As we had suspected all along, the Saudi definition of 'cornered' differs wholly from our own...
The UK's ambassador to Saudi Arabia says he believes the Saudi security services may have helped in the escape of a gang who killed 22 people. Briton Michael Hamilton, 61, who was born in Kilmarnock and lived in Sussex, was among those killed in a siege in the Saudi city of al Khobar in May. His family believes the Saudi forces colluded with the terrorists. Ambassador Sir Sherard Cowper-Coles told Radio 4's Today there appeared to have beeen some sort of "arrangement". Sir Sherard said he thought it was impossible for the "militants to escape without some sort of understanding with security forces." Motherfunkers.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
09/08/2004 5:32:34 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
And the sun rose in the east this morning and other breaking news....
#2
Yup, we all know there was collusion but the remarkable thing here is that the British establishment, particularly diplomats, aren't supposed to say shit against the Saudis. (££££) A welcome comment.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
09/08/2004 13:28 Comments ||
Top||
There are some 400 public companies that do business with terrorist-sponsoring states. Many of these companies provide critical revenues and advanced equipment and technology to these countries. In addition, each of these European, Asian and U.S.-owned subsidiary companies provides moral and political cover to the governments of these countries, obscuring the fact that they are providing hard currency, weapons, technology and safe harbor to terrorists.
Accordingly, DivestTerror.org does not differentiate among companies operating in terrorist-sponsoring states. Until such time as these countries discontinue their sponsorship of terrorism, it is our view that no company, regardless of the scale of their operations, should be willing to do business with them.
Regrettably, hundreds of multinational and American companies have, to date, refused voluntarily to send this vital security message to the terrorist-sponsoring governments. A dozen of these companies exemplify the various ways in which this behavior is helping prop up such governments and, thereby, enabling their ability to aid and abet terrorism. (N.B. All of the information concerning the activities of this illustrative "Dirty Dozen" was derived from publicly available sources.).
#1
This guy may be right but he picked the wrong week to have a public peeing contest with Putin.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
09/08/2004 21:48 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Russia's threat to target "terrorists anywhere" is a danger to Britain, Europe and the rest of the world, a top Chechen separatist terrorist based in the UK fifth columnist has warned.
Akhmed Zakayev said the vow meant Russia may try to assassinate Chechens wherever they are, regardless of international boundaries.
Chechen Islamist terrorists, anyway.
And he warned that sent out a "very disturbing signal to all civilised countries sucker countries who give us shelter because they're PC idiots".
I suspect his definition of "civilized" is a lot different from mine.
Wanker.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
09/08/2004 21:48 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Well, I'm sorry, but I don't want Russians to shoot a Chechen refugee in my street because Putin just happens to declare him a terrorist.
Btw, same goes for Americans, French or others.
If you break the law of my country, you go to jail.
#4
TGA, this is a strong issue for me. I see few alternatives to sending out wetwork teams to begin snuffing the top echalons of jihadist clerics. Because of Islamism's intentionally decentralized and transnational nature, there are few other choices.
Militarily steamrolling Islamist rogue states on a country-by-country basis is simply too time consuming and ridiculously expensive. Time constraints alone make it imperative that the main moutpieces for terrorism begin dying off in significant numbers.
While I certainly understand your discomfort and even dislike of such a notion, I don't see where there's much choice in the matter. I'd certainly welcome your own analysis of how to go about truncating the proponents of terrorism. I think declaring Wahabbism a political idology and thereby stripping it of all religious status would be an excellent starting point. The same may need to go for Salafists as well.
Again, I'd really enjoy hearing your own opinions on this, TGA.
#5
When the Russians take over a school in Chechnya or some third country and start massacring children, then I'll give this article some credibility. In the meantime, keep scurrying, you filthy cockroaches.
Posted by: Dar ||
09/08/2004 22:18 Comments ||
Top||
#6
The Chechen's aren't going to get a lot of sympathy from me after their child killing spree.
#7
I think that this Chechen is incorrect. The Russians aren't just threatening Chechens. They are threatening every recalcitrant from Dan unto Beersheba, as it were. Judging from the look on Putin's face, a stoical ex-KGB officer, I would not be surprised if the bad boys are about to see the Russian equivalent of Jihad. I suspect his response will be as dramatic in Russia as George Bush's response was after 9-11. Or, as a friend once said, "I 'spect there's gonna be a WHOLE lot of homicidin' goin' on."
#8
Zenster, I will not allow foreign hitmen to kill people in Germany at their discretion, period. This is a country where law is upheld for everyone.
What the Russians do in lawless places is not of my concern.
But here in Germany they better not kill anyone. We are not killing Russian mafia members on the Red Square either.
I certainly have no problem with stripping Wahhabis of their "religious protection". But that doesn't mean that KGB killers can kill them at will in my city.
They better not try that.
#13
You are quite clear, TGA, and I cannot continue my own stance without admitting to the hypocrisy of not wanting such American inspired wetwork going on in my own country. What about German teams going after those in your nation who actively foment violent jihad? Does that notion equally offend you?
Sadly, terrorists pervert the rule of law in open societies so as to further their own murderous agendas. One need only examine abu Hamza in Britain for a sterling example. It is becoming increasingly apparent that many European nations largely refuse to clamp down on jihadist clerics. France is a major offender in this. Their harboring of Khomenei effectively helped spawn Hizbollah.
As I mentioned in my first post, time is running short. If major strides are not made towards immediately jailing or eliminating the Islamists, the price will be a terrorist nuclear attack. Between those two options, snuffing the jihadist clerics becomes much more attractive.
I'm glad that we both agree on stripping Wahhabism of its religious status. What other measures do you see as being sufficiently constructive in the short term (i.e. ~5 years or less)?
#14
Zenster, those who preach jihad do break German law and should go to jail or be deported. And the legal stance is toughening here. The next minister of the interior will probably be the Bavarian Beckstein (conservative CSU), who is the toughest guy in prosecuting islamists of all shades.
I wish U.S. authorities would take an equal tough stance on U.S. Neo Nazis who publish racial hatred filth hosted on U.S. website claiming "free speech".
#15
If you break the law of my country, you go to jail.
Unless you're involved in the planning of 9-11. In which case Germany decides the evidence against you is "tainted" because it may have come from "torture".
Nothing personal, TGA. Just an observation.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
09/08/2004 22:59 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Robert Crawford, you are aware of the fact that this was what the DEFENSE LAWYERS wanted, not the prosecution?
But we indeed observe our own laws. This means that evidence must be real evidence. Not a faxed summary of a "he said" from DoJ. Without any ability to question the witness.
Btw it's not about torture. The U.S. confirmed the use of interrogation techniques (for example sleep deprivation etc.) which are illegal in Germany. Sorry, that's the law. Unless it's changed courts have to follow the law.
It's not "Germany" that decides on evidence btw, it's the court. Since we had a Volksgerichtshof we're rather interested in keeping the two apart.
How's that Moussawi case going over there in Alexandria, Va.?
#17
Wouldn't it be gratifying to wake up one morning, turn on the TV, and listen to an anchorperson read the overnight news, and have it be a chronology of unfortunate incidents and violent outcomes that have befallen Islamicist adherents around the world.
Every day, it seems to be western nightclubs being bombed, western truck drivers being beheaded, western jetliners being blown from the sky, western schools being attacked, western train stations being rubbled.
It would really be nice to hear the TV announcers talking themselves hoarse just reading the list of overnight "wet work" achievements.
Explode every Islamacist newspaper office and press bureau worldwide. Show some "before" and "after" gun camera footage with the crosshairs on the Al Jazeera studios.
Create a TV audience that grows weary of seeing 10 fresh madrases go up in flames EVERY DAY for three years.
Read about the wonderful job some clever people did by seeding the world with RPG rounds that explode in place when the RPG trigger is pulled.
I want to see a chronicle of pain and suffering that sweeps the Islamic world and makes Palestine look like summer day camp. I want to see it get so bad that I actually start feeling sorry for the Islamic people of the earth - as their population dwindles away under relentless attrition activity.
I want to hear about Iranian, and Syrian, and North Korean, and Saudi diplomats dying like flies all over the world - from ricin poisoning.
I want every radical Imam on earth to be afraid to leave their residence for fear of following in thr hoofprints of Yassin and Rantisi - vaporized.
#18
This is really quite simple. It is either them or us. I vote to kill them where ever, when ever they are found.
Posted by: Douglas De Bono ||
09/08/2004 23:12 Comments ||
Top||
#19
I think I've been consistent in voting for new Saudi "picnic accidents" in the desert
Posted by: Frank G ||
09/08/2004 23:12 Comments ||
Top||
#20
This has gone beyond any particular nation's laws and slipped into a simpler Natural Law phase. Those who can, will begin killing terrorists wherever they can find them, and it should be so. Blah blah blah about the murderer's rights .. they forfeited them stabbing 18 month old babies and raping school girls in Russia, not mention 9/11. Kill them in Germany or wherever else they can be put in a scope's sights. Jesus Christ, Europe has become such a sanctuary ... time to ring the bells in that church. TGA, you DON'T want these scum living comfortably and feeling snug in your country. Of course, your point does stand or fall on the hitman being caught, so yes, to a degree, I concur that if they get caught a new career path would be good to consider. I suspect they will not get caught, let alone persued.
#21
TGA: I wish U.S. authorities would take an equal tough stance on U.S. Neo Nazis who publish racial hatred filth hosted on U.S. website claiming "free speech".
I don't think we're too worried about it unless the adherents start hurting people. Besides, these organizations are well and truly penetrated. (The old joke was that there were more FBI agents than real Nazis in some of the meetings).
Islamists have gone way beyond hurting people. If they don't pay, we will pay. This is why I had no problem with the Mossad settling accounts for the Black September incident, after Germany released the terrorists.
#24
Beau, there is a lot of things I don't want or tolerate.
But no foreign head of state tells me that he can and will decide to kill people in my country. He will not decide who is a terrorist and who is not. WE will.
Next thing I hear is Fidel Castro declaring Cuban refugees "terrorists" and feels free to assassinate them in Germany.
Sorry, no way.
We all know that the CIA occasionally "removes human problems from our premises"... and we often look the other way.
But don't start bragging about it. And don't get caught red handed.
#25
I wonder if they are afraid that the Russians will start targeting the Mainstream Media - after all they are knowing allies of the islamist terrorists.
#26
Zhang Fei, the stuff posted on U.S. Nazi site IS hurting and killing people in Germany. That's where the local Neo-Nazis here get their dosis of hate from before they go out and torch an asylum shelter or hunt a black foreigner to death.
The Wahhabi preacher kills no one except with his words, too.
#27
I wish U.S. authorities would take an equal tough stance on U.S. Neo Nazis who publish racial hatred filth hosted on U.S. website claiming "free speech".
I could not agree with you more, TGA. The continued bleating from these cretins is nothing more than hate speech and needs to be curtailed. Certain forms of "free" speech are correctly and legally constrained. Nazi propaganda surely should fall into that category.
I think I've been consistent in voting for new Saudi "picnic accidents" in the desert.
To your credit, Frank G, yes you have. You very clearly have kept the finger (which one, I leave for you to choose) pointed at Riyadh.
I don't think we're too worried about it unless the adherents start hurting people.
I disagree, Zhang Fei. American neo-Nazis effectively provide moral support to their counterparts in Germany. We need to smash Nazis wherever they are. We do not need to see them abetting the terrorists and there's speculation that this is already happening. You know, that Jewish hatred thing.
As you can see, TGA, the admittedly biased sentiment shown here isn't exactly in your favor. Germany is already behind the eight ball because of the Hamburg cell. It is incumbent upon your country to make a much more vigorous showing in terms of clipping the terrorists' wings. I can, will and do ask that more gets done about it. Europe comes across as a virtual haven for terrorism. Until there is a sharp departure from this perception, my vote is on the wetwork teams. They can begin in Saudi Arabia, but sooner or later all countries harboring terrorists must get a visit.
There was a time in 1946, when the Narodnyi Komissariat Vnutrennikh Del (or NKVD) decided who was a "terrorist" in Germany and who was not.
Never again.
And Zenster, the "Hamburg Cell" was secretly plotting in Germany. It was openly learning to fly planes without the landing part in Florida. And Mr Atta got a U.S. visa six months after he flew his plane into the WTC.
I hope you never find out that the next attack on America was planned and executed by a group in Detroit. Then we'll talk again about vigorous efforts.
#30
Zhang Fei, the stuff posted on U.S. Nazi site IS hurting and killing people in Germany. That's where the local Neo-Nazis here get their dosis of hate from before they go out and torch an asylum shelter or hunt a black foreigner to death. The Wahhabi preacher kills no one except with his words, too.
German Nazis who read English language material? OK. I will not abridge our right to read whatever we want just to prevent some neo-Nazi from getting ideas. The proper response is to kill the people who commit these kinds of acts. Unfortunately, Germany doesn't have the death penalty. We're not going to help Germany make up for its lack of judgment by banning inflammatory materials. Sorry - that's why we're Americans and you're German.
Nazism is a spent force. Not so with Islam, which not only preaches violence, but funds it across the globe. This is why it deserves to be treated with a mailed fist, not kid gloves.
#31
I agree with TGA, and point out that his stance is the US stance as well: anyone who does a hit on someone in the US will be prosecuted for murder. The US won't stage hits in other countries that have a government and legal system, instead we'll work with those governments to have terrorists arrested and tried (or extradited). But we're free to hunt down terrorists in lawless lands (e.g., Somalia, Afghanistan).
Posted by: Steve White ||
09/08/2004 23:57 Comments ||
Top||
#32
Nope, nope sorry TGA, we are keeping our free speech...what you suggest is like saying if you outlaw guns, then that will keep criminals from having guns...when really the criminals still have guns, and the law abiding citizens are left with no way to protect themselves from those criminals.
Look at Islam for example, the jihadis and islamists will still spew and blow shit up, and the law abiding folks will be powerless to speak out because they will be scared to criticise Islam for fear of being arrested for 'hate-speech'.
And that is exactly what is happening in Australia and some European countries.
So you will eventually end up with a frustrated society who will seek to go underground to criticise Islam, then you will have some people who want to radicalise these groups because, hell youre faced with a jihad against you, and you cant even say anything about it, some will decide to take matters into their own hands.
Criminalising free speech is a damn good way to make a bad problem worse in the situation we are facing.
Plus, if someone is a terrorist, or a nazi, or a KKK person, etc., then I hope they feel free to let us all know that about themselves. Then we know who to keep an eye on. ;)
#34
I have a bone to pick with your argument TGA. Every day multiple women are brutally raped and murdered. Every day, multiple women and children disappear, never to be seen again. Yet I can go to my local Blockbuster and rent any number of movies that graphically depict, if not glorify brutal actions against women.
Are you upset about that? By your arguments you should be. But...woosh..what's that silence I hear from you about that?
I don't see you complaining about the stuff posted on the internet or produced in studios and mega-marketed that gives men their does of hate that inspires them before they go rape, beat and murder a young girl.
Yet, you try to put forth the argument that the stuff posted on the internet from a handful of neo-nazi juvenile misfits is responsible for all of your problems in Germany. Give me a break.
#35
Free Speech? You must be kidding! Inciting people to slaughter Jews has nothing to do with free speech.
Shouting "FIRE" in a theater doesn't qualify either.
You think "Free Speech" would be respected if the local Arabs got together in Lower Manhattan in two days to praise the "Magnificent 19" of 9/11.
#36
but apparently inciting people to rape, torture and murder women is different. I guess I'm just wondering how you justify that into your argument TGA.
#37
B you are comparing apples and pears here. Movies are works of fiction, and they are clearly understood as that by most viewers (although some might misunderstand them).
No movie tells you: When you've finished watching, go out and rape or kill a woman. A movie that really GLORIFIES murder and rape of women in unmistakable ways should actually be banned.
And many are, btw. Don't tell me your local Blockbuster stocks graphic rape porn glorifying the whole thing? In all nude, bloody graphic details? Does it?
By your free speech definition, Der Stürmer should be legal and readily available. His publisher was hanged in 1946. He killed nobody with his hands, yet he was a mass murderer.
And those Nazi sites are not the works of a few "juvenile misfits". They are the work of affluent people and organizations with a dedicated agenda.
#39
I hope you never find out that the next attack on America was planned and executed by a group in Detroit. Then we'll talk again about vigorous efforts.
Which is why I already posted this:
"You are quite clear, TGA, and I cannot continue my own stance without admitting to the hypocrisy of not wanting such American inspired wetwork going on in my own country."
On the matter of neo-Nazi websites and the like; There exist certain types of speech that are rightfully curtailed by law. Just like shouting "fire" in a crowded theater that isn't burning is illegal, so is making death threats against a person or openly advocating the violent overthrown of America's government.
Neo-Nazis overtly glorify their desire for continued genocide against the Jews. This is clearly defined hate-speech and needs to be legally proscribed. Contrary to recent European "sensitivity standards," calling Islam a "dirty religion" or labeling Islamists as "fanatics" is not hate-speech. Those are opinions which every person is free to express. How such countries reconcile allowing jihad to be taught in mosques while supressing opposition views to such obviously violent religious doctrine is beyond me.
You think "Free Speech" would be respected if the local Arabs got together in Lower Manhattan in two days to praise the "Magnificent 19" of 9/11.
While vigilante crowds might see that such a gathering was closed down out of hand, any event like that which praises terrorist activity should be legally estopped. This is the exact same sort of hate speech as the Nazis, no difference.
B, I think you are conflating gratuitous movie violence with patently clear advocacy of genocide. There is a huge distinction that I think you might concede if you reconsider. Re-enacting violence against a woman is a far cry from calling for the extermination of an entire culture.
#40
Zenster, "sensitivity standards" of free speech may vary.
Tell a woman that she has a gorgeous butt.
In the U.S.: A lawsuit for sexual harrassment
In Europe: A stern look or a smile (depending on whether you look handsome or not)
In Latin America: A BIG Smile
#41
I think I am suffering from a disconnect. I don't find anything at the link, but my understanding of Putin's statement is that it is very simular to what GW said after 9/11: terrorist camps are fair game in countries that sponsor islamo-butchers. The journalist/pundit has written that Putin really meant that he was loosing hit-squads throughout Western nations. It appears to me that he has created the same type of strawman that the leftists in our country create when the wish to attack the Patriot Act.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
09/09/2004 0:37 Comments ||
Top||
#42
Post #39 was mine.
And those Nazi sites are not the works of a few "juvenile misfits". They are the work of affluent people and organizations with a dedicated agenda.
And I would like to see a thorough federal investigation that not only sought to close down such hatemongers but also traced their funding back to those "affluent people and organizations with a dedicated agenda" for further prosecution on felony charges.
TGA, who do you reckon these "affluent people" are and what is their real motivation, besides racial hatred, for sponsoring such un-American drivel (and just plain trash in general)? It is phenomenal to consider that in an age of compulsory education people still carry such blind and ignorant hatreds.
#43
maybe they are in Germany. But here they are a bunch of bedraggled juvenile misfits. Last time I heard of a neo-nazi actually killing someone was ....a good while back. And even then those crimes are few and far between here in the US.
My point stands. Compared to the violence against women portrayed on the very media we are using - right now - incitement against women is a far greater problem - it's not all fiction. If they only picked Jewish women, would it then qualify as a hate crime?
Your complaint that a few juvenile misfits in the US, posting hate speech are somehow responsible for all of Germany's woes is just ridiculous and seems especially weak since you are unwilling to condem a far more prevalent type of hate crimes.
#44
Zenster, "sensitivity standards" of free speech may vary.
Yes, but this new crap in Britain about not being able to openly criticize other religions is restraint of free speech. That was my point. Plus, if denying people the chance to make sexual comments upon another's physique is the price for eliminating violence against women, I'll have to vote for it. Abuse of women is a GLOBAL problem and one that must be brought under control post haste.
#45
B First I have never made that point about those people being responsible for Germany's problems.
I will condemn any hate crime, why do you think I would not? Btw I can do without quite a few bloody U.S. movies, thank you. But they show FICTION.
And Zenster, I think you just spoke out against cherished free speech. You're willing to ban a (mostly) innocent compliment because this compliment leads to the sexual abuse of women? Might lead?
But a website spewing hate and lies against "niggers" and Jews is free speech? What kind of double standard is that?
#46
B, I think you are severely underestimating the makeup of American neo-Nazi groups. Aryan Nation is not a "bunch of bedraggled juvenile misfits." They are responsible for "murder, counterfeiting, bank robberies and armored car hold-ups." This is no small potatoes.
The predominant White prison gang, the Aryan Brotherhood (AB), got its start in San Quentin in the mid-1960s. Despite the fact that some members sport swastika tattoos and other Nazi symbols, its leaders are primarily interested in drug trafficking, protection rackets, prostitution and extortion inside and outside prison. This gang is tightly controlled from within the prison system, despite repeated attempts by law enforcement to break it up.
Please reconsider your position regarding this hyperviolent gang of genocidal thugs.
#47
Zhang Fei, the stuff posted on U.S. Nazi site IS hurting and killing people in Germany. That's where the local Neo-Nazis here get their dosis of hate from before they go out and torch an asylum shelter or hunt a black foreigner to death.
Pleeeease TGA - it stretches all bounds of your credibility to think that you could not find multiple internet sites promoting real violence against women, much less actual photos. I feel certain are more of those online than there are neo-nazi sites.
All calls for hate speech are bad. No one is disagreeing with you on that. What is being disagreed is the line between speech, stating an opinion that all jews or fags are bad v/s specific calls for killing (illegal).
Just like I am arguing the line between stories inciting violence against women (legal) v/s real photos or calls for it (illegal).
It's a fine line in both areas - but we allow the opinions and do not allow calls for real action.
seems like you've made my point better than your own.
#48
perhaps I should Zenster. But I bet you can't find me a recent article about them killing a jew or a black person - and I could probably find you twenty crimes against women - from today alone...and yesterday...and the day before.
But that's not my real point. The point I am making is in post #47.
#49
Zenster, I think you just spoke out against cherished free speech.
How so, TGA? Inappropriate sexual comments between non-consenting adults quite often constitutes nothing more than simple abuse. That's nothing I cherish. Shrugging off such behavior with an explanation of "boys-will-be-boys" has served to perpetuate the ugly tradition of degrading women in general. Please clarify what you mean. I'm also curious about where B stands on this issue.
#50
Shrugging off such behavior with an explanation of "boys-will-be-boys" has served to perpetuate the ugly tradition of degrading women in general.
I completely agree, Zenster. However, there is plenty of room for grey when drawing that line. Fat jokes, bald jokes, short jokes, and even blonde jokes, are also abusive.
I think with speech, it's best to draw the line at calls for action.
#51
B please don't change the subject. You were talking about the videos of your local Blockbuster Store (I wouldn't know what they stock).
On the internet you just find about anything... and sites that promote and glorify violence and abuse against women are as vile as those promoting hate crimes against Jews or Blacks. Both would be illegal in Germany and German hosters will shut them down rather fast (or are required by law to do so).
Obviously we differ about what is "appropriate" and what is not. That is true for different parts of the world as well. Listen to a discussion between a Brazilian, a German and an U.S. woman and you'd find very different views about what is "degrading" and what is not.
B I agree that there is a fine line, often blurred. No real solution there.
But asking the Saudis to stop their Wahhabis preaching hate in the madrassa AND defending the same thing as "free speech" in the U.S. stretches the argument every so slightly.
Condemning "sexually degrading" comments as leading to sexual abuse AND at the same time defending "racially degrading" comments as free speech does as well.
#54
B please don't change the subject. You were talking about the videos of your local Blockbuster Store (I wouldn't know what they stock).
um...excuse me..but I've never changed the subject. I'm sinking my teeth into the fact that you said,
"the stuff posted on U.S. Nazi site IS hurting and killing people in Germany. That's where the local Neo-Nazis here get their dosis of hate from before they go out and torch an asylum shelter or hunt a black foreigner to death"
and I'm not letting go.
BTW..TGA...things that a call for action against women or jews are also illegal here.
You are up on a mighty high horse there, TGA. And your comments about what a woman in Brazil v/s a German or US woman are extemely offensive.
your word, "degrading", is nothing short of a slap to face of all women... considering the type of material that we both know is readily available.
#55
Zenster, you openly call for the slaughter of Muslims here every day, many times a day--some would and do call that "hate speech" and a "call for genocide."
Want RB shut down?
Neo-Nazis are a miniscule group of fringe crazies in this country and as you yourself pointed out with the links about murder trials, those White Supremacists acted and committed murder; it wasn't just "talk."
As the Liberals keep reminding us, we do have the First Amendment and to restrict its freedoms should be very difficult.
Charity begins at home: You are quite the misogynist ("Woman hater" for those in Rio Linda), as I've found out.
Clean up your own act before you go after others you think are egregious before you start agitating for new laws.
(And you're pretty intolerant of Christians, too--Do you think Americans practicing their faith should be censored or jailed, too?)
Thank God President Bush is in the White House and Clarence Thomas, Scalia and Rehnquist are in the Supreme Court and not you and your "tolerant, Liberal" friends!
Liberals these days are anything but tolerant or liberal!
#57
TGA- Euro and Aussie hate speech laws are now protecting the fascists more than they are hindering them.
When you live in a politically correct culture, hate speech laws mean that people who write books about the threat of Islam get prosecuted under those laws, while wahabbi mosques keep going up everyday.
And plotting a crime is different than incitement. Ive heard incitement plenty, Im not burning down a mosque. It comes down to responsibility. And the person who DECIDES after reading the neo nazi website to go burn a synagogue is responsible, not the website he read.
And when someone yells fire in a movie theater, it is a crime, not incitement...the people he yelled to in the theater who may hurt one another did not DECIDE to hurt one another, neither did they decide to run or stay and get burned to death.
Anyway, I think you will see that hate speech laws will not only not work, they will make matters worse.
#58
B What on earth is "degrading" about the thing that women in the U.S., Germany and Brazil differ in their opinion about what kind of compliments they find "sexually degrading" and which not? In the U.S. even a casual remark about a nice haircut can land you in legal trouble.
Extremely offensive???
Sorry B, I have never been "offensive" to women, this is simply ridiculous. I never make a compliment to a woman that this woman might find offensive. But I been to Brazil, and NO woman I have made a compliment about her body to (after getting to know her a bit) has EVER complained about it, but has given me a broad smile and a "muito obrigado". I would not even try this in the U.S.
As for the U.S. Nazi sites: German authorities routinely ask U.S. providers to shut down a Nazi hate site because court proceedings showed that German Neo-Nazis used them to organize hate crimes. It doesn't happen every day but it does happen.
Call for action? Does any Blockbuster movie call for action against women?
#62
Sorry B, it's you who is constantly distorting my points and changing the subject.
It's 8.30 am here and all I had was a coffee.
Let's leave it there. The discussion doesn't go anywhere.
My point is: If sexually degrading speech is condemned, then racially degrading speech must be condemned, too. You can't have the cake and eat it.
#63
My apologies, apparently it wasn't too much drink, but too little coffee. Go back and READ my posts. If you think I'm talking about compliments, it's clear you need to wipe the sleep from your eyes.
#64
I have condemned Nazi hate sites
I have cindemned Jihadi sites
I have condemned sites that degrade women
So what part of the condemnation don't you understand, B?
You brought up the women subject. And you blamed me for "silence" before I even had a chance to reply. The whole argument started when Zenster wanted Germany to take a harder stance regarding people who give Jihad speeches, and I replied, yes, fine, but what about the harder stances to Nazi speeches in the U.S.? (And they merge when it comes to Antisemitism).
Then you B come in and blame me for not condemning movies that degrade women. Which I did in latter posts.
So? Your point? What on earth is degrading or offensive about my comments now?
#65
"the stuff posted on U.S. Nazi site IS hurting and killing people in Germany. That's where the local Neo-Nazis here get their dosis of hate from before they go out and torch an asylum shelter or hunt a black foreigner to death"
How hard is this really, TGA.
These are your words, no? How hard is it to see that you are blaming America because some misfits in our huge country make some ridiculous statements.
I haven't changed the subject. These are your words.
I'm tired. It's not early here. You are quick to condemn "words" that inspire hatred against jews or blacks, but you wiggle when it comes to words that condemn women.
You clearly didn't read my posts. It annoys me.
Reread my posts if you want to pursue this further. Your complaints that I'm talking about "compliments" shows you didn't bother to respect what I said.
I took the time to put a thought out. If you don't want to read it, why should I bother.
#66
Yes these are my words. And they are right out of actual German court proceedings. About 90 percent of all Nazi hate sites are hosted in the U.S. because they are protected by "free speech" there. And German court have demonstrated the influence of these websites on actual hate crimes in Germany. You belittled them as the work of some juvenile misfits which they are clearly not.
And dammit, I did condemn words that degrade women. What I said is that in the USA some words are seen as "degrading" which in other countries are seen as welcome compliments. This is a fact that any traveller can attest too. Since I have been in Germany, USA and Brazil, I can make that statement.
Jeez.
But frankly I'm getting tired of this, too. So good night.
1. Internet sites that actually call for specific acts against jews or blacks ARE ILLEGAL here too, compadre. They can be shut down.
2. Internet sites that call for specific acts or post real pictures of real violence against women are also illegal.
So what we are talking about is the "free speech" stuff that is allowed to, as you say, incite - otherwise, they are just as illegal here as they are in Germany.
The problem caused by skinheads pales so greatly in comparison to the crimes against women, that complaining of neo-nazi crimes is like demanding immediate treatement for a hangnail on a bloody battlefield. I'm not saying you condone the violence against women - but "degrade" is not a word I would use to describe the brutal rapes, torture and murders that occur daily.
Secondly - I live in this country and I've lived in many different parts of it. Neonazis are NOT prevalent here. While they may be organized in much the same way that Hells Angels are organized to sell drugs and generate income from hate, they ARE NOT, I repeat, NOT a big part of our landscape. Your saying otherwise, doesn't make it so. This is a HUGE country. There ARE NOT daily news reports of neonazi's beating jews, blacks and gays. At least not any more so than than your average punk getting drunk and looking for someone to pound. Yet brutal rapes and murders occur, possibly by the thousands, worldwide. Perhaps your outrage would be better spent on much more serious problem than the occassional crime committed by neo-nazis.
Futhermore ...what got me started on all of this was your accusation that the Neo-Nazi stuff in your country is a by product from ours.That's just so freaking laughable its not even funny. Dusting off one case where some freaks from our HUGE country connected with some freaks from yours and drawing the conclusion that the neo nazi movement moves from west is so absurd as to be beneath you.
Posted by: B ||
09/09/2004 10:20 Comments ||
Top||
#68
should have said "moves from west to east"
Posted by: B ||
09/09/2004 10:22 Comments ||
Top||
#70
RN.. sorry, couldn't help myself. I guess I did beat it to death. I better watch out.. might get accused of a hate crime. :-)
Posted by: B ||
09/09/2004 10:53 Comments ||
Top||
#71
Not to take this to round 11, just a quick reply and lets be done with.
No argument with point 1 and 2.
Belitteling the Nazi problem because women are subject to so much more violence is not my idea of it.
I never used "degrade" to "describe the brutal rapes, torture and murders that occur daily". I used it for the (fictional) movies. Please don't quote me wrong all the time. I said women in different parts of the world have different ideas about what kind of comments about their body they find degrading. Rape, torture and murder don't fall into that category, they are universally condemned, that goes without saying. Btw you are not clear in your arguments whether you think that fictional movies lead men to rape, torture and murder.
There is not "your Neonazis" and "our Neonazis" argument. These organizations are international, they are financed by people all over the world, and they simply use the countries for their propaganda that make it easiest for them. Liberal free speech laws allow them to post a lot of things on U.S. servers or printed material (sent from the U.S. to Germany per mail) that are not allowed in Germany.
Replace Nazis by Jihadis, and we'll talk again. When it comes to Islamist propaganda, many American suddenly seem very cool about the ideal of free speech.
#72
I have never argued against your point that it is difficult for Germany to shut down access to this filth, due to worldwide access from the Internet.
And like you asked me to substitute "Islamic" to see it from a different perspective, I asked you to substitute "graphic violence against women" to see a broader point of view.
I limited my discussion from Hollywood to the Internet, because you'd have to be crazy not to admit that the Internet is a useful tool in promoting child porn, facilitating the sale and transport of women and children for sexual purposes and in providing an outlet for sicko's to trade their true-live stories about rape and murder. That ain't fiction, TGA. And the resulting problem is far greater than your Nazi problem.
The reason I brought up the women, was not to belittle the Nazi issue, but to expose what I knew would be a double standard on your part regarding the tolerance of ideas that sit right smack in middle - between individual freedom -and the common-good's need for monitor and control.
We allow vile speech, (be it neo-nazi; violence against women; or Islamic claims of superiority) as free speech. We value this freedom because it allows people to vet their ideas, no matter how offensive. But we do as good as a job as your country in prohibiting speech that steps out of that very big grey area, and into the black, once it is stated as a call to "action".
This thread has many twist and turns, so rather than go on, I'll just make my central point. You were just engaging in EU, knee-jerk, blame America for everything, when you claimed that, "the stuff posted on U.S. Nazi sites are hurting and killing people in Germany. That's where the local Neo-Nazis here get their dosis of hate from before they go out and torch an asylum shelter or hunt a black foreigner to death"
While stuff posted elsewhere in the world might make it harder for Germany to kill their Nazi beast - the US is hardly responsible for your overall problem.
Futhermore, the idea that the US is a country that "make it easiest for them" as you said when this got started, is absurd. I can't think of any other country where the Neo-nazi movement is more effectively infiltrated by the FBI, than our own. And internet sites calling for specific violence are illegal. So I don't get why you are claiming the US is the "Easiest" place for them to operate - as opposed to any other place, worldwide, with an internet connection.
Nazi stuff moves from East to West, not the other way around TGA. Blaming America for the Nazi problem, is absurd.
#73
I'll modify my last sentence - it moves both ways. I'll conceed that perhaps it is more funded and organized than I am I aware, but that's because, other than on the internet, or occassional graphitti, the entire movement is next to inivisible here.
Before reading, consider this: The AP has this posted in the "Strange News" catagory. Naturally. Anything with the scent of honor, duty, et al...well, that strange to them.
Navy recruiter Wendy Chunn visited the McIntyre home hoping to persuade their 18-year-old daughter to enlist. The sales pitch worked better than she had imagined: The entire family signed up.
"No. No. Never. Never," Chunn said when asked if she had ever heard of an entire family enlisting. "It's drawing some nationwide attention." The family didn't enlist all at once; the daughter, Brandi McIntyre, was the first to sign.
Brandi showed interest in joining the military last May, so her father, Kerry McIntyre, contacted the Navy recruiting office. Kerry had served in the Army during the late 1980s and early '90s and also served briefly in the Army Reserve.
Kerry McIntyre told Chunn his 19-year-old son, Jamie, also was interested in military service. At the time, Jamie and his mother, Angela, were attending Gadsden State Community College.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: ||
09/08/2004 11:11:44 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
GOOD not Strange. FYI, my whole family was in the Air Force (but not at the same time). My Dad met Mom while in the Air force and we three boys followed in sequence. A year after I enlisted, I met my wife who was on active duty at the time (like Father like Son). Yes I am bragging!
Posted by: Steve from Relto ||
09/08/2004 13:52 Comments ||
Top||
#5
A cool if somewhat eccentric family. I was gonna say something about Locust Fork Alabama and the John Deere signing bonus, but I won't. It's a fine canoe area.
Prosecutors in the trial of Lynne F. Stewart, a lawyer accused of aiding terrorism, showed jurors a videotape yesterday of Osama bin Laden summoning Muslims to fight to free an Islamic cleric held in an American prison. Mr. bin Laden promises "to do all we can" to liberate the cleric, Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, who was Ms. Stewart's client and who is serving a life sentence in the United States for conspiring to commit terrorist attacks in New York City. In the video, filmed in Afghanistan in the fall of 2000, another Qaeda chief, Ayman al-Zawahiri, says that he is "talking business" about securing the sheik's release. "I'm talking jihad," Mr. Zawahiri says.
"Yeah! Dat's what I'm talkin' about! Jee-had, baby!"
The videotape is the endpoint of a circuitous trail of connections that prosecutors have been tracing for weeks between Mr. Abdel Rahman, an Egyptian held in solitary confinement in a Minnesota penitentiary, and a cluster of Islamic militants in his home country and Afghanistan. The accusation against Ms. Stewart is that she illegally allowed the sheik to communicate a call to war that inspired Egyptian militants. Ms. Stewart seemed somewhat shaken for the first time since the trial began in June. In a telephone interview yesterday after court, she accused the prosecutors of using a "smear tactic."
Normally we refer to it as a "tape"...
She vehemently denied any link to Mr. bin Laden and said she knew nothing about the disputes among the sheik's followers in the Middle East that led the Qaeda leader to hold the meeting shown on the tape. "The prosecutors are saying, 'This is the arch-fiend of terrorism, and here it is the week of 9/11 and we are putting his image into evidence,' " Ms. Stewart said. "It's hard to fight it," she added.
#4
In light of the fondness that major terrorist players have for communicating orders to kill Americans in quantity, private attorneys may want to rethink any representation of these types. Public defenders would be much less likely to experience conflict-of-interest situations like the one that currently has Ms. Stewert's tit in the proverbial wringer.
From IntelWire, an article by J. M. Berger
The U.S. government secretly detained Osama bin Laden's brother-in-law for four months in 1995, after the INS announced he had already been deported to Jordan, according to documents obtained by INTELWIRE using the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). The Jordan deportation was authorized by then-Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick, at the request of Secretary of State Warren Christopher. A member of the independent commission investigating the September 11 attacks, Gorelick came under fire earlier in 2004 for possible conflicts arising from her role in the Clinton administration's war on terrorism.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
09/08/2004 12:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Gee, Jamie, you didn't think this was relevant to the commission's work? This is the kind of blunderers we'll get if we elect John Kerry in November.
Posted by: Douglas De Bono ||
09/08/2004 0:14 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Cover Up sounds like an fascinating book read. Gorelick should never have been on the Commission, unless, of course, she was involved with yet another cover up.
#3
Where the hell did this guy go? Mohamed Loay Bayazid allegedly tried to purchase uranium for al Qaeda in the early 1990s, according to the affadavit and other court records.
Posted by: Capt America ||
09/08/2004 1:42 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Padilla's interest in obtaining material to use in a dirty bomb was not new to Al Qaeda. A top BIF official, Mohamed Loay Bayazid, allegedly attempted to obtain uranium to help bin Laden develop a radiological weapon in 1993. Bayazid was a Syrian-American who lived for for a time in Kansas City. He also spent time with bin Laden's operations in the Sudan. Bayazid moved to Chicago shortly before Khalifa arrived in the US in 1994. Khalifa and Bayazid were arrested in Mountain View, California, in December 1994, just one month before Al-Zawahiri arrived in Santa Clara, Calif. (Al-Zawahiri was accompanied by Ali Mohammed, who had close ties with someone involved in Benevolence.)
Bayazid's uncle in Kansas City, who thinks the jews and the CIA were behind 9/11, confirms that his nephew, Mohamed Bayazid,was associated with Osama bin Laden in the late 1980s and early 1990s, working with groups associated with bin Laden in Peshawar, Pakistan, and Khartoum. In Pakistan, the uncle reports, his nephew was "helping and teaching the kids." When he allegedly attempted to buy the uranium for Bin Laden, his drivers license used the headquarters of Benevolence International as his address.
Posted by: Capt America ||
09/08/2004 1:46 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Bayazid was a Syrian-American who lived for several years in Kansas City. He had also spent time with bin Laden's operations in the Sudan. In 1993, he had tried to purchase uranium for al Qaeda, apparently without success. Bayazid moved to Chicago shortly before Khalifa arrived.
The two were arrested in Mountain View, California, in December 1994, just one month before another top bin Laden lieutenant, Ayman Al-Zawahiri arrived in Santa Clara, Calif., for a fundraising trip that may also be connected to Benevolence. (This connection is still theoretical, but Zawahiri stayed with Ali Mohammed, a triple-agent al Qaeda informer based in Northern California who was closely tied to Wadih El-Hage, a Texas-based al Qaeda operative who was directly tied to Benevolence.) Even though his connections to bin Laden and to Khalid Shaikh Mohammed's operation in Manila were well-known to U.S. intelligence sources, Khalifa was extradited to Jordan in 1995 to face charges relating to a terrorist bombing. Khalifa was acquitted and is currently living freely in Saudi Arabia. Bayazid was subsequently released and is also at large, location unknown.
Posted by: Capt America ||
09/08/2004 1:55 Comments ||
Top||
#6
heh, heh...just feeds my suspicion that we've been holding bin Laden since Tora Bora.
who knows...who cares...and what difference does the second guessing make?
No words can describe the horror and grief generated by the deaths of so many innocent people at the hands of those who dishonor the cause they espouse. We offer sincere condolences to the families of the victims and call for a swift resolution to the conflict in that troubled region that will let all people live in peace and freedom.
That seems carefully, um, wordsmithed.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
09/08/2004 12:00:00 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
What about condemning the bastards who did this? Where is the outrage in the Islamic world when they target old men and children? There is none, because deep down people like CAIR agree with what happened at Beslan.
This is a simple thing that can be stated with simple words, not the Clintonesque spin doctors we see here.
Posted by: Douglas De Bono ||
09/08/2004 0:11 Comments ||
Top||
#2
At least they used 'terrorists', something that quite a bit of the mainstream media has trouble finding in their vocabulary lately.
#4
I think that this group had better reconsider whether it is more important to them to support America or their co-religionists. It is not enough to denounce the terrorists, they have to name them and fight them. George Bush said after 9/11 that "you are either with us or with the terrorists." It's long past the time to choose. A few more incidents like Beslan and their free ride may come to a very unpleasant end.
#5
No more incidents, for me. Beslan did it. Fry 'em up wherever you find them, from Grozny to Teheran to Islamabad to Riyadh to Washington, DC. The reservoir is dry.
#6
What is disgusting about this is that by 'calling for a swift resolution to the conflict' they are deflecting the blame from the Islamist terrorists who perpetrated it.
I have noticed this same tactic from that Palestinian woman who is the western PR mouthpiece for Yasser. She likewise condemned the recent bus bombing by saying she hopes they resolve the conflict that causes both palestinians and israelis to be killed (loosely paraphrased) thus also deflecting the blame from where it truly lies.
This is a snakey trick and like De Bono says, betrays their true position.
They actually agree with the cause of the people who commit these attrocities and want to make life easier for others like them.
I love the way the international media refuses to actually refer to the Beslan terrorists by the name they gave themselves.
I heard it on BBC world service in the first couple of days of the seige : does anybody here have it? it was something Islam something...
they never repeated it after things got bad.
after that they only referred to them in the most secular of ways. "chechyn rebels" or "arab nationals" who helped them. absolutely refusing to use the groups real name to deflect blame from radical islamism.
There was no statement posted on this website at all until....today! The CAIR spokeswoman claimed it was because all the muslims were at a conference in Chicago and couldn't get to the computer. (Of course, the conference began AFTER the siege of the school by these devils).
CAIR only spoke up when talk radio hosts demanded to know why none of the "moderate" muslims in this country were condemning this.
CAIR denies that the problems in the muslim world are totally due to the actions of the "small minority" of "extremists"...they continue to blame the U.S. and Israel for their evil.
Posted by: jawa ||
09/08/2004 12:03 Comments ||
Top||
#13
No words can describe the horror and grief generated by the deaths of so many innocent people at the hands of those who dishonor the cause they espouse.
Well, certainly not those words. How about
Muslim terrorists in Beslan tortured and murdered hundreds whose families are now stricken with grief and swelling with anger against terrorists. The terrorists and those who think like them will pay in an ugly way.
The leader of the Islamist gang that carried out the Bali nightclub bombing two years ago has written a book justifying his actions. The author, Imam Samudra, displays little remorse for his role in a plot that killed more than 200 people. Imam Samudra has titled his book Me Against the Terrorists, but in his view, the terrorists are the United States and its allies. Samudra is currently sitting on death row in a Bali prison after a court convicted him of being the organizational mastermind of the 10-man gang that detonated three bombs in a Bali tourist area on the night of October 12, 2002. The blasts killed 202 people. In the book, which so far has been published only in Indonesian, Samudra shows some regret for the Muslims who were killed, but has little sympathy for the young western tourists who made up the majority of the victims.
He writes that the target was bigger than Bali, which he describes as a small place where American terrorists and their allies gathered. His real targets were what he describes as the arrogant and proud colonialists and criminals who oppress Muslims. Samudra denies in the book that innocent civilians were killed, writing that it is common knowledge that the United States, Australia and Singapore gave their civilians military training. The book is written as an autobiography, and among other things covers his training in an al-Qaida camp in Afghanistan. He describes his time in the camp as one of the happiest of his life, with only the sound of gunfire and the recital of verses from the Koran, and without what he describes as "calls of the devil" - female voices, or music. Samudra says profits from the book are to be divided between his family and his legal defense team, who have so far been acting for free. Only one of the Bali bombers, Ali Imron, has apologized for the attacks. He is one of four men sentenced to life in prison. Three others including Samudra have been sentenced to death, and two members of the team are still at large.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
09/08/2004 15:53 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Khatami issued a "guarantee" not to seek atomic weapons, and warned Washington that it can't stabilize Iraq and Afghanistan without Teheran's help.
Seems to me we can't stabilize Iraq and Afghanistan with all of Teheran's interference is more like it. I know the solution, it involves large smoking holes in the ground.
Posted by: Shep UK ||
09/08/2004 16:13 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Placing human shields at their decoy sites is somewhat ingenious, however I doubt that will "blink the eye" of Israel at the moment of truth, (remember the female protester [shield] that stood in front of the tank!)First class case of the jitters if you ask me.
#7
I will call my ex-friend in Florida that was a human shield in Iraq for Sammy. Maybe she can get paid for this, which could help pay her fine to the US for her little trip to Baghdad. Heh heh.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
09/08/2004 16:31 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Someone spread the word that human shields are much more effective if the clerics themselves were part of the various contingents....
#13
Perhaps they should run an ad in the WaPo or NY Slimes. There are plenty of lilly-livered peeze activists over there. We could stand to thin the herd a bit anyway.
What are they paying? Is there hazardous duty pay?
Posted by: Capt America ||
09/08/2004 19:19 Comments ||
Top||
#15
As many as it takes to finish the job! We won't forget 9/11, and now Russia won't forget 9/4 - 9/6 (and onward). 'Fraid you made a lil' mistake waking up the sleeping bear....We'll be nice (have to in our P.C. world), but I'm betting that Putin will soon take the gloves off! We will NOT desecrate the memories of those we've lost in Iraq by NOT finishing the job! {Puts tin foil hat on} And, BTW, we're really good Zionists, we're gonna let Israel take on Iran's nuke program {takes tin foil hat off}.
Posted by: BA ||
09/08/2004 20:42 Comments ||
Top||
#19
I got a kick out of the disgruntled human shields during the Iraq War - the ones that wanted to shield orphanages but instead were positioned to shield military targets. They were exasperated when the Baathists pointed out that orphans were their own shields. At least the Iranian regime is adhering to truth-in-advertising standards. I wonder if there will be any moles that slip in with the shields.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
09/08/2004 22:58 Comments ||
Top||
#20
Everyone remember the technical term for "human shield": "war criminal".
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
09/08/2004 23:02 Comments ||
Top||
Syria has, after a short break, returned into Uncle Sam's crosshairs. The immediate consequences were Israel's warning to Syria after the Beer Sheba terror attack, and a US diplomatic offensive aimed at forcing Syria to get out of Lebanon. The attack in Beer Sheba got the limelight, but the really important events this week in the Middle East occurred in Lebanon and Gaza. On the 29th of August a firefight broke out in the Palestinian refugee camp Ein el-Hilweh, near the port of Sidon, in which two Palestinians were killed, supposedly by operatives of Sabaath al-Nasr, a small radical Islamic Palestinian terrorist organization. It seemed like just another small incident of random violence endemic to this part of the world, and was treated accordingly, relegated to the international media's peanut gallery. However much more was at stake.
The firefight was the end result of a botched assassination campaign hatched by Iran, intended to allow its proxies to replace Arafat's Fatah movement as the most important armed Palestinian force in Lebanon. According to western intelligence sources, the attackers were not al Nasr operatives, but Pasderan (Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guards, an independent elite military force answerable only to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, similar to the SS in the Third Reich) officers. The prime target of the offensive were not the two relatively junior Fatah officers killed, but Col Abdul Jaafar, one of the most senior Fatah officers in the camp, in charge of internal security.
Between 2-3 weeks Col. Sultan Abu Einan, the Fatah commander in the camp sent Arafat an urgent communication, warning him that his erstwhile Hezbullah and Iranian allies were planning to take over the camp. According to intelligence sources, Hezbullah and the Pasderan were recruiting Fatah troops, offering them $500 a month for their allegiance. He warned Arafat that unless something was done, Hezbullah would soon be able to replace Fatah as the main military force in the camp.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Paul Moloney ||
09/08/2004 3:58:38 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
More reasons to remove Iran's ruling mullahs the sooner the better.
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
09/08/2004 4:08 Comments ||
Top||
#2
With Russia siding with Israel, the Iranians seem to be spreading themselves a bit thin.
#3
Nah, they've got Allan on their side. He covers their flanks.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
09/08/2004 9:47 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Why do we care who's the cock of this particular dungheap? Is there something strategic about it? It was my impression that the Syrians and Lebanese have it sealed up to keep the savages penned up and away from the throats of the good people of, hrm, Sidon was it?
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
09/08/2004 12:41 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Al-Q has a nasty habit of seeping out around the edges. El-Hellhole is best left to the locals to kill each other in.
#6
The blackhats have to believe that they are currently invulnerable. US elections and the military bogged down in Iraq, Tony Blair trying to maintain control of the Labor Party, and Israel Likud in disarray over the fence, etc. You have to believe they are betting that they have a window of opportunity and a free pass over the next 2 to 4 months, and they are trying to make the most of it.
After the peaceful end to the military standoff in Najaf last month, many Iraqis and Americans hoped that the conflict between the Iraqi interim government and the young cleric Moktada al-Sadr had been resolved, and that Mr. Sadr's men would go back to their normal lives. The heavy fighting that erupted in the Baghdad slum of Sadr City yesterday showed that nothing could have been further from the truth. News reports suggest that rather than dispersing, Mr. Sadr's followers have simply returned home to carry on the fight. Thus the fundamental weakness of the Najaf peace deal - allowing Mr. Sadr's army to keep its weapons - has finally been exposed, raising the question of what role the militia will play in a future Iraq.
While some now argue that the group will embark on a brutal campaign of guerrilla warfare, posing a permanent threat to the stability of whatever government emerges in Baghdad, others believe that Mr. Sadr's latest insurgency is part of a strategy to secure a prominent place at the negotiating table, paving the way for the militia's eventual conversion into a normal political party. Surprisingly little attention has yet been given to a third, more worrisome, possibility: the transformation of Mr. Sadr's Mahdi Army into an Iraqi version of the Lebanese group Hezbollah.
Hezbollah occupies a prominent position in the terrorist universe because it found a unique way of combining political restraint with militancy. It emerged in the wake of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982. While formally committed to creating an Islamic republic, the group quickly realized that a religiously motivated campaign of terrorism would fail to achieve any political ends in multiethnic Lebanon.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
09/08/2004 12:52:14 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
More from the NY Slimes. I don't imagine anyone thought that the al-Sadr thugs would simply become common citizens. But it appears they are no longer hiding at the Shrine of Imam Ali. Iraq is not Lebanon, and no one expects al-Sadr to form a political party.
#2
Many good points - but I take issue with this idea: While it may be that "Hezbollah occupies a prominent position in the terrorist universe because it found a unique way of combining political restraint with militancy."
It is IMHO a real stretch to think that Mookie Sadr has a drop of political restraint in his uneducated little body. The guy is just a thug.
While I agree with the overall premise of this article - I think there is a good bit of wishful thinking in this, that Sadr has more influence to create a quagmire than he really possesses. Why else would this article find itself printed in the NYT?
And secondly, I take issue with the idea that it was some sort of long term goal by Iran to use Sadr as a means to the political bargaining table. I think Iran mistakenly thought that they could use Sadr to start a Shia civil war. Having failed, Iran (and the NYT) is hoping that they can recreate a Hezbollah. Maybe - but it's unlikely that Sadr has what it takes to pull it off.
Again, my point is NOT to dispute this idea that Iran will attempt to recreate the Mahdi Army into Hezbollah - but I detect a strong whiff of hoping for a "quagmire" i, what has so far been little more than the unsuccessful hostage taking of the Najaf mosque.
#4
How much more likely is it, then, that elements of the Russian military or the KGB, acting in secret and on their own authority, could gain control of one or more nuclear weapons and use them to avenge the Beslen atrocity?
Equally likely is rogue FSB and mafiya elements-- slim difference in the FSU-- gaining control of nukes and slipping them for cash to members of the Dr Khan network. Which means they sooner or later wind up in the hands of the mullahs or AQ or Hezbollah.
If Russia fails, we fail. Putin's speech made me think of 1905: finally, an admission of the rot within the Russian state and the desperate need to reverse its criminalization, demoralization, and enfeeblement. Pakistan north.
President Bush, the day before election day, has Colin Powell send a message to Syria, Iran and Lebanon.
It basically sez: "Pay close attention to election day returns. As it becomes obvious President Bush will have a second term, and with every state reporting in, U.S. and coalition troops will be moving closer to your borders, B-1 and B-2 bombers will approach your airspace and prepositioned SF personnel will close on key terrorist related locations.You have until the polls close and the final tally is in, to remove all terrorists, their offices and training bases from your country. To dismantle any facility capable of producing WMD. If this is not done, the very next morning, you will receive the full might of our combined armed forces. And your world will never be the same. Have a nice day!"
#8
RN, why would the message be any different if Bush loses the election? As a lame duck, he doesn't have to keep opponents back home happy, and Kerry would have to deal with the long term consequences. Think of it as the Bush version of stealing all the "w" keys from the typewriters ;-)
Oh yes, and setting himself up for a win against Hillary Clinton in 2008.
[letter to editor of the NYPost]--
The murder of schoolchildren in Russia by Islamic terrorists has a precedent ("The Beslan Savagery," Editorial, Sept. 4). On May 15, 1974, Yasser Arafat's terrorists took over a school in the northern Israel town of Maalot. They murdered 22 children and wounded 60 before they were killed by Israeli commandos. An American doctor who was vacationing in Israel treated many of the survivors. He reported that the Arab gunmen aimed at the faces and heads of the children....
Posted by: mhw ||
09/08/2004 10:08:28 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
The Maalot (High School) massacre was a terrorist attack in Maalot, Israel that occurred on May 15th 1974.
On this date, which corresponds with the 26th anniversary of Israeli independence, Palestinian terrorists broke into the high school in Maalot, a community in northern Israel.
The terrorists immediately killed a security guard and some of the children, the remaining children and teachers were held as hostages.
In the morning, the terrorists were identified as members of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP) who had infiltrated into Israel from Lebanon. They presented their demands: release Arab terrorists from Israeli prisons, or they would kill the children. The deadline was set at 6:00 p.m. the same day.
The Knesset, the Israeli parliment, met in an emergency session, and by 3:00PM a decision was reached to negotiate, but the terrorists refused a request for more time.
At 5:45 p.m., a unit of the elite Golani Brigade stormed the building. All of the terrorists were killed in the assault, but not before they used firearms and explosives to kill 21 children that afternoon. All told, 26 people were killed and 66 wounded (not including the terrorists), including several people murdered by the terrorists on their way to the school the night before.
Beslan was just another turn of the crank in the parade of disgusting atrocities performed by members of, and in the name of, the ROP.
#2
I don't mean to piss on anyone's chips but didn't the Christian Phalangists do likewise in Beirut? Actually, this may help frame the Phalangists' actions as revenge. Still unfettered evil tho'.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
09/08/2004 15:40 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Howard - you mean sabra and Shatila - you may have a point, but IIRC that was a massacre in hot blood after the assasination of Bashir Gemayel, more than a preplanned act. Still evil though.
#4
Aye, I think you're dead right - they blew up his headquarters/apartment - Druze was he?
Posted by: Howard UK ||
09/08/2004 16:25 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Gemayal was Lebanese Christian, and head of the Phalangists. Israel installed him as Pres of Lebanon, with Israeli troops in Beirut (in 1982). He signed a peace deal with Israel (egypt was the only other arab state to do so, and that was still recent, and Sadat was dead). The Pals killed him, Im not sure how. The Phalangists then went on a rampage, killing Pals. Sharon was blamed for not acting quickly enough to stop them. Israel was forced to withdraw from Beirut. US, UK and French forces went in to fill the vacuum. Shiite and Druze militias, with Syrian backing, fought US forces. Hezbollah bombed a USMC barracks, killing over 200 and Reagan pulled US troops out (i presume uk and France withdrew around the same time) Syria filled the vacuum. Israel retreated to a security zone in the south.
On April 8 came the downing of Air Force Maj. Jim Ewald's A-10 Thunderbolt fighter over Baghdad and the discovery that it was a French-made Roland missile that brought down the American pilot and destroyed a $13 million aircraft. Ewald, one of the first U.S. pilots shot down in the war, was rescued by members of the Army's 54th Engineer Battalion who saw him parachute to earth not far from the wreckage. Army intelligence concluded that the French had sold the missile to the Iraqis within the past year, despite French denials. A week after Ewald's A-10 was downed, an Army team searching Iraqi weapons depots at the Baghdad airport discovered caches of French-made missiles. One anti-aircraft missile, among a cache of 51 Roland-2s from a French-German manufacturing partnership, bore a label indicating that the batch was produced just months earlier. In May, Army intelligence found a stack of blank French passports in an Iraqi ministry, confirming what U.S. intelligence already had determined: The French had helped Iraqi war criminals escape from coalition forces — and therefore justice. And, the piece de resistance, so to speak:
Then, there were French-made trucks and radios and the deadly grenade launchers, known as RPGs, with French-made night sights. Saddam loyalists used them to kill American soldiers long after the toppling of the dictator's regime. A shocking revelation, later in the story:
The fact that new French missiles were showing up in the hands of Saddam loyalists months after the fall of Baghdad made Wolfowitz and his close aides livid. Still, others in the U.S. government worked to defend the French. The CIA, to avoid upsetting ties with French intelligence, played down the French role in helping Saddam. The agency had a weak human intelligence-gathering capability, and France, because of its history of ties to Iraq, was much better at penetrating Saddam's regime. The State Department's response was not surprising. Asked about French support for Iraq while on a fence-mending mission to Paris in May 2003, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell had said: "We're not going to paper over it and pretend it didn't occur. It did occur. But we're going to work through that." So the CIA and State were poo-poo'ing the French arms sales that were getting Americans killed. State's concern is not rocking the boat and keeping the Paris staff as large as possible. I guess they enjoy Paris while they're "working" and then enjoy their Saudi pensions once they've retired. This part was actually a surprise:
Among those who took a softer position on France was National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, the former Stanford provost who surrounded herself with State Department officials and Foreign Service officers.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
09/08/2004 3:18:01 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
But DoD didnt leak this till now. When CIA and State,fresh from crushing Chalabi, seem to behind FBI leaks of Franklin investigation, with its attack on AIPAC, Israel, Feith and all the other "enemies". The long knives are out now.
#2
to me this confirms france is an eneamy of the alliance and should be terminated, those ungratefull bastards should'nt be allowed out of thier borders - i want war with the French!
Posted by: Shep UK ||
09/08/2004 16:04 Comments ||
Top||
#3
It's a word I hate to use, but we desperately need to purge CIA and State. They don't appear to be working for the US anymore.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
09/08/2004 16:04 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Talk to any Brits who were at Dunkirk... invade France now.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
09/08/2004 16:07 Comments ||
Top||
#5
All organizations work for themselves. CIA's and States missions necessarily make them inclined to certain viewpoints sometimes at odds with US policy. States JOB is to make nicey nice around the world, and CIAs is to gather info, in deep cooperation with other intel services. Just like a marketing dept wants better customer service even if it doesnt pay, State and CIA will pursue their missions even when at odds with US strategy. Its upto the CEO to keep everyone in line.
France has always been an enemy of the English speaking peoples. When has France ever been an ally of either the US or the UK except at the expense of one or the other? The only reason they helped the US in 1781 was they hoped to put it to the UK. Being allied with France has NEVER been to the benefit of the UK or the US.
Let's face it, they've been petulant and destructive has beens since 1703. I hope they join the Calliphate before the big war begins so we can nuke them too.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
09/08/2004 16:20 Comments ||
Top||
#7
When has France ever been an ally of either the US or the UK except at the expense of one or the other?
1914 - 1918.
1939 - 1940.
1944-1945.
In NATO, from 1948 to 1964.
As for France during the leadup to world war two, and France honor generally, I suggest reading Winston Churchills "The Gathering Storm" in which several French leaders are men of honor, and several UK leaders make mistakes as severe as any made by France.
What France did in the above article is on the heads of De Villepin and Chirac, and should not distort our view of France through history.
#8
The government of France needs to know that this is what enemies of the United States do. China supplied fiber optics for radar sites for Saddam. The situation is that France should be looked at the same way as China, as a potential opponent in a war. We are not going to break diplomatic relations, but this incident with the missile hardware sold to an enemy of the US is serious. We need to end any military agreements with them, including joint manuevers, etc etc. French intelligence in the WoT may be helpful, but it seems to me that if we got into any gray areas, the French would feed us disinformation. We will have to reevaluate our relationship with French intelligence. We also need to figure out what to do about French diplomats and their movements in the US. France needs to know that there is a serious and heavy price to pay for selling hardware that puts US forces in harm's way.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
09/08/2004 16:28 Comments ||
Top||
#9
What did France do for the US or the UK from 1914-1918? The benefit flowed all one way. The Brits and Americans were stooges for the French. They did nothing for us except provide graves. Ditto 1939-1940, 1944-45 and 1948-1964. They were a parasite not an ally.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
09/08/2004 16:30 Comments ||
Top||
#10
. . .heavy price to pay for selling hardware that puts US forces in harm's way
You know those executives of those companies who manufactured that stuff better not show their faces around here. . . It could be rather dicey.
#11
in 1914 they gave thousands of lives fighting an enemy that threatened Brit control of the seas. UK in 1914 did NOT fight in France out of selflessness. Ditto for every other period (and US included) Again, for a discussion of French sacrifice, and of UK mistreatment of France, and bending over backwards for Germany, in the interwar period you should read Winston Churchill "The Gathering Storm". He worked with them closely for years, and knew them well. He did not share the opinion you express.
#13
The UK did not fight in France out of selflessnes but out of miscalculation as Niall Ferguson has persuasively argued. The US fought out of self-interest without a doubt. While French individuals act with honor and courage, Their nation does not. It was French arrogance and vindictiveness that scuttled the peace in 1919 and laid the ground for WWII.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
09/08/2004 16:43 Comments ||
Top||
#14
LH: yep, we were in France purely out of self interest. However, this doesn't dispel our natural enmity toward the French. My Grandfather was shot at by French troops when quitting Normandy.. allowed the Eighth army to evacuate and serve in Africa and to vanquish the Germans at El Alamein, the turning point of WW2. The same grandfather lost six uncles at the battles of Ypres. He'd never fight the Germans again but said he'd love a crack at the French.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
09/08/2004 16:47 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Not 8th Army but B.E.F. (before I'm corrected)
Posted by: Howard UK ||
09/08/2004 16:48 Comments ||
Top||
#16
I guess this blows Kerry's plan to ally himself with the French out of the water.
Posted by: V is for Victory ||
09/08/2004 16:49 Comments ||
Top||
#17
We do not yet know what will happen in France or whether the French resistance will be prolonged, both in France and in the French Empire overseas. The French Government will be throwing away great opportunities and casting adrift their future if they do not continue the war in accordance with their Treaty obligations, from which we have not felt able to release them. The House will have read the historic declaration in which, at the desire of many Frenchmen-and of our own hearts-we have proclaimed our willingness at the darkest hour in French history to conclude a union of common citizenship in this struggle. However matters may go in France or with the French Government, or other French Governments, we in this Island and in the British Empire will never lose our sense of comradeship with the French people. If we are now called upon to endure what they have been suffering, we shall emulate their courage, and if final victory rewards our toils they shall share the gains, aye, and freedom shall be restored to all. We abate nothing of our just demands; not one jot or tittle do we recede. Czechs, Poles, Norwegians, Dutch, Belgians have joined their causes to our own. All these shall be restored.
WSC
#18
Getting back on topic, I find it interesting that this info on the Roland is coming out just now. We heard about this back during the war, and like a lot of other things, it vanished into a black hole. Makes me wonder just what else is going to pop out.
Posted by: Steve ||
09/08/2004 16:52 Comments ||
Top||
#19
Yah, Ferguson thinks that if Germany had won in 1914 it would only have meant the equivalent of the EU anyway. Which says more about NF than it does about either Wilhelmine Germany OR the EU.
Churchill makes quite clear that France had no choice, without the US in the League, and without a firm guarantee of post-war borders from the UK, they had to contain Germany on their own, and tried to use reparations to do so. They could not count on the benevolence of Weimar institutions - indeed German rearmament began under Weimar. Churchill makes it clear what he thinks of Brits who failed to understand the French strategic dilemma, and who were overly sympthetic to Germany. Again, I suggest reading the Gathering Storm.
#20
I don't believe the average Tommy understood the political machinations behind either war - but did understand the nature of the French.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
09/08/2004 16:57 Comments ||
Top||
#21
Your headline should read:
"France Sold Arms to Saddam Until Eve of War; ProbablyDefinitely Possibly After"
;-)
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
09/08/2004 16:57 Comments ||
Top||
#22
Talk to any Brits who were at Dunkirk... invade France now.
Not worth it at this time. I say let the Islamozoids take over and scatter the Phrench across the continent, then we go in and slaughter the Islamofreaks and then partition what's left amongst the neighbors of the former nation.
I guess this blows Kerry's plan to ally himself with the French out of the water.
Why would you think that?
Kerry will just consider it nuanced - and be jealous he didn't get a cut of the profits.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
09/08/2004 17:01 Comments ||
Top||
#24
Steve, I agree with you re getting back on topic. Bitching about what France did in WWI & II is a waste of time. I remember this story and it was reported that the Rolands were not newly manufactured. I don't recall how this was verified or by whom. It is consistent with comments that I heard from a CIA-connected individual that the French assisted Saddam's people in spiriting WMD's out of Iraq immediately before the war. Since there is no way to confirm it I say we just put our heads down and get the current job done. If we find any French folks in Iraq who don't have a real good reason to be there, consider them an enemy spy and shoot them.
Posted by: remote man ||
09/08/2004 17:05 Comments ||
Top||
#25
If the Germans had won we would have had the EU without the CAP, another way the French draw reparations in perpetuity from the Germans. The Germans have been beaten so senseless the The Brits, Americans and Russians they no longer know any better.
France had destroyed the chances of Versailles being a treaty of peace long before the Senate rejected the League.
Steve is correct; but it will be in no one's interest to reveal everything or connect all the dots, so France's treachery will go unrequited.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
09/08/2004 17:05 Comments ||
Top||
Police in Paris have discovered a fully equipped cinema-cum-restaurant in a large and previously uncharted cavern underneath the capital's chic 16th arrondissement.
Officers admit they are at a loss to know who built or used one of Paris's most intriguing recent discoveries.
"We have no idea whatsoever," a police spokesman said.
"There were two swastikas painted on the ceiling, but also celtic crosses and several stars of David, so we don't think it's extremists. Some sect or secret society, maybe. There are any number of possibilities."
Or it could be where Chirac goes to hide from the public duriong a bipolar episode. . .
It seems to all fit a pattern, though this is probably off topic.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
09/08/2004 17:41 Comments ||
Top||
#32
All organizations work for themselves. CIA's and States missions necessarily make them inclined to certain viewpoints sometimes at odds with US policy. States JOB is to make nicey nice around the world,
State's JOB is to represent US interests around the world. If that means making "nicey nice", that's what they should do. If it means knocking over tea carts and insulting the sultan's daughter, that's what they should do. It may cost a State official his nice "speaker" position with a Saudi (or French) think tank, but that's the price of service.
and CIAs is to gather info, in deep cooperation with other intel services.
And when those other services feed the CIA false information -- like the forged papers that France handed out -- and when it's the other nation's policy to arm our enemies, the CIA might want to move that other nation from the "friendly and cooperative" column to at least the "unfriendly and uncooperative" column.
Just like a marketing dept wants better customer service even if it doesnt pay, State and CIA will pursue their missions even when at odds with US strategy. Its upto the CEO to keep everyone in line.
When State and the CIA are pulling this kind of crap, they're not pursuing their missions. They're haring off on their own, private foreign policies!
This isn't a matter of boys-will-be-boys bureaucratic infighting, it's borderline (at least!) insubordination. This isn't something we should be hearing about through a quietly published book, but from prosecutors. A whole hell of a lot of people in State and CIA should be facing jail time over this!
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
09/08/2004 17:48 Comments ||
Top||
#33
Mrs Davis
Please, do your homework in history before posting.
Why the UK went to war with Germany? First, because the Germans were aiming to have a Fleeet able to defeat the English one. Second, because it has been a constant policy for England (like stated explicitly by Churchill in his history of WWII) to ever oppose the strongest power in the continent: the easiest way to keep control of the seas is to ensure the continental power is forced to maintain a strong army for defence against continetal powers. 3) Because the Germans invaded a neutral (Belgium) and perpetrated a number of war crimes there (like using civilians as human shields). The later probably didn't influence those cold monsters called politicians but it did influence the British public.
Now about Versailles. Sorry but the drivel about reparations is German/Nazi propaganda. Let's remember the situation. THe Germans had destroyed the industry and mines of most of Belgium and of a large part of "industrial France". Did I mention fields who would not bear crops for many years due to being chock full of mines and unexploded shells or poisoned by the metals from bullets and shells?
Meaning that after the war the Germans would have cornered european markets due to the absence of their French and Belgian competitors. It was thus logic to have them not only pay for the damages but to block them from reaping the fruits of the destruction they had caused. Just what YOU would do if someone did the same to your house and your business. However after much meddling by British and Americans (very generous with other people's money) the reparatiuons were scaled to having each German pay thirty marks per year (remember the destroyed Bekgian and French plants ) and even that they did not pay.
About Dunkerque. There is some bad blood in the French side because for days the British cared only about their own while they were constantly bombed (it was the small boats, fishing and pleasure who saved most of the British army and geography precluded the French to use their own). You could also remember that it was Belgium's surenderring who left British flank on the air and that one of the reasons for the Dunkirk miracle was French retarding action (mostly at Lille).
I would also suggest you google a bit about what happenned to 1300 French sailors from battleship Bretagne at Mers el Kebir, July 3, 1940
Oh, BTW, this noon I lunched with a co-worker and we talaked about how much the loath and shame we feel about Chirac.
#34
I think I have more male relatives buried in France than England.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
09/08/2004 18:08 Comments ||
Top||
#35
George Ellison Yup, Check the date and check the Ellisons who fought in the Barnsley pals/Yorks and Lancs. Fuckwit. That's why I have no respect for the French. Check the 'England' family who fought too.. that's why I have minimal respect for the French... oh and let's get onto WW2...
Posted by: Howard UK ||
09/08/2004 18:27 Comments ||
Top||
#36
And if you don't believe me ... check my site you wanker...
Posted by: Howard UK ||
09/08/2004 18:31 Comments ||
Top||
#38
I really think I'm too upset to post any more.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
09/08/2004 18:36 Comments ||
Top||
#39
JFM we can argue all we want about WWI, but after WWII it was done differently with a lot less French input and seems to have worked out a little better.
Let's also not forget how well the French repulsed the Americans when they invaded French North Africa.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
09/08/2004 18:37 Comments ||
Top||
#40
OK, I hate me for doing that, but the Washington Times recycles information here that has been discredited months ago.
The Roland 2 missiles that were found in Iraq, could not have born a label that the batch was fabricated just months before. The production of Roland II stopped in 1988, and even the U.S. Army has conceded that those Rolands were imported into Iraq before 1990. The Polish had to apologize to France for making a claim about the recent production date: they simply took a date that probably indicated a last Iraqi inspection of the missiles for the French production dates. Roland 3 missiles were never exported to Iraq (and would not have worked with the launch system anyway). They have not been found either so the point is obsolete. Also France has not produced any Roland missile type since 1993. (I know about these missiles.)
The blank French passports probably originated from the looted French embassy. Note that every embassy stocks empty passports. Collaboration between the French and Baathists can simply not be proven by that (not that it is impossible or improbable). In Marseilles a gang stole thousands of blank passports, but none of those ever showed up in Iraq (French police recovered most of them later).
As for the trucks, radios and RPGs with French-made night sights, they don't prove that France sold them. All these can easily be smuggled into the country by arms dealers. If your local burglar shoots you with a German gun, don't hold Germany responsible for that either. If you buy 10 grams of excellent shit in San Francisco, that doesn't mean that the government of Jamaica sold the stuff to the United States.
I'm not trying to downplay things here. But the arguments made by the Washington Times for recent collaboration between France and Saddam have either been proven false months ago or are irrelevant for proving anything. The rest is mere speculation.
#41
Howard -- it's OK. LiberalHawk is being very selective in his quoting of Churchill, ignoring the bits where Churchill reports a Frenchman saying (paraphrasing here) that it would be better to be slaves to the Nazis than partners with the British. He's also glossing over the glee with which the French collaborated.
None of that really matters; the critical issue is that France is at this moment behaving as an enemy of the United States!
I was joking the other day when I remarked that France's paying ransom for their kidnapped journalists was a way for them to openly fund the terrorists in Iraq. I'm not so sure about that anymore.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
09/08/2004 18:47 Comments ||
Top||
#42
I think we should put the Anglo/French history debate back in the coffin...
#43
Thanks - I speak French fluently and must admit that this has come from the frequent visits to war graves in Normandy. I also long to see the graves of my family in Khartoum when this WoT shit is over.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
09/08/2004 18:54 Comments ||
Top||
#44
Uh, Howard...Khartoum may be a glowing ash tray by the time this WoT shit is over.
Posted by: remote man ||
09/08/2004 19:03 Comments ||
Top||
#45
Howard...graves...your family in during the time of Gordon Pasha...another Mahdi Army casualty...or later. I was in country for several years.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
09/08/2004 19:14 Comments ||
Top||
#47
TGA -- you're sure the information YOU'RE using is accurate?
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
09/08/2004 20:04 Comments ||
Top||
#48
Thanks, TGA. Nonetheless, the French are clearly no longer our allies and Chirac and De Villepin are untrustworthy -- in my book rating somewhere below Kerry, who rates somewhere well below the worst used car salesman.
Posted by: Tom ||
09/08/2004 20:54 Comments ||
Top||
#49
Robert Crawford, the only "hard" information is about the Rolands, and this one is definitely false. That the WaTi trots out the same old, long discredited Roland story is telling.
The passport story has never been more than a rumor published by the Washington Times quoting "anonymous sources". No U.S. official has ever confirmed the story, none of these passports has ever been shown. The Washington Times itself had this to say:
"Meanwhile, the Department of Homeland Security this week concluded an intelligence investigation that said that reports of France's role in providing passports to former Iraqi officials could not be confirmed. According to the defense officials, the French passports found in Iraq were obtained by U.S. military teams in the country within the past several weeks.
The teams are searching for weapons of mass destruction and gathering intelligence on Iraq's arms programs.
"There were about a dozen French passports recovered that we know of," one defense official said. No other details were provided.
The official said the passports themselves do not mean that France provided the documents and that the passports may have been looted from the French Embassy."
Oh and had the French wanted to help leading Baathists to escape they would certainly not have provided blank passports, but filled in ones. They might have wanted to know WHO uses their passports, no?
As I said: It's pure speculation. I'm so tired of these "anonymous intelligence sources" who never produce a shred of public evidence. Also the Washington Times never bothered to publish the categorical denial issued by the French Foreign Ministry. Of course the French may not tell the truth but it's basic journalistic style to publish the comment of those you accuse of something.
Also Powell's statement is taken out of context. It did not refer to possible French collaboration with Saddam. Here's the correct quote (Evian summit)
"QUESTION: A question for Mr. de Villepin and Mr. Powell. Can you comment on the state of Franco-American relations? How would you
characterize them now?
SECRETARY POWELL: The United States and France have been friends and allies for many years, more than two centuries, and we remain friends and allies. We have had a serious disagreement in recent months. We're not going to paper it over and pretend it didn't occur. It did occur.
And we're going to work our way through that. But we will always be pulled together by the strongest ties of common values, a belief in
the individual rights of men and women, democracy, the free enterprise system, and all that our two nations and two peoples have been through
together for the last 225 years.
The disagreement refers to the French position in the Iraq War, not to possible French arms sales.
#50
This is also not reporting but a puff piece to promote a book written by Gertz, a reporter at the WaTi, so we aren't getting everything, just enough to make us want to buy the book. It is also a first of three.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
09/08/2004 21:27 Comments ||
Top||
#51
"It is believed.."
"It is well known that.."
"...could not be confirmed."
Plus starting out with a clearly false claim.
I don't think I will buy that book.
I'm sure there is plenty of evidence that France (and others) closely collaborated with Saddam until 1990.
That France (and not rogue arms dealer) sold arms to Saddam lately will be hard to prove. I'm not holding my breath.
I hope you read this. The definitive book (be it in English or in French) about Vichy's Army has been written by American historian Robert Paxton: "Parades and politics at Vichy".
According to it the French officers loathed the idea of having to fight Americans instead of, say Germans, (fighting the British was another matter: there was a lot of resentment for Mers el Kebir, specially in North Africa) problem is: 1) they had orders 2) Most of them wanted Operation Torch to succeed but not opposing enough resistance would trigger a German invasion of Vichy France (in fact that was the final outcome).
SECRETARY POWELL: The United States and France have been friends and allies for many years, more than two centuries, and we remain friends and allies. We have had a serious disagreement in recent months. We're not going to paper it over and pretend it didn't occur. It did occur. And we're going to work our way through that. But we will always be pulled together by the strongest ties of common values, a belief in the individual rights of men and women, democracy, the free enterprise system, and all that our two nations and two peoples have been through together for the last 225 years.
Powell is wrong. When you read the French press or waitch the French TV it is obvious that the leading classes are conditionning the French for a full (cold) war against the United States. France will not be a difficult ally like in times of de Gaulle (who was the first to side with Ammerica during the Cuban missile crisis), not a rival but an ennemy. The French ruling classes NEED French people hate America in order to make the French accept the european dreams of their leaders and not questionning their model of society.
#54
JFM - but it is a policy doomed to failure, unless the French manage to form a solid alliance with states other than the rest of the EU. The EU is already slipping from the clutches of France and, at the end of the day, most Europeans won't be interested in a pointless French ego-trip showdown with the States. So that leaves Russia, China, and/or the Arab/Muslim world. We've seen in the last week or so just how deep Arab affection for France runs, and I doubt either Russia or China have much more interest in alliances with France, and besides, presently neither seem to be interested in Mutually Assured Destruction wars with the US.
Running against the EU is just propelling France further and further into the abyss of irrelevancy. It's the familiar story of tough domestic troubles being masked by scapegoating and aggression towards others. Displacement activity, if you like. Bad for France. Could also be bad for France's neighbours in the long run.
Do you think the French elite is acting more as a result of calculated strategy, or an unconscious ego-driven desire to challenge an America it perceives as inferior/undeserving of its position of pre-eminence. Is there some sort of 'cultural exceptionalism' attitude at play, where French civilisation is almost regarded as divinely inspired and therefore divinely capable and protected (similar to Muslim delusions of predestination in that respect)? Do they realise how futile their anti-Americanism is, in other words?
From DEBKA, add salt:The pair talked as they walked, indicating sandbanks until they reached a point 500 meters from his perch atop an IDF position. They then turned back and disappeared behind Palestinian houses. M. decided this break in Palestinian routine was worth reporting to his superior officer, which he did and put the incident out of his mind. Around 90 minutes later, he stood up to move to another part of the roof. His right shoulder had been visible over the parapet no more than three or four seconds when he was knocked over by a gunshot before he had time to fire. Another soldier on the roof shot back at once, but the sniper was gone.
In the hospital, M was shown the bullet extracted from his shoulder. It came from an M16 automatic rifle and had been fired from a distance of 500 meters, exactly the point where the pair had turned back from the sandbank opposite M.'s rooftop sights. His comrade told him he had caught a glimpse of the shooter he missed and was sure he was European. "A sniper fast enough to lock onto my shoulder, shoot and disappear — all in the space of a three or four seconds must be a top-line professional marksman," said M.
Which leaves out your average islamic gunny who favors point and spray.
His account has been repeated by members of other units serving in the Rafah and Khan Younes sectors of the southern Gaza Strip. They swear they have come across snipers they are sure are not Palestinian but foreigners from northern parts of the world.
DEBKAfile's military sources report that in 2003, the IDF confirmed four instances of "foreign" snipers operating in Palestinian ranks. By September, 5 incidents had been registered this year. In one, an Israel soldier died of a direct shot to the head; four were injured in Operation Rainbow in Rafah earlier this year and two more recently. Soldiers serving in the southern sector claim the number of casualties from European snipers is much higher and are asking questions. Their officers reply that the matter is extremely sensitive but urge them to take precautions on the assumption that professional marksmen are in the vicinity.
Some troops say they have heard the special bang peculiar to the Russian-made SVD sharpshooter's rifle, of the type captured aboard the Karin-A Palestinian smugglers' ship and found during Operation Rainbow. The troops who have come up against these foreigners note their exceptional speed. They fire a single round and duck out of sight, leaving a Palestinian to take over their firing position.
Shoot, duck, let the turban take the bullet.
This description, according to DEBKAfile's military sources, fits mercenary marksmen. By firing once and moving out, they save themselves from Israeli sniper reprisals. As one Israeli officer put it, "After all they're in it for the money, not to get killed." For that reason too, they never stay long in the Gaza Strip — a couple of days and they are gone back across the border into Egypt. Some are thought to enter through the Palestinian gunrunning tunnels from Sinai to Rafah and leave by the same route. Others may be smuggled in from Sinai to southern Israel in groups of illegal workers and prostitutes. The smugglers are said to receive extra-high pay, as much as $1,000, for bringing a foreign marksman in and out of the Gaza Strip.
Palestinian terrorist chiefs have been importing marksmen for hire to hit Israeli troops for two or more years. In March 2002, the London Daily Telegraph, known for its good British MoD and intelligence sources, reported a request from the Israeli Mossad to the British MI6 to find out if an IRA sharpshooter had not been responsible for the 7 Israeli troop deaths at the Wadi Harmiya checkpoint. Israeli tests had shown that the planning of the ambush, the type of weapons used, the way the firefight was managed and, even more tellingly, the fact that the weapons left behind were not the ones used, were typical of an assailant thoroughly conversant with IRA tactics. One month later, when the Moshav Adura was stormed by Palestinian gunmen, Israeli civilians who had seen the terrorists at close quarters reported that among the Palestinians was a European.
Seems like a reasonable assumption. Maybe a gun-for-hire, maybe a islamic convert, european or american sympathizer, or chechan fellow traveler. Hard to say, need a good anti-sniper team to sort them out.
Posted by: Steve ||
09/08/2004 2:14:43 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Doesn't make much sense. Locals are cheaper and disposable. Plus, if they can get Yassin, they can get a European mercenary.
#3
Sadly, the PA is swimming in M-16s since Clinton agreed to arm the PA "police" (uniformed terrorists, in effect).
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
09/08/2004 14:51 Comments ||
Top||
#4
In the late 60's early 70's indications were that several Warsaw Pac nations were providing assorted military training (bomb-making, assassination techniques, sniping, etc) to "international" terrorists at camps in an African desert nation. Among the participants, ANC, PFLP-GC, Fatah, Red Brigades, IRA and others.
The "others" included instructors from former "specialized" units harboring a grudge against the West.
#7
Plenty of weapons are chambered for the 5.56mm (.223) caliber round. They're just guessing from the round recovered from this one soldiers shoulder. You can tell the caliber and sometimes the number of grooves on the bullet can hint at the weapon.
Posted by: Steve ||
09/08/2004 15:18 Comments ||
Top||
#8
I go for the papist scum. No surrender.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
09/08/2004 15:44 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Probably American or Canadian Liberals on holiday in Gaza. It's like Disney land for them: crawl in a cave, meet new people, and fire off a couple of rounds at the Zionists. Was it berringer inthe movie sniper? I guessing Hollywood types.
#10
summin don't compute here. M-16/whatever in 5.56 is not what most shooters would use at 500 meters. At that range wind is a real killer for that light bullet. If there was someone out there that was really serious they would be using at least a 7 mm or more likely a 7.65 mm ie the Druganov. Not saying that someone couldn't make that shot if they were just a bit lucky, but why settle for maybe instead of going for sure.
Posted by: Old Fogey ||
09/08/2004 15:54 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Perhaps they 're only using the tools they've got at hand. Not sure there is a lot of dragunov laying around in Gaza.
Warning: this article suffers from end-stage Eurasianet Syndrome, complete with linked Rall cartoon, multiple paragraphs of fluff, and a standard call for "nuance" by Putin. But Eurasianet -- bless their pointed heads -- excel at providing local information that few other English-speaking outlets bother to cover. Despite their rampant Ameriphobia, this one strength warrants their continued survival in my Bookmarks list. Case in point:
North Ossetians are convinced that the Ingush constituted the bulk of the [Beslan] attackers, a North Ossetian government official told the Russky Kuryer newspaper. "Basically no one in the republic is talking about the Chechens," the newspaper quoted the official as saying. According to Sergei Arutyunov, the head of the Caucasus Department at the Moscow-based Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, "the conflict in the Prigorodny region could resume and this could lead to a huge amount of bloodshed." The Beslan tragedy is also stoking antagonism between Russia and Georgia ... Some hawkish political analysts are urging Russia to get tough with Georgia. One Kremlin-connected observer, Gleb Pavlovsky, who heads the Effective Policy Foundation, told the Russky Zhurnal website; those who planned a terrorist act in Beslan wouldn't have chosen North Ossetia as a target if Saakashvili hadn't "unfrozen the Ossetian issue." In sharp contrast, a significant number of experts are urging the Kremlin to seek an accommodation with Tbilisi on the South Ossetia issue.
That would seem the more reasonable step to me, but what do I know?
The conflict-fraught situation in North Ossetia, Arutyunov told the Vremya Novostei daily, should prompt Russia to press for a rapid settlement of the South Ossetia issue. For the record, I'm of the latter opinion. Putin needs to take the Transcaucasus out of the equation, and the easiest way is to make nice with Georgia by cutting the strings on Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The alternative is putting Georgia on the side of the Muslims.
The North Caucasus is going to explode. I sincerely hope that my armchair analysis is dead wrong, but I don't think Russia can dodge the bullet this time. I didn't feel this way about Basayev's lunatic charge into Dagestan back in '99, nor the Theater raid in '02, nor the attack in Nazran back in June. Beslan really was the magic bullet. Can Russian territorial unity survive this?
Posted by: Another Dan ||
09/08/2004 5:34:08 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Another Dan, your point has real merit, but I'm not sure I agree. To cave now would be to embolden the terrorists further.
It's easy to see why they paired with Israel. Expect some key hits very soon.
#2
Whether AD's analysis is right or wrong, I'd like to say thanks for linking to stuff about a very confused region, which provides far deeper understanding than anything I've seen in the American media. I had only the sketchiest bit of knowledge until yesterday's thread.
#5
There is some "Dark" justice about Beslan and other terrorist attacks after all. The reckless politics of KGB sponsoring terrorism (Arafat is a KGB creation...) all over the world but mainly in west of the 70's and 80's are exploding in their face pitty that it wasnt Putin and friends that are taking the hit. I hope that nuclear help they are giving to Iran will explode in their face first...Russians werent so stupid....
I dont think so Dan . Problem with Russians is the old loyalities of KGB (including Putin) with Arab countries and Persia. Lots of armements contracts go to arabs. Of course they could expand assassinations like the recent one in Emirates. But this is people of KGB to that to change it will be the end of last 50years Russian policy i dont think it will happen after all Beslan was in Ossetia not near power center adding that civilian population is historically not much more than meat for the Kremlin.
#6
oops..thanks LH. It's all very confusing. I struggled to even find a decent map of these places on google...which by the way seems to have gone downhill since it's IPO launched. Looks to me like what pops up is whatever paid them the most $$. Boooring and useless. That's another stock I'd dump ...those guys are still living in the 90's era of tech arrogance. I just don't think they will make it.
ANONYMOUS - lets just hope that what the KGB created, the KGB can destroy.
Think WWII. We don't need to love the Russian KGB to welcome their ability to kill our enemies.
Posted by: B ||
09/08/2004 10:36 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Not so sure about the "Christian on Christian" thing. There's tension between the Russians and the Georgians concerning the Pankisi Gorge area and it's being a base for Chechen/Al Qaeda terrorists. The possibility that a chem lab (Ricin) was located there. Although the Georgians claim to have sorted it all out, with the only threat in the region from "criminals". In addition, recent reporting indicates that a new mosque was constructed in the town of Duisi and that "wahhabis" were often guests there.
Let's see: Christian = church...Orthodox Catholic = Christian.
#8
South Ossetia is a part of Georgia that wants to leave Georgia and go back to Russia. There has been violence, IIUC between the South Ossetians and the govt of Georgia. South Ossetians are mainly christians, as are Georgians. Ossetians=christians. Georgians = christians. Ossetians vs Georgians = Christians vs Christians. OK?
#9
Thanks, LH. B and RN, the confusion is very understandable.
Most Ossetians -- including virtually all of them in Georgian South Ossetia -- are Orthodox Christians. For the usual long, complicated reasons, Ossetes are traditionally very loyal to Moscow. Georgians hate Russia, and hence they hate anyone who likes Russia (and are willing to ally with anyone who hates Russia, hence the unfortunate Georgian-Chechen detente in the early 90s).
Georgia's Pankisi Gorge is inhabited by a local Chechen community, not Ossetes. It's east of South Ossetia, just over the Georgian border from Chechnya itself.
This map may either help or confuse you further. It shows ethnicity/language instead of religion, but suffice to say the following:
Russians, Georgians, Ossetians, Greeks are mostly or exclusively Orthodox Christians. Azeris are Shi'a Muslim. Kalmyks (the mauve color at the top) are Lamai Buddhists (no shit, a European Buddhist country). The others are mostly Sunni or Sufi Muslim. As always, there are religious minorities; among the North Ossetians for example, there are some Muslims and even a few old-timer pagans.
Yes, it's a bit complicated.
Posted by: Another Dan ||
09/08/2004 15:44 Comments ||
Top||
#10
One more footnote: In Arabic, the Caucasus mountains are "Jebel al-Alsan," the Mountain[s] of Languages.
Posted by: Another Dan ||
09/08/2004 15:47 Comments ||
Top||
Russia Says Could Strike 'Terrorist' Bases Anywhere
Russia is prepared to launch pre-emptive strikes on bases used for training militants anywhere in the world, a senior general was quoted as saying on Wednesday. Note Al Reuters scare quotes. My headline more accurately reflects the General's words: Al Reuters still can't bring itself to call the child-murdering Mohammedan devil-spawn what they really are.
"As for launching pre-emptive strikes on terrorist bases, we will carry out all measures to liquidate terrorist bases in any region of the world," General Yuri Baluevsky said, according to Russian news agencies. "However, this does not mean that we will launch nuclear strikes." Or does it? The very inclusion of this disclaimer might indicate that they have considered the big one.
Posted by: Atomic Conspiracy ||
09/08/2004 5:47:20 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
AC, no doubt they did. But I think they do have it in reserve for a target rich environment, somewhere south of Caucasus mtn range, or even south-west of it. Then further down, there presents itself an opportunity to test in silicon rich environment, maybe they could produce tectites, or sheets of glass, who knows.
Speaking of target rich environment...
For some reason, I can't post neither news links nor articles, (submissions do not appear after posting), so here is mentioned instead.
#2
The first time I saw someone "Nuke Mecca!" just after 9-11, I thought they were crazier than a March hare.
Now, we are actually at that point.
Satanic Arabia is an obvious target, and Mecca is the one place where there is no chance of frying any Americans, other than a few Islamo quislings we could happily do without.
#6
Well, there is a little problem. If Über-Wahhabis had their way, they would level Mecca themselves. They already got away with destruction of some structures, despite protests of muslims elsewhere. They also see Kaaba as a source of idolatry. Yea, utter nutz, don't tell me. The only thing that prevents them is that hajj is a source of sizable revenue for Fraudis and keeps the other muslims in a form of servitude to holders of keys.
So, I am not sure how nukin' Mecca would play itself out. Wahhabis may percieve it as a victory--the enemy was led by the hand of Allan, while the rest of the muslims may get really mad.
Or, they may realize that if Allan couldn't protect Mecca, then what kind of omnipotent deity is he... I dunno.
Kingdom of Satanic Arabia can be tackled conventionally in one-two weeks. But if one would use some fast particles, neutron weapons may be a better choice.
There are targets more suitable for nukin', as I am concerned. After all's done, Mecca may be a cherry on the icing, a final exclamation mark in the whole story.
#12
heh..heh...apparently the Nazi's spawn learned nothing from their elders. Is it just me or is anyone else thinking that historyy repeats itself and they just made the same mistake Hitler made when he marched on Moscow. Russians, like Mericans are an unwise choice to tangle with. The Russians can match them in their penchant for ruthlessness.
#13
The Russians are not in a position to mount large-scale military operations outside their region. What they did learn in Afghanistan, and it's been underscored by U.S. and coalition SF forces, that small unit operations are the most effective against specific targets (terrorist training bases, HQ's and key personnel). They have the will to execute (that's the operative word) anyone, anywhere they believe has a responsibility for terrorist attacks against them.
You can expect to read about/see bodies piling up in the most interesting places.
#15
Another fun workday at the Rantburg Pest ConTROLL Department . . .
"Ye Gods! Steve! Look up there!"
"What is that thing, Steve?"
"It looks like a UFO."
"What's that in the cockpit? A creature from another world?"
"Why, crack my shell and fry me for an egg if I'm wrong, but unless my Roger Tory Peterson's Field Guide to the Trolls of Greater Rantburg has a misprint, it's a Serbian Lop-Eared Troll! You know what that means?"
"Boris is back! Scramble the interceptors!"
Posted by: Mike ||
09/08/2004 10:23 Comments ||
Top||
#16
UFO is sounding particularly deranged this morning.
Posted by: B ||
09/08/2004 10:25 Comments ||
Top||
#17
Boris Pribitch, take your lies and delusions somewhere else. Loser. Now it's clear why the Kosovars, et al, kicked your ass with inferior weapons.
Posted by: Frank G ||
09/08/2004 10:26 Comments ||
Top||
#21
Attacking the Russians makes sense in a backwards kind of logic. After all it was defeating the Soviets in Afghanistan that got Bin Laden into thinking the US would be a pushover. Well now the US has chased him all over hell and back and his boys are looking for another big victory and hoping they can take on Russia again.
I think it might have made a second big mistake.
I read a story the other day about strife amung the terrorists in the school. HOw some didn't know they would be killing kids and how the leader blew up two suicide bomber women in the group to end the little rebellion. Reading between the lines I imagine the Checnyans were the ones who didn't want to kill the kids. They know the Russians better and know they'd take the big hit. The other thing pointing to it being the Checyans against killing the kids is its rare to get female suicide bombers. The Palestinians and the Chechyans are the only ones I know of who have used them.
Posted by: Steve ||
09/08/2004 10:56 Comments ||
Top||
#23
Lotta rain up here today. I think it's a Zionist plot. As a matter of fact, I know it is because "they" say we're getting more tomorrow. How would "they" know that?
UFOOL, do you spin around in circles when you walk down the street so the Mossad can't sneak up on you and nail your paranoid little ass?
#31
i bet UFO believes the greys and bigfoot and perhaps even nessy are all aiding the 'imaginary zionist army'. Man probably never even landed on the moon according to UFO and i'll bet he thinks Christopher Colombus's navigater was an Arab too. So deluded anthing is possible is his little child like imagination, how much LSD have you consumed UFO? your reality seems so differant to ours, must be really mind blowing stuff u got there.
Posted by: Shep UK ||
09/08/2004 13:59 Comments ||
Top||
#32
UFOOL. I'm under your bed.
Sleep tight.
Posted by: The Mossad ||
09/08/2004 13:59 Comments ||
Top||
#33
increasingly the motive seems to be to get the Ossetians to massacre Ingush, thus getting the Ingush to join the Chechens in their war against Russia, and perhaps even to get the Dagestanis and other muslims in Russia to join in. This would fit in with a strategy that AQ has been pursuing since 9/11 and before, to PROVOKE a war between civilizations, as a way of displacing moderates who would work with the West and getting the entire muslim world to join them and follow them. The russians seem to realize this, and have apparently gone to some trouble to protect Ingush in Ossetia. This is wise.
#36
I think that Russia must act in a *complementary* way to the US. The US goes after the triggermen, the "fighters". But this does not solve the problem, because it does not address the cause of the problem.
I hope that Russia uses a different tactic: KILL THE IMAMS! THE DIRECTIVE: Any Imam or Mullah on the entire planet has 72 hours to live once they are known to advocate violence, murder, or Jihad directed against ANY civilian.
It shouldn't matter if they live in Pakistan, or Iran, OR CANADA, OR BRITAIN, OR THE US.
Surely there are enough skilled Russians who could cut the tongues out of their heads so that they choke on their own blood? 10 dead Imams in a single country will reduce the lust for blood by their followers by 90%.
If anyone here wants to forward this suggestion to President Putin, please feel free to do so.
#39
Anonymoose : As long as the "Imam's" bodies are covered with pig fat and left for buzzards, vultures, crows, and stray dogs to consume. Then I will agree with your suggestion.
#40
Of course, Boris, just as the Mossad carried out the Madrid train bombings to strengthen support for Spanish involvement in Iraq.
Collaborationist swine like you are the prime evidence against your delusions theories.
The terrorists know that they can count on conspira-liars to deflect blame and media fifth columnists and left-devil politicians to advocate appeasement, exactly as we have seen since the Beslan atrocity.
#41
BigEd: Trust in faith. The Russians have some talents in this field. I remember after the US hostages were successfully taken and held in Lebanon, the same gang kidnapped four Russians. The KGB counter-kidnapped their Imam, then FedEx'ed a few of his less important body parts to the kidnappers. The Russians hostages were not only immediately released, but the kidnappers drove them to the Russian embassy, literally.
I am also reminded how the Russians dealt with some of the captured German SS, in field conditions: "First you nail two shell casings into their kneecaps, and then you ask them questions. If you feel like asking questions."
But the important thing is does it work? For that, I can almost guarantee that getting the Imams to shut up will suck a LOT of wind out of this nonsense.
#42
#7 "Russia says it could strike terrorist bases anywhere"
Except Iran ..
Bryan, to me this is the deal-breaker. Until RasPutin purchases a clue and cuts the cord with Iran, all of his proclaimations are just so much window dressing. Halting sales of weapons and armaments to terrorist sponsoring countries is another prerequisite as well. Russia has worked very hard to bring about Beslan. Harsh, I know, but it's a fact.
From one of the links in this thread:
"Why the law-enforcement bodies didn't know and why they allowed a column of fighters to get into the city past all checkpoints — this is something that can be judged only through rumors," the newspaper Novye Izvestia said Monday.
This remains a central issue that must be satisfactorily resolved. All staff at every single one of the checkpoints must be brought up on charges. The guards who actually waved through the vehicle should be EXECUTED. The people of Beslan deserve nothing less. Had the checkpoints functioned, this atrocity might not have happened. Bribes or no bribes, a large truck like that still should have had its "cargo" inspected. Those who neglected this one vital function may as well have helped pull the triggers in the gym.
#36I hope that Russia uses a different tactic: KILL THE IMAMS!
THE DIRECTIVE: Any Imam or Mullah on the entire planet has 72 hours to live once they are known to advocate violence, murder, or Jihad directed against ANY civilian.
It shouldn't matter if they live in Pakistan, or Iran, OR CANADA, OR BRITAIN, OR THE US.
Anonymoose, as an American, I'm not quite ready to have wetwork teams operating in our own country at our own government's behest. I'm d@mn close, but just not there ... yet.
America should instantly deport all Imams or Mullahs that preach violent jihad. We most definitely should be sending wetwork teams to all other Islamic countries to begin snuffing these radical clerics. They are declaring war upon America from the shelter of the mosques and they should pay for it with their lives.
Even if it doesn't suck the wind out of their sails, it will show a basic determination upon our part to blow away our enemies wherever they are and make an example for all potential jihadis to ponder before they consider strapping on that bomb vest.
#43
Zenster: this shows a basic difference between the Russian and American zeitgeist. I quite agree that Americans would have qualms with "wetwork" against (seeming) non-combatants. Now, granted, Americans are first-rate at exterminating combatants in the field; but there is always a peculiar urge in them to arrest them, if at all possible; which, granted, is not a bad idea if you want information from them.
But dismiss the notion that these men are truly non-combatants. They inspire, they direct, they plan for and they command others from what they believe is the safety of the pulpit. They do not wish to die themselves, or even feel threatened. Instead, they want to send others to die.
Russians are under no such illusions. It would be an easy matter for them to sanction with prejudice someone like the blind cleric who directed the first WTC bombing. Or "Hookhand", in Britain. Or any number of clerics in Saudi Arabia, or Pakistan. Or Iran, for that matter. And no problem at all with seeming conflict-of-interest in Iran. They would not be fighting Iran, just an individual in Iran who truly deserves to die. Be it the entire Guardian Council or the High Priest for Life himself. Nothing personal, just business.
An important point is that Russia does not have the resources to burn that the US does. But it can use the resources it has to great effect. By them focusing on the troublemakers, and the US continuing to focus on the executors, as I said before, 90% of this nonsense would stop through lack of interest. The Imams would stop preaching murderous Jihad, and their followers would have no direction, no stimulation, and no coordination for their rage.
#44
But dismiss the notion that these men are truly non-combatants.
I already have. It's just that if we are going to go after these terrorists with wetwork teams within our own borders, what about those neo-Nazi groups who like the Islamic terror organizations' similar lust for renewed genocide? Should those skinheads go into the crosshairs too? What about the likes of Nicholes and McVeigh, should we be capping them as well?
I trust you can see where I'm leading, Anonymoose? I'm all for going after them on their home turf where they feel most comfortable. The ones on our own turf need to be deported or tried and jailed for sedition or conspiring to harm American citizens. I think jailing them with general prison populations would probably get the desired results rather quickly.
I still have big problems with Russia's conflict of interest in their support of terrorist nations. I agree that it is a hangover from the bad old KGB days, but they need to wean themselves off this "balance of power" concept as it is obviously not in their best interests anymore.
#45
Zenster: that is not a good extrapolation. You are trying to apply American laws and pricipals to nations that do not have them. And I do mean "nations". While such things as "incitement" are unlawful in the US, they are not in most of the world. An Imam, there, can call for murderous Jihad, for killing children, anything, without breaking *their* laws.
And while Russians can gleefully kill such people, and without remorse, they do not do so frivilously. It would not turn into a shooting gallery; but if the Kremlin decided that an Imam should die, he *would* die. No messing around with trying to arrest him, or getting him to change his ways, or making a deal with him, or bribing him. He would be a dead man walking.
Ironically, this is just the opposite from how you effectively deal with combatants, as the US does. The US "way", in that case, say Iraq, is far better than the Russian "way", for example, in Chechnya.
But do not slight the Russian "way" in dealing with such people as Gaulieters and Imams. By taking out one man, they might save the lives of a hundred of his followers; which, ironically (to an American), they would call a "humanitarian" act. And they would have a point. For as long as such people live, even in prison, they continue to inspire new combatants to pick up arms, new fools to die for their cause.
But, and as an important point, such people are almost ALWAYS cowards. As long as they can sacrifice endless numbers of their followers, they are as brave as they come. But when their own life, or even their own comforts, are threatened, they bow and grovel before whoever holds a knife at their throat, or a boot on their back.
#46
This discussion highlights one of the frequently overlooked advantages of a Gideon/Phoenix wetwork approach: nobody even claims that it is legal. How is that an advantage? As arch-lib CBS reporter Bob Simon (who advocates a Gideon/Phoenix campaign) has pointed out, it can be done without any legal or Constitutional changes that could later be used by other leaders to abuse legitimate dissidents.
#47
Another Mossad mission accomplished, first 911 and then the Beslan massacre -- now Britain and France, and maybe even Germany, must be 'persuaded' to join the genocide on Moslems and Israel can take on the protective role of little-big-brother.
How transparent, as in any crime the motive is the key element, and based on the results accomplished, the only ME player with a motive is Israel. Israel's Pentagon mole is one piece of convincing evidence.
EFL
Of the 18 presidential candidates, the current interim incumbent, Hamid Karzai, is the strongest. He is Pashtun, the dominant ethnic grouping, and favored by both Islamabad and Washington, the latter having handpicked him in the first place. But in the important Pashtun belt on the border with Pakistan, anti-US sentiment is running high, making Karzai vulnerable to his main rival, Yunus Qanooni. Qanooni hails from the minority Tajik community, and is backed by Iran, Russia and India. He is a former education minister and a member of the Jamiat-i-Islami led by the influential Professor Buhanuddin Rabbani and is believed to have a strong voter bank in the heartlands - Takhar, Panjsher and Badakshan, apart from approximately 800,000 Afghan refugees in Iran who are eligible to vote. He also has some support in the predominantly Pashtun belt where the Jamiat-i-Islami has footholds, such as in Jalalabad, Kabul and Logar. Qanooni is viewed as an Islamist and anti-US.
Karzai's vulnerability is compounded by the Taliban (defined by the US as "bad" Taliban as opposed to "good" ones ) calling for a boycott of the elections. The Taliban movement still holds massive appeal for the Pashtun population in east and southeastern Afghanistan, especially in Khost, Paktia, Paktika, Kunar, Zabul, Oruzgan and Kandahar. Initially, the majority of the Afghan adult population refused to register for the polls. The government then issued special cards to those who did register, and these cards are a virtual prerequisite for being a "national". People are stopped at bus stops and check points and forced to produce the registration cards, or else face harassment. Registration figures shot up as a result. However, in places like Zabul and Hilmand, the Taliban often besiege areas and beat up people found with cards. In addition to approximately 10 million voters in Afghanistan, about 1.5 million in refugee camps in Pakistan can also vote. The Taliban have already distributed warning leaflets in these camps that those found voting will have their homes demolished. Some independent clerics are also preaching to discourage females from voting. This trend also exists in the Pashtun belt.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Paul Moloney ||
09/08/2004 5:05:37 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Post-Beslan, is Russia still so keen to back an Islamist candidate?
#2
Qanooni is hardly friendly to AQ or the Saudis. Hes old Northern Alliance, which was friendly to Russia, Iran and India, and hostile to Pakistan. If the above article is accurate (and Im NOT sure it is) we're back to the classic great game in Afghanistan, with Russia against whoever controls the other side of the Khyber pass - first UK, then Pakistan backed by the US, and now the US backed by Pakistan. Like the mid-90s, only now the Taliban are out of the picture (sorta) and the US is dominant, not Pakistan. The article does NOT mention Dostum, who is old NA but NOT at all fundie, is Uzbek rather than Tajik, and is IIUC running on his own.
Events in Beslan have had an unusual and unexpected impact in Chechnya. The local population, which had largely backed the actions by Chechen terrorists, seems to have turned against them. Separatists' families, including those of anti-Russian resistance leaders such as Maskhadov, Basayev, Umarov —who are thought to have orchestrated the Beslan attack— have publicly condemned the actions of their relatives. Pamzan and Ruslan Maskhadov, cousins of former Chechen President Aslan Maskhadov called on him to end terrorism. "Today, life is back to normal in the Chechen Republic. It is possible to work and receive a salary," the two brothers said. "Consequently, the reasons for terror are neither present nor justified." They urged Mashkadov to put an end to his actions once and for all and stop the gangs "who have killed hundreds of innocent children." They also asked Ossetians for forgiveness. I don't suppose the Russians would have anything to do with these statements...
Zholzan Abdulkadyrova, Aslan Maskhadov's sister, appealed to her brother telling him to stop the crimes against helpless people. In the early phase of the Beslan crisis, Ms Abdulkadyrova had offered herself as a hostage in place of the children held. "Chechens," she said, "do not want to be the enemies either of Ossetians, Ingushs or Russians."
"Chechens don't want to be deported to someplace really, really cold..."
The author is former Additional Secretary, Research and Analysis Wing
The deadly bomb attack on the Awami League rally in Dhaka on August 21 is yet another stark reminder that none, save the ruling clique and its fundamentalist allies, is safe in today's Bangladesh. A hitherto unknown terrorist group, Hikmatul Jehad, has claimed responsibility for the dastardly act and threatened to kill Hasina within seven days.
That's what Islamists do instead of civil, well-reasoned discourse...
But indications are that it was the handiwork of the Harkat-ul Jihad-e-Islam (HuJI) that had unsuccessfully attempted to kill Hasina at Kotalipara in 2000 when she was the prime minister. A legacy of the Pakistan-era communal politics, the growth of radical political Islam in Bangladesh has been a process of incremental build-up brought about by a combination of internal and external factors. An identity crisis rooted in the conflict between the moderate Bengali cultural ethos and the harsh theocratic reality of Pakistan led to the war of liberation in 1971, but the post-liberation experiment ended abruptly in 1975 with the killing of Sheikh Mujib in a military putsch.
The Paks, unable to win a war even among themselves, were nevertheless able to mount an assassination, getting their Dire Revenge™, and doing much in the process to prevent Bangla from becoming something resembling a civilized country...
Gen Ziaur Rehman lifted the ban on the communal and fundamentalist parties and de-secularized the constitution in 1977 under pressure from Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries. Gen HM Ershad declared Islam as the state religion in 1988. The process of Islamization initiated by the two military rulers reactivated the Jamaat-e-Islami and other communal and fundamentalist forces in the country.
Then they sat around for a few years scratching their turbans, wondering where all the civil unrest was coming from...
Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld charged yesterday that Iran is fueling the deadly insurgency in Iraq with money and fighters. But, in an interview with editors and reporters of The Washington Times, Mr. Rumsfeld acknowledged that the United States has limited options because other nations are "not willing" to join in pressuring Iran, which has shown behavior that Mr. Rumsfeld said is "not part of the civilized world." The defense secretary, a main architect of President Bush's strategy of attacking Islamic terrorists worldwide, declared of the insurgency in Iraq, "They're losing."
Arab mercenaries are demanding that militants carry out new terrorist acts, regardless of who will become victims of terrorism, Major-General Ilya Shabalkin, an official with the regional operative headquarters directing the anti-terrorist operation in the Northern Caucasus, told Interfax on Tuesday.
Dang! Ilya got promoted in July, and I never even noticed. I guess I missed the promotion party...
Shabalkin said this information came from a member of the group that committed crimes in the Achkhoi-Martan and Urus-Martan regions, who voluntarily turned himself in to law enforcement agencies recently. The man also surrendered his Kalashnikov gun, Shabalkin said. The former militant says Arab mercenaries are constantly demanding new terrorist acts and their main goal is to instill fear and chaos in Chechnya. Those mercenaries do not care who the victims of the terrorist acts are, the man said.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
09/08/2004 12:44:46 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Problem for them is that they will get more blood - Islmaist blood, by the gallon.
Putin is not going to call the dogs off this time, and the US State Department weenies will not be able to pretzel themselves to side with the Chechyn terrs.
#2
I think the nuclear option is a real possibility here.
Ever since the collapse of the Soviet Union there has been speculation about the relative security of ex-Soviet nuclear weapons. At the very least, the system of custody, command and control is not all it should be. This has usually been discussed in the context of Islamic terrorists getting their hands on a Russian nuke.
How much more likely is it, then, that elements of the Russian military or the KGB, acting in secret and on their own authority, could gain control of one or more nuclear weapons and use them to avenge the Beslen atrocity?
This scenario could also be used to create plausible deniability for an offially sanctioned attack.
#7
BTW, I'm very well aware that it is almost impossible for a regular, professionally produced inventory-type nuke to detonate by accident. It hasn't happened in 59 years of moving thousands of the things all over the world, so that is a pretty good indication. In fact, it is very hard to set one off on purpose.
This is not true, however, of the kind of "home-made" device some freak might be putting together in the basement of the local mosque, so the scenario remains credible.
#8
How much more likely is it, then, that elements of the Russian military or the KGB, acting in secret and on their own authority, could gain control of one or more nuclear weapons and use them to avenge the Beslen atrocity?
Equally likely is rogue FSB and mafiya elements-- slim difference in the FSU-- gaining control of nukes and slipping them for cash to members of the Dr Khan network. Which means they sooner or later wind up in the hands of the mullahs or AQ or Hezbollah.
If Russia fails, we fail. Putin's speech made me think of 1905: finally, an admission of the rot within the Russian state and the desperate need to reverse its criminalization, demoralization, and enfeeblement.
Another analogy: think of Putin's Russia as Pakistan North. Russia desperately needs our help, and we desperately need Russia to succeed. Get on that plane, Condi and Rummy. And bring an entourage of nonproliferation experts and oil major execs with you.
Let NATO die a quiet death. Give whatever carrots you need to Russia's nuke industry. Get Russia firmly on our side, help them be effective. Get it done this time.
How, if at all, do you secure a port from the likelihood of a dirty bomb slipped into one of the gazillion or so containers that are offloaded automatically each day in LA, Baltimore, Houston etc.?
How do you secure it without throwing a wrench into our shipping trade, hence retail, and thereby chopping off 1% or so from our GDP growth?
#10
Excuse me, Lex, did I say anything to suggest that nuclear terrorism was unlikely or impossible? Your line of questioning seems to respond to some statement that I did not make.
#11
Brits recently deployed some interesting equippment. They are able to see through container walls as it passes underneath. It is designed primarily for finding illegals, but it can be calibrated for all sorts of purposes. Just saying.
#12
Beyond that, we KNOW that Islamic terrorists have been seeking nuclear and radiological weapons for many years and they haven't yet succeeded. In contrast, those who indisputably have access haven't had the incentive-----until now.
#13
AC, the funny part of the KNOW is that the moment they succeed, we would KNOW in the most disturbing way--they would use it as soon as they can deploy it. Hopefully, that is not in cards and contingencies exist for cases of collapse of regime , like Pakistan.
#15
Zarathustra, we (the US) also have systems that can "see through" container walls and we can detect nuclear weapons using this and other types of sensor. The system is a drive through system that collects an image when the container is on a truck. However our primary means of vetting containers is through inspection at the source comapny, when the container is loaded and sealed, since the majority of containers come from reputable companies.
Posted by: V is for Victory ||
09/08/2004 8:40 Comments ||
Top||
#16
lex - you pose your questions as if they weren't already a possibility. The only thing that has changed is the Russians willingness to fight harder against the terrorists.
I'm sad to think of what this means in terms of ratcheting up of bloodshed. But ratchet up it will.
#17
There certainly could an "accidental explosion" of a cobbled together nuclear device that the terror boys assembling in their basement. I wouldn't shed a tear. However, nuclear devices from various countries all have signatures, and our gov't would know almost immediately where it really came from I don't suppose we would have to tell, though
#18
DLS -- presumably the terrs would be using fissile material they stole -- somehow -- from the Russians. That way, the signature would LOOK Russian, even though it was a work accident on the terrs part.
At least, that's the story I'd stick to.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
09/08/2004 13:23 Comments ||
Top||
#19
RC. I like the way you think. Maybe the terrorists could manage to steal five or six. We could only wish they could figure out a way to hijack a MIRVed SS 19. Wouldn't that make a pretty glow in the east.
Candidates for president in Afghanistan's first free elections to be held Oct. 9 officially kicked off their campaigns yesterday. The favorite among the 18 candidates is seen to be current President Hamid Karzai, who has been supported by the US since the US-led coalition's ouster of the radical Taliban regime in late 2001. Campaigning for the presidential election is permitted to continue until three days before the voting. Taliban remnants have vowed to step their up attacks in a bid to disrupt the election process, but no incidents were reported as official campaigning got under way yesterday.
I'd like to see more remnants of the Taliban -- arms here, legs there, special on turbans today, 2 for 1.
UN officials reported more than 10.5 million Afghans have registered to vote, 41.3 percent of them women, exceeding earlier estimates for the number of people expected to vote. Elections for president and parliament were originally set to be held in June, but were postponed due to organizational and security problems. The parliamentary election is scheduled to take place next April.
That should be an adventure in good jirga...
The October presidential vote will fall three years after the US unleashed a military assault to destroy the Taliban regime for harboring Osama bin Laden after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. Voters will cast their ballots in 5,000 polling stations run by about 130,000 staff, covering areas so mountainous and remote they are only accessible by donkey or on foot and lack modern communication links. Fundamentalist fighters loyal to the ousted Taliban rulers have vowed to disrupt the polls and have been waging a bombing and guerrilla campaign, killing more than 20 people including 12 election workers since May. Despite the bloodshed, about 10.5 million people have registered to vote in the central Asian state's first-ever presidential elections -- more than the 9.8 eligible voters originally forecast by the UN.
Thus raising charges of fraud, never mind that the UN forecast was done on the back of an envelope.
See if you can guess the source before clicking the link ...
As American military deaths in Iraq operations surpassed the 1,000 mark, top Pentagon officials said Tuesday that insurgents controlled important parts of central Iraq and that it was unclear when American and Iraqi forces would be able to secure those areas. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and Gen. Richard B. Myers, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at a news conference that the American strategy in retaking rebel-held strongholds hinged on training and equipping Iraqi forces to take the lead. Mr. Rumsfeld said Iraqi officials understood they must regain control of the insurgent safe havens. "They get it, and will find a way over time to deal with it,'' he said.
#3
They are foolish if they think that more deaths will help Kerry. While it will firm up Kerry's grip on the Howard Dean base, it won't win over any independents. Quite the contrary.
With each terrorist act, they actually cement the concept in the ordinary American mind that we are at war with Jihad, rather than "freedom fighting".
Furthermore - while I understand the propaganda value in hyping the 1000 deaths....it actually reminds the non-frothing minds just how low the death toll really was, considering what was accomplished.
Kerry has already bagged the Dean vote and the "quamire" issue is falling flat with the average American.
#6
Granted that Fallujah, Ramada, Samarra, etc. would have fewer terrorists if Turkey had allowed a northern front. However, even with 10% fewer Baathoterrorists and Islamoterrorists, the situation there would be much the same as it is now. The NYT article seems basically correct.
#7
mhw, the only problem, as I see it, is PC. It's killing us. Without it, it would have been all cleared out Nov/Dec last year.
Cordon, remove civs, attack and exterminate. Rinse and repeat in the infected locations. That would be all to it. After that, the hearts and minds would follow as there would be little interference with rebuilding effort.
I think you are basically correct. Our PC approach to war is to have mercy on the cruel ones. This ultimately leads to cruelty to the merciful ones.
The tactics you suggest are also reasonable; however, the scale of the cordoning, etc. is immense. It will take, unfortunately a lot of time and manpower and cost many lives.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
09/08/2004 9:36 Comments ||
Top||
#13
When in Pakistan/Afghanistan I was unpleasantly surprised to find that most State "diplomats" were unrepentant apologists for their "pet" programs and were quite willing to abrogate the USA to the secondary position in favor of the host nation. Total immersion in the local culture can be, and is too often taken to the extreme by our DoS partners.
#15
Mark Steyn wrote a while back that iffin' the Sunnis don't want to participate in the national political life, then they have that perfect right not to do so. But the Sunnis decision to refuse to participate should not stop the rest of the country from establishing a free market democratic system.
Let the Sunnis stew in their own juces. Let their supporters start to notice when the rest of the country hs money, food, services, and etc while they cling to Baathist ideology.
ESPN by satellite and cold beer are far more devastating weapons to Baathist socialism that a MOAB or an infantry battalion in this case.
Badanov
Commander
41st Armchair General Brigade,
I Monday Morning Quarterback Corps
#16
seems that the situation in Samarra (and i think also Baquba) is rather more fluid than the Myers statement indicates, though its probably wise to paint things a little worse than they are.
as for approaches, I see an interesting tradeoff. Go in now, with mainly US forces, or wait, allowing more attacks on Iraqi reconstruction, but then going in with predominantly Iraqi forces. I see arguments both ways. Waiting seems like a reasonable option. Hard to say without knowing the progress of training, which is under Maj Gen Petraeus.
#18
word today is that centcom and Allawi think they can turn Samarra - not a Fallujah deal but full access for US and Iraqi forces in return for reconstruction aid - tribal sheiks willing to play, 300 of 400 "insurgents" are unemployed who can be bought. Problem is 100 hard core, including 40 foreigners.
If that works Baquba should be doable as well.
Only Fallujah really needs the rough treatment. But Fallujah really needs it.
#19
Its funny to see how spiffo says to just MOAB them, problem solved. Well, if you don't care about collateral damage, then all MOABing the cities will do is create anti-American sentiment in the long run. This is not our goal. Unless it is. Then we have a problem. Knifing the backs of the Turks. If that's what our country is about, then I'm out of here, because our country will degenerate into nothingness.
#20
This "story" is more disinformation and lies, trash-talking the war and President Bush's prosecution of it by the NYSlimes.
SSDD.
Don't make the mistake of thinking that the 1st ID ("The Big Red One") can't keep the peace and maintain authority in Iraq any place, any time--including these Sunni cities.
#22
greatam - in the midst of some excellent news gathering and insiteful analysis, theres a lot of well "ranting" that goes on here. Which is kinda logical, since the place is called Rantburg. One gets used to it, and learns to ignore the more egregious examples. Usually after a pointless flamewar or two, though.
#24
The problem with Allawi's attempts to wean the "moderates" away from the dead-enders is that they are unprotected within these cities. Allawi needs to get some elite troops to establish safe areas within each city, probably starting with Fallujah. I don't have a clue who these special forces might be, but they should be Muslim and not American. Or maybe bring in the Spetnaz units who lost guys at Beslan?
V
Commanding Officer
Special Guesswork Unit
42nd Armchair General Brigade
1st Monday Morning Qtrback Corps
Posted by: V is for Victory ||
09/08/2004 17:40 Comments ||
Top||
#25
The other issue is that the "normal" folks in these towns are being fed a line that fighting the US and other coalition troops is the nationalist thing to do. Now I don't know how much real nationalism there is in Iraq, given that it is a predominantly tribla society, but this still strikes me as odd. If you truly had feelings of naitonalism wouldn't you want your country rebuilt and have a booming economy with jobs for all? Think of the amount of capital that would be flowing into Iraq right now if the security situation were calm. Think what that would mean for both the average joe and the leadership. Think what it would mean for the mullah's pocketbooks. Are these people intentionally stupid to pass up this opportunity? If so does that mean we are just killing the stupid ones and improving the Iraqi gene pool?
Posted by: remote man ||
09/08/2004 19:11 Comments ||
Top||
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.
