how can we find out who is paying for this camp...?

> how can we find out who is
> paying for this camp...?

Well, money is fungible, so I feel quite justified in claiming that the EU is paying for it.

Anyone notice that the kid jumping over the fire has his finger on the "Trigger" of the fake gun cutout he is holding?

Bad idea. Unless you are actually shooting at that moment, you should never put your finger on the trigger. Taking a jump like that with your finger on the trigger is a quick way to shoot someone accidentally.

Of course, considering that the person beside them is likely to be another islamokazi 'splodeydope, this may not be a bad idea.

Do the darwin awards have an assist category?

A recent graduate practicing his lessons: [Link: story.news.yahoo.com...]

Whenever I see pictures like this, I wish I could call Child Protective Services who would then remove these children from their parents' homes and give them to human beings who would actually love them.

I also think about how Jews responded during the Holocaust when they were in much more dire circumstances than the Palestinians. To my recollection, no Jew ever went out and deliberately killed German children or old people or pregnant women, either out of revenge or as a military strategy. It seems to me that throughout that nightmare, the Jewish community in general never lost its decency or humanity. Clearly, many Palestinians have not been capable of the same. Very sad.

On another topic entirely, I saw yesterday a posting on Bill Quick's website that indicates that the war against Iraq has already started. In fact, it's been going on since March. Perhaps George Bush has been saying, "I have no war plan on my desk" because he already approved one and threw it into his "Out" basket months ago. Now, it's on Tommy Franks' desk, being implemented.

This was from an article by Marc Erikson in Asia Times Online, dated August 17, 2002. I was wondering if any of you had any further information or comments. Thanks.

Here's the link to the article:

[Link: www.atimes.com...]

Does it ever disturb the Muslims in the Middle East that they are dependent on western made arms for their violence, as I've never seen any Muslim designed firearm other than that cardboard one that kid sports. The only one in the Middle East who seems capable of designing weaponry is Israel.

After all these images of the Junior Varsity Gestapo that Arafat is building, I'd like to pose a serious question: Do the Palestinians need to be "MacArthurized"?

That is, we occupy them, disarm them (as completely as possible), write them a constitution, dispose of all their militant leaders, supervise all of their education (secular AND religious), and teach them how to govern themselves like human beings?

Unfortunately MacArthur is no longer with us, but maybe this would be a good job for Al Gore. He's into all that "nation-building" stuff. Every earnest shirt-sleeve liberal who still believes in paternalistic government could be packed up and shipped over there, where they could scold and meddle to their heart's content.

(Footnote to #7) More great ideas! We could thrown in Ann Coulter, and Camille Paglia with high-heeled boots and a whip.

"...we occupy them, disarm them (as completely as possible), write them a constitution, dispose of all their militant leaders, supervise all of their education (secular AND religious), and teach them how to govern themselves like human beings"

Actually, my understanding is that this is not far from what took place under Israeli "occupation" between 1967 and 1993. From what I have read of that period, the Palestinian infant mortality rate declined by 50%, life expectancy rose from an average 38 years to 62 years, and 5 or 6 universities were built in the territories.

It has only taken a few years for the intifadeh to reverse all of those gains. And the EU and US will pay to have everything rebuilt so they can have another go.

As the old folk song chimes, "when will they ever learn; when will they ever learn?"

L. Rogers,

I hope that article finally puts to rest the debate on LGF about whether Bush is really serious about attacking Iraq. I, for one, never doubted him.

On a related front, the local news (Tucson, AZ) reported that at least 1000 Airmen from the large Air Force base near my home have shipped out for the Middle East. More may follow, and for those who are familiar with my postings, the number of empty slots in the jet parking lot on the base continues to increase.

Brandi -

Keep it up Baby! Good stuff.

RE: the pictures. Oooo! They're jumping over FIRE!!! Oooo! Weren't they doing that in the Afghan camps?

It's all over for us now. I know we train our special ops forces on occasion, but ... jumping over FIRE??? That's just too much for us.

Shouldn't there be an international law banning fire-jumping?

#7

I have always said that anything less than a Marshall Plan (for the whole region) will be futile.

Frank (#6):

"Does it ever disturb the Muslims in the Middle East that they are dependent on western made arms for their violence..."

No, it only disturbs them when the Israelis use Western made weaponry.

When the muslims use Western made arms, it's acceptable because they have to use whatever means possible to fight the "occupation", therefore they are justified in using Western made arms.

Well the Blue Angels have not been called in yet.

They were just flying by my office window for the Chicago Air and Water Show. (very cool by the way).

Last year we had the Thunderbirds, so maybe they are already over there.

Brandi,

Thanks for the extra info.

If the Erickson article and your info are correct, then I suspect that Bush may be encouraging all this debate about the war in Iraq and allowing the war plan leaks in order to distract public and media attention from what is actually going on. It may also be a part of a plan to confuse Saddam and his henchmen. Their actions lately do seem confused to me.

I would guess that after months of quiet warfare, the plan is to have the "hot" part of the war last as short a time as possible so that Saddam will be out of power before the "Arab street" and their allies can gather themselves together to protest. When presented with a fait accompli, what could they do but start arguing about the post-Saddam government.

Brandi,

Thanks for the extra information.

If the Erikson article and your info are correct, then I suspect that Bush may be encouraging all this debate about the war in Iraq and allowing the war plan leaks in order to distract public and media attention from what is actually going on. It may also be a part of a plan to confuse Saddam and his henchmen. Their actions lately do seem confused to me.

I would guess that after months of quiet warfare, the plan is to have the "hot" part of the war last as short a time as possible so that Saddam will be out of power before the "Arab street" and their allies can gather themselves together to protest. When presented with a fait accompli, what could they do but start arguing about the post-Saddam government.

Bottom pic:

Betya the guy just fried his balls.

As an aside, ABC news reported that Russia was about to sign a $4billion trade agreement with Iraq. They kept harping on how this could damper US efforts to form a *coalition* against Saddam. They mentioned that point 3 times, as if we're hard of hearing. Then some economics professor made a remark that Russia wouldn't take to kindly to someone (re: US) interfering with their economic recovery.

Now what's this all about? An out for Bush?

Is Putin with us or against us. Never trusted the Russians...a bunch of mafia-type thugs run the country now anyway.

So maybe someone can enlighten me on this ABC news report while I jump over my B-B-Q with flames 10 feet tall.

Bossman - don't do it!

How typically American of you all to quickly blame Muslims/Arabs for a war that obviously involves more than one party.
Have a look at your Government and their policies. Guess who's suppling the Arms that's fuelling the crimes committed by these warring Nations? How much of American Fighter Jets, Tanks etc find their way to Isreal and the Arab Nations.
One side demands... The other Supplies. That's Business for you.

I am not a muslim, nor am I an Arab.
I just feel that what has happened to the Afghanistani people is extremely unfair.
America and its allies (Including Britain, from where I'm from) had no right to destroy Afghanistan and litter the place with land mines.

The alledged perpetrator of 9/11 was from Saudi. If you really had "balls" why didnt you drop some mines on them? Oh. thats right, Oil.

I just feel that what has happened to the Afghanistani people is extremely unfair.

You mean the destruction of the Arab colonial government called the "Taliban"? Or the subsequent vaccination of thousands -- perhaps tens of thousands -- of Afghans? Or possibly the first wave of humanitarian aid in decades that hasn't mostly disappeared into the hands of the Taliban?

America and its allies (Including Britain, from where I'm from) had no right to destroy Afghanistan and litter the place with land mines.

Dude, the Soviets did the destroying, first by the puppet government they supported against the Afghan king, then during their invasion -- remember that? I suspect they also planted more land mines than the US has.

Honestly, I'd be surprised if the US has put any land mines in Afghanistan --
the war moved so quickly, there wasn't a need to develop defensive positions. There may be some fields around current bases, but if they're US fields, I bet they're well-mapped and well-marked.

Or are you confusing unexploded cluster bombs with landmines? There may be a few of them, but from what I've heard, they're brightly colored and quite obvious as to their nature. I'd also be surprised if they're not already all cleaned up.

The alledged perpetrator of 9/11 was from Saudi. If you really had "balls" why didnt you drop some mines on them? Oh. thats right, Oil.

Yep. As soon as the alternate sources come on line, it had better be the Saudis' turn, or there's going to be a political disaster for Bush.

But beyond that -- why Afghanistan first? Because it was being used a secure base and training area for al'Qaeda -- who you call the "alleged perpetrator of 9/11". Clear enough?

How typically American of you all to quickly blame Muslims/Arabs for a war that obviously involves more than one party.

How typically European of you to assign moral equivalence to terrorism, and response to terrorism...

Have a look at your Government and their policies. Guess who's suppling the Arms that's fuelling the crimes committed by these warring Nations?

Again, "crimes" is a loaded word when describing defending oneself from terrorist fanatics, incited daily by the likes of Arafat.

"Crimes" is accurate to describe exploding oneself at a wedding party, a nightclub, a pizza parlor, a bus station, a children's bedroom in a private residence...

How much of American Fighter Jets, Tanks etc find their way to Isreal and the Arab Nations.

Thankfully, Israel has the capability to defend itself. The nation, smaller than the state of New Jersey, has been under threat of destruction numerous times by its surrounding hostile neighbors, often from all of them at once.

In case you are not familiar with New Jersey, you can drive across it in under an hour. Imagine enemy forces invading from all sides when they can all meet in the middle in thirty minutes.

I am not a muslim, nor am I an Arab.
I just feel that what has happened to the Afghanistani people is extremely unfair.
America and its allies (Including Britain, from where I'm from) had no right to destroy Afghanistan and litter the place with land mines.

I assume you are speaking of pre 9/11 Afganistan? If memory serves, the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. Seems you left them out of your list of Afghan enemies...

Post 9/11 "our government and its policies" destroyed one of the most repressive regimes on Earth, and freed the Afghan people.

The alledged perpetrator of 9/11 was from Saudi.

"Alledged”??? UBL admitted his guild on video for crying out loud. Get over it, he admitted responsibility already, and so have his cohorts.

If you really had "balls" why didnt you drop some mines on them? Oh. thats right, Oil.

Simple, UBL and his Jonestown mob were not in Saudi Arabia, they were in Afghanistan.

And FYI, mines are not dropped, they are buried in the dirt by ground soldiers.

In the past, diplomatic niceties with Saudi was a necessary evil, as they control a great portion of the *world's* oil supply. However, post 9/11, strategic US priorities have changed.

The US relies less on Saudi oil than when they pulled the embargo stunt in 1973; the US also relies upon its safety from terrorists, which are incubated by Saudi Wahabbi islamic fundamentalism. This relationship will change much over the next decade, keep an eye on it.

Also, I love the “it was only about oil” argument. What a laugh. Do you drive a car? Buy any products shipped by a truck? When speaking of a nation, that argument is as silly as stating “Joe killed that man because he put a plastic bag over Joe’s head. What was Joe thinking! All that over some air.”

Saudi Arabia will be dealt with soon enough, give it time.

 

new2unix...

Have you been in a comma for the last 11 months? or do you just read Al Guardian?

new2unix (Knew Two Eunuchs? Which two?) wrote:

"America and its allies (Including Britain, from where I'm from) had no right to destroy Afghanistan and litter the place with land mines."

This is what you guys get for playing "football" without helmets. We didn't destroy Afghanistan. And we didn't put the land mines there, the Afghans did. U.S. and British troops are now taking them out, at considerable risk and with no help from you.

Who the hell told you that Afghanistan had been "destroyed"? Have you been pub crawling in Baghdad, or are you just another loyal reader of the Mirror?

Thanks for your concern Zulubaby but the jump was successful. David Blaine watch out, here I come. Next time I will use 2 BBQ's in a row.

I'll ask one more time...Did anybody see today's report on ABC World News about Russia wanting to sign a $4 billion economic deal with Iraq?

See my last post for more details.

According to these two articles;

[Link: www.atimes.com...]

[Link: www.atimes.com...]

the Saudi Entity seems to be on the "to do" list.

Have you been in a comma for the last 11 months?

In a comma?
Is that anything like being on a period?

Well, you can't learn the left --- it wastes your time and annoys the left. But I've got nothing better to do at the moment and it won't take long:

If this were all about oil, we would have invaded North Dakota before we invaded Afghanistan. And we'd ditch Israel and suck up to the Iraqis.

Then we'd join the European Union.

Okay here's that article...the TV report was scewed differently, more like I reported in post
#17

VIST:[Link: abcnews.go.com...]

Carl, allow me to quote from one of the articles you gave a link to:

Saudi Arabia next in line?
By Pepe Escobar

"The US imports half of its consumption of oil. It is desperately trying to get rid of its dependence on Saudi Arabia and Venezuela by importing more from Africa and by an ever closer cooperation with Russia. America's hawks and the oil lobby consider control of Iraq absolutely essential to finish off American dependence on Saudi oil. No amount of spinning will disguise that this is the real reason for the war.

But at the same time this is the main reason for the Saudi opposition to an attack. The American officials most hawkish on Iraq are by no coincidence the most hawkish on Saudi Arabia. Leaks to the press, such as the recent obscure Rand Corporation analyst report denouncing Saudi Arabia are nothing more than a smokescreen to disguise what really drives the Americans crazy: the increasingly good relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran, and Prince Abdullah's interest in really finding a solution for the Palestinian tragedy.

Gulf diplomatic sources confirm that the Saudi royal family has been closely monitoring the mood of the Arab street regarding Ariel Sharon's devastating "policies" in Palestine. The Arab street is undeniably silent. So the Saudi family is not worried about a violent popular reaction in the event of an invasion of Iraq. But its more conservative elements definitely worry about the transformation of Iraq into an American base. Iraq is potentially richer than Egypt, and it is invulnerable to Wahhabi proselytizing. Saudis believe that in the long run, with the de facto annexation of Iraq as a client regime, America would inevitably turn against Saudi Arabia."

I know that you can't see me through cyberspace, but just imagine, if you can, the enormous smile on my face. Yeah, Bush is the Saudis' stooge. Sure. Patience, people. Patience. Give the man a chance to get his ducks in a row.

I love it when the arabs/palis complain that Israel is using US military equipment. They should be happy that that the US keeps on supplying the equipment. A short glance at history should explain why.

* In 1951, there were no adequate machine guns being supplied to Israel.

The result was the Uzi. [Link: www.vectorarms.com...]

* In 1970, the US refused to sell Israel tanks.

The result was the Merkava tank, probably the best designed tank in the world. [Link: www.eurosatory.mod.gov.il...]

* In the Gulf war, the US refused at first to give Israel the codes to the Patriot missiles.

The result was the Arrow Weapon System. [Link: www.mod.gov.il...]

Let us not forget the Shavit [Link: www.spacer.com...] Israeli-modified Mirages [Link: www.iaf.org.il...] guided missile technology, spy planes, etc. etc.

With necessity being the mother of brilliant inventions in Israel, the arabs/palis should not be in such a rush to encourage the staving off of US supplies. I can only imagine, for example, what the replacements for F-16s would look like.

new2unix,

As far as I can tell the Saudis think they are on the US of A hit list. They are delaying a $30 bn investment in their oil fields because they are not sure they will be in power to reap the rewards.

American strategy is to take one country at a time. Be patient.

As for the Afghanis: It has been a rule of international law for over 5,000 years that the people of a nation are responsible for it's government. If the government does bad things outside it's own land then the people of the country are held responsible.

If the Afghanis didn't want an American attack the people of Afghanistan should have expelled the Taliban. After all just a few years earlier they had expelled the communists. They have a long history of expelling unwanted governments.

In the end people get the government they deserve.

This can often be unfortunate.

What nobody cares about the $4Billion dollar agreement between Russia and Iraq?

Comments ladies and genitals.

Bossman,

Go down six posts. Charles posted this as his first for the 17th.

Sorry Justin (#32) I checked out all the posts for the 17th and I can't find it. Either I'm blind (possible) or my Mac is having an Iraqi Attack.

Could you be more specific, I've checked all the posts for the last 3 days...vhere oh vhere is it?

You said it's the first post for the 17th but there's something else there.

Bossman,

It's titled "Old Habits Die Hard". Right above "Peace Abbey on the 16th and right below "Shiri Negari".

lewsinnyc - excellent point.

And look at the other side of the picture: Over the last decades of its sorry existence, the Soviet Union supplied Israel's enemies with thousands of T-55 and T-62 tanks. This resulted in the whole region being littered with Soviet scrap metal, from the Suez to Damascus.

The IDF destroyed the Egyptian armed forces in 1967. The Soviets completely re-equipped them over the next six years, an almost unparalleled example of aggression by proxy. Yet it's always Israel that's the imperialist puppet, the "51st state".

Thanks Justin, found it!

Now I can Putin my two cents!

Arafat Baby Wipe Watch

re#37

Be nice if that golden canister had a bomb inside.