An explosion at the American owned Marriott Hotel in central Islamabad injured at least seven people today. The Pakistani government has denied any terrorist involvement in the blast. MSNBC reports that at least 11 US officials were staying at the hotel and one US diplomat was reported among the injured by Channel News Asia. The manager of the hotel claims that this was probably just an accident caused by bad-wiring, but the convergence of coincidences seems very suspicious. Other hotel employees interviewed by Agence France Presse claimed that they believed the explosion was the result of a bomb. The explosion was in the lobby area of the hotel, a place frequented by Westerners.

Posted by: Rusty at 04:49 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 125 words, total size 1 kb.

This photo, released by the Palestinian Authority shows an ailing Yasser Arafat shaking hands with terrorist sympathizers of all stripes. When asked to comment on his condition Arafat could only shout the word "Timmy" over and over.

According to World Net Daily, sources in Israel claim that Arafat 'could be faking it'. Could Arafat's sudden handicap have something to do with the upcoming Paris Special Olympics? No word yet but sources close to Arafat call the trip "Project Cartman".

Posted by: Rusty at 04:17 PM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 97 words, total size 1 kb.

The Commissar remakes the funniest scene from the second-funniest movie of all time. Mel Brooks would be proud, Zarqawi would be doubly mad (once for the parody and once to learn that Mel Brooks was a Jew).

Posted by: Rusty at 03:53 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 53 words, total size 1 kb.

This is an archive page. For the latest news on The Army of Ansar al-Sunnah, an offshoot of the Army of Ansar al-Islam, and other terrorist groups in Iraq please go to the MAIN PAGE HERE.

UPDATE 5/10: Army of Ansar al-Sunna website releases images of Japanese hostage Akihiko Saito. Images, story, and link to website.
---------------------------------------

The Army of Ansar al-Islam has murdered eleven Iraqi National Guardsman in a video released by the group today. Two days ago the same group had released a video showing the captured Iraqis, accusing them of collaboration with the enemy. Ten of the victims are seen shirtless and kneeling in the video before they are shot in the back of the head by one of the terrorists with an AK-47. The video also shows the grisly beheading of one of the Iraqi victims.

[Right: An image from the video showing the Eleven Iraqi National Guardsman-- Each hostage is told to state his name.

Left: An image from the video used for propaganda purposes showing the relationship between the Iraqi National Guard and American troops.]

The AP reports this translation of the voiceover on the video warning Iraqis who 'collaborate' to "Repent to God. ... Abandon your weapons and go home and beware of supporting the apostate Crusaders or their followers, the Iraqi government, or else you will only find death."

The Army of Ansar al-Sunnah website also carried the following warning ``We will not forget about the blood of our elderly, women and children that are shed daily in Fallujah, Samarra, Ramadi and elsewhere on your hands and the hands of those you work with.'' and according to the AP it said that the 11 slain men were ``responsible for guarding the Crusader American troops in the Radwaniya area'' in Baghdad.

Executing those accused of collaboration is a common tool of intimidation used by other Islamist terrorists in Palestine, Chechnya, and Kashmir.

A graphic video of the execution can be found at the Terrorist Media site.

WARNING: Graphic images from the video posted below. more...

Posted by: Rusty at 01:10 PM | Comments (33) | Add Comment
Post contains 674 words, total size 6 kb.

Ironically, reported by Right Wing News:

ANALYSIS: IRAQ EXPLOSIVES EASILY MOVED BY 'WORLD'S STRONGEST MAN' CONTESTANTS

A new scientific study by the French Ministry of Sport and Jejune Ennui reported today that the 380 tons of high explosives missing from an Iraqi site "could have easily been looted by a team of specially trained burly Scandanavian strongmen with 'roid rage.'"

more...

Posted by: Demosophist at 11:19 AM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 267 words, total size 2 kb.

A third document has surfaced linking John Kerry's anti-war activities to the North Vietnamese and Vietcong. The documents were found in the Virtual Vietnam Archive at Texas Tech University and reveal some amount of coordination between John Kerry's Vietnam Vetrans Against the War, Ho Chi Minh's North Vietnamese government and the Provisional Government of South Vietnam--better known as the Viet Cong.

The latest document can be found online at a website set up to handle inquiries at the Virtual Vietnam Archive. The website was set up after Chad Evans of In the Bullpen contacted the director of the archive questioning the authenticity of the documents. Chad's analysis of the current document can be found here.

World Net Daily claims that the new document provides context for why John Kerry would adapt the Seven Point Plan of Viet Cong leader Madame Nguyen Thi Binh. Kerry has denied any coordination with the North Vietnamese or Viet Cong.

Chad at In the Bullpen is following this closely and will have updates.

Let me just state, for the record once again, that these documents show that the North Vietnamese and the Viet Cong believed they were influencing John Kerry's group. They also show that John Kerry and the Viet Cong had the same goals and the same solution to the problem of how to bring peace to Vietnam. What they do not show is that John Kerry took marching orders from Ho Chi Minh. As I said in my post on this subject yesterday:

I do not believe [John Kerry] was directed by [the Viet Cong]. They didn't have to. John Kery was on board the ship regardless of who was steering. If the North Vietnamese told John Kerry to jump, yet he was going to jump anyway that says nothing about control or power.

Posted by: Rusty at 11:06 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 328 words, total size 3 kb.

Al-Jazeera, the virulently anti-American Arabic satelite network, has broadcast a video of a previously unknown terrorist group holding a Polish woman hostage in Iraq. The group, calling itself the Abu Bakr al-Siddiq Fundamentalist Brigades, says that she will not be released until two demands are met. Al-Jazeera denies that the group has threatened to kill her but has not yet released the entire video.

First, the group demanded that all female Iraqi prisoners be released. The Coalition, though, has consistently denied holding more than two women since that demand was first made by The Army of Ansar al-Zawahiri, a group that had kidnapped the now released Italian aid worders Simona Pari and Simona Torretta.

The second demand by the group was that Poland withdraw it's troops from Iraq. According to Middle East Online news service Polish Defense Minister Jerzy Szmajdzinski has said "The Polish government is not in the business of meeting kidnappers' demand."

The name of the woman is not yet known, but Polish commanders on the ground say she was not attached to any of Poland's military units in any civilian or other capacity. Polish officials also say that the woman may be a US citizen of Polish ancestry.

The AP reports that a spokesman for the Iraqi Interior Ministry believes that "the woman was a longtime Iraq resident with Iraqi citizenship and was believed to have been abducted Wednesday night from her home in Baghdad. Abdul Rahman did not release her name."

Polish media reports that the woman was a long-time resident of Baghdad and may have lived across the street from the Palestine hotel. The BBC reports that the woman had worked for the Polish embassy for about a year in the 1990s.

The woman has now been identified as Teresa Borcz-Kalifa. Like kidnapped director of the Care International, Margaret Hassan, this victim was a long-time resident of Baghdad and married to an Iraqi national.

Care International announced today that it would suspend all operations in Iraq. In a simple message to Margarat Hassan's kidnappers, the Care UK website posted the following statement

CARE has closed down all operations in Iraq. Please release Mrs. Hassan to her family and friends in Iraq.

In other hostage developments, a new tape released by the Army of Ansar al-Islam shows the murder of eleven Iraqi National Guardsman [more info here]. In the tape, ten of the victims are shot while the video shows the gruesome beheading of one of the victims.

Developing....

Posted by: Rusty at 08:22 AM | Comments (56) | Add Comment
Post contains 493 words, total size 4 kb.

But it wasn't in Iraq. And guess who dropped the ball? (Hint: It wasn't George Bush.)

PS-Rusty, always on the cutting edge, first reported this in his October 19th popst: France Junior (Belgium) Supplying Weapons to the Taliban?

Posted by: Demosophist at 01:50 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 58 words, total size 1 kb.

Although neither the 3rd ID nor the 101st Airborne found evidence that the 308 tons of explosives were intact when they conducted their searches of al Qaqaa, it is also a fact that they weren't looking for it. It's not entirely clear, either, that all of the material was there when the IAEA made its final inspection before the war, because they didn't actually check the containers, and just assumed that the seals they had placed earlier were sufficient evidence that the material had not been tampered with. I don't know how "safe" this assumption was, but for the purpose of analyzing the credibility of the Kerry attack, that doesn't matter. more...

Posted by: Demosophist at 05:56 PM | Comments (17) | Add Comment
Post contains 660 words, total size 4 kb.

Anything that can go wrong on Rusty's blog will go wrong on Rusty's blog. Not only did this site go down, but my backup site here was down too.

And it came back up, literally, minutes before I was walking out the door! It's all George Bush's fault!!!!

Posted by: Rusty at 05:02 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 54 words, total size 1 kb.

Great group interview with Dinesh D'Souza in the Washington Post. He gets the prize for most compassionate campaign advice:

Florida: What advice would you give the Bush-Cheney campaign in the waning days of the election?

Dinesh D'Souza: The Democrats think the terrorist threat is confined to Al Qaeda and "the guys who did 9/11." Reminder to John Edwards: the guys who did 9/11 are dead. If you understand that the battle is much broader, if you understand that the problem of terrorism is partly in the bad regimes (Syria, Iran, Saddam's Iraq) that dominate the Muslim world, if you understand that terrorism arises out of the dysfunctional societies of the Middle East, if you see the importance of establishing a democratic example in the Arab world--then vote for Bush.

OK, so he probably didn't hear the question, and I'm taking a few liberties interpreting the response. It's still a good answer. Read the whole thing.

(Simultaneously beamed by Demosophist to Demosophia, Anticipatory Retaliation and The Jawa Report)

Posted by: Demosophist at 12:14 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 183 words, total size 1 kb.

Did you know that John F. Kerry opposes the death penalty? I didn't until a few days ago. It's true. Check it out at the NY Times. Now, I may not know much about how to run an election and all that, but will somebody please tell Karl "Goebbels" Rove about this. Cause where I'm sitting, not a single one of my 'moderate' friends would vote for a guy who opposed the death penalty. NONE. This is the a litmus test for most people. A guy who doesn't support the death penalty is a liberal to us here in flyover country. More than that, soccer-moms, housewives, blue-collar workers, every one but a bunch of coastal elites all think the same thing. THIS IS THE ISSUE YOU SHOULD HAVE BEEN HAMMERING ON FOR THE PAST MONTH. It's not too late Mr. Rove. Please come up with one more ad. You could have won 45 states had you done so earlier.

Posted by: Rusty at 10:30 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 183 words, total size 1 kb.

UPDATE: Updated post "Zarqawi Releases Beheading Video of Japanese Victim" here. If you are looking for the latest news and information on a more recent beheading/ murder video released by the terrorist bastards, PLEASE GO TO THE MAIN PAGE HERE.

Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of the group formerly knows as Tawhid wal Jihad and now renamed 'Al-Qaida's Committee in Mesopotamia', has released a videotape of a Japanese hostage. In the video, Zarqawi threatens to behead the Japanese hostage "if Tokyo did not withdraw its troops" within 48 hours. Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi has stated that all Japanese troops would remain in Iraq and Japan has denied that any members of it's military are missing.

[Right: Image from the video courtesy of Reuters]

According to Reuters, the terrorist group gave "...the Japanese government 48 hours to withdraw its troops from Iraq or this infidel will meet the same fate as [Nick] Berg ... and the other infidels." The man on the video does not appear to be a member of the military and it is unknown at this time what he was doing in Iraq. Japan has about 550 troops in Iraq, all of which are engaged in non-combat infrastructure building activities.

According to Channel News Asia via Simon, Japanese TV station NHK is reporting that the hostage is 24 year old Akio Koda. It is not known why Koda was in Iraq. NHK describes him as a drifter who has been out of contact with his parents for months. In the hostage video, the terrorists claim to have evidence that Koda had recently been in Israel and in Jordan recently.

Developing......

Posted by: Rusty at 08:58 PM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 275 words, total size 2 kb.

It's true. The Jawa Report is now a source for Google News.

Rob at Fine? Why Fine? dropped a comment notifying me. I laughed as I typed in "oil for food", ha-ha, funny Rob. *Astonishment* Go look for yourself!! It links to this post.

***Thanks everyone!!!

Posted by: Rusty at 08:15 PM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 64 words, total size 1 kb.

1 I thought that you'd be surprised. I actually get emailed via GoogleNewsAlert everytime "oil for food" pops up in a news story and I was surprised to see The Jawa Report in my latest email. Hey, if Atrois can be listed there why can't you?

Posted by: Rob A. at October 26, 2004 08:51 PM (8APPC)

2 That's too good. I'm going to launch a similar campaign.

Posted by: Simon at October 26, 2004 09:16 PM (FUPxT)

3 and the "NO FUCKIN SHIT" award goes to: http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000685127

Posted by: Mr. K at October 26, 2004 09:41 PM (y/Bac)

4 Aljazeerah is listed as a news source, too. Go figure.

Posted by: Editor at October 26, 2004 09:43 PM (uurD1)

5 Rusty Rather? No way.

Posted by: Leopold Stotch at October 26, 2004 09:47 PM (plokx)

6 Oh yeah,and how long 'til you move away from Raney St.,and off to McMaynerbury you'll go.Snob! Can I have your Wagner Char-King?

Posted by: mikeatSE at October 27, 2004 12:58 AM (Y4RiX)

7 Way to go Rusty

Posted by: Froggy at October 27, 2004 01:11 AM (4M6d6)

8 Pressure pays.

Posted by: Dick at October 27, 2004 06:02 AM (hu9UN)

9 There goes google news as a source of reliable information

Posted by: Digger at October 28, 2004 05:02 AM (FYEx6)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Via Paul at Wizbang a World Net Daily article reports that recent documents have been uncovered which show that John Kerry's Vietnam Veterans Against the War were being directly directed by the North Vietnamese Communists. The documents were said to be found in archives at Texas Tech Univiersity as part of that university's Vietnam-era archive which holds more than 2 million documents. Some of the documents are translations of intercepted NV/VC communiques.

The first document can be found here. The Winter Soldier Website describes the document as "a 1971 "Circular" distributed by the Vietnamese communists within Vietnam." From the document:

The spontaneous antiwar movements in the US have received assistance and guidance from the friendly ((VC/NVN)) delegations at the Paris Peace Talks.

The second document is described as "a communist Directive designed to motivate discussions within Vietnam about promoting the ongoing antiwar activities in the United States." It can be found here. In the document NV sympathizers are urged to step up propaganda activities that demoralize US troops. The document cites John Kerry's denunciation of 'war crimes' and the staged event where he 'gave back' his medals as examples that would help demoralize the troops.

Kevin follows up that post with a NY Sun article which claims that the NV simply looked favorably on Kerry's activities. Paul also muses that the document "smacks of Bill Burkett written all over it" and that the left will cry foul and forgery.

Let me start off by saying the documents appear real to me. But having said that, do we really learn anything new? I'm just not so sure this is the smoking gun that it is alleged to be. In 1995 I attended a May Day rally in Moscow's Red Square. At that rally I heard the head of the Communist Party USA as he denounced Yankee Imperialism, mourned over the loss of the Soviet Union, and lied about how Soviets once had a greater standard of living than Americans. Did the CPUSA have direct links to the Soviet Union? Of course. Did this guy actually believe the vile garbage spewing from his mouth? As far as I could tell, yes.

The phrase Stalin used for people like this was 'useful idiots'. These were people who thought they were doing what was in the best interests of their own country by betraying that country. It always fascinates me when I hear or read what traitors write. Very rarely does a traitor think of what he is doing as treason. Rather, the common thread among traitors is that they believe that they are smarter than officials in government. They believe that their acts of betrayal are in fact acts of patriotism. So when traitors gave away nuclear secrets to the Soviets at the start of the Cold War, they rationalized it as a higher form of patriotism. If the people in the State Department were only as smart as me they would realize that the only way to gaurantee our nation's safety is if the Soviets also have a bomb.

I look at John Kerry's anti-Vietnam War activities in much the same way. The fact that he adopted line for line the policy prescriptions of the Vietcong is enough for me. I do not believe he was directed by them. They didn't have to. John Kery was on board the ship regardless of who was steering. If the North Vietnamese told John Kerry to jump, yet he was going to jump anyway that says nothing about control or power.

Most members of the CPUSA probably did not know that they were being funded and directed by the Soviets. Most members of the German Bund did not know they were being funded and directed by the Nazis. That's besides the point. The point is not who directs you but who you sympathize with. If you go to a football game and route for the visiting team expect a few glares. When your country is in a war and you route for the enemy, expect to be called a traitor. Not because we want to demean you and call you names, but because that is exactly what you are--a traitor. If the shoe fits, wear it.

Critical Update: Chad at In the Bullpen just e-mailed with this, and he has posted it at his site here. Here's a tidbit, there's more that you should read, and from what he says you should expect an update later in the day:

I just got off the phone with a worker at the Vietnam archive. She informed me of the following. There were two people from the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth at the Texas Tech University archive within the last two to three weeks specifically looking for documents pertaining to John Kerry's anti-war movmement Vietnam Veterans Against the War. She told me there has been a bit of a buzz around there as of late after these two individuals claimed they found something huge. She would not give me any more information and was pretty nervous concerning the questioning.

Critical Update II: Chad at In the Bullpen has his INDC moment. He picked up the phone and called the head of the archive. The documents are real. The head of the archive vouches for them, and he and several of the employees at the archives saw the Swifties looking for them.

Further, the archive has the documents online. Rob at Say Anything has the links so that you can see the original documents yourselves.

Critical Update III: The director of the Virtual Vietnam Archive has set up a webpage where you can download the documents here. As I just told Chad in an e-mail, it looks like the blogosphere is doing some real journalism again. You'll take note that the director of the archive told Chad that not a single journalist has yet talked to him about the authenticity of the documents yet.

Critiical Update IV: As you can probably tell, Chad at In the Bullpen has been keeping me in the loop so to speak, but I'm just a sideline to his main show--a show I should add started with an e-mail I got from Paul at Wizbang. Well Chad has this critical update, and all of you need to spread the word on this--the director of the archive has actually found one of the original captured Vietnamese documents in their microfilm collection. What we saw earlier was the military translation of the document, now we have the original. The authenticity of the document should no longer be in question. However, I would still be cautious about jumping to the conclusion that John Kerry knowingly worked for the North Vietnamese/Vietcong.

Critical Update V: Mark at Tempus Fugit also does some real journalism and has also communicated with the archives and received this e-mail further verifying the authenticity of the documents: "Adding to the authenticity of these documents, they are also available as part of the Combined Document Exploitation Center Collection at the National Archives and Records Administration in College Park, MD...These documents are also part of the CDEC Collection on Microfilm " Although the archive director notes it might take some time to locate them at either of those locations, the rest of the e-mail seems to add further evidence that these are real.

UPDATES: I'm surfing around, trying to get a feel for what other bloggers are saying and thinking. Here's some of the reaction: more...

Posted by: Rusty at 08:01 PM | Comments (59) | Add Comment
Post contains 2233 words, total size 18 kb.

1 Here we go again.. None of this matter's any more.. I mean Everyone basically know's this already... And im not a Kerry supporter...But it's seems as though u bush supporters are getting a little desperate. with a week left and still you posting these post that know one but bush supports will read and go drink a beer. like he did during that Vietnam War.......

Posted by: IraQ at October 26, 2004 09:17 AM (xdHNZ)

2 Hmmm...but Bush evaded serving his country in the same war. Sounds tantamount to draft dodgers who fled their duty and settled in Canada (though Bush used his family connections instead of having to flee). It's tough, which traitor do you vote for? The one who served and fought or the one who resisted serving?

Posted by: Venom at October 26, 2004 09:17 AM (dbxVM)

3 Venom, Service really isn't the question with these two gentleman. It's what Kerry did after he left Vietnam. Unless you've served and been called a baby killer (more than once), you'll never understand the reason I despise Senator Kerry and yes, I'll hold it against that rotten, no good, son of a bitch until the day I die. Nobody shits on me or my brothers and walks away. Nobody.

Posted by: dick at October 26, 2004 09:34 AM (hu9UN)

4 Heh. You guys are missing what the article actually says. It has nothing to do with the service of John Kerry, it's that he was working for the Vietcong to bring defeat to the United States. The authenticity of the documents are in question at this moment, but if true this is huge and not just for John Kerry.

Posted by: Chad Evans at October 26, 2004 09:36 AM (t2lXY)

5 If any one of these losers win the US is going to shit. I'm being serious here. If you switched up the players, hypothetically (I know some ppl don't know what that means and wont be able to see past it) so they were on the opposing team, Bush a Democrat & Kerry a Republican. Republicans would be bashing Bush for his lack of military service during Vietnam and lack of intelligence, Democrats would be bashing Kerry for chronic exaggerating/lying and playing for the other team. When it comes down to it these guys are both unworthy of being President. Honestly, being a Republican shouldn't mean you can't question dubious activities such as Halliburton getting open cheques to "re-build" Iraq. ( I know that's beating a dead horse but sometimes you have to really think and be critical about where your tax dollars are going) And, just because you're a Democrat doesn't mean you can't secretly wish they picked someone else. And, if you support the war then sign up or shut up because whether it was right or wrong they need you over there. I think there are a lot of war supporters who get off being holier that thou to anti-war ppl but won't back up their big fuckin mouths and step up to the plate.

Posted by: LMAO at October 26, 2004 09:49 AM (p5xDI)

6 Added to my post after you looked at it earlier: "I took time to read the rest of the Wizbang post. Not only did the God-damned worthless son of a bitch lie, lie, and keep on lying, the North Vietnamese were telling him what to say. Is there really anyone left in this country so incredibly stupid they could still vote for this jackass?"

Posted by: Bill Faith at October 26, 2004 09:54 AM (qKQwG)

7 John Kerry is a phony and a liar, but who knows if these documents aren't forgeries? Even I have a hard time believing he was a de facto enemy agent.

Posted by: Mr. K at October 26, 2004 10:09 AM (cFrT5)

8 Mr. K, Check out the critical update. It looks like the documents are real.

Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at October 26, 2004 10:18 AM (JQjhA)

9 First.. Document about Bush come out and they turn out be be a lie. Now the Republicans some how uncover some documents proofing that kerry was a puppet to the Vietcong. I mean come on Rusty... Are u guys really that Bull headed to feed into such dumb political non-sense. As I said before none of this will matter in about a week. I really hoping we make the right choice. because anything will be better than the last four years..

Posted by: IraQ- was it really about Iraq at October 26, 2004 10:28 AM (xdHNZ)

10 I think I am gonna puke...

Posted by: Mr. K at October 26, 2004 10:44 AM (cFrT5)

11 Good call, LMAO. It's a tough choice between which of those two idiots ought to run the world's superpower. Seems pretty fishy that this sort of document emerges now. Sounds like a desperate act. dick: A man is entitled to change his opinion if his experiences convince him he did something wrong. And I think service is definitely a big part of it. How do you leave the keys to the one of the biggest nuclear arsenals (if not the biggest) in the world in the hands of someone who didn't feel it was his duty to serve his country in Vietnam?And you want defend this guy? Sounds like he shit on you and your brothers, too.

Posted by: Venom at October 26, 2004 10:52 AM (dbxVM)

12 I found the online Vietnam archive and downloaded both of the documents in question. http://sayanythingblog.com/archives/004694.php

Posted by: Rob at October 26, 2004 10:56 AM (fcqpB)

13 Without the documents, I said he was a traitor and guilty of treason. If the documents are genuine, it is proven. I think it would be fitting, if after he loses the election, he is tried for treason and expelled from congress.

Posted by: Bill at October 26, 2004 10:58 AM (EPsu8)

14 Venom: Go tell a Guardsman or Reservist that they are evading service to their country. Take LMAO with you, as he can then give you a ride to the hospital.

Posted by: Mr. K at October 26, 2004 11:02 AM (cFrT5)

15 Well, if that's the best argument you have, let's go back and examine Clinton's successful efforts at dodging the draft all together. He held those keys for eight years but, you forgot about that, I guess. Or, is it not a conveinent time to bring him up? Also, considering that I once held the postition of B-man at a nuclear site during the Reagan administration, (I literally had those keys you speak of on my person, EMAS and CTSA certified) you might not want to bring up the nuke argument at all. It won't wash with me.

Posted by: Dick at October 26, 2004 11:08 AM (hu9UN)

16 Mr.K - as long as he doesn't mind me driving my gas guzzling SUV while I'm throwing Big Bacon Classic burger wrappers out the window.

Posted by: LMAO at October 26, 2004 11:33 AM (p5xDI)

17 Agreed, Dick - Clinton was a poor choice for president, too. The U.S. electorate has been batting 0 for the last few presidents, and looks like they will this time around, again, regardless of who wins. Pretty sad. Mr.K. - no, I have respect for reservists and guardsmen, not for presidents that shirk their duty (I mean, come on - Bush was given a nice gig in Alabama and he even managed to fuck that up.).

Posted by: Venom at October 26, 2004 11:48 AM (dbxVM)

18 It appears the documents are extremely legit per my conversation with the document curator. The intelligence might be in question, but not the documents themselves. See my post for details that Rusty Linked above.

Posted by: Chad Evans at October 26, 2004 12:11 PM (t2lXY)

19 Venom: Actually, you show a complete lack of respect for the service of Guardsmen and Reservists. You compared them to draft dodgers in an earlier post. I would really like to introduce you to some reservists I know. No one really knows what Bush did in Alabama. My guess is he was goofing off, at least part of the time. What we know he did not do, is falsely testify before the US Senate...possibly after receiving coaching from the Viet Cong...concerning "war crimes " committed as a matter of offical military policy. If Bush "fucked up", I see a huge contrast between his "fuck up" and John Kerry's "fuck up". And I think goofing off when you are 26 years old is a lot more forgiveable that betraying your fellow countrymen.

Posted by: Mr. K at October 26, 2004 12:12 PM (cFrT5)

20 Nope, Mr. K, wrong again. I said Bush was evading his service to his country because (as per your own opinion) he was goofing off. Doesn't sound like serving one's country to me. I compared Bush to draft dodgers, not those who actually served FULLY in the guard. If he was actually serving his country in the air national guard, the records would be there, right? But why are his so mysteriously gone? Let me re-emphasize what I said: Bush, as a person EVADING his service in the air national guard, is akin to a draft dodger who does not serve his country. I have all the respect in the world for those in the national guard and reserves who DID and CONTINUE to SERVE their country, not those who shirk their responsibilities. Service in the reserves is honourable; to be AWOL from it (when kids are dying in Vietnam) is not. Great, so Kerry lied in front of the Senate. Doesn't change my original point. Which is that I don't think either Kerry or Bush are good leaders for the U.S. and that it's a sad state of affairs when you have to choose between these two idiots.

Posted by: Venom at October 26, 2004 12:33 PM (dbxVM)

21 Venom, not only do you show a lack of respect for Guardsmen, as Mr. K pointed out, but you also have you facts wrong. Bush VOLUNTEERED to go to Vietnam but was denied his request because of a lack of flying hours.

Posted by: Editor at October 26, 2004 12:34 PM (adpJH)

22 Correct me if I am mistaken, but if true, this would disqualify him for service in the Senate. Let alone allow him to run for POTUS.

Posted by: Ricky V at October 26, 2004 12:35 PM (AHaCg)

23 Is this going anywhere on its own? Probably not. Sadly, no one cares. However, it might possibly provide the last bit of impetus needed to focus attention on the questions about Kerry's discharge and the petition to disqualify him from office on the basis of his post-war meetings with the VietCong, both of which were also going nowhere before this: http://patriotpetitions.us/kerry/ "Thus, in accordance with the Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3, which states, "No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President ... having previously taken an oath ... to support the Constitution of the United States, [who has] engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof," We, the People of these United States, believe John F. Kerry is unfit for public office. It is for this reason -- for his record of giving aid and comfort to the enemy while a member of the U.S. Armed Forces in violation of this oath -- that Senator Kerry should be prosecuted and disqualified for national office." \end flogging of dead equine flesh.

Posted by: Cassandra at October 26, 2004 12:37 PM (nkNzG)

24 Well dang Ricky... I must learn to type faster.

Posted by: Cass at October 26, 2004 12:39 PM (nkNzG)

25 Mr. K What the hell are u talking about. You have to be one dumb fuck to actually believe that Kerry document. If it was true there wouldnt be a election next week. Oh that's right you do believe it so you are a dumb ass.... and as far as guardsmen and women go. my brother is one and all of them dont have the same views. WKhy do you think we are having such a hard time getting recruits in now a days. Most of these kids signed up so this can pay for school and help with their income. Not fight a war.... if you are so gun ho why arn't you inlisted

Posted by: IraQ -was it really about iraq at October 26, 2004 12:40 PM (xdHNZ)

26 Cass - Given the length of your comment, I imagine you started before I did! Yeah, that confirms my thoughts. Thanks for pasting that. I thought I had read that before somewhere!

Posted by: Ricky V at October 26, 2004 12:43 PM (AHaCg)

27 IraQ - Perhaps your sign in should be LoIQ. Maybe the documents are true, maybe they aren't. Judging from your writing skills, my guess is your brother in the guard is also your cousin. As for enlistment, they don't accept 41 year old guys, though the possibility of going over as a contractor is definitely intriguing. I don't know where you get your information on recruitment. It is not what I have read. Or seen. I have two nephews headed into the service. They are fine, tough young men. Not little candyasses like you and Venom. I can see both of you, pants hanging on your ass, stringy, oily hair, a tatoo to let us know how tough you are, and pierced toungues to enhance you partner's orgasm when you perform fellatio...

Posted by: Mr. K at October 26, 2004 12:59 PM (cFrT5)

28 I read the majority of the documentation. I was just wondering though, could this circular be considered enemy propoganda? I mean it sounds like these guys are just trying to take credit for something someone else is doing. Also, John Kerry comes across as a chronic liar, so one may tend to believe he didn't meet with these people in Paris. I don't know, it just seems everyone is calling him a big liar but then when it suits their fancy they believe what he says. In times of war propaganda is a huge morale boost, used on both sides. This just seems like propaganda to me. And how do you back this up? Yeah, it could have been typed up in '71 or whatever, but who typed it? where is the original circular? these questions need to be asked before this becomes the republican version of a Dan Rather incident.

Posted by: LMAO at October 26, 2004 01:08 PM (p5xDI)

29 Mr.K did i strike a nerve. Well for your info i am currently with the lapd. so your last comment doesn't really refer to me. And im pretty sure that when you were your two BRAVE nephews age you didnt sign up. that's why at 41 years old your getting so pissed at the comments people are sending you.. But we understand...

Posted by: IraQ at October 26, 2004 01:13 PM (xdHNZ)

30 Oh, boo-hoo, Mr. K does't like my opinion of Bush. Someone argues with you, so they must be homosexual? Oh, and while you're picturing me, try to keep your hands above the equator. You always bring up the "gay" response when someone starts to shoot you down. And that's quite the description, one can only guess where you saw that, huh? You must have some kind of repressed urges huh? Hahahahaha!!! Anyhow, you can believe what you want, but my words are there. I said Bush was akin to a draft dodger, not guardsmen. If people can't read (either the original post or the explanations that followed), that's not my problem. I know that twisting them around and make homo-comments is the only way you feel you can win an argument, but that's your gay issue to deal with.

Posted by: Venom at October 26, 2004 01:16 PM (dbxVM)

31 Venom, the records on Bush are there - he has released them and the media have poured over them for years and have found.... nothing. Nada. Zip. He missed a few drill periods and made them up. That is par for the course in the Guards and Reserves - everyone has a civilian job, and anyway if you're in a non-flight status that is no biggie. People keep making the mistake of equating the Reserves/Guard with AD and they aren't the same. One of the first things my husband used to quantify whether a drill was successful or not was...how many showed up. If you think on that for a second, you'll see that implicit in that little statistic is the suggestion that...people often don't show up for drill! And they don't fry. They just make it up. It drives the AD staff nuts, but these people do have lives you know. Get over it. And it is well-documented now that many, many people have come forward to say they saw Bush at drill - I have documented it several times. The lamestream media, sadly, seem unable to find their own rear ends even with a microscope and GPS.

Posted by: Cassandra at October 26, 2004 01:16 PM (nkNzG)

32 The documents are real. End of story. But they do not prove that Kerry knowingly worked for a foreign government. But, as I said in my post, that is besides the point. Kerry did give comfort and aid to the enemy in a time of war. That is enough to convince me he is unfit for command.

Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at October 26, 2004 01:22 PM (JQjhA)

33 Cassandra, many people have come forward to say that what Kerry did in Vietnam is legit, but many Republicans don't believe it. Both sides are responsibile for their share of bullshit, and both sides have candidates that spell a losing situation for whoever wins.

Posted by: Venom at October 26, 2004 01:24 PM (dbxVM)

34 ...and while we're on the subject of missing records... Form 180... 94 pages of missing records... all pertaining directly to disputed aspects of his military record... a broken promise on Meet the Press to release ALL HIS RECORDS... Ladies and Gents: I give you: John...Forbes...Kerry: He claimed one entire month of Ted Peck's command history on his web site and then had to erase it. The darned guy was only in 'Nam for 4 months for Pete's sake... He claimed he and BOBrother's dude David Alston "saved each other" numerous times.... But Alson was injured in the same incident that took Peck out of commission and led to Kerry's taking command. According to the after action reports, they could only have been together a max of 7 days... during which there were... 2 combat incidents. Obviously seared...seared I tell you into the man's memory. He and old what's-his-noodle (the guy he fished out of the drink - no, not the Hamster) can't agree on which boat he was even on (Jim Rassmann - I think his name was). I documented this one a while back - it's hilarious. Kerry keeps adding in spurious details about what Rassmann is EATING fer Chrissakes. If you're going to lie, KISS. 3 words: Christmas in Cambodia He doesn't even lie well. Or even entertainingly. And in the end, that's what I can't forgive.

Posted by: Cassandra at October 26, 2004 01:28 PM (nkNzG)

35 LoIQ- Who says I am pissed. And even though you are in LAPD, you are not necessarily excluded from any commentary. You may be undercover vice officer involved in busting up male prostitution rings, and are really dedicated about maintaining your cover. Ok. I was too scared to join the military back in 1981. The US was engaged in wars all over the place. Plus, that full ride scholarship to play defense looked more interesting than going into the military to get a free education...I might have gotten called up to, uh, wherever it was we were waging war back then...but I was too shit scared to go in. LAPD. Aren't you the guys the let OJ off the hook? Or were you the ones that beat the shit out of Rodney King? Or are you the other LAPD?

Posted by: Mr. K at October 26, 2004 01:31 PM (vsvV/)

36 Venom: You may be right. I have to say for the record: I'm an officer's daughter and an officer's wife. Right now we have Marines who are seriously wounded and they are hitchhiking back to the front so they won't let their buddies down. Kerry had 3 bandaid wounds and he used them to flee the field and avoid combat. An officer doesn't do that. My father in law had a wife and 3 kids and did 2 tours in the same brownwater Navy John Kerry served in. He's dead now, at 58, of liver cancer. We think it happened from Agent Orange. So you see, I don't look too kindly on what Kerry said about Vietnam vets like my father in law or my Dad (who was also Navy and also served in Vietnam - one WHOLE tour). And I don't look too kindly on an officer who puts himself in for a medal, gets denied, and goes behind his CO's back and gets it resubbed. In the Navy and Marine Corps that is viewed with disfavor. And then on top of it all, he came back and spit in the faces of his fellow vets. And he's had 33 years to correct the record, but he had not been a big enough man to admit his error. I don't have to know much else about the man - that tells me all I need to know about his character. If you are charged with the welfare of your men and you run out on them, you are not fit to lead. And if you do not respect the rules, you are not fit to lead. And if you lie, or putting the best possible face on it, if you permit yourself to be used by unscrupulous people and you cause hurt to good and honorable men, and you do not have the courage to face them and apologize, and try to put right the harm you have done, like Steve Pitkin did at the KerryLied rally, then you are not fit to lead. He, at least, was a man. It's really quite simple.

Posted by: Cassandra at October 26, 2004 01:38 PM (nkNzG)

37 Venom: I actually just enjoy insults of all sorts, whether getting them or receiving them. And I don't single out anyone based on sexual preferences. However, if the shoe fits, you may wish to shove it up your ass, becuase you are backpedaling big time from calling W and all guardsmen by association, draft dodgers. "but Bush evaded serving his country in the same war. Sounds tantamount to draft dodgers who fled their duty and settled in Canada (though Bush used his family connections instead of having to flee). It's tough, which traitor do you vote for? The one who served and fought or the one who resisted serving?" There are your own words...used his family connections to do what?

Posted by: Mr. K at October 26, 2004 01:41 PM (vsvV/)

38 Ok Mr.K... Now I really believe i hit a nerve... Now you bringing up OJ and Rodeney Now your funny. You must have been one of those who cried when OJ won his case. and i also see you are one of those with the excuse of a Fooseball scholarship rather than fight for your country.. i see people like you all the time. Please bring something else up that has nothing to do with the subject....

Posted by: IraQ at October 26, 2004 01:44 PM (xdHNZ)

39 Fair enough, Cassandra. I respect any man/woman who does their duty for their country, and I am sorry to hear that Agent Orange might have been responsible for his death. If Kerry lied, he has no business being the Commander-in-Chief. But I haven't been impressed with Bush during his time in office, either.

Posted by: Venom at October 26, 2004 01:47 PM (dbxVM)

40 Mr. K, I will explain ONE LAST TIME because you apparently can't read too well. "but Bush evaded serving his country in the same war." was in relation to Bush allegedly going AWOL during his Alabama National Guard, not for actually being ENLISTED in the National guard. I have explained this several times. You, unfortunately, will not be content until you have twisted what I've said into something you can use. The family connections were in relation to friends the Bush family had that kept Bush out of the draft. Do you finally understand, or do we need some hooked on phonics for you?

Posted by: Venom at October 26, 2004 02:03 PM (dbxVM)

41 Be careful Venom... he's 41.....

Posted by: IraQ at October 26, 2004 02:11 PM (xdHNZ)

42 Venom, I have to step back in and mention something. Those boys that left the States and went to Canada? They evaded serving their country. Bush was in the Guard and flew fighters. I respect him for that. I'm sorry that you don't, that's your opinion. If you will look around, you'll see that it's the Vets and their families who do support Bush. As a native and current resident of Texas, we've seen this draft evasion crap drug out time and again and nothing but bullshit speculation is made of it. Until you have proof, don't bother bringing it up. It's old news. As a former member of the US Army Infantry, I take serious offense to Kerry and that bitch Jane Fonda for what they did. When he spoke in front of Congress, that was recorded and played back to NVA troops. It emboldened them to kill American soldiers. There were plenty of soldiers killed directly as a result of what Kerry said. Your words, "Great, so Kerry lied in front of the Senate." No, he shit on every soldier that ever put on the uniform and we will not forget that. One other thing, I still have every decoration that I was awarded. What about Kerry? Until you've been there or done that, in all honesty, your opinion on Kerry's military service or bush's service really doesn't matter.

Posted by: Dick at October 26, 2004 02:40 PM (hu9UN)

43 Dick: I don't respect Bush for going AWOL. Learn to read. You want proof? How about this site: http://www.glcq.com/bush_at_arpc1.htm I've read it, why don't you? Or will it matter? I mean, are you an objective enough person to consider (even for a moment) that Bush isn't the man you claim (hope) he is?

Posted by: Venom at October 26, 2004 02:49 PM (dbxVM)

44 Venom. Okay honestly, I just tried the link. It started off screaming Deserter! Obviously written by a left winger and I will not give it my time. It equated to Lawrence O'Donnell screaming "liar!" In other words, not only will I not read that trash but, I have no respect for the author or for you for when it comes down to it. The only reason you cruise this site is to cause trouble and get folks hot under the collar. You and your cronies are mentally weak if you buy into that tripe. As for your "learn to read" remark? Get over yourself, you've got nothing I want or need. Once again, your opinion does not matter.

Posted by: Dick at October 26, 2004 03:13 PM (hu9UN)

45 I am a Vietnam vet and a biker and have proudly worn a small "Vietnam Vet" patch on my vest for several years. Lots of bikers wear similar patches. It isn't meant as a boast. We don't gather and tell war stories. It was a way to identify a brother. You don't get drunk and pick a fight with a brother, for instance. We stuck together, outlaws and vets. I think that we all hoped that someday a Vietnam Vet would make a run at the Presidency. Someone with the dignity to quietly say, "I served." That person would have my vote. Instead, the first vet to run for that high office is the one who sold us out. It's sad. I can't vote for Kerry. It makes no difference to me who his opponent is, I cannot vote for John Kerry. Whenever I think of John Kerry with his three Purple Hearts, Bronze Star and Silver Star, all earned within a three month period of time, I think of Carlos Hathcock. White Feather didn't earn medals as fast as Kerry and in Vietnam, Carlos Hathcock was GOD. If you don't know who he is, ask a Marine. Any Marine. Any age. Kerry is a piece of garbage. His running mate is the modern day Dan Quayle. Bush isn't much better, but he was not a draft dodger. He was a Guardsman. I was drafted. If I could have gotten into the guard, I would have. If I could have pulled strings, I would have. Nam was not a vacation spot. It was a duty. I'm rambling, so I'll close this post. But first let me ask one question. Substitute Iraq for Vietnam. Substitute Taliban or Al Quida for North Vietnamese Delegation. Would you vote for that man?

Posted by: Breaux at October 26, 2004 03:14 PM (AT1j2)

46 Dick, one question: what is the harm in reading/listening to an opposing viewpoint? At least then you can make an objective opinion. If they're lying, you can at least point out why and how. If not, maybe you're better off knowing the truth. Sure, a site like that may have been written by someone who is left-wing. It might also have been written by someone like me - a conservative who is ashamed that someone like Bush got elected. You know, in all honesty, I just want people to question the world around them. I wish people wouldn't just make up their minds without objectively hearing both sides. Seriously, is that really too much to ask? Too many people these days (on both sides of the political spectrum) immediately ignore anything that even approaches a different perspective. As for the "Learn to read" comment, it was directed at you because I have repeatedly explained what I wrote. And, as you've demonstrated in your last article, you won't listen because it's not what you want to hear.

Posted by: Venom at October 26, 2004 03:26 PM (dbxVM)

47 Breaux, very eloquent. I've got no sympathy for Kerry either, but I think you've written one of the most intelligent things yet in this thread.

Posted by: Venom at October 26, 2004 03:32 PM (dbxVM)

48 I am literally amazed at the human ability to simply discount information like this, as though the consequences of voting for a traitor are minimal, and one's allegiances are of modest importance. Frankly, I don't know what issue would be of greater importance... and the notion that something like half the public simply don't care, as long as he's "not George Bush" suggests to me that we have a serious "democracy malfunction." Of course, all this assumes that the documents purporting to prove Kerry's complicity are valid... but what amazes me is that so many people don't seem to care. Which will be the first media outlet to take this story seriously enough to check it out?

Posted by: Demosophist at October 26, 2004 03:54 PM (OtR16)

49 Demosophist: People who have swallowed the Michael Moore blather, as posters like Venom (MoveOn?) and LO-Iq will not hear of anything that even remotely breaks down the case for Kerry, or builds a case for Bush. Really, I don't know why I bother with guys like that, except that it is fun. Every now and then, I go over to Atrios and do the same thing. But no matter how many facts you write, and how much logic you may bring forward, two simple laws of will always govern with guys like these: you cannot pour a gallon of knowledge into a one quart brain, and a fool convinced against his will, will have the same opinion still. So, just get out and vote, and hope that most Americans are intelligent enough to make the right decision. Kirk

Posted by: Mr. K at October 26, 2004 04:33 PM (y/Bac)

50 "Really, I don't know why I bother with guys like that, except that it is fun." Funny enough, that's kinda why I like poking holes in your walls (and people like you). Admit it, you're as incapable of objectively listening to a different opinion as you claim I am. By the way, I notice again you can't read: I've repeatedly said I don't support Kerry (or Bush).

Posted by: Venom at October 26, 2004 04:47 PM (dbxVM)

51 I just wanted to stop in and tell you how impressed I am with the work you have done so far. Thanks for checking my blog.

Posted by: Gullyborg at October 26, 2004 04:52 PM (Vxg4n)

52 Venom: Given that someone has to be President and it is kind of an important job, don't you think it's important to decide which one of them is, I suppose from your point of view, the least harmful? My neighbor (whom I very much like) is saying the same thing you are, and it really disturbs me. There are very important things going on right now: people are fighting and dying and someone has to make the big decisions. I'd like to think we have the right man in place (and frankly, I do think that right now). This is a hard job and we're in it for the long haul. No one (including the President, if anyone bothered to actually read his speeches instead of MoDo'ing them and misquoting them) ever said this would be easy. Abstaining from the process is, in my opinion, not an option when there are people prepared to give their lives for this country. I'm sorry if I'm laying a guilt trip on you, but I'm trying to make a point here. I've been to too many funerals in the past year. Those families, in spite of their grief, continue to support what we're doing, and they continue to support the President. You may disagree, and you certainly have that right. It's a free country. It strikes me, over and over again because I suppose I'm a bit closer to this issue than some (and less than others) that the first responders: police, firefighters, military: the people who have to pick up the piece of a terrorist attack - all support Bush by at least 3-1. The FOP endorsed Bush. The FDNY endorsed Bush. Most of the 911 families did too. My son's a cop and my husband is a career Marine. By rights, we could be sick of this whole thing, but we understand why we're being inconvenienced, if that's the right word for it. It seems to be the civilians who are bi*ching and moaning about losing the war. I don't get it. The people on the ground aren't losing heart. The people in Iraq and Afghanistan aren't losing heart. It's the morons who are safe in their homes in the cities in America who are. Why is that? What the heck do they have to complain about? If we get it, why can't they?

Posted by: Cassandra at October 26, 2004 05:25 PM (nkNzG)

53 And I'm truly sorry if that sounded disrespectful, Venom. I meant no offense. I get so frustrated sometimes. This election has me more upset than I have ever been in my entire life.

Posted by: Cassandra at October 26, 2004 05:31 PM (nkNzG)

54 Venom: You are wrong. There is an awful lot about Bush's I don't like, but it has nothing to do with what Michael Moore tells you to believe. I am with him on the big issue, which is the aggressive stance on dealing with the Islamists, the Arabs, and the Middle East in general. If the Libertarians had a hawk, that is where my support would be. Unfortunately, that agenda does not exist. Thanks for all the fun!

Posted by: Mr. K at October 26, 2004 05:54 PM (y/Bac)

55 If anyone want to look into the veracity of the SwiftVets diiging into the Texas siles, its on realtime chat archives at Swiftvets.com. MOnday, SEpt. 13, Navy Chief decides to go take a look. http://www2.swiftvets.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=9071 By DoGooder

Posted by: DoGooder at October 26, 2004 08:22 PM (+y3aN)

56 In 1972 every Marine knew Kerry was a traitor. Can't believe how soon people forget Kerry and Hanoi Jane. Neither one has been accountable for what they did to the US serviceman. I've never blamed the LAPD for the OJ Simpson verdict. The blame is on the jury, prosecutors, money and the black public. People dancing in the streets after the murderer of two innocents set free. Remind anyone of Iraq?

Posted by: greyrosoter at October 26, 2004 09:23 PM (CBNGy)

57 BREAUX: Semper Fi Bro. Good post and god bless Carlos.

Posted by: greyrooster at October 26, 2004 09:29 PM (CBNGy)

58 Greyrooster: LAPD and the OJ mess is way OT on my part, but you can add bungling of evidence handling to the reason OJ got away with murder. Furhman being a notorious bigot was another, and I agree with your other reasons. My uncle is Charlotte PD, and is a staunch Bush guy. I don't know any law enforcement that support Kerry, and don't understand why even one from LA would.

Posted by: Mr. K at October 26, 2004 09:37 PM (y/Bac)

59 Critical Update V: Matt at Tempus Fugit Actually, the name is Mark. :-) Thanks for the ping.

Posted by: Mark J at October 26, 2004 10:00 PM (ykFk5)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Notice when John Kerry talks about Iraq that he always says 'there was no al-Qaeda connection' but he never says 'there was no terrorist connections'?? Ever wonder why that is? Simple, because Iraq was a state sponsor of terrorism and John Kerry knows it.

This MEMRI report, via Jane at Armies of Liberation, reveals that under the UN Oil For Food program Saddam Hussein gave Abu al-Abbas vouchers worth 11.5 million barrels of oil, of which Abbas sold nearly 1.5 million barrels of oil.

Who is Abu al-Abbas? Captured in Iraq during the war, he was the leader of the Palestinian Liberation Front, a group listed as a terrorist organization by the US State Department and the group responsible for the murder of an American citizen on the Achille Lauro cruise ship.

The MEMRI report continues:

Abu Al-Abbas was first mentioned in a “top secret and personal” letter (No.110/2/43 of 25 January 1993) from the Iraqi intelligence service to the secretary of the president of the republic. The letter listed the terrorist organizations that could be employed by Iraq to carry out sabotage and terrorism activities against American interests in the Arab world.

Posted by: Rusty at 05:14 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 223 words, total size 2 kb.

And it's 69.

Posted by: Rusty at 04:30 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 9 words, total size 1 kb.

A new video released by the Army of Ansar al-Sunnah shows 11 Iraqi National Guard soldiers being held hostage by the group. The video can be downloaded here. The video shows the eleven men sitting in what appears to be the same courtyard the group has used to murder several other hostages. The video shows each soldier dressed in various Iraqi National Guard uniforms or in 'LSF' shirts and each soldier is asked to state his name for the camera. [Right: image from the video showing the hostages]

While this Boston Globe article claims that 'the authenticity of the posting cannot be confirmed', let me just put that to rest. This is authentic. The saddest part is that these men are dead already. The Army of Ansar al-Sunnah has murdered all of their hostages, including several Iraqi nationals and those who appeared to 'repent' of their collaboration with the US. All of their earlier victims have been civilians. Further, as reported here earlier, the group has deepened it's ties to al Qaeda in the past few weeks. more...

Posted by: Rusty at 02:58 PM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 362 words, total size 3 kb.

George W. Bush for President: The endorsement I once never thought I'd write. * * * * *

Posted by: Rusty at 02:17 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 30 words, total size 1 kb.

Josh Marshall presents a case that supposedly refutes NBC's story that the explosives thought to have disappeared from al Qaqaa were, in fact not there when the first US forces arrived. The trouble with Josh's case is that there's just not much to it. Besides the claim that the NBC team and others who support their version of things simply weren't sufficiently expert to have known what was or wasn't there, his primary argument is that the sheer volume of explosives could not have been moved without being noticed. The flaw in this argument is conceptual. It presumes 380 tons were moved against a placid background of inactivity, mirroring the conditions of our present fixation. It confuses time and circumstance in the classic self parody of the left's argumentative style. It unconsciously assumes that 40 trucks we retrospectively consider important would have been easily noticed, in the midst of 64,000 trucks frenetically transporting similar material of equal or greater importance all over the country of Iraq, during the fog of war. more...

Posted by: Demosophist at 12:52 PM | Comments (12) | Add Comment
Post contains 1037 words, total size 7 kb.