Moving beyond 'shoot 'em up'
By Gregory M. Lamb | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor For all you peacekeeping Sims lovers out there, here's your chance to second guess the UN. Personally I'd rather play Gallactica or Donkey Kong, but whatever gets you off!
The situation is critical, and many lives are at stake. Success rides on the decisions you make. But in these video games, blasting your way out of trouble, guns blazing, isn't an option.
Instead, you must organize a peaceful protest against a dictator, shepherd supplies to hungry refugees, or lead "first responders" during a local catastrophe.
As the video-game market matures, these "serious games" are beginning to win advocates, who see them as great teaching tools, and grab the attention of large numbers of players.
"Food Force" is a free online game from the United Nations World Food Program that sends children ages 8 to 13 on six realistic aid missions. It's already been downloaded more than 2.5 million times. And the Woodrow Wilson Center for International Scholars in Washington, D.C. has founded the Serious Games Initiative to explore how key challenges facing governments and nonprofit groups can be addressed using game play.
"A lot of people are looking at [video] games because of their pervasiveness and because of their really unique capabilities for learning," says Suzanne Seggerman, co-founder of Games for Change, a two-year-old nonprofit that promotes games with a social conscience.
"It's a totally different style of teaching ... it's 'learn by doing,' " says Steve York, the senior producer at York-Zimmerman Inc., a documentary film company in Washington, D.C. Together with the International Center on Nonviolent Conflict (ICNC) and Breakaway Games Ltd., a video gamemaker, his company is producing "A Force More Powerful," in which players use peaceful means to unseat a dictator in 10 fictitious scenarios. The game will be released in February.
Backed by the ICNC, Mr. York's company already has produced two award-winning documentary films about nonviolent political change, including "Bringing Down a Dictator" (2002), which described the overthrow of Serbian strongman Slobodan Milosevic.
"We discovered ... that a lot of people around the world were using our films for training purposes" in countries with oppressive governments, York says. By playing the video game, protesters learn what works and what doesn't, such as "if you try this tactic, you're going to get eight of your activists assassinated or thrown into prison by the regime," he says.
Serious games represent "a huge market" that shows no limits for growth, says Deb Tillett, president of Breakaway Games Ltd. in Hunt Valley, Md. "A Force More Powerful" and others like it represent about 50 percent of the projects now under development at her company, she says.
The United States military has led the way in the development of "serious games" or training simulations, Ms. Tillett says. While "World of Warcraft," the most popular online fantasy fighting game can boast 5 million players, "America's Army," made as a recruiting tool for the US Army, has more than 6.3 million online players and will shortly become available on home game systems.
"America's Army" allows players to "train," conduct missions, and be rewarded with promotions. While it was costly to develop, the military has been more than paid back by "the dollars it's saving in fewer washouts" because recruits know what they're getting into, Tillett says.
Another Breakaway project is "Free Dive," a scuba-diving simulator that's so involving that it has lessened the pain of gravely ill children who play it while undergoing medical treatment.
"Incident Commander," developed by Breakaway after 9/11 for the Department of Justice, trains first responders to local emergencies such as a school shooting, hostage crisis, or chemical spill.
"Small towns and small municipalities can't afford big training programs and big tools," Tillett says. "Incident Commander" will be sent free of charge to 30,000 small towns and cities for use by city officials, police, firemen, and school principals. "The game play is really heart-pounding," she says.
Creating a video game can be expensive - popular games can cost $3 million to $20 million to develop, Tillett says. Serious games - which have proved popular and effective - can be made for a fraction of that cost, but the business model for how to pay for games that promote good causes is unclear, says David Rejeski. He studies the potential of games at the Woodrow Wilson International Center and coined the term "serious games" years ago.
Mr. Rejeski advocates the establishment of a "Corporation for Public Gaming" that would stimulate the development of serious games the way the Corporation for Public Broadcasting developed noncommercial TV. The Wilson Center sponsors an annual conference on serious games. The latest one, in October, drew more than 500 attendees.
Though the technical requirements of "A Force More Powerful" have been kept simple, so that it will play on older, inexpensive computers anywhere in the world, the "social modeling" involved in it is highly sophisticated, Tillett and York say. For example, players decide what their resistance movement's policies will be on 26 issues like women's rights, voting rights, free movement across borders, and taxes. Tailoring those positions may affect who joins your cause.
Another aspect of the game will be a website where players can discuss the game, trade ideas and strategies, and even post their own modifications for downloading, York says. Some US colleges and universities have expressed interest in the game, which can offer a quite different experience from just reading a textbook on nonviolent movements, he says.
Parents who'd like to see alternatives to the violence in commercial video games may be interested, too. "As I've watched three sons grow through some questionable digital gaming experiences ... I've been waiting for something like ["A Force More Powerful"] to come along," says Gordon Imrie, a father of three high school- and college-age sons in Hinsdale, Ill. He's followed the work of the ICNC for several years.
Just wait, Ms. Seggerman says. Serious games are only in their infancy, comparable to the silent movies of the early 20th century or the early television of the 1940s and '50s, she says.
Eventually, "serious games will take over the world" of gaming, predicts Jason Della Rocca, executive director of the International Game Developers Association in San Francisco. People will use video games for learning so easily and so often that they won't think twice about it, he says. People using video games will no more be labeled "gamers" than people today who listen to music are labeled "listeners," he says.
#1
"Food Force" is a free online game from the United Nations World Food Program that sends children ages 8 to 13 on six realistic aid missions.
So are they sent as aid workers or refugees forced to trade sex for food? With the UN, it's hard to tell, and the age range is about right for the UN.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
12/22/2005 13:06 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Instead they should make a game like Tropico, a simulated nation where the UN folks try to bilk all the money they can and keep the dictator in power. That would not only be realistic but fun.
#3
Breakaway games, BTW is run by some folks originally from Microprose, who published Civ2. In addition to this serious games initiative, they worked with Firaxis on the Sid Meiers Gettysburg/Antietam games, published their own Napoleonic games using the SMG engine, and worked with Firaxis on the scenarios in Civ3:Conquests.
#4
"Breakaway Games Ltd., a video gamemaker, his company is producing "A Force More Powerful," in which players use peaceful means to unseat a dictator in 10 fictitious scenarios. The game will be released in February"
BTW, I once discussed this particular game with a Brit leftie on a gaming forum - he expressed concern it was "a neocon game" - hoo boy!!
#5
Mr. Rejeski advocates the establishment of a "Corporation for Public Gaming" that would stimulate the development of serious games the way the Corporation for Public Broadcasting developed noncommercial TV.
Bzzzt!
If there's a public organization that sees a need for a "game", they can already do it. See "America's Army" and "Incident Commander" for examples. All the establishment of a specialized bureaucracy would do is allow the process to be easily politicized and to support the production of unneeded crap at taxpayer's expense.
Much like the Corporation for Public Broadcasting has done, come to think of it.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
12/22/2005 13:57 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Jim Dunnigan is popular on this site. Ask him about the SPI game Firefight sometime. It was commissioned by the US Army, and so it was made impossible for the US side to lose.
Posted by: Eric Jablow ||
12/22/2005 17:41 Comments ||
Top||
#7
I don't play many games. Most of them don't interest me. I've never been one for the shoot-everything-in-sight games. The game I enjoy the most is "Railroad Tycoon". I designed a similar game to "teach history, economics, and political science", but my poor programming skills kept me from ever developing it. The only "war" game I've played more than once or twice was "Descent".
There are precedents for using games to teach. I'm not against that. I'm just against trying to use them for indoctrination purposes instead of teaching. I think both the UN game and some of these others may be designed to push something other than intellectually honest information.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
12/22/2005 19:22 Comments ||
Top||
As the US military's battle to subdue the Taleban and other rebel groups in Afghanistan moves into its fifth year, one eastern province bordering Pakistan has increasingly become a symbol of its difficulties. Despite several major American offensives in Kunar over the past year, the militants keep re-grouping - many of them foreign fighters with al-Qaeda backing. The trouble it has had in this area has led US forces to use psychological operations, or 'psy-ops' tactics, that one US human rights group alleges could have broken the Geneva conventions governing armed conflict. US troops have been broadcasting messages which Human Rights Watch says implicitly threatens "collective punishment" for people of the valley. It was in Kunar that US forces suffered their worst single loss of life in Afghanistan since they first invaded in 2001 in response to the 9/11 attacks. One of their helicopters was shot down in late June, killing all 16 special forces and crew on board. The situation there bears comparison with that facing US troops in western Iraq battling Sunni rebels and al-Qaeda militants - although casualties there are far higher. Every time they try to clear an area, the insurgents move elsewhere and then return when the Americans have gone. That is what militant groups have been doing all year in Kunar, according to local officials and residents of the province who spoke to the BBC. The difficult, high altitude terrain is on their side. So too, say these officials, is the presence of a nearby safe haven - the tribal areas of neighbouring Pakistan. They say many militants fled there after the most recent nine-day American offensive in late November.
In a press release about Operation 'Sorkh Khar' - which translates as Operation Red Donkey - the US military described it as a "success" in dominating "the enemy in what has been a staging area in Kunar." But residents and officials in the province - who asked not to be named because of security concerns - said many insurgents had now returned. The stronghold of these groups - and the focus of many US operations - has been the steep, forested Korengal valley, to the north-west of the provincial capital, Asadabad. It was here that the US Chinook helicopter was shot down on 28 June, after being sent in to rescue a special forces unit on the ground whose mission had been compromised. Three members of that four-man team were also killed. The valley has become a kind of meeting place for anti-American militants of all shades. "Enemy central" in the words of one US soldier who's been there. Local officials have said for some time that supporters of the Taleban and al-Qaeda have been increasingly working together there.
They also co-operate with militants from Hizb-e Islami Gulbuddin, a group led by hardline Islamist former mujahideen commander and one time Afghan prime minister Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. His whereabouts are unknown, but he is one of the key targets of US forces in the region. So too is the man said to be al-Qaeda's leader in Kunar, an Arab called Abu Ikhlas al-Misri, who fought the Russians in the region during the 1980s and has lived there ever since, marrying locally. In turn, he is believed to work closely with a Taleban commander known as Ahmad Shah, who US commanders believe was involved in bringing down the helicopter. Add to this difficult mix "criminal activity", according to Lt-Col Jerry O'Hara, chief spokesman at the US military's main operational base Bagram - with many people involved in smuggling "drugs, timber and gems". But the US is not losing in Kunar or its Korengal valley in particular, he insists. "We're not letting go of that area." But in the long term, he says, "the solution there is not going to be a military one. It's about the Afghan government and security forces taking over."
One tactic US forces have recently tried is to broadcast messages on local radio in the name of Kunar's governor calling on Korengal residents to expel "enemy fighters living in their areas". It's all part of an approach used nationwide by the US-led coalition, to try to undermine support for militants in these areas. And despite the intense militant activity in Kunar, Afghan officials say many people there only provide support under pressure. The BBC obtained a copy of one broadcast from officials in the province who requested anonymity. They said they had been given the message by American personnel from a local base and believed that is where it had been written, even though it was in the name of the governor and his deputy.
This is how it ends: "if they 125the people of Korengal.375 are not going to comply with the demands of expelling the enemy from their villages then we will be forced to continue to pursue the enemy relentlessly until the elders either force them to leave or the hand of our national security troops force them out.
The people of Korengal are either with the people of Kunar or against them." However, when asked about the message, the US military said it was not their work. "I am told we did not write this document; that it was written by the governor," said Lt Colonel Laurent Fox, a spokesman at its headquarters in Kabul, in an e-mailed response. However, his statement confirmed that US troops had put it out. "I was told that CJTF-76 (the operational name of the US-led coalition force in Afghanistan) did transcribe it after it came out and ran some messages based on this letter on Peace radio in that area." But according to Human Rights Watch, regardless of the document's original authorship, broadcasting the message to the people of Korengal could break international conventions.
"It contains a barely veiled threat of collective punishment," said Sam Zarifi, its research director for Asia. "Making such a threat is a violation of the Geneva conventions and other laws of war." Lt Colonel Laurent Fox said the aim of transmitting the message was to use "non-lethal means against anti-government personnel." However, some Afghan officials involved in disseminating the broadcast said they were not happy about the language, which they described as "how the foreigners speak". "It will make things worse," another warned.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
12/22/2005 11:06 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"The batttle for Kunar province"
Lol, Dan. Much bigger than a regular battle, huh?
For the article's authors, Andrew North And Bilal Sarwary, I suggest the "batttle" against the Taleban is Afghanistan's, we don't have a vote and wanted the Afghanis folks to decide the issue, which they did. Or didn't you guys notice?
Prolly not.
As for the main thrust of the piece, which is mostly anti-US, bite me. The warlords and tribal leaders of Afghanistan who are for sale and don't give a rat's ass about anyone else are the real hurdle remaining to these people. It's stand up on your hind-legs time.
I've sworn off nation-building efforts forever. If Afghans "get it" and decide to maintain a free democracy, illiberal or whatever, more power to 'em. If they don't and allow a few asshat leaders and PakiWaki ISI operatives to set them back a dozen centuries, so be that, as well, as far as I'm concerned.
Once we remove our forces, any future interaction with Afghanistan should be punitive in nature because they reverted and involve no aid nor boots. Enough, IMHO.
Islam. That's where it all comes from - and goes back to. Focus.
Yunous Qanouni, the self-styled Afghan opposition leader, has been elected president of the lower house of parliament, narrowly beating a former factional leader allied to Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president.
That'd be Rasool Sayyaf. I consider this a "good news" story...
Qanouni, an ethnic Tajik who came a distant second to Karzai in presidential elections last year, was chosen on Wednesday to lead the 249-seat lower house of parliament with 122 votes against 117 for Abdul Rasoul Sayyaf, his closest challenger. Qanuni is from the Panjshir Valley, the heart of opposition to Soviet occupation in the 1980s and Taliban rule in the 1990s.
Rasool is a Pashtun, but his heart, assuming he has one, is in Soddy Arabia.
You won't know til you do the autopsy.
He [Qanouni, not Rasool] was a senior leader of the Northern Alliance that helped US-led forces topple the Taliban in 2001 and became interior minister in Karzai's interim government. Relations cooled when Karzai demoted him to education minister in 2002 and he resigned after announcing his candidacy for the presidential election in October last year.
Taht was when Karzai was trying to curb the power of the Pandjir Valley men.
Qanuni has tried to form an opposition bloc called the Understanding Front and warned before the election that he might not support all of Karzai's cabinet choices, which have to be endorsed by parliament.
I expect it'll be a loyal opposition, though I suspect it'll be pretty heavily ethnic influenced.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/22/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
December 22, 2005: The efforts of the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) to create a unified government for Somalia have been more or less fruitless. Not only are the various warlords who control much of the country unwilling to give up any power, but the northern break-away regions of Somaliland and Puntland, which have enjoyed relative stability for several years now, see no reason to become tied to a corpse.
One result of this is that Italy, the former colonial authority, appears to be inclined to cease supporting the TFG and seek another resolution to the chaos that engulfs much of Somalia. As Italyâs voice carries considerable influence on EU policies toward Somalia, this could signal the end of the TFG. In this regard, representatives of the Italian government are apparently discussing future policies toward Somalia with other EU governments and the US.
Meanwhile, perhaps in emulation of Somaliland and Puntland, local tribal and district leaders in the southwestern region along the Juba River, have established a regional authority, which has actually taken some action to curb the pirates operating along the coast.
Posted by: Steve ||
12/22/2005 09:14 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Hasnt Africa prospered since it has shaken off its colonial oppressors. A wonderful example to the world.
The United Nations and the African Union have condemned an attack on a village in Darfur in western Sudan in which armed men killed 20 civilians and burned their huts.
I'm sure they find that very comforting...
The attackers riding camels and horses swept through the village of Abu Sorouj in the war-wrecked Darfur region on Monday, killing the villagers and destroying and looting their houses, UN spokesperson Radhia Achouri, told reporters. UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan condemned the attack, Achouri said on Wednesday, warning that "the security situation in Darfur remains volatile. Militia attacks on villages continue".
He condemns, but he does nothing. Give him another peace prize.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/22/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
What pisses me off is that I have to read this on al-Jizz, while our own MSM has *crickets chirping* and only reports on how many Iraqis we've killed (even though, we go WAY beyond what anyone else does to not kill civilians). Nope, nuttin' to see here...it's just Bush's listenin' to you calling Papa John's and NO drillin' in ANWR!
Posted by: BA ||
12/22/2005 10:00 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"it's just Bush's listenin' to you calling Papa John's"
#3
So how long has this been going on while the UN sits on its hands? Years now?
I expect a strongly worded letter any year now. Then the UN and AU will start up their 'food for nookie' program.
BA, thats nothing. The BBC had an article on all the 'civilian casualties' quoting such impeachable sources as 'Iraq body count' and the discreated Lancet article.
The article left a strong sense that all the hundreds of thousands of dead are the sole fault of the coalition (sp?).
#4
"it's just Bush's listenin' to you calling Papa John's"
ROFL, BA!
WOW! My first ROFL from .com, I love it! (/blushing and golf clapping and patting myself on the back now/). And, CF, I think the President's # is a lot closer to reality (he admitted 30,000 Iraqis dead...I don't think he called them civilians vs. military, but anyhoo), as he was citing 30,000 estimated from the DAILY MSM reports, which, in and of themselves, quote "Anonymous sources" and "Doctors" at the local hospital. And, a lot of these MSM "reports" include those Iraqis killed by the "insurgents" as road-side collateral of their IEDs in a lot of cases.
Posted by: BA ||
12/22/2005 13:06 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Ha! Don't be mean, BA, that's not the first by a long shot, nor will it be the last, I'm certain! You're making me feel all self-conscious n' stuff, heh. Mebbe I should go now - it's is my bedtime, lol. Me 'n Dracula hang out these days... ;-)
#6
I was actually being somewhat serious, .com. Don't remember ever getting a ROFL from ya. And, all kiddin' aside, I do stand back in awe of your verbal bloodlettings when trolls show up. Your rants are one in a million in my book! Now, enough brown-nosin'.
Posted by: BA ||
12/22/2005 13:38 Comments ||
Top||
2 youths shot dead in city
Unidentified assailants gunned down two youths near Mouchak crossing in the city last evening. One of the victims is Wasim, 27, while the identity of the other youth in his mid-20s could not be known immediately. A man stumbled on the dead bodies in the dark while returning to his boarding mess on DIT Extension Road around 8pm.
The domestic help of the mess said six to seven youths appeared near the mess in a hurry around 6:00pm and left the place immediately. The house help said she heard several gunshots, but did not realise then due to noises in the kitchen.
On information, police came and found a cellphone ringing in Wasim's pocket. Rita, 17, the caller, showed up and identified Wasim, saying he served out his two-and-a-half year jail term one week ago. She claimed to have known Wasim since then. The police picked up the girl for interrogation.
Top drug smuggler held in Rajshahi
Rapid Action Battalion (Rab) yesterday picked up a top drug smuggler and suspected explosives supplier to JMB. Anwarul Islam, a drug smuggler based in Godagari frontier in Rajshahi, was held along with cash money over Tk 1.50 lakh and 100gm heroin while he was receiving the amount from a courier service in Rajshahi city. With years of experience in drug smuggling, Anwarul and his accomplices used to control the cross-border network of explosives with the favour of a local minister, sources alleged. The law enforcers said they are checking whether he was linked with JMB's munitions supplies.
Soon to be taken on a midnight drive to look for explosives caches
Anwarul is accused in several drug smuggling cases. He threatened a local journalist for writing against his activities several months ago.
5,000 bottles phensidyl seized in Rajshahi
Bangladesh Riffles (BDR) seized an Indian engine boat loaded with 5,000 bottles of phensidyl syrup from the Padma River in Rajshahi district Tuesday night. BDR sources said a BDR patrol team of Meerganj BOP chased some smugglers when they, on board an engine boat, were entering into Bangladesh territorial waters through the river Padma at about 8:30pm. The smugglers jumped into the river from the boat and swam towards India leaving the boat with the contraband items behind, said a BDR press release
2 suspected dacoits lynched in Munshiganj
Dec 21 : Two alleged dacoits were lynched by mob at Noadda, a remote village of Tongibari upazila, on Tuesday. The victims were identified as Kalu Miah (35) and Sumon (32) who hailed from Narayanganj. Their accomplices Noor Hossain (30) of Dinajpur and Yusuf (22) of Hijla who managed to escape the wrath of the mob were held by police 22km away at Hashara on Dhaka-Mawa Road with a Pajero jeep.
Interrogation of Noor and Yusuf by Sirajdikhan police revealed that four of them hijacked the pajero jeep (Dhaka Metro Ma-11-4698) of AB Bank from Motijheel in Dhaka City on Monday night. They drove to Noadda with a plan to plunder the house of Subal Gazi of the village. Witnesses account said residents of Noadda saw them passing in a jeep at 6 in the morning. Suspecting dacoits they were held and confined in a primary school. On receipt of information five policemen came there at about 9am and tried to rescue the alleged dacoits.
But finding the mob fierce and unyielding the policemen retreated. The mob fell on them. Two of them were lynched but two others managed to escape and flee with the jeep.
Three alleged dacoits injured by mob
Dec 21: Three alleged dacoits were injured severely in mass beating when they were committing robbery at a house at Mogholtole at Agrabad in the port city Monday morning. The injured persons are identified as Moinuddin, Rahaman and Sakib.
According to the police and witnesses, a gang of robbers numbering around five entered the house of one Nur mohammed at Mog Pukur Par area at Mogholtole at Agrabad in the city at around 10 am on Monday. The armed robbers made Hajera Khatoon, the mother in law of the house-master Nur Mohammed hostage at the gun point. They looted gold and around taka 2500 in cash from the house at that time. Hajera Khatoon shouted after the leaving of robbers from the house and local people surrounded them in front of the house.
Local people caught three of them identified as Moinuddin, Rahaman and Sakib. The mob beat up the causing their severe injury. However, police rushed to the spot and nabbed them with the looted goods. The injured dacoits were admitted to the Chittagong Medical College Hospital. A case was filed in this connection.
Gang leader arrested
Dec 21: The Chhatak thana police in a raid on December 17 arrested a gang leader of robbers from Bhuigoan village under Chhatak Upazila. The arrested was identified as Abdul Kader (60) of the village.
A team of police led by ASI Aimus Ali raided the house of Abdul Kader at the village. Sensing the presence of police, Abdul Kader tried to flee but the police after a good chase arrested him. Police said, Abdul Kader was wanted in connection with a number of cases including robbery and murder. He was sent to jail through court.
Posted by: Steve ||
12/22/2005 09:33 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
seized an Indian engine boat loaded
Sounds funny, but I believe that's technically correct. Or is it the other way around?
Rocket Engine
Motor Cars...
Electric Motor.... aw hell. Who knows.
Posted by: Leon Clavin ||
12/22/2005 12:12 Comments ||
Top||
#2
That's probably a translation error, the correct term would be MV (Motor Vessel, usualy diesel but includes gasoline engines) as opposed to SS (Steam Ship, usualy turbines, a much bigger ship)
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
12/22/2005 13:59 Comments ||
Top||
#3
The codeine based syrup is mixed with sweet tea and is very popular with urban youth
A ââcough syrup mafiaââ is operating along the Indo-Bangla border. According to the Border Security Force, after cattle, cough syrup is the item most smuggled into Bangladesh.
With liquor banned in Bangladesh, âIndian syrupâ has emerged the poor manâs drink in the country thanks to the ââsyrup mafiaââ on both sides of the border which adds some âvalueâ to the product by mixing alcohol.
According to senior BSF officers, almost 25 per cent of the cough syrup manufactured in India is being smuggled into Bangladesh through the North-eastern states.
Posted by: john ||
12/22/2005 22:46 Comments ||
Top||
The government has no plan to bring sedition charges against the militants who have been carrying out bomb attacks on different government mechanisms, including the judiciary, since last August with a view to establishing "the rule of Islam". Over three months ago, State Minister for Home Affairs Lutfozzaman Babar, however, said the government is not reluctant to bring sedition charges against the bombers.
Changed their minds, did they?
"If we find their action amounting to sedition, there will not be any unwillingness on our part," the state minister told reporters on September 14. The government was examining the legal aspects of the matter at that time, he said.
SEDITION - Conduct which is directed against a government and which tends toward insurrection but does not amount to treason. Treasonous conduct consists of levying war against the United States or of adhering to its enemies, giving them aid and comfort.
The raising commotions or disturbances in the state; it is a revolt against legitimate authority.
The distinction between sedition and treason consists in this, that though its ultimate object is a violation of the public peace, or at least such a course of measures as evidently engenders it, yet it does not aim at direct and open violence against the laws, or the subversion of the Constitution.
The bombing campaign, assuming it's not in the service of a foreign state, isn't treason under the American definition, which is derived from common law. I'd say it meets the definition of insurrection square on, though. Raising a commotion in the state and revolt against legitimate authority, too.
The militants, in a bid to achieve their goals, have been carrying out suicide attacks and bombings that so far killed 27, including two judges and four lawyers, and left people in abysmal insecurity.
So how's that miss the definition? Or is the Bangla definition that far away from ours?
Meanwhile, the arrested militants of the banned Jamaatul Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB) have confessed to working to establish Islamic Shariah replacing the existing laws. Legal experts termed the militants' target and activities anti-state and suggested filing sedition charges along with the criminal cases against them. But the home ministry has asked the law enforcers to submit charge sheets against those so far learnt to be involved in the bomb attacks and bring them under conviction.
Sedition's a capital offense. I'd guess their protectors can fix anything less...
The law enforcers have arrested around 800 people since August 17 on charges of militancy and filed 181 cases, most of them under the Explosive Substances Act. The act has a provision of 20-year imprisonment as the highest punishment.
... rather than a stretched neck. This is kind of transparent, isn't it?
Babar on September 14 said, "Cases have been filed across the country under the Explosive Substances Act and Special Power Act, which suit best, and the probe is on accordingly." The law enforcers have so far submitted 85 charge sheets and sent eight cases to the Speedy Trial Tribunal.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/22/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
LONDON - British MP and anti-Iraq war campaigner George Galloway is to face a fresh investigation into the funding of his campaign against UN sanctions in Iraq, a report said on Thursday. The Daily Telegraph said the Charity Commission, the regulatory body for not-for-profit organisations in England and Wales, had launched another probe into the now wound-up Mariam Appeal created by the former Labour MP in 1998.
The commission concluded last year that no funds for the appeal, which provided medical aid to Iraqi civilians, had been misused or acquired from improper sources. But its head of legal services said in May the commission would look at new information from a US Senate sub-committee, which has accused Galloway of taking illegal kickbacks from the former Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein.
I've been waiting for the hearing to be used in a productive way ...
In October, a probe into the UNâs now defunct oil-for-food programme in Iraq alleged that Galloway was allocated more than 18 million barrels of oil under the scandal-tainted scheme. The allocations -- vehemently denied by Galloway -- were allegedly made either directly in his name or that of his associate, Jordanian businessman Fawaz Zureikat, to support the Mariam Appeal against sanctions.
A spokesman for Galloway was quoted by the Telegraph as saying the fresh investigation was âa complete waste of timeâ and had been launched at Washingtonâs behest. The Mariam Appeal had been âentirely legitimateâ, as were all donations, the spokesman told the newspaper, insisting that the Charity Commission would find nothing new.
Posted by: Steve White ||
12/22/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Mexico is trying to form a united front in Latin American against a US plan to build a fence along hundreds of miles of its southern border.
Foreign Minister Luis Ernesto Derbez said he had spoken to other countries in the region and that they would work together against the proposal.
Keep speaking, it only builds the case for the fence
The US House of Representatives passed an immigration bill last week, backing the 1,130-km (700-mile) fence. The plan has been described by Mexican President Vicente Fox as "shameful". Mr Derbez said it would not just affect Mexicans, but also migrants from El Salvador to Brazil.
That's the whole point, ain't it?
The Guatemalan President, Oscar Berger, has already condemned the proposal. On Wednesday, his Venezuelan counterpart Hugo Chavez described Mexico's stance as "dignified".
Correspondents say that every day an estimated 1,500 Latin Americans, mostly from Mexico, cross into the United States illegally. President George W Bush has said that border security "must adapt to the nation's changing needs".
The US bill - which the Senate is due to debate in February - also includes the use of troops and police to halt migrants, and tighter employment controls. Critics of the plan say some of the measures would be impossible to enforce and would push illegal immigrants further underground.
Then we'll just have to dig them out, won't we?
Posted by: Steve ||
12/22/2005 08:40 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
If anything should serve to solidify Congressional resolve for a barrier, this Mexican "united front" effort should do it. Unfortunately, there are probably some in the Senate who will seek to align with the Fox and Berger. Kudos to the House for backing the fence.
#2
Of course the another choice is to start talking up the Western Hemisphere Commonwealth composed of former nations which decided to piss off the Yankees. Time to notify Fox that the NAFTA is to be terminated, we'll see who needs who in the end. I'm sure the expanded trade with Hugo and Fidel will make up for it.
#3
I saw the headline and wondered if he was talkin' to Germany since he's been using the "It's the next Berlin Wall(tm)" analogy so much. I also wonder how some of these countries will act knowing how Mexico treats those in come in from their southern border. A few of these phone calls may result in *crickets chirping* methinks.
Posted by: BA ||
12/22/2005 10:05 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I love the Berlin Wall analogy. Look which way the people are fleeing, Comrade Fox.
Okay, lessee... we pull out the old pre-vote checklist...
Stevens - Promise bridge to the Moon.
Kennedy - Swimming Lessons and a truckload of Old Blubbernose.
Kerry - A phone call, a note, an email, anything!
Harkin - Changing the records to say he really did fly combat.
Leahy - Annex New Hampshire so Vermont sorta looks like it counts.
Voinovich - A case of linen hankies.
Durban - Change the spelling of Turban.
Clinton - Pretend she really is a "moderate" 'n stuff.
Schumer - Pretend that he's more important than the Jr Senator, NY.
Specter - Pretend that he really is an important Constitutional Scholar.
So how many izzat? 10? Okay, only 50 more to go - or 41 if you believe in the Consitution...
#6
I think its time we took the gloves off. Many of the Mexican immigrants come with talk of conquest and Mexican support of this could be considered nearly an act of war. Nearly 60% of Mexicans polled say they want to come to the US.
Clearly Mexico is a failed and hostile state and we are considering invading and nation-building to set up a proper government that won't keep the people in poverty.
#7
Guest Worker/Amnesty Bullshit aside.
It boils down to one simple question. Is the pourus southern border a threat to US national security?
If the answer is no, then fuck it and just open it up! Seriously, don't waste another cent on a silly half-ass feely-good make it look like we are doing something policy.
If the answer is yes, then have the balls to put the resources and manpower to best eliminate the threat. I no longer chuckle at suggestions of electricfied fences, armed centuries with shoot-to-kill orders, and landmines. At least they are sincere suggestions for deterrents. Bottom line, if someone gets shot or breaks thier neck attempting to break into a nuclear facility, it is not the fault of the facility rather it is the fault of the tresspassers. Once you sift through all the double-speak the only difference is in degree of threat.
#10
..and we are considering invading and nation-building to set up a proper government..
No, no, no. They've had more than enough time to watch what goes on here, copy it, and tweak it to their satisfaction. Either they do what needs to be done on their own, or they suffer the consequences of their laziness/apathy. Enough dollars have gone south already, without us having to waste money directly by trying to straighten out a mess of their own creation. I'm done with cutting Mexico any slack; ten million illegal immigrant Mexicans already here and more trying to cross every day and every night is too, TOO much.
Critics of the plan say some of the measures would be impossible to enforce..
Bullshit. This is nothing more than a ploy to allow the current intolerable situation to continue unabated until a solution is proposed that would satisfy these so-called critics. Such a solution, however, isn't likely to make the public happy, nor really solve the problem.
..and would push illegal immigrants further underground.
#11
The reason Fox et al are scared of the fence is that people will have to stay in Mexico and they might start looking real close at the corruption and ineptitude of the Mexican Government. Once the people realize they have to change things at home in order to have a better life the ruling class might get the French revolution treatment. Make no mistake the Mexican working in the U.S. are propping up the economy of Mexico, so if that flow is stopped or interrupted then the Federalies will be in big financial and then political trouble.
#12
Annex Mexico, problem solved, build the fence at Mexico's southern border (It's much shorter there)
But then we've got all that open coastline to guard and defend, so it's a moot point whether or not to build a southern fence at all.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
12/22/2005 14:06 Comments ||
Top||
#13
I'm sure we can find a source of cheap labor nearby to help build it.
The Paleos sell the Israelis the concrete needed for the Wall on the West Bank. I don't see why we couldn't hire Mexican labor for our fence. $10 an hour, decent benefits, safe working conditions -- hell, we'd be over-subscribed.
Posted by: Steve White ||
12/22/2005 15:11 Comments ||
Top||
#14
If they are anything like Philippino and Korean contractors (who built concealed tunnels into PX and Commisary warehouses), I'd say watch out for revolving doors in that fence.
Posted by: Steve ||
12/22/2005 15:42 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Annex Mexico, problem solved,..
No, because then there's all of Mexico's dirt-poor peasants to have to do something about. We already have our own poverty issues to tackle without compounding it further by adding millions more to the equation.
And then there's a little problem with language... (keep in mind that instead of requiring the annexed to learn English, the PC lobby would probably demand that we learn Spanish)
#16
Mexicos dirt poor peasants are hard workers with no jobs to do, that is why so many come here. There are no jobs because the government is corrupt and they have laws preventing investment. These things would be demolished, investment would flow, and the economy would pick up.
In the mean time the Oil money could be used to pay to hire peasants to rebuild the Mexican infrastructure. If there is work down south the illegals will stop coming north.
Don't annex them, make the states a territory(s) and when things are going well give them the choice (statehood, independence, or wait to decide later).
Uh, no. We already annexed part of that country (the American Southwest used to be the Mexican Northwest). They still haven't forgiven us for that one.
Not that I really care....
The part that frightens Fox y amigos is not only the fact that their younger poor guys and girls are going to be hanging around back home and possibly causing unrest, but also that they are going to have a slowing of the money spigot from the workers up north.
Especially that last part....which is why they have recently gone out of their way to allow Mexican expatriates here in the US the right to vote in elections back home, get ID's from the consulates, etc. If they lose the ties to Mexico, they are far less likely to send back big chunks of their paychecks.
Now imagine...you are currently getting $ from 10 million of your citizens in America. Let's say for fun they are sending home 5k. (I don't know how much they actually send....I am using the Dr Dean/Kerry method of pulling figures outta my a$$). That's 50 billion.
Unca Sam makes it harder to get in. Fewer of your citizens get in, and there's a natural die-off rate anyway. So in a couple of years, you only have 9 1/2 million citizens here. They'll be sending back 47.5 billion. And it slowly goes down, while your population back home goes up.
Mexico can't take that kind of a hit very easily. The other countries aren't as dependent, but they still can use the money. No wonder Vicente is screaming like a little girl.
#18
It's not just the repatriated earnings, either. It's the lost payoffs to the Federales from the coyotes and drug smugglers. That will be a big pay cut for the military. Wonder what they'd do to restore their lost "wages".
#19
Build the fence all the way across from the Pacific to the Gulf of Mexico. Electrify it (build a couple of nuclear generating plants to supply the power). Build guard towers every quarter-mile, with shoot-to-kill orders for anyone trying to damage the fence. Then bomb the he$$ out of Mexico City. It won't end the problem, but it'll sure reduce the stress.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
12/22/2005 19:49 Comments ||
Top||
#20
Mexicos dirt poor peasants are hard workers with no jobs to do, that is why so many come here.
But see, we already have our own home-grown poverty problem. Our poor could do those jobs, and probably at a better wage too, since the downward pressure on wages created by the presence of all these mojados willing to work on the cheap would be largely eliminated. Sure, the public would likely feel a varying degree of pinch as higher costs might be passed on, but isn't it worth paying out a little extra knowing that all the employees up and down the chain are legit?
#21
I get angry every time I walk into the US Post Office and see signs advertising the US Government's service to securely send dollars to Mexico. Banks, Western Union, and every other swinging dick out there all want a piece of illegal aliens' paychecks to send their money home. If it were illegal to remit dollars to Mexico, a lot of the incentive for illegals would go away. Further, if the US Government would enforce our f**king laws and start sending people to prison, this problem would go away. I, for one, would happily pay more in taxes to build the prisons to hold every person who employs an illegal.
#22
Mexico is the only country that shares our southern border. We don't even care that Mexico objects to the fence, why should we care about the attenuated cries from hundreds of miles further south? I mean, what are they going to do: boycott the Ambassador's Christmas tea?
December 22, 2005: Chinese Cyber War efforts are being betrayed by increased professionalism. What? In the past, Chinese hacking efforts were typically numerous, and often sloppy. Being able to trace some of the attackers back to Chinese neighborhoods ( known to contain military or government bureaucracies) made it pretty clear who the intruders probably were. The Chinese denied everything, although they admitted that there were Chinese students who might do that sort of thing, and, of course, there were criminal elements out there as well. But more recently, a lot of the attacks from China have been much better organized, possessing a, shall we say, âmilitary precision.â These guys arenât trainees, bored students or inept criminals. The latest batch of Chinese hackers are going after American military servers, and are trying to plant Trojan Horse type software, that will enable them to return, at will, to grab data from the infected PC, or quickly shut it down. A Trojan Horse can also be used to monitor what goes on in the infected PC, but that requires sending stuff back to China, which makes it more likely that the PC infection will be discovered. Many of the infections are being discovered, although itâs a secret how many, and how. The big question is, how many of the infections were not detected. The Chinese are also going after American defense contractors, and U.S. government systems in general. Many of these attacks appear to be to collect secret information.
Cyber War begins in peace time, as you constantly scout enemy networks, trying to get a good idea of how vulnerable they are to infection. When the real war comes, whoever can do the most damage, the quickest, wins. While the rest of the Chinese army may not train a lot, the same cannot be said for the Cyber War troops. They are training hard, and doing it on the networks they would attack in wartime.
Posted by: Steve ||
12/22/2005 09:23 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I recommend the Pentagon begin employing Navajo Code Talkers Hackers and switch to the WDUYSOC* Operating System immediately!
#2
As if we don't know this hacking is taking place? The Norks even are reported to have an advanced cyberforce, although they are reported to be using tandy hardware from 1985.
Seriously though, I bet we're spending considerable efforts defending our e-infrastructure.
Another half ass "we're digging deep" strategy page scare story to generate subscribers?
#4
Although I'm confident that we'll never hear about it, we all can be sure that our military is preparing some pretty nasty forms of reprisal. This sort of exploratory cyber-spying has to have a severe price tag attached to it.
#5
(1) Old news ... c.f. the Red Lion attack around the time we were getting ready to go into Iraq.
(2) The single largest cadet activity at West Point is the student chapter of ACM's SIGSAC (special interest group, security). One of their annual events is a several-day Cyber Defense Exercise against the other service academies, with NSA running the competition and judging.
The first year, NSA left a minor door open on the unclassified server from which they ran the competition. The West Point cadets owned that machine in the first few hours. Heh.
(3) West Point was the first under-graduate institution to be awarded NSA designation as a Center of Academic Excellence in Information Assurance Education in 2001 and renewed in 2004.
Bottom line: it's not news and a lot is going on to create a capability of our own.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/22/2005 11:04 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Last time I checked, the Republicans have a majority in both houses. So why the f$%&k can't they pass key legislation? When the Democrats held both houses they ruled with an iron fist. Maybe the Republicans are better off as a minority party after all.
Posted by: Jonathan ||
12/22/2005 11:24 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Actually the Dems didn't do that well when they controlled.
For example, the Dems have had repeal of Taft-Hartley in their platform for 20+ years and never got to closure on this. They tried and failed to mandate state education spending; they were forced to swallow NAFTA and other trade agreements, they were forced to agree to welfare reform and tax cuts.
#4
teh Dems bemoan our dependence on foreign oil and rather than seek domestic sources, would rather tax us into mass transit to add $ for their social vote-buying nanny state. I have no use for RINOs who helped and abetted this maneuver - they should've forced the Donks to filibuster all thru the holiday, keeping them in DC
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/22/2005 12:20 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Jonathan,
It takes 60 votes to invoke cloture. The Republicans have only 55. And, they don't do filibusters like Mr. Smith any more.
Remember who has the record for longest filibuster, and why.
Posted by: Eric Jablow ||
12/22/2005 12:54 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Remember who has the record for longest filibuster, and why.
Hmm, probably some Southern Democrat defending segregation by reading out of a phone book.
MHW, you're right that the Democrats suffered some setbacks, but if I recall welfare reform, tax cuts, and NAFTA occurred after the Republicans took over. In their heyday in the '60s and '70s the Democrats got pretty much everything they wanted and crushed any hint of dissent within their party. Republicans are much more lenient with their "mavericks" (christ I hate that term) and so you get RINOs like Chaffee and Snowe.
Posted by: Jonathan ||
12/22/2005 15:01 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Republican's lenient with their mavericks, I dunno, the R's have their shit together as it were on messaging and most of their issues are tight and votes tighter controlled.
This is about constituents and their responses to this. Check the polls and then check the votes.
I'm betting they coincide. Remember, being a politician is above all else about staying in power once in power.
These guys voted this down because of constituent backlash, not because they are mavericks. This issue is not an easy debate, though it may be framed as such by many. And let's not fool ourselves that Alaskan oil reserves are going to solve our nation's energy dependence on foreign oil fellas, just aint.
Maybe it will be a philosophical victory for those seeking to bring energy development back home to the US, but the oil companies and their lobbyist have no intention of cutting dependence on foreign energy sources they control access to, ask .com he's got some experience in this area. I'm sure some other regulars here know the game as well.
While I'm all for domestic energy development, let's talk coal to fuel, there's a real viable alternative to foreign oil. Anyone who tells you drilling Alaska is going to take us away from foreign energy dependence is bullshitting.
However, as I mentioned, there's enough coal here in the US, namely Montana & Dakotas to do some serious harm to a foreign energy market.
But why look for domestic sources when we can keep bleeding the middle east dry?
I'm all about taking the Arab's shit from them and not letting the Chinese get ahold of it, lets let Alaska be wild, as God knows we ain't got enough places like Alaska left in the world. I ain't saying that we shouldn't be developing infrastructure, I'm just saying let's choose wisely.
That's a country boy's take though, and I'd rather hunt and fish Alaska than facilitate some rapper or rich asshole's housewife driving a Hummer to the hair salon and soccer practice any day of the damn week so...
#8
well, Elvis, if you can hunt and fish in ANWR, you're a better outdoorsman than anyone else - look at the pictures of the actual area, not some fuzzy lying propaganda by the Wilderness Society. It's cold, barren and rocky - when not covered in ice and snow. Wake up!
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/22/2005 18:00 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Liberal alert? Y'all feelin my green roots?
Don't get pissy with me Frank, cause I got my opinions and you got yours, but I ain't followin a talkin point that isn't realistic. I'm just a hick with some yearnin to believe in wide open spaces and an intrinsic value in what's wild and untouchable. Makes me all fuzzy inside, just like when I read "call of the wild" for the first time.
Larger habitat picture is what I'm talking about Frank. And I'm quite awake. What's your logic, because if its defense I believe it is misplaced.
I know there's a shitload of land sitting empty up there, but what's wrong with that, does every single square inch of earth have to be covered with mini malls to be considered progress. And yes, I know we're not talking about mini malls, but we are talking about a significant extraction effort and we all know that means significant infrastructure.
If it's 100%, 90%, or even, I'll go to 87% remediable then you might convince me, but tell me, is it? Or will significant habitat be permanently disrupted.
I ain't hunted caribou yet, and might not ever, hell I don't even know if you can, but that Wild and wooly country inspires me, and it just plain awesome, whether I can drive my truck to it or not.
I don't claim to be an expert on this issue, but my points are still made and quite valid, and whether or not I can get there to hunt and or fish it personally doen't influence my opinion on drilling for some very, very short term profit.
This is not a strategic issue, its a profit issue. And big oil has spent plenty of money framing it as a defense issue, which it ain't, for their profit.
I don't collect a check from Exxon though, many people do, but is this one drilling project going to make or break them or the American or Alaskan economy.
No. So, whatever. I see a value to Wilderness, and most who don't
feel as if it's a government lock out, and I understand that, but what the hell is wrong with a little balance in the world?
So whatever, you go your way, I'll go mine and I'll be happy.
#10
EHLTB - if you think every square inch of this country is covered with mini-malls - you must live in the BosWash corridor. Forget about Alaska for a moment - go to San Antonio. Get on I-10 and start driving west. Keep going till you hit Phoenix. THEN tell us how crowded this country is.
#11
You guys are really missing the point. End the end...around 1/10 of 1% of ANWR would have had a wellhead on it. That would come to less than 2500 acres affected. You could wander the ANWR for years and not run into a wellhead.
It's all about the LLL and their whores in Congress. I will laugh my fanny off in the coming years when the pissheads on the East and West coasts who are keeping ANWR closed start paying $5 per gallon at the pump, and $1000 heating bills and electic bills.
And the 1-2 million+ additional barrels per day would represent over 20% of the domestic production. And the 15-20 billion barrels (minimum) of recoverable "people in the know" believe is there is more than has been recovered out of the North Slope...and those fields have been producing for over 2 decades.
#12
Oh, so ANWR gonna solve our domestic energy needs is it? Ten to one says we drill ANWR and gas is still $5 a gallon in the coming years. Damn shame, but I'll take odds. Some gamblers out there no doubt.
The well head aint the issue as anyone familiar with migratory habits of big game animals will tell you, its the roads. Miles and miles and miles of new roads smack dab in the middle of God's country.Now let's talk derigibles for reachin the wellheads and you've got my vote.
I'll tell you from experience that big game don't take too kindly to roads in their way. It's not about gettin hit by the constant flow of trucks either, its about migratory routes and large herds. But I aint reviewed the plans and I aint an expert, so I'll shut the hell up till I know more. But before I do let me ask this. I've got a bit of experience with Wilderness, whataboutchall? The rest of y'all seen any elk or bear or anything remotely wild besides a whitetail or raccoon in your neck of the woods recently?
When was the last time any of y'all advocates of ANWR saw YOUR prey bugle out and heard a wolf call back. Maybe Paul up in Alaska, the rest, anybody?
God knows we need more opportunities to say we've been scared a grizzly was gonna get us, find any value in that? Well I do, and I sure as hell hope my grandkids get the chance to say the same thing.
But that's right, there ain't value in such things for city folk is there? I guess that's a good thing, keeps people out of my neck of the woods.
Oh, and DMFD, you got me all wrong, all wrong. Try a bit sparser, waaaaaay sparser. I despise cities, and I know Texas quite well, too many damn people, friendly though y'all may be. It's a bit too crowded for a country boy like me too, desert or no desert.
#14
EP Of course not - ANWR drilling and extraction will not SOLVE our energy problem. But that is no excuse to do NOTHING.
Prudhoe Bay and the pipeline do not appear to have disrupted the ecology. The elk and caribou herds are larger thatn they heve ever been. What ids the real issue here? Are we even arguing about the same issue? I care about energy for the nation. I also care about wilderness, but not as much.
Would you propose a plan? (And not wind mills which are more destructive of wilderness than oil well are.)
My people, the Inupiat, comprise the membership of ASRC. We hold title to 92,000 acres of privately owned land in the middle of the controversial Coastal Plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, also known as ANWR. We believe that responsible development of this area is our fundamental human right to economic self-determination...
Within those halls (of Congress) there is a debate on the most controversial element of the President?s national energy plan. This element is the responsible development of oil and gas on a tiny parcel of land within my region; it is the Coastal Plain of ANWR. Again, my people hold title to 92,000 acres of land within the Coastal Plain. We cannot develop our privately owned land unless Congress authorizes development within the Coastal Plain.
The uninformed will tell you that the Coastal Plain is untouched by man; that it is America?s Serengeti; the last great wilderness on earth; or that it cannot be developed responsibly. I am here to tell you the truth. In short, the Coastal Plain of ANWR is not untouched by man, nor is it the last great wilderness on earth. Finally, we believe that ANWR can be developed responsibly.
For thousands of years the Inupiat people have occupied the Arctic region of Alaska called the North Slope. This area is 89,000 square miles in size, equivalent to the size of the state of Minnesota. We have eight villages scattered throughout the North Slope. One of our villages is Kaktovik, the only village within the recognized boundaries of the entire 19.6 million acres of ANWR.
Kaktovik is situated within the 1.5 million acres of the Coastal Plain. To put this in perspective for you, Kaktovik is the only village within the boundaries of an area the size of the state of South Carolina. The Inupiat people of Kaktovik own the surface rights to the 92,000 acres while ASRC owns the subsurface rights to that land.
Kaktovik residents support responsible ANWR development, as do 75% of all Alaskans and the Alaska Federation of Natives, an organization that represents all Alaska Natives.
To allege the Coastal Plain, or ANWR as a whole, is untouched by man is incorrect. Kaktovik has a population of roughly 260 people. Personally, I know the Coastal Plain is far from untouched because my great grandfather was commissioned by the U.S. Government in 1920, to conduct a census along 400 miles of coastal tundra between my hometown of Barrow and Demarcation Point which is on the U.S./Canadian border. When pressured to join the ministry he packed up his family and moved to a riverbank on the Coastal Plain just outside of Kaktovik.
This area is not the last great wilderness on earth. ANWR, especially the Coastal Plain, was utilized by my ancestors and it is currently inhabited by only my people; the U.S. Government even established DEW line radar sites within the Coastal Plain; and, in the southern portion of ANWR where development is strictly prohibited, nor desired, America?s wealthy and elite disrupt wildlife when they charter their helicopters in to hike the mountains or float the river. An average of 100 Americans a year visits the southern portion of ANWR that will never be open to development.
The decision of my people to support development was not made in haste, nor were we pressured by the industry. Our decision is rooted in our knowledge of the environment, stewardship of the animals and history with the Prudhoe Bay development.
When you oppose drilling in ANWR, you insist on your romanticized vision at the expense of their ability to develop their lands and improve the living standard of their people.
#16
The Senate is "Stuck-on-Stupid." Term limitations immediately for God's sake! What a bunch of losers. More drilling and exploration along with more refining capacity are very badly needed. Unfortunately, it don't bubble up from the ground anymore like it did no Jeb Clampets place. Unless we want to be tied to ME oil for the next 200 years, we'd better get our drilling hats on.
#17
The argument that MY romanticized version of Alaska is screwing natives in Alaska is a bit misplaced and irrelevant to whether or not our energy and defense needs will be met by drilling ANWR. But hey I don't live there, and I ain't met the natives you speak of.
Not to be an asshole, but when did this become an economic opportunity for Natives issue? 5, even 10 seconds after the reality sets in that ANWR will provide very little energy for a very short time and its not that big a step towards securing a future free of foreign oil dependence? Seems like an attempt at a defense, a grasping towards some, any reason to support the drilling.
I mean I care about people, all people in general, but I'm not here to worry nor talk about natives' plight in rural Alaska I'm here to talk security and the argument that drilling in ANWR will take us anywhere near close to a real american energy future is fallacy.
But to address the letter you posted from said natives, It seems a bit ridiculous to claim that putting in an extensive road network and oil drilling operation is equivalent to a traditional Native footpath or even an entire network of traditional native villages. Apples and oranges even. Wouldn't you agree?
Obviously these natives are, in your mind at least traditional stewards of the land, so wouldn't they, of course, be better stewards of the land than any white man following your logic? That's why their statements are so valid right?
However, and I'm not calling them liars, but that being said, I'd write whatever I had to write if my entire society was on the verge of extinction and one of the most economically depressed peoples in the world. Caribou bedamned, hard choices, but they have a bad situation to deal with. That being said, maybe they're right, maybe it won't be so bad, I don't know. I'm just suspicious.
I do value wilderness more than short term economic gain for a select few for anyone's future reference, but I live in a warm house, heated by natural gas no doubt provided by the same people or at least industry that wants to drill in ANWR. I'm not against industry by any stretch of the imagination, I'm just askin if this is really, really necessary.
So anything I say is just my opinion, as I said previously. And I'm just some ignorant hick with the smallest bit of experience in the wilderness and an admittedly deep suspicion of anyone promising a quick fix, especially billionaire executives toolin around in their leer jets living behind their palace walls.
But, I digress... does ANWR solve our energy needs? Does it come close? Well, does it?
And its not that I dont want to do something about our energy future, obviously I do. And I made some suggestions, including developing a real energy infrastructure right here under our noses. A huge economic opportunity for Americans that can compete with foreign oil, coal to gas. Fischer Trope my friends, and its not a pipe dream or a half ass temporary fix.
Coal to fuel offers a real solution, as I so ineloquently and incompletely mentioned above. Though I understand why noone would bother to read my postings, as I ain't nor do I wish to be in the mainstream.
There, that's my limit for spreading my bullshit for the day. Good night, and God bless.
#18
We have coyotes and foxes in my little corner of the outer suburbs... fwiw. And my contribution toward the oil problem is to use an old-fashioned rotary lawnmower, and to buy a hybrid car (soon, I hope -- Mr. Wife tells me the minivan is developing transmission problems, which I believe is not a good thing). So my gas usage will soon go down by a third. I hope that helps, EP.
The Bush administration's decision to sometimes bypass the secretive U.S. court that governs terrorism wiretaps could threaten cases against terror suspects that rely on evidence uncovered during the disputed eavesdropping, some legal experts cautioned.
These experts pointed to this week's unprecedented resignation from the government's spy court by U.S. District Judge James Robertson as an indicator of the judiciary's unease over domestic wiretaps ordered without warrants under a highly classified domestic spying program authorized by President Bush.
Neither Robertson nor the White House would comment Wednesday on his abrupt resignation from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the little-known panel of 11 U.S. judges that secretively approves wiretaps and searches in the most sensitive terrorism and espionage cases. But legal experts were astonished.
"This is a very big deal. Judges get upset with government lawyers all the time, but they don't resign in protest unless they're really offended to the point of saying they're being misused," said Kenneth C. Bass, a former senior Justice Department lawyer who oversaw such wiretap requests during the Carter administration.
"This was definitely a statement of protest," agreed Scott Silliman, a former Air Force attorney and Duke University law professor. "It is unusual because it signifies that at least one member of the court believes that the president has exceeded his legal authority."
Robertson's surprise resignation added to a chorus of pointed questions in Washington over the propriety of the surveillance, which the White House said had successfully detected and prevented attacks inside the United States.
The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Arlen Specter, R-Pa., said he intends to begin oversight hearings in January to assess the stated justifications for the spying.
"When the attorney general says the force resolution gives the president the power to conduct these surveillances, I have grave doubts about that," Specter said.
Separately, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Jane Harman of California, said she was informed about the program in 2003 and believes it is "essential to U.S. national security." But Harman also complained it was inappropriate for the White House to discuss the secret program only with leaders of the intelligence committees.
Rep. Peter Hoekstra, R-Mich., the committee chairman, said he participated in at least six briefings on the spying program since August 2004. He said he is comfortable the surveillance was aimed at al-Qaeda terrorists and people associated with al-Qaeda inside the United States. Hoekstra also said lawmakers who were notified about the surveillance won't resign like Robertson.
"We all decided that we are going to stay, and we are going to keep our jobs," he said.
Under the spying program, secretly authorized by President Bush in October 2001, the National Security Agency was permitted to eavesdrop without a judge's approval on communications between suspected terrorists overseas and people inside the United States.
Officials have said they only performed such wiretaps when there was a reasonable basis to conclude that the conversation included a suspected terrorist and one party was overseas. Citing national security, officials have declined to say how many times they have done so.
A court-approved wiretap under traditional surveillance law requires a higher legal standard, demonstrating probable cause to the spy court that the target is an agent of a foreign power, such as a terrorist group. That law also says no such wiretaps can be performed except under its provisions.
Since the 2001 attacks on New York and Washington, the government has focused on preventing and disrupting attacks rather than building court cases against suspected terrorists. But experts cautioned that future legal prosecutions could be tainted if evidence was uncovered about a terror plot using a wiretap determined to be improper.
"Imagine if there is evidence critical to a criminal prosecution and the defendant challenges the evidence because it is constitutionally suspect," said Beryl Howell, former general counsel for the Senate Judiciary Committee. "It could jeopardize any criminal case."
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
12/22/2005 00:41 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Certainly true of any court ruled by a Carter, Geo41, or Clintoonian appointee - and perhaps some others who managed to hide their Tranzi cores effectively, as well.
How this issue is finally decided is Big JuJu, IMHO.
#3
But Harman also complained it was inappropriate for the White House to discuss the secret program only with leaders of the intelligence committees.
Last time I checked Nancy Pelosi wasn't on the House Intelligence Committee. She may be an airhead but isn't some powerless piss-ant.
"I was advised of President Bush's decision to provide authority to the National Security Agency to conduct unspecified activities shortly after he made it and have been provided with updates on several occasions," House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi
#4
Note that she doesn't identify who told her. Odds may be that she was illegaly informed by one of her Dhimmidonk cohorts. I think there may be more pitfalls to this that they think... assuming they do think, sometimes.
An unprecedented lawsuit stemming from the gruesome killing of four American civilians in Iraq is slowly making its way through the U.S. legal system, closely watched by companies estimated to field up to 100,000 contractors alongside the U.S. military. Lawyers and military experts say the case highlights legal gray zones, a lack of regulation and little oversight of a booming global industry believed to bring in more than $150 billion annually. Civilian military contractors now perform scores of functions once restricted to regular troops, and a trend toward "privatizing war" has been accelerating steadily.
The suit was brought by the families of four civilian contractors shot last year by Iraqi insurgents, who burned their bodies and hung the charred remains from a bridge across the Euphrates river in the city of Falluja. The four -- Stephen Helveston, Mike Teague, Jerko Zovko and Wesley Batalona -- worked for Blackwater Security Consulting LLC, one of the companies fielding armed civilians in Iraq under contract with the Pentagon. All four had military experience and signed contracts assuming all risks and waiving their right to sue.
The suit against Blackwater says the company broke explicit terms of its contract with the men by sending them to escort a food convoy in unarmored cars, without heavy machine guns, proper briefings, advance notice or pre-mission reconnaissance, in teams that were understaffed and lacked even a map. "Sending four men out on the security mission instead of the required six essentially took away the team's ability to defend itself," the suit says. "Not having one driver, one navigator and a rear-gunner with a 180 degree field of fire, the team never had a chance...the insurgents were literally able to walk up behind the vehicles and open fire upon them at close range."
Alleging wrongful death and fraud, the suit is the first of its kind in the U.S. The way it is resolved, experts say, could have major implications for the future of military contracting and result in more rules and regulations. Story continues at the link.
#2
I suspect the fellow that owned the bunker could have installed a nifty alarm system, maybe even billed to the gov'mnt. There are a number of very effective, tamper proof systems on the market. I hope folks are looking into this type of alternative.
#3
Exactly how many billions have we expended on Homeland Security, and this is what we get?
There's a lot of detonation cord, detonation caps, and C-4 missing here. And near the troubled border (no less!), at a time when some suggest there is no real threat of terrorists coming on over from Mexico. Hope Richard Miniter is right.
#1
"Now for the first time, a key Pentagon intelligence agency involved in homeland security is delving into Islam's holy texts to answer whether Islam is being radicalized by the terrorists or is already radical. Military brass want a better understanding of what's motivating the insurgents in Iraq and the terrorists around the globe, including those inside America who may be preparing to strike domestic military bases. The enemy appears indefatigable, even more active now than before 9/11."
Surely they did that the day after 911.
Good article, hope its true, it would obviously change the whole face of the conflict.
#2
"Today we are confronted with a stateless threat that does not have at the strategic level targetable entities: no capitals, no economic base, no military formations or installations," states a new Pentagon briefing paper I've obtained. "Yet political Islam wages an ideological battle against the non-Islamic world at the tactical, operational and strategic level. The West's response is focused at the tactical and operation level, leaving the strategic level -- Islam -- unaddressed."
This was posted here on RB on 12/15 - from the original FrontPageMag article, thanks to SPo'D / MSN-b, but only Zenster seems to have read it and grasped its significance at the time. AttaBoy, Zen, lol!
I wanted to post it but couldn't get to RB at the time, so I begged for help - and SPo'd helped a poor schmuck out - Thx, SPo'D!
And Thank You B-Man (!!!) for giving it more light!
It's huge. It's bigger than big. It's officials finally sticking their noses under the blind-leading-the-PC-blindered PC tent-flap and seeing the fucking Truthâ¢. Check out the FPMag article, too.
Pray that it spreads. I am still worried that institutionalized PCism is going to get (many) more of us killed, but this offers a ray of hope.
#4
Today we are confronted with a stateless threat that does not have at the strategic level targetable entities: no capitals, no economic base, no military formations or installations
Pfft. Islamofascism is no more "stateless" than Marxism-Leninism was in the 20th century. Sure, as an ideology it's not *entirely* dependent on states -- but then again neither was communism. I'd like to find the time one day to examine the possible parallels between Che Guevara and Osama Bin Laden.
The main difference is that since communism promised a paradise-on-earth, its failure to deliver was in a couple decades obvious for everyone to see. Islamofascism promises an afterlife paradise which is unfortunately harder to disprove.
There are these Mad Mullahs camped out on the Eastern side of "The Gulf" and there's this little 40km-wide strip of land running along the Western side that...
Posted by: Leon Clavin ||
12/22/2005 7:18 Comments ||
Top||
#7
I saw the article on the 15th but frankly I think it is being oversold.
Just because one or two offices in DOD have a clue doesn't mean the DOD does as a whole. There are still legends of Islamic apologists out there lavishly praising Moslems when they emit minor concessions to humanistic thoughts.
As far as Aris's point, many Communists still believe in Marxism for a number of reason (e.g., they think Stalin screwed up, they think it was abolished before the classless society could arise, etc.).
#8
Aris - I'm hearing your point about the lure of Big Mo's Brothel, rather than revolution in the here and now. The trick is to educate the mmm's, who in actuality are only a little bit worse than the PC liberals in that they almost believe that the ROP is an ROP. A summary run down on the facts of the book and its profit usually works on those not suffering with excessive cognitive dissonance.
.com - dont worry, I've been making sure people know about the importance of this here in the UK. Anyone who knows the Burg will testify, atheists and christians can work together on this;
SPIRITUAL WARFARE!!!
Buffy eat yer heart out
#10
Aris, glad to see you are using your faculties, as god intended ;-)
As for the article...
It's a start, but to get the message through wide and far may take quite a few years. A tiny speck of light piercing through a breach in the PC wall.
I was hoping to find out how it would come to pass that muslims would start leaving Islam in droves, beyond generalities and promises, but I don't see any supporting analysis presented. I think it may be a lot slower than Sina's wishfull thinking. Although a great majority of muslims are rather nominal, it would seem to me that in order to get them out of the prison of the religion, some form of replacement has to take place. If that would be the case, it better be good (as in well done, thorough substitute that would fill the void). It is not possible to make almost a billion people secularists overnight.
#11
Hey Aris, be careful with talk like that. You don't want .com's relatives to hit you with a wrongful death suit. 8^)
I agree with you completely. The one thing that is terribly hard for the West to fight in these ideological wars is that the underlying ideology of the West is based on individual freedom and responsibility. In other words life is what you make it, paradise or hell. Islam, Communism, et. al. promise a shining path devoid of any need for personal effort. Just follow the bouncing ball (or latest dictator) to the promised land.
Hard to fight that with the old "keep your nose to the grindstone and you'll eventually make it" schtick.
#12
Pfft. Islamofascism is no more "stateless" than Marxism-Leninism
Have to agree with Aris on that one. While I'm ranting, an unrelated comment. Rantburg's bigjim-ky posted a tasteless rant yesterday, his right I'd say. One of the Moderators quickly pulled it off. I commented on the deletion and was lectured soundly, no problem, I'll still have arss wen they have no teeth. My thanks all for the primer on the Rantburg hierarchy, moderators, minders, medlers, whingeing(ers) whatever that was, et al. As a Burg novice I was totally clueless to the pecking order. I thought the fellows comment was, like a few others I've seen here, tactless and indeed distasteful. I suspect a few would judge some of my commentary as such as well. I would only ask (just asking, please no one give birth to a bloody Holstein) that if we're indeed supportive of free speech, and I'm sure most are, then lets practice what we preach. To do otherwise is a bit, well hypocritical. If this retort means the firing squad for me, then "shoot straight you bastards!"
#14
Besoeker, has to be seen, but I think you've committed a thread hijacking. ;-P
I have no idea about pecking order here and I care diddly squat. That said, I am aware that mods are only human. Been there, done that, it's not an easy job. Slack necessary.
if we're indeed supportive of free speech, and I'm sure most are, then lets practice what we preach.
There are tradeoffs. To keep the noise protion of the info/noice equation low, sometimes it may be necessary to commit a little intervention. Since it is rather infrequent, I'd reckon RB is doing rather well in that regard. Of course, this is my, entirely biased, opinion.
#17
2x4 - Lol. So, um, how're ya gonna top - or even equal - 72 nubile virginians to a bunch of incredibly sex-starved misogynists?
Wooo. Tough one, methinks. When you think about it, this is prolly Reason #1 why Little Mo was so successful peddling (There sure is lots of ped-stuff in Islam, isn't there?) this TFBS* ideology. That his Shari'a legacy made it even worse, amplifying the very worst aspects of the condition you might say, is gonna make it a tall order. Imagine how they'll feel if all the things denied them suddenly became okie-dokie... If you were a 35 yr old Muzzy virginian yourownself, exceptin' the occasional Starbucks encounter taken to the mall parking lot or some "shepherd time", heh, and suddenly it was allowed to smile at that pretty veil, er, woman, and talk to her and find out if you both liked long walks on the beach 'n everything, and she was amenable, and "I was a Flower of the mountain yes when I put the rose in my hair like the Andalusian girls used or shall I wear a red yes and how he kissed me under the Moorish wall and I thought well as well him as another and then I asked him with my eyes to ask again yes and then he asked me would I yes to say yes my mountain flower and first I put my arms around him yes and drew him down to me so he could feel my breasts all perfume yes and his heart was going like mad and yes I said yes I will Yes." and, well, how would you feel?
#18
.com, shhhh, itsa secret. Three words, deux ex machina. Can't say no more.
(...The prototype is still rather bulky, but attempts are being made to reduce it to a simple head set. The vergins? Yea, just like the real thing. and some translucency is added by the modeling software...)
#21
Just because one or two offices in DOD have a clue doesn't mean the DOD does as a whole.
Be VERY careful what you ask for. One of the key pillars of our professional military is a carefully developed and enforced a-political culture. Yes, most military have political and religious beliefs -- ones they hold strongly, perhaps more strongly than most civilians.
But as an organization, the military is deliberately insulated from political stances -- and for good reason.
If you're not sure why that's so, go back to 1802 and the founding of West Point as a *national* academy for a *national* army that transcended state religions (some of which were still Established then) and state identities.
Yes, the issue of Islam as an ideology is an important one. But the officers I know are very wary of being pulled into taking political and religious stances *officially* - they fear the destructive effects on the Army and other services and are right IMO to do so.
It's a tough balancing act, because they also must identify and respond to the real threat. Which is what they are trying to do. Don't kid yourself -- as *individuals* there's a lot of recognition of the problem. But it takes it up a whole nuther level to do this officially.
#22
"I'd like to find the time one day to examine the possible parallels between Che Guevara and Osama Bin Laden."
Hopefully, Aris, the thing they have most in common is that they are both dead.
#23
One of the main stumbling points to educating the military/ intelligence /law enforcement communities about Islam is that they always invite Wahhabi-approved Islamist apologists to "educate" them.
#24
It must be agree_with_Aris_day, becuase I was going to make the same point to start this thread (although with a somewhat different underlying rationale) and he is dead right.
The main problem with Islam is that it is a state religion, because it claims an absolute monopoly of religous belief and there is no role for individual consience.
And as far as 'nominal muslims' are concerned, in my experience of a few, and I am fairly sure they were representative. You are either a practicsing believer or an apostate/unbeliever. There aint no middle ground.
The writers of the article are guilty of applying western concepts of religion to islam and they simply don't apply. The comparison with communisms is apt.
#25
First, no I'm not looking for a fight - just expressing my opinion, but I think the PCism which the Pentagon has displayed up until now is the non-reality-based political stance, not the fact that they are finally getting it right and, I presume at some point, adjusting accordingly.
#27
These so-called stateless enemies are not really stateless. States support them, states enable them, states give them safe harbor. States, meaning governments, authorities, dictators, whatever. These enemies produce nothing, so they depend upon the resources of others, and they need lots of resources in the form of money.
And that is where Saudi Arabia and Iran come in. They have the oil. We have the money. We get the oil, and they get the money. They money goes to our enemies. Follow the money. Everything else is dealing with the symptoms.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
12/22/2005 11:23 Comments ||
Top||
#28
Alaska Paul:
Didnt you know, according to Bush supporters, that OIL has nothing to do with the War On Terror?
#29
Okay, Dirk, I have a compromise so we can all get along here... we'll just admit that it's all about OIL and take the OIL without paying for it. There's plenty of historical precedent. Would that make you happy? Now just go out and warm up your SUV for about 20 minutes before you leave for lunch.
#30
Seriously, Dirk, did you hear Osama say that 9/11 was all about OIL? No. Did Saddam rattle sabres, impede U.N. inspectors, and violate no-fly zones all for OIL? No. Did the London Tube bombers care about OIL? No. If I were you -- and people wanted to kill me and eliminate my culture and civilization -- I'd be mighty careful about determining their motives. That's what this thread is about, not Bush bashing.
#34
Thank you, .com! Let me tell you a true story...
I have three teenagers. Two have IQs around 140 and one has an IQ around 80. For years I tried "enrichment" to close the "smarts" gap a bit, but every time I turned around my "80" would go back to killing time and exhibiting minimal curiosity about anything. So now I have just accepted that some people are content to be ignorant and there's not much you can do to change them. You just need to love them and find them a place they can be productive in their own way.
I just forgot to apply that to Dirk. Maybe we can find him some landscaping work after the fence is finished.
#36
I'm not going to discuss at length my recent visit to the vatican in my response to this article, nor will I go into depth my analysis of Judaism as a form of governance.
However I will say that most religion has largely existed as a state function and vise versa since the beginnings of organized human interactions.
Whatever else I may say is my opinion, but I believe that any assumption that the US will go to war with Islam is folly.
#37
I really want to agree with you, lotp, and for years I did. But I altered one word and tried out your statement again:
"Yes, the issue of Nazism as an ideology is an important one. But the officers I know are very wary of being pulled into taking political and religious stances *officially* - they fear the destructive effects on the Army and other services and are right IMO to do so."
The difference today is that Islam has the imprimatur of being a religion. Whether it deserves that status is a debate that sorely needs to occur. How can we expect to win if we don't even have the balls to judge the enemy?
Posted by: ST ||
12/22/2005 13:42 Comments ||
Top||
#38
EP - You may be right, the US may not be able to go to war with Islam but it certainly can't win a war with "terror". We are no good at winning wars that don't have a definable enemy. Take the longest and most expensive war ever - Johnson's "war on poverty". $9 trillion and counting. Or the "war on drugs". The war on "terror" is not winnable. "Terror" is a feeling and can only be managed. We need to drop the PC crap already and define the enemy. The war against "radical islamists" makes more sense. These are people and we can find them and deal with them. The war against "radical islamists and states that support them" is even better.
.com - thanks for the link to the frontpagemag article. It's a good read. If newspapers did their jobs articles and discussions like this would go on everywhere.
Maybe we are finally breaking through. And, I imagine (ref: mhw #7) that many are right here about individuals in the services of our country TRULY recognize our enemy, they just can't officially state it. .com and many others here have actually been to the ME and (I haven't personally, but hope to 1 day when they open Walt Disney World in Qom, Iran) it truly does sound like it's a lock, stock and barrel type of "religion." When you go to war over there twice (in 1 country) and protect Muslims in another country within the last decade, I imagine that a lot of our troops bring home the truth of what they saw "over there", and it doesn't sound pretty.
Posted by: BA ||
12/22/2005 14:29 Comments ||
Top||
#40
Sorry, goofed up that 2nd sentence. Should be
"And, I imagine (ref: mhw #7) that many individuals who serve our country TRULY...." Best summary of this is Daniel Pipes in my mind.
"Terror" = Tactic
"Radical Islamists" = Enemy (and like IP states, I'd add the countries that support them).
Posted by: BA ||
12/22/2005 14:32 Comments ||
Top||
#42
This was posted here on RB on 12/15 - from the original FrontPageMag article, thanks to SPo'D / MSN-b, but only Zenster seems to have read it and grasped its significance at the time. AttaBoy, Zen, lol!
Thank you, .com. We all need to remember that even dwarves started out small. If this is the long awaited sea change in American military thinking, it could not happen a minute sooner. That it is four years overdue simply boggles the mind.
If history has one single lesson to teach, it is that silence is consent. Somehow, as with many other basic laws of reality, Islam deems itself immune to this ancient axiom. The thundering silence of Islam with respect to denouncing and actively fighting radicalism within its ranks condemns it outright.
If Muslims refuse to criticize radical Muslims solely out of a misplaced sense of solidarity, then that solidarity must be interpreted as the formation of a monolithic stance. WE SIMPLY HAVE NO CHOICE. There is no time to carefully winnow out the bad seeds from amongst the vast ranks of this political ideology masquerading as a religion. Our own reluctance to do so is being used against us in a most cruel and calculating fashion.
We must return the favor in kind and put all Islam on notice that housecleaning is its own obligation and any failure to immediately do so will cause their entire faith to be adjudged as hostile. For Muslims to assume that we infidels will solve their problems for them and do so in an exceptionally diligent or sensitive fashion is sheer lunacy. We owe Islam no such favor and, to date, the repayment received for our leniancy has been nothing but senseless loss of human life.
Islam must be put on notice that any further acquiescence to their radical brethern's visions of genocide will result in a holocaust for their own believers. That Islamists seek a double holocaust, one for the Jews and another Global Cultural Holocaust for all infidels should be enough to make clear how important it is that Muslims be made aware that their entire religion's continued existence hinges upon their authentic and genuine renouncement of violent conversion and jihad. Nothing less is satisfactory, especially in light of how Islam sanctions the most vile forms of lying in the name of saving itself.
#43
I think the need to examine Islam from a strategic level is a good move. #39 nailed it: know thine enemy.
Black Jack Pershing got into their heads and figured out what would freak out the Islamists of his day. The religion changed via fatwa in order to ensure military supremacy, which implies Islam is being used as a tool rather than as a reason. However, the average worshipper does not regard themselves as a nut or bolt to be adjusted by his tool/religion, so there may be hope a strategic analysis that determines that the Imams are the on/off switch.
Determining the right switch is, however, only half the battle: We have a military supervised by PC afflicted civilians who may ignore the switch or forbid that it be effectively flipped off.
#44
I have advocated calling things by their correct names for a long time. Religion of Peace? Pfeh. The Koran calls for violent jihad. The Islamofacists have a valid interpretation of their book. There are other interpretations also, but I believe that the Islamists represent the Islamic Reformation.
When I saw this article on 12/15 on Frontpage, I hoped that it indicated that part of our leadership is beginning to see that we are in a war of civilizations - whether we like it or not. The PCism that "protects" our military from political stances will only hold up for so long. Most commenters here know know the history of the War in the Pacific - probably better than I. Each time the Japanese comitted a new atrocity, our men escalated also. Was it understandable? Yes. Was it good? No. Was it right? I don't know.
Zenster and .com state it very well. The Muslim world will have to sort itself out. The protests against Zarqawi in Jordan should not give Muslims a break. They might deserve a break when they begin to protest against and turn in their extremists when they blow up non-Muslims. I pray that this will happen, because if it doesn't, we will find ourselves in the position of Crusaders at Albi in southern France: "Kill them all, let God sort them out."
#47
Just a reminder: what Fred gives us here at Rantburg is not Freedom to Say Anything We Want. Rather, it is freedom to comment and post articles within the constraints permitted by Fred and his designated moderators (not a job I'd take even if I had to pay taxes on the the salary -- they spend half their time just taking out the spammers!). Other than that I am not aware of any hierarchy, just those who have established their bone fides over time, and those who haven't yet. And, of course, trolls of varying ability. ;-) Hope that helps, Besoeker, et al.
Western relief agencies including those run by the United Nations and the United States government are complaining of perceptible harassment by âJihadi elementsâ working in the quake hit-areas where some 20,000 workers belonging to religious NGOs are carrying out relief activities. The relief agencies also fear that if this tension should explode into actual violence against them, they might have to pack up and quit. A statement to this effect was made by the Hansjoerg Strohmeyer, Chief of the Office of the Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, UN, at an Asia Society function in New York recently. The UN official expressed concerns over the safety of Western relief workers at the hands of workers from religious organizations in the quake-hit areas, summing up the mood of the Western-relief agencies.
Western apprehensions were recently highlighted by the US ambassador to Pakistan, Ryan C. Crocker, when he called upon the government to monitor and if necessary stop some jihadi organizations from continuing with their relief work. This was another manifestation of the disquiet in Western circles. However, sources in the law enforcement agencies say that the army, the biggest relief agency working in the area, has made it absolutely clear to all the religious NGOs that any political attempt to muddy the waters in Azad Kashmir, let alone provoke violence, by the religious groups would lead to a swift reprisals from the state. âAny violence in the relief-areas would be cataclysmic for Pakistan in so many ways and will not be toleratedâ, a senior army officer told Daily Times. âRest assured that none will be allowed to harass any Western relief agencyâ, he added.
The religious NGOs working in the area also deny that any friction exists between them and Western relief agencies. Sources in Jamaatul Dawa, the leading Islamic organization working in the area, said that relations between with Western agencies are âvery cordial.â However, sources in the religious groups admit the presence of workers from several banned organizations like Hizbul Mujahideen and others in the area. âThere are many workers from Hizbul Mujahideen and Al Badr working in the area from the platform of other religious relief organizations but as far as Jamaatul Dawa is concerned, we do not have a single worker from banned groups working with us,â said a leader of the Jamaatul Dawa.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/22/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
UNITED NATIONS (AP) -- In a secret and secure location, a set of computers holds the hundreds of thousands of files that document how companies and individuals from some 40 countries exploited the U.N. oil-for-food program in league with Saddam Hussein. Yet nearly two months after the $35 million U.N.-backed probe that collected all those documents exposed just how troubled the program was, there has been no rush by the authorities in question to study it.
Prosecutors and investigators from just 11 countries have requested documents for prosecuting bodies since the probe's final report was released Oct. 27, said Reid Morden, executive director of the inquiry led by former U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker. Last week the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, a Paris-based group of 30 free-market democracies, urged governments to do more to investigate evidence of kickbacks and corruption. Morden said he was not concerned at the pace so far. "It's not surprising that things are drifting in as opposed to an avalanche at day one."
Some experts suspect there are governments that don't want to investigate their own complicity, or that treat bribery as the price of doing business abroad, or simply have judicial machinery that grinds slowly. Morden would not say which prosecutors have sought information, but an official close to the investigation said they were Australia, Britain, France, Germany, India, Italy, Jordan, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, and the United States. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the names of the countries have not been released.
Some of the most active prosecutors are in the United States, where 15 people have been charged; France, where judges are investigating 10 officials and business leaders; and Switzerland, where a criminal probe is focusing on at least four people. Yet in others, like Russia, home to many of the companies that participated in the oil-for-food abuses, there appears to have been little movement.
"I don't think it's surprising that some of these governments may be less than assiduous in following up," said James Dobbins, a former U.S. assistant secretary of state now with the Rand Corp. "It probably depends in part on the exact facts of any given case, but I don't think in most cases they're going to prosecute it with a crusading zeal."
The oil-for-food program, established in 1996 with Iraq's economy crippled by sanctions, allowed Saddam to sell oil in exchange for humanitarian goods meant for his people. But Volcker's inquiry showed that Saddam sold oil to foreign countries in hopes of getting their support for lifting sanctions, and enriched himself by $1.8 billion through a kickback scheme. Companies and politicians essentially paid him for the right to do business, circumventing the U.N. program.
Even the head of the program, Benon Sevan, was accused of accepting some $147,000 in kickbacks, a charge he denies. Sevan is being investigated by the Manhattan District Attorney's office but has returned to his native Cyprus, which has no extradition treaty with the United States. In November, the Volcker committee's mandate was extended to Dec. 31 in order to preserve investigators' access to the documents, and Morden said the team would ensure that they can get them well beyond that date.
Fearing the report may be ignored, some U.S. lawmakers have shared information with foreign authorities and pressed them to take action.
Norm Coleman, the Minnesota Republican who chairs a permanent Senate subcommittee on investigations and has been a leading critic of both the U.N. and oil-for-food, has met with several ambassadors of countries whose companies or government personnel were said to be involved.
But worldwide anti-corruption surveys show that paying bribes and kickbacks are generally seen as a necessary part of dealmaking with foreign countries. Iraq was clearly one of them, said Charles Duelfer, a former U.S. weapons inspector whose own report on Iraq's weapons capabilities, released last year, also detailed much of the wrongdoing in oil-for-food. "Certainly Iraq, even before oil-for-food and sanctions, conducted business by buying influence," Duelfer said.
But anti-corruption advocates say that should be no excuse for the many reputable U.S. and European companies named in Volcker's report. "It was absolutely everyone," said Juanita Olaya of Transparency International, a Berlin-based anti-corruption watchdog. "It's easy to fall into the commonplace of saying the Iraqi regime was terrible, but the whole cauldron of things there was terrible. There was of course a lot of secrecy, but how come 2,200 companies had to bear this and you never heard someone blowing the whistle out loud?"
Since Volcker's report appeared, Volvo has acknowledged paying the regime, with chief executive Leif Johansson telling the Swedish news agency TT, "This was the way to do business in Iraq." Siemens of Germany has denied wrongdoing, while German authorities are investigating a former employee of DaimlerChrysler AG over the sale of a vehicle to Iraq mentioned in the inquiry.
Two leading politicians have faced public scrutiny for their involvement. India's former foreign minister, Natwar Singh, was demoted after the allegations arose, and then resigned on Tuesday, still denying wrongdoing. France is investigating Jean-Bernard Merimee, its former U.N. ambassador. "In the United States I have confidence that they will investigate and prosecute wherever it's appropriate, I just hope other member governments do the same," U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said.
Megawati Sukarnoputri, former president of Indonesia and ultranationalist Russian politician Vladimir Zhirinovsky were among politicians named in the report. Both have denied wrongdoing and no investigation has been announced.
The government of Jordan, whose companies were prominent among alleged violators, said more than a month ago that it has begun an inquiry. But the most prominent Jordanian mentioned in the report, Fawaz Zureikat, said he hasn't been contacted yet. Zureikat, a Jordanian businessman, was accused of funneling money from the oil-for-food program to the wife of British parliamentarian George Galloway and a political organization that Galloway established in 1998 to help a 4-year-old Iraqi girl with leukemia. Galloway insists he's the innocent victim of a "witch hunt."
Zureikat, who has denied any wrongdoing, offers a widely held claim that the oil-for-food investigation is a largely U.S.-led campaign to discredit the United Nations. "The United States wants the U.N. to be disqualified as a responsible organization in international affairs," he said.
I think that's worked out very well, don't you?
Posted by: Steve ||
12/22/2005 16:47 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The UN. Wotta sick joke. Expensive, feckless, irrelevant, corrupt, hateful, irreparable, base, sordid - as classic an example of human vulgarity as can be imagined. The end-phase of the evolution of human greed, avarice, failure.
#2
Let's not forget that Kofi has already handed out golden parachutes to some of those under scrutiny. Their abrupt retirement may well shelter them from further investigation.
#5
The "Oil For Food" program was administered in IRAQ from the UN HQ at the old Canal Hotel in Baghdad (no longer taking reservations by the way). They, the Oil for Food wogs, were an elitist bunch of secretive snobs back in the early 1990's. They'd have nothing at all to do with any of the other UN programs or people coming in or out of the Canal. Everyone always suspected there was a scunk in the woodpile with that bunch. When the program was finally busted, a global cheer went up among former UN personnel who.... knew the deal.
December 22, 2005: There are several wars going on in Iraq, and itâs important to keep them sorted out. The main battle is between Sunni Arabs (about 20 percent of the population), and the rest of the population (60 percent Shia Arabs, 20 percent Sunni Kurds and several other religious and ethnic minorities). The big battle is between Sunni and Shia, and has been for over a thousand years. While some 88 percent of the 1.3 billion Moslems on the planet are Sunni, about 11 percent are Shia. While most other Islamic sects just represent religious differences, many Shia believe they should be running the Islamic world, and that all Moslems should be Shia. The Sunnis disagree, often violently.
What has kept the Shia cause alive all these centuries is the fact that some 90 percent of Iranians are Shia. Iran (also known as Persia, or Parthia), has been the major power in the region for over 2,000 years. The Parthians were the one group the Romans could not defeat. While Persia was overrun by the initial wave of Islamic conquest, the Iranians soon developed their own distinct form of Islam. They became Shia. So did many others in the region. Today, Bahrain and Azerbaijan are two-thirds Shia. Iraq is 60 percent Shia. There are many countries with a Shia minority. In Lebanon, the Shia are about 35 percent of the population. In Saudi Arabia, the ten percent of the population that are Shia are concentrated in the eastern part of the kingdom, where the oil is. There are many other Moslem nations with Shia minorities, including Afghanistan, Pakistan, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates and India (where about ten percent of the 145 million Moslems are Shia.)
While the Arabs take great pride in the fact that Islam originated, and spread, from Arabia, there has always been an uneasy feelings that the Iranians would one day take over. When the Arab Caliphate began falling apart a thousand years ago, Shia Iran became relatively stronger. But then a series of external events saved the Arabs from Iranian domination. The Mongols smashed the Iranians up real good. A few centuries later, as the Iranians recovered, the Turks moved in to protect the Arabs. When the Turkish empire fell apart a century ago, Europeans and Americans arrived to keep the Iranians from taking care of their "Arab problem".
After World War II, all seemed well in the Persian Gulf. The Iranians were ruled by a monarchy, which recognized Arab control of Islamâs holy places in Saudi Arabia. Then, in the late 1970s, the Iranian monarchy was overthrown. The revolt was supported by the Shia clergy, which was always more politically active, and better organized, than the Sunni clergy. The Iranians were going to establish a democracy, but then Iraq (led by Saddam Hussein) invaded Iran in 1980, hoping to grab some territory while the Iranians were disorganized from their revolution. That changed everything. The Iranians got organized, the Shia clergy took over and democracy got put on hold. Iran turned into a theocracy, run by the senior clergy. Worse yet, the clergy called for a world wide religious revolution. The world was to be converted to Islam, Shia Islam. But because 88 percent of Moslems are Sunni, the Iranian religious revolution didnât get very far. It wasnât for want of trying. The Iranian Shia sent money and guns to Shia revolutionaries all over the region. This caused some noise, and death, but never really gained much traction. The Sunnis fought back. The hard core Sunni clerics had always considered the Shia to be heretics, and this business of Shia religious revolution just made the Sunni fanatics madder.
Even before the radical Shia clergy took over in Iran, radical Sunni clergy were preaching Islamic world conquest. That slowly grew, until it became al Qaeda, and other like-minded groups, in the 1990s. But it got worse. Even before the âIslamic Republic of Iranâ appeared in the 1980s, Saudi Arabia was funding religious schools all over the Islamic world, and encouraging the persecution of Shias. But once the Iranian theocracy got established, the Saudis, and other wealthy Sunni Arabs in the Persian Gulf, were funding Sunni radicalism, and encouraging anti-Shia violence. The Shia must not be allowed to spread their heretical teachings. This battle has largely been ignored in the West, but it has been going on for decades, and thousands die each year because of it.
As bad as Saddam Hussein was, the Sunni world saw him as a their defender against Shia Iran. When Saddam fell, Sunnis, especially Sunni Arabs in the Persian Gulf, saw Iran taking over Iraq, because 60 percent of Iraqis are Sunni, and then taking over the Persian Gulf. While the West just saw Saddam as a nasty tyrant, the Sunni world saw him as someone who knew how to handle Shia scum. Again, this aspect of Saddamâs popularity in the Moslem world went largely unreported.
But the Shia angle is key. A major component of al Qaedaâs attraction is its willingness to go after Shia. This is why Iran never provided much support for al Qaeda. That Iran provided any at all merely demonstrates how eager rabid Iranian religious radicals were to strike a blow at the unbelievers (the West). But most Iranians hate al Qaeda, and Sunni radicals in general. Again, it doesnât get reported much in the West, but in Iran, and Shia areas elsewhere, the latest terrorist attack against Shia anywhere, is always big news.
Posted by: Steve ||
12/22/2005 09:16 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Heh. Yes, 'tis true. So, if we're in the blaming mood - and who isn't, especially within Islam and the MSM - we can blame Carter, er, I mean Bush, I guess.
Y'know, I've been thinking about becoming a professional splitter and starting two new branches of Islam, Shi'atsu and Sunnier, but I've been busy. And I had a cold.
#3
StrategyPage need to check their history. Iran didn't become predominantly Shiia until the 16th century under the Safavide dynasty. For almost thousand years prior, Iran was predominately Sunni.
#4
Let's pray they don't settle their differences anytime soon as a united Islam might be problematic for the western world.
.com y phil et all, here on the Burg you and others have mentioned and/or concurred in the past your opinions/analyses regarding Iraqi nationalist hatred of Iran because of the Iran/Iraq war .
I am seeking further understanding of this subject matter in my analysis of the influence of the Persian Ayatollas over SCIRI/Badr and the new Iraqi leadership.
I have mentioned this subject several times before, but would like to ask you if you could point me to some resources I can use for research into this matter, scholarly if possible.
While I understand that the attitude of the Iraqi Shiia population is something that is probably not quantifiable in scientific terms, as they were not polled until recently and probably not on this subject, I am interested in some sources for research.
#5
I don't have scholarly resources I can offer, EP, sorry.
I've read a lot of speculative stuff on this, as I'm sure you have. The only "new" thing I can toss in is that I did have 2 personal friends, Iraqis, one a Sunni and one a Shi'a, while in Saudi at Aramco. In conversations both had 3 issues they overlapped on that supports the position that Iran's influence is (was? that was circa 2003) much smaller than many might think.
Re: the Iran / Iraq war, Saddam used the Shi'a in his forces in the fodder role as much as possible, for obvious reasons, and many Shi'a families have blood debts which they ascribe to the MMs, logic playing no part in this, of course.
There is very strong antipathy between Arabs and Persians which dates back to the Dawn of Time.
Then there's nationalism, which Saddam had propagandized heavily during his full reign - he wanted to become the modern Saladin, etc.
I'll admit an aspect that does bother me about Iraqi / Iranian Shi'a - the "leaders" of SCIRI, et al, may have become "leaders" with $$$ assistance from the MMs. The MMs have meddled in everything else they can, from Tater to the IEDs, so this would not surprise me in the least.
Question is, would people follow their "party" leader where their conflicting emotions and the tribal leader / clan / family (in whatever mix) wouldn't allow them to go, otherwise? I don't know the answer. What's happening today has never happened there, to these people, before, so it's impossible to guess from the outside. I'd say the Iraqi blogs may be the best bet to determine that, prior to events, anyway.
Apologies for not being able to provide anything more definitive - I hope the points might be helpful in locating some, though. Good luck, bro.
#6
I shoulda put friends in quotes, lol. I might've been their friend, but of course they were actually only acquaintances in the reciprocation venue. ;-)
#7
Some big questions there EP. But a couple of points.
1. I wouldn't worry about Sunnis and Shiias merging into a single entity. It simply won't happen. What is happening is tactical cooperation on issues they agree on, like Israel, and against perceived common enemies.
What we are seeing is an homogenizing of Sunni Islam and perhaps Shiia islam as well through the propagation and imposition of a standard doctrine. All established and dominant religions do this (to an extent); ref the history of the catholic church. The process is being driven by gobs of oil money
2. I am frequently surprised at how nationalistic Arabs are, given most of them live in made up countries of recent origin, like Iraq. However, I treat with scepticism statements about the relative importance of ethnicity, religion and nation in the ME. All three are important.
3, I think there are important differences between Shiia and Sunni Islam related to their origins and how they rose to the dominant positions they hold today. I suspect Shiia Islam is like catholicism say in 16th century Spain. Whereas Sunni Islam is more like a social movement, perhaps comparable to European protestantism of the 16C. I don't have a good handle on this and if you discover anything, I'd ask you feed it back to us.
Otherwise, I have an interesting Darwinian analysis of religions that I really should write up. Its quite insightful.
Iran wants Saddam Hussein, whose Baghdad trial resumed yesterday, to be charged with ordering poison gas attacks that killed thousands of Iranian civilians during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war, a top Iranian official said. Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said Saddam had used chemical weapons to kill Iranians during the war, especially in Iranâs northwestern Kurdish area, flattening entire villages and destroying farms. âIran is the main victim of chemical weapons. Saddamâs use of chemicals was against international laws,â Mottaki told reporters in a hospital where he was visiting âliving martyrsâ, wounded survivors of Saddamâs chemical weapons attacks.
Usually I disagree with the Medes and the Persians almost reflexively. Sammy's use of chem weapons in the Iran War was the first large-scale use since WWI.
Several dozen veterans wounded by chemical weapons are undergoing treatment in central Tehranâs Sassan Hospital, one of two hospitals in the capital specializing in such wounds. Mottaki said Iran had prepared a petition which the Foreign Ministry would pass on to the court in Baghdad. âThe court has yet to review Saddamâs crimes abroad. We want his crimes against Iranians to be investigated,â he said.
They're currently concentrating on his crimes against his own people, which makes the Iranian claims irrelevant to this case. That doesn't bar a second, separate case, assuming his neck's not stretched first.
The petition included documents that proved Iraqâs use of nerve and mustard gas during the eight-year war, Mottaki said. âDuring the war, Saddam used chemicals against Iran 20 times,â Mottaki said, adding that some 40,000 people had been affected. Iran has repeatedly accused the West of supplying Saddam with the technology and some of the materials to develop chemical weapons. âWestern countries and companies that supplied Saddam with chemicals share the responsibility for this crime,â Mottaki said. âSaddam acquired chemicals from more than 400 Western companies, including 25 American, 15 German and 10 British companies.â
Posted by: Fred ||
12/22/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Let them have it in exchange for de-nuking Iran.
#2
âWestern countries and companies that supplied Saddam with chemicals share the responsibility for this crime,â
"It's not the trigger puller's fault, it's the gunmakers fault"
Yeah, sure.
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
12/22/2005 8:46 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Saddam had and used chemical weapons? Aren't those like WMDs? Gosh, you would think the media would be all over something like this. Not to mention the mass graves, torture and other Saddamic excesses. One could almost be forgiven for thinking that he was an evil mother*bleep*er and needed to be removed.
As for the Iranians, if Saddam was so bad, why didn't you snatch him yourselves? Oh, wait! You tried for 10 years to do something the weak and cowardly Americans and their allies did in 3 weeks. I'm sure there must be a lesson there somewhere.
OK, I'm stopping now before I strain my sneer muscles.
ROFL - I'm gonna have to go check my Anat & Phys textbooks... don't recall that group offhand, heh. Can you help me out Steve and identify them? Here's a handy page on the Superior Maxillary Region - at least I presume you're referring to a coordinated contraction of a facial group - am I mistaken?
#6
Why don't we have a live, pay-per-view, no-holds-barred death match between Sammy and Mr. Mottaki, then? All proceeds to go to the Iranians actually harmed by Saddam's WMDs. And, we make them wrestle in their tighty-whities.
Posted by: BA ||
12/22/2005 9:56 Comments ||
Top||
#7
They wrestle to the death then we shoot the winner. Sounds good to me.
Didn't the Japanese use gas weapons against the Chinese in (and before) WWII? And, the Germans used gas a lot, just not on the battlefield. (My uncle was a prisoner at Auschwitz.)
Posted by: Eric Jablow ||
12/22/2005 12:59 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Sneer muscle
When you pull up your upper lip--when you show that one top tooth, the one the museum guard broke--this is your levatorlabii superioris muscle at work. Your sneer muscle. Let's pretend you smell some old stale urine.
Jordanâs King Abdullah appointed on Tuesday a new head of the countryâs powerful spy agency in a move to boost its capability to counter the growing threat of Al Qaeda leader in Iraq Abu Musab Al Zarqawi, officials said.
Mohammad Zahabi, a Western trained career intelligence officer from a younger generation of mid-level operatives, replaced Samih Asfoura as chief of the General Intelligence Department (GID), known widely as the Mukhabarat.
âThis move has more to do with putting at the helm the most qualified and competent men to handle the greater challenges posed by Al Qaeda and Zarqawi,â a security source told Reuters. The move, widely expected for several months, was given extra impetus by last monthâs simultaneous suicide bombings, which killed 60 people and dented Jordanâs image as a haven from regional instability.
âThe threat by Al Qaeda against Jordan has never been as grave and deadly as in these times. Zahabiâs ability to raise the morale of the GID will be critical in the battle against the terrorists,â said another security source.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
12/22/2005 00:34 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
intelligence officer from a younger generation of mid-level operatives,
Mahmoud Abbasâ aides talked yesterday about the possibility of postponing Jan. 25 Parliament elections, citing Israelâs decision to ban voting in Jerusalem. Postponing or even canceling the Jan. 25 Palestinian parliamentary election could serve the interests of Abbas and the Israelis, but both sides dismissed speculation that they were in this together.
Hamas, entering a parliamentary race for the first time, expects to capitalize on internal bickering that has split Abbasâ Fatah party. Israel is alarmed at the possibility that Hamas could do well in the voting or even win. Both would welcome a way to reduce the influence of the movement, blamed for bombings.
Israeli officials said that unlike past elections, the 200,000 Palestinians who live in East Jerusalem would not be allowed to vote â part of Israelâs objection to Hamas taking part in the election. The movementâs participation in the elections was one of the reasons cited by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharonâs office for not allowing Palestinians living in occupied East Jerusalem to participate in Januaryâs election. âIn the past, we have allowed Palestinians to vote in post offices but not this time,â an official told AFP on condition of anonymity.
Abbas said the Palestinian leadership would carefully consider its next step, saying it had yet to be officially informed of Israelâs decision. âThe Palestinian leadership will study this issue before making a response, for the responsibility is enormous,â he said.
Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhhri said the Palestinian Authority should âmultiply its contacts with the parties concerned to facilitate the holding of elections as was the case in the presidential election.â The main Palestinian factions signed a truce back in March during talks hosted by Cairo. While the truce has largely held, there has been a recent spike in the firing of Qassams, rockets named after Hamasâ armed wing.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/22/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
New investigations into the financing of extremist causes and terrorism have disclosed closer links to both local and cross-border crime than experts previously had believed.
A source familiar with the results of recent investigations into terrorism financing in Southeast Asia, said: ''Radical leaders and groups may be turning more and more to crime in some sort of desperate attempt to get funding. But the more likely explanation is that crime and extreme terrorism always was a natural partnership'' which has expanded in recent years. The latest round of investigations began last month, when the National Intelligence Agency sent a special task force to look into how extremists were supporting the insurgency against local agencies and the national government.
The results so far have been mixed. Experts from four agencies have pooled their reports, and agree there is no hard evidence of involvement by the most notorious international terrorist groups such as al-Qaeda or Jemaah Islamiyah.
''The various teams have been pretty well unanimous in a month of investigations,'' said the source. ''The funding for southern violence is local. The bad news is that it includes some Malaysian money as well as funds from the South, and from gangs in Bangkok.''
The Thai investigators were from the Revenue Department, the Anti-Money Laundering Office and the Office of the Narcotics Control Board, coordinated by criminal investigators from the police. They reported strong evidence of direct links between criminal gangs, self-styled Islamists and separatists.
Most of the money for arms, bombs, training, transportation and other demands of the violent groups comes from two sources, the investigators have concluded _ drug trafficking and strong-arm extortion, usually from small companies made to pay criminals as ''insurance'' against violence or arson against the company or its employees.
''A certain number of the killings and attacks in the South are punishment against people or companies who refuse to pay up,'' the source explained. He described it as a circular chain of dependency, where criminal gangs give money to anti-government groups to commit violence, which allows the criminal gangs to intimidate more people or companies. But Islamist groups and leaders are directly involved in southern drug trafficking, the investigators concluded _ often with corrupt police or soldiers who are supposedly fighting the insurgents.
Similar criminal-terrorism links have been found in almost every serious investigation into how extremists support themselves and get access to funds for major terrorist attacks.
The JI operations chief Riduan Isamuddin, better known as Hambali, reportedly was carrying $70,000 in cash when he was arrested in Ayutthaya more than two years ago. Experts have back-tracked the cash to a network of funding _ from the facilities of the al-Qaeda main group, from the JI wing in Australia, from criminal rings in Indonesia and the Philippines, and elsewhere.
Zachary Abuza, a professor at Simmons College in Boston and a recognised expert on militant Islam in Southeast Asia, wrote two years ago that al-Qaeda considered the Asean region as their ''back office, [because of] loosely regulated financial sectors and pervasive money laundering and smuggling networks.''
In fact, more than 13 years ago Osama bin Laden personally dispatched his brother-in-law Mohammad Jamal Khalifa to set up the militant Abu Sayyaf in the Philippines, using money skimmed from Islamic charities and at least one supposedly legitimate exporting firm _ a terrorist white-collar criminal.
Ten years on, said Mr Abuza, al-Qaeda's subsidiary for Southeast Asia, Jemaah Islamiyah, steals money from Islamic charities, skims legitimate donations to mosques and conducts bank and store robberies to help build terrorist accounts.
Exactly a year ago, details surfaced showing Malaysians in Kelantan state sympathetic to Thai separatists, had embezzled 1.2 million ringgit (12.6 million baht) from the Malaysian Muslim Welfare Organisation, and channelled at least some of it to militants in Thailand, identified in the Malaysian media as Pulo.
Investigating terrorist funding, already a difficult task, is particularly hard in South and Southeast Asia because the criminals and terrorists are so close, investigators believe.
But beyond local alliances with gangsters as in the Thai South, international and foreign investigations have found consistent links between terrorism and crime that are growing.
In Indonesia, the Central Java police chief, Inspector-General Chaerul Rasyid, said recently that Islamic clerics have told the government extremists are specifically recruiting Muslim petty criminals into the pro-terrorist groups. While early terrorist attacks in Bali and Jakarta involved known Islamist champions as planners and suicide bombers, recruiting tactics by extremist groups have changed.
Pol Gen Rasyid said terrorists have recently recruited 35 new suicide bombers _ but were concentrating on boosting the ranks of their gangs with ''criminals and drug addicts to help them carry out their attacks''.
In Paris last month, authorities said they were stunned to discover that when hundreds of officers conducted a multi-city sweep that broke up an Islamic terrorist network in two places near Paris, and reportedly stopped terrorist attacks before they occurred, more than half of the 20 men arrested were common criminals known to have been involved in armed robberies and similar violent crime.
Investigations continue. Ouassini Cherifi, a French-Algerian convicted in 2002 of trafficking in fake passports, is reportedly assisting French authorities.
Counterfeit passports, of course, are a major and necessary part of the 21st century's terrorist travel packet. This is a common meeting place for terrorists and criminals, and Thailand has been accused of being the world centre for passport forgery and trafficking.
Cherifi had known connections to Thailand-based forgery rings, and had just served a five-year prison sentence for selling fake passports made in Thailand and used by militants to travel to Afghanistan and Pakistan for terrorist training.
Last Oct 14, the criminal court jailed Algerian Atamnia Yacine, 33, for forging and trying to sell 180 passports. Anti-terrorist experts say his customers included the British terrorists who attacked the London subway on July 7, although no charges have been officially laid against him for that. Yacine had fake Spanish passports when he was arrested.
Last January, police arrested Mahieddine Daikh of Bangladesh, said to be a top passport trafficker, and the source of the fake Spanish passport used by Hambali as he evaded authorities in Singapore, Indonesia, Malaysia, Burma, Cambodia and Thailand.
''Terrorists have a harder and harder time getting the money they need to train, travel and attack,'' said the source. ''They will continue getting closer and closer to criminals and organised crime, which can provide them with cash. In return, the terrorists will have to provide muscle and protection for the criminals. It is a circle the terrorists can't break now, even though it is fantastically anti-Muslim to commit crimes or consort with criminals.''
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
12/22/2005 00:39 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I thought that this was Standard Operating Procedure for most AQ terror cells, with the 9/11 group being an exception.
yeah, whatever. These bastards will take money wherever they can get it. If they could generate $$$ for terror by forming a Bin Laden Full monty brigade they would.
These assholes just don't want to get real jobs, they want to be heroes and live the fun life of an international terrorists where wifey aint bitchin and moanin about the stale bread and whiney ass kids. Although I'd probably take the wifey over the fun they get when the piper comes to call. Oh, but that's right 70 virgins, uh huh.
from the December 21, 2005 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1221/p01s04-wome.html
Waiting for the rapture in Iran
By Scott Peterson | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
Very, very, very disturbing. Let's hope the state department has some cards to play in their quest for revolt in Iran.
JAMKARAN, IRAN - For those who believe, the devotion is real. Tears stream down the cheeks of 2,000 men ripe for the return of the Mahdi, the 12th Imam they expect will soon emerge to bring justice and peace to a corrupt world.
Eyes stare upward and arms open wide to receive God's promised salvation. The storyteller's lyrical song speaks of tragedy on the path to salvation, prompting cries of anguish and joy.
As at a Christian revivalist meeting that promises healing and redemption, many weep as they pray for the Shiite Muslim version of the second coming of the Messiah. "Sometimes I feel they don't need me," says Mahdi Salashur, the religious storyteller, after leading congregants on an emotional late-night journey. "They are wired to God in their hearts."
Among the true believers is Iran's hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who predicted with "no doubt" his June election victory, months in advance, at a time when polls gave him barely 1 percent support. The president also spoke of an aura that wreathed him throughout his controversial UN speech in September.
"O mighty Lord," Mr. Ahmadinejad intoned to his surprised audience, "I pray to you to hasten the emergence of your last repository, the promised one, that perfect and pure human being, the one that will fill this world with justice and peace."
Later, at a private meeting with a cleric that was caught on video, Ahmadinejad shared his views of the moment. "I felt that all of a sudden the atmosphere changed, and for 27 to 28 minutes the leaders did not blink," he said. "They were astonished.... it had opened their eyes and ears for the message of the Islamic Republic."
A spokesman last week dismissed the video as fake (other sources confirm it is authentic), and denied that Ahmadinejad bases decisions on "heavenly affairs." But this presidential obsession with the Mahdaviat [belief in the second coming] yields a certitude that leaves little room for compromise.
From redressing the gulf between rich and poor in Iran, to challenging the United States and Israel and enhancing Iran's power with nuclear programs, every issue is designed to lay the foundation for the Mahdi's return.
Ahmadinejad's executive self-confidence contrasts sharply with the eight-year presidency of Mohammad Khatami, a moderate cleric who advocated a "dialogue of civilizations" and Iran's return to the international fold.
Ahmadinejad is instead transporting Iran back to the first radical years after the 1979 Islamic revolution, defined by battling imperial US and Soviet powers and Zionism. The former Revolutionary Guardsman says Israel is a "tumor" that must be "wiped off the map." He denies the Holocaust. And he is pushing the Iran's nuclear-power card; stalled talks with the European Union to curb those plans resume Wednesday in Vienna.
"This kind of mentality makes you very strong," says Amir Mohebian, political editor of the conservative Resalat newspaper.
"Bush said: 'God said to me, attack Afghanistan and attack Iraq.' The mentality of Mr. Bush and Mr. Ahmadinejad is the same here - both think God tells them what to do," says Mr. Mohebian, noting that end-of-time beliefs have similar roots in Christian and Muslim theology.
"If you think these are the last days of the world, and Jesus will come [again], this idea will change all your relations," says Mohebian. "If I think the Mahdi will come in two, three, or four years, why should I be soft? Now is the time to stand strong, to be hard."
That mind-set also hearkens back to the missionary ambition of the newly forged Islamic Republic. "What Ahmadinejad believes is that we have to create a model state based on ... Islamic democracy - to be given to the world," says Hamidreza Taraghi, head of the conservative Islamic Coalition Society. "The ... government accepts this role for themselves."
A top priority of Ahmadinejad is "to challenge America, which is trying to impose itself as the final salvation of the human being, and insert its unjust state [in the region]," says Mr. Taraghi.
Taraghi says the US is "trying to place itself as the new Mahdi." This may mean no peace with Iran, he adds, "unless America changes its hegemonic ... thinking, doesn't use nuclear weapons, [or] impose its will on other nations."
Final rulings on such issues rest with Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, whose position of velayat-e-faqih - God's jurisprudent on earth - is meant to serve as the direct link with the divine.
And while rule by clerics might suggest joy over a leader who believes he is divinely guided, Shiite religious texts ban all claims of such revelations and warn against "false prophets." The punishment for "fooling" people is so great, notes one, that "hell's fire and its occupants are crying."
Analysts say a lay president who demonstrates such a connection may also be a danger by undermining the role and authority of Ayatollah Khamenei.
"One objection [to the government] is they take advantage of Islamic religion and Imam Zaman [Mahdi] - they exploit them," says Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri, a ranking dissident cleric in Qom. "If the government uses religious slogans and religion as a tool [to gain power], this makes people fed up with religion and is wrong."
The Mahdi's eventual return is an article of faith for Shiite Muslims that taps deeply into Persian consciousness and mystical tradition. Signs began to appear in Tehran three years ago, announcing that "He's Coming." But only a portion of Iranians actively prepare for that moment.
Part of the tradition holds that the Jamkaran mosque was ordered built by the Mahdi himself, during a dream revealed to a "righteous man" some 1,000 years ago. It is here that believers are closest to the Mahdi. Written prayers dropped into the adjacent well (which, local guides point out has no religious basis) are thought by pilgrims to be divinely answered.
Officials deny rumors that Ahmadinejad, as mayor last year, secretly tasked the Tehran City Council with reconfiguring the capital to prepare a suitable route for the Mahdi's return. They also deny that a list of Ahmadinejad's new cabinet members has been dropped into the well - a superstition that even Ayatollah Khomeini, the father of Iran's revolution, refused to associate with.
"The legitimacy of Khatami came from the religious elite. But the legitimacy of Ahmadinejad comes from traditional religious thought [over half a century ago]," says Mohsen Kadivar, a reformist cleric and philosophy professor in Tehran. "Ahmadinejad and his men believe it is popular, [but] it's a very simple interpretation. We don't believe in it; the majority of academics don't believe in it."
Still, an early cabinet decision earmarked $17 million for Jamkaran. And there is talk of building a direct train link from Tehran to the elegant blue-tiled mosque, which lies 65 miles south of the capital, east of the Shiite religious center of Qom.
Already, Jamkaran is estimated to receive the second-largest number of pilgrims of any holy site in Iran. Devotees, many from Iran's legions of poor and less-educated who voted heartily for Ahmadinejad, line up by the hundreds to receive food, and on Tuesday night settle in family groups on blankets outside.
With hands over their hearts in supplication, they approach the radiant mosque for evening prayers, and scrawl requests to the Mahdi on preprinted prayer forms. Many pilgrims say their prayers are answered, and health problems are healed.
"When you come here, you get your [prayer] request fulfilled, if you are clean and pure," says Fatima, speaking through a small gap in her head covering as she tends to a pot of rice boiling on a portable gas stove. Her family is holding vigil outside the mosque after dark.
She attributes a significant healing 10 years ago to a Jamkaran visit, but says the "Mahdi does not allow me to talk about it with anybody else."
Pilgrims are not limited to the poor or infirm, however. One young couple - he's a banker in Qom, and wears a stylish suit - say they had their prayer answered after coming 40 Tuesday nights in a row. Now they have another request, and will be here 40 times again.
"We Iranians have very strong beliefs, and this is a holy place," says Mahdi Abdulahi, holding a late-model motorcycle helmet as he stands near the mosque entrance. "I don't think it's a matter of [presidential] propaganda to crank you up. It depends upon your own belief."
Critics, many of them clerics, accuse Ahmadinejad of manipulating public sentiment, even if he is personally sincere in his belief.
"They pay more attention to the facade of religion, rather than the jewel of religion," says Mohammad Ali Ayazi, a professor at the influential seminary in Qom. "Having sincerity or honesty does not make any difference to the results.
"It's very dangerous, a person exploiting religion for political achievement, because everyone has their own relationship with God," says Mr. Ayazi, who estimates that focus on the Mahdi's imminent return appeals to 20 percent of Iranians. "It makes me sad that someone would endanger that."
Ayazi says that Ahmadinejad uses religion to motivate the public because he lacks political legitimacy. "You don't expect such a thing from a leader, because it turns comic. You laugh, but you become sad, because it is not supposed to be funny."
Sayed Hadi Hashemi, a black-turbaned senior cleric in Qom, says that "The Mahdi will rise, and it's a reality that needs [study] by religious science. But if you say, as Ahmadinejad says, 'We should construct an avenue in Tehran for the Mahdi to arrive,' this is only fooling the public."
But few doubt the sincerity of Ahmadinejad's belief. Some point to his seemingly impossible prediction of electoral success, three months before the June vote.
"You will see, on the day of the election, I will be the winner - I have no doubt about it," says political editor Mohebian, quoting those who heard the remarks. "People change, and we can calculate [politically] why he won. But this [gives a] kind of self-confidence," he says. "Mr. Ahmadinejad thinks he has a mission."
Worshippers wail for redemption before Mahdi's second coming
Even as the last lilting note of the night fades, burly guards surround the religious storyteller, linking arms to protect him - not from assassination, but adulation.
As the Madoh - a Shiite Muslim storyteller - rises from a sea of red-eyed, kneeling men at the Jamkaran Mosque, devotees surge forward to try to hug, kiss, or touch him.
Later, like a rock star leaving a backstage exit, Mahdi Salashur puts on a basiji militia jacket, pulls the hood over his head in semidisguise, and steps out the door.
For the previous two hours, he has relentlessly rallied his listeners around the belief in the Mahdi, the all-powerful 12th Imam, whom Shiites expect to return to earth.
"Don't let the wish stay in our hearts! Come on, come on! I have a fear of not seeing You!" Mr. Salashur tells the crowd in a poetic, longing voice. "Everybody wants to see the Lord and Master of the Age! Mourn, raise your hands."
People chant. Men cry.
"Those who sinned, cry more!" orders the Madoh.
Salashur's voice steadies as he tells a story of a faithful friend "martyred" during the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s. The friend dreamed that Imam Hossein, who was killed in battle in the 7th century, appeared and said he would take him away.
"The night before he becomes a martyr, he was crying," Salashur recalls, raising the emotional heat. His friend worried that he was not "pure enough" to stand before the martyrs.
"If they ask: 'How do you justify yourself?' I have no answer," Salashur quoted his friend saying. That night, he was killed.
"Yah, Imam of the Age! I ask you to swear, whom [do] you love more?" says Salashur, sitting quietly with hands folded, his voice choking.
Then, imploring: "For Heaven's sake, take us away in a way that we can look at your eyes [without shame]!"
The Madoh cools the crowd with a lengthy standard prayer, the Tavasol, and then begins more stories. One is of Zeinab, aunt of the Imam, when she entered Damascus.
"Aye, cry! Love your own crying!" Salashur cringes, before he even starts. "Akhh, [it is so bad] I want to die! I want to die!"
"They wanted to pour flowers on the head of Zeinab," he says, as the crowd approaches meltdown. "Yah Imam of the Age, our apologies! All of a sudden, people were throwing stones at Zeinab from the top of the buildings..."
The audience bursts, and wails as if at a funeral. The Madoh cries out in God's name, again and again.
I fear we will be forced to deal with these legions of endtimers one day soon if/and or when the lunatic radicals take over Iran entirely. Their new President almost assures their coming destruction at our hands.
Talks between Iran and the European Union's big three powers ended Wednesday with an agreement to hold more negotiations in January aimed at easing concerns about Iran's atomic program, an Iranian official said. Wednesday's "talks on talks" in Vienna between France, Britain and Germany and Iran were aimed at determining whether there was a basis for further discussion between the two sides. "We agreed to continue our talks in January. Regarding the location, we have agreed on Vienna," Javad Vaeedi, head of the Iranian delegation, told reporters.
The head of France's delegation, Stanislav de Laboulaye, was less firm on a meeting next month. "The two sides agreed to consult their respective leaderships with a view to holding another round of talks in January, with the aim of agreeing a framework for negotiations," Laboulaye told reporters. "Both sides set out their positions in an open and frank manner," he added.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/22/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Talk, delay, talk, delay, talk-oops, they have nukes now. Brilliant strategy we're taking, following the Euro method of solving problems. Wait until it's too late to do anything about it.
Sigh. This administration has put us all at risk by abandoning the correct approach it started with in the region and switching to the Euro method. Then again, had we stuck with our original approach, it would have been lonely company by now.
Yet there's something truly disgusting about going along with this charade when we know the consequences could easily be millions of dead people.
#2
jules 2 - Sigh. And here we are again, for the 10 gazillionth time. C'mon, we're of the same mind, methinks... I normally enjoy your posts and hope we come to agree here. I like your analysis and insights - I wanna be pals 'n stuff, heh. You're smart and I'm too old for this shit, anymore. But, one more time, I feel I have to say this to keep us honest. Advance apologies if I offend - none is actually intended, just a "Hey, slow down!" thingy.
The presumption that what we can see being done is all that's being done is, indeed, very inviting. That the odds are that it's untrue, however, should not be ignored. Additionally, lambasting Dubya, et al, on the assumption is both premature and out of bounds, IMHO.
This sort of attack comment (that's what it is, IMHO) isn't new. Dubya has been thoroughly whacked by many many here for not doing things per someone's personal schedule. Sigh. Hell, he's been attacked here on this topic numerous times - folks making the same premature assumption - many months ago. Yet here we are - and it hasn't played out, yet.
I freely admit he hasn't met some of my preferences for timely actions, too... I have a list, if they wanna see it, lol. BUT. Such is living within the reality of being the President of The United States vs. the total whim of an outside observer, no? The time is not "up", the clock hasn't run out, and we do not know WTF is going on - any of us. So puh-fucking-leeze criticize with that in mind. Don't think shit's happening fast enough to suit your personal notions? Fine - say that. Don't think shit's going the way you want it to? Fine - say that. I'm disgusted by the assumption that what you / we see is all there is to be seen. And I'm pissed at him, too, about my fucking list! It's important! ;-)
The evidence, especially regards Dubya's tenure, indicates that he takes serious shit uh, well, seriously, unlike many of his predecessors. Ask the Taliban. Ask Saddam. Ask the Israelis about their bunker-buster inventory. Ask Kimmie about the food and oil he no longer gets from moronic appeasing State Dept policy wonks. Ask... Well, who has Bush given their due? The list is pretty damned long, when you honestly assess it. Perfect? Nope, but then we don't wear any, much less all, of the straight-jackets, legal and otherwise, that he does. Who else would've done what he's done - actually done, not simply speechified for poll and voter approval testing or yammered about on some blog?
We will all have to wait and see. Skeery? Yep. Imagine being an Israeli. Has he actually done what you've just bashed him for? No. You only give half-credit for astonishing progress - and then bash him with your assumptions. Not good. Not honest. Not "fair". Sigh. I'm tired and you hit one of my buttons. Sorry, but that's my take on your comment. I hope you're wrong. You and I are on the same side and share the same concerns, I assure you, but I think you've jumped off a cliff of your own making. At least, and I mean least, I hope so.
I'm counting on it, in fact. That the fucking cowards of the US Senate watered down the rocking House bill (submitted by Henry Hyde) which would specifically give Bush the "warrant" he needs to stop / wage war / act on the Mad Mullahs' deliverable nuke campaign, turning it into a sick sad fucking joke "Sense of the Senate" piece of PC fluff, is part and parcel to the situation. To act, he will have to streeeeeetch his authority. He'll probably do it, too. They'll probably try to impeach him for it, too.
I know your frustration - and share it. If he doesn't, then you can bash him for not exceeding his constitutional authority uh, um, sufficiently, to satisfy you and me and everyone else who understands where the MM's are taking the world - but please, put the blame where it belongs - on the (correctly identified) Dhimmidonks and gutless RINOs of the US Senate - who pulled the punch and took the warrant out of his hands.
Such is the reality, today, of being The President of The United States. Sucks to be him. Even more to be an Israeli waiting for the shoe to drop, though I hope they don't if we actually do sit mutely by with the utterly gutless Euros. Much easier to be us. We're brave and omniscient. Just ask us.
#3
The curious thing to me is that the EU is within the current tactical range of their existing missiles. You'd think that the EUnicks would want to put a stop to this at all costs. But, they dont. They are going to be pussies and Israel is going to have to do something crazy to try to stay alive.
#4
No offense taken in what you say, .com. I actually wasn't intending this as a bash against the president; that's why I added the counter argument that continuing with his original approach would have negative consequences, too (i.e., had he had the luxury to continue the good fight with the same righteous purposefulness we know him by, we would be even more isolated in the world and have even fewer allies to help carry this load, because they are all twisted up with guilt and confusion, and the populaces of some of those allies' countries are even torn about whether they really want us to succeed). The UN and our "allies" think the king is wearing clothes; we, seeing a nude tyrant, are outnumbered. We are like a Cassandra; we could not persuade.
It IS frustration you hear, yes-frustration that the "European" approach (I don't know what else to call it, sorry right-minded European Rantburgers) has won out. I am frustrated at mankind (for which my brother-in-law recently scolded me) for its deliberate ignorance over a tremendously lethal dilemma. 30, 40 years of experience with terrorism should have given the Europeans a much more realistic mindset about the nature of terrorism, and millions killed in world wars on their native soils because of self-imposed denial, avoidance and delay should have made them appreciate more than ANY others the need to confront evil while it is in pupa stage. Instead, they are more entrenched in denial and self-immolating behavior than ever. They are attempting to bargain with the scimitar at their throat; years of bargaining with and buying off terrorists has made them no safer-it has put them at greater risk. The risk of attacks on European soil is higher than ever; and we are going to defer to their wisdom? We are going to let them take the wheel for what to do about Iran?
I take very much to heart what you are saying about the corner the president is in, and have every bit as much disgust as you do when he is encouraged to choose utopian solutions that can never be.
What I wrote was not an attack on President Bush personally. I will ALWAYS ALWAYS be grateful that he was in office when 9/11 happened and was courageous enough and had integrity enough to take out Saddam. My frustration comes from what appears to be the fact (and perhaps you're right, I may not be getting a full picture of it) that his original approach has been deflected, rerouted, dissuaded, replaced by an idiotic plan to put a blind fool in the driver's seat of our Iran policy.
,com-I have great affection for you and respect for your ideas. Absolutely peace, and Merry Christmas.
The president of the Progressive Socialist Party, MP Walid Jumblatt has the right to adapt with the changes of the international climate and the movement of the U.S.-Israeli winds in the region," said Syrian daily newspaper, Tishreen. Tishreen launched Wednesday a harsh attack against Jumblatt, describing his stands as "extremist and aggressive."
In comments to The Daily Star, PSP spokesperson Rami al-Rayess said it was "not the first time that the Syrian paper has attacked the party and its president, Walid Jumblatt." He added that such statements "were part of a continuous campaign to increase tension between the two countries."
I'd call it a continuous campaign to intimidate their ex-colony, myself...
"We have always tried not to hold debates with the paper, although we know that it is directly linked to the Syrian regime," Rayess said. "But the psychological analysis that was done by the newspaper falls into the campaign to increase tension," he added. Rayess further said: "Syria is not only employing this strategy in the media, but also in direct attacks and assassinations that began with the assassination attempt that targeted Minister Marwan Hamade in October 2004."
In a front-page editorial, Tishreen said Syria had firm values and would not breach its principles to take revenge on Jumblatt.
"No, no! Really. We're not gonna boom him."
It added that Jumblatt's positions "prompt us to analyze this sick and obsessed behavior and to return to the 'psychopathic personality' in order to find the right explanation for it."
I think being on the hit list would have an effect on my mental equilibrium, too, come to think of it...
It also described him as "a Don Quixote hero," who rushed to attack the Syria regime each time international leaders issued a statement against it. "The only thing constant about him is the inconsistency of his positions and stands," it said.
He is kinda wiggly-greasy in his stands, but I think that runs in the family...
"This sick and crazy behavior has psychological and mental reasons that we hope will be subject to a behavioral analysis, which would explain many weird positions and dangerous moodiness," the daily stated. Tishreen accused the Progressive Socialist Party leader of running after satellite television networks in an attempt to be regarded as "the stubborn struggler against the Syrian regime."
I think that's attributable to being on the hit list, too. Remember, Hariri told Wally it was going to be one of them or the other. Wally just missed being the national hero, and Hariri just mised having his psyche analyzed in the Syrian party newspaper.
The daily said Jumblatt's "dreams, desires and hopes were shattered as a result of [his] ties with the international colonial powers and some of their leaders."
"The entire Syrian people were offended by Jumblatt's nasty comments," the newspaper said, adding that Syria "is a state of institutions that respects its history, treaties, charters and fixed stands. Syria is proud of every free Arab man, who died defending Arabism ... it is proud of every Lebanese, who refuses to harm Syria, its leaders and its people. All the conspiracies and plans will fail and collapse, along with their inventors."
Yasss... More insidious conspiracies, nefarious plots hatched in smoke-filled rooms by men of sinister aspect, all with the aim of harming Syria's honor and dignity...
Tishreen's attack on Jumblatt came three days after the anti-Syrian politician accused Syrian authorities of being behind the series of political assassinations in Lebanon.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/22/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
Speaking aboard a U.S. Air Force flight from Washington to Pakistan on 21 December, U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld stated that the U.S. government does not know the whereabouts of Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, but has a âreasonable assumptionâ that he is in the remote area along the Afghan-Pakistan border.
"I suspect that, in any event, if he's alive and functioning, that he's probably spending a major fraction of his time trying to avoid being caught," Rumsfeld told journalists. "I have trouble believing that he's able to operate sufficiently to be in a position of major command over a worldwide Al-Qaeda operation, but I could be wrong. We just don't know."
On 13 December, U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan Ryan Crocker told reporters in Islamabad that he did not believe bin Laden was in control of Al-Qaeda and that the organization was in âserious trouble.â
âI think that Osama bin Laden is no longer the operational head of Al-Qaeda, because he is hiding deep inside the mountains and he doesnât have contact with the Al-Qaeda people,â Crocker said.
Crocker might have been responding to a video address made on 7 December by Al-Qaeda deputy chief Ayman Al-Zawahiri, who claimed that bin Laden was alive and well and leading the jihad.
âAll the lies that U.S. President Bush tries to delude the Americans with, saying that he destroyed half, or three quarters of Al-Qaeda are but nonsense merely in his own head,â Zawahiri said on the tape.
The fact that Al-Zawahiri is able to post videos of himself on websites indicates that the Al-Qaeda leadership is not totally isolated in distant mountainous regions. In September, Al-Zawahiri appeared on a video in which he claimed that Al-Qaeda was responsible for the blasts in the London transport system in July, in which 56 people were killed. Three of the suicide bombers had previously visited Pakistan, fuelling speculation that they might have been in contact with Al-Qaeda.
During his meeting with the press, Rumsfeld was asked if he believes that bin Laden is alive.
"If he's not around.... We know he has a fondness for talking on tapes and videotapes, and he seems not to be terribly fond of it for the last period of months," Rumsfeld said. "But I just don't know [if he's dead]."
The Pakistani commander in charge of counterterrorism operations along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, Lt. General Safdar Hussain, was asked by CBS News on 25 September about the possibility that bin Laden might be dead or incapacitated.
âIs it all that important to find him?" Hussain said. Even if heâs taken out tomorrow, his ideology is not going to come to an end. So, I donât think that heâs that important that we should be overly concerned about his being dead or alive.â
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
12/22/2005 11:18 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Lol. Duh! A round-up of the typical dumbshit press questions about OBL these days - and Rummy passed the Patience Test, again!
I'd love to see (or read about) him grabbing some worthless MSM shit-for-brains "reporter" by the collar and just slapping the holy dogshit outta his ass for asking pointless "Duh!" questions like this. Now that would be news of the Man Bites Dog variety.
#2
The fact that Al-Zawahiri is able to post videos of himself on websites indicates that the Al-Qaeda leadership is not totally isolated in distant mountainous regions.
What planet is this dude from? The guy has a camcorder and a laptop. That doesnt really count as a operational control complex, well, maybe for those assholes it does, but you get my point anyway.
President Bush asserted this week that the news media published a U.S. government leak in 1998 about Osama bin Laden's use of a satellite phone, alerting the al Qaeda leader to government monitoring and prompting him to abandon the device.
The story of the vicious leak that destroyed a valuable intelligence operation was first reported by a best-selling book, validated by the Sept. 11 commission and then repeated by the president.
But it appears to be an urban myth.
The al Qaeda leader's communication to aides via satellite phone had already been reported in 1996 -- and the source of the information was another government, the Taliban, which ruled Afghanistan at the time.
The second time a news organization reported on the satellite phone, the source was bin Laden himself.
Causal effects are hard to prove, but other factors could have persuaded bin Laden to turn off his satellite phone in August 1998. A day earlier, the United States had fired dozens of cruise missiles at his training camps, missing him by hours.
Bush made his assertion at a news conference Monday, in which he defended his authorization of warrantless monitoring of communications between some U.S. citizens and suspected terrorists overseas. He fumed that "the fact that we were following Osama bin Laden because he was using a certain type of telephone made it into the press as the result of a leak." He berated the media for "revealing sources, methods and what we use the information for" and thus helping "the enemy" change its operations.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Monday that the president was referring to an article that appeared in the Washington Times on Aug. 21, 1998, the day after the cruise missile attack, which was launched in retaliation for the bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa two weeks earlier. The Sept. 11 commission also cited the article as "a leak" that prompted bin Laden to stop using his satellite phone, though it noted that he had added more bodyguards and began moving his sleeping place "frequently and unpredictably" after the missile attack.
Two former Clinton administration officials first fingered the Times article in a 2002 book, "The Age of Sacred Terror." Daniel Benjamin and Steven Simon wrote that after the "unabashed right-wing newspaper" published the story, bin Laden "stopped using the satellite phone instantly" and "the United States lost its best chance to find him."
The article, a profile of bin Laden, buried the information about his satellite phone in the 21st paragraph. It never said that the United States was listening in on bin Laden, as the president alleged. The writer, Martin Sieff, said yesterday that the information about the phone was "already in the public domain" when he wrote the story.
A search of media databases shows that Time magazine had first reported on Dec. 16, 1996, that bin Laden "uses satellite phones to contact fellow Islamic militants in Europe, the Middle East and Africa." Taliban officials provided the information, with one official -- security chief Mulla Abdul Mannan Niazi -- telling Time, "He's in high spirits."
The day before the Washington Times article was published -- and the day of the attacks -- CNN producer Peter Bergen appeared on the network to talk about an interview he had with bin Laden in 1997.
"He communicates by satellite phone, even though Afghanistan in some levels is back in the Middle Ages and a country that barely functions," Bergen said.
Bergen noted that as early as 1997, bin Laden's men were very concerned about electronic surveillance. "They scanned us electronically," he said, because they were worried that anyone meeting with bin Laden "might have some tracking device from some intelligence agency." In 1996, the Chechen insurgent leader Dzhokhar Dudayev was killed by a Russian missile that locked in to his satellite phone signal.
That same day, CBS reported that bin Laden used a satellite phone to give a television interview. USA Today ran a profile of bin Laden on the same day as the Washington Times's article, quoting a former U.S. official about his "fondness for his cell phone."
It was not until Sept. 7, 1998 -- after bin Laden apparently stopped using his phone -- that a newspaper reported that the United States had intercepted his phone calls and obtained his voiceprint. U.S. authorities "used their communications intercept capacity to pick up calls placed by bin Laden on his Inmarsat satellite phone, despite his apparent use of electronic 'scramblers,' " the Los Angeles Times reported.
Officials could not explain yesterday why they focused on the Washington Times story when other news organizations at the same time reported on the satellite phone -- and that the information was not particularly newsworthy.
"You got me," said Benjamin, who was director for counterterrorism on the National Security Council staff at the time. "That was the understanding in the White House and the intelligence community. The story ran and the lights went out."
Lee H. Hamilton, vice chairman of the Sept. 11 commission, gave a speech in October in which he said the leak "was terribly damaging." Yesterday, he said the commission relied on the testimony of three "very responsible, very senior intelligence officers," who he said "linked the Times story to the cessation of the use of the phone." He said they described it as a very serious leak.
But Hamilton said he did not recall any discussion about other news outlets' reports. "I cannot conceive we would have singled out the Washington Times if we knew about all of the reporting," he said.
A White House official said last night the administration was confident that press reports changed bin Laden's behavior. CIA spokesman Tom Crispell declined to comment, saying the question involves intelligence sources and methods.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
12/22/2005 00:34 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The reporters for all of the mentioned news groups left or right leaning should be summoned and if they dont give up thier source then they go to prison indefinatley until source is revealed. Any time miltary classified info is reported the reporters should have a choice of either jail or give up thier source and that source should be procecuted to the fullest. Leaks have become a acceptable loss and even become part of the game that is wrong you cant have every analyst and worker who has access making the determination of what they think is classified and what they think should or can be leaked. All leaks are treason and should be procecuted to the fullest no matter who the leaker is period.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
The United Nations and the African Union have condemned an attack on a village in Darfur in western Sudan in which armed men killed 20 civilians and burned their huts. 
2 youths shot dead in city
LONDON - British MP and anti-Iraq war campaigner George Galloway is to face a fresh investigation into the funding of his campaign against UN sanctions in Iraq, a report said on Thursday. The Daily Telegraph said the Charity Commission, the regulatory body for not-for-profit organisations in England and Wales, had launched another probe into the now wound-up Mariam Appeal created by the former Labour MP in 1998.
Iran wants Saddam Hussein, whose Baghdad trial resumed yesterday, to be charged with ordering poison gas attacks that killed thousands of Iranian civilians during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war, a top Iranian official said. Foreign Minister 
Talks between Iran and the European Union's big three powers ended Wednesday with an agreement to hold more negotiations in January aimed at easing concerns about Iran's atomic program, an Iranian official said. Wednesday's "talks on talks" in Vienna between France, Britain and Germany and Iran were aimed at determining whether there was a basis for further discussion between the two sides. "We agreed to continue our talks in January. Regarding the location, we have agreed on Vienna," Javad Vaeedi, head of the Iranian delegation, told reporters. 
The president of the Progressive Socialist Party, MP 
