February 25, 2005
Hizbullah Bombs Tel Aviv Nightclub
The group that the European Union recently claimed 'is not a terrorist organization' is responsible for tonight's bombing of a Tel Aviv nightclub which killed at least four and injured scores more.
The Jerusalem Post and the AP report that a senior Palestinian security official lays the blame for the bombing sqarely on the shoulders of the Lebanese based Hizbullah.
While the individual who carried out the suicide attack was a leader of the al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade in the West Bank town of Tulkarm, the PA denies that the military branch of Yassir Arafat's Fatah movement had anything to do with the attack. Speaking on condition of anonymity, the Palestinian official claims that Hizbullah recruited and paid for the homicide mission.
Other media reports that factions within the al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade and Islamic Jihad claimed joint responsibility for the attack, but leaders of al Aqsa later denied involvement. The Associated Press also speculates that certain cells within al Aqsa are receiving money and orders from Hizbullah. If that is the case, than the Palestinian Authority's ability to control militants within its ranks may be severely limited.
Hizbullah has recently made threats against leaders in the anti-Syrian uprising in Lebanon. Syria has occupied Lebanon for over a decade and allowed Hizbullah freedom to launch attacks against Israel from Lebanese territory. Hizbullah is a recognized political party in Lebanon with strong ties to both Syria and Iran.
Despite Hizbullah's known connection to the murder of American soldiers and Israeli civilians, the European Union has been reluctant to formally declare the group a terrorist organization.
Leaders of Hizbullah in Lebanon have disclaimed the attacks calling the accusation that they were behind the mass murder "lies."
Initial reports from Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas are encouraging. The NY Times quotes Abbas as saying, "The Palestinian Authority will not stand silent in the face of this act of sabotage. We will follow and track down those responsible and they will be punished accordingly."
The J Post reports this from the scene of the mass murder:
About 20 to 30 people queued up outside the "Stage" club on the generally packed Herbert Samuel Boulevard shortly after 11 pm Friday night when the bomber, dressed as a reveler himself, struck. As he reached the front of the line he detonated a nail-packed device just before being searched by one of the club's guards. The force of the blast ripped cars open like cans, and sprayed the victims' blood onto the club's smashed front fa ade. Shops and windows of nearby buildings were obliterated.
Posted by: Rusty at
11:28 PM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 436 words, total size 3 kb.
1
Hisbollah wants Israel to retaliate against Lebanon to distract from the Hariri killing and the Syrian occupation. Israel should delay it's response, or do a limited targeted assassination. A major airstrike on Lebanon would play into Hisbollah's hands right now.
Posted by: Carlos at February 26, 2005 09:47 AM (8e/V4)
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at February 26, 2005 10:09 AM (ywZa8)
3
It seems that after 55 years of this shi- we would get mad enought to blow all the MuslimFascists to He--! Why are we not doing something?
Posted by: Rod Stanton at February 26, 2005 02:53 PM (QMgRR)
4
European Union? Reminds me of an antique shop attempting to stock modern merchandise.
Posted by: greyrooster at February 26, 2005 09:03 PM (CBNGy)
5
Israel is NOT going to attack Lebanon. After the Hairari assassination Lebanon was placed firmly on the west's side vis a vis the WOT... why would you attack an ally when there's a perfectly good enemy to go after?
To the guy who runs this blog (a fine job you do btw)... I think you should be VERY careful about declaring that Syria is responsible for either the Beirut or the Tel Aviv attack.
There's no concrete evidence yet - of course they're the most likely suspects... however if they really were brazen enough to take such actions in this climate (post Saddam & Arafat; Bush on a policy-endorsing 2nd term), and assuming they're half-witted enough to at least hold down a consistent foreign policy, then I'd say the prospect of this escalating into a US-Syrian conflict is very high indeed.
Just think about it - if this continues how can Bush avoid a Syria-US war without reneging on his policies? How can he justify invading one """terrorist state""" but leaving a much more credible enemy unscathed? And why the hell would he do that when (rightly or wrongly) his stance at least seems, to the American public, to be working?
My money would be on Syria realising (if they haven't already) how self-destructive they're being and so doing a massive u-turn, whilst denying the terrorism charge all along. The problem is that that would leave the window open for Al Qaeda to move in (if they haven't already) and massively enflame the situation.
Declaring who did this prematurely can only incite hostility between the two sides, possibly causing a war that could otherwise be avoided. You shouldn't give Al Qaeda the satisfaction of wielding so much power over our Governments.
Posted by: Martin at February 27, 2005 08:07 AM (WnUPO)
6
>>>"Declaring who did this prematurely can only incite hostility between the two sides, possibly causing a war that could otherwise be avoided. You shouldn't give Al Qaeda the satisfaction of wielding so much power over our Governments."
It seems to me that the "power" Al-Qaida has so far wielded over our governments has only turned around and bit Al-Qaida in the ass. The more we play into Al-Qaida's hands, the worse for them, and the better for the world in general. They are rueing the day we played into their hands.
Posted by: Carlos at February 27, 2005 01:30 PM (8e/V4)
7
well, Israel is taking it out on the Palestinian people.They have no control of Hezbollah which is located in Lebanon but Arial Sharon does not care; he's already shut down talks and the road to peace plan because of what a Lebonese terrorist did.
What a jerk. I hope they VOTE him OUT soon or there will never be peace - and that's something Ariel Sharon does not want with the Palestinian people, so he'll use any excuse.
The man should be assassinated, so we can go forward. So THEY can go forward.
Cindy
Posted by: firstbrokenangel at February 27, 2005 11:20 PM (PEKrh)
8
Cindy... nice to hear some non-right views but advocating the assassination of an Israeli premier is a really silly thing to do, especially given that country's history of assassinations. Were it to happen it wouldn't be your Palestinian friends doing it either - it'd be the Israeli far right (beneficial??!). I genuinely think Sharon has turned a corner and until he does something idiotic (won't be long, I'm sure) we should give him the benefit of the doubt.
Carlos... "The more we play into Al-Qaida's hands, the worse for them" - really? I wonder if the Spanish would agree - they allowed Al Qaida to elect their (leftist) Government! Was that a good idea??
Posted by: Martin at February 28, 2005 11:08 AM (WnUPO)
9
Well Martin, he has cut off talks with the Palestinian people and has even said today that Abbas better get the terror groups under control.
AND it has already been proven the bombing of Tel Avev was caused by Hezbolla = a terrorist group from Syria - they've claimed responsibility - or don't you watch the news?
Rod, I am with you on this because I'm tired of this shit. Yes we are moving troops out slowly but the terrorists in one car bomb today, killed over 115 people, injuring 130 in Iraq - they are going after the Iraqi people who want a job of either Policemen or National Guard. I think in their best interest, they should take the guys from Iraq to a safer place, to do training, the physicals and whatnot because those are the places the terrorists are attacking. Sure we found another van filled with explosives and walking the roads finding the IED's and then communication between Bin Laden and Zarqawi. Every day Fox shows something good going on in Iraq, so we stop more than what happens. Those beheaded women with "spy" written on them could be people who have reported to the forces or to the ING that something is going on in a nearby home. So.. they are standing up for themselves. Today Lebenon did an unprecedended thing and you will see more changes in the Middle East - which is kind of exciting because they are all thumbing their noses to the terrorists whom they do not want in their country. As long as they stay off our soil, the more happier I'll be. It'll be hard and messy for awhile but in the end, it will be worth it. I hope I live long enough to see it happen. I might be 51, but feel 151. Sometimes I have to take a break and sit back, not say anything but when I run into such ignorance, I can't help it; I have to say something.
But one thing we all have to do no matter what we believe and that is supporting our troops wherever they are in the world, but especially those in Iraq right now. We also need to support each other and if there is something you really don't know about, I suggest hitting law books and start reading.
Cindy
Posted by: firstbrokenangel at February 28, 2005 11:13 PM (PEKrh)
10
Hmmm! An American calling for the assasination of a freely elected head of state of Another country. I rather thought that would be a Islamofacist thing.
Posted by: greyrooster at March 01, 2005 07:53 AM (CBNGy)
11
**Cindy sed**
he has cut off talks with the Palestinian people...
AND it has already been proven the bombing of Tel Avev was caused by Hezbolla = a terrorist group from Syria - they've claimed responsibility - or don't you watch the news?
*************
Sharon most certainly has NOT cut off talks with the Palestinian leadership... I don't know where you got that idea from. And his administration isn't just talking, they're "chatting" - look at the TV interviews with any Israeli spokesmen and the rhetoric they're coming up with is a total u-turn on the kind of crap they trudged out a few months ago when Arafat was alive.
Also you know perfectly well that it hasn't been PROVEN Hezbollah did the Tel Aviv bomb - terrorist groups make false claims of responsibility all the time, especially Palestinian ones which overlap in such a complicated way. And even if the claim is genuine... who *exactly* is making that claim? The leadership of Hezbollah, or a bunch of nutters from a discredited offshoot?
Posted by: Martin at March 01, 2005 10:47 AM (WnUPO)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Need Help
I need help doing a couple of things with the blog. If you can help please e-mail me at: mypetjawa*at*gmail*dot*com.
Regular readers know why I blog anonymously. I would like to keep things that way. Here's what I need to do, but don't know how to do it.
a) set up a pay-pal and amazon honor account, but do it in such a way that would protect my privacy. I don't even want my city to be seen by those donating. Yes, I'm that paranoid.
b) get a blog ads thingy going. I cannot, for the life of me, figure out how to start with blog ads.
All this because I want a little bit of that crazy blog money I keep hearing about!
Posted by: Rusty at
05:19 PM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 128 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Why don't you just legally change your name to Rusty Shackleford?
Posted by: Leopold Stotch at February 25, 2005 06:05 PM (Qgyzl)
2
Mark Jaquith (http://txfx.net) does all of my technical work for me. He's excellent. He'll probably try to convert you to Wordpress, but he really is good.
He's been busy doing some work for Malkin lately, but I'm sure he could fit you in.
Posted by: Rob at February 25, 2005 07:21 PM (0drzk)
3
A good person to ask would be:
http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com//
Posted by: KevinM at February 25, 2005 09:02 PM (pNALc)
4
Rusty Shakelford would do, so would the name of your blog "myjawa.com" anound you still remain anonomous. You can also open a PO Box for the ad money and just put a note on your left side here saying this space is free for ads. Not the ads being free, just that you have a really long blog that people can pay monthly to paypal for the space they take up on your blog.
When it comes to asking people if they want space to advertize on your blog; then also talk to other bloggers that have ads and ask them how they got them.
You could make a lot of money,Rusty,because your blog is long and you have so much space here on the right side for advertizements.
Give that a shot.
Cindy
Posted by: firstbrokenangel at February 25, 2005 09:43 PM (PEKrh)
5
Here's the deal about the PO box, it would still place me in the city I am in--Arlen, Texas--and I don't want people knowing the cityi I live in.
Think Luke Skywalker:"If they've followed them here then that could have led them......HOME!"
Ben:"Wait Luke!"
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at February 25, 2005 10:38 PM (ywZa8)
6
I bet you aren't afraid of nymphomaniacal stalkers, so it must be the tewowists...I suggest you wear a disguise.
Posted by: Mr. K at February 26, 2005 06:31 AM (wtu69)
7
What ~ you don't want people to know you live in a caravan?
All the prof stuff is great, but you and I know you are a motorway nomad who smokes joints and posts posts all day from a laptop while on the move.
Posted by: qpr jon at February 27, 2005 11:07 AM (d63U+)
8
I ain't too happy about my blog being blocked by the stupid software DR RS.
GAM breaks the filter.
What a thing. these bloody blog spammers do my fucking head in.
Posted by: qpr jon at February 27, 2005 11:09 AM (d63U+)
9
Like I said before - ask Kevin. Use the name Rusty Shakelford if you want but if it's for your blog, use "MyPetJawa."
Cindy
Posted by: firstbrokenangel at February 28, 2005 11:15 PM (PEKrh)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Founder of anti-Iraq War Movement in Britan Now Pro-War
Harry Barnes, a Member of Parliament and one of the founders of
Labour Against the War has defected. It seems the Iraq War was worth it after all.
Times Online:
An MP who was a founder member of Labour Against the War has quit the group, saying that after last monthÂ’s elections in Iraq he now believed Allied troops should remain in the country, it emerged today....
The North-East Derbyshire MP, who is stepping down at the election, accused his former colleagues in the anti-war movement of retailing "simple-minded" claims about the extent of civilian casualties in Iraq since the war....
He could no longer support the anti-war campÂ’s demands for withdrawal of troops of the US-led coalition, which he said should be a decision for the Iraqi people....
Mr Barnes accused the anti-war movement of offering a "one-sided" view of life in Iraq, endlessly repeating the 100,000 casualty estimate produced in an analysis of deaths caused by the conflict, published in the academic journal The Lancet.
"That analysis said it could be anything between 2,000 and 198,000," he said. "Some things are just over-the-top and simple-minded."
Thanks for the tip from
Dr. Leopold Stotch via e-mail.
Posted by: Rusty at
04:52 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 213 words, total size 1 kb.
1
the thing that slays me about the ubsurdity of the 100,000 civilian deaths claim is the scale of it. there would be so many bodies it would have been allmost impossible to burry them. just look at the tsunami disaster! one hundred thousand dead bodies are hard to dispose of.
in places where the tsunami hit bodies stank for weeks, it was so hard to deal with them all. it is patently ridiculus that after all our precision bombing we killed that many civilians and thier would be evidence for the world to see.
instead all we have is the tired rants from leftist hacks that we killed that many people.
Posted by: rumcrook at February 25, 2005 06:07 PM (TlR3g)
2
Gee, sorry guys. When you get a peer reviewed piece published maybe we'll all take your claims seriously. Until then all you're doing is dropping random quotes that are supposed to prejudice against the
only authoritative study on the subject.
As I said at my own blog weeks ago, it is just sad that the reaction to the Lancet study has been anything other than humility and concern.
Posted by: Professor Peter Von Nostrand at February 25, 2005 09:20 PM (Mt2dO)
3
"That analysis said it could be anything between 2,000 and 198,000," he said. "Some things are just over-the-top and simple-minded."
From the Lancet Report:
"This survey indicates that the death toll associated with the invasion and occupation of Iraq is probably about 100,000 people, and
may be much higher." (my emphasis added)
The report concludes with the following statement, which underscores the very reason why there is no authoritative report on Iraqi deaths aside from the Lancet report, with the military and all those for this war instead willing to hang their hats on the rhetoric of "precision bombing":
"US General Tommy Franks is widely quoted as saying 'we don't do body counts.' The Geneva Conventions have clear guidance about the repsonsibilities of occupying armies to the civilian population they control. The fact that more than half the deaths reportedly caused by the occupying forces were women and children is caus for conern. In particular, Convention IV, Article 27 states that protected persons '... shall be at all times humanely treated, and shall be protected especially against acts of violence...'. It seems difficult to understand how a military force could monitor the extent to which civilians are protected against violence without systematically doing body counts or at least looking at the kinds of casualties they induce. This survey shows that with modest funds, 4 weeks, and seven Iraqi team members willing to risk their lives, a useful measure of civilian deaths could be obtained. There seems to be little excuse for occupying forces to not be able to provide more precise tallies. In view of the political importance of this conflict, these results should be confirmed by an independent body such as the ICRC, Epicentre, or WHO. In the interim, civility and enlightened self-interest demand a re-evaluation of the consequences of weaponry now used by coalition forces in populated areas."
Posted by: Professor Peter Von Nostrand at February 25, 2005 10:34 PM (Mt2dO)
4
Von Nostrand:
Had you paid attention in your methodology class you would have learned to look at how to look at the way in which the survey was done.
This was a survey done by going door to door and asking people if they had any relatives/friends who had died recently. You get that? This was a SURVEY.
To make matters worse the survey made two even bigger mistakes. It compared the post-invasion survey with a pre-invasion mortality survey done by the Hussein administration. When the Lancet report talks about pre-war UN surveys what they fail to disclose is that the UN relied on the Iraq government to actually do the footwork.
Oh, and BTW--the Lancet had to issue a retraction a couple of months ago. It seems that the original article had not distinguished between deaths due to insurgency activities vs deaths due to Coalition activities.
The Lancet report was pure propaganda. You, of all people, should understand that when we are peer reviewing something we naturally agree with then it is very difficult to see the problems inherent in research.
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at February 25, 2005 10:45 PM (ywZa8)
5
Gee. I did pay attention in my methodology classes (feeling pompous tonight I see). But I guess the main point here is to heap as much doubt on an authoritative report as is humanly possible, even if the topic under discussion is - by any count - of a magnitude many many times greater than even the 9/11 attacks.
Why is it that the first method of attack employed by conservatives is that liberal criticism must be related to either some imagined lack of proper training or ideologically induced blindness? That's really weak.
If we're going to play that game I guess I'll have to add that I can only wonder how a morbid obsession with beheading videos must skew a person's ability to interpret Middle Eastern displeasure with U.S. policy, or any other events related to that part of the world. Seems to me the approach you take to your blog is a primary generator of bias to both yourself and anyone who spends a bit of time reading/watching it.
Posted by: Professor Peter Von Nostrand at February 26, 2005 02:28 AM (Mt2dO)
6
Okay, Peter von nostril. Back to the two people that use your blog. They miss you. We will not.
Posted by: greyrooster at February 26, 2005 09:07 PM (CBNGy)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Blame Canada
In light of
Canada's withdrawal for any more participation in the US missile defense program--an announced withdrawal, I might add, coming the same day a
succesful test of the system was made--our friends over at
Six Meat Buffet have come up with the following alternate missile defense schematics for the Canadians. Click the image for larger image.
Posted by: Rusty at
04:35 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 61 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Bush to Putin at the recent summit.....
"Remember when we told you to keep your damn hands off the Canadian Arctic North these last 60 years?
Well Vlady..We just don't care anymore, so you take as much of that sheet of ice as you want." "The Cheese heads don't have but a couple of dog sleds and a 30 year old snowmobile to stop ya." "Y'all won't see anyone until you reach Manatoba."
Posted by: Margaret Trudeau at February 25, 2005 04:47 PM (kTtxU)
2
One article I read said they do not want to participate in the defense act but expect us to notify them if we something coming so they can decide if we should shoot it down before it hits them or not. If they want to be notified they need to pony up at least part of the money, otherwise they need to resume the duck and cover practice session in their schools. They condemn us for being capitalists then turn to the only kids on the block with the earning ability to pay the bills. Just like most of Europe does. The time for the parts of the world that detest us to take responsibility for their own well-being has long since passed.
Posted by: bullwinkle at February 25, 2005 05:13 PM (9KpI+)
3
Canada can go to hell - they are a part of north america, after all. Things might change, tho, because the Canadian people are on our side despite the polititions.
Cindy
Posted by: firstbrokenangel at February 25, 2005 09:47 PM (PEKrh)
4
At least the super-magnet is redirecting missile strikes to Manitoba. Fuck them. Fuck fucking Manitoba.
Posted by: Ghost of a flea at February 28, 2005 09:49 AM (zcp7Z)
5
Canada should replace the maple leaf with a chicken i mean they are acting very foolsih and just how many terrorists live in canada? MOVE OVER DUDY DO-RIGHT
Posted by: sandpiper at March 01, 2005 02:56 PM (AOQk0)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Rusty Shackleford is a 'Little Eichmann' (Updated for Ted Rall)
Reader comment:
Wake up. You are just one more "little Eichmann" who is day by day destroying our freedoms and drawing this country closer to its destruction.
Pay back is a bitch.
And we wonder why people like Ahmed Omar Abu Ali feel justified in planning the murder of our President?
UPDATE: I'll contribute that as my Exhibit A in refuting Ted Rall's stupid assertion that the Right is meaner than the Left. Since that is a reader comment from TODAY, I'll take it as qualifying for his challenge.
Others taking up the challenge:
John Henke's comments: "I hope you all die, die painfully."
Decision '08 finds this nugget: "'an event like this [the assassination of Bush] could be just what this country needs'."
Polipundit has this from Dick Gephardt:“[Bush has] declared war on the American people.”
John Hawkins has a photo at an anti-war protest which reads:"We support our troops when they shoot their officers."
Posted by: Rusty at
04:20 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 169 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Piss off, asshole.
M.W.
Posted by: MIGHTY WHITEY at February 25, 2005 04:34 PM (KSAlJ)
2
And they're so erudite.....
Posted by: Dan at February 25, 2005 05:17 PM (q3pwu)
3
I remember seeing that and I think I gave him a piece of my mind. Such ignorance.
Cindy
Posted by: firstbrokenangel at February 25, 2005 09:49 PM (PEKrh)
4
Assoles. We are such a lucky people, lucky nation, and we should appreciate that fact. If it wasn't for our warriors fighing for our freedom, we might not even be able to do this.
Cindy
Posted by: firstbrokenangel at February 28, 2005 11:19 PM (PEKrh)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
$10,000 Reward Offered for Proof Helen Thomas Slept With Eleanor Roosevelt: A counter-factual analysis
No, not really. But now that the left-wing-
it's-not-about-gay-sex-blogosphere has offered a $10,000 reward for any
physical evidence that would prove Jeff Gannon / James Guckert slept with adminstration officials I just thought we'd play a little hard ball too.
Too low-brow you say?
Ok. Since women obviously don't produce the kind of DNA evidence the left is searching for we'll have to settle for a good old fashion counter-factual analysis.
Counter-factual analysis?
Sorry. Forgot to take off my methodology hat.
Counter-factual analysis is when we compare what actually happened to what would have happened if one variable was changed.
For instance, had Hitler (no, not Bush-Hitler, the real one) decided not to order the Luftwaffe to stop bombing the port at Dunkirk we might imagine that England would have been forced to capitulate soon after the Battle of Brittain was launched.
That is counter-factual analysis.
The Soros funded Media Matters blogosphere crowd keeps making this counter-factual claim, or something like it: Had Jeff Gannon been a Democratic partisan during the Clinton administration you know this would have turned into a major scandal.
Maybe or maybe not. Just as in the same way we cannot know that if the Nazis had cut off the retreating British at Dunkirk what the final outcome of the war would have been, we cannot really know what the reaction would have been if had the Jeff Gannon affair happened during the Clinton administration.
But what the left is missing here is that the Jeff Gannon affair, or something quite like it, may have already happened and it may have happened during the Clinton Administration. In fact, how do we know that it did not? The only reason that we know so much about Jeff Gannon is that the left blogosphere has placed his life under a microscope.
Have they bothered to put Helen Thomas's life under that same microscope?
John Hawkins does a bang-up job in this post of comparing Helen Thomas's 'thoughtful, provocative, and non-partisan' questions to Jeff Gannon's alleged soft-balls.
Read all of the Helen Thomas quotes. If this is how the objective non-partisan media acts, then give me the partisan media any day. At least with the partisan media you know where they are coming from. There is no illusion of neutrality.
Hawkins ends the comparison with this bit of advice that I reprint for you. Willis, Atrios, and Kos would do well to heed it:
Of course, Thomas hasn't been accused of any sexual misconduct, but how would anyone know unless Helen Thomas' sex life is given the same exacting scrutiny that Jeff Gannon's was? Is it possible that Thomas might be a lesbian? Could she have worked for an escort service on the side? Has she ever had an affair with a married man? Most conservatives, myself included, don't think those are relevant questions to ask of reporters, but since the left doesn't seem to share our opinion, perhaps there's an intrepid liberal blogger out there who wants to dig into Helen Thomas' sex life? Just look at the traffic that has been generated on the left by dragging Gannon's sex life through the mud -- who's to say it would be any different with Thomas?
Let me close with a warning that bloggers on the left should take to heart: the precedent you are setting by dragging a minor media figure's sex life (and even rumors about his sex life) into the public domain may come back and bite you. After all, if it becomes accepted that Jeff Gannon's sex life is fair game, then why wouldn't the sex life of major media figures or even big name bloggers be fair game as well? Let's hope that the left side of the blogosphere -- in a desperate attempt to keep a small, insignificant scandal alive -- has not created a "Gannon Standard" that will be used to justify this sort of public sliming for years to come. [READ THE WHOLE THING]
Posted by: Rusty at
04:14 PM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
Post contains 685 words, total size 4 kb.
1
Whoa!!
Heh.
Urrggglllhhhhhhhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmpppptttt......
thats gonna leave mark
Posted by: Pile On® at February 25, 2005 06:10 PM (9e5bZ)
2
Uhhhh heh uuuhhh heh....He said "hard"
"Shut up, Beavis!"
Posted by: Steve the Lamabutcher at February 25, 2005 07:16 PM (4cI/7)
3
Unfortunately, I can imagine that Helen Thomas WOULD leave behind DNA-analysis worthy... stuff. Uggggghhhhh......
Posted by: Squatch at February 25, 2005 07:33 PM (2Swtu)
4
Where do I collect my $10,000? I slept with Helen and I've got the brown paper bag to prove it.
Posted by: DWC at February 25, 2005 10:29 PM (4+WsX)
5
Dang! I didn't read the article close enough. I'm not Eleanor Roosevelt.
Posted by: DWC at February 25, 2005 10:31 PM (4+WsX)
6
Send DNA to:
Rusty Shackleford
224 Bull Dyke Ln.
Arlen, TX 6666-1218
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at February 25, 2005 10:34 PM (ywZa8)
7
I believe a tryst with H.T. would be a "3 bagger."
You know the routine;
a bag for your head
a bag for her head
and a bag for the dog's head so at least someone will respect you in the morning.
Posted by: James Brown at February 26, 2005 08:54 PM (1U7ie)
8
Take heart all.
Despite the MSM defense of this little terrorist, not a single one of the Wahabbis prosecuted in Northern Virginia in recent years have been acquitted. Indeed, all have pleaded guilty to federal felonies with serious jailtime attached.
From money laundering to plotting terrorist acts to supporting terrorist organizations, there has been not a single - not one - spirited defense offered by anyone charged to date. That's a revealing contrast to the whining and moaning by the Muslim PR hounds of Northern Virginia.
As for Abu Ali, I expect him to meet the same fate despite the handwringing of the MSM and all of the Muslim/Wahabbi "advocacy" groups.
The MSM is particularly irresponsible in failing to note that many countries beyond Saudi Arabia may legally detain suspected terrorists for periods of up to two years, just as they did with Abu Ali: France for one (which promptly jailed several recent Gitmo releasees on suspicion); and Thailand, Singapore, and Indonesia come to mind.
Posted by: Penguin43 at February 27, 2005 06:18 AM (s5uPT)
9
A tryst with HT would be a coyote V. Otherwise, HT looks like a ER clone. Her more genuine love interest would seem to be Janet Reno.
Posted by: RichinJapan at February 27, 2005 11:44 PM (PXsv4)
10
Janet Reno? Yuk. Must have been a Clinton appointee.
Posted by: greyrooster at March 01, 2005 10:51 PM (CBNGy)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
MSM, thy name is 'Blogger'

Screenshot taken from Google News front page moments ago.......
UPDATE: Google, you are a harsh lover. Removed after about 5 minutes on the front page.
Posted by: Rusty at
03:18 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 35 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I'm going to have to start attacking you now that you're part of the Mainstream Media. As an amateur blogger, I'm obligated, you see.
Posted by: Preston Taylor Holmes at February 25, 2005 03:47 PM (WsZ4F)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Ahmed Omar Abu Ali's Terrorist Connections Revealed
Evan Kohlman of the
Counterterrorism blog has uncovered more connections between Ahmed Omar Abu Ali and an al Qaeda plot to assassinate the President of the United States. Ali's parents own words also reveal the extent to which the family was involved in the Islamist movement.
The USDOJ alleges that Abu Ali along with "Co-Conspirator #2" plotted to either shoot the President or use a car-bomb to kill him. But who is "Co-Conspirator #2"? His name is Zubayr Al-Rimi.
You can read how Evan linked the two here.
According to the FBI, "Zubayr Al-Rimi is being sought for questioning in connection with possible threats against the United States."
Apparently Reuters picked up on Evan's line of reasoning:
The man, identified only as co-conspirator No. 2, was on a list of 19 suspects in suicide bombings at housing compounds in Riyadh in May 2003 that killed 35 people. Saudi officials have said the 19 had contacts with al-Qaida.
Among those killed in a raid in September 2003 was Zubayr al-Rimi, also known as Sultan Jubran Sultan al-Qahtani. Saudi officials described him as the second-ranking al-Qaida member in Saudi Arabia. The raid came after a tip from the FBI, part of heightened cooperation between the United States and Saudi Arabia following the May attacks.
Meanwhile, Ahmed Omar Abu Ali's parents continue to feign that they knew nothing of their sons jihadi ties and are bringing suit against the United States. This despite the fact that they sent their son to a Wahhabi school funded by the Saudis and attended a Saalifiyah mosque.
ABC News:
The family of a 23-year-old accused of plotting with al-Qaida to kill President Bush said Thursday they want to pursue a lawsuit accusing the administration of being behind their son's detention and alleged torture in a Saudi prison.
Ahmed Abu Ali "was tortured on orders of the USA; they are monsters," his mother, Faten, said outside a federal courtroom.
And how does Faten, who is from Jordan yet wears the veil so common in Saudi Arabia, know? She
knows it because the US is the puppetmaster of Saudi Arabia. This is what her husband claims:
The young man's father, Omar, said, "The Saudi government are slaves of the Americans" and the U.S. government is lying when it says his son was under Saudi control for the 20 months before he was flown to the United States and charged.
Oddly enough, this is the same thing the jihadis in the Muslim Brotherhood believe. The organization with ties to the mosque that the Ali family attend. The Muslim American Society, the US branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, organized the press conference and rally that the Ali couple made the accusation.
Coincidentally, the al Qaeda Organization on the Arabian Peninsula also believes that the Saudi government is a slave of the Americans. The younger Ali is accused of being a member of that organization.
Whether or not the parents openly support violent jihad against the US and Saudi government is irrelevant if they believe that the US and their Saudi puppets are evil and corrupt governments. If the son also believed what was being taught in the home, in school, and in the mosque than it is predictable that he would follow his conscience and plan war against those he was taught to hate.
Abu Ali the elder also claims that his son was tortured in Saudi Arabia at the behest of the CIA. How does he know?
Outside the courtroom, Omar Abu Ali said he knew his son was being tortured at the Alhair prison in Riyadh because of the words the young man blurted out in his first phone call home after being arrested.
"I've been on a long trip in a wild jungle," Omar Abu Ali said his son told him. The father said he was terrified by the call because he knew it was code that he was being tortured.
Sounds like code for "I was tortured" to me. However, from the motion filed by the DOJ over bail we learn:
An American doctor gave the defendant a thorough physical examination on or about February 21, 2005, after the defendant had been transferred by the Saudi Government to U.S. custody. The doctor found no evidence of any physical mistreatment on the defendantÂ’s back or any other part of his body. Moreover, the doctor specifically asked the defendant if he had been abused or harmed in any way, and the defendant said no.
During the initial hearing, you will recall, that Abu Ali's lawyer blurted out that Ali had been beaten and exclaimed he wanted to show the judge. The lawyer, of course, knew that the judge would not allow that to be done. Further:
The Consul at the U.S. embassy in Riyadh, an employee of the Department of State, met
personally with the defendant on several occasions during his detention in Saudi Arabia.
On no occasion did the defendant complain of any physical or psychological
mistreatment. To the contrary, the defendant advised the Consul – to whom he could have confided claims of mistreatment to prompt intervention on his behalf by the U.S. Government – that he was being well treated. For example, during the Consul’s initial visit with the defendant on July 8, 2003, the defendant used the words “excellent,” “kind,” and “humane” to describe his treatment. During a subsequent visit in August 2003, the defendant remarked that he had access to a gym with fitness machines and was permitted to play soccer with other inmates in a gym area. The Consul routinely recorded after each visit that the defendant “was in good health and spirits. There was nothing in his physical appearance, demeanor, or speech to indicate mistreatment or abuse.”
It goes on, but the most telling part from the DOJ motion is this:
Not until his initial appearance, with members of the news media present, did the defendant claim that he had been physically mistreated while in Saudi custody.
Indeed.
We have been leading the fight to uncover the conncections between the Ali family and the jihadi ideology. If any readers have more information, please send it to me at me e-mail address shown in the left side-bar.
more...
Posted by: Rusty at
12:38 PM
| Comments (39)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1086 words, total size 7 kb.
1
Not until his initial appearance, with members of the news media present, did the defendant claim that he had been physically mistreated while in Saudi custody.
Just curious, you wanted him to claim he was mistreated before his
initial apperance?
Where does that quote even come from? It's not in any of the links from your post.
Posted by: mantis at February 25, 2005 02:44 PM (zmcHh)
2
It is from the DOJ motion to deny bail.
Thanks for pointing this out. I have tried to clarify.
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at February 25, 2005 03:24 PM (JQjhA)
3
The judge in this case acknowledged that there was circumstantial evidence of torture. Obviously there is enough scarring to suggest that the man was tortured.
Justice is supposed to be blind. However, it is unattainable when people such as yourself become so blinded by their racism that they are unable to see the truth.
Wake up. You are just one more "little Eichmann" who is day by day destroying our freedoms and drawing this country closer to its destruction.
Pay back is a bitch.
Posted by: William Thomas Sherman at February 25, 2005 03:58 PM (sj3Jj)
4
I urge you, dear tolerant reader, to do a little research into the allegations made in the initial lawsuit. The allegations that Ahmed Omar Abu Ali was tortured came from his parents based on two things.
1) their feeling that he was being tortured. That's right, their feeling.
2) an argument based on an ecological fallacy. a) Since Saudi Arabia routinely tortures inmates, b) and since Ahmed Omar Abu Ali is in a Saudi jail then c) Ahmed Omar Abu Ali must have been tortured.
Even if Ali was tortured then how is the US to blame? Ali was arrested in Saudi Arabia in conjunction with al Qaeda in Arabia. How is the US responsible for the Saudis not filing charges???
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at February 25, 2005 04:23 PM (JQjhA)
5
William Sherman is clearly a moonbat.
There is no "evidence" that Abu Ali was tortured. There is an accusation that is bereft of substantiation. His parents make the accusation using the language of the Islamofascist terrorists, that the Saudi government is controlled by Americans and Jews and that it is allegedly "repressing" so called "real" Muslims.
All through his incarceration in Saudi Arabia he told US Consulate staff he was being treated well. Either he lied to them numerous times then or he is lying now. This type of accusation is standard by Islamofascists and Moonbats since it is an attempt to take attention away from the fact that the accused has a rather strong case against them and onto something that cannot be disproven. It isn't up to the US to prove he wasn't tortured in Saudi Arabia. It is his responsibility to do that in court, in Saudi Arabia. It is simply not an issue for US jurisprudence. The man was raised and trained to be an Islamofascist killer. His lawyer ran the old "the Zionists are behind it all" canard to the press yesterday. Sadly for him, his attorney is a wild eyed lunatic member of the Islamofascist movement himself.
This individual wasn't jailed because he's an Arab or a Muslim or the US government is supposedly "racists". He was jailed because there is substantial reason to believe he conspired to assasinate the President of the United States. Period. Too bad the left has last it's collective mind. They're fit only to be ignored by sober, reasonable, and mature society any more.
Posted by: johnb_nc at February 25, 2005 05:08 PM (cwAjJ)
6
You are mixing terms
Wahabbi
Salafiyah
then you throw in the Muslim brotherhood.
you then mention jordan and the veil so common in saudi
I know It must be hard to keep these terms straight but usualy
Wahaabi = Salafi
Muslim Brotherhood ties are incompatable with Saudi Arabia and with the movement of the Salafs.
How soon till we get to hear another american say the wahaabis of Iran
and the shiites of the Muslim brotherhood?
Posted by: BrotherAbdullah at February 25, 2005 07:15 PM (V9cPo)
7
Brother Abdullah,
The Muslim Brotherhood was, and is, based in Egypt. Had you studied what appears to be your own religious divisions, you would have learned that Salafaayism refers to an interpretation of Islamic history as one in which Muslim states have become corrupt because they have left the true teachings of Islam and have abandoned Sharia.
The Wahabbi curriculum referred to was not mentioned in reference to Abu Ali's parents (apparent) belief system, which is that of the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafi. However, Abu Ali did attend a schoold that had a Wahabbi curriculum put forth by the Saudi State.
If you were to be honest (unless you are just ignorant) than you would admit that the Salafi problem with the Saudis is not just that they are corrupt, but that they do not interpret sharia in a strict enough manner.
The true philisophical aim of the Salafi movement is that of restoration of the global caliphate in some manner (although interpretive differences exist on how this is to be done).
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at February 25, 2005 10:54 PM (ywZa8)
8
johnb nc: Nice to hear from you. Common sense is a wonderful tool when fighting the evil empire. The emperor's (hillary) forces continue to send one moonbat after another into the fray. Refreshing it is, the truth.
brother abdullah: For real, you cannot be.
Posted by: greyrooster at February 26, 2005 02:51 AM (CBNGy)
9
During the initial hearing, you will recall, that Abu Ali's lawyer blurted out that Ali had been beaten and exclaimed he wanted to show the judge. The lawyer, of course, knew that the judge would not allow that to be done.
Hi Randy,
Forgive my ignorance, but why would a judge not allow this to be done?
Posted by: Rupert at February 26, 2005 12:53 PM (MT/OJ)
Posted by: Rupert at February 26, 2005 12:54 PM (MT/OJ)
11
There is evidence, and you will see it soon enough. Stop hating so much.. what are your bases of belief? What is the point you're trying to get across?
Posted by: random-reader at February 26, 2005 01:58 PM (pZyKh)
12
ramdon-reader: The point is that it is bullshit. We have fallen for it before. The liberals have conditioned these idiots to use these false claims. What other excuse can the bastard come up with to deny his confession. Any piece of shit attorney will instruct his client to scream foul. Judges never allow the showing of so called wounds in court. The reason? Simple as your mind. It's called self inflicted.
You ask what the point is? The point is the same dog never bites me twice. 1st time his fault. 2nd time my fault.
His claims are bullshit. Old crap used by criminals for the last 40 years.
Posted by: greyrooster at February 26, 2005 09:19 PM (CBNGy)
13
No, I assure you, it is not bull. If only you knew the well mannered fellow. He is honestly incapable of conceiving such atrocities. His wounds are not self inflicted, you should know well that Saudis usually torture their prisoners. My only wish for those who read articles from this site is to not be so closed minded and to stop hating different religions. All religions have their Hitlers, don't focus on one.
Posted by: random-reader at February 26, 2005 11:29 PM (pZyKh)
14
Take heart all.
Despite the MSM defense of this little terrorist, not a single one of the Wahabbis prosecuted in Northern Virginia in recent years have been acquitted. Indeed, all have pleaded guilty to federal felonies with serious jailtime attached.
From money laundering to plotting terrorist acts to supporting terrorist organizations, there has been not a single - not one - spirited defense offered by anyone charged to date. That's a revealing contrast to the whining and moaning by the Muslim PR hounds of Northern Virginia.
As for Abu Ali, I expect him to meet the same fate despite the handwringing of the MSM and all of the Muslim/Wahabbi "advocacy" groups.
The MSM is particularly irresponsible in failing to note that many countries beyond Saudi Arabia may legally detain suspected terrorists for periods of up to two years, just as they did with Abu Ali: France for one (which promptly jailed several recent Gitmo releasees on suspicion); and Thailand, Singapore, and Indonesia come to mind.
Posted by: Penguin43 at February 27, 2005 06:20 AM (s5uPT)
15
Well-mannered? Like Goebbels?
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at February 27, 2005 11:21 AM (u+cPl)
16
"Whether in this world or in the Hereafter; our return will be to Allah; and the Transgressors will be companions of the HellFire!, soon you will remember what I say to you (now) I commit to Allah: for Allah(ever) watches over his Servants."
Posted by: random reader at March 01, 2005 06:00 AM (fbuCS)
17
"Or think you that you will enter Paradise without such (trials) as came to those who passed before you? They were afflicted with severe poverty and ailments and were so shaken that even the Messenger and those who believed along with him said, "when (will come) the help of Allah? Yes! Certainly, the help of Allah is near!"
By the way "TO BE A MUSLIM IS TO BE TESTED" so Our Muslims Don't lose Faith for the help of Allah is near....and Transgressors don't be too Sure Verily the end is For Us..
(William Thomas Sherman)..It is nice to know that there is someone who knows the Truth...
Posted by: Faith at March 01, 2005 06:15 AM (fbuCS)
18
random kinda frightens me
Posted by: REMF at March 01, 2005 06:23 AM (3ejvo)
19
I guess you simple minded muslims are saying the muslim Saudis tortured another muslim. Okay! Whats the big deal and why is it the fault of the United States. You camel humpers have been torturing and killing each other for centuries. Keep up the good work. Who gives a shit about what you backward animals do? Just PLEASE stay in your own countries to do it. Bunch of friggin cavemen wanting to bring their backward assed religion to the civilized world. Stay where you are. Be happy praising Allah while you cook grasshoppers over camel dung fires.
Posted by: greyrooster at March 01, 2005 08:14 AM (CBNGy)
20
Don't be frightened no harm meant; it is a reminder that there is a creator who will hold everyone accountable!!!
Posted by: random reader at March 01, 2005 08:37 AM (WoY+a)
21
Frightened??? Nay. Thats a muslim thing.
Posted by: greyrooster at March 01, 2005 10:55 PM (CBNGy)
22
Dear Rusty, You are sadly mistaken.
The Ikhwan al Muslimoon (The Muslim Brotherhood Movt)
and the salafi Dawah (The call of the best generation known as Al salaf) are two very different things.
The Muslim Brotherhood are among the leaders of the Call of the caliphate, we see this thru their playing a leading role in the Jihad in Central asia, their role in the 1980s in Afghanistan, and during the 1970s in the Creation of Hamas. and in the modern day with Hizbut tahir.
the Muslim Brotherhood have influenced such Great muslim Mujihideen (those who partake in the struggle) as The Late Great Shaikhs Abdullah Azzam and Ahmad Yassin Both of Palestine.
The Best generation of Al salaf is something every muslim aspires to be.
There is No such school of thought (madhab) known as Wahhaabi despite what some would have people believe.
Ibn Abdul Wahaab never set out to create a school of thought rather he called people towards prayer with a clear voice, and there is nothing in the books or thoughts of Ibn Abdul Wahaab that you will not find in the Quran or in the Sunnah.
There are today Fools who call themselves salafi in the Mosques/Masjids, those who would claim we know Al Quran better than anyone else, these are if we follow the events of Qiymah those who fan the flames of Qiymah!
Be carefull brother in calling another brotherly Muslim ignorant.
Posted by: BrotherAbdullah at March 02, 2005 03:32 AM (V9cPo)
23
I figured it all out- you guys are the KKK.
Posted by: KEA- CHICAGO LOVER at March 04, 2005 02:36 PM (hFw0j)
24
Opinions and beliefs should be heard without bias, but seeing as to how this is virtually impossible within the human mindset, I understand these postings' passionate rebuttals. However, greyrooster, your posting is a prime example of unbridled ignorance. I don't understand it, and cannot tolerate it without saying something. Don't cheapen yourself by allowing your hate to let you spew such unintelligent prejudices. People like you cannot respect others different than themselves, but at least respect yourself enough to filter your spoken thought, because what you've said makes it so much harder to see anything else you have to say as valid.
In reference to the article, I cannot formulate a clear cut opinion. I'm weary of what information is available to us, because it is limited and prejudiced within itself. I see other postings make reference to "the truth." "The truth" is that there's no way of knowing the "the truth." So while everyone is debating this said truth, keep in mind, that everyone has bias but there's no need for that bias to let your opinions be clouded with mean, narrow minded words with which some of these postings are written.
Posted by: Brie at March 11, 2005 06:52 PM (KJgPQ)
25
you guys dont know anything that is my cousin you guys are talking about he was tortured and just because someone is an arab and a muslim dosent mean he or she is a terrorists you guys are like most americans today paranoid and auntie fatin wears aveil because it is modest and uncle omar works for saudi arabia. covering your face is not part of islam like most people think you should read the quran
Posted by: az at May 02, 2005 12:45 PM (uIgzp)
Posted by: az at May 02, 2005 12:47 PM (uIgzp)
27
rusty shackleford is a king of the hill poser
Posted by: az at May 02, 2005 04:31 PM (nT8f/)
28
MUSLIMS AND ARABS ARE NOT MOONBATS BUT CHRISTIANS WHO HATE MUSLIMS ARE CROSS AND FISH LOVING FREAKS
Posted by: az at May 02, 2005 04:47 PM (nT8f/)
29
greyroosters name should be greyfish or cross
Posted by: az at May 02, 2005 04:49 PM (nT8f/)
30
greyroosters name should be greyfish or greycross
Posted by: az at May 02, 2005 04:49 PM (nT8f/)
31
it is a very well know fact that the united states uses nations whose governments are "Puppets" or have no respect to human rights such as syria and saudi arabia to torture suspects. whabis and extremists are not the only group calling some governments puppets to the u.s. The united states has installed governments post colonization era.. Iran's Shah for example
Posted by: abfgus at May 12, 2005 01:43 AM (rfBXS)
32
"You camel humpers have been torturing and killing each other for centuries. " Let's not start talking about torture and wiping out an entire race "native American" torturing each other "Spanish inquisition" and preemptive war in the name of religion "crusades" backwardness (Europe's Dark Ages) and finally shipping slaves from Africa and wiping out indigenous peopleÂ’s religion and culture with "The white manÂ’s burden" There are mistakes in every race and every culture and they always come back to ignorance and closing our minds and hearts to ones who look or live differently
Posted by: abfgus at May 12, 2005 01:53 AM (rfBXS)
33
i am trying to post a webpage link but i got this error:
Comment Submission Error
Your comment submission failed for the following reasons:
Your comment could not be submitted due to questionable content: d e m o c r a c y n o w . o r g
Please correct the error in the form below, then press Post to post your comment.
Posted by: abfgus at May 12, 2005 02:17 AM (cmAXD)
34
http://www.d e m o c r a c y n o w .org/article.pl?sid=05/02/25/1455238
make sure there are no spaces when you post the link
Posted by: abfgus at May 12, 2005 02:18 AM (cmAXD)
35
The light is going out
By William Fisher
The Modern Tribune - January 11, 2005
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The governmentÂ’s 'position is as striking as it is sweeping,' the judge said. He warned that its behavior would allow the government to arrest people and deliver them to another country in order to avoid constitutional scrutiny, or even 'to deliver American citizens to foreign governments to obtain information through the use of torture.'"
WASHINGTON, D.C. (1/11) - At his confirmation hearing to be AmericaÂ’s next attorney general, President BushÂ’s White House Counsel, Alberto Gonzales ducked most of the potentially contentious questions asked by his US Senate questioners. But he pledged that he would work around the clock to protect civil liberties and human rights.
Well, hereÂ’s a place for him to begin:
Since June 2003, Ahmed Abu Ali, a 23-year-old US citizen, has been held in al-HaÂ’ir prison in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. He was reportedly arrested by Saudi Arabian authorities on June 11, 2003 in the city of Medina, while taking an exam at the Islamic University there. He has no access to legal counsel or to family members. It is not clear whether he has been charged with a crime, nor is it clears when, or if, he will be put on trial. The US Government says it had nothing to do with his detention, although three FBI agents reportedly questioned him soon after his arrest. Saudi officials have declined to give an explanation for his detention, but say they are holding him at the request of the US State Department and would be glad to release him if there was a request from the US.
The US consul failed to visit Ahmed Abu Ali until almost a month after his detention, and then began monthly visits. Two months after his arrest, in September 2003, he was interrogated by three FBI agents. They reportedly threatened to declare him an “enemy combatant” and send him to Guantanamo Bay. Or he could stand trial in Saudi Arabia, where he would have no legal defense. He was then placed in solitary confinement for three months. Between November 2003 and February 2004, the US consul halted his monthly visits.
With the help of a prominent civil rights attorney, Morton Sklar, Executive Director of Human Rights USA, in August of this year Abu Ali's parents sued the US government. They asked a Federal court to order a hearing on his detention. For authority, they relied on the Supreme Court rulings in the cases of the Guantanamo Bay prisoners, and an American citizen, Yaser Hamdi. These decisions affirmed that even in wartime, the President does not have a “blank check” to detain people without due process.
Responding to the parents' petition in federal court, Justice Department attorneys said US courts lacked jurisdiction over cases involving US citizens in foreign custody. District Judge John D. Bates rejected the notion that "when the United States acts against citizens abroad it can do so free of the Bill of Rights." He ordered the Justice Department to produce evidence establishing what role, if any, U.S. officials played in Abu Ali's arrest and detention.
The government’s “position is as striking as it is sweeping," the judge said. He warned that its behavior would allow the government to arrest people and deliver them to another country in order to avoid constitutional scrutiny, or even "to deliver American citizens to foreign governments to obtain information through the use of torture."
The State Department Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2003 says Saudi Arabian security forces "tortured detainees" and that "torture and abuse were used to obtain confessions from prisoners." The report also cites
" Â… credible reports that security forces continued to torture and abuse detainees and prisoners, arbitrarily arrest and detain persons, and hold them in incommunicado detention."
Amnesty International has expressed “concern” over Abu Ali’s plight. “As information or confessions are often extracted under this kind of duress, the failure of United States consular authorities to visit Ahmed Abu Ali promptly after his initial detention, or to regularly visit him since then, has put him at increased risk of these abuses.”
The judge directed the US officials named in the suit to respond within 30 days. Those officials include Attorney General John D. Ashcroft, FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III, Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge and Secretary of State Colin L. Powell. So far the silence has been deafening.
At the time they filed the suit, in August of this year, the Saudi government told the family they had no interest in their son. The United States insisted that it was not holding him. But the day the family filed suit, the State Department called the parents and told them that the Saudis were charging him with unspecified terrorism-related crimes. At this point, it is unclear whether any charges have been brought by the Saudis.
But The Washington Post reported that the Saudi embassy said in an e-mail that a senior Saudi official had issued the following statement: Abu Ali "is being detained with the full knowledge and support of the US government. There is an ongoing investigation regarding this individual. At this time, we have received no request for extradition."
Yet, more recently, The Post reported, Abu Ali was told by Saudi authorities that his trial was approaching. US officials have not facilitated legal representation, nor have they discovered what, if anything, he has been charged with.
"Every development we have seen suggests this is a US case and US prosecution," said attorney Sklar.
US officials have been interested in Ahmed Abu Ali because of an alleged connection to a now-concluded Virginia terrorism case. During the July 2003 bail hearing for one of the Virginia defendants, Sabri Benkhala, it was mentioned that Abu Ali was an associate of his who had allegedly confessed to belonging to al-QÂ’aeda during interrogations that were conducted by Saudi Arabia authorities and observed by the FBI. Ahmed Abu Ali denied to his family that he had ever made such a confession. Curiously, the allegation was not repeated during BenkhalaÂ’s March 2004 trial. He was acquitted of all charges.
Most Americans are, lamentably, uninformed about this case – or many other cases of post 9/11 infringements on liberties guaranteed by the US Constitution.
Or they have been persuaded by the Bush Administration that losing some of these liberties is critical to “winning the war on terror”.
But many citizens are outraged. Typical is Lawrence Jones of Conifer, Colorado, who wrote to The Denver Post, “Do you know what we call detainees when they are held by other countries without sufficient evidence and without due process of law? ‘Political prisoners.’ And we make a great show of our self-righteous disdain when other countries do exactly what we are doing. What happened to the America I learned about in school, the America that set people free because of a lack of evidence? What are we holding these people on -- hunches?”
The author of the now infamous memo to President Bush characterizing the Geneva Conventions as “obsolete” and “quaint” will soon be confirmed as the nation’s top law enforcement officer. America’s new Attorney General would do well to listen to consult Churchill’s October 16, 1938 speech, "The Light is Going Out” for his job description.
Directed at the U.S. from London, he said: "I avail myself with relief of the opportunity speaking to the people of the United States. I do not know how long such liberties will be allowed, the stations of uncensored expression are closing down; the lights are going out; but there is still time for those to whom freedom and Parliamentary government mean something, to consult together... They [dictators] are afraid of words and thoughts: words spoken abroad, thoughts stirring at home--all the more powerful because forbidden--terrify them."
William Fisher has managed economic development programs in the Middle East for the US State Department and the US Agency for International Development, and served in the international affairs area in the Kennedy administration.
Posted by: abfgus at May 12, 2005 02:41 AM (cmAXD)
36
WHAT DEMOCRACY ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT AMERICA ??!!!
Posted by: hatootch at May 16, 2005 06:49 AM (kIola)
37
people like greyrooster are prejudice just like all the cowardly freaks in america who belives in the patriot act iam getting out of this stupid white fake christian country iam either moving to canada or cuba communism is better than capitalism.
Posted by: az at May 19, 2005 12:29 PM (uIgzp)
38
GUYMEN KEEP OFFOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Posted by: MUGU at July 12, 2005 06:44 AM (ZGQbn)
39
ahmad will be free no one in my family will be charged guilty when innocent bush can just go jump off a clif i hate him but not enough to kill him
Posted by: az at November 02, 2005 06:12 PM (nT8f/)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Verb Conjugation: Orgle (Update:Chewebacca Orgles)
We orgle. They orgle. You (plural) orgle. I yip. You (singular) yip.
Thus:
When I saw them orgling I went to me room and yipped.
UPDATE: Thanks to Dave at Garfield Ridge this link to The Facts of Life theme sung (or should I say orgled) by Chewbacca.
WARNING: Put all fluids down before clicking link.
Posted by: Rusty at
11:21 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 66 words, total size 1 kb.
1
That was funny. Almost close enough to the real thing.
Cindy
Posted by: firstbrokenangel at February 25, 2005 12:56 PM (PEKrh)
2
You warned me. But still... laughed myself into a coughing fit.
How could something so stupid be so brilliant?
Posted by: Gordon at February 25, 2005 04:34 PM (dEFhD)
3
This was too funny.
It has earned a place in the permanent collection.
Posted by: moneybagzz at February 26, 2005 12:25 AM (ui6sj)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Iran Gives Rape Victim 100 Lashes for Sex
At least this teenage girl didn't get the maximum sentence for sex outside of marriage which is the death penalty. Under sharia law, a rape victim must prove that they sufficiently struggled against her attackers. If a woman claims rape and there are no male witnesses to testify on her behalf she is subject to penalties such as this.
Robert Spencer notes that "How did they establish that she consented? This article doesn't say, but it was probably from the testimony of the men involved. Traditional Islamic law disallows a woman's testimony in such a case."
Further, note the discrepency between the girls punishment and the boys involved. BBC:
The court dismissed the girl's claim that she was raped. It said she had sex of her own free will, the official Iran Daily newspaper reported.
The girl was sentenced to 100 lashes because her accusations of rape and kidnap could have landed her partners a death penalty, the Tehran judge said.
Sex outside marriage is illegal in Iran and capital punishment can be imposed.
The young men in the case were sentenced to 30 and 40 lashes each.
Under Iranian law, girls over the age of nine and boys over 16 face the death penalty for crimes such as rape and murder, while capital punishment can be imposed in certain cases of illegal sexual relationships....
Yes, let's let these people develop nukes. More evidence the once progressive Persian state has become deeply perverted by the Islamic Revolution.
Posted by: Rusty at
08:39 AM
| Comments (25)
| Add Comment
Post contains 261 words, total size 2 kb.
1
I once got 100 lashes during sex. Does that count as a similar experience?
Posted by: Wine-aholic at February 25, 2005 09:16 AM (Wsn+K)
2
They could at least administer an equal number of lashes to both genders.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at February 25, 2005 09:26 AM (x+5JB)
3
100 Lashes for getting raped. Nice. When will the common man in Iran rise up and hang the Mooo-las from every lamp post?
All our Iranian friends need to do, is start killing every Mooo-la they see. Pull out their beards first, then rape them, then give them 100 lashes, then hit them with rocks and finally hang their evil bodys from a lamp post and light it on fire.
DEATH TO THE FILTHY IRANIAN Mooo-Las
Posted by: OBSNOOKS at February 25, 2005 10:43 AM (yBHNA)
4
Just one of many good reasons to invade that shithole.
Posted by: elliott at February 25, 2005 10:49 AM (RLooS)
5
Don't invade. Arm the student population. They want their MTV. The young hate the Mullahs. Give them lawyers, guns and money!
I agree with Snooks. DEATH TO THE FILTHY Moo-Las
Posted by: Earl Dittman at February 25, 2005 10:59 AM (yBHNA)
6
Earl has the right idea. They are totally ready for a change.
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at February 25, 2005 11:08 AM (JQjhA)
7
When was Persia ever progressive? Back when they had a monarchy under the Shah?
Posted by: Mickey at February 25, 2005 12:02 PM (ELnLC)
8
Meanwhile, the MoooLahs can bugger young boys to their hearts content(permissable under Islam per the Koran) and this poor girl gets 100 lashes for being raped.
Death to the MooooLAhs! We should all pitch in and offer bountys on their filthy heads. What say you all?
Posted by: SNOOKS at February 25, 2005 12:16 PM (yBHNA)
9
Some lefty ponce told me that we need tolerance of other cultures.
F- Tolerance. I won't tolerate my redneck neighbors hound dog crapping on my lawn, why the hell should we be tolerant of these filthy moooolahs bottomknocking young boys and whipping girls who have been raped?
I would be happy to pitch in for a moooolah bounty.
Posted by: Fillmuhcrevice at February 25, 2005 12:19 PM (yBHNA)
10
nice real nice. what will they think up next?
Posted by: megan at February 25, 2005 12:31 PM (xDs/2)
11
Why not send a few Communists into Iran......they seem to know a few things about overthrowing government.
Posted by: Red Wolf at February 25, 2005 12:31 PM (1RznM)
12
Send this to Nancy Pelosi and Babs Boxer. Maybe they wil open their eyes.
Posted by: Rod Stanton at February 25, 2005 12:42 PM (QMgRR)
13
Is Iran like Saudi Arabia where they are strict Sharia law?
Either way, it's sickening. You know, we're a young country but just look how far we have come? Why can't these countries change to the times of the world? I mean, come on, they were there before Jesus but nothing has changed at all
We are a lucky people, a privileged people and we need to protect that.
Cindy
Posted by: firstbrokenangel at February 25, 2005 01:02 PM (PEKrh)
14
COME COMRADES!!! LET US START THE IRAN REVOLUTION!!! HUZZZZZZZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!
Posted by: Communist at February 25, 2005 01:03 PM (1RznM)
15
TITANS OF THE BLOGS VS. MAD MULLAHS OF IRAN!
Folks here's my "secret" strategic weapon to implode the women hating Mad Mullahs of Iran before they go nuclear.
See comment at this link to now blog site:
Link Here
LET'RUMBLE!
Posted by: Ron Wright at February 25, 2005 02:43 PM (Rkx7M)
16
Nasty punishment indeed - however, a good point that her false testimony could have got these men killed should she have been believed.
A punishment for false allegations of rape would be a good idea would it not.
Posted by: Think Again at February 27, 2005 04:47 AM (rByZX)
17
"I trusted one of these young men, whom I got to know by phone, and went to his place. But because he betrayed me, I filed the case against him and his friend out of revenge," the girl confessed, according to the reports.
http://www.politicalgateway.com/news/read.html?id=3001
Posted by: Think Again at February 27, 2005 04:51 AM (rByZX)
18
damn Iran people, when i do go to the army next year, i hope i get stationed there.
Posted by: karou at April 22, 2005 11:08 AM (Wrt5K)
Posted by: bamdad at May 19, 2005 04:16 AM (RDD1B)
20
uhhh, since when do you people take what little you read in an article and go by that, maybe she really was lying maybe she wasn't. You've got to have shit for brains-like most of you do- to make an assumption based on just this.
And IS America still a progressive country??? Weve got a Bible-hugging conservative President and you say we're progressive????
Posted by: nari at June 16, 2005 04:06 PM (M7kiy)
21
LIsten to all the ignorant white people who wish to participate on the topic of iran, we were an advanced mordern country way ahead of so called "modern western society" before your dear president at the time wanted the shah gone because he would not provide cheap full any more and the americans killed him (but they say he died of cancer) put in power the moo-las! oh look how everything always points back to the ameircans and britsh!then you wonder why the rest of the world hates your flirthy bastards!
Posted by: princess of persia at July 22, 2005 10:59 PM (xseaI)
22
100 lashes for the women getting raped, even in Saudi Arabia that doesnt happen!
Posted by: Saudi-Soldier at July 24, 2005 07:50 PM (RbsYR)
23
No on Saudi Arabia, they would haved killed the poor girl. Iran is more Liberal than Saudi Arabia and other Islamic countries.
Posted by: James at July 25, 2005 05:32 AM (5diGh)
24
No in Saudi Arabia they would haved killed the poor girl. Iran is more Liberal than Saudi Arabia and other Islamic countries.
Posted by: James at July 25, 2005 05:32 AM (5diGh)
25
Some of these inappropriate comments I've read so far could lead to serious deaths if it were done in the wrong places of the world.You people could be ruined for your acts of hatred.
Posted by: Saeid at July 27, 2005 05:20 PM (Br1gy)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Saudi Connection to Presidential Assassination Suspect Getting MSM Coverage
Fox and Friends ran a lengthy segment this morning discussing connecting Ahmed Omar Abu Ali's motivation for plotting to assassinate Pres. Bush with the al Qaeda network to the Saudi funded Islamic Institute. The hosts brought up the Wahhabi curruculum at the school and seemed genuinely concerned that there are thousands of similar schools funded by the government of Saudi Arabia. The three also promised a lengthier report this weekend. As of this morning, no print articles can be found on the subject at FoxNews.com.
Where are the trio (or their producers) getting this information? You be the judge.
*Good morning Fox producers. Glad to have you as part of our growing readership.
Posted by: Rusty at
08:21 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 131 words, total size 1 kb.
1
they probably don't work on weekends.
I also heard his father worked there or taught there and was let go when the kid graduated at the ripe old age of 18. But what are schools like this thriving in the US? I mean WTF? And near Washington, DC? If we're supposed to be looking for terrorists, wouldn't that be the first place to close down.
hmmmmmm
Cindy
Cin
Posted by: firstbrokenangel at February 25, 2005 01:08 PM (PEKrh)
2
Hey Macktastic Rusty Wicked---does this mean Juliet Huddy is in the stable of beeeches too?
Posted by: Steve the Llamabutcher at February 25, 2005 07:26 PM (4cI/7)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Another Top Zarqawi Aide Captured
Mohamed Najam Ibrahim, a top leader in Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's al Qada in Iraq network has been captured in the city of Baqouba. According to the AP, Ibrahim was personally involved, along with his unnamed brother, in beheadings. Iraqi officias say he is being interrogated by authorities for information they hoped would lead to other arrests.
Who the Ibrahim brothers' beheaded victims were was not reported by Iraqi officials.
In the past several weeks a number of top Zarqawi aides have been captured or killed. With each new arrest information is gathered and more arrests are made. Are we getting closer to capturing Zarqawi? I certainly hope so.
UPDATE: It looks like we nabbed two Zarqawi aides in the same day.
Let me quote Ice Cube for a moment, "Today was a good day."
Others: Backcountry Conservative, Captain Ed
Posted by: Rusty at
08:06 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 149 words, total size 1 kb.
1
They should turn this guy loose in one of the very neighborhoods where he'd been instrumental in killing fellow Iraqis--after informing the locals of their special "guest," of course.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at February 25, 2005 09:31 AM (x+5JB)
2
They also arrested a Saudi General who taught them how to do the beheadings.
geez
Cindy
Posted by: firstbrokenangel at February 25, 2005 01:10 PM (PEKrh)
3
Sheesh, how can they keep getting Zarqawi's cohorts, yet not any closer to getting the man himself? Aren't any of these aides being interrogated?????
Posted by: Laura at February 25, 2005 02:05 PM (ptOpl)
4
What? Interrogate them. Then we would have to listen to the Abu Garib prison cry babies again. Simple minded freaks like Jim would have a field day if we put panties on their heads.
Posted by: greyrooster at February 25, 2005 11:39 PM (CBNGy)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
February 24, 2005
Al Jazeera Cartoon Calls Jihadis to Arms
A country invades a nearby nation, rapes its women, murders its children, and tortures its citizens. How do you react? Would you think yourself justified in fighting this evil country?
That is exactly the way many Muslims see us. You would too if your only source of television were al Jazeera.
Take for instance this animated cartoon which is supposeed to be a criticism of Syria. It begins by showing how nobody wants the poor incompetent Syrians. It is even funny for a moment. Of course, it wouldn't be al Jazeera if it didn't end on this frame posted below.
more...
Posted by: Rusty at
04:38 PM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 114 words, total size 1 kb.
1
"That is exactly the way many Muslims see us. You would too if your only source of television were al Jazeera."
Ahem! I believe I heard Rumsfled say those very words just a few weeks ago. LOL Good words.
Posted by: Bubbe at February 24, 2005 05:50 PM (4BlQ+)
2
Wow! Rumsfield is a Jawa reader. Awesome.
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at February 24, 2005 07:23 PM (ywZa8)
3
im thinking an arabic language tv news station out of free iraq beamed into the rest of the region with a pro u.s pro truth delivery is needed to counter the enemy that is al jazeera...
Posted by: rumcrook at February 24, 2005 09:13 PM (TlR3g)
4
I'd settle for an Arabic language channel broadcasting the truth, period. If they dropped the islamic jihad rhetoric and stop being a talking head for terrorists, even Al-J would be fairly acceptable.
The pro-US part would just come naturally.
Posted by: Jonathan Murray at February 25, 2005 12:43 AM (7D30s)
5
" You would too if your only source of television were al Jazeera."
Because they put israelis on tv?
Posted by: actus at February 25, 2005 07:33 AM (5Lqt9)
6
http://hammorabi.blogspot.com/
Posted by: firstbrokenangel at February 25, 2005 07:44 AM (PEKrh)
7
Is it really much different than Fox News.
Posted by: Ed at February 26, 2005 12:26 AM (49KHa)
8
Based on the past events, clarity is in cartoon. It doesn't take a mathematician to determine that Abu Gharaib happened as a result of new attorney general, Alberto Gonzales. Consequently, reality shines on the U.S. military. What is preached at the top slides to the bottom and as such your practice of torture makes you worse than the enemy.
Posted by: J at February 28, 2005 04:02 PM (r9Wp/)
9
This is the "ilk" you aid and abet. Think. Anathema comes to mind.
Posted by: M at March 04, 2005 12:43 AM (hEwYL)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
$10,000 Reward Offered for Proof Gannon Slept With Top Officials (UPDATE: Gannon-Rather-KKKarl-Rove-Gate)
Blogger Kelly Ann Collins has teamed up with a 'source' to offer a reward for any one that had GAY KINKY-SEX with top-ranking (read: ANY Republican) government (read: or any one who has ever shaken a Republican's hand) official. None of this is about sex, of course, but did we forget to mention the fact that Jeff Gannon / James Guckert was a GAY KINKY-SEX PROSTITUTE & ESCORT and that we're looking for
DNA evidence? From
the post:
A wealthy Washington socialite is offering a $10,000 reward for proof that Jeff Gannon (pictured), an allegedly gay kinky-sex prostitute / escort / white house reporter / GOP operative, has had sexual relations with top-ranking government officials....
So, I ask again -- have you seen this man? Have you slept with this man? Do you know this man?
A local socialite, who wishes to remain anonymous, has teamed up with this site to offer a $10,000 reward to anyone that can provide hard proof (photos, phone pictures, locks of hair, DNA on a suit) that Jeff Gannon had ANY sexual -- or romantic -- relationship with any top-ranking officials here in Washington.
HT to
Wonkette who adds:
Huh. Since when is Matt Drudge a "local socialite"? Also: expect giggling over the definition of "top-ranking." Heh.
Update: Goldstein and
Ace offer their commentary.
UPDATE II: Jeff Gannon has his own blog (ht: Hubris in PW comments)
UPDATE SO CRITICAL I'M STRIKING ALL THE NONSENSE I WROTE BELOW ABOUT HOW THE WHOLE JEFF GANNON THING WAS REALLY NO BIG DEAL:
In a revelation so shocking that it will bring the citizen-journalist phenomenon to a halt and will no doubt usher in the era of the politician-journalist, Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) has revealed that Jeff Gannon was responsible for breaking Rathergate which proves once and for all the KKKarl Rove did forge those documents in a grand conspiracy (no doubt orchestrated by Shrimp-Chub-Bush's masters in the Illumnati-Trialateral-Zionist-Haliburton-Mossad Commission).
How does he know? He can feel it, man. He can feel it.
Charles Johnson first broke this amazing revelation which is sure to break my spirits and lead me to volunteer for the Media Matters empire which, incidentally, is run by David Brock the man who was deceived--just like I have been--by the vast right--wing-Christian-Coalition conspiracy into writing the journalistic masterpiece and Pulitzer nominated books The Real Anita Hill & The Seduction of Hilary Rodham before he saw the light and joined the left-wing-gay-outting integrity filled and Soros funded empire of Media Matters and wrote the classic and acclaimed The Republican Noise Machine: The Right-Wing Media and How it Corrupts Democracy.
Ace and Rob have more. Both obviously still deceived by the corporate media.
Instapundit chimes in on KKKarl Rove-Gannon-Rathergate, kinda. Did you know Glenn Reynolds writes for MSNBC, a subsidiary of NBC, a subsidiary of General Electric which also happens to build the jet engines for the US war machine. Who profitted from the Iraq war? Follow the money, man. Follow the money.
UPDATE III: On a serious note, the other day MSNBC ran every single question asked by Gannon in news conferences. Not a single one seemed out of the ordinary. Not a single one seemed any less inane and trite than ones offered by legitimate reporters. None.
But what about all the softball questions?
The hard questions are the ones you want asked. It's all subjective. To the folks at Media Matters the hard questions are never asked.
I take it anything short of 'Ari, when is Bush-Hitler going to admit he lied to lead us into war so that we could steal oil for Haliburton and murder innocent Iraqi children and torture prisoners at Abu Ghraib?' would suffice.
Posted by: Rusty at
03:11 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 637 words, total size 5 kb.
1
The last lines you crossed out are the closest to the truth, so why is that your limit on what should be asked. The Bush admin did practice massive propaganda selling this w2ar to the american people under false pretense. The US did engage in this war to secure control of future oil consumption driven by ideological assumptions of geostrategic realpolitik. The US has murdererd thousands of iraqi children as "collateral damage" (tell the parents of those children it was well intentioned). And lastly, Alberto Gonzales, along with many in the Bush admin beggan this campaign openly defying the ICC, the Geneva Conventions, sending suspects to other countries to be killed, etc. Remember, when John Lindh was captured, Mike Span is on camera telling him that if he didnt talk he was going to kill Lindh. Thats when the prison rioted and CIA man Span was killed.
To get good answers we really need to look at the real world.
Posted by: ernie at February 25, 2005 11:23 AM (ursvs)
2
ernie: You are one sick puppy. Get help now.
Even consider moving to the middle east to be near your friends?
Posted by: greyrooster at February 25, 2005 11:44 PM (CBNGy)
3
http://names.anotheruniversesucks.org/indiana__real--estate/ glidedwhooshwindow
Posted by: fainted at June 17, 2005 06:57 AM (kc7a6)
4
http://real.presselibre.org/9714502/ fistheaterstiniest
Posted by: means at September 24, 2005 10:40 PM (0buiw)
5
http://webmarket.orig.com/CGI/wwwboard/messages/2867.html hatslikessweatshirts
Posted by: constricted at October 29, 2005 07:31 PM (uSisd)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Would Be Bush Assassin's Jihadi Connections
The Justice Department's motion to detain Ahmed Omar Abu Ali is full of interesting facts that show a deep connection between the man and the jihad ideology. The motion can be
downloaded from this post. For instance, the following describes a book found by the FBI links Ahmed Omar Abu Ali to the Muslim Brotherhood.
You will recall from this post that Ahmed Omar Abu Ali attended a mosque with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. Although the official stance of the Muslim Brotherhood has been to renounce violence in pursuit of their political goals, it is the nature of the political goals themselves that are troubling. The Muslim Brotherhood wishes to restore the global calilphate and impose sharia law. The Muslim Brotherhood is in fact the ideological parent of al Qaeda.
If The Muslim Brotherhood sounds so familiar it is because Lynne Stewart was recently convicted of passing information from her terrorist client Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman to the radical Egyptian Brotherhood, an offshoot of the larger group. The Sheik was a key figure in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
From the Defense Department's motion recounting material found in Ahmed Omar Abu Ali's Fairfax, Virginia home:
A book in Arabic written by senior al-Qaeda official Ayman al-Zawahiri, Usama bin LadenÂ’s deputy, in which al-Zawahiri characterizes democracy as a new religion that must be destroyed by war, describes anyone who supports democracy as an infidel, and condemns the Muslim Brotherhood for renouncing violent jihad as a means to establishing an Islamic state.
In another document we hear the standard Islamist rejoinder against the US toppling of the Taliban regime and praises the Sept. 11th attrocities. Notice how jihadis both deny that bin Laden was responsible for the attacks yet praise him for doing so:
Nearly ten months ago, the World was witness to a momentous attack against the greatest Empire of modern times. On September 11, 2001, a little past nine in the morning, time stood still. In a brief moment, the United States of America suffered the pain the people of Iraq and Palestine endure on a daily basis . . . .
In one of the most sophisticated, well-planned attacks seen in modern times, the
Twin Towers, the source of providing $5 Billion in annual aid to Israel, were destroyed. And what is often conveniently forgotten is that the third plane turned
the Pentagon, the symbol of American military supremacy, into a rhombus, whilst the fourth plane was shot down by the US themselves. In barber shops, cafes, markets, everywhere people were whispering celebrations . . . .
Within days of the attack, without a shred of evidence, the blame was laid firmly and squarely on one man, Usama Bin Laden. The US in its arrogance demanded that Mullah Omar, the Leader of the Believers hand Usama Bin Laden over to them, r face the consequences.
Clearly George Bush has never met Mullah Omar; had he done [so] he may have realised that the Prince of Believers fears no one but Allah, Lord of the Worlds. Mullah Omar would rather walk through a blazing fire than betray his friend and guest. . . . Mullah Omar, the Mujahideen of both Al-Qaida and Taliban chose to endure the pain of 15,000 lb ‘Daisy Cutter’ bombs in order to protect their friend and hold fast to the principles of their religion. Men with this courage, honour and integrity are indeed diamonds amongst the rocks . . . . Will the mothers of theUmmah raise more men of this calibre?
As
reported by us here, the MSM left out the fact that tapes found in Ahmed Omar Abu Ali's house promoted violence against Christians as well as Jews. Oddly, press accounts mentioned the tapes promoted violent jihad against Jews, but left out Christians. This bolsters Ali's innocence claims because many on the American left believe that fighting jihad against Zionists is a legitimate use of violence:
Audio tapes in Arabic promoting violent jihad, the killing of Jews, and a battle by Muslims against Christians and Jews.
This last bit from the motion sums it all up:
The defendantÂ’s possession of these items at his residence makes it clear that even before he departed the United States for Saudi Arabia in September 2002, he already had come to embrace and support the violent ideology and objectives of al-Qaeda.
It should come as no surprise that the
Valedictorian of a school with a Wahhabi curriculum--a school entirely funded by the Saudi Arabian government--
who attended a mosque with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, who's family calls on the help of the Muslim American Society--the American arm of the Muslim Brotherhood--would actually
believe what he was being taught and attempt to act on those beleifs.
The objection might be raised that since the Muslim Brotherhood has parted with al Qaeda by renouncing violence that these connections are meaningless. Possibly, however the renouncement of violence was a tactical move on part of the Muslim Brotherhood. They did not renounce violent jihad in principle, rather, they say violent jihad is not necessarily the best tactic.
More evidence that Ahmed Omar Abu Ali hated his country of birth comes from the motion. We reported early on that the indicted suspect's father and mother, Omar and Faten Ali, are Jordanian by birth (after correcting an error that we made that they were Saudi). While Omar has become a naturalized citizen of the US, his wife Faten is still a Jordanian. Because of this, Ahmed Omar Abu Ali was a dual citizen of Jordan and the US.
What would you do if you had dual citizenship and yet believed that one of these two nations was guilty of being the equivalent of Nazi Germany? From the motion:
The government proffers that the defendant lived in Jordan from 1993 to 1997, and that he has close family members residing in Jordan. Indeed, the defendant has admitted that he possesses Jordanian citizenship in addition to his U.S. citizenship10 and, in a
November 2003 meeting with the U.S. Consul in Riyadh, inquired about the procedures for renouncing his U.S. citizenship.
Posted by: Rusty at
03:00 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 1020 words, total size 7 kb.
Online Jihadis: "Chop off the head of Guiliana Sgrena"
From
the SITE Institute's translation of an onile discussion about Guiliana Sgrena at an Islamist bulletin board:
...Guiliana Sgrena should be "slaughtered" in order to teach the Europeans in general and the Italians in particular a lesson as a result of their support to the "crusaders"...
"My brothers in Al-Qaeda, kill this ugly old woman and do not show any mercy towards her. Do not forget that the Italians, as a people and as a government, hate Islam and the Muslims."...
"Chop off the head of Guiliana Sgrena"
Posted by: Rusty at
12:20 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 105 words, total size 1 kb.
1
OMG - hope they don't listen.
Cindy
Posted by: firstbrokenangel at February 24, 2005 12:27 PM (PEKrh)
2
The ones calling for the slaughter of this Commie Italian Skag are not true Islamists. The carriers of tiny examples of manhood use the word "chop"- The only "chops" we in Islam know of are Mutton Chops which are worn by our women.
I admit, I do not like this woman who has taken herself hostage. I am sure her left wing commie friend who is calling for her head to be "chopped" off does not mean her any harm.
Posted by: filth allah at February 24, 2005 01:06 PM (yBHNA)
Posted by: clayton at March 03, 2005 12:46 PM (0Q94X)
Posted by: The Italian at March 06, 2005 03:15 PM (iNCuo)
5
The Resistence in Iraq should take care not to shoot off its own foot. The US and its criminal buddies are too powerful militarily to be driven out of Iraq by force of arms. But investigation and witness by those who oppose the Iraqi invasion and the presence of US forces in Iraq-LIKE Guiliana Sgrena, is a powerful force against US propaganda and lies about its behavior in Iraq.
Iraq NEEDS outside journalists to tell the truth about US abuse of Iraqi people such as the US led genocide at Fallujah. Who will show outside world what the US is doing in Iraq if not dissident journalists? Why did the jihad groups kidnap a DISSIDENT, and not all the imbedded propagandists the US and its criminal pals have running all over Iraq?
Posted by: qyinn at March 07, 2005 08:38 PM (+7VNs)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Canadian Islamic Congress Praised Saddam Hussein, Syrian Dictator-Condemns US
Check out this
Canandian Islamic Congress letter in support of Syria's occupation of Lebanon. After condemning the US for ousting Hussein's model administration and calling the Syrian occupation of Lebanon a 'peace-keeping mission' guess what it blames the real motivation for the US invasion of Iraq?
It's the Jews, stupid.
In a letter today to Prime Minister Paul Martin, the Canadian Islamic Congress said it endorses yesterday Martin's characterization that Syrian troops are in Lebanon as peacekeepers, not invaders. "The withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon should be left up to those two countries to negotiate," said the CIC....
To date, the American-led invasion of Iraq has resulted in the deaths of more than 100,000 Iraqis and thousands of Americans. Iraq has been transformed from country with 100% employment and a stable public service infrastructure, into an impoverished nation in disarray, with more than half of its adult workforce jobless. From being one of the leading Middle East states in administration, education and health care, Iraq has fallen to one of the world's most disadvantaged societies.
The CIC is charging that America's aggressive Middle East policies are designed primarily to shore up Israel's military power and economic advantages in the region, while attempting to divert world attention from Israel's territorial expansion into the West Bank through illegal Jews-only settlements.
(ht:
James Joyner and Via
Kate at Small Dead Animals)
Posted by: Rusty at
12:12 PM
| Comments (16)
| Add Comment
Post contains 245 words, total size 2 kb.
1
What's wrong with that? It seems like a good start for a fantasy novel of some sort.
Posted by: Wine-aholic at February 24, 2005 12:18 PM (Wsn+K)
2
Damn thing posted before I had my say...
So yeah, the CIC forgot that under Hussein, there was 100% turnout for their 'elections,' whereas the imperialist invaders could only mangage 60% or so.
Posted by: Wine-aholic at February 24, 2005 12:20 PM (Wsn+K)
3
Forget Canada. They have sold their souls. Close the border and let them go their way. I say we shouldn't have anything to do with them. Keep American jobs in America and keep Canadians in Canada. Frig em. We don't need them. American automobile makers can put Americans to work. Let the muslims feed them.
Posted by: greyrooster at February 24, 2005 01:53 PM (CBNGy)
4
Actually, it's been pointed out that Martin was speaking sarcastically when he made that comment. The CIC took the entire comment out of context.
Anyways, until there is a majority government in place in Canada, you'll see more waffling on issues.
Posted by: Venom at February 24, 2005 02:08 PM (dbxVM)
5
Canada, as a whole, has never been to bright. Don't take anything they say too personally.
I don't think their military could fight their way out of a wet paper bag...
Posted by: thespirit at February 25, 2005 11:30 AM (CYPld)
6
Yeah, low homicide rates, free health care and subsidized education. Oh yeah, and fiscal surpluses.
What a shitty country.
Posted by: Venom at February 25, 2005 12:15 PM (dbxVM)
7
The Canadian Islamic Congress may not be right about everything in Iraq under Saddam Hussein, but several things pre-invasion are irrefutable: Iraq was free of jihadist terrorists, was not a training ground for terrorists, and represented no threat to the United States. And over 100,000 Iraqi citizens who have since been killed were still alive.
Posted by: Mike B. at February 25, 2005 05:49 PM (r08dQ)
8
Vemon: Your talk is confusing. I remember when you were shouting how Canada could not afford to do shit. Retoric for the sake of retoric.
Canada is like my family. Free health care, free education, free transportation and a little surplus. What happens when daddy's well runs dry? It's easy when there's only 6 of us and the money comes from the USA. Same as in Canada.
One difference. My kids aren't afraid to fight.
Close the border. We need them not. To long we have carried them.
Posted by: greyrooster at February 26, 2005 12:03 AM (CBNGy)
9
Mike b: Are you claiming less than 100,000 Iraqi citizens were killed under Saddam?
Free of terrorists? Are you nuts? The entire Saddam regime was the world's biggest terrorist.
No threat to the United States? How would you know? Were you privy to Saddams future plans? He was a threat to his own people. A proven threat to neighboring Arab states. Was he content after having his ass kicked out of Kuwait?
Your irrefutable claim in more than refutable.
Posted by: greyrooster at February 26, 2005 09:33 PM (CBNGy)
10
Grey,
Canada looks after its own, first. The same as any country ought to. Would you put the citizens of Canada ahead of the citizens of the U.S? Of course not. Canada isn't going to let its citizens suffer if it can avoid it. As such, Canada contributes what it can in terms of, say, troops after taking care of its citizens. I mean, Canada's army is so small to begin with, how many troops would you think they would be able to offer up anyways?
It's not a question of "being afraid to fight." It's a question of being *able* to contribute meangingfully. Canada has troops on the ground in Afghanistan. I don't see how that makes them afraid.
I'm not saying America should adopt Canada's way of governing. I'm just implying that I don't see the point of criticizing a country that's actually dont pretty well for themselves.
Besides, if you close the border with Canada, where will the U.S. get its oil (it imports more oil from Canada than from Saudi Arabia), its clean water, its lumber, and other valuable resources.
Sounds like both countries help each other out.
Posted by: Venom at February 28, 2005 01:21 PM (dbxVM)
11
*...donE pretty well for themselves.
Posted by: Venom at February 28, 2005 01:23 PM (dbxVM)
12
I see the CIG is as misinformed as the american public that decided to send in comments. All citizens of all countries need to open their minds and read the news not written within their own country before forming an opinion. The CIG has its own agenda for world dominence as well as the USA. As for you americans who think you'd be better off shutting the border, go ahead I'm sure the Mexicans or maybe the Chinese will supply them with fresh water, oil, cheap prescription drugs and technology.
Posted by: kevin C at March 01, 2005 08:48 AM (EUHio)
13
Hey Greygoose, how stupid can you get? Close the border to canada? I hope canada closes the border to the U.S. I live on the west coast and lost my job because the U.S. has destroyed our forestry industry(oh yeah, were fighting this soft-wood lumber dispute where the U.S. are illegally clear-cutting our forrests but since we are asking an american committee to step in and stop it I'm sure the dispute will drag on forever)and I have freinds in alberta and saskachewan who cant send their cattle into the states because thousands of miles away some canadian cow is suspected of having mad cow disease (but of course when a case is found INSIDE the U.S., your government says it is just an isolated incident and that your beef industry is fine but ours is still under inspection), so they end up having to sell their cattle for pennies just to stay alive and you know who buys them..... Americans. They come up to Canada, buy them for nothing, take them over the border as American Cattle, and make millions. Pretty much the only thing still creating jobs in western canada is our oil industry, which Im sure wont last since the US is bent on taking over the oil fields it will need in years to come. You dont need us? We dont need you to keep destroying our economy. But thats just canadian-american relations...... this forum seems to be more about Iraq and Islam.... so once again I'll ask......
Hey Greygoose, How stupid can you get?!? I'll admit that Saddam Hussien was not the greatest leader in history, but he was an Iraqi leader! The citizens of Iraq are not going to follow a war-monger like Bush or some stooge washington steam-rolled into office as leader of their newest colony. Saddam did attack kuwait and Iran... but the U.S. has not once gone 1 year without being at war or working in the shadows behind some war since entering WW2 back in the 40's! They dont neccisarrily expand their borders (atleast no american would say they were) but they force each of their new colonys to buy their weapons.... tell them what they can and cannot do.... and force them to buy American products to inflate the U.S. economy. It's called Imperialization.... and the U.S. were the ones who pushed to make it illegal after it led to the world wars.
You think Saddam treated his citizens as badly as the States are treating them? Hell no! I never heard of him killing innocent women and children and he definitly never tortured them and went against the Geneva accord as the U.S. are doing. Right now the man is being held unjustly, and if he is ever tried for something like war-crimes, his best defence would be, "look at what I've done.... I'll admit to it. Now look at what President Bush has done." If their going to lock him up them should do at least the same if not worse to bush.
O.K.- Ive ranted, gotta go now but before I make my final point, and before you read any further, I want to ask everyone a question. If your agreeing with me so-far, forget about that. If you hate what I've written (im sure theres alot of you), clear that from your mind. Read the question, take a minute, and make a clear answer, not from what other people have written or told you, whether its your president, parent, or whoever, but your own conscious thought. since this is a war for freedom and liberty and justice and all that, I just have to ask......
What is Freedom to you?
And try to think politically.... not freedom is running through the park with my dog.
you got it.... good for you.... You wanna know what freedom is to me? probably not but I'll tell you anyways. Freedom to me is the right of every state to choose it's economic and social system in accord with the will of it's people, without outside interference in whatever form it takes. so who agrees? I bet even alot of George Dubya supporters will agree to most of that, up until the outside interference part. And if you agree, know that your not alone... because I got that statement right out of a united nations resolution... a resolution voted on more than once... brought up over and over again because most people see it as the very basis of freedom in our global society.... and each time it has been voted every single member of the united nations against just one opposing it...... The United States of America. Even back when they were communist U.S.S.R., the Russians agreed to it. So it just makes me wanna ask.... What have americans got against freedom?
Posted by: Canadian Jihad at March 01, 2005 04:53 PM (bxOjK)
14
oh and to "thespirit", canada has never been too bright? I guess thats why our educators are known around the world as "the best", far superior to the U.S. And I guess thats why the U.S. always tries to steal Canadian talent in almost every field from up north. Our government does the best with what it has to work with, and after aligning ourselves with you long ago, it doesn't leave us much to work with. But hey, our leader isn't seen as a moronic puppet all over the world, and of course our populace is not left following this empty headed toy which does only what the fingers up its ass tell it to do.
Oh yeah... and our military couldnt fight it's way out of a paper bag? I think is how you put it. Really, you can tell me, how far did you get in school, grade 6?.... 7? Well it's true we havent tried to build our military up ready for world domination like our favorite (and only) neighbors, we do go on many peace keeping missions for the U.N. You remember the U.N. dont you there pee-brain? And you know what, since the U.N. opposed the wars in Afganistan and Iraq, they were kind-of illegal, and the U.N. should have sent a force in to stop the American Imperialists. Unfortunatly, the U.N. are pussies who are to afraid of starting WW3 to stand up for what is truly just and right. Too bad.... I would have volunteered to kill some yanks.
Oh and if you think our military is so pitiful, well the score is Canada 1 - U.S. 0. War of 1812 bitch, if you've ever opened a history book (or any book for that matter) you might have known that. We were outnumbered and outgunned then, and we burnt your fucking White House to the ground. You wanna go for round two, I'd love to see that mother burning again.
Posted by: Canadian Jihad at March 01, 2005 06:07 PM (bxOjK)
15
thank you for give me this oppothing
Posted by: michael at April 12, 2005 08:36 AM (wvs0E)
16
Wow Tried to read it all but seems like same content on most sights what you all seem to forget is that regardless of what we feel it just does'nt matter we have gone to far and mother earth is sending messages that shes not going to take the disrespect we are showing her and that God is on the way and if you've got somethiong you need to get straight with GOD you had better do some repenting because he won't be whistling dixy when he returns Satan is here now! and it won't be long till GOD say's : Hey wassup since you's killed my son! Hey man! (His disbelife) you've poluted the WATER! wow and AIR TOO!! OK Who's responcible! Long pause no ONE wants too speak up! OK kick ass time!! I leave yous alone too discover the beauty of mother earth and this is what you do to her ( Analogy : Parents leave puppy=(EARTH) to care of a child=(US) and come back to find dog=(EARTH) half dead from abuse=(Polutants and POLOTICIANS) and neglect and the child has bullied and beat and corrupted his fellow children as well. What do you do? If I where God and I am not I would wipe the slate clean of the whole solar system and start all over and write it off as a freak accident before it invades and wreaks and infects the rest of my work. The other solar systems. Like a scientist discovering a major fungas parasite has started taking over a experiment and to prevent the spread of humanity he wipes it out lol theres going to be hell too pay folks and I just pray God does'nt hold me in line with the rest of the lot that will be condemed too ETERNAL DAMNATION! Right Mr.Bush? See ya would'nt want to be you. May God Grant and Have Mercy in all that seek the truth in him and may he grant us the courage to wipe out all who oppose HIS WILL!=(Government's Period + Source of all the WORLD'S Troubles) For us too Love and honour and respect each other and charish all of life's differences. Jesus said in his last breaths Son=(Us) Take care and Honour of thy Mother = (Literal & EARTH!) And Mother= (EARTH & literal) Hold and take care of thy son=(US) Wow I don't know why I bother even getting out of Bed anymore it seems so pointless in the way the future looks from here all the Best Everyone see you in the Next life It will be Much better I promise. For the BIBLE told me so!
LenD Great White North
Posted by: LenD at June 15, 2005 09:28 PM (mUpqU)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
169kb generated in CPU 0.1258, elapsed 0.349 seconds.
135 queries taking 0.2485 seconds, 443 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.