#3
Present-day pop culture would have you believe that Hugh Hefner, Liz Taylor, and the Beatles invented sex in about 1965, with hippies joining in to perfect the marketing methodology.
I am pleased to see Rantburg upholding the primacy of our predecessors in that respect.
KABUL, Jan 22: Afghan President Hamid Karzai and India's foreign minister opened a new road on Thursday that would help link Afghanistan with a port in Iran and challenge Pakistani dominance of trade routes into the landlocked country. The 220-km road in the southwest Afghan province of Nimroz is the centrepiece of a $1.1 billion Indian reconstruction effort in Afghanistan. It has drawn criticism from Pakistan, worried about New Delhi's growing influence in the region.
India hopes to be able to deliver goods to Afghanistan through the Iranian port of Chahbahar, and this has triggered fears in Pakistan that it is being encircled.
Everything triggers those fears ...
"This project symbolises India's strong commitment towards development of Afghanistan," said Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee.
"It also symbolises the strong determination of the government and people of these two countries that they will not succumb to the pressure of the forces of terror," added Mr Mukherjee, who said he had discussed intelligence-sharing with his Afghan counterpart Rangeen Dadfar Spanta.
Heh-heh.
Eleven Indian workers and 126 Afghan police and soldiers, who were providing security for the road, were killed during its construction, said Mr Mukherjee. "In fact, for the construction of (every) 1.5km of road, one human life was sacrificed."
The road, which cost $150 million and was entirely funded by India, runs from Delaram in Nimroz to Zaranj on the Iranian border, which connects to the Iranian port of Chahbahar. It opens up an alternate route into Afghanistan, which now relies mostly on goods transported overland from ports in Pakistan.
We can't use it, of course, but the mere fact the road is there puts pressure on the Paks.
#2
The road is prob a good thing for INDIA given the sorry state of its SUBMARINE FORCE - EVEN IFF RUSSIA DID GIVE INDIA AKULAS, the bulk of India's naval subs will have to be either retired or scrapped by the time any AKULAS come around.
Also, PAKISTANI DEFENCE FORUM/OTHER > THERE MAY BE NO CARRIER FOR INDIA'S CARRIER AVIATION PLANES [to operate from]???
Afghan and international forces claimed to have killed around 30 militants in Afghanistan, 22 of them in NATO airstrikes after a patrol was attacked near the Pakistan border.
A 'large number of insurgents' attacked a NATO patrol in eastern Khost province on Wednesday, the alliance's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) said in a statement. "The ISAF patrol fired back in response and called in attack helicopters and close air support," it said. "ISAF service members from a nearby operating base assessed the scene, confirming a total of 22 insurgents killed in the remote area."
An ISAF official told AFP the attack had taken place in the province's Bak district. The Afghan Defence Ministry said separately that police posts in neighbouring Tere Zayi district had come under attack on Wednesday, sparking heavy fighting that lasted until Thursday morning. "Eight enemies were killed and another two wounded were left on the battlefield," it said. It was not immediately clear if the ISAF and the Afghan ministry were referring to the same incident. The US-led coalition said separately that its forces had killed six Taliban in an operation in the southern province of Zabul. "Coalition forces killed six armed Taliban militants and detained one suspected militant during an operation to disrupt the Taliban's foreign fighter and roadside bomb network in Zabul province," it said in a statement.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/23/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under: Taliban
President Barack Obama yesterday signed three landmark executive orders mandating the closure of the Guantanamo Bay prison, shutting down all CIA prisons and banning the use of torture. The orders signaled a sharp reversal of the controversial Bush administration "war on terror" policies launched in the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks.
Signing the Guantanamo order which also halted any further military hearings of the inmates, Obama said he was setting in place a process by which the camp "will be closed no later than one year from now."
I see dead people ...
But many of the prisoners could find themselves released a lot sooner, as the order establishes a process to review their cases "with the goal of disposing of the detainees before closing the facility."
"The order sets up an immediate review to determine whether it is possible to transfer detainees to third countries, consistent with national security," a White House summary said. "If transfer is not approved, a second review will determine whether prosecution is possible and in what forum."
If any of the remaining inmates, about 245 according to the Pentagon, cannot be transferred or prosecuted, then the review coordinated by the attorney general and the defense secretary will look at lawful ways of dealing with them.
Gitmo was lawful.
Obama also ordered that those remaining in the prison in southern Cuba, which was opened in January 2002, will from now on be treated under the terms of the Geneva Conventions.
Bad move: they don't qualify for protection under the Geneva protocols. It's a bad precedent.
In a separate order he shuttered all CIA prisons operating abroad which were used for the secret renditions of "war on terror" suspects via third countries to Guantanamo Bay. The order "states that the CIA shall close as expeditiously as possible any detention facility that it currently operates and shall not operate any such detention facility in the future," a senior administration official told reporters.
And Obama commanded that all US agencies were to provide access to detainees to the International Committee of the Red Cross.
In prohibiting torture, Obama ruled that no advice on interrogations issued between September 11, 2001 and Tuesday's inauguration by the Department of Justice or any other legal body remained relevant. A new task force will also be set up to examine the details of the interrogation guidelines set out in the Army Field Manual to decide whether new rules need to be issued for the CIA.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/23/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"B.O. shutspretends he's going to shut down Guantanamo"
There - fixed. No charge.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
01/23/2009 0:11 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Per Obama, you now have more rights if you violate the laws of war (don't wear uniforms, don't carry weapons openly and intentionally put civilian lives at risk) than you do if you do obey the laws of war.
#5
This is typical liberal leftist delusional thinking. These gitmo jihadis are psychopaths, brought up from an early age to hate everything about western civilization. You can be as kind, thoughtful, and caring to them, but to their eyes, you are an infidel, and you should be killed or subjugated.
I am afraid that we will be ruled again by pre 9-11 mindsets, who will expose us to terrorist attacks again. This time, with more loss of life.
Or we will be steadily be softened up and infiltrated, and destroyed from within, like the wasp who lays an egg inside the body of its victim, where it larva devours the paralyzed host.
I hate to be morbid, but that is the way I see it.
#6
We'll be fine. Move the Guantanamites to Malibu or Marin. Let them dine on Lefties for a little while. The lefties will get mad and declare unholy war on them and likely commit the genocide they've been whining about for 7 years. Only the lefties can pull it off - they're much more vicious than those of us on the right.
#7
Way to shred the Geneva Conventions, dipshit. mhw has it exactly right. I could bitch-slap this man-child for his reckless naivete, and tongue-lash his predecessor for his refusal to confront the b.s. and call the bluff of the ICRC and Geneva signatories by calling for a new convention.
And remember - the only people pointing out the obvious effing truth about this issue are on these unread comment boards. Congress? Not a peep. Academia? Right. The meticulously negotiated and constructed Geneva framework is trashed by its guardians (ICRC) and the children temporarily in charge of the US, and no adults even bother to speak up.
#8
Lovely to see taking care of his GITMO detainee colleagues was literally the first action undertaken by B.O. No further questions regarding presidential priorities your honor.
#11
I don't think this matters, for several reasons.
1) Gitmo was a "Potemkin village", designed to attract attention away from other field prisons. It worked great in that capacity. Most of its high value detainees had already been drained of useful information and are destined for Florence, Colorado (The ADX). The rest are just window dressing, and can be let go.
2) The other CIA field prisons have likely finished their job, and their detainees are either dead or given over to countries that will have no problem disposing of them. Closing them own just means they can be sterilized and have the buildings demolished.
3) I'm still convinced that waterboarding was just a tactical ploy, used because it was a cheap and quick way to get tactical information within 48 hours of capture. Philippine Insurrection technology, literally.
4) Anyone held longer than that would be given drugs, to give us long and detailed information. Twilight anesthetics make most people so chatty about secret stuff that doctors get embarrassed by them. Hardly what I would call torture, though.
I'm actually ticked off that the CIA didn't set up any mass drug induced brainwashing facilities to reprogram Jihadis to kill other Jihadis. They could have busted up this whole al-Qaeda crap in record time by doing that.
#13
Moose, I'd like to think you're right. I'd like to think the detainees have been wrung dry of useful intel over the years.
Problem is, we still need somewhere to park them, and I really don't want them on US soil. Gitmo was great for this. Sure, we can park them in an Iraqi or Afghani prison but it isn't as good a solution.
Posted by: Steve White ||
01/23/2009 9:39 Comments ||
Top||
#14
Had a heated discussion with a lib-colleague and I asked him to show me any country in the history of the world that has put on trial those who were captured on the battle field.....dead silence.
#15
Gitmo was chosen because technically its not US territory. SCOTUS Justice Kennedy decided that the US Constitution applies across all other sovereignties which eliminates the rationale for Gitmo [but as with so many things in life, opens up a whole new can of worms which SCOTUS will have to create an entire new wing in law libraries to address the consequences of]. This is in addition to the new stack in the libraries that will have to address the issues about how the Geneva Convention must comply with civil legal concepts of due process, never here to fore thought applicable by any of the drafters or signers of said Convention. Remember there are no principles in law, only more case law to be created to fill an ever expanding gray area of exception.
#16
Hasn't Murtha offered to take them in his district. If I had to live in Johnstown or Uniontown I would probably give up OBL's heroin stash just to be considered for rendition to Somalia.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
01/23/2009 10:29 Comments ||
Top||
#17
"with the goal of disposing of the detainees
I can see a contract for Haliburton Waste Disposal Services in the future.
#21
I think Gitmo has outlived its usefulness. If there is another, secret site set up to interrogate prisoners... great. If Bambi brings them into the US court system... we are fucked.
#22
In prohibiting torture, Obama ruled that no advice on interrogations issued between September 11, 2001 and Tuesday's inauguration by the Department of Justice or any other legal body remained relevant. A new task force will also be set up to examine the details of the interrogation guidelines set out in the Army Field Manual to decide whether new rules need to be issued for the CIA.
BO's stepping on Congress' toes here. The Constitution is very clear - CONGRESS defines the rules and regulations that govern the Armed Forces, not the President.
I truly believe the Obama presidency is going to be one long, drawn-out lesson on the Constitution of the United States. This spate of early executive orders, and their foolishness, is strike one against the Obama presidency.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
01/23/2009 11:19 Comments ||
Top||
#23
O.P.
Unfortunately I think it may turn out to be one long drawn out redefintion of the constitution and its interpretation. We already have congresscritters acting as they are empowered to negotiate with foreign powers (Queen Nancy) and getting away with it.
As for the detainees - I say release them..... in the middle of the Atlantic.
And Obama commanded that all US agencies were to provide access to detainees to the International Committee of the Red Cross.
#24
I don't believe a word of it. The fun will start when we talk about returning these psychopaths to their country of origin. Then 2 things will happen:
The "civilized counties" will complain that they don't want em back.
Prisoners from Muslim counties will complain they'll be tortured if they're returned.
The result will be that we'll still be stuck with them. Probably in Guantanamo. However Barak will be able to say "Hey, we tried."
Posted by: Frozen Al ||
01/23/2009 11:57 Comments ||
Top||
#25
Can't see what the problem is. If I were a Muslim, I would close Guantanamo down as my first act of the presidency.
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Now, here's audio sound bites. This is Obama. He has to ask Greg Craig, the White House counsel, for help here, signing the closing of Gitmo executive order.
OBAMA: (chiseling in marble sound effect) In order to effect the appropriate disposition of individuals currently detained by the Department of Defense at Guantanamo, uh, and promptly to close the detention facility at Guantanamo consistent with the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States and interests of justice, I hereby order. And we then we will then, uh, provide the process whereby Guantanamo will be closed no later than, uh, one year from now. We will be... Uhhh.... Ummm.... Is there a separate executive order, Greg, with respect to how we're going to dispose of the detainees? Is that it, eh, uh, what we're doing?
CRAIG: We'll set up a process!
OBAMA: We will be, uh, setting up a process whereby this is going to be taking place.
RUSH: By the way, we are etching his words. We're chiseling his words in marble, since that's how CNN has portrayed the articulate pronouncements of President Obama. "By the way, Greg, what are we doing here? Separate executive order with respect to how we're going to dispose of the detainees. Is that what we're doing?" "We will set up a process! We'll set up a process. I'm sorry. I've also been asked not to be so critical 'til Obama really messes up. I know he just messed up, but I don't think some of the dingleberries in this country quite understand how he screwed up yet, and if I didn't tell 'em, they won't know. We're going to set up a process? Can I translate that? How would you translate that, "We're going to set up a process for dealing with the people that are there now"? (interruption) That's exactly right: We don't have a clue what we're doing. This is the "we don't have a clue" executive order. We don't have a plan. We don't have a plan. We're going to take care of the plan during the next year. Political.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Here's one more audio sound bite from Obama. Now, this is just this morning at the White House in the Oval Orifice, and Obama here is on the task force that they're gonna use process to create to deal with the detainees that are going to end up being released from Guantanamo Bay. And once again, Greg Craig, the White House counsel, has to explain it to Obama in the midst of Obama's announcement here. Greg Craig, as you know, sometimes we don't know who he works for. Sometimes it's the American government; sometimes it's the Cuban government. I mean, he did represent the father (this means Castro) of the young Elian Gonzalez, who Janet Reno eventually saw to it was dispatched back to the slums and the authoritarian tyranny of Cuba. Here is Obama announcing what they're going to do with the detainees.
OBAMA: (chiseling in marble sound effect) What we're doing here is to set up a special interagency task force on detainee disposition. They are going to provide me with information in terms of how we are able to deal in the disposition of some of the detainees that may be currently in Guantanamo that we cannot transfer to other countries, who could pose a serious danger to the United States, uh, but, uh, we cannot try because of various problems related to evidence, uh, in a Article 3 court. So this task force is going to provide us with, uh, a series of recommendations on, uh, that. Is that correct, Greg?
CRAIG: That's right. And detainee policy going forward.
OBAMA: And detainee policy going forward so that we don't find ourselves in these kinds of situations, uh, in the future.
CRAIG: And there is clear guidance for the military as well.
OBAMA: And that we are providing clear guidance to our military in terms of having to do with it.
RUSH: Unbelievable here! What am I supposed to do? Am I supposed to marvel at this? Am I supposed to sit here and marvel at how this new teamwork is taking place, about how the president is incorporating all these people? It sounds to me like... You know, folks, this is not much evidence to go on, but I'm sure we could find the audio sound bites of me in the past saying, "You know, there's a part of me when I said I was conflicted about Obama, I'm not sure what's going on. Does he just want to be president with everybody else doing all the work and he gets to just be the figurehead and play the big games?" I don't recall. Honestly, I don't recall. I'm not saying it hasn't happened. But somebody help me out here. Have we ever seen a president announce an executive order and have to turn to his counsel to explain what the hell the executive order is?
'Cause it's his order! He's the president. It's his executive order, but then is it his executive order? "Is that correct, Greg? This task force is going to provide us with a series of recommendations? Is that correct, Greg?" "And detainee policy going forward," and then Obama repeats it, "and detainee policy going forward so that we don't find ourselves in these kinds of situations in the future." Then Craig interrupts without even being asked, "and there is clear guidance for the military as well." And Obama says, "and we're providing clear guidance for our military in terms of how to deal with this." What am I supposed to do? They shoulda just put it on the prompter. They absolutely shoulda just put it on the teleprompter, but then the press would report there was a teleprompter. It's his executive order. And with Greg Craig in there... Remember, Greg Craig also as he needed as Bill Clinton's lead attorney during the impeachment proceedings.
That was after he represented Castro and the father of Elian Gonzalez. Oh, this is... You know, I so want my president to do the right thing and for our country to succeed. This is not inspiring confidence. Is it? (interruption) What do you mean, "he hasn't found his voice yet"? He hasn't found his voice? This is the most articulate president we have ever elected? I know that's what they said about Clinton when he screwed up in the first two years, "He's still looking for his voice, still searching." All right. I don't want to make too big a deal out of it. I just don't recall a lawyer being in there, interrupting and being asked for guidance on what the president's executive order. All I can tell you, folks, is none of this that you heard has the slightest thing to do with United States security.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: You know how I know it never happened that Bush had to turn to Cheney or somebody and have the executive order he was signing explained to him? You know how I know that? Because if it had happened we would still be watching video of it today, because the whole template on Bush was that he's stupid, that he's a blockhead, that he's an idiot, and we would have seen that replayed over and over again. We would have had stories, "Does Bush even run the administration?" 'Cause they thought Cheney was running it all along anyway. So now here's Obama, apparently not fully up to speed on what's happening with his own executive orders. He has to turn to Greg Craig, who once was a lawyer for Fidel Castro and Elian Gonzalez's dad in Cuba.
Have you people seen the movie Blazing Saddles? Some of you youngsters out there may not have seen Blazing Saddles, it's one of the funniest movies ever, it's by Mel Brooks. You should go out there -- I know some of you tightwads don't buy movies -- go out there and rent it. Mel Brooks plays a bunch of characters, and one of the characters he plays is Governor Le Petomane, and he's an absolute idiot. He's a figurehead. All he cares about is the showgirl in the back room and having some time with her after he finishes the so-called official duties. Harvey Korman plays Hedley Lamarr, the chief of staff who's constantly throwing official papers in front of Governor Le Petomane to sign. He signs it, heads back to the showgirl. And, in fact, the movie -- well, never mind. I'm not going to say more about it, but that's what I thought I was watching. It's his executive order. I still can't get over this.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: I want to go back and replay an audio sound bite. This is this morning in Washington, the Oval Office, President Obama signing an executive order calling for the closure of Club Gitmo within one year. Now, we will not have the chisel sounds. We've already chiseled this bite in marble, so you will not hear them here.
OBAMA: In order to effect the appropriate disposition of individuals currently detained by the Department of Defense at Guantanamo, uh, and promptly to close the detention facility at Guantanamo consistent with the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States and interests of justice, I hereby order. And we then we will then, uh, the process whereby Guantanamo will be closed no later than one year from now. We will be... Uhhh.... Umm.... Is there a separate executive order, Greg, with respect to how we're going to dispose of the detainees? Is that it, eh, uh, what we're doing?
CRAIG: We'll set up a process!
OBAMA: We will be setting up a process, uh, whereby this is going to be taking place.
RUSH: Greg, is there going to be another executive order? What are you guys doing back there, did you write another executive order, or is this it? That's Greg Craig, the White House counsel who represented the father of Elian Gonzalez and Fidel Castro of Cuba. Also represented Bill Clinton in the impeachment hearings. I didn't play this to once again highlight Obama not knowing what's going on with his own executive order. What I did was to illustrate it's not very FDR-like, and I wanted to make mention of this for those in the Obama administration monitoring this program. What you did today, purely political, not oriented toward the security of this country. Do you people in New York feel safer now? I mean you may like your country a little more, but do you feel safer here? We're going to close a prison for terrorists in the interests of national security and justice? (laughing) And the foreign policy interests of the United States. Anyway, FDR would not do this. Remember, FDR put Japanese citizens in the internment camps! He did what he had to do in time of war to protect this country. This is not FDR-like. And I had to make that observation.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Apparently, ladies and gentlemen, I was not the only one to notice that Obama's executive orders that he signed today seemed to be executive orders he hadn't seen yet. He's asking Greg Craig, (paraphrasing) "What are we doing here, Greg?" Greg Craig says, "Here's what we're doing," and Obama repeats it as though it's his own words. This afternoon on Fox News Channel Jon Scott talked to Democrat strategist Bob Beckel about Obama's signing of the executive orders today and the confusion with the media. Now, I don't know what confusion with the media there was, because I wasn't there, but here's the question that Jon Scott asked: "If you were running the media show at the White House, would you call somebody on the carpet? I mean you want the president to look presidential, right?"
BECKEL: Yeah, I suspect that this is gonna lead to a discussion here with a few people. Look, for people who pulled off -- just think about what they pulled off at the Democratic National Convention, I mean these are pros, and they're gonna -- they can't make little mistakes, 'cause we're going to talk about it. So I suspect that there's going to be a few heads that are going to roll and I also suspect you're not going to see many missteps after this.
RUSH: I'm not sure what he's talking about here. I don't know what the misstep with the media was, unless it is Obama not knowing what his executive orders said. But maybe media there was a media screw-up in there, maybe people didn't get in there, I have no clue what this is about. I hope to find out. It was a media issue yesterday. This says it's about the executive order. (interruption) Well, I know about that, the controversy yesterday was the White House released photos of the finger and Rahm Emanuel in the Oval Office, and the Drive-Bys are upset, they didn't run the picture because they want their own photographers in there and they weren't allowed in their to take their own. They had to run the White House picture. Of course the Drive-Bys, occasionally they'll stand up for themselves, even when it's Obama, "We're not going to run your propaganda. We didn't take the picture. It's a White House picture. We want our own picture. We run the propaganda around here. We want our cameras in there to record the propaganda." Well, he cut his finger off, didn't he, or do something? He cut his little finger off to show toughness or something. He cut it and didn't get it looked at and it was getting ugly looking out there, had to go chop it off, in a show of great toughness. Yeah, like the Yakuza guys, like the Japanese Mafia. Exactly, Snerdley, exactly.
So I don't think Beckel here is talking about -- I think we still are the only ones talking about the fact that Obama had no idea what executive orders he was signing and what they said.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
#29
Ok, I have tried to stay out, but here comes the rant and Im wearing body armor for the return volley.
The facts as I see it after reading all the reports are there are about 20 high value prisoners there. These are the ones we want to send to the gallows. The others are questionable or low level guys. I recommend we leak out that they traded their freedom for information and we let them go or we keep them and treat them as POWs. The High value guys we keep and hang. Just as we would any war criminals.
But as far as Obama goes: I think we as a nation need to step back a step and rethink this war. I believe we should prosecute this war and the detainees under the Geneva convention laws at the Hague. The rub is that there are no internationally agreed on laws of war for this type of battle. I do believe Obama got it half right, not by design or any great thought, but by accident. And believe me, it chokes to say it. With that, the world must reclassify the conventions of how wars are fought and the classification of combatants when it comes to soldiers fighting for an ideology and not a nation state.
For example we classify the prisoners as detainees, not soldiers, not PWs. We use rules that should not apply with processes that are nonexistent, we are literally making it up as we go. Our rules call for uniforms, patches, and nation states to lead them. When we catch a terrorist we say hes not wearing a uniform and we can shoot him and not safeguard to the rear, etc That rule was designed for spies. The terrorists at Gitmo are not spies, they are soldiers, not for a nation but for an ideology. A misguided ideology that calls for the death of all nonbelievers. They are truly our enemy and deserve the wrath of Americas anger, so dont think Im going soft here. At the onset of the war making it up as we go was fine, now the world need to get up off its collective ass and get this right. We have no conventions to deal with combatants not tied to a nation state. We have no conventions for dealing with nations that sponsor or provide sanctuary. When an act of war occurs in London, a bombing, we treat it as a crime. Treating it as an act of war, not an internal crime but a war crime, would allow us more freedom in combating them.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
01/23/2009 16:44 Comments ||
Top||
#30
I agree 49pan. But Bambi I don't think has the political balls to say as such. Almost no politician does and expects to be re-elected. The sad thing is, most of the western population simply doesn't get it. They think somehow it is the west's fault, or poverty, or Israel, or anything else.
#31
Disagree. FDR executed 6 German Sabateurs during WWII. Not spies, but those who had intentions & the means of killing civilians and infrastructure and the intent to do so. I.E. - enemy combatants not in uniform. If there is not a precedent for this type of thing, then we set one on our terms - not the world's.
When we catch a terrorist we say he's not wearing a uniform and we can shoot him and not safeguard to the rear, etc... That rule was designed for spies.
i'd say it was designed for sabateurs as well as for spies, but that wouldn't strictly be right either.
The Geneva Convention wasn't designed _for_ soldiers. It was designed _for_ civilians. It merely has incentives for soldiers who fight in such a way as to help insure that the civilian populace in general doesn't become a target.
of course, many of these terrorists target civilians in the first place. Funny, if they targeted New York, people would get mad. If they target a mosque in Karbala and blow up thirty people, the average American thinks it proves we have no business there and need to abandon the country to the guys who blew up the Mosque.
#33
SM and Andy, Your correct and I neglected to include sabateurs and should have. I also agree that "WE" must set the precedent and force the world to agree to it. We have to drive it to protect our service members and govermnent agencies from charges stemming from their actions in combat. Interesting point on the Geneva accord being designed for Civs. Too many years of being a soldier and looking at it from the other perspective, point well taken.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
01/23/2009 18:35 Comments ||
Top||
#34
Its my understanding that the GC was designed to protect civilians by defining certain rules of war:
* Combatants are clearly identified as such (by a uniform, obvious badge, etc...)
* Combatants do *not* hide in the civilian populations (in schools, hospitals, churches/mosques) nor use them for military purposes
* Combatants do *not* intentionally target civilians
Sides were given an incentive to follow the rules - their POW's would be treated with respect. They have certain protections (against summary execution in the field for example)
And most important those who *break* the conventions do *not* receive the protections.
By extending the protections to those who do not deserve them (i.e. the Terrorists) we _weaken_ the GC because now China (or Russia) have no incentive to follow it - after all their will get the protections no matter what.
Of course I am not a lawyer, never played one on TV and didn't stay in a Holiday Inn last night. So anyone correct me if I'm wrong.
#35
When we catch a terrorist we say he's not wearing a uniform and we can shoot him and not safeguard to the rear, etc... That rule was designed for spies.
No. It was designed for civilians.
If your enemy is in uniform, they you should only fire at people in uniforms. If the enemy stops wearing uniforms then how can you tell who is a civilian and who is a combatant? So any combatant who does not wear a uniform is putting the lives of civilians unnecessarily at risk and is a war criminal and subject to summary execution.
The laws of war are fine. They should be enforced and obeyed. We obey them but fail to enforce them. That is a mistake.
I was thinking more along the lines of something involving an 8 and a 4, Spike.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
01/23/2009 20:10 Comments ||
Top||
#37
We're all basically on the same page. I have a lot of respect for W but this is another one where he should've a) basically said what three of us said about the GC on this thread or b) told the world and the country's lefties to f*ck off about gitmo. or C) * my choice. summarilly executed some of these dogs and pulled out the GC paper work to back up the action as in the best interest of iraqi & afghani civilians. (not to mention those of us that wear a uniform).
#41
Crazy Fool and others are correct. Pan, I don't think you are. We HAVE BEEN applying the conventions and the law of armed conflict, which are unambiguous on the relevant issues here.
The gap is in terms of what to do with the detainees after capture. It's safe to say the process we've developed (in any of its versions, including the original one) is fully adequate, and is "consistent with our values" to use the narcissistic formulation with slanderous implications used by that nitwit man-child now in the WH.
US legal chauvinists and "human rights activists" have nothing but their fairly parochial and ignorant certitude to back up demands for all the trappings of US criminal procedure. The military commissions model adopts many of the aspects of the civil or Napoleonic code courts used by 80% of the world for their criminal trials. It is fully consistent with our values - but one needs an effective IQ above 70 to recognize that.
Yes, the previous administration could have convened another session to amend Geneva (that's what has been done in the past to update the accords framework for new or unanticipated issues). The goal would have been to make use of some sort of military commission the preferred process for detainees.
The situation remains that the Bush admin. (as in so many other areas) made the right decisions and then utterly refused to explain, advocate, defend, or rebut when the baseless slanders and distortions ensued. This was a strategic catastrophe WRT public affairs and propaganda.
The new crew, consistent with past behavior, makes stupid decisions (or deceptive feints at decisions) while piling on more slander and distortion of the Bush actions.
ISLAMABAD: A teacher who once fought as a mujahideen against Soviet occupation forces in Afghanistan as been gunned down by the Taliban in Pakistans troubled Swat valley for not hiking up his salwar or trousers above his ankles.
Though the Pakistani Taliban have not issued any edict for the salwar to be worn in this manner, there have been reports of the militants threatening men for not hiking up their trousers.
The militants say hiking up the trousers is essential for offering prayers. Former mujahideen Amjad Islam, who was working as a teacher in a private school in Swat, was gunned down yesterday for not hiking his salwar above his ankles. The militants then went to Islams house and gunned down his father, Ghani Akbar, a lawyer by profession.
Islams body was later hung by the militants from a pole in the College Square in Matta town and locals were warned not to touch it till Friday. The body was taken down and moved to Islams house after a local jirga intervened.
Local residents said the militants had asked Islam to hitch his salwar above his ankles last morning. The teacher told them he was a former mujahideen and knew everything about Islam. He also said nobody could be forced to pull up his salwar above the ankles, the News daily reported.
Islam said he had also seen the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, which had not forced men to wear their salwar in this manner. His arguments angered the militants and led to a scuffle.
The teacher, who had a pistol, fired at the militants and killed a Taliban fighter and wounded two more. He then tried to flee but the militants shot and stabbed him, killing him instantly. Locals also said Islams father was a religious and humble man who was well respected in the area.
Large tracts of the Swat valley in the North West Frontier Province are now controlled by local Taliban fighters led by radical cleric Maulana Fazlullah despite a major anti-militancy operation launched in the area by the Pakistan army in October 2007.
Posted by: john frum ||
01/23/2009 18:23 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under: TTP
#1
So let me get this straight: if a woman in Pakistan shows and ankle, she is a slutty whore who can be raped and stoned. If a man does NOT show his ankles, he is an infidel and can be shot.
Are these guys nuts or something?
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia ||
01/23/2009 18:36 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: Frank G ||
01/23/2009 19:53 Comments ||
Top||
#6
"Are these guys nuts or something?"
Both, Rambler.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
01/23/2009 20:09 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Showing ankles is a sign, like an earring in the right ear or pants worn backwards.
Posted by: ed ||
01/23/2009 20:18 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Power play. These guys were just showing everybody who's boss, them being the local gangsters. Pants, schmants, all they want is for the locals to show deference. Any dumb thing they ask for will do. The Japanese in the Philippines made everyone bow to them, same thing.
Barry's answer? I hope...
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) - Missiles fired from a suspected U.S. spy plane killed seven people Friday on the Pakistan side of the Afghan border, a lawless region where al-Qaida militants are known to hide out, officials said.
The strike was the first on Pakistani territory since the inauguration of President Barrack Obama. Pakistani leaders had expressed hope Obama would halt the attacks, more than 30 of which have been launched since the middle of last year, reportedly killing several senior militants.
The pro-U.S. government routinely protests them as a violation of the country's sovereignty, but most observers speculate it has an unwritten agreement allowing them to take place. Hmmmmmm...don't think they mentioned that when Bush was around.
One drone fired three missiles into the village of Zharki in North Waziristan, hitting two buildings, the intelligence officials said on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media. At least seven people were killed, but there identities were not immediately known.
The United States rarely acknowledges firing the missiles, which are mostly fired from drones believed launched from neighboring Afghanistan.
Not a chance. President Obama hasn't got around to surrendering on that front.
Posted by: ed ||
01/23/2009 11:41 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Update...
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan Missiles fired from a suspected U.S. spy plane killed 10 people Friday in Pakistan just east of the Afghan border, security officials said, the first such strike since the inauguration of President Barack Obama.
At least five of the dead were identified as foreign militants, an intelligence officer said.
One drone fired three missiles into the village of Zharki in North Waziristan, hitting two buildings over the space of 10 minutes, the security officials said. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media.
At least 10 people were killed, they said. Their names were not released.
#6
At least seven people were killed, dozens wounded. The majority of those killed were foreigners," said local and security officials employing a term usually used to refer to Al-Qaeda militants.
"Two missiles fired by a suspected US drone hit a house in Wana," a senior security official told AFP, referring to the main town in South Waziristan district and a known hub of Taliban and Al-Qaeda extremists.
It was the second suspected US missile attack in northwest Pakistan on Friday, just hours after eight people were killed in North Waziristan.
Soon after the blast in the Gangikhel neighbourhood of western Wana, electricity supplies went down and the area plunged into darkness, local officials said.
Taliban militants immediately surrounded the site of the attack and barred locals from venturing close.
Wana, a known Taliban and Al Qaeda hub, is also the main stomping ground of Maulvi Nazir, a key Taliban commander accused by the United States of recruiting and sending fighters to Afghanistan to attack US and NATO forces.
Local officials said the target was a guest house owned by a local pro-Taliban tribesman.
#7
Taliban militants immediately surrounded the site of the attack and barred locals from venturing close.
This is so common that we whoever is behind this ought to routinely fire a second round just for them.
Posted by: Frank G ||
01/23/2009 18:09 Comments ||
Top||
#10
I am shocked and sickened that Obama has dipped his hands into the blood of innocents. These people never got their day in court. They were never given their due process rights to a fair trial, unlike the people in Gitmo. They have been convicted of nothing. Their lives were ended by a summary extra-judicial execution utterly without warrant or legal justification. Obama is a war criminal and should be arrested and tried for his war crimes.
#11
Uh, NS, Obama's WH staffer(missed the name) on talk radio this am says Gitmo terrorists didn't get due process, are just poor refugees caught up in Bush's thoughtless warmongering, and suggests we implement Clinton's adopt-a-refugee plan from Kosovo days and take home these poor homeless detainees (no one else will take them) and feed them in our own homes!!!! I kid you not--I heard this with my own ears!!!! Of course, his own personal situation leaves no space for a pet terrorist, as they just refurbished the spare room into a home theater for his own son. He actually slammed the radio caller who called the plan asinine, saying he expected closed minds with cold, dead white hands to cling to their guns and attitudes. This is going to be the longest four years of my life.
#12
NS, your satire is a straight-line, logical extension of the muddled thinking WRT Gitmo and related matters. Or, as someone wrote somewhere recently , "nothing says 'no due process' quite like a Hellfire attack without warning".
I didn't have any worries the nitwit would continue these attacks. (for those troubled by my indelicate and disrespectful tone and words, let's just say first impressions are hard to overcome, and mine in this case were formed first-hand, in the field)
Hassan Khogiani, a close aide of Mustafa Kamran, leader of the defunct Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) in Jamrud, was arrested from Peshawar's Ring Road area on Thursday, sources said. However, police officials denied knowledge of the arrest. The sources said Khogiani, also known as Sarwar, was captured from a locality near the Rehman Baba shrine in Hazarkhani area. They said he was a close associate of TTP leader Hijrat, who was arrested in December from the city's Hayatabad area. According to security officials, Hijrat was involved in the abductions of Afghan ambassador-designate to Pakistan Abdul Khaliq Farahi and Iranian diplomat Hashmatollah Attarzedah.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/23/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: TTP
#1
PAKISTANI DEFENCE FORUMS > INDIA PLANNING COVERT STRIKES AGZ PAKISTAN [crack/elite Specops + post-Terror quick reaction pursuit into Pakistan]; + INDIAN MINISTER MUKERJER: PAKISTAN IS STILL PROMOTING/SPONSORING MILITANT TERRORISM AND MUST BE DISCIPLINED.
ALso on PDF > GEOPOLITICAL DIARY: INDIA'S AFGHANISTAN OPTION; + AFGHANISTAN: INDIA UNVEILS NEW STRATEGIC ROAD [India will ECON-ONLY? enter Afghanistan via Iran port of Chahbahar]; + SIR CREEK: THE OTHER DISPUTE BETWEEN INDIA AND PAKISTAN [Economically strategic River point + Resources region for both Nations]???
* WORLD MIL FORUM: INDIA: STRATEGIC SCHOLARS FAVOR USA AND JAPAN BLOCKING CHINA'S ENTRY INTO THE INDIAN OCEAN, + JAPAN:CHINA IS DIRECTLY CHALLENGING BOTH JAPAN, USA WITH ITS DESIGNS FOR A CHINESE-CENTRIC INDIAN OCEAN FOLLOWED BY EXPANSION OF CHINESE NAVAL, MILITARY FROCES INTO THE PACIFIC. JAPAN WILL BE FORCED TO MILITARILY STRENGTHEN ITS DEFENSE POSTURE AGZ CHINA's NEW POWER REGARDLESS OF US REGIONAL INTERESTS???
Security forces on Thursday destroyed suspected militantsÂ' positions with explosives in Bajaur Agency. While national lashkar seized a large quantity of arms and ammunition in an operation against suspected militants. According to sources, security forces backed by mortar guns and artillery carried out attacks on militantsÂ' hideouts situated in Chaharmang, Chenar and Nawagai areas of Nawagai tehsil. Several militantsÂ' positions and their bunkers were demolished in the attacks, sources said. On the other hand, national lashkar recovered a large quantity of ammunition in a successful operation against militants.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/23/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: TTP
Security forces on Thursday stepped up search operation to arrest the wanted persons in Mohmand Agency. Security forces killed several militants in an ongoing search operation in Pandyali and Safi tehsils while hunt was on for the arrest of remaining persons.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/23/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: TTP
#1
ION WAFF.com > PAKISTAN AUTHORISES CHINA TO DEAL WITH INDIA AS PER 26/11 [Mumbai Attack]. China given a "BLANK CHEQUE" by Paki to "negotiate" [only?] wid India.
Several militants, including top commanders of the banned Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), Mohmand chapter, were killed on Wednesday, as military intensified its operation against combatants in Mohmand Agency.
Sources said security forces targeted the hideouts of the militants in Lakaro and Pindyali Tehsils and elsewhere in the tribal agency with gunship helicopters, killing several militants and destroying their hideouts.
The sources said the house of Omar Kahlid, TTP Mohmand Agency chief, was also destroyed in the aerial blitz.
The sources said over 15 militants, including some important commanders, perished in the attack, while about 40 shops in Qayyumabad and Askarabad bazaars on Peshawar-Bajaur Road and 33 houses were also destroyed. The sources added that security forces occupied the militant hideout after killing six militants in Ghaziabad area.
Fierce fighting and shelling was also reported in Kamardin, Amarai Kor, Karair, Chingai, Palosai and Habibzai areas. Unconfirmed reports said Omar Khalid and a number of his fighters were staying in a hideout on the hilltop near Haji Sahib Tarangzai shrine when security forces attacked the place with heavy weapons in the evening.
According to the reports, a fierce gunbattle took place between security forces and insurgents in which Omar Khalid and TTP Halimzai tehsil Thief Wajihullah were reportedly killed and several others, including TTP Mohmand Naib Amir Qari Shakeel injured. However, neither security forces nor the Taliban confirmed the killing of Omar Khalid.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/23/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: TTP
Eleven Taliban were killed and nine others injured in separate military assaults in the restive Swat valley, a military spokesman said on Thursday. Four Taliban were killed and six injured when helicopter gunships targeted their hideout in the Qambar area of Mingora, the headquarters of Swat district. The killed Taliban were identified as Abu Hamza, Ismail, Abdul Rauf and Qari Ghaffar. Seven other Taliban were killed in a separate assault by ground troops in the Drushkhela area of Matta tehsil the same day, the spokesman said. Three other Taliban were injured in the operation. The spokesman said security forces had also seized the bodies of two Taliban from area where the clashes took place. A security forces personnel was also injured in the exchange of fire with the Taliban, he said.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/23/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: TTP
Aswat al-Iraq: Four persons of the same family were killed by unidentified gunmen fire in northern Wassit, a security source in the province said on Thursday. "Unidentified gunmen opened fire today (Jan. 22) at a family of four in al-Zohour neighborhood, al-Suwayra district, (135 km) north of al-Kut city, killing them all instantly," the source told Aswat al-Iraq news agency. "No motives could be detected for the killing of a father, his wife, daughter and son," the source added. He said that the culprits escaped before the police arrived at the scene and cordon off the family's house. "The bodies of victims were removed to a morgue in Kut," he said.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/23/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: Iraqi Insurgency
Aswat al-Iraq: An Iraqi army force detained on Thursday four wanted suspected members of al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) during a security operation in eastern Mosul city, a military source said. "A force from the 3rd Brigade captured four wanted men in al-Tahrir neighborhood, eastern Mosul," the source told Aswat al-Iraq news agency. "The detainees are suspected members of AQI and are wanted on charges of perpetrating several crimes," the source added.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/23/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: al-Qaeda in Iraq
Documentation obtained from the Middle East Newsline reveals a direct connection between Iran and the Islamic militants Israel fought during its recent Gaza offensive. It reveals that Iranian military advisers from Irans elite Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) were killed during the 22-day war with Hamas, which ended with a self-imposed Israeli cease-fire on Sunday.
IRGC officers helped the Hamas regime and Islamic Jihad fire BM-21 Grad rockets from urban areas. We believe there were dozens of IRGC personnel in Gaza during the war, an Israeli source said. Some were killed; others went into hiding; and others escaped.
[According to] Israeli intelligence sources, IRGC sent officers to the Gaza Strip to help Hamas improve the range and accuracy of its rockets. IRGC was also authorized to help establish facilities to produce the Grad and other extended-range Katyusha-class rockets in the Gaza Strip.
Israel expects Iran to expand the IRGC presence in the Gaza Strip amid the cease-fire. Iran is expected to build a Hamas arsenal of rockets with ranges of up to 50 miles, which would include the Fajr-3 and Fajr-4 rockets.
The IRGC presence was arranged in 2008 by the late Hamas Interior Minister Said Siyam, the sources said. Siyam was killed in an Israeli air strike on Gaza City on Saturday, hours before the unilateral cease-fire began. Siyams death removes Hamas key liasion with Iran, an Israeli source said. But there are others who could fill his shoes.
In a bid to restore a commercial lifeline to the Hamas-ruled territory, hundreds of Palestinians came to the Gaza Strip's border with Egypt on Thursday to try to repair smuggling tunnels despite Israeli threats of new military action to prevent the resumption of such activities.
"Soon it will be operational, I will not bring drugs or weapons, I plan to use it to bring in what people need most -- food and fuel, and that is very profitable," tunnel-owner Mohammed told Reuters.
Hamas and other Palestinian factions use their own tunnels to smuggle in weapons but journalists do not have access to them and it was impossible to see whether they had resumed operation.
Israel has threatened new military action to prevent Hamas from replenishing the rocket arsenal it used to strike southern Israeli towns. Israeli troops pulled out of the Gaza Strip on Wednesday, three days after separate ceasefires declared by Israel and Hamas went into effect. "If we need to do additional military operations to stop smuggling, it will be done ... Israel reserves the right to act against smuggling, period," Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni told Israel Radio.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/23/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: Hamas
#1
An army of a thousand Rachel Corries.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
01/23/2009 10:31 Comments ||
Top||
The Sri Lankan military shelled a hospital and a village inside a government-declared "safe zone" for displaced families Thursday, killing at least 30 civilians, health officials said.
The assault was the deadliest attack on civilians in two years and underscored the rising concern for the hundreds of thousands of war refugees reportedly trapped in the conflict zone as the military closes in on the ethnic Tamil rebels' last stronghold in the northeast.
Health officials said at least 67 civilians were killed in shelling since Tuesday.
The military denied launching the attack on the "safe zone" and accused the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam rebels of carrying out the assault themselves.
"If it has been hit and people have been injured, then definitely it is the LTTE. They are capable of this kind of thing," military spokesman Brig. Udaya Nanayakkara said.
Independent accounts of the fighting are not available because journalists are barred from the war zone.
Meanwhile, the military captured a building the rebels had used as the main operations center in their fight against the advancing army, complete with detailed maps of troop deployments throughout the region, Nanayakkara said.
The rebels appeared to have set up a new center elsewhere before the army moved in, he said.
With the civil war escalating in recent months and the government pushing the insurgents into a shrinking slice of territory in the northeast, aid groups and diplomats have expressed fears over the safety of the civilians trapped in rebel-held territory.
In an effort to coax civilians to leave, the government dropped leaflets throughout the region Wednesday announcing the establishment of a "safe zone" on the edge of rebel-held territory that it would not attack. Civilians who gathered there would then be transferred across the front lines to safety, the military said.
But an hour after the leaflet drop, two shells hit a makeshift hospital located in a school in Vallipunam, a village inside the "safe zone," said Kandasamy Tharmakulasingham, a local health official. No one was injured in that attack, he told The Associated Press.
The hospital and village were hit again Thursday morning in an attack so devastating that health officials had difficulty counting the mangled bodies, he said.
Moses Piratheepan, a 17-year-old boy who had been admitted to the hospital with a chest ailment, said he was having breakfast when the shelling started.
Three shells fell into his ward during the hourlong barrage, and he was hit by shrapnel in the back, he said.
"The hospital staff gave me first aid but could not transfer me to safety because the shells were falling," he told AP by telephone.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/23/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Afghan and international forces claimed to have killed around 30 militants in Afghanistan, 22 of them in NATO airstrikes after a patrol was attacked near the Pakistan border.
Several militants, including top commanders of the banned Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), Mohmand chapter, were killed on Wednesday, as military intensified its operation against combatants in Mohmand Agency. 
Eleven Taliban were killed and nine others injured in separate military assaults in the restive Swat valley, a military spokesman said on Thursday. Four Taliban were killed and six injured when helicopter gunships targeted their hideout in the Qambar area of Mingora, the headquarters of Swat district. The killed Taliban were identified as Abu Hamza, Ismail, Abdul Rauf and Qari Ghaffar. Seven other Taliban were killed in a separate assault by ground troops in the Drushkhela area of Matta tehsil the same day, the spokesman said. Three other Taliban were injured in the operation. The spokesman said security forces had also seized the bodies of two Taliban from area where the clashes took place. A security forces personnel was also injured in the exchange of fire with the Taliban, he said.
