Hi there, !
Today Sat 11/19/2005 Fri 11/18/2005 Thu 11/17/2005 Wed 11/16/2005 Tue 11/15/2005 Mon 11/14/2005 Sun 11/13/2005 Archives
441796 articles and 1558929 comments are archived on Rantburg.

Today: 95 articles and 481 comments as of 20:02.
Post a news link    Post your own article   
Area: WoT Operations    Non-WoT    Opinion            Posting Order
French assembly backs emergency measure
Today's Headlines
Headline Comments [Views]
Page 2: WoT Background
0 [239] 
1 00:00 tu3031 [257] 
2 00:00 trailing wife [314] 
3 00:00 mmurray821 [243] 
4 00:00 Frank G [242] 
5 00:00 ElvisHasLeftTheBuilding [246] 
15 00:00 Captain America [251] 
19 00:00 badanov [237] 
4 00:00 Ding Dangalang [242] 
18 00:00 JosephMendiola [404] 
5 00:00 Gletch Whomong5036 [249] 
4 00:00 bgrebel9 [257] 
3 00:00 HubertThumperyerdink3867 [240] 
16 00:00 Shipman [250] 
3 00:00 Shipman [261] 
14 00:00 Intrinsicpilot [255] 
1 00:00 john [260] 
8 00:00 Shipman [254] 
20 00:00 JosephMendiola [314] 
2 00:00 Shipman [245] 
2 00:00 BigEd [247] 
2 00:00 OregonGuy [235] 
0 [255] 
0 [251] 
0 [255] 
2 00:00 Shipman [232] 
6 00:00 Shipman [247] 
0 [243] 
Page 1: WoT Operations
0 [263]
0 [264]
3 00:00 Witt [330]
2 00:00 C-Low [323]
3 00:00 Bomb-a-rama [260]
2 00:00 rjschwarz [325]
22 00:00 Alaska Paul [327]
5 00:00 Zenster [386]
2 00:00 Flurt Thravising4039 [264]
8 00:00 Captain America [258]
2 00:00 Shipman [270]
13 00:00 Bubba [261]
2 00:00 Shipman [267]
11 00:00 Zenster [318]
5 00:00 Alaska Paul [303]
0 [267]
4 00:00 Frank G [331]
7 00:00 2b [251]
0 [264]
2 00:00 Old Patriot [242]
0 [267]
0 [251]
3 00:00 Redneck Jim [250]
1 00:00 Sock Puppet O´ Doom [269]
11 00:00 Grolusing Chutch6799 [251]
9 00:00 JFM [246]
5 00:00 ElvisHasLeftTheBuilding [333]
0 [243]
3 00:00 Adriane [244]
1 00:00 Sock Puppet O´ Doom [245]
3 00:00 Zenster [331]
1 00:00 The Happy Fliegerabwehrkanonen [256]
0 [254]
0 [252]
9 00:00 Zenster [310]
10 00:00 trailing wife [246]
0 [248]
0 [274]
0 [254]
32 00:00 Whutch Threth6418 [519]
1 00:00 Glenmore [266]
0 [241]
2 00:00 2b [254]
0 [245]
8 00:00 Frank G [321]
7 00:00 Bomb-a-rama [245]
Page 3: Non-WoT
9 00:00 JosephMendiola [336]
3 00:00 Steve [252]
5 00:00 Alaska Paul [246]
0 [233]
6 00:00 JosephMendiola [354]
16 00:00 Zenster [317]
12 00:00 Secret Master [278]
7 00:00 DMFD [251]
8 00:00 Chetle Glater1707 [259]
7 00:00 Special Rapporteur [260]
0 [260]
12 00:00 trailing wife [347]
2 00:00 Old Patriot [251]
2 00:00 gromgoru [248]
3 00:00 Shipman [248]
13 00:00 Zenster [246]
Page 4: Opinion
2 00:00 DMFD [268]
9 00:00 .com [261]
1 00:00 2b [243]
3 00:00 DMFD [248]
3 00:00 Bright Pebbles [259]
Brown turbans threaten Soddy journalist
The car of a Hail-based journalist was vandalized yesterday by miscreants who were allegedly angered by his Internet postings. Rabah Al-Quwayi, a reporter for the Arabic daily Okaz, was about to go to work in the morning when he saw that the window of his car had been broken and a note had been left behind. The note said: “In the name of God, the Most Gracious and the Most Merciful: This time it is your car but next time it is you. Return to your religion and forsake heresy. This is the last warning.”
Sounds remarkably like a death threat to me...
“I’ve been receiving threatening SMS messages and verbal attacks for a year now,” Al-Quwayi told Arab News over the phone from Hail. “But this is the first time things have turned physical. I tried to track the numbers through the Saudi Telecom Company (STC) but it always turns out that the numbers are registered to expatriates.” The reporter was not attacked for anything he had written in Okaz, but rather for his participation in several Internet forums. Al-Quwayi’s liberal points of view upset a number of participants in the forums.

The attack on his car took place the day after Al-Quwayi, also a supervisor at one of the prominent Saudi cultural Internet forums, posted an article on the site. His article commented on the case of Muhammad Al-Harbi, a chemistry teacher who was charged and convicted of mocking religion. “I wrote that the only logical explanation for Al-Harbi’s case is that he is against terrorism and some religious people seem to support terrorism and so Al-Harbi, by disagreeing with them, is against religion. It is confusing,” Al-Quwayi explained.
Al-Harbi was also convicted by a Soddy court, which would make me think it also supports terrorism. So there goes my windshield.
Another threat was made on Al-Quwayi’s life last month. The threat was made on the well-known fundamentalist website, Al-Sahat. “They took a sentence that I had written earlier out of context. In a long article I wrote in a discussion of the Holy Qur’an and posted on the Internet, I said that ‘nothing should be taken for granted.’ The fundamentalists then concluded that I did not believe in the Holy Qur’an and so I should be killed.”
That's their usual response when people don't agree with them in every respect, isn't it?
When he saw the damage to his car, Al-Quwayi immediately called the police. He said that they arrived quickly and showed great concern. “They examined the car, took fingerprints and even a DNA expert was there to check,” he said. The police explained to Al-Quwayi that the bad handwriting in the note and the spelling mistakes were done on purpose to confuse and disguise.
Posted by: Fred || 11/16/2005 00:00 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [254 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Prolly just some Saudi Prince nothing to worry about.
Posted by: Sock Puppet O´ Doom || 11/16/2005 0:19 Comments || Top||

#2  There may be a clue in the guy's name. Do any Arabic speakers know whether Harbi is related to Dar-al-Harb (Land of War as opposed to the Dar al Islam)?

If so, the guy is either very brave, stupid, or under some kind of forced Dhimmi status.

Perhaps he took up the first name as a corruption of the ancient Syriac / Semitic Aramaic
"More Ham Head"?
Posted by: Admiral Allan Ackbar || 11/16/2005 8:26 Comments || Top||

#3  The stupid reporter is from Hail. What the Hail did he expect in Dar es Salam?
Posted by: Flolump Whairong1750 || 11/16/2005 8:30 Comments || Top||

#4  So when is the NY Times gonna do a 30 part series on the suppression of girl's golf in Augusta journalistic freedom in Saudi?
Posted by: ed || 11/16/2005 8:33 Comments || Top||

#5  "The attack on his car took place the day after Al-Quwayi, also a supervisor at one of the prominent Saudi cultural Internet forums, posted an article on the site."

SEE???? SEE????
Down with Ameryken Hegemony of all Internets!!!
Posted by: Admiral Allan Ackbar || 11/16/2005 9:03 Comments || Top||

#6  "always turns out that the numbers are registered to expatriates."
Aaarrr it be them liquor filled degenerate foreigners AGAIN
Posted by: pihkalbadger || 11/16/2005 11:15 Comments || Top||

#7  Interesting that they use the "Most Merciful" title in a death threat.
Posted by: DoDo || 11/16/2005 14:58 Comments || Top||

#8  Alwaz DoDo it's like DieRigor.
Posted by: Shipman || 11/16/2005 19:35 Comments || Top||

UK to extradite Ahmad to US
Charles Clarke has ordered the extradition of Babar Ahmad to the US to face trial on alleged terrorism offences, the Home Office has said. It said the home secretary had "given full consideration" to representations made on Mr Ahmad's behalf.

Mr Ahmad, 31, a computer expert nasty Islamonazi piece of shit from Tooting, London, is accused of running websites that supported terrorists and urged Muslims to fight a holy war. His family said they would appeal the extradition order in the High Court.

Mr Ahmad is being held in Woodhill Prison, Milton Keynes. On a posting on his website he said: "This decision should only come as a surprise to those who thought that there was still justice for Muslims in Britain. Yeah right..

"I entrust my affairs to Allah and His Words from the Quran." The Muslim Council of Britain said it was "very disappointed" in the extradition ruling.
I get the impression that Allah's gonna be a great source of consolation over the coming years, pal.

It questioned the fairness of the Extradition Treaty 2003 under which the US government does not have to prove to the UK that there is a prima facie case to answer.
Got to love it.

"If our government has any evidence of wrongdoing on the part of Babar Ahmad then he should be charged in this country and put on trial here," spokesman Inayat Bunglawala said.Yeah, but the Americans can fry him...

Meanwhile, a spokesman for his family said: "In effect, this sends a message to British Muslims that there is no legal and democratic means to air your concerns."
Yeah right..

"We held protests, wrote letters, lobbied MPs and compiled petitions of over 15,000 signatures...


"If the floodgates for extradition are allowed to be opened, it will be British Muslims that will be targeted - the very people the British government was hoping to win support from in the fight against terrorism."

We will win the fight against terrorism with or without the support of the Muslim community in the UK. However, the Muslim community in the UK has much to lose by supporting men such as this.

In May 2005, a District Court judge ruled Mr Ahmad could be extradited, and the case was sent to the home secretary for final approval. A Home Office spokesman said: "The home secretary has given full consideration to complex representations that have been made on Mr Ahmad's behalf, but is satisfied that the conditions for his extradition have been met.
It's hi-ho and off to Club Gitmo you go..

"It is a matter for Mr Ahmad as to whether he wishes to appeal this decision and the earlier decision of the District Judge that he is extraditable."

The Labour MP for Tooting, Sadiq Khan, told BBC News 24 Mr Ahmad should face any trial in the UK.Sadiq Khan - almost the same name as one of the 7/7 boomers..

"The allegations are that Babar Ahmad committed these criminal offences whilst in the UK, whilst a British citizen and whilst in London - if that is the case, the obvious question is why can't and why shouldn't he be tried in the UK?"
Cos our cousins be wantin a word..

In claims dating back to 1997, the US government has accused Mr Ahmad of "conspiring to support terrorism", saying he "sought, invited and solicited contributions" via websites and e-mails.Another Islamo-snuff-fetishist..

The US Department of State has claimed that websites run by Mr Ahmad urged Muslims to use "every means at their disposal" to train for jihad, or holy war.
Such a nice boy...

The websites are said to call for support for terrorist causes in Afghanistan and Chechnya, as well as encouraging the transfer of money and useful equipment via the sites. It is also alleged Mr Ahmad tried to set up a terrorist training camp in Arizona.Surely you mean a soccer camp...

His lawyers have said Mr Ahmad would be at risk of the death penalty if he was sent to the US and transferred to military jurisdiction.
Yes yes yes!!

The extradition order comes under UK legislation designed to speed up the extradition of suspected terrorists, which came into force in January 2004. The government is fully committed to completing extradition cases relating to terrorist offences as quickly as possible. Under the act there is no requirement for the US authorities to present a prima facie case, although UK authorities must do so in seeking extraditions from the US.


Throw the fookin key away..

Posted by: Howard UK || 11/16/2005 06:19 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [257 views] Top|| File under:

#1  So when is the US gonna get our mitts on Hookboy? The lads at Sing Sing heard he has soft hands cheeks.
Posted by: ed || 11/16/2005 8:26 Comments || Top||

#2  We need to subcontract out the trial phase after extradition. After all, our court dockets are full, and the suspects do need a speedy trial. **wink wink**
Posted by: Alaska Paul || 11/16/2005 9:45 Comments || Top||

#3  "This decision should only come as a surprise to those who thought that there was still justice for Muslims in Britain"
How about Muslims stop blowing up subway trains in Britain??????????????????????????? I hope the US puts Ahmad away for life in prison.
Posted by: bgrebel9 || 11/16/2005 11:24 Comments || Top||

#4  "This decision should only come as a surprise to those who thought that there was still justice for Muslims in Britain"
How about Muslims stop blowing up subway trains in Britain??????????????????????????? I hope the US puts Ahmad away for life in prison.
Posted by: bgrebel9 || 11/16/2005 11:27 Comments || Top||

Bishop: Turkey is a 'bomb' under the EU
The Roman Catholic Bishop of the Dutch city of Roermond has spoken out against Turkey joining the European Union.

Bishop Frans Wiertz expressed fear that Muslims in the Netherlands often don't accept democratic principles. He made his comments in the Limburg magazine 'Chapeau!' which was published on Wednesday.

"Politicians underestimate the problem of Islam in Europe," Wiertz said. "We are surrendering our own norms and values of mutual esteem and respect. On the other hand, there is barely any or no freedom of religion in Turkey."

"With the coming of a hundred million Turks you are planting a democratic bomb under Europe," the bishop said.

Wiertz went on to say: "In our own country we have dropped the principle of the majority decides. Because we want to put everything and everyone on an equal footing, a small minority has actually got an enormous grip on society. But for very many Muslims - even in this country - the democratic principle is alien to them. They have never learned to accept it".

The bishop said newcomers had to be taught to accept democratic principles. He expressed doubt whether Islamic schools were doing enough to promote this. "We must not be so naive, otherwise the bottom of our society threatens to collapse".

Wiertz said he was worried about the rise of Islamic orthodoxy in Turkey. He said it was very difficult for Roman Catholics to be open about their faith in Turkey, while there was absolutely no religious freedom in most 'Arabic' countries.
Posted by: lotp || 11/16/2005 13:50 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [243 views] Top|| File under:

#1  it's a good point that needs to be made more often.
Posted by: 2b || 11/16/2005 14:50 Comments || Top||

#2  Expect him to be brought in for "spreading social discord" in some court soon. Europe will not face the truth.
Posted by: Sock Puppet O´ Doom || 11/16/2005 15:30 Comments || Top||

#3  "We must not be so naive, otherwise the bottom of our society threatens to collapse".

Too late
i.e. see France
Posted by: mmurray821 || 11/16/2005 17:12 Comments || Top||

Chirac May Have Had Stroke In September
The French president's appearance Monday night on TV is making waves and not just because of his remarks. In his first major public address after two weeks of riots swept France, Chirac appeared wearing spectacles -- a throwback to his appearance during the 1970s.

The president -- who will be 73 on Nov. 29 -- also appeared tired and old.

In the 1980s, Chirac traded his spectacles for contact lenses, in an effort to look more up-to-date and appeal to a younger electorate. After serving stints as French prime minister and mayor of Paris, Chirac was elected French president in 1995. He was re-elected in 2002.

His popularity has plummeted in recent months. A new IPSOS survey published in Le Point weekly, however, gives Chirac a 39 percent popularity score, up 6 points from October.

In September, Chirac suffered what many analysts describe as a stroke. That, plus a string of other recent political defeats, has prompted many analysts to write off his chances of running for or winning a third term in 2007.
Interesting how they kind of snuck that little tidbit in right near the end.
Posted by: Anonymoose || 11/16/2005 11:21 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [251 views] Top|| File under:

#1  I hope, at the very least, that it left him with a gimpy foot or something. Maybe we'll have better luck next time.
Posted by: BH || 11/16/2005 11:49 Comments || Top||

#2  hope the clown dies.
Posted by: Shep UK || 11/16/2005 12:07 Comments || Top||

#3  I'm believing it.
Posted by: Gletch Whomong5036 || 11/16/2005 12:28 Comments || Top||

#4  Might explain the indecisiveness in the face of the riots.
Posted by: Mike || 11/16/2005 12:48 Comments || Top||

#5  I doubt it.
Posted by: tu3031 || 11/16/2005 12:51 Comments || Top||

#6  ..has prompted many analysts to write off his chances of running for or winning a third term in 2007.

Any chance he'll be indicted and prosecuted once he's done?
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama || 11/16/2005 13:54 Comments || Top||

#7  Might explain the indecisiveness in the face of the riots

Nope, he has ever been indecise. The classic politician more prone to words than actions.
Posted by: JFM || 11/16/2005 14:21 Comments || Top||

#8  I feel sorry for all the poor people who've had strokes after listening to him.
Posted by: DoDo || 11/16/2005 14:53 Comments || Top||

#9  How would you know the difference?
Posted by: CrazyFool || 11/16/2005 14:53 Comments || Top||

#10  "Any chance he'll be indicted and prosecuted once he's done?"

Count on it. The papers are ready to file. That is why he is so desperate to keep himself or his man in power. The pardon is important to him.
Posted by: Sock Puppet O´ Doom || 11/16/2005 16:05 Comments || Top||

#11  "will he be pithed?"
Posted by: Frank G || 11/16/2005 16:58 Comments || Top||

#12  ples to hold ze arms up
smile bitte
Who's the President of the United States?
Posted by: Sheriff Cal Cutter || 11/16/2005 17:11 Comments || Top||

#13  Stroke? He's speaking French, so how can you tell if his speech is slurred?
Posted by: BigEd || 11/16/2005 18:04 Comments || Top||

#14  Actually, the stroke may explain how he was less effective at covering his ass. Not saying it didn't affect him, because it probably did, just not in the way some of us think it did. ;)
Posted by: Edward Yee || 11/16/2005 18:26 Comments || Top||

#15  Stoke this! Chirac, you flaming clown puppet.
Posted by: Captain America || 11/16/2005 18:54 Comments || Top||

Car Torching a Tradition in France
PARIS (AP) - The torching of thousands of cars by restive suburban youths across France in the last few weeks has drawn worldwide attention, but it's a tactic with a long tradition in this country.
Just a quaint local custom, nothing to see here, move along
Whether for revenge, crime or simply for sport, French youths have been setting cars aflame for decades. They torched cars during France's first major bout with suburban violence in the 1980s in tough neighborhoods ringing Lyon.
Gangs over the years have stolen cars to use for other crimes, then burned them, said criminologist Alain Bauer, president of the French National Crime Commission. And in the 1990s, youths in Detroit Strasbourg began torching cars to mark Halloween the New Year. "It was like a fun thing to do," Bauer said. Each year, "they burned 10, 20, 50, then 100. It became a tradition. This tradition spread all over the country."

Setting cars afire has a symbolic impact, Bauer said. "In France, a car is like a jewel," he said. "You use it not only to work but as a representation of your social status."
Same thing here, big difference being if you set fire to some dudes ride, you're asking to git shot.
National police said Wednesday that almost 9,000 vehicles - cars, buses, motorcycles - had been set afire since the Oct. 27 start of the urban unrest that began in a northeast Paris suburb and spread to poor suburbs and towns around France. But between January and the end of October, 30,000 cars had already been torched across the country, National Police Chief Michel Gaudin said in an interview published Tuesday in the daily Le Monde.

The unrest that started Oct. 27 reflects long pent-up frustrations of despairing suburban youths - often the children of Muslim North African immigrants - who face daily discrimination on the job market and elsewhere and are locked out of mainstream French society.

One difference between the unrest in the 1980s and the more recent burnings is that rioters in Lyon positioned the cars between themselves and police to use the vehicles as "weapons" against security forces - "like throwing stones," said Bauer. In addition to crime and sport, car torchings have a "tribal" dimension among suburban gangs. "It's a way to show they own the neighborhood. It's territorial control with tribalization," Bauer said. Cars are accessible and easy to set afire, and the torcher pays a minimal price - if caught at all, said Patrice Ribeiro, national secretary of the Synergie police officers union. Cars "burn well and fast," he added.

Yet another motive - classic but more cynical - is the ambush, said Ribeiro. The car is burned to draw the firemen who are followed by police. "You (then) attack the police," he said. Ribeiro said most of those convicted of car arson simply end up paying fines. "Little by little it has become a sport," he said.
Posted by: Steve || 11/16/2005 09:21 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [249 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Aw, jeez, it's a tradition. We're sorry to pass judgement. Feel free to allow the "despairing suburban youths" to torch every car in France.
Posted by: tu3031 || 11/16/2005 9:43 Comments || Top||

#2  I say, give these disaffected youths 50 million euros and your problem will go away, gahr-ohn-teed.
Posted by: Alaska Paul || 11/16/2005 9:56 Comments || Top||

#3  I wonder how many of the cars getting torched are POS Renaults that the owner just wants to get away from.
Posted by: Cheaderhead || 11/16/2005 11:14 Comments || Top||

#4  That is the most pathetic attempt at spin I have ever heard.

Posted by: Desert Blondie || 11/16/2005 11:20 Comments || Top||

#5  Considering it france, it sounds like a good tradition. Let's sell em some American cars and create more jobs in the good old U.S. of A.
Posted by: Gletch Whomong5036 || 11/16/2005 12:41 Comments || Top||

Danes Vote in Key Local Polls
Hundreds of thousands of Danes and foreigners residing in the country went to the polls on Tuesday, November 15, to elect new municipality councils across the Scandinavian country, with many Muslims voting for pro-immigrants parties.
According to Danish law, immigrants who have spent more than three years in the country are entitled to voting in local and national elections. Danish Muslims are estimated at 180,000 or around 3 per cent of Denmark's 5.4 million. The majority of Muslims in Denmark are residing in the country's capital.
"Me and my wife gave the thumbs-up for the Social Democrats," Baker, a Turkish-Kurdish immigrant, told IslamOnline.net after casting his ballot in Ishoj Kommune, a Copenhagen suburb. "They better serve our interests," added the 45-year-old immigrant who has been living in Denmark for more than 26 years.
Or there's gonna be hell to pay!"
Asked if she has done the same, his hijab-clad wife nodded meekly responded to the affirmative. Baker, who now lives on social aid provided by the government for unemployed immigrants after a back surgery, insisted that Muslims in the immigrants-populated municipality were voting for the SD for political rather than religious reasons.
"I got a bad back. Gimme my check."
Posted by: Fred || 11/16/2005 00:00 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [247 views] Top|| File under:

#1  According to Danish law, immigrants who have spent more than three years in the country are entitled to voting in local and national elections. Danish Muslims are estimated at 180,000 or around 3 per cent of Denmark's 5.4 million. The majority of Muslims in Denmark are residing in the country's capital.

Denmark...you get what you pay for. Next up? Sharia Law and the elimination of Hans Christian Anderson.
Posted by: anymouse || 11/16/2005 7:47 Comments || Top||

#2  Yea verily, USA Great Satan. Hans Cheistian Andersen, little satan. Put a scarf on that little mermaid, for goodness sake...
Posted by: BigEd || 11/16/2005 18:02 Comments || Top||

Fifth Column
Sheehan Demands Trial On Protest Charge
Today's posting theme - Attention Whores!

War protester Cindy Sheehan said Wednesday she was demanding a trial for demonstrating without a permit outside the White House.
She doesn't want a trial; she wants a platform.
Sheehan also plans to revive her protest near President Bush's Texas ranch during Thanksgiving week, despite new county ordinances banning roadside camping.
So she can get arrested again.
Sheehan and other anti-war activists arrested with her Sept. 26 in Washington conducted a news conference in front of the federal courthouse Wednesday before heading to a court appearance on the misdemeanor charge.
Fine / slap on wrist.
Sheehan, whose 24-year-old son Casey was killed while serving in Iraq last year, said "2,062 people have been killed as of today in this monstrosity."
"So we should never, ever go to war because people die."
She and more than 300 others were arrested as they gathered near an entrance to the White House grounds. Each carried a board bearing the name of a U.S. soldier killed in Iraq.

The arrests outside the White House concluded a weekend of protests that drew over 100,000 anti-war activists, really? and a smaller group of counterprotesters. It was the largest anti-war demonstration since the Vietnam War.
How long has the reporter been waiting to use that line?
Those arrested got $50 tickets and authorities charged them with protesting without a permit. All were released.
Tough call...
In Texas next week, Sheehan and at least a dozen supporters are prepared to be arrested as they return to the makeshift campsite along the road leading to Bush's ranch, where he is expected to spend the holiday.

"It is critical for our democracy that we continue to ask the same questions that Cindy Sheehan asked this summer: What is the noble cause for the war with Iraq, and at what point do we say enough bloodshed has happened?" Hadi Jawad, co-founder of the Crawford Peace House, said Tuesday.
You keep asking the questions because you don't like the answers and you hope it'll change.
Bush defends the decision to go into Iraq in 2003, citing the threat posed by Saddam Hussein. The president says troops will remain in Iraq as long as necessary.

Sheehan was not arrested during her 26-day vigil that coincided with Bush's working vacation at his ranch just outside Crawford.
She will be this time. A real Martyr for The Cause!
But dozens of residents in the rural area complained of noise and traffic congestion as the protesters pitched tents in shallow ditches about 2 1/2 miles away from the ranch. Some traffic was from counter protests of hundreds of Bush supporters who said Sheehan's group was hurting troop morale.
Dump manure in the ditches this time.
A month later, McLennan County commissioners approved the new ordinances, which prohibit parking on parts of 14 roads near the ranch _ roughly a 5-mile radius _ and prohibit camping in any county ditch. The laws also ban portable toilets in ditches.
Too bad they can't move Crawford to, say, Minnesota, for this event. You'd be able to count the protestors on one hand.
Posted by: Raj || 11/16/2005 10:10 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [237 views] Top|| File under:

#1  I think she's gone beyond attention whore to full-fledged stalker right about now.
Posted by: Desert Blondie || 11/16/2005 10:34 Comments || Top||

#2  Folks usually like to return home and spend Thanskgiving with family. I guess Cindy is just different.
Posted by: john || 11/16/2005 11:30 Comments || Top||

#3  Laura should send a nice plastic turkey out to the drainage ditch...
Posted by: Seafarious || 11/16/2005 11:32 Comments || Top||

#4  I said it before, but I will say it again: "Take care of the problem with nature." Seed the area around the road with essence of skunk and when the hippies show up they will have some company. I can almost gurantee that at least one of the skunks will take offense to them being there and let loose a shot of skunk spunk. Short of that I think they should whack this witch (and her friends) when they arrest them. BTW anyone want to bet that a couple of members of Congress might show up next week in support in hopes of arrest and detention?
Posted by: Cyber Sarge || 11/16/2005 12:09 Comments || Top||

#5  Did someone say skunk? I'm so there. How much for a bag?
Posted by: Ageing Hippy || 11/16/2005 12:16 Comments || Top||

#6  Folks usually like to return home and spend Thanskgiving with family. I guess Cindy is just different.

She has no family. She destroyed it.
Posted by: Robert Crawford || 11/16/2005 12:23 Comments || Top||

#7  She has no family. She destroyed it.

One wonders if Shithan did this literally -- driving her son to re-enlist and go to Iraq to get away from her just as she drove her husband and family away...

Perhaps her son might have thought Iraq was the better choice.....

And no, I do not feel sorry for her - she made her choice she can live with it.
Posted by: CrazyFool || 11/16/2005 12:45 Comments || Top||

#8  CF, She destroyed her family when her hubby got fed up with her antics and divorced her.
Posted by: Thomotch Thralet7447 || 11/16/2005 12:46 Comments || Top||

#9  I was thinking more along the lines of several squirt guns loaded with cat urine, but either way is fine.
Posted by: hairofthedawg || 11/16/2005 12:50 Comments || Top||

#10  I'm thinking this would be a fine time to relocate a couple hundred fire ant nests to cover those camping areas. They really don't like being stepped on. Heh.
Posted by: Steve || 11/16/2005 13:54 Comments || Top||

#11  Seed the area around the road with essence of skunk and when the hippies show up they will have some company

Skunks will be unable to stand the smell of hippies.
Posted by: JFM || 11/16/2005 14:23 Comments || Top||

#12  I'm tellin' ya - plant some fire ant nests in strategic ditches around the ranch, then watch the fun.

As to demanding a trial over a $50 fine, sure - give her one. Find her guilty and charge her court costs.

Oughta take all of 4-5 hours.
Posted by: mojo || 11/16/2005 14:47 Comments || Top||

#13  But that would get PETA all upset. And for once I might agree with them - why be so cruel to fireants and skunks?
Posted by: CrazyFool || 11/16/2005 14:49 Comments || Top||

#14  two words: Poison Oak
Posted by: Frank G || 11/16/2005 14:50 Comments || Top||

#15  "You keep asking the questions because you don't like the answers and you hope it'll change"

They keep asking the questions, then refuse to hear.

They scream to be heard, but have nothing to say.
Posted by: Hyper || 11/16/2005 15:55 Comments || Top||

#16  Who?
Posted by: Bright Pebbles || 11/16/2005 16:46 Comments || Top||

#17  I would like to invite Ms Sheehan to protest at my campaign appearances. Well, maybe not in Iowa. And only at selected ones in New Hampshire. But definetly in South Carolina, and other southern primaries. And even in New York. And assuming, praise be to Goddess,, I get the nomination, she should protest at the convention, and at all my campaign stops in the general election.
Posted by: Hillary Rodham Clinton || 11/16/2005 17:13 Comments || Top||

#18  They should have planted cactus and sentry plants between the shoulder of the road and the fence lines. Really good for stopping intruders and I bet it'd ruin the campout as well.
Posted by: rjschwarz || 11/16/2005 17:35 Comments || Top||

#19  I was thinking more along the lines of several squirt guns loaded with cat urine, but either way is fine.z

I'd pay $10 USD just to watch you make a cat piss into a water pistol.
Posted by: badanov || 11/16/2005 20:09 Comments || Top||

Home Front: Culture Wars
Scheer gets the boot at L.A. Times
Posted by: Fred || 11/16/2005 00:00 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [255 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Not sure who Sheer is, will someone provide a link to one or two of his articles? Still I find it interesting that now National Review's Jonah Goldburg will appear in the LA Times.

The LA Times has been hemoraging readers for years, it seems they are trying to shore up the leaks.
Posted by: rjschwarz || 11/16/2005 0:22 Comments || Top||

#2  Yeah! Robert Scheer was among the WORST fuckwit Kool Aid swilling Moonbats out there.

Who & What he was - *sniff* past tense. I hope he can't find a job & ends up eating Drano, but you know the Moron Circuit will pay him to spew - he earned their devotion by doing it for years. Asshole. Good riddance.

For a good laugh, check out Sharkansky's parody called:
Robert Scheer's Canard-o-Matic

You really have to work hard as a lying sack of Socialist Shit to generate such "love", y'know?
Posted by: .com || 11/16/2005 0:49 Comments || Top||

#3  Sounds like they are having budget problems to me.

The nation's top conservative cartoonist lost his job today as the Los Angeles Times announced that it was laying off Pulitzer Prize winning cartoonist, Michael Ramirez. The Times also laid off liberal columnist Robert Scheer.

Ramirez is likely the most widely syndicated cartoonist who is sold individually and not in a package service. He's known for brilliant drawings and a consistently strong conservative point of view that was a stark contrast to the liberal editorial pages at the LA Times. The Times quotes Ramirez,

"I can't help but think it's also a philosophical parting of ways." He said he also believed his removal was partly due to budgetary concerns, as well as a desire to change the look of the editorial pages."

It is expected that the Times will not hire a replacement for Ramirez. The Chicago Tribune, which owns the Times, has not hired a staff editorial cartoonist in recent years since the death of their Pulitzer Prize winner, Jeff MacNelly.

The Los Angeles Times also recently cancelled their subscriptions to syndicated editorial cartoons, keeping subscriptions to only three liberal cartoonists Ted Rall, Jeff Danziger and Tom Toles. They are expected to commission occasional cartoon illustrations and have been purchasing exclusive freelance cartoons from a variety of freelancers, including Mr. Fish (Dwayne Booth).

This is the latest in a series of shakeups at the Times, including the recent layoff of my former editor, Michael Kinsley. The Times has a rich tradition of editorial cartoonists that comes to an end with Ramirez, their former cartoonist, three time Pulitzer Prize winner, Paul Conrad, took early retirement from the Times and continues to draw in syndication.
Posted by: 2b || 11/16/2005 1:23 Comments || Top||

#4  Woodward Was Told of Plame More Than Two Years Ago


(Woodward is going to have a lot of haters after driving another stake through the heart of the MSM.)
Posted by: danking70 || 11/16/2005 1:28 Comments || Top||

#5  Radio killed TV. The internet killed the Newspaper. The LA Times is hurting for money. Their subscriptions are way down and advertising income is way down.

I am happy as a clam. May they all rot in hell.
Posted by: Sock Puppet O´ Doom || 11/16/2005 2:05 Comments || Top||

#6  good catch danking70.... possible fizzle fo' shizzle.
Posted by: Red Dog || 11/16/2005 3:19 Comments || Top||

#7  Shneer is a scum sucking bow-wow
Posted by: Captain America || 11/16/2005 3:29 Comments || Top||

#8  span class=moonbat
"More crushing of dissent in Ashcroft's AmeriKKKa. How much did Rove pay the LAT to silence Scheer?"
Posted by: Mike || 11/16/2005 6:55 Comments || Top||

#9  Seems to be a lot of reporters hanging around that cannot remember who what when where and why.
Posted by: john || 11/16/2005 7:05 Comments || Top||

#10  There are only so many positions at the Socialist Workers Daily. Better get those resumes wordprocessed...oh wait they're the workers of the world...typed and delivered before the inbox reaches dump weight.
Posted by: Theregum Phemp7167 || 11/16/2005 8:27 Comments || Top||

#11  If they simplly told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth I think they would sell newspapers. As it is you have to take big chunk of salt with your morning LA Times.
Posted by: rjschwarz || 11/16/2005 9:53 Comments || Top||

#12  The guy is too liberal for the times. That is a stretch. Mmnnnn. This story almost moves the interest dial indicator--but not quite since it involves the LA (stands for liberal asswipe) times.
Posted by: Gletch Whomong5036 || 11/16/2005 12:33 Comments || Top||

#13  We're not rid of him yet. Ssn Fran Chronicle is gonna pick him up.
Posted by: Rex Mundi || 11/16/2005 13:36 Comments || Top||

#14  Ditto to .com's analysis. Couldn't have said it better myself. The only problem is that in the sewers of the msm these kinds of rats usually end up getting some kind of career advancement. This guy will either (1) write a book of lies, or (2) advance to a more senior position at another piece of trash newspaper. (Or both).
Posted by: Intrinsicpilot || 11/16/2005 13:55 Comments || Top||

Home Front: Politix
Pincus: Woodward 'Asked Me to Keep Him Out' of Plame Reporting
NEW YORK Walter Pincus, the longtime Washington Post reporter and one of several journalists who testified in the Valerie Plame case, said he believed as far back as 2003 that Bob Woodward had some involvement in the case but he did not pursue the information because Woodward asked him not to. "He asked me to keep him out of the reporting and I agreed to do that," Pincus said today. His comments followed a Post story today about Woodward's testimony on Monday before special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, in which Woodward reportedly disclosed that a senior White House official told him about Plame's identity as a CIA operative a month before her identity was disclosed publicly.

In today's Post story, by reporters Jim VandeHei and Carol Leonnig, Woodward is quoted as saying he told Pincus that he knew about Plame's true identity as a CIA operative in 2003. Pincus said, in the same story, that he did not recall Woodward telling him that, but believed he might have confused the conversation with one they had in October 2003 after Pincus wrote a story about being called to testify.
"In October, I think he did come by after I had written about being called and said I wasn't the only one who would be called," Pincus said, adding that he believed Woodward was talking about himself, but did not press him on it. "Bob and I have an odd relationship because he is doing books and I am writing about the same subject."

Pincus said he did not believe Woodward had purposely lied about their conversation, saying, "I think he thought he told me something." cough Scooter Libby cough Pincus declined to comment on the other revelation in today's story, namely that Woodward had waited until last month before revealing his conversation with the White House official to Executive Editor Leonard Downie Jr. "I don't talk about what other people do, other reporters," he said. "Everybody does in this business what they think is the right thing to do." Pincus also declined to comment on what reaction there has been in the Post newsroom to Woodward's testimony. "I'm not listening," he said. Woodward did not return calls seeking comment.

Pincus gave his deposition to Fitzgerald in September 2004, in which he spoke about a conversation with a source related to the Plame case, but has never disclosed the identity of the source. When asked if Woodward's unusual arrangement with the paper, in which he often withholds information and source identities for use in his books, is a problem for the Post, Pincus defended Woodward and said the situation is often a help.

He cited as an example a story Pincus wrote in 2003 just before the U.S. invasion of Iraq, which doubted the existence of weapons of mass destruction. "Bob helped to get it in the paper," Pincus said. "He had been hearing the same thing and actually wrote a couple of paragraphs that I adapted into the story."
Posted by: Steve || 11/16/2005 15:17 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [257 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Hey, Walter, is that the sun up there?
I dunno. Lemme ask Bob Woodward and see what he says.
Posted by: tu3031 || 11/16/2005 17:27 Comments || Top||

Bill Clinton - Iraq Invasion Was A Big Mistake
And now for more from the original Monday Morning Quarterback / Attention Whore...

The United States made a "big mistake" when it invaded Iraq, former President Bill Clinton said Wednesday, citing the lack of planning for what would happen after dictator Saddam Hussein was overthrown.

"Saddam is gone. It's a good thing, but I don't agree with what was done, " Clinton told students at the American University of Dubai.
So getting rid of Saddam is a good thing, but it was bad that we did it? And this guy was president for eight years with that kind of logic circuit?
"It was a big mistake. The American government made several errors ... one of which is how easy it would be to get rid of Saddam and how hard it would be to unite the country."
Um, Bill, for the record, it did turn out to be fairly easy to defeat the Iraqi Army and Saddam would've been found earlier if he wasn't hiding in a freakin' hole in the ground. Also, I don't recall anything by the Bush administration saying that unifying the country was a primary goal.
Clinton did however say that the United States had done some good things in Iraq: the removal of Saddam, the ratification of a new constitution, and the holding of parliamentary elections.
All ego, no class, and no clue...
Posted by: Raj || 11/16/2005 09:59 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [404 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Gotta admit. He's an expert on "big mistakes".
Posted by: tu3031 || 11/16/2005 10:11 Comments || Top||

#2  Clinton Backs Bush on Iraq War But Questions Invasion's Timing

By John F. Harris
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, June 20, 2004; Page A04

Former president Bill Clinton said he agreed with President Bush's decision to confront Iraq about its potential weapons programs, but thought the administration erred in starting a war in 2003 rather than allowing United Nations weapons inspectors longer to carry out their work.


Clinton made similar comments in an interview with Time magazine, in which he said he "supported the Iraq thing" but questioned its timing. Portions of both interviews -- part of the publicity campaign in advance of this week's release of Clinton's memoirs -- were distributed in advance by the news organizations.

The Time excerpts, in particular, leave Clinton's views on Iraq somewhat jumbled. He both defends Bush for confronting a threat of which Clinton also spoke in dire terms while president, and minimizes the size and urgency of the problem posed by Iraq's suspected weapons programs.

Noting that he has "repeatedly defended President Bush against the left" on Iraq, Clinton dismissed the notion that the Iraq war was principally about protecting petroleum or financial interests.

Instead, he asserts that Bush acted primarily for ideological reasons and that the president was under the sway of Vice President Cheney and Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz. "We went in there because he bought the Wolfowitz-Cheney analysis" that defeating Iraq would help transform the greater Middle East toward democracy.
Posted by: Uloluth Spavilet1699 || 11/16/2005 10:18 Comments || Top||

#3  I'm SOOO sick of this SORRY LAME EXCUSE for a human being. HEY BILL........ FU*K YOU!!!!!You back steppin' PEICE OF SHIT!!!!!
Posted by: ARMYGUY || 11/16/2005 10:24 Comments || Top||

#4  The United States made a "big mistake" when it invaded Iraq, former President Bill Clinton said Wednesday, citing the lack of planning for what would happen after dictator Saddam Hussein was overthrown.

And just what were Roosevelt's plans for Germany in 1942? or Truman's for Korea in 1951? Or do they get a pass because they were Dems? And just what was your plan in 1998 when you did this -

The Iraq Liberation Act

October 31, 1998



Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release

October 31, 1998


Today I am signing into law H.R. 4655, the "Iraq Liberation Act of 1998." This Act makes clear that it is the sense of the Congress that the United States should support those elements of the Iraqi opposition that advocate a very different future for Iraq than the bitter reality of internal repression and external aggression that the current regime in Baghdad now offers.

Let me be clear on what the U.S. objectives are: The United States wants Iraq to rejoin the family of nations as a freedom-loving and law-abiding member. This is in our interest and that of our allies within the region.

The United States favors an Iraq that offers its people freedom at home. I categorically reject arguments that this is unattainable due to Iraq's history or its ethnic or sectarian make-up. Iraqis deserve and desire freedom like everyone else. The United States looks forward to a democratically supported regime that would permit us to enter into a dialogue leading to the reintegration of Iraq into normal international life.

My Administration has pursued, and will continue to pursue, these objectives through active application of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions. The evidence is overwhelming that such changes will not happen under the current Iraq leadership.

In the meantime, while the United States continues to look to the Security Council's efforts to keep the current regime's behavior in check, we look forward to new leadership in Iraq that has the support of the Iraqi people. The United States is providing support to opposition groups from all sectors of the Iraqi community that could lead to a popularly supported government.

On October 21, 1998, I signed into law the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1999, which made $8 million available for assistance to the Iraqi democratic opposition. This assistance is intended to help the democratic opposition unify, work together more effectively, and articulate the aspirations of the Iraqi people for a pluralistic, participa--tory political system that will include all of Iraq's diverse ethnic and religious groups. As required by the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for FY 1998 (Public Law 105-174), the Department of State submitted a report to the Congress on plans to establish a program to support the democratic opposition. My Administration, as required by that statute, has also begun to implement a program to compile information regarding allegations of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes by Iraq's current leaders as a step towards bringing to justice those directly responsible for such acts.

The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 provides additional, discretionary authorities under which my Administration can act to further the objectives I outlined above. There are, of course, other important elements of U.S. policy. These include the maintenance of U.N. Security Council support efforts to eliminate Iraq's weapons and missile programs and economic sanctions that continue to deny the regime the means to reconstitute those threats to international peace and security. United States support for the Iraqi opposition will be carried out consistent with those policy objectives as well. Similarly, U.S. support must be attuned to what the opposition can effectively make use of as it develops over time. With those observations, I sign H.R. 4655 into law.



October 31, 1998.

Where was the plan for after Saddam departed when you pushed this?
Posted by: Theregum Phemp7167 || 11/16/2005 10:27 Comments || Top||

#5  Bill Clinton was a big mistake. Hillary will be a bigger one.
Posted by: SR-71 || 11/16/2005 10:32 Comments || Top||

#6  Bill Clinton's parents not using birth control was a big mistake.
Posted by: mmurray821 || 11/16/2005 10:34 Comments || Top||

#7  With all due respect to Bill, it is unclear to me from this very short article whether the "big mistake" identified by Clinton was a.) invading Iraq, or b.) not properly anticipating the results of the invasion, or c.)doing the right thing (getting rid of Saddam?) for all the wrong reasons. Without a copy of the speech itself, it would appear that this news release and headline itself is entirely misleading.
Posted by: john || 11/16/2005 11:43 Comments || Top||

#8  "...he asserts that Bush acted primarily for ideological reasons..." and "...that defeating Iraq would help transform the greater Middle East toward democracy..." Clinton may very well be correct in this part of his analysis; that says nothing about whether such a Bush strategy was wrong, or why.
Posted by: Glenmore || 11/16/2005 11:46 Comments || Top||

#9  What the hell ever happened to the "Gentleman's agreement" that ex-Presidents keep their mouths shut on policy, at least in public? What, Bill, you couldn't pick up the phone and call the Prez with your complaints/suggestions? Lost the number, did ya, you ass?

And Jimmuh can STFU too.
Posted by: mojo || 11/16/2005 11:51 Comments || Top||

#10  F#@king Monday morning quarterbacks. Why don't the Peanut Prez and Slick Willy ever tell us what we should do next? Given their own records in the Middle East, that should give us a clear picture of what not to do.
Posted by: Darrell || 11/16/2005 11:55 Comments || Top||

#11  Hey Paula, next time, just bite the bastard's balls off. That should earn you several lifetimes of positive karma, and numerous donations to your defense fund.
Posted by: wxjames || 11/16/2005 12:12 Comments || Top||

#12  What the hell ever happened to the "Gentleman's agreement" that ex-Presidents keep their mouths shut on policy, at least in public?

It was thrown out when Bush was elected. Expect it to be reinstated after the next Democrat's elected.
Posted by: Robert Crawford || 11/16/2005 12:22 Comments || Top||

#13  BJ Clinton, you were a big mistake. You lost credibility while getting a blowjob in the White House while our enemies were at work. I have seen a number of presidents come and go. You have to be the worst one I have ever seen come (and go). Now you are trying to find some phony place in history. Why don't you STFU.
Posted by: Gletch Whomong5036 || 11/16/2005 12:23 Comments || Top||

#14  The people who keep attacking "the plan", are going to make it more likely, that the next president, who can get the congress to approve a war, won't want to have to fight the "lack of plan" people (most of who voted for the war- but did'nt think they needed a plan for after the war at that time-if Bush is reckless, aren't they), so they will just nuke them. No need for a plan.
Posted by: plainslow || 11/16/2005 12:23 Comments || Top||

#15  What the hell ever happened to the "Gentleman's agreement" that ex-Presidents keep their mouths shut on policy, at least in public?

After Juanita Broaderick the term Gentleman and B. J. Clinton should only be used to emphasise contrast.
Posted by: Unump Thraque9838 || 11/16/2005 12:27 Comments || Top||

#16  On a related note, Stephen Hayes writes about some interesting finds from the ISG.
Posted by: doc || 11/16/2005 12:56 Comments || Top||

#17  Gentlemen's agreements apply only between gentlemen.

The mistake with the Iraq invasion is that it did not occur in 1998 when Saddam threw out the inspectors and Clinton blinked.
Posted by: rjschwarz || 11/16/2005 17:29 Comments || Top||

#18  No doubt Ollie Stone's JFK Part Deux plays in somewhere, espec where Costner descibes the Dallas event as "COUP D'ETAT", and "... A MILITARY-STYLE AMBUSH FROM START TO FINISH" ags the Government and the American people. "ITS FASCISM THATS COMING BACK" except that for the DemoLefties a FASCIST > DE-REGULATED COMMUNIST. thus ala 9-11/GWOT Dubya-led alleged FASCISM = COMMUNISM by any other PC/PDeniable DemoLeft + Clintonian description, or at least the "new" JEDI = SITH SITH LORDS in REVENGE OF THE SITH. The Commies collude and assist the Radical Islamists long before 9-11 ergo its only the Islamists that attacked America on 9-11, and killed 000 Clintonian Amerikans or citizens of the future USR!? * IFF DARTH STAINIOUS BILL anti-USA "BIG BOY" remark . infers Dubya's and GOP-led America's alleged "BULLY" IMPERIALISM AND GEOPOL BELLICOSITY, what now for Clinty's new anti-US "BIG DOG" remark - "big dogs", espec the dangerous kind, are either forcibly controlled andor forcibly destroyed. for the safety and public security of all, are they not??? EITHER WAY THE USA > ROTTWEILER, PIT BULL, MASTIFF, OR OTHER IS FORCIBLY PUT DOWN - THE USA LOSES NO MATTER WHAT!
Posted by: JosephMendiola || 11/17/2005 0:14 Comments || Top||

Woodward Was Told of Plame More Than Two Years Ago
Sorry but I'm speechless. If someone else wants to provide the snark. My bucket of water was cold.
Washington Post Assistant Managing Editor Bob Woodward testified under oath Monday in the CIA leak case that a senior administration official told him about CIA operative Valerie Plame and her position at the agency nearly a month before her identity was disclosed. In a more than two-hour deposition, Woodward told Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald that the official casually told him in mid-June 2003 that Plame worked as a CIA analyst on weapons of mass destruction, and that he did not believe the information to be classified or sensitive, according to a statement Woodward released yesterday.

Fitzgerald interviewed Woodward about the previously undisclosed conversation after the official alerted the prosecutor to it on Nov. 3 -- one week after Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, was indicted in the investigation.

Citing a confidentiality agreement in which the source freed Woodward to testify but would not allow him to discuss their conversations publicly, Woodward and Post editors refused to disclose the official's name or provide crucial details about the testimony. Woodward did not share the information with Washington Post Executive Editor Leonard Downie Jr. until last month, and the only Post reporter whom Woodward said he remembers telling in the summer of 2003 does not recall the conversation taking place.

Woodward said he also testified that he met with Libby on June 27, 2003, and discussed Iraq policy as part of his research for a book on President Bush's march to war. He said he does not believe Libby said anything about Plame. He also told Fitzgerald that it is possible he asked Libby about Plame or her husband, former ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV. He based that testimony on an 18-page list of questions he planned to ask Libby in an interview that included the phrases "yellowcake" and "Joe Wilson's wife." Woodward said in his statement, however, that "I had no recollection" of mentioning the pair to Libby. He also said that his original government source did not mention Plame by name, referring to her only as "Wilson's wife."
Woodward's testimony appears to change key elements in the chronology Fitzgerald laid out in his investigation and announced when indicting Libby three weeks ago. It would make the unnamed official -- not Libby -- the first government employee to disclose Plame's CIA employment to a reporter. It would also make Woodward, who has been publicly critical of the investigation, the first reporter known to have learned about Plame from a government source.

The testimony, however, does not appear to shed new light on whether Libby is guilty of lying and obstructing justice in the nearly two-year-old probe or provide new insight into the role of senior Bush adviser Karl Rove, who remains under investigation. Mark Corallo, a spokesman for Rove, said that Rove is not the unnamed official who told Woodward about Plame and that he did not discuss Plame with Woodward.

William Jeffress Jr., one of Libby's lawyers, said yesterday that Woodward's testimony undermines Fitzgerald's public claims about his client and raises questions about what else the prosecutor may not know. Libby has said he learned Plame's identity from NBC journalist Tim Russert. "If what Woodward says is so, will Mr. Fitzgerald now say he was wrong to say on TV that Scooter Libby was the first official to give this information to a reporter?" Jeffress said last night. "The second question I would have is: Why did Mr. Fitzgerald indict Mr. Libby before fully investigating what other reporters knew about Wilson's wife?"

Fitzgerald has spent nearly two years investigating whether senior Bush administration officials illegally leaked classified information -- Plame's identity as a CIA operative -- to reporters to discredit allegations made by Wilson. Plame's name was revealed in a July 14, 2003, column by Robert D. Novak, eight days after Wilson publicly accused the administration of twisting intelligence to justify the Iraq war. Fitzgerald's spokesman, Randall Samborn, declined to comment yesterday.

Woodward is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporter and author best known for exposing the Watergate scandal and keeping secret for 30 years the identity of his government source "Deep Throat." "It was the first time in 35 years as a reporter that I have been asked to provide information to a grand jury," he said in the statement.

Downie said The Post waited until late yesterday to disclose Woodward's deposition in the case in hopes of persuading his sources to allow him to speak publicly. Woodward declined to elaborate on the statement he released to The Post late yesterday afternoon and publicly last night. He would not answer any questions, including those not governed by his confidentiality agreement with sources. According to his statement, Woodward also testified about a third unnamed source. He told Fitzgerald that he does not recall discussing Plame with this person when they spoke on June 20, 2003.

It is unclear what prompted Woodward's original unnamed source to alert Fitzgerald to the mid-June 2003 mention of Plame to Woodward. Once he did, Fitzgerald sought Woodward's testimony, and three officials released him to testify about conversations he had with them. Downie, Woodward and a Post lawyer declined to discuss why the official may have stepped forward this month. Downie defended the newspaper's decision not to release certain details about what triggered Woodward's deposition because "we can't do anything in any way to unravel the confidentiality agreements our reporters make."

Woodward never mentioned this contact -- which was at the center of a criminal investigation and a high-stakes First Amendment legal battle between the prosecutor and two news organizations -- to his supervisors until last month. Downie said in an interview yesterday that Woodward told him about the contact to alert him to a possible story. He declined to say whether he was upset that Woodward withheld the information from him. Downie said he could not explain why Woodward provided a tip about Wilson's wife to Walter Pincus, a Post reporter writing about the subject, but did not pursue the matter when the CIA leak investigation began. He said Woodward has often worked under ground rules while doing research for his books that prevent him from naming sources or even using the information they provide until much later.

Woodward's statement said he testified: "I told Walter Pincus, a reporter at The Post, without naming my source, that I understood Wilson's wife worked at the CIA as a WMD analyst." Pincus said he does not recall Woodward telling him that. In an interview, Pincus said he cannot imagine he would have forgotten such a conversation around the same time he was writing about Wilson. "Are you kidding?" Pincus said. "I certainly would have remembered that."

Pincus said Woodward may be confused about the timing and the exact nature of the conversation. He said he remembers Woodward making a vague mention to him in October 2003. That month, Pincus had written a story explaining how an administration source had contacted him about Wilson. He recalled Woodward telling him that Pincus was not the only person who had been contacted.

Woodward, who is preparing a third book on the Bush administration, has called Fitzgerald "a junkyard-dog prosecutor" who turns over every rock looking for evidence. The night before Fitzgerald announced Libby's indictment, Woodward said he did not see evidence of criminal intent or of a substantial crime behind the leak. "When the story comes out, I'm quite confident we're going to find out that it started kind of as gossip, as chatter," he told CNN's Larry King.
Much of the case against Libby involves reporters memories of what was said when several years ago. Should be fun when his lawyers get them on the stand.
Woodward also said in interviews this summer and fall that the damage done by Plame's name being revealed in the media was "quite minimal."
"When I think all of the facts come out in this case, it's going to be laughable because the consequences are not that great," he told National Public Radio this summer.
Posted by: danking70 || 11/16/2005 01:10 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [240 views] Top|| File under:

#1  1) Libby is not off the hook by this because he was charged with lying, not leaking.
2) Whoever was Woodward's source could be in deep trouble if he has previously testified or made public denials (e.g. Chaney?)
3) Even if Plame was not covert (as seems to be the case, unless her 'cover' was as an overt analyst) her identity may still have been 'classified', and thus leaking of it a crime - even if it was still classified only because of bureaucratic error.
Posted by: Glenmore || 11/16/2005 8:30 Comments || Top||

#2  Libby may not be off the hook, but the prosecutors case may end up resting on very thin ice. The use of investigations that are unable to, after years of disrupting lives and spending millions of dollars, establish that any crime has occurred but that some individuals may have not bee fully straight with the investigators is virtual entrapment. The Martha Stewart case was bogus and the Libby case is looking to be bogus.

In the unlikely event that an officer of the government ever asks me a question I know that I'll divulge nothing except my name. If these mf's want to play cute little games of finding the one mistake or internal inconsistance or lie in everything you say, then the best bet is to say nothing.

OOJ is a legitimate charge if a crime was committed and someone sought to obstruct justice. But if it can't be proven that the crime was committed, OOJ should not be a consolation prize for all the hard work the prosecutor put in or to give him a way to prosecute someone he suspects is guilty but can't prove. At some point prosecutorial abuse of OOJ may result in its repeal.
Posted by: Ulerese Shineting1601 || 11/16/2005 9:08 Comments || Top||

#3  The Plame case is getting shopworn it has be peddled so much. The Plame case was hatched and peddled by the left wing dimis in an attempt to try to make something stick prior to election 2006 and 2008.
Posted by: HubertThumperyerdink3867 || 11/16/2005 14:16 Comments || Top||

Home Front: WoT
US Senate defeats Iraq timetable bid
The Republican-controlled Senate has defeated a Democratic effort to pressure President George W Bush to outline a timetable for a phased withdrawal of US troops from Iraq. It then overwhelmingly endorsed a weaker statement of US policy in Iraq. By 58-40, senators on Tuesday rejected a Democratic plan that the minority party's leadership advanced in the wake of declining public support for a conflict that has claimed more than 2000 US lives and cost more than $200 billion.

The non-binding measure called for Bush to outline a plan for gradually withdrawing US troops from Iraq. Republicans countered with their own non-binding alternative. It urged that 2006 "should be a period of significant transition to full Iraqi sovereignty", with Iraqi forces taking the lead in providing security, a step Republicans said would create the conditions for the phased redeployment of US forces.
Posted by: Fred || 11/16/2005 00:00 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [247 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Defeats!! the Elephants caved..gave in to a bunch of rapist!! Gave into a slandering bunch of crooks!! To Commies!! Defeats..Bill Frisk needs to resign!

Frisk should have said "Fuck you Harry Reid! Fuck you John Kerry and BTW John Kerry why don't you release those 180a forms asshole so the country can really see you are a coward!!"

Fucking chicken shit Elephants!! You can't call them Republicans they don't deserve the term. Hell Elephants is too great a name for the 42 whimpy ass muther fuckin coward....OH I AM SO PISSED OFF!! There pig fuckers!! Everyone of those traitors are pig fuckers. I spit in everyone of their faces.

While GWB is out of the country no less...incredible work here. We have no leader ship. I have been waiting for these days for 30 years. These people have fucked everyone of us. The men and women in the US Military have got to be thinking why the hell bother. Instead of making a great stand and shoving it down there throats. They played right into the hands of the Dim-O-Rats..

Bill Frisk, Warner and every other cocksucker who said yes to the "alternative" should be beaten!! I am not going to sleep to well tonight.

Posted by: Long Hair Republican || 11/16/2005 0:34 Comments || Top||

#2  I think they rather deftly beat Harry Reid.

But if you want to swear never to vote for any of them again, feel free.
Posted by: liberalhawk || 11/16/2005 9:32 Comments || Top||

#3  and yes, Im unhappy with Harry Reid and the dem proposal. It was not a good plan. They should have proposed something closer to what the GOP proposed.
Posted by: liberalhawk || 11/16/2005 9:34 Comments || Top||

#4  Dont hold back LHR, tell us how you really feel.

When are these whimpy wristed repubs going to realize that they are the majority?
Posted by: CrazyFool || 11/16/2005 9:48 Comments || Top||

#5  As I told FDR over and over: Time tables are paramount. Bring the troops home by Jan. 1, 1945. But did he listen to me? Noooo.
Posted by: Ghost of Gerald Nye || 11/16/2005 15:24 Comments || Top||

#6  Geebus but this Burg has some angry ghosts.
Posted by: Shipman || 11/16/2005 17:15 Comments || Top||

U.S. Fights to Keep Control Of Global Internet Oversight
WSJ (subscription req'd)

Stop those greedy, control freak bastards!
Several Nations at Summit Argued for Power Change;
All Eggs in Icann's Basket

The U.S. fought back complaints by a host of nations at a global summit here and retained oversight of the technical underpinnings of the Internet.

At the same time, the U.S. agreed to create a forum to discuss an array of Internet policy issues. The first such forum will be held in Greece during the first half of next year, U.S. officials say.

But even with that agreement, "There is no change in the status quo" regarding the governing of the Internet, David Gross, a member of the U.S. delegation attending the summit, said last night.

Countries including China, Iran, Brazil, Saudi Arabia and Russia lobbied at the first-ever global summit on the Internet, hosted by the United Nations' International Telecommunication Union, for changes to the current arrangement, which gives the Commerce Department sole oversight of determining the technical foundation for how Internet users communicate with one another. Among other matters, the U.S. oversees the creation of domain names and Internet addresses.

With more than a billion people using the Internet, a coalition has emerged around the notion it is unfair and undemocratic for "one country to control the Internet," said Yoshio Utsumi, secretary general of the ITU. Countries like China have been pushing for creation of a U.N.-monitored body to oversee the Internet.

"The Internet is becoming a critical element of our lives," added Abdullah Al-Darrab, the chief negotiator for Saudi Arabia, in an interview. "What's needed are clear policies, and setting them is the right of every government, not just one."

Critics of U.S. domination of the Internet were placated somewhat by the agreement on the creation of the forum open to governments, nongovernmental organizations and the private sector. Still, criticism of the U.S. grip on Internet plumbing is unlikely to dissipate.

U.S. negotiators said opening the process to intergovernmental oversight risks burdening the Internet with bureaucracy and stifling its innovative nature.

Companies "want to make sure they don't have to hire more international lawyers than engineers," said Michael Gallagher, assistant secretary of commerce and a member of the U.S. delegation.

The body that determines domain names, such as .com, .net and .info, is a private California-based nonprofit organization called the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. The Commerce Department, through a memorandum of understanding, has retained oversight of Icann since its inception in 1998.

Other countries had believed the U.S. would sever its ties to Icann, making the body independent. But in June Commerce officials released a statement indicating the U.S. wasn't prepared to give up its role any time soon.

The U.S. and officials from countries that mostly agree with its position, including Canada, New Zealand and Australia, worried such a body would be an interim step toward the creation of a formal body with oversight of Icann. A Saudi official acknowledged that their ultimate aim was to replace the U.S. oversight position with an intergovernmental body, though the day-to-day operations of the Internet would remain with Icann.

Paul Twomey, the chief executive officer of Icann and an Australian, has described the intensifying global tussle over the Internet as one between politics and technical engineering. "We have to pick our way through that very carefully so we don't do any real damage to the Internet," he said in a recent interview.
Posted by: Captain America || 11/16/2005 01:00 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [250 views] Top|| File under:

#1  "The Internet is becoming a critical element of our lives," added Abdullah Al-Darrab, the chief negotiator for Saudi Arabia, in an interview. "What's needed are clear policies, and setting them is the right of every government, not just one."

The right of every government? Maybe the right of every government if it givers all its citizens unfettered access to the internet, and then only by concensus.

The next thing they will bitch about will be the undemocratic nature of Unix, removing the permissions and file ownership under the concept that it is 'undemocratic,' and everyone has the right to access files on a platform.

What is happening here at this summit is true democracy. A gang of despots decides to use its power of numbers to try to overwelm ( read: mug ) a single nation. International democracy at its nadir.
Posted by: badanov || 11/16/2005 1:26 Comments || Top||

#2  Why don't they just come out and say what they realy want?

Starving wimminsz and kidz for sex and a willing goat or two.
Posted by: badanov || 11/16/2005 1:32 Comments || Top||

#3  They don't have to connect to the Internet. Countrywide intranets are completely feasible. Basically, they want to control what Americans see. And we're not going to stand for that.
Posted by: Elmenter Snineque1852 || 11/16/2005 1:55 Comments || Top||

#4  It's not about what we see entirely, it's more about what we say. They don't like it much you see.
Posted by: Sock Puppet O´ Doom || 11/16/2005 2:11 Comments || Top||

#5  International democracy at its nadir.

I would've said "zenith". For all the harm this will do at least it isn't likely to get us all killed which is more than I can say about most exercises of this nature.
Posted by: AzCat || 11/16/2005 2:47 Comments || Top||

#6  Fight? Fight?

There is no fight. They can make their own and see how it flies. The internet is just a piece of technology which like medicine, commerce, aviation, etc. is done in English because of one Big Fat reason, the United States. It is the engine that drives the modern world in those areas. If you want to be part of the leading edge you play by that game. If you want your own, go make it. Envy and fear are all you really have and that is not going to get you the best and brightest in the future. Bye, bye.
Posted by: Theregum Phemp7167 || 11/16/2005 8:33 Comments || Top||

#7  Idiots didn't make it but sure as hell they are capable of destroying it.
Posted by: MunkarKat || 11/16/2005 8:40 Comments || Top||

#8  Compromise reached as expected: the international talking heads are forming a brand new and formally powerless debating society while the US is keeping its hand on the rudder. That's probably the best outcome we could have expected.
Posted by: AzCat || 11/16/2005 9:10 Comments || Top||

#9  With more than a billion people using the Internet, a coalition has emerged around the notion it is unfair and undemocratic for "one country to control the Internet,"

Countries like China, Iran and Saudi Arabia lecturing us on the lack of fairness and democracy is, well, just so self-Fisking...
Posted by: Raj || 11/16/2005 9:37 Comments || Top||

#10  Perhaps the above mentioned countries would like to ensconce themselves behind the Great Firewall of China?
Posted by: ed || 11/16/2005 9:46 Comments || Top||

#11  Fight's over, boys. The UN folded; we win. We get the innernut, the conferees get lunch and a nice goody bag. Yay.
Posted by: Seafarious || 11/16/2005 10:01 Comments || Top||

#12  Also from the WSJ: 'Divide' and Conquer?: Why dictators are cheering the U.N. Internet turf grab.
Worse, the corruption and incompetence at U.N. headquarters, however disturbing, are the least of the problems linked to the U.N.'s bid to control interconnectivity. The deeper trouble is that the U.N. has embraced the same tyrants who in the name of helping the downtrodden are now seeking via Internet control to tread them down some more.

That is hardly the kind of information, however, that U.N. organizers of this Tunis turf grab are about to share. The U.N. Web site for this event goes heavy on high-tech doo-dads, and very light on the highly relevant big picture. For instance, the site includes two scroll bars. One shows select news coverage of the summit. The other shows funding contributions from various quarters, including the governments of Syria, Libya and Saudi Arabia, all distinguished as perennial members of Freedom House's list of the world most repressive regimes. Except the U.N. site doesn't make mention of the censorship and brutal internal repression of these regimes--only of their participation, and their money.
Posted by: ed || 11/16/2005 10:18 Comments || Top||

#13  "The Internet is becoming a critical element of our lives," added Abdullah Al-Darrab, the chief negotiator for Saudi Arabia, in an interview. "What's needed are clear policies, and setting them is the right of every government, not just one."

Doesn't this just sound hilarious? No one forced the Internet onto these asswipes, and now that they're hooked of their own volition, they want to dictate terms?

Eat sand, Abdullah.
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama || 11/16/2005 10:27 Comments || Top||

#14  Countries like China have been pushing for creation of a U.N.-monitored body to oversee the Internet.

"The Internet is becoming a critical element of our lives," added Abdullah Al-Darrab, the chief negotiator for Saudi Arabia, in an interview.

Let's see here ... China, the biggest human rights abuser on earth and Saudi Arabia, the last country on earth to abolish slavery. And these two monster wankers are pitching b!tch about how one of the oldest democracies on earth has control of the most powerful tool since the internal combustion engine.

One of my latest laws is that, "Power is most appealing to those least competent to wield it." When I finally see our critics coming up with novel, efficient and elegant improvements to the Internet, through innovative open-source coding and organizational modifications I might listen for a millisecond.

One does not obtain proprietary interest in an invention by fiat, you do it by making substantial contributions towards its improvement. Something none of the above mega-whiners has come within a parsec of doing. This is nothing but a naked power grab by the worst intentioned and least qualified to administer such tremendous influence. They can collectively go piss up a rope.
Posted by: Zenster || 11/16/2005 12:43 Comments || Top||

#15  It is the 'net that will kill off the totalitarian regimes in the long run more than bombs and bullets IMO.
Posted by: Cheaderhead || 11/16/2005 16:11 Comments || Top||

#16  What TP sed.
Posted by: Shipman || 11/16/2005 17:37 Comments || Top||

US Given Ultimatum on Guantanamo Inspection
The United Nations on Tuesday, November 15, gave the United States Thursday as an ultimatum to respond to a request for human rights inspectors' free access to the X-Ray detention camp in Cuba. "The United States has until Thursday (November 17) to confirm it will allow United Nations inspectors open access to detainees at the Guantanamo Bay prison camp in Cuba," the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, Manfred Nowak, told Agence France Presse (AFP).

Earlier, the UN team welcomed a US invitation to inspect the infamous prison, but asked for free access and personal interviews with the detainees. "We cannot accept the exclusion of private interviews with detainees as this would not only contravene the Terms of Reference for Fact-finding missions by Special Procedures but also undermine the purpose of an objective and fair assessment of the situation of detainees held at the Guantanamo Bay," the UN investigators told the US administration in a joint statement.

Nowak said the absence of a conclusive answer by midnight on Thursday will be taken as a refusal. "The situation is very clear: if the United States does not accept our conditions, we will not go," Nowak warned.
Posted by: Fred || 11/16/2005 00:00 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [314 views] Top|| File under:

#1  "The situation is very clear: if the United States does not accept our conditions, we will not go...."

That's a win/win if I've ever seen one.
Posted by: AzCat || 11/16/2005 0:25 Comments || Top||

#2  "The situation is very clear: if the United States does not accept our conditions, we will not go."

LOL! Now there's an empty threat if I ever heard one! Next, he'll be telling us he's going to hold his breath 'til he turns blue...
Posted by: PBMcL || 11/16/2005 0:26 Comments || Top||

#3  Article: "The situation is very clear: if the United States does not accept our conditions, we will not go," Nowak warned.

Hokay - if you don't want to show up, we won't insist.
Posted by: Elmenter Snineque1852 || 11/16/2005 0:48 Comments || Top||

#4  I don't think they quite grasp the subtle meaning of the customary ultimatum. This is much closer to tantrum than ultimatum, lol.
Posted by: .com || 11/16/2005 0:52 Comments || Top||

#5  UN: We are gving you three chances to allowm inspections. If you refuse the first two times, the next time... er.. will be three.
Posted by: badanov || 11/16/2005 1:10 Comments || Top||

#6  "We cannot accept the exclusion of private interviews with detainees

I'll save them the trouble. This is what the complaints will sound like: "I asked for spaghetti with marinara sauce, and all I got was noodles and ketchup".

Nevermind, they probably would get spaghetti with marinara if they asked for it.
Posted by: Rafael || 11/16/2005 1:22 Comments || Top||

#7  BTW, fifty bonus points for anyone who knows where that quotation came from.
Posted by: Rafael || 11/16/2005 1:25 Comments || Top||

#8  Most of these so-called "Human Rights" inspectors' deserve to be incarcerated at Gitmo.

Fuck 'em, without US money that don't mean shit.
Posted by: Captain America || 11/16/2005 3:35 Comments || Top||

#9  Just kick the fricking UN out of the US and be done with the whiners
Posted by: 3dc || 11/16/2005 4:13 Comments || Top||

#10  Oh just what we were afraid of, pedo, rapist UN human rights inspectors. Get real.
Posted by: Sock Puppet O´ Doom || 11/16/2005 5:12 Comments || Top||

#11  Oooooh, we only have until tomorrow. Tribunals and firing squads in 5, 4, 3, 2...
Posted by: Darrell || 11/16/2005 7:19 Comments || Top||

#12  Rafael, it's from Goodfellas.
Posted by: Deacon Blues || 11/16/2005 7:22 Comments || Top||

#13  The United States has until Thursday (November 17) to confirm it will allow United Nations inspectors open access to detainees at the Guantanamo Bay prison camp in Cuba

My bet is the UN's worried what the terrs will say about UN fund-raising operations.
Posted by: Robert Crawford || 11/16/2005 7:54 Comments || Top||

#14  Yep, right after you clean out all the crooks involved in the Oil-for-Bribes program. Considering you just reinstated with back pay the one crook you had the timidity to release, that's not going to happen soon.
Posted by: Theregum Phemp7167 || 11/16/2005 8:41 Comments || Top||

Sorry but, as their captors we have a duty to protect them from rapist, crooks, and murderers.
Posted by: CrazyFool || 11/16/2005 9:10 Comments || Top||

#16  Isn't being interviewed by UNweinnies cruel and unusual punishment?
Posted by: mmurray821 || 11/16/2005 10:36 Comments || Top||

#17  However, this is going to be a festering issue. It will be seized upon by the Dhimmicrats, and since the RINOs are wavering on the war right now, it isn't a good time to put another issue into the news cycle.

I think we need to play along for a while here: there's plenty of wiggle room on what 'open access' means, and we should work diligently -- but slowly, on as close to geologic time as we can -- to ensure that we nail down what that means.

"Why, of course we'll let you come, we just don't want to be surprised by any requests. I'm sorry, could you repeat yourselves, we don't speak French. Oh, that wasn't French? Sorry, our mistake. Could you repeat yourselves?"

I'd string this along for a while.
Posted by: Steve White || 11/16/2005 11:00 Comments || Top||

#18  Sure, dude....the minute the UN gives us free and unfettered access to the Oil for Food records.....

Posted by: Desert Blondie || 11/16/2005 11:18 Comments || Top||

#19  "Or WHAT, Hans Brix?"
Posted by: mojo || 11/16/2005 11:55 Comments || Top||

#20  Its NUREMBOURG iff the USA doesn't serve more veal wid dem dar glazes and nuts!?
Posted by: JosephMendiola || 11/16/2005 23:52 Comments || Top||

U.S. forces upgrade Iraqi training
Ten days has been added to Iraqi basic training at the hands of U.S. instructors. The 14-day program has been expanded to 24 days, and a second group of Iraqi soldiers has begun the new 24-day cycle.

"It started off as a two-week program," said Staff Sgt. Michael J. Munoz of the 80th Division, who serves as the operation's noncommissioned officer at the academy. During the 24 days of training, Munoz said the recruits now learn drill and ceremony, weapons marksmanship, squad-level movement techniques, room-clearing procedures and how to operate traffic-control points.

Instructors are able to go into greater detail when teaching the individual skills because they have more time with the new soldiers than they did during the 14-day cycles, Munoz told the Army News Service.

At the academy, recruits are taught hand-and-arm signals. All the instruction is in Arabic. Iraqi noncommissioned officers teach the course, ANS reported Tuesday.

"We're at a phase now where we mainly just advise the Iraqi instructors," said Sgt. 1st Class Naymon Mack. "Two years ago, we started off with Americans giving all the training. American drill instructors did all the training through interpreters."
This means several things. First, that the intense pressure to build their army quickly has lessened after achieving 2/3rds authorized levels. Second, that there is much less "field training" available against real enemies, so it has to be taught in a rear area environment. Third, is that they are now specializing recruits earlier, based on predicted requirements.
Posted by: Anonymoose || 11/16/2005 11:29 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [246 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Good deal, makin a real military. When we're through, the Iraqi army will be one of the best trained and equipped military forces in the world.

Perfect for that Anvil effect when we are kicking the shit out of the mad mullahs in 10 years!

Posted by: ElvisHasLeftTheBuilding || 11/16/2005 12:15 Comments || Top||

#2  Hard to imagine a Shiite dominated Iraq going to war with Iran...
Posted by: Damn_Proud_American || 11/16/2005 13:35 Comments || Top||

#3  Never heard of sow's ears & silk purses?
Posted by: gromgoru || 11/16/2005 13:46 Comments || Top||

#4  Enroute to Austerlitz, Napoleon had two armies against the Austrian four. Napoleon left one of his armies to guard his southern flank in Italy. It just sat there, while his single army captured one of the Austrian armies at Ulm, solely through the use of maneuver, then defeated the other three in the main battle. His Italian army served better just by holding the fort.

If the Iraqi army can be persuaded just to effectively defend their country, which should not be objectionable to them, it both frees up the US to maneuver against the Iranians, and forces the Iranians to keep forces against the Iraqi border, doing nothing.

Of course, if the Iranians leave the border area, there is no promise that other forces might pass through the Iraqi lines on their way into Iran.
Posted by: Anonymoose || 11/16/2005 13:46 Comments || Top||

#5  Iran will attempt to disrupt all oil flow when we go to war with them, meaning they would have made a mad dash to Iraq and Saudi Arabia to destroy the southern oil fields, now they won't be able to do that because the Iraqi army will be waiting right there at the border.

Thus the anvil I referred to, and word on the street in Iraq is that Shiia or not, the Iraqi's ain't forgot that little Iraq/Iran war thingy. They're mostly still pissed at Iran and wouldn't mind killing a few Iranians if given the opportunity.

They'll be even more willing to do that when the Iranians attempt to cut their flow of oil when we go to war with Iran.

Posted by: ElvisHasLeftTheBuilding || 11/16/2005 18:42 Comments || Top||

Jordanian Suicide Bomber Only Got Married To Be Allowed Out In Public
excerpted from much longer NYT article, but addresses the utter moral bankruptcy of their "religion" -- that is, that this b*tch's religion says she can't go out in public as a single woman, but it also says she's supposed to kill as many innocents as possible.

Anyway, if I looked like her, I'd blow myself up too.

The king [Abdullah] said the woman would be a valuable source of information on the Iraqi terror group she had joined. He derisively noted that she had married the man who accompanied her on her suicide mission only shortly before the attack. As religious people, the man could not accompany her unless they were married, the king said, emphasizing the irony that they wanted to kill people but were worried about propriety.

"This was what they call a marriage of convenience because they had their ethics and if a woman was to go over and kill innocent people she has to be accompanied by a man," King Abdullah said, stressing the irony.
Posted by: PlanetDan || 11/16/2005 14:50 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [314 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Tactical nitpick: We know of female suicide bombers attacking (word used b/c not all were successful) Israelis, but where were their handlers/accompanying men?
Posted by: Edward Yee || 11/16/2005 21:09 Comments || Top||

#2  Edward, I think in many cases their menfolk fitted them up and then dropped them off at the nearest corner, with permission to continue on with the mission.
Posted by: trailing wife || 11/16/2005 22:30 Comments || Top||

Support for al-Qaeda plunges in Jordan
Almost two thirds of Jordanians have changed their views of al Qaeda for the worse following suicide bombings against Amman hotels that killed more than 50 people last week, a poll said on Wednesday.

The poll of 1,014 people published by independent Al Ghad newspaper also said 87.1 percent of respondents considered al Qaeda a "terrorist organisation" and that 86.4 percent said the group's attacks did not represent Islam.

The poll by survey firm Ipsos did not provide a comparative figure, but in the past surveys had showed that al Qaeda enjoyed high approval ratings in Jordan.

Iraqi suicide bombers belonging to al Qaeda in Iraq -- led by Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi -- killed themselves and 54 other people in three near-simultaneous attacks in Amman luxury hotels on Nov. 9 in one of Jordan's worst attacks.

The majority of the dead were Jordanians at wedding parties.

The attacks have sparked outrage in Jordan, which had previously been spared al Qaeda-linked attacks that have hit other countries.

Asked if last week's attacks had changed their view of al Qaeda, 64 percent of respondents said it had changed for the worse while 2.1 percent said it had changed for the better. 31.9 percent said they had not changed their views.

Jordan's King Abdullah on Tuesday night dismissed 11 of his advisers, including the national security adviser, in a reshuffle officials said had been expected for several months but that were hastened by the suicide blasts.

The government has announced plans to draft new anti-terrorism laws in a country where the Western-trained security forces already enjoy wide powers.

The margin of error of the poll, conducted by phone Nov. 13 and Nov. 14, was 3.2 percent, it said.
Posted by: Dan Darling || 11/16/2005 10:06 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [242 views] Top|| File under:

#1  I wouldn't put too much into this. Next week they'll probably blow up some Jews and everybody will jump right back on the bandwagon.
Posted by: tu3031 || 11/16/2005 13:06 Comments || Top||

#2  well as Reuters reports, 87% of people polled called Al-Q a terrorist organization.

That correlates with the 0% of Reuters reporters who call AlQ a terrorist organization.
Posted by: mhw || 11/16/2005 13:41 Comments || Top||

#3  Doesn't have to be Jews tu3031. Anybody, non Jordanian/Palestinian (same thing really, the Hashemites are an imported ruling class --- kinda like whites in old Rodesia) will do.
Posted by: gromgoru || 11/16/2005 13:50 Comments || Top||

#4  We are still the infidels that must convert or die
Posted by: Ding Dangalang || 11/16/2005 16:40 Comments || Top||

Palestinians Critical of Gaza Borders Deal
Cheeze. They're never happy, are they?
Posted by: Fred || 11/16/2005 00:00 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [245 views] Top|| File under:

#1  "The agreement infringes on the Palestinian sovereignty and cast a pall over future negotiations on the fate of the Beit Hanoun and Karni crossing points as well as on the West Bank," Kayed Al-Ghol, leader of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) told IslamOnline.net.

Palestinians have a future?
Posted by: gromgoru || 11/16/2005 13:55 Comments || Top||

#2  To quote the Prophet Lucky (PBUH)
They're never happy unless they're burrowing.
Posted by: Shipman || 11/16/2005 17:41 Comments || Top||

Jordan: King, Queen meet with families of terror victims
Their Majesties King Abdullah and Queen Rania on Tuesday met with the families of the victims of the November 9 terrorist attacks on three Amman hotels. At a Royal Court meeting, King Abdullah told the families of the victims that the courage, unity and solidarity Jordanians showed sent a strong message to the terrorists that they have no place in the Kingdom. "The pain you felt for the loss of your beloved ones, who were killed for no crime they committed, was shared by all Jordanians, regardless of their origins or religions," the King said.

Jordan to introduce new anti-terror legislation
Interior Minister Awni Yarvas announced Tuesday the government is drafting a new anti-terrorism bill as part of “protective measures” to ensure the Kingdom prevents further attacks similar to the 11/9 bombings of three Amman hotels. The new bill, to be given urgent status on Parliament's agenda when the 110-member Lower House reconvenes on Dec. 1, will set harsh punishments for anyone who condones or supports acts of terror. It will also grant authorities the power to hold any terror suspect for questioning indefinitely, and to issue penalties to those who seek to endanger the lives and properties of citizens, whether inside or outside the country.
They're carrying this numerology thing too far. First 9-11, then 3-11, now 11-9...
Posted by: Fred || 11/16/2005 00:00 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [255 views] Top|| File under:

Science & Technology
Missile defense a 'growing business'
The commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet yesterday said countries are doing more to build ballistic missile-defense systems amid greater awareness of the threat from the long-range projectiles.

Adm. Gary Roughead told a conference of about 700 engineers on Kaua'i that the danger from a "significant weapon" would be removed if the ballistic missile threat were overcome.

"Ballistic missile defense is a growing business as far as the numbers and capability out there," Roughead said in remarks transcribed by the fleet public affairs office. "The North Korean missile development program is something that not only we watch closely, but some of the regional nations out there are involved."

He added that "Japan, in particular, is very mindful and very aware of what threat that poses."

Tokyo's interest in missile defense systems grew after North Korea test-fired a missile over northern Japan in 1998.

Roughead spoke before an annual conference of the Directed Energy Professional Society. The group is mostly made up of engineers who develop the high-energy laser and high-powered microwave technology used to defend against ballistic missiles...

...Society members gathered on Kaua'i, the site of a major missile defense testing facility, for the first time this year...
Kaua'i is an amazing and beautiful place.
Posted by: Anonymoose || 11/16/2005 13:31 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [242 views] Top|| File under:

#1  it seems to me that this is the only way to go. Too many rouge states have or will soon have the capabilities. The idea that we can somehow control it by trying to keep them building them is now ancient history.
Posted by: 2b || 11/16/2005 14:48 Comments || Top||

#2  2b,

"rouge states"?!? damn makeup wearing pinko commie bastards trying to build missle systems! ;)
Posted by: Damn_Proud_American || 11/16/2005 16:38 Comments || Top||

#3  Perhaps it's time the US gave up total control of North American missle defense systems. Something so vital to the planet should have a wider range of operational input.
Posted by: Shipman || 11/16/2005 17:57 Comments || Top||

#4  naw - I only share my umbrella with friends. Others get whatever rains down on them
Posted by: Frank G || 11/16/2005 19:14 Comments || Top||

Southeast Asia
azahari bin husin gets glowing review. ralph edwards unavaylable for coment
Posted by: muck4doo || 11/16/2005 17:48 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [239 views] Top|| File under:

Palestinian groups source of new Lebanon tension
Paleos continue to win friends and influence people by being murderous sociopaths. Actually, I think the Lebanese tired of the Paleo seething years ago, but fear of their Syrian puppetmasters kept their eyes averted and their lips sealed. This article has some interesting info in it.
SULTAN YACOUB, Lebanon -- Three gunmen pop up behind some rocks near Lebanon's rugged border with Syria. "Go back. This area is off limits," one bellows down the hillside, which conceals a network of tunnels used by a pro-Syrian Palestinian faction to shelter weapons and fighters. A roadside bomb made from an artillery shell and connected to a wire peeks out of a small ditch near the entrance to the base controlled by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command (PFLP-GC), ready to repel any attack. Hidden in remote valleys or perched on strategic hills, guerrilla positions run by Damascus-based Palestinian groups dot Lebanon's frontier with Syria, among the last remnants of its military and political domination of its smaller neighbor.

Lebanese have long turned a blind eye to these posts, but they have been in the spotlight since a U.N. resolution last year demanded foreign troops withdraw from Lebanon and militias -- a reference to Palestinian factions and Hizbollah -- disarm. The Palestinian outposts remain, arousing fears among many Lebanese that Damascus could use Palestinian guerrillas, who played a key role in the 1975-1990 civil war, to destabilize a country already shaken by a series of bombings this year.

U.N. envoy Terje Roed-Larsen said in a report last month that arms were being taken across the border to Palestinians in Lebanon.

This has added to the stand-off between the government, which demands they give up arms outside Lebanon's 12 refugee camps, and the Syrian-backed guerrillas who arrived over 35 years ago. Bracing against the breeze outside a concrete shack that passes for a hilltop base, a guerrilla from the pro-Syrian Fatah Uprising digs his hands into the pockets of an ill-fitting green uniform and explains why the group wants to keep its guns. "We maintain these military positions to defend against Israel and we will stay here until we are allowed to return to our homes in Palestine," he said. "But our guns will never point at the Lebanese Army. We point them only at Israel."

While both sides have played down the likelihood of a showdown, saying they are seeking talks, not conflict, over Palestinian arms, nerves are strained and tensions running high. Elite Lebanese Army units in armored vehicles have encircled the PFLP-GC bunker at Sultan Yacoub and deployed in force along other parts of the eastern frontier where a civilian army surveyor was shot dead by suspected Palestinian guerrillas last month. Fatah Uprising, which runs some small outposts nearby, denies killing the man, as do the grizzled fighters themselves. The army has sealed several eastern valleys that lead to Syria after increasing reports that Palestinian militants were acting as a conduit for arms smuggled across dirt tracks that criss-cross the area. The troops are on alert. "This fuss is part of U.S. and Israeli pressure against us. Let us return to Palestine and we will leave these posts," one PFLP-GC official said.

Fatah Uprising has already vacated a few tiny posts that are difficult to defend, according to one of the fighters who left. Closing the larger bases held by the PFLP-GC could be more of a challenge, especially as Palestinian factions are themselves split over what to do about weapons outside the refugee camps. Those closer to the Palestinian Authority and in control of most of the camps have been flexible. Syrian-backed militants who wield most muscle outside the camps see things differently. Led by Ahmad Jibril, the PFLP-GC won notoriety with an attack in 1987 in which fighters hang-glided into Israel, killing six soldiers and helping spark the first Palestinian intifada, or uprising. It also runs the large Naameh bunker south of Beirut, which has been the target of several Israeli air raids, including one since Israel ended a 22-year occupation of south Lebanon in 2000.

With pressure mounting on Syria, the stand-off over Palestinian arms is sure to stay on the international agenda. The United States is seeking a new U.N. resolution against Syria, based on Roed-Larsen's accusations. About 390,000 Palestinian refugees are registered in Lebanon's 12 camps, set up when Israel was created in 1948 and run by Palestinian fighters armed mainly with assault rifles, grenade launchers and rockets. Lebanese authorities have no presence or say inside the camps. Residents of the Lebanese border village of Qusaya say the PFLP-GC is expanding its bunker in the hills above their village, but there was no way to check as the guerrillas who run will not let visitors in. "There were about 10 of them before but they must be 100 now. They have been bolstering the post since the Syrians left," said one resident, speaking on condition of anonymity.

"They have everything up there; rockets, anti-aircraft guns, artillery, but they don't come to the village or bother anyone."

The Palestinians say that if anyone is nervous, it is they. Clutching his AK-47 rifle, a fighter in trademark PFLP-GC maroon fatigues, said he did not want history to repeat itself. "We carry arms to protect our people in the camps. The Sabra and Shatila massacres are still fresh in our minds," he said, referring to the 1982 slaughter by pro-Israeli Lebanese militia of hundreds of Palestinians in the Beirut camps. "Who will guarantee us the massacres won't happen again?"
Posted by: Seafarious || 11/16/2005 00:00 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [261 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Shabra and Shaktilah. Oh yeah. WWhat about the many Shjabra and Shaktilahs perpetrated by the Palestians? Go to freelebanon.org or freelebanon.com and learn
Posted by: nd || 11/16/2005 3:57 Comments || Top||

#2  "Who will guarantee us the massacres won't happen again?"

Somebody (guess who) guarantee that they will.
Posted by: gromgoru || 11/16/2005 13:53 Comments || Top||

#3  Fierce defender of Pali Plantains... kinda wastes water to grow those in that area don't it?
Posted by: Shipman || 11/16/2005 17:53 Comments || Top||

Nasrallah meets his owners Iran's FM in Syria
Meeting places hizbullah's loyalty under scrutiny
The loyalty of Hizbullah and the Lebanese Shiite community is again under scrutiny following unconfirmed reports of the party's secretary general, Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, meeting secretly with Iran's Foreign Minister in Damascus. Al-Hayat newspaper's correspondent in Damascus, Ibrahim Hammidi, told LBCI's Naharkhom Saed talk show: "The meeting came in the midst of rising tensions between Damascus and the United Nations on the one hand, and the Lebanese government and Premier Fouad Siniora on the other."
So Hassan, naturally, wanted to know what his opinion was...
Hammidi, though, believed it was not the first time Nasrallah had met with visiting Iranian officials. "On almost every occasion when an Iranian top official has visited Syria, Nasrallah has met with them," he told LBCI on Tuesday.
You weren't supposed to notice. It's a secret. He usually wears a domino mask when he goes...
However, observers are paying particular attention to the rumors of such a visit amid mounting tensions between Lebanon and Syria. And once more local critics are demanding that the Shiites decide whether they are "with Lebanon or Syria" in the ongoing row between the neighboring countries.
They're with Iran. Iran actually owns Syria, so you can fill in the rest...
On condition of anonymity, one Hizbullah official told The Daily Star "under the circumstances it would be a natural event in case [the meeting] had actually happened," but refused to consider the meeting as being directed "in any way" against the Lebanese government.
"No, no! Certainly not!"
"Regionally, the issues are not categorized within the local disagreement between Hizbullah and the government," the official added, pointing out "the meeting [between Nasrallah and the Iranian minister] would have been necessitated by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's meeting with U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to discuss the future of the whole region, including the future of Hizbullah, Syria and Iran."
"So, you see, it was really the Zionists' fault."
Posted by: Fred || 11/16/2005 00:00 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [235 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Iran and Syria at the same time?
A little double ended action for Naz this week? Hey, it pays the bills, right Naz?
Posted by: tu3031 || 11/16/2005 16:35 Comments || Top||

#2  Poor little Pierrette
Where's your Pierrot?
Why are you all alone?
You should be
So fancy-free
Your heart should be high
But instead
You hang your head
And try not to cry
Poor little Pierrette
You mustn't show
Your dream of love has flown
Just keep on dancing
Till the dawn, and then
He may come back again
--Sandy Wilson

Two clowns in Harlequin.
Posted by: OregonGuy || 11/16/2005 18:29 Comments || Top||

Lebanese parties slam calls for dissent by Syria's Tishrin
Lebanese parties rejected on Tuesday Syria's interference in Lebanon's internal affairs, after Syria's state-run Tishrin daily called on the Lebanese to hold a mass demonstration in Beirut to overthrow Premier Fouad Siniora's Cabinet.
That's nearly as subtle as a sledge hammer. I wonder what time the buses load in Damascus?
The call for massive protests came after Syrian President Bashar Assad described Siniora as "the slave of slaves" in a fiery speech against the mounting international pressure on his regime last Thursday. Tensions rose last week between Siniora and Hizbullah leaders who demanded the prime minister announce a firm position on Security Council Resolution 1559.
The Hezbollah proxies are a lot more discrete than fergawdsake calling for street demonstrations in the party newspaper.
The government is also under pressure to reduce the cost of diesel fuel, which is currently set at LL16,000 per tank. On Friday dozens of Bekaa residents demonstrated to demand the government lower the cost to LL12,000 per 20 liters.
"How many dozens?"
"More than one dozen."
Siniora had met on Monday with North Bekaa MPs and heads of municipalities in an attempt to contain the socio-economic crisis before it develops into a political one, according to sources close to the premier. Although no Lebanese party has yet to call for demonstrations against Siniora's Cabinet, the premier's efforts to contain the crisis seemed to be ineffective after the Syrian call for revolt under the slogan of "Coldness and Hunger = Revolution."
They already had a revolution, Pencil Neck...
Tishrin said: "Participants in the Bekaa protests said a mass demonstration will be held next Thursday during Cabinet's weekly session to ask Siniora's Cabinet to resign."
"How many people you expecting?"
It added: "The Bekaa residents' protests on Friday had a political nature and these protests are likely, according to Lebanese sources, to be transported to Akkar, the South and North Bekaa." The newspaper continued: "Press reports emerged lately that many Lebanese MPs and politicians are participating in this 'orange' protest to demonstrate against the hard living conditions add the high costs of diesel fuel. The slogans of the protesters will be Coldness and Hunger = Revolution."
Just like Tishrin suggests? Ain't that a coincidence...
The Free Patriotic Movement denied on Tuesday any connection to the call for demonstrations described by Tishrin as the "orange demonstration," the color adopted by the movement. In a statement, the FPM said that although its leadership is "opposed to the government's policies, especially its deficiency in solving the socio-economic crisis, it will not participate in any move that may destabilize the internal situation or harm Lebanon's sovereignty."
"So piss off!"
Posted by: Fred || 11/16/2005 00:00 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [255 views] Top|| File under:

Judge refuses to release Hamdan, Azar
Chief Lebanese Investigating Magistrate Elias Eid refused on Tuesday to release two former security chiefs awaiting trial for their possible role in the assassination of former Premier Rafik Hariri. Naji Boustani, the defense attorney of both Mustapha Hamdan and Raymond Azar, filed a motion on Saturday for his clients' release on grounds they were being detained on "suspicions and not hard evidence."
Sounds like a routine motion, routinely rejected...
Hamdan is the former head of the Presidential Guards, while Azar formerly ran the country's Military Intelligence department. The two officials were officially charged on September 3, along with two other former generals, with "murder, attempted murder and carrying out a terrorist act."
I think there'd have been a fair amount of hell to pay had they been sprung. Time enough for the lawyers to muddy the waters...
Eid also refused to release Mahmoud Abdel-Al, a senior official in the Islamic Al-Ahbash organization. Lead UN investigator Detlev Mehlis linked Abdel-Al to suspicious phone calls made shortly before and after Hariri's murder. Mehlis is due to arrive in Beirut by Wednesday night after a short vacation in Berlin.
Posted by: Fred || 11/16/2005 00:00 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [251 views] Top|| File under:

Iran warns IAEA ahead of key meeting
Iran's top nuclear negotiator issued a blunt warning to the UN atomic watchdog on Tuesday, saying more pressure on the Tehran over its controversial nuclear activities would have “consequences.” The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is to meet from November 24, with Iran running the risk of being sent to the UN Security Council amid suspicions it is using a nuclear energy drive as a cover for weapons development. But Ali Larijani, quoted by the ISNA news agency, said a Security Council referral “would have consequences on Iran's cooperation, and would not be good for Iran's cooperation.”

“If they put too much pressure on Iran, Iran will be forced to work differently,” he said in the latest of a string of warnings to the IAEA and its 35-nation board of governors. Iran, which maintains it only wants to make electricity, has already threatened that if its case is sent to New York it would limit access to IAEA inspectors and abandon a freeze on uranium enrichment. Enrichment is a process used to make reactor fuel, but it can also be diverted to make the core of a nuclear bomb. Larijani also said that if the IAEA “bases its work on legal and technical considerations,” the next report by agency director Mohammad Al Baradei “will be positive” for Tehran.
Posted by: Fred || 11/16/2005 00:00 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [232 views] Top|| File under:

Posted by: bgrebel9 || 11/16/2005 11:29 Comments || Top||


This is the sort of half-cocked anger that keeps Fred from being invited to the pajama party.
Posted by: Shipman || 11/16/2005 17:55 Comments || Top||

Bihar Govt Suspends Jehanabad Police Chief
Bihar Governor Buta Singh yesterday suspended the district Police Chief, Superintendent Sunil Kumar Singh, for the delay in action taken by the Jehanabad Police administration and dereliction of duty. The SP was suspended because he failed to act after getting a tip of a possible attack. “The district police had the prior information of the naxals’ plan but they failed to take action on time,” Bihar governor said.

Bihar Home Secretary H.C. Sirohi said B.S. Meena, the police chief of Rohtas district, will be the new SP of Jehanabad. Sirohi said IG (Operations) R.R. Verma had at 3 p.m.(IST) on Sunday informed IG (central zone) A.S. Nimbran and SP Jehanabad about a possible attack by the extremists. But it seems that no action was taken, he said. Meanwhile, upset with the Bihar administration for failing to repulse the Maoist attack in Jehanabad, the Union Home Ministry asked the state to inquire why intelligence warning of an attack was not acted upon. The Ministry is keen to find out why Ajay Kanu, CPI (Maoist) area commander and a central committee member who was among those freed during the raid, was shifted to Jehanabad from Beur Jail a few weeks ago. The Bihar administration has been asked to explain who authorized the shift and why.
Posted by: Fred || 11/16/2005 00:00 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [260 views] Top|| File under:

#1  By any measure, Bihar is a failed state - remove it (and parts of UP) and all of India's demographic indicators would shoot up.

There is a joke in India about a Japanese delegation that visited Bihar. They were amazed at the vast mineral wealth (coal, Iron ore etc) and potential cheap labor for manufacturing (many tens of millions of workers).
"We can help turn Bihar into another Japan in 10 years" they said.
The Chief Minister, Laloo Yadav replied "So what? Give me Japan and I will turn it into Bihar in 10 months"
Another joke has Pakistan begging for Kashmir. The Indian PM responds "we will give you Kashmir, but you have to also take Bihar"
"No thank you" says Musharraf.

Posted by: john || 11/16/2005 15:42 Comments || Top||

Africa: North
Egyptians vote in election runoff
Widespread fraud reported in Egypt runoffs

Egypt Runoffs
Vote Buying, Bus Loading, Intrusive Police
Right outta the East St. Louis playbook! Nice work, Coach.
Egypt's election runoffs witnessed vote buying, voters' bus loading, illegal collective registration, intimidation and intervention of policemen, an element that was unprecedentedly absent in Wednesday's first round of election. "Observers are reporting a disturbing escalation of violence throughout polling places in Egypt," the Independent Committee for Election Monitoring said in a statement on Tuesday, November 15. Seventeen people were wounded in violence between supporters of rival candidates involved in runoffs for the first phase of Egypt's parliamentary elections, the official Middle East News Agency (MENA) said. Fifteen people were wounded in the Beni Sueif governorate south of Cairo, and scores were in a serious condition.
Posted by: Fred || 11/16/2005 00:00 || Comments || Link || E-Mail|| [243 views] Top|| File under:

Who's in the News

E-Mail Me

The Classics
The O Club
Rantburg Store
The Bloids
The Never-ending Story
Gulf War I
The Way We Were

Hair Through the Ages

On Sale now!

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.
Click here for more information

Meet the Mods
In no particular order...
Steve White
Scooter McGruder
john frum
Bright Pebbles
trailing wife
Frank G
Alaska Paul

Two weeks of WOT
Wed 2005-11-16
  French assembly backs emergency measure
Tue 2005-11-15
  Senior Jordian security, religious advisors resign
Mon 2005-11-14
  Jordan boomerette in TV confession
Sun 2005-11-13
  Jordan boomerette misfired
Sat 2005-11-12
  Jordan Authorities interrogate 12 suspects
Fri 2005-11-11
  Izzat Ibrahim croaks?
Thu 2005-11-10
  Azahari's death confirmed
Wed 2005-11-09
  Three hotels boomed in Amman
Tue 2005-11-08
  Oz raids bad boyz, holy man nabbed
Mon 2005-11-07
  Frankenfadeh, Day 11
Sun 2005-11-06
  Radulon Sahiron snagged -- oops, not so
Sat 2005-11-05
  U.S. Launches Major Offensive in Iraq
Fri 2005-11-04
  Frankistan Intifada Gains Dangerous Momentum
Thu 2005-11-03
  Abu Musaab al-Suri nabbed in Pak?
Wed 2005-11-02
  Omar al-Farouq escaped from Bagram

Better than the average link...

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.
WoT Operations (46)    Non-WoT (16)    Opinion (5)    (0)    (0)