Article

2004-09-02 Down Under

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by tipper 2004-09-02 2:08:41 AM|| || Front Page|| [11128 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 One simple solution: A wetwork team that blows this maggot's filthy twisted @ss straight to Hell if he is ever spotted outside of prison walls. Same goes for every single one of these slimeballs, including Bashir. Bali must not be forgotten.

Posted by Zenster 2004-09-02 2:34:15 AM|| 2004-09-02 2:34:15 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Canada has a different outlook on jail time than we do in the US. In Canada the solution for this problem would be to open a Starbucks in the prison.

Posted by Super Hose 2004-09-02 3:45:28 AM|| 2004-09-02 3:45:28 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Zenster you may have the right idea. The best action would be to wack him in his cell. Message, "your ass ain't safe anywhere. Just a friendly reminder from the victims home boys."

Posted by Sock Puppet of Doom 2004-09-02 4:42:23 AM|| 2004-09-02 4:42:23 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 The best action would be to wack him in his cell.

Works for me, SPoD. I just want this scumbag at room temperature post haste. All the better if it's done when he thinks he's most safe. The way Indonesia has paraded around these grinning jackals for media consumption is simply hideous. I dread to think what the average Australian feels when they see these wastes of skin leering into the camera. My blood boils as it is.

Posted by Zenster 2004-09-02 5:19:40 AM|| 2004-09-02 5:19:40 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 Tom Clancy is in agreement with you,Zen.Check out his latest"Teeth of the Tiger".If anything Jack Jr.is even more ruthless than Daddy.

Posted by raptor 2004-09-02 10:01:31 AM|| 2004-09-02 10:01:31 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 HUGE CAVEAT: What Indonesia is doing here, letting Ali Imron go get coffee with Pak (âelder, fatherâ) Gorries, is not easy to wrap my mind around. Iâm really torn between my Western WTF! reaction, and my more Indonesian-type reaction (which is kind of a âWell, I can see why they do that, but it might not be the best thing to do . . . Time moves on, time moves on, time moves on, harmony, respect, order . . . He did repent and apologize, you know . . .)

That said, the official explanation is that this guy is cooperating with the police in nailing other bad guys. Since weâre not running that investigation, I wonder if it doesnât make sense to sit back and see how things play out? I MEAN, REALLY, IN HOW MANY OTHER COUNTRIES OF THE WORLD HAVE A LARGE NUMBER OF TERRORISTS ALREADY BEEN ROUNDED UP, TRIED, CONVICTED, AND GIVEN SERIOUS SENTENCES -- INCLUDING QUITE A FEW DEATH SENTENCES?

On a separate note, Zenster, overkill is not the answer. Your gung ho, âpro-militaryâ solutions lack the temper of realism. Donât give up on Muslims, in general. You tend to voice strong support (to the point of utter overkill) for positions obviously near and dear to many who visit this blog -- and then (here and there, thrown in as if afterthoughts) mock Bush and the validity of his presidency, without any proof to back up the slander. How do you square your âkill them all, let God sort them outâ rhetoric with your âBush is a crookâ rhetoric?

Posted by cingold 2004-09-02 1:10:49 PM|| 2004-09-02 1:10:49 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 #6 On a separate note, Zenster, overkill is not the answer. Your gung ho, âpro-militaryâ solutions lack the temper of realism. Donât give up on Muslims, in general. You tend to voice strong support (to the point of utter overkill) for positions obviously near and dear to many who visit this blog -- and then (here and there, thrown in as if afterthoughts) mock Bush and the validity of his presidency, without any proof to back up the slander. How do you square your âkill them all, let God sort them outâ rhetoric with your âBush is a crookâ rhetoric?

cingold, while it may not be intentional, you seem to be cherry-picking my posts. I have received harsh treatment here at Rantburg for maintaining that there are moderate Muslims (a point which Fred himself finally interceded to make as well). That hardly squares with the "overkill" mentality you are assigning me. Please note that I do not advocate direct nuclear attacks on theocratic and totalitarian Islamic states, despite their overt sponsorship of terrorism. I have repeatedly voiced support for establishing a credible deterrent or forcible custodianship of the Arabian shrines so that access to them for the Haj can be used as a quid pro quo in fighting terrorism. I advocate this specifically as an alternative to total war, which less restrained people hereabouts do support.

You say that I "mock" the White House. The current administration's attempts to blur the separation of church and state make a mockery of our nation's constitution. Support for the DOMA (Defense of Marriage Amendment) is nothing short of attempting to insert discriminative religious doctrine into American law.

Precedent also directs the courts to deem DOMA unconstitutional. Loving v. Virginia, decided only 36 years ago, banned all restrictions of marriage between persons of different races. Such laws violate the 14th Amendment, which grants every person equal rights and due process of law.

Does this amendment's protection not reach the gay community? For the Constitution to be substantial, for it to have any power or meaning, it has to reach this minority population. In Loving v. Virginia, the Court eloquently declared "the freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men." Marriage is one of the basic civil rights of people, and the law can deny such a fundamental right to no one.

Along with being a symbol of love and commitment, marriage in the United States grants certain rights between spouses, which are just as pertinent to the union of two persons of the same sex as they are to spouses of the opposite sex. These include child custody, divorce protections, certain property rights, insurance breaks and visitation of partners in the hospital. These rights should extend to the unions of people of any sexual orientation.

For the moment, let's try to ignore the fact that gay marriage has been around for thousands of years:

Roots of Homosexual Marriage Go Way Back

Yale historian John Boswell researched the history of homosexual marriage and contended that such unions were legally sanctioned and religiously upheld for over 3,000 years in ancient African, Asian, Egyptian, Greek, Mesopotamian, Native American and Roman cultures.

Same-sex relationships did not gain widespread condemnation until the 13th century, according to Boswell, when religious orders labeled them immoral.

Among the evidence Boswell presents are Greek texts of the ceremonies, along with their English translations.

The texts are clear. There is no doubt that
the ceremonies sanction a union between two people of the same sex. Even before Boswell, historians who knew of the existence of the texts admitted as much. The accompanying prayers invoke the example of paired Christian saints of the same sex - in particular, the martyred Roman soldiers, Serge and Bacchus, who were the most famous and revered paired saints in early Christianity.

Additionally, establishment of The Office of Faith Based Giving has only served to blur the separation of church and state even further. This is nothing less than government funding of religion and is in direct violation of our nation's constitution. What's more, Rep. Mark Souder, (R-IA) introduced an amendment to the House's Homeownership and Economic Development Act of 2000 that permits religious organizations which administer federally funded programs to discriminate in their hiring on the basis of religious creed and sexual orientation. All of these are complete and total violations of federally mandated equal opportunity hiring practices.

Please tell me how this does not make a mockery of our nation's secular heritage? Such willful erosion of the very legal foundations this country rests upon is tantamount to treason and represents a degree of treachery that I find unconscionable.

As to the 2000 election. It matters not whether a Republican or Democratic won. What matters is that when an election is decided by a number of votes that are significantly less than the margin of error for that state, let alone the entire nation, it demands the most intense scrutiny.

The glitch in a state that President Bush won by just 537 votes could have been significant ... The purge of felons from voter rolls has been a thorny issue since the 2000 presidential election. A private company hired to identify ineligible voters before the election produced a list with scores of errors, and elections supervisors used it to remove voters without verifying its accuracy. A federal lawsuit led to an agreement to restore rights to thousands of voters.

Questionable practices such as the mistake riddled purge of felons from the voter's roles and numerous other dubious circumstances all contributed a shadow of doubt to the results.

* Voting machines in minority districts were defective, old and outmoded compared with machines available elsewhere.

* Applications for absentee ballots were toyed with, which would be fraud.

* Some Haitian-American and Hispanic voters who needed language assistance did not receive it.

* Poll workers in minority communities had no access to computers or phones to check voter registrations.

* A higher percentage of minority votes were not counted in the election tally, compared with those of whites.

* Some polls closed early, preventing many people from voting.

* There was an especially large police presence in certain neighborhoods that may have deterred some people from exercising their right to vote.

I do not post these points to open up debate over the validity of Florida's 2000 federal election results. I use them to vividly demonstrate the incredible chain of circumstances involved in deciding its outcome. That the final decision would rest in the hands of a court whose partisan majority conincided with the candidate they would eventually select represents a nadir of American electoral practices. Again, had the Democrats won under similar circumstances it would be just as questionable and equally odious.

Finally, with the slimmest of margins in this nation's entire history, the White House nonetheless acts as if it was giving a unanimous mandate for the implementation of its policies. This is most pointedly highlighted by its continual blurring of the separation of church and state and I find it to be worthy of only scorn and mockery. Our nation's glory can be traced back directly to its secular origins. It is hypocrisy in the extreme to be spilling the blood of our soldiers fighting Islamic totalitarianism abroad while, at the same time, installing a fledgling theocracy here at home.

And this brings us back to this thread's central topic.

cingold, I'm glad to see you say how it "is not easy to wrap my mind around" Imron's little Starbuck's soiree. You accurately predicted that, despite Indonesia rightfully overturning recent terrorism convictions on the basis of their postdated nature, that rule of law would prevail. At first it seemed so.

Need I mention that Imron is serving a life sentence? While he may be repetant and even assisting the ongoing investigation, his presence outside of prison walls in the context of a casual outing for coffee absolutely reeks of the lax "business as usual" collaboration between security services and terrorism that we see in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia et al.

Indonesia's past history of corruption and graft do not cast this recent debacle in any sort of comforting light. Imron was the one who instructed others in how to contruct and detonate the Bali bombs. Additionally, he secured the vehicles used in the operation. He represents a linchpin for the entire operation. That he is remorseful now in no way ameliorates his culpability in the murder of hundreds of innocent people.

Imron, Amrozi and Bashir all constitute the core of an extremely dangerous terrorist network. Indonesia's track record in fighting terrorism is dismal at best. I advocate elimination of such terror operatives because of the dire threat they represent to human life, Indonesian and American alike. You will note that I do not talk of regime change in Indonesia. That is not the issue. Killing terrorists, especially convicted terrorists who are suddenly seen enjoying freedoms entirely inappropriate to their reduced station, is a priority to me. Circumventing a corrupt nation's questionable legal structure to ensure that no further loss of life takes place at the hands of these brutal killers is something I consider worthwhile.

No, we should not go about sprinkling atomic bombs amongst various and sundry totalitarian or theocratic regimes But we must also address how to combat a deliberately decentralized and transnational terrorist organization. Killing them where they reside is one of the few ways of doing so short of forcible regime change like that in Iraq. Waiting to "see how things play out" as a corrupt and ineffectual nation pursues "business as usual" falls far short of what it will take to eradicate terrorism in a timely fashion.

Posted by Zenster 2004-09-02 3:35:01 PM|| 2004-09-02 3:35:01 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 Zman there was an attempted theft of the Florida election but you've got the wrong suspect. Are you familiar with the term motor voter? In Florida it means voting by bus and then there's of course I can vote in this crappy state, I'm from New yawk. All New yawkers are allowed to vote in Broward County by default.

Posted by Shipman 2004-09-02 4:15:53 PM|| 2004-09-02 4:15:53 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 Shipman, those snowbird double voters should be imprisoned for election fraud. Capiche?

Posted by Zenster 2004-09-02 4:27:14 PM|| 2004-09-02 4:27:14 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 Zenster, I have a general respect for intelligence (including yours), but donât you find your deconstructionist argument that âgay marriage has been around for thousands of yearsâ to be quite a bit duplicit and disingenuous? IIRC, this argument was soundly trounced just about a week ago RIGHT HERE on Rantburg.

As for the âoverkill,â thatâs just my perception . . . so deal with it. We all have opinions. Again, in my mind, your gung ho, âpro-militaryâ solutions lack the temper of realism. Muslims, in general, live their lives out, bleed and die, and hope daily for a better life (just like all us Westerners). Palestine and other similar countries simply prove that the gentrification of entitlement, without personal responsibility and true democratic voice, always leads to thuggery. If we follow the policies of President Bush, there is much reason to hope millions more can be set free to pursue life, liberty and happiness. We have the sword for the warring, and our right hand of friendship for the peaceful.

Regarding your opinions of Bush, FOAD.

Your argument regarding âour nationâs secular heritage,â like your arguments regarding homosexuality, also are duplicit and disingenuous. I commend to you a reading of a text widely used to support the establishment of the U.S. government, Blackstoneâs Commentaries on the Laws of England (1769). I wouldnât call that a particularly âsecularâ piece -- at least not in the sense you mean. I also commend to you a reading of the text used even more widely than Blackstoneâs Commentaries to support the establishment of the U.S. government, the Judeo-Christian Bible. I wouldnât call that a particularly âsecularâ piece, either -- at least not in the sense you mean. In reality, whether you care to believe it or not, the religious freedoms and âsecularâ nature of this country (that you purport to so cherish) flow directly and naturally from the Judeo-Christian doctrines of tolerance and acceptance that are foundations of this country.

Now, going back to Indonesiaâs handling of Ali Imron, do you have any idea of what an Indonesian prison is like? Indonesians may well sneer at the relative luxury we give criminals here in the U.S. Many a U.S. prisoner serving a U.S. life sentence in a U.S. prison has a greater life expectancy than the average, free Indonesian. That, alone, should give you an idea of prison conditions in Indonesia. Iâm not saying Imron should be set free just because he repented, but (then) neither is the Indonesian government. Imron will serve out his sentence in a Indonesian prison -- not in the relative luxury of a Western prison.

But, again, whoâs to say what kind of information the Indonesians are getting out of this guy, and what they have had to do to obtain that actionable information. My question still stands (which, BTW, you conveniently avoided answering), IN HOW MANY OTHER COUNTRIES OF THE WORLD HAVE A LARGE NUMBER OF TERRORISTS ALREADY BEEN ROUNDED UP, TRIED, CONVICTED, AND GIVEN SERIOUS SENTENCES -- INCLUDING QUITE A FEW DEATH SENTENCES?

Posted by cingold 2004-09-02 4:56:11 PM|| 2004-09-02 4:56:11 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 Fixing a link:
IIRC, this argument was soundly trounced just about a week ago RIGHT HERE on Rantburg.

Posted by cingold 2004-09-02 4:58:55 PM|| 2004-09-02 4:58:55 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 #10 IN HOW MANY OTHER COUNTRIES OF THE WORLD HAVE A LARGE NUMBER OF TERRORISTS ALREADY BEEN ROUNDED UP, TRIED, CONVICTED, AND GIVEN SERIOUS SENTENCES -- INCLUDING QUITE A FEW DEATH SENTENCES?

Short answer: Not enough.

When Saudi Arabia's own government is still spewing blatant lies, such as a majority of American women sleep with their fathers and that all Jews are pigs and monkeys, or that it is the obligation of all Muslims to hate and, if appropriate, kill Christians and Jews, clearly, not enough is being done to thwart the real roots of terrorism.

However much America's founding fathers relied upon or derived from Mosaic law in establishing parts of our constitution, it in no way justifies further adoption of exclusively religious doctrine so as to directly controvert existing federal law as it applies to anti-discrimination and fair hiring practices. I find that to be the trappings of theocracy and therefore detestable.

As to Indonesian officials deliberately risking the potential escape of a convicted mass murderer. I'd sooner see that chance deleted through extra-judicial execution, even at the cost of losing further information, than take the chance that such a vile demon might ever walk free to slaughter anew.

Posted by Zenster 2004-09-02 5:28:44 PM|| 2004-09-02 5:28:44 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 Short answer: Not enough.

Great, so applaud the Indonesian government for all they are doing right.

However much America's founding fathers relied upon or derived from Mosaic law in establishing parts of our constitution, it in no way justifies further adoption of exclusively religious doctrine so as to directly controvert existing federal law as it applies to anti-discrimination and fair hiring practices.

The fearful monster of U.S. theocracy, that you bemoan, does not exist, is not being planned, and is totally inconsistent with the Judeo-Christian doctrines that you admit âAmerica's founding fathers relied upon,â and of which you express such fear and distrust. These doctrines made the great country you purport to cherish; I wouldnât damn them if I were you. If you understood these Judeo-Christian doctrines, you would realize that what you are so alarmed about could never happen. The very Bible thumping Christians you decry would die to fight against such tyranny -- just as they have done time and again over the course of this nations history.

As to Indonesian officials deliberately risking the potential escape of a convicted mass murderer. I'd sooner see that chance deleted through extra-judicial execution . . .

From the way I read the story, with all those black-clad security guards around, escape wasnât even a remote possibility. Knowing Indonesians, an escape attempt would have just advanced an opportunity for that execution you so hanker for. And, regarding âextra-judicial executionâ (setting aside for the moment the issue of foreign policy concerns), now who is trashing the political concepts that make the U.S. so great . . . Again, overkill, and (dare I say it?) un-American.

Posted by cingold 2004-09-02 5:45:28 PM|| 2004-09-02 5:45:28 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 #10 Regarding your opinions of Bush, FOAD.

Your gratuitous invitation to violence meagerly bespeaks any persuasive powers of debate upon your own part and nowhere makes a compelling argument in your favor. At no time have I made such an ill mannered gesture towards your own self and I consider your's a flat out repudiation of the tenets you posit.

With respect to offing the terrorists wherever they may be; At some point America's national security overrides the sovereignty of other countries. It did in both Afghanistan and Iraq and will most likely prove to do so again. Wetwork teams have been a feature of espionage from time immemorial. While I would rather rely upon the transparent conduct of foreign countries in their prosecution of the war on terrorism, so long as there are many which overtly propagate terror, I will continue to advocate extra-judicial execution of those conspirators in situ.

Posted by Zenster 2004-09-02 6:06:06 PM|| 2004-09-02 6:06:06 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 #14 #10 Regarding your opinions of Bush, FOAD.

Your gratuitous invitation to violence . . .

Havenât you ever heard of a metaphor? You repeatedly âdo violenceâ to the office of the current President -- the only political figure I see staying the course (despite shifts in public resolve and populism) regarding what needs to be done to win the WOT. Youâre offended by âFOAD?â You donât see yourself as repeatedly making ill mannered gestures toward other posters here through your phraseology, your bald contempt for those you seem to deem less acute, and the presumptuous presentation of your particular socio-political agendas as the status quo of the human race?

You can decide my mode of engaging you to be a repudiation of my posited tenets, if you wish. But, you and I both know that objective constructs remain inviolate and immovable despite the debatable qualities of their promoters. So, at your own peril, feel free to consider those tenets repudiated by your own myopic impressions of me.

âWith respect to offing the terrorists . . . [and] advoca[cy of] extra-judicial execution of those conspirators in situ,â that is appropriate only in the context of war on hostile territory. Indonesia, whatever its current or past transgressions and indiscretions, has proven itself far from hostile. No, itâs not a state in the Union, and doesnât want to be, but it is a notable ally in seeking out and destroying the common enemy of the WOT. Promoting âwetworkâ (ah, what a euphemism) in that country detracts from the goal of winning the WOT. Again, overkill and un-American.

Posted by cingold 2004-09-02 6:38:45 PM|| 2004-09-02 6:38:45 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 #15 that is appropriate only in the context of war on hostile territory

cingold, this is central to the issue of fighting terrorism and its decentralized structure. Countries like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan that coddle, foment and even knowingly shelter terrorists become de facto "hostile territory."

I am beginning to believe that Wahhabism should be declared a political ideology and not a religion, thereby making it subject to all sedition laws. The violence that Wahhabist clerics routinely encourage needs to be identified as a clear physical and military assault upon the governments of those whom their attacks are directed at. Only when Islamism's political agenda is openly identified as such will we begin to properly combat it.

A last question; Do you deny that wetwork has been a common component of American and numerous other countries' covert foreign policy for many decades? Your febrile attempts to paint me as un-American for calling a spade a spade doesn't cut any ice with me.

Posted by Zenster 2004-09-02 7:10:18 PM|| 2004-09-02 7:10:18 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 Countries like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan that coddle, foment and even knowingly shelter terrorists become de facto "hostile territory."

TRUE. Most true for Iran, but far too true for Saudi Arabia, and less and less true for Pakistan. But, at the present time, not true at all for Indonesia. So, why suggest âwetworkâ (which can only undermine the WOT) in a country already working hard to defeat the WOT and bring islamofascists to justice? I found that suggestion to be counterproductive.

Do you deny that wetwork has been a common component of American and numerous other countries' covert foreign policy for many decades?

I do not deny that; in fact, I can only hope we have all sorts of black forces at work changing the face of the hostile world. But, then, theyâre black -- so no one would really hear about those effort so as to get all worked up over them, right? You might wonder why black ops are black. Might it make sense to not advertise those policies?

Your febrile attempts to paint me as un-American for calling a spade a spade doesn't cut any ice with me.

LOL. Iâll take an aspirin. It wasnât meant as an ad hominem. I think some of your positions are overkill and un-American. That is a logical and rational perspective on my part. I donât question your motives or sincerity in the least bit. In fact, I appreciate you passion and intellect, and willingness to (sometimes) consider other viewpoints. I certainly donât mean that you are un-American and kill wantonly -- just some of your ideas.

Now, donât get all shocked, but I actually agree with you that âWahhabism should be declared a political ideology and not a religion, thereby making it subject to all sedition laws,â (except for the caveat that not sedition laws, but laws of warfare, should be applied). It is, at best, a political system aspiring to world domination, and which is infused with religiously inspired self-serving justifications.

Posted by cingold 2004-09-02 7:40:10 PM|| 2004-09-02 7:40:10 PM|| Front Page Top

#18 I donât question your motives or sincerity in the least bit. In fact, I appreciate you passion and intellect, and willingness to (sometimes) consider other viewpoints. I certainly donât mean that you are un-American and kill wantonly -- just some of your ideas.

Now, donât get all shocked, but I actually agree with you that âWahhabism should be declared a political ideology and not a religion, thereby making it subject to all sedition laws,â (except for the caveat that not sedition laws, but laws of warfare, should be applied). It is, at best, a political system aspiring to world domination, and which is infused with religiously inspired self-serving justifications.

cingold, I'm glad to see the two of us are reading off the same page once in a while. Quite obviously, I have a much lower opinion of Indonesia's efforts than you do.

That said, I'm happy to see you take note of my willingness to consider other viewpoints. Were that not so, I would not be here at Rantburg. More than once in the past few months, I have used information gathered here to shut a blithering piehole or two, and it was gratifying to have the facts at hand to do so.

I regard militant Islam as a substantial threat, and more especially, a gigantic black hole for monies desperately needed in the fight against much more critical woes, like famine, disease and illiteracy. That a picayune minority of outright thugs have so successfully siphoned off such a vast portion of international resources absolutely infuriates me. The collateral deaths from other privations, let alone terrorism's depredations, make it all the more critical that terrorists are exterminated post haste. It is most likely this that you interpret as a "kill 'em all" attitude. I would just as soon live in peace with Muslims who are willing to coexist. Should they chose otherwise, I merely want them all dead and out of the way so that those of us who choose to make progress may do so unfettered by such stone age thinking.

Posted by Anonymous6166 2004-09-02 8:17:21 PM|| 2004-09-02 8:17:21 PM|| Front Page Top

#19 Anonymous6166 = Zenster -- Sigh, continuing cookie issues.

Posted by Zenster 2004-09-02 8:20:04 PM|| 2004-09-02 8:20:04 PM|| Front Page Top

00:43 UFO
00:43 UFO
00:40 UFO
00:40 UFO
21:53 SuperSerb
21:53 SuperSerb
21:52 UFO
21:52 UFO
21:46 UFO
21:46 UFO
19:37 Atomic Conspiracy
19:37 Atomic Conspiracy
18:34 Atomic Conspiracy
18:34 Atomic Conspiracy
18:22 Atomic Conspiracy
18:22 Atomic Conspiracy
18:21 Atomic Conspiracy
18:21 Atomic Conspiracy
07:43 Shipman
07:28 Half
04:05 Bulldog
03:27 B
03:22 John Kerry
02:36 gromky