Saturday, September 24, 2005

Basra warrant issued for two UK soldiers

Basra judge has issued an arrest warrant for two British soldiers after an Iraqi civilian was reportedly killed and a police officer injured. The two servicemen - believed to be undercover SAS officers - were detained after a confrontation on Monday. UK troops later freed the soldiers from Iraqi custody after storming a police station in the southern Iraqi city.
A UK forces spokesman said the warrant had no legal basis but that they would co-operate with the Iraqi inquiry. The MoD said it was aware of reports about the arrest warrant for the soldiers but that British authorities had not received any such warrant.
British forces spokesman Major Steve Melbourne said the two men had immunity from prosecution under an arrangement between the Iraqi government and coalition forces.
"They have no legal basis for the issue of these warrants," he told BBC News

...i would love to know the whole story behind this...

By Blogger kingweasil, at September 26, 2005 12:52 pm  

Top Democrats won't attend anti-war rally in Washington

WASHINGTON - (KRT) As the anti-war movement arrives in Washington this weekend, many top Democrats are leaving.

Nationally known Democratic war critics, including Howard Dean, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, and Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, Russell Feingold of Wisconsin and John Kerry of Massachusetts, won't attend what sponsors say will be a big anti-war rally Saturday in Washington.

The only Democratic officeholders who plan to address the rally are Reps. Cynthia McKinney of Georgia and John Conyers of Michigan.

Today's leading Democrats head a party divided over the war, and many leaders are wary of standing with anti-war activists, who represent much of the party's base. The divide between anti-war activists and Democratic leaders underscores a challenge the party faces in the 2006 congressional elections and beyond. Some activists say that Democrats such as Clinton and Kerry who criticize the war but refuse to demand a timetable for withdrawal are effectively supporting the status quo - and may not merit future support.

Spokesmen for the Democrats who are skipping the anti-war event all said they had schedule conflicts. But some leading anti-war activists aren't buying it.

"There are a lot of people here who are wondering, where are the Democrats?" said Tom Andrews, a former Democratic House member from Maine who's now the national director of Win Without War, one of several groups that are organizing three days of protests against the war in Washington starting Saturday.

"The Democratic Party has an identity crisis on this issue. We need voices. We need leadership," Andrews said. "But fear is driving them."

Can You Marginalize a Majority?

In a move to preempt the antiwar protesters converging on Washington this weekend, President Bush yesterday put forth the following equation: Withdrawing from Iraq equals letting the terrorists win equals more 9/11s.

The White House's goal is to cast anybody who supports a pullout of U.S. troops from Iraq as sadly delusional, reckless and not to be taken seriously

But Bush may be in trouble here, because he's trying to marginalize a majority.

A recent Gallup Poll , for instance, found that 63 percent of Americans -- almost two out of three -- support the immediate partial or complete withdrawal of U.S. troops. Fewer than one in three Americans support Bush's handling of the war.

Full text of the Presidents remarks can be found Here

Super work performed.

By Anonymous Brendan Gamage, at November 28, 2005 3:19 pm  

Iran says sanctions could push oil to 100 usd/barrel

TEHRAN (AFX) - The head of Iran's powerful Revolutionary Guards warned that the imposition of sanctions on the Islamic republic over its nuclear programme could push the price of oil to 100 usd a barrel.

'Any sanction against Iran can make the oil price reach 100 dollars a barrel,' General Yahya Rahim Safavi said in a speech to worshippers attending Friday prayers in Tehran.

Iran is OPEC's second producer.

'Any economic and political pressure on Iran from any power ... will result in a harsh reaction from Iran,' he added.

The Islamic republic 'has a solid and unbeatable defence potential (and) can retaliate and attack the interests of the enemies in remote places,' the general asserted.

Iran insists its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes only.

Report attacks 'myth' of foreign fighters

The US and the Iraqi government have overstated the number of foreign fighters in Iraq, "feeding the myth" that they are the backbone of the insurgency, an American thinktank says in a new report.

Foreign militants - mainly from Algeria, Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia - account for less than 10% of the estimated 30,000 insurgents, according to the Washington-based Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).

The CSIS disputes reports that Saudis account for most of the foreign insurgents and says best estimates suggest Algerians are the largest group (20%), followed by Syrians (18%), Yemenis (17%), Sudanese (15%), Egyptians (13%), Saudis (12%) and those from other states (5%). British intelligence estimate the number of British jihadists at about 100.

The CSIS report says: "The vast majority of Saudi militants who have entered Iraq were not terrorist sympathisers before the war; and were radicalised almost exclusively by the coalition invasion."

. "Most of the Saudi militants were motivated by revulsion at the idea of an Arab land being occupied by a non-Arab country. These feelings are intensified by the images of the occupation they see on television and the internet ... the catalyst most often cited [in interrogations] is Abu Ghraib, though images from Guantánamo bay also feed into the pathology."

Source:Guardian

UK : This is an act of censorship worthy of Joseph Goebbels

At last history hits pay dirt. For years it was pap for television. The nation's rulers needed scientists for guns, linguists for trade and economists for mistakes. History was for nuts and numismatists. Now up pops Charles Clarke jingling bags of gold. The home secretary has promised the prime minister that he will lock away for five years anyone who "glorifies, exalts or celebrates" a terrorist act committed in the past 20 years. He does not care if glorification was not meant. If someone, somewhere takes anything that I say or write as encouraging to terror, even if they do not act on it, I have committed a criminal act.

Read the full article Here

Another day of "last throws" in Iraq

Sept 23 (Reuters) - Following are security incidents reported in Iraq on Friday, Sept. 23, as of 1200 GMT.
U.S. and Iraqi forces are battling a Sunni Arab insurgency against the Shi'ite and Kurdish-led government in Baghdad.
Asterisk denotes new or updated item.
BAGHDAD - Five people were killed and eight wounded when a suicide bomber in a vehicle blew himself up at a bus station in central Baghdad, police said.
*BAGHDAD - An official in the Ministry of Interior was killed along with his brother by gunmen in the western Doura district of the capital and a third brother was wounded, police said.
*BAGHDAD - Gunmen killed an official in Ministry of Interior in the capital's Mansur district.
*LATIFIYA - One official in the railway directorate was killed and six were wounded by a bomb planted beside the railway in the town of Latifiya, 40 km (25 miles) southwest of Baghdad, police said.
RAMADI - One U.S soldier was killed by small arms fire on Thursday in Ramadi, 110 km (68 miles) west of Baghdad, the U.S. military said.
KHALIS -Iraqi security forces conducted a raid and arrested 10 people in Khalis, 15 km north of Baquba.
MOSUL - Three officials in the Turkmen Front were killed and one wounded on Thursday by gunmen in Mosul, 390 km (240 miles) north of Baghdad. An official in the group said they were attacked while leaving their office.
MOSUL - One policeman was killed on Thursday by gunmen in Mosul, a police source said.
MOSUL - Six bodies of people who were shot dead were found on Thursday and Friday in different areas of Mosul, a medical source said.
BALAD - One U.S soldier was killed and another wounded on Thursday when a roadside bomb exploded near their patrol near Balad, 110 km (70 miles) north of Baghdad, the U.S. military said.

Friday, September 23, 2005

Neocon Quiz

Spotted this one on the site of "Oroboros" who posted here yesterday

As He/She says "very interesting (if not very scientific)"

Do we have any hidden Neocons in the camp ?

Check it out Here

Based on your answers, you are most likely a realist. Read below to learn more about each foreign policy perspective.

Uh H, does that mean I'm not the crazy Right Wing nut the Dissent folks think I am?

By Blogger G_in_AL, at September 23, 2005 1:55 pm  

Golly, G, and I'm most likely a liberal, but not a socialist. But of course, the disclaimer on both of our results is that the results are not scientific. Meaning that Bush might believe them, but for me it's just a cute diversion for 5 minutes. I'm not a liberal, I'm a radical. Sometimes far left, sometimes right wing, depends on the matter under discussion. You might even have noticed some small tendency that direction, but we're usually commenting on issues where I fall to the left of center.

Actually, one of my Brit friends told me once that I was so far left that I actually made the circle and came back all the way to the far-far right. He had listened to me debate for about an hour with a Bush apologist, who was afraid for citizens to have guns but wanted to send every able-bodied american younger than himself to Iraq. Of course I argued with him. It was either fight his ignorance over there in the bar, or fight his ignorance here at home.... He hated me for my love of freedom. (chuckle out loud)

By Anonymous Nostradamnthem, at September 23, 2005 5:13 pm  

steer clear from my blog; I thought we settled.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at September 23, 2005 6:29 pm  

Anonymous (Bassizzzt): my only reply is LOL

G: nah your not a crazy right wing nut , just a crazy nut , to me your right winged but to some i am sure you are center , but your not a Neocon , you just sympathise with some neocon views

Nostradamnthem: thanks for popping by and enlightening me with your wisdom

you said "Of course I argued with him. It was either fight his ignorance over there in the bar, or fight his ignorance here at home.... He hated me for my love of freedom."

And i am still laughing , fantastic stuff !

as for me , well yes i do come up as a liberal , but if your asking a foreigner( me) about american foreign policy then i expect even right winged brits would come up as liberal

By Blogger _H_, at September 23, 2005 7:58 pm  

makes sense... and Nost, we know you are a member of ELF, just turn your self in now... LOL

By Blogger G_in_AL, at September 23, 2005 8:14 pm  

Hugo Chávez Speaks

In his first interview in the United States, the Venezuelan president talks about President Bush, Pat Robertson and giving cheap oil to America's poor

Scores of world leaders have come to the United States for the United Nations summit. Among them, Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez. In a speech before the world body, Chávez accused the U.S. of trying to hijack the U.N. Summit, and described the United States as a terrorist nation because it's harboring televangelist Pat Robertson who recently called for Chávez's assassination.
President Chávez also accused the United States of being behind the reported coup against him in 2002. Chávez condemned the U.S. invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, and threatened to cut off oil sales to the United States.

Read the interview Here

See the last week from the view of the Middle East

An interesting quicktime video of the most recent events in the middle east , picking the more interesting views from many different countries


Video

You may need to register to view the video

This attack on free speech will fuel Muslim hostility

If Britain's proposed laws on inciting terrorism were applied fairly, those who incite wars of aggression would also be in the dock

Snip..

In any event, the world has not yet agreed what constitutes "terrorism". the UN secretary general, Kofi Annan, tried to simplify matters by asserting that the killing of civilians was a terrorist act, but that was rightly rejected by the general assembly. The word "innocent", contained in the original draft, was left out. What about the US security firm Blackwater's security guards? What about armed Israeli civilians who create settlements on occupied Palestinian land? The kind of language proposed in the British legislation could easily characterise a call to resist allied occupation soldiers in Iraq as incitement. Is force now to be the preserve of the powerful?

Read the full article Here

It's going to be really hard for anybody to come up with an actionable definition of terrorism without nailing Bush and Blair to the wall to be skinned. Don't hold your breath waiting....

By Anonymous Nostradamnthem, at September 23, 2005 4:58 pm  

it is a lose , lose situation for Busn n Blair this one ,

either as you say they nail themselves to the wall , or the end up calling Al-Qaeda freedom fighters

how on earth do you define terrorism

I have had plenty come here and try to define it (righties) but the definition never holds up to much scrutiny

By Blogger _H_, at September 24, 2005 4:24 am  

Thursday, September 22, 2005

Pentagon blocking September 11 inquiry: senator

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Republican chairman of the Senate judiciary committee accused the Pentagon on Wednesday of stonewalling an inquiry into claims that the U.S. military identified four September 11 hijackers more than a year before the 2001 attacks.
The Defense Department barred several witnesses from testifying at a judiciary committee hearing and instead sent a top-level official who could provide little information on al Qaeda-related intelligence uncovered by a secret military team code-named Able Danger.

"That looks to me like it may be obstruction of the committee's activities, something we will have to determine," said the panel's chairman, Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania.
Specter also complained that the Pentagon delivered hundreds of pages of documents related to Able Danger late on the eve of the hearing, giving his committee staff no time to review the material.
"The American people are entitled to some answers," Specter said. "It is not a matter of attaching blame. It is a matter of correcting errors so that we don't have a repetition of 9/11."

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said the Pentagon considered Able Danger to be a classified matter and declined to participate when the judiciary committee chose to hold an open hearing.
"We have to obey the laws with respect to security classifications," Rumsfeld told reporters.

Witnesses barred from testifying included military intelligence officers and analysts involved in Able Danger, a now defunct operation that used powerful computers to sift through public data in search of intelligence clues.

People involved with the operation have said that Able Danger identified September 11 ringleader Mohamed Atta and three other hijackers as being members of an al Qaeda cell in the early months of 2000.

As much as I would love to know what the hell is going on... I have to say I was surprised to even hear anything about this. I can see from here that there are massive security implications.

But still... give me something, right now its like the cat is half way out of the bag already.

By Blogger G_in_AL, at September 22, 2005 1:53 pm  

The cat is out of the bag. Too much has already been revealed. However, it is probably not safe to reveal all the details. Of course if we had gotten Osama back when we had him in our cross hairs, then this wouldn't have been an issue. All should be revealed when it doesn't endanger any our lives. Of course that ain't happening while Bush is in office.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at September 22, 2005 3:53 pm  

I think thats is the point that i see

if the US government had given 100 % to catching osama etc then this should be a fair and open subject now ,

it is not , and it may well be many years before the people of the US get the FULL story of what did or did not happen

By Blogger _H_, at September 22, 2005 4:45 pm  

The GOP Specter still saying it's about correcting errors, not blame? So its just another 'institutional failure'?

When will he realize that the mountain of 'institutional failures' this administration has never occurred before? When will they realize that with so many errors to correct, it's still proof positive that somebody is either steering the ship to the rocks, or asleep at the helm? In either case, it adds up to BLAME?

By Anonymous Nostradamnhtem, at September 23, 2005 4:55 pm  

very true Nostradamnthem

in my view it is history itself that will define the blame , and i think history will be very hard

any kind of present responsibilty is just a hopefull dream

By Blogger _H_, at September 24, 2005 4:26 am  

Interview with the British soldiers who escaped burning tanks

Interesting interview from the BBC






Here

U.S. policy in Iraq is effectively handing the country to Iran

NEW YORK (Reuters) -- U.S. policy in Iraq is widening sectarian divisions to the point of effectively handing the country to Iran, Saudi Arabian Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal said on Tuesday.
"(Iraq's) people have been separated from each other," Faisal told the Council of Foreign Relations in New York.
"You talk now about Sunnis as if they were separate entity from the Shiite."
He urged the United States, which is battling a Sunni Arab insurgency against occupying U.S. forces and backs the Kurdish- and Shiite-led Iraqi government, to work "to bring these people together."
Saudi Arabia has voiced fears that an Iraqi constitution, due to be put to a referendum in four weeks, could split the country apart and disenfranchise a Sunni minority that lost power when a U.S.-led invasion ousted Saddam Hussein in 2003.
"If you allow civil war, Iraq is finished forever," Faisal said.

Read the rest Here

You are darn right it is... at least the southern portion.

By Blogger copy editor, at September 22, 2005 2:33 pm  

I think Iraq went into a cold civil war right after Saddam was caught. It seems to be heating up now, but I think the factions were getting their stuff together. Now the plans are being carried out and we have this huge mess.

This will be done in Afganistan as well. Expect more mayhem.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at September 22, 2005 3:50 pm  

Copy Editor ,

thanks for your comment , yes the Sh'ite powebase that we have created is a major threat to middle east peace in any form

Hype ,

yup your right , the worst is yet to come , so expect another dose of "Mission Accomplished" to go round soon

By Blogger _H_, at September 22, 2005 4:56 pm  

Iran gains reprieve in nuclear standoff

VIENNA, Austria (AP) -- Iran gained a reprieve in the standoff over its nuclear program Wednesday, with diplomats saying the European Union had decided to postpone its push to refer Iran to the U.N. Security Council.
The decision to delay a vote until a later board meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency instead of demanding one this week appeared driven by concerns about strong opposition.
More than a dozen of the 35 IAEA board member nations meeting in Vienna -- including Security Council members Russia and China -- are against the idea.
Although a new EU draft motion does not mention Security Council sanctions, it still calls for reporting Iran to the council if it continues defying board demands that include freezing activities related to uranium enrichment, said senior diplomats accredited to the IAEA

Read the rest of the article Here

more than a dozen of 35 is still less than half... why did the EU crumble under pressure from Russia and China, who both have a vested interest in standing with Iran, right or wrong?

The US supported their draft resolution, and now they've left us hanging out to dry...

By Blogger G_in_AL, at September 22, 2005 1:55 pm  

ummm, maybe because they know better now... maybe because we are a joke now..

They know we have little power. They saw our response to Katrina and they see how we are doing in Iraq. The defeat was easy because Iraq was broken down. Now the world can see us for who we really are. They should stand up to us. They should have their own intelligence and not rely on ours. They shouldn't rely on our politics to make their decisions. Also, they realize that even our own intelligence says Iran probably wouldn't be able to develop nukes for another 10 years.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at September 22, 2005 3:47 pm  

G you said "more than a dozen of 35 is still less than half..."

erm but it only takes ONE member of the security council to VETO , and already 2 members have hinted that they will

Hype you said "maybe because we are a joke now.."

I hate to say it but your right , I am and always have been very supporting of the US , my country and yours are very close

but you can not deny that at this moment in time the US reputation in the world is at its lowest ever ebb , and putting someone like John Bolton at the UN has now made the US a laughing stock ,

It really is time for a change of direction from the US before the credibility is lost forever

By Blogger _H_, at September 22, 2005 5:01 pm  

I agree. Too bad we get another election.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at September 22, 2005 5:17 pm  

Wednesday, September 21, 2005

How many bullets does it take to defeat an insurgency

The "cakewalk war" is now two and one-half years old. US casualties (dead and wounded) number 20,000. As 20,000 is the number of Iraqi insurgents according to US military commanders, each insurgent is responsible for one US casualty.

US troops in Iraq number about 150,000. Obviously, US troops have not inflicted 150,000 casualties on the Iraqi insurgents. US troops have perhaps inflicted 150,000 casualties on the Iraqi civilian population, primarily women and children who are the "collateral damage" of the "righteous" and "virtuous" US invasion that is spreading civilian deaths all over Mesopotamia in the name of democracy.What could the US have possibly done to give America a worse name than to invade Iraq and murder its citizens .

According to the September 1 Manufacturing & Technology News, the Government Accounting Office has reported that over the course of the cakewalk war, the US military’s use of small caliber ammunition has risen to 1.8 billion rounds. Think about that number. If there are 20,000 insurgents, it means US troops have fired 90,000 rounds at each insurgent.

Very few have been hit. We don’t know how many. To avoid the analogy with Vietnam, until last week the US military studiously avoided body counts. If 2,000 insurgents have been killed, each death required 900,000 rounds of ammunition.The combination of US government owned ammo plants and those of US commercial producers together cannot make bullets as fast as US troops are firing them.

The Bush administration has had to turn to foreign producers such as Israel Military Industries. Think about that. Hollowed out US industry cannot produce enough ammunition to defeat a 20,000 man insurgency.

5 bullets would do.

One to kill Zarqawi. The next to kill his "successor", and then one more to knock off the "next successor".

Then put one in the head of theocracy in Iran, and one in the head of theocracy in Syria.

After that... it would desolve.

anyway, I will quit being an ass now.

By Blogger G_in_AL, at September 21, 2005 6:55 pm  

One day Gump we might be on the receiving end of such behavior. How would it feel to have your leaders killed? How would it feel to have people from your neighborhood shot and killed because they spoke up politically. Their government is their business. End of story. We have no right to tell other countries how to govern themselves. Your comments are fascist.

You just advocated a style of government that gave Hitler the power to do what he did.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at September 21, 2005 7:47 pm  

"Hollowed out US industry cannot produce enough ammunition to defeat a 20,000 man insurgency."

We can thank the American Liberal gun control freaks for that; other than that, you're right.

By Blogger Bassizzzt, at September 22, 2005 1:36 am  

you will have to help me out here Bassizzzt , not being american , i am probably getting confused

what does thia have to do with the "liberal gun control freaks" ?

?

By Blogger _H_, at September 22, 2005 2:45 am  

I'm afraid that the idea may not be to "defeat" the insurgency. The numbers you put forward, 900,000 rounds "per death", (not to mention all the other accoutrements of insurgency-busting) seems terribly inefficient. One would assume that various contractors (Israel Military Industries, et all) must be paid to supply these munitions. There must someone who stands to make a pretty penny off of an inefficient war. Given the recent development of British forces *creating* an insurgency, (http://www.theage.com.au/news/World/British-vehicles-crash-into-Basra-jail/2005/09/19/1126982003628.html)
the likelihood of the existence of a agenda to squeeze every defense contract dollar out of this engagement seems quite high.

- Oroboros -
http://hellistruth.blogspot.com/

By Blogger Oroboros, at September 22, 2005 4:37 am  

Hype... "they spoke up politically."

Um, they are blowing people up, not just "speaking out"

And you must have missed the part where I said "I will quit being an ass"

Call me a Nazi if you want, but it only makes you look even dumber... hard to believe as that is.

By Blogger G_in_AL, at September 22, 2005 1:57 pm  

Actually if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck... Your comments, I believe show your true feelings. Otherwise you wouldn't have said it. I would never say something like that. That is a horrible thing to say. Gump is like Pat Robertson. Maybe his heart is in the right place, but his brain isn't wired right.

Blowing up people and terrorism is a way to protest. It is violent. I don't support that, but none the less it exists. Killing yourself can be an act of protest. If you don't understand that then that explains alot about you.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at September 22, 2005 3:40 pm  

Gump knows very little about people, different cultures and ways of life...

And to top that, he doesn't believe in evolution, natural selection, global warming, peace, fiscal responsibility and whole lotta other things I don't have time to get into right now.

I am still waiting on him to say Bush is a failure. He won't even though he knows it is true.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at September 22, 2005 3:42 pm  

Oroboros :

thanks for your comment :

you said " There must someone who stands to make a pretty penny off of an inefficient war."

spot on in my view , there are far to many people(and companies) who have plenty to gain from this continuation of this war . Worrying indeed

you said "Given the recent development of British forces *creating* an insurgency,"

yes i have read a lot on this concept but have as yet refrained from posting on it , there are alot of strange activities that is for sure , and it makes sense logically to come to that conclusion , but for me the jury is still out , though i must admit i am leaning your way

Hype :


you said "
Blowing up people and terrorism is a way to protest"


yup , the problem some people have on the right , is they think that to understand why someone blows themselves up is to justify it

It is not , it is the first and most important step to understand what makes a person so angry they wish to do such a thing

if someone Murders a child we want the police to leave no stone unturned to find out who and why they did it , But when it comes to terrorism , suddenly we are expected not to ask the very same questions or we are seen as justifying ... how odd

are the Police justfying murder when they investigate why the killer did what he did ?

By Blogger _H_, at September 22, 2005 5:13 pm  

I agree. Learning the true motives up people will be the answer to this problem. If the truth ever comes out.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at September 22, 2005 5:20 pm  

Rarely is the question asked: "Don't they teach our military to shoot straight instead of spraying bullets?"

By Anonymous Nostradamnthem, at September 23, 2005 5:19 pm  

Al Qaeda "content to take credit for any terrorist attack"

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A U.S. counterterrorism official says the newly released tape of Osama bin Laden's chief deputy does not in itself demonstrate that al Qaeda planned or directed the terrorist attacks in London last July.
In the tape broadcast Monday on Al-Jazeera, Ayman al-Zawahiri claimed responsibility for the July bombings on mass transit in downtown London. The first attack on July 7 killed 56 people, including the four bombers. Two weeks later, four bombs failed to detonate.
The U.S. official said this is not the first time al Qaeda has hinted at responsibility for the attacks. Al-Zawahiri appeared on a previous tape in which he blamed the policies of British Prime Minister Tony Blair and U.S. President George W. Bush for the bombings.
But the counterterrorism official said al Qaeda seemed "content to take credit for any terrorist attacks."

This is a view that i am in tune with , it seems every single time there is a terrorist attack somewhere , two months later (if nobody else claims it) some Al-qaeda spokesman will claim credit .

It is becoming almost a running joke to me , It is obvious to all concerned that "Al Qaeda" had nothing at all to do with the London bomings , but it suits the US and the "terrorists" just fine if they jump in and take the credit

they are kinda like the ACLU, they need some publicity, folks are not taking them as serious anymore... Al Qaeda has become a catch phrase instead of an orginization.

By Blogger G_in_AL, at September 21, 2005 3:26 am  

spot on G !!! (did i just say that lol)

thats exactly what they are ..

"A catch phrase"


hmmm not sure if i can get used to a world where we agree G (kidding)

By Blogger _H_, at September 21, 2005 4:25 am  

that kinda gave me shivers....

By Blogger G_in_AL, at September 21, 2005 12:34 pm  

At this point, any terrorist attack will suit .القاعدة

By Blogger Bassizzzt, at September 22, 2005 1:38 am  

lol, do have that thing in your permanent clip board now?

By Blogger G_in_AL, at September 22, 2005 1:58 pm  

Russia & China will block any efforts to take Iran to the UN security council

Russia and China have openly opposed Western efforts to take Iran to the UN Security Council over Tehran's controversial nuclear activities.
The US and EU have been pressing for Iran to be referred to the Security Council, which can impose sanctions.
But Moscow and Beijing may block the plan, with Russia saying the current situation was "not irreversible".
Iran has threatened to bar snap inspections of its nuclear sites if it is referred to the Security Council.
Iran's chief nuclear negotiator Ali Larijani also said Tehran would also consider pulling out of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and resume uranium enrichment if the "language of force" continues.

HAHAHAH, the triad is complete.... I will have to link this to my post in the morning.

By Blogger G_in_AL, at September 21, 2005 3:27 am  

Iraqi Police 'have been recruiting insurgents'

Iraq's National Security Adviser Muwafaq al-Rubaie has admitted the country's security forces have been infiltrated by insurgents.
Speaking on the BBC's Newsnight programme, he said he had no idea how far they have already been undermined.
It comes after the British Army said it was forced to take action to free two UK soldiers after learning Iraqi police had handed them to a militia group.
The Pentagon warned in July that Iraq's police force was recruiting insurgents.
He admitted he did not know to what extent the security forces were already infiltrated by insurgents.

not corruption in Iraq? No way....

I just wish our forces could take the kid gloves off and clean house there.

By Blogger G_in_AL, at September 21, 2005 3:30 am  

Tuesday, September 20, 2005

British SAS rescued from Shia militia

Following the confusing events in Basra yesterday the BBC has managed to put some of the pieces together ....





Both men were members of the SAS elite special forces, sources told the BBC's Richard Galpin in Baghdad.

The soldiers were arrested by police and then handed over to a militia group, the British Army says.

Iraq's interior ministry ordered the police force in Basra to release the soldiers but that order was ignored.

Instead they ended up in the hands of Shia militia, prompting the flattening of a wall at the police station and the later dramatic rescue, the Ministry of Defence said.

Basra governor Mohammed al-Waili said the men - possibly working undercover - were arrested for allegedly shooting dead a policeman and wounding another.

Update: the Two SAS men have now been confirmed as being rescued from a nearby Militia house and not the Police station ,

A timeline of events can be read Here

I am glad to hear they are alright. However, we seem to be missing some of the story. Why was the order ignored? If it was infact given, what kind of command structure do they have if no one is following orders? Hopefully we will find out more.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at September 20, 2005 4:55 pm  

Dont miss the BIG story hiding in this lot Hype

this sentence "Instead they ended up in the hands of Shia militia,"

hmmm , so Iraqi police are handing over 'prisoners' to Shia militia !

another example of the country being nowhere near security and peace

arent we told it is the US/UK/Iraqi forces agaisnt the Militia and terrorists and insurgents ?

seems not

seems it is the US/UK versus the Iraqi forces/Militia

that is a real sign of how bad things have got

By Blogger _H_, at September 20, 2005 5:00 pm  

It is hard to tell what is what with all the smoke and mirrors.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at September 20, 2005 7:24 pm  

I think the police were paid to hand over the "westerners", and so they did.

You know, stuff like this happens in Mexico all the time too. In fact, i was there with some buddies about 8 years ago or so, and one of them ended up in jail because he was drunk... at a bar...(i.e. he was American and had money). The only way he was getting out was by forking up his watch and the money left in his wallet. I knew other guys that lost their cars down there to the "impound".

This stuff isnt shocking in a less than stable, and less than established authority system. The only difference is they two guys they picked up had some buddies with tanks and helicopters.

By Blogger G_in_AL, at September 20, 2005 10:15 pm  

Why were these two men "undercover" and out shooting people? Something smells here.

By Blogger K. Ron Silkwood, at September 20, 2005 11:01 pm  

from what i can put together k.ron , it seems the Iraqi Police spotted the armed men , did not click and just opened fire

if this was standard british troops i would question it , but with these guys i can't imagine them breaking procedure

By Blogger _H_, at September 21, 2005 1:37 am  

SAS is some spooky stuff... Delta squad types no?

So my guess is we wont know WHAT they were doing out there.

By Blogger G_in_AL, at September 21, 2005 3:31 am  

well they are another group that kind of only half exists

the british authorities will not admit (of course) that these guys were SAS

so what ever the plot , we will never read it

one interesting side note though ,

the Iraqi Police have claimed (in some reports) that they captured the soliders trying to plant explosives !

i am not buying thay yet , but it is a rumour out there at the fringes

By Blogger _H_, at September 21, 2005 4:28 am  

Bulgaria Begins Iraq Withdrawal Mid October

Bulgaria's troops will begin their withdrawal from Iraq in the middle of October, the Chief of General Staff of the Bulgarian Army General Nikola Kolev announced.

Kolev also said that the withdrawal operation should be completed by December 31. Still, he underlined that Bulgaria's political leaders are still mulling the form of the country's future participation in the Coalition.

General Kolev explained that the plan for the withdrawal is ready and is now being coordinated with the Coalition partners and the US central commandment.

Bulgaria's parliament, which has the final say over Bulgarian troop deployments, approved in May a government plan to withdraw the country's 450 troops in Iraq by the end of the year. It was also decided that the troops in Iraq are reduced to 370.

Bulgaria's new Prime Minister Sergei Stanishev has said the country will withdraw its troops from Iraq by the end of the year, stepping back from the socialists' vow to pull out the soldiers sooner.

Watch Iraq as everybody leaves. This is going down very similar to Iran. We will have actually done more harm than good in this war. Iraq is Vietnam all over again. Nixon is alive and well through Rove/BushCo.

The ME is pissed. We are going broke. Our country is on its way to being all out Fascist. I live in Jesusland but in reality all these people are actually anti-Jesus. They are the opposite almost all the time. It is rare for anybody to follow his teachings. There is a lot of rhetoric. People rarely practice what they teach and they want to force everybody to affirm their belief in G*D.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at September 20, 2005 4:51 pm  

Your right , it is not looking good at all ,

the righties will say that it is only 450 troops , but it is not about numbers , it is about another country backing out of what was a pathetic coalition to start .

By Blogger _H_, at September 20, 2005 4:56 pm  

The coalition was a joke. Going to the UN was a joke. Finding Saddam in a hole was a joke. This whole war is a bad joke.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at September 20, 2005 7:25 pm  

you will only find agreement from me on that one hype :-)

By Blogger _H_, at September 21, 2005 1:38 am  

Saudi intelligence: 'Iraq invasion radicalized Saudi fighters'

RIYADH (Reuters) - Hundreds of Saudi fighters who joined the insurgency in Iraq showed few signs of militancy before the U.S.-led overthrow of Saddam Hussein, according to a detailed study based on Saudi intelligence reports.
The study by the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), obtained by Reuters on Sunday, also said Saudis made up just 350 of the 3,000-strong foreign insurgents in Iraq — fewer than many officials have assumed.
"Analysts and government officials in the U.S. and Iraq have overstated the size of the foreign element in the Iraqi insurgency, especially that of the Saudi contingent," it said.
Non-Iraqi militants made up less than 10 percent of the insurgents' ranks — perhaps even half that — the study said.
Most were motivated by "revulsion at the idea of an Arab land being occupied by a non-Arab country."
The study by Middle East analyst Anthony Cordesman and Saudi security adviser Nawaf Obaid may offer further fuel to critics who say that instead of weakening al Qaeda, the 2003 invasion of Iraq brought fresh recruits to Osama bin Laden's network.
It said Saudi Arabia had interrogated dozens of Saudi militants who either returned from Iraq or were caught at the border. "One important point was the number who insisted that they were not militants before the Iraq war," it said.
"The vast majority of Saudi militants who entered Iraq were not terrorist sympathizers before the war, and were radicalized almost exclusively by the coalition invasion," the study said.
Backing up their claim, 85 percent of those interrogated were not on any watch list of known militants, the study said. Most came from the west, south or center of Saudi Arabia, often from middle class families of prominent conservative tribes.
Many were well-educated and had jobs and all of them were Sunni Muslims, the study said. Majority Sunnis in Saudi Arabia are troubled by the emergency of Iraq's Shi'ite majority.

Source Here

Prediction 101. Shouldn't we have known this? Oh, wait. We did.

Some of us were more concerned about the effect of the Iraq war on the whole ME than the supposed WMD sitting in Saddam's backyard.

Looks like we were right. Go figure.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at September 20, 2005 4:44 pm  

very true Hype

did you note this line "Non-Iraqi militants made up less than 10 percent of the insurgents' ranks — perhaps even half that — the study said"

So it seems the bullshit of this all being done by foriegn fighters is being prooved to be wrong

as far as the Saudi intelligence is concerned 9 out of every 10 insurgents are Iraqi born citizens

By Blogger _H_, at September 20, 2005 5:02 pm  

We are being told they are ex-Saddam loyalists, but it would seem more likely that an internal power struggle (civil war) had already started or taken place. It is hard to say.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at September 20, 2005 7:27 pm  

well even though G hates to see it :oP , i think if this isnt 'quite' a civil war yet , then we are very very close to that line

By Blogger _H_, at September 21, 2005 1:39 am  

Did UK soldiers 'storm' Basra prison

British forces have rescued two UK servicemen who were arrested by Iraqi police in the southern city of Basra. Official Iraqi sources say British tanks stormed the city's jail, but the Ministry of Defence says the men's release was negotiated. Basra governor Mohammed al-Waili said it was a "barbaric act of aggression". The arrests sparked clashes in which UK tanks came under attack. Two civilians were reportedly killed and three UK soldiers were injured.
MoD officials insist they have been talking to the Iraqi authorities to secure the release of the men - who were reported to be working undercover.

Full story Here

I just posted on this too H, but from a different slant.

This thing sounds like something from our Wild Wild West, no?

By Blogger G_in_AL, at September 20, 2005 1:55 pm  

Wild Wild West? As if you could characterize a war in another country as the Wild Wild West... Whatever Gump!

This was bound to happen. Now we are saying the Iraqi police have no authority. Well at least none when it comes to enforcement regarding US/UK soldiers. It's no surprise either.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at September 20, 2005 4:42 pm  

Sunday, September 18, 2005

At least 250 dead from surge in violence in Iraq

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - Four days after al-Qaida in Iraq declared all-out war on the country’s Shiite majority, more than 250 people have been killed, 30 of them yesterday in a massive car bombing outside a produce market in a poor Shiite suburb east of Baghdad.
In all, at least 52 people were killed or found dead yesterday throughout the country, victims of mounting sectarian killings promised by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the Jordanian-born leader of the terrorist organization and a moving force behind the Sunni-dominated insurgency.
After a suicide car bomber exploded his vehicle Wednesday in the midst of assembled day laborers in a largely Shiite neighborhood in north Baghdad, an audio tape posted on the Internet and claiming to be from al-Zarqawi announced an "all-out war against Shiites everywhere. Beware, there will be no mercy."
The death toll from at least 14 bombings Wednesday was 167, marking the worst day of violence in the capital since U.S. troops invaded and overthrew Saddam Hussein 2½ years ago

Watch how bad it pisses off the insurgents when the Shia an Sunni still dont resort to open conflict.

In a year, when this place has worked itself out, you, and many others are going to hate the taste of the "shut up" juice you're drinking

;p

By Blogger G_in_AL, at September 19, 2005 4:10 pm  

erm , keep up G , the Shia are attacking british tanks as we speak ,

2 british soldiers arrested by Iraqi police today !

british tanks on fire in the center of Basra

the Shia are on the edge of flipping G

you should never judge the juice till you have allowed it to pass through the system

wtf that means i dont know lol

but big things happening today in the south

By Blogger _H_, at September 19, 2005 4:21 pm  

Gump is clueless. Didn't we tell him last week this was going to happen? It is not like we want it to happen. Maybe, considering the fact that anybody should be able to predict this, BushCo is actually wanting a divided and warring middle east. Have you stepped back and thought maybe these guys are always lying to us? They tell us what we want to hear and let us second guess their true motives.

-Hype

By Blogger Hype, at September 19, 2005 4:30 pm  

Watch the Iranian president's UN speech

Watch the Iranian presidents speech Here from the BBC