mypetjawa v. 2.0 (beta) "<i>Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to ev

June 08, 2006

Zarqawi al Qaeda's "Jeb Stuart"?

I'm somewhat tentative about referring to Musab al Zarqawi as al Qaeda's Jeb Stuart, because I don't want to be misunderstood as suggesting that the two are comparable in every respect. The two commanders were alike in the sense that they were important second fiddles, but there's no comparison in terms of their ethics and morality. The difference is quite uncomplicated: Jeb Stuart, while arguably a defender of slavery, never blew up or sawed the heads off innocent noncombatants. And his military successes can rightly be called that, rather than the sort of piddling incessant vandalism that has undermined as much as advanced Zarqawi's co-called "cause." But the two are alike, in spite of what "terrorism expert", Richard Clarke, says, because they were both irreplaceable in the hierarchy of their respective armies, and their deaths will be seen to have marked a turning point.
more...

Posted by: Demosophist at 08:10 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 476 words, total size 4 kb.

1 "Turning Point" is being used quite alot today regarding al-Zarqawi. Obviously possible. What is also interesting is comments like "we knew he was there", in a house in Zarqawi's dog patch. How did we know that? Then there was the announcement that 17 other raids/operations were launched with the conclusion of al-Zarqawi's life. This all shows we, the US, knows what al-Qaeda knows in Iraq. Hey, maybe we'll take out the nbr 2,3, and 4 today as well.

Posted by: CHANGEhappens at June 08, 2006 08:31 AM (hGibF)

2 Jeb Stuart was inarguably a defender of slavery. It is an interesting comparison. In the book Imperial Hubris (bad prose style and in need of an editor, but an excellent book in terms of content) the author compares bin Laden to Robert E. Lee....it's not something the author believes, he says that bin Laden occupies a similar role in the minds of many Muslims as Lee did in the minds of many Southerners. Knowing what I know about Lee's honor and integrity, the comparison is utterly foreign to me, but it taught me a lot about how some muslims view bin Laden.

Posted by: jd at June 08, 2006 01:04 PM (aqTJB)

3 np. zark is alq's john stewart. WUZ!

Posted by: reliapundit at June 08, 2006 08:23 PM (Yteil)

4 the death of this great man will not stop the united states humiliating defeat, you should know that you have all ready lost by now! your armed forces only kill innocent women and children! it took cowardice marines to slaughter 24 women and children. and it took two companies of special forces, five snitches and two f-16 fighter planes to kill one brave muslim warrior, who killed scores of cowardice us soldiers who are suppose to be occupiers, but are afraid to step out of the green zone for fear of their asses being handed to them. "oh yeah youre winning this war allright"! mr. stuart you are the one going to hell. when abu musab alzarqawi meets all mighty god, god will recognize his servant and grant him entry into heaven. but when you meet god, god will say to you, jeb you coward, you and those marines who killed my believers can go to hell!

Posted by: sword in your heart at June 08, 2006 08:29 PM (jSCnq)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

May 06, 2006

Five Â“SuspiciousÂ” Men Detained on AA Flight

The flight was originated in Dallas. An air martial noticed the men and the plane landed in Newark. No word yet on who they are or what made them suspicious. Five men, American Airlines, you get the idea.

AP Via Yahoo News: NEWARK, N.J. - Authorities on Saturday boarded an American Airlines plane and detained five men after it landed at Newark Liberty International Airport, according to a spokesman for the airport's operator.
The plane was bound from Dallas Fort Worth International Airport when an air marshal notified authorities of five men he considered suspicious, according to Marc LaVorgna, a spokesman for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.
Port Authority police took the five men into custody immediately after the plane landed at 3:20 p.m., LaVorgna said.

WeÂ’ll update when more details become available.

Update : via Brignt and Early:

The men _ identified only as four Angolan military personnel and an Israeli _ were traveling back to their respective home countries after attending helicopter training school in Texas, said Steven Siegel, a spokesman for the FBI's Newark office.
Fellow passengers on Flight 1874, which had departed from Dallas Fort Worth International Airport, became suspicious of the men because they were speaking in foreign languages and had "aircraft flight materials" with them, Siegel said.

Hey at least we know people are aware and watching. False alarm.

Posted by: Howie at 03:25 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 239 words, total size 2 kb.

April 23, 2006

New Bin Laden Audiotape Whines About 'Crusader War'

Al-Jazeera, the terrorists' voice of choice, has broadcast a new audiotape, purportedly from Osama bin Laden, in which the Saudi terrorist complains about the West's treatment of Palestinian terrorist government Hamas:

In the recording, aired on Sunday, the al-Qaeda leader said the isolation and cutting off of aid to the Hamas-led Palestinian government reaffirmed that the West was at war with the Islamic nation.
"The blockade which the West is imposing on the government of Hamas proves that there is a Zionist crusaders war on Islam," he said.

This is the sort of twisted logic that appeals to the average ignorant Muslim on the street and in the terrorist-breeding madrassas, aided and abetted by "media outlets" like al-Jazeera. After whining about aid being cut off to the Hamas government, bin Laden then whines piteously about Western people supporting the War on Terror:

"They send their sons to armies to fight us and they continue their financial and moral support while our countries are burned and our houses are bombed and our people are killed."

The only people indiscriminately burning mosques and murdering civilians are his own supporters, but many, if not most, Muslims are either deliberately misinformed by Arab media or too intellectually dishonest to admit the truth.

The rationalizations in Osama's comments may be a signal that a new terrorist attack is planned, which he is trying to justify in advance.

Bin Laden also railed about the Danish Mohammed cartoons and urged Islamist terrorists to help out their buddies in Sudan.

Al-Jazeera, of course, is careful not to mention the words "terrorist" or "terrorism", referring to the world's most notorious terrorist as "the al Qaeda leader".

Via the Stop the ACLU.

Cross-posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto.

Posted by: Bluto at 05:14 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 300 words, total size 2 kb.

April 21, 2006

America's Sons Come Home After 62 Years

From a Department of Defense press release:

The Department of Defense POW/Missing Personnel Office (DPMO)
announced today that the remains of eleven U.S. airmen, missing in action from World War II, have been identified and are being returned to their families for burial with full military honors.
They are Capt. Thomas C. Paschal, El Monte, Calif.; 1st Lt. Frank P. Giugliano, New York, N.Y.; 1st Lt. James P. Gullion, Paris, Texas; 2nd Lt. Leland A. Rehmet, San Antonio, Texas; 2nd Lt. John A. Widsteen, Palo Alto, Calif., Staff Sgt. Richard F. King, Moultrie, Ga.; Staff Sgt. William Lowery, Republic, Pa..; Staff Sgt. Elgin J. Luckenbach, Luckenbach, Texas.; Staff Sgt. Marion B. May, Amarillo, Texas.; Sgt. Marshall P. Borofsky, Chicago, Ill.; Sgt. Walter G. Harm, Philadelphia, Penn.; all U.S. Army Air Forces.
On April 16, 1944, Paschal and Widsteen were piloting a B-24J Liberator with the other nine men aboard. The aircraft was returning to Nadzab, New Guinea after bombing enemy targets near Hollandia. The plane was last seen off the coast of the island flying into poor weather.

Most of the men will be buried today in Arlington National Cemetery. The families of three of the men have decided to bury them in their hometowns.

Cross-posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto, Stop the ACLU, and Vince Aut Morire.

Posted by: Bluto at 12:39 PM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 231 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Dude -- you might want to check the batteries in that calculator. Its should have come up with 62 years, not 52. Or is the problem "operator error"? Regardless, it is fantastic to have these men home again. May God bless them and their families.

Posted by: Rhymes With Right at April 21, 2006 01:36 PM (4nXaP)

2 Good deal.

Posted by: Howie at April 21, 2006 02:25 PM (D3+20)

3 They remain forever young.

Posted by: Dave K at April 21, 2006 03:50 PM (YaR8u)

4 I wonder if there were any leftards there to protest against our unjust war against Hitler?

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 22, 2006 05:06 AM (0yYS2)

5 Actually, it was the right that opposed the war against Hitler. Don't you read history? The left wanted to take on fascism as early as 1935. It's why Hemingway went to spain to fight with the leftists against Franco's fascists, allied with Hitler. It's why FDR's big opponent in the rearmament battle of 38-41 was the right wing, led by racists like Lindbergh and isolationists of all stripes (including the pacifist left, but they were the smaller part). Try again, IM, try again. (There were even some on the right who, after Pearl Harbor, advocating only going after the Japanese, and leaving the Jews and Hitler's other victims to burn. Please get me right--I am NOT using that historical position by a minority of the Right to characterize today's conservatives. I'm saying you couldn't be more pathetic and ignorant in your attempt to compare WWII and Iraq. The "left" was far stronger in the fight against fascism than the right was, in part because many on the right had sympathized with Franco, and yes, with Hitler (and in fairness, many on the left with Stalin)

Posted by: jd at April 22, 2006 01:06 PM (ccFYg)

6 Finally JD provides us with the anicdote to all the ultra right crap spewing over this site. I await the "educated" response from Inprobulus Maximus after he picked up a history book. Thank God our founding fathers were not so close minded, otherwise we would would be in a world of . . . .

Posted by: Garner at April 22, 2006 05:05 PM (x7v0S)

7 Yes JD, I read history, and pathetic and ignorant are words that you shouldn't throw around lightly, as you have no idea how ill equipped you are to tangle with me. I know more about history than you know the inside of your house, I'll warrant, and if I feel like it, I can bury you in facts without even referencing any material. You use the term "Right" to describe anyone who isn't a piece of shit Communist, which I guess is true, but hardly accurate to describe who "we" are today, and who "they" were yesterday. The terms Right and Left originated in France, based on where the Statists and the Populists sat, and like everything else they produce, is generally useless except in a superficial sort of way. Fascists and Communists are blood brothers because both creeds are Statist in nature, and both seek to crush freedom. With rare exception, it has always been the respect for individual liberty that has motivated the people of this nation, and to try to paint it otherwise is dishonest. But then, I expect nothing else from the likes of you. The leftards also opposed our stance against Hitler, right up until he invaded Russia, then it was okay, though that didn't stop them from trying to pass military and industrial secrets to the Communists, who were also our sworn enemies, but who were less immediate a threat than the Nazi's. It was an American Communist, Ted Hall, who passed our nuclear secrets to the Russians, thus setting the stage for the Cold War and the nuclear proliferation nightmare we have today. Your party has much for which to answer, so watch where you point your fingers. Regarding Hemingway, his decision to fight in the Spanish war was based purely upon his opposition to Fascism, though your kind would like to paint him as a good Communist. Hemingway was a populist at heart, because he liked people, but he opposed Statism of any kind, even that of FDR's Great Society. To try to use him, a good example of the American spirit, to bolster your love of Communism, is the very definition of pathetic and ignorant. Leftards today are either misinformed idiots or bald-faced liars, and they oppose everything that makes this country great, and are trying to destroy it at every turn, as they have been for a hundred years now, but you and your Tvarischi will fail, because liberty will always live in the hearts of enough people to remain when your idiotic Socialism is a thing of the past.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 22, 2006 05:21 PM (0yYS2)

8 Wow, I guess being being objective and open minded really pisses people off. Funny how this liberal worked in Iraq for the State Department. I must have been secretly trying to conspire with the terrorists to attack the Us forces stationed there. Improbulus, ever go Iraq? I pray to God you don't have to.

Posted by: Garner at April 22, 2006 05:42 PM (x7v0S)

9 Yes, I did go to Iraq in 1990, and not as some government parasite, but as a soldier, which is something you don't have the balls to be. I wish to God that I could go again, but they can't use me with all my injuries that I received in the service of my country, though I'd be glad to go with my bad back, torn ligaments, and all. Don't start crowing about what you've done, because you haven't done shit.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 22, 2006 07:45 PM (0yYS2)

10 IM--you know as little about Hem, as you do about world history. Read any one of several bios of Hem to figure out some of his politics. The Kenneth Lynn was is the best, IMHO. He was a committed leftist at one time, and his anger at Dos Passos and others who moved right was real. He and his eventual third wife Martha Gellhorne fought in Spain as leftists. Having seen Batista in action in Cuba, he was also pretty ambivalent about Castro. (I don't think he was ever very sophisticated politically, but like many great writers, he assumed that brilliance in one area was transferable universally) You are correct that the Communist Party in this country briefly endorsed the Molotov-Ribbentrop peace of 39-41--but that in no way makes untrue what I said about the left and right in the 30s and their attitudes towards fascism. In fact, the Comintern's aboutface on Hitler led to massive upheavals in the far left in this country, as many finally saw that Moscow was controlling the Comm. Party USA. Most on the left remained opposed to Hitler, regardless of cynical orders from Moscow. Even rightwing histories of the American left cover this; it is not in dispute. It was one of the things that led to neo-conservatism among Jewish intellectuals---how could the communist party preach alliance with the anti-semitic Hitler? As for my use of right: I don't think it applies to everyone who isn't a communist. It is a vague term, but since you throw around "left" and of course the lovely neologism "leftard", I'm rather surprised at your hypocrisy in objecting to the term "right". Are you saying that Lindbergh and the Liberty League were not "right"? Conservatism as you articulate it briefly above sounds far more like "libertarianism" a related but distinct ideology.

Posted by: jd at April 23, 2006 07:48 AM (uT71O)

11 JD, you're obviously well-versed in propaganda, so why don't you just admit that you're a Communist? You see the world as two camps; Yours, and everyone else's, with America as the prime enemy. Do you think you're the first to come here trying to sell that shit? The way you phrase everything as Fascim vs. Communism tells us at once what you are and where your loyalties lie. Just move to France, Cuba, or North Korea or anywhere else, but please get the hell out of America; we don't need you.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 23, 2006 05:52 PM (0yYS2)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

April 12, 2006

Police Detective's Death Attributed to 9/11 Dust Cloud

From the Associated Press:

A coroner's report released Tuesday found James Zadroga's death after developing respiratory disease was "directly related" to the 2001 attack on the World Trade Center. Zadroga, of Little Egg Harbor, N.J., died Jan. 5.
Researchers say it will take decades to determine which illnesses and deaths among ground zero workers were caused by their exposure to the asbestos-laden dust cloud.

Unfortunately, a few politicians took the opportunity of Zadroga's autopsy results to posture and shill for votes: more...

Posted by: Bluto at 10:40 PM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 248 words, total size 2 kb.

1 See? This all proves it was nothing but a Bushitlerburton/Zionist/Neocon/JOOOOOOOish conspiracy to further enrich the pharmaceutical industry as well as the CIA owned military-industrial complex.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 13, 2006 07:03 AM (0yYS2)

2 Funny maxie. This lil' thing however has had me worried for some time. I too have been having breathing problems for the past couple of years - yes - I do smoke - but - I was right there too from hour 1 till Nov - then 6 months in an out on various details. I'm a lil' spooked about it.

Posted by: hondo at April 13, 2006 08:42 AM (4mgfY)

3 I knew it was bad news for their health when I saw all those people caked in dust on 9/11.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at April 13, 2006 09:17 AM (8e/V4)

4 Anyone wanna guess who'll end up getting sued over all the medical problems that may result of all this? I'm guessing it'll be the manufacturers of the materials, the contractors who built the buildings, and the government at all levels, but not the actual culpable party - islam.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 13, 2006 10:40 AM (0yYS2)

5 I see the moron is back.

Posted by: Oyster at April 13, 2006 05:31 PM (YudAC)

6 Yes, Oyster; it takes a special kind of person to disrespect a post about the death of a 9/11 first responder.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at April 13, 2006 08:08 PM (RHG+K)

7 Nobody to sue maxie. We all knew the risks going in - only an idiot can claim ignorance. Just hoping that the various agencies involved do the right thing if complications arise.

Posted by: hondo at April 13, 2006 08:48 PM (4mgfY)

8 And I mean "special" as in "short bus special".

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at April 13, 2006 08:56 PM (RHG+K)

9 Hondo, don't hold your breath while waiting for any government agency to "do the right thing". The government treats us like chattel, and should be overthrown and reformed per the Constitution.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at April 14, 2006 05:30 AM (0yYS2)

10 At last Maxie and I agree on something! Well said Maxie!

Posted by: Last word Larry at April 15, 2006 07:16 PM (FCC6c)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

March 30, 2006

Fidel Castro Reported Dead

Rumors have begun circulating in Spanish language publications that Cuban dictator Fidel Castro has died. Cuban officials are denying the reports. Developing....

UPDATE: Okay, so the consensus is that those reports were wrong. Hey, a guy can dream, can't he? Plus, how often do you get to read a story where the translation talks about Fidel being castrated? Anyway, Gringo unleashed has a cleaner translation, with far fewer references to castration than Google's.

more...

Posted by: Rusty at 11:47 AM | Comments (38) | Add Comment
Post contains 219 words, total size 2 kb.

1 I freaking wish he was dead. I doubt it though. I haven't heard anything about it in the news.

Posted by: Robert Savage at March 30, 2006 11:56 AM (CnDtU)

2 Val @Babalu blog believes it to be false. He's usually pretty accurate. We'll have to wait.

Posted by: jesusland joe at March 30, 2006 11:57 AM (rUyw4)

3 That's true. The fact is Fidel is in his 70s. People usually die in their 80s. Hell my Grandmother is 83 and still healthy. Fidel exercises everyday.

Posted by: Robert Savage at March 30, 2006 12:13 PM (CnDtU)

4 Growing up in Florida, I've seen everything change except the leader of Cuba.

Posted by: Chip at March 30, 2006 12:20 PM (0PjVX)

5 If I had a nickel for every time fidel castro had died... There's a school of thought in the Cuban-American community that these rumors are actually begun by fidel himself in order to gauge public opinion. I will say however, that if you ever want to see an American city completely stop on its tracks - not from bedlam or tragedy but from sheer unbridled joy - keep an eye on Miami when the bearded bastard finally meets Beelzebub.

Posted by: Val Prieto at March 30, 2006 12:35 PM (Suix3)

6 A sudden "infarct"? It's just gas.

Posted by: Oyster at March 30, 2006 01:01 PM (c/HVo)

7 What's wrong with a 425hp V8 Dodge Charger? A lack of straightaways? Seriously, the WRX is no muscle car, but it's fast enough, and it's AWD makes it ideal for windy, narrow European roads, especially in bad weather.

Posted by: Brian B at March 30, 2006 01:03 PM (rGfpg)

8 "According to sources officials the Cuban dictator I have not been castrating for some days was in delicate state of health after to have undergone a sudden infarct." Does the translation mean that the Cuban dictator I (the first Cuban dictator?) has not been castrating lately or that according to the official sources of the dictator, the reporter has not been castrating lately. Either way, I approve of the sudden decrease in castration.

Posted by: Apesnake at March 30, 2006 01:06 PM (scKzN)

9 Of course he's not dead, yet. It's probably a translation issue, but look at the timestamp, May 29th, 10:22 P.M.. He's going to die two months from now. I like how Google translated it, miÃƒÂ© 29 sea, 20h22 In afternoon today died in its residence of the Laguito longevo Cuban dictator Fidel I castrate. According to sources officials the Cuban dictator I have not been castrating for some days was in delicate state of health after to have undergone a sudden infarct. Fidel I castrate volume the power the 1 of January of 1959, with a coup d'etat, demoting to Fulgencio dictator Batiste and since then one has stayed in being able. Official sources of the government, its brother Raul I castrate and stops leaders of the regime have not even wanted to notify to the Cuban town, awaiting an international reaction.Cuban dictator "I have not been castrating".

Posted by: Dale at March 30, 2006 01:10 PM (VE3QR)

10 And I'm saving a bottle of champagne to celebrate the demise of Castro with Val and the people of Miami. Thanks for a great blog, Val.

Posted by: jesusland joe at March 30, 2006 01:11 PM (rUyw4)

11 He'll be 80 in August. And he's still alive. To find these things out, check www.deadoraliveinfo.com

Posted by: Kristine at March 30, 2006 01:49 PM (O6S8T)

12 Love the comments! I laughed till I cried. OK, so Castro is probably not dead. But if he's been castrated, or if he has stopped castrating, those are all nice outcomes too!

Posted by: Don Neuendorf at March 30, 2006 02:01 PM (rD6oC)

13 OT: I could really use some help over at this website. I have been trying to fight the good fight for some time now with no effect. Anyone that would like to give me a hand is welcome... http://secretarabian.blogspot.com/

Posted by: Babs at March 30, 2006 03:04 PM (iZZlp)

14 My grandmother got out of Cuba two years before Castro took over. As a matter of fact when I was little we lived in Miami and our family was to fly to Cuba to visit Grandma's other relatives. That morning our flight was cancelled. It was later that day that we found out why. Castro had taken over. To this day I wonder if we would still be stuck in Cuba had our flight been one day sooner. I was very young but can still remember my grandma being hysterical.

Posted by: Oyster at March 30, 2006 03:17 PM (c/HVo)

15 That's weird. I thought about Fidel Castro dying today. I have no idea how Fidel ever came into my head, but there he was; and he was dead. Let's hope so.

Posted by: Asgerd at March 30, 2006 03:23 PM (Elsgc)

16 This is Fidel Castro speaking. I am not dead. It is true that I often fart when I walk, go to the bathroom if I even think about having a Mojito, and my palace now smells like a nursing home in Miami, but trust me I am alive. Just to prove it to you, tonight, I will make a short speech....only about four hours.

Posted by: Steve Sharon at March 30, 2006 03:27 PM (ri2iY)

17 Nothing on CNN yet, but I did get excited when the page first came up with the red "breaking news" banner - but it was about some ferry sinking in Bahrain and not Castro.

Posted by: Mark at March 30, 2006 03:52 PM (UN2Uu)

18 Wish it were true. If it has happened, I would have expected immediate announcements from Hugo Chavez trying to assume the mantle of Castroism in S. America. No way the guy could hold back! Infarct is a major brain aneurism - like dead in sixt seconds type.

Posted by: shiftright at March 30, 2006 04:05 PM (tdeDO)

19 So it's not gas?

Posted by: Oyster at March 30, 2006 04:22 PM (c/HVo)

20 Anyone know if Generallismo Francisco Franco is still dead?

Posted by: Vinnie at March 30, 2006 04:32 PM (f289O)

21 "Infarct is a major brain aneurism - like dead in sixt seconds type." I think an infarct can be any blood blockage. A myocardial infarct would result in a heart attack but just infarct could be anywhere (if it is newsworthy it would probably be a stroke, or heart attack or something) and of any degree of severity. It is also still unclear to me if castro had the infarct or the person he was castrating. If he was castrating himself it could be both.

Posted by: Apesnake at March 30, 2006 10:00 PM (scKzN)

22 Oh wait. Someone was cutting down on their castrating, right? Maybe not being able to castrate caused enough stress to give castro a heart attack. The guy can't even go a few days. I guess once you give up cigars you need something to relieve the stress. Or maybe he is looking for a replacement pair.

Posted by: Apesnake at March 30, 2006 10:06 PM (scKzN)

23 Castro dead? They'll never admit it. I have it on good authority they have embalmers and taxidermists on call 24/7.

Posted by: Harrison at March 30, 2006 10:10 PM (SX0hA)

24 The problem with castro's name and translation tools is that the word castro literally mean "I castrate" in Spanish. It's the first person conjugation of the verb "castrar" which means "to castrate". I did a blog post on the irony of this a while back. It's ironic because castro has castrated a nation for 47 years.

Posted by: conductor at March 30, 2006 10:27 PM (Lak4z)

25 If Castro has indeed died, I would be willing to bet his higher-ups will try to keep it quiet. If the Cuban people knew that he was dead, that would likely be the end of that regime, and I'm sure there are others in his regime that want to step into his place while leaving the existing structure in place. (I'm not an expert on Cuba, and this is entirely my opinion, but I would strongly suspect if Cubans knew he was dead some sort of uprising would take place and we'd be seeing either a brand new dictator, or a "Cuba Libre" in the next little while.)

Posted by: LC CanForce 101 at March 31, 2006 12:22 AM (3smJS)

26 Upon re-reading my last comment and mentioning "higher-ups", I would like to clarify that my meaning was his "lieutenants and other assorted henchmen", and did not mean "people higher up in the chain of command than himself" as they do not exist. Sorry for the error, just wanted to clarify what I meant.

Posted by: LC CanForce 101 at March 31, 2006 02:07 AM (3smJS)

27 Well, if anyone sees a build up of military in the streets to be ready for a possible uprising, we'll know he's dead.

Posted by: Oyster at March 31, 2006 06:02 AM (YudAC)

28 More moron idiocy. Your sources are about as reliable as your IQ's are high (not a bit). Get fucking real. http://www.ain.cubaweb.cu/idioma...- alvarorios.htm

Posted by: da weaz at March 31, 2006 06:44 AM (0Felb)

29 da weaz: Cram it.

Posted by: Oyster at March 31, 2006 07:44 AM (YudAC)

30 Serious joke! Will this cause Cuba to ban Google?

Posted by: fisherwy at March 31, 2006 09:24 AM (lQSli)

31 Yeah, da weaz, the source was Indymedia. I always said the people at Indymedia had the lowest IQ's on the planet. Glad you agree with me.

Posted by: jesusland joe at March 31, 2006 10:18 AM (rUyw4)

32 Forget all your stupid sources. We'll find out soon enough on wheher he's dead. What a petty argument.

Posted by: Robert Savage at March 31, 2006 02:02 PM (ok/wr)

33 Hey asshole. Stop impersonating me. Get some balls and show yourself.

Posted by: George Ramos at March 31, 2006 05:57 PM (CnDtU)

34 LOOK, I told you I am NOT dead. Just yesterday after eating two orders of Yucca and a plantain I had a solid bowel movement. Dont tell ME Im dead. I am still the supreme commandant, the father of the country, and am almost as socialist as Howard Dean...I am Fidel Castro and I am ALIVE!

Posted by: Steve Sharon at April 01, 2006 03:27 AM (iz4He)

35 You all are fucking American bastards that prefer an asassin as Bush instead of having alive an idealist as Fidel. Remember that nobleness is not heritable, but it must be decived. Long life to Che Guevara and Fidel!!!!

Posted by: FabiÃ¡n VÃ¡zquez at April 06, 2006 08:28 PM (n395c)

36 Fabian Vazquez, you are an idiot. I bet your sorry ass lives in America and yet you say American bastards. I am Cuban and am ashamed there could be such idiotic ideologies as yours still prevelant. You are an idiot of sorts.

Posted by: Jorge Rodriguez at April 07, 2006 04:19 PM (sApS4)

37 Dear people on this site, i grew up in Cuba, i only moved from there to be with my father, whom is ill and is a canadian citizen. How can you criticize Castro for being a monster and so forth, his goal was to bring equality to his people, poor people had access to education and heath care. I would agree that Castro may suppress many types of media, but don't be fooled, your government does the same thing but on a much larger scale. How can you trash Castro when your country has over 42 million people who don't have access to health care, or where 34% of people live in poverty. I realize there a people who are capitalists and that is fine with me, but don't pretend that capitalism is fair to everyone because there are billions of people living in poverty around the world, i would rather have a thousand Fidel Castros in the world than one George Bush.

Posted by: Ricardo Del Toro at April 13, 2006 04:22 PM (jL/Tf)

38 hey am cubano and what ricardo sad is true and fidel castro no es ningun come mierda

Posted by: yudiel at May 28, 2006 10:24 PM (Ffvoi)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

March 27, 2006

Abdul Rahman Released

CNN is flying a banner saying Abdul has been released from custody.

Developing...

FOXNEWS as well.

It was reported today that Rahman would seek safety outside Afghanistan. No word yet on what country, if any, he has been moved to.

UN via The TimesAdrian Edwards, a UN spokesman in Kabul, said that he expected that one of the countries interested in a peaceful solution to the case would give refuge to 41-year-old Mr Rahman.

Ok, found the AP original Story and it says that Mr. Rahman was released just outside of Kabul. Hopefully this is a somewhat of a ruse and he was met there and taken to safety.

AP via Yahoo News : Justice Minister Mohammed Sarwar Danish told The Associated Press that the 41-year-old was released from the high-security Policharki prison on the outskirts of Kabul late Monday.
"We released him last night because the prosecutors told us to," he said. "His family was there when he was freed, but I don't know where he was taken."

Does I don't know mean long gone? Does outskirts mean at the airport? It's possible the county that takes him may be a bit skittish about going public. I would hate to think of the other possibilities.

Posted by: Howie at 10:51 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 209 words, total size 1 kb.

March 24, 2006

Afghan Christian May Be Freed

Abdul Rahman, the Afghan who converted from Islam to Christianity and was threatened with death under sharia law for apostasy, may be released soon.

From Agence France Presse:

An Afghan Christian facing possible execution for converting from Islam was likely to be released from jail "soon," a senior government official said following huge Western pressure over the case.
"He is likely to be released soon," the official said, adding there would be a top-level meeting on the matter Saturday.

The sharia law against apostasy does not specify that a Muslim who converts only to Christianity must be punished. The "crime" is leaving Islam, regardless of what faith the apostate then embraces.

Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto.

Posted by: Bluto at 04:11 PM | Comments (28) | Add Comment
Post contains 127 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Likely he'll be killed in the streets by his fellow citizens who happen to be of the "religion of peace" persuasion.

Posted by: Ernie Oporto at March 24, 2006 04:33 PM (/lpvu)

2 I'd be thankful if he's released and is willing, given the means, to leave the country for another. I'm wondering if that may end up even being a requirement.

Posted by: Javapuke at March 24, 2006 05:23 PM (OOrBj)

3 He should DEFECT like people running away from the former Soviet union. Go find an American Military Establishment and ask for political and religeous asylum.

Posted by: The Gunny at March 24, 2006 05:24 PM (UItaE)

4 One thing that would stop this from the religion of peace would be if muslims clerics where taken and decapitated. If enough of them get a taste of a blade to their necks they'd think twice. Muslims are like a stuborn mule that needs to be hit between the eyes with a 2x4 to get it to move.

Posted by: Andre at March 24, 2006 06:51 PM (/u+1F)

5 What is so stupid about this whole damn thing... He converted 16 years ago, while in Germany.

Posted by: Ariya at March 24, 2006 06:59 PM (yHb0A)

6 I saw my Great Grandfather do that to his mule, that did not want to get harnessed to the plow. After he lifted that 2 by 4 up in the air, that mule calmed down real fast. I suppose my Great Grandfather had hit that mule in the past, and the mule remembered it. That five acres got plowed with no problem after that. Maybe it would work with those moon god worshippers too. That sticks in my mind to this day.

Posted by: Leatherneck at March 24, 2006 07:01 PM (D2g/j)

7 I think that this problem really serves to underscore the seriousness of the problem that the united states faces with bringing democracy to Kabul. The U.S. view of freedom of religion is a much different than that of Kabul. In Kabul their community finds it acceptable to vote a government into office, and then if that government enacts laws based on the muslim Koran those laws will be enforced.

Posted by: Teething problems in Kabul at March 24, 2006 07:46 PM (PhGSN)

8 "An Afghan Christian facing possible execution for converting from Islam was likely to be released from jail "soon," a senior government official said following huge Western pressure over the case" I hope to God he is "released" like the Christian Peacemaker or whatever they were called in Iraq were "released" In Afganistan that would mean "released" by a platoon of Rangers or Marines with guns blazing. Hearing how the people for whom the USA spent its blood and treasure on treat those with different religious beliefs is enough to turn me into one of those "go to Hell Conservatives that I read about at NRO earlier in the week!

Posted by: Kent at March 24, 2006 07:59 PM (8xG54)

9 Released soon........Hm. To perhaps, walk the streets of Kabul, alone? I don't think so. Those ROP boys have some really fun stuff planned for him, and it will be done very publicly. If you thought beheading was inhuman, wait 'til you see what they do to him. (If we don't give him safe passage out of there.)

Posted by: n.a. palm at March 24, 2006 08:30 PM (ZRUjY)

10 Teething, why don't you admit that it is the whole of Islam that is the problem. The religion itself is barbaric as practiced by the vast majority of its adherants. Bringing democracy to any Islamic nation is next to impossible. One wonders what is to be done with these people, as they seem to reject the ideas of the modern world.

Posted by: jesusland joe at March 24, 2006 08:35 PM (rUyw4)

11 I hope this man finds safety. And soon. And I think he's shown the necessary wherewithal to merit a little help from the coalition. I do get tired of the extreme responses though from both ends of the spectrum. It's always either "blow 'em to hell, they'd do the same" or "if we were just a little nicer..." There's a reasonable and correct response to every action taken by these whack-job extremists. Sometimes force is needed and sometimes reason can be applied. The art is knowing when to do what. In this case, a great deal of focus on this gentleman has produced some response from his oppressors, but he's not out of the woods yet. It truly is a shame though, that diplomacy is necessary in these instances, because common sense is such a commodity in that part of the world. What are the odds that he'll show more gratitude than the CPT group has if he is freed? I think we know the answer to that. Sad but true.

Posted by: Oyster at March 24, 2006 09:06 PM (YudAC)

12 The whole thing looked staged to me. Basically, an "ally" is helping us vilify Muslims. If they were really going to kill this guy, they wouldn't have paraded him on TV, allowing him to espouse his apostasy to the whole world. To paraphrase Karl RoveÂ… "We create reality and when you think you know what reality is, we change it."

Posted by: Greg at March 24, 2006 10:07 PM (q5wwn)

13 Staged? No. Just Islam. Maybe this will serve as a reality check.

Posted by: REMF at March 24, 2006 11:43 PM (7RMSi)

14 Even after the resolution of this particular case the overall problem will remain. There are not a great many apostates in Afghanistan but there are others. And I expect more to appear for a variety of reasons and agendas. The entire dociety and culture must be modernized. That is an education issue.

Posted by: john Ryan at March 25, 2006 12:02 AM (TcoRJ)

15 >>>>>If they were really going to kill this guy, they wouldn't have paraded him on TV, allowing him to espouse his apostasy to the whole world. Clearly you're a member of the "reality-based" community where a cigar is never just a cigar and the obvious answer is always wrong. Executing apostates publicly serves their purposes by letting it serve as a lesson to other would-be apostates. Executing someone in secret kinda defeats the purpose.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 25, 2006 01:19 AM (8e/V4)

16 WTF?

Posted by: REMF at March 25, 2006 05:49 AM (7RMSi)

17 Don't worry about it REMF, it's just another libtard troll, one of greg's friends no doubt, displaying his IQ for everyone to see. I've actually come to enjoy it, because it exposes the leftards for what they are and what they've got: Nothing. In any event, don't let it bother you, because we'll hang them all soon enough.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 25, 2006 07:13 AM (0yYS2)

18 Well I think we should strike his neck, brother

Posted by: REMF at March 25, 2006 07:51 AM (7RMSi)

19 As per usual, money talks. Hope he goes free. Where do all of these retard trolls come from Rusty?

Posted by: Dick at March 25, 2006 08:21 AM (XlQVK)

20 Hey, guys? Democracy is democracy, right? Good job, Bush. Give barbarians a chance to form their own laws and government. Next time just leave the place alone instead of sacrificing brave American soldiers on the alter of Islamic Fascism.

Posted by: MiB at March 25, 2006 12:15 PM (XRlh2)

21 Gladly.

Posted by: Oyster at March 25, 2006 01:04 PM (V9juS)

22 The IDIOT who wrote hang me needs to be SHOT!!! PUNK!!!! anyways HA HA ISLAM... pWn3D

Posted by: billy faeth at March 25, 2006 01:44 PM (Lc35u)

23 SPECIAL NOTE: Our pet troll actually "communicated" with us at Vince Aut Morire the other night. Turns out he's a Leftist who considers all American soldiers to be murderers, hates conservative blogs, and...there was a very broad hint that he...pleasures himself while posting his "numbers".

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at March 25, 2006 02:25 PM (RHG+K)

24 Carlos: "Executing apostates publicly" What execution? All I saw was a staged PR piece that serves the American agenda. They are not going to execute this guy and Bush can take credit for it. It's a political homerun for Bush.

Posted by: Greg at March 25, 2006 02:30 PM (q5wwn)

25 I pray that this man will be released and permitted to flee to safety in a civilized country, but I suspect that this will end in a martyr's crown. I think one way he may be saved is if American muslim organizations use their authority to free him. However, I don't hold much hope in that either.

Posted by: Asgerd at March 25, 2006 03:21 PM (FAzNe)

26 Haha. Greg is still subscribing to Alex Jones' conspiracy theories. The obvious is never the truth. There's a conspiracy in everything and Bush is behind it all. Oh yeah, and Rove. Hey Greg, we're really all communists here and we're pulling you into our trap. We only say the things we do so you'll keep hating republicans and conservatives and lean even more left and help us eventually rule the world. Muhahaha!

Posted by: Oyster at March 25, 2006 07:08 PM (YudAC)

27 MiB: Good job, Bush. Give barbarians a chance to form their own laws and government. Next time just leave the place alone instead of sacrificing brave American soldiers on the alter of Islamic Fascism. --- Good job, Bush. Give barbarians a chance to form their own laws and government. Next time just flatten the place into glass instead of sacrificing brave American soldiers on the alter of Islamic Fascism. Fixed it for you, MiB.

Posted by: MegaTroopX at March 26, 2006 03:38 PM (yT/Rw)

28 "Next time just leave the place alone..." - OMG, this has got to be the most ignorant comment ever made at Jawa. Just leave the Taliban and the al Qaeda training camps in place? Ooookay, MiB.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at March 26, 2006 03:56 PM (RHG+K)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

March 22, 2006

Petition to Censure Jimmy Carter

I received a press release tonight from Move American Forward announcing their efforts to have Congress formally censure former President Jimmy Carter, who been behaving rather...erratically...of late. In fact, at times it seems that Carter doesn't realize that he's no longer an elected official, and has taken it upon himself to negotiate with foreign governments and campaign against UN resolutions that would serve America's interests. more...

Posted by: Bluto at 12:05 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 167 words, total size 1 kb.

1 If by "censure" you mean "put a bullet in his head", I'd like to open the bidding at $10,000.00, which I would come up with even if I had to sell a kidney. Now to find a liberal with healthy kidneys...

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 22, 2006 05:48 AM (0yYS2)

2 So you give him a strongly worded letter - what's that supposed to achieve? As long as he doesn't have any real power when it comes to US policy making, let him say whatever he wants. The greatest punishment will be to have it permanently recorded in the history books what a lousy President he was while in office and what an embarrassing, traitorous loon he became afterwards.

Posted by: Graeme at March 22, 2006 06:52 AM (qOhR3)

3 Where do I sign?

Posted by: n.a. palm at March 22, 2006 07:53 AM (4fv8l)

4 Didn't Bush say that if you play nice with terrorists, that you are a terrorist? Ala palm: where do I sign?

Posted by: yo at March 22, 2006 08:44 AM (Stkxb)

5 In fact, at times it seems that Carter doesn't realize that he's no longer an elected official, and has taken it upon himself to negotiate with foreign governments and campaign against UN resolutions that would serve America's interests. The Logan Act, the only other U.S law that is hardly ever enforced (second to Treason) and comes with a fine, or three year prison sentence, for exactly what he is doing, even Senator rockefeller met the criteria when he took it upon himself to discuss U.S policy with Saudia Arabia and other middle-eastern countries pre-Iraq war in regards to the up-coming war.

Posted by: davec at March 22, 2006 11:29 AM (CcXvt)

6 Everytime Jimmy shows up, just call his brother Billy, and ask him to show up too. That should be enough to make Jimmy hide.

Posted by: Leatherneck at March 22, 2006 09:29 PM (D2g/j)

7 Doesn't the Constitution say something about the President being the only one with the right to negotiate with foreign governments? This is no small matter, but we've brooked so much treason for so long, it seems small in comparison. Carter should be charged, tried, found guilty, and publicly hanged for treason, and I would pay any amount of money to get to kick the props out from under him.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 23, 2006 06:33 AM (0yYS2)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

March 21, 2006

That's One Phat Bass

World record large mouth bass caught yesterday at Dixon Lake, in San Diego County by Mac Weakley. Yes, the world's biggest bass was caught in California. Take that Confederate Yankee. The fish weighed 25 lbs. 1 oz, breaking the previous record of 22 lbs. 4 ozs set by George W. Perry at Montgomery Lake in Georgia in 1932.

Unfortunately, this giant of a fish was "foul-hooked"--which means that it was hooked in a place other than in the mouth. In other words, Weakly's lure snagged the fish on accident. The IGFA rules, though, only disqualify the fish if it was intentionally fould-hooked. Regardless of its official position in the record books, this is the biggest bass ever caught.

My dad and cousin sometimes fish this lake, but I've never been. Suddenly I regret my decision to not join them. The San Diego Union Tribune is following the story here, here, and here.

UPDATE: Field and Stream seem to have the best account here.

Others: Wizbang discusses the ins and outs of the catch, Point Five's Cindy Sheehan take, Stix Blog--who seem jealous

Posted by: Rusty at 02:59 PM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 190 words, total size 2 kb.

March 16, 2006

Large U.S. Assault Begins in Iraq

Good luck & God bless. I pray that our troops will rescue any hostages which may be held captive in the area. More here.

UPDATE: Start Cranking Out The Virgins
more...

Posted by: Rusty at 10:49 AM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 362 words, total size 3 kb.

A Familiar Face

The Pentagon has just released to the public documents captured in Operation Iraqi Freedom. They can be accessed here in Adobe Acrobat format.

This one's interesting; the synopsis describes it this way:

ISGZ-2004-019920
2002 Iraqi Intelligence Correspondence concerning the presence of al-Qaida Members in Iraq. Correspondence between IRS members on a suspicion, later confirmed, of the presence of an Al-Qaeda terrorist group. Moreover, it includes photos and names.

The document hasn't been translated into English; many of the documents released are available only in Arabic. This one consists of photocopies of handwritten notes and photos, presumably of the al Qaeda members that Iraqi intelligence had listed as being in Iraq in 2002. Here's a detail from page 6: more...

Posted by: Bluto at 01:03 AM | Comments (13) | Add Comment
Post contains 153 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Nice biography on Zarqawi. It makes him out to be a saint.

Posted by: Oyster at March 16, 2006 04:04 AM (YudAC)

2 Holy freakin schneike!

Posted by: Rusty at March 16, 2006 08:17 AM (JQjhA)

3 Yup that's Zaqueery.

Posted by: Howie at March 16, 2006 08:29 AM (NUh+w)

4 Check the shirt collar. The Zark suffers from the Arab national allergy to soap and water.

Posted by: david72 at March 16, 2006 09:36 AM (0WQCz)

5 Will the main stream press be as eager to get this info to the public as they were about touting "no weapons" or 'Abu Graib photos'? I don't think so!

Posted by: Ron Ruckman at March 16, 2006 12:55 PM (icxd8)

6 Can someone please explain why information like this has taken so long to reach the public, and why it is in the interest of the Bush administration to withhold it? Why do we question the mainstream media on this, after all they haven't had the information. However the White House has. What's going on?

Posted by: Mike at March 16, 2006 04:42 PM (lsVU/)

7 You guys have very short little memories. The administration had a chance to take out Zarqawi when he was a sitting duck in northern Iraq at the beginning of the war but the idea was shot down by the NSC. His camps were there, we knew where they were, but some bright guy in the Pentagon decided not to get him. According to several sources, the Pentagon had pushed to "take out" Zarqawi's operation at least three times prior to the invasion of Iraq, but had been vetoed by the National Security Council. The council's decision was made because they thought it would make it harder to convince other countries to join the US in a coalition against Iraq. "People were more obsessed with developing the coalition to overthrow Saddam than to execute the presidentÂ’s policy of preemption against terrorists," said former National Security Council member Roger Cressey.

Posted by: Jerry at March 16, 2006 08:30 PM (R5ka6)

8 Mike - information like this has to be properly vetted and when information of this import has been passed to the media inthe past, they don't run with it.

Posted by: Tim at March 17, 2006 02:34 PM (O+1/6)

9 It's the same picture. Isn't that odd?

Posted by: Regret at March 17, 2006 03:07 PM (OhVLZ)

10 No, it's not really that odd at all. There are few photographs of Zarqawi in circulation. The mug shot of him is probably the one that best shows his facial features, so it probably gets passed around the most.

Posted by: Darkmage at March 17, 2006 09:01 PM (It1I5)

11 Quote: "Will the main stream press be as eager to get this info to the public as they were about touting "no weapons" or 'Abu Graib photos'? I don't think so!" Posted by: Ron Ruckman at March 16, 2006 12:55 PM Are you that eager ? You notice how the photo looks rather mug-shot-ish ? That is because it is. The report states Saddam had that photo issued to his forces so they could identify and arrest Zarqawi. Yeah talk it up guys. That the link between Saddam and Zarqawi was that he was taking the same action against him in 2002 that the US is in 2006. Yeah that REALLY helps. If you were smarter you might notice your foot is missing from an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound.

Posted by: Geoff at March 17, 2006 11:35 PM (aOeXm)

12 Geoff, Mug Shots are taken AFTER you are arrested. You might be correct, but other terrorists also were allowed into Iraq and even had offices there. Check out Michael Totten's web page where he talks about the Kurdish town where Zarqawi was before the war. So, we could have possibly taken him out in the beginning.

Posted by: Aaron at March 18, 2006 08:22 AM (IwRtX)

13 It's possible that these mug shots were taken when Zarqawi was in Jordanian custody before being released in a general amnesty after King Hussein died in 1999.

Posted by: lawhawk at March 20, 2006 02:45 PM (eppTH)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

March 12, 2006

CIA Agents Named on Internet

(Washington. D.C.) The Chicago Tribune conducted a search on the Internet for CIA data and found "more than 2,600 CIA employees, 50 internal agency telephone numbers and the locations of some two dozen secret CIA facilities around the United States." All data were compiled from commercial sources.

Included in the virtual directory were the names and addresses of publicly-known employees, such as Director Porter Goss, and data regarding clandestine employees and front companies.

Holy moly! If the Tribune reporting is accurate, I'd surmise that the alleged outing of Valerie Plame as a CIA agent is nothing.

From Interested-Participant.

Posted by: Mike Pechar at 10:25 AM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 108 words, total size 1 kb.

1 The Tribune is not disclosing the identities of any of the CIA employees uncovered in its database searches, the searching techniques used or other details that might put agency employees or operatives at risk. The CIA apparently was unaware of the extent to which its employees were in the public domain until being provided with a partial list of names by the Tribune. Amazing what you can find on the Internet these days.

Posted by: Homeland Stupidity at March 12, 2006 11:09 AM (FVbj6)

2 The Tribune is doing something my colleague Chris Mcnab, and author of the book "Network Security Assessment" (Oreilly) did for a whitepaper, over two-three years ago now: Internet Counterintelligence - CIA Not only did he mine whois/ipblock/zone records/email headers/ which also turned up around 2 pages of employee names/email/phone numbers/extentions He was also able to create a internal map of how their network looked on the inside.

Posted by: davec at March 12, 2006 11:45 AM (CcXvt)

3 I really don't see how the CIA being retarded and having all sorts of supposed-to-be-secret information (its not secret, you see, if you can google the frickin' stuff) makes "outing" a CIA agent any better. This is supposing Plame was outed and not just some random code monkey employee.

Posted by: MiB at March 12, 2006 01:10 PM (VeYWn)

4 Think of some information as being inside a spiders web, and imagine strumming some of the strands -- the spider knows who you are. sorry for the cryptic analogy.

Posted by: davec at March 12, 2006 01:13 PM (CcXvt)

5 We have Jimmah and Bubba to thank for gutting the CIA and the military, and when the next attack happens, as it surely will, we should find them and hang them.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 12, 2006 01:32 PM (0yYS2)

6 I take umbrage (or whatever) with the Tribune's headline and sub: "Internet blows CIA cover: It's easy to track America's covert operatives. All you need to know is how to navigate the Internet." Tne Internet didn't blow anyone's cover. The idiot CIA employees who put down "CIA" as a place of employment on public record forms. Or worse, they'll write "CIA Agent" or something equally stupid on forms requesting only a general term for "Profession" or something similar.

Posted by: Asgerd at March 12, 2006 05:50 PM (TTO4C)

7 "Or worse, they'll write "CIA Agent" or something equally stupid on forms requesting only a general term for "Profession" or something similar.' Asgerd, you're assuming that's true. It was merely mentioned as an off-chance possibility in one sentence in a two page article and you turn it into a near fact. Frankly, if one were a real "spook" and not just an employee, I find it hard to believe they would put "Sooper Sekrit Agent" on any application for anything. They didn't get to their position by being so ignorant.

Posted by: Oyster at March 13, 2006 06:50 AM (YudAC)

8 Oyster, I agree with you that the men and women who work the NOCs or other clandestine positions are smart enough not to write "NOC" on a job form, but the CIA is a bureaucracy, with many, (too) many bureaucrats working non-lethal jobs. Those folks don't need to be very bright; they just need to pass a polygraph. Many of those employees are careless, and do careless things with their identities.

Posted by: Asgerd at March 13, 2006 11:00 AM (ssQjS)

9 Just pass a polygraph? you are joking right -- my friend has to give way more than that, and take a polygraph for a position as a dispatch clerk for the local police municipality. I think you're over simplifying, all analysts, and managers all have to have the required security clearance for the documents they're reading/working on be it "Top Secret" or "TS/CI" etc. The CIA employs thousands of employee's that do not work with confidential data, so their name is hardly a security leak. I think by the comparison of the CIA appearing in search engine, or other Internet sources qualifies confidential data leakage, we can also say anyone viewing the parking lot at Langley can find out who works there. They do have procedures in place to insure confidentiality.

Posted by: davec at March 13, 2006 11:21 AM (CcXvt)

10 another manufactured controversy? The article is somewhat misleading...

Posted by: anon at March 13, 2006 06:14 PM (02Pse)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

March 11, 2006

Slobodan Milosevic Dies in Prison

(The Hague) Former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic was found dead in his prison cell at the UN Detention Center in The Hague.

From Focus-Fen.net:

"It is true," a source close to the government in Belgrade told AFP, when asked to confirm the report.
The source, who requested anonymity, refused to elaborate further.
Milosevic was standing trial at the Hague-based UN war crimes court on more than 60 counts including genocide and crimes against humanity for his role in the Balkan wars, including the 1995 massacre of 8,000 Muslims at Srebrenica.

Milosevic was 65. Over 60 counts of genocide and he never gets convicted nor sentenced.

From Interested-Participant.

Posted by: Mike Pechar at 06:48 AM | Comments (27) | Add Comment
Post contains 115 words, total size 1 kb.

Pakistani Forces Kill Islamist Terrorists

From Reuters:

ISLAMABAD (Reuters) - Pakistani security forces backed by helicopter gunships attacked a hideout of Islamist militants in a tribal region near the Afghan border, killing up to 30 guerrillas, the military said on Saturday.
Military spokesman Major-General Shaukat Sultan said the overnight attack in the North Waziristan tribal region was ordered after intelligence reports suggested that militants were gathered in a compound along with a huge cache of arms, ammunition and explosives.

There were reportedly "foreigners" among the dead. Enjoy your seventy-two raisins, scumbags.

Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto and Vince Aut Morire.

Posted by: Bluto at 12:11 AM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 106 words, total size 1 kb.

1 An interesting if not odd, article linked back to the (Times?) I still would like to know how the road rash knew it was time to leave before the wonder vest went off. What happens if I do thi...........

Posted by: forest hunter at March 11, 2006 12:36 AM (Fq6zR)

2 Should I take the red pill, or the blue pill?

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 11, 2006 12:46 AM (0yYS2)

3 And when it's always dark........

Posted by: forest hunter at March 11, 2006 12:48 AM (Fq6zR)

4 Every time at least 10 of these guys are taken out it gets a nod. 30 in one crunch cracks a smile. Time for some hot coco too.

Posted by: Javapuke at March 11, 2006 05:02 AM (6TLwd)

5 You've got to wonder why Pakistan keeps North Warziristan around. The place is like a neighbourhood crackhouse - as long as it's there the authorities will have to keep making raid, after raid, after raid.

Posted by: Graeme at March 11, 2006 07:31 AM (5xq4z)

6 i won't believe these reports until i see heads on pikes. killing as many jihadoterrorists is good. slobo slaughtered more than kla fighters; he murdered unarmed men and women and chldren.

Posted by: reliapundit at March 11, 2006 08:33 AM (rvmEE)

7 Graeme, the culture of the subcontinent is such that a little warmaking now and then by this tribe or that faction, with the ensuing small scale carnage, is simply a facet of life there, and most people take no more notice of it than they do of the weather. There are over a billion people on the subcontinent now, mainly in India and Pakistan, and in some places, the occasional slaughter is just a way of expanding one's property boundries. I'm currently reading Raj - The Making and Unmaking of British India, of which the prologue presents a short history of the conquests of India beginning with the Mughals, and the information contained therein, combined with other facts, anecdotal evidence, and a general, topical knowledge of the history of the subcontinent and its peoples, shows that there is nothing new about anything that is happening in that part of the world, except that the savagery has now spilled out of its native region into ours. Thus, we have two choices; fight, or die.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 11, 2006 09:05 AM (0yYS2)

8 of topic but I read While Europe Slept by Bruce Bawer, last night. I have never been so enraged by a book before in my adult life--and i've read my share of human misery, corruption and violence. I wish I could explain away his argument but I believe he is spot on. Page after fucking page of traitors "dialogue-ing" away their own civilization. Europe, you have really fucked yourself this time! and oh yeah, rot in hell you 30 (or so!) islamotards. If only Europe could grow some balls and do the same. Europe=a continental vagina! ha!

Posted by: jonathan at March 11, 2006 10:25 AM (rh5AQ)

9 Europe is screwed, and we'll have to save them. Again. This time, we should colonize the continent ourselves.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 11, 2006 06:43 PM (0yYS2)

10 They sure wont be going to paridise

Posted by: sandpiper at March 12, 2006 07:45 PM (D9h75)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

March 09, 2006

DP World to Hand Over Ports to US Firm

We won't be letting the UAE run our ports after all.

CNN : Reading a statement from DP World on the Senate floor, Warner, a Virginia Republican, said the reason is "to preserve" the strong relationship between the UAE and United States... ...House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Illinois, and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tennessee, delivered the news to Bush during a meeting Thursday at the White House, two Republican sources said

Good deal? I guess time will tell sounds better to me. I think the heavy public outcry is to credit for this. This shows that in America what the people really want they can get.

Posted by: Howie at 01:08 PM | Comments (42) | Add Comment
Post contains 122 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Alienating an Arab ally in the war on terror was such a stupid thing to do I don't even have the words.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 09, 2006 01:20 PM (8e/V4)

2 Hey! What seems stupid is why aren't we managing our own ports in the first place? Britain needs work but so do we! Far as alienating, if the scales are so balanced, let's go ahead and tip them one way or the other so we can truly see who is with us and who is not!

Posted by: Justjustice at March 09, 2006 01:30 PM (Y2ILH)

3 We let Britain manage port terminals, but not the UAE? Britain??? which is a haven for radical jihadis fleeing from countries like the UAE where they are imprisoned and killed??? RIDICULOUS. Terrorist infiltration is far more likely with politically correct European countries than it is with hardline secular Arab governments. This was just plain ignorant on the part of the GOP, and pure craven opportunism by the Democrats. A pox on both of them.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 09, 2006 01:36 PM (8e/V4)

4 This is no "Success" as being trumpeted by both the left & the right. We have attached a name to this act of ignorance, that name is "racism".

Posted by: Vegas Vic at March 09, 2006 02:13 PM (21MfC)

5 Truth Seeker has seen signs on Earth that Christ is standing after emerging from a split in the Earth which resembles a crow. Below him is a Hooded figure. Half way down the hooded figure is an ultraviolet infant spirit. It is tumbling towards the Boarlike, Dragon beast. I think it signifies what is happening as infant spirits are fed to the beast at the hands of hooded figures. God himself appears at least twice. An imaginative eye might percieve more.

Posted by: TruthSeeker at March 09, 2006 02:19 PM (Y2ILH)

6 I wouldn't go so far as racism, but profiling - definately. Something the left abhors.

Posted by: Oyster at March 09, 2006 02:19 PM (rf0W8)

7 I see it as a message strait from the people to the middle east. Fix the shit. It pressures those nations to do more against terror.

Posted by: Howie at March 09, 2006 02:25 PM (D3+20)

8 The Sauds and Chicoms run our ports, so what's the beef against the UAE?

Posted by: Marcus Aurelius at March 09, 2006 02:31 PM (ffPYG)

9 Not he deal itself so much as do we really want more of the same.

Posted by: Howie at March 09, 2006 02:41 PM (D3+20)

10 >>>We have attached a name to this act of ignorance, that name is "racism". It had nothing to do with "racism." It had everything to do with legitimate (but misplaced) fears about national security on the part of the GOP, and pure political cravenness by the Democrats (who don't give two shits about national security).

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 09, 2006 02:55 PM (8e/V4)

11 "Ally in the war on terror?" that was a joke, right? Meanwhile, the real deal the UAE is interested in getting through isnt even being discussed, not even on this site: The UAE's pending purchase of Doncasters which would put them firmly in the business of supplying the US Military with engines and ae rospace parts and other military munitions.

Posted by: Steve Sharon at March 09, 2006 02:56 PM (IGC5v)

12 From Paul Sperry's base of terrorism related information: Sheik Maktoum's reaction to the mass murder of 3,000 in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania was shockingly unsympathetic (as was CAIR's). In fact, he reserved his sympathies for Palestinians. Two weeks after 9/11, Sheik Maktoum warned Washington not to attack "innocent" Muslims in Afghanistan and to instead focus on "Israeli terrorists" in its war on terrorism. He argued that they are the only real terrorists. "The Arab and Muslim communities have paid dearly for terrorism, especially the state terrorism practiced by the government of [Israeli Prime Minister Ariel] Sharon and extremist groups in Israel," he bellowed. "Regrettably, the powers in the international community [read: America, "the Great Satan"] have done nothing but watch the Israeli terrorists, a matter which has angered Arabs and Muslims [including most assuredly Sheik Maktoum]." He added, "Confrontation of terrorism must cover Israeli terrorism." Sheik Maktoum defines Palestinian suicide bombings as "legitimate acts of resistance," and not terrorism (which makes you wonder how he defines 9/11), and he has held Dubai telethons to support the families of suicide bombers. Also, the sheik has been accused of winking at al-Qaida money-laundering in his city-state, and helping an ailing bin Laden receive care at a Dubai hospital when he was on the lam.

Posted by: Steve Sharon at March 09, 2006 02:59 PM (IGC5v)

13 This shows that in America what the people really want they can get. Who made the concession then, the Democrats or the Republicans? -- it would seem to me both parties, and the American people had the decision made for them by the UAE.

Posted by: davec at March 09, 2006 03:14 PM (CcXvt)

14 Each one of these awful excerpts just continue to uphold the undeniable fact that all arabs are subhuman filth. There is only one way to win the war on terror and that is the swift execution of every arab man, woman, and child.

Posted by: USA Patriot at March 09, 2006 03:16 PM (AqYSV)

15 This shows that in America what the people really want they can get. Even when they have no idea why they want it.

Posted by: Jim at March 09, 2006 03:21 PM (YkmII)

16 Score a victory for the Dems, the left and the iso-nuts. I didn't think it was possible - especially on the so-called issue of "national security" - but they pulled it off - congradulations. Now lets try and be a little consistant about the UAE/DPW and "national security" since everyone seems to care now. DPW does run one particular port virtually exclusively in every aspect - the Port Of Dubai. On any given day, dozens of US naval ships are in that port for service, supply, re-deployment, personnel transfer, R&R etc. In a year hundreds of US naval ships pass thru there - including entire Carrier Task Forces and nuclear submarines. Tens of thousands of naval personnel take shore leave there, plus tens of thousands more military personnel from the SE Asia theater. In fact, it is the largest US naval operation in the WORLD outside the US (ports like Norfolk and Pearl Harbor (remember that name)). Down the road is one of the largest US Air bases in the world. The entire air refueling fleet and bulk of Military Airlift in that region is based there. Massive expansion of site storage, maintenance and runways makes it the only available base in the region capable of handling our bomber fleets - and its easily resupplied - by rail & sea link. Some areas in the Iraq & (especially) Afghanistan are re-supplied and serviced exclusively by Military Airlift Command (MAC UAE/Dubai). In fact, virtually all military cargo going into the SE Asian theater goes thru the Port Of Dubai - examples: fuel, bombs, bullets, armor, toothpaste, toiletpaper (very important!!) and momma's baked cookies. OK - since we are now all concerned about the UAE, terrorism, and national security - isn't it about time someone point out the horrific national security nightmare envisioned above? I mean - this all has the potential to make Pearl Harbor look like a minor skirmish and water balloon fight!!!! Let's be consistant here! This is a real national security situation and crisis! Tens of thousands (maybe more) of American lives are at stake (oh - US military personnel do count as Americans - right?). AND .... the safety and security of nuclear weapons too!!!! Don't some of you think we should be demanding an immediate withdrawl? The risk is there - why take it? Get out now! This is some really heavy shit national secuity stuff people! Of course operations in Iraq and Afhganistan would grind to a halt and probably collapse - and any potential military action against Iran if necessary becomes impossible - but that's not the immediate problem! National Security is! Some Dems and the left are a lot smarter than I thought. The most vital link in any military operations is rear area supply and support. Destroy/poison that - and they achieve what they can't otherwise.

Posted by: hondo at March 09, 2006 03:28 PM (fyKFC)

17 It's not racism. That's ludicrous. The fact that Americans don't trust arabs is not OUR fault. As someone said, the arab world "needs to clean up the shit" if they want to be trusted.

Posted by: Richard at March 09, 2006 03:34 PM (7KF8r)

18 Very interesting, hondo. Do you think that the UAE will ask that the US go somewhere else and play? Or do they need us to help assure their own security? I'm very curious about this, hondo. Do you have more info?

Posted by: jesusland joe at March 09, 2006 03:36 PM (rUyw4)

19 JC I gotta agree on the racism aspect. The Dems/left played the Race card - and they played it incredibly well! They found an issue with traction and they will repeat variations of it for the next several months. I refer you to Bluto's recent topic posting concerning the WP poll on American attitudes concerning muslims and islam.

Posted by: hondo at March 09, 2006 03:44 PM (fyKFC)

20 JJ There is nowhere else to go due to topographical and logistics considerations. Kuwait/Basra is out of the question due to the Iranian situation - its a narrow bottleneck and very(!) short-range fixed location for targeting - the Strait of Hormuz compounds it even further. A virtual military nightmare with the potential for disaster. Interestingly enough - the only options (all poor) available for a logistical operation this size would be in India. I don't know JJ. I have no idea how all this anti-arab anti-foreign investment is going to play out. Keep your eye on Boeing/Airbus in the near future for any hints.

Posted by: hondo at March 09, 2006 04:06 PM (fyKFC)

21 The hysterics won and have possibly subverted our efforts to fight terror in the UAE and elsewhere. Stupid people always pay a price.

Posted by: RA at March 09, 2006 06:28 PM (u3a5v)

22 OK, half of the UAE ruleing family hugs, and kisses Osama. The UAE has a boycott on Israel, along with other stinking moon god worshipping countries. The ports would not be the problem, the information on what comes in, and out would be. Put that in your pipe, and smoke it!

Posted by: Leatherneck at March 09, 2006 06:56 PM (D2g/j)

23 Boy, I hope Halliburton gets the contract to run the ports..

Posted by: Marvin at March 09, 2006 07:12 PM (TQL4M)

24 Then be consistant and demand the withdrawl of so much of US military assets from their "reach and clutches"! Er, "what comes in and out"?????. A nuclear device detonated in the Port Of Dubai (UAE) would do 10 times more damage (at least!!!) than the Japanese achieved at Pearl Harbor! That is a national security issue - isn't it? Total silence (TOTAL!!!) on this throughout this entire ports thing! Amazing!

Posted by: hondo at March 09, 2006 07:13 PM (fyKFC)

25 I'll admit it is ignorance on my part, hondo, even though I've not commented directly on the ports issue, knowing that I did not have enough information to make an informed decision. Frankly, I had no idea that so much of our logistics supporting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan went through the port of Dubai. This is a much more complex issue than what was framed in the debate. I need to know more. Thanks, hondo.

Posted by: jesusland joe at March 09, 2006 07:33 PM (rUyw4)

26 My sources - oddly enough in-house military magazines like LOGISTICS, SOLDIER etc., and returning friends - many spent some time in Dubai ... including all of our translators and Intel people. The magnitude and importance is staggering! Some of my troopers (ex-marines) said they have seen a military port operation this big since Norfolk. Why it wasn't brought up - I don't know. Maybe because the hysteria developed so fast ... the desire to not overly advertise a military ops so important and vast ... I don't know. There really wasn't a debate on all this. The Admin didn't expect or anticipate it being played the way it was ... nor the kneejerk reaction and folding on the right.

Posted by: hondo at March 09, 2006 07:58 PM (fyKFC)

27 According to what has been written, the customs/ Homeland Security have detection devises for the atomic problem. But, if I was a moon god worshipper wanting something nice to attack, what could be better than a Hospital ship, and where it will be/go etc?

Posted by: Leatherneck at March 09, 2006 08:01 PM (D2g/j)

28 The ship in question is in the Port Of Dubai - now say it! - and demand the withdrawl of US military forces from Dubai! and cease all operations in SE Asia! At this point, I not sure whether your an idiot, an ass, or a coy lil' lefty playing everyone here.

Posted by: hondo at March 09, 2006 08:06 PM (fyKFC)

29 We were not talking about withdrawing from anywhere. All I was saying is the information is worth it's weight in gold. Customs still run the ports, but they really do not have the muslims inside their company who would want information on different stuff. The UAE does, and is a big reason for our mistrust. P.S. Do not tell me want to say.

Posted by: Leatherneck at March 09, 2006 08:25 PM (D2g/j)

30 Your talking out of both sides of your mouth - can't seem to make up your mind what is national security and what isn't - you can say whatever you want to say - seems you won't say anything about operations in Dubai. Reference that Hospital Ship - I know that ship - it sometimes berths here in NYC - often within clear view very nearby at the Homeport pier on Staten Island. As far as I know, that ship at this moment is in the Port Of Dubai - if you think its unsafe then freakin' say so! PS - I won't tell you what to say - but I will tell you to go fuck yourself - feel better?

Posted by: hondo at March 09, 2006 08:43 PM (fyKFC)

31 Hondo has an excellent point. I have had mixed feelings myself about this deal, but I know why and will readily admit it was based on an intangible mistrust and a lack of information. So I took the time to really check into the situation and learned the difference between "21 ports" and "21 terminals in 6 ports" (a mere fraction of port operations). I also learned right off the bat that they wouldn't be handling security, that would still be our job. Of course, they'll have their own security measures to supliment ours as well. I also learned that we do indeed have a massive number of ships, air power and a multitude of military personnel in Dubai at any given time. I also know three people who have lived in Dubai and say that it's a very progressive (forgive the word) and modern city replete with whatever one's heart desires. Women hang on the beach near naked, you can get hookers, see any movie you want and dine out in some of the finest restaurants in the world. 5 star hotels and a bustling night life? No problem. It's not at all like Saudi Arabia right on the same mini continent. The hype and suspicion is way overblown. (Glad I proof read that. I had you down as Honda instead of Hondo, lol)

Posted by: Oyster at March 10, 2006 06:44 AM (YudAC)

32 There are no muslims *spit* who are our allies; those who are not openly at war against us are only disguised enemies who are biding their time. Muslims *spit* are lying, cowardly, backstabbing scum who have no regard for the Western notions of honor, integrity, or honesty, and cannot be trusted until you dump them in a sewer trench, douse them with diesel, and burn them to ashes in their own shit.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 10, 2006 07:59 AM (0yYS2)

33 A rose by any other name. Having worked for the government, I have become cynical regarding the endless array of dirty tricks they have up their sleeve. Nixon didn't corner the market on dirty tricks. They boys at the top always get what they want. I'd be leary of them creating a new entity or buying out an existing one and the players in the Ports Deal remaing the same. It always about the money and not about what is good for the people.

Posted by: Chimp Alert at March 10, 2006 10:08 AM (JD/cE)

34 Chimpy may be a libtard, but he speaks the truth here about how government is about enriching those in power rather than serving the best interest of the nation, although I'm sure he would vehemently deny that the sainted Billery ever did anything remotely crooked during its time in office.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 10, 2006 11:52 AM (0yYS2)

35 I am not so superheated in my regard of this whole affair. It seems pretty innocuous and beneficial to the U.S. Really! Consider the outcome. 1) A LOT of Dems and liberals are suddenly on the right side of the war on terror. Where is Kerry & Moore et al and their "there is no war", nonsense? Apparently there IS a war, and for one reason or another, we're not putting questionable companies in strategic positions in our trade infrastructure. So? 2) The (relatively, I'll grant) clear message from the people and Congress, that puts islamic nations on notice that their actions, from supporting terrorism to boycotting Israel and Denmark, have consequences. Fine with that. The UAE loses some face? Golly! I'll send a card. 3) A remarkable unanimity in the general public. Let's face it. This idea sounded like a boneheaded move from the word 'go'. Was it? Probably not. But the way it's threshing out is just fine, thanks. 4) Racism? Profiling? So what? Sorry kids, but the new saying that "not all Muslims are terrorists, but virtually all terrorists are Muslims" , is a fact. Want to change that? Great! Let me know how it works out. As for the ports, I think I'm with Scrappleface (.com) and think that they should be turned over to Wal-Mart.

Posted by: heldmyw at March 10, 2006 11:54 AM (LvGT1)

36 So, should Arab/islamic national/owned airlines be allowed into US Airspace and land? Should any cargo ship/vessel originating or passing thru islamic ports be allowed to enter our harbors? (world traffic is - well er - world traffic, and would include Asia, Europe, South America etc) Should we remove all of our valuable and hugh military assets out of Dubai/UAE where they are vulnerable? (this would include all of the Indian Ocean fleet and a chuck of the S. Atlantic fleet). Should we allow any foreign corporation to do business in America? We don't know who they hire or their personnel practices overseas, or what associations, agreements or trade they might have with islamic nations and how that might affect their operations. There are so many unanswered questions! Why are we in Iraq? after all, those are arabs/muslims attacking us - right?

Posted by: hondo at March 10, 2006 12:53 PM (fyKFC)

37 Chimpy isn't lib or con. Chimpy's favorite saying is "VOTE-It perpetuates the illusion of choice". Chimpy thinks that anyone who believes the rhetoric, a politician delivers, is foolish. All they really want is money and they don't care if it comes from China or criminals, Bill Clinton being a perfect example and Hillary being more perfect.

Posted by: Chimp Alert at March 10, 2006 02:28 PM (JD/cE)

38 It's strange. So many say the arab/muslim states should do more reference the war on terror, radical islam, Israel, etc. There are many muslim states. Along comes one (UAE) that not only does do more - it is quietly the #1 of them all (you never ever get 100% of what you want from anybody! - including blond blue eyed or whatever Brits as an example). Then what happens - so many slam that #1 down - not good enough! Fine - OK! But then - so many then turn around and say again the muslim states should do more! If I was a muslim I would be saying to myself right now - "Do more? Compared to what? - and why bother?".

Posted by: hondo at March 10, 2006 02:31 PM (fyKFC)

39 Chimp Alert, If you think your commentary will provide a solid base for compromise between the Chimpy McHitlerburton crowd and those here who aren't of that mindset, you'd better take stock of your library of rhetoric and try another tactic. Yes, it's all about the money. Now, care to say something specific about the subject at hand, or is generalizing all you're capable of?

Posted by: Oyster at March 10, 2006 02:49 PM (rf0W8)

40 Oyster That's what's called "the 2 cent addition". Means nothing - can't even buy a Bazooka single for that price anymore.

Posted by: hondo at March 10, 2006 03:05 PM (fyKFC)

41 Okay, let's cut the guy a break, he may be okay, but it'll take a while to sort him out. After all, he hasn't said anything about the neocon/zionist/space-alien New World Order yet, and obviously doesn't think the sun shines out of Billary's ass, so he's acceptable for now.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 11, 2006 09:27 AM (0yYS2)

42 Oyster, I appreciate that you agree it is all about the money. Part B: There's nothing you can do about it unless you are a lobbyist with deep pockets-Que sera sera. Yes it is a generalization because it is a big umbrella that covers most political activity. At the same time, it is specific to the ports issue. Just as money is laundered through a long trail of various entities, so can control of the ports be disguised. That's what I suspect will happen. In the end, the majority will believe that they have won and that the government is ruled by the people. So yes, that is all I have to say on this site. You will continue addressing a moot issue as I search for a site that discusses the Illegal Alien issue so I can offer the same genralizations to them. Also, when Chimpy keeps score, he rates generalizations, backed by current and historical events, to be higher in value than Ad Homen attacks.

Posted by: Chimp Alert at March 11, 2006 08:13 PM (08tHr)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

March 08, 2006

Moussaoui's Target: The White House

From Reuters:

ALEXANDRIA, Virginia (Reuters) - September 11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui talked of his dream to fly an airplane into the White House more than a year before the hijacked aircraft attacks, a witness linked to al Qaeda testified in federal court on Wednesday.
Fazi Bafana, formerly a treasurer of a unit of Jemaah Islamiah, which is linked to al Qaeda, revealed discussion of that dream in videotaped testimony played during Moussaoui's sentencing trial.
"He told me he had a dream. He dreamed to fly an airplane ... into the White House," Bafana said. "He told me he informed (Osama bin Laden) what he dreamed and (bin Laden) said go ahead. He asked me to assist him."

When the defense cross-examined Bafana he said that he thought Moussaoui was "cuckoo". Of course the "cuckoo" defense might work better if jetliners had not, in fact, actually been flown into buildings on September 11, 2001.

Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto.

Posted by: Bluto at 06:14 PM | Comments (16) | Add Comment
Post contains 169 words, total size 1 kb.

1 what more proof do we need that all arabs and muslims are subhuman filth that deserves nothing more than complete and total annhilation? it is time to round up all arabs in america and give them what they want--a one way ticket to hell.

Posted by: USA Patriot at March 08, 2006 06:27 PM (AqYSV)

2 Bluto I am sure the koskids and the left are gonna shove their feet in their mouths with this one - I think you know what I mean. Mr USA Patriot I by no means wish to question your patriotism - though your common sense and sanity are pretty much open to view. Too much of this "talk" goes by without being questioned or subject to a "reality check" by your "friends" here on this board. I'm reminded of the old saying about family - you can't pick your relatives. Oh well, the attic door is open - feel free to come downstairs for awhile.

Posted by: hondo at March 08, 2006 06:50 PM (fyKFC)

3 the greatest crime in the war on terror has been the resources and lives spent trying to build a country for these filthy subhumans. it is a crime America will pay for dearly many decades later. we should be eradicating the arab population amongst us and using our resources to help Americans. there can be no compromise and no compassion extended to the enemy who attacked us up until an honorable marine puts a bullet in the head of the last arab enemy.

Posted by: USA Patriot at March 08, 2006 06:57 PM (AqYSV)

4 Like I said - your common sense and sanity is on display.

Posted by: hondo at March 08, 2006 07:19 PM (fyKFC)

5 Yep, just like we paid dearly for it rebuilding Japan, and Germany. You're an idiot, and most people can see through you like glass. Go back to DailyKos.

Posted by: davec at March 08, 2006 07:20 PM (CcXvt)

6 USA Patriot, if you are a patriot you will cease and desist all the talk of genocide. Please, this just hurts our cause.

Posted by: jesusland joe at March 08, 2006 07:39 PM (rUyw4)

7 I am not talking about genocide. I am sincerely providing the logical solution to the arab problem and the filthy forces behind terrorism. It is simple logic; eliminate the source of the problem and the problem goes away. We will see how not dealing with the subhuman arab will result in endless death and destruction to Americans and other global citizens.

Posted by: USA Patriot at March 08, 2006 07:50 PM (p74Yq)

8 Why did this "person" show up the same time greg rears his ugly head?

Posted by: Oyster at March 08, 2006 07:51 PM (YudAC)

9 I am not anyone named Greg, nor am I liberal. I am however deeply pissed off at our countries direction and refusal to deal with issues with the toughness required. Americans and American prosperity should be our governments top priority instead they pander to corporate scum and politically correct pantywastes and gamble with the lives and livelyhoods of decent Americans. Examples: 1) precious young soldiers sacrificed for subhuman arabs who do not want a free democratic society and could not sustain or function within it even if they did. 2) filthy disease ridden mexicans crossing our borders and raping our social services and other government programs and costing us billions. 3) global outsourcing of jobs only interested in big companies profit margins. Americans being shit upon because it is cheaper to train a bunch of indian monkeys for 50 cents an hour and generate mind blowing profits for shareholders. The average joe is left holding the bag as usual. Wake up America.

Posted by: USA Patriot at March 08, 2006 08:02 PM (p74Yq)

10 Why don't you try Stormfront.org? Nobody seems to be buying here.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at March 08, 2006 08:11 PM (RHG+K)

11 I visited the site as you suggested and find nothing American or Patriotic about it.

Posted by: USA Patriot at March 08, 2006 08:50 PM (AqYSV)

12 Panty wastes!! thats a new one, see you learn something everyday..

Posted by: MathewK at March 08, 2006 11:13 PM (22QD3)

13 Whoops, forgot to mention, even Osama would have thought Moussaoui was off his rocker, dreaming about him and all that, Osama would never turn his back on Moussaoui.

Posted by: MathewK at March 08, 2006 11:15 PM (22QD3)

14 I heard that back in 1969 some wacko wanted to hijack a airlinner and fly it into the whitehouse but he ended up dead

Posted by: sandpiper at March 12, 2006 07:57 PM (D9h75)

15 WorldSex Daily Updated Free Links to Hardcore Sex Pictures, Movies, Free Porn Videos and XXX Live Sex Cams

Posted by: SEXMENS at April 06, 2006 09:21 PM (5IZro)

16 What is the most important information I should know about Clonazepam? Ã¢Â€Â¢ Use caution when driving, operating machinery, or performing other hazardous activities. Clonazepam will cause drowsiness and may cause dizziness. If you experience drowsiness or dizziness, avoid these activities. Ã¢Â€Â¢ Use alcohol cautiously. Alcohol may increase drowsiness and dizziness while you are taking Clonazepam. Alcohol may also increase your risk of having a seizure. Ã¢Â€Â¢ Do not stop taking Clonazepam suddenly. This could cause seizures and withdrawal symptoms. Talk to your doctor if you need to stop treatment with Clonazepam. What is Clonazepam? Ã¢Â€Â¢ Clonazepam is in a class of drugs called benzodiazepines. Clonazepam affects chemicals in your brain that may become unbalanced and cause seizures. Ã¢Â€Â¢ Clonazepam is used to treat seizures. Ã¢Â€Â¢ Clonazepam may also be used for purposes other than those listed in this medication guide.

Posted by: CLONAZEPAM at April 08, 2006 10:09 AM (KKPBL)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Teri Hatcher Reveals Past Sex Abuse

(Sunnyvale, California) Popular television and film actress Teri Hatcher (pic) has come forward and announced that she was molested by her uncle, Richard Hayes Stone, when she was a little girl.

Hatcher contacted Santa Clara County prosecutor Chuck Gillingham to help in convicting Stone, 67, for molesting 14-year-old Sarah Van Cleemput who later committed suicide. Gillingham needed Hatcher's corroborating testimony.

From MercuryNews.com:

"She asked what I thought," about coming forward, Gillingham said of Hatcher. "I said, 'I'm going to beg you to be involved, as hard as that is for you.'"
Gillingham flew down to Los Angeles with a Sunnyvale public safety officer to take Hatcher's statement.
"When we went to interview her, she almost canceled," Gillingham said. "But she had been with her daughter that morning and was thinking if, God forbid, something happened to her daughter that someone would come forward and do the right thing."
With a tape recording running, Hatcher explained in detail how her uncle -- the then-husband of her mother's sister -- allegedly molested her in the late 1960s and early '70s when she was no more than 7.
"Obviously she took a big risk doing the interview," Gillingham said.
After prosecutors gave the defense a transcript of Hatcher's interview, Stone pleaded guilty Oct. 24, 2002, leaving no need for a trial nor a court appearance for Hatcher.

Hatcher tells her whole story in the April issue of Vanity Fair Magazine.

From Interested-Participant.

Posted by: Mike Pechar at 12:14 PM | Comments (17) | Add Comment
Post contains 249 words, total size 2 kb.

1 There was no trial and a confession by the defendant. So why did she make report of it to the press?

Posted by: Papertiger at March 08, 2006 01:12 PM (wZLWV)

2 paper, the uncle has every opportunity to sue her for slander if she's lying.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 08, 2006 01:39 PM (8e/V4)

3 Paper, why shouldn't she?

Posted by: Oyster at March 08, 2006 02:59 PM (rf0W8)

4 Why shouldn't she? I don't know, maybe I'm old fashioned, but I don't consider the public airing of family business to be in good taste.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 08, 2006 04:26 PM (0yYS2)

5 "family business" lololol! That's one way of putting it.

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 08, 2006 04:48 PM (8e/V4)

6 Well IM, that's a man's viewpoint. I'll give you that. But this is a bit different. Actually, I can understand a male not wanting to make public any abuse by a male family memdber or any other male member of society. But for women, it's different. Being of the "weaker" sex I think I can say with authority, it's definately a bit different. Ever been raped? I have.

Posted by: Oyster at March 08, 2006 08:01 PM (YudAC)

7 Well, I'm sure that was a thread stopper. Sorry 'bout that.

Posted by: Oyster at March 08, 2006 08:25 PM (YudAC)

8 Too bad she didn't come forward before the suicide.

Posted by: Bullshark at March 09, 2006 06:10 AM (m1nCk)

9 No Oyster, my skin is thicker than that. I was saying that I don't think it's right for anyone to air their dirty laundry in public just for the sake of it. Her statement served no purpose but to bring publicity to her flagging career.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 09, 2006 06:10 AM (0yYS2)

10 That may have been her motive. I don't know, but if it highlights a situation that too many people are willing to ignore - because a family member was involved - then I say all the better. There are a significant number of families out there who have an uncle everyone keeps the kids from, but they don't feel enough of a sense of community to report him and protect other people's kids. It's always just a dirty secret kept within the family. I just think it's wrong. And the more that get exposed, the better.

Posted by: Oyster at March 09, 2006 06:31 AM (YudAC)

11 IM Yes, her statement serves an immense purpose - it shows that shes willing to talk publically about something that silence only serves to perpetuate. She is willing to say "see, I was too afraid to tell and someone else got hurt. please learn." You have no idea how so many families will cover and run in these situations. It's taken us months to try and break an extended family's silence on the murder of a 6 week old baby. And there's no guarantee when it goes to trial that a jury will convict because at this point we can't be assured that the family members won't change their stories yet again.

Posted by: Darleen at March 09, 2006 08:38 AM (FgfaV)

12 Good points ladies, but I still think there's a more dignified way to handle things, but then, dignified behavior was outlawed in America long ago, about the same time of the election of that piece of shit scumbag Kennedy.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 09, 2006 12:13 PM (0yYS2)

13 More dignified than the action itself? I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but it can't stay a private matter. Those who commit these acts no longer have the right to privacy and the families who do go public have a much better chance at closure.

Posted by: Oyster at March 09, 2006 01:20 PM (rf0W8)

14 To digress slightly from the thread, I read somewhere that the problem of sex crimes against children which occur in South America are usually kept within the family. It doesn't become public. The problem is resolved by killing the offender. The death is reported as an accident or suicide. I can't vouch for the accuracy of the source. Otherwise, I lean toward Oyster's argument. That is excepting the part about being a thread stopper.

Posted by: Mike at March 09, 2006 04:11 PM (NbXFu)

15 That's the way it should be handled Mike, and not broadcast globally for everyone to know, but then, there is no sense of dignity in the Western world these days, which is a sure sign of its decline.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 10, 2006 08:34 AM (0yYS2)

16 If you've read the article or listened to any of the interviews with the writer, this was not what she intended to do in the interview. It "came out like a volcano". And the idea that a recent Golden Globe award winner has a flagging career is just stupid. I'm a close relative of the prosecutor. I can tell you none of her story is untrue.

Posted by: mama shoe at March 10, 2006 10:39 AM (Eh/Hv)

17 The fact is that no matter how "private" you want or try to keep it, the media always sees it as another item to sensationalize because of the perceived "freedom of information" right. We call some lawyers "ambulance chasers", well, there's a large portion of the media who could be accorded the same title. They hang out in the courthouses looking for stuff, "Oooh, a juicy molestation case. Let's put it ont 6:00 news!"

Posted by: Oyster at March 10, 2006 11:07 AM (rf0W8)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Suspects Arrested in AL Church Fires

(Washington) Two young men have been arrested in connection with the string of church fires in Alabama. Ben Moseley, 19, and Russell Debusk, 19, were taken into custody by federal agents. Both are being charged with arson and conspiracy to commit arson.

A third suspect is being sought in the fires at five Bibb County churches and four in west Alabama last month.

[Update 1230 EST]

The two suspects in custody are students at Birmingham Southern College. The third suspect is reported to be Matthew Lee Cloyd who is a student at the University of Alabama - Birmingham. I noticed that FoxNews now reports that the third suspect has been arrested.

Posted by: Mike Pechar at 09:38 AM | Comments (26) | Add Comment
Post contains 120 words, total size 1 kb.

1 ahhhh the joy of looking through the archives of MPJ ! Feb 8th is where I looked. It seems as though many people felt that this was the work of muslims or such. Some people will no doubt be shocked that it was not.

Posted by: john ryan at March 08, 2006 10:09 AM (TcoRJ)

2 A pic of one of the suspected perps, leaves little doubt this guys a Bubba. http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060215/ids_photos_ts/r1333704343.jpg

Posted by: traderrob at March 08, 2006 10:14 AM (3al54)

3 Yes I thought that too. Still not much info on it yet.

Posted by: Howie at March 08, 2006 10:20 AM (D3+20)

4 finally we get to blame whitey!

Posted by: Jesusland Carlos at March 08, 2006 10:24 AM (8e/V4)

5 That URL listed is not a picture of one of the guys arrested today. That is a picture of a mentally ill person who was arrested weeks ago for a single "copycat" fire.

Posted by: ArrMatey at March 08, 2006 10:27 AM (WfwK9)

6 Just read the caption: Alabama authorities arrested Jason Watkins, shown in this booking handout photo, on charges of setting an abandoned church on fire but described him as a copycat who is not suspected in a spate of unsolved church burnings in the state. Photo released February 14, 2006. REUTERS/Calhoun County Sheriff's Department/Handout

Posted by: ArrMatey at March 08, 2006 10:29 AM (WfwK9)

7 Rob, it says he's not suspected in the other churces, but in the arson of a single abandoned church. It does not say where. But no doubt he looks "disturbed". And John Ryan: First, comments made here do not necessarily reflect the views of the host or the views of other commenters. Second, to use them as a bludgeon to paint us all with your broad brush or the site in general is disingenuous. Third, the bulk of such comments were not regulars here. Fourth, if one does not take into consideration the pervasive political atmosphere at the time, ie. the cartoon violence worldwide, in order to berate those who even considered it might be tied to that is, again, being disingenuous. If you have a bone to pick with anyone here it would behoove you to address that individual and not the group as a whole.

Posted by: Oyster at March 08, 2006 10:30 AM (rf0W8)

8 I stand corrected.

Posted by: traderrob at March 08, 2006 10:32 AM (3al54)

9 Sorry, Rob. It looks like we all ganged up on you at the same time. It wasn't intentional.

Posted by: Oyster at March 08, 2006 10:36 AM (rf0W8)

10 The two boys arrested are from a Methodist college, which is no surprise really, since the Methodists are the most liberal of all Protestant denominations, and have married gays and ordain women as ministers, whereas the Baptists are the most conservative. Sounds to me like a case of moonbats on a rampage.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 08, 2006 10:41 AM (0yYS2)

11 It's OK Oyster, what I get for "skimming: rather then reading the entire cap.

Posted by: traderrob at March 08, 2006 10:52 AM (3al54)

12 Here is the right guy, Russel DeBusk from the BSC website where he goes to school: http://www.bsc.edu/communications/photoweek/2005/20050114.htm.

Posted by: traderrob at March 08, 2006 11:01 AM (3al54)

13 john Go back and be more specific when you refer to commentary on a old topic.

Posted by: hondo at March 08, 2006 11:08 AM (fyKFC)

14 Nice to hear that regulars here don't revel in bigotry, and that those who do are challenged for it. It will be interesting to see how this comment gets treated: The two boys arrested are from a Methodist college, which is no surprise really, since the Methodists are the most liberal of all Protestant denominations, and have married gays and ordain women as ministers, whereas the Baptists are the most conservative. Sounds to me like a case of moonbats on a rampage. Take care when painting with a broad brush. The artist usually gets splattered more than the subject.

Posted by: 8ackgr0und N015e at March 08, 2006 11:20 AM (lukak)

15 I wonder if this could have anything to do with the shooting death of gay BSC professor Sammie Speigner last year. His assailant avoided a capital murder conviction by arguing a "gay panic" defense in spite of plentiful evidence that he intentionally robbed and killed the professor. http://mikesnoise.typepad.com/noisepage/2006/03/two_suspects_ar.html

Posted by: Mike at March 08, 2006 11:42 AM (lMCVl)

16 The post I was referring to was by Rusty Feb 8th "4 More churches burn in Alabama: Domestic Terrorism Watch and MSM Hypocrisy. http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/156367.php What were we saying then ? Also Hondo the apology that you offered then to me was accepted, I just did not read it until now when I went back to that archived post.

Posted by: john ryan at March 08, 2006 12:30 PM (TcoRJ)

17 I read the post again, John, before I ever addressed you. And what was your point? That any number of us are disappointed that it wasn't the work of "muslims or such". C'mon, John. Be honest with yourself and admit that you "want" us to be disappointed. And now you're disappointed that we're not. You should be gleeful that you finally have a Christian on Christian act of aggression. Rusty said clearly and in plain English that his chagrin was directed toward the MSM's speculation on all sorts of people or groups while they were careful not to mention that which was on many people's minds. Dredging up the awful actions of the Klan thirty years ago as a culprit was irresponsible. The perpetual boogeyman always at the ready to be blamed. This could have been perpetrated by anyone. But best to bring up a dirty past of a group with no strength anymore than say, oh, maybe an abortion rights group or Islamist activity. No. That would have been politically incorrect. Speaking for myself, I'm quite happy that it wasn't Islam related - that they haven't again brought their war here (yet) aside from the occasional act like we saw with the guy driving into a college hangout.

Posted by: Oyster at March 08, 2006 01:04 PM (rf0W8)

18 I went to Birmingham Southern, and to paint it in such a way I.M. is to toally miss the point. Yes, it is a Methodist college. Does that make all students there Methodists? Not by a long shot. The school has its share of moonbats, as does any college. And to think that the Methodist council speaks for all Methodists is wrong (I'm trying to be nice here).

Posted by: ken at March 08, 2006 01:08 PM (hFZJx)

19 ah the noise Reference broad strokes - if your going to quote someone you should include names - if that isn't too much of a burden. This will give you the opportunity to address and engage directly to your hearts content.

Posted by: hondo at March 08, 2006 02:06 PM (fyKFC)

20 But you know I'm right.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 08, 2006 04:31 PM (0yYS2)

21 if you're going to quote someone you should include names gee hondo... it's that hard to scroll up? Stultus Maximus figured it out... how hard could it be?

Posted by: 8ackgr0und N015e at March 08, 2006 09:53 PM (K5Ko+)

22 Hey noisy fart, how do you want to die? There's slow hanging, burning alive, skinning alive, drowning, the acid bath, and many other options, but be sure that you're all going to get it soon.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 09, 2006 06:09 AM (0yYS2)

23 "Big Nuisance" writes: Hey noisy fart, how do you want to die? I answer that the same way every time.... "After you."

Posted by: 8ackgr0und N015e at March 09, 2006 11:41 AM (SVPNF)

24 If I could make killing an idiot libtard like you my last act, I'd do it gladly.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 09, 2006 12:06 PM (0yYS2)

25 What kind of nw age cult do they belong to?

Posted by: sandpiper at March 10, 2006 03:54 PM (U/q87)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Iran Deploys New Sub in Persian Gulf

From the Gulf Daily News (Bahrain):

The Nahang (meaning whale) and was "built by specialists in the Iranian defence ministry and has the capability to carry multipurpose weapons for different missions", said Rear Admiral Sajjad Kouchaki.

Iranian plans to produce its own submarine were reported almost a year ago. At that time Iran was said to be planning a submarine "...designed to remain undetected and fire missiles and torpedoes simultaneously."

Fears about Iran's quest for nuclear technology have focused on the No Dong missiles it obtained from North Korea. Iranian submarines designed for quiet running and capable of launching missiles may add an unwelcome new dimension to Iran's current nuclear brinksmanship.

Also posted at The Dread Pundit Bluto and Vince Aut Morire.

Posted by: Bluto at 12:32 AM | Comments (24) | Add Comment
Post contains 135 words, total size 1 kb.

1 And I just can't stop laughing every time I see the term "No Dong Missile." Sounds like it was named by someone who was so ronery.

Posted by: Vinnie at March 08, 2006 12:42 AM (f289O)

2 Just another reason Iran needs to be taken out as soon as its feasible(sp?).

Posted by: Moose at March 08, 2006 12:45 AM (3btGz)

3 How ironic, they have the Whale Submarine -- the U.S Navy has the "Harpoon" Missile: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/agm-84.htm It could only be funnier, if it was an anti-submarine missile.

Posted by: dave at March 08, 2006 01:08 AM (CcXvt)

4 If it makes you feel any better, Dave, we launched Harpoons out of the ASROC launcher.

Posted by: Vinnie at March 08, 2006 01:35 AM (f289O)

5 The question is, is Iranian sub technology any more reliable than Chinese sub tech? It's a difficult technology to master. I'm much more worried about the Project 877 (Updated Kilo class) subs they've been buying from Russia.

Posted by: Cybrludite at March 08, 2006 01:44 AM (XFoEH)

6 D'oh! Must not type from memory. The Project 636 Kilos are the updated ones...

Posted by: Cybrludite at March 08, 2006 01:45 AM (XFoEH)

7 Cybrludite: At least you've got one.

Posted by: forest hunter at March 08, 2006 02:24 AM (Fq6zR)

8 No Dong Missiles...seriously? Is that a joke? Somehow I see a Kursk-like tragedy in Iran's near future. How advanced can their sub program be?

Posted by: Jack's Smirking Revenge at March 08, 2006 04:18 AM (CtVG6)

9 Iran isn't developing submarines, Russians and Chinese are doing it for them.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 08, 2006 05:01 AM (0yYS2)

10 IM: That's because that corner of the world hasn't produced anything worthy of notice in, well, ... ever.

Posted by: Oyster at March 08, 2006 06:32 AM (YudAC)

11 True Oyster, but my point is that we are financing our enemies by trading with one and flat-out giving money to another, while allowing a third to prepare unchecked for war against us. I'm about ready to get on the "Impeach Bush" bandwagon too, because I really don't think he has the brains, balls, or integrity to face this situation. Then again, neither does any other policitican I can think of. I think it's about time for a second Revolution; drag the muslims, liberals, and politicians of both parties out into the streets and hang them all and be done with them.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 08, 2006 07:00 AM (0yYS2)

12 I understand. Every day that goes by makes isolationism look better and better to me.

Posted by: Oyster at March 08, 2006 07:23 AM (YudAC)

13 It looks like the US, France, England and Germany are all aboard over the issue of Iran and its developing nukes.

Posted by: goesh at March 08, 2006 07:31 AM (vX0fY)

14 What a brilliant idea, Iran, you peaceful member of the international community, you; you loving part of the harmonious global society. Get this lone cigar tin fifteen miles out to sea and don't be surprised... ...when it just vanishes.

Posted by: 6Gun at March 08, 2006 09:04 AM (QEBMZ)

15 Is IRAN going to do what germany did during both WW I and WW II will they carry out unrestricted submarine warfare? we should sink them if they do thats a act of war

Posted by: sandpiper at March 08, 2006 10:29 AM (swaoX)

16 You're on the right track 6gun, as it's an open secret that there is a US Navy attack sub in the Persian Gulf pretty much all the time. I wouldn't be surprised if the Iranian boat suffers an "accident" on its maiden voyage.

Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at March 08, 2006 10:44 AM (0yYS2)

17 I'm still laughing at "The Whale" Submarine and the "Harpoon" missile.

Posted by: Oyster at March 08, 2006 10:58 AM (rf0W8)

18 If I'm supposed to be impressed or feel threatened by Iranian military hardware - I'm not. Obsolete 2nd & 3rd rate junk is good solely for parades. If your impressed by an Iranian submarine - then I have a 50 piece ratchet set to sell you - made in Cambodia.

Posted by: hondo at March 08, 2006 11:03 AM (fyKFC)

19 hondo, et. al.: I'm not impressed with the technology. What worries me is ROE that could allow these things to get in range of valuable targets.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at March 08, 2006 11:31 AM (RHG+K)

20 Another factor is that part of the world just does not have a 'mechanical culture'. They do not understand either preventative/periodic maintenance or proper repair practices. Sell them a nice new sub and unless they hire the builders to also maintain it, it will turn to junk in no time.

Posted by: Mike at March 08, 2006 01:01 PM (JSetw)

21 who knows maybe they'll ask some of their politicians and reporters to come on board to see the maiden voyage, and it will sink. Anytime Iran requests reporters, or military brass to get on board a vehicle it seems to end up in a fiery pile of metal. "Hey Abdul, the President sent me a ticket to travel on "Air Dissident" to come see him, but you'll have to drive and pick me up because it's only one-way"

Posted by: davec at March 08, 2006 01:35 PM (CcXvt)

22 Has anyone bothered to ask what our subbloggers have to think about all this? Bubbleheads has some thoughts about these mini subs. I had slammed the AP about their initial coverage of the Iranian sub program last year. This sub project is likely to enhance littoral water operations and specifically improve terrorism operations or insertions into foreign countries. It's not meant to counter US submarines, which are far more sophisticated and advanced (in every way from speed to stealth). Those Kilos are not quite up to US standards either, but they do pose a limited threat. Guess that's what to expect when you have a media that doesn't have a clue as to what they're discussing.

Posted by: lawhawk at March 08, 2006 02:08 PM (eppTH)

23 The Dung Eating Iranians have been purchasing subs from Russia for sometime now. I highly doubt, any subs are operating in the Persian Gulf an extremely sub-hostile environment (shallow, salty, and warm very easy to track a sub in such a location). My guess is they operate in the Gulf of Oman and the idea is for them to attack shipping as it comes out of the Persian Gulf. Perhaps we have a LA or two in those environs but I am guessing its going to be more a job for the surface fleet. We usually have a carrier or two or three in the near area along with sub hunting aircraft and ships.

Posted by: Marcus Aurelius at March 08, 2006 03:16 PM (ffPYG)

24 If these stupid moolahs make a good "Aftabeh" that doesn't leak, I will say they have done something great. Aftabeh is an iranian toilet furniture. I suppose when the "sub" starts leaking, they will use the pages of Quarn to stop the leakages. I thought the press people forgot couple of phrases in the headline. So this sub can fire missiles and torpedos..... and then would suddenly sink...??? each missile and torpedo that fires, leaves an open hole in the sub... I guess the never thought that one coming.lolololololol poor sailors who go to their death with this "locally" made sub...

Posted by: Hamid at April 03, 2006 05:10 AM (zWpXi)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

204kb generated in CPU 0.0851, elapsed 0.1696 seconds.
135 queries taking 0.134 seconds, 583 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.

Search Thingy

Monthly Traffic

Pages: 10945
Files: 81
Bytes: 264.6M
CPU Time: 12:31
Queries: 1243906

Content

Posts: 5690
Comments: 76633

Feeds

June 08, 2006

May 06, 2006

April 23, 2006

April 21, 2006

April 12, 2006

March 30, 2006

March 27, 2006

March 24, 2006

March 22, 2006

March 21, 2006

March 16, 2006

March 12, 2006

March 11, 2006

March 09, 2006

March 08, 2006

Search Thingy

Recent Comments

Categories

Archives

Blogroll

Monthly Traffic

Content

Feeds