LGF

more options

  

Advertisement

Case Closed

Sat, Nov 15, 2003 at 8:19:15 am PST

I don’t usually do this, but a reader sent me the complete transcript of the secret memo published by the Weekly Standard, and since their web site is still off line I’m going to mirror the article here, because it’s incredibly important news.

____________________________

Case Closed
From the November 24, 2003 issue: The U.S. government's secret memo detailing cooperation between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden.
by Stephen F. Hayes
11/24/2003, Volume 009, Issue 11

OSAMA BIN LADEN and Saddam Hussein had an operational relationship from the early 1990s to 2003 that involved training in explosives and weapons of mass destruction, logistical support for terrorist attacks, al Qaeda training camps and safe haven in Iraq, and Iraqi financial support for al Qaeda--perhaps even for Mohamed Atta--according to a top secret U.S. government memorandum obtained by THE WEEKLY STANDARD.

The memo, dated October 27, 2003, was sent from Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith to Senators Pat Roberts and Jay Rockefeller, the chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. It was written in response to a request from the committee as part of its investigation into prewar intelligence claims made by the administration. Intelligence reporting included in the 16-page memo comes from a variety of domestic and foreign agencies, including the FBI, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the National Security Agency. Much of the evidence is detailed, conclusive, and corroborated by multiple sources. Some of it is new information obtained in custodial interviews with high-level al Qaeda terrorists and Iraqi officials, and some of it is more than a decade old. The picture that emerges is one of a history of collaboration between two of America's most determined and dangerous enemies.

According to the memo--which lays out the intelligence in 50 numbered points--Iraq-al Qaeda contacts began in 1990 and continued through mid-March 2003, days before the Iraq War began. Most of the numbered passages contain straight, fact-based intelligence reporting, which in some cases includes an evaluation of the credibility of the source. This reporting is often followed by commentary and analysis.

The relationship began shortly before the first Gulf War. According to reporting in the memo, bin Laden sent "emissaries to Jordan in 1990 to meet with Iraqi government officials." At some unspecified point in 1991, according to a CIA analysis, "Iraq sought Sudan's assistance to establish links to al Qaeda." The outreach went in both directions. According to 1993 CIA reporting cited in the memo, "bin Laden wanted to expand his organization's capabilities through ties with Iraq."

The primary go-between throughout these early stages was Sudanese strongman Hassan al-Turabi, a leader of the al Qaeda-affiliated National Islamic Front. Numerous sources have confirmed this. One defector reported that "al-Turabi was instrumental in arranging the Iraqi-al Qaeda relationship. The defector said Iraq sought al Qaeda influence through its connections with Afghanistan, to facilitate the transshipment of proscribed weapons and equipment to Iraq. In return, Iraq provided al Qaeda with training and instructors."

One such confirmation came in a postwar interview with one of Saddam Hussein's henchmen. As the memo details:

4. According to a May 2003 debriefing of a senior Iraqi intelligence officer, Iraqi intelligence established a highly secretive relationship with Egyptian Islamic Jihad, and later with al Qaeda. The first meeting in 1992 between the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) and al Qaeda was brokered by al-Turabi. Former IIS deputy director Faruq Hijazi and senior al Qaeda leader [Ayman al] Zawahiri were at the meeting--the first of several between 1992 and 1995 in Sudan. Additional meetings between Iraqi intelligence and al Qaeda were held in Pakistan. Members of al Qaeda would sometimes visit Baghdad where they would meet the Iraqi intelligence chief in a safe house. The report claimed that Saddam insisted the relationship with al Qaeda be kept secret. After 9-11, the source said Saddam made a personnel change in the IIS for fear the relationship would come under scrutiny from foreign probes.

A decisive moment in the budding relationship came in 1993, when bin Laden faced internal resistance to his cooperation with Saddam.

5. A CIA report from a contact with good access, some of whose reporting has been corroborated, said that certain elements in the "Islamic Army" of bin Laden were against the secular regime of Saddam. Overriding the internal factional strife that was developing, bin Laden came to an "understanding" with Saddam that the Islamic Army would no longer support anti-Saddam activities. According to sensitive reporting released in U.S. court documents during the African Embassy trial, in 1993 bin Laden reached an "understanding" with Saddam under which he (bin Laden) forbade al Qaeda operations to be mounted against the Iraqi leader.

Another facilitator of the relationship during the mid-1990s was Mahmdouh Mahmud Salim (a.k.a. Abu Hajer al-Iraqi). Abu Hajer, now in a New York prison, was described in court proceedings related to the August 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania as bin Laden's "best friend." According to CIA reporting dating back to the Clinton administration, bin Laden trusted him to serve as a liaison with Saddam's regime and tasked him with procurement of weapons of mass destruction for al Qaeda. FBI reporting in the memo reveals that Abu Hajer "visited Iraq in early 1995" and "had a good relationship with Iraqi intelligence. Sometime before mid-1995 he went on an al Qaeda mission to discuss unspecified cooperation with the Iraqi government."

Some of the reporting about the relationship throughout the mid-1990s comes from a source who had intimate knowledge of bin Laden and his dealings. This source, according to CIA analysis, offered "the most credible information" on cooperation between bin Laden and Iraq.

This source's reports read almost like a diary. Specific dates of when bin Laden flew to various cities are included, as well as names of individuals he met. The source did not offer information on the substantive talks during the meetings. . . . There are not a great many reports in general on the relationship between bin Laden and Iraq because of the secrecy surrounding it. But when this source with close access provided a "window" into bin Laden's activities, bin Laden is seen as heavily involved with Iraq (and Iran).

Reporting from the early 1990s remains somewhat sketchy, though multiple sources place Hassan al-Turabi and Ayman al Zawahiri, bin Laden's current No. 2, at the center of the relationship. The reporting gets much more specific in the mid-1990s:

8. Reporting from a well placed source disclosed that bin Laden was receiving training on bomb making from the IIS's [Iraqi Intelligence Service] principal technical expert on making sophisticated explosives, Brigadier Salim al-Ahmed. Brigadier Salim was observed at bin Laden's farm in Khartoum in Sept.-Oct. 1995 and again in July 1996, in the company of the Director of Iraqi Intelligence, Mani abd-al-Rashid al-Tikriti.

9 . . . Bin Laden visited Doha, Qatar (17-19 Jan. 1996), staying at the residence of a member of the Qatari ruling family. He discussed the successful movement of explosives into Saudi Arabia, and operations targeted against U.S. and U.K. interests in Dammam, Dharan, and Khobar, using clandestine al Qaeda cells in Saudi Arabia. Upon his return, bin Laden met with Hijazi and Turabi, among others.

And later more reporting, from the same "well placed" source:

10. The Director of Iraqi Intelligence, Mani abd-al-Rashid al-Tikriti, met privately with bin Laden at his farm in Sudan in July 1996. Tikriti used an Iraqi delegation traveling to Khartoum to discuss bilateral cooperation as his "cover" for his own entry into Sudan to meet with bin Laden and Hassan al-Turabi. The Iraqi intelligence chief and two other IIS officers met at bin Laden's farm and discussed bin Laden's request for IIS technical assistance in: a) making letter and parcel bombs; b) making bombs which could be placed on aircraft and detonated by changes in barometric pressure; and c) making false passport [sic]. Bin Laden specifically requested that [Brigadier Salim al-Ahmed], Iraqi intelligence's premier explosives maker--especially skilled in making car bombs--remain with him in Sudan. The Iraqi intelligence chief instructed Salim to remain in Sudan with bin Laden as long as required.

The analysis of those events follows:

The time of the visit from the IIS director was a few weeks after the Khobar Towers bombing. The bombing came on the third anniversary of a U.S. [Tomahawk missile] strike on IIS HQ (retaliation for the attempted assassination of former President Bush in Kuwait) for which Iraqi officials explicitly threatened retaliation.

IN ADDITION TO THE CONTACTS CLUSTERED in the mid-1990s, intelligence reports detail a flurry of activities in early 1998 and again in December 1998. A "former senior Iraqi intelligence officer" reported that "the Iraqi intelligence service station in Pakistan was Baghdad's point of contact with al Qaeda. He also said bin Laden visited Baghdad in Jan. 1998 and met with Tariq Aziz."

11. According to sensitive reporting, Saddam personally sent Faruq Hijazi, IIS deputy director and later Iraqi ambassador to Turkey, to meet with bin Laden at least twice, first in Sudan and later in Afghanistan in 1999. . . .

14. According to a sensitive reporting [from] a "regular and reliable source," [Ayman al] Zawahiri, a senior al Qaeda operative, visited Baghdad and met with the Iraqi Vice President on 3 February 1998. The goal of the visit was to arrange for coordination between Iraq and bin Laden and establish camps in an-Nasiriyah and Iraqi Kurdistan under the leadership of Abdul Aziz.

That visit came as the Iraqis intensified their defiance of the U.N. inspection regime, known as UNSCOM, created by the cease-fire agreement following the Gulf War. UNSCOM demanded access to Saddam's presidential palaces that he refused to provide. As the tensions mounted, President Bill Clinton went to the Pentagon on February 18, 1998, and prepared the nation for war. He warned of "an unholy axis of terrorists, drug traffickers, and organized international criminals" and said "there is no more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein."

The day after this speech, according to documents unearthed in April 2003 in the Iraqi Intelligence headquarters by journalists Mitch Potter and Inigo Gilmore, Hussein's intelligence service wrote a memo detailing coming meetings with a bin Laden representative traveling to Baghdad. Each reference to bin Laden had been covered by liquid paper that, when revealed, exposed a plan to increase cooperation between Iraq and al Qaeda. According to that memo, the IIS agreed to pay for "all the travel and hotel costs inside Iraq to gain the knowledge of the message from bin Laden and to convey to his envoy an oral message from us to bin Laden." The document set as the goal for the meeting a discussion of "the future of our relationship with him, bin Laden, and to achieve a direct meeting with him." The al Qaeda representative, the document went on to suggest, might provide "a way to maintain contacts with bin Laden."

Four days later, on February 23, 1998, bin Laden issued his now-famous fatwa on the plight of Iraq, published in the Arabic-language daily, al Quds al-Arabi: "For over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing its neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples." Bin Laden urged his followers to act: "The ruling to kill all Americans and their allies--civilians and military--is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it."

Although war was temporarily averted by a last-minute deal brokered by U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan, tensions soon rose again. The standoff with Iraq came to a head in December 1998, when President Clinton launched Operation Desert Fox, a 70-hour bombing campaign that began on December 16 and ended three days later, on December 19, 1998.

According to press reports at the time, Faruq Hijazi, deputy director of Iraqi Intelligence, met with bin Laden in Afghanistan on December 21, 1998, to offer bin Laden safe haven in Iraq. CIA reporting in the memo to the Senate Intelligence Committee seems to confirm this meeting and relates two others.

15. A foreign government service reported that an Iraqi delegation, including at least two Iraqi intelligence officers formerly assigned to the Iraqi Embassy in Pakistan, met in late 1998 with bin Laden in Afghanistan.

16. According to CIA reporting, bin Laden and Zawahiri met with two Iraqi intelligence officers in Afghanistan in Dec. 1998.

17. . . . Iraq sent an intelligence officer to Afghanistan to seek closer ties to bin Laden and the Taliban in late 1998. The source reported that the Iraqi regime was trying to broaden its cooperation with al Qaeda. Iraq was looking to recruit Muslim "elements" to sabotage U.S. and U.K. interests. After a senior Iraqi intelligence officer met with Taliban leader
[Mullah] Omar, arrangements were made for a series of meetings between the Iraqi intelligence officer and bin Laden in Pakistan. The source noted Faruq Hijazi was in Afghanistan in late 1998.

18. . . . Faruq Hijazi went to Afghanistan in 1999 along with several other Iraqi officials to meet with bin Laden. The source claimed that Hijazi would have met bin Laden only at Saddam's explicit direction.

An analysis that follows No. 18 provides additional context and an explanation of these reports:

Reporting entries #4, #11, #15, #16, #17, and #18, from different sources, corroborate each other and provide confirmation of meetings between al Qaeda operatives and Iraqi intelligence in Afghanistan and Pakistan. None of the reports have information on operational details or the purpose of such meetings. The covert nature of the relationship would indicate strict compartmentation [sic] of operations.

Information about connections between al Qaeda and Iraq was so widespread by early 1999 that it made its way into the mainstream press. A January 11, 1999, Newsweek story ran under this headline: "Saddam + Bin Laden?" The story cited an "Arab intelligence source" with knowledge of contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda. "According to this source, Saddam expected last month's American and British bombing campaign to go on much longer than it did. The dictator believed that as the attacks continued, indignation would grow in the Muslim world, making his terrorism offensive both harder to trace and more effective. With acts of terror contributing to chaos in the region, Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait might feel less inclined to support Washington. Saddam's long-term strategy, according to several sources, is to bully or cajole Muslim countries into breaking the embargo against Iraq, without waiting for the United Nations to lift if formally."

INTELLIGENCE REPORTS about the nature of the relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda from mid-1999 through 2003 are conflicting. One senior Iraqi intelligence officer in U.S. custody, Khalil Ibrahim Abdallah, "said that the last contact between the IIS and al Qaeda was in July 1999. Bin Laden wanted to meet with Saddam, he said. The guidance sent back from Saddam's office reportedly ordered Iraqi intelligence to refrain from any further contact with bin Laden and al Qaeda. The source opined that Saddam wanted to distance himself from al Qaeda."

The bulk of reporting on the relationship contradicts this claim. One report states that "in late 1999" al Qaeda set up a training camp in northern Iraq that "was operational as of 1999." Other reports suggest that the Iraqi regime contemplated several offers of safe haven to bin Laden throughout 1999.

23. . . . Iraqi officials were carefully considering offering safe haven to bin Laden and his closest collaborators in Nov. 1999. The source indicated the idea was put forward by the presumed head of Iraqi intelligence in Islamabad (Khalid Janaby) who in turn was in frequent contact and had good relations with bin Laden.

Some of the most intriguing intelligence concerns an Iraqi named Ahmed Hikmat Shakir:

24. According to sensitive reporting, a Malaysia-based Iraqi national (Shakir) facilitated the arrival of one of the Sept 11 hijackers for an operational meeting in Kuala Lumpur (Jan 2000). Sensitive reporting indicates Shakir's travel and contacts link him to a worldwide network of terrorists, including al Qaeda. Shakir worked at the Kuala Lumpur airport--a job he claimed to have obtained through an Iraqi embassy employee.

One of the men at that al Qaeda operational meeting in the Kuala Lumpur Hotel was Tawfiz al Atash, a top bin Laden lieutenant later identified as the mastermind of the October 12, 2000, attack on the USS Cole.

25. Investigation into the bombing of the USS Cole in October 2000 by al Qaeda revealed no specific Iraqi connections but according to the CIA, "fragmentary evidence points to possible Iraqi involvement."

26. During a custodial interview, Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi [a senior al Qaeda operative] said he was told by an al Qaeda associate that he was tasked to travel to Iraq (1998) to establish a relationship with Iraqi intelligence to obtain poisons and gases training. After the USS Cole bombing in 2000, two al Qaeda operatives were sent to Iraq for CBW-related [Chemical and Biological Weapons] training beginning in Dec 2000. Iraqi intelligence was "encouraged" after the embassy and USS Cole bombings to provide this training.

The analysis of this report follows.

CIA maintains that Ibn al-Shaykh's timeline is consistent with other sensitive reporting indicating that bin Laden asked Iraq in 1998 for advanced weapons, including CBW and "poisons."

Additional reporting also calls into question the claim that relations between Iraq and al Qaeda cooled after mid-1999:

27. According to sensitive CIA reporting, . . . the Saudi National Guard went on a kingdom-wide state of alert in late Dec 2000 after learning Saddam agreed to assist al Qaeda in attacking U.S./U.K. interests in Saudi Arabia.

And then there is the alleged contact between lead 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta and an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague. The reporting on those links suggests not one meeting, but as many as four. What's more, the memo reveals potential financing of Atta's activities by Iraqi intelligence.

The Czech counterintelligence service reported that the Sept. 11 hijacker [Mohamed] Atta met with the former Iraqi intelligence chief in Prague, [Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim Samir] al Ani, on several occasions. During one of these meetings, al Ani ordered the IIS finance officer to issue Atta funds from IIS financial holdings in the Prague office.

And the commentary:

CIA can confirm two Atta visits to Prague--in Dec. 1994 and in June 2000; data surrounding the other two--on 26 Oct 1999 and 9 April 2001--is complicated and sometimes contradictory and CIA and FBI cannot confirm Atta met with the IIS. Czech Interior Minister Stanislav Gross continues to stand by his information.

It's not just Gross who stands by the information. Five high-ranking members of the Czech government have publicly confirmed meetings between Atta and al Ani. The meeting that has gotten the most press attention--April 9, 2001--is also the most widely disputed. Even some of the most hawkish Bush administration officials are privately skeptical that Atta met al Ani on that occasion. They believe that reports of the alleged meeting, said to have taken place in public, outside the headquarters of the U.S.-financed Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, suggest a level of sloppiness that doesn't fit the pattern of previous high-level Iraq-al Qaeda contacts.

Whether or not that specific meeting occurred, the report by Czech counterintelligence that al Ani ordered the Iraqi Intelligence Service officer to provide IIS funds to Atta might help explain the lead hijacker's determination to reach Prague, despite significant obstacles, in the spring of 2000. (Note that the report stops short of confirming that the funds were transferred. It claims only that the IIS officer requested the transfer.) Recall that Atta flew to Prague from Germany on May 30, 2000, but was denied entry because he did not have a valid visa. Rather than simply return to Germany and fly directly to the United States, his ultimate destination, Atta took pains to get to Prague. After he was refused entry the first time, he traveled back to Germany, obtained the proper paperwork, and caught a bus back to Prague. He left for the United States the day after arriving in Prague for the second time.

Several reports indicate that the relationship between Saddam and bin Laden continued, even after the September 11 attacks:

31. An Oct. 2002 . . . report said al Qaeda and Iraq reached a secret agreement whereby Iraq would provide safe haven to al Qaeda members and provide them with money and weapons. The agreement reportedly prompted a large number of al Qaeda members to head to Iraq. The report also said that al Qaeda members involved in a fraudulent passport network for al Qaeda had been directed to procure 90 Iraqi and Syrian passports for al Qaeda personnel.

The analysis that accompanies that report indicates that the report fits the pattern of Iraq-al Qaeda collaboration:

References to procurement of false passports from Iraq and offers of safe haven previously have surfaced in CIA source reporting considered reliable. Intelligence reports to date have maintained that Iraqi support for al Qaeda usually involved providing training, obtaining passports, and offers of refuge. This report adds to that list by including weapons and money. This assistance would make sense in the aftermath of 9-11.

Colin Powell, in his February 5, 2003, presentation to the U.N. Security Council, revealed the activities of Abu Musab al Zarqawi. Reporting in the memo expands on Powell's case and might help explain some of the resistance the U.S. military is currently facing in Iraq.

37. Sensitive reporting indicates senior terrorist planner and close al Qaeda associate al Zarqawi has had an operational alliance with Iraqi officials. As of Oct. 2002, al Zarqawi maintained contacts with the IIS to procure weapons and explosives, including surface-to-air missiles from an IIS officer in Baghdad. According to sensitive reporting, al Zarqawi was setting up sleeper cells in Baghdad to be activated in case of a U.S. occupation of the city, suggesting his operational cooperation with the Iraqis may have deepened in recent months. Such cooperation could include IIS provision of a secure operating bases [sic] and steady access to arms and explosives in preparation for a possible U.S. invasion. Al Zarqawi's procurements from the Iraqis also could support al Qaeda operations against the U.S. or its allies elsewhere.

38. According to sensitive reporting, a contact with good access who does not have an established reporting record: An Iraqi intelligence service officer said that as of mid-March the IIS was providing weapons to al Qaeda members located in northern Iraq, including rocket propelled grenade (RPG)-18 launchers. According to IIS information, northern Iraq-based al Qaeda members believed that the U.S. intended to strike al Qaeda targets during an anticipated assault against Ansar al-Islam positions.

The memo further reported pre-war intelligence which "claimed that an Iraqi intelligence official, praising Ansar al-Islam, provided it with $100,000 and agreed to continue to give assistance."

CRITICS OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION have complained that Iraq-al Qaeda connections are a fantasy, trumped up by the warmongers at the White House to fit their preconceived notions about international terror; that links between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden have been routinely "exaggerated" for political purposes; that hawks "cherry-picked" bits of intelligence and tendentiously presented these to the American public.

Carl Levin, a senior member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, made those points as recently as November 9, in an appearance on "Fox News Sunday." Republicans on the committee, he complained, refuse to look at the administration's "exaggeration of intelligence."

Said Levin: "The question is whether or not they exaggerated intelligence in order to carry out their purpose, which was to make the case for going to war. Did we know, for instance, with certainty that there was any relationship between the Iraqis and the terrorists that were in Afghanistan, bin Laden? The administration said that there's a connection between those terrorist groups in Afghanistan and Iraq. Was there a basis for that?"

There was, as shown in the memo to the committee on which Levin serves. And much of the reporting comes from Clinton-era intelligence. Not that you would know this from Al Gore's recent public statements. Indeed, the former vice president claims to be privy to new "evidence" that the administration lied. In an August speech at New York University, Gore claimed: "The evidence now shows clearly that Saddam did not want to work with Osama bin Laden at all, much less give him weapons of mass destruction." Really?

One of the most interesting things to note about the 16-page memo is that it covers only a fraction of the evidence that will eventually be available to document the relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda. For one thing, both Saddam and bin Laden were desperate to keep their cooperation secret. (Remember, Iraqi intelligence used liquid paper on an internal intelligence document to conceal bin Laden's name.) For another, few people in the U.S. government are expressly looking for such links. There is no Iraq-al Qaeda equivalent of the CIA's 1,400-person Iraq Survey Group currently searching Iraq for weapons of mass destruction.

Instead, CIA and FBI officials are methodically reviewing Iraqi intelligence files that survived the three-week war last spring. These documents would cover several miles if laid end-to-end. And they are in Arabic. They include not only connections between bin Laden and Saddam, but also revolting details of the regime's long history of brutality. It will be a slow process.

So Feith's memo to the Senate Intelligence Committee is best viewed as sort of a "Cliff's Notes" version of the relationship. It contains the highlights, but it is far from exhaustive.

One example. The memo contains only one paragraph on Ahmed Hikmat Shakir, the Iraqi facilitator who escorted two September 11 hijackers through customs in Kuala Lumpur. U.S. intelligence agencies have extensive reporting on his activities before and after the September 11 hijacking. That they would include only this brief overview suggests the 16-page memo, extensive as it is, just skims the surface of the reporting on Iraq-al Qaeda connections.

Other intelligence reports indicate that Shakir whisked not one but two September 11 hijackers--Khalid al Midhar and Nawaq al Hamzi--through the passport and customs process upon their arrival in Kuala Lumpur on January 5, 2000. Shakir then traveled with the hijackers to the Kuala Lumpur Hotel where they met with Ramzi bin al Shibh, one of the masterminds of the September 11 plot. The meeting lasted three days. Shakir returned to work on January 9 and January 10, and never again.

Shakir got his airport job through a contact at the Iraqi Embassy. (Iraq routinely used its embassies as staging grounds for its intelligence operations; in some cases, more than half of the alleged "diplomats" were intelligence operatives.) The Iraqi embassy, not his employer, controlled Shakir's schedule. He was detained in Qatar on September 17, 2001. Authorities found in his possession contact information for terrorists involved in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the 1998 embassy bombings, the 2000 attack on the USS Cole, and the September 11 hijackings. The CIA had previous reporting that Shakir had received a phone call from the safe house where the 1993 World Trade Center attacks had been plotted.

The Qataris released Shakir shortly after his arrest. On October 21, 2001, he flew to Amman, Jordan, where he was to change planes to a flight to Baghdad. He didn't make that flight. Shakir was detained in Jordan for three months, where the CIA interrogated him. His interrogators concluded that Shakir had received extensive training in counter-interrogation techniques. Not long after he was detained, according to an official familiar with the intelligence, the Iraqi regime began to "pressure" Jordanian intelligence to release him. At the same time, Amnesty International complained that Shakir was being held without charge. The Jordanians released him on January 28, 2002, at which point he is believed to have fled back to Iraq.

Was Shakir an Iraqi agent? Does he provide a connection between Saddam Hussein and September 11? We don't know. We may someday find out.

But there can no longer be any serious argument about whether Saddam Hussein's Iraq worked with Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda to plot against Americans.

Stephen F. Hayes is a staff writer at The Weekly Standard.

Advertisement

559 comments

  • Comments are open and unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Little Green Footballs.
  • Obscene, abusive, silly, or annoying remarks may be deleted, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their views by Little Green Footballs.
  • Posts that contain phone numbers, street addresses, email addresses or other personal information will also be deleted, as will posts that consist only of a variation on the word, "First!"
  • Comments that advocate violence will be cause for immediate banning with no appeal.
  • Disagreement and debate are welcome, but insults and abuse are not, and may cause your account to be blocked.
  • REMEMBER: posting comments at LGF is a privilege, not a right. Abuse that privilege, and your account will be blocked.

Hide comments | Jump to bottom

1 Captain America  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:26:12am

Ummm, you mean Bush was right to attack Iraq?

Whoever would have guessed?

Don't expect any recognition from the Leftist deniers.

2 db  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:29:05am

Bush may have been right -

- BUT, he didn't KNOW it at the time, or tell us about it, so he was WRONG.

/tinfoil hat off

3 belize042  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:29:19am

On a first perusal, I couldn't find the links to the Jooooos and Big Ooooiiiilll. And Haliburton. Guess I'll have to wait for the al-Reuters version to read those parts.

4 The Sanity Inspector  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:30:44am

Time for the nay-sayers to move the goalposts again...

5 David2  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:31:46am

Nice effort to bring this to everyone. We appreciate it. Hopefully, the media will feel the same way.

6 Jonathan  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:34:03am

They won't admit it but how much more smoking a gun do they need ...

All those who are going to protest at Bush's visit here (London) next week - this should be compulsory reading. Plus the sight on the other thread of the photos of today's outrage in Istanbul

Until the leaders of Islam control these despicable maniacs, the civilised world must do it for them.

7 AG abu Ima pepper youra pepper He's a pepper  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:35:39am

Hmmmm....

Douglas Feith is involved.

Those wily, clever Jews are inventing trumped up charges again.

8 Ed Moran:Abu De Donde Alan Esta?  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:36:51am

I'd recommend "The War Against America" by Laurie Mylroie, where she lays out a pretty convincing argument that the first WTC attack, while carried out by Palestinians living in the NYC area, was coordinated by Iraq. She lays out some detailed evidence that Ramsi Youseff was neither Kuwaiti nor Pakistani, but from the Baluchistan region of Iran (the Baluch's are Sunni Arabs who aren't terribly comfortable with Iranian ( Shia & Persian ) rule), and that Youseff was almost certainly an agent of Iraqi intelligence.

9 gymnast  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:37:59am

As I said earlier, it appears that Senators Roberts and Rockefeller, no longer content with the low status of being copperheads have moved up to the big leagues of Sedition and Treason. Are they being coached by the Junior Senator from New York?

10 MB  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:38:10am

This is a very good overview of the Iraqi/Al-Qaeda connections that led to the War on Terror in Iraq. I will not be surprised to find out that the Iraqis were involved in the WTC and OKC bombings.

11 Catch22  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:38:32am

I am in awe.

He did it again.

Bush gave his political opponents enough rope to hang themselves, and now we see they have stuck their necks in the noose.

And they'll still complain about HIS intelligence.

Yes, they will squirm and kick a bit, but with a little luck, they'll eventually just twist in the wind...

12 Ed Moran:Abu De Donde Alan Es?  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:39:04am

Do you think Peter "Hanan Ashwari's Bottom" Jennings will lead off the Monday broadcast of World News Tonight with an admission that the Iraq war wasn't all about oil?

13 jimmytheclaw  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:41:34am

To all trolls and LLL that read this thread

told you so nyaaaa nyaaaa thbtttfffffff

14 Karski  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:41:42am

#11 Catch22

Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding!

We have a winner.

Yep. Bush sure is an idiot alright.

Ha!

I can't wait for the squirming to begin (Rockefeller et al ... I'm looking in your direction).

And then the wrath at the polls. Fox had better not drop the ball on this one.

15 Colt  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:42:39am

#7 AG

Douglas Feith is involved.

My thoughts exactly. This memo is worth shit to the left because of that.

And even then, it's the Bush administration. Who LIED, dontcha know...

16 drool  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:43:10am

Honestly, why do we even need this article?

To any reasonable person, it should seem eminently logical that all of these Middle-Eastern regimes and terrorist groups had some sort of relationship, whatever it was.

I don't mean to be a spoilsport, but people who aren't convinced by the above mentioned common-sense probably won't be convinced by this proof either. I hope I'm wrong.

17 Sean Crowley  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:43:36am

OK, Can we know say Howard Dean's 15 minutes are up?

18 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:45:04am

Charles, brace yourself for a storm. Weekly Standard's offline; Rantburg posted the text, and now they're offline.

Mail me a copy. If you go down, I'll host it until everybody comes back.

19 zulubaby  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:45:18am

Ed Moran (#12)

Do you think Peter "Hanan Ashwari's Bottom" Jennings will lead off the Monday broadcast of World News Tonight with an admission that the Iraq war wasn't all about oil?

Yes, and at precisely the same moment, hell will freeze over.

20 Bourgeois Reactionary  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:53:21am

AG #7 - anything 'neo-con' Douglas Feith (Undersecretary of Defense for Policy) says is automatically considered to be lies and disinformation. The Left hates a guy who claims that the Palis already have a state, called Jordan (80% of British Mandate).

MB #10 - OKC always did seem strange to me, it would be interesting to see if there are connections. As for the Iraq / Al Q ties, I never doubted it.

21 belize042  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:54:45am

Zulubaby,

Charles should get a flying pig image ready, you know, in case it does happen (Hell freezing over, I mean. That other thing, about Peter Jennings, is never going to occur).

22 Weeeeeeeee  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:55:39am

I'll bet the mainstream press ignores this story. It doesn't fit their cookie cutter "Bush is a Liar" image.

23 andrew  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:57:07am

Didn't the senate's intelligence committee have this info since Oct. 27?

24 John  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:59:14am

You know the Democrats are going to say the facts in this memo are as accurate as the information from the CIA about Iraq buying nuclear weapons material from Niger (nevermind that the report say a nation in Africa and didn't specify Niger). We're way past the time that any new intellegence report is going to get them off their talking points for the 2004 election.

However, given that many of these reports do date from the Clinton Administration, it would be nice if some reporter would ask Bill what he thinks about them, which would force him to either confirm their accuracy, or claim the CIA was running a rogue information collection operation while he was in office (excepting Valerie Plame, of course).

25 cletus  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:00:58am

I'd say that the constituents of any Democrat who has been privy to the information the intelligence committee has access to and has been making the "Bush lied, no connection" argument but is not up for removal (re-election? please...) next year should be looking for legal ways to remove them and replace them with someone who is actually motivated to protect the United States. This, along with the "pull the trigger" memo from earlier this month really tells you all you need to know about the Democrats. The party has absolutely NO INTEGRITY REMAINING. Copperheads are precisely what these reprehensible people are. Snakes in our midst; ready to bite and poison the body politic in order to weaken it enough that they can control it again. They do not care about America any longer; they only care about their own power (or lack thereof). They are making it increasingly clear that to them the deaths of thousands of Americans (their own constituents included) mean nothing unless it provides them an angle/opportunity to regain power. They think nothing of compromising intelligence sources, or purposely making arguments that they know are false and are refuted by classified documents; counting on the Republicans' patriotism to keep them silent in the face of the Democratic lies in order to protect our vital information sources. These are the actions of people without HONOR.

26 lindsay  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:02:13am

OT

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) U.S. Army helicopter crashes in northern Iraq, U.S. military says.

27 Sean II  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:05:04am

Fox is carrying this report...

They do not print the whole transcript but but provide the link to The Weekly Standard.

28 Colt - Abu Shabab  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:05:37am

Not to piss in the Cheerios, but are we sure this is reliable? Like the WMD reports, I don't want to get my hopes up without being certain.

29 andrew  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:11:05am

#28 Colt
It seems to be thoroughly vetted.

30 Weeeeeeeee  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:11:34am

Amazing, the Democrats are willing to sell out America for their own political ambitions and power.

31 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:13:10am
Not to piss in the Cheerios, but are we sure this is reliable? Like the WMD reports, I don't want to get my hopes up without being certain.

Hayes and the Weekly Standard have a good record; we're not talking about the New York Times here.

Also, the last week and a half has seen a flurry of leaks that the Democrats haven't just confirmed, but gotten angry over their getting out. I suspect someone's returning fire in the leak war.

Today's leak story comes courtesyof the Wall Street Journal:

[Link: www.opinionjournal.com...]

Somebody sent them Democrat memos dealing with the judicial confirmation process. It's not pretty.

32 Paladin  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:16:39am

"Treason doth never prosper
What is the reason?
For, if treason prosper,
None dare call it treason."


Paging:
Al Gore
Hiliary Clinton
Jay Rockefeller
Chuck Shumer
Jim Jeffords
Tom Daschle
Ted Kennedy
ad naseum

33 Colt - Abu Shabab  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:19:35am

#29 andrew

Of course it does, but that doesn't mean it isn't politically, er, embellished.

Don't misunderstand me, I expect there was a link such as the one described. I just want to be certain.

#31 Robert Crawford

Fair points.

34 Sandy P.  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:19:41am

Gee, Iraq and WTC #1? Gee, who would have thought?

Jayna Davis and Laurie Mylroie must be feeling pretty good about now.

This should give the euroweenies apoplexy.

35 Colt - Abu Shabab  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:21:45am

Oops. #33 cont.

Fair points.

we're not talking about the New York Times here.

Ironically, when they run it, people will take more notice.

36 axiom  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:22:20am

Ed Moran: Is Laurie Mylorie the same author that wrote a number of Op/Ed pieces published in the Wall Street Journal about the activities of the Iraqi army when they invaded Kuwait?

Apparently one of the first targets to sweep upon invasion of Kuwait was Iraqi intelligence operatives ransacking the Kuwaiti Interior Ministry offices to collect, forge and modify Kuwait National ID immigration papers that eventually ended up in the hands of one Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. If I recall correctly Al Qaida operatives regularly were caught with Kuwaiti papers.

37 Cherokee Bill  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:25:53am

Glad to see all of this in print but the alphabets will bury it in their zeal and complicity with Levin, Rockefeller and the rest of the hate America/Bush crowd.
We all knew it to be true but you can bet the ranch that nothing will change in the hate America/Bush rantings.
One can only hope that their foaming at the mouth rhetoric will backfire on Election Day.
Thanks Charles for posting it.

38 axiom  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:26:00am

Ed Moran: Take a look at the reviews of Laurie's book at Amazon.

My personal fav.

1 star
from Berkeley, CA
Complete rubbish!
This book directly contradicts virtually everything we've learned from "Dollars for Terror: The Us and Islam" by Richard Labeviere which was published a year BEFORE 9/11/2001. Mr. Labeviere is a journalist for Swiss TV and spent years researching the links between various Saudi royals, the bin Ladin family, al Qaeda and the CIA. He asserts that the CIA used al Qaeda in Macedonia, Kosovo, Chechnya and elsewhere at least up until 2000.

39 Colt - Abu Shabab  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:30:19am

#38 axiom

from Berkeley, CA

Woah, who'd have guessed?

40 axiom  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:32:30am

The fact that the memo to the Intelligence Committee has Doug Feith's name on it is all the LLL needs to discredit it. The only problem they have is when President Clinton affirms the information by his hawkish stance on this war as well. After Clinton agrees, the LLL is running solo with only of Foggy Bottom's slimes.

41 William  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:34:30am

Aside from the importance of this information, it is absolutely pathetic that the Bush administration is forced to fight treasonous leaks with counter-leaks while our nation is at war.

This is all political horseshit.

America's enemies should see a united front.  Instead, they see Democrat senators and Democrat congressional reps actively undermining America's interests for political gain.

Anyone inclined to vote for Howard Dean, or anyone else other than Bush in 2004, ask yourself this: "Would Islamic terrorists rather have Bush and Rumsfeld fighting terrorism, or someone else?"

If you vote against Bush and Rumsfeld, you are voting the way Islamic terrorists hope you will.  Food for thought.

(From a former Independent voter.)
 

42 Logic Bullet  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:38:31am

OTT, 2 blackhawks down in Northern Iraq....details coming in

43 zaza  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:40:01am

I haven't read the whole thing yet, but has anyone else been reminded of those murals found in Iraq (Nassiryah, was it?) with the Iraqi airline planes flying through two skyscrapers...

Aside from that, I never understood why the links were always so played down or denied. Esp. the Czech meeting.

44 justdanny abu absalom  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:41:26am

Thank you Sir.

45 axiom  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:46:37am

#43 zaza

The Czech meetings were downplayed because the media wanted them downplayed. Major media sees themselves as the primary power holder in the world and part of maintaining that power is making sure dictators and despots are protected.

46 axiom  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:49:49am

Ed Moran: Ignore my question in #36 about Mylroie. She is the woman that wrote the Op/Ed I was referring to.

Benador Associates has it up on their website.

47 Roger L. Simon  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:51:59am

I just blogged about this and I think it's really important that this memo get shoved front and center again and again, because it speaks to the essential dishonesty of our major media. Much of this information was readily available, but not desseminated. The press was only interested in "quagmire." They must be exposed and ridiculed.

48 Paladin  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:56:35am

#47 Roger L. Simon

Don't they expose and ridicule themselves on a daily basis? They are doing a much better job than we ever could.

49 axiom  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:59:10am

Roger L. Simon: One would have expected the media to have made a maad dash for the bombed out remains of the Iraqi Intelligence Offices nearly everyday to see what sort of information they could get their hands on. Hell, I think this target would have been the first on the list of visits for many iraqis, perhaps second only to the prisions where their missing family members were last seen.

50 billhedrick  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:03:04am

somewhat OT. Thought problem: Ted Rall's latest opus, how does it affect the "Arab Street" any differently than the same opinions expressed by a columnist in an Egyptian daily, or a commentary on Al Jaz? Actually it gives our enemies more ammunition since it's obvious to them that America does not back GWB and the WoT. That the Dims and the LLL are so eaten up with their Bushenhassen that they will sacrifice their country to defeat him is contemptable. Rockefeller knew this stuff and still said there was no connection? String him up.

51 Bob  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:04:41am

this doesn't tell me about Ramzi Yousef and Khalid Sheik Muhammed.

Can someone tell me about those two jokers?

also, globalsecurity has this:

CIA Report on WMD Tech

52 Sandy P.  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:05:13am

Jayna Davis does have a website:

Jayna Davis

53 Please Islam Stop Sucking  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:08:41am

Sorry if this has been covered here already. This from DEBKA:

In London, four Middle East students recently caught videotaping synagogues. They were released as no law broken but are being watched.


DEBKA

I demand a war of civilizations!

54 JD  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:19:59am

OT....just on Fox News

PRAGUE, Czech Republic — Czech police arrested two Slovak nationals who attempted to sell nearly seven pounds of radioactive material to undercover officers working a sting operation, officials said Saturday.

The potential uses of the substance remained unclear pending an investigation, but an expert said initial tests revealed two components that could possibly be used in a dirty bomb.

55 Gary Bruce  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:21:13am

Robert Crawford writes:

the last week and a half has seen a flurry of leaks that the Democrats haven't just confirmed, but gotten angry over their getting out. I suspect someone's returning fire in the leak war.

That's a good sign of Republican resolve, but the political fallout doesn't seem to be registering because their ability to disseminate it to the general public is so feeble. Fact is, the Fifth Columnist mass media are united against this Administration and this War and are effective in blocking any conservative initiatives.

Unless the President goes on the offensive against the Media Fifth Column, along with House and Senate Repubs by his side in a coordinate political assault, they will not be able to marshal the population behind them.

What happened to communications on the Repub side? Is it a matter of political will, technical competence, or something else?

If Fox (2 million viewers), the Washington Times (circulation 100,000), and the New York Post (circ. 450,000) are the only mass media ready to defend this country, there is a massive problem in front of us.

56 Ed Moran:Abu De Donde Alan Es?  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:23:55am

Axiom, Ramzi Youseff's fingerprints were sent to Kuwait after he was caught ( one of his travelling companions was caught with several passports for Yousegg, including one in the identity of a Kuwaiti), and matched the fingerprints of the Kuwaiti, whose entire family disappeared during the invasion. The Kuwaiti was a student in England, and thus travelled frequently. Mylroie's theory was that the entire family was killed by Iraqi intelligence after the invasion, and Youseff's fingerprints were substituted.

The (probably) murdered Kuwaiti was 5'7" when he left for the UK as an 18 year old, according to his original passport, Youseff was almost 6' tall.


Although she believes Iraqi intelligence ran the whole operation, the local legwork in New York/New Jersey were Palestinians ( born in various Arab countries, mostly Egypt) who had ties to Abu Nidal and the Fatah Revolutionary Council.

57 Ger  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:25:13am

Fun activity: hand a copy of the memo to your nearest LLL and say, "Dope, meet Rope."

58 john  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:30:19am

Getting this information out is a very good thing.

The majority of the public really has not followed/doesn't really care about the connection of Iraq and Al'q. By and large most peole believe there is some kind of connection (without giving it too much of thier daily alotment of reasoning). Something as powerful as this memo may be a catalyst to wake up many who are just marginally following the many facets of the war on terror.
Think of it this way. Imagine a sponge with a slow drip drip drip of water onto the top. If its a warm day (or a big sponge) the water may never drip out out of the bottom. But give it a squeeze and you get all those little drops coming out at once.
I think this analogy is true for a lot of Americans. Most of us are concerned about our day to day lives, the economy etc, etc. This info goes into our reasoning but it's just stored away.
Then something comes along to 'squeeze the sponge'. I suspect this may do it for many people - particularly those who have taken note of the dems whining about 'no-connection', 'Bush is a Liar' ad nauseum. Maybe if we are really fortunate, many will see the mainstream media for the shilling pack of weasels they truly are. One can only hope......

59 Il Padrino  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:34:43am

#57

If only it were that simple. I've posted the basics of the memo at another site I visit and the response has been, "Eh, so what...American intelligence can't be trusted."

60 Rang1995  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:35:20am

Trouble is there are too many people i know who discount this (weekly standard) Firth, anything from Debka,They only believe the guardian,BBC, the EU, polls by ZOGBY, CNN, BARBARA S...that's what we are up against...FOOLs jerks and anti-semites

61 Vic  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:35:39am

Domestic Donks

Iraqi Donks

...

Advantage: Iraqi Donks

:)
Vic

62 Ed Moran:Abu De Donde Alan Es?  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:36:01am

BTW, from what I understand, Bill Clinton does not want Howard Dean to be the Democratic nominee, and I suspect if their triumphant return to power is going to occur in 2008, the Clinton's would probably prefer a Bush victory. My gut feeling is they are opportunists who put personal power over party.


So it might be in Clinton's perceived interest to confirm some of these things, to help a Bush reelection.


Hillary would much prefer to be running against a Republican coming out of a primary battle in 2008 than wait for 2012 after a two term dhimmicrat president.

63 Bleeding heart conservative  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:37:43am

Charles Johnson has a term, "peace creeps," which does not apply to every pacifist, just the types that march under the banner of "peace" while disparaging America, sneering at the military, despising the initiative against terrorism, and repudiating liberation of fellow humans from tyranny. So full of self-righteous hatred of the President and his talk of creating a free, prosperous and democratic Iraq that they never bother to ask Iraqis what they think of the removal of a brutal genocidal madman.

Well, a gaggle of peace creeps are going to insult and discourage the reservist men and women reporting for duty at Fort Lewis, WA, today. This is a brigade headed over to Iraq starting tomorrow, and the last thing they need to see is a bunch of loathsome twits spitting on their service. Service which, by the way, provides these indolent ingrates the freedom to viciously attack their own homeland and its defenders.

If you live in the western Washington area, please come to Ft. Lewis. A group of us will be there to pre-empt their hideous hatefest with a demonstration of support and gratitude for these courageous soldiers.

Below are the details of their cretinous little psy-ops:

November 15 - Saturday:
NO MORE TROOPS FOR AN UNJUST WAR!
Noon-2pm: Sign-holding outside of Ft. Lewis Army Base
Nov. 15 is the day 3,000 National Guard troops will report for duty before being shipped out to Iraq.
Veterans, military families, anyone who believes this unjust war is not worth dying or killing for, and anyone who wants to support the questioning and resistance of the troops, many of whom share our sentiments against the Iraq War--
Bring signs and banners and line the street outside of the Madigan Hospital Gate of Ft Lewis, right off of I-5 exit 122 (Fort Lewis is located just off Interstate 5, midway between Tacoma and Olympia.
For a map and directions see: [Link: www.lewis.army.mil...]
Street parking is available in Tillicum. Take a right instead of a left off of the exit and walk over the bridge that crosses over the freeway to reach the gate.
To CARPOOL from Seattle, meet outside of Seattle Central Community College at 10:00am, Broadway & Pine in Capitol Hill.) See you there! Let's raise the level of resistance to the war in this country at a time when the lies are exposed and Bush's approval ratings are at an all-time low.
Sponsored by Not In Our Name (NION), Vietnam Veterans Against the War Anti-Imperialists (VVAWAI), Sound Nonviolent Opponents of War (S.N.O.W.),and Act Now to Stop War and End Racism (A.N.S.W.E.R.).

Some suggestions for signs:
GI Rights Hotline 800-394-9544
No More Troops for an Unjust War
This Unjust War is Not Worth Dying and Killing For
We Support GI Resistance
Question Authority
The People of Iraq are Not Our Enemy
The People of the World are Our Sisters & Brothers
The Recruiters Lied
Bush Lies, Thousands Die
Let Iraq Live, Bring the Troops Home

FINAL NOTE: It is true, the people of Iraq are not our enemy. In fact, they were our allies in the fight against the Baath regime. So why should we abandon our ally in this time of transition? Why be so dim to think that they're making a valuable suggestion? Do they think this will influence anything, other than the morale of the soldiers about to say goodbye to their loved ones?

May the historical record show that every freedom under which the Iraqis will flourish is not in the name of these "peace protestors."

64 addison  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:40:11am

Off Topic: I have a question that I am unable to fully answer on my own.

With the Democrat Party at the precipice of a very probable multi-election cycle nadir and becoming more beholden to fringe groups (PETA, NOW, Sierra Club, NAACP, certain trial lawyer groups, the anti-gun lobby, almost every pro-abortion group, etc.), how does their diminishing ability to project governmental power and influence legislation influence those groups who have become almost inextricably tied to them? Will they become more shrill, moderate, emaciate to a shell of their former selves, cease to exist in toto...?

How does this affect the major media outlets (ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, CNBC, NYT, etc.) that are often nothing more than Democrat Party booster clubs? Will they veer more towards anti-reality non-sensical partishanship or will they reform? Will media outlets drop the fatuous pretension of "objectivity" and finally label themselves as Left-wing, center-left, "center", etc.?

Just wondering, as we are on the edge of a fairly sizeable shift in America politics (as reflected by governor's races, the 2002 election cycle, voter registration records, anecdotal reports (Roger L. Simon, Michael Totten, Zell Miller, Ed Koch, etc.), even college student approval ratings of Bush...) that will affect a large number of groups, media outlets, laws, etc. that are outside the normally thought of influence of the Democrat Party.

What happens to people who frequent sites such as Democratic Underground.com? Will they go insane (beyond, that is, their present tenuous grasp of reality); will they "wake up"; how will they deal with the possibility of having little to no influence in governmental dealings for 10-20 years?

That kind of stuff. I suppose the answer is an essay in itself, but I'm curous as to what some of you think (the reasoned LGF crowd, not the "Democrats smell like butt" group).

65 David2  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:43:28am

This document is painful to read. These politicians are traitors. I wonder if Gore Vidal will state that they would have been hung in colonial times.

66 axiom  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:08:07am

addison: The groups you listed craft the legislation, talking points and fire up the Democratic Party lackeys. Without NOW, the NAACP, Sierra Club, etc, the Democrats would have 1) No Money, B) No Supporters and C) No Media support.

Not even another 9/11 would change these folks. They are convinced that America must be more european, without question more European. Texas politicians stand in the way so they determine that Bush, Delay and Rove have to be stopped.

67 Sean II  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:08:34am

Breaking:

Two U.S. Black Hawk helicopters crash in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul. Status of crew and passengers unknown, military sources say. Details soon.

68 scribeboy  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:14:32am

This "secret" scoop by the Weekly Standard has about as much credibility as the lies that pore from Bush's mouth. Nigerian yellowcake, anyone?

69 andrew  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:16:05am

Why do so many trolls have 'boy' in their nick?

70 sej  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:18:07am

means nothing to me , it discredits the left, but who cares they suffer from a mental defect anyway. We must fight terrorism that is what is important

71 scribeboy  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:20:19am

I was just kidding. Nobody could possibly be as stupid as my last comment just sounded.

72 Geepers  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:22:37am

scribeboy (#68),

This "secret" scoop by the Weekly Standard has about as much credibility as the lies that pore from Bush's mouth. Nigerian yellowcake, anyone?

You want to give us a link where Bush even said the word yellowcake?

You're talking out of your ass.

Maybe it would help your argument if YOU USED THE CAPS LOCK AND SOME !!!!!!

73 Camel Prophet  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:23:03am

OT:

[bigoted word]s are bound by the unholy koran and hadith. The attached comment from a huge muslimaniac exegesis website, establishes bedrock ersatz prophecy concerning the timing and culpability for the destruction of the unholy Kaba of Mecca, which is the "cargo ship" to the Marduk prostrating muslim savages. Apparently, pig-one of islam said that a skinny legged "Ethiopian" would destroy the unholy Kaba, shortly before the "end of days." So what if a chubby white lady fired an ICBM with multiple nuclear tipped warheads, which turned Mecca into glass? I hate speculation, so let's fucking do it!:

[Link: www.tafsir.com...]

CUT THE HEAD OFF THE SNAKE AND THE BODY DIES.

74 Colt - Abu Shabab  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:25:25am
Nobody could possibly be as stupid as my last comment just sounded.

You say that, but you basically quoted Howard Dean.

75 Moshe  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:25:44am

OT:


Four Former Shin Bet leaders warn of catastrophe unless Israel strikes peace deal
http://www.sfgate.com/c...

"Another of the four, Yaakov Perry, said it was no coincidence that those closest to the conflict came to the same conclusion.

"Why is it that that everyone, Shin Bet directors, chiefs of staff, former security personnel ... become the advocates of reconciliation with the Palestinians?" Perry said."

76 Please Islam Stop Sucking  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:28:29am
CUT THE HEAD OFF THE SNAKE AND THE BODY DIES.

This snake has approximately 4 heads. Not all equal. Certainly saudi arabia is the biggest head on the beast though, with the mad mullahs in a very close second. But you are right. Cut them off, and we will witness a new period of relative peace and calm. Let's get it over with already! Faster Please!!

77 Targetpractice (Abu Boom Boom)  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:29:08am

Hmm. I'm looking at a different outcome than the Dims outright lying that they know nothing about this. I not only expect for them to acknowledge it, but then to demand to know why Dubya didn't present this information when he was pushing for the war. And no matter what the WH says, they're gonna claim that Dubya had an ulterior motive for keeping this quiet.

78 zum-zam  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:35:23am

Letting this memo out only now proves again one of the Bush admin. biggest weakness of "whyittooksoooolong?"

79 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:37:35am

Gary Bruce:

What happened to communications on the Repub side? Is it a matter of political will, technical competence, or something else?

Part of it is style; the Republicans don't always make good public speakers. Another factor is respect for law; the anti-war/pro-Democrat movement hasn't had a problem leaking classified documents that make the administration look bad, but Republicans have a hard time committing a Federal crime just to get their evidence out.

The major factor is, of course, the press. Remember when the administration decided to go around the White House press corps and give interviews directly to local stations? The White House corps went nuts, casting it as an attempt by the administration to "abuse the rubes in the heartland".

This will have a similar problem; over at Rantburg someone posted a really good explanation why the press will ignore it; it doesn't fit the storyline as they've been telling it. Since they can't work it into the storyline, well, it just has to be cut.

80 ploome  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:37:41am

#75 Moshe

Islam thrives in isolation and ignorance

and its through isolating the palestinian arabs and teaching them nothing but hate and lies, Arafat and his gang manipulate the people

the fight is with the thugs from Tunis and the people who hold power, through the desperation and violence of the masses they control.

Coexistance is possible....but the people who benefit from copnflict must be eliminated

81 Anti Neocon  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:40:21am

Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden


This is a secret memo. It's interesting that a small time news organ like The Weekly Standard could get a hold of it and not more mainstream sources. The Weekly Standard must be the ultimate root source of the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. I would suppose that no one would want to take note of the fact that GWB II's father was in charge of the CIA during the time that Osama and Saddam became friends. I would suppose that no one would want to take note of the fact that the CIA was helping both bin Laden in Afghanistan and Saddam in Iraq at the time they met. It would seem logical that the CIA at that time would have encouraged these two to be allies.

Ahh well, "The sins of the father are visited on the son." Of course George seems to be enjoying himself. Really, it's the sins of Republican Presidents that are visited on the Democrat Presidents who have to clean up after them.

82 Gary Bruce  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:40:57am

Moshe writes:

"Why is it that that everyone, Shin Bet directors, chiefs of staff, former security personnel ... become the advocates of reconciliation with the Palestinians?" Perry said."

These military and intelligence leaders are deluding themselves that peace is possible because they don't want to fight the type of war they know Israel must fight to survive--one that goes against the liberal sensibility of all too many Israelis.

Their refusal to recognize the reality confronting their country will only hasten and intensify the total war that will be fought.

83 andrew  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:43:15am

#81 Anti Neocon
What year(s) was GHW Bush CIA Chief - I forget?

84 trance reducer  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:44:47am

Any intelligence coming out of Iraq and especially from the British press demands further scrutiny and corroboration. Call it un-American or treasonous if you want but it makes good sense.

"... according to documents unearthed in April 2003 in the Iraqi Intelligence headquarters by journalists Mitch Potter and Inigo Gilmore..." does not inspire confidence in the veracity of the contents.

There are too many loose ends and intelligence has been proven wrong before. Why would Bush continually suggest that Iraq had links to al Qaeda and 9/11, then state that there was no connection?

Was that to prove that Dick Cheney really is in charge?

85 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:46:56am

#64, addison: I expect left wing terrorism to make a comeback in the US. There's already been one "anarchist" arrested for plotting attacks on US military bases, and one watermelon activist has been arrested for loosening bolts on transmission tower legs.

The boomers are gonna be reliving their "glory days" of the late '60s, early '70s with the help of a bunch of "young skulls full of mush" that have never known anything but anti-Americanism and leftist extremism. Imagine groups like ISM doing their thing on US soil, trained by ELF, ALF, and maybe even the ISM and its Palestinian sponsors itself.

Remember, these people seriously believe the "Bush == Hitler" crap. They think they're fighting evil; having never been taught any history beyond the PC crap that passes for it in schools today, they have no real reference to compare to. We're in real danger that some of them are going to justify doing anything.

86 Gary Bruce  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:48:54am

Robert Crawford:

Part of it is style; the Republicans don't always make good public speakers. Another factor is respect for law...

It may just be cultural, as you point out. The Repubs have never understood the role and capability of communications, so they've never given it a primary role in their political methodology. While the Dems have learned how to use and abuse communitions politically, so they've fully integrated communications into their entire operation--before, during and after the election process. They know how communications can set public agendas and use it to implement their goals. Repubs had better wake up to how to "communicate" before it's too late.

87 LoneStar  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:50:13am

It's on Fox News now!

88 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:51:59am

84, "trance inducer":

Why would Bush continually suggest that Iraq had links to al Qaeda and 9/11, then state that there was no connection?

This is a lie, the Big Lie the anti-war loons have been pushing.

Bush and the rest of the administration have said there is evidence of ties between Saddam and al'Qaeda, but no evidence of Saddam being involved in 9-11.

See the difference?

89 Colt - Abu Shabab  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:52:15am
Really, it's the sins of Republican Presidents that are visited on the Democrat Presidents who have to clean up after them.

Which reminds me - well done, Mr Clinton. You bombed more countries than both Bushes combined.

90 Moshe  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:52:51am

#82 Gary Bruce wrote: These military and intelligence leaders are deluding themselves that peace is possible because they don't want to fight the type of
war they know Israel must fight to survive

So you think you know more about what is and isn't possible than the 4 previous leaders of the Shin Bet intelligence service as well as Moshe Ya'alon the Commander of the IDF ?

Just curious - did you read the article?

91 zam-zam  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:54:07am

Dear Mr. Bush,
Isn't it time to level the most problematic parts of the Sunni Triangle as Sen. Trent Lott suggested?
How many of our boys have to be killed for you to realize that Arabs only understand POWER (destruction). With Saddam still out there how are we going to convince these Sunnis that our power is Akbar than Saddam’s ever been?

...Which is again the well know symptom of the Bush admin:

Whyittakeyousooolong?

92 Paladin  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:54:48am

#81 Anti sanity

GAZE

93 Colt - Abu Shabab  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:55:04am

#90 Moshe

No one did - your link didn't work.

94 h0mi  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:58:15am

I find myself amazed and astounded at the inability of the anti-war group (on the left and right) to understand how is it 2 people who supposedly hate one another can work together. "Saddam is an apostate (or a "poor muslim"), Bin Laden hates him more than we do!" is 1 meme. The other is "Bin Laden is a fundamentalist which is an anathema (sp?) to Saddam."

Nevermind that both have a common enemy. Nevermind that Shia and Sunni Muslims, who also have similar hostilities towards each other can set aside their differences for a while to go after Israel or the US or others.
Nevermind that the saying "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" originated in the middle east.
Nevermind that another similar saying that originated in this region goes something like "My brother and I against my cousin; my cousin and I against the stranger" showing to me clearly the way some people set aside their differences.
Nevermind that these same radicals gladly work alongside people they staunchly dislike in order to defeat an opponent they dislike even more- we see that with the left's support of the "republican" (cough) Bill Clinton and right wingers' support for moderate Republicans like Giuliani, Schwartzenegger, Riordan and Pataki in their elections.

The polls that showed >50% of all Americans believed there to be ties between Al Qaeda and Iraq was fueled not by non-existant deception on the part of the media or by the administration but because of the simple idea that maybe it makes sense that people who are against America could possibly coordinate their efforts together and achieve their goals. And just like "people know" but the cops don't about where criminal activity occurrs, and the level of involvement of drug gangs/organized crime in various areas of a neighborhood, "people know" when a terror group is working with a government sponsor. Finding proof is for the "lawyers" whether they be the DA or at the UN or the state department.

95 Palandine  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:58:30am

#84 Trance reducer

Why would Bush continually suggest that Iraq had links to al Qaeda and 9/11, then state that there was no connection?

Could you please cite one (1) instance in which President Bush said that Iraq had links to the September 11 attacks? Just one? That would still be far less than the "continuous suggestions" you speak of, but it would be a start. Fact is, he _never_ said it.

I just love it how the Left assumes that the people are sheep who need to be herded by their betters, that they cannot think for themselves. I'm one of those peole who think the jury is still out on whether Iraq cooperated with al Qaeda in the attack. It's not a certainty, but it's definitely a possibility. I came to that conclusion by myself. I did not need President Bush to tell me this. Let's see--Iraq is an aggressive enemy that for 12 years flouted the terms of its surrender. It continued to pursue weapons of mass destruction and continually fired on pilots patrolling the no-fly zones. After Gulf War I Saddam got Allah in a big way, commissioned "The Mother of All Wars" mosque and had a copy of the Koran written in his own blood. Iraq tried to assassinate former President Bush. Saddam gloated over the deaths of thousands in the World Trade Center buildings for literally weeks, even as the remains continued to smolder. At Salman Pak Saddam had set up a jetliner so that terrorists could train in hikjackings. It appears that Atta may have met with a member of Iraqi intelligence before the attacks. Saddam commissioned murals of him standing in front of the towers as a plane crashes into one. Iraq had become a haven for terrorists, as shown by the presence of Abu Nidal and a number of terrorist camps. None of that is conclusive proof, but it does make it difficult for me to say, unequivically and with absolute certainty, that Iraq had absolutely nothing to do with September 11, 2001.

96 h0mi  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:00:01am

The show that I'm waiting to drop is to see proof of ties between Oklahoma City and Iraq. Which would mean all the garbage about militias and the NRA in the 90s was simply a concerted effort by Democrats and the left to stifle dissent and stifle anti-government activism.

97 claude  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:00:13am

after skimming your site, to which I was lead by a reference at dKos, I have found a point of potential commonality:

Bicycles?

(Disclosure: as a 16 yr old, back in 1962, I rode a bicycle around Lake Superior. The paving on the new Trans-Canada freeway wasn't yet installed on some sections near WaWa, Ontario.)

I ask a simple question: How do you folks feel about bike lanes? Are they a useful addition to urban life, part of the solution, or are bike lanes yet another pinko/green plot to destroy the American Way of Life?

Yes, I realize this is off the subject, but I didn't see anywhere else to comment. Yes, perhaps I didn't skim sufficiently and missed the place that discusses the role of the bicycle in the urban/suburban context. Yes, I am trying to provoke response, but I am genuinely looking for anything we can agree on. We Americans, being stuck here together in America for the foreseeable future, need to start finding places from which we can begin to speak with, rather than scream at, each other.

?

98 andrew  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:02:29am

#97 Claude
IMO bike lanes = good.

99 Anti Neocon  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:02:56am

A case might be made that Clinton attacked reluctantly, but necessarily. Bush the second's attack on Iraq was both eager and unnecessary.

100 Moshe  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:04:09am

#90 - Colt your link didn't work

oops sorry, my bad

[Link: www.sfgate.com...]

101 Gary Bruce  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:04:09am

Moshe writes:

So you think you know more about what is and isn't possible than the 4 previous leaders of the Shin Bet intelligence service as well as Moshe Ya'alon the Commander of the IDF ?

I don't know all that is and isn't "possible" by the Israeli military and intelligence services--I do know as much as they about the overall political situation facing Israel. I think these Israeli leaders are afraid of fighting a total war against an enemy that now believes it possible to destroy Israel through terror--and is succeeding in turning parts of the West against Israel, such as Europe and even Asia.

The longer Israel delays fighting a war that will defeat their enemy, the more vicious that war will become as the Paleos become more confident of victory.

The appeasement comments from these individuals will only undermine the morale of the Israeli military and intelligence services when they are forced to engage in that war. If you think the Paleos want peace, you're as deluded as these folks are.

102 andrew  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:07:22am

#99 anti neocon
Yeah yeah, Saddam was a misunderstood nice guy, blah, blah, blah.

103 Zachary Cohen  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:09:04am

What? No! Saddam had nothing to do with the attacks. Saddam had the Qu'ran written in his own blood was a secular leader.

Terrorists and Saddam collaborating together? Who would have ever thunk it? I mean, all that funneled money to Hamas didn't throw me off, nor Abu Abbas living in Baghdad under Saddam's prediction, nor Iraq's attempt to stop the U.S's impending strike by turning over suspects for the 1993 WTC bombing.

104 Paladin  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:11:25am

#99 anti sanity

If you took that case, you'd have a fool for a lawyer.

105 Malik al-Malook  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:11:26am

Oh geez, I'm going to feed the troll.

anti neocon: George H W Bush was Vice President from 1981 to 1989, not the head of the CIA.

I would suppose that no one would want to take note of the fact that the CIA was helping both bin Laden in Afghanistan and Saddam in Iraq at the time they met. It would seem logical that the CIA at that time would have encouraged these two to be allies.


There are zero links between UBL and the CIA. You're citing six degrees of separation to establish your UBL link. Secondly, the CIA has never supported Saddam. It just isn't anywhere to be found. Another invention of yours is all that can account for it.

Thus since both of your assumptions are false the conclusion is irrelevant. Return to your trough.

106 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:12:17am

#95, Palandine:

According to the Weekly Standard story, Iraqi intelligence may have issued Mohammed Atta some money.

How's that for a possible link?

107 zulubaby  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:14:10am

Moshe, your name is really Moshe? Why do I suspect you of trolliness?

I was just on another forum and some Jew-hater there linked to the same article, crowing about it, mad excitement. BFD.

108 CornholioAbu now I can say HA! to my LLL friends  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:14:12am

#1  Captain America 

Ummm, you mean Bush was right to attack Iraq?

Whoever would have guessed?

Don't expect any recognition from the Leftist deniers.

You got that right. My first thought on the memo was "there goes Dean's top campaign issue."
But notice this story is not on the NYT website. And it won't be. Left-wing journalists will cheerfully ignore this story so Democratic candidates can continue to wail "it was all about the oiiil."

Come to think of it, this memo was sent to the Senate Intelligence Committee. The same committee with the infamous Democratic memo plotting ways to use the Committee politically to further the "Bush Lied" Democratic position. So the Democrats knew about the Sadddam - Al Queda cooperation.

Who's lying to us now???

109 Colt - Abu Shabab  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:15:56am

#100 Moshe

To dodge your question, it disturbs me that four Shin Beth chiefs believe that a compromise can be made. That means they don't see the PLO, Hamas, PIJ, etc, as proxies of the Arab states (and Iran), but as autonomous groups.

110 Mr. E. Train  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:16:46am

This will not make a dent in the LLL screeching.... one of the defining factors that make up the LLL is its ability to not let facts deter them from what they already "KNOW"

111 Malik al-Malook  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:20:42am

CornholioAbu: I disagree. This story will end up in the NY Times. It will just fall under the "Media Critic" section discussing the Weekly Standard as a Rupert Murdoch publication, the connection to the Project for a New American Century and the Neo Con slithering drool that often is secluded to the Editorial page of the NY Times.

Count on it.

112 Chris  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:21:39am

Fox News sure is making a lot about it. They do a feature on it every half hour it seems. Hopefully with FOX, Blogs and Talk Radio this can make it to at least the Washington Post.

113 roger  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:30:15am

can someone tell me what LLL means?

114 Colt - Abu Shabab  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:31:22am

Loony Liberal Left.

115 Right Wing Conspirator  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:33:38am

Woo hoo. My boy just got back for leave from Iraq this morning. Going over there to see him in a few minutes. So far, what I gathered from him is that for the most part the Iraqis are worthless. They don't understand civility and kindness, all they understand is total authority and violence. Granted that just came about in the first five minutes of talking to him on the phone so I am sure I will get more details when we crack a few brews tonight. :-)

116 Clutch  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:34:01am

#66

Heh-heh-heh...had two Sierra Club tools (a nice young woman and man) show up at my door last night, looking for me to sign some petition that they were hawking (and grub for money, too). As soon as I saw "Sierra Club" on their clipboards, I politely and firmly told the that I do NOT support any cause that the Sierra Club is involved in and politely closed the door, firmly, in their face.

Hope they grow out of it...

117 Moshe  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:34:38am

#109 - ColtTo dodge your question, it disturbs me that four Shin Beth chiefs believe that a compromise can be made.

first, Moshe Ya'alon and the Four former Shin Bet chiefs know more details about the situation than any civilian anywhere

Anyone who says otherwise is blowing hot air, in my humble opinion.

Ya'alon, and the four ex-chiefs - Ayalon, Shalom, Perry and Gilon are not LLL's and are not peaceniks by any stretch of the imagination

Secondly, not only can a compromise be made - one HAS been made. It's called the Geneva Accord - and as the article notes:

During the Yediot interview, Perry, Shalom and Gilon added their signatures to a petition calling for the implementation of the proposal, joining 100,000 Israelis and about 60,000 Palestinians.

118 Colt - Abu Shabab  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:35:07am

#115 RWC

Pass on our regards :-)

And if you could post, or at least email me, what he says about the situation, I'd appreciate it.

119 Colt - Abu Shabab  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:38:25am

#117 Moshe

first, Moshe Ya'alon and the Four former Shin Bet chiefs know more details about the situation than any civilian anywhere

I wouldn't deny that, which is what scares me.

I know that Islamic Jihad is a Syrian-front group. I know that Hamas relies on the Gulf States for support. I know that the PLO relies on Iran and the Arab League for weapons. I know that Hizb'Allah is an Iranian-front group.

And I know they will not compromise.

What I want to know is, why do they think they will?

120 Moshe  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:40:21am

Meanwhile, while the IDF chief Ya'alon and the four former Shin Bet leaders are saying Sharon is leading Israel down the primrose path:

A right-wing Knesset member Tuesday accused high-profile Israeli leftists who drafted an unofficial peace plan with the Palestinians of "treason" and demanded they be sentenced to death or life imprisonment.
[Link: www.spacewar.com...]

121 Right Wing Conspirator  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:40:55am

#118 Colt - Abu Shabab

Pass on our regards :-)
And if you could post, or at least email me, what he says about the situation, I'd appreciate it.

Definitely will, and thanks. I will probably be on later tonight but if I don't see you I will send it to you. Hopefully he has some pics too, the only one that I had seen was of him and his Iraqi "best friend" over there, they paid him to clean the latrines out. :-)

122 Thump, thumper, thumpin'  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:41:07am

This is sort of OT, but this is one of my pet peeves, and I just have to rebut #81 - Anti-Neocon's grave misquoting of Scripture:


Ezek 18:1-4

1 The word of the LORD came to me:
2 "What do you people mean by quoting this proverb about the land of Israel: "`The fathers eat sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge'?
3 "As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, you will no longer quote this proverb in Israel.
4 For every living soul belongs to me, the father as well as the son-- both alike belong to me. The soul who sins is the one who will die.

(as it is said: Read the rest for verses 5-19)

Ezek 18:20
20 The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous man will be credited to him, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against him.

(as above for v 21-22)
(NIV)

Thumpin' over for now...

123 Colt - Abu Shabab  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:41:30am

#117 Moshe

Secondly, not only can a compromise be made - one HAS been made. It's called the Geneva Accord - and as the article notes:

Uh-huh. Peace has broken out, and all terrorist groups have either dissolved or been arrested by PA forces (the same people...). The Arab states have recognised Israel and signed non-aggression pacts. Trade is flourishing and...

Wait, no. A state of war exists between all but two of the Arab states, who violate the terms of their peace treaties on a daily basis. Terror groups continue to operate. And none of the terms in the EU peace plan have come about.

124 Colt - Abu Shabab  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:43:59am

A state of war exists between Israel and all but two of the Arab states...

:-)

125 Malik al-Malook  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:46:29am

RWC: Cheers on the good news. Please pass along my gratitude for his service. Let him know that the "chicken hawk warbloggers" are fighting this war on the information front.

126 Moshe  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:47:20am

#123 - Colt

of course there have been no fruits from the Geneva Accord yet

Sharon hasn't endorsed it. However he may be forced to if people keep signing the petitions at the current rate.

Instead, he prefers to kill time, making unrealistic demands while Israeli women and children get blown to bits daily.

127 Malik al-Malook  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:49:19am

Colt: Do you have any links to some information about the state of war between Israel and the Arab states? I think the two states are Egpyt and Jordan. Do the Arab states include Turkey?

128 Colt - Abu Shabab  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:53:35am

#126 Moshe

Instead, he prefers to kill time, making unrealistic demands while Israeli women and children get blown to bits daily.

What don't you understand about this:

Article 15: The liberation of Palestine, from an Arab viewpoint, is a national (qawmi) duty and it attempts to repel the Zionist and imperialist aggression against the Arab homeland, and aims at the elimination of Zionism in Palestine.

Or this:

Article 20: The Balfour Declaration, the Mandate for Palestine, and everything that has been based upon them, are deemed null and void. Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the true conception of what constitutes statehood. Judaism, being a religion, is not an independent nationality. Nor do Jews constitute a single nation with an identity of its own; they are citizens of the states to which they belong.

Or this:

Article 21: The Arab Palestinian people, expressing themselves by the armed Palestinian revolution, reject all solutions which are substitutes for the total liberation of Palestine and reject all proposals aiming at the liquidation of the Palestinian problem, or its internationalization.

That's from the PLO charter. Here's some stuff from the Hamas charter:

"Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it."

Or this:

"The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up. "

Or this:

"After Palestine, the Zionists aspire to expand from the Nile to the Euphrates. When they will have digested the region they overtook, they will aspire to further expansion, and so on. Their plan is embodied in the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion", and their present conduct is the best proof of what we are saying."

The PLO and Hamas are the most important terror groups, and they're opposed to the existence of Israel. How will the EU peace plan change that?

129 addison  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:53:46am

This was linked earlier above, but everyone--everyone--should read this Opinion Journal article. It is a collection of excerpts from memos sent betwixt Democrats concerning Bush's nominees.

November 7, 2001/To: Senator Durbin
"The groups singled out three--Jeffrey Sutton (6th Circuit); Priscilla Owen (5th Circuit); and Caroline [sic] Kuhl (9th Circuit)--as a potential nominee for a contentious hearing early next year, with a [sic] eye to voting him or her down in Committee. They also identified Miguel Estrada (D.C. Circuit) as especially dangerous, because he has a minimal paper trail, he is Latino, and the White House seems to be grooming him for a Supreme Court appointment. They want to hold Estrada off as long as possible."

Another:

June 12, 2002/To: SENATOR (Kennedy)
"...Ultimately, if [Chairman Pat] Leahy insists on having an August hearing, it appears that the groups are willing to let [Timothy] Tymkovich [10th Circuit] go through (the core of the coalition made that decision last night, but they are checking with the gay rights groups)."
130 FreakyBoy  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:53:52am

RWC

Have a great reunion. Give him my sincerest thanks.

131 Amy  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:55:11am

From what I hear, Arafat's current strategy is to do nothing until after the 2004 elections when, he hopes, Bush will be out of office and he'll have the Dems to do his bidding in terms of pressuring Israel to give in to his demands.

These revelations about the Iraq-al Qaeda connection will, perhaps, cause Arafat to re-think his position. If Bush and Sharon both stay in office through 2008, Arafat will get squat, the wall will be finished, Iraq will be pacified, and Syria and Iran will be wondering who's next on the agenda.

I just wouldn't want to be a European Jew (a/k/a the softest of soft targets) in the meantime.

132 CornholioAbu now I can say HA! to my LLL friends  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:56:04am

Malik al-Malook 

I disagree. This story will end up in the NY Times. It will just fall under the "Media Critic" section . . .

You're right. The NYT may run this story, a few days from now, buried on a back page below the fold. One of the press's strongest powers is the ability to select which stories get on the front page.

133 Colt - Abu Shabab  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:56:50am

#127 Malik al-Malook

Egypt signed a peace treaty with Israel in 1979, and Jordan signed another in 1994. The Arab League declared war on Israel in 1948, and is still at war with Israel. The Arab League considers itself to be the only legitimate voice of the Arab world. And Turkey is allied with Israel, happily :-)

134 Moshe  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 11:08:03am

#128 - Colt - What don't you understand about this:
[snip lots of stuff from PLO and Hamas documents]

What bearing do any of those documents have on what Ya'alon and the four ex Shin Bet chiefs said?

Do you honestly think they are not aware of what's in those documents? Please

Also the Geneva accord was negotiated by Israelis and Palestinians. It's not 'an EU plan'. The EU may have facilitated the meeting, and it may have provided a meeting place but the plan is not dictated by the EU.

You've agreed that the four former Shin Bet chiefs know more than any civilan. And with Israel's very survival in mind, this is what they say:

The group of former Shin Bet leaders said that for its own survival Israel needs to withdraw from the West Bank and Gaza Strip even if leads to a clash with some of the 220,000 Jewish settlers who live there.

They said Sharon's preoccupation with trying to halt attacks by Palestinians before agreeing to peace talks is at best misguided, and at worst a ploy to avoid concessions.

1) You agreed you believe the former Shin Bet leaders know more than any civilian about the situation.

2) The former Shin Bet leaders say Israel's survival as a democratic and Jewish state depends on a withdrawal to the green line.

3) Based upon the prior two facts, if you oppose unilateral withdrawal to the green line, are you not acting against the best interests of Israel ?

135 John O'Brien  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 11:08:48am

The LLL's over at Daily Kos seem to think this is all a hoax - a la the forged uranium documents


p.s.

they're hoping the chopper which just went down was shot down and not just a fluke accident.

136 Colt - Abu Shabab  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 11:12:54am

#134 Moshe

1) You agreed you believe the former Shin Bet leaders know more than any civilian about the situation.

2) The former Shin Bet leaders say Israel's survival as a democratic and Jewish state depends on a withdrawal to the green line.

3) Based upon the prior two facts, if you oppose unilateral withdrawal to the green line, are you not acting against the best interests of Israel ?

1) Yes I do.
2) Yes they do.
3) No, I am disagreeing with their interpretations of the facts.

My point is this: what, in that plan, means that Hamas and the PLO, not to mention Iran and the Arab League, will make peace? I'd like to hear their opinions.

137 sullivan-fan  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 11:25:41am

I'd like to see someone compile the quotes by the Democrat candidates denying any links by Iraq with terrorism and UBL. Ditto the quotes of Maureen Dowd. It would be great to have side-by-side with Feith's work.

138 Colt - Abu Shabab  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 11:28:07am

#137 sullivan-fan

Have a look at this (post #16). It doesn't take in to account this memo, but it's interesting reading :-)

139 mariecooper  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 11:30:07am

Hey does anyone remember a Democratic Judge from the south being in Iraq earlier this year helping with legal work there? I seem to recollect he wrote a letter that was published about the link between Sadaam and Al Qaeda, also that the administration had quieted him on this.

140 Colt - Abu Shabab  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 11:33:40am
141 Please Islam Stop Sucking  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 11:33:46am
I not only expect for them to acknowledge it, but then to demand to know why Dubya didn't present this information when he was pushing for the war.

And for the Dems that argue this ridiculous point, I simply point out how fucked we would have been had we grandstanded this info while Saddumb was in power. We're already fucked enough, without telling the enemy what we know. Many Many Many more allied soldiers would have died had saddumb known what we suspected.

If it is all true, then it would seem that Saddumb actually thought he could flaunt his connections with Qaida to the arab world, thus reaping the benefits of being perceived as a modern day Arab warrior standing up to the evil west, while avoiding responsibility in the western world for all of the murder Qaida was committing with his (and others) support. Now I wonder what would have given him (and others) the confidence to feel he could do this? France? On the other hand, maybe Saddumb had no idea that Qaida was going to do 9-11. Sure, he was supporting them, but mostly as a pay off to fend off total collapse. Once Qaida learned all they needed from his regime in order to commit unspeakable acts of terrorism, they set Saddumb up. Qaida wanted to hit the US in a way that made us topple Saddumb. What qaida was not expecting though, was that we would first go after Afgoneistan. I think that absolutely took them by surprise.

Even though Saddumb was supporting Qaida, even if it was more extortion than a partnership (as if it matters), Iraq was not the only state sponsor of different arms of Qaida. Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria Pakiland and Libya are all state sponsors of different parts of Qaida. This war will never end until we take out the state sponsors of Qaida. Just like Qaida is trying to take out the state sponsor of Jews, the US. They only have one target. We have many.

142 AJ  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 11:37:26am

The LLL will do a bait and switch,saying that since there were more connections between other countries (Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia) we shouldn't have attacked Iraq. Of course, if we actually did attack any other countries, they would then ask why not Iraq, or why any country at all. you can't please the LLL.

143 jimmytheclaw  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 11:38:43am

OT
my neighboes brother [local fire chief] someone who saved my life several years ago when he was a paramedic. was told the other day to pack his bags in 72 hours he will be going for a month or so for training then he will head to iraq. he was told to expect to be activated for 18-24 months hopefully before he leaves i'll see him and get his email if so hopefully he can keep me up on the truth in what is going on over there or i can point out some military blogs and get him to post stuff there. as for LLL's reading this his family and community stand behind him and they love to laugh at indy media blogs or other funny stuff that is found on the web. also if anyone knows sons of servicemen that are in country the Sons of the American Legion is a very good organization to join for more info go to legion.org and click on the Sons link. and when this guy gets back i'm definately buying a keg

144 wa wa wombat  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 11:40:19am

Isn't this stuff is supposed to stay classified?

145 JimInMPLS  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 11:43:05am

This story is not anywhere to be found at cnn.com or msnbc.com or msn.com etc........

146 scaramouche  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 11:45:50am

But that's impossible! Osama is a holy rolling Islamist and Saddam is secular Baathist, clearly an incompatible mix.

Why, it would be like an alliance between Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin.

Oh wait...

/LLL received wisdom and failed logic.

147 Please Islam Stop Sucking  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 11:53:58am
Of course, if we actually did attack any other countries, they would then ask why not Iraq, or why any country at all. you can't please the LLL.

Not to mention, if we had gone after syria, Iran, or Saudi Arabia before taking out Saddumb, he would have been in power, and allied against us in that fight. No, the only ****ry we could attack without Saddumb acting against us was Afgoneistan. It makes sense if he felt fucked by Qaida at the time, especially if he knew that his ****ry was presently infested with the very Qaida that fucked him.

Now that we have taken out Saddumb, we can go after one of the other monster-states, with a pretty fucking good foothold in the region. In fact, if you consider the entire Arab world the enemy, we have done a pretty good job of starting to carve these fuckers up geographically. Think of Afgoneistan as the forward, and Iraq as the first chapter. Since 9-11, we have been writing the book (for the most part). How many chapters do you think we have to go?

148 Darleen  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 12:14:38pm

OT but, oh, you gotta love James Lileks!!

There have been many things I’ve wished to write about this week. Michael Moore went to Germany and slammed America up and down for all the usual reasons – we don’t have passports! We only speak English! Our stupid minds! Stupid, stupid! We’re not like the cultured Europeans, who – aside from their occasional continent-shattering spasms of facism – are the epp-ee-tomay of culture and enlightenment. This, in the same week that a survey of EUians named Israel as the greatest threat to world peace. (Sometimes I swear that if a European hits his thumb with a hammer when no one’s around, he shouts GODDAMN JEWS!)
149 ralph  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 12:17:49pm

Douglas Feith "evil" neocon is on CSPAN now @ 5:17 est.

150 h0mi  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 12:19:59pm

Bike lanes...

I dont ride bikes. I dislike bike lanes because they have tended to be implemented in a manner that eliminates parking. If bike lanes can be implemented in a manner that still allows cars to park on the street, then I'd be less opposed.

151 Colt - Abu Shabab  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 12:29:35pm

#149 ralph

Hmm. He didn't make any reference to the major AQ-Iraq ties outlined in this memo.

152 ralph  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 12:31:24pm

#151 colt

This took place on Thursday 11/13/03

153 Colt - Abu Shabab  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 12:32:07pm

#152 ralph

Ahhhh. Ok. Thanks :-)

154 addison  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 12:32:16pm

Anyone know how the Louisiana election is going?

155 Joshua  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 12:39:12pm

You know, most of this information was public record, much of it published by the government watchdog Judicial Watch. There is a lot of cooberating evidence that wasn't available before, and everything on the USS Cole and Embassy bombings is pretty new (although judicial watch did theorize that Iraq was involved in the attacks). For the publicly known information, just visit this site, it has all the judicial watch info and more:
[Link: www.spiritoftruth.org.nz...]

What yanks my crank is on Foxnews there was a democratic senator asking why this memo didnt come out before the war. While some of the cooberating info in it may be somewhat new, most of its conclusions and big points are really old news, so why didn't the good senator do her own job and just, say, search the internet, instead of being a lazyass and waiting for some analyst to gather the information for her. And to argue the point is moot, there were tons of connections that were well known before this memo. Hell, the memo doesn't even touch on the long standing Abu Sayyaf-Iraqi connection or the possible involvement of Iraqi intelligence services in Somalia.

156 andrew  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 12:43:47pm

#154 addison
You can watch the election results here. Nothing in yet though.

157 Joshua  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 12:47:44pm

One big problem that the US may be facing now is that they underestimated Al-Qaeda and Int'l terror groups connections to Saddam, and are paying for it now. If anyone planned this insurgency, it was Bin Laden's crew. Bush probably underestimated Al-Qaeda's infrastructure in the country, and thus never considered the Al-Qaeda insurgency. Plus I think the Fedayeen had close ties to Al-Qaeda the whole time, and that would explain their ability to cooperate amorphously and keep themselves hidden.

158 David Block  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:15:48pm

#83 Andrew:

GHW Bush was head of the CIA under Nixon and Ford. 1972-1976 or thereabouts. I believe that pre-dates any connection between Osama and Saddam.

159 Leah  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:15:53pm

This is a true generalizaion..Yes generalizations can accurately define a situation. The Moslem World sees itself as a PAN ISLAMIC World..Why the Pan Arab/Islamic concept disappeared, I don't know. Was it deemed not PC enough or just TOO ACCURATE..??to define what was the reality of the situation.

The Arab/Moslem world sees theirselves NOT in the way in which the West has defined it. The present boarders of Arab/Islamic Countries are NOT the boarders that many of Islamic citizens recognize. They see themselves as citizens of countries that DON'T match the present maps. Then there is the wider Islamic World in which it is expected TO COOPERATE with each other in matters of War. Thats the USUAL in cases where it is Islam vs..ANYONE. If they don't cooperate directly..then it is thru others..but it IS a on going cooperation one way or the other.

I wonder why this cooperation between Bin Laden and Saddam is such a "surprise"..E Gad...its a DUH..if ya ask me. They were and are just good at "hiding" it.

I dont know about you all here..but I think its time we dont stake our survival on facts that can only pass the AMERICAN COURTROOM TEST. The world ISNT an American Court of Law..and never was. We just need to state that much as we'd like to PROVE facts as in Court..that just isnt realistic and FAIR to Democratic Peoples.. EVERYWHERE.

160 happy as a lark  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:18:33pm

what a hilarious site you have here - baiting all those that disagree ... lol .. its good for business i guess .. but as to whether it furthers any sensible debate or opinion ... naaaa

161 dgd  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:20:50pm

Again, what I'm going to do with the content of the memo is save it as a file and EVERY time some dipshit reporter writes a Bush lied story e-mail it to them. I know most of them won't read the whole thing but if their inbox is full of reasoned criticism and the content of the memo some of them may catch a clue about what we are facing.

162 ralph  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:22:25pm

#160 happy as a lark

but as to whether it furthers any sensible debate or opinion

Give it your best shot pinhead.

163 Leah  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:26:45pm

I dont consider American SURVIVAL Hilarious..you little creep. Also right now...today...a number of my COUSINS and also a number of Turks that sheltered us years ago..are lying dead or bruised and bleeding in Turkey. That isn't hilarious EITHER.

Shall I think twice about going to SHUL HERE in America? Will I put my life in danger by going to SHUL? Did you know that many Shuls in America have GUARDS now? This is the NORM now.

Hilarious..I DONT THINK SO...

Good discussion with realistic and sensible people.

164 Bleeding heart conservative  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:31:18pm

OT re #63
I just returned from Fort Lewis. There was a handful of peace creeps, but a SWARM of pro-Iraqi Freedom, pro-America "demonstrators." It was a sea of Us flags, and the bad guys were completely eclipsed.
5 overpasses before and after the base were lined with troop-supporters, and the Not in our name goons left with their tails between theri legs. In fact, since our side was there early, and they came from noon on, they had to get behind us. They waved flags with a picture of earth on it, which is tolerabel, but there were several: Be my hero: refuse to die or kill for an unjust war"
or the worst, a nazi-Bush poster.

But for thsoe few fools and losers, this was surely a disappointmnet and a loss. They were vaslty outnumbered and we won hands down.
Also, Standing at the overpass, you could hear constant honks of support. I mean, nonstop honks with each second. IT was awesome.
Great day to be alive.

165 Happy as 2 larks  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:37:04pm

#160

Was that your attempt to further the process of sensible debate?

166 zulubaby  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:37:38pm

Best to ignore the troll.

167 Leah  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:39:22pm

You arent coming here to Debate. You are coming here to play games. Ill let Chas decide what to do with you.

168 happy as a lark  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:39:26pm

its good debate because it fits your vision of the world .. it meets your victimhood .. and it hosted by someone that plays to your prejudices and bigotry ..

just as elsewhere there will be a mirror image of this site .. no big deal.

as for turkey .. do you shed tears when innocent palestinians die .. where does your outrage go then .. where does your humanity and despair go?

do you care that in the last 2 years 1000 children have been murderd by the idf? do you care that 3 palestinians are killed each and every day?

do you even know that 6 children and 11 adults were murdered in the last week by the idf?

i doubt it because this site and you are not interested in serious debate about the whole issue, the bigger picture .. you just want a place to replay victimhood .. and be in denial .

is israel accountable for any of its actions at all ... the answer in your book is always no .. because its always somebody else to blame.

169 Leah  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:40:33pm

Youre right Zulu..Ignore is the best way.

170 zulubaby  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:43:00pm

Leah (#167)

You arent coming here to Debate.

Exactly. Post #168 is what it came here for.

171 Ger  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:47:05pm

#168-

GAAAAAAAAAAAZE....

172 andrew  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:47:46pm

#158 David Block
Yup. That's what I was hoping the troll would find out.

173 Ed Moran:Abu De Donde Alan Es?  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:48:09pm

Noticing the Colt/Moshe discussion.

Can anybody name me any treaty signed between Arabs and "infidels" which the Arabs followed long term and in good faith.


I know Egypt has a treaty with Israel, but constantly says the most outrageous things through the govt. controlled press, and at the very least turns a blind eye to weapons smuggling into Gaza.


We all know how well Saddam obeyed the conditions of the truce that ended GW1.


Just wondering....

174 hobgoblin  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:48:20pm

the IDF killed children like this?

[Link: news.yahoo.com...]

(warning graphic)

Good for them.

175 hobgoblin  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:49:33pm

Sounds like VFI with a bug in her ass

176 zulubaby  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:50:24pm
177 happy as a lark  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:50:40pm

Youre right Zulu..Ignore is the best way. '

but isnt that the problem that it is so easy for you to ignore the pain and horror of what your enemies go thru.

why the denial .. ?

as for the main issue in the original post

al qaeda and saddam .. who are we kidding here saddam was a secualr dictator he hated islamists such as bin laden.

why do you think there are mass graves in iraq?

bin laden offered to the saudis and the americans his help to depose saddam in 1991. his offer was declined by the saudis .

to make the link to bin laden and saddam is about as convincing as those that claim that mossad was behind the wtc attacks.

less propaganda of hate .. and more facts and understanding of the whole picture.

178 centaur  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:52:05pm

#160,

How profound.

/

179 Leah  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:52:13pm

Changed my mind....

IF so called Palistinian PARENTS didnt COOPERATE in making their CHILDREN living BOMBS there wouldnt BE any no. of so called Palistinian CHILDREN dead.
The VALUES of the generic Arabs that call themselves Palistinians are accurately mirrored in what THEY THINK is NOBLE. DECENT human beings dont do what they are doing.

There isnt a Palistinian Country NOW and never has been. There is no proof of a separate and distinct PALISTINIAN people, state, language, history (going back before 1958 or so).

Why dont you ask JORDANIANS how they care for their Palistinian bretheren? Why dont you ask SYRIANS and Leb. how THEY view the so called Palistinians? Why dont you ask EGYPTIANS if they think that the Pals are indeed authentic OLD CITIZENS of the area or just johnny come lately PAWNS to be used to get the STATE and COUNTRY of ISRAEL into their hands.

I LIKE my WORLD VIEW. It is of all peoples being FREE..really free, not just a constructed PC version of Freedom and Liberty...to sell to the Western World.

F. you and the happy little horse you trotted in on.

180 Nico Belakhof (Lebanon)  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:53:26pm

#133 Colt - Abu Shabab
#127 Malik al-Malook

Lebanon signed the 1948 armistice with Israel and did not participate in the three subsequent Arab-Israeli wars (Also, my understanding is that Lebanon never actually fought in the 1948 war either.)

The Lebanese government signed two military cooperation treaties with Israel in the 1980s while fighting against the PLO and Syrian invasion. With the collapse of the Lebanese government authority in Southern Lebanon, civilians formed the South Lebanon Army in cooperation with Israel to counter the PLO and Hizb Allah in Southern Lebanon.

Lebanon has been under occupation (partially since 1973 and totally since 1990) by the PLO and now Syria; the Syrian-puppet Lebanese government is currently officially anti-Israeli, but the question is: would Lebanon be pro- or anti-Israel if it were not under -- or under the threat of -- occupation by its Arab neighbors?

My answer is: I suspect that Lebanon would have normalized relations long ago, given: the mostly liberal, pro-Western traditions and institutions, the record of military cooperation cited above (several thousand Lebanese exiles remain in Israel), and the equal status of Jews in Lebanon.

Also, note that Turkey is not Arab or an Arab League member.

181 Happy as 2 larks  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:53:33pm

1. I'm not a victim, and I don't feel like one either.

2. I'm not happy about the fact that innocent Palestinians die, but how distraught am I meant to be when their own leadership are telling them to go out and 'martyr' themselves?

3. The bigger picture is precisely what I'm interested in.

4. Israel is accountable for its actions, primarily to its own people. Israel cannot be held accountable by the Arab nations who have sought to destroy it for over 50 years.

182 Ed Moran:Abu De Donde Alan Es?  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:55:39pm

Hey

Gay as a Lark-


How many Pali children were intentionally killed by the IDF?


How many Israeli children were intentionally killed by the Islamobots?

Since the Palestinians were offered 95% of the "Occupied Territories" and much of Jerusalem back at Camp David, and rejected it without a counter-offer, do you really think the Arabs would be happy and leave Israel alone if they gave back all the "Occupied Territories"?

(Hint, were the Arabs all peaceful and loving with Israel before 1967, when the West Bank was Jordanian and Gaza was Egyptian?)

183 hobgoblin  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:55:59pm

birdbrain

you didn't answer me.

Children like this?

[Link: news.yahoo.com...]

FOAD, tool.

184 centaur  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:59:39pm

Hitler was a Nazi, he hated communists. So, too, did FDR, and Churchhill, for that matter. None of them would ever, ever, ever cozy up to Stalin... inconceivable.

185 Ben F  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 1:59:56pm

I heard today on C-SPAN Radio part of a speech titled The Global War on Terrorism that Under Secretary Feith gave a few days ago at the Council for Foreign Relations. I can't find a video or audio link but transcripts are available at DoD (miserably formatted) and CFR. After listening to the speech, the moderator asked the first question, which was whether Iraq was an intelligent target at this early stage of the war on terror. Feith's answer (the copy below is from the DoD website with a few paragraph breaks added by me but no other editing) is very direct and powerful, especially in light of these new intelligence revelations:

As I at least touched on in the remarks, when we looked at the 9/11 attack, and we saw that the terrorists were able to kill 3,000 people, one of the first thoughts that struck us was these are people who are willing, the terrorists, to kill as many people as they possibly can. And if they had access to biological weapons or nuclear weapons they would have been happy to kill 10 times, 100 times, 1,000 times the number of people that they killed in New York and Washington and Pennsylvania on September 11th. And so we were focused, as I said on this connection among the terrorist groups, their state sponsors and weapons of mass destruction.

And that is I think a proper strategic focus in the global war on terrorism. It is the principal and the largest danger that we face. And in fighting terrorist organizations one of the most effective approaches is denying them bases of operation and denying them their state support. And we did that in Afghanistan, and we did that with one of the regimes in the world that was a prominent supporter of terrorist organizations and aspired to chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. And there is no question they had those programs.

The debate right now is over did they actually have stockpiles as opposed to programs for chemical and biological weapons?

When it comes to chemical and biological weapons, if you have the program you have the knowledge, you have the production capability. One can produce militarily significant quantities in very short order. Furthermore, the Saddam Hussein regime had actually used chemical weapons. And so the danger that this regime, which advocated terrorism, supported it, rewarded it, had links with terrorist organizations and had these capabilities, that this regime might, if left alone, get to the point where it would be providing weapons of mass destruction to terrorist organization was a serious risk and went to what I said was the strategic heart of the problem.

And so I think it was - that was the reason that it fitted in, that was I think the motive for taking this action and I think that it was justified. Now, it happens to be, as I explained in my remarks, there are a number of other aspects to the problem, including the fact that the Saddam Hussein regime was one of the worst scofflaw regimes in violating U.N. Security Council resolutions, and a tyranny and a threat to its neighbors, and all those other points I made, which are important. But specifically with regard to your question, I don't think there is any question that if one had one's eye on the ball the key strategic issue in the global war on terrorism, this connection that I discussed, that Iraq lived right at that connection.

Clear, concise, and to the point, IMO. If you show these paragraphs to reasonably sentient persons without identifying the source, I think that most would concede the logic.

186 ralph  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:03:17pm

#177 happy as a lark

al qaeda and saddam .. who are we kidding here saddam was a secualr dictator he hated islamists such as bin laden.

Socialists are infidels wherever they are," the statement said. But it added: "It does not hurt that in current circumstances, the interests of Muslims coincide with the interests of the socialists in the war against crusaders."
[Link: www.commondreams.org...]

187 Leah  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:03:31pm

I'm sorry to have to say this..to have come to this conclusion BUT...The desire to use your own CHILDREN for PR Purposes and to equip them to be HUMAN BOMBS..is reflective of a groups VALUES. This isn't like the last of a people having to let their older children fight in a war, which is bad enough to HAVE to do..this is something so ugly ...it leaves DECENT HUMAN BEINGS speechless.

This is an extension of the "Refugee Camp" situation that the entire ARAB world set up..Again they have let their citizens suffer and die and be twisted for crass PR purposes. Who ARE these people that would think all this is justifiable? And what ELSE will they DO if we dont stop them now.

188 Ed Moran:Abu De Donde Alan Es?  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:03:43pm

180- Of course Lebanon didn't join in, until the civil war and subsequent Syrian invasion, Lebanon had a power sharing government, with Christians having as much power as the Muslims.

I'm sure the Cherokee Nation would have arguments about this re Andrew Jackson, but at least some Christians actually take treaties and agreements seriously.


Off to the in-laws for BBQ.


Peace.

189 Bleeding heart conservative  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:03:58pm

Crappy as a Clark,

Israelis kill trying to defend their existence, freedom and lives.

Palestinians kill for because of humiliation. That's why Arafat declined the Barak peace offer: loss of face. They can't handle being bested in any way by Jews, whther it's on a military, scientific, or moral battleground.

Or maybe it was to continue the $100,000 a month he sends his wife in Paris.

190 Glen Wishard  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:07:29pm

Joshua:

One big problem that the US may be facing now is that they underestimated Al-Qaeda and Int'l terror groups connections to Saddam, and are paying for it now. If anyone planned this insurgency, it was Bin Laden's crew.

I must disagree. I don't think Al-Qaeda has the expertise, especially after the serious pruning we've given them. I think the insurgents are led by professional soldiers, i.e., some of the more competent of Saddam's officers, and I think it will come out that they have some assistance from European and former East Bloc "Ronin."

And BTW - CENSURE, RECALL, IMPEACH, EXPEL AND HANG THE COPPERHEADS!

191 happy as a lark  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:07:51pm

'Israel is accountable for its actions, primarily to its own people. Israel cannot be held accountable by the Arab nations who have sought to destroy it for over 50 years. '

of course israel is accountable for the palestinians .. it has sought to ethnically cleanse these people out of existence .. israel has denied the people their homes and their homeland.

yet israel defends its right to commit any form of brutality in the name of its freedom.

why the hypocrisy ?
why deny those that have been divested of their dignity the right to fight for their freedoms?

after all that is how israel justifies its atrocities against innocent palestinians.

192 reaganite  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:11:28pm

#184 centaur
Nope, never happen! :-Þ

193 Moshe  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:15:25pm

#173 - Ed Moran - Can anybody name me any treaty signed between Arabs and "infidels" which the Arabs followed long term and in good faith.

Ed - do you actually think that Ya'alon and the four Shin Bet chiefs have not considered whether the Arabs would honor a peace treaty when they insist Israel must sign one ASAP for its own survival ?

This second guessing of the IDF Commander and the Four previous Shin Bet chiefs is getting kind of silly. They know more than all of us put together 10x over.

194 rumcrook  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:16:01pm

the right to fight for thier freedom?

so you support palistinians who blow up babies or shoot babies in thier cribs as a tool to fight for "freedom"

I wont even begain with the crap about isreali terror. its a bunch of propaganda crap, not to mention the obvious lack of a soul your displaying by infering palistinian terrorism is freedom fighting but israeli defense of thier very existence is terror.

FOAD

195 happy as a lark  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:16:06pm

'Socialists are infidels wherever they are," the statement said. But it added: "It does not hurt that in current circumstances, the interests of Muslims coincide with the interests of the socialists in the war against crusaders."'

and this is supposed to be evidence ?

'I'm sorry to have to say this..to have come to this conclusion BUT...The desire to use your own CHILDREN for PR Purposes and to equip them to be HUMAN BOMBS..is reflective of a groups VALUES. This isn't like the last of a people having to let their older children fight in a war, which is bad enough to HAVE to do..this is something so ugly ...it leaves DECENT HUMAN BEINGS speechless'

what drives the children to commit these acts? what is it that israel is doing to create such a resistance? how little hope do these individuals have that they see the only solution to be the sacrifice of their lives ..?

you talk about values of palestinians .. but what about the values of the israeli govt. that brings about this last desperate attempt for dignity in their lives?

why deny them their homeland..why the genocide?

the collective punishment of palestinian people has resulted in 60% near to starvation. the economic deprivation because of israeli occupation means that 60% live on less than $2 a day.

where in the talmud/torah does it teach this abuse of human life?

196 Joshua  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:16:44pm

Happy as a lark-

Any honest examination of Islam reveals that it is possessed of a janus faced ethic, and doesn't even contain the ideal of a universal ethic, like the ethics western societies have developed. It seeks not to treat all people the same, but rather to treat one group (muslims) one way, a second group (dhimmi) another way, and yet a third group (all others), differently as well. This underlying ethical problem prevents the growth of true capitalism or democracy, and only groups that have adapted Islam to match individual human experience (like the Sufis of Turkey), have been freed of the quagmire of Islamic society. You can only have peace with a people interested in peace, and anyone who believes that peace is greater than justice deserved neither. The truth is, Israel was granted land, not a state. Statehood is earned, not granted, and Israel has earned statehood through scientific and artistic creation, democratic development, military advances, and more. No Islamic state has attained the level of true nationhood Israel has. Why? Because their underlying ethical system is flawed. Even oppressed groups can earn statehood, even with what little autonomy they have, the palestianians can claim statehood through proper, peaceful struggle, through education, through true self-governance. Look at India, it earned statehood, statehood was not granted. And even if we argue that Israel oppresses palestinians, though I think the oppression is justified by the palestinian adherence to Islamist ways, it does not excuse the palestinian inability to act within proper rules of state or national conduct, any more than Indian terrorism would have been justified by British oppression, which was far worse than anything the Israelis have done. Finally, the palestinian's own alliance with Hitler partially caused their problems with the west, and they have done little to distance themselves from fascist, communist, or islamist philosophy. Until the palestinians distance themselves from international terrorism, like the muslim brotherhood (related to Hamas)/ Hezbollah/Iranian/Syrian/Al Qaeda nexus, until they adopt a universal ethic, recognize Israel's right to exist, and create their own state through scientific, governmental, philosophical, and artistic advancements, they will never have the right to have their interests considered equal to that of the Israelis or the rest of the truly modern, civilized world. That is the way it is, accept it.

197 Terrance  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:18:41pm

Er... how do we know this is real and not something made up by some guy sitting in his underwear making up conspiracy theories in his bedroom?

198 ralph  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:19:38pm

#195 happy as a fart

and this is supposed to be evidence ?

Now its : BIN LADEN LIED!

199 addison  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:20:09pm
...it [Israel] has sought to ethnically cleanse these people ["Palestinians"] out of existence ..


They sure are doing a poor job of it considering their military capability. Given that they could defeat and utterly cleanse the Middle East of life in a matter of days, one finds this charge a bit strange and lacking in logic.

There is a button that makes the readability of your writing easier for others--it's called the SHIFT key. Try using it in conjunction with other keys; makes a world of difference.

200 reaganite  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:21:14pm

#197 Terrance

Er... how do we know this is real and not something made up by some guy sitting in his underwear making up conspiracy theories in his bedroom?

How do we know you're not sitting in your underwear trying to debunk conspiricy theories?

201 scaramouche  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:21:52pm

happy as a lark--You don't seem particularly happy to me. It could be because your grasp of history is so shaky that some very moldy and discredited notions have been rattling around in your brain for long. It's unfortunate that you believe Israel alone is responsible for the Palestinians dire predicament; that you are prepared to discount the stellar role the UN has played in erecting an entire bureaucracy to sustain the misery; that you refuse to see how the Arab world, which has alternately shunned the Palestinians or murdered them by the thousands is complicit in maintaining them in their wretched state; that you are unable to accept that Yasser Arafat, arguably the most hapless and hopeless leader in history has been the principal architect of his peoples' misfortune; how the Palestinian culture of death and hate has corroded the brains of an entire generation of young people. I could go on and on and on and on. But I won't, because it is clear that your mind was closed some time ago and the cobwebs have taken over. It must be comforting to see things so clearly; it is tragic to be so blind.

202 ralph  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:22:17pm

#195 happy as a fart

what drives the children to commit these acts?

"The Islamic nation today is in urgent need [of reviving] the spirit of Jihad in its sons, [by using] all types of Jihad and to concentrate all its resources on strengthening Allah's religion and to force His enemies [to surrender]."

[Link: www.memri.org...]

203 reaganite  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:22:38pm

I can spell, when I use spell check *sigh*

204 Happy as 2 larks  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:26:22pm

Do you seriously think that Israel has tried to 'ethnically cleanse' the Palestinians? I suspect you're being disingenuous when you say that, but the obvious answer is that if Israel was intent on 'ethnically cleansing' the Palestinians, there would be no Palestinians left alive the region at all. They would all be dead. That should be fairly easy to understand.

The deliberate failure of Arafat and the PA to reach a settlement with their Israeli neighbours is the sole reason for the Palastinians not having a fully-fledged state at this moment.

As for denying the right of Palestinians to fight for their freedom - which freedom do you mean exactly? The freedom to declare a sovereign state, like they failed to do in 1948? Or the freedom to annihilate the state of Israel, and everyone in it?

205 Norwegian kafir  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:28:04pm

I bet this one will never show up on the BBC.


[Link: www.faithfreedom.org...] Islam is the Matrix. We hand out red pills.

Support a global movement of ex-muslims, bringing Islam down from within.

206 Glen Wishard  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:29:11pm

happy as a lark and dumber than a box of rocks:

do you care that in the last 2 years 1000 children have been murderd by the idf? do you care that 3 palestinians are killed each and every day?

Do your mother and father care that you're obviously flunking Math and History as well as English? It's almost like they want the Child Welfare people to take you away from them, isn't it?

207 Ben F  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:29:44pm

#151 Colt - Abu Shabab

Under Secretary Feith did not specifically mention pre-GWII Iraq-al Qaeda links in his CFR speech, though he does state that "al-Qaeda and its allies" are among the four groups that Coalition forces are battling in Iraq now. However, he did refer more broadly to Iraq-terror links. The connection is made quite clearly in the response that I quote in #185 to the moderator's question, but this passage from what was presumably the prepared text (again I have added paragraph breaks to the DoD text) is also squarely on point:

As President Bush noted early on, the war's greatest strategic danger remains the possibility that terrorists will obtain chemical, biological or nuclear weapons. The list of states that sponsor terrorism correlates obviously and ominously with the list of those that have programs to produce such weapons of mass destruction.

The nexus of terrorist groups, state sponsors of terrorism and WMD is the security nightmare of the 21st century. It remains our focus. We are treating this threat as a compelling danger in the near term. We are not waiting for it to become imminent, for we cannot expect to receive unambiguous warning of, for example, a terrorist group's acquisition of biological weapons agents.

We know the list of terrorist-sponsoring states with WMD programs - Iran, Syria, Libya and North Korea. Iraq used to be in that category but no longer is. Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, was a sadistic tyranny that developed and used weapons of mass destruction, launched aggressive attacks and wars against Iran, Kuwait, Israel and Saudi Arabia, and supported terrorists by providing them with safe harbor, funds, training and other help. It had defied a long list of legally binding U.N. Security Council resolutions. It undid the U.N. inspection regime of the 1990s. It eviscerated the economic sanctions regime and it shot virtually daily at the U.S. and British aircraft patrolling Iraq's northern and southern no-fly zones.

In sum, containment of Saddam Hussein's Iraq was a hollow hope. The best information available from intelligence sources said that, one, Saddam Hussein had chemical and biological weapons and was pursuing nuclear weapons; and, two, if Saddam Hussein obtained fissile material from outside Iraq as opposed to producing it indigenously, he could have had a nuclear weapons within a year. Those assessments, and most of the underlying information, were not recent products of the intelligence community. They were consistent with the intelligence that predated the administration of George W. Bush, and they were consistent with the intelligence from cooperative foreign services and with the United Nations' estimates of weapons unaccounted for.

It was reasonable - indeed necessary - for the U.S. government to rely on the best information it had available. And while we haven't yet found, and may not find, stockpiles of chemical or biological weapons in Iraq, David Kay reports that the Iraq survey group has obtained corroborative evidence of Saddam's nuclear, chemical and biological programs, covert laboratories, advanced missile programs, and Iraq's program active right up to the start of the war to conceal WMD-related developments from the U.N. inspectors. The Iraqi dictator posed a serious threat. Given the nature of that threat, seen in light of our experience with the 9-11 surprise attack, and the crumbling one after another of the pillars of containment, it would have been risky in the extreme to have allowed him to remain in power for the indefinite future.

Intelligence is never perfect, but that's not grounds for inaction in the face of the kind of information the President had about Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Saddam's demise has freed Iraqis of a tyrant, deprived terrorists of a financier and supporter, eliminated a threat to regional stability, taken Iraq off the list of rogue states with WMD programs, and created a new opportunity for free political institutions to arise in the Arab world. All of this serves our cause in the global war on terrorism.

Note the first sentence in the third paragraph I quote above. Is Feith describing an updated Axis of Evil™? Or are the two newbies on Feith's list just candidate members, still trying to make the final cut?

208 Malik al-Malook  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:30:07pm

happy as a lark: The IDF is responsible for some civilian casualties. It's inevitable when fighting defensive battles in civilian areas. Whereas the enemy takes the battle to the lives of innocent civilians there will in fact be future unnecessary losses of life.

But where responsibility is shared is with those that plan, perpetrate and recruit to the cause of human sacrifice for the sake of taking civilian life that does not wish or attempt to take that of yours. Palestinian loss of life does in fact have a group that wears the badge of responsibility and it is that of the Palestinian leadership and supporters that lead the populace to their own death and destruction.

209 happy as a lark  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:31:45pm

'Israelis kill trying to defend their existence, freedom and lives. '

how many nuclear weapons does israel need?
how many bioterror weapons and chem weapons does it need?

how many laser guided missiles and apache helicopters?

how much does the usa need to spend on behalf of israels insatiable thirst for military hardware?

and you are threatened by stone throwing children .. and palestinians who strap bombs to themselves. how else do you think a balance of terror is achieved?

#196 Joshua

it is an interesting but flawed piece of writing. it is self serving.

it is interesting though i suspect that should judaism be described in the same terms (and islam and juadism could easily be interchanged in your piece) you would call it anti semitism.

what do you know of islam?

do you read understand arabic , do you understand the terms of the koran , what are your sources of material?

you have an agenda and it shows. a little more balance and maybe you could draw some meaningful conclusions.

i suspect that hitler managed some anti jewish propaganda and then claimed that his beliefs were some how more civilised and progressive.

also as an aside what makes you believe that democracy is any sign of decency?

democracy is easily abused and can be as brutal as any dictatorship .. to not recognise this is a big mistake.

210 addison  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:36:58pm

The fatuity of the "Group X (with nuclear weapons, airplanes, tanks, etc.) is trying to ethnically cleans Group Y (who have little in the way of military might)" also rears its ugly head when people talk about a clash of civilizations between the West and the Islamic world. They may be clashing against us, but the converse is not true, for were it, they would all be dead. This is not hyperbole nor is it a dream of mine, it is merely an obvious point.

Does anyone truly believe that the US, with more military might than most of the rest of the world combined, is trying to "kill all the Muslims"? If so, why are we so slow at it? The very fact that we develop precession weapons puts a lie to the idea we want "everyone" killed. Were that true, we would use Dresden-style bombing and level entire cities when seeking the destruction of one man.

Were Israel attempting to kill "all the 'Palestinians'", they could have done that in, oh, 1967. Someone far wittier than myself wrote "The Palestinians would kill all the Israelis but they cannot; the Israelis can kill all the Palestinians but they won't." This should be obvious.

211 andrew  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:37:53pm

Yeah - brutal democracy, oppressive representative government.

212 Glen Wishard  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:37:59pm

Oh, boy, here we go:

what do you know of islam?

do you read understand arabic , do you understand the terms of the koran , what are your sources of material?

Another Crack Baby for Allah.

213 addison  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:38:56pm
you have an agenda and it shows. a little more balance and maybe you could draw some meaningful conclusions.


Words you should live by but obviously do not.

214 ralph  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:38:56pm

#209 happy as a fart

democracy is easily abused and can be as brutal as any dictatorship .. to not recognise this is a big mistake.

What was the last dictatorship you live under douche bag?

215 Darleen  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:40:28pm

#195 larky-baby

You're really too easy

what drives the children to commit these acts?

Their parents. It's call criminal abuse and the children in a civilized society would be removed by groups dedicated to child welfare.

what is it that israel is doing to create such a resistance?

Israel's fault lies in merely existing. Truly such a question is patently indecent. It falls within the same category as the wife-beater who points at his victim and says, "She talked back to me! It's her fault I beat her!"

I'm sick to death of the 'blame the victim' mentality. It didn't absolve Hitler of his evil based on his reasoning that all of Germany's problems were the fault of the Jews...so it doesn't absolve Arafat, Hamas, PLO, et al either.

216 hobgoblin  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:41:29pm

Once more "dumber than a stump"

"what do you know of Islam"

how about this?

[Link: news.yahoo.com...]

217 happy as a lark  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:42:58pm

#201 no i dont discount other factors but to deny israeli terrorism that led to israels inception is disingenuous.

to deny that such terrorism iwhich now manifests itself as state terrorism is also incredible.

israel has a role to play but despite its overwhelming power -worlds 4th largest military- it fails to grasp the humanity and humility to do so.

israel has attempted to ethnically cleanse paletinians first from their land then from the history books. it is an open secret that ariel sharon has sought to establish a greater israel .. the demolishing of homes that disallows the return of palestinians is there for all to see. the building of fences that run roughshod over land rights is well documented.

arafat could not agree to the flawed deal offered by barak. it would have meant a series of city 'states' all divided by the roads that would have remained under israeli control... the terms of the deal offered less that 80% of the occupied terrotories .. i could go on but i think it should be recognised that there needs to be a deal made with dignity not one based upon humiliating the palestinians ..

218 Sandy P.  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:43:12pm

--what drives the children to commit these acts? what is it that israel is doing to create such a resistance? how little hope do these individuals have that they see the only solution to be the sacrifice of their lives ..?

Their parents, Imans, Koran and culture.

Israel exists, that's what's driving the palis to splodydope. If the Pali issue went away, who else are the govs of the ME going to blame because they're backwards? It's everyone's fault except their own. Why is the grass greener in Israel and the Palis go to work there? Why aren't there enough jobs on the Palis' side? Especially since the PA's worth an estimated $50 billion and Arafish is worth an estimated $800 million? Why hasn't this been put back into the community to improve and invest in the community to make their lives better? Why is "the world" paying for them when they're hoarding their money to buy bombs?

What drives 1 y.o. babies to dress up as suicide bombers and pose w/AK-47s?

Oh, wait, they're too young to know better. Must be their parents?????

Friday sermons for decades if not centuries???

219 addison  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:43:25pm
what is it that israel is doing to create such a resistance?


They are:
1. Jews
2. Alive

220 Leah  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:43:29pm

There IS no attempt to ETHNICALLY CLEANSE the so called Palestinians. Generic Arab people live in various and numerous ARAB COUNTRIES--the world cannot be so called "cleansed" of generic Arab peoples..And Israel is NOT cleansing anyone..just fighting for its existence.

While you've been repeating PR created phrases like "indigenous peoples" and "ethnically cleansing"...JEWS have been busy ADDING to the WORLDS base of knowledge..while fighting to RE-POPULATE their ORIGINAL HOMELAND..That Israel is the Jewish Homeland is PROVABLE in the "ground" and in the "genes". Unlike the Pals..we ARE who we say we are..and lived when and where we say we did ..and have proved it. Sorry to have HAD TO resort to Genetic Testing..but the Pals were about to mount a billion dollar "campaign" that Jews today AREN'T the same people as "biblical Jews" and therefore have no right to Israel...

Unlike the newcomers to the area with a newly made up name, IE Palistinians..Jews ARE the original inhabitants of this are and after being really "ETHNICALLY CLEANSED" from Europe limped BACK to their original homeland, Israel. While fighting Arab Countries that wanted to "finish Hitlers job" they have attempted OVER AND OVER again to make peace with their so called "cousins"..In the midst of never ending WAR BY their "neighbors" Israel and Jews ..this tiny remnant of a people have attempted to add to the GOOD of all of the world. The list of accomplishments ( I...dont know how they do it myself) is astonishing.

And what do we have on the OTHER side? 26 or so MOSLEM countries that ,instead of figuring out how to WHIPE OUT Israel, could at least attempt in some way to bring something of value to the world. Whats Islam doing today? Attacking anyone and EVERYONE that isn't THEM. The only thing these greedy people with 26 Countries already in their hands should do..is hang their head in SHAME. They have a BILLION people..and they have done WHAT? to distinguish themselves lately...BUPKAS (to all of you that dont know yiddish..Bupkas means NOTHING..with a capital N)

CASE...F**N ...CLOSED!!!!!!

221 Happy as a secret Zionist cabal of larks  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:44:34pm

"also as an aside what makes you believe that democracy is any sign of decency?"

Got any better ideas? Anarcho-syndicalism? Green anarchism? Sharia'h law maybe?

222 Darleen  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:44:57pm

#217 larky-poo

Do you mainline that revisionist propaganda or just absorb it through a high colonic?

223 Joshua  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:49:07pm

happy as a lark-
My brother is a Muslim, and reads arabic and turkish, I am a Christian minister, and I have spent the last 2 years in close contact with Imams and many underground Islamic groups. For 6 months I visited mosques as a muslim "undercover" to investigate for my book. I know what goes on behind close doors. Of all the Muslims groups I investigated the only one that really presented anything other than a schizophrenic vision of the world was gulenist sufis. Thats the truth, plain and simple. Whats more, more Muslims have died at the hands of other Muslims than by any other group, it is intellectually dishonest to blame those deaths on anything other than the misuse of free will and a skewed vision of right and wrong. I hold people fully responsible for their actions, knowing we live in a fallen world where sometimes there are no right decisions, just less wrong ones. Finally, democracy may sometimes be tyrranical, but it is far less so than most autocratic governments, the chances of an "evil" democracy are far less than a democratic one. This is proven again and again. It is again intellectually dishonest to suggest otherwise, history strongly disputes you. Thus in the world of less wrong choices, democracy is the best we have. All interpretations of gods will are partially wrong and partially correct, and those that are more right have a responsibility to spread their limited but more correct vision of what the world should be. It has always been that way, and always will be. I see societies and cultures as biological organisms: they are born, they compete, they change, evolve, spawn new movements, and die. Islam and the West are competing in the competitive market of culture, one will live and grow, the other will die, slowly and painfully. I believe that it is Gods will that we prevail, but I know that in this world of limited choices, we will have to bring about great pain, and absorb great pain, to see it through.

224 hobgoblin  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:52:25pm

Oh, no...

NOT

HUMILIATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


AACCCKKKKKggghhghgh!


God forbit we HUMILIATE people who can't get beyond the technological threshhold of throwing rocks at tanks, or the social threshhold of women's rights!

Egad, we're evil, wicked, nasty and cruel!

Those poor, poor Jordyptians. They can't help it they're so ass-backwards. We should never remind them how backwards they are.

Thank you, Ms. Feel Goody


Is it nap time yet?

FOAD, tool.

225 Joshua  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:53:31pm

Happy as a lark:
BTW-
The fathers of baathism, islamism, and pan-arabism created their anti-Jewish, anti-western ideologies long before the creation of Israel.

226 happy as a lark  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:54:03pm

#208 once again there is no room for israeli accountability it is as always about blaming everyone else.

#210 the clash of civilisations is a flawed argument huntingdon was merely providing a justification for much of the thinking behind the neo cons/pnac new world order.

as you will know there are many ways to ethnically cleanse just because it is not in ya face rounding up as with the holocaust it does not mean it is not happening.

is the usa on an anti islamic drive .. no not as a primary objective .. it is acting to secure the worlds resources (see peak oil etc) but it is no secret that the bush cabal are inextricably linked to israel and israeli politics. wolfowitz/perle and cheney not to mention kritol bolton et al are no shrinking violets in this respect. the off shoot of the policy is one that targets muslims as the replacement for the soviets and the cold war.

#215. i think arqfat is more justified and has a good case to blame israel. i dont think that can be denied by any sensible person. but it is as you suggest not just israel.

227 ralph  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:55:31pm

#223 joshua

Of all the Muslims groups I investigated the only one that really presented anything other than a schizophrenic vision of the world was gulenist sufis.

You spotted the mysterious moderate muslim.

228 scaramouche  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:55:32pm

happy as a lark--The only "fawless" deal the Palestinians would have settled for is if the Israelis had agreed to march en masse into the sea.

229 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:55:59pm

Terrence -

I'm not even in my underwear, so there!!!

230 happy and sad  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:57:43pm

This is the best, and most depressing, article I've read in the last 2+ years.

Hope it has an effect.

Thanks Stephen and Charles.

231 scaramouche  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:57:46pm

"Flawless"

232 ralph  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:58:13pm

#226 happy as a fart

#210 the clash of civilisations is a flawed argument huntingdon was merely providing a justification for much of the thinking behind the neo cons/pnac new world order.

I hope you are the first infidel that the ax falls on.

233 Athos  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:59:45pm

Loony as a lark -

Delusional, paranoid trolls should try to stay away from computers - it allows them to hide their stupidity instead of trying to "debate" by tossing out the same old talking points that were failures 30 years ago, 20 years ago, 10 years ago, and 5 minutes ago.

What's next - the whine about Arab shame and humiliation? The pointed attacks on the US for it's support of an Israeli nation or a people that have more claim to the land than the "Palestinians"?

Where are your tears for the Jews that were butchered and evicted from their homes of thousands of years in 1948 across the "Arab" lands? In numbers that exceeded two-fold the numbers of those who left Israel to make room for the "conqueroring" Arab "armies".

You see nothing wrong in the subversion of a people by communists, opportunists, and basic gutter waste who siphon $900+ Million from humanitarian aid, who encourage their youth to strap 20kg of explosives encased in nails and bolts soaked in rat poison to walk into restaurants, bars, and buses to attack innocent civilians?!

You hide behind the so-called Religion of Peace and toss contempt at people saying that they can't understand it because they don't speak Arabic....

Well, plenty of analysis is available about the ROP in other languages - particularly interesting are the ones written by Muslims who are fed up with the abuses of Islam. Or how about those who study history, and the history of the region - the butchery and buggery that the leading practioners of Islam are so infamous for? For 1400+ years, the ROP has seeked to murder, rape, and enslave it's way to domination. Where is current history is the continuation of this not happening?

Why are you so frightened by democracy? The concept of FREEDOM? The concept of CHOICE?

You are pitiful. You are an elitest. You are the one who sees only what they believe.

234 Malik al-Malook  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 2:59:58pm

#217 happy as a lark

Is Israel fighting a war inside Jordan? This is fact a nation that isi 76% Palestinian Arab. Please point me to the death camps in Jordan paid for, manned and sponsored by Israel.

thanks.txt

235 Leah  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:06:28pm

H..G-d Forbid it right..We are at once dealing with a large group with self esteem "issues" and at the SAME time an exaggerated self of themselves. What a mess.

They are behind EVERYONE in the world. I wonder what it feels like to watch one country and culture after the other surpass the MIGHTY ISLAMIC World? (especially those Jooossss)

How do they fix this? Get down to WORK and SCHOOL like everyone ELSE?...naaaahhhh...Kill Jews is how THEY think they can whipe away the HUMILIATION of it all... Clear thinking right?

236 rumcrook  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:07:33pm

wow some great responses, lark you have been toasted.

all aspects of your propaganda have been destroyed.

your tripe has been answered with fact.

and by the way you never answered the question, does your heart dance when you here that another jewish oppressor has been shot in his crib?

237 Iron Fist  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:10:38pm

#64 addison,

I think that, ultimately the Democrats will fracture into two, or, possibly, three parties. One of those parties already exists. If the Democrats would stop pandering to the moonbat left, the Green party would snap them up in a heartbeat. Thus, if the more mainstream Democrats (i.e. Lieberman, Miller, Breaux, etc.) were to reassert control of their party, the hard left calves off (much like an iceberg calving off of a glacier), and the Democratic Party moves towards the mainstream on many issues.

For example, gun control is a loser for a majority of Americans. Don’t look at polls. Most polls are bullshit, anyway. Look at votes. Democrat Phil Bredesen ran to the right of Republican Van Hillary in last year's Gubernatorial race in my state, and he won. I actually know someone fairly close to Bredesen (dude and wife were invited to a political dinner with less than twenty attendees. And it wasn’t a fundraiser. That’s pretty close :-), and he assures me Bredesen means what he says. Certainly, Bredesen has been a better Governor than his Republican predecessor.

But until the Donks drop gun control as a major plank in their platform, I won’t be voting Democrat.

The other major fracture in US politics is abortion.

I, myself, am among those Americans who believe that the Federal Government has no right to regulate abortion, but who finds the right to, essentially, cut off the kid's head as it is being born to be rather wrong.

That puts me in the camp of none other than Daniel Patrick Moynihan. An Ultra-Liberal.

I know this is a subject that Charles would prefer us not to discuss, but it is, unfortunately, necessary if I am to adequately answer your question.

There can be reasonable restrictions on nearly any right (even the right not to incriminate oneself goes away if one has been given immunity from prosecution , although right to counsel before one answered any given question still applies). Mr. Pol and I went round and round on that re. the Second Amendment. I drew the line at a .50 cal BMG (a hell of a weapon), a limit I, and most other Americans, consider reasonable.

Partial-birth abortion is another limit that most Americans consider reasonable.

A Democratic Party that fell under those brackets would be viable (hard-Left will kill the Donks. If they keep on their current path, they are, as Zell Miller warned, dead as a national party), but probably not make them a majority party.

That is why I say there’s a potential for three parties. One ultra-Left, one mainstream (what Howie Dean calls Republican-lite . Basically people like Zell Miller, John Breaux, and Phil Bredesen), and one in between. That would, essentially be the party of the Trial Lawyers, Unions (although I suspect that the private sector unions will split between the mainstream party ad this center-Left party, while the public sector unions will fall solidly in the latter camp), and the NAACP. That third party could elect a handful of senators, but in a Senate that requires a Super-Majority to get a judge appoineted, four Senators could be crucial.

OTOH, it could be insignificant. If you had fifty Bill Frists, twenty Zell Millers and twenty-five Ted Kennedys, five Robert Byrds don't do you a whole lot of good.

Just my hypothesis. Take it for what it is worth (two whole cents :-)

238 Malik al-Malook  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:11:36pm
is the usa on an anti islamic drive .. no not as a primary objective .. it is acting to secure the worlds resources


Russian President Putin just arrested Mikhail Khodorkovsky head of the largest energy resources company in Russia. Is Russia and Putin a member of the Bush Cabal?

Let me offer you a list of the top 10 oil producing states and you then can explain how Bush & Co are seeking to control them.

1. United States
2. Saudi Arabia
3. Russia
4. Mexico
5. Iran
6. China
7. Norway
8. Canada
9. Venezuela
10. United Kingdom

239 Leah  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:13:03pm

LARL: And while we are at it..Arabic isnt ROCKET SCIENCE. Normal everyday people CAN learn to read and translate this one language..AND they can understand the nuances of the language..so drop the business of Westerners NOT UNDERSTANDING Arabic enough to know damn well what you are saying NOW and what you said and meant in the Koran.

240 happy as a lark  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:15:57pm

#218 do you really believe that it is solely those reason for their actions. that there is no provocation from other sources. that it is not a reaction to other factors too?

'Especially since the PA's worth an estimated $50 billion and Arafish is worth an estimated $800 million?'

there is no real evidence of corruption and lets be honest here cheney rumsfeld arent doing too badly out of their interests just as sharon and bush also take their cut. arafat is not unique .. he is if the allegations could be proven just following the masters of the game.

'What drives 1 y.o. babies to dress up as suicide bombers and pose w/AK-47s?'

maybe you should consider this question a little more sensibly.

'That Israel is the Jewish Homeland is PROVABLE in the "ground" and in the "genes'

if you care to look into it you will find recently archaeologists (jewish and reknowned) have proven that israel is not the promised land , that the claims by zionists are not true. this has been somewhat censored by the jewish media. but its there if you care to research.

'Islam and the West are competing in the competitive market of culture, one will live and grow, the other will die, slowly and painfully. I believe that it is Gods will that we prevail, but I know that in this world of limited choices, we will have to bring about great pain, and absorb great pain, to see it through'

no islam is not competing in a competitive capitalist market , the culture is very different. capitalism is flawed it is dependent on consumerism if that falters what is left. i think you are correct capitalism is about to die , well at least change , and the great re awakening of the islamic consciousness is about to take place because of the very threat of being denied the freedom to exist by the west.

as for you perception and your supposed observations i think you are quite wrong in your all encompassing conclusions. i suspect that if you go out with the answers there is very little to be learned. why did you go undercover it is not necessary .. unles you wanted it to sound more dramatic. as i said your ideas are flawed or at least limited in extent and experience..

there have been benign dictatorships ,some based on royalty etc.. to suggest that these have not occurred successfully is a derelection of duty. to place ones faith into democracy and then to ignore it when it places bush into the presidency is a dangerous precedent.

the anti islamic rhetoric is not new .. i think we can for example all recognise the nature of the crusades and the debate that was happening at that time too.

241 Athos  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:17:11pm

#226 Loony as a Lark (where's the third 'L' - that's it - Loony as a Lefty Lark.....)

is the usa on an anti islamic drive .. no not as a primary objective .. it is acting to secure the worlds resources (see peak oil etc) but it is no secret that the bush cabal are inextricably linked to israel and israeli politics. wolfowitz/perle and cheney not to mention kritol bolton et al are no shrinking violets in this respect. the off shoot of the policy is one that targets muslims as the replacement for the soviets and the cold war.

So, it's all about oil?

Wow - how original - now we are on ANSWER, NOIN, or even IAC or the parent WWP?

Want to know how the US could have gotten Iraqi oil easy - the same way France was going about it - offering Saddam a long term contract to buy it, and elimination of the sanctions, and to stay in power. Would have cost the US about $5B USD, and its soul.

"Bush cabel" - ELITE BUZZWORD ALERT - - ELITE BUZZWORD ALERT

Still pissed off over Nov - Dec 2000? Want some cheese (brie?) with that whine?

It's nimrods and wankers like you that refuse to accept that there is not only a group of people that can't accept the Cold War ended (you lost), or the fact that radical Islam has declared war on the US as it is the only nation besides Israel that stop it from turning the world back to the 11th Century. Just because Old Europe has already surrendered, doesn't mean that the rest of the world will.

i think arqfat is more justified and has a good case to blame israel.

So, a commie Egyptian, scam artist, murderer and thief, who attempted to overthrow Jordan in 1970 - is more than justified to kill innocent Jews? He has a "good case to blame Israel"? For What? What did Israel do to him that was worse than he did to himself?

It must feel good to stand up and be counted with those who endorse and support murder and mayhem. 60 years ago in Germany, guess you would have stood just as proudly with Hitler.

242 andrew  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:18:56pm

Un-fuggen-believable!

243 ralph  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:19:58pm

#240 happy as a fart

capitalism is flawed it is dependent on consumerism

When you run out of toilet paper please do not go out and buy more.

244 Darleen  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:23:18pm

#235 Leah

I cannot help but draw a comparison between those Islamists who murder in response to "humiliation" and the way gangbangers 'think' and behave.

I work in a DA office in So. Cal. Our transcriptionist let me listen in on an interview with a member of a rather notorious and extremely dangerous Mexican gang. The gangbanger said something along the lines of (as memory serves me):

"Well, yeah, man, it's like I was kickin it, drinkin' a forty, smokin some weed and like yeah, man, this dude, this dude, see, he was lookin at me. Like he was lookin at me, no respect now you see, like he was lookin at me

so I shot him

I mean, I say 'you can't look at me' like it was disrespectful like so I shot him..he can't be lookin at me like that..."

245 addison  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:23:56pm
capitalism is flawed it is dependent on consumerism


Leaving the polite voice: No f*cking shit?!? Could have fooled me. And you needed a semi-colon in the middle of that sentence. And you still have some repulsion to the SHIFT key. Give it a try; it's fun.

246 Engineer  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:28:28pm

#243 ralph

When you run out of toilet paper please do not go out and buy more.

He can be one with his arab brothers and use his left hand.

247 happy as a lark  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:29:40pm

#236 lol dont make me laff and dont delude yourself .. you are reading what you want to read thats all.

#238 id love to get into detail but i dont have the time. but you can find the facts on the net if you really want to find out about peak oil ..wolfowitzs white paper of 1994 .. and the reasserting of intentions in the papers of 2000 .. and maybe a read of the cia assesments of the nature of the 'threats' to the usa as a global power by 2015. (hint oil and china).

the fact is at current growth levels china will be the most powerful globally by 2015/20 . the fact is that if the oil producers change from the dollar to the euro (the petrodollar) america is another 3rd world country. at the moment it is the petrodollar that provides the economic stregth of american economy. (it produces dollars for 5 cents and sells them to the world for 100 cents ).

the fact is that japan controls america thru its massive dollar holdings .. that along with the petro dollars held by the mid east states. the invasion of iraq is about oil as was afghanistan as a primary purpose.

#239 learning a language and understanding the culture and nuam=nces are different things. but a pre requisite is to be able to learn arabic. the koran is written in a classical arabic which is not spoken and needs much study to understand.

248 Ben F  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:32:07pm

#191 Happy--

Glen has already answered you in #206, but did you know that Jordanian forces killed more Palestinians in September 1970 than Israel has in two Intifadas? This source puts Palestinian losses in the PLO-Jordan war at 2,000.

You can't persuade people here with your lies, because we know them for what they are. If you know also that these are lies, and you simply want to pollute this thread with blood libel against Jews, then FOAD.

If you wonder whether perhaps you have been fed with lies, and wish to explore the issue, then stop throwing accusations and start asking questions.

But returning to Black September for a moment, you might wish to look at this site, which is full of pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli polemics and contains outrageous accusations against Israel. On an unlinked page with broken graphics, you will find an account of the Black September uprising that alleges that Jordanian forces engaged in deliberate massacres of Palestinians in the refugee camps, and that the death toll was on the order of 30,000. You can find this figure elsewhere if you look.

That 30,000 figure is probably a horrid lie; the Palestinians lie horribly about trumped-up Israeli atrocities so I tend to assume that their account of the Black September massacres is probably equally baseless. But if it were true, how strange that the world did not condemn King Hussein for committing genocide on such a scale, eh?

249 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:32:10pm

Addison, his type refuses to capitalize because it's "oppressive". As if making your words clearer to those you're trying to communicate with is "oppressive".

Either that, or they're brainless socialists who think there's a connection between "capitalization" and "capitalism".

250 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:33:27pm

So Happy I Could Just Shit:

Are you trying to say something in #240?

251 Darleen  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:34:09pm

#240 larky-poo

Ah! I get it now. You are all for a modern Caliphate where the 'people of the book' are thoroughly dhimmitized, the culture and government are 100% Islamist, law is Sharia, non-Muslim non-"people of the book" are exterminated or enslave (slavery being one of those things permitted, even encouraged, in dar al islam), Muslim men will never fear women again (having been put in their proper place under a burqa, kicked out of schools and restricted to the home of their fathers or husbands) and the whole world is now skittles and [non alcoholic] beer.

And I just best you see yourself as one of those mullahs that will run everything.

What part do you want for yourself? Running a maddrassa to abuse children or heading up the local Office of Virtue and accompanying your men on raids to beat women in the streets for showing their hair?

252 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:34:16pm

"Happy as a lark" is the archetype of "ignorance is bliss".

253 Sick Of It All  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:35:07pm

Happy as A Lark:

You're letting your Muslim brethren down; get into Iraq, pick up an AK-47, and fight bravely and hard against your favorite Japanese-controlled, Israeli-backing, soon-to-be-3rd-world-country. Put your money where your mouth is, and don't be surprised when you're shipped back to your western democratic country of origin in a pine box.

254 Athos  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:35:13pm

Loony as a Leftist Lark,

Again, why the fear over Democracy and Capitalism? People have been saying the death is at hand for democracy and capitalism since the days of the Greeks.

Capitalism, and in turn it's partner, Democracy, is far from death. History proves it. At the heart of both is FREEDOM. And that is a beating heart that even the radicals of Islam can't silence - yet they fear this more than any other thing.

The secret to Islam is to keep the masses in the 11th century, as uneducated, controlled, fodder for the jihad.

It is no different from that other "religion of peace" called Communism.

In the 20th century, Communism was directly responsible for over 100 million deaths, yet this pales to the blood lust that Islam has thrust on the world since the 7th century.

Yet, LLLark, out of all the crap that you spew from your posts, there was one correct statement -

no islam is not competing in a competitive capitalist market , the culture is very different.

The culture is very different. It is the culture of death, destruction, slavery, and a new dark age. Just as it was over the past 1400 years. Islam has re-declared war on civilization - just as it as in the past when it felt strong envough to prevail. Just as in Tours and Vienna, we will stand against it, and those who support the elimination of freedom.

You've choosen where to stand. And we will even grant you the "freedom" to spout your lies and call for our destruction. That only makes us stronger....and harder for our enemies to hide.

255 reaganite  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:35:38pm

Why are you people wasting so much time on this L³ asshat?

It's a troll in every sense of the word!

256 ploome  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:35:45pm

216 hobgoblin

LOL

257 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:37:34pm

#247 So Happy I Could Just Shit:

the fact is at current growth levels china will be the most powerful globally by 2015/20

If this does happen, it will be due primarily to China's embrace of capitalism, and discarding of much of the communist economic straightjacket.

the fact is that japan controls america thru its massive dollar holdings

Aren't you about 14 years behind the times?

258 Malik al-Malook  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:38:52pm

happy as a lark: You sure do have the time. You've been here for 2 hours. What's 15 more minutes, let alone a copy and paste job from a bunker of propaganda sites?

Saudi Arabia has already rejected twice a switch to the euro as the petro currency. Russia has floated the idea but only as inaccurate stories reported by Communist papers in Europe and Moscow.

259 Athos  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:39:59pm

NEWS ALERT -

From Loony as a Leftist Lark:

the fact is that japan controls america thru its massive dollar holdings .. that along with the petro dollars held by the mid east states. the invasion of iraq is about oil as was afghanistan as a primary purpose.

The JOOS don't control America or the world - Japan does.

Or is it the Saudi's and their Petro dollars?

and the invasion of Afghanistan was also about oil? OIL???!! WTF is the oil in Afghanistan? Hidden by Halliburton?

This moonbat is really starting to bark at the moon.

260 ralph  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:40:01pm

#247 happy as a fart

the fact is that if the oil producers change from the dollar to the euro

NOOOOOOOOOO Paul Krugman. Krugman Truth Squad

261 happy as a lark  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:41:13pm

i think i have made my original point quite well.

there is no debate just name calling because its not debate you want .. it frightens you.

you ahve a specific view of the world and you need to have it reinforced like children .. you need reassurance

why? because you rely on someone elses truth and not your own ..

you have to do some work and engage yourselves in to the other side and look at things from a different perspective.

but that requires a willingness to be wrong..which youare not .. and if you prove yourselves wrong your world collapses around you .. and youll have no one to pick you up.

now thats the worst kind of fear and cowardice.

go on challenge your truths .. give them a real test not these self serving debates where you just repeat the mantra of your masters but where you go and learn something new.

believe what you will but at least make the effort to seek the whole picture.. not things that reinforce petty prejudices and bigotry.

you can be more than losers...be informed losers.

262 ploome  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:42:04pm

looney as a Lark says

and the great re awakening of the islamic consciousness is about to take place because of the very threat of being denied the freedom to exist by the west.

no, lunytunes, islam is being denied the ability to take over and subdue the west.

we dont want to be slaves of islam

take your pedophilic death cult back to the desert it came from

263 Sick Of It All  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:44:13pm

Happy Turd:

Read post #261 back to yourself substituting 'you' with 'me.'

264 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:44:15pm

#259 Athos -

Japan controls the world because the Japanese have read Protocols and applied the lessons learned from it.

Only slightly joking - the book is a best-seller in Japan, not because they want to "send them to the ovens", but because they are trying to emulate their success, if in a twisted way.

265 Athos  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:44:50pm

#262 LLL

LOL - Debate? ROFL! Willing to be wrong? ROTFLMFAO!

Never did see an answer to my points....coward.

Someone should have taught you it's polite to just leave the table when you've had enough to eat.

Dinner's over Troll.

Let the door hit you in the arse on the way out.

GAZE!

The main moral from Mr. Holland's Opus..........

266 ralph  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:44:54pm

#261 happy as a fart

i think i have made my original point quite well.

What was your original point?

267 Iron Fist  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:45:01pm

#240 Dumber than my Parrot,


there have been benign dictatorships ,some based on royalty etc.. to suggest that these have not occurred successfully is a dereliction of duty.


Care to point them out?

I have studied government rather extensively. I can't think of a single dictatorship I would consider benign.

Would you consider Cesare Borgia’s dictatorship (the model for Machiavelli’s The Prince) benign? He quartered some people, had others wheeled and braided.

Is that your idea of benevolence?

Likewise Stalin. Kolyma alone was an atrocity that has never been parallel in its inhumanity, and it was but one of Stalin’s many atrocities.

Is that your idea of benevolence?

The British Monarchy would be your best refuge, but even there you are lacking. I assume you have heard of Henry VII? Cut off the heads of a few inconvenient bitches that happened to be his wives?

Is that your idea of benevolence?

Hell, holmes, ya ought to be for me for dictator.

My greatest malevolence is, by your definition, benevolence.

268 Malik al-Malook  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:47:05pm

happy as a lark: As I posted the United is the world's largest oil producer. On what date is the US set to start buying and selling its oil in Euros?

269 Leah  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:47:06pm

Darlene...You couldnt be MORE RIGHT ON. They are very much the same. Weve got some "troubled" peeps here..but the gang members have yet to acquire Biological Weapons or are on the cusp of acquiring Nukesl..This is in fact a huge group of dangerous to everyone people..They dont care if they blow up the entire world to whipe out their so called HUMILIATION.

Happy....Did you THINK? we didnt know that was coming..that you would TRY to say in anyway possible that Jews ARENT the origional peoples..or that Israel ISNT our Homeland? We dont have only ONE test of this...we have many and many MORE to come..How come we did this? Cause we KNEW you were out to DELEGITIMIZE Jews if you could.

Archeology in the ME is WAR. Watch who tries to Delegitimize Jews..And who gets into Arab Lands to DO some allied Archeology..Certainly NOT Jews or Friends of Jews. Keep THAT in mind when SOME come up with so called proof for this newest delegitimizing effort. Remember that the Jordanian guy found the Dead Sea Scrolls..and tried to make SURE it didnt get into Jewish Hands..They didnt want Jews to pinpoint their habitation of Israel with the Scrolls...

I carry a marker that matches the marker of a famous Jew..Perhaps you know of him. His name is JESUS. He lived in Israel along with MANY of his JEWISH relatives..And HIS relatives lived in Israel as well..Another famous guy you MAY know..His name is DAVID..and another is SOLOMON. THEY all are MY relatives..We ALL share a distinctive MARKER. We were there When we said we were and where we said we were. Give or take a few years probably....

270 ploome  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:47:54pm

Lark's point was, inspite of Israel attempt at genocide of the arab palestinian people

the number of 'palestinian' refugees, has grown from approx 700,000

to about 5,000,000 and counting

some genocide

271 db  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:48:29pm

#243 ralf

"Three stones, smooth is better"

to paraphrase Mo

272 ploome  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:49:30pm

db

LOL

273 scaramouche  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:50:37pm

Happy as a lark--How about learing Hebrew so you can discern the nuances of Judaism? The Torah is written in classical aramaic which is not spoken and needs much study to understand. Contrary to what they teach in madrassah, Jews are not really descended from apes and pigs. They had the misfortune, however, to be the first monotheistic faith, for which Islam has never forgiven them. But then, if you could read Hebrew and understood the nuances of the Jewish culture, you would already know that and would have a more fruitful way to occupy yourself on a Saturday night. Give it up, Sissyphus. Our problem isn't that we are insensitive to the nuances of Islamic culture; it's that we understand it all too well.

274 happy as a lark  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:52:01pm

'Ah! I get it now. You are all for a modern Caliphate where the 'people of the book' are thoroughly dhimmitized, the culture and government are 100% Islamist, law is Sharia, non-Muslim non-"people of the book" are exterminated or enslave (slavery being one of those things permitted, even encouraged, in dar al islam), Muslim men will never fear women again (having been put in their proper place under a burqa, kicked out of schools and restricted to the home of their fathers or husbands) and the whole world is now skittles and [non alcoholic] beer.'

i think this is more about your ignorance,prejudices than about what i want me. interesting insight.

'and the invasion of Afghanistan was also about oil? OIL???!! WTF is the oil in Afghanistan? Hidden by Halliburton?'

oil and gas from the caucuses / turkmenistan. the favored route is thru iran (hence why iran is on the axis of evil) but the alternative is thru afghanistan and pakistan (look up unocol and taliban - the taliban came to texas but rejected bushs sorry unocols 15% profits deal) .

iran has considered changing to the euro iraq had already done so , venezuela and opec have considered these changes too.

275 Leah  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:53:34pm

Ploome...GOOD..."some genocide" is right. Sheesh...A backwards type of genocide. WE should have been so lucky to be genocided..like THAT.

276 Athos  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:53:36pm

#267 Iron Fist -

If not Henry VIII, how about Bloody Mary his daughter?

Some of L cubes favourite "benign" dictators:

1. Uncle Fidel - even Hollywood understands and loves him.

2. Hitler
3. Pol Pot
5. Arafat - The Joos made him do it.
6. Nasser
7. Assad pere
8. Saddam
9. Ayatollah Khomeni
and, of course,

The Prophet - without whom, none of this would be possible.

277 ralph  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:54:02pm

Happy as a Fart = Josh Marshall or matt
the anal retentive crew.

278 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:56:51pm

#273 Scaramouche -

I think you mean Classical Hebrew?

279 happy as a lark  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:58:24pm

#268 actually the usa produces around 10% of the worlds capacity.. and is not the worlds leading producer.

it will become a net importer by 2007 and will be wholly reliant by 2010-15 as will the uk (2015-2020).

i think those are the figures.

280 andrew  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 3:59:45pm

It's all so inverted! I thought I understood right and wrong but lark has shaken my beliefs to the core. O woe is me.

281 db  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:01:33pm

#207 Ben F

Note the first sentence in the third paragraph I quote above. Is Feith describing an updated Axis of Evil™? Or are the two newbies on Feith's list just candidate members, still trying to make the final cut?

They are all on the official target list. No big speeches needed, they know who they are.

282 happy as a lark  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:01:42pm

#269 well im only reporting the findings of world reknowned jewish archaeologists ..that live and work in israel. your gripe is with them not me im afraid.

283 scaramouche  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:04:28pm
'Ah! I get it now. You are all for a modern Caliphate where the 'people of the book' are thoroughly dhimmitized, the culture and government are 100% Islamist, law is Sharia, non-Muslim non-"people of the book" are exterminated or enslave (slavery being one of those things permitted, even encouraged, in dar al islam), Muslim men will never fear women again (having been put in their proper place under a burqa, kicked out of schools and restricted to the home of their fathers or husbands) and the whole world is now skittles and [non alcoholic] beer.

I think you just described Saudi Arabia.

284 ralph  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:05:06pm

#279 happy as a fart

i think those are the figures.

Prove it TROLL

285 ploome  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:06:16pm

282 happy as a lark

dont be disingenuous

you are presenting theory as fact

and fringe theory at that

286 ralph  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:06:44pm

#279 happy as a dickhead

You are an ASSHOLE.

287 ralph  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:09:07pm

#279 happy as a dickhead

Who the fuck cares, after 2 hours of posting, what you have to say shit head.

288 Darleen  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:10:03pm

#274 larky poo finally answers!

Here you went and posted your anti-capitalist, anti-democracy statements... stated that the Islamic resurgence will the the worlds saving grace....

and now you wish to claim you are NOT a shill for "convert or die" worldwide Islamism?

or is this the same type of 'logic' as when Islamists state there was no such thing as the Holocaust while concurrently praising Hitler wishing he had finished off all the Jews?

Gangbanger mentality..that's what I see.

289 happy as a lark  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:11:58pm

#270 some genocide


again thats the denial that you suffer from. the genocide is a fact but then its not israeli or jewish people that are being murdered and so to you it is wholly justified.

i suppose this is the wonderful teachings of jewish religious texts.

in truth there is a no defining line between yourselves and those that you so ready dispose of.

well mom is calling me for my hot milk before i take my nap ..

shame you all couldnt be more civil but then thats a reflection of you and not moi.

290 zulubaby  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:14:53pm

Oh, fuck off already, you colossal waste of time. Buh-bye.

291 Evariste's Zaide  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:14:57pm

Good Grief!
People, people!
Remember the LGF prayer:
"Lord, grant me the serenity to ignore the trolls,
the courage to debate with honest opponents,
and the wisdom to know the difference."

Surely, after reading 3 or 4 of Daffy Duck's posts, it should have become obvious that you were talking to a parrot.
What a waste of Charles' bandwidth!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I found a pleasant little surprise in my junk mail yesterday. It was a brochure from SONY advertising some of their high-end goodies. Holiday market share time is nigh, don'tcha know.
Nice stuff but out of my league.
The pleasant surprise part was a detail in a 2-page high gloss photo spread depicting a nice, young middle-age couple snuggling in a VERY well appointed room before a lighted fireplace and a huge, to-die-for HDTV home movie theater.
No Christmas tree!
Instead, positioned quite prominently, the ad folks had placed a lighted hannukia (9 light menorah).
Given all the contemptuous scorning of Jews by so many companies of late, I was very pleased to see at least one large international corporation acknowledging, dare I say celebrating, the fact that Jews also have a holiday during the holidays.

It warmed my cockles and tickled my globular clusters!

(Now, I'll bet a bunch o' you guys could come up with something at least as interesting as that insignificant anecdote. Or, maybe tell us a funny joke!
Something...ANYTHING!...besides playing pixel ping-pong with a jejeune, pishker of a Jew hating cretin. PUHLEEEEEZE!)

292 Valentine  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:14:58pm

Notice how Happy as a friggin carp has yet to give a link to anything? The US produces more than half the fuel it consumes, roughly 6.5 million barrels per day, another 5-6 million is imported with a majority of the imports coming from mexico and canada. You're right we're not the world's leading producer, we're in the number 2 or 3 spot, but then we use a lot more oil than we can produce. You've yet to make any cohesive arguments stating why you believe in what you do believe with backing up from some reliable sources of some sort.

As for your crap about the palestinians let me ask this, you said how many nukes, bio and chem weapons does Israel need to defend itself and from whom, well I ask how many WMD's does it take for the palestinians, saudis, syrians, and iranians to achieve their goals of wiping out the israelis?

Answer: Just 1 nuke is enough.

293 reaganite  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:15:02pm

Head, meet wall. Lark is a tool who will not listen. Classic troll.

294 ralph  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:15:07pm

#289 happy as a fart

well mom is calling me for my hot milk before i take my nap ..

And a good night to the BATES MOTEL.

295 Sick Of It All  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:16:30pm

Denial of *genocide*?!

Last time I read about one, a real genocide reduced a population by about 6mil instead of increasing it by about 450.000.

Have a good nap, and hopefully when you wake up it'll be time to pay your dhimmi tax.

296 Athos  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:16:34pm

Mr. Holland's Opus

"Yes, it is filled with cliches, but it is still an engaging outing" - Bob Bloom, Journal and Courier - Lafayette, IN

This movie makes the case that no life spent in a worthy pursuit is ever really wasted - and this picture attempts to do so in a Capra-like spring of emotion and drama. Think of it as a musically based Dead Poet's Society.

GAZE GLUTTON TROLL

297 Leah  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:17:11pm

Thats a crock of you know what Lark...It is probably a bunch of ultra liberal Jews with what we in our group fondly call "issues"...They THINK if they just "give it to you all" then they will be SAFE at last. They are TIRED...of all this fighting....but this Jew ISN'T TIRED as many of us WORLD WIDE arent as well. PLUS we have our FRIENDS and FELLOW CITIZENS in the West who know us..and know that we, like them, support Decent Values, FREEDOM and DEMOCRACY while all of us know that basically members of Islam DO NOT see any value in Democracy and Freedom.

So sorry...but our marker ,distinct from any other, even tho we are Diaspora Jews PUT US just where we say we are from. The PROOF is in the ground..is in the writings...and is in the FLESH AND BLOOD...

Too bad for YOU. Your newest little de-legitimizing of Jews attempt is bust. Why dont you go back to the "Canaanite" claim of yours. Huh? It had some problems...it DOESN'T whipe out Jewish claims..but...the Pal thing is dead as a doornail..Got to think of SOMETHING....

So tells us all Lark..Where are you writing from? How old? Just a few stats...

298 zulubaby  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:17:15pm

Zaide, I'm with you, this trolly is a total waste of time, energy and bandwidth. And I have missed you!

299 rumcrook  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:23:22pm

do you deny that jesus was jewish?

do you deny that he was from israel?

do you deny that the Romans, sticlers for righting down everything and who chronicaled the sack of the jewish temple and the diaspora of the JEWS around the empire in stone did what they said they did?

your in a cload of denial.

you still havent answered my question

does it make you happy when you hear that another zionist jew was shot in his crib?

300 Evariste's Zaide  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:23:33pm

Hi, Z-lady!
Seen any good haircuts, lately?
(Smiling ruefully cause I would have loved to be there, too!)
I wuz thinkin' 'bout you just this morning while re-stocking my Lindt white chocolate truffles stash.
Weird how I "see" you & other regulars in my mind just as clearly as folks I know in the meat-world.

301 Sick Of It All  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:23:40pm

damn - make that 4,300,*000*

302 andrew  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:25:08pm

#300 Evariste's Zaide

meat-world

Man, that's perfect! lol

303 Athos  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:26:16pm

More "enlightenment" from that "great nation" La Belle France - Even the French Interior Minister admits that this was a deliberate anti-semitic act.

Not that France would actually do anything about it.

304 happy as a lark  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:28:15pm

The US consumes 26% of the world's oil and imports nearly 60% of that for an import bill in 2000 of some US$100 billion

In 2001, the U.S imported 54% of the oil it needed, importing 11-12 million barrels a day and producing about 8-9 million a day to provide the 20 million barrels a day the U.S. consumes daily.
Of those imports, 48% came from the Western Hemisphere and 30% came from the Persian Gulf region, with the rest coming from Africa and Europe.

Although the U.S. imports only 11.4 % of its oil from the Persian Gulf region, that area contains 590 billion barrels of known reserves. Add Iran, Libya and Algeria and you have another 130 billion barrels. The enormous pool of oil stretching form Algeria to Iran is estimated at 720 billion barrels. The reserves expected from the Caspain Sea in Central Asia will be added to this total in a few years.

According to data published on the website of British Petroleum ([Link: www.bp.com...] the USA consumes about 895.6 million tonnes of oil, which is about 25.5 per cent of global oil consumption. Domestic oil production in the USA in 2001 was about 351.7 million tonnes. Calculations show that at this rate of oil production, the oil reserves of the USA will be exhausted in about ten and a half year's time.

305 Kat  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:29:50pm

#186 Ralph

Socialists are infidels wherever they are," the statement said. But it added: "It does not hurt that in current circumstances, the interests of Muslims coincide with the interests of the socialists in the war against crusaders."

To add to your thought, isn't this supposing that Bin Hiden is *truly* as devout as portrayed by the media, and not, as I've often suspected, using the facade of devoutness to ensure the loyalty of his followers?
color me cynical I guess.......

306 rumcrook  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:30:45pm

"the genocide is a fact but then its not israeli or jewish people that are being murdered and so to you it is wholly justified."

aaaahhhh and the most telling bias of all. you are worthless and a shill for the islamist propaganda, you cant even admitt jews are being killed, how addled you are, on the one hand you exclaim that pali's murdering israelis with bombs or shooting whole familys including babies in thier cribs is freedom fighting,

then you exclaim that no jews are dying?????


answer the question dirtbag does it make you happy when zionist jews are shot in thier CRIBS?

307 scaramouche  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:33:17pm

I think we need to integrate the LGF prayer with a 6-step Trolls Anonymous program (modified from the full 12-step program):

Step 1: Accept that there is a higher power than the trolls.

Step 2: Accept that you have no control over what a troll believes, only over what you believe.

Step 3: Try not to anger the troll; it only encourages it.

Step 4: Accept that just because one troll has retreated, another may spring up to take its place.

Step 5: Remember, swearing, either in full words or acronyms will probably not chase the troll away; however, ignoring it just might.

Step 6: Accept that on any given day, some trolls may find their way onto LGF, but remember that their numbers are small and their effort futile.

308 zulubaby  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:33:50pm

Zaide (#300)

I wuz thinkin' 'bout you just this morning while re-stocking my Lindt white chocolate truffles stash.

Aah, you know that I'm weak at the knees thinking about Lindt white chocolate truffles!

Weird how I "see" you & other regulars in my mind just as clearly as folks I know in the meat-world.

How to relate our LGF friends and the "inside jokes" to our real world? :-)

309 manyoso  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:34:04pm

So does this mean the case isn't closed?

Please, say it ain't so Weekly Standard.

Instaquack and the other gullibles who swallowed the Weekly Standard article which didn't even bother to release the actual memo... even though it was purportedly coming from Feith...

Altogether now:

HACKS!

310 zulubaby  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:35:28pm

Now where's your grandson? He's not around enough lately either.

311 Paladin  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:39:07pm

Good old Trolls--


Putting the F-U back in fun.

312 rumcrook  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:41:40pm

NO IT MEANS YOUR RUNNING SCARED AND SPINNIN FAST.

313 ralph  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:42:12pm

#304 happy being stupid

the USA consumes about 895.6 million tonnes of oil, which is about 25.5 per cent of global oil consumption

And the USA doesn't do anything with its share????
We are all WELFARE QUEENS LIKE YOU.

314 happy as a lark  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:42:59pm

#306 no one is denying the death of israelis .. but you here are denying the genocide (amnesty/red cross/ UN ) the crimes against humanity that israel is commiting. against palestinians.

my earlier post was specific to another post and to quote out of context is silly. but then i cant really say im surprised as its undoubtedly a psychological flaw that enables the denial that exists within the pro israeli community (and of course their mirror images in the palestinian world).

sadly too much of that flaw exists here in your postings.

315 manyoso  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:43:24pm

HAHAHHAAAHHHH!!!!

The DoD itself throws cold water on the Weekly Standard article and scolds whoever leaked it. You idiots.

316 Evariste's Zaide  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:45:18pm

Dunno. He hasn't e-mailed, either.
I don't want to be a busybody but I do worry about my friends.
Maybe I should just barge in & give him a WHAZZAP?!
Like this.

317 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:45:41pm

My God.

The LLL will latch onto a leaked memo that says there are 50,000 fedayeen in Iraq, declaring it God's truth and demanding reactions to it. But show them information that contradicts their pathetic lies, and they stick their fingers in their ears and scream "LIES! ALL LIES!"

318 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:46:58pm

manyoso -- Care to link to a news story to that regard, and not to Atrios and his festival of idiots?

319 happy as a lark  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:47:56pm

'And the USA doesn't do anything with its share????'

Calculations show that at this rate of oil production, the oil reserves of the USA will be exhausted in about ten and a half year's time.

320 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:49:46pm

Lark -- They've been saying that for fifty years.

321 Sean  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:52:59pm

Is this a Studebaker Lark?

322 Evil Otto  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:53:34pm

Nice cut and paste job, Happy. You didn't write that, since you have a severe allergic reaction to capital letters in your posts and can't argue your way out of a wet paper sack. So where did you get it?

Where *I* come from, that's called plagiarism.

323 zulubaby  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:57:13pm

Zaide (#316)

That's hysterical!! I've been in a terrible state today, what with the bombings in Turkey and the Jewish school being torched in Paris, but that did make me laugh. You'll probably enjoy this too :-)

324 Barry Crocker  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:57:20pm

happy as a lark:

Just showing that it's in America's strategic interests to control Middle Eastern oil does not in itself prove that those motivations are what lie behind US policy. Showing a possible motive isn't the same as proving guilt.

If economic conerns to the exclusion of all others really drove American policy there are better ways they could have advanced their interests than installing representative government in Iraq - that should be the clue that their commitment to democracy and freedom is sincere...

325 Sean  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:57:34pm

Or is it the old brand of cigarettes?

326 Malik al-Malook  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:58:17pm

manyoso: There is presently a gag order on all CPA authorities in Iraq pertaining to any and all information presented to the press, iraqi, american or other. Do you suppose for a moment that the DoD is under the same orders? You know...from the fucking President devoted against leaks.

Think as an observer.

327 Melissa  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 4:59:56pm

Bless your bleeding heart, conservative. I read about your counterprotest in an earlier post and hoped it went well.

Those of us who support our military are in the vast majority, but we are rarely heard from in the media. At least you got a mention in the Seattle P-I:

Scores of people rallied on Interstate 5 overpasses Saturday in support of the troops, while a smaller number organized to protest the U.S. invasion.

It must have pained the AP writer to have to write that.

328 Malik al-Malook  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:00:05pm

happy as a lark: are you including untapped estimated resources throughout the United States or only what is currently being drilled?

330 ralph  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:00:51pm

#319 happy as a DICK

Calculations show that at this rate of oil production, the oil reserves of the USA will be exhausted in about ten and a half year's time.

Prove it ASSHOLE.

331 Moshe  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:01:29pm

#238 - Malik - Let me offer you a list of the top 10 oil producing states and you then can explain how Bush & Co are seeking to control them

Your list appears to be wrong. The US is not the top producer. The top oil producing countries are:

Country Crude oil production (million barrels per day)
Saudi Arabia* 7.889
Russia 6.730
United States 5.801
Iran 3.572
China 3.297
* Including share of production from Neutral Zone.
source: [Link: www.opec.org...] (FAQ's)

To answer your question of 'how is the USA trying to control them' - via diplomacy first, coercion second, and the threat of violence third


Noticably missing from that list is Iraq, which normally would have been up there if it wasn't for sanctions, war etc. How the US is controlling Iraq is fairly obvious, so I won't address it.

How do we try to control the Saudis ? By acting as their protector, supplying all their military hardware and thus controlling them via spare parts for their jets, and finally, publicly threatening to steal their oil when they step out of line

How does the US try to control Iran ? Ask Ollie North. Generally it's done via bribes, via coercion and threats of regime change. But of course, the US basically lost control over Iran in 1979.

Clearly there's not a hell of a lot the US can do to control Russia or China. Subsequently we're not doing anything to try to control them other than diplomacy and coercion (Throw Russia out of G8: Richard Perle).

332 Evariste's Zaide  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:04:00pm

#322 Evil Otto
"Where *I* come from, that's called plagiarism."

Don't confuse the poor schmendrick further with big 5 syllable words like "plagiarism".
Next, you'll have to tutor it on linking & the use of "proper attribution".
Try using expressions commensurate with its IQ level like "copeeing offa sumbuddyelse's payper."

333 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:04:22pm

Malik:

There is presently a gag order on all CPA authorities in Iraq pertaining to any and all information presented to the press, iraqi, american or other. Do you suppose for a moment that the DoD is under the same orders? You know...from the fucking President devoted against leaks.

I think it's likely this memo was leaked by the same source that leaked the Democrat strategy memo from the Intelligence Committee. Presumably, anyone with access to one has access to the other.

It's quite possible a Democrat staffer has developed a conscience. I suspect the party will mount a witch hunt to find him.

334 Sean  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:05:41pm

I found this with google:

Posted by bob on October 05, 2000 at 16:45:53:
In Reply to: Happy as a Lark posted by Maddog on October 05, 2000 at 14:53:05:

: I have heard it many times and was curious about its origin. "Happy as a Lark"

We humans tend to anthropomorphise animals, attributing human emotions and motivations to them. It's a harmless hobby. We attribute to larks, which have a beautiful melodious song, happiness... since humans sing when happy. The bird is issuing mating calls and staking out territory when biologists un-romanticize it... but "horny and territorial as a lark" just doesn't cut it as a phrase.

335 manyoso  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:07:25pm

If you'd simply read and follow the links you'd see that the DoD has disowned the WS article and its conclusions: "Case Closed"

DoD statement proves the WS article is full of shit. Hayes said the case was "closed" and cited this leaked memo as proof. Winger bloggers/commenters were nearly besides themselves with glee. Fact is, this is just another case of stovepiped intelligence, read Sy Hersh article, that the Wingers bought hook line and sinker. Instapundit was lamenting the fact that the SCLM hadn't caught this connection. DoD says it is just an index of supportive raw intelligence with no substantive analysis or conclusions.

Well the case certainly isn't closed. It is just another example of the Right grabbing onto any piece of raw intelligence that on the surface seems to help them idealogically. The DoD statement specifically refutes that the memo provides a "case closed" conclusion. Hayes just saw a bunch of raw intelligence and did his best administration pre-war skewing of intelligence results. That is all.

I think I have a new name for these pro-war idiots: neocon stovepipers. What do you think?

336 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:08:17pm
337 Sean  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:09:52pm

Frank IBC - Good one!

338 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:13:31pm

#334 Sean:

Birds as heard by Human: "Chirp chirp. Tweet tweet tweet."

Human: "Ah, listen to the lovely song of the pretty birds."

Birds as heard by other birds: "Yo, wassup beatch?"

339 Leah  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:13:46pm

We dont need ANY memos..We know the general behavior of Pan Islam. That they WOULDNT have been cooperating would be a SURPISE. They were, they are, and they will be together in the BIG JIHAD ...and thats common knowledge. Give me a break please..

340 Dan G.  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:13:51pm

"[...]90 Iraqi and Syrian passports for al Qaeda personnel."

Interesting... perhaps that hooligan a few weeks back that was carrying a Syrian passport on wasn't actually Syrian...

Diversion from the war on terror my ass.

341 Darleen  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:14:56pm

manyoso

Did your work as an intelligence officer also include ignoring Islamists training as commercial pilots because, it is KNOWN no one would ever fly a commerical jet into a skyscraper?

Just what ideology drives the studied blindness of the leftists who claim that Islamist_terrorism_does_not_exist but if it does its_the_fault_of_Bush_and_Israel?

342 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:16:25pm

Can someone please explain the moonbats' obsession with the term "neoconservative"? Is it simply shorthand for "Jews and their sympathizers"?

343 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:17:44pm

manyoso:

If you'd simply read and follow the links you'd see that the DoD has disowned the WS article and its conclusions: "Case Closed"

You linked to Atrios. Atrios lies.

Thankfully, Instapundit linked to the actual DoD press release:

[Link: www.dod.mil...]

It confirms that the memo is real and was prepared by the DoD. All it really disowns are Hayes' conclusions.

So, why don't you deal with the information in the memo, rather than trying to wish it away? How does the information in the memo -- which the DoD has now confirmed as being information gathered by US intelligence -- change your opinions?

344 leah  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:18:14pm

Zaide..I want to know just who this particular Schemdrick IS and where he or she comes from... Nasty little schmendrick....thats for sure.

345 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:20:06pm

Frank IBC:

Can someone please explain the moonbats' obsession with the term "neoconservative"? Is it simply shorthand for "Jews and their sympathizers"?

That's part of it. Another part of it is their love of labeling people and their over-arching belief in conspiracies and "movements".

The major part of it is their inability to deal with the facts and evidence and thus the need to simply attack those they disagree with by hurling what they think are insults.

346 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:21:02pm

I think Manyoso is really Bob Novak.

347 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:22:11pm
I think Manyoso is really Bob Novak.

Nah. I don't think Bob Novak's that big of a moron.

Unless you're talking about the pet-shop owner Bob Novak. In which case you may have a point.

348 Evariste's Zaide  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:26:26pm

#343 Robert Crawford
From your link:
"Individuals who leak or purport to leak classified information are doing serious harm to national security; such activity is deplorable and may be illegal."

In plain talk...somebody in the global spook network is mightily annoyed at this leak.
Some individuals' very lives may have been put at risk because of blown covers.

OF COURSE, they're going to try to soft pedal this!
But I fear it may already be too late.

Enquiring minds don't always have a need to know!

349 Binky  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:27:28pm

HAHAHAHA! If such a memo really existed Bush would have been touting it from the beginning. What hogwash. Even Bush isn't that stupid.

350 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:28:16pm

"Neoconservative" originally referred to former liberals such as Norman Podhoretz, Irving Kristol, and David Horowitz, who later became conservative.

But Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al have been "conservative" all of their lives - they don't seem the least bit "neo" to me...so why are they being called "neoconservatives"? The only answer I can think of is the one I posted in #342.

351 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:31:16pm

Zaide:

Some individuals' very lives may have been put at risk because of blown covers.

Sadly, yes.

On the other hand, accurate and fair reporting on this information may restore American and worldwide resolve to deal with the terrorist states and to finish the job in Iraq. That could save many more lives.

I've already said it once today -- this memo should have been released by the White House, not leaked by some Senate staffer with more conscience than the typical Democrat.

352 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:32:04pm

If such a memo really existed Bush would have been touting it from the beginning.

I'm guessing you didn't read the date that the memo was published?

353 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:34:00pm

Who let the Atriolls in? :(

354 Malik al-Malook  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:36:06pm

Moshe: My source is the Energy Information Agency.
link
CIA fact book for 2003 confirms my list, except Saudi Arabia and the US swap spots.
link

But lets take pre-Kuwait invasion to get a good look at Iraqi oil production. This source reports the Iraqis were producing at most 3.5 million barrels per day in 1988. In the same year the Saudis were 5.7 million barrels per day and the US was 8.1 million barrels per day.

Do these numbers change your assumption that the US controls most of the world's oil and is seeking to contorl the rest that it doesn't? What about Norway and Canada? What's their role in the oil conspiracy? Is the US trying to dominate the Winter Olympics podiums?

355 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:36:38pm

Frank -- I know it's tempting, but don't think for a second that people like "Binky" are intellectually honest. They have their conclusions firmly in hand, and have no intention of allowing any new evidence change them. The stronger the countering evidence, the more strongly they will deny its existence.

I blogged about the same reaction to Powell's speech to the UN:

When I hear someone reacting to Powell's presentation with "they've lied before" the conclusion I reach is that the speaker had his mind made up, and is simply rationalizing their decision to refuse the evidence. They're admitting that the evidence is convincing -- and that no amount of evidence will change their minds.

The left has spent two years in a cloud of ignorance, hatred, bigotry and anger. It's just gonna get worse.

356 Darleen  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:37:20pm

earth to Binky

DoD has confirmed the existence of the memo.

Keep underestimating GW...especially as it looks like Jay Rockefeller et al may end up hoisted on their own "no connections between Iraq and Al Qaeda" petards.

357 Joshua  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:38:12pm

Happy as a lark
I tried to engage you in honest debate, but you can do little more than just make statements without backing them up, you do not debate, you jibber. However, you know about jack shit about history, and very little about human nature. Capitalism, like democracy and separate powers and church, are based on the idea that human nature is fallible and basically sinful. Islam is a failed system because it believes it can complete or cure human nature. This is no cure for human nature, it is flawed and sinful. Unless you learn this and realize we are all sinful, debased beings you cannot put systems in place that help us overcome our own inherent weakness. Your ideological slavery and complete naivte about human potential is your weakness. No kidding the best government is a benevolent dictatorship, you learn that in 1st year political science. Second class teaches that the worst gov't is a bad dictatorship, and since most individuals are bad, most dictatorships are bad. DUH. You have no way to defend leaving power in the hands of an individual or aristocracy because you cannot support any assertion of any possibility of a positive human nature. Muslims are just as evil as all mankind, they are just to naive to believe it, and thus have no checks on their own desire to be first, their own desire to be God. (See Pt II)

358 Joshua  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:39:51pm

Qutb and Human Nature
Even though Qutb used Marx’s philosophy as part of his reasoning behind Islamic revolution, Qutb’s primary justification for the instillation of the shariah across the globe, along with his conceptualization of jahiliyya societies and cosmic justice, emanates from his belief in man’s deterministic and inherently good nature. Qutb believes that since God has decreed that certain laws will govern the universe, and man is part of the universe, then man’s nature must be subject to similar laws. Invariably this Law is found only in Islam, the true link between God and man (6). For Qutb, God created man as a special being separate from the animals, and man therefore must be by his nature good. Unfortunately, the world and history do not suggest that man’s inherent goodness is a reality, and Qutb is well aware of this fact. The reason mankind’s past and present do not “harmonize” with his nature is due the fact that we are trapped by false gods, these false gods are any system of government not grounded in fundamentalist Islam, and they hold the world in a state similar to the one that preceded the establishment of God’s religion through the various prophets; all people---including all Muslims---who follow the laws of such governments are in fact polytheists and therefore trapped in a state of jahiliyya. (7) By stating this Qutb bypasses the concept of the “people of the book” as protected peoples, the passivity present in most moderate Islamic philosophies, and the basic idea that Muslims should not attack other Muslims (8). Qutb’s coherent and well-defined message along with his carefully crafted theological understanding of human nature make his overall message one of great power. It is not hard to understand why these ideas are so prevalent among the Muslims of the Middle East. Most Muslim philosophies lack such a modern understanding of the problem of evil, and many people in the third world groan with pain and suffering, trapped on all sides by a darkness and decline they cannot understand or explain. Because of his definitive explanation of the cause of the pain, Qutb has given Muslim people a simple and understandable philosophy that answers their questions and gives them a way out. “Why are we suffering?” the masses ask. Because, responds Qutb, jahiliyya rules the world, Islam is the only system of government and religion that can defeat jahiliyya, Islam is dead because Islam does not exist as a distinct society dedicated to struggling with the evil, thus Islam must be resurrected and the struggle against Jahiliyya must begin so that mankind will be transformed into what it can be: Islamic. Unfortunately, Qutb’s philosophy of human nature is incomplete. Rigid Islamic Law, as the Iranian Revolution has proved, does not transform society into some kind of utopia. Human nature doesn’t change, it is what it is, and what it is, is sinful. By understanding that God is the only source of good, Qutb has correctly identified the answer to the problems within the human condition, but he fails to realize that no system of laws can make God’s will manifest, God works incrementally through millions of human interactions. A good deed here a kind word there, an idea here, an invention there, multiply a zillion times and soon you have a world that is what it can be. This problem then extends to Qutb’s vision of social justice. Heck, Qutb's concept of social justice is exactly the same as Marx's, and on this point, Qutb makes the same fatal mistake. Qutb falsely believes that social justice can be instilled in this world. It is simply wrong to believe that mankind is by nature good just as it is a mistake to believe that perfect justice is an ideal can be realized, because this belief does not jive with the empirical evidence that is presented to us by history. Qutb can romanticize the early Muslim empire all he wants, but if he thinks there was ever a time or place where heaven on earth actually existed he is blinding himself to any input from objective reality. History is cold, hard facts, and nothing in history suggests that mankind has ever tended towards good, at best it points to the possibility that mankind can work in concert with the universe and does at times, but not that these are his natural or normal state. If it were, there would be no need for religion in the first place; people would just follow their desires and impulses. Due in large part to the limitations of human nature, we are trapped in a world where true social justice is an ideal that will always be imperfectly represented in the real world. It is simply impossible for mankind to create a world of perfect or near-perfect people or of perfected justice; our nature fights against us and prevents us from achieving this ideal. However, Qutb never even considers these possibilities, he simply believes that by enforcing a religious life we can make people reflect what he sees as their true godly nature, and that we can create a world where injustice is non-existent, but its just not that easy. Even in a world of just laws, there will be unjust men who run free and gain power. Like Qutb, I do not believe in compartmentalizing our religious and secular lives and it is important that we try to serve that transcendent value as hard as we can at all times and in all endeavors, but like the American theologian Reinhold Niebuhr and unlike Qutb, I understand what the concept of a transcendent value truly is, and it is obvious that Qutb and Marx are committing one common sin: they are effectively claiming to know how to perfectly implement God’s will. Qutb, for all his hatred of Marx’s materialism and oversimplification of humanity’s plight, fell into a similar trap, by blurring the line between this world and the next and making all secular matters religious in order to “cure” man’s problems, he winds up in the same place Marx did by making all religious matters the state's domain. Religion cannot take the place of government any more than government can take the place of religion. Only the delicate balance of our founding fathers, of Niebuhr, allows us to serve the transcendent while avoiding the danger of giving those who claim to be its messenger total power over our existence. The past’s lessons were learned hard, and I think recent events show that there is a core group of people out there who have learned them. For what its worth, Qutb's view of human nature is only partially inaccurate, he at least admits that in the PRESENT human nature is imperfect; most philosophers are so optimistic they believe mankind is already perfectible, and thus unlike Qutb, they do not have the ability to explain why there is social injustice in the first place. For Qutb, however, knowing the cause of evil is not enough, it must be confronted and overcome. In order for this to happen, a revolution had to take place, the philosophy of militant Muslims like him had to take concrete form

359 Joshua  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:41:01pm

---------------Excerpt from my book

360 Evariste's Zaide  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:41:58pm

#344 Leah
"Nasty little schmendrick"

Leah, that's ALL you need to know about it!
The questions "where, who, & why" are as irrelevant, when in the malodorous presence of a crotchcheese-noshing snotgurgle, as asking a barking dog whence its angst.

Speak about them in the 3rd person neuter, never to them directly or with masculine/feminine pronouns.

They are a pitiable tribe, never sure that they exist in the objective sense, so they seek reassurance of their presence on this plane by making goo-goo faces at passers-by, acquiring tatoos, pin their fathers' fishing tackle to their pisks and, generally, try to generate any form of attention from anybody within spitting distance.
Being reviled & loathed is preferable to them than the ignominy of their manifest non-importance to any fully civilized human.

Ignore them & they slink back under their bridges & resume contemplating their prepuces.

361 manyoso  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:42:02pm

Quick history:

WS article said the case was closed. War bloggers giggled with glee. DoD said case isn't closed. War bloggers groan and insist this proves nothing. Which is precisely the point.

362 Moshe  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:43:12pm

#350 - Frank - "Neoconservative" originally referred to former liberals such as Norman Podhoretz, Irving Kristol, and David Horowitz, who later became conservative.

it still does

But Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al have been "conservative" all of their lives - they don't seem the least bit "neo" to me...so why are they being called
"neoconservatives"?

Where are Bush Cheney and Rumsfeld being called neo-conservative? They're all life-long Republicans

Neoconservative doesn't mean "Jews and their supporters" or else you could call a large chunk of the LLL's like Michael Lerner Neoconservative

I've only seen people like Kristol, Krauthammer, Friedman, Feith, Wolfowitz etc referred to as "neocons" and they fit the definition

Read it from a Jewish source if it makes you feel better
The war in Iraq was conceived by 25 neoconservative intellectuals, most of them Jewish, who are pushing President Bush to change the course of history.

363 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:46:18pm

Manyoso -- You're not used to getting your information from the printed word, are you?

Hayes made conclusions based on the information in the memo. The DoD said "those aren't our conclusions".

The DoD did NOT say "there are no connections" or "the memo was fake". They said "those aren't our conclusions".

All you're doing is admitting that you can't deal with the information in the memo and prefer to play games. Once more, how does the information in the memo change your opinions?

364 Malik al-Malook  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:47:46pm

Moshe: Do you really need to see all the stories about neo-conservatives and the individuals that have been labeled such in the media, intarweb and blogosphere?

Even if one was to get their news through leftish screed from Robert Scheer and the gang the neo-conservative labels would be quite clear.

365 Malik al-Malook  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:48:30pm

Moshe: Also, I still have post #354 up as a response for you. ;)

366 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:49:09pm

And just to be clear Manyoso, "the case is closed" was Hayes' argument, not the content of the memo. No, we don't have the complete memo, but from what's presented in the story we have quite a bit of information.

Deal with that information, not with the article's title. Are you capable of doing that?

367 Malik al-Malook  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:50:22pm

OT: What's the verdict on Atrios? I checked out the site and it just looks like every other Dean supporter website. That and I know about the Don Luskin Blog lawsuit dealy.

368 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:51:16pm

Moshe -

I'm referring to the way in which the term "neoconservative" is used by LLL moonbats, not its generally accepted meaning.

369 HULUGU  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:51:47pm

guys-guys-gals-gals--goys also--why waste chuck's bandwidth--why not refer all sexual inverts like "horny in the dark" to alan's thread--the smegmahead should just be alaned and genug--btw--this was the worst possible news day to leak this memo--when people/organizations want to bury bad stories about themselves, they always put it out on friday night after the close so it gets printed in saturday's paper which is not as widly read as during the week's or sunday's--so i'm really interested who leaked this on such a poor news day for coverage-- any ideas?

370 Joshua  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:56:14pm

Lark- calculations are all based on "all things staying the same"---all things do not stay the same, there are millions of extenuating circumstances. For instance, an environmental group bet a captialist think tank that a set of 15 resources would rise in price in a certain period of time, the bet was 1500 dollars, the time period 25 years. In 1989, the capitalist think tank won, even though all earlier calculations had "proven" the resources would be more expensive. Its economics 101, you cannot know what will happen in 10 years, you are not psychic, by that time the LLL will be so marginalized we will just being tapping Alaskan reserves, then what, or when we develop alternative fuels. You are an amazing man, you think some expertise in one or two fields makes you psychic and all-knowing. The law of diminishing returns applies to all things, that means we will run out of our ability to find new resources before we run out of resources. Learn statistical mathematics before you start using statistics.

371 Jim  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:58:10pm

Frank and Moshe,

"Neocon" also is used to mean an American in favor of using the military to bring democracy and liberty to the world. That is the "sneer" meaning of the term, too, when used by liberals who are against such a policy, being more partial to socialist authoritarianism.

372 Evariste's Zaide  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 5:58:42pm

Michael Lerner AND Haaretz in the same post!?!?

ROFLMAO! Oh shit! This is too freakin' rich! My sides hurt.
Maybe, next, we'll hear from a Shimoon Peresite. HAR!
Talk about your comic relief.

373 manyoso  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:00:55pm

Crawford, the memo doesn't change my opinions about anything. I do not have the proper information, training or ability to dissect raw intelligence without significant help or other informed facts and neither do you or the hacks at the Weekly Standard. The memo was raw intelligence just as the bogus Iraq/Niger/Uranium was raw intelligence. It does not prove nor disprove shit until it is vetted and fact checked. Nevertheless, the WS article wasted no time in concluding, based on this unfiltered raw intelligence, that the case was closed... precisely because this fit their idealogical aims. The same thing the administration is guilty of with the larger body of raw intelligence surrounding the case for the Iraq war. Just a bunch of uncritical stovepiping that is now resulted (and continues to result) in the loss of real American lives. And many Iraqi, Italian, French, etc, etc, lives too.

374 Glen Wishard  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:02:46pm

Frank IBC:

Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al have been "conservative" all of their lives - they don't seem the least bit "neo" to me...so why are they being called "neoconservatives"?

Neoconservative doesn't just mean ex-liberal; and it's not just for former Trotskyist intellectuals anymore.

Neoconservatism (in general) means opposition to "Country Club Republicans", isolationism, and other undesirable aspects of the old conservativism (Paleoconservatism).

To the Left, "Neoconservative" means:

A. Jewish
B. Probably Jewish (kind of looks Jewish)
C. Has a Jewish person on his staff
D. Gets money from rich people - who are probably Jewish
E. Is controlled by a microchip implanted in his brain by a doctor (who was probably not a good liberal Anglo-Saxon Episcopalian)

375 Yehudit  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:02:51pm
you here are denying the genocide (amnesty/red cross/ UN ) the crimes against humanity that israel is commiting. against palestinians.

Oh the UN and the Red Cross. Such objective truth-seeking organizations, with no anti-Jewish agenda. Right.

"Genocide" has a particular meaning. Look it up. Israel isn't practicing genocide on anyone.

BTW as many Palestinians are killed by each other as by Israelis. So are they practicing genocide on each other? The UN needs to be alerted!

376 Moshe  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:05:57pm

#354 - Malik But lets take pre-Kuwait invasion to get a good look at Iraqi oil production

Oil production is basically irrelevant. Production doesn't say anything about what the actual financial possibilities are.

What is relevant, and what we should be discussing is total known oil deposits.

While Iraq may not have been producing a lot in 1988 that doesn't prove much. It was a very screwed up war torn country at that time - hundreds of thousands were dead and much of the country was in ruins. However it had and still has one of the world's largest known oil deposits.

The profits that Israel's entrepreneurs might produce in Iraq are minimal compared to the benefits that will be forthcoming should Israel's government succeed in realizing a couple of major infrastructure projects, notably the disused Mosul-Haifa pipeline. Israeli Infrastructure Minister Joseph Paritzky has been pursuing the idea of reopening the pipeline.
Asia Times

An intriguing pointer to one potentially significant benefit was a report by Haaretz on 31 March that minister for national infrastructures Joseph Paritzky was considering the possibility of reopening the long-defunct oil pipeline from Mosul to the Mediterranean port of Haifa. With Israel lacking energy resources of its own and depending on highly expensive oil from Russia, reopening the pipeline would transform its economy.
Janes Intelligence Report

Israel is exploring the possibility of reactivating the old oil pipeline from Mosul, in Iraq, to Haifa after the war with Iraq and the anticipated change of rule in Baghdad. ...... Several attempts have been made to renew the flow of oil through the pipeline to Haifa - the last one during the Iran-Iraq war - but all have failed.
Jewish Agency for Israel

377 Malik al-Malook  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:05:58pm

#373 manyoso

By that standard your opinion of the NY Times Op/Ed piece by one Joe Wilson is also that of a non-intelligence expert "hack". Is that correct?

What are your standards for alotting one the gratitude to analyze and offer conlusions on intelligence information?

378 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:08:58pm

Manyoso -- In other words, you prefer not to be confused with facts.

There's no point in arguing any further with you; anyone who reacts to evidence contrary to their position with denial of its existence is not worth the time.

379 Malik al-Malook  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:11:49pm

#376 Moshe

These articles are about Israel possibly reopening a pipeline to Mosul. I'm sorry, I'm not reading in between the lines if you are asking me to. Now Israel is mentioned in succession with the United States seeking to dominate the world's petro resources. Help me out buddy.

380 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:12:00pm

#376 Moshe -

A very pleasant side effect of that pipeline, is that tolls collected on the Suez Canal might drop more than a little bit.

381 Adam in MA  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:13:57pm

Malik, no my opinion of Joe Wilson's op-ed is also informed by the *fact* that the Niger uranium case was a blatant forgery or did you miss that.

Crawford, we must disagree upon the definition of "facts". Are you of the opinion that the Niger uranium connection was also a "fact" of raw intelligence? That it was not a blatant forgery? If you are of this opinion then I will concur on this point; there is no reason to argue with you further since you are incapable of discriminating between real evidence and forged evidence.

382 Teacake  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:15:52pm

The people out to kill you are going to be killed while trying to kill the people who kill you defending themselves. That's not genocide even if the people who's aim in life is to kill you are all of the same nationality or what ever... genocide would be if for no aparent reason we decided to get rid of all arabs off the face of the earth... get a brain.

383 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:36:24pm

#381 -- Who are you? Are you "manyoso" changing names? Why?

Yes, the Niger story appears to be false. So what? Bush referred to British intelligence reports that the Brits still stand behind. There's more to Africa than Niger, you know.

You still haven't dealt with any of the evidence presented in the memo. Do you believe the Czechs are lying about all the contacts between Atta and the IIS? That the two meetings the CIA "confirms" were illusory?

How do you justify ignoring this text from the memo?

Reporting entries #4, #11, #15, #16, #17, and #18, from different sources, corroborate each other and provide confirmation of meetings between al Qaeda operatives and Iraqi intelligence in Afghanistan and Pakistan. None of the reports have information on operational details or the purpose of such meetings. The covert nature of the relationship would indicate strict compartmentation [sic] of operations.

This isn't "raw" intelligence; this is a bit of analysis. What it's saying is that there are six independent sources saying al'Qaeda and Iraqi intelligence met. Don't you think the phrase "provide confirmation" means the author considered the evidence solid? Since all the sources had to sign off on the memo's content, and this phrase was left in the memo, doesn't that suggest that this is a solid conclusion to draw?

BTW, the DoD press release that's been harped on as "refutation" verifies that the memo was approved by the intelligence community:

The provision of the classified annex to the Intelligence Committee was cleared by other agencies and done with the permission of the Intelligence Community.

So, the CIA, NSA, and the DIA all signed off on the statement that meetings between al'Qaeda and the IIS were "confirmed".

What about this?

During a custodial interview, Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi [a senior al Qaeda operative] said he was told by an al Qaeda associate that he was tasked to travel to Iraq (1998) to establish a relationship with Iraqi intelligence to obtain poisons and gases training.

Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi has been captured; "custodial interview" means interrogation. OK, yeah, it's possible that he lied, but that's followed by:

CIA maintains that Ibn al-Shaykh's timeline is consistent with other sensitive reporting indicating that bin Laden asked Iraq in 1998 for advanced weapons, including CBW and "poisons."

In other words, the CIA says his statements agree with other information, so the likelihood of it all being a lie goes WAY down.

This isn't just "raw intelligence", this is information that has been cross-confirmed. How can you honestly justify continuing to ignore this?

384 Malik al-Malook  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:38:42pm

#381 Adam in MA(I guess you are maynaso)

"*fact* that the Niger uranium case was a blatant forgery or did you miss that." If you say it was a forgery than I certainly missed that. The statements made by the President in the SOTU however remain entirely accurate. The British stand by their Niger intelligence.

One thing I outright reject is Joe Wilson's explanation of his activities which to this day remain classified. I don't quite understand his work in Niger if it is reported that most of the Niger people do not concur meeting with Joe Wilson at all during his 8 day visit. I heard he sipped tea and went to Niger, but that's it.

385 manyoso  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:43:17pm

"This isn't just "raw intelligence", this is information that has been cross-confirmed. How can you honestly justify continuing to ignore this?"

The DoD says it *is* raw intelligence. How can *you* honestly justify continuing to ignore this?

Do you know better than the DoD about the status of this intelligence?

386 Charles  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:44:23pm

As anticipated, the spinning from the likes of Atrios and Daily Kos and Matthew Yglesias is so furious it's throwing off sparks of sheer stupidity.

As Robert Crawford said, there is absolutely nothing in the release from the Department of Defense that disputes the actual content of the memo. The DoD simply says that the conclusions reached by Stephen Hayes are not their conclusions. It takes a true simpleton to read this as a refutation of Hayes' article -- a simpleton, or a person who can't acknowledge the facts because he/she is utterly blinded by unexamined ideology.

It's going to take a very long time for the Democratic party to recover from the damage they are inflicting on themselves with this stunning failure of intellect, morality, and common sense. And as a former Democrat myself, I say this with a heavy heart.

387 addison  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:46:05pm

Joe Wilson is his own worst enemy in terms of integrity and professionalism. His op-ed in the NYT essentially stated that he sipped green tea, asked people if there was any uranium around (they said "No"), and he came back to the US. To say his "investigation" was shallow would be an understatement of some magnitude.

Bush's statement in the State of The Union speech said "Africa", not "Niger" and it, as others have noted, rested on the backs of the British intelligence, not our own--the Brits stand by that intelligence to this day.

388 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:50:30pm

manyoso:

The DoD says it *is* raw intelligence. How can *you* honestly justify continuing to ignore this?

Do you know better than the DoD about the status of this intelligence?

I can read, manyoso, I can read. The memo clearly makes statements regarding the reliability of some of the information. I quoted some of that above, and you seem to have ignored it.

Furthermore, the DoD doesn't say it's ALL "raw" intelligence. It says:

The items listed in the classified annex were either raw reports or products

They do say it's not an analysis, but of the question of the relationship, not of the evidence itself:

The classified annex was not an analysis of the substantive issue of the relationship between Iraq and al Qaida, and it drew no conclusions.

In other words, you're misrepresenting the DoD release.

And you still haven't dealth with material actuall IN the memo, particularly the items that the memo itself says have been corroborated or confirmed. Why?

389 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 6:51:49pm

Charles -- I wish I could say I was surprised, but I'm not. The Left's primary means of dealing with the war has been denial, since just about 9-12-2001.

390 Moshe  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:06:04pm

#379 - Malik - Now Israel is mentioned in succession with the United States seeking to dominate the world's petro resources.

The whole world is trying to control petroleum resources

Modern economies run on petroleum.

I think what makes peoeple resent the neoconservatives in the administration is an impression - created by their behavior - that they are liars and thieves who push other people's kids to their deaths both for personal profit, and for the benefit of Israel, and in a way that is detrimental to the American people, and utterly without shame or remorse.

The Iraq war was based on lies, pushed to a large degree by people who used to work directly for Benjamin Netanyahu. Then once the war would be over, the US and Israel would be looking forward to profiting richly from the war.

Famous neocons like Richard Perle and various other members of the Defense Policy Board have been caught red handed in conflicts of interest - profiting from the war they promoted with lies and forgeries - by representing defense contractors while holding positions of enormous influence.

Then when he gets caught stealing, he lies about it. He claims Seymour Hersh made it all up, calls him a terrorist, and with lots of bluster, writes in the newspaper that he's going to sue - but then it turns out he was bluffing because he never files.

Israel wanted Iraq overthrown for many reasons which are virtually all either financial or strategic, but not related to Israel's survival. So that's why Israel and the neocons in the administration were pushing the whole time. The neocons set up a direct pipeline for bogus evidence to be passed from their Likud friends to the president's ear.

"Israeli intelligence officials had new evidence that Iraq was speeding up efforts to produce biological and chemical weapons, [Ranaan Gissin, a senior Sharon adviser] added." AP/Guardian

391 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:22:59pm

Moshe:

The Iraq war was based on lies, pushed to a large degree by people who used to work directly for Benjamin Netanyahu. Then once the war would be over, the US and Israel would be looking forward to profiting richly from the war.

This entire paragraph is a lie. Not one statement in it is true.

Doesn't say much about the rest of your writing, does it?

392 wa wa wombat  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:26:20pm

I love the sweeping generalizations in these comments. The memo was obviously leaked by a republican to a conservative newspaper. It doesn't get more partisan than that. That alone should undermine the credibilty of the article. The same way the Wilson's credibility is undermined because he's a democrat .. as some argue

393 Quiller  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:38:15pm


moshe
NY Times is reporting that DoD says Perle didn't break any laws. Not that it will matter to you. (I'm not sure how to link to this because I'm not signed up with the Times website; the headline was posted by Drudge). Of course, Perle's still guilty of being a Zionist, right?
And:

The Iraq war was based on lies

Really? Assuming for the sake of argument that your claim is true (huge assumption), the deed has been done and right now there are thousands of honest, sincere Americans and Iraqis over there struggling to turn it into something good and something right, as opposed to the way it was under Saddamn. Why do you seek to undermine this? Why must bitter little people like you keep striving to tear things down. Even if (again, solely for the sake of argument) Bush and Cheney and Israel and all the Neocons' motives are only power and profit, those don't have to be my motives for supporting Iraqi freedom. It's so sad how all you guys who sermonize about "the war for oil" and that Bush and Cheney and Big Oil are profiting from all of this never seemed to mind it when Saddamn and Uday and Qusay and all their kleptocratic cronies were the ones making money off of Iraq's oil supply.

(PS, this is my first ever post!)

394 Charles  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:38:32pm

I think "Moshe" just outed himself.

395 zulubaby  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:42:56pm

Moshe, did you respond to my question yet?

396 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:46:53pm

Ma Ma Moonbat -

So anything leaked by a Republican, to a "conservative newspaper" [sic - The Weekly Standard is a MAGAZINE] is a priori not credible?

Wilson's credibility wasn't undermined by the fact that he was a Democrat. It was undermined by the fact that he was a shamelessly partisan, publicity-seeking, firebreathing lunatic of the first order, who among other things, was in the habit of updating the media daily with his own fantasy obituary.

Hey, I don't think that Zell Miller's credibility is undermined by the fact that he was a Democrat, do you?

Thank you for your breathtakingly intelligent analysis.

397 Moshe  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:51:58pm

#391 - Robert Crawford This entire paragraph is a lie. Not one statement in it is true.

OK well I'd be curious to see you back that up with some evidence! But I guess I wouldn't be surprised if you don't.

Clearly the war was based on lies. Even the administration admits it presented forged and sometimes entirely bogus evidence. It just blames other parties like Britain.

Where are the hundreds of tons of VX gas, the nuclear bombs, all the 'illegal' missiles from N. Korea, the centrifuges etc etc. We've been there for 7 months and haven't found squat.

Wolfowitz and Feith both worked for Netanyahu's government writing policy papers - advice.

In 1996, Perle was advising both Robert Dole in the USA and Netanyahu in Israel

I also showed that bogus intelligence about Iraq's bio/chem production was being fed via Israel right there in #390

I gave proof of Israel looking forward to the oil before the war even started in #376 - straight from the Israeli Government

Robert - are you for real ? I'm still trying to figure out which part of that sentence you think is false

398 Frank IBC, Hounded to Death by "FrankIBCWatch"  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 7:59:24pm

I think what makes peo...ple resent the neoconservatives in the administration is an impression - created by their behavior - that they are liars and thieves who push other people's kids to their deaths both for personal profit, and for the benefit of Israel, and in a way that is detrimental to the American people, and utterly without shame or remorse.

What, are you accusing me of calling them liars, theives, profiteers, stooges for Israel? Naaah...it's just an impression they created...
/Moshe

Who here wants to bet that "Moshe" is his real name?

Isn't it funny how Moshe's use of the term "Neoconservative" contradicts his position in #362?

I do give him credit - he was able to restrain the most intense aspects of his moonbattiness for quite a while.

Like I said earlier, who let the Atriolls in? (Trying desperately to add a new word to the LGF Lexicon)

399 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:02:10pm

399...

400 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:04:26pm

400!!!

(Sorry, just had to...)

401 DOD  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:06:55pm

What's up with this?

402 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:08:16pm

so-called-Moshe:

Sorry, I misinterpreted your #376. Are you suggesting that the potential Israeli oil pipelines are NOT good things?

403 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:10:30pm
Clearly the war was based on lies. Even the administration admits it presented forged and sometimes entirely bogus evidence. It just blames other parties like Britain.

And this paragraph is a lie.

Do you do nothing but lie?

The administration didn't "blame" Britain; they used British intelligence that isn't related to the Niger memo or that idiot Watson's vacation in Niger! Your claim is a lie.

The Iraq war was based on lies,

This is a lie because there has always been plenty of evidence of Saddam's ties to terrorism, his willingness to use violence, and his continuing drive to acquire WMD. The administration claims are based on information like that included in the memo leaked yesterday, information that the anti-war crowd seems more interested in ignoring than reading.

pushed to a large degree by people who used to work directly for Benjamin Netanyahu.

So? That has bearing only on the paranoid, anti-semitic fantasies that the war was done for Israel's benefit. More importantly, "pushed to a large degree" is a dishonest way to ignore those who supported the idea of liberating Iraq who never did work for Netanyahu!

Like, for example, me. Or Kenneth Pollack.

Or Bill Clinton.

Then once the war would be over, the US and Israel would be looking forward to profiting richly from the war.

Oh, such a profit! $87 billion in expenses and aid!

Like I said, every statement in that paragraph is a lie.

Psst -- you might want to read a little more news. We have, in fact found centrifuges. As for the rest of it, well, they're still finding Japanese chemical shells in China, 60 years after WWII. The searchers aren't done yet.

404 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:12:43pm

Ma Ma Moonbat -

Not sure what your point is - would Conservatives be more credible if they leaked to Liberal media instead of conservative media?

405 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:12:46pm

#401 -- The DoD confirmed the memo's real and that the information in it had been vetted by the CIA, NSA, and DIA. They say they don't necessarily agree with Hayes' conclusion, but that he has the facts right.

Oh, and they don't support the idea of leaking confidential memos.

406 Moshe  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:14:14pm

#403 - So-called-Frank Sorry, I misinterpreted your #376. Are you suggesting that the potential Israeli oil pipelines are NOT good things?

I didn't take any position on the goodness of pipelines in #376

Trade is a good thing - the more intricate the web of trading between states, the more reluctant they will be to go to war because it would be economically harmful to all

Is getting the pipeline a good motivation for war in which many, many thousands of people get maimed or die? That's an entirely different question

407 Robert Crawford  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:15:00pm

No, Frank, he's saying that the only credible sources of information are liberals. In other words, he's saying he'll never listen to anything that doesn't confirm what he already believes.

408 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:15:44pm

pushed to a large degree by people who used to work directly for Benjamin Netanyahu.

He forgot to add:

{jarring organ chord}

409 Moshe  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:21:23pm

#403 - Robert Crawford:

Hm, yeah - I didn't think you would back your claim up with anything (from #391), and I was right

Clearly you're just trolling. I backed up my statement with copious references and you failed.

410 J.D.  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:21:33pm
.....by responding to state-sponsored terrorism solely by arresting and trying individual perpetrators, the U.S. government, in effect, invites such states to commit acts of terror in such a way as to leave behind a few relatively minor figures to be arrested, tried, and convicted. Done adroitly, this makes it unlikely that the larger, more important, and more difficult question of state sponsorship will ever be addressed.....

See the date on this article by Laurie Mylroie?

The National Interest, Winter, 1995/96 THE WORLD TRADE CENTER BOMB:
Who is Ramzi Yousef? And Why It Matters

411 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:23:36pm

So-called Moshe:

Is getting the pipeline a good motivation for war in which many, many thousands of people get maimed or die?

Are you suggesting that that was the sole, or primary, or even secondary motivation for the war?

Excuse me, but your slip is showing.

412 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:25:09pm

Sorry, the second and third paragraphs should NOT have been in Italics.

413 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:32:27pm

#411 Ma Ma Moonbat:

If you're referring to my #404, I was referring to your #392 in which you said

The memo was obviously leaked by a republican to a conservative newspaper.

Which appeared to suggest that only memos leaked by Democrats and/or to liberal newspapers are credible.

So please tell me what is wrong with my inference?

414 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:37:03pm

so-called-Moshe -

Do you understand the definition of "trolling"

415 Charles  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:39:53pm

"wa wa wombat" is banned for posting an obscene insult. His last comment was posted from an Egyptian account, by the way. Anything else this person posts will be deleted.

416 Right Wing Conspirator  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:41:49pm

#409 moshe

Sorry trolly. You are asking him to prove a negative with evidence. Sorry, can't be done. Well, it can be, but it would take up a shi*load of bandwith and a helluva lot of links. The easiest thing to do is have you prove your assertions, but somehow I don't think that will happen. Nighty night troll.

417 Right Wing Conspirator  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:47:25pm

#415 Charles

When did "wa wa wombat" do that, not saying it didn't but I was just looking for it and couldn't find a deleted statement. But then again I just learned to type in HTML tags so that meinz I ezn't 2 bryt.
PS- did you ever let it be known where "Alan" was posting from.

418 Moshe  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:50:57pm

#412 - so-called-Frank:

Are you suggesting that that was the sole, or primary, or even secondary motivation for the war?

1) based on the fact that the Israeli government had tried to get the Mosul - Haifa pipeline going multiple times in the past and that Israel knew that the US overthrowing the Iraqi regime could lead to the pipeline being opened again, clearly it played a factor. Israel's economy has been tanking since the 2nd intifadah

2) Israel provided 'evidence' of Iraq's supposed bio/chem program which has so far proven to be completely unfounded

3) Netanyahu came and testified/lobbied/scaremongered before US congress in favor of the war, pushed the myth that overthrowing Iraq would cause a domino-effect throughout the region. Finally he pushed for attacking Iran after Iraq.

Was the Haifa-Mosul oil pipeline the sole or primary motivation for the war? Of course not. I've never heard anyone claim that.

Did it play a factor? Of course it did. The Janes article says the US was making arrangements for the pipeline to reopen with the Iraqi exiles and Jordanians before the war, and according to the Israeli government URL I posted, Israel had coveted that pipeline ever since 1948, had tried to reopen it multiple times, and Ha'aretz wrote about it before the war. Billions of dollars are at stake so to claim that Israel just looked the other way and ignored that is rather naive, IMO.

419 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:56:21pm

Charles:

Was the deleted post in reference to my #413? {Giggling maniacly}

420 Darleen  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 8:58:56pm

wa wa wombat

The memo was obviously leaked by a republican to a conservative newspaper


Obviously? And what crystal ball are you using? Could it not have been any number of people disgusted and fed up and finally wanting to balance out the neo-treasonous Demo "trigger" memo?

No, of course not. The Dems on the Senate Committee are saints and above_it_all ...

421 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:02:45pm

#418 -

Was the Haifa-Mosul oil pipeline the sole or primary motivation for the war? Of course not. I've never heard anyone claim that.

Er, have you listened to your own posts? So just how big of a factor was it, according to you? Backtracking from your own posts yet again, I see.

422 Frank IBC  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:08:57pm

Moshe:

Just curious, how many calories do you burn up, talking out of two sides of your mouth?

423 Quiller  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:12:40pm
Is getting the pipeline a good motivation for war in which many, many thousands of people get maimed or die?

mushy moshe:
Would leaving the Taliban in control of the Afghan people be a good thing? Would leaving the Baathist regime with it's boot on the Iraqi people's throats and WMD programs intact be good? Many, many more thousands died at Saddam's hands than have in this war. Regardless of any damn pipeline, and despite all these "motivations" you keep harping about, there are other effects of the Afghan and Iraqi campaigns besides access to oil. Afghanistan is free and far less friendly to terrorists than it once was. Iraq too is free and is no longer a threat to its neighbors or to the U.S.; and, as in Afghanistan, the Iraqi campaign is forward movement in the WoT. Terrorists are on the run. Screw your conspiratorial "motivations" -- look at results. You make it seem as if these two military campaigns occurred solely in the context of this alleged Israeli lust for oil. You're ignoring the real-world dampening effect on the ability of terrorist groups to find safe haven and state sponsorship brought about by the two campaigns. Whether that was the motivation or not (& I believe it was), it is going to be the effect. You sad fool. It doesn't matter whether Israel "covets" some stupid pipeline. Many of us simply covet a world where we don't have to worry about waking up one day to discover New York has been nuked or our water supply has been poisoned by jihadists. Regardless of oil, regardless of you conspiracy theories, the Afghan and Iraq campaigns are bringing us closer to such a world.

424 Charles  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 9:15:34pm

The "wombat" character is playing proxy games, but his posts will continue to be deleted.

NOTE: If you see one of his droppings, do not reply to it, because it's going to be deleted, and your reply will be wasted energy. This is why I constantly beg our readers to ignore the obvious trolls. (Not that it does me any good.)

425 Moshe  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:00:01pm

#421 - so-called-Frank:

So just how big of a factor was it, according to you?

That's impossible to say without knowing the internal processes and discussions that the public does not currently have access to

You're asking me to wildly speculate, which I'm not willing to do. What I did do was draw a conclusion from what the facts of Israeli government said and from reliable reports from fairly unbiased sources.

Backtracking from your own posts yet again, I see.

Not at all. Which post do you think I'm backtracking from? Please quote back the exact part you're referring to

You asked if I thought it was the sole or primary motivation and I said no. I stand by my conclusion from Israel's own statements that it was a factor.

-----------

#432 - Quiller :

Would leaving the Baathist regime with it's boot on the Iraqi people's throats and WMD programs intact be good?

The US bankrolled Iraq during the years he was filling all those mass graves with Kurds. I don't think the Baathist regime was good - I think it was horrible.

However I don't think that realistically played any factor at all in the decision to go to war. The vast majority of atrocities happened over 20 years ago so we can't change history.

Many, many more thousands died at Saddam's hands than have in this war.

Well, the war isn't over yet is it.

If you add the first gulf war + this war, and add the deaths from the US-backed UN sanctions it's debatable whether Saddam killed more or the US did, but again this is meaningless. The US didn't do anything to stop the killing when it was actually going on, and anything we do now doesn't bring those people back.

And how do his 20+ year old atrocities justify even more killing? Saddam killed perhaps tens of thousands of kurds, when they tried to revolt 20 years ago, so now that justifies us killing tens of thousands of other people, 20 years after we were complicit in the death of the kurds in the first place ?

Regardless of any damn pipeline, and despite all these "motivations" you keep harping about, there are other effects of the Afghan and Iraqi campaigns besides access to oil.

I didn't say there weren't

Afghanistan is free and far less friendly to terrorists than it once was.

Afghanistan isn't free by any definition I know. True, Saddam isn't in control any longer. But it's occupied by foreign armies and it's not democratic. It's not autonomous, it doesn't have control over its own territory.

I don't know what you're reading but I read of neo-Taliban movements and car bombs in Kabul. The situation doesn't seem that much better in Afghanistan than it does in Iraq.

If you've forgotten, the goal wasn't to make Afghanistan "less friendly" to terrorists. It was to eliminate terror in Afghanistan.

Iraq too is free and is no longer a threat to its neighbors or to the U.S.

Again, Iraq isn't free by any definition I know. True, the Taliban are not officially in control over the entire country anymore. But it's not democratic, it's occupied by foreign armies, it's not autonomous and it doesn't have control over its own territory.

and, as in Afghanistan, the Iraqi campaign is forward movement in the WoT.

No Iraq is not. In fact it's a step backwards because now instead of less terrorists, there are many more terrorists attacking Americans and killing them.

You're ignoring the real-world dampening effect on the ability of terrorist groups to find safe haven and state sponsorship brought about by the two campaigns.

Am I ? Have you ever played whack-a-mole ?

When the US invaded Afghanistan, the Taliban and Al Qaeda simply fled to Pakistan.

When the US invaded Iraq, the Saddam regime mostly fled to Syria.

If we're making it so safe in Afghanistan and Iraq then why do carbombs keep going off and helicopters keep getting shot down with RPGs at increasing rates daily ?

The US is just moving terrorists from here to there, and killing a few here and there but at this rate the US is never going to "end terror" because the US policy has been creating terrorists faster than it kills them - we're only making the job of terror recruiters that much easier

Regardless of oil, regardless of you conspiracy theories, the Afghan and Iraq campaigns are bringing us closer to such a world.

Yeah - one step forward, 5 steps back

426 Yehudit  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:37:25pm

Is this turning into another thread that breaks the server?
:-)

427 Short Fat Corporal  Sat, Nov 15, 2003 10:58:35pm

So what's your solution then Moshe?

Elect a Democrat, bring our troops back here, then wait to be bombed here?

The central point to this, which you are showing yourself adept at advoiding, is that these Muslim terrorists want us to bow down to them, either as more mind warped Muslim converts or as dhimmis. Until you are honest enough to admit that, and stop dancing around BS issues (the Israelis started the war for a secret oil pipeline) or pointing out the obvious, but inconsequential (the Ba'athists or the Al'Queda are trying to kill Americans), there is no point in discussing the issue with you.

I say that the fact that the Al Queada, et al, hates us, and continues to attack our troops is inconsequential due to the fact that military Americans are doing the fighting and dieing overseas instead of civilian Americans dying here. Don't even attempt to twist my words to likening their deaths as inconsequential

A more appropriate deviation of this paticular thread would be discussing the 5th column tendencies of the "American" press, and how to make sure the general public is aware of all the facts; not what the Deomcrats/press decide which facts to dole out and twist.

428 Chas  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 1:27:36am

HAve many of you (or any for that matter) worked out what the cause of all this trouble is?
1) My enemy's enemy is my friend. This is so much bullshit and needs to be attacked at every use but is standard doctrine in geo-politics. It is the reason that both Saddam and Osama were recipient's of enormous quantities of US money and weapons. The deals and idiocy that put SH and OBL in their positions of power are being made again in Iraq and Afghanistan but with different 'clients'. Dr Frankenstein was destroyed by his monster as soon as he lost control of it.

2) Raised in a refugee camp. Do you really understand what it might be like to be born and raised in one of those hellholes? Can you imagine any aspect of spending your whole life as a military-oppressed 'citizen' of what are death camps by another name. Add to that, no chance of a job, no healthcare, very little food. The only surplus is AK-47s.
Throw in some opportunistic religious fundamentalism and you've got yourself a terrorist cabbage patch.

3) Western hypocrisy. It isn't hard to find examples of US, British and French hypocrisy at any level. Weren't the Afghans promised a reconstruction once the Soviets were kicked out? Did it happen?
Isn't the world still full of despots and ruling-class criminals? Some of them arguably more evil than Saddam? Why aren't the same rules and judgements being applied to them?


Remember how the US supported the first Vietnamese declaration of independence?
Remember how the US supported the regime of Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden back in the day?
Remember how we have always been at war with Oceania?

429 aaron's rantblog  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 1:38:51am

#8 RFK was ALSO murdered by a Palestinian, Sirhan Sirhan.

#11 I would NOT want to play poker with Dubya. I agree with you COMPLETELY.

#12 It was Jennings' bottom.

#53 There were also recent videotaping of Jewish girl's high schools in Baltimore.

#69 Do THIS and THIS answer you?

#75 Any bets that all four are Labor Party members appointed by the Peresites?

#114 That's a term from the Department of Redundancy Department.

And to all the remaining Muslims and their watermelon (green outside, red inside) Dhimmicrat apologists... EAT SOME KORAN CAKE!!!

Folks, is there ANY way to get a grassroots effort to get Victor Davis Hanson to write for Dubya? He needs help in the communications department... desperately. VDH is this generation's Winston Churchill.

I was in favor of deporting Arabs from Gaza and Judea and Samaria, but I may have to focus on the home front by advocating deporting Dhimmicrats to Canada and Mexico, first.

430 matteo  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 1:40:52am

charles,

you forgot to put the entire text of the DOD statement on this "clase closed" thing on your front page as well.

[Link: www.dod.mil...]

"money quote":

_The classified annex was not an analysis of the substantive issue of the relationship between Iraq and al Qaida, and it drew no conclusions._



---

those damn Peaceniks must have invaded the Pentagon, as well

431 HA  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 1:42:04am

The Democrats are conducting a systematic, orchestrated campaign of lies in order to undermine the war effort. It can no longer be denied that the Democrats have known for years that Saddam and Al Qaeda had extensive ties going back years.

The only question now is WHAT DID THE DEMOCRATS KNOW AND WHEN DID THEY KNOW IT!

432 aaron's rantblog  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 1:46:14am

#430 I think it's quite conceivable that anti-idiotarians are capable of drawing their own conclusions.

The vast left-wing Dhimmicrat media empire (Jennings, LA Times, NY Times, et al), on the other hand, behave as if there is no truth unless they spoon feed it to Joe and Jane Sixpack. Post Rush & Fox, Joe and Jane are FINALLY hearing the non-suicidal side of the story.

Dhimmicrats are "useful idiots" to the Dhimmicidal Maniac Minions of Islam.

433 Frank IBC  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 5:23:37am

Musa said:

In #425: Afghanistan isn't free by any definition I know. True, Saddam isn't in control any longer.

Duh????

In his #390 and #412, Musa alleges that the proposed re-opening of the Mosul-Haifa pipeline was a, if not THE major motive for for the war:

#390

The Iraq war was based on lies, pushed to a large degree by people who used to work directly for Benjamin Netanyahu. Then once the war would be over, the US and Israel would be looking forward to profiting richly from the war....

Israel wanted Iraq overthrown for many reasons which are virtually all either financial or strategic, but not related to Israel's survival. So that's why Israel and the neocons in the administration were pushing the whole time. The neocons set up a direct pipeline for bogus evidence to be passed from their Likud friends to the president's ear.

#418

based on the fact that the Israeli government had tried to get the Mosul - Haifa pipeline going multiple times in the past and that Israel knew that the US overthrowing the Iraqi regime could lead to the pipeline being opened again, clearly it played a factor. Israel's economy has been tanking since the 2nd intifadah

In my response to my calling his BS in my #411, where I asked him just how big a role this pipleline supposedly played in this war, Musa dodgingly replies:

#418:

Was the Haifa-Mosul oil pipeline the sole or primary motivation for the war? Of course not. I've never heard anyone claim that..

And further dodges...

#425:

That's impossible to say without knowing the internal processes and discussions that the public does not currently have access to

You're asking me to wildly speculate, which I'm not willing to do.

This is getting more and more hilarious. Your slimy evasiveness is absolutely incredible.

Hey, Gang - let's all do the Moshe Two-Step!

434 Charles  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 5:59:32am

Don't forget, "Moshe" first appeared at LGF gloating over the report of the former Shin Bet officials who want Israel to adopt the latest suicidal deal negotiated with terrorists by Israeli leftists -- the so-called "Geneva Accords."

From there, "Moshe" the pseudo-Jew segued into the standard leftist cant, seasoned with a big dash of antisemitism and conspiracy theory.

We've got several robots infesting the board in the past few days, regurgitating their pre-programmed propaganda with no intention to learn or discuss anything. I've had to ban a couple of them when they collapsed into raving insults. So far this "Moshe" bot is at least keeping it civil -- but don't fool yourself into thinking you'll make a dent in its hardened steel casing.

435 Glenmore  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 6:15:39am

#384 Wilson/Niger

I too am curious about what Joe Wilson was really doing in Niger, and why he was selected to do it. Perhaps he truly was sent because of his wife - as a COVER for her going. Did his wife accompany him on that trip?

Perhaps we can make a trade of the White House staffer who leaked Plame's ID for the Senator (staffer) who generated that Intelligence Committee abuse plan?

I had also wondered about the meaning of "LLL", and had guessed it from context - though also came up with 'Lying Leftist Lunatics'. Seems like a lot of redundancy in both though.

436 view from Ireland  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 6:39:49am

Ah, the capacity for doublethink from Charles and his acolytes marches on relentlessly. I would have thought that the difference between crying 'Wolf!' and proving the existence of said wolf were clearly distinct?
Case closed? Nope.
Case proven? Nope
What we have here is another rerun of the WMD debacle. Bush and his administration claimed that Saddam was sitting on a bunch of WMD, and had all sorts of intelligence to support that claim. Sadly (or not) it seems that this wasn't strictly true, and the cries of 'Wolf!' became tainted with an air of hype and fabrication.
This memo (illegally publicised - where are the standard LGF cries of 'Treason!'?) has been clearly defined by the DoD as a collection of unsubstantiated material, some from the people that brought us the pre-war WMD 'evidence', some from unknown provenance, which proves nothing.

OT: I'm just back from a trip to the US, where I unsurprisingly found little evidence of the sort of fringe xenophobia and warmongering propounded by LGF. Following on from a stimulating lecture by Art Spiegelman (or is he yet another 'self loathing jew' for the list?), and his response to 9/11, Bush and the 'war on terror' in Dublin a couple of weeks ago, it's confirmed my faith in the majority of clear-thinking Americans. That and 'Queer Eye for the Straight Guy' give me hope ;)

437 black_flag  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 7:02:20am

vfi,
your pathetic, get thee back to ireland and there ye remain.

438 zulubaby  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 7:05:19am

Oh G-d, not her again.

439 j-damn  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 7:17:03am
HAve many of you (or any for that matter) worked out what the cause of all this trouble is?

Who cares? "Gee, doc, how did the cancer get there?" Chemo the f*cker, already.

Raised in a refugee camp. Do you really understand what it might be like to be born and raised in one of those hellholes?

Who cares? It wasn't me who listened the governments of Jordan, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq in 1948. It wasn't the US who told those people to leave their homes and possessions and, sure, they could come back right after we killed those damned jews and dumped them into the Mediterranean. Tough. F*cking. Sh*t.

Isn't the world still full of despots and ruling-class criminals? Some of them arguably more evil than Saddam? Why aren't the same rules and judgements being applied to them?

Because people like you would use your own doublethink & Orwellian language to oppose those operations every step of the way, too.

Run along...don't you have some goalposts to move?

440 Todd  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 7:37:22am

Wow - this memo has everything that someone would want to read after the fact. Amazing consistency!

441 Bleeding Heart Conservative  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 7:53:39am

Vfi, you like all of your typ, seem eager to believe the best of Saddam and the worst of the US.

Why?

442 Right Brain  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 8:10:07am

#436

Your misunderstanding regarding the WMD in Iraq seems fundamental to your worldview your self-belief that the search is over and none were found; nothing could be further from the truth. The "Interim Progress Report on the Activities of the Iraq Survey Group" 10/2/03 stated that presently the 1,400 person team looking for WMD in Iraq has visited only 10 of the known 130 sites, that is less than 8%, many of those yet to be checked are massive, one is fifty square miles in size. One of the sites they visited was not on the list as it was unknown to the UN: an underground network of biological weapons labs replete with an underground prison designed to test virus and bacterium on human subjects, this group of labs were current, in use, and in each one we found piles of burning documents and computers with smashed hard drives. The report states that this program “ involved thousands of people, billions of dollars, and were elaborately shielded by security and deception operations.” What is your theory of why they were there, installed in underground vaults with smoldering documents in piles? Were they developing a new toothpaste? In each of the seven years that the United Nations looked for WMD in Iraq they found them, then they were kicked out. What is your theory, that they threw out the inspectors in 1998 and then Iraq disarmed on its own?

I recently had dinner with Jerry Adams and entourage in NYC, and I am happy to report that these Irishmen exhibited none of the self-delusion, bitterness, and factual ignorance rife in your posts.

443 Leah  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 8:18:05am

OT but really not. All of a sudden, regular everyday citizens are EXPERTS at making conclusions or NOT making conclusions out of raw intelligence reports. Hmmm. Seems to ME..when the raw intelligence supports THEIR side..then it is not raw..but understandably true..on the other hand...just the opposite with raw intelligence to the CIA..ONLY...that points to trouble in the world for Americans from the other side. Gosh..We need to get these "experts" right to work in ANALYZING raw intelligence. Forget about training in this area..Why bother with THAT. Dontcha love it?

Where were these people all these years when there was a FLOOD of raw intelligence reports indicating that IF we didn't DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT the West would be at WAR with the "awakened" Islam? So I say...What did Arabists in the US KNOW and WHEN did they know it? And when they absolutely knew it DID they obfuscate and CONTINUE to Lobby for the Islamic World.?.And what did they GAIN from it? Did they HIDE this upcoming "problem" cause they were given GOODIES by the Islamic World and fellow Arabists in the US? and Europe? Could you call that TRAITOROUS? And who have been ALLIES of the Islamic World going back to WW2...(put Ireland in that column unfortunately--Chas..Enemy of my Enemy...situation)..Who ELSE in the World has worked against the US and the Western Democracies ALL THIS TIME?

These are just SOME questions that need to be answered..but I guess SOME of these INSTANT Intelligence Experts can answer them...

444 Frank IBC  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 8:18:46am

#437 Black_Flag:

I'd prefer she not pollute my beloved ancestral land, either.

Chump don't want no hep, Chump don't get de hep. Jive ass fool ain't got no brains anyhow.

-Barbara Billingsly, Airplane

445 zulubaby  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 8:21:29am
I recently had dinner with Jerry Adams and entourage in NYC, and I am happy to report that these Irishmen exhibited none of the self-delusion, bitterness, and factual ignorance rife in your posts.

An elegant smack-down.

446 view from ireland  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 8:24:31am

#442  Right Brain

I'm assuming you mean Gerry Adams?
Perhaps this might enlighten you in relation to his, and his party's position on the war?:
[Link: archives.tcm.ie...]

UN inspectors found WMD in Iraq. They destroyed those WMD. They were not 'kicked out' of Iraq, but left prior to Clinton's bombing campaign, to ensure their safety:
[Link: www.fair.org...]

No WMD have been found in Iraq since the UN inspectors did their job, and prior to the war Powell made a variety of claims of evidence of specific instances of WMD that have come to nought. At present the evidence suggests that the Iraqi's claims in relation to WMD in the pre-war period are closer to the truth that the US administrations claims.

447 Leah  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 8:27:19am

Im not an expert in Intelligence either..but it seems to me..that we ought to know what the OTHER Intelligence Agencies and Groups are doing. There is such a thing as: STATE DEPT. INTELLIGENCE. Who are they? Whats been going on there for years? (as if I couldnt have a clue to whats going on there) and what part THAT group plays in all this...Hmmmm? Can you IMAGINE what might be going on there?

What about MILITARY INTELLIGENCE Groups? Some of them are considered MORE reliable than the CIA. Who are THEY? Who are the Arabists in THAT group?

Course DC CAB DRIVERS can tell us MORE about whats going on and who goes where and who goes with whom....Some "secrets" about the World arent so secret when you live and work in DC. and the surrounding area...An example is the Islamic Businesses...Cultural Centers..and Interest Sections (snicker snicker) in NORTHERN VA...EVERYONE knew these were bogus and everyone knew that money for Terrorism was being funnelled from these "Organizations"...You can start with naming the people in Govnt who KNEW about this...and why they let it go on and on and on....

448 view from ireland  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 8:29:01am

#445  zulubaby

An elegant smack-down.

If patent innacuracy is elegant.

449 zulubaby  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 8:36:55am
If patent innacuracy (sic) is elegant.

If typos are inaccuracies ...

450 view from ireland  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 8:37:32am

um, inaccuracy.

451 zulubaby  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 8:38:39am

Um, yeah.

452 Right Brain  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 8:45:19am

#446

Thanks for the correction of "Gerry" rather than "Jerry," his name tag said "Jerry" and the American press publishes him as such, I found 1600 instances of "Jerry Adams Pres. of Sinn Fein." One of my Irish grandfathers used Jerry and the other Gerry. But certainly it is better to refer to Mr. Adams by his preferred spelling.

The rest however is incorrect, a US President cannot "bomb" a country without the specific authorization of congress, prior to Nixon they could, but we put a stop to that decades ago. "Clinton's bombing campaign" was authorized by the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998. pp #9 from said act:

(9) Since March 1996, Iraq has systematically sought to deny weapons inspectors from the United Nations Special Commission on Iraq (UNSCOM) access to key facilities and documents, has on several occasions endangered the safe operation of UNSCOM helicopters transporting UNSCOM personnel in Iraq, and has persisted in a pattern of deception and concealment regarding the history of its weapons of mass destruction programs.

Hence your statement that they left to avoid getting hit by stuff lobbed from the air is nonsense.

453 view from ireland  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 8:50:32am

#451  zulubaby

Get over it. Adams opposed this war and there's multiple sources to prove it. No WMD have been found despite the claims before the war. This 'case closed' 'important' memo has been discounted as proof of anything by the DoD. Saddam didn't kick out the UN inspectors.
Have you anything you can actually dispute?

454 view from ireland  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 8:56:33am

#452  Right Brain

His name is Gerry, but that's not the real point. You managed to invert his position in relation to the war 100%.

The UN inspectors left Iraq because of the threat of bombing by US and UK forces. Clinton was president at the time, and made the decision to bomb. You can tinker with the phraseology all you like to avoid the realities, but that is why they left Iraq.

455 Conscientious cultural objector  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 9:02:25am

Islamonazis, feminazis... now some Orange twat.

By the paedophile tendencies of mohammad!!

Is there no end to this!?

456 Darleen  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 9:22:39am

Here's a giggle, LGF fans

the troll, manyoso (aka Adam from MA), is over at Citizen Smash spamming the exact same crappola he did here last night!

[Link: www.lt-smash.us...]

Nothing like challenging the orthodoxy of the "Bush Lied!" acolytes to send them scurrying with the same diatribes all over the place.

457 Right Brain  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 9:31:20am

#454 You need to go read #442 again, we have just started the search and it will go on for some time, your past tense grammar implies that the search has been completed, it has not. Better to say "none have been found to date despite the fact that they've looked at 8% of the known facilities." But that isn't as melodramatic. We both know as soon as some are found your camp will claim, without foundation because accusation is always enough, that they were planted. And how do you know what Gerry Adams said at our table regarding the war, nothing against it I can assure you of that. And if this leaked memo pans out, those who spoke against this war, and I am allowing for the "loyal opposition" of concerned citizens, are going to be viewed with nothing but contempt. History will not be kind to them.

Here the BBC has him as "Jerry" and "Gerry" in one page! Funny.

[Link: news.bbc.co.uk...]

458 Darleen  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 9:43:03am

VFI

No WMD have been found despite the claims before the war.

And? So? Who did NOT believe there were no WMD? And in case you missed it, UN 1441 was explicit about WMD AND WMD programs. Kay has already documented the ongoing WMD programs of Saddam's regime.

From Chomsky to Gore Vidal, the sheer idiocy of the anti-American-war crowd is on display ... ignore mass graves, ignore WMD & programs, ignore industrial shredders ... IGNORE IRAQI CITIZENS ... the world is threatened by America and Israel and any deviation from such religiously held faith must be countered.

The LLL neurosis has now edged into full-blown psychosis.

459 view from ireland  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 10:05:36am

#457  Right Brain

Kay has not produced one gram of WMD. All of the inspections (under Kay and prior to his investigation) has produced no WMD. Kays assertion of the discovery of potential sites of weapon research/production does not equate with the claims made about existant WMD before the war. There hasn't been any evidence to support the claims made before the war. Crying lack of time in discovery of such claimed weapons rings rather weak at this stage. Kay isn't going to dig up the entire desert looking for chemicals. If WMD were to be found, it would be on the back of the interregation of people involved in the WMD programme, and if theyt haven't produced anything by now, it's unlikely they will in the future.

I really have no interest in your dinner conversations btw. Adams has been repeatedly interviewed and recorded (with the majority of right thinking people) as opposing the war, and supporting a UN led, rather than US led solution to the problems in Iraq. Whether Adams chose to discuss this at one dinner sitting is of little importance. His position is on the record.

#458  Darleen
There haven't been any WMD to ignore. And when is the existance of the supposed 'industrial people shedder' story every going to be backed up by any actual evidence? Does 'stolen incubators' ring any bells?

460 Leah  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 10:08:00am

Somehow we got roped into trying to fit all information we KNOW to be true into so called "evidence" that would pass in the American Court System parameters. This is ridiculous!! While we are "futzing around" with making SURE our so called "evidence" is solid enough to pass American criminal trial tests..the Islamic World is laughing its head off and making PLANS. (so is China..they are watching) One of these days while we ponder this and that..one forth of our country could be blown away by Islamic Terrorists. SHEESH!!!

Is SOMEBODY going to wake up and say that in this day and age..we HAVE to have everyone playing by the same rules OR sadly, we have to adjust our previous thinking and possibly adjust the DEFINITION of the term "evidence"? The Arab World is "playing" the US and the West. WE have to get into the "game"..or else......

461 Ben F  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 10:11:22am

VFI--

Are you really as dense as you seem?

Secretary Powell went to the UN with evidence of active Iraqi WMD programs and active Iraqi efforts to conceal same from UN inspectors.

Both allegations have been conclusively confirmed by Kay's inspectors. One or another secific allegation may not have held up under closer scrutiny, but overall the intelligence upon which the war was based holds up extremely well.

Stockpiles of weapons have not been found, but this could be consistent with reports that they were shuttled to Syria. Plus, as Under Secretary Feith recently explained:

The debate right now is over did they actually have stockpiles as opposed to programs for chemical and biological weapons?

When it comes to chemical and biological weapons, if you have the program, you have the knowledge, you have the production capability. One can produce militarily significant quantities in very short order.

Furthermore, the Saddam Hussein regime had actually used chemical weapons. And so the danger that this regime, which advocated terrorism, supported it, rewarded it, had links with terrorist organizations and had these capabilities, that this regime might, if left alone, get to the point where it would be providing weapons of mass destruction to terrorist organization was a serious risk and went to what I said was the strategic heart of the problem. And so I think it was—that was the reason that it fitted in. That was I think the motive for taking this action. And I think that it was justified.

If you want to hold onto your views despite the evidence, go right ahead, but don't pretend that the evidence supports them. The facts that have emerged are all running against you.

462 William  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 10:14:13am

Kay has not produced one gram of WMD.

The burden was on Saddam to compy with UN Resolution 1441.

Saddam refused to comply.

UN Resolution 1441 -- Saddam's "final opportunity to comply" -- was therefore enforced.
 

463 William  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 10:16:44am

The UN inspectors left Iraq because of the threat of bombing by US and UK forces. Clinton was president at the time, and made the decision to bomb. You can tinker with the phraseology all you like to avoid the realities, but that is why they left Iraq.

Wrong again.



CNN
November 5, 1998

U.N. Security Council votes to condemn Iraq

The United Nations Security Council late Thursday voted unanimously to condemn Iraq and to demand that Baghdad immediately resume cooperation with U.N. weapons inspectors. Baghdad has already said it will not comply.

The resolution called Iraq's decision last week to halt cooperation with the U.N. Special Commission a "flagrant violation" of the 1991 resolution on Iraqi disarmament. It is the 45th U.N. resolution involving Iraq since the country invaded Kuwait in 1990.

[Link: www.cnn.com...]

464 vierw from ireland  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 10:26:04am

#463  William 

Sorry William. I'm right on this matter.

The United Nations Security Council held a special meeting Wednesday, after the chief U.N. weapons inspector suddenly pulled his entire inspection team out of Iraq.

Russia, which along with China opposes military action, called the meeting to question chief inspector Richard Butler about the withdrawal. "It is a precautionary move only," Butler said, "and I sincerely hope it is temporary."

Butler said he made the decision after receiving what he called "some recommendations" from the United States. He cited safety concerns amid an "increasingly hostile" atmosphere in Iraq as the U.S. prepares for possible airstrikes. Butler said 103 inspectors arrived by plane in Bahrain Wednesday night.


[Link: edition.cnn.com...]

465 zulubaby  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 10:26:23am
Get over it.

You're the one that tried to get snotty, calling a typo an inaccuracy, and now I must get over it?

Adams opposed this war and there's multiple sources to prove it. No WMD have been found despite the claims before the war. This 'case closed' 'important' memo has been discounted as proof of anything by the DoD. Saddam didn't kick out the UN inspectors.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz ... At this point you must bore even yourself.

Have you anything you can actually dispute?

Why bother? You're sly and dishonest and everyone knows it.

P.S. How are your ISM buddies?

466 Ernest Brown  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 10:33:55am

Art Spiegelman is indeed "self-hating" and has been called on it by individuals on all sides of the political spectrum, most notably Harvey Pekar, the anti-war leftist who writes AMERICAN SPLENDOR magazine.

467 vierw from ireland  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 10:44:23am

#461  Ben F
Spare me the sidestepping. You can't put the knowledge to produce WMD back in it's bottle once that knowledge exists. The issue was actual WMD's. Repeating the tired 'they smuggled them off to Syria' refrain without any evidence just won't wash in the real world, cheers.


Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.

George W. Bush, President
Address to the Nation, 3/17/2003


There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. And . . . as this operation continues, those weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who guard them.

General Tommy Franks, Commander in Chief, Central Command
Press Conference, 3/22/2003


One of our top objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are a number of sites.

Victoria Clarke, Pentagon Spokeswoman
Press Briefing, 3/22/2003


We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.

Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
ABC Interview, 3/30/2003


But make no mistake -- as I said earlier -- we have high confidence that they have weapons of mass destruction. That is what this war was about and it is about.

Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary
Press Briefing, 4/10/2003

Hans Blix had five months to find weapons. He found nothing. We've had five weeks. Come back to me in five months. If we haven't found any, we will have a credibility problem.I don't have any doubt that we will locate them. I think it takes time. They've obviously been deeply hidden, and it will require that we get the information from people who know where they are.

Charles Krauthammer, 4/22/03

468 Leah  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 10:46:08am

This is what happened...Yeah..Iraq completely and
totally divested itself of every kind of munitions..They didn't have to worry about IRAN and of course they also didn't have to worry about the Saudis either..They made
themselves totally DEFENSELESS....

Course they also had SEVEN MONTHS in which they could have..(course they didn't?) Moved, Hidden, Transfered whatever they wanted TO wherever they wanted..like perhaps SYRIA.. Lets all NOT use our common sense here ...

Just give me a total break ...Again, considering Saddam and who he IS and what he DID in the past..hevon forbid we think that Saddam might have been playing all kinds of hide and seek games with the entire world...

I heard that effective Biological Weapons can fit in a couple ROOMS. And Chemical Weapons...also can be hidden in a relatively small space..BOTH need a short time to ACTIVATE. As for Nukes..or PRE NUKES...look in The Bekka Valley..or somewhere in AFRICA... SO F*N EASY to relocate.

469 view from ireland  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 10:50:38am

#466  Ernest Brown

What a surprise.

If I call you 'self hating', does that make you so? How does one qualify to determine these 'self haters'?

Spiegelman strikes me as an enormously principled and brave man, who has no apparent issues of self worth/value. I suspect that you just don't like his politics, and that clouds your perspective.

470 William  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 10:53:11am

Sorry William. I'm right on this matter.

Not at all.  You omit the order of events.

The article I posted was from November 5th 1998, your article was from November 11th.

Here, try reading again:


CNN
November 5, 1998

U.N. Security Council votes to condemn Iraq

The United Nations Security Council late Thursday voted unanimously to condemn Iraq and to demand that Baghdad immediately resume cooperation with U.N. weapons inspectors. Baghdad has already said it will not comply.

The resolution called Iraq's decision last week to halt cooperation with the U.N. Special Commission a "flagrant violation" of the 1991 resolution on Iraqi disarmament. It is the 45th U.N. resolution involving Iraq since the country invaded Kuwait in 1990.

[Link: www.cnn.com...]


 
Step 1: The UN unanimously condemned Iraq for non-cooperation (after 44 prior resolutions).

Step 2: It was decided to to enforce Iraqi cooperation by force.


Further, from your own article from Nov 11, 1998:


Moscow has been in contact with Baghdad trying to get the Iraqis to resume cooperation and resolve the situation peacefully, which he stressed was the only real solution.

...

Iraq is still refusing to cooperate with weapons inspectors until the Security Council begins to lift the debilitating economic sanctions imposed since the Gulf War.

[Link: edition.cnn.com...]

Your intellectual honesty is nonexistent, I'm not sure why I even bother...
 

471 zulubaby  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 11:10:56am
Spiegelman strikes me as an enormously principled and brave man, who has no apparent issues of self worth/value.

Aah, yes, this coming from someone who believes that ...

There are no 'good and bad' terrorist acts, but there are decent people who are drawn into terrorism.

... and who can't even bring herself to condemn the brutal murder of a 7-month old baby.

view from Ireland, you wouldn't know "principled" if it jumped up and bit you in the face. Get over yourself, terrorist-apologist that you are. You make me sick.

472 William  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 11:11:53am

View from Ireland, you forgot to mention these quotes:


"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members...

It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."

Senator Hillary Clinton (Democrat, New York)
Addressing the US Senate
October 10, 2002
[Link: clinton.senate.gov...]

---

"Mr. President, I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security and that of our allies in the Persian Gulf region."

Senator John F. Kerry (Democrat, Massachusetts)
Addressing the US Senate
October 9, 2002
[Link: www.johnkerry.com...]

---

BOB SCHIEFFER, Chief Washington Correspondent:

And with us now is the Democratic presidential candidate Dick Gephardt. Congressman, you supported taking military action in Iraq. Do you think now it was the right thing to do?

REP. RICHARD GEPHARDT, D-MO, Democratic Presidential Candidate:

I do. I base my determination on what I heard from the CIA. I went out there a couple of times and talked to everybody, including George Tenet. I talked to people in the Clinton administration.

SCHIEFFER:

Well, let me just ask you, do you feel, Congressman, that you were misled?

GEPHARDT:

I don't. I asked very direct questions of the top people in the CIA and people who'd served in the Clinton administration. And they said they believed that Saddam Hussein either had weapons or had the components of weapons or the ability to quickly make weapons of mass destruction. What we're worried about is an A-bomb in a Ryder truck in New York, in Washington and St. Louis. It cannot happen. We have to prevent it from happening. And it was on that basis that I voted to do this.

Congressman Richard Gebhardt (Democrat, Montana)
Interviewed on CBS News "Face the Nation"
November 2, 2003
[Link: www.cbsnews.com...]

---

"In the next century, the community of nations may see more and more the very kind of threat Iraq poses now -- a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction ready to use them or provide them to terrorists, drug traffickers or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed.

If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow by the knowledge that they can act with impunity, even in the face of a clear message from the United Nations Security Council and clear evidence of a weapons of mass destruction program."

President Clinton
Address to Joint Chiefs of Staff and Pentagon staff
February 17, 1998
[Link: www.cnn.com...]

 

473 William  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 11:13:22am

"The global community -- in the form of the United Nations -- has declared repeatedly, through multiple resolutions, that the frightening prospect of a nuclear-armed Saddam cannot come to pass. But the U.N. has been unable to enforce those resolutions. We must eliminate that threat now, before it is too late.

But this isn't just a future threat. Saddam's existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq's enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East.

As the attacks of September 11 demonstrated, the immense destructiveness of modern technology means we can no longer afford to wait around for a smoking gun. September 11 demonstrated that the fact that an attack on our homeland has not yet occurred cannot give us any false sense of security that one will not occur in the future. We no longer have that luxury.

September 11 changed America. It made us realize we must deal differently with the very real threat of terrorism, whether it comes from shadowy groups operating in the mountains of Afghanistan or in 70 other countries around the world, including our own.

There has been some debate over how "imminent" a threat Iraq poses. I do believe that Iraq poses an imminent threat, but I also believe that after September 11, that question is increasingly outdated. It is in the nature of these weapons, and the way they are targeted against civilian populations, that documented capability and demonstrated intent may be the only warning we get. To insist on further evidence could put some of our fellow Americans at risk. Can we afford to take that chance? We cannot!

The President has rightly called Saddam Hussein's efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction a grave and gathering threat to Americans. The global community has tried but failed to address that threat over the past decade. I have come to the inescapable conclusion that the threat posed to America by Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction is so serious that despite the risks -- and we should not minimize the risks -- we must authorize the President to take the necessary steps to deal with that threat."

Senator John D. Rockefeller (Democrat, West Virginia)
Also a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee
Addressing the Senate
October 10, 2002
[Link: www.senate.gov...]

---

"Iraq is a long way from Ohio, but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."

President Clinton's Secretary of State Madeleine Albright
Town Hall Meeting on Iraq at Ohio State University
February 18, 1998
[Link: www.fas.org...]

---

"Imagine the consequences if Saddam fails to comply and we fail to act. Saddam will be emboldened, believing the international community has lost its will. He will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction. And some day, some way, I am certain, he will use that arsenal again, as he has ten times since 1983."

President Clinton's National Security Advisor Sandy Berger
Town Hall Meeting on Iraq at Ohio State University
February 18, 1998
[Link: www.fas.org...]

---

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."

Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (Democrat, California)
Also a member of the House Intelligence Committee
Statement on US Led Military Strike Against Iraq
December 16, 1998
[Link: www.house.gov...]

---

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."

Former Clinton Vice-President Al Gore
Speech to San Francisco Commonwealth Club
September 23, 2002
[Link: www.gore2004us.com...]

---

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability."

Robert C. Byrd
Former Ku Klux Klan recruiter, currently a US Senator (Democrat, West Virginia)
Addressing the US Senate
October 3, 2002
[Link: byrd.senate.gov...]

---

"Iraq appears not to have come to a genuine acceptance -- not even today -- of the disarmament, which was demanded of it and which it needs to carry out to win the confidence of the world and to live in peace."

Dr. Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector
Addressing the UN Security Council
January 27, 2003
[Link: www.un.org...]

---

"The nerve agent VX is one of the most toxic ever developed. 13,000 chemical bombs were dropped by the Iraqi Air Force between 1983 and 1988, while Iraq has declared that 19,500 bombs were consumed during this period. Thus, there is a discrepancy of 6,500 bombs. The amount of chemical agent in these bombs would be in the order of about 1,000 tonnes."

Dr. Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector
Addressing the UN Security Council
January 27, 2003
[Link: www.un.org...]

---

"The recent inspection find in the private home of a scientist of a box of some 3,000 pages of documents, much of it relating to the laser enrichment of uranium support a concern that has long existed that documents might be distributed to the homes of private individuals. ...we cannot help but think that the case might not be isolated and that such placements of documents is deliberate to make discovery difficult and to seek to shield documents by placing them in private homes."

Dr. Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector
Addressing the UN Security Council
January 27, 2003
[Link: www.un.org...]

---

"His regime threatens the safety of his people, the stability of his region, and the security of all the rest of us.

What if he fails to comply, and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction and continue to press for the release of the sanctions and continue to ignore the solemn commitments that he made?

Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction.

And some day, some way, I guarantee you, he'll use the arsenal."

President Clinton
Address to Joint Chiefs of Staff and Pentagon staff
February 17, 1998
[Link: www.cnn.com...]

 

474 William  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 11:21:15am

Last quote for the day:

"[W]e have evidence of meetings between Iraqi officials and leaders of al Qaeda, and testimony that Iraqi agents helped train al Qaeda operatives to use chemical and biological weapons. We also know that al Qaeda leaders have been, and are now, harbored in Iraq. ... Having reached the conclusion I have about the clear and present danger Saddam represents to the U.S., I want to give the president a limited but strong mandate to act against Saddam."

Senator Joseph Lieberman (Democrat, Connecticut)
"Why Democrats should support the president on Iraq"
The Wall Street Journal
October 7, 2002
[Link: www.opinionjournal.com...]

 

475 Ben F  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 11:48:51am

#112 Chris--

The story made the Post, sort of. That is, the Feith memo is mentioned in the body of a story that consists primarily of quotations of a report by Tony Cordesman of CSIS that includes notes of a briefing by David Kay including :No evidence of any Qraqi effort to transfer weapons of mass destruction or weapons to terrorists." I see no indication that Cordesman was even interviewed for the article; it looks as though Walter Pincus just pulled quotes from Cordesman's report.

Given that we do not know whether Cordesman's notes reflect what Kay said or merely Cordesman's interpretation, the Post's headline: "CIA Finds No Evidence Hussein Sought to Arm Terrorists," is irresponsible.

476 Dayadhvam  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 12:04:26pm

A little late to the game, but.

Seems we dropped off discussion of the DOD memo as conclusively saying they approve of all the information in Feith's report. Not the case.

"The provision of the classified annex to the Intelligence Committee was cleared by other agencies and done with the permission of the Intelligence Community."

This says the provision of the report-- not the actual material in the report itself-- was approved by 'other agencies'. In other words, all they did was allow Feith to give the report to the Intelligence Committee, to say nothing of whether the actual claims were true, doubtful, or false. And, later: "The classified annex was not an analysis of the substantive issue of the relationship between Iraq and al Qaida, and it drew no conclusions." I.e., it just presented once again a lot of the old information they've all seen already.

And what happened to such activity being "deplorable and illegal"?

477 Dayadhvam  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 12:10:11pm

Link should be to here. Sorry.

478 Ernest Brown  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 12:14:54pm

#469

Then you weren't paying attention if you ever read "Prisoner of the Hell Planet," (in MAUS) were you?

Spiegelman's mother killed herself as a result of her stay in the camps. Spiegelman himself was institutionalized and had a very rocky relationship with his father, who made no apologies for being a Holocaust survivor. It would be perfectly in character for him to adopt a "Stockholm syndrome" attitude of denial towards those anti-Semitic thugs who have declared their intention of murdering him in cold blood.
As I pointed out in my initial post, which you so cravenly & typically ignored, his perpetuation of anti-Semitic stereotypes is acknowledged even by people who share his view of the war.

479 Frank IBC  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 1:05:53pm

I think "Vierw from Ireland" needs to take a hint from "Ion Fist".

480 Frank IBC  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 1:25:53pm

The real reason the Wilson/Plame "Leak" Scandal died out, was that the Democrats were terrified that Sen. Robert Byrd might mispronounce "Niger" in a most unfortunate way.

481 Athos  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 2:04:18pm

What an unbelievable thread - we go from Loony as a Leftist Lark, to Moshe, to View From Idiocy.......it's a real closed minded troll-fest.

As Charles indicated earlier - there are morlocks on this thread that are so ingrained, so indoctrinated, that their notepads are barely an inch wide - to match the narrowness of their vision and acceptance of fact.

They will spin, and recite the talking points of the ISM, IRC, WWP, NOIN, and ANSWER until they utterly bore us to death - which in their feeble minds, exactly what they want to have happen.

No where will they answer the question - why are they supporting terrorism? why are they supporting someone who killed millions of his citizens over the past 20 years - including thousands with WMD that he doesn't have. Why - because they want the terrorists and stalinists / maoists to win. They, the "elite" are the only ones who are "intelligent" enough to decide what's fact and what is not.

Such complete wankers.


Remember, they only see what they believe, and never forget the LGF prayer.

482 zulubaby  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 2:19:41pm

Athos (#481)

I think Mark Steyn said it best:

Instead, it is the explosive European street that remains implacably pro-Saddam, pro-Yasser, pro-jihad, pro-Taliban misogynist homophobes, pro-anyone as long as they are anti-American.
483 piglet  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 2:40:26pm

Art Spiegelman wrote Maus. It is a masterpiece.
He is also a very troubled man, and his failure to understand the Iraq war and break with his old lefty dogma is disappointing. At the new yorker he produced many brave and challenging covers.

[Link: www.motherjones.com...]


Getting in Touch with My Inner Racist
By Art Spiegelman
September/October 1997 Issue

[Link: www.jewz.com...]

NEW YORK, June 11 (JTA) - Where pressure and persuasion have failed to grease the wheels of Israeli-Palestinian peace, cash will.


At least that's the thinking behind a new campaign powered by such figures as actor Ed Asner, novelist Michael Chabon and cartoonist Art Spiegelman.

They and other celebrity Jews, academics and religious leaders have signed on to a petition by the group Jewish Alliance for Justice and Peace, titled "A Call to Bring the Settlers Home to Israel."

The Chicago-based group, also known by its Hebrew name Brit Tzedek v'Shalom, sponsored national newspaper ads last week that call for offering around $3 billion in cash incentives to 16,000 settler families - or nearly $190,000 per family - to move back inside the Green Line, as Israel's pre-1967 border is known.

The money would come from U.S. foreign aid and from the European Union, according to the plan's backers.

How about asner writes a big check with some of that Mary Tyler More show money? Hey, View From Ireland,
how many dollars can we put you down for?

484 view from ireland  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 2:58:18pm

#470  William

Thanks for the big list of quotes from other people who got it wrong too. At least Blix has come clean and concedes he doesn't believe there are any existant WMD to be found, and the Iraqis were probably telling the truth when they said they dumped the stuff into the sand years ago.

In relation to Butler pulling out the inspectors (note: not Saddam kicking them out, as stated earlier), perhaps you might like to read up on the choreography and responsibility for those events at the time:
[Link: www.globalpolicy.org...]

I think, you'll find that I was indeed correct in my summation.

485 view from ireland  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 3:04:37pm

#471  zulubaby

Such a bore to hear your desperate bleatings once again.

Maybe some day you'll figure out the realities of terrorism, and the people who undertake terrorist acts. That day will be the end of your happy black and white worldview. I guess it's something to do with growing up in that sick apartheid society? Of course Mandela was a nasty terrorist too, wasn't he?

486 Ryan Waxx  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 6:03:09pm

View from Ireland:

You are technically but inconsequentally correct re: Saddam kicking out the inspectors. William is also correct.

Saddam DID NOT force the inspectors to leave, but he DID forbid them from coming back in.

So all we must do is alter the claim from "Saddam kicked the inspectors out" to "Saddam prevented inspectors from entering the country/doing their job", and your 'point' goes the way of the dodo. How fitting.

A different point: no one needs to be a 'intelligence expert' to grok basic concepts like 'several different sources saying the same thing makes the intelligence more reliable'. Do you think that we breed intelligence analysts in a nutrient tank, or have the omniknowledge fairy bless them with super powers? No. Therefore it is logical to assume that sensible laymen can analyse intelligence, as long as they are mindful of the limits of their knowlegde.

The memo in question does seem to support most of the WS's conclusions. And it amuses me to see the memo's detractors shooting the messenger by labelling them 'non-experts'. AS IF they have a pattern of believing the CIA 'experts!' Ha Ha!

Now, Atriolls, if you'll excuse us, the grown-ups have things to discuss. Why don't you go back upstairs and watch more Sailor Moon videos? And do try to leave some handi-wipes for tomorrow: I don't feel like shopping for more.

487 Bog  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 6:49:17pm

Sorry, but it's all BS. Look:

[Link: www.dod.mil...]

488 zulubaby  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 7:03:16pm
I guess it's something to do with growing up in that sick apartheid society?

And I guess your love for terrorists is a result of growing up in that sick terrorist society of yours?

Fuck you.

489 Ryan Waxx  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 7:14:08pm

#487:

I'm sorry you coulndn't be bothered to read the other posts in this thread, otherwise you might have discovered that the DOD was taking umberage with the memo's conclusions, and labelling it as 'raw data'.

Therefore, your statement "i't's all BS" represents your wishful thinking. Of course, numerous commentators have already been discussing that link earlier in the thread.

The moral? Read before posting. It makes you look less clueless.

490 view from Ireland  Sun, Nov 16, 2003 11:45:47pm

#486  Ryan Waxx 

Given that Butler was effectively a stooge of the US, and that they had been attacked by the US and UK without proper security council authorisation, I'm not surprised that they didn't allow them back in. It's also fair to say that there haven't been any WMD found in Iraq (as Iraq claimed) since the inspectors left, so it's entirely possible that Iraq felt it had fulfilled it's end of the dealon that front.

Bottom line: It took the threat of bombing by the US to remove the inspectors from Iraq. That was the day that the hype and fabrication in relation to the Iraqi WMD threat began, and the beneficial intelligence on the ground ended.

The memo is clearly labled as inconclusive by the DoD. You don't know anything of the reliability or provenance of the allegations contained, but you do know that it's been discounted as proof of anything. 'Raw' reports are just as you would imagine; unverified conjecture.

491 Abu Messerschmitt  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 3:28:06am

Ah, River in Egypt is still defending Saddam, still desperately trying to spin away all the evidence. Poor Saddam, so badly maligned and picked on by the forces of American Imperialism. At least he still has River In Egypt in his corner.

My question is why anyone even bothers debating. No matter how high the evidence is stacked against him, she will stand by her man. Personally, I think it's a sexual thing. And this is pure and utter speculation on my part, and it's not being presented in the spirit of meanness or vilification, but it is true that some women get deeply turned on by men of power. I think part of River in Egypt's psychology is an attraction to the absolute power wielded by Saddam. I also think the reason she has a soft spot in her heart for terrorists is because of the absolute power over life and death that they wield.

Aside from her consistent arguments in defense of Saddam and terrorists, I have no real evidence of this, but it is a very strong vibe that I get and I am usually pretty good at this kind of thing.

492 Ryan Waxx  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 3:31:47am

Just as *I* would imagine? More like as *you* would imagine. Your statement that:

You don't know anything of the reliability or provenance of the allegations contained

Is flat-out bullshit. We know several things about the information:

1. It was considered good enough to give to senators.
2. Some of it has been verified against CIA's timelime, making it more plausible.
3. Some of it is cooberated by other independant sources, making that portion of the information much more likely.

I could go on, but these main points are quite enough to blow your 'we know nothing' argument right out of the water.

The only sensible criticism I can possibly see of the memo is that it is one-sided. It was information requested "from Douglas J. Feith, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, in response to follow-up questions from his July 10 testimony."

Therefore, we can assume that little dispositive information would have been included - you don't answer a senator's question with intel that he can use to skewer you with. Of course, were you to apply the same skepticism that you have expressed about the memo, you would be forced to conclude that such dispositive information really, truly is something that we know nothing about, to include not even knowing if it exists.

And we already know what your opinion is of intel that we know nothing about, now don't we?

And thank you for the admission that Saddam did indeed prevent inspections, your 'the inspectors were stooges of the U.S.!' apologia notwithstanding.

493 view from Ireland  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 4:06:28am

#492 Ryan Waxx

The DoD statement says that much of the memo is comprised of 'raw reports'. We are not told the provenance of these 'raw reports', and we are told that we shouldn't draw any conclusion from them. I'm not sure what part of 'don't treat this as proof of anything' escapes you. The fact that it was passed on to a senator doesn't change the judgement as to the veracity and meaning of the content (clearly flagged as inconclusive).

I didn't say UN inspectors were stooges of the US. I said Butler was. This surely is undisputed by anyone with familiarity with the history and consequences of the inspections process. My point stands; The inspectors were not 'kicked out by Iraq', but were ordered to leave by Butler, following discussion between Butler and US authorities, where he was told that the impending bombing campaign would endanger them. Saddam was obstructive to inspections from day one, the inspectors left because of US bombing.

494 Ryan Waxx  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 4:49:06am

"we are told that we shouldn't draw any conclusion from them."

Since when does the DOD tell you what to think about anything? You do have a brain, don't you? Hello?

But thanks for illustrating the most serious weakness in your argument: It stands on one very shaky leg: an appeal to authority. And then you distort what the authority says to fit your preconceptions.

You ignored two-thirds of my numbered points (I wonder why?), and arrogantly dismissed the remaining third (The fact that it was passed on to a senator doesn't change...) in a totally fact-free manner. Should I take that as confirmation that I was right on the money?

495 Abu Messerschmitt  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 4:55:47am
Should I take that as confirmation that I was right on the money?

Based on RIE's usual pattern of argument, I would.

496 view from Ireland  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 5:12:11am

#494 Ryan Waxx

I've a brain thanks, and the capacity to know fact from supposition. The only content in this memo is presented as inconclusive, by the pertinent authorities investigating the claims of contacts/collaboration between Saddam's regime and terrorist groups. You nor I are in any position to draw conclusions from 'reports' from unknown provenance where the investigating bodies have established no conclusions with a greater knowledge of said provenance. The fact that they explicitly state that the reports prove nothing might be something of a clue as to their value?

Neither of us can do anything but take the DoD at their word, since we don't have the reports in front of us, and they do. It's nothing to do with 'appeal to authority'or the DoD 'telling me what to think', and quite a lot to do with a complete absense of information on our part, and the judgement of those with the information on the other hand. You can't argue with the DoD's assessment, since you don't have any meaningful information to argue with. Your 'numbered points' are just supposition, since you don't know the validity of any of the supposed 'reports'.

I'd say you were about as far off the money as you could possibly get, but I've only my opinion and the direction of the people with the information (the DoD) to support that view.

497 Ryan Waxx  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 5:41:20am

This argument reminds me of a 'B' horror flick:

Officer: We'll stop that creature from planet 9, don't you worry miss.

Miss: Oh, but what's that?

(scary music begins to play. VFI's argument, a slimy but strangely insubstansial creature rises from the swamp).

Officer: Ok, let 'em have it boys!

(all 50 police open fire at once, reducing the creature to ash).

Officer: Got 'im!

(the same scary music begins to play. VFI's argument, the same slimy and still strangely insubstansial creature rises from the swamp. Strangely, the creature looks exactly like it did before. You suspect the producer just used the same film clip).

Former Marine: Hey boss, it too late to help out? I went back to the farm and dug up this old mortar I kept from 'nam.

(the Marine drops a shell into the tube, and miraculously hits the creature right in the forehead. The creature explodes, sliming everyone in the area.)

Marine: Whooo-ee! But at least we kilt that SOB!

(same scary music, same creature, same lack of substance. same swamp.)

Obligatory neighbodhood scientist: Oh my god! We can't stop this thing! It seems to be... IMPERVIOUS TO REALITY!

(finally, some new scary musc)

498 Abu Messerschmitt  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 5:59:53am

Ryan, you're catching on. RIE will label any bit of information that supports her worldview an an undisputable fact and any bit of information that refutes it as ... supposition, unsupported rumor, whaetver.

There's simply no point in arguing with a woman who gets wet when she sees a car bomb go off.

499 view from Ireland  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 6:17:21am

#497 Ryan Waxx

Hilarious stuff, but I'd remind you that the information contained in the memo has been determined to be inconclusive by those who collected and interpreted that content. If you feel you somehow know better without any information; well done you. Just be honest enough to admit it's contrary to the view of those with the facts.

#498 Abu Messerschmitt

Given that you have admitted your 'theory' about me is the product of your own imagination, i'd be a bit more circumspect about airing your sick musings. It just reflects badly upon you.

500 zulubaby  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 6:24:47am

Ryan Waxx (#497)

LOL! You nailed it. I think we should just break out the scary music every time she posts. Less bandwidth, time and energy wasted that way.

501 Abu Messerschmitt  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 6:27:53am

I may be subject to sick musings, but at least I don't stick up for tyrants and terrorists.

502 view from Ireland  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 6:44:05am

#501 Abu Messerschmitt

Where exactly do I 'Stick up for tyrants and terrorists'?
The memo is falsly claimed as some sort of proof of connections that haven't been made (and that incidently were used as a partial justification for an unilaterally motivated war), and the claim that UN inspectors were 'kicked out by Iraq' is also equally false.

Unless blind obedience to false claims is some sort of shortcut to overthrowing tyranny, I'd say I was sticking up for the simple truth. Sorry to burst your bubble, but I've no desire to prop up Saddam. You might find solus in the fabricated, but I certainly don't.

503 view from Ireland  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 6:46:37am

#500 zulubaby

Shouldn't you be keeping tabs on Mandela the terrorist?

504 Frank IBC, Omniknowledge Fairy  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 6:49:22am

I notice that Musa, er, "Moshe" never came back after my #433.

{Patting self on back}

#491 Abu Messerschmidt:

No matter how high the evidence is stacked against him, she will stand by her man. Personally, I think it's a sexual thing.

Clinton enjoyed a similar phenomenon. Limbaugh labelled it "The Arousal Gap".

505 view from Ireland  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 6:52:55am

#504 Frank IBC, Omniknowledge Fairy

{Patting self on back}

What an empty life you must lead.

506 zulubaby  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 6:53:30am
Shouldn't you be keeping tabs on Mandela the terrorist?

Mandela is a terrorist? You truly are a sick POS. And a shameless liar too, apparently.

Where exactly do I 'Stick up for tyrants and terrorists'?

In the posts that I linked to here, for starters. Terrorist-apologist, ISM-loving troll that you are. Let the back-peddling and twisting begin.

507 Abu Messerschmitt  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 6:56:07am
Clinton enjoyed a similar phenomenon. Limbaugh labelled it "The Arousal Gap".

I emphasize, I'm not trying to be rude or nasty or funny. I really think this is (at least part of) what's going on, in a Freudian sense, as an explanation for the inability of a person say an unkind word about terrorists without putting a "but" in the sentence.

508 zulubaby  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 7:01:14am

Frank IBC (#504)

I hate to tell you this, but Moshe has been stinking up other threads, including one just this morning. But if you could get rid of the Howling Banshee, that would be greatly appreciated by the LGF community.

509 Ernest Brown  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 7:10:48am

Zulubaby,

Notice that she ducked the facts about Spiegelman.

So much for, "I've a brain thanks, and the capacity to know fact from supposition."

As has been mentioned in the past, we've just got to keep exposing her passion for fascism.

510 zulubaby  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 7:22:46am

Ernest Brown (#509)

That's Troll Girl's strategy -- constantly moving the goal posts. When she's exposed (yet again) for the shameless liar that she is, she simply changes the subject. She's sly and slimy and I can't stand her dishonesty. Even Gordon, who is just as trollish most of the time, isn't as bad as drek from Ireland. He actually believes what he's saying. This one is here to troll, period.

(Thanks for the info on Spiegelman, by the way).

511 view from Ireland  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 7:24:31am

#506 zulubaby

You find me an apology for terrorism that I've made, and I'll listen to your bleatings with all the grace they deserve.

Thatcher and Dick Cheney seemed to believe Mandela was a terrorist, and certainly made noises to that effect. Since we're supposed to take Dick's word on the 'bad guys' in the 'war on terror' to this day, I'd have thought you'd be signed up to that bandwagon. Gerry Adams is called a terrorist too, but Bush was happy enough to meet him and shoot the shit only this year.

You just seem to have difficulty grasping the concept of any deviation from the 'Terrorists are blood hungry monsters' line. Terrorism is is undertaken by a wide variety of people, for different purposes, and sometimes by those who feel morally obligated by injustice that cannot be countered by any other means. You don't have to be a monster to participate in terrorism - you just have to have run out of other options. I know this because I've lived in a society that has fallen to the scourge of terrorism, and found it's way past it. I know 'terrorists', and i know that they are not all monsters. If you don't want to hear this truth, then close your ears. It doesn't make me an apologist for terrorism. It just means I've learned something you haven't.

Oh, and I've lost friends, and damn near lost my parents to terrorism, so spare me the 'naive/romantic view of armed struggle' accusations.

512 zulubaby  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 7:30:13am
Thatcher and Dick Cheney seemed to believe Mandela was a terrorist, and certainly made noises to that effect.

What does that have to do with my views, you blithering idiot?

513 view from Ireland  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 7:30:22am

#509 Ernest Brown

What 'facts' am I supposed to be ignoring?
Spiegelman has a lot to say about the 'war on terror' and speaks his mind in an articulate and persuasive manner. He has a long record of political commentary, and happens to hold a view you don't agree with.

Come back to me when you have something relevant to relate.

514 Abu Messerschmitt  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 7:33:00am

After reading #511, I feel quite validated.

515 view from Ireland  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 7:38:20am

#512 zulubaby

What does that have to do with my views, you blithering idiot?

You've never shown any capacity to operate outside the LGF groupthink mentality to date. I'd assume that the 'word of Dick' would be your torchlight in this respect too?

So, was Mandela the convicted bomber and leader of ANC a terrorist?

516 view from Ireland  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 7:41:40am

#514 Abu Messerschmitt

Just goes to show how blinkered you are then.
Do you honestly believe all terrorism is the product of evil monsters? Be honest now.

517 Abu Messerschmitt  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 7:45:49am

Could I shake the hand of a man, knowing it had been stained with the blood of children? No.

518 view from Ireland  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 7:51:15am

#517 Abu Messerschmitt

That would put a lot of US pilots and IDF soldiers out of your reach then. Keep in mind also that there are more terrorists without children's blood on their hands than those with. Is that your moral cut-off point? You'll shake the hand of a terrorist without any dead children to his/her name?

519 zulubaby  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 7:54:04am
I'd assume that the 'word of Dick' would be your torchlight in this respect too?

Don't put words in my mouth, it's a sly and dishonest tactic (no big surprise, coming from you).

So, was Mandela the convicted bomber and leader of ANC a terrorist?

What do you think, since you're the authority on terrorists? You are so arrogant, it doesn't occur to you that perhaps others know more about certain issues than you do.

You wrote in response to Ernest Brown:

What 'facts' am I supposed to be ignoring?

What facts don't you ignore? And when you're not ignoring facts, you're making things up and putting words in people's mouths like you just did to me.

You are here to bait and troll and derail threads --nothing more. And you're a terrorist-lover and apologist, no matter how many ways you try to slice and dice that little fact. Why do you come here? You force people to jump through hoops to "prove" things to you, and then, when they do so, you dismiss it and tell them to "come back with more". Well fuck you and your sick games.

520 zulubaby  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 7:55:50am
That would put a lot of US pilots and IDF soldiers out of your reach then.

So now US pilots and IDF soldiers are terrorists? Define terrorism.

521 Abu Messerschmitt  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 8:01:33am

For someone who constantly whines about other people seeing things as too simplistic, you are awfully quick to lump soldiers who accidentally harm civilians in with terrorists who deliberately target them. But then, you knew that, didn't you?

People who target and murder innocents, especially children, to further their own power and political ends are monsters. And when you strip away bullshit about oppression and poverty and desperation all that other crap, power is what Hamas, Hezbollah, Saddam Hussein, and even your studs in the IRA were really all about. Those who finance or lend moral support to terrorists are also monsters.

Soldiers who regret the killing of innocents are not.

522 view from Ireland  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 8:05:38am

#520 zulubaby

Try and keep up dear. Abu M only mentioned those with the blood of children on their hands. As I pointed out it doesn't come as a pre-requisite for the 'terrorist' moniker.

As to Mandela; no, he's no terrorist, but that's simply because we accept the legitimacy of the context he undertook an armed campaign within. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter, and there's precious little to define one from another.

523 view from Ireland  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 8:17:10am

#521 Abu Messerschmitt

Life's so simple in your world, isn't it.

Are the Iraqis who target military helicopters with RPG's terrorists? Is the man who puts a bomb under a car to avenge the death of their brother a terrorist. Are the suicide bombers who target IDF bases terrorists, were the lebanese car bombers that killed the Marines and French paratroopers in Beirut terrorists?

None of these people fall into any of your handy catagories. The US waged war on Iraqis (innocents as well as active combatants) in order to 'further their own power and political ends'. That's what Bush said before he sent the troops in, remember?

524 Abu Messerschmitt  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 8:22:16am

Zulu, babe, you're right. I got sucked into the Troll Event Horizon of the Globular Cluster of Willful Ignorance and Moral Relativism that is River in Egypt. There is simply no point in arguing with anyone who thinks that the deliberate slaughter of children and other innocents for the sake of political power does not make one a monster.

Maybe she isn't a splodey-ho. I am pretty sure there is a Freudian/arousal gap explanation for her embrace of terrorists and tyrants, but even if I'm wrong, what difference does it make why she loves terrorists?

525 zulubaby  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 8:29:58am

Abu Messerschmitt (#524)

She's never wrong, nobody else's point of view has value, she'll have you jumping around to "prove" things to her and then she'll either ignore the facts completely or tell you to "do better". Her arrogance is fascinating really. People have wasted precious hours arguing with her only to realize, too late, that she's changed the debate completely -- she's that sly, and she has hair-splitting down to a fine art. A troll to end all trolls.

526 view from Ireland  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 8:31:03am

#524 Abu Messerschmitt

I take it that's an evasion then?

And where did I say anything about qualification for the 'monster' moniker? I don't agree with terrorism, irrespective of the age of the victims (kids are no more innocent than the middle aged, the elderly, or those in the prime of life), and I make no apology for terrorists. I just acknowlege what you refuse to; that you don't have to be a 'monster' to be involved in terrorist activities. I've met former terrorists from both sides of teh divide in Ireland who were nothing like monsters. Just regular people forced into wrong actions. Their acts stand with or without the demonisation.

Any other hobbies beyond cod psychology btw? It's not your forte.

527 Abu Messerschmitt  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 8:33:50am

Not falling for it.

Not being baited.

Time to watch a nice little film that, despite the title, is not about terror apologists.

528 view from Ireland  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 8:35:05am

#525 zulubaby

The day you contribute anything of value to a debate, is the day I'll have to clean my monitor. You are the epitomy of the dittohead. If you taxed yourself with an original thought or expression it would probably strain something.

529 Abu Messerschmitt  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 8:36:58am

Ignore the troll, Zulu, you are a stand up babe. If you had friends who were involved in terrorism, you'd turn them in, not pat them on the back on have them over for a spot of tea. You're a good person.

530 view from Ireland  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 8:40:15am

#529 Abu Messerschmitt

How touching.

531 Claudius  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 8:44:20am

VFI

"Are the Iraqis who target military helicopters with RPG's terrorists?"

no

"Is the man who puts a bomb under a car to avenge the death of their brother a terrorist."

who's in the car? probably a yes.

"Are the suicide bombers who target IDF bases terrorists?"

hmm .... depends. The ones who dress up as IDF soldiers, enter barracks and shoot sleeping soldiers, yes.

, "were the lebanese car bombers that killed the Marines and French paratroopers in Beirut terrorists?"

meh. i guess not.

Okay, let's play in reverse:

Were the people who flew planes into the WTC terrorists?

Are people who shoot little babies in carseats terrorists?

Are people who cut off a reporter's head, filiming it for use in a recruitment spot, terrorists?

See, vfi, the thing is that I can totally agree with you that there are some things which fall in the gray area between "terrorism" and "resistance" (or whatever),

WHILE (watch closely now)

still thinking that there is a category of terrorist acts which are entirely inexcusable, which threaten me directly as an inhabitant of a major urban area, which are part of a decades-long trend of increasing escalation,

and which are, yes, planned and perpetrated by "monsters."

Will you concede that this "know-it-when-i-see-it" category does exist?

It's a spectrum, dammit: the presence of a grey area in the middle does NOT mean that there aren't identifiable ends to the spectrum.

Does this count as "contributing to a debate?"

532 zulubaby  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 8:50:31am
Just regular people forced into wrong actions.

Oh yes, of course! I am now convinced that there is something wrong with you. You have no morals whatsoever, you can't even recognize the innocence of children. I would say that it's a consequence of your living in a society overrun with terrorists, but I won't make excuses for terrorists or their sympathizers. I don't believe that you can tell right from wrong and your coldness and heartlessness are frightening. You'd probably make a good terrorist now that I think about it.

533 zulubaby  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 8:59:53am

Abu Messerschmitt (#529)

Thank you :-)

view from Ireland, you're a bitter little thing, aren't you? I don't care what you think of me. Considering what my opinion of you is, what you think of me is of no consequence. You can't tell the difference between the most basic principles of right and wrong. That's what makes terrorists (and their sympathizers) so ruthless.

534 Abu Messerschmitt  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 9:25:40am

No prob, ZB, I just couldn't stand to see you let that hateful splodeyho get under your skin.

535 zulubaby  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 9:33:13am

Abu Messerschmitt (#534)

She gets to me because she's a mendacious person. I don't fear confronting the ugliness that exists in this world, but I abhor lies and dishonesty.

536 view from Ireland  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 9:34:36am

#531 Claudius

Were the people who flew planes into the WTC terrorists?

Sure.

Are people who shoot little babies in carseats terrorists?

Some would be. Some would be regular soldiers. I seem to recall a family of Iraqis getting shot up at a checkpoint by US soldiers.

Are people who cut off a reporter's head, filiming it for use in a recruitment spot, terrorists?

Sure.

You don't grasp my point however. Most of my list I'd consider terrorists too. My point is that their motivation extends beyond simple evil or 'monstrosity'. Terrorism has multiple motivations and rationale. I would excuse very little that falls under the auspices of 'terrorism', and would support none.

Any menace to one's own person is easier to interpret as the work of monsters. I'm sure that the average palestinian holds the same view in relation to the IDF. I've personally been in situations where I've been in a certain degree of threat from loyalist terrorists by (a degree of) design, and republican terrorists by default. It didn't make either of those groups 'monsters', simply because they threatend me at the time. I've been in New York a number of times since 9/11 and can grasp the fear that a large scale disaster like that can bring. I'm no stranger to buildings blowing up, and the sick fear and sorrow that come with it. I don't see Islam as a bunch of monsters plotting your demise however. 30 people in planes, or even a hundred thousand radicals do not a religious war make. There's a certain number of people who want the destruction of the west, and there's a greater number who oppose various tenants of US foreign policy. There seems to be a great degree of confusion between the two.

Yes, that's a meaningful contribution. Lots of posters here make them, Zulubabe isn't one of them.

537 zulubaby  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 9:36:19am
Yes, that's a meaningful contribution. Lots of posters here make them, Zulubabe isn't one of them.

And you should be banned because you're a sly troll.

538 view from Ireland  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 9:54:21am

#537 zulubaby

Cry me a river.

539 Frank IBC  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 10:08:45am

Life's so simple in your world, isn't it.

"Simplistic" is yet another one of those terms, like "extreme", that LLL Idiots use when they disagree with an argument but can't refute it.

Previously I thought VFI was incapable of human emotion. Happily, this thread has proven me wrong.

(Faster, please!)

Looks like this thread ain't dyin' anytime soon.

540 Ernest Brown  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 10:15:04am

#531,

Yes, you're demonstrating VFI's pathetic attempts to engage in pathological reasoning. She's guilty of the fallacy of the beard:


-----
Semantic Version:

Form:
A differs from Z by a continuum of insignificant changes, and there is no non-arbitrary place at which a sharp line between the two can be drawn.
Therefore, there is really no difference between A and Z.
This type plays upon the vagueness of the distinction between two terms that lie on a continuum. For instance, the concepts of "bald" and "hairy" lie at opposite ends of a spectrum of hairiness. This continuum is the "slope", and it is the lack of a non-arbitrary line between hairiness and baldness that makes it "slippery". We could, of course, decide to count, say, 10,000 hairs or less as the definition of "bald", but this would be arbitrary. Why not 10,001 or 9,999? Obviously, no answer can be given other than the fact that we prefer round numbers, but round numbers are an artefact of our base 10 numbering system. However, it does not follow from the fact that there is no sharp, non-arbitrary line between "bald" and "hairy" that there really is no difference between the two. A difference in degree is still a difference, and a big enough difference in degree can amount to a difference in kind. For instance, according to the theory of evolution, the difference between species is a difference in degree.
-----
[Link: www.fallacyfiles.org...]

541 Apu Messerschmitt  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 10:15:17am
Previously I thought VFI was incapable of human emotion.

Bitterness... hatred... contempt... those are emotions, aren't they?

And, of course, lust for the guys in the black masks with their long, hard guns and tight explosive belts...

542 ploome  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 10:18:33am
My point is that their motivation extends beyond simple evil or 'monstrosity'. Terrorism has multiple motivations and rationale.

their motivation doesnt matter! Can you find any motiviation other than evil, to bomb a schoolbus? to enter a house and deliberately shoot toddlers hinding under the bed?

Any menace to one's own person is easier to interpret as the work of monsters. I'm sure that the average palestinian holds the same view in relation to the IDF.

indoctrination to the point of pasychotic paranoia, can affect one's view about anything. 50 years of trying to erase any Jewish connection to the Temple Mount and Jerusalem can result in viewing IDF and Israeli's and monsters. So now we know why! but...they are still insane.

Finsbury Park mosque teaches, England should be and is designatted to become part of the islamic ummah, as is Kashmir, and India and AMerica. Just because there are millions of people who 'hold to that view' doesn't make it valid

There's a certain number of people who want the destruction of the west, and there's a greater number who oppose various tenants of US foreign policy.

France, as demonstrated by Chirac and deVillepin and others like them, dont merely oppose various tenants of US foreign policy...the want the destruction of American power, hegemony and they may not understand, that IS the destruction of the 'West'.

mewanwhile....here are two invaluable article...just to show you the pattern if islamic 'struggle', and how you fit into the greater plan

[Link: pub6.ezboard.com...]

[Link: www.bharatvani.org...]

543 ploome  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 10:21:04am

540 Ernest Brown

exactly.....

I have been struggling to articulate what it is about VFI that is so repulsive

and you have succinctly described it

well done....:-)

544 zulubaby  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 10:27:51am

ploome (#542)

Good post and thanks, even though she will ignore it all, including the links, distort, twist, lie ... the usual.

545 ploome  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 10:28:14am

540 Ernest Brown

the link you posted is defective...please repost

thanks

546 ploome  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 10:30:54am
547 Abu Messerschmitt  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 10:34:14am

Actually, RIE reminds me of a LLL lady I used to know. I once said in a debate that "Stealing a loaf of bread to feed a hungry child may be morally defensible, but very, very little of the theft that goes on in society goes on for purposes like that." And she went off on me, "So, you want children to starve to protect the wealth of greedy capitalists!" In her mind, since one kind of theft was morally defensible, every other kind of theft was okay, and Pepperidge Farm was the real villain for not giving out free bread to everybody.

Actually, that kind of describes all the LLL's on this forum.

548 Ernest Brown  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 10:41:54am

Ploome,

Thanks, I don't think the link is broken The semantic version is what is commonly identified as "fallacy of the beard," since it emphasizes an inability to make decisions on a continuum. The slippery slope fallacy claims that one event on a continuum necessarily leads to another.

Here it is again:


The Fallacy of the Beard (Slippery Slope varient)

Also:

-----
This fallacy of the beard is committed when a person argues that you cannot come to a conclusion because one thing differs from another only in degree. The name of the fallacy derives from the difficulty of determining when exactly someone has a beard. Is it when one has a `five-o'clock shadow'? When the whiskers are one quarter of an inch long? Longer? Just when is one's facial hair long enough to be called a beard? Just because one cannot determine how long the hair has to be does not mean that three inches of facial hair cannot be called a beard, and a slight stubble should not. Just because the line is hard to draw does not mean that differences mean nothing.

The question of modesty is hotly debated in our day. Standards for modest dress have radically changed over time. And standards for modest dress differ from culture to culture. Does this mean that we cannot determine immodesty from modesty? While one may not be able to determine when a dress is immodest—ankle-length, knee-high, one inch above the knee two inches—there is certainly a difference between a mini-skirt and one that is ankle-length! It is fallacious to say because we cannot determine the exact point at which a dress changes from being modest to being immodest that there is no such thing as immodesty.

-----
[Link: www.summit.org...]

35. Fallacy of the beard. Arguing (a) that small or minor differences do not (or cannot) make a difference, or are not (or cannot be) significant, or (b) arguing so as to find a definite point at which something can be named. For example, insisting that a few hairs lost here and there do not indicate anything about my impending baldness; or trying to determine how many hairs a person must have before he can be called bald (or not bald).

[Link: zebu.uoregon.edu...]

549 Frank IBC, Abu Five-O'Clock Shadow  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 10:50:27am

#541 Abu Messerschmidt:

Bitterness... hatred... contempt... those are emotions, aren't they?

I said "human" emotions, not necessarily "good" emotions. Until recently I hadn't seen any evidence of ANY emotions.

Re: Fallacy of the Beard/Slippery Slope

It is true that there are many shades of gray between black and white. But the idiots who scream about "shades of gray" are typically incapable of distinguishing Charcoal from Dovefeather.

550 ploome  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 11:10:29am

where now is snakefromIreland??

back in the bowels of relativity?

551 Claudius  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 11:20:07am

VFI -

"My point is that their motivation extends beyond simple evil or 'monstrosity'. Terrorism has multiple motivations and rationale."

True. Too true. Is your point, then, that by exploring these people's motives we will be better equipped to thwart their actions -

or is it that "to know all is to forgive all?"

If the former, I don't see where most of the people here would disagree.

If the latter, FOAD.

552 mobius1  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 12:50:45pm

the surfacing of a memo after the fact still does not suggest that bush had prior knowledge; and further, bush himself declared that there was no saddam-al qaeda link.

so, in my estimation, this is either a forgery; or, sheer luck. it was not, however, a statement of foreknoweldge or intent. bush still misled the nation to go to war.

553 ploome  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 12:57:51pm

Mobiusssssssssssssss

helloooooooooooo

554 Frank IBC  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 6:33:52pm

#508 Zulubaby:

Well, I said in #504 er, "Moshe" never came back after my #433.

And he's gone for good!!!

And since View From The Magdalene Laundries never returned after my #539, I'll take credit for that one, too! :)

{patting self on back again} :)

555 zulubaby  Mon, Nov 17, 2003 6:46:01pm

Frank IBC (#554)

If you managed to get rid of Troll Girl, I'll pat you on the back too. I may even want to hug you!! Alas, she's probably sleeping (bats need to sleep too), only to pounce on us when we least suspect it!

556 Frank IBC  Tue, Nov 18, 2003 2:23:29am

I may even want to hug you!!

Thanks, now I can't sleep. :)

The reason I'm happy to see she is actually showing emotions, is that I feel that we may finally be on the verge of a breakthrough - and no, I don't mean that she will "see the light".

557 Debunker  Tue, Nov 18, 2003 3:30:23am

Umm... have you seen this yet? Apparently, the Pentagon hasn't drawn the same conclusions that those on the right side of the blogosphere have.

[Link: www.dod.mil...]

And keep in mind this is Pentagon speak for "this is bullshit".

Don't you think the Administration would have put this forward if it was verifiable proof of a substantial connection between OBL and Saddam? It is nonsense and the admin knows it.

Stop making fools of yourselves.

558 Abu Messerschmitt  Tue, Nov 18, 2003 5:44:34am
News reports that the Defense Department recently confirmed new information with respect to contacts between al-Qaida and Iraq in a letter to the Senate Intelligence Committee are inaccurate... The classified annex was not an analysis of the substantive issue of the relationship between Iraq and al Qaida, and it drew no conclusions.


Hardly a strongly worded denial. I think Debunker is spinning a little desperately. This statement neither confirms nor denies the data in the memo. Far from denouncing it as "BS" it simply take no opinion.

559 Frank IBC  Tue, Nov 18, 2003 6:12:32am

Archie Bunker:

Don't spin too hard. You might embarrass yourself.


This entry has been archived.
Comments are closed.

^ back to top ^

log in
Name:
Pass:

Register Forgot Your Password? My Account Re-send Confirmation (To log in, cookies must be enabled in your browser!)

► LGF Headlines

► Top 10 Comments

► Bottom Comments

► Recent Comments

► Tools/Info

► LGF Hits

► Slideshows

► Resources

► Never Forget

► Statistics

► Tag Cloud

► Contact

You must have Javascript enabled to use the contact form.
Your email:

Subject:

Message:


Messages may be published in our weblog, unless you request otherwise.
Tech Note:
Using the Contact Form

► News/Opinion

More Partners

Compare Electricity Prices in your area. Texas Electricity is deregulated; you have the right to choose Texas Electric Rates from among many Texas Electric Companies.

New world odor.


Barnes & Noble Home