Muslim men who cant control themselves."
You wouldn't believe how many variations on this theme I've seen around the blogosphere. I'm sensing a grassroots (well, some kind of root) movement here......
#28
So we are all agreed that this Imam is no moderate, but has in fact, been portrayed as one ?
Actually, J.D. Lux, this is a complex situation. Al-Hilali enjoyed a rather enduring reputation as a moderate when he first arrived in Australia. While it appears as though this may have been protective coloration, there still remain some serious questions. I'll post excerpts from all the various articles I linked in yesterday's investigation and then address some of those questions.
1988: Sheik Hilali again avoided being expelled from the country in 1988 following comments he made about Jews being the "underlying cause of all wars".
2000: The spiritual head of Lakemba Mosque in Sydney's southwest attracted criticism in 2000 for allegedly blaming "Australian society" for the infamous Sydney gang rapes.
2003: (From MEMRI)
In a speech in March 2003, he likened "Bush Jr." to the son of Genghis Khan, calling him "the most ignorant president to lead the White House." [5] Sheikh Al-Hilali also declared that President Bush, Australian Prime Minister John Howard, and British Prime Minister Tony Blair are the "axis of evil." [6]
2004: Although the cleric has formerly claimed that he broke away from the Brotherhood because they were too "extreme" in their teachings, several years ago he allegedly praised suicide bombers and called anyone who died fighting for Islam a "hero".
And in 2004, he gave speeches in Lebanon that seemed to suggest the September 11 attacks on the US weren't so bad.
2004: Sheik Hilaly issued a statement condemning all acts of terrorism.
"We assert on religious authority to any person on the face of this earth who may entertain any notion of Australia as a military target, that such a notion is contrary to the teachings of Islam and the natural laws of human behaviour," Sheik Hilaly said.
"Any destructive behaviour that threatens the security of this country is an act of stupidity, recklessness and madness that is harmful to the Muslims and is at odds with the forgiving nature of religion."
2004: (From MEMRI)
In a February 13, 2004 sermon at the Al-Quds mosque while on a visit to Sidon, Lebanon, the Mufti of Australia and New Zealand, Taj Al-Din Al-Hilali, called for Jihad against Israel, and added: "The war waged by the U.S. and Israel against the Muslims is a cruel war aimed at annihilating the [Islamic] nation."
Date Unknown: (From MEMRI)
In a speech in March 2003, he likened "Bush Jr." to the son of Genghis Khan, calling him "the most ignorant president to lead the White House." [5] Sheikh Al-Hilali also declared that President Bush, Australian Prime Minister John Howard, and British Prime Minister Tony Blair are the "axis of evil." [6]
2006: The cleric was once again reaching for a credibility lifeline in July when The Weekend Australian revealed that he had called the Holocaust "a ploy made by the Zionists" and trivialised the number of Jews killed by the Nazis.
Date Unknown: (From MEMRI)
"We are also proud of what Hamas and the Islamic Jihad are both doing in the occupied territories. We support the resistance and support, with all our might, the martyrdom operations carried out by the Palestinian liberation movements, operations that are a legitimate act against the cruel occupation, according to all international norms and conventions.
"Also, whoever carries out a martyrdom [operation] is a pure Shahid and one of the men of Paradise. Moreover, he stands at the head of the Shahids." [9]
What a riot! While trying to search under "Hilali Moderate" I was linked to yesterday's Rantburg article where I posted many of the above links. I cannot find the related articles at this time, but at one point Hilali had condemned certain acts of terrorism (as noted above) and supposedly quit the Muslim Brotherhood because it was "too extreme". Much of this is called into question by al-Hilali's overall conduct.
Finally, we must address the most disturbing notion of all. Al-Hilali is the leader of ALL Muslims in New Zealand and Australia. As can be seen, despite whatever personal convictions he maintains, al-Hilali is widely regarded as a moderate.
One can be sure that some of his claims to moderation are merely window-dressing, taqqiya in its purest form. Much more disturbing is how, despite al-Hilali's immoderate rantings about "uncovered meat", his attempts to shrug off the gang rapes, his veiled threats to Australia and it government, few, if any, amongst the hundreds of thousands of Australian or Kiwi Muslims are taking him to task or attempting to have him ousted from his position as Mufti.
This can only be interpreted as overall approval for what is being said by al-Hilali, regardless of whether it is labeled as moderate or radical. This further exacerbates any decision as to just how moderate other so-called "Moderate Muslims" actually are. Yasser Arafat probably set the gold standard for two-faced taqqiya in his saying one thing in English and wholly another in Arabic.
Al-Hilali has only served to further erode any slight hopes I had regarding moderate Muslims. More and more, it would seem that such a position is strictly for the kuffar's consumption and rarely backed by similar words inside the local mosque.
In closing, this further cements my own perception that Islam must eventually polarize. Just as bin Laden and other radicals have sought to polarize the Muslim and non-Muslim world, so it must be within Islam itself. Much as with how there is no middle ground on terrorism; Either you support or condemn it but cannot be undecided, so it will most likely become with Islam.
Islam must now segregate itself into two houses. Radical Islam with its jihadists and violent psychopaths and Radical Islamic Reformists who must just as aggressively seek out and identify or kill these deceitful and violent Muslims who perpetuate jihad. Again, there must be no middle ground made available. Muslims must be put in a position of choosing to allow terrorism or actively seeking the genuine and authentic reformation of their morally crippled creed.
#29
Well I'll grant you that he is a nuanced fellow.
And often tailors his speeches fro his audience and seems to have suffered a six week lapse into modernity in early 2004.
And his apology was nicely worded.
I got a big kick out of his assertion that Afghans discovered Australia, which as we all know makes it "Muslim Lands".
Expect the same stories in SW/USA
--"I visited the town of Alice Springs in central Australia, and found there a map [of Alice Springs] under the name Mecca. Alice Springs is surrounded by high black mountains, similar to the mountains of Mecca. Summer there lasts 10 months, and winter only two months. The temperature is above 50 degrees Celsius.
"There are several kinds of dates and palm trees there. We did not believe that dates could grow there. Now that we know the reason, we no longer wonder. We found that our ancestors the Afghans were among the first Muslims, and they settled this area and called it Mecca.
"The strange thing was that when our muezzin [who accompanied Sheikh Al-Hilali on his visit to Alice Springs] stood up to call for prayer, the old people of the town came out, and so did men and youths, and they looked different than the black Aborigines. They were a mixture of Afghan and Aborigine, as a result of marriages of Afghan men and Aborigine women. When the muezzin called 'Allahu Akbar,' they said, 'We have heard this song from our ancestors ' When they asked us 'What is this song you are singing?' we told them that this was an announcement of prayer time. When we asked them their names, they answered John, or Steve, but their names ended with Saraj Al-Din, Abdallah, or Muhammad "
Sheik Taj al-Din al-Hilaly is my personal most hated.
He is imam of Lakemba Mosque: the epicentre of the cultural problems in Sydney.
Pakistani and Lebanese Muslims gang raped women: epicentre of the attitudes that made it possible: Lakemba Mosque.
Lebs (Lebanese Muslims) frequently attack Aussie women verbally, calling them sluts. Sexually assault them. Leb gangs mug people regularly.
Caused the so-called Cronulla 'race' riots (nothing to do with race at all - only cultural clash between leb gangs and everyone else. Epicentre of their culture: Lakemba mosque.
Five nights of reprisal riots where cars torched, christmas carolers shot at, random citizens beaten savagely. 200 men first gathered at... Lakemba Mosque, then set out in convoy of 50 cars to Maroubra, Brighton Le Sands and smashed cars and shops. Flying the Lebanese flag.
(Bloomberg) -- German Defense Minister Franz Josef Jung today ordered the suspension of two soldiers who posed for photos with a human skull during a 2003 mission with ISAF peace- keepers in Afghanistan. The pictures were published this week. Snapshots of German soldiers holding human remains appeared in the Bild Zeitung newspaper on Oct. 25, prompting the army to launch an investigation to find the culprits. Further photographs depicting soldiers from other units stationed in Afghanistan were published by RTL television yesterday. Tampering with human remains is a punishable offence in Germany
Jung told reporters outside parliament that the army had suspended two of the six soldiers depicted in Bild's photos. ``I've also asked the Inspector-General of the Army to review troop training before and during service'' in Afghanistan. Jung has called the photos ``loathsome.''
Publication of the photos may highlight gaps in the leadership and discipline of Germany's troops in Afghanistan as its allies in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization pressure Chancellor Angela Merkel to boost troop numbers in the country.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/28/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11130 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Suspended? Um, suspended from what? Sipping tea in Kabul?
I haven't seen a link to Canada's new series of recruitment videos that were released on 10/6/06, so here it is. The "Fight" ads started running on TV about the same time the US Army changed to the "Army Strong" campaign, and they have a somewhat similar (IMHO, better) look and feel.
Click through the splash screen, then click on "watch our ad". Requires Flash 8. Here's the link.
The former head of Britains foreign spy service says hes puzzled Canada doesnt have one of its own. Sir Richard Dearlove said today he finds it surprising Canada lacks a proper foreign intelligence service, and has resisted creating one. Dearlove says Canada could make an important contribution to its own national security interests as well as its major allies.
He points to Australia, saying its external spy service has achieved a high degree of sophistication and success, especially in the Asia-Pacific region.
Dearlove says Canadas CSIS has evolved into a world-class security service but lacks a clear-cut mandate to gather intelligence overseas. He told a gathering of security officials it would take 10 to 20 years for Canada to establish a genuine foreign spy outfit.
Dearlove headed Britains Secret Intelligence Service, better known as MI6, from August 1999 until July 2004.
#1
That's because until just a year or two ago canada thought they didn't need one. They thought if they laid low, they wouldn't get hit. Now they know better.
Besides, if it was a secret spy agency, would we know about it?
#4
CSIS does all of our spying, both foreign and domestic. Even the RCMP has liason officers in embassies overseas, although I don't think they do any spying per se. We just don't have the MI5/6 or FBI/CIA seperations. Considering the turf battles we see going on in the US, I'd call it a feature, not a bug.
President George W. Bush said Friday the United States does not torture prisoners, commenting after U.S. Vice-President Dick Cheney embraced the suggestion of a North Dakota radio host that a dunk in water might be useful to force terrorist suspects to talk.
Human rights groups complained Cheneys words amounted to an endorsement of the torture technique known as water boarding, in which the victim believes he is about to drown. The White House insisted Cheney was not talking about water boarding but would not explain what he meant.
Less than two weeks before midterm congressional elections, the White House was put on the defensive as news of Cheneys remark spread. Bush was asked about it at a White House photo opportunity with NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer. Presidential spokesman Tony Snow was pelted with questions at two briefings.
Democrats also pointed to Cheneys statement.
Is the White House that was for torture before it was against it, now for torture again? asked U.S. Senator John Kerry. Kerry, in his unsuccessful campaign for the presidency, had been skewered by Bush for saying he had voted for war funds before he voted against them.
Cheney triggered the flap in an interview Tuesday by radio broadcaster Scott Hennen of WDAY in Fargo, N.D. Hennen said callers had told him: Please, let the vice-president know that if it takes dunking a terrorist in water, were all for it, if it saves lives.
Would you agree a dunk in water is a no-brainer if it can save lives? Hennen asked.
Well, its a no-brainer for me but for a while there I was criticized as being the vice-president for torture, Cheney said.
We dont torture. Thats not what were involved in.
At his photo op, Bush said: This country doesnt torture, were not going to torture. We will interrogate people we pick up off the battlefield to determine whether or not theyve got information that will be helpful to protect the country.
Snow, at a morning meeting with reporters, tried to brush off the controversy.
You know, as a matter of common sense that the vice-president of the United States is not going to be talking about water boarding. Never would, never does, never will, Snow said.
You think Dick Cheneys going to slip up on something like this? No, come on.
Snow said Cheney did not interpret the question as referring to water boarding and the vice-president did not make any comments about water boarding. He said the question put to Cheney was loosely worded.
The administration has repeatedly refused to say which techniques it believes are permitted under a new law. Asked to define a dunk in water, Snow said: Its a dunk in the water.
At a televised briefing later, the questions turned tougher and more pointed.
The vice-president says he was talking in general terms about a questioning program that is legal to save American lives and he was not referring to water boarding, Snow said.
Yet, the spokesman conceded: I can understand that people will look at this and draw the conclusions that youre trying to draw.
Larry Cox, executive director of Amnesty International U.S.A., said in a statement: Whats really a no-brainer is that no U.S. official, much less a vice-president, should champion torture.
Vice-President Cheneys advocacy of water boarding sets a new human rights low at a time when human rights is already scraping the bottom of the Bush administration barrel.
Human Rights Watch said Cheneys remarks are the Bush administrations first clear endorsement of water boarding.
A new U.S. army manual, released last month, bans torture and degrading treatment of prisoners, explicitly barring water boarding and other procedures.
#1
Didn't I see something about Maureen Dowd being bundled off to Oklahoma City in a black helicopter, then forced to eat barbecue, drink beer and shop for clothes at a local TJ Maxx? TORTURE, I tell ya...where's Amnesia Amnesty International when you really need them?
Posted by: Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) ||
10/28/2006 18:19 Comments ||
Top||
FORT CAMPBELL, Ky. (AP) - The Army arraigned a 101st Airborne Division soldier Friday who was charged with raping and killing a 14-year-old Iraqi girl and killing three others in her family. Pfc. Bryan L. Howard is accused of plotting in March to rape and kill the teenager in Mahmoudiya, a village about 20 miles south of Baghdad. Three other soldiers and a former Army private from the division's 502nd Infantry Regiment also face charges related to the attack.
Howard deferred entering a plea or scheduling a court-martial during the proceedings at Fort Campbell. Both his attorney, Cpt. Ryan Rosauer, and his father Lynn Howard in the audience, declined to speak to reporters.
Two other soldiers accused of rape and murder with him in the attack - Sgt. Paul E. Cortez and Pfc. Jesse V. Spielman - could be given the death sentence if they are convicted, a military judge ruled earlier this month. Both will be arraigned soon, the military said. Former Army private Steve Green also faces rape and murder charges but is being tried in federal court.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/28/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11130 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Death Sentence!
I'm not at all defending these guys, but geesh!
We havent even given a single murdering, insurgent a death sentence yet. We used to shoot them in the head, right there in the field when we caught them, now they live out their days in relative luxury at Gitmo. But these dudes get the death sentence?
Did you know that enlisted defendants in a General Courts Martial can request that a third of the board members be made up of fellow enlisted members? I'm sure ex-JAG could give you the particulars from the lawyer side of the table. From someone who sat on the other, its not a good idea if you are looking for sympathy. As one of my troops pointed out, sympathy is found in the dictionary between sh!t and syphilis.
#3
I baptise thee in the name of the Cheney regime
Posted by: Captain America ||
10/28/2006 2:50 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I hear the Taliban are putting on an anti-waterboarding rally next weekend in Wazoo and would like anyone who has a problem with this practice to attend . . . .
#6
Karl Rove is a genius. This issue doesn't resonate with most Americans. I wonder if Cheney did this on purpose knowing that the media would respond on cue.
#9
lol
have to listen to Alanis Morissette....,
I had a patient that had the moslum prayer going non stop, drove me nuts and I only had to listen to it for 10 minutes or so. I feel sorry for our troops that have to listen to that continually, man o man.
hmmm, any other singers that come to mind here?
Jan at work
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/28/2006 16:57 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Muskrat Love ...
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/28/2006 18:02 Comments ||
Top||
#12
any song by Bread
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/28/2006 18:25 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Make them listen to rants and songs by Harry Belafante. That way we can kill two birds with one stone. It not only would drive the muzzies nuts, but would make ole Harry spin in his grave - even if he ISN'T dead yet.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
10/28/2006 19:33 Comments ||
Top||
#14
This issue doesn't resonate with most Americans.
Actually, the polls I've seen show that Americans are not opposed to selective water dunks. Funny thing about that survival instinct.
Posted by: Captain America ||
10/28/2006 20:35 Comments ||
Top||
President Bush said Friday the United States does not torture prisoners, commenting after Vice President Dick Cheney embraced the suggestion that a dunk in water might be useful to get terrorist suspects to talk.
Hopefully we're just shooting them up with enough drugs to make them into garrulous zombies.
Human rights groups complained that Cheney's words amounted to an endorsement of a torture technique known as "water boarding."
Human rights groups complained that Cheney's words amounted to an endorsement of a torture technique known as "water boarding," in which the victim believes he is about to drown. The White House insisted Cheney was not talking about water boarding, but would not explain what he meant.
Personally, I don't care. If they decide to work the bastards over with Brillo and barbecue forks, I'm willing to help.
Less than two weeks before midterm congressional elections, the White House was put on the defensive as news of Cheney's remark spread. Bush was asked about it at a White House photo opportunity with NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer. Presidential spokesman Tony Snow was pelted with questions at two briefings with reporters.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/28/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11131 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
They could torture the bastards till their guts come out for all I care.
#2
He should have said - US doesn't TAKE prisoners...
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
10/28/2006 9:30 Comments ||
Top||
#3
pelted with questions from reporters
I could never be WH press secretary. Too many cameras recording my bare-handed beating of the reporters
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/28/2006 9:58 Comments ||
Top||
#4
When America so openly celebrates torture, it's hard to believe that its demise (in the sense of relative influence in world affairs) is not soon to follow. Watching Bush backtrack or correct is rare indeed. And commendable even. I mean, we all know the torture is torture whatever the denials (or in Cheney's case, the celebrations) but such a naked assertion of it, such a open celebration ... . When the conversatives who admire such men do not nonetheless find something extremely objectionable in their violations of America ... the decline has already begun, pushed and pulled along by its voracious adherents.
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/28/2006 11:56 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Presidential spokesman Tony Snow was pelted with questions at two briefings with reporters.
Did anybody else see that? You could literally SEE the drool coming off the reporters mouths when they were talking. And Snow just looked at them like they were idiotic most the time. It was great to watch.
Posted by: Charles ||
10/28/2006 12:08 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Damn why do we get the idiotic trolls, I swear I hear one more time about the American Ideal about how wholesome we are. Look you stupid git people through are whole history had to do bad things to keep this country whole and if you don't like it Crustie F*cking leave.
What appears to be a lament or critique, at least on first blush, is actually a celebration of being speshul, superior, a Chosen One. If only we were all so gifted 'n stuff. Sigh.
Lol.
Crusty, baby, your big red nose is off-center. Hie thee to make-up, toot suite! How can you play the role seriously if you look funny? It's CogDis of the First Order, lol.
#9
Give them a bath with lye soap and GI scrub brushes. Did that once with a guy who wouldn't bathe. There wasn't much skin left. It's not torture, it's hygiene.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
10/28/2006 19:35 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Crustie the clown from Toronto, Ontario. No wonder the nose is off-center. All the good ones come south.
Methinks it is the same clown that's posted a couple of times before. Only the name has changed.
Pakistans ex-President, Ghulam Ishaq Khan, from 1988 to 1993, Friday died of pneumonia in northern Pakistani city, said his son-in-law. He was suffering from pneumonia and died of it in Peshawar, 250 kilometers north of Islamabad, Arfan Ullah-Murawat, his son-in-law, told media. Khan came to power following the death of former Prtesident Zia-ul-Haq in a mysterious plane crash along with a US diplomat.
THE United Nations is to draw up an international treaty on small-arms control in an attempt to prevent the sale of weapons, which is flourishing in war zones despite individual embargoes. The resolution says the lack of international standards in the arms trade "is a contributory factor to conflict, displacement of our noble Palestinian brethren people, crime and terrorism".
Kofi Annan, the UN secretary-general, has been asked to authorise a group of experts to look into "establishing common international standards for the import, export and transfer of conventional arms".
The resolution was adopted by the UN general assembly committee dealing with disarmament issues with 139 countries voting in favour and 24 abstentions, including Russia and China, both major arms-producing countries. There was one No vote, registered by the United States.
The decision means the next month will be spent drawing up a treaty which must then be approved by the general assembly. Human-rights campaigners said the treaty would go a long way to keep small arms out of conflict zones. Supporters of the UN action say such weapons can flow into conflict areas because of inconsistencies in current laws. Jeremy Hobbs, the director of Oxfam International, which has been campaigning in favour of the treaty, said: "The world's governments have voted to end the scandal of the unregulated arms trade. Since the Control Arms campaign began three years ago, an estimated one million people have been killed by conventional weapons."
Existing export controls can be relatively easily circumvented by arms manufacturers, even in countries with supposed strict rules, by manufacturing the components of weapons in nations with lax laws. Campaigners behind the resolution said they hoped the final treaty would compel countries to officially authorise all weapons transfers, improve compliance with previous treaties related to conventional weapons and also prohibit weapons transfers with countries likely to use the arms to violate their citizens' rights.
Kate Gilmore, Amnesty International's executive deputy secretary-general, said: "This massive vote to develop a global arms trade treaty is an historic opportunity for governments to tackle the scourge of irresponsible and immoral arms transfers. Any credible treaty must outlaw those transfers which fuel the systematic murder, rape, torture and expulsion of thousands of people."
The UK international development minister Gareth Thomas backed the move.
"All countries should support such a treaty as it offers the hope of a safer world where children are not scared to go to school," he said.
And Richard Grenell, a spokesman for the US mission to the United Nations, said: "The only way for a global arms trade treaty to work is to have every country agree on a standard. For us, that standard would be so far below what we are already required to do under US law that we had to vote against it in order to maintain our higher standards."
The resolution requests the UN secretary-general to seek the hotel with the best views of all UN member states and to submit a report to the general assembly in late 2007.
#1
This is bizzy work. Nothing will come of it because half of the GA would violate it for a buck. But it will be a nifty excuse for lots of meetings, lunches, travel, stays in 5-star hotels, and maybe even a pot of money to skim.
#2
The reality is this is a renewed attempt against the universal human right of persons to be armed for personal protection. It has zero to do with the claimed objectives.
#4
I hope the UN remembers to send a copy of that treaty to China. I don't know if they have noticed, but every terrorist, insurgent, criminal, murderer in that part of the world has an AK-47 in their hand. And nobody makes em cheaper than china. I seriously doubt that they are the Bulgarian AK's with the milled recievers and chrome lined barrels that we get over here. Prolly more like the stamped reciever with the crappy mild steel barrel that has been made in china, literally by the millions, for every low-life murderer from chechnya to peru.
#5
Right - the intended target of this thing is a guy like me here in Amerikka who wants a new Weatherby hunting rifle, not the maoist guerillas in Nepal. Screw 'em...
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
10/28/2006 9:28 Comments ||
Top||
#6
No, No, No, the intent here is shakedown.
Siep one, Identify the dealers.
Step two, "License" them.
Step three, Declare "Problem solved, no more Illegal Gun Dealers.
Step four, reap the cash, ignore calls for "Reform"
Step five, "Reform" (Translation fees go up)
Repeat as long as you can get away with it. (20 Years minimum.)
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
10/28/2006 10:40 Comments ||
Top||
Iraq's prime minister and the U.S. ambassador declared common goals on Friday after days of public wrangling that raised new questions about Iraq policy before next month's U.S. congressional elections. In a joint statement after a meeting with U.S. envoy Zalmay Khalilzad, Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki said his government had "timelines" for political developments, employing the word at the heart of the debate.
Iraqi officials say Maliki was angered this week when Khalilzad seemed to assure impatient American voters the Iraqi leader was following a U.S.-backed timetable of performance "benchmarks", and they insisted any "timelines" were a purely Iraqi initiative and did not commit Maliki to action.
Bush told a White House news conference Iraqi leaders had agreed to a "schedule" and reminded Maliki that his patience was "not unlimited" and his support for the prime minister conditional on him making "tough decisions".
Nonetheless, the statement may ease electoral pressure on U.S. President George W. Bush and his officials, who were left struggling to explain their exit strategy from Iraq after Maliki denied he was working to a schedule and sharply criticised U.S. security policy, saying he could do better if given more leeway.
"The Iraqi government has made clear the issues that must be resolved with timelines for them to take positive steps forward on behalf of the Iraqi people," it said. "The United States fully supports their goals and will help make them a success."
Washington is anxious for Maliki, a Shi'ite, to crack down on Shi'ite militia death squads blamed for much of the killing. Khalilzad had told a news conference on Tuesday that Iraqi leaders had "committed themselves to a timeline for making ... decisions". Maliki responded two days later that "we do not believe in a timetable and no one will impose one on us". Bush told a White House news conference Iraqi leaders had agreed to a "schedule" and reminded Maliki that his patience was "not unlimited" and his support for the prime minister conditional on him making "tough decisions".
Posted by: Fred ||
10/28/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11134 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Maliki's goals, via DAWA, SCIRI, and Qom, do not intersect with ours. End of story.
#2
.com, one thing to keep in mind: if Maliki has been watching CNN and reading the mainstream US press, he's seeing story after story about how the Democrats are about to take over Congress. It's no secret that Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Murtha and Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Lamont and the rest of the Donks are all set to do to Prime Minister Maliki and Iraq what they did to President Thieu and South Vietnam, and to Prime Minister Nol and Cambodia, a generation ago. If I were him, I'd be watching my back, and maybe looking for a way to cut a deal with the other side if it comes down to that, too.
Posted by: Mike ||
10/28/2006 15:46 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Hang on there, Mike. I'm thinking you're mistaken.
It is my firm opinion that Maliki would not be displeased one iota if we left today - public mutterings aside.
He and his block (DAWA, SCIRI, et al) are majority Shia fully under the spell and pay of the Mad Mullahs and will simply drop the poorly-maintained pretenses and go medieval on the Sunnis if we are not around. They have made the Interior Ministry, they who control the police, into an official Death Squad and Militia support center. If you were around during Jaafari's reign, when Jabr controlled the IM, you would have read about him preventing the activation of the police who had successfully completed training under the Germans and US. He held them out - so his IM Death Squads could operate without hindrance. Hell, Jabr even ran a torture facility, a real one, go figure, huh? Maliki taking over for Jaafari - and Jabr moving over to the Finance Ministry - a sweet thing to get him out of the headlines but maintain the influence of one of the architects of the current mess - merely put a new face on the same game, IMHO.
Please point out my errors and I'll be happy to modify accordingly.
#8
Welcome, cajunbelle! Always glad to have another Rantburg lady join the conversation -- it's good for our gentlemen to wonder whether or not they're actually outnumbered, and if so by how much. It makes their dreams so much more interesting. ;-)
IAF aircraft bombed overnight Thursday the home of a Hamas operative in the Jabaliya refugee camp that was being used as a weapons warehouse. The IDF said that the occupants had been warned 15 minutes before the strike to vacate the premises, and no one was wounded.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/28/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11126 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Why this continued warning. Blow their asses up. Were there any purty sparklers ?
West Bank Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said he will dissolve the Hamas-led government within two weeks if the Islamic militant group does not agree to form a governing coalition with his Fatah Party, Palestinian officials said. Abbas told the European Union's top diplomat that he would replace the Cabinet with an apolitical panel of professionals, the officials said Friday.
The moderate Palestinian president has raised the idea before but promised not to force it on a reluctant Hamas. His new stand suggested a willingness to take a stronger line against Hamas in a bid to ease crippling Western sanctions designed to force the Islamic group to moderate its militantly anti-Israel ideology. The message was relayed to visiting EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana by the Palestinian officials, who agreed to discuss the confidential information with The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk to the media.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/28/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11130 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
But somehow they still seem to have money for weapons. No food, but they have tons of explosives and guns coming across the border from Egypt.
Hamas is awaiting Israel's response to the latest deal proposed by the organization for captured IDF soldier Cpl Gilad Shalit's release, the London-based Al-Hayat newspaper reported on Friday. Reportedly, the Hamas leadership has withdrawn its demand that concurrent with Shalit's release, Palestinian security prisoners would be immediately released by Israel. Instead, Hamas is said to be willing to free Shalit, and wait two months for Israel to release some 1000 prisoners.
Al-Hayat claimed that Hamas leader-in-exile Khaled Mashaal was expected to hear Israel's response to the proposal when he travels from Damascus to Cairo next week to meet with head of Egyptian intelligence Omar Suleiman. Moussa Abu Marzouk, a top Hamas official, denied the report. "There is no official invitation to Cairo. There is no one heading to Cairo now," he told The Associated Press.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/28/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11130 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The deal seems lopsided to me. Do they want to get rid of these bozos for some reason?
#2
If those dipshits release 1000 murderers for one dumbass private, then I can't feel sorry for them anymore when one of the 1000 blows himself up in a bus or a market. I'd release them, at 10,000 feet, from a C-5 flying over Gaza.
#3
"Oh my god! They're hitting the ground like sacks of wet cement!"
Happy Thanksgiving Eid
Posted by: Les Nessman ||
10/28/2006 9:17 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Do they want to get rid of these bozos for some reason?
Could be. Many of them are Fatah men, and Hamas has assembled huge numbers of foreign reinforcements in the fight to control Gaza. Israel may want to even the odds there.
#5
If those dipshits release 1000 murderers for one dumbass private
Hooooooooha!
Hell yes, let the Jews send the bullet to kill him. It would quicken things up and make many people happy, like yourself.
Dumb fuck privates, why do they keep dying?
The head of the Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency on Friday hailed what he described as epochal progress toward putting a high-energy laser aboard a modified Boeing Co. 747 to zap ballistic missiles that could be fired by North Korea and Iran.
The so-called Airborne Laser has been developed at a cost so far of about $3.5 billion with the aim of destroying, at the speed of light, all classes of ballistic missiles shortly after their launch. If successful in flight testing and deployed, it would become part of an emerging U.S. anti-missile shield that also includes land- and sea-based interceptor missiles.
"You've demonstrated capability on the ground," Air Force Lt. Gen. Henry Obering said at a ceremony at which the aircraft was rolled out of a Wichita, Kansas, hangar where it has been undergoing modifications. "Not since that time nearly twenty-two hundred years ago, when Archimedes reflected the sun's rays to set the Roman fleet on fire off Syracuse, has the world seen a weapon that puts fresh meaning into the phrase 'in real time'."
Continued on Page 49
#1
Engineers are to start installing a high-energy chemical oxygen iodine laser on the modified jumbo jet next year
Sunlight may be the best disinfectant but I'm more than happy to rely upon oxygen and iodine for a little "antibacterial" action.
From their start, I have always maintained that the SDI-Star Wars programs were a near-equivalent to the Apollo program in terms of both short-term benefits and long range technology spin-offs.
Despite all of the naysaying by critics or anti-military types and regardless of current technological expertise, DEWs (Directed Energy Weapons) will become the de facto standard in military hardware. Witness parallel efforts to develop a small laser firearm for ground-based troops.
As with every single other advance that has rendered America this world's sole undisputed (unless you actually believe China's propaganda) superpower, I welcome this new addition to liberty's arsenal.
#2
Article: Philip Coyle, the Pentagon's chief weapons tester under former President Bill Clinton and now at the private Center for Defense Information, said in an e-mail reply to Reuters that its real effectiveness appeared doubtful.
I've heard many variations of the word "liberal" - "progressive", "moderate", etc. This is the first time I've heard it rendered as "private".
#3
Ahmanutjob better start staying indoor more or he may well develop a bad sunburn one of these days! And Tater. And his stoopid tots.
Any word on using that laser firearm to blind or ventilate terrorists on the ground? Blinding terrorists or lopping off an arm would be a real good solution for the problem they pose, even if "human rights" groups say it's inhumane [nevermind the terrorists' victims human rights, of course]. It would make sniper-equivalents out of many, and no sound to give them away. You'd have to think ten times before you'd choose to go up against this kind of weapon. And you certainly wouldn't want to leave these laying around.
#4
Any word on using that laser firearm to blind or ventilate terrorists on the ground?
It's pretty safe to say that the laser in question approaches the megawatt or multi-megawatt range. You might as well go deer hunting with a Howitzer or M1-Abrams. Not that it wouldn't be fun, mind you.
Long digression into the Ancients knew everything (as the zeitgeist of Western thought for 2,000 years) avoided, but despite modern failures to replicate what the pic shows, it intrigues me the Greeks understood the possibility, which suggests they had experienced the actuality of a 'death ray'.
#13
A shiny missile doesn't ward off the laser. Why? Because a plused laser is still a shockwave impact weapon. Its the impact of the photon's and not the heat that kills the missile.
Is a dx/dt thingy... A strong very narrow pulse that sets up a shockwave.
You want a decent set of gaps between the pulses as a heat, vaporization and ionization will degraged and deflect the pulses.
Think of a successful laser ABM system as a rapid fire hammer not a burning ray.
#15
I have a souvenir neutrino rifle left over from earlier efforts, but it doesn't have any discernable effect, damnit. Gotta use a larger calibre. There's no elegance in using those big ugly photon slugs, but the guys in the crew cuts say ya gotta go with results. grumble-grumble...
#17
Its the impact of the photon's and not the heat that kills the missile.
Yup. The photonic wavefront of a multi-megawatt laser beam literally slams into re-entry vehicles or airbore targets like a head on collision with a truck. Target death is achieved through fragmentation. None of this melting or vaporizing stuff and polished nickel-steel nosecones do exactly squat to reflect it.
Fundamental research into laser drilling discovered that a CW (Constant Wattage) beam rapidly lost power in the bore due to off-axis scattering by exiting chips.
They quickly learned to pulse laser drills so that kerf material was ejected from the bore by air pressure shock waves from the detonation of each successive arriving photon packet, thus leaving a clear beam path.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
10/28/2006 17:55 Comments ||
Top||
#20
This laser has been around for a while and many ground shots made at White Sands. Believe me (I saw the videos only), this thing does ablate and melt metal rapidly. On a stationary target, (admittedly not off axis, moving, etc) it melts and vaporizes 3 inches of block aluminum in about 10 seconds. I forgot target distance for shot, but in the multiple kilometer range.
#21
Just one caution re: expectations for directed energy weapons.
Altitude, humidity and some forms of weather can interfere with the beam, an effect that DOD has spent a considerable amount of time and money measuring and modeling. Sea level in many places, jungles etc. are poorer places to deploy them than deserts and higher altitudes.
Given the low humidity at White Sands, that means that you cannot extrapolate distances & energy transfer achieved in tests there to just any place around the world. At altitude, however, plane to plane or plane to missile use will not face the same degradation.
The flip side of that is that unlike a kinetic weapon (gun, artillery etc.) the beams don't just die away if they miss - they continue to travel for potentially a VERY long distance. Issues of airspace management become very important in any engagement using them to down airborne threats.
#22
the beams don't just die away if they miss - they continue to travel for potentially a VERY long distance. Issues of airspace management become very important in any engagement using them to down airborne threats.
At any major high-power laser installation you will find that there is a much lower power "pilot laser" piped into the beamline for orientation, alignment and other maintenance tasks. This allows personnel to perform setup and modification of beamline experiments without risking injury by having the high-power beam present.
So it is with DEW lasers. They all have much lower power coaxial targeting beams that perform ranging and target acquisition. Only when the targeting beam has successfully painted and begun tracking a potential hostile vehicle is the main beam brought online. This assures reduced consumption of expensive reactants (in the case of chemical lasers), prolongs overall emission lifetime and helps to prevent any beam overshoot that might cause unintended strikes.
"I tried him with mild jokesthen with severe ones; I dosed him with bad jokes, and riddled him with good ones; I fired old, stale jokes on him, and peppered him fore and aft with red-hot new ones. I warmed up to my work, and assaulted him on the right and left, in front and behind; I fumed, and charged, and ranted, till I was hoarse and sick, and frantic and furious; but I never moved him onceI never started a smile or a tear! Never a ghost of a smile, and never a suspicion of moisture!"
I'm ALSO familiar with the simulations DOD has run, having run some of my own using the same simulation platform.
Rules of airspace management are a BIG deal with regard to deployment of mobile lasers, in particular. Or at least the joint program office developing them thinks so.
#26
And need I also add that I'm familiar with the various models of groundbased THEL, both the chemically and the wired ones? And their effective ranges? And the atomospheric modelling associated with evaluating both laser designs and simulating operational scenarios? And .....
#28
It was the little bits afterwards that filled in the details.
Seriously, of course we have attempted to include engineering features to minimize overshoots and misses in tactical lasers. But there ARE issues associated with directed energy weapons that go beyond the basic engineering work. Airspace management is one of them. There are other operational issues I won't go into here.
My main reason for bringing this up is to manage expectations. Lasers are "Star War" things to many people. They have great promise, but there are many open questions about their use, just as there are issues WRT UAVs on our border, co-mingling with commercial and general aviation.
Bah! Have you ever played with a laser? There are unlimited amounts of fun to be had toying around with one of those puppies. Several years ago a pal showed up on my doorstep with a Spectra-Physics 20mW Argon Laser. He told me that if I could fix it I could keep it. One $10.00 contacter later I had the beast up and running. Near my lab was a chap who serviced lasers for a living and he brought in SP's rep and they tweaked the critter back to spec perfection.
I built a three stage variable speed motorized rotating epicentric mirror array that produces complex Lissajou figures. Along with a crude chopper and some other cheap optics I put on some tasty home laser light shows for my guests. For extra fun, I pipe in my 5 mW HeNe laser for two colors.
I recently acquired a Stanford Research SR540 variable speed precision optical chopper for even more fun and games. This should allow me to set up beautiful rotating spoked beam projections.
Try using a laser to just barely graze the edge of an ice cube fixed in place on a mirror. Bounce the beam onto a bedsheet or projection screen and I swear you can see individual molecular layers of the crystal melting away. It looks like these gorgeous slowly shifting Gaussian field patterns.
The romance ain't gone, you just have to get creative about it.
#34
It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye.
Old laser lab warning sign:
CAUTION - DO NOT STARE INTO LASER WITH REMAINING EYE
Hook up your laser to a computer and show me what an atom looks like, then I'll be impressed.
Individual atoms are much smaller than visible optical wavelengths, which goes a long way towards explaining why we humans cannot see them. For imaging individual atoms, the instrument of choice is the Scanning Tunneling Microscope.
You need to get laid.
Darrell, your willingness to speculate openly about another person's sex life shows everyone exactly what sort of moral integrity you posses or, more likely, lack.
Ive been laid by one honest woman more times than youve had hot dinners.
#35
Darrell, your willingness to speculate openly about another person's sex life shows everyone exactly what sort of moral integrity you posses or, more likely, lack.
Either that or he's bored by your interminable posts.
Redacted by moderator. Comments may be redacted for trolling, violation of standards of good manners, or plain stupidity. Please correct the condition that applies and try again. Contents may be viewed in the sinktrap. Further violations may result in banning.
France's Foreign Ministry on Friday called Iran's expansion of its nuclear program to a second network of uranium-enrichment centrifuges a negative sign that should be taken to account at UN talks over possible sanctions. French President Jacques Chirac, meanwhile, expressed support for sanctions against Iran, but insisted that they be temporary and reversible.
A semiofficial Iranian news agency reported Friday that Iran has injected gas into a second network and successfully enriched uranium. Enriched uranium can be used in nuclear reactors or nuclear weapons. "This constitutes a new signal that is in our eyes clearly a negative signal. We should take it into account in our evaluation of the dossier," Foreign Ministry spokesman Jean-Baptiste Mattei told a news conference.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/28/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11132 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Mon Dieu ! Nous devons montrer notre engagement à ces entretiens sans fin par l'escalade à une nuance plus puissante de stationnaire !
Redacted by moderator. Comments may be redacted for trolling, violation of standards of good manners, or plain stupidity. Please correct the condition that applies and try again. Contents may be viewed in the sinktrap. Further violations may result in banning.
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice stepped up international pressure on Hizbullah to disarm, saying in a television interview aired Friday that the guerrilla group must surrender its weapons if it wants to remain part of Lebanon's political process. Rice urged Hizbullah to lay down its arms according to the cease-fire that ended its 34-day war with Israel last summer, and choose between being a militant group and a legitimate political organization.
Hizbullah is under heavy international pressure to surrender its weapons, but the Iranian- and Syrian-backed group - which holds 11 seats in the Lebanese parliament and two spots in the Cabinet - has refused to disarm.
"You cannot have one foot in terror and the use of violence and the other foot in politics."
"If Hizbullah wants to be in politics... Hezbollah should be disarmed. You cannot have one foot in terror and the use of violence and the other foot in politics. It just doesn't work that way," Rice said in an interview with the privately-owned Lebanese Broadcasting Corp. "Hizbullah has to decide whether it's going to maintain its terrorist wing and remain a terrorist organization or whether it's going to ... be part the political process," she said.
The interview was taped at Rice's office in Washington, and conducted by May Chidiac, a Lebanese journalist who lost an arm and a leg in car bombing in Lebanon in September 2005. The US government has labeled Hizbullah a terrorist organization and blames it for the deaths of 241 US Marines in the bombing of their Beirut barracks in 1983, as well as for two attacks on the US embassy in Beirut and the 1985 TWA hijacking that killed an American serviceman on board. Hezbollah has repeatedly denied such accusations and says it now opposes terrorism.
Rice also urged the Lebanese government to end what it called Hizbullah's "state within a state" and prevent weapons from reaching the militant group.
"A normal state has an army and police that answer to the state, not to a state within a state."
"I'm counting on Lebanon to live up to its obligations, and I'm counting on Lebanon to want to evolve to a normal state," Rice told the satellite channel. "And a normal state has an army and police that answer to the state, not to a state within a state."
The UN cease-fire resolution that ended the Hizbullah-Israel war on Aug. 14 called for the Lebanese army to deploy alongside international peacekeepers in Hizbullah strongholds across south Lebanon. Some 16,000 Lebanese troops have fanned out across the region, including along the border with Israel, for the first time in decades. The two forces are tasked with establishing a Hizbullah-free buffer zone stretching some 30 kilometers north of the Israeli border.
Rice also warned that as Lebanon tries to rebuild, some people might try to destabilize its Western-backed government. "We've heard that there are people who would like to intimidate or assassinate again," she said, referring to the 2005 assassinations of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and other anti-Syrian politicians. She did not elaborate.
Asked if Syria was trying to destabilize Lebanon following its withdrawal last year, Rice said: "It's not any great secret that there are concerns about what Syria, which once occupied the country, might try and do through continuing contacts in the country. But I don't want accuse any one place. I just want to make very clear that the international community believes there should be no foreign intimidation of the Lebanese people."
Posted by: Fred ||
10/28/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11140 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
But how will they soar with the vultures with only one wing?
#2
Obviously Hezbollah should not disarm as that is precisely the kind of domination in Lebanon that Israel seeks and has sought for decades. (Those being the decades that made Hezbollah a natural response and inevitable reality.)
The state within a state is unique although the criticism of Hezbollah on these grounds is not.
Rice did not elaborate because she was farting. One does not elaborate on a fart. Who could believe Rice would utter any such statement without it being thoroughly contrived!
But wait! Do not I hear a faint reproach in those final comments? And a reproach against a dear and valuable friend no less!
As for Syria, as if it is a threat to Lebanon at the present juncture. As if Lebanon need be wary of Syria! Laughable.
Rice has invaluable contributions to make in her position as Secretary of State. There are still opportunities for her to make some.
#7
The state within a state is unique although the criticism of Hezbollah on these grounds is not.
Bullshit. I call you out, you patently obvious, hypocritical idiot.
The standard definition of a state is that it have a monopoly on force within its borders. Regardless of whether it is called a revolution, insurgency, or invasion, it happens when another military force, with a separate chain of command, exists within the recognized border of a nation. Ya lefties seemed happy enough when skinhead and white power militias within the United States were brought to heel, and YOU would have had a field day if a paramilitary organization freely operated out the united states was attacking mexicans within Mexico as a pre-emptive measure to prevent Illegal Immigration, AND the US Government acted the way the Lebanese government acts with regard to Israel if Mexico (rightly, in such a case) invaded the United States to stop said attacks. EVERY NATION has a right to stop such cross-border attacks by employing cross-border counter-measures when the host nation is unwilling or unable to stop such attacks. Indeed, the host nation IS RESPONSIBLE if it is found to be covertly supporting such attacks in order to establish deniability. Support takes all kinds of forms, and in this case, an implied assertion that an attack on Hezbollah is an attack on Lebanon, while loudly denying that there is an organizational link between Lebanon's government and Hezbollah.
This is wanting your cake and eating it too, and thus it is not surprizing that those who believe that such is possible, and that the world owes them a living and respect, apart from what one does, supports Hezbollah.
Hezbollah, by the day, does not fulfill the Geneva convention conditions for legitimate state-less prisoners of war. Although they have a chain of command, they do not wear a distinctive insignia and boast about deliberately targeting civilians.
Your response to this will obviously determine what I will say next, since I will be able to deduce what passes for your character...
and then the troll goes on for four more paragraphs.....
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/28/2006 11:50 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Ptah, I understand the standard definition of a state as entailing a monopoly on violence. This monopoly on violence, however, does not automatically mean that such a state cannot (by definition) itself use this violence in terroristic ways.
Who could disagree with the right of nations to protect its borders but making that point raises the tricky problem of borders. How are we to discuss borders when it is precisely borders (and the nation laying claim to them or continually expanding them through settlements) that are the point of contention?
So, I see the attempt to insist on a state having a monopoly on violence as being an obvious side-stepping of this actual context (as opposed to offering thought experiments in other parts of the world like the U.S. and Mexico, or skinheads or whatever).
Israel, some years ago, was occupying southern Lebanon. It was using its monopoly on state violence to dominate Lebanon and prevent the Palestinians from resisting the occupation from this locale. Hezbollah, resisted this monopoly on state violence and it seems clear that this resistance contributed to Israel's backing off from its occupation of this territory (although there is still Shebaa Farms, and in Syria, the Golen Heights to be disputed as well as resource issues and disputes specific to this region never mind the West Bank and East Jerusalem).
I'm not wanting it both ways. I'm just recognizing the Hezbollah is already part of the political process in a way far more effective than were it to surrender its guns. I appreciate that Israel might wish to render Hezbollah militarily impotent but its reasons for doing so are not so parochial as to prevent cross "border" raids. This isn't just some security issue. Its about land and resources and future ambitions and aspirations. It's about regime change, apartheid and the "New Middle East".
The Israeli attack on Lebanon is hardly an argument against an organization like Hezbollah. Such organizations served Israel's interests well before it declared itself a state. Indeed, they helped ensure this declaration. Such terrorist organizations eventually came into the fold. Some such leaders came to lead the nation. They become national heroes. Perhaps in time the same will happen in Lebanon but to try and define away a legitimate resistance to Israel's actions in lands outside its "borders" (wherever those are) seems intentionally stacked to favour an outcome against interests not those of Israel. And this is why such organizations come to be in the first place.
And this is why Rice is farting in the wind. Politics and terror are not opposing ends of a continuum. They are different aspects of the same process. Both are politics. Israel, the U.S., Hezbollah etc., all understand this. Why are we pretending we don't? Israel and the U.S. have both nakedly used terrorism to further political, economic agendas. So is Hezbollah. Hezbollah's ambitions are far more circumspect and far less damaging than those (as just evidenced) of Israel. Why are they being asked to disarm on the basis of not being Lebanon's sole source of military might, when Israel's use of its monopoly on violence is far more horrific and terroristic than anything Hezbollah has chosen to exercise?
#11
If the Lebanese had any integrity or sovereignty, they wouldn't have allowed foreigners (PLO, Syria, Iran, anyone else who wants to) to exist as an occupying force. The fact that they don't resist indicates they aren't worth listening to when crying over Israeli intervention to stop attacks from across the border. Your lame version of history is a lie. The fact that you persist in the lie makes you an unworthy debater. Buh-bye. Thanks for playing
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/28/2006 12:06 Comments ||
Top||
#12
How are we to discuss borders when it is precisely borders (and the nation laying claim to them or continually expanding them through settlements) that are the point of contention?
You conveniently forget the context within which Israel occupied part of Lebanon: continued attacks on Israel that were based there. If you are keen on legalities, then acknowledge as well the UN resolutions that Lebanon accepted but never fulfilled.
And -- your argument would be a bit more persuasive if you didn't resort to childish playground taunts about farting.
#13
Funny, the amp meter's pegged at zero, yet there's this steady clackity-clack staccato. Mebbe Sparky just likes typing victimology myths, peddling lame notions of heroic resistance -- or mebbe it just likes the sound.
With such a nym, either he thinks he's smarter than everyone else, or he thinks he's going to be an electrical engineer. Hopefully the former -- if the latter some people are going to be in serious danger in a few years. Whereas if he just thinks he's smarter... well, the realization will only be privately painful, and is a normal part of the process of becoming an adult.
For HighVoltage: Nations at peace do not allow their residents, whether citizen or alien, to attack across their borders. Nations that do so allow, are either de facto or de jure at war, and when war comes back at them, they have no business complaining.
To put in simpler and more personal terms: when you tell the hockey forward, the one with only two teeth, that he's ugly, and he punches you in the nose, kicks you in the knee, and checks you into the nearby tree with the branch stub precisely at groin level, how surprised are you going to be, really? And then, when the case comes before the judge (you are going to sue him for overreacting, right?), it turns out that you were the one who loosened the screws on the blade of his hockey skate, causing it to fall off just as he took the slap shot that would have sent the team to the Stanley Cup instead of the doghouse, not to mention breaking his arm so badly he may never play anything again... well you see my point.
It was the United Nations that originally established Israel's borders. It was the UN once again that determined that Israel had indeed withdrawn completely from Lebanon in 199-whatever, the Shebaa Farms being Syrian territory. The Arab countries, including Lebanon, refused to accept the situation and went to war openly four times (1948, 1956, 1967, 1973) and less openly thrice (the Lebanon situation, and the Palestinian Intifadas I and II), losing each time. World custom since the time homo sapians began to wage war is that when a country starts a war and loses, its borders are rearranged (think of Germany after WWI and WWII, Canada which once upon a time owned Maine, Mexico...). That the Arabs refuse to accept this is why they keep starting wars and losing.
I am not at all hopeful that this information will open your eyes. Actual facts rarely impact minds such as yours. Only please do the world a favour and stick to philosophical endeavors, rather than those that might actually result in harm to others should your philosphy about red and green wires intersect with things that go boom.
#20
Politics and terror are not opposing ends of a continuum. They are different aspects of the same process
Asshats can't make a salient argument for more than 5 seconds without trotting out their latest version of moral equivalency. Of course they wrap it up in a shiny new package, but the contents still smell like sh*t.
There is good in the world and there is evil. Politics and Terror are not parts of the same process. Politics, since it's inception, however imperfectly realized, is about the betterment of man. Terror is all about the most base of human instincts--- murder, hatred, pride, ignorance and yes, evil. What do they do when trolls are born....gouge their eyes out?
#22
I hope AC drops by, since I consider him the Master of All Things Media, and puts the dog down regards equivalency.
I know we need facts upon which to operate, but publishing or placing the symp and terr view alongside the true analyst, one who lives with fact as it is found, sans spin and cherry-picking, elevates the unthinkable to thinkable for those who are too lazy to apply that critical thinking thingy that lotp notes is Very Important Stuff in another thread. Amen.
This is the negative side of our communications revolution. UNcritical thought rules - and the goobers get equal treatment, thus elevating their spew to the same level as intelligent analysis.
Okay, I'm done. Just wanted to muddy the water point that out. Heh.
#23
This blame Islam attitude is really getting old and a bit sophomoric. Islam was just the simple tool used to incite a culture to action. None of this is new; we have lived through it before. You can template WWII to this war and it is very similar.
Hitler rallied the Germans, forever high jacking the Aryan culture. Now the term Aryan is vilified and anyone who speaks of an association with it is considered a racist. Islam is headed down the same road. They are forever, right or wrong, associated with terrorism. They will have to live that down in world history, a sad fact, as Im sure there are many who believe in Islam that are against the war. Not unlike the Germans who were opposed to the war but too afraid to resist openly.
We called the Blitzkrieg and wolf packs terrorists and horrific. Rising up from the murky depths to sink unsuspecting ship and then disappearing into the night. And racing across Europe killing all in their paths. The terrorists used airplanes as missiles to bomb the US. I do believe we tried it three times in WWII to bomb Berlin. Roadside bombs with ambushes are also nothing new. AQ is extremely profesicient at it but again, no a new ambush tactic. The Germans performed horrific experiments against non-humans and exterminated 6 million Jews. Now the radical Islamists are trying to kill all the infidels or non humans, nothing new to recent history again except they are not very successful as of yet. The point here is we are not facing anything new in tactics or ideology in this war.
Saddam was nothing more than the lunatic Mussolini was. A nutcase loudmouth with no real ability to back his radical actions. We took him and his armies in hours. Nevertheless, like taking Mussolini, we did not take the real threat, and we are fighting it there in Iraq today. Like the war in Europe, we are using Iraq as the battleground and not the US, thank god for that. The Saudis are remarkably like the French. Just trying to survive and giving way to whoever has the power. They will prove to be pitiful like the French, white flag joke inserted here.
Which leaves me to Israel and Iran. Unless Israel is at risk of falling, we will not get a total war mentality. Like England in WWII, we will get intense when Israel is close to falling. Our real enemy here is not Islam, although I believe it has been derailed to the point of being unrecoverable, like the Aryan race. The real enemy here is Iran. The leadership there has fueled the hate, funded the actions, and provided the leadership required to see this war move forward, and planning the next phases. They are moving toward total war. They are developing the bomb, exporting training and hate across the world, manipulating the Islamic sheep into action against the West, not unlike the Nazis manipulating hate for the Jews.
There is nothing really new in this war except that we still cannot decide who our enemy is. We must go to basics. Tactically we must keep the fight over there, fighting AQ in Iraq, Hezbollah and Hamas in Lebanon and Gaza, and the media and ignorant in the West. We have to keep our operational center of gravity at establishing a civilized Iraq and Afghanistan. Strategically we have to go after Iran. When we do this this war will wind down. The funding, training, equipment, and support for the fighting will dry up.
My personal cut on all this is until Israel is at risk or has fallen we will continue the way we are, muddling through. I am also very afraid when Israel falls it will be nuclear and so will our response. Sorry Fred for the long rant, I just had to get it out once.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
10/28/2006 18:35 Comments ||
Top||
#24
Ptah, I understand the standard definition of a state as entailing a monopoly on violence. This monopoly on violence, however, does not automatically mean that such a state cannot (by definition) itself use this violence in terroristic ways.
Ah, the "Try and redefine accepted terms so that we can make the morally unequal equivalent" trick. Jeez, that is so easy to see that one wonders why libs still try to do it.
For your education: The standard term is "monopoly of force", not "monopoloy of violence". "Violence" has negative connotations that "force" does not. YOU CHOSE IT, knowing that negative connotation, and that choice is significant. A perusal of the rest of your post confirmed that you're using the definition to argue that accepted sovereign nations who adhere to domestic laws and international treaties are equivalent, at base, to terrorists, who reject any limits or constraints on their freedom to act any way they please for religious or "freedom fighting" reasons. A strange time to abandon the marxo-liberal belief that religion is the opiate of the people, eh?
An argument that flows from an attempt to confound "legitimate force" with "terrorist violence" by changing a definition succeeds only when both sides accept the changed definition. I do not, so the argument fails.
There IS a difference between having a policy that explicitly targets civilians (terrorism) and a policy that targets terrorists that only incidentally harms civilians. This distinction is embodied in the Geneva Conventions. IT IS FORBIDDEN for armies to situate themselves within a population in such a way that a legitimate attack on that army would inevitably cause civilian casualties (using human shields). International Law is clear on this: there is no free lunch. The attacking army is free to decide whether to attack or forbear, subject to the restriction that the force not be in gross excess of what is necessary to eliminate the MILITARY threat. All civilian casualties are then accounted to the illegally positioned defender. This was the debate surrounding the response of the Israelis during the most recent conflict, mainly because it was a way to deflect attention from the fact that Hezbollah did indeed situate themselves illegally. The fact that there would have been NO civilian casualties if Hezbollah had situated themselves away from the population centers, in accordance to the GCs, was conveniently ignored. As YOU conveniently ignore. Of course, if they had, they'd have been paste, which leads to the obvious conclusion that that was an outcome that would have been unacceptable to you.
I should point out that this sort of behavior is PART of a larger psychic cycle: the terrorists ARE COUNTING ON PEOPLE LIKE YOU TO COMMENT LIKE THAT IN VENUES LIKE THIS. They CANNOT win conventionally, which is WHY they indulge in terrorist tactics. They accept that their enemies will condemn the use of such tactics, but it gives them heart that YOU, and NGOs that should know better, AND other nations, AND the United Nations, choose to look the other way, make mountains out of molehills, move the goal posts in such a way that what was accepted in the past is suddenly, without warning, unacceptable today.
This fabricated outrage is then voiced, in the hopes that Israel and the USA actually ACT as democracies, responsive to pressure THAT TERRORISTS DO NOT HEED. The very fact that Israel STOPPED, is inherent proof that it is NOT of the same sort as Hezbollah. Thus is fulfilled the words of Abraham Lincoln, who observed that democracies either live through all time or die by suicide: terrorists only hope to overcome a democracy is to get aid from within that democracy.
You, the UN, and NGOs that should know better, are the instrumental equivalent of the FLEA that is essential in the life cycle of the Black plague to jump from rat to human. Y'all are the MOSQUITO that is essential in the life cycle of Malaria, to enable it to infect humans. Hey, is THAT why NGOs oppose DDT? Solidarity with a soul-brother?
#29
Point of information: Nobody likes Vogon poetry, not even the Vogons. On the other hand, I like .com's charming bit of doggerel. And, as it happens, I'm qualified to judge.
#30
Islam was just the simple tool used to incite a culture to action.
Simple tools for simple minds?
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
10/28/2006 22:07 Comments ||
Top||
#31
Ptah, geez thanks for offering an interpretation of my argument. I find it interesting that you interpreted my use of "monopoly of violence" as being a tactic rather than just the way I happened to phrase it and view it. I'm not trying to hide anything. I'm flat out stating that Israel's actions deliberately kill innocent civilians. They know - with certainty - that an onslaught on Lebanon as just occurred will kill innocent civilians. This position means that Israel violates the Geneva Conventions as sure as anyone else who so acts. (This, of course, outside of the fact that the sovereign nations of note have records of not adhering to domestic law nor to international treaties.)
In terms of the distinction you credit me for putting to use in my argument - "legitimate force" vs. "terrorist violence" - following the logic of that above, I'm stating that Israel and Hezbollah both employ legitimate violence and terrorist violence. (Also, an argument does not fail based on whether you accept the terms or not. It just means we can't agree to discuss the topic. Given specific terms either an argument is sound or unsound.)
While I appreciate your discusion of how Hezbollah situated itself, I've read at least one article discussing the opposite (Israelis soldiers situating themselves in populated areas.). Actually, the real responsiblity in terms of bombing population centers lays with Israel when it was Israel that did the bombing. Israel bombed population centers, knowing this would kill many innocent civilians. It bombed targets over the entire country, killing over one thousand. But why? YOU are talking about the rules and definitions of engagement. I am talking about what Israel did to Lebanon for NO GOOD JUSTIFIABLE REASON. Naked, brutal, violence and the right to resist it.
But then you get even more bizarre. You once again construct your own argument and then attribute it to me by ironically, unblushingly, invoking International Law, discussing how Hezbollah ought to stand in the open so Israelis can kill them quick and easy, and then suggest that had they done so this is precisely what would have happened to them. So I guess from the perspective of battle, any organization that did that would be suicidal and stupid beyond belief. It stands then that Hezbollah did what was right and necessary from a military tactics perspective. All this mind you and rejecting your claim that Hezbollah spent its time hiding behind families rather than offering a far stronger military proponent a taste of the violence it so often inflicts upon the surrounding peoples.
When we reach the point where you use a lot of capital letters I sense a hint of paranoia but who knows. I'm not sure how much terrorists are counting on me to advance their devious tactics by my offering a comment at Rantburg.com. But then, back to the logic of military action: "... they CANNOT win conventionally, which is WHY they indulge in terrorist tactics" .... well then isn't terrorism a rational response? Or are you arguing that if you can't win conventionally you oughtn't develop alternatives? This based on what? Definitions or laws or rules of engagement duly codified to ensure that a weaker resistance force is crushed by a stronger force without the latter having to pay a military, political and/or economic cost?
I sense that your argument - where you've taken the topic - focuses too narrowly on moral equivalence (which to me is a "no brainer") and Hezbollah's tactics for winning (again, given your arguments the rational thing for Hezbollah to do is what it did.). Each side is morally culpable for the innoncent citizens that their bombs, bullets or economic policies cause to die, be wounded, starve to death etc.. Israel doesn't get a "free lunch" Ptah when it comes to killing innocent civilians.
Who would have thought that little old me, NGO's and the U.N. "choose to look the other way, make mountains out of molehills, move the goal posts in such a way that what was accepted in the past is suddenly, without warning, unacceptable today." Not sure exactly where you're going here but I hope you're not longing for the good old days of some kind or another.
Final paragraphs:
Actually, I think you're just losing focus at the end.
One could have fun with it I guess for e.g.,:
-"The very fact that Israel STOPPED, is inherent proof that it is NOT of the same sort as Hezbollah."
Really! Inherent proof you say. What exactly do you believe Israel has stopped? Nothing has stopped. It is still full guns and blazing. Tragically.
-"Thus is fulfilled the words of Abraham Lincoln, who observed that democracies either live through all time or die by suicide: terrorists only hope to overcome a democracy is to get aid from within that democracy."
The implication is that people like me are those aids (what an inflammatory Military Commissions Act way of putting things don't you think?). What it seems clear Lincoln was driving at, however, was that when a democracy begins to reject or overturn its sacred principles and rules such acts are like self inflicted wounds against the nations long term viability. The democracy destroys itself not others destroy the democracy. So it isn't terrorists that are the primary concern when it comes to a democracy. It is the people of the democracy. They aid a democracies death when they do nothing to keep democratic principles alive.
#33
So Mr. High Voltage believes it's acceptable for Hizb'allah to defend itself across the border into Israel, but not acceptable for Israel to do the same. In other words, it's the duty of the Jews to commit suicide to suit his compunctions. What a lovely man he is, to be sure.
#34
Or he thinks it's ok for a terrorist group to kidnap an "occupier" on Israel's internationally recognized land, but not for Israel to retaliate for that act of war.
Shiite militia Hezbollah yesterday said it will join talks on a national unity government proposed by Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, adding that it hoped the initiative would break the impasse in Lebanon. Hezbollah welcomes the initiative launched by speaker Berri and announces its intention to take part in the envisaged meeting, the movement said in a statement. Berri called on Wednesday for fresh talks across Lebanons sectarian divide to form a national unity government and drag the country out of a crippling political stalemate.
He suggested that the talks, which would resume roundtable discussions held earlier this year, begin on Monday and last for a maximum of 15 days, in the hope of agreeing a new government and reforming the countrys electoral law. Those two issues are key demands of Hezbollah, which fought a summer war with Israel, and its Christian and pro-Syrian allies.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/28/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11128 views]
Top|| File under:
The U.S. Department of Defense is now taking its requests for corrections public through a website known as For the Record. Here, the Department of Defense is openly calling for corrections from major media outlets, and even noting when they refuse to publish letters to the editor.
The most recent was this past Tuesday, when the DOD published a letter, that the New York Times refused to run, which contained quotes from five generals (former CENTCOM commander Tommy Franks, current CENTCOM commander John Abizaid, MNF Commander George Casey, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Richard Myers, as well as his successor, Peter Pace) that rebutted a New York Times editorial. This has been picked up by a number of bloggers who have been able to spread the Pentagon's rebuttal and the efforts of the New York Times to sweep it under the rug across the country.
The Defense Department has been dealing with a number of misleading stories. From Newsweek's misreporting of a Koran-flushing incident (caused by a detainee, not guards as reported by Newsweek), to claims of prisoner mistreatment (often without context, including one instance where a detainee spat on an interrogator), to a massive rewriting of an embedded reporter's report on the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment's efforts in Tal Afar, by editors of Time magazine, to the revelations about NSA efforts, the DOD has been barraged by numerous stories, many of which were followed by angry editorials.
The DOD is pushing back, not only putting out requests to correct the record (with the refusals published as well), but also citing stories of heroes that the media has failed to cover usually two or three a week. Among these are accounts of those who have been awarded medals for battlefield bravery, like Navy Cross recipients Robert J. Mitchell Jr. and Bradley A. Kasal, as well as Silver Star recipients Juan M. Rubio, Sarun Sar, Jeremy Church, and Leigh Ann Hester. The DOD has also followed CENTCOM's lead in running pieces on what terrorists actually say another item largely ignored by the mainstream media.
The Department of Defense is acting in an effort to avoid a repeat of the aftermath of the 1968 Tet Offensive. On the battlefield, American and South Vietnamese forces won a victory effectively destroying the Viet Cong and crippling North Vietnamese forces in South Vietnam. However, media misreporting, including Walter Cronkite's famous mischaracterization of the war as a "stalemate", took away the victory that had been won on the battlefield. Such a scenario is less likely now, largely due to the presence of the internet (including blogs), talk radio, and other news networks and the Department of Defense is taking advantage of alternative ways to get around the mainstream media.
#2
It's a great idea, but I'm wondering if it's not 4 years or so too late. One of my biggest gripes against GWB & Co. was their utter failure to realize that the Islamofascists would eventually find willing allies in our mass media, and would use the MSM as a force multiplier.
In the days immediately following 9/11, I was surprised to see all segments of the media behaving as if they were solidly on our side, but even then (while the WTC rubble was still smoldering) I knew that it wouldn't last. I told my wife, "give them six months and they'll be in full fifth-column mode". In fact it took more like six weeks...by the end of October, the media were beginning to burble and coo approvingly about "the resurgent peace movement" and its opposition to ANY military response to 9/11.
I've spent the last five years in a state of mystification re the Administration's interactions with the media. For example...why, Why, WHY wasn't a modern Office of War Information started up by the end of '01? I'm not asking for "management" or censorship of the MSM, but the Administration should have realized that they'd need alternate means of getting their message out sans the MSM partisan rinse cycle. The blogosphere helps, sure...but where are the war-bond tours, or the feature films about Brad Kasal's or Leigh Ann Hester's exploits? "Hollyweird won't make a pro-war movie about the GWOT", you say? Maybe not...but maybe they would if they knew they'd get tax credits against the production costs, or maybe outright grants from the OWI.
Posted by: Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) ||
10/28/2006 18:38 Comments ||
Top||
#3
It's a great idea, but I'm wondering if it's not 4 years or so too late.
If I had known just how complicit the MSM would be with repsect to terrorist interests, I'd have demanded that this sort of effort be an intrinsic part of the War on Terrorism from the get go.
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.
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - South Korean military officials have observed activities at the North's suspected nuclear test site that may be preparations for a second test, news reports said Saturday. Yonhap news agency, citing several unidentified military officials, said Seoul is keeping a close watch on the movements of trucks and soldiers at the Punggye-ri site in the country's remote northeast.
Australia's top Muslim cleric defied mounting pressure to step down for comments comparing women without head scarves to "uncovered meat," and suggested Friday that President Bush was more deserving of criticism for the bloodshed in Iraq.
(Bloomberg) -- German Defense Minister Franz Josef Jung today ordered the suspension of two soldiers who posed for photos with a human skull during a 2003 mission with ISAF peace- keepers in Afghanistan. The pictures were published this week. Snapshots of German soldiers holding human remains appeared in the Bild Zeitung newspaper on Oct. 25, prompting the army to launch an investigation to find the culprits. Further photographs depicting soldiers from other units stationed in Afghanistan were published by RTL television yesterday. Tampering with human remains is a punishable offence in Germany 
I haven't seen a link to Canada's new series of recruitment videos that were released on 10/6/06, so here it is. The "Fight" ads started running on TV about the same time the US Army changed to the "Army Strong" campaign, and they have a somewhat similar (IMHO, better) look and feel.
The former head of Britains foreign spy service says hes puzzled Canada doesnt have one of its own. Sir Richard Dearlove said today he finds it surprising Canada lacks a proper foreign intelligence service, and has resisted creating one. Dearlove says Canada could make an important contribution to its own national security interests as well as its major allies. 
Iraq's prime minister and the U.S. ambassador declared common goals on Friday after days of public wrangling that raised new questions about Iraq policy before next month's U.S. congressional elections. In a joint statement after a meeting with U.S. envoy Zalmay Khalilzad, Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki said his government had "timelines" for political developments, employing the word at the heart of the debate.
West Bank Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said he will dissolve the Hamas-led government within two weeks if the Islamic militant group does not agree to form a governing coalition with his Fatah Party, Palestinian officials said. Abbas told the European Union's top diplomat that he would replace the Cabinet with an apolitical panel of professionals, the officials said Friday. 
The head of the Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency on Friday hailed what he described as epochal progress toward putting a high-energy laser aboard a modified Boeing Co. 747 to zap ballistic missiles that could be fired by North Korea and Iran.
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice stepped up international pressure on Hizbullah to disarm, saying in a television interview aired Friday that the guerrilla group must surrender its weapons if it wants to remain part of Lebanon's political process. Rice urged Hizbullah to lay down its arms according to the cease-fire that ended its 34-day war with Israel last summer, and choose between being a militant group and a legitimate political organization. 
Shiite militia Hezbollah yesterday said it will join talks on a national unity government proposed by Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri, adding that it hoped the initiative would break the impasse in Lebanon. Hezbollah welcomes the initiative launched by speaker Berri and announces its intention to take part in the envisaged meeting, the movement said in a statement. Berri called on Wednesday for fresh talks across Lebanons sectarian divide to form a national unity government and drag the country out of a crippling political stalemate. 
