EFL-FU - HT to Drudge
George Galloway, the British MP, was last night accused of lying by a US Congressional committee when he testified earlier this year that he had not received any United Nation food-for-oil allocations from the deposed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.
In a report issued here, Minnesota Senator Norm Coleman and his colleagues on the Senate Subcommittee for Investigations claim to have evidence showing that Mr Galloway's political organisation and his wife received vouchers worth almost $600,000 (£338,000) from the then Iraqi government.
"We have what we call the smoking gun," said Mr Coleman, who will send the report to the US Department of Justice and the British authorities. The MP could face charges of perjury, making false statements and obstructing a Congressional investigation. Each charge carries a possible jail term of five years and a fine of $250,000.
But Mr Galloway again denied the allegations - as vehemently as he did last May in a bravura performance before the Subcommittee, when he accused Mr Coleman of mounting "the mother of all smokescreens" to divert attention from America's post-invasion difficulties, and launched a broadside against the Bush administration's entire policy in Iraq.
"I have not made a penny out of oil deals with Iraq, or indeed any other kind of deal," the MP said last night. "This ought to be dead, yet Norm Coleman parrots it once more from 3,000 miles away and protected by privilege." His spokesman later described the report as "derogatory and defamatory". The report claims that between 1999 and 2003 Mr Galloway personally solicited and was granted vouchers for 23 million barrels of oil, at below the market price. These vouchers could then be resold at a profit. It also alleges that money was channelled to Amineh Abu-Zayyad, the MP's wife, and to the Mariam Appeal, an organisation set up by Mr Galloway to help a young Iraqi girl with leukemia.
Mr Coleman maintains that his evidence is based on bank records, as well as interviews with Tariq Aziz, the former foreign minister and deputy prime minister under Saddam, and with the former vice-president Taha Yasin Ramadan.
Mr Galloway's appearance before the panel, the Minnesota senator said, was "a lot of bombast". The MP was "anything but straight with the committee; he was anything but straight with the American people
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/24/2005 21:06 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[9 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
see PD? There is evidence. He'll deny it, of course, and his euro-CAIR/True believers will back him up, sipping deeply from the dhimmi-koolaid
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/24/2005 21:19 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Uh, wait a minute, this is like deja vu all over again, Frank, lol.
#3
Oops, I posted the pic while you were wagging yer finger at me, lol. Okay, let's see if it passes muster... I wouldn't trust Aziz, of course, to come clean in a trial, but if the records are solid and the paper trail disproves his statements, both public and sworn, that would be soooo sweet! Should Aziz unfuck himself, for a change, and decide to testify - that would be icing. He wasn't very cooperative after capture, according to news reports, so this change comes as news, too.
#6
The MP could face charges of perjury, making false statements and obstructing a Congressional investigation. Each charge carries a possible jail term of five years and a fine of $250,000.
As much as I detest both Galloway and the UN, this would be a horrible precedent to set. I hope it's never seriously considered.
#7
heh heh thanks AS - never would've thought of that
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/24/2005 22:20 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Good catch Frank, I'd like to see the bastard Galloway and his crickets humilated with solid evidence [paper and testimony]and then indicted.
I propose a toast, Here's to a short trip to hell for Galloway & friends, have a nice rot in hell for an eternity .
Abdominal Snowman, It helps if you close two eyes on one side and just look at her with the other two. ..that only cut 1/2 the nausea and vomiting AS, so i had to nail a piece of plywood on my monitor.
/i pity the fool who marries her, i wonder if she has other sets...
Posted by: Red Dog ||
10/24/2005 22:51 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Hey! I saw her in a bar one time. Don't remember where and all I remember was she hated me on sight, but I remember her.
George Galloway has strongly refuted new allegations that he pocketed money from Saddam Hussein's scandal ridden oil-for-food programme and lied about it under oath.
The US Senate committee investigating the Respect MP's alleged involvement in the saga claims to have discovered £85,000 (150,000 dollars) in Iraqi oil money in his wife's bank account.
Mr Galloway may face criminal charges if found to have given false testimony to the committee when he defended himself against similar claims in a passionate showdown earlier this year.
The Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations has accused him of giving "false and misleading testimony" at the May 17 hearing.
Mr Galloway, who used the headline-grabbing appearance as the basis for a new book, denied being an oil trader, soliciting oil allocations or instructing anyone to do so on his behalf.
But Republican Senator Norm Coleman, who chairs the committee, claims to have obtained new evidence proving that Saddam's regime granted oil allocations to the Bethnal Green and Bow MP and his Mariam Appeal fund.
The committee's new report accuses Mr Galloway of personally soliciting and being granted eight oil allocations totalling 23 million barrels from the Hussein government between 1999 and 2003.
It claims that his estranged wife, Dr Amineh Abu-Zayyad, received approximately £85,000 (150,000 dollars) in connection with one allocation of oil.
Developing...
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/24/2005 21:04 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
HT to Drudge - my bad
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/24/2005 21:09 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Oh yes, plz. Develop, develop. A bona fide paper trail that nailed this asshole would rank right up there with capturing the Big Shithead himself. Only caveat would be to authenticate the hell out of any and all evidence before presenting it. It's easy to fall for something if it's what you want to see. Ask Rather.
British banks are banning piggy banks because they may offend some Muslims. Halifax and NatWest banks have led the move to scrap the time-honoured symbol of saving from being given to children or used in their advertising, the Daily Express/Daily Star group reports here.
Muslims do not eat pork, as Islamic culture deems the pig to be an impure animal. But camels and goats are just fine, worth of, um, "love," even.
Salim Mulla, secretary of the Lancashire Council of Mosques, backed the bank move. "This is a sensitive issue and I think the banks are simply being courteous to their customers," he said. Many people are offended by the worship of the devil known as "Allah." Let's ban it.
However, the move brought accusations of political correctness gone mad from critics. "The next thing we will be banning Christmas trees and cribs and the logical result of that process is a bland uniformity," the Dean of Blackburn, Reverend Christopher Armstrong, said. "We should learn to celebrate our difference, not be fearful of them." The next thing? I guess there's no ACLU in Britain.
Khalid Mahmoud, the Labour MP for a Birmingham seat and one of four Muslim MPs in Britain, also criticised the piggy-bank ban. "We live in a multicultural society and the traditions and symbols of one community should not be obliterated just to accommodate another," Mr Mahmoud said. "I doubt many Muslims would be seriously offended by piggy banks." But the ban still stands.
#2
The banks should immediately be sued because for years they have offended their Jewish customers in the same way, yet have neither discontinued this hateful practice or apologized.
Several of there employees have also been observed to be consuming bacon, ham, and spam without washing their hands before contaminating currency with grease from these Satanic pork products and by-products.
#4
Are pigs more offensive to mooselimbs than to Jewish people? Why has there never been a move by the Jews to have piggy banks extirpated? And why are the Brits now being so accommodating to the mooselimbs whereas they have been somewhat less so to Jews?
It's sort of like why the media still dote on Mao, Lenin and Che while the Nazis are the most depraved killers in history.
This is not just dhimmitude, it is identification. The euros admire the firm faith of the mooselimbs, a faith they long ago abandoned but now seek to rediscover. Europe will not be conquered, it will be converted, and not by the sword.
#5
HS - interesting tak, but IMHO the faith they seek will turn out soon to not be what they were looking for and they, striking out, will reject it, in a nasty brutish euro-continent cleansing of Islam
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/24/2005 20:21 Comments ||
Top||
#6
frankly, I'm getting a Arab bank to replace my piggy bank - you don't wanna know where the coins go, but the eyes do light up in delight
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/24/2005 20:29 Comments ||
Top||
#8
wonder how the Islamonuts deal with "Roth IRAs"?
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/24/2005 21:17 Comments ||
Top||
#9
So... what the hell are muslims doing in an infidel interest-charging bank anyway?
Isn't that against their religion too?
Pretty soon they will be whining about christians praying in a christian church. (they already do this in Indonesia and kill christians / burn churches...).
#10
There is a simple solution. Brits who don't like it can express their displeasure by closing their accounts at the Halifax and NatWest banks. If they don't, and allow the Muslims to tred on them like this, then so be it.
Iqbal winced as his finger touched the purple bruising and neat line of stitches above his swollen left eye. He stood in the wreckage of his fast-food shop, including an upturned charity box, looted of its donations to victims of the South Asian earthquake.
The 33-year-old shopkeeper, who did not want to give his full name, said: " This is racial harmony in Britain today: where a rumour of a crime leads to a mob who trash your business and want to smash your face in because of your colour."
Shortly after 7pm on Saturday night, a gang of about 100 youths, most of them black, swept along Iqbal's street in the Lozells area of Birmingham, smashing his windows and display counter with cricket bats and bricks. The charity box was emptied of £200 donated by customers, both black and Asian.
A few yards from the kebab shop, a British Pakistani taxi driver suffered serious head injuries when his car was set upon by masked attackers, throwing house bricks through the windows. Yesterday the wrecked car stood outside the man's house, a pile of blood-stained bricks in the front and passenger seats.
By the end of a night punctuated on at least 12 occasions by gunfire, one man was dead, 20 people had been sent to hospital, including three with stab wounds, and at least a dozen homes and businesses ransacked in the worst racial violence to have hit Britain's second city since the Hands-worth riots in 1985. Police said that more than 80 offences had been committed during one 75-minute "burst of extreme violence". They confirmed that the victim of the fatal stabbing was a 23-year-old black man.
Hundreds of police were patrolling the Lozells area to try to prevent a recurrence of the vicious clashes between Afro-Caribbean and Asian youths, which senior officers blamed on a "small minority" intent on stirring up racial hatred.
The disturbances on Saturday came after a week of increasing friction. This had been caused by unsubstantiated allegations of the gang rape of a 14-year-old black girl by up to 19 Asian men in an Asian-owned shop selling Afro-Caribbean beauty products in the nearby district of Perry Barr.
West Midlands Police said last night that an exhaustive investigation had yet to find any evidence that the assault had taken place and the alleged victim had yet to come forward. Supporters say her status as an illegal immigrant means she is too afraid to do so.
But the lack of evidence did not prevent details from being broadcast in lurid detail by DJs for two Afro-Caribbean pirate radio stations in Birmingham throughout last week. This led to protests outside the beauty products shop and a petition signed by 1,000 calling for more to be done to trace the alleged rapists.
The Independent has learnt that at least one of the radio stations, Hot FM, and a DJ named "Warren G", called for a boycott of Asian businesses in Lozells. This is a racially mixed area north-west of Birmingham city centre with a large Muslim community originating from Pakistan and Bangladesh. Claims were made that several black women had been assaulted by Asian men.
The 33-year-old owner of the beauty products chain, Beauty Queens Cosmetics, who has strongly denied that any sexual assault took place after being interviewed by police for 12 hours last week, said a mob mentality had been generated. He said: "What kind of society are we living in when hundreds of presumably law-abiding citizens can be duped into coming on to the streets to protest when the so-called organisers don't know exactly what they are protesting about?"
Police sources said they were investigating claims of incitement to racial hatred against Hot FM and another station, Sting FM.
Ilyas Mohammed, 28, a Royal Mail worker who narrowly escaped injury when a brick was thrown through his car window, said: "I happen to listen to Hot FM and the stuff this station was putting out was poison. It was about how this girl had been attacked and the Asians were to blame. They said black people should not be spending their money in Asian shops and how we were too successful. The sub-text was obvious.
"It was more like Rwanda than Birmingham. What happened last night was black kids feeling they could respond to that by beating up some Pakis."
The disturbances, which also left one police officer injured when he was hit in the leg by a projectile fired from a ball bearing gun, followed a meeting held at the New Testament Church of God on Lozells Road, attended by two senior police officers and the Labour MP Khalid Mahmood, who represents Perry Barr.
Police played down suggestions that the violence was inspired by rival Asian and black drugs gangs. Assistant Chief Constable David Shaw said the meeting and an earlier peaceful demonstration had led him to believe there would be a "successful conclusion" to rising tensions. He said: "It now becomes clear some people did not intend that to happen. People started the day with intent to actually create mayhem."
A senior figure in the Lozells Afro-Caribbean community, many of whom are of Jamaican extraction, said a sense of social injustice lay behind the trouble. He said: "I'm ashamed of what I've seen in recent days  people from my community walking into Asian shops and telling them to shut down or be burnt down. It is an absolute minority but beneath it is the fact that the Asian community here has been successful. The shopping area on Lozells Road 20 years ago had two or three Asian shops  now they make up the vast majority. Some people here think that's down to some sort of unfair advantage and last night was their way of seeking their revenge."
#2
Iqbal winced as his finger touched the purple bruising and neat line of stitches above his swollen left eye. He stood in the wreckage of his fast-food shop, including an upturned charity box, looted of its donations to victims of the South Asian earthquake.
It was a dark and stormy night...no need to read further.
#3
He said: "What kind of society are we living in when hundreds of presumably law-abiding citizens can be duped into coming on to the streets to protest when the so-called organisers don't know exactly what they are protesting about?"
Maybe, the same sort of society involved below:
On Friday, thousands of demonstrators took to the streets in this city, apparently angry over a play that was performed two years ago in the church, and was recently distributed on video disc. Though few people interviewed Saturday said they actually saw the play or the DVD, the word on the street was it was anti-Islamic.
[Emphasis Added]
If it's good enough for Muslims in Egypt, it's good enough for Afro-Caribbeans in England. Blind stupidity is not the exclusive domain of Islam. Constant indulgence by Muslims can lead to a spread of it in other cultures. Especially those who have recently been on the receiving end of Islamist terrorism.
Append standard boilerplate vis, "sauce for goose" and "living by the sword."
#5
Race Riot in UK, Muslims Targeted
I'd liken to say 'Turn about'sa bitch' but it will have to wait until a few thousand "Asian" die in a collapsing inferno. [no acts of God included] Go back to sandland.
Posted by: Red Dog ||
10/24/2005 2:36 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Although they're playing up the "colour" angle, I doubt that had anything to do with it(some of the Paks were likely darker than the Afros). This was about a battle between two minority groups fostered by the multicultural elites. No doubt jooos were behind it.
Security threats emanating from the Caribbean Basin typically revolve around its position as a key trans-shipment point for South American narcotics to the United States and Europe, as well as illegal immigration, money laundering, and other forms of banking and document fraud. Indeed, organized criminal networks from as far away as Western and Eastern Europe, Russia, and Asia, in addition to U.S. and South American organizations, have a formidable presence in the region.
In the wake of the September 11 attacks, however, many observers began to look at the regionâs potential as a base of operations for radical Islamist terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda to stage attacks against the U.S. and its interests in the Western Hemisphere. Upon cursory examination, the regionâs geographic proximity to the U.S., porous borders, widespread poverty and endemic corruption, energy reserves, not to mention the tens of thousands of Americans and Europeans who vacation there at any given time of the year, make it an attractive target.
The potential threat of al-Qaeda using the Caribbean Basin as a base of operations came to the fore when allegations circulated that Adnan G. El-Shukrijumah, a known al-Qaeda operative, was reportedly spotted in Honduras in June 2004. Despite a lack of hard evidence, U.S. and regional security officials believe that Shukrijumahâs alleged presence in the region stemmed from an al-Qaeda plot to link up with Central American gangs such as Mara Salvatrucha (MS) and Mara 18th Street (M18). U.S. Panamanian officials reported that Shukrijumah was in Panama as early as April 2001, possibly surveying high-value targets such as the Panama Canal, after which it is alleged he visited several neighboring countries [1]. Trinidadian sources go a step further and tie Shukrijumah to the Darul Uloom, an Islamic institute in Trinidad, and claim he may have infiltrated Central America via Trinidad and Tobago with a Trinidadian, Guyanese, or Canadian passport [2].
The July 2004 arrest of Ashraf Ahmad Abdullah, an Egyptian man, at Miami International Airport for running a prolific smuggling ring from his home base in Guatemala for Egyptians and other Arabs seeking entry into the United States, did raise alarm bells for good reason. Although Abdullah has not been tied to al-Qaeda or terrorism, but is instead believed to have been interested solely in profit, the relative ease with which he was able to smuggle illegal migrants originating from countries of âspecial interestâ into the U.S. via Latin America and the Caribbean Basin highlights the vulnerability of the U.S. underbelly [3]. It is difficult to gauge whether terrorist networks deployed operatives to the U.S. through Abdullahâs network without his knowledge.
The regionâs small Muslim population is comprised mostly of South and Southeast Asians with deep roots stemming back to the Colonial period, as well as Arabs. The region has also experienced an increase of migrants from the Middle East in recent decades. Some of the largest Muslim communities are found in Guyana, Suriname, and Trinidad and Tobago. Adherence to Islam varies dramatically from country to country. In general, it reflects the diverse ethnic and cultural traditions that comprise the region and is often infused with distinctly âCaribbeanâ features. This is best evidenced by the Shiâa Muharram rituals known locally as Hosay, (derived from the regional transliteration of Husayn) performed by East Indian Shiâa Muslims in Trinidad and Tobago, Guyana, Suriname, and Jamaica, that commemorate the martyrdom of Imam Husayn.
Recent Arab migrants from the Middle East tend to be more pious and traditional relative to their second and third generation Arab and Muslim counterparts. Moreover, there are a growing number of locals converting to Islam, especially among impoverished minorities such as the indigenous peoples of the Mexican state of Chiapas and marginalized populations of African descent in the Caribbean islands.
Most Muslim converts embrace Islam for purely spiritual reasons and do not harbor any inclination towards political or religious extremism. Many see Islam as a rite of empowerment in societies where they are underserved and experience discrimination. Nevertheless, there is a concern that al-Qaeda is targeting these groups for recruitment due to their perceived ability to travel and blend into Western cities more effectively.
U.S. and regional security sources point to the activities of a number of obscure organizations based in oil- and natural gas-rich Trinidad and Tobago as evidence of the Caribbean Basinâs potential to spawn homegrown radical Islamist organizations [4].
The Jammat al-Muslimeen (Muslim Group) is Trinidad and Tobagoâs most notorious Muslim organization. Although Trinidadâs ethnically and religiously diverse population, split roughly between descendants of African slaves and indentured servants from India and a sizable âmixedâ community, includes Sunni and Shiâa Muslim immigrants from South Asia and the Middle East, the Jammat is known almost exclusively as a Black Sunni Muslim organization comprised mainly of Afro-Trinidadian converts to Islam. The group is led by Imam Yasin Abu Bakr, a former police officer who was born Lenox Philip. The Jammat is best known for its violent 1990 attempt to overthrow the Trinidadian government over grievances related to land ownership, social and economic inequality, and government corruption [5].
On July 27, 1990, Abu Bakr, along with leading Jammat figures Bilaal Abdullah and Maulana Hasan Anyabwile, led over 100 members of the group in storming Trinidadâs Red House (National Parliament), taking Prime Minister A.N.R. Robinson and most of his cabinet captive. The group also took over Trinidad and Tobago Television, then the countryâs only television network, and the Trinidad Broadcasting Company, one of two radio stations. The ensuing standoff lasted for five days while rioting and looting gripped the capital, Port of Spain, leading to scores of deaths and the destruction of millions of dollars worth of property. Abu Bakr surrendered to the authorities after a period of negotiations that allowed the group to escape prosecution [6]. Significantly, many of the weapons used in the failed coup were imported from Florida through Louis Haneef, an Afro-Trinidadian Muslim convert based in the U.S. Haneef spent four years in a U.S. federal prison after being convicted for his role in smuggling the weapons to Trinidad [7].
Many observers attribute the origins of the coup attempt to Trinidadâs history of racially inspired riots and revolutionary social protest movements. Between six and eight percent of Trinidad and Tobagoâs population is Muslim, with the Jammat representing a tiny fringe of the community.
U.S. and Trinidadian authorities have kept a close eye on the Jammatâs activities since the 9/11 attacks, but there is no hard evidence tying the group to international terrorism, let alone al-Qaeda. However, Abu Bakr did maintain links with Libyaâs Muammar Qadhafi in the 1980s and 90s and considers him a close friend to this day. The Jammat reportedly received funds through Libyaâs World Islamic Call Society (WICS) to finance the construction of its main mosque, schools, and a medical center, but there is no evidence linking Tripoli with the failed 1990 coup attempt. Abu Bakrâs most recent publicized links with controversial international figures include Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.
In many respects, the Jammat al-Muslimeenâs ideology and rhetoric mirror that of militant Black ethno-nationalist movements, including the most radical fringes of the Nation of Islam. Abu Bakrâs supporters see him as a hero fighting for social justice. Interestingly, although most Trinidadians did not support his 1990 coup attempt, many at the time agreed with the issues raised by the Jammat during the crisis, especially impoverished Afro-Trinidadians. At the same time, the Jammat is seen by many locally as a well organized criminal empire involved in everything from drug smuggling, money laundering, kidnapping for ransom, and extortion, with Abu Bakr running the show [8]. Abu Bakr has since been the target of a series of criminal investigations and indictments for his alleged role in ordering the murders of former Jammat members.
The Waajihatul Islaamiyyah (Islamic Front), headed by Omar Abdullah, himself a Black Muslim convert, has also been identified as a potential threat by U.S. intelligence and Trinidadian authorities. Like the Jammat al-Muslimeen, the Wajithatul Islamiyyah is comprised mostly of Afro-Trinidadian converts to Islam. Local sources allege that Abdullah harbors extremist leanings. The Waajihatul has been accused of publishing material expressing support for al-Qaeda, but Trinidadian authorities have not provided conclusive evidence of any direct links with the group. He is often outspoken in his criticism of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East and the Trinidadian governmentâs policy towards Muslims. Trinidadian authorities also tie Abdullah to local crime and other illicit dealings [9].
The Jamaat al-Murabiteen (Almoravids, after the African Muslim dynasty that ruled Morocco and Spain in the 11th and 12th Century) and the related Jammat al-Islami al-Karibi (Caribbean Islamic Group) are associated with one time Jamaat al-Muslimeen chief of security Maulana Hasan Anyabwile, formerly Beville Marshall. He split with Abu Bakr in 2001 over what Trinidadian sources allege was a personal rift with the groupâs leader. Anyabwile hosted a radio show where he was known to criticize Trinidadian Hindus, Indian Muslims, and his former Jamaat al-Muslimeen associates for their purported failure in improving the lot of Muslims in Trinidad and Tobago. Local sources also allege that he is an extremist [10].
Anyabwile was shot and critically wounded in 2002 by an unknown attacker in what many believe was part of a larger turf war between rival Muslim activists, most likely the Jammat al-Muslimeen. Now a paraplegic, Anyabwile continues to fear for his life, but remains an outspoken critic of Abu Bakr [11].
The Caribbean Basin will remain a region of concern in the war on terrorism. Despite a lack of hard evidence to date, international terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda in theory can potentially feed off of the institutional weakness, political and economic instability, poverty, and lawlessness that characterize the Caribbean Basin to further their aims. But as the case of Trinidad and Tobago demonstrates, the mere presence of Islamist activist groups (or Muslims in general) does not necessarily equate to links to al-Qaeda. Therefore, in addressing the threat (or perceived threat) of radical Islam in the region effectively, it is imperative that policymakers consider the nexus between deep-seated social, political, and economic grievances and international terrorism, and not simply settle for shortsighted solutions.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
10/24/2005 13:28 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11 views]
Top|| File under:
Riot police dispersed an opposition rally in Azerbaijan's capital on Sunday, beating and detaining demonstrators who defied a ban on downtown protests to demand that parliamentary elections in two weeks be free. Opposition groups in the Caspian Sea coast nation have charged that the government will try to rig the Nov. 6 vote and have been holding rallies nearly every weekend, clashing with police in the former Soviet republic.
About 200 riot police moved against several hundred protesters, hitting some with batons and pushing them away from a square where they had tried to hold a rally. Protesters, some carrying red carnations, chanted "Free Elections!" One demonstrator fell after several officers hit him over the head with batons, and fellow protesters carried him away to a safer area.
Good luck to them. I know little about the regime of Aliev, Junior, but I'm against hereditary presidencies on principle. If they want a king, let them call him a king and give him a funny hat.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/24/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
(via LGF) The American Friends Service Committee is planning to hold a series of parties all across the country when the 2000th US soldier is killed in Iraq...
#8
But are you grim enough? That's the question, y'know. Does the reaction yield a "pffftt" or a "boom"... "Grim" is the crux of the biscuit, methinks, and the grim quotient will be the key determinant. Whimper or Bang? Cake or Death?
#12
AFSC is the Quakers?!?!? Quakers using dead American soldiers as a political tool sounds like a particularly sick, twisted version of ScrappleFace.
It was not "faith in the power of love to overcome violence and injustice" that put an end to mass graves, secret police, nerve-gassed children and live people tossed into shredders in Saddam's Iraq. It was military force. To think sitting around in a circle singing Kumbaya will fix the bad things in the world is naive beyond comprehension.
#14
Yet another organization which has fallen under the influence, thoroughly infiltrated, in other words, by the socialists, Moonbats, and Tranzis. Whatever they may once have had, in the way of honorable intentions, is lost -- they have been subverted, hijacked lock, stock, and barrel to The Dark Side. And I'll wager they were a very, very, easy mark.
It does not take 20-20 vision or a pure heart to recognize the insanity of claiming the US is an Imperial Power or the Home of Terrorism or the Essence of Evil or the Worst of Whatever... On its face, any and all of these assertions are asinine.
It does take, however, a truly deranged and twisted mind to buy into any aspect of the Moonbat Kool Aid Kreed.
This is where reasonable sane people can differ, I guess.
When.
When is enough, enough?
When do we say enough lies?
When do we decide enough subversive shit?
When do we realize we are actually at risk?
When do we admit, we can lose - everything?
When do we recognize that our civility is our key weakness?
When do we actually take off the gloves?
When do we see what is, rather than a watered-down what we want to see?
When do we stop the games, the Pollyanna pattycake, and get serious?
When do we grab a shovel and muck out the barn?
Tough questions. Tougher answers.
"Doctor, it hurts when I do this."
"Well then, don't do that, silly.
That's what pain is for, y'know, it's a warning.
Calculating your survival quotient is a simple equation...
The key bit is how many warnings you need to learn the lesson.
Oops, I guess that was your last.
Sorry.
Chart nah (Maybe next life)."
#17
These clowns do this periodically near where I live in suburban NY. There is a group of counterprotestors there every time. The counterprotestors get a much better response (though they are fewer in number). On a number of occasions, I have bought the counterprotestors cold bottled water. Now that things are getting chillier, hot chocolate may be in order.
Posted by: Tibor ||
10/24/2005 12:15 Comments ||
Top||
#18
I've been doing something of a review of the movies, lately, the insidious anti-Americanism that pervades the vast majority of them. Right now I'm watching the Ozzie sci-fi classic, The Quiet Earth, a very interesting end of the world flic and, of course, it's absolutely all America's fault. *sniff*
Truly sad, y'know, that so many have been led, probably from diapers onward, to the Dark Side. Innocently they go, the moonbattery reinforced constantly, unrelentingly, cluelessly - and without ever once actually challenging the destination - the essence of the meme being peddled. Almost makes me weep and reconsider.
Then I come to my senses and remember this is for all the marbles. All of them. So fuck 'em. Who wants thoughtless, gutless, clueless bastards for traveling companions, anyway. Not me. Crying Frying time is here.
Please bring a candle and anything you may want to read or sing, as well as signs about ending the war or remembering the dead, keeping in mind the solemnity of the occassion. This event will be held rain or shine.
#22
Two different things to be sure but the AFSC is endorsed by the Society of Friends. AFSC it primarily populated by activist quakers and those whose minds have been damaged by "quakerism".
#23
Once upon a time, the Quakers went to battle armed only with medical kits, determined to help all they encountered. How sad that they have descended to this. If they had the courage of their convictions, they'd be sending units to Iraq to heal those wounded by suicide bombs and drive-by shootings.
#24
Two thousand soldiers dead. In just a little under three years.
About the same as the number of people killed on America's highways in the last three weeks.
Is there some goddamn reason why I should fly into a screaming panic about the former, while completely ignoring the latter-- which, BTW, includes a number of little children???
Posted by: Dave D. ||
10/24/2005 14:13 Comments ||
Top||
#25
The American Friends Service Committee is the same worthless bunch that held blood drives for the NVA during the VietNam War. I have had nothing but disdain for these loathesome self-righteous self-important, condescending copralites since then. They should have been shot then, now would be OK.
#26
The "Service Comittee" is a moonbat org, unacknowledged by the main body, as far as I'm aware.
From their website at https://www.afsc.org/about/default.htm :
-- Founded by Quakers in 1917...
-- The AFSC is directed by a Quaker board and staffed by Quakers...
Sound pretty Quakerish to me. Where is Sgt. York when you need him?
#29
No gathering in Garrett Park? Isn't that the town that declared itself a nuclear-free zone? I hope for their sake the Norks, Mullahs and al Qaeda got the press release.
Posted by: Tibor ||
10/24/2005 18:51 Comments ||
Top||
#30
The "Society of Friends" is the Quakers. The "Service Comittee" is a moonbat org, unacknowledged by the main body, as far as I'm aware.
Posted by mojo
If the Quakers have gone this far off of the rails, then I worry deeply for America's pacifist sector. The Quakers I grew up with were some of the most enlightened people I had ever met.
I'm hoping that any notion of them "celebrating" a 2,000th military death has been adequately dispelled. Still, if they do not understand that their own exceptionally lucid faith is presently centered directly under radical Islam's sword, then their collective spiritual compass has been depolarized.
This goes beyond pathetic. Moral relativism may well represent the most antidote-free form of kool-aid there is.
Anyone who joyously celebrates America's 2,000th military loss of life in Iraq is little more than a traitor. Not just to America, but to the survival of mankind as a whole.
Enemy Body Counts Revived
U.S. Is Citing Tolls to Show Success in Iraq Revived, although it just sort of snuck up on them...
By Bradley Graham
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, October 24, 2005; Page A01 Above the fold
Eager to demonstrate success in Iraq, in a way the MSM might notice, as opposed to elections, or schools, or boring success stories the U.S. military has abandoned its previous refusal to publicize enemy body counts and now cites such numbers periodically to show the impact of some counterinsurgency operations.
The revival of body counts, a practice discredited during the Vietnam War, has apparently come without formal guidance from the Pentagon's leadership. Military spokesmen in Washington and Baghdad said they knew of no written directive detailing the circumstances under which such figures should be released or the steps that should be taken to ensure accuracy. Maybe they could have Dan Rather help out with the accuracy? Instead, they described an ad hoc process that has emerged over the past year, with authority to issue death tolls pushed out to the field and down to the level of division staffs.
So far, the releases have tended to be associated either with major attacks that netted significant numbers of enemy fighters or with lengthy operations that have spanned days or weeks. On Saturday, for instance, the U.S. military reported 20 insurgents killed and one captured in raids on five houses suspected of sheltering foreign fighters in a town near the Syrian border. Six days earlier, the 2nd Marine Division issued a statement saying an estimated 70 suspected insurgents had died in the Ramadi area as a result of three separate airstrikes by fighter jets and helicopters.
That Oct. 16 statement reflected some of the pitfalls associated with releasing such statistics. The number was immediately challenged by witnesses, who said many of those killed were not insurgents but civilians, including women and children. And we all know they can count better than soldiers.
Privately, several uniformed but un-named military and civilian defense officials expressed concern that the pendulum may have swung too far, with body counts now creeping into too many news releases from Iraq and Afghanistan. They also questioned the effectiveness of citing such figures in conflicts where the enemy has shown itself capable of rapidly replacing dead fighters and where commanders acknowledge great uncertainty about the total size of the enemy force.
Nevertheless, no formal review of the practice has been ordered, despite the current WaPo hand-wringing according to spokesmen at the Pentagon and in Baghdad. Several senior officers and Pentagon officials involved in shaping communications strategies argued that the occasional release of body counts has important value, particularly when used to convey the scale of individual operations.
"Specific numbers are used to periodically provide context and help frame particular engagements," said Brig. Gen. Donald Alston, director of communications for the U.S. military command in Baghdad. He added, however, that there is no plan "to issue such numbers on a regular basis to score progress." So the article's headline is inaccurate....
During the Vietnam War, enemy body counts became a regular feature in military statements intended to demonstrate progress. But the statistics ended up proving poor indicators of the war's course. Sorta like the fifth-column press. Pressure on U.S. units to produce high death tolls led to inflated tallies, which tore at Pentagon credibility. Where is Dan Rather when you need him?
"In Vietnam, we were pursuing a strategy of attrition, so body counts became the measure of performance for military units," said Conrad C. Crane, director of the military history institute at the U.S. Army War College. "But the numbers got so wrapped up with career aspirations that they were sometimes falsified."
The Vietnam experience led U.S. commanders to shun issuing enemy death tallies in later conflicts, through the initial stages of the Iraq war. "We don't do body counts on other people," Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said in November 2003, when asked on "Fox News Sunday" whether the number of enemy dead exceeded the U.S. toll. And still don't except according to WaPo.
That policy appeared to shift with the assault on the insurgent stronghold of Fallujah in November, an operation considered crucial at the time to denying safe havens to enemy fighters. U.S. military officials reported 1,200 to 1,600 enemy fighters killed, although reporters on the scene noted far fewer corpses were found by Marines after the fighting. And the WaPo couldn't verify sitting in a Baghdad bar....
A surge in enemy activity this year has generated a corresponding increase in offensives by U.S. and Iraqi forces -- and a rise in the number of U.S. military statements containing numbers of enemy killed. Maybe you could provide a graph of the number of attacks to support your contention of a "surge".
High-ranking commanders also have contributed to the trend. In January, Army Gen. George Casey, the top U.S. officer in Iraq, said U.S. and Iraqi forces had killed or captured 15,000 people last year. In May, Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, then-chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, mentioned the killing of 250 of insurgent leader Abu Musab Zarqawi's "closest lieutenants" as evidence of progress in Iraq.
The Pentagon says its policy is still to try to avoid publicizing enemy body counts. But the U.S. military command in Baghdad does keep a running tally of enemy dead that is classified, and field commanders now have authority to release death tolls for isolated engagements in the interest, officials said, of countering enemy propaganda and conveying the size and presumed but unverifiable! effectiveness of some U.S. military operations.
"For a discrete operation, it's a metric that can help convey magnitude and context," said Bryan Whitman, a senior Pentagon spokesman. The release of such figures also can serve to boost the morale of U.S. forces and bolster confidence "that their plans and weapons work effectively," said Marine Lt. Col. David Lapan, spokesman for the 2nd Marine Expeditionary Force, which operates in western Iraq.
Lapan said in an e-mail message that no "threshold" exists for deciding when to release an enemy death toll, adding that such decisions are made "on a case-by-case basis."
He indicated that the numbers are frequently derived from advance estimates of how many enemy fighters are at a targeted site, which explains why the death counts can sometimes get released so soon after an attack. Lapan said improvements in surveillance and targeting techniques allow for "greater certainty about the numbers of casualties we inflict in some situations."
In the case of the disputed Oct. 16 tally in Ramadi, Lapan stood by the figure of 70 enemy dead, saying the Marines "had information from a variety of sources that gave us confidence in the number of enemy fighters killed in the engagements."
Still, defense specialists such as Crane cautioned that enemy body counts in Iraq and Afghanistan are prone to inaccuracy and are of questionable significance. The murky nature of the conflicts, they said, make it difficult to know at times who is an insurgent, a criminal or an innocent civilian. No trouble with identification on 9/11/01, was there. "There still are problems in identifying who is who, just as there were in Vietnam," Crane said. Another similarity!
Posted by: Bobby ||
10/24/2005 07:10 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
yawn. But I do have to admire their offensive tactic since the real story is that the MSM is reviving US body counts to ignore the success of the Iraqi political process.
With the grim milestone of the 2,000th U.S. military death looming in Iraq, many wonder about the direction of the insurgency that killed most of them.
Experts think the country's increasingly regional-oriented politics will fuel the insurgency and even spread it further inside Iraq. Others put forward a simple, disquieting scenario: So long as U.S. and other foreign troops remain in Iraq, the insurgency will continue.
"It will become more chaotic," predicted Magnus Ranstorp of the Swedish National Defense College (search ) in Stockholm, Sweden. "It is obvious that the United States is in Iraq to stay. If this is the case, the Shiites will likely join the Sunnis in the fight."
The 2,000 mark in U.S. military deaths is approaching at a time when Iraqi and U.S. officials are congratulating themselves that the Oct. 15 constitutional referendum and the start of Saddam Hussein's (search ) trial four days later passed without major bloodshed and destruction.
They also are upbeat about the growing efficiency and number â 200,000 at present â of Iraq's security forces, although some U.S. commanders say the Iraqis need 18 months to two years before they can fight the insurgency unaided.
Recent operations in western Iraq, especially in towns along the Euphrates River close to the Syrian border, are said to have been effective in disrupting the insurgents' supply lines and reducing the number of car bombs.
Stepped-up security has forced insurgents in recent weeks to largely abandon using car bombs and resort to indirect fire, such as lobbing mortar shells from afar, Interior Minister Bayan Jabr said.
Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch, U.S. military spokesman in Iraq, said troops captured more than 300 foreign fighters and killed 100 members of Al Qaeda (search) in Iraq the past six months. Other successes include the detention of 600 insurgents in the two weeks before the referendum, said Maj. Gen. William G. Webster, commander of U.S. forces in Baghdad.
But no official predicts a quick victory.
"The insurgents are still there," Lynch cautioned. "They still want to derail the democratic process. They still want to discredit the Iraqi government, so operations continue."
The insurgents are made up of disparate groups of Sunni Arabs, who lost the privileged status they held under Saddam. But the motives driving them are many, from a nationalist anger over the presence of foreign troops to an urge to create an Islamic state to a desire to regain perks.
The domestic rebels are aided by foreign fighters brought into Iraq by leaders like al-Qaida in Iraq's Jordanian-born Abu Musab al-Zarqawi to participate in a self-styled "holy war." The foreign contingent, said by U.S. officials to be mostly Arabs, is widely blamed for dozens of devastating suicide bombings targeting Shiite Muslims and Iraqi security forces.
Iraq's majority Shiites and minority Kurds â the two communities most oppressed under Saddam â have been empowered by the former dictator's ouster and are cooperating with the Americans.
Their areas, in the south and north, are almost entirely free of the violence that grips regions with significant Sunni Arab populations.
But experts contend the fighting could soon begin to take dramatic turns, more heavily influenced by outside events and possibly bringing new factions into the fight.
For example, they say, if Washington and London continue to put pressure on Iran over its nuclear program, Iraq's Shiite neighbor could be tempted to encourage radical Iraqi Shiite factions to stage attacks on U.S. and British forces.
Indeed, British Prime Minister Tony Blair said recently the bombs that killed eight British soldiers in southern Iraq since May were similar to those used by Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed Shiite militant group in Lebanon.
Iran, which has close links to Shiite political parties in Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari's coalition government, has denied any involvement.
"The Iranians are instrumental in upping the ante," said Vali Nasr, who lectures on national security affairs at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, Calif. "They have been practicing restraint, but this may already have begun to change."
Nasr said Iraqi Shiites' tolerance of the U.S. military presence flows from Washington's support for the political process that has benefited them the most. But, he said, this could change if it appeared the United States was not leaving Iraq.
U.S. forces already had a taste of simultaneously fighting Sunni Arabs and Shiites. For nearly five months last year, U.S. forces were stretched to the limit, fighting the mainstream insurgency in Sunni areas while struggling to put down two rebellions by Shiite militiamen loyal to radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr.
Syria, another neighbor, could succumb to mounting U.S. pressure to keep Islamic fighters from using its territory to cross into Iraq. But it also could respond by seeking to create more problems for the Americans by helping the militants to join the Iraq war.
"As long as there are Americans in Iraq, Islamists will want to go and fight them," said Dia'a Rashwan, an Egyptian expert on Muslim militant groups.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
10/24/2005 13:33 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The Swedish National Defense College in Stockholm, Sweden?
What do they teach there? How to stay neutral and play both ends against the middle? Seeing how they haven't been in a war since about 1815 and all...
#2
"As long as there are Americans in Iraq, Islamists will want to go and fight them," said Dia'a Rashwan, an Egyptian expert on Muslim militant groups.
#4
The Swedes provided a good number of combat troops and aircraft for the UN operations in the Congo in the early 1960's and saw some fighting. They were working in conjunction with the Indians and the Irish in actual peace-making instead of useless peace-keeping. That was the last time the UN was ever effective IMHO.
#5
"...some U.S. commanders say the Iraqis need 18 months to two years before they can fight the insurgency unaided."
That is *not* what was said. They journos weren't listening. The general very carefully phrased it, and what he actually suggested was that it would take the Iraqis from 18 months to two years to fight a conventional defensive war.
All the difference in the world.
Fighting terrorists is peanuts. Being able to fight a conventional defensive war against Iran (since there is no one else in the area who is belligerent), is a major, major accomplishment.
If they can do *that* in 18 months to two years, then the US military will have accomplished the miraculous. Not impossible, but miraculous. And I would suggest they intend to do just that.
Via Tim Blair, Car and Driver takes Operation Iraqi Freedom out for a test drive.
Excerpt:
A few more patrols, and regrettably, my summer internship in Baghdad is over. When my unit dropped me off back at the Baghdad airport, I'd logged nearly 200 miles on patrol. The Patriots made me feel more than welcome, and I am honored to have been able to be among them.
In the period, just short of a week, that I was in Iraq, none of my Patriot compatriots was harmed. But elsewhere, 28 American servicemen and women were killed during that time, as well as an undetermined number of Iraqi policemen and Army personnel, who are constant targets of insurgent reprisals-not to mention dozens of civilian and insurgent casualties.
I was asked more than once during my "mini-tour" of duty why a Car and Driver writer was in Baghdad. I answered that since this war has a lot to do with carsâand the petroleum products needed to run themâit was just as appropriate for me to be here as any fancy-pants network anchor. None of whom, by the way, joined us on patrol. Take that, Wolf Blitzer
#2
Daily reports include notes like, "Wires noticed sticking out of dead goat on roadside; goat detonated by EOD" (a.k.a. the bomb squad). Recently, insurgents shoved an artillery shell into a cow's butt and then herded it onto the roadway in front of a convoy in the hope of detonating it. Instead, the cow shat the 105mm suppository right back out. The only casualty was the cow's rectum.
Seafarious, I think if wolfie witnessed this, he'd leave a little deposit in his pants.
Posted by: Red Dog ||
10/24/2005 3:23 Comments ||
Top||
#3
RD, if *I* witnessed that spectacle, I probably would too. The bad part is that these troops can't go laugh it off at the end of the day over a beer or three.
Israel has dropped its campaign to ban the violent Islamic Hamas from Palestinian parliamentary elections, a senior official said Sunday, acknowledging defeat after President Bush pointedly skipped repeating the demand in a public appearance with the Palestinian leader last week.
Though he did reportedly bring it up in private, in a loud voice...
In another election-related development, the Palestinian prime minister said a program is under way to disarm a militant group and bring its gunmen into the security services — a possible pattern for dealing with Hamas as it turns political after nearly two decades of deadly attacks against Israelis.
They're repeating the mistake they've been making all along of confusing men with guns with soldiers or cops. Take my word for it, there's a lot more to it than just waving a gun and making faces.
Israel never made specific threats against the Palestinians in connection with Hamas candidates in the January election, but hinted it would refuse to remove roadblocks and ease other travel restrictions vital to carrying out a free elections campaign. Israel says it is still strongly opposed to Hamas participation because its charter calls for destruction of the Jewish state, but it will take no steps to stop it. "Are we going to go to war on this issue or interfere on this issue? No," the senior official said.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/24/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"Are we going to go to war on this issue or interfere on this issue? No," the senior official said.
We'll just go on blasting them out of their curly-toed slippers whenever the opportunity presents itself. It's hard to get elected when you're busy taking the dirt nap. Go ahead and ask whatever's left of Yassin or Rantissi.
October 24, 2005: A second firm is now producing armored shipping containers, for protecting people (from roadside bombs and gunfire) being transported through hostile territory. Last summer, "TransProtec," which is literally a cargo container with armor, was introduced. Now itâs MTTCS (Multipurpose Troop Transport Carrier System). Think of MTTCS as modified cargo containers, built to fit on the beds of 2 Âœ, five and seven ton military trucks. The lightweight armor protects against rifle bullets (7.62) and nearly all bomb fragments. MTTCS is actually a modular system. With center and end modules. There are two and four foot long (7.8 feet wide and 8 feet high) and two foot long center sections, as well as end sections. The four foot module has a hatch on top, and a ring mount, so you can mount a machine-gun and swing it around in all directions. The four foot sections weigh 4,400 pounds with the roof and end sections, 3,650 without the roof. The sections are light enough to use available lifting equipment to put them on a truck bed, where they are quickly bolted together.
Thus for the smallest truck, a 2 œ ton one, you would use a single four foot module, and two end modules, creating space for four troops inside. For a longer seven ton truck, you could use two fours and a two, plus end modules, which all weighs 9,600 pounds, and can carry 16 troops, plus having two ring mounts topside. Such a configuration would be 20.2 feet long.
The MTTCS can also be used on the ground, as part of base defenses. The MTTCS has undergone combat testing in Iraq, last Summer and is going into mass production. Commanders in Iraq want protection like MTTCS, or custom built gun trucks (using heavy, as in 5 or 7 ton trucks) for convoy and supply movement work. The big trucks are much safer than a hummer if you are hit with a bomb. While the terrorists are using larger bombs, the increased size of such bombs limits the number places they can plant them, it takes longer to place them and this makes it more likely that the crew planting the bomb will get caught. But these larger bombs are rough on M-2 Bradleys and hummers. While the army has armored the cabs of many heavy trucks, it is reluctant to do so with the truck beds, because that limits the amount of cargo the truck can carry. Putting on and taking off the armor sets is also not a good idea, as it takes time and wears out the fittings. So MTTCS has a ready market, not just for Iraq, but in other troublespots where terrorists are attacking.
Posted by: Steve ||
10/24/2005 09:29 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I see a real market for these armored containers. They also can also afford protection for up to 16 smugglers or be dual-use homes for Taliban-types! Also, cargo containers used for storage units would be ghetto proof!
#5
My experience at home in Memphis says little to nothing is "ghetto proof".
Nor would these containers be secure in Iraq(or South Memphis) were it to sit in one place long enough. Some enterprising young criminal einstein would figure out how to get into them soon enough. But that doesn't negate the usefulness of such a module based approach to up armoring vehicles.It's a great, cheap, and flexible system; sounds like a winner for the short term.
My bet is that we'll see one of these used in Saddam's near future for his one way trip to the gas chambers.
Hell, throw some bullet proof glass on both sides and parade him around Baghdad like a "condemned to death" pope mobile of sorts.
Maybe they could even pump a little tear gas in every now and then just to entertain the locals with Saddam's writhing before they let loose the good stuff on him.
#6
Does anyone have any links to some pictures of these things? The company web page is not very good, and the one picture I could find was almost a thumbnail.
Jemaah Islamiyah (JI), an extremist Islamic organization is still using the south of the Philippines to train its members despite a drive by separatist Muslims who have joined forces with the government to keep them out.
âThe JI is still making use of some Mindanao bases for training activities," military deputy chief Lieutenant-General Samuel Bagasin said yesterday. He said the extremist organisation was operating in the mountainous areas of Lanao del Sur and Maguindanao on the main southern island of Mindanao and the nearby small island chains of Basilan and Jolo.
JI members âwere recruiting localsâ and had âclose links with Abu Sayyafâ, a local outlawed Muslim group.
Bagasin stressed however that the JI does not have links with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front which has signed a ceasefire with the central government.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
10/24/2005 14:36 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
BANGKOK, Oct 23 (Bernama) -- Grieving over the death of someone close or special can bring families, friends and even conflicting parties together. As Malaysians from all folks of life joined Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and his family to mourn the passing of his wife on Thursday, Malaysia and Thailand at loggerheads for months set aside their differences on that day.
Unlike days earlier when diplomatic channel seems to be the last resort to end the spat, [Thailand's] Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra sent his deputy Surakiart Sathirathai to attend Endon's funeral in Putrajaya. In fact, that gesture eclipsed days or even months of counter accusations over the problem in the violence-stricken southern provinces of Thailand, straining their otherwise excellent ties. Surakiart, Thailand's candidate for the United Nations secretary-general post, met Abdullah, his counterpart Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak and Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar during the brief visit.
Although nothing concrete can be expected from such an event, it is expected to go a long way in normalising the strained ties partly over the 131 Thai Muslims from Narathiwat who fled to Kelantan in August. The incident happened a day after an imam was killed in Ban Lahan of the Sungai Padi district. Officials, who went to investigate the shooting, [were] blocked by angry villages who blamed the authorities for the murder. Insurgents out to form an independent Muslim state were blamed for the violence in the south although some officials, including Thaksin, believed it was partly launched by drug syndicates.
When the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) entered the fray, Malaysia-Thailand ties soured.
The Thais were furious when [Malaysian Foreign Minister] Syed Hamid said Malaysia was only willing to send back the villagers if the Thai Government could guarantee their human rights and later questioned their maturity over Thailand's protest on the boycott of Thai goods in Malaysia by non- governmental organisations.
The plight of the 131 Thai Muslims remain a sticky issue but after two months, the UNHCR has not made any decision. But if the rather calm atmosphere and events in the past few days are an indication, an end to the diplomatic row maybe in the offing. Thai Foreign Ministry spokesman Sihasak Phuangketkeow said due to the sensitivity of the issue, UNHCR preferred to let both countries settle the problem through negotiations. Seen as a confidence-building process, the three-day visit by the Thai team... comprising officials from the foreign ministry and south provinces, would enable them to meet the refugees and try to persuade them to return to their homeland.
Kantathi said the Thai Government was even willing to resettle them in any part of the country if the villagers were scared to return to their homes.
Prime Minister Thaksin, who blasted the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) for its statement which he said was an interference in [Thailand's] domestic affairs, said he would meet Abdullah on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Summit in Busan, South Korea, next month.
Many observers and diplomats here felt the two nations should bury their "ego" and look at mutual interests, cooperate with each other and try to solve problems through the diplomatic channel and not through the media as both could end up losing.
Although the Thai Government had repeatedly said Malaysia was not involved in the southern unrest, comments by some politicians have exaggerated the situation to the extent that people on the street are believing that their neighbours have some hand in the conflict. Both countries have more to lose if the current row is left unchecked.
Tourists, especially from Malaysia and investors, are scared of going into the south and soon, even international travelers could start leaving out this region out of their travel itinerary.
"Don't forget, people in the West see this as a whole. The Bali bombing and Muslims separatists in Thailand can scare them off...eventually tourists and even investors will opt for countries like Vietnam and China, not Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia," said a western journalist based here.
Furthermore, a more pressing problem of bird flu is on the way and needs the speedy cooperation of governments in the region as its presence last year almost crippled agriculture and tourism sectors in the region.
Malaysia and Thailand must inform each other of their troop movements at the border to avoid misunderstandings, [Deputy Prime Minister] Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak said... this would also help to prevent any untoward incident from happening.
Malaysia would also continue cooperating with the Thai army in conducting joint border patrols, he told a press conference after breaking fast with defence forces personnel at the Lapangan Terbang camp here...when pressed for comment on a statement by Defence Forces Chief, Admiral Tan Sri Mohd Anwar Mohd Nor who said the military had detected several men in black uniforms engaging in spying activities on movements of the Territorial Army at the border since September.
Presently, patrolling of the common border is carried out as decided by the Joint Border Committee involving the two nations.
Najib, who also performed terawih prayers at the camp, said the issue need not be blown out of proportion, stressing the situation was under control and that Malaysia would not do anything that would harm bilateral ties or appear to be interfering in the affairs of the neigbour.
DEBKA, salt to taste:
The Syrian leadership has gathered itself in for the next shock after the UN Hariri investigationâs findings drawn up by Detlev Mehlis implicated President Bashar Assadâs close family circle in the assassination of Lebanese leader Rafiq Hariri last February. They expect the UN Security Council convening Tuesday, Oct. 25, to pass an American-French draft resolution condemning Damascus. They are also braced for another disastrous UN report. This one was drawn up by Special Middle East Envoy Terje Roed-Larsen - according to DEBKAfileâs sources, as a cooperative effort with Mehlis. It damns Damascus for violating Security Council resolution 1559 which ordered foreign forces to quit Lebanon and the dismantling of militias in the country. Larsen will expose Syria as continuing to maintain military intelligence agents in Lebanon and derailing efforts to start decommissioning the Hizballah.
The presidential palace in Damascus has set up an emergency response team to ward off these hammer blows. It is made up of officials of the presidency, the foreign ministry, the security services and legal experts. But this official framework is only a façade; it does not affect the turmoil raging inside the close Assad family circle or pacify the top military brass.
Turmoil raging like a bad toe fungus...
The Assads are dominated by four figures: the president, his sister Bouchra (regarded as the toughest and most corrupt), her husband Assef Shawqat, head of general intelligence, who is a reputed professional hitman, and Maher Assad, Basharâs younger brother.
Close enough to be seen as part of the Assad clan is the Syrian tycoon Rami Makhlouf. He is the ruling familyâs moneybags whose financial dealings, including transactions with Iraq, have filled the ruling Assad coffers with billions of dollars which are invested outside the country. Makhlouf is especially close to Bouchra.
The first crack in the familyâs cohesion was forced by interior minister Ghazi Kenaan and his death (whether murder or suicide. Kenaan provided the cement for the strong bond between the president and brother-in-law Shawqat. Haririâs assassination convinced Kenaan to pull away from that partnership. This made him a liability and his days were numbered. Then came the traumatic night of Oct. 20, when the unrevised Mehlis report on the Hariri murder handed to the UN secretary implicated Maher Assad and Shawqat by name.
Because of the universal assumption that the pair would never have performed a deed of this magnitude without the presidentâs knowledge, the ugly cloud moved over his head â even before any proof was adduced that could stand up in court.
This foursome is now locked in together in stifling proximity. Given the slightest hint that any formation of three is willing to sacrifice the fourth member to save themselves will tip the group over into a life-and-death struggle. That is the moment the Assad clanâs enemies are watching and waiting for â within the Assadâs own Alawite sect, among his opponents in the intelligence, security, and military communities and, it goes without saying, among Syrian opposition parties in exile. Rifat Assad, the presidentâs uncle, is waiting in the wings for his chance to seize the presidency. Washington and Paris are also biding their time. They all judge the Assad family as being on the brink of imploding - which is why condemnation rather than sanctions will come out of the Security Council session Tuesday and why Condoleezza Rice spoke of accountability â but not punishment.
This waiting game is also a game of hazard. The Assad family may hold up through its vicissitudes â only to be overthrown in a military coup; or by another branch of the Assad clan, such as the one led by Rifat. He may opt for violence to topple his nephewâs regime and save the dynasty. The violent removal of Syriaâs ally in Beirut, president Emil Lahoud, whom the UN Hariri report places under grave suspicion, would also shake the Assad presidency to its core.
Yummmm, popcorn!
The situation of the Palestinian Authorityâs Chairman Mahmoud Abbas is no less shaky. As though synchronized with the mortal UN findings against Damascus, Abbas called on the White House on Oct. 20 only to make the disturbing discovery that he was no longer President George W. Bushâs blue-eyed boy. Washington would back economic measures to improve the lives of ordinary Palestinians, but Abu Mazenâs refusal to crack down on the terrorists had cost him the White Houseâs support for his leadership.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Steve ||
10/24/2005 11:55 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Not a good time to go to bed at night. And don't eat that soup or drink from that glass.. Accidents will happen....
#5
That pic of Assad needs a Blues Brothers hat photoshopped in and it would be perfect.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
10/24/2005 22:10 Comments ||
Top||
#6
The Assads are dominated by four figures: the president, his sister Bouchra (regarded as the toughest and most corrupt), her husband Assef Shawqat, head of general intelligence, who is a reputed professional hitman, and Maher Assad, Basharâs younger brother.
And they all lived happily ever after ...
Crikey, what a nest of vipers. You could napalm a cornfield and not get enough popcorn for this spectacle. Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch.
From Geostrategy-Direct, subscription req'd.
ANKARA â The United States has been seeking Turkish cooperation to contain Iran and Syria.
The U.S. Defense Department has discussed the use of Turkey as a base for American military operations in the Middle East, Turkish government sources said. They said U.S. European Command wants to use Turkish military bases for reconnaissance and intelligence missions in Iran and Syria.
"The first stage has been defining threats in the Middle East and ways to monitor them," a Turkish source said. "The next step is an operational plan whereby both Turkey and the United States would cooperate." Cooperation would be nice, for a change, but how much will it cost us?
Over the past three weeks, Turkey and the United States have held high-level meetings on Iran and Syria. The discussions took place during visits to Ankara by U.S. National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley and Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Robert Joseph.
Officials said Joseph, during a Sept. 30 meeting, sought Turkey's agreement to the U.S. assessment that Iran's nuclear weapons and intermediate-range missile programs posed a threat to the entire Middle East.
They said the Turkish Foreign Ministry and General Staff recognized the Iranian threat, but stressed their support for a diplomatic solution. Of course, what else are the Turks going to say publicly?
"We are not going to commit ourselves to helping the United States against Iran," an official said. "We also don't want to commit ourselves to anything that could be interpreted as cooperation for a military strike." But by letting the US use bases for recon, Iran and Syria will look at Turkey as a facilitator for the US, i.e., an enemy. Cannot have it both ways.
Last week, a former senior State Department official said Turkey and the United States have an interest in preventing Iran's nuclear ambitions. Understatement of the week.
Former Undersecretary of State Marc Grossman told a meeting in Ankara cosponsored by the Washington-based Brookings Institution that the Iran issue could constitute a "new test in Turkish-U.S. relations."
Turkish sources said the U.S. military has also sought to expand its presence at the Incirlik Air Force base near Syria. They said the U.S. military wants to intensify reconnaissance from Incirlik of both Syria as well as northern Iraq.
[...snip...]
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
10/24/2005 01:08 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Gotta go with .com on this one. We need to let Turkey twist gently in the breeze. Who knows how many American lives might have been spared had we gotten access to Iraq through Turkey. Find some way to do without them and let the EU continue their "separate but equal" charade with these back-stabbing polecats.
#2
The U.S. Defense Department has discussed the use of Turkey as a base for American military operations in the Middle East, Turkish government sources said.
Boy, our officials have awfully short memories, don't they?
#3
A complex issue. However, the benefits seem to outweigh the costs and grievances: Turkey may yet prove helpful in any action against Syria or Iran. Turkey is also a stick with which to poke the EU. And lastly, it's in everyone's interest for Turkey not to go jihadi in the future.
Posted by: Rafael ||
10/24/2005 2:00 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Who knows how many American lives might have been spared
You say that as if the initial stages of the war cost hundreds of thousands of lives. Not to belittle the lives lost, but personally I feared something like 10,000 dead. IMO, passage through Turkey was a non-issue. It would have been nice, but the way I remember it, the US did just fine without it. So F Turkey.
Posted by: Rafael ||
10/24/2005 2:14 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Turkey may yet prove helpful in any action against Syria or Iran.
That's nice, 'cos they certainly weren't any help where Iraq was concerned. Had they been, we would have been saved a LOT of trouble.
#6
They turned down a 3 billion dollar bribe to go into Iraq through their territory. This cost a lot of lives and let the enemy escape intact because he wasn't surrounded.
#7
Escape to where? Seems more likely the regulars dropped their weapons and simply went home, while the die-hards prepared to fight another day, which would have happened regardless of whether Turkey provided passage or not.
we would have been saved a LOT of trouble.
But not in the long run, as is plainly the case now.
Posted by: Rafael ||
10/24/2005 3:59 Comments ||
Top||
#8
fooled me once, shame on you. Fooled me twice, shame on me.
Hey Rafael, I got some beach front property in Florida I want to sell you. Great deal if you buy in the next hour. Sure, Wilma might wipe it out - but are you feeling lucky? Are you?
#11
Rafael...You need to read some of the Lesson's learned from CENTCOM from the invasion. The plan was for the 4ID to roll down across the upper Tigris, and block and disrupt the ratline from Syria. That would have saved a lot of heartburn as the "alleged" WMD's escaped to Syria and the Bekka. Also it would not have allowed the islamo-cockroaches time to establish as strong a foothold in the Al Anbar. That's CENTCOM...not me.
#13
If we can't count on much from Turkey, let's find out for sure. If they aren't playing ball with us, it may be time to put them out in the cold and develop plans that consider them, France, Spain and Germany to be hostile powers. We should then ditch NATO and build an alliance of nations that are seriously interested in preserving democracy. But let's find out if they learned any lessons from the run up to Iraq, first.
#15
I disagree with UP1853. There's value in uncertainty if you're the one who can manipulate that. Let the Turks wonder where they stand. Let their military, traditionally strongly supportive of us, fret. Let our true enemies (e.g., Iran) worry about what the Turks might or might not do. Let them spend time and effort trying to influence the Turks -- there's only so many hours in a day, so make our enemies waste theirs.
Whatever decision we make about the Turks, the rest of the world should never know it.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/24/2005 10:32 Comments ||
Top||
#16
You guys are awefull rough on Turkey. Turkey is right there in the middle of all this shit. It would be like us next to mexico full of insurgents, no wonder they don't want to commit. The EU doesn't want them, the Arab states dont want them, Russia doesn't want them. Where do you think they will turn? To us, that's right. They don't have a whole lot to offer, but they have their strategic location. Being fresh out of friends, they may turn out to be a good ally someday.
#19
Turkey is right there in the middle of all this shit. It would be like us next to mexico full of insurgents, no wonder they don't want to commit. The EU doesn't want them, the Arab states dont want them, Russia doesn't want them. Where do you think they will turn? To us, that's right. They don't have a whole lot to offer, but they have their strategic location. Being fresh out of friends, they may turn out to be a good ally someday.
This was already the case when we needed access to Iraq. Little has changed since then save that the EU's tacit reluctance has become open hesitation. No big news here except that we've had just one more demonstration of unreliability from a country that was supposed to be one of our allies. Their "unhelpfulness" with Iraq was sheer ingratitude and not much else.
At some point the dithering has to end. Turkey has frittered away their chances and our patience.
#20
The truck caravan to the Bekaa Valley via Syria was complete before the invasion -- I remember seeing the satellite pictures. Sending the 4th ID through Turkey as originally planned wouldn't have changed that (and I must admit I am really looking forward to seeing the goodies finally dug up!). The 4th ID anvil to the hammer that was the rest of the invasion force would have made the Sunni Triangle denizens feel immediately the cost of losing the war... as opposed to the slower attrition by which they are losing now. However, while the original plan would have definitely been "shock and awe", the current slow and inevitable gristmill leaves a certain mentality with no way to rationalize their losses as temporary or accidental. And by taking place in the full glare of Ummah attention, the lesson is being taught well beyond Iraq's borders.
Turkey appears by all accounts to be teetering between the attractions of the West and of the Ummah. Under their current administration they are leaning toward the religious side. But a great many Turks still see the attraction of Attaturk's dream: a secular Moslem state, just as Israel is a secular Jewish state, and the U.S. is a secular Christian state.
#21
A beautiful, if somewhat sterilized and bloodless, summation, tw, *kudos*
Work in more light regards the obvious US losses directly stemming from Turkey's perfidy - no matter how strategic they are to the cold calculus of realpolitik, and I'm sure a bona fide Gold Star mother could assist with that verbiage - and I'm your slave.
#22
.com. you know I can't do the blood 'n' guts bit -- I haven't the imagination, and thank goodness not the experience. I rely on you and the others who've been stuck in for that. As for the comparison of losses (another bloodless word, I apologize), I'll have to rely on you military types for that, too. I wouldn't know how to begin to lay out the equation. All I know is that the current method appears to be working. Who was it that said all plans are perfect until the battle starts?
#23
trailing...what you say about the 4ID is expanded and correct. However, the comment about the WMD's is true in light of hindsight and history (no offense intended). Part of the CONOP (and thus a reason for the 4ID in Turkey) was to sever the ratline and cut off escape routes for bad (read Baghdad area Baathists) guys and the WMD's.
#24
the obvious US losses directly stemming from Turkey's perfidy
You've mentioned that before, can you give some examples?
With 20/20 hindsight, given the relative ease and speed with which Iraq was taken, I don't buy that hammer and anvil plan. The jihadi plan all along was to give up and fight another day, hiding among (and behind) the civilian population. Passage through Turkey would be irrelevant in this case.
Besides, all major cities were bypassed. Total destructive war wasn't a part of the hearts-and-minds deal. Attacking from the north wouldn't have changed that.
Turkey deserves scorn, but this whole thing about passage through Turkey somehow changing the outcome is overblown, imo.
Posted by: Rafael ||
10/24/2005 14:33 Comments ||
Top||
#25
anymouse, I'm never offended by the comments of those (a good proportion of the Rantburg population, I fear, not to mention the outside world) who know more about something than this little civilian housewife. It's only those who know less that annoy me. After all, it isn't arrogance when one really is as good as one claims.
tw - kettle's on the boil - or just short of it, doncha know. :)
Rafael. Sigh, again. Lordy, lordy, where to begin. I don't really know how to state the case, in one swell foop, when there is one hell of a sequence of events that just screams out the answer with every IED, with every rat's nest that has to be cleaned out, with every passing day. I'll pose a series of questions, I think. That would be best, since I don't really feel like writing a book.
Do you know much about military ops? I mean know, first-hand?
Have you paid attention to what has happened over the last 2+ yrs regards the Sunni Triangle - and nowhere else, actually?
Who do you think needed, more than any other region of Iraq, a first-hand lesson in tasting no-shit, bloody in your face, ass-kicking defeat for everything Saddam stood for?
Do you know what gets an Arab's attention, holds it, and focuses it?
Do you know what gets an Arab's respect? The real one that reminds him not to shoot you in the back, as soon as it's turned?
Do you think that if the war had been conducted as planned by the best of our military planners that it might have made a difference over the last 2+ years?
(Sure, they did the deed rolling up from the south - and largely pacified the path from Kuwait to Baghdad - in spite of the lack of the hammer from Turkey sweeping through SunniLand. But that's the point - an undefeated enemy is exactly that. The Sunni Triangle got a pass.)
Who in Iraq is the enemy of freedom for Iraq? Precisely those who never had to endure war. Precisely those who needed to.
If it had all happened as planned, and we will never know all of the aspects of "The Plan" since it was short-circuited before it even saw the light of day, I submit to you:
1) The insurgency, the real one composed of Iraqi Ba'athists and disaffected RG, would have been much shorter, much less bloody, and much less likely to have encouraged the flypaper effect. Those planners aren't stupid dolts, y'know. They do this shit for a living. They thought about the campaign. They thought about the aftermath. They thought about the occupation. They considered who we were fighting. They considered who would ally against us and with the Ba'athists. All of it. Much of this may have been a surprise to many observers, but it wasn't to those who were tasked with finding solutions and developing the plans to implement them.
2) Indeed, it's possible that the flypaper effect may have still occurred to some degree, but they would've found far less sanctuary, far fewer tribal leaders willing to shelter them and support them logistically, a far smaller Ba'athist treasury to get them started - it would've been pounded to shit with their tribal leaders suing for peace - as it should've been and would've been without Turkey's perfidy.
Sigh. I could roll out the sequence of events, again, that led to this, but I won't. It's about understanding what and who we're fighting. What will make them stop and be glad they aren't already dead. It's about why they were allowed the pass that created the circumstances that have fostered first, the insurgency, and then the foreign-fighter terrorism that followed on. Without a pass for the Sunni Triangle, that would not have happened with anywhere near the ferocity nor effectiveness.
Time is part of the equation, too. If you conduct a blitzkrieg then pacification is far more likely than if you give the enemy time to organize. That should ring true to anyone, military experience or not. They had all the time in the world, thanks to Turkey. The Pentagon took the second front force and made it the relief for the first - I believe they took the broken plan and tried to wing it - and muffed it. I believe the first CA being replaced by the second CA was part of that winging-it mess - and muff. Given all the time, it encouraged precisely who and what was the focus of this entire war: Saddam and his supporters.
I'm sorry, I don't feel like I've done a good job of this - some days are better than others for lucid commentary. Today, I just feel like watching another movie - and I've got Serenity cued up to go. I think I'll go watch it.
Perhaps someone else more eloquent can do better, but to someone who has played with fire, this is so clearly obvious that it boggles to have to explain it.
#27
May I trouble you for a cup of Earl Grey with just a splash of milk, .com? Thank you so much. :-) I'm making brownies (from a box, admittedly, but still), and I'll be happy to share with all who need sustenance to support the mental effort of this thread. ;-) Popcorn won't suit, here.
#28
The US should privately be as close an ally to Turkey as they allow. Spite (rightious or not) has no place in diplomacy. The US should publiclly keep our distance to allow Turkey to get a handle on their domestic radicals.
Also the US should work with Turkey to win the War on Terror. I don't mean as a launching pad for military, or even using their troops, I mean the hearts & Minds.
The US should do whatever we can to get the Sufi brand of Sunni Islam to become top dog again. Turkey is Sufi land, we should put US dollars to spread Sufi Islam into Mosques in tactical areas currently dominated by the Wahhabist freaks. We should us US dollars to help them print up Sufi Korans if that's what it takes. We should try to get the Turks to come up with some kind of Islamic Council (to replace Egypt in that stead) or even a Pope (to replace the Imam of Mecca) so they can be seen as the leaders of Islam instead of the current million voices from a million mosques, most of which are frothing maniacs.
#29
I say let Turkey flap in the wind. They did us and Iraq great damage with their reversal of support for an invasion from the north into Iraq.
They were with us and then lined up behind France and Germany. They are not our trust worthy allies and can never again be allowed to think they are. They have yet to learn from their error. Yhat is thanks to our continuing to think we need to help them or support them when we do not. A series of Air bases in situated in Iraq would suit our current global situation much better then any in Turkey.
Let them feel the pain. Let them flap in the wind. Let them worry about Iran and the Kurds.
there are a great many people, including some strong supporters of Op. Iraqi Freedom, who think that their were many mistakes made in the occupation, from the use of too few troops, to mistakes in how the CPA was staffed, etc. The gist of this POV is that going into Iraq was a good idea, and may yet be a success, but that mistakes made by Donald Rumsfeld in particular made it much harder than it needed to be. McCain and Kristol are particularly notable for this POV (Kristol openly).
One oft heard counter argument is that the reason there werent enough troops in the immediate postwar was because Turkey wouldnt let the 4th ID come through the north, and so their arrival in Iraq was delayed. Everything that has since gone wrong is attributed to that - had the 4th ID been present immediatly the insurgency would have been quashed at the beginning, and we'd be over and done by now. Ergo, Turkey was guilty of the greatest behavior ever.
While I cannot deny there is something to this POV, I think its perhaps a bit overdrawn. you can also see how convenient it is for people who despise McCain, and who want to hold Rumsfeld blameless.
Discussions of Turkey here cannot be understood absent that context, I think.
No I'm not a military person, never have been in a uniform, or in a foxhole fighting for my life. Neither am I a complete dolt, and I can sometimes recognize that 1+1 doesn't equal 3. There's something in your reasoning that says 1+1=3 and in my mind that is inconsistant. Let's just agree to disagree. I understand the "1+1" part of your argument, and the "3" part of your argument, but there's something wrong with the "=" part of your argument. The connection isn't there. Sorry.
The importance of the 4ID in the initial stages is overemphasized, given the way events transpired. I would tend to agree with LH.
It's pointless delving too much into this, but why are you so sure that the whole passage through Turkey thing wasn't a form of deception? It's been done before in Gulf War I with the Marines (not involving Turkey though).
Posted by: Rafael ||
10/24/2005 17:26 Comments ||
Top||
#32
My movie's over, pretty good one, too.
ROFL. Wow, have I been told what's what or what? Lol. Where are my waders...
rjschwarx(No T) said: "The US should privately be as close an ally to Turkey as they allow."
*slaps forehead* Fucking brilliant. What was I thinking? That allies should be counted on to provide the courtesies (i.e. passage) customarily accorded allies? Even when we went to the mat for them (i.e Patriot batteries despite France's scuttling the NATO vote, EU membership support, huge fucking aid package offer)? Silly me. Let's jump into bed with them. They're spiffy allies - as long as you don't actually count on them for anything. Sometime I dunno what gets into me. I just expect others to live up to the commitments they make. Sigh.
lh said: "Everything that has since gone wrong is attributed to that"
Lol. Since I didn't say that, or even close to that, I call bullshit. That's your Donkdick exaggeration game, lh. You trot that sucker out pretty often. Does it actually work in other forums? Lol. Pisses me off something fierce. When you don't have a decent counter argument, you turn disingenuous, as you did here. I'm of two minds here. One sez laugh it off and one sez Fuck You. Decisions, decisions. Try being honest, eh? That bit certainly wasn't.
and then he said: "it is for people who despise McCain, and who want to hold Rumsfeld blameless"
More Donkdick stupidity, not to mention totally irrelevant political blather from a Dhimmidonk operative. Does misdirection and muddling the message really work for you elsewhere? Amazing. Tripe.
Rafael said: "There's something in your reasoning that says 1+1=3 and in my mind that is inconsistent."
Well gosh, that's really, uh, um pointless. And sooo persuasive. I'm stunned.
and "The importance of the 4ID in the initial stages is overemphasized, given the way events transpired."
So, um, did you read a single word I wrote? Do you "get" any of it? I'm flabbergasted by this sentence. Pray-tell, just how did things transpire? I thought that was the whole fucking point. They went well, from Kuwait to Baghdad because our military is outfuckingstanding. Since the fall, they went badly everywhere we didn't go (except Kurd territory - because they're not Arabs) - which is the Sunni Triangle. From this region came 90% of the shit that "transpired" since the fall of Baghdad. These assholes have provided the logistics, support, funding, and rallying point for what became the flypaper "strategy" (in quotes because I don't think that was planned for because the Sunni Triangle was not supposed to get a pass on the war thingy and be allowed to foment and nurture the insurgency) -- which has yielded hundreds of dead, US and Iraqi, and I tried to explain why. Sheesh. Are we on the same planet?
and "Let's just agree to disagree."
Fucking-A, Bubba. You got that right. Hey, no sweat. I live. I learn. You asked. I gave it a shot though, admittedly, not my best. You'll believe whatever suits you anyway, but I responded, as requested.
I will note that none of you actually addressed anything I wrote. Not a single point, actually. None of the relevant bits. None. Nothing addressed, nothing refuted, nothing added. Just pissed a bit, here 'n there, responding to no point and making no effort. I wasted my time. It's sad, really, that this isn't obvious, but such is life.
rjs has no standards for allies. The Turks are peachy. Check.
lh can't stop being a political animal - ever - and has no answers outside politics. Check.
Rafael has "feelings" that I'm a complete dolt -- I can't add 1+1 and get 2. Check.
Thx, I'll remember.
#33
This whole fucking shenanigan dance from the Turks is their half ass way of boot licking their way into a guarantee from us that we will contain the kurds.
Fuck Turkey, let the Kurds send the Peshmerga up their ass until the cows come home.
#34
It's pointless delving too much into this, but why are you so sure that the whole passage through Turkey thing wasn't a form of deception? It's been done before in Gulf War I with the Marines (not involving Turkey though).
No. Having been involved in that OPDEC in GWI, it's MNSHO that the 4th ID movement through Turkey was not a deception. Here's an official history:
In early 2003, a force of some 2000 1st Infantry Division troops was deployed to Turkey to command and control Army Forces Turkey (ARFOR-T). Their mission was to receive and move the 4th Infantry Division across Iraq and into Northern Iraq. Units from the Big Red One included HHC, 1st ID; 1-4 Cavalry; 1-26 Inf; 1-6 FA; 2-1 Avn; HHC, Engineer Brigade; 9th Eng Bn; DISCOM; 701st MSB; 601st Avn Spt Bn; 4-3 Air Defense Artillery; 101st MI Bn; 121st Sig Bn; and the 12th Chem Co. Many other support units from Europe were also assigned. The Big Red One opened three seaports of debarkation, two airports of debarkation, three command posts and numerous convoy support centers along the 500-mile route from the Turkish coast to the Iraqi border. Six ships were downloaded and some 1200 vehicles, trailers and containers were moved to Mardin, Turkey. When the Turkish Parliament voted to deny US ground forces access to Turkey, ARFOR-T received a change of mission and began a deliberate deployment to collapse the line of communication it had built. The ships were reloaded and the Big Red One returned to Germany.
One does not do all this, then have it sit while diplomats go through a very public song-and-dance with Turkey, just to make a diversion. Not when it can be done effectively with a lot less.
#35
Ah yes, .com in all his glory. He first starts the condescension: the "my argument is so obvious that if you don't agree with it, then you're obviously stupid and/or inexperienced" attitude. Then if someone disagrees with his argument, it's "HAND/FOAD". Same pattern, as always.
Let's see: The Sunni Triangle got a pass because Turkey didn't allow US troops through its territory. Hence all the problems with the Sunni Triangle (and Iraq by extension) can be indirectly attributable to Turkey.
The fact that one does not have to imply the other, bears no consequence in .com's universe.
I asked for examples, you provided none, because it's so fucking OBVIOUS. Well splendid. Good for you.
.com: Since the fall, they went badly everywhere we didn't go ... which is the Sunni Triangle.
So, like, is the 4thID still stuck at the Turkish border to this day? Because had they been in Iraq, everything would have been just super.
You know, there is an alternative explanation, inferred from events. If you cared I could present my case, but you don't so I won't.
HAND to you too.
Posted by: Rafael ||
10/24/2005 19:32 Comments ||
Top||
#36
Well, that's pretty brilliant work there, Rafael. I now wonder where your concern lies, with an answer to how it fits together or my tone. You're offended. Okay, life's hard and yes, I do think it's fucking obvious. My bad.
Again, you address nothing of relevance. I asked the questions that the success level and damage to US forces from the insurgency demands and, believing without hesitation that it's linked to the Turkey perfidy, I tried to explain why. There were far fewer troops in theater than was planned for - we sorta have a tried and true military policy of applying overwhelming force whenever possible - and there wasn't dick we could do about it, thanks to Turkey dragging it out until we were almost fully committed to that path. That was one hell of a come to fucking Jesus Jolt, I'll wager, back at CENTCOM. I tried to answer the questions, except for what gets the Arabs' attention and respect - which is applied power, of course.
I never said "Hence all the problems with the Sunni Triangle..." - nor did I say - "Because had they been in Iraq, everything would have been just super." - geez, so you're a disingenuous exaggerating lying shithead, too. Is there some sort of school you attended where they teach you to lie through your teeth? That makes my day, bubba. But pointing these obvious lies out is, of course, my bad. That you post them is, what, understandable? Lol. Yewbetcha. It must, somehow, be my bad.
I'm supposed to feel bad because you took offense at my tone? This has been a fairly regular RB topic for over 2 years. I've have been consistent in my position because I think it's clearly a contributing factor to our death and injured toll - and I've said that clearly many times. You missed all those days, I guess. Who knew? That dumbfounding coincidence was part of the tone thingy that rankles you. My bad.
Well, I guess that covers it. So, if I follow you, the deaths and injuries from IED's, ambushes, rat-nests like Fallujah, Ramadi, Qaim, Tal Afar, et al, have little to do with the Triangle getting a pass? Is that your mysterious conclusion? And Turkey is what, a peach of an ally? You don't exactly say, and unlike you, I won't put words in your mouth - I guess I'll have to guess. What you did post is enough, actually, I consider myself fully educated regards your military acumen.
BTW, one does not have to imply the other, but I obviously think it does, but I said it so badly, offensively, terribly. Evilly, even. I am so unfair. My bad.
Oh, and to be agreeable and end on an upbeat note, yes, indeed, let's dispense with the HAND's then. Gotcha. My bad.
#37
"We are not going to commit ourselves to helping the United States against Iran," an official said. "We also don't want to commit ourselves to anything that could be interpreted as cooperation for a military strike."...
"But by letting the US use bases for recon (*Stage Aside: Bases established and maintained by the U.S. since the 1950's, and then having to endure constant raghead ingratious drama since). "Iran and Syria will look at Turkey as a facilitator for the US, i.e., an enemy. Cannot have it both ways". {well, Duh. Let's just start up a glass factory, O.K.?")
You said: the Sunni Triangle was not supposed to get a pass on the war thingy and be allowed to foment and nurture the insurgency
So they were allowed to foment and nurture the insurgency? Just like that? I assume you're implying that the Sunni Triangle got a pass because of Turkey, because the 4thID wasn't allowed to do what they do best.
Then you say: they would've found far less sanctuary, far fewer tribal leaders willing to shelter them and support them logistically, a far smaller Ba'athist treasury to get them started - it would've been pounded to shit with their tribal leaders suing for peace - as it should've been and would've been without Turkey's perfidy.
So Baghdad was pounded to shit at will, but the Sunni Triangle was not, because the 4thID wasn't there. Somehow, with all its might and technology and intelligence, the US military missed the Sunni Triangle. They meant to pound it to shit, but couldn't. It wouldn't be because there was no need to pound it to shit at that very moment, would it? If there was, they would have done it, 4thID or no 4thID.
Furthermore, 2,000,000 boots on the ground would not have made a difference at that time because the plan did not call for pounding the place to shit. There was no need to and would have been counter-productive to the whole hearts and minds plan.
Your focus on Turkey and the 4thID is misplaced.
So, if I follow you, the deaths and injuries from IED's, ambushes, rat-nests like Fallujah, Ramadi, Qaim, Tal Afar, et al, have little to do with the Triangle getting a pass?
It has little to do with the 4thID. If the Sunni Triangle got a pass, it's because the US military wanted it that way in the initial stages and not long thereafter.
And Turkey is what, a peach of an ally? You don't exactly say
I said they deserve scorn for what they did. Not strong enough? Ok then..they should be fucked. They should also be used for the tools they are.
Posted by: Rafael ||
10/24/2005 21:30 Comments ||
Top||
The real problem lies within the Sunni-Arab community itself. By eliminating Saddam's regime, the coalition simultaneously disenfranchised that community and decapitated it. Saddam had either co-opted the leaders of that community or killed them, and those that remained fell when he was captured. Radical imams and people like Zarqawi gained power within the Sunni-Arab community by stepping into a vacuum created by coalition success. Their appeal came, as it so often does, from their ability to focus anger and hatred. They spewed anti-Americanism, of course, and thereby drove countless young Iraqi men to their deaths in hopeless combat, but they also preached hatred against Shiites and the doctrine that Iraq should be ruled by the Sunnis forever.
Sunnis have dominated what is now Iraq for centuries--under the Ottoman Empire, the British, and subsequently. Even today, Sunni Arabs claim to be a "majority" in Iraq. For the most part, they do not mean that they are more numerous than the Shiites (though some propaganda tracts attempt to "prove" just that), but rather that they are (or should be) the dominant element in Iraq. In this sense, they are inherently hostile to any arrangement granting power to the Shia--which of course almost any real democracy will do. American assumptions that the Sunnis had been victimized as badly by Saddam as the Shiites and would therefore welcome democracy have turned out to be wrong, undermining U.S. military strategy in the Sunni Triangle.
The decapitation of the Sunni-Arab community in Iraq posed another problem as well, beyond the vacuum exploited by Zarqawi and radical clerics. It meant that there was no recognized authority figure who could speak for that community or control it. The contrast with the Moqtada al-Sadr uprising was stark: At a pivotal moment in that rebellion, Ayatollah Ali Sistani, the recognized leader of the Iraqi Shia communities, spoke against Moqtada and urged the Shia not to support him. Sistani thereafter worked to broker several deals that gradually stripped Moqtada of his base and ultimately eliminated the military threat he posed. There was no leader who could perform a similar service in the Sunni-Arab regions.
The failure to occupy the Sunni Triangle after the war in April 2003 aggravated these challenges. Besides allowing Zarqawi and his ilk to step in, it also meant that the Sunni Arabs of Iraq never felt that they had been defeated. They did not fear American forces, as evidenced by the fact that Fallujans of all ages, men and women, came out to watch the first battle of Falluja as though it were a spectator sport--not the behavior one would expect of a people in awe of America's military might.
#40
If the Sunni Triangle got a pass, it's because the US military wanted it that way in the initial stages and not long thereafter.
Don't think so. The US military stopped romping and stomping because organized resistance stopped. Then the "insurgency" began. Our mistake was pulling the punch on Fallujah the first time.
#41
Furthermore, 2,000,000 boots on the ground would not have made a difference at that time because the plan did not call for pounding the place to shit
The 2000 troops were a preparatory force to receive and move the 4th Infantry Division from the Turkish coast to the Iraqi border.
One does not create a deception by settting up three debarkation seaports, two debarkation airports, three command posts, convoy support centers along a 500-mile route, and unload six ships of some 1200 vehicles, trailers and containers.
What it was, was a combined screwing by the State Department (who deliberately didn't do their job), France (who offered a bribe to the Turks) and Turkey. A pox on all of them.
#42
From the link provided by Whogum: Once the few malcontents committed to the old despotism were eliminated or cowed, ran the common wisdom, the coalition would be able to withdraw. The focus on a small military footprint that would minimize the appearance of a U.S. occupation made sense in this context.
So it seems they did wanted it that way. True enough, it did make sense at the time. Reinforces what I said earlier. The 4thID wasn't needed, in that context.
The insurgency came after the organized resistance stopped, as Ebbains points out, by which time what Turkey did or didn't do, wasn't a factor.
Posted by: Rafael ||
10/24/2005 22:12 Comments ||
Top||
#43
Pappy, point taken. I am now convinced it wasn't a deception. It was only a (weak) suggestion on my part.
Posted by: Rafael ||
10/24/2005 22:15 Comments ||
Top||
#44
Sigh. What an obvious waste of time.
EH - Would there have been a standing core of Ba'athist insurgents if Fallujah and Ramadi and all the rest had been thumped in the 4th ID sweep? I suggest, with no hesitation, that the stomach and manpower for it would've been seriously reduced. I agree that stopping the cleansing process on Fallujah the first time, when the politicians undercut the military, was a serious SNAFU. I additionally assert it would've been a lesser issue had it been militarily pacified prior to that - during the invasion - by the 4th ID.
You present your assertion as obvious.
I submit mine is just as obvious.
Rafael - I have read what I've written - several times, before submitting.
You take from the article what you want to take. The Plan, worked on for several months, went down the shitter - and that was because of Turkey. Period. Full Stop. Got that? It was turned into trash on March 22. They played us like a fiddle - and for as long as possible. We were screwed. Pentagon Abandons Turkey Deployment Plan
We were fully committed to The Plan.
After the flush, everything that followed, from the brilliant drive from Kuwait to Baghdad - to the gaping military vacuum in the Sunni Triangle - was a direct result of that fact. They winged it - and it didn't work nearly as well as they hoped. The proof is the Sunni Triangle and the price we've paid for that vacuum.
Why did we leave the triangle alone for so long? Simple: political positions were taken and had to be defended. Stupid, but true. To fix this, we had to stand up functioning Iraqi troops to both take over posts elsewhere to free our people up and to assist us in cleaning it out.
What has happened since decent numbers of capable Iraqi troops have come online? We've gone after the triangle - to do the job left undone since Day One of the invasion.
You guys can stroke each other if you're inclined. I say it's bullshit.
There was a CA military vacuum in the Triangle and it was filled by the bad guys. Those who say differently have their motives. The Pentagon? They wanted it that way? Lol. okay - that's just dumb. Simply dumb. Why? No invasion force overlooks the primary opposition's home territory unless it's forced by necessity - or they're idiots.
The bits you cherry-pick and think support your view are classic, after the fact, ass coverage bits for the level of damage suffered in the post-major ops period.
Everything you said about pounding things to shit is wrong. Every notion, every word, every implication. I believe it's intentionally disingenuous, too.
But that's alright. You can tell yourself that you get it and I don't. But you might consider that I'm not alone, despite the pathetic reaction to this thread. You are the ONLY person I've ever encountered on this topic that makes the claim that that the exclusion of the 4th ID had no real effect - unless EH wants to jump on that bandwagon, that's unclear - and I'm summarizing your posts - if that's wrong, then pick the nit, baby, but that certainly fits, IMHO.
Others argue we should make nice. Others argue how important and strategic Turkey is. Others argue we should just get over it and stick to realpolitik.
But none of them have made that singular assertion and made a case for it - it's all yours. It's a total load of shit and anyone with military experience will verify that as a fact.
Sigh. Been through this so many times. Fuck it. Believe what you wish.
#45
my 2cents: If we had been able to grind down from Turkey, so many apparatchik Baathists may not have fled the capital, been contained there and killed as they should be. Just like a balloon, they press out in the direction of least pressure, in this case: "Akbar! We've been beloved relatives even though I had your children tortured... can I set up an IED shop in your garage? No? Well, I have a gun...."
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/24/2005 23:24 Comments ||
Top||
#46
Yep, after all that's been said here, Turkey made little to no difference. Yup, yup....
#47
There's one blaring inconsistency in your argument. Even if the 4thID drove through the Sunni Triangle on schedule, they would have thumped the regular Iraqi army first, disbanded them, and told them to go home. As was the pattern throughout Iraq. According to "The Plan" there would not have been an initial pounding to shit of everything and everyone in sight. The die-hards would have survived to fight another day anyway.
What reason would they have, at the time, to pound to shit everyone in the Sunni Triangle? At that time, in the initial stages, before the insurgency,...,none whatsoever.
Posted by: Rafael ||
10/24/2005 23:43 Comments ||
Top||
#48
It was turned into trash on March 22. They played us like a fiddle - and for as long as possible. We were screwed.
well, not to say I told you so, but they should have listened to me. Yup! I kept saying that Turkey was going to screw us. Everyone kept disagreeing with me telling me that I just didn't understand the Turks and how the military was going to step in and save the day. It was obvious to me, as someone who was new to military blogs and didn't have a vested interest in believing that Turkey would act like Turkey would have acted perhaps 2/5/10 years earlier.
Not that it would have made much difference. I'm sure it was worth pursuing it as far and and fast and as furious as we could for the benefits that would have been obtained if they could have gotten Turkey to cooperate.
As someone who believes that Turkey will stab us in the back given any opportunity to do so and can never be an ally, I was persuaded by rj's post about keeping the diplomatic ties open. Much in the same way that you say hello to your enemy when you pass them in the halls and attend the same meetings they go to so you can see what trouble they are brewing. It doesn't hurt and can provide some benefits. But all the same, you should never, ever trust them or get your self in a position where you rely on them. The current turkey will be always be one to smile and shake your hand, but only for the purpose to look for an opportunity to stab you in the back. JMHO
To the ongoing insurgency, in the long run...no. But that's just my opinion. I know, it's hard to fathom there are differing opinions.
Posted by: Rafael ||
10/24/2005 23:47 Comments ||
Top||
#50
WTF? That makes no sense at all.
The "pattern all over Iraq" was both wasting RG units and taking out the much more dedicated feydayeen. That was the hardcore opposition. What war were you watching?
What are you talking about? What you posted is gibberish. You should pound some shit, methinks. You think you're being cute, I don't.
A couple of days after the long awaited UN probe team's report into the murder of Premier Rafik Hariri, Prime Minister Fouad Siniora said he had "no prior knowledge of anything that was in the report." In an interview with Al-Arabiyya television station on Sunday, Siniora denied having known from Mehlis who was involved in the assassination. He said he did know about any of the people Mehlis "accuses in the report or whom he considers suspects. I am keen on the independence of Mehlis' work, and the independence of the judiciary."
Asked about the censored report and the report given to the Security Council and if there are any doubts about the censored one, Siniora said: "We have to make it clear to people, because they are thinking there are two reports. The truth is there are two different paragraphs in the report. There were names in the confidential report, paragraph 96, while in the ordinary report, the names were removed."
Siniora added that he personally believes President Emile Lahoud should resign. "I have said this in more than one occasion. It would be beneficial for Lebanon and for the President. But this decision is his to take."
I think that when Emil eventually leaves it's going to be in the dead of night, maybe with only the clothes on his back. The customary exile in Gay Paree might not even be available if the Frenchies have a warrant out for him. Tripoli or Harare might be the best he can do.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/24/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I'm sure Bobby-boy would take him, especially if he can bring a few bucks. Zimbabwe can use all the help they can get, even bad help.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
10/24/2005 13:59 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Damn straight! Hook up his honky ass to my plow.
Posted by: Farmin B. Hard ||
10/24/2005 14:17 Comments ||
Top||
Syria continues to arm proxy terrorists guerrillas and run assassins spies in Lebanon despite withdrawing its troops from the country in April, an Israeli newspaper quoted an upcoming U.N. report as saying on Sunday. The report, due out later this week, could compound international pressure building up against Damascus since a U.N. probe last week named senior Syrian officials as suspects in the assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri. I'm shocked, shocked!
Haaretz daily said the report, by U.N. envoy Terje Roed-Larsen, accuses Syria of continuing "to maintain its direct military control of Lebanon through its agents in the Lebanese presidential palace, the army and intelligence organisations". Syria also continues to supply Shi'ite guerrilla group Hizbollah and Palestinian militants based in Lebanon with weapons, Haaretz quoted the Roed-Larsen report as saying.
Syria has denied that its intelligence agents are in Lebanon, and has also rejected accusations that it is arming Hizbollah. "Certainly not! Lies! All lies!"
Roed-Larsen's findings, if accurately reported through the blogosphere, as the MSM won't report anything that might help the US, are likely to fuel U.S.-led efforts to put more pressure on Syria to end any remaining presence in Lebanon and seal its Iraq border against infiltration by foreign fighters.
Earlier on Sunday, the United States and Britain ratcheted up pressure on Syria, saying the U.N. probe implicating it in the killing of Hariri was "very serious" and the world must act. "World" = US, Britain, Oz.
#1
Iff recent news articles of Iran vv its IRGC taking over Syria's control of the local Lebanon-based anti-Israel armed militias are correct, then "Baby Assad" and his cabal have other serious probs besides a potential American/Allied invasion. Assad=Syria may have to decide whom they ultimately prefer to be PC conquered by - the USA or Mullah-led Iran. How ironic that Syria may end up being another "Lebanon" to someone else, and NOT necessarily by Dubya.
Experts and intelligence observers differ on the likely authenticity of a letter published by U.S. intelligence, which they say was written by al-Qaida's Number Two and chief ideologue, Ayman al-Zawahiri, to the group's leader in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.
Some seem sure it is a fake, despite the high confidence that U.S. officials say they have in it. Others are equally convinced it is genuine. Most remain agnostic, even if leaning one way or the other.
But one thing they are all agreed on is that -- if real -- the document offers some amazing and unique insights into the private world of the man who has been the political and ideological driving force behind al-Qaida since it was founded.
That ideological certitude is manifest at numerous points in the manuscript.
"The strongest weapon which the mujahedin enjoy -- after the help and granting of success by God -- is popular support from the Muslim masses," the letter reads.
But those masses "for many reasons -- and this is not the place to discuss (them) -- do not rally except against an outside occupying enemy, especially if the enemy is firstly Jewish, and secondly American," which accounts, in the author's view, "for the popular support the mujahedin enjoy in Iraq."
And this bond with the masses must develop once the Americans are expelled, he argues -- going as far as advocating participation in elections.
Al-Qaida in Iraq should seek to share power with other Islamic forces, the letter says, advocating "an appeasement of Muslims and a sharing with them in governance" and the making of laws.
The power-sharing forum would be an Islamic council known as a Shura, which should be "elected by the people of the country to represent them and overlook the work of the authorities in accordance with the rules of the glorious Sharia."
The author goes on to argue that losing its bond with the masses is the worst thing the mujahedin have to fear from "the secular, apostate forces that are controlling our countries."
"These forces... are stealthily striving to separate (the mujahedin) from the misguided or frightened Muslim masses."
To counter this, he concludes, "Our planning must strive to involve the Muslim masses in the battle."
This strategic calculation is at the heart of the author's widely noted critiques of beheading hostages when "we can kill the captives by bullet," and of what he calls "attacks on ordinary Shiites."
Shiism, he writes "is a religious school based on excess and falsehood," and confrontation with them "will happen sooner or later. This is the judgment of history."
But in the meantime, he cautions, "The majority of Muslims don't comprehend this and possibly could not even imagine it."
As a consequence, "Many of your Muslim admirers amongst the common folk are wondering about your attacks on the Shiites."
Likewise, he writes of the video-taped beheadings that have become Zarqawi's gory trademark, "the feelings of the Muslim populace who love and support you will never find (this) palatable."
Although the author is clearly taking issue with Zarqawi on a number of fronts, he is careful to repeatedly demonstrate his humility. "In my view," he writes, "which I continue to reiterate is limited and has a distant perspective upon the events..."
He also asks again and again for news of the insurgency -- an eerie echo of the letters sent a century ago by exiled Bolsheviks to their party comrades back in Russia.
But in the era of the global electronic news media, the author's pleas for news have been interpreted as a sign that he is cut off from communication with the outside world. "We sense Zawahiri's isolation," wrote Washington Post columnist David Ignatius. "He can't see television or read newspapers easily. He complains frequently of being out of touch."
Ben Venzke, a terrorism analyst whose firm Intel Center consults for U.S. agencies, cautions against reading too much into the author's constant requests for news.
"What he's looking for is more direct reporting from the ground. More detail," he told United Press International.
Venzke says the letter needs to be seen alongside Zawahiri's other recent communications, including video and audio tapes.
All-in-all, "based on his awareness of current events, It is unlikely that he is completely cut off from the news media," he said, adding that -- in addition to wanting more detail -- Zawahiri "clearly doesn't trust the news sources he has access to."
That's not all he doesn't trust.
"Please take every caution in... meetings," he writes, "especially when someone claims to carry an important letter or contributions. It was in this way that they arrested (al-Qaida number three) Khalid Sheikh (Mohammed)."
KSM, as he is known, was seized by U.S. and Pakistani forces at a safe house in Rawalpindi on March 1, 2003 and has been in CIA custody at an undisclosed location ever since.
The author also cautions Zarqawi about meeting aides "in a public place or in a place that is not known to you." It was in this way, he says, that that Abu al-Faraj al-Libi -- "May God set him free and release him from his torment" -- was caught, "lured by one of his brothers, who had been taken into custody, to meet him at a public location where a trap had been set."
At other points, he complains that of 21 audiotape messages he sent out through "the brothers" only 15 were broadcast "for one reason or another.
"We ask God for acceptance and devotion," he concludes.
He also bemoans the fate of his very own "Mein Kampf" -- the autobiographical "A Knight Under the Prophet's Banner."
The author says he gave a copy of the manuscript to a fellow jihadi and then lost the original. "Al-Sharq al-Awsat newspaper published it truncated and jumbled," he grumbles, surmising that the paper was provided with the text from his laptop computer by U.S. intelligence because the serialization "coincided with a publication of messages from my computer in the same newspaper."
Finally there is the matter of money.
"Our situation ... is good by the grace of God," the author writes, "But many of the lines have been cut off. Because of this, we need a payment while new lines are being opened. So, if you're capable of sending a payment of approximately one hundred thousand, we'll be very grateful to you."
Some observers have counted this among the signs of weakness that they say the author shows -- so uncharacteristic of Zawahiri.
But Venzke again cautions against reading too much into this passage pointing out that it that it is prefaced, "The brothers informed me that you suggested to them sending some assistance" -- suggesting that it was Zarqawi who offered his support, rather than Zawahiri who is requesting it.
"This is not a desperate plea," he said. "It's more like a request for some bridging finance."
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
10/24/2005 13:40 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
H/T Smash
STOCKHOLM, Sweden â A Somali suspected of being a militia leader during the 1993 "Black Hawk Down" battle that left 18 Americans dead was arrested Monday on suspicion of war crimes while attending a conference in Sweden, police and organizers said.
A man identified as Abdi Hassan Awale, who once served as Somalia's interior minister, was taken into custody after Somalis living in Sweden recognized him and reported him to police, said Gillian Nilsson, an organizer of the conference on development in the Horn of Africa.
Awale, also known as Abdi Qeybdiid, was a commander in warlord Farah Aidid's militia when it fought a 19-hour battle against American troops in Mogadishu on Oct. 3, 1993. Two U.S. helicopters were shot down and hundreds of Somalis died, in addition to the American soldiers. The story was featured in the book and movie "Black Hawk Down."
Police spokesman Karl Sandberg would not confirm the suspect's identity, but said the 57-year-old Somali man was arrested on suspicion of war crimes early Monday at a hotel in Lund and taken to Goteborg for questioning.
The suspect's lawyer, Pieter Kjessler, told Swedish public radio that he denied the allegations against him during questioning on Monday.
Somalia was thrown into civil war and anarchy after clan-based warlords overthrew dictator Mohamed Siad Barre in 1991. More than 500,000 people have been killed and some 3.5 million have been driven from their homes, 1.5 million of whom have taken refuge in neighboring countries.
Awale, who was a colonel in Somalia's former army, was named interior minister in the internationally unrecognized government that was declared in the capital after Barre's ouster.
News of Awale's capture was welcomed by Somalis living in the United States.
"We were joyous to hear this," said Omar Jamal, executive director of the Somali Justice Advocacy center in St. Paul, Minn. "It sends a loud and clear message to all the other Somali war criminals."
Jamal said Awale was involved in the 1993 militia fighting with American troops.
Nilsson said Awale was part of a six-member Somali delegation headed by Parliamentary speaker Sharif Hassan Sheikh Aden that attended the development conference in Sweden.
#3
on another note...I have a buddy who was in the convoy. Wounded twice. He said it was surreal. Hundreds of tracers simultaneously. He said he truly thought he was going to die.
There has been a lot of outrage in the media concerning the burning of a couple of dead, Taliban fighters in Afghanistan in early October. Yet, the Australian journalist who videotaped the proceedings, Stephen Dupont, stated in an interview on National Public Radio yesterday (audio link to follow courtesy of Bareknucklepolitics.com) that he believed the bodies were burned purely for reasons of hygiene when the local villagers refused to retrieve them, and that the American soldiers didn't do anything wrong.
"I actually believe that the guys who were involved in the burning did it with honorable, you know, reasons. They did it through their orders, or they did if for hygiene. I had no doubt in my mind that they were telling me the truth. If they were doing something that was problematic or controversial, thereâs no way they would have shown me this. Thereâs no way they would have let me go up there and film this."
With regard to the bodies intentionally being pointed toward Mecca as many in the press have asserted, Dupont said:
"No. Look, the bodies as far as Iâm concerned, the bodies were lying on the ground, they werenât facing anywhere, they were just lying there..."
#3
The dead burnt bodies of contractors at Fallujha or the beheaded corpses of course do not warrant outrage in the media. In multi-cultural speak, it's ok as long as it's American/British/Ozzie etc. Tell me again why we need press protection? They're just a cultural form of HIV to democracy.
October 24, 2005: An Australian journalist recently filmed American paratroopers in Afghanistan burning the two bodies of two dead Taliban gunmen. Although the American soldiers said they were burning the bodies for sanitary reasons (they were starting to rot), the Australian journalist believed that, because there were psychological warfare troops in the area, this was all some kind of ploy to get some nearby Taliban to come out and fight. The media portrayed the incident as an accurate representation of what the Australian journalist thought he was witnessing, and a major defeat for the U.S. in their war on terror.
Actually, stuff like this has no impact in the Islamic world. That's because, in the Islamic media, stories like this are invented daily. You can check out the English language sites for media in Islamic countries for examples. Some wild stuff there. The Moslems who hate us wonât change their minds because of two burning bodies. Those Moslems who are down on Islamic terrorists wonât get very upset about two of them getting torched, even though cremation is frowned upon in the Islamic world (even for Islamic terrorists who burn fellow Moslems to death in the course of their operations, which explains al Qaedas sagging poll numbers.)
Where this will hurt is in the United States? It will hurt in those parts of the world where there is is more concern for burned up Taliban than in the Moslem world. That's largely in the Western world, especially among some American politicians and pundits. How will this hurt? Congress can call for more âoversightâ of U.S. military operations. The troops are already irked at the lawyers added to some staffs over the last decade. The lawyers are their to veto operations if there is too great a chance that the action will offend someone in the world and, ultimately, someone in Congress.
If the bodies were burned as a result of some psychological warfare operation, or just to clean up the battlefield, and the act offended the local Moslems, the troops will pay a higher price than any official investigation (which is already underway) can hand out. The troops have to deal with angry, and heavily armed, people every day. They try real hard to act in their own best interests. That being to avoid getting killed while carrying out their mission. Soldiers sent to Afghanistan go through many hours of cultural sensitivity training. They already know that one misstep can destroy lots of good will, and that in turn means fewer Afghans will pass on useful (often life saving) information, and more will fell inclined to take shot at Americans.
American troops in Afghanistan have conducted thousands of patrols, raids and fire fights in their pursuit of Islamic terrorists. Out in the mountains, the situation is often murky, and the troops are on their own. Decisions have to made on the spot to keep things moving. But thereâs a tendency, back in the U.S.A. to be unforgiving of anything that goes wrong, and to demand more micromanagement. In combat, things do go wrong, and more micromanagement causes more problems than it solves. But all this is nothing new, it started four decades ago in Vietnam. Apparently, an abundance of combat images served up on TV gave lots of pundits, voters and government officials the illusion they know whatâs really going on, and should get involved. The fact of the matter is that the U.S. military has been punishing troops for misbehavior since 1776. Yet all this means nothing to those who seek perfection, or simply another way to criticize the way the war is being fought, or the need for a war on terror at all. Any problems with the troops in Afghanistan are a lot closer to home.
Posted by: Steve ||
10/24/2005 09:21 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
All 100% true, Steve. Want to remind people to complain publicly about the way journalists are rewarded.
When media awards take place, those stories that embarrass the government and cause measurable policy change in our own country are the ones rewarded.
THis means prestige for the journalist, pay rises, kudos.
The Aussie journalist and the team that put together the DATELINE story for SBS TV will be respected MORE because the US Government started an inquiry in to the incident.
Their report sparked an inquiry.
They shamed the US Government in to doing something they would not have done without the media report.
Ergo they are respected by other media, and media awards judges regardless of the fact their report was wrong, damaging and irrelevant anyway. Even if all they reported was true, it should not matter one jot, it's a war and mistreating dead bodies in an effort to win quicker I believe would be justified.
This journalist and the Dateline team will most likely get a special (praising) mention in the media magazine Walkley (i think it's called) put out by the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance.
They may even win a prize at the next Walkley Awards.
This culture breeds rabid-dog media hell bent on attacking the slightest chink in Western society but which ignores far greater sins on the part of our enemy. EG: Islamist terrorists hacking off the head of Daniel Pearl while still alive.
If you want this situation to change, you have to change the way journos are rewarded.
To change that, write loads of letters to media outlets, and keep an eye on media awards. COMPLAIN like you were a muslim pressure group.
Make them aware of this failing.
This will bring results : it will take a long time but it will fix the problem.
WASHINGTON, Oct 23 (Reuters) - Cindy Sheehan, the military mother who made her sonâs death in Iraq a rallying point for the anti-war movement, plans to tie herself to the White House fence to protest the milestone of 2,000 U.S. military deaths in Iraq.
âIâm going to go to Washington, D.C. and Iâm going to give a speech at the White House, and after I do, Iâm going to tie myself to the fence and refuse to leave until they agree to bring our troops home,â Sheehan said in a telephone interview last week as the milestone approached.
âAnd Iâll probably get arrested, and when I get out, Iâll go back and do the same thing,â she said.
The death toll among U.S. military forces since the March 2003 invasion stood at 1,996 on Sunday.
The milestoneâs approach prompted plans for hundreds of other demonstrations across the United States, but for Sheehan, each military death in the Iraqi war has been a tragedy
#2
"military mother who made her sonâs death in Iraq a rallying point for the anti-war movement" Could have shortened that to "Desperate media whore..."
#5
If she's going to tie herself to the fence, just leave her there. She'll untie herself after she has soiled herself a couple of times. The answer to these moonbats is to ignore them - they can't stand that.
#6
I wouldn't bet on it Spot - people like Shithan are certified moonbats - they would probably revel in their own shait. Kind of like throwning feces.
but for Sheehan, each military death in the Iraqi war has been a tragedy
Typical Al-Reuthers - they missspelled is another chance to dishonor those who died honorably.
Posted by: ed ||
10/24/2005 9:10 Comments ||
Top||
#8
My eyes, my eyes!!!!!
Posted by: Steven ||
10/24/2005 9:23 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Current kills but voltage hurts like heck. Run several hundred KVolts at no current down the fence for entertainment purposes.
Maybe a big Van de Graf...
#10
"Cindy Sheehan, the military mother who made her sonâs death in Iraq a rallying point for the anti-war movement, plans to tie herself to the White House fence ... ."
#12
As a practical matter, Ms Sheehan has not shown the ability to stay in one place for very long. I'd let her sit handcuffed to the fence until she got bored.
#15
Where's Tom Sawyer when you need him? I think Mother Sheehan might look fetching in a nice thick coat of sopping wet white-wash.
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
10/24/2005 14:03 Comments ||
Top||
#16
I don't understand why nobody has planted tons of Poison oak and poison ivy and cactus along the base of the fence. Yeah you can stand there all you want, but don't come nocking on our door for some anti-itch cream you bastards!
#20
Karl Rove: "I'm thinking the landscaping along the fence is dehydrated. Adjust the sprinkler heads accordingly"
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/24/2005 14:59 Comments ||
Top||
#21
When she does this. Secret Service should act like they do not know she is "tied" to the fence and just zap her with tazers for about 12 hours. Maybe even shoot her with their hand cannons for not moving along when told to...
#22
I read somewhere last week that she actually did not raise her son, but that he was raised by his father and step mom. Anyone know if this is true? If it is, then it is incredibly relevant to he POV being almost totally worthless, especially when it is added to the fact that her son RE-enlisted and volunteered for the mission in which he was killed.
#23
rm - Snopes. He became who he was certainly in spite of her - and possibly, just possibly, to spite her, though I'd rather not speak ill of him in any way - he deserves far better than he's gotten by having this sick fuck as his mother.
At least half of the 249-seat of the lower house of Afghanistan went to the religious leaders and former fighters, including four former Taliban commanders, said a report of The New York Times.
I'm not surprised. Are you surprised? This is Afghanistan. They tried to kill off everybody who wasn't a holy man or a warlord.
More than a month after the elections, nearly all provisional results have finally been released for Afghanistanâs Parliament and provincial assemblies, cementing a victory for Islamic conservatives and the jihad fighters involved in the wars of the past two decades. About 50 of the men elected fall into a broad category of independents, or educated professionals, and 11 are former Communists. Women have taken 68 seats â slightly more than the 25 per cent representation guaranteed under the new electoral system.
The only real problem I see is the holy men. The warlords, lest we forget, fought for their piece of the pie. Rabbani's government was recognized virtually world-wide on 9-11, to include occupying Afghanistan's UN seat. They could just as easily have been installed as the legitimate government in Kabul.
It is far from clear how voting blocs will form, because the election system sidelined political parties, and most candidates ran as independents. Even with such a parliament, president Hamid Karzai is likely to be able to push through most bills and appointments. He can rely to some degree on support from his fellow Pashtuns, the largest ethnic group in the country, who will control more than 100 seats.
Though that's the faction I'd trust least.
With backing from educated professionals and some other independents, that may prove to be enough support for all but the most controversial issues.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/24/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Religious leaders, fighters make Afghan parliament
If anyone can pull it off, Karzai can. He's a wizard with stones. As long as his 'health' doesn't abandon him, he'll be a force even after he retires.
Posted by: Red Dog ||
10/24/2005 2:52 Comments ||
Top||
New Delhiâs ban on international aid for quake victims in Kashmir shows that India pursues anti Muslim polices, said Jamaat-e-Islami (JI) chief Qazi Hussain Ahmed on Sunday. Qazi expressed grief over the loss of life and property in Kashmir and said that Indiaâs cold attitude towards victims in Held Kashmir negated its claims about Kashmir being an integral part of India. He said that New Delhi was making Kashmiris suffer because of their sentimental attachment to Pakistan. The JI chief appealed to people to help Kashmiris and said that people should donate to the Al-Khidmat Foundation to assist victims in Kashmir.
Regarding the presidentâs comment about JIâs popularity, he said that President General Pervez Musharraf was using his ârigged victoryâ in the local council elections to increase his popularity. The president was exploiting a natural calamity to promote his politics, Qazi said, adding that the president was going against Pakistanâs policies by opening the line of control (LoC) and recognizing Israel. He said the president was busy assessing religious parties at a time when the country needed unity in its ranks.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/24/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Hi chia pet from Muzzy hell. See ya wouldn't want to be ya.
Posted by: Red Dog ||
10/24/2005 2:58 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.
Riot police dispersed an opposition rally in Azerbaijan's capital on Sunday, beating and detaining demonstrators who defied a ban on downtown protests to demand that parliamentary elections in two weeks be free. Opposition groups in the Caspian Sea coast nation have charged that the government will try to rig the Nov. 6 vote and have been holding rallies nearly every weekend, clashing with police in the former Soviet republic.
Israel has dropped its campaign to ban the violent Islamic 
The presidential palace in Damascus has set up an emergency response team to ward off these hammer blows. It is made up of officials of the presidency, the foreign ministry, the security services and legal experts. But this official framework is only a façade; it does not affect the turmoil raging inside the close Assad family circle or pacify the top military brass. 
The violent removal of Syriaâs ally in Beirut, president Emil Lahoud, whom the UN Hariri report places under grave suspicion, would also shake the Assad presidency to its core. 
A couple of days after the long awaited UN probe team's report into the murder of Premier 
Syria continues to arm proxy 
At least half of the 249-seat of the lower house of Afghanistan went to the religious leaders and former fighters, including four former Taliban commanders, said a report of The New York Times.
