June 14, 2005
Posted by: Rusty at
10:54 AM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 194 words, total size 3 kb.
Jihadweb has published an online guide on how to become a terrorist in Iraq. The instructions (in Arabic) can be downloaded here by clicking the image to the right. I'm making it available since I have an odd feeling this site won't be up very much longer ;-) [UPDATE: DOWN LIKE A CLOWN CHARLIE BROWN]After describing how to mentally and physically prepare for becoming a terrorist in Iraq (including the instructions that you should never turn down a suicide mission) the author goes on to give advice on how to get into Iraq. First, get in touch with your local Salaafist group. This would be any mosque with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood or other Islamist groups.
Next, get yourself into Syria. From SITE's translation include:
After providing guidelines through which a potential mujahideen should mentally prepare himself for battle, the author supplies information on how to reach Iraq and the mujahideen. He states that " Salafist jihadists are in most of the Arab countriesÂ…most of these have good relations with the mujahideen groups in Iraq and, through these groups, hundreds of thousands have reached the land of the two rivers." Meanwhile, the author urges readers to be cautious, warning that "Â…getting near some of them may lead to you getting persecuted. Try to get in touch with them in a very secret wayÂ…."Just to show you where these guys stand, and to avoid the frequent charge made against me that I don't really know the website in question is pro-terrorist, here is a screenshot of one of their many banners. Any questions?
Once the potential mujahid is ready to enter Iraq, the author suggests entering into Iraq "Â…via the Syrian lands." He notes that while "There is a saying that the Syrian regime turns their face [away] from the mujahideen who take secret roads" Syrian authorities are nonetheless "Â…complicating things at the entry and exit front, so make your entry to Syria via Turkey, or for a good reason. Your parents should know the reason [by which you are professing to enter Syria]Â… and it is good if you have your passport with an entry via to Turkey, so you can pretend that youÂ’re in transit to Turkey." One a further note, he suggests that potential insurgents "wear jeans and eat donuts and use a walkman which has a tape of any singer" in order to appear westernized, and thus less of a threat. [full translation available by subscription at SITE]
Posted by: Rusty at
10:16 AM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 413 words, total size 3 kb.
Posted by: Rusty at
09:31 AM
| Comments (23)
| Add Comment
Post contains 41 words, total size 1 kb.
As far as incoherent or all over the place...I think not. I might be guilty of bad comedy sometimes, but not what you accuse me of.
"Everyone huh? Funny that they're so quiet about it. I have heard a few tell you off from time to time though."
Have you ever seen a room go quiet from embarrassment? I've seen more than a few accuse you of being a hard-liner.
"Well, I'm not into that "love thine enemy" crap. I'd rather kill my enemy. I know it's not very warm and fuzzy, but it works like gangbusters in a war, which I've been to, and you have not."
You're right I haven't been to war, and I hope I never have to kill anyone. The problem is, you're not over there fighting. You're in Tennessee talking about killing people in the streets!
"Oh I don't know, maybe the fact that people want to kill Americans and other innocent people. I know it sounds crazy, but that sort of thing kind of upsets me."
Same here.
"Somewhere between the nut-sack and the trigger finger. Some call it heart, some call it guts. I don't spend much time thinking about it."
Well, depending on what you're doing IM, some might call that your 'taint'..hehe.
"And therein lies the problem. You can't win a war without hating your enemy. I hate anyone who wants to kill me or any other innocent person. I don't think terrorists need to be understood, they need a bullet to the head and to be hanged from a bridge for the crows, and their family made to pay for the bullet and the rope. I'm a bastard if I don't like someone, though you probably already could tell."
When I referred to 'hate' I meant anyone in HERE...fellow Americans, regardless of left/right/up/down...not terrorists, who I agree should meet just as ugly an end as which they inflict upon others.
"Some have tried it, and while my table manners are of the best, most
people don't want to truly discuss the harsh realities of the world. You might say I'm a little too intense for polite company during political discussion. I can clear out a room full of hippies faster than a drug raid, and I don't have to be rude to do it, just brutally honest."
Imagining that actually makes me laugh my ass off... Anyway, I'm pretty intense too. I'd be game even if you were going crazy.
"Thanks for the compliment. I thought I never replied with anything real or substantial? You're all over the place. Anyway, it's not paranoia when someone is out to get you. Seen the news lately? They're out to get us. That's what I'm pissed about, and I have no time for someone who doesn't get that. You don't seem to get that. I'd rather that the most important news items of the day from Iraq could be something more mundane than suicide bombings, like maybe a new factory or school opening. I wish I could go to the local Pakistani grocery (I love Indian food, with Punjabi as my absolute favorite), without wondering who in there might be building a bomb in their basement. I really wish that everyone in the world could just relax and not want to kill or subjugate one another, but I know that will never be. So I hate those who want to do bad things. I guess that makes me crazy."
No man, that does not mean you're crazy...but saying you're ready to start popping of random Muslims in your hood seems a bit extreme to me. Indian food is the bomb though, no pun-jabi intended. I take back the substantial part, but 'real' is a point of view. Still though, why aren't you in the military anymore?
journalist not wishing to embed with US forces is free to apply for an Iraqi visa, fly to Baghdad, and hire a car and an interpreter who can drive them around town. They can knock on doors and talk directly with people; visit hospitals, talk with doctors; stop by the side of the road and talk with shepherds; or even hang out in a village and help make the goat cheese. Iraqi people are generally polite and usually more than willing to offer opinions about what's happening in their neighborhood.Couldn't have said it better myself. But isn't the very act of embedding with the terrorists an act of treason? Imagine a reporter from Life magazine deciding to hang out with the Waffen SS, just to get their point of view. There was an age when reporters understood their first allegiance was to their country and not the story. We seem to have forgotten that at some point.Of course, the major problem with eschewing a close military presence is the enemy's proclivity to kidnap and behead journalists whose reports portray insurgents in a negative or violent way. This puts ethical journalists in a tight spot where they have the freedom to roam but not to report the truth; whereas journalists who embed with US forces often report very negatively.
Now, here is your chance to help out. I'll just quote Jeremy's description of what is going on here. Yon describes a 5 year old little girl with a heart condition that can be treated back in the States:
The short version is, the soldiers want to help her, but are being held up by red tape. I have emailed our state's Senators concerning the matter, and thought that perhaps other readers might want to do the same.
I don't imagine myself much of a writer, but I will paste my letter below, in case anyone would like to use what I wrote in whole or in part.
Senator XXXX,In the Isla Zeral area of Mosul, Iraq, there is a 5 year old girl desperately in need of help. Her name is Rhma Taha Ahmed and she suffers from a heart condition. In mid-May, her father flagged down a passing US Army patrol from the 1-24th Infantry Regiment of the 25th Infantry Division and asked them to look at his daughter. Captain Paul Carron, the Bravo company commander of this unit, decided to take action to help this little girl get the medical attention she so urgently needs. While many American doctors have pledged money or free treatment, this young girl's chance for life is being delayed by bureaucratic snags and red tape. Senator XXXX, our great country has the means to help this young girl before it is too late. We have doctors willing to help her; we have soldiers, in harm's way in the defense of freedom and the Iraqi people, reaching out to a sick child, far above the call of duty. We have every thing we need, letÂ’s not let red tape stand in the way. Senator, you are in the position to expedite the process of bringing Rhma here for treatment. I ask that you help our soldiers and our nation demonstrate their compassion for people everywhere.
Sincerely,
YYYY
To find out your Senators e-mail address, go here.
Posted by: Rusty at
09:18 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 596 words, total size 4 kb.
June 13, 2005
Posted by: Rusty at
04:34 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 36 words, total size 1 kb.
Now excuse me if I punch out of here early. They painted the hallway here and I'm totally getting high off the fumes.......
Posted by: Rusty at
04:11 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 62 words, total size 1 kb.
The same minimization occurs when you compare [insert unliked political figure here] to Hitler or [insert perceived problem here] to the holocaust. Some crimes and criminals are so far beyond infamy that to compare any one or any thing to them does a grave injustice to their victims. Comparing Camp X-Ray to gulags is immoral and disgusting because it is an insult to the tens of millions of victims who died under the horrible opression that was the gulag system.
UPDATE: Let me also add that using such terminology is also immoral for consequentalist reasons. If you really believe that Bush = Hitler then, as a moral being, aren't you compelled by conscience to do something about that? Isn't it your moral obligation then to attempt to assasinate the President? If you answer no, then either a) you don't really believe Bush = Hitler or b) you are a moral idiot. But if you answer yes....You see where this is going?
For this reason I have, in the past, called on the government of the U.S. to bomb al Jazeera and have called Noam Chomsky a traitor. If you wish to make the case that the U.S. has some sort of equivelancy to the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany then you are also making the moral case for war against the United States. The reason the jihadis fight the U.S. is not that they simply hate us, but that they believe the lies told to them by al Jazeera and the Leftist Western press. That is, they believe they are engaged in a moral struggle. They are the freedom fighters, we are the Hitlers!
Again, words have consequences. The gulags were genocidal. If the U.S. is actually engaged in such a genocidal endeavor, then it would be the duty of all moral beings to resist--with force. Unless AI is willing to call for war against the U.S., I'd suggest they shut their pie holes.
I've known R.J. Rummel's work for some time in my professional capacity. His specialty is documenting state-sponsored genocide. Thanks to Dean Esmay for pointing out that Rummel is also a blogger. Here is an excerpt from his must read post on the subject of the gulags:
Overall, from 1917 to 1987, Gulag, including transit deaths, probably killed about 39,464,000 Soviet citizens and foreigners. Compare this 6,228.5 mile stack of corpses (assuming each corpse has a width of 10 inches), each a loving, self-conscious human being like you and I, to these totals:Gulag = 39,464,000 murdered (democide/genocide);
All American executions 1864-1982 = 5,753 killed;
All the Americans killed in all its wars up to the Gulf War = 1,177,936 killed;
The killed in battle in World War I = 9,000,000;
Of World War II = 15,000,000;
All 20th Century international and domestic wars = 35,654,000 killed;
And all major wars 1740-1997 = 20,000,000 killed.Now tell me again, Irene Khan and William Schulz of AI, that Guantánamo is like Gulag
Posted by: Rusty at
03:28 PM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 552 words, total size 4 kb.
Posted by: Rusty at
02:57 PM
| Comments (13)
| Add Comment
Post contains 310 words, total size 2 kb.
Reading the SF Gate article is like reading a press release from the ACLU, isn't it? Notice all the meme-like qualities of the article? The way the FBI is made to seem like they screwed the pooch, how very few terrorists have been convicted, yada, yada.
But even as the SF Gate goes out of its way to discredit the arrests of the al Qaeda suspects in Lodi, this news from Pakistan. Tell me, if the FBI simply mixed the names up, what is the real Maulana Fazlur Rehman Khalil doing on the run?? Pakistan Daily Times:
Maulana Fazlur Rehman Khalil, former chief of Jamiatul Ansar (JA), has gone into hiding after the arrest of Hamid Hayat and Umer Hayat who told the Federal Bureau of Investigation that they received training from a Pakistani Al Qaeda camp allegedly run by Khalil.Security agencies have begun efforts to arrest Khalil after Hamid Hayat and Umer Hayat were arrested in Lodi, California.
Sources said he was earlier released by security agencies after eight months’ detention. “Khalil was released on the condition that he separate himself from his militant activities but after this new development security agencies have resumed efforts for his arrest,” sources said.
Posted by: Rusty at
02:33 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 293 words, total size 2 kb.
Yesterday I experienced a problem that is happening more and more in America today; laziness overcoming the need to provide an appropriate level of customer service. This also goes hand-in-hand with work ethic and personal responsibility.more...
Posted by: Chris Short at
12:30 PM
| Comments (44)
| Add Comment
Post contains 651 words, total size 4 kb.
The Left's obsession with the Downing Street memo is a perfect example of a faith-based conspiracy theory in search of proof. This faith begins with the assumption that the war in Iraq could not have been for the stated reasons but rather that there is a hidden agenda to the Iraq conflict. From what I gather, the Left is divided over the specifics of this hidden agenda (the theories, though, usually center on some sort of Imperialistic grab for power in the Middle East, which will eventually lead to a US war against Syria and/or Iran) but they do agree that a conspiracy existed at the highest levels to lie to the American people as to the real reasons for going to war.
Via Duncan 'Atrios' Black this post by Digby is indicative of such conspiracy theories:
I honestly don't know why there is any question that the Downing St Memo is the most important historical document to emerge showing that Bush and company took us into Iraq on false pretenses. It's true that there have been many hints --- the biggest of which is that, uh, there weren't any f*cking WMD --- but this is clear proof that they lied prior to that....Digby then goes on to offer a number of odd speculations as to the real reason we invaded Iraq.It is a full-on game plan for obfuscation and "rolling out the product" that proves they knew that Iraq wasn't a threat. ....
They may never be able to admit all that. But in that it officially documents the fact that the administration knew there was no threat and knew there was no connection to terrorism, the Downing Street Memo gives the press the chance to ask, finally, why we really invaded Iraq.
Another part of this particular conspiracy theory is the notion that it's not enough that members of the Bush and Blair administration are involved but that leading news organizations, such as The New York Times, are also part of the plot to mislead the American people. For instance this post by Kevin Drum and this one by Nico over at Think Progress. Both begin with the premise that the conspiracy has objectively (I mean objectively in the epistemelogical sense, that is that the authors believe as an objective fact rather than as a matter of opinion this view) been proved in the Downing Street memo. Thus with the conspiracy proved, anything short of front-page coverage at The New York Times is evidence that the publication is part of the conspiracy.
The problem with Digby, Atrios , Nico, and Kevin Drum's assesment of the Downing Street memo is the same as with all conspiracy theories: they begin with the conspiracy premise, selectively use evidence, and disregard any evidence to the contrary. So, the Downing Street Memo is seen by these conpiracy theorists as 'the smoking gun' which 'proves' that Bush has ulterior motives for going to war.
Such thinking disregards hundreds if not thousands of statements, both public and private, that the reasons (there were multiple reasons, if you don't have amnesia) for going to war were exactly as stated. Further, such thinking disregards hundreds if not thousands of statements, both public and private, that the decision to go to war was not finally made until shortly before the invasion.
This does not mean that most people, President Bush and Tony Blair included, did not think that the invasion was not inevetable. To assume that Blair and Bush did not believe war was coming is to think that they were idiots. Of course they thought war was coming and were making the necessary arrangements. Duh, this is what governments do! A conspiracy theory about the real reasons for going to war is not needed to explain the Downing Street memo, as Michael Kinsley, to his credit, points out here:
But even on its face, the memo is not proof that Bush had decided on war. It states that war is "now seen as inevitable" by "Washington." That is, people other than Bush had concluded, based on observation, that he was determined to go to war. There is no claim of even fourth-hand knowledge that he had actually declared this intention. Even if "Washington" meant administration decision-makers, rather than the usual freelance chatterboxes, C was only saying that these people believed that war was how events would play out.The Downing Street memo might be used as evidence that the stated reasons for going to war were not the same as the real reasons for going to war. The same memo can also be used as evidence that our leaders weren't utter morons to believe that the UN could actually enforce it's will on Saddam Hussein.
Did the Bush and Blair administrations believe that a day of reckoning was coming with Saddam Hussein? All indications say yes. But so what? Plenty of times in history the same sort of writing has been on the wall. In June of 1941 did the Roosevelt administration believe a conflict would soon be coming between the U.S. and Japan? Of course it did! Sanctions were not working to get the Japanese out of China and there was a lot of saber rattling on both sides. But that is not proof that some sort of grand conspiracy existed to start a war with Japan. Did Lincoln believe that a war was coming between the North and the South? Yes! Fifty years of history all pointed to such a conflict. But that is not proof of some sort of grand conspiracy by Lincoln to start a war.
The Left's obsession with The Downing Street memo is not borderline paranoia, it is has become full on paranoia. The truth of the matter is that the paranoid obsession with the grand Bush conspiracy theory runs so deep among the Left today, that no amount of evidence to the contrary could make them disbelieve.
Posted by: Rusty at
12:24 PM
| Comments (84)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1104 words, total size 7 kb.
, Congress concluded that Iraq's continuing weapons of mass destruction programs threatened vital United States interests and international peace and security, declared Iraq to be in `material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations' and urged the President `to take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations';
Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations;
Posted by: Rusty at
10:45 AM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 19 words, total size 1 kb.
We'll announce further details later or check Carrie's website here. If you're in the Orange County, CA, area it would be nice if you could show your support.
UPDATE: From Roy's daughter Carrie:
Hi Rusty,
We are going to have it next to the Huntington Beach Pier (off of Main
Street) at 6:45 on Thursday June 23rd. Thank you so much for your help! I
hope you are doing well!!
Take care,
Carrie
Posted by: Rusty at
10:36 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 171 words, total size 1 kb.
Posted by: Rusty at
10:17 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 510 words, total size 7 kb.
Why is it that the terrorists continually target left-wing journalists? Is it a) because the vast majority of journalists are leftists and therefore chances are if you take a journalist hostage he'll more than likely be a left-winger? Or is it b) because left-wing journalists are stupid enough to believe their own propaganda about the so-called 'insurgency', thinking that the 'freedom fighters' are really no threat until one day they find themselves hostage?
I'm leaning towards b myself, but there is a good arguement to be made for a.
Our man on the streets in Romania, Adi, points out one of the most fascinating aspects of Florence Aubenas release is that she was held captive for almost two months with three Romanian journalists who were also being held hostage. As you may recall, an American citizen has been formally accused by the Romanian government of setting up the kidnapping of the three Romanians. If the four were held together by the same group of terrorists, why was the French hostage not released until now?
Notice from the article below that the left-leaning French Liberation, for whom Aubenas worked, can't find anything bad to say about the men who held their employee hostage for close to half a year. I can understand how a hostage might develop Stockholm syndrome, but not the employer of a hostage. It never ceases to amaze how far the left-leaning press will go to apologize for the attrocities committed by their terrorist allies. more...
Posted by: Rusty at
09:24 AM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 550 words, total size 4 kb.
So now that Iran is busying itself supporting the insurgency in Iraq, at least some of that money is being used for acts of terrorism against the Iranian government. Ironical.
As Ward Churchill would say: "It's just the hens coming home to roost."
UPDATE: I've found a few more articles in which the Iranians blame the US for being linked to the terror attack. After reading that I'm much more inclined to believe that elements within the Iranian government itself is to blame for the bombings in an effort to garner public support for a more hardline candidate than Hashemi Rafsanjani who leads in the polls. Yes, it's a conspiracy theory, but such conspiracies are much more likely to exist in closed societies with formal media controls such as in Iran.
Here is the article from Townhall:
Iran's fundamentalist government has blamed U.S.-sheltered terrorists for a series of bomb blasts on Sunday that killed at least nine people, less than a week before voters choose a new president...UPDATE II: Roger L. Simon points to a DEBKA report which ties the White House to the group responsible for the bombing. It is DEBKA, which for those of you who don't know, is kind of like the Israeli version of Matt Drudge, only with a focus on terrorism, and a lot less reliable:But a spokesman for Iran's Security Council accused groups linked to the ousted Baathist regime in Iraq.
A senior national security official was quoted as blaming Arab separatists whom he said were being trained under the protection of U.S. forces in neighboring Iraq.
The official, Ali Agha Mohammadi, said British forces based in southern Iraq may also be linked to the attackers.
"We call on the Americans and the British to condemn these attacks and hand over the terrorists in Iraq. Sadly, they have so far not said anything," he said.
On April 22, DEBKA-Net-Weekly 203 lead article explored Khuzestan Arab Spring offensive and its Kurdish Iraqi backing. On May 6, DNW 204 revealed Khuzestan FrontÂ’s No. 2 leader Said Taher Naama paid secret visit to White House April 23
CNN: more...
Posted by: Rusty at
09:01 AM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 689 words, total size 5 kb.
June 12, 2005
A year ago I started a brief debate regarding trackback etiquette. James McGovern has given me some inspiration and I'd like to rekindle that debate. My thoughts, ideas, and opinions have been posted over at Lockergnome.
Let's create a standard for blogs and trackbacks; let's end this debate and move along effectively.
Posted by: Chris Short at
05:16 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 62 words, total size 1 kb.
Iraqi Interior Minister Bayan Jabr Sulagh said on Saturday that insurgent attacks in Baghdad have dramatically decreased since launching Operation Al-Barq, asserting that Iraqi security forces will establish full security in Baghdad within the next six months.
In a press conference in Baghdad, the minister said that the number of car-bomb attacks in Baghdad have decreased from 14 attacks a day to one or two attacks only, while the number of arrested insurgents increased from 10 to 85 a day, noting that Operation Al-Barq has a 90 percent success rate.
Sulagh added that the number of detainees was 219 before launching the operation and increased to 1318 detainees during the operation, noting that the number of insurgents killed in the operation reached 36 insurgents, while detainees include four Sudanese, two Jordanians, one Egyptian, and one Syrian.
He said that the Iraqi security forces seized eight ready-for-use car bombs in Baghdad, and seized 27 other car bombs in gunmen hideouts.He added that the forces seized six million US dollars, 52 mortar rounds, 37 missiles, 325 Kalashnikovs, 13 RPG-7 launchers, 36 guns, and 37 grenades. - The minister noted that four Iraqi policemen and army men were killed and 17 others were wounded in Operation Al-Barq, while 35 civilians were killed and 87 were wounded in the operation.
Posted by Traderrob
Posted by: Traderrob at
08:48 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 247 words, total size 2 kb.
The freshly-minted Muslim Knight is said to be in favor of a law "to create an offence (sic) of incitement to religious hatred." I'm not sure if that means he's for or against religious hatred. The Religion of Peace hasn't been all that clear on the subject in recent years.
Note that when a Muslim places a sword next to the neck of an infidel, it's a beheading, but when an infidel places a sword next to the neck of a Muslim, it's a bestowing. The difference between Islam and anything else is not strictly philosophical.
What are the chances that the King of Islam will make the Queen a mullah? Or a mufti?
Companion post at Interested-Participant.
Posted by: Mike Pechar at
08:07 AM
| Comments (13)
| Add Comment
Post contains 186 words, total size 1 kb.
June 11, 2005
This type of threat is typical of the al Qaeda in Iraq group, but up until now the threat has usually been that hostages would be executed (many by beheading) if the US did not release women prisoners. This threat is indicative that the insurgency in Iraq is now between secularists in governmnet and religious fanatics who's aim is to install a Taliban like government.
In the past, al Qaeda in Iraq (formerly known as Tawhid and Jihad) has followed through with these types of threats by murdering their victims. The group, in an attempt to legitimze their crimes, first forces the victims to confess to various crimes against Islam before murdering them. A video is usually posted some time later. As soon as a video is released, we will post links and images of the crimes committed by the 'insurgents' in Iraq.
The Al Qaeda group in Iraq has said that it was holding 36 Iraqi troops hostage and demanded the government free all women prisoners within 24 hours, according to a Web statement.Hat tip: Chad at In the BullpenThe statement addressed to Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari 24 hours to free all Muslim women prisoners held in Interior Ministry jails.
The statement said the group was holding 36 National Guards after raids in Western Iraq, and not 22 as reported by Iraqi police on Wednesday.
The Sunni Muslim group, which has often abducted and killed officials and soldiers, said the 36 were being questioned about their "crimes against Sunnis".
Posted by: Rusty at
01:05 PM
| Comments (13)
| Add Comment
Post contains 332 words, total size 2 kb.
137 queries taking 0.2325 seconds, 548 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
