Saturday, January 14, 2006

Iran 'does not need nuclear arms'

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has defended Iran's decision to resume nuclear research, but has denied that Tehran is seeking to acquire nuclear weapons.

These are excerpts of his statement at the news conference in Tehran, and his replies to reporters' questions, as broadcast on Iranian TV. Source : here

A nation which has culture, logic and civilization does not need nuclear weapons. The countries which seek nuclear weapons are those which want to solve all problems by the use of force. Our nation does not need such weapons.

They ask us why we have started [nuclear] research. Our reply is that there is no limitation to research. There are no limits imposed on research in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty nor in the Additional Protocol. Nor have we made any such commitment.

They say openly that they are opposed to this research. By what right do you make such a statement? Is this not a fundamentalist medieval perspective? We believe that, unfortunately, despite their technological and scientific development, in certain parts of the world, several Western countries still have an ideological and intellectual perspective which belong to the medieval age.

Today, the language of hegemony, of force, of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons is no longer applicable. These things are no longer effective in international dealings. Today, nations have awakened, and they will determine their own future.

We have adhered to international laws and continue to do so. Over 1,400 days of inspection have been carried out at our facilities - that is unprecedented.

We have put forward a proposal calling for the UN to set up a disarmament committee. But some countries hold a stick over our head during the negotiations, threatening to refer our case to the UN Security Council unless we bend to their will. Why do they tarnish the integrity of international institutions? Why do they force the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] to get involve with politics?

Our path is very clear. We shall continue with our activities within the regulations of the IAEA and the NPT. According to international law, Iran has the right to the peaceful use of nuclear energy. We are acting in the framework of the IAEA's regulations. Today, we are carrying out research. I should also say that our people will not accept that others should impose on us whatever they want. Our nation has a definite right to peaceful nuclear technology and will achieve it.

We are the only nation that has invited all others to come and join us. If you say that you do not trust us, you can come and become our partner. We are ready to become your partner in your [nuclear] technology. We can each supervise the others activities. We can watch that you do not deviate towards nuclear weapons, and you can also become our partners and monitor our activities directly.

How do you justify this logic of having a full arsenal of nuclear weapons, but when it comes to nations such as ours, you do not even allow research? This logic cannot rule the world today. Even if the Security Council gets involved in this subject, it will not help solve the equation. We do not want to move in this direction. But those who insist on undermining our rights should know that this will not happen.

Notes to readers before leaving comments :

I am NOT printing this statement due to any personal belief that every word is or is not true . The IAEA still do not know if Iran is trying to build a weapon or not so the rest of us around the world would be more than a little idiotic to claim that we have the answer to that question when 1400 days of actual on the ground inspections so far have failed to settle the issue . We simply do not know regardless of what people like George Bush tell us

But I do print this statement as a small amount of balance to the war pimps around the world who seem to expect us to believe that they have access to a greater truth than the IAEA

There is NO history (in modern times) of Iran actually starting any wars with ANYONE and I certainly believe that the solution can be best found in a combination of the IAEA and also in convincing Israel to sign the NPT and agree to get rid of their Nuclear weapons

But you can't find peace through hypocrisy . I will be the first to say that Iran's behavior and rhetoric has been disgusting at times but being told to comply with international law by countries that hid their own development of WMD just plays into the hands of those that see evidence of double standards and bullying by the west .

Surely the one lesson we should learn from the invasion of Iraq and the subsequent slaughter of so many Muslims is that the intelligence agencies of the west are prone to making HUGE errors in their analysis and i trust their word on this subject about as much as i would trust Pinocchio . My faith remains in the excellent work of the noble peace prize winner Mohamed elbaradei , he was right on Iraq and i have no doubt he will be right on Iran as well ..

Finally if you are 100 % certain that you KNOW Iran is actually building a bomb and NOT pursuing their right (as every country has that has signed the NPT) to peacefull nuclear energy then please stop what you are doing and inform the IAEA of the facts you have obtained that they have failed to notice after 1400 days on the ground . I am sure they will appreciate your wisdom .

By Blogger _H_, at January 15, 2006 12:53 am  

_H_, good "preemptive" comment. Of course, we can expect the usual comments from the usual crowd. The "war pimps" have got quite a system down, don't they. First, make false claims to rally the call to war. Second, have war. Third, quickly learn that claims were false (there would, of course be a small contingent that would claim the nukes are buried in Syria). Fourth, say with false lament that the war was regretably based on bad intel that (lie) no one disputed but that we must now "stay the course." And if you call for the end, it is just because "you want to see Bush/America fail."

On the the point of Israel signing the NPT, Israel is in violation of UNSC resolution 687, though I'm sure that the U.S. is not going to crap out of Israel. (Before someone who thinks they know what the resolution comes in the say I'm wrong, read numbered paragraph 14 of the resolution.)

Finally, if anyone is 100% certain Iran is building a bomb, I should surely like to borrow or purchase your crystal ball for use on the NYSE.

By Blogger DJEB, at January 15, 2006 2:43 am  

unfortunately, not one of the media in the west showed this part of the interview. Most of them extracted the last phrase " ...But those who insist (
...) should know that this will not happen."

Somehow I think that a president of a theocratic state skeaks out the truth about the contemporary history of war. His speach was more true than any speach of G.W.Bush ...!

By Blogger Memento aka a moment in life, at January 15, 2006 10:21 am  

he is handsome

By Blogger underpanter, at January 15, 2006 1:25 pm  

Auf dem Foto lacht er wie ein kleiner lieber Bub, andererseits nennt ihn maximalfantasie einen VOLLKOFFER. Was ist richtig?

By Anonymous Anonymous, at January 15, 2006 2:40 pm  


That was one of my main reasons for posting this . It is very easy to take a single sentence from a speech and make it look evil , in fact as you pointed out his comments are well thought out and the worlds press have chosen to ignore that


hehehe , well maybe he has seen your site !!!


Dieses ist die Frage, wissen wir nicht und ich zweifellos würde Leute bombardiert werden und nicht ermordet werden wünschen, es sei denn wir sicher sind, die krank sein würden bitte ist Versuch rechts auf englisch mein Deutscher nicht guter der


why no comment here ? your happy to NUKE the INNOCENT people of Iran but your not willing to explore the facts on the ground in the country ?

By Blogger _H_, at January 15, 2006 9:04 pm  

No, Jeannie is not willing to explore the facts. For anon, das ist nicht mein kampft (or something like that).

By Blogger DJEB, at January 16, 2006 12:48 am  

I liked the opening line:
"A nation which has culture, logic and civilization does not need nuclear weapons"
This should be a food for thought for many american war mongers.

By Blogger Knight Of The Storms, at January 16, 2006 8:37 am  

CNN said Iran was re-starting their nuclear weapsons program. CNN got the boot from Iran over the mix up. CNN might start to think twice about reporting the lies and get back to actual journalism.


By Blogger Hype, at January 16, 2006 6:11 pm  

CNN have had to say sorry now Hype ,

As usual what happens when the usual suspects search for their articles of hatred and they find that sort of propoganda still availible to read on the internet

saying sorry sometimes is not enough , Just like the recent lies in the J post , we will be defending against trash like that for months

By Blogger _H_, at January 17, 2006 10:21 pm  

the nucelar bomb that iran r doin is wrong i will not stand for it.
all they r doing is destroying trheir own land it is a stuiped thing 2 do Iran r going crazy that is why us people should stop this bomb.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at January 18, 2006 8:19 am  

We must stop Iran from this nucalar bomb will kill many or even worse kill their friends and relitives we must stop this from happening otherwise it will and us humans will not live in peace

By Anonymous Anonymous, at January 18, 2006 8:22 am  

What Nuclear bomb Anonymous ?

why do you think they are making a bomb ?

Even if they had a bomb who do you think they would use it on ?

Israel ?

They would kill thousands of Palastinians (the people they support so strongly)

I understand that you are worried. When people keep telling you something it makes it sound like it must be true but nobody knows that Iran is building a bomb..

I would normally remove your comment for it is clear you have not read the first comment in this thread that says "Notes to readers before leaving comments"

But it seems you may be genuinly concerned by what you have read or seen on TV

Try reading this

Please do not believe everything you see and read

and please try and read the first comment first if you choose to reply

By Blogger _H_, at January 18, 2006 8:41 am  

Indeed, what nuclear bomb r u talking about anon? As _H_ is fond of saying, if you have some evidence that Iran has or is building a nuclear weapon, please forward that information to the IAEA immediately.

By Blogger DJEB, at January 18, 2006 5:20 pm  

Angry Pakistani officials say al-Zawahiri was not in the village illegally attacked by US

Ayman al-Zawahiri was not in the village that was attacked yesterday Pakistani officials have said. But the attack did leave at least 18 local people dead.

The US military has denied knowledge of the attack, which US media reported had been carried out by the CIA.

But Islamabad condemned the strike and called the US ambassador to complain. Pakistan's Information Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed told a news conference the Pakistani government wanted "to assure the people we will not allow such incidents to reoccur".

The raid took place in the village of Damadola in the Bajaur tribal area. A Predator drone reportedly fired missiles at a particular housing compound in the village. Tribesmen there are convinced the strike was the work of the Americans and are very angry at the attack. reported here

Reporters who reached Damadola spoke of three houses hundreds of metres apart that had been destroyed. Shah Zaman said he lost two of his sons and a daughter. "I ran out and saw planes. I ran toward a nearby mountain with my wife. When we were running we heard three more explosions. I saw my home being hit."

According to preliminary investigations there was foreign presence in the area and that, in all probability, was targeted from across the border in Afghanistan," Pakistan's foreign ministry said in a statement, adding it had complained to the US envoy in Islamabad.

The US has about 20,000 troops in Afghanistan, but Pakistan does not allow them to operate across the border.

Darn! Did we miss him? You know you can't trust anything the Liberals say.

By Blogger Jeannie, at January 15, 2006 7:04 pm  

Darn Jeanie !

you only managed to Murder 18 innocent women and children inside a sovereign country that you claim to call a friend . A friend that has not given you ANY authority to use your military inside their country

now the rest of the world calls this TERRORISM what do you call it , 'great television' ?

'The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them' George Orwell

whats your point , that they are only Muslims ? .

The next time a huge terrorist attack happens in your country I am sure you will be the last to consider the sick and evil murder of innocents by your own side as having anything to do with it

aaaahhh ignorance is bliss they say ....

By Blogger _H_, at January 15, 2006 9:31 pm  

As I said, jeannie, the more you speak, the more of us "liberals" you create.

By Blogger DJEB, at January 16, 2006 12:49 am  

Predator video:

By Blogger GOP Christian, at January 18, 2006 2:36 pm  

Not really related, is it, gop-satanist. This is not footage of the illegal act of war against Pakistan.

I am sure you found the video amusing none the less. And I am sure that you either have never read the Bible, or its message was lost on you.

By Blogger DJEB, at January 18, 2006 3:41 pm  

GOP Christian

Please keep your comments related to the thread , if you want to promote you 'gop satanist' agenda you have your own site to do so on

If you can't keep your comments on topic I will delete them

By Blogger _H_, at January 18, 2006 8:48 pm  

The CIA is "without a doubt" running secret torture jails : European inquiry (Video)

A Swiss senator carrying out an inquiry into claims the CIA has run illegal secret detention centres in Europe has said he has no doubt they exist.

Dick Marty accused the US of violating human rights and attacked European nations for their "shocking" passivity in the face of such violations.

"The question is: was the CIA really working in Europe?" he said. "I believe we can say today, without a doubt, yes." Washington's policy "respects neither human rights nor the Geneva Conventions", he said.

He cited as evidence the case of Egyptian cleric and terror suspect Osama Mustafa Hassan, also known as Abu Omar, who was allegedly kidnapped by CIA agents from Milan in 2003 and flown to Egypt for interrogation.

Mr Marty also criticised European governments for failing to act when it seemed clear they knew about the US policy. "It's not possible to transport people from one place to another in such a manner without the secret services knowing about it," he said.

"What was shocking was the passivity with which we all, in Europe, have welcomed these things."

"Europeans should be less hypocritical and not turn a blind eye. There are those who do the dirty work abroad but there are also those who know when they should close their eyes when that dirty work is being done."

Mr Marty said it was unfair to single out for criticism Romania and Poland, both named in media reports as possible sites for the centres. Both have denied involvement.

Governments across Europe had been "willingly silent", he said, and it was now time for Europeans to decide whether they would continue to tolerate the illegal actions of the CIA.

Source : here video: here (windows media player required)

All I gotta say is thank you guys for putting this up. Most people dont have the brains or the nerve. Congratualtions and tahnks for doing america a service by helping your fellow citzens wake up.

By Blogger mr. X, at January 14, 2006 5:00 am  

nice blog

By Anonymous Anonymous, at January 14, 2006 6:21 am  

Awesome blog.. i like it very much.
pls visit

By Blogger PokerMan, at January 14, 2006 7:36 am  

any news on al-Zawahiri ???

By Blogger Memento aka a moment in life, at January 14, 2006 8:49 am  

Mr X

Well I am in fact English but thank you for your compliment anyway and thank you for visiting


I don't think Ayman al-Zawahiri was there ( of course i could be wrong ) but that is why i have not posted any such claims yet .

The story started with the anger of the Bajaur tribal people to a missile attack that they claim (and video shows) killed innocent civilians including children . I reported that here

Now that story has changed but there is no evidence as of yet that ANY Al-Qaeda members were there at all . In the main we are dealing with

Quoting intelligence sources, US media said it was a CIA raid.

But at the same time the official line is

The US military says it is not aware of any operations taking place in the Bajaur tribal area.

Which has the scent of a damage limitation story , IE a release story followed by instant denial

source BBC

These stories of senior Al-qaeda members being killed tend to come out every month or so , the last one was Abu Hamza Rabia

A point of note from my perspective

(1) the death of Ayman al-Zawahiri would have no effect what so ever on the operational ability of Al-Qaeda he is merely a figure head for the whole operation works using a loose disconnected framework where each cell is not only independent but is also unaware of the operations of any other cell

for example al-Zawahiri certainly would not have been aware in advance of the attacks on London or Bali

In all sensible terms Al-Qaeda as we knew them was destroyed in Afghanistan and the attacks we see today are simple , crude but effective copy cats who are inspired by (amongst other factors)the war in Iraq and sympathy for what they see as the slaughter of their Muslim brothers

If only the death (or not ) of Zawahiri could be seen to make the world safer (or not) it would all be a lot simpler

If we get confirmation of his Death then i will report it of course , but my major concern at this point is what a US predeter was doing firing 8 missiles at a house 50km inside the border of a claimed ally when Pakistan's military are 'claiming' they are not aware of any such thing ( which i find hard to believe also)

It just does not smell right , Its not like attacking a house in Iraq of Afghanistan , this is a 'Friendly nation' and if 18 people, including women and children are dead then in any western country that would be seen as an act of war

By Blogger _H_, at January 14, 2006 9:48 am  

And now the Pakistani are angry at the US !!!

By Blogger Memento aka a moment in life, at January 14, 2006 7:01 pm  

Great! Someone has to do something about these terrorists. We're dealing with people who want to wipe us out. It's too bad we have to send them out of the country but if we can get valuable information that will save thousands of lives, go for it!!! The blood on the statute of Liberty offends me and you should be ashamed! You are working for the "bad guys", the "terrorists". That's ok, we will take care of these killers. Someone has too. Do you think the Swiss or the French will stand up for once and do what is right? Doing what is right is not always popular. This is not high school so we really don't give a crap about what spineless wimps think of the US. If we must stand with a few friends so be it. At least they are true friends and they stand on the side of good and want to do what is right. Those terrorists are lucky I'm not running the detention centers. You'd better believe I won't give them sympathy. They kill, murder, behead, rape and terrorize men, women and children. They are the evil of the world and those who sympathise and even help them deserve the same treatment those terrorists put onto others.

You libs offend me because you you guys don't even see that you are helping the evil to continue.

Think about what side you are on.

By Blogger Jeannie, at January 15, 2006 6:41 pm  


Great! Someone has to do something about these terrorists. We're dealing with people who want to wipe us out.

I Agree and that's why we are trying to stop the evil Neocon agenda who have murdered far more innocents then al-qaeda could even dream over 100,000 in Iraq up to a million killed by the sanctions we placed on them , mainly woman and children . The evil of 9/11 killed 300o people but the evil of the response has killed 100 times that many innocents

or did you mean the other terrorists :-)

It's too bad we have to send them out of the country but if we can get valuable information that will save thousands of lives, go for it!!!

Oops , your confusing the TV program '24' with real the real world , it is easily done , care to tell me of any lives that have been saved by torture ? i doubt you can for it doesn't work , your own military commanders admit as much . However i can show you of all the innocents murdered by those who are so enraged at your barbaric treatment of the Muslims ,

The blood on the statute of Liberty offends me

Good , so it should it , don't you find it a little ironic that you have no problem with the torture of innocents as young as 13 years old by your own government but a bit of blood on a picture gets your back up . the use of chemical weapons , depleted uranium , the kidnap of people from sovereign countries , the anal buggery of prisoners with chemical lights . whats next Jeannie , you going to get offended when someone sets fire to the flag ? or are you going to notice the fact it said made in china on the label ?

Take a look at this picture of what your government has done to children , see if it offends you as much as a doctored statue of liberty . see If this makes your blood boil , for you seem to have no concern with boiling the blood of children , just so long as they are not American children here

As a side note maybe you should consider giving the gift of liberty back to the french , for it was the French who helped you gain your liberty but you seem to 'hate' them too

and you should be ashamed!

I am ashamed . I am dismayed that people still think in the barbaric way you do in the year 2006

You are working for the "bad guys", the "terrorists".

Oh i see , I didn't know George Bush employed me , maybe i should call him about my wage cheque

That's ok, we will take care of these killers.

Glad your on board , lets get the neocons impeached and charged with war crimes , :-)

Someone has too. Do you think the Swiss or the French will stand up for once and do what is right?

They already are standing up for what is right , they are standing up against the extremists that are in power in your country . Europeans have had to deal with terrorism for a long time , I can remember when Ronald McDonald was sending money to the IRA from the profits on the burgers you were eating , I wonder how many people died due to you not giving a shit about it back then ? hmmmm does that make you a terrorist ?

Doing what is right is not always popular.

Senseless Murder and war crimes are very rarely popular

This is not high school so we really don't give a crap about what spineless wimps think of the US.

I can see that , but wait for it , this may shock you ... the world did not begin on September 11th . I was working in the anti terrorism field probably when you were still at high school . Terrorism has existed longer then you have been alive and all of a sudden you think you have all the answers ... yea , of course you do

They kill, murder, rape and terrorize men, women and children. They are the evil of the world and those who sympathise and even help them deserve the same treatment those terrorists put onto others.

Again I agree and Again your describing the crimes of your own government

You libs offend me because you you guys don't even see that you are helping the evil to continue.

The truth will always offend you

Think about what side you are on.

I know what side i am on , think about your support of terrorism , without people like you they could not get away with it , go back an look at the picture of the children , do you feel proud of your support in their murder ?

I hope you sleep well at night

By Blogger _H_, at January 15, 2006 10:45 pm  

I'll have a go, too, if you don't mind, _H_.

"Someone has to do something about these terrorists.

What terrorists? "Terrorists" like Maher Arar? I know your ilk not only wants to reinstitute the fascist state by getting rid of habeus corpus and torturing people, but you also pine for genocide (hence your comment on nuking Iran). It's the 1930's all over, only this time Arabs are the Jews and your ilk are...

"if we can get valuable information that will save thousands of lives, go for it!!!

Had you ever bothered to read anthing other than the ramblings of that drug-addict Rush Limbaughm you would perhaps know something about gathering intel. You would know that you cannot get "valuable information that will save thousands of lives" through torture.

"The blood on the statute of Liberty offends me and you should be ashamed!

It frankly offends me that someone who abvocates the obliteration of millions of innocent lives would have the gall to tell us we should be ashamed of anything posted on this site. You are truly without moral conscience.

"You are working for the "bad guys", the "terrorists".

And you have some documentation that shows we are aiding terrorists that you can show us? Or is advocating American ideals like habeus corpus or rejecting torture now a terrorist act?

"Do you think the Swiss or the French will stand up for once and do what is right? Doing what is right is not always popular.

And what is right? According to you, it is rejecting habeus corpus and torture. You are a sick one.

"This is not high school so we really don't give a crap about what spineless wimps think of the US. If we must stand with a few friends so be it.

High school? Have you lost your mind? What the hell are you rambling on about? You do have your "few" friends, though: Islam Karimov, Saparmurat Niyazov, Teodoro Obiang and their ilk - in other words terrorists. (If you don't know who they are, it's high time to get some education.)

"Those terrorists are lucky I'm not running the detention centers.

Which terrorists? It hasn't escaped us that neither you or the government you so dearly love has ever bothered to provide any evidence of guilt. That's convenient. I think you are a terrorist. Yes! Let's ship you off for torture. I guarantee that with enough persuation, you'll say what we want to here regardless of what is true.

As for them being lucky that a woman who has publicly called for the murder of millions of innocents
(your nuke Iran comment on the other thread) isn't running the secret prisons, I'm sure your right.

By Blogger DJEB, at January 16, 2006 1:20 am  

Letterman takes the piss out of O'reilly

If you did not see it Watch the video from Double Agent.

My source : Logical Voice

Now thats funny

Glad to see this is getting such good coverage :) Bill's a dip and a half.

By Blogger stefan, at January 15, 2006 2:05 am  

I would like to point out that before I had ever seen the video, let alone posted it, I read about it in an excellent piece on Stefan's blog.

By Blogger DJEB, at January 15, 2006 2:49 am  

that's just entertaining.

By Anonymous cb, at January 15, 2006 5:15 pm how exactly is this good for letterman. He even admits he cant go par with bill on facts.


those who are uneducated on the news, should not voice an opinion.
Otherwise you are arguing morals against fact. Dangerous

By Blogger Dustin, at January 16, 2006 8:23 am  

Please, the word "fact" and the name Bill O'Reilly do not go together.

By Blogger DJEB, at January 16, 2006 3:16 pm  

'He even admits he cant go par with bill on facts.'

that was a joke..

I could tell Dave was baiting Bill and even held back. I expect this much from Dave. He is able to restrain himself.

Dave handled Bill very well. Dave would wipe the floor with Bill in every debate.


By Blogger Hype, at January 16, 2006 6:16 pm  

According to right-wing website, O'Reilly made Letterman look like an idiot.

Funny is how O'Reilly got every one of his "facts" wrong while on the show. Is he a liar, or just grossly incompetent?

By Blogger DJEB, at January 19, 2006 1:43 am  

Friday, January 13, 2006

Bush Authorized Domestic Spying Before 9/11

Truthout is reporting that 'The National Security Agency advised President Bush in early 2001 that it had been eavesdropping on Americans during the course of its work monitoring suspected terrorists and foreigners believed to have ties to terrorist groups, according to a declassified document.' (pdf)

'The NSA's vast data-mining activities began shortly after Bush was sworn in as president and the document contradicts his assertion that the 9/11 attacks prompted him to take the unprecedented step of signing a secret executive order authorizing the NSA to monitor a select number of American citizens thought to have ties to terrorist groups.'

'What had long been understood to be protocol in the event that the NSA spied on average Americans was that the agency would black out the identities of those individuals or immediately destroy the information.'

'But according to people who worked at the NSA as encryption specialists during this time, that's not what happened. On orders from Defense Department officials and President Bush, the agency kept a running list of the names of Americans in its system and made it readily available to a number of senior officials in the Bush administration, these sources said, which in essence meant the NSA was conducting a covert domestic surveillance operation in violation of the law.'

Read the full article here

This administration's term has been like an onion. the more layers you peel back, the more it smells. History will eventually reveal the truth of this administration, I am sure of it.

By Anonymous cb, at January 14, 2006 5:33 pm  

The thing that not many are talking about is Project Echelon. It has been monitoring electronic communications since (at least) the 90's.

By Blogger DJEB, at January 15, 2006 2:51 am  

So did Clinton. And Bush1 and Reagan, and Ford, and.... it's been going on for years.

By Blogger Pawpaw, at January 15, 2006 5:42 pm  

Yes, and those who leaked out this information should be put on trial and imprisoned! How dare they help the terrorist by aiding them with more information.

The first thing, I would do to clean up the leaks is to fire all the heads of the Defense Department, then start firing those in the CIA. When the leaks stop, you know you've fired the right man (or woman). The leakers are not helping the US at all and it is obvious it is a Liberal who wants the Democrats back in power @ the White House. Power is all that is important to them -- at any cost. Even if it means putting the US in even more danger.

Yes, we must continue to spy on calls from the US to known Terrorists. Daaaaaaaahhhhhh.

By Blogger Jeannie, at January 15, 2006 6:47 pm  

Paw Paw

I don't doubt other American Presidents also did this , but certainly not on the same sort of scale , personally i couldn't care less who runs your country left or right , as long as this evil Neocon agenda is stopped

Jeannie ,

Hello again , i am so pleased you found the time to leave so many comments , It is for people like you that i designed my site and i am delighted your taking advantage of that .

Would these be the evil twisted terrorists your glad to be spying on , hey its your tax money pissing down the drain ... go for it

By Blogger _H_, at January 15, 2006 10:59 pm  

"those who leaked out this information should be put on trial and imprisoned!

An anti-democratic thought if I ever heard one. Yes, it's vital that the government be allowed to carry out its illegal and immoral actions without being held accountable.

"The first thing, I would do...

Yes, you are the though one, aren't you. The one who advocates incinerating millions of Iranian men, women and children.

By Blogger DJEB, at January 16, 2006 1:27 am  


Do you think this matter enough to tick off the rest of the real Conservatives?


By Blogger Hype, at January 16, 2006 6:20 pm  

As per usual Hype I am sure they will just attack it and move on

We can only begin to put this right once we get the PNAC idiots out of office

By Blogger _H_, at January 17, 2006 3:09 am  

Foreign fighters flood into Afghanistan

HUNDREDS of foreign Islamic fighters are gathering in Afghanistan ahead of the deployment of 4,000 British troops to the country in the spring.

The fighters, including Jordanians, Yemenis, Egyptians and Gulf Arabs, stepped up their campaign two months ago with a series of suicide bombings against NATO peacekeepers, United States troops and Afghan government leaders.

"Attacks in Afghanistan are now running at more than 500 a month - it's getting as dangerous for westerners as Iraq in some places," said a British officer involved in planning the NATO peacekeeping mission in the south-west of the country.

Read more here

I love how these Liberals report this story. Notice how they lable them as "Fighters"? They are terrorists!!! Suicide bombings?! Hello?!!! McFly?!!! They are not true fights. They blow themselves up including whoever is near by. They are spineless wimps who can't solve their problems except by killing themselves. Come on! What moron has such a worthless life as to agree to end it by blowing themselves up. That's just how messed up these terrorists are. They think committing suicide is a good thing. Brainwashed!

By Blogger Jeannie, at January 15, 2006 6:53 pm  

woo hoo , Jeanie ...

Have you been to Afghanstan ? have you interviewed the people crossing the border or are you just speaking out the back of your head

what is the difference between a terrorist and a freedom fighter

you see Luis Posada Carriles Is a Terrorist but he was working for you so that does not count

I thought Mr Bush said 'you are either with us or your with the terrorists' well Luis here is wanted for terrorism and for some reason you have refused to let him stand trial for his crimes

so either

the bombing of a Cuban commercial airliner over Barbados in which all 73 people aboard died. is not terrorism and if that is not terrorism then what is ?


your government harbours terrorists and using Mr Bush's own words he has told us by his action which side he is on

By Blogger _H_, at January 15, 2006 11:13 pm  

A terrorist is one who carries out acts of terror, the Contras in Latin America for example. And what is terror? The threat or use of violence to coerce (much like threatening to attack another nation, if you can think of any country that's ever done that). I "fighter" would be one who follows the Geneva Conventions and does not carry out acts of terror as defined above.

"What moron has such a worthless life as to agree to end it by blowing themselves up."

Good question. I see that you have not read the most important study ever carried out on suicide terrorism: Robert A. Pape's Dying to Win. I suggest you pick it up before you embarrass yourself any further.

By Blogger DJEB, at January 16, 2006 1:34 am  

wonderful comments.

this is so obvious..


By Blogger Hype, at January 16, 2006 6:19 pm  

US missiles kills 18 civilians in Pakistan

ISLAMABAD, Jan. 13 (Xinhuanet) -- A lawmaker from Pakistan Bajur tribal region said on Friday that an American spy plane fired missiles on three civilians' houses, killing 18 people, including women and children.

"A U.S. spy plane have been flying in the Bajur region for three days. The plane did such a flight early in the morning and bombed three houses of locals in the Damadola village, 50 kilometers away from the Pak-Afghan border," Member of Pakistan's National Assembly from the Bajur tribal region Sahibzada Haroon ur Rashid told journalists on phone from Bajur.

Damadola is around 200 km northwest of the capital, Islamabad.

Rashid said that the plane first threw light and then made a circle around the target and fired eight missiles on the houses of three local tribesmen.

A total of 18 people were killed in the attack which carried out at 3 a.m. on Friday, he said. Four other people, including two children, were injured and they are said to be in critical condition.

Rashid said that no al-Qaeda member or foreign citizen among those died.

"It is inhuman act to kill civilians under the excuse of foreign militants," he said. "The government should officially condemn U.S. attack," said Rashid

Source : here

Insurgents and Al Qaeda clash in Iraq

The battle was one of several clashes between Al Qaeda and local Iraqi guerrilla groups that have broken out in recent months across the Sunni Triangle.

Read more here (4 page article)

What is probably more worrying is the number of people in the world who still do not know there is a difference between 'Insurgents' and 'Al Qaeda' .

This is terrible news... for the U.S. propaganda machine.

By Blogger DJEB, at January 13, 2006 1:57 am  

I was watching a week-long documentary series on Iraq War on more4 channel . Great stuff! check the site at

the documentary is called Iraq: the Bloody Circus!

I found it quite interesting...


Oh, and a comment on your post:

Do you think that Bush can distinguise between insurgents and Al Qaeda??? Or even... Does He really care ???

By Blogger Memento aka a moment in life, at January 13, 2006 1:59 pm  

Terrible news indeed. Nothing hurts a political campaign more than nuance ;)

By Blogger stefan, at January 13, 2006 7:01 pm  

Memento ,

Yes I have been watching and recording it all , it is great stuff

So many programs of this more4 series are excellent i would really like to put the whole lot online for those without more4 to watch ..

two problems though , (1) the files i have recorded total about 12gb and (2) obviously the copyright issue of putting such videos online

but anyone who can watch more4 (probably just the UK) i would highly recommend doing so

the guys that were willing to enter the 48 hour gitmo must be insain and the program 'why the arabs hate the west' explained the issue so well that only the political blind would fail to learn something about why we are in this mess to start with

Do you think that Bush can distinguise between insurgents and Al Qaeda??? Or even... Does He really care ???

well there is the true story of the time that president Bush was at the super bowl with some arab guests and they were discussing Iraq .....

the arabs became aware during the chat that the president did not even know that there is a major difference between sunni arabs and the shia . This was only weeks before the war started

Blair was the same , he called in top Arab experts on the eve of war and when told of the complexity of Iraq and that you could end up with something far worse than saddam simpy replied

"but he is evil isn't he ?"

As noted by Djeb and stefan this is terrible news for the US propaganda machine , you can't have people realising the difference between terrorists and a legitimate inusgency

By Blogger _H_, at January 13, 2006 7:42 pm  

I hear that the Salvation Army Reserve is on a Deploy-Ready status. Can you confirm??

By Blogger Footprint, at January 13, 2006 8:03 pm  

"the program 'why the arabs hate the west' explained the issue so well that only the political blind would fail to learn something about why we are in this mess to start with"

I must point out that I didn't see the program in question, but i broadly agree with the assertion that Bush and Blair were ignorant of the consequences of invading Iraq, but I have one question.
Did the program identify Israel as one of the reasons why Arabs hate the West?
If it did then I'm afraid it is another example of the typical Arab anti-Israeli policy, an age-old prejudice with no regard for the truth.
If you explore the history of the conflicts in the Middle East you quickly realise that what is often depicted as Israeli aggression is something else entirely. Muslims in the arab world (and elsewhere) simply want to see Israel destroyed and all Jews in the Middle East 'driven into the sea'.
It was as malicious an ideology in the nineteen-forties as it is today.

By Anonymous Keefy, at January 14, 2006 8:18 pm  

Keefy reading your comment i find your view JUST as biased as those in the Arab world that JUST blame Israel

I Have a very good understanding of the Middle East and have spent a great deal of my time trying to understand the issues at stake from all sides

That of course included spending a lot of time actually in the middle east

The truth is someway short of what your describe and it seems your view is more partisan than not

Both Israel and the Arabs have at times acted in a disgusting manner and BOTH are guilty of sickness beyond belief

On why do the 'Arabs hate the west'

a very incomplete list of the main point's raised can be found Here

and some accurate information on the Israeli / palastinian conflict can be found here

I am neither Jewish nor Muslim so it is easy for me to step back and see the crimes of both sides in context

But far too many people seem to see one side or the other as the victim in this .

And especially on the side of Israel there is a ton of false news stories ( often started from the Jerusalem post ) that people accept as being true

Next thing we know such stories as the shooting of Mohammed Jamal Ahmad Al-Dura (the infamous footage of a 12 year old boy hiding behind his father) is replaced with the incredible fiction claiming that Israeli soldiers did not do it after all based on 'research' by extreme right wing Israeli propagandists

where is stories like this fail to make any mark in the world's press

I point out these stories as your view is clearly in favour of Israel

What comes to mind is the words of George Orwell when he said

Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac.

And those that seek the truth would be wise to step away from the dehumanisation of each other by Israel and the Arabs and seek the truth which will never be found by listening to one side or the other

Your statement Muslims in the arab world (and elsewhere) simply want to see Israel destroyed and all Jews in the Middle East 'driven into the sea'.
It was as malicious an ideology in the nineteen-forties as it is today.
sounds very xenophobic and i hope you did not mean to generalise a whole race of people in such a way


By Blogger _H_, at January 14, 2006 9:38 pm  

"Keefy reading your comment i find your view JUST as biased as those in the Arab world that JUST blame Israel"

I was going to say the same thing, particularly since I have "explore[d] the history of the conflicts in the Middle East."

By Blogger DJEB, at January 15, 2006 2:54 am  

Hi again,
Thanks for your comments. I am neither Jewish nor Muslim, but I have certainly travelled in the Middle East. I began some years ago by being very Pro-Palestinian in my views (but having researched little about the conflict), but then I started to look into the history of the region (much like you have) and it changed my mind completely. While I agree that both sides have committed horrendous acts in the past, I don't think there is any doubt that Palestinian terrorism targets innocent civilians while the Israeli forces at least try only to target combatants - yet I find the overwhelming tenor of reporting in the UK to be anti-Israeli in tone.
As for the website that you directed me to (, I find it to be as one-sided and inaccurate as you probably think i am. Bald statistics cannot provide a rounded description of a situation, just the same as a list of colours cannot describe the Mona Lisa. Just one example - the statistic regarding child casualties is tragic whichever way you look at it - but the Palestinians are known to have sent their children into the front line against Israel, especially in the early days of the current intifada, some (wearing bomb-belts) were told to run at checkposts etc. Israeli's tried to keep their children away from the conflict as much as they could.
While the Palestinians show as little regard for their own children as they do for their sworn enemy, then I'm afraid the number of child casulaties will continue to escalate. I really hope that doesn't happen.
As for my comment about Muslims in the arab world wanting to see Israel destroyed - I realise that not every single Muslim would, and I apologise for the generalisation - but I'm sorry, in my own experience the overwhelming majority in Gaza, the West Bank, Egypt, Syria, Iran, Iraq - do. How many have approached the media, in any form, wishing to express their support for Israel, and their hope that the Jewish state should be allowed to remain in peace and thrive? Surrounding countries have used the Palestinian people as pawns in their war against Israel, from the very beginning.
Ask yourself a few questions - Who exactly was in the land before 1947? Where did the 'Palestinian people' come from? How did Israel end up 'occupying' the Palestinian territories? It was finding the answers to these questions that started me down the road to the truth as I see it.
I understand that you will probably read this post and think 'he's plainly one-sided etc' - but i must tell you, I genuinely want to discover the truth about the situation because it is of great significance to me.
I think many people in Europe view Israel as a right-wing nation, and well-meaning people of left-wing or liberal tendancies are sucked into defending the Palestinian people because they percieve them as being the victims of the conflict. That is how I began after all.
But not now.

Thanks for the opportunity to speak.

By Anonymous Keefy, at January 15, 2006 1:27 pm  

The diference between home grown insurgents and Al Kaida should be known to anyone who uses their brains once in a while.

For me it is good news, that insurgents are starting tu fight Al Kaida. Hopefully they will throw them out of Iraq one day. I can't imagine anything worse than Al Kaida gaining power in Sunni parts of Iraq and then starting exporting their ideology to other parts of the Arab world. (Which, unfortunately, they are doing right now anyway.)

By Blogger jin, at January 15, 2006 5:42 pm  


Thanks for your reply and your courteous manner

I welcome your comments here and certainly have no desire to stifle debate by excluding views that are different than my own . You are free to come here as and when you wish to make your point . I only remove comments that are sick and warped such as the "lets nuke Iraq , Iran ' comment by Jeanie ( In fact i am leaving it in place for it actually helps my case more than hinders it )

I would be delighted to go through the debate on a point by point bases with you . you obviously understand the complexity of the issue but in the space provided your not able to provide sources , evidence , facts to back up your claims and to do so here would become an infinite task

You ask questions that I have also asked and I certainly would question the answer's you appear to have come up with and i would be interested in examining the sources behind your opinion

So If you wish feel free to email me from my profile and I will gladly debate the Issue with you .

Please feel free to comment on whatever you wish to on this site , You will probably not find much agreement from me but it would be a pleasure to debate with you ....


I agree that the worst thing for Iraq would be to allow Al-qaeda to gain control , but to me that just highlights how idiotic the invasion of Iraq was in the first place ,

Secular Saddam would NEVER have allowed Al-qaeda to have any influence in the country

By Blogger _H_, at January 15, 2006 11:54 pm  

Not that it's that relevant, but I'll lay out my position with a great deal of plagiarise, if you don't mind. I began some years ago by being very Pro-Israeli in my views (but having researched little about the conflict), but then I started to look into the history of the region and it changed my mind considerably.

"I don't think there is any doubt that Palestinian terrorism targets innocent civilians while the Israeli forces at least try only to target combatants"

Oh, there is quite a lot of doubt as even a cursory look at B'Tselem reveals (although it doesn't reveal it at this moment because their server is down). Or Ha'aretz for another example.

As for your claims that Palestinians don't care about their children, it's the sort of baseless accusation we see all the time. I've seen this kind of de-humanising accusation before. The idea that people send their kids out as walking bombs is asinine and needs no response.

"Who exactly was in the land before 1947? Where did the 'Palestinian people' come from?

Sounds like a set up for the Golda Meir argument...

_H_, a comment on your response to Jin: it is the task of the oppressed to free themselves, not for others to go in and do it for them. Sure, we can help, although that's not what happened in 2003 and the U.S. refused to do it in 1991.

By Blogger DJEB, at January 16, 2006 1:55 am  


I agree on both your replies (keefy and jin)

I Hope that Keefy does contact and has the time to debate . For almost all his points i would question .

On a quiet day my reply would have been much more precise but alas today has been very busy on the site what with the one who would calmly slaughter Arab women and children in there millions whilst happily putting up photo's of her own children on her site

now what was it i was saying about the dehumanisation of people

it is just shocking that ' Some ' people in the US really are that brainwashed

on jin again I agree and as per usual thanks for all your comments Djeb , you so often pick up on what i miss and i am grateful the time and effort you put into responding to people here . as well as your posts of course


By Blogger _H_, at January 16, 2006 2:22 am  

For a woman who is supposed to be a visible minority, her kid is mighty whitey, isn't she? The photo of the woman holding "Kayla" on her birthday is surely white. Is she the mom? Or is this our blue-eyed minority woman? BTW, what kind of nut has a framed Navy recruiting poster hanging in their bedroom? Old blue eyes again. And again.

By Blogger DJEB, at January 16, 2006 2:51 am  

Hamas drops call for destruction of Israel

Hamas has dropped its call for the destruction of Israel from its manifesto for the Palestinian parliamentary election in a fortnight, a move that brings the group closer to the mainstream Palestinian position of building a state within the boundaries of the occupied territories.

The Islamist faction, responsible for a long campaign of suicide bombings and other attacks on Israelis, still calls for the maintenance of the armed struggle against occupation. But it steps back from Hamas's 1988 charter demanding Israel's eradication and the establishment of a Palestinian state in its place

Read the full article here

Thursday, January 12, 2006

“What the World Thinks of America,” (Video)

The BBC hosted a unique global television debate about America's place in the world with 10 other national broadcasters. Discussing the views around the world of the US and its policies. You can watch it here (real player required) First broadcast - BBC - 06/17/03 (length is nearly 1.5 hrs)

Well worth the time if you can spare it . I wonder how the numbers would pan out if such a debate was tried in 2006 ?

Thanks for sharing this broadcast. You are quite right in saying that it is well worth the time to watch it.
I shudder to think of what the world opinion of America is today, considering the large amount of anti-American sentiment expressed in this June 2003 program.
While I can understand some of the anti-American sentiment discussed in this program, particularly the current leadership & the invasion of Iraq, I was dismayed to hear that people so often equate America with soap operas, movies, Coke, Pepsi, McDonald's, and big corporations controlling much of the wealth of the world and making their own country poorer. Only the South African speaker gave credit to America for helping his country.
It is demoralizing to me to have the good qualities of America, including foreign aid and medical/scientific advancements, so often disregarded. Someone in the program did mention that when other countries want America's help they like us, but when they do not need our help they resent us.

By Blogger Ginger, at January 18, 2006 12:36 am  

Ginger, unfortunately America has too many people like "jeannie" or "gop-christian" (see the other recent threads)
speaking for them. Some might find it hard not to equate those monsters with the rest of the country.

As for the foreign aid, you can discount half of it as it is military "aid." Helping out folks like Islam Karimov is not aid. Look into the strings attached to the rest of it and it is not so generous. Private aid from the American people, not their government is much more generous and is given with a kind spirit with no strings attached (including demanding gratitude for their government's "aid").

By Blogger DJEB, at January 18, 2006 3:48 pm  

I agree Djeb , the likes og GOP christan etc cloud the view we get ..

And the issues of foreign aid are not as clear cut as many Americans would tell you they are .

Saying that I know that millions of Americans are fighting hard to put things right

The important lesson (in my opinion) from this video is that the America we see is not the America that many US citizens see when they look in the mirror

By Blogger _H_, at January 18, 2006 8:54 pm  

New Documents Confirm Black Ops "Special Access Program" Unit Covered Up Detainee Abuse

NEW YORK -- The American Civil Liberties Union today released new documents obtained from the Defense Department detailing abuse at U.S. facilities in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantánamo Bay.

Included in the release is the first publicly available government document confirming the existence of a secret “Special Access Program” involving a special ops unit, Task Force 6-26, which has been implicated in numerous detainee abuse incidents in Iraq, and whose operatives used fake names to thwart an Army investigation.

“These documents confirm that the torture of detainees and its subsequent cover-up was part of a larger clandestine operation, in all likelihood, authorized by senior government officials,” said ACLU attorney Amrit Singh. “Despite mounting evidence of systemic abuse authorized or endorsed from above, however, not a single high level official has thus far been brought to justice.”

Read More here

See the Documents for yourself here

My Way : Starring George Bush

This is one of the best pieces of film I have seen in some time , it has some distressing images so dont watch it unless you are ok with such things and it also can take a LONG time to load so sorry 56k readers i really would not bother ....

My Way ( click play in the window that opens and wait )

My Source : After Downing Street

I was reminded by the first comment on their site of the famous words by Gandhi when he said

First, they ignore you
Then, they ridicule you
Then, they attack you
Then . . . YOU WIN

Note : this really is quite a difficult clip to get to work , I wouldnt normally post such an awkward to work with mpg but like i say it is worth it ...

remember to click the play button in the window that opens

By Blogger _H_, at January 12, 2006 10:39 pm  

bush is an idiot

By Blogger MikeChau, at January 13, 2006 3:43 am  


The constant stream of amusing and poignant animations from Mark Fiore continues with Jackopoly


By Blogger soypobre, at January 17, 2006 2:38 pm  

Your blog certainly is threadbare, soypobre...

By Blogger DJEB, at January 17, 2006 11:33 pm  

I took a look and thought the same thing Djeb

why advertise an empty blog !


By Blogger _H_, at January 18, 2006 12:11 am  

Hey, who knows what trips some people's triggers? For some it is calling for the violent deaths of millions of innocent men, women and children...

By Blogger DJEB, at January 18, 2006 3:50 pm  

Saudi King meets with al-Sadr

King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia has met radical Iraqi leader Muqtada al-Sadr in the firebrand Iraqi cleric’s first major appearance on the regional scene, Saudi media and Iraqi officials said Wednesday.

State-run Saudi TV showed the U.S.-allied monarch receiving the black bearded, anti-American al-Sadr at a reception held for Muslim dignitaries for the annual hajj pilgrimage.

Read more here

From wanted 'dead or alive' to international statesman , this anti American , pro Iranian religious leader of the militant Sadr Army is certainly making his mark on the world stage.

This I am sure will be of little comfort to the families of US soldiers killed by his militia , but of course he is now untouchable and could end up being worse for the world and the Iraqi people (or at least as bad) as Saddam was .

US Army its own worst enemy: British officer

A senior British officer has written a scathing critique of the U.S. Army and its performance in Iraq, accusing it of cultural ignorance, moralistic self-righteousness, unproductive micromanagement and unwarranted optimism there.

British Brig. Nigel Aylwin-Foster, who was deputy commander of a program to train the Iraqi military, said American officers in Iraq displayed such "cultural insensitivity" that it "arguably amounted to institutional racism" and may have spurred the growth of the insurgency. The Army has been slow to adapt its tactics, he argues, and its approach during the early stages of the occupation "exacerbated the task it now faces by alienating significant sections of the population."

So who would publish such a scathing critique ?

The answer ... the 'US army' in this weeks edition of the magazine Military Review

Is he attacking the soldiers on the ground ?

Well no , he clearly says ' The Army is full of soldiers showing qualities such as patriotism, duty, passion and talent'

So what is the problem ?

Well he states "it (the US army) seemed weighed down by bureaucracy, a stiflingly hierarchical outlook, a predisposition to offensive operations, and a sense that duty required all issues to be confronted head-on."

It is no suprise that the article has sparked indignation in the US. Col Kevin Benson, commander of the US Army's elite School of Advanced Military Studies, said his first reaction was that Brig Aylwin-Foster was "an insufferable British snob".

"Some of this is pretty powerful stuff and it made me a little upset,"

"But sometimes good articles do make you angry. We should publish articles like this."

Read the full article for yourself at Military Review ( pdf file )

Sources and further reading here , here and here .

Thank god. Discovered you today. I am quite interested in this subject as I have seen with my naked eye how terrible terrorism could be. Will visit for more and more news about it. Cheers!


By Blogger vkn, at January 12, 2006 12:02 pm  

The problem is us. My fellow Texans and Americans are the problem.

They are racist. Maybe not all of them but a majority harbor hatred of all things different.

Like children who won't eat broccoli and hate it.. yet have never actually tried broccoli.


By Blogger Hype, at January 12, 2006 3:52 pm  

"it (the US army) seemed weighed down by bureaucracy, a stiflingly hierarchical outlook, a predisposition to offensive operations, and a sense that duty required all issues to be confronted head-on."

I suppose that's what you get when you have a military that hasn't had to change for so many years. (Bureaucracy wise, that is). The US military hasn't had a decent challenge in so long, and with challenge or competition, it's easy to just go with business as usual.

By Anonymous cb, at January 12, 2006 4:58 pm  

The true problem is LIBERALS! If the US is such a problem then why are millions of people trying to break in every year. If the US is soooo full of racists then why do millions of minorities become successful and wealthy.

It is people like you, the spoiled brats, who can't make it in the US who constantly complain and blame all of their problems on everyone else. The failures in America are those who cry and play the race card the most. I'm a minority and I can tell you that hype is WRONG!

By Blogger Jeannie, at January 15, 2006 7:00 pm  


hello Jeanie

I must say thank you for ammusing me so much today

I am starting to question my belief in evolution

you speak freely about murdering people in Iraq ooops Iran , you love the torture of children and now you speak for the minorites

I think it is safe to say your NOT a minority and they are more than capable of speaking for themselves

btw that copy of "Mein Kemp" on your shelf is looking a bit dusty , time for another read maybe ?

By Blogger _H_, at January 16, 2006 12:03 am  

" The true problem is LIBERALS!

Liberals are forcing troops in Iraq to misbehave? You have truly lost your mind.

"If the US is such a problem then why are millions of people trying to break in every year.

A total non sequitur (sorry for using a word you don't know), but I'll bite. Because they face better economic prospects than they do in their impoverished nations.

"If the US is soooo full of racists then why do millions of minorities become successful and wealthy.

We are still on a total non sequitur (sorry again) aimed at avoiding the issue, but... The 'success' and 'wealth' of minorities in the U.S. doesn't look so good when one looks are how inequality breaks down along racial lines. And is the U.S. "soooo full of racists"? How about using actual facts to look at the issue? "Studies have consistenly found that people of colour who are equally or more qualified than whites are still less likely to be hired because of racial prejudice on the part of employers..." [Tim Wise, Affirmative Action: Racial Preference in Black and white, p.17 (references to claim given in footnote)] Moreover, "according to a survey by the National Opinion Research Center, sixty-two percent of whites think blacks are lazies than other groups, fifty-six percent say say they are more prone to violence, and fifty-three percent say they are less intelligent." [Ibid, p. 22] In other words, soooo (four Os) many people are racist in the U.S. No hype, just fact. Now begone you brat.

By Blogger DJEB, at January 16, 2006 2:18 am  

Just wanna add, though, that the way 'liberals' is typed in all caps is very, very convincing. I might have been persuaded by her argument had the entire post been all caps... [/sarcasm]

By Blogger DJEB, at January 17, 2006 1:05 am  

America : Amnesty international seeks your help

Four years ago, the USA transferred the first “war on terror” detainees – hooded and shackled - to the detention facility at Guantánamo Bay Naval Base, Cuba.

As the detention regime at Guantánamo Bay enters its fifth year, around 500 people from 35 countries continue to be held without charge or trial. Denied their rights under international law, there are mounting allegations of torture and ill-treatment of detainees at the camp.

Amnesty International is asking for your help , to see more click here

Related : Amnesty Releases New Gitmo Torture Testimony

I will send my letter today.


By Blogger Hype, at January 12, 2006 3:58 pm  

UK : Michael Howard speaking sense about Iran !

Tony Blair is wrong to talk about democracy as the answer to all of the Middle East's problems, former Tory leader Michael Howard has said.

Quizzed on Iran in the Commons, Mr Blair said the world's security lay in spreading "freedom and democracy". But Mr Howard later said he was talking "gibberish" given that Iran's president had been "democratically elected".

"To go on and on about democracy, has he forgotten that the president of Iran, the cause of all this trouble, was actually democratically elected?," Mr Howard told BBC Two's Daily Politics.

"I'm all for democracy but to say it's the answer to all the problems of the Middle East, and the world, is absurd," he added.

Source : here

Now when a right wingnut like Howard starts speaking more sense then the so called center left ( read right) UK government then it really does make you wonder how far off course British politics has become.

finally, somebody who can discern truth from bullshit..

we need more people like him.


By Blogger Hype, at January 12, 2006 4:00 pm  

Wednesday, January 11, 2006

Swiss claim proof that CIA ran Europe jails

European investigators looking into allegations of secret CIA-run prisons in Europe said yesterday that an Egyptian government message naming countries where such prisons existed could amount to indirect proof of the claims.

But the investigators from the Council of Europe, the continent's top human rights body, said they were trying to confirm that the Egyptian document was genuine. The document's existence was reported on Sunday by the Swiss weekly SonnstagsBlick.

The newspaper reported that the document said Egypt had confirmed through its own sources that the US intelligence agency had held 23 terror suspects at a military base in Romania.

The message also said there were similar US detention centres in Ukraine, Kosovo, Macedonia and Bulgaria, according to the newspaper.

The message, a fax sent by satellite transmission from Egypt's foreign ministry to its embassy in London, was intercepted on November 15 by Swiss intelligence, the newspaper reported. The Swiss defence ministry said it was investigating the leak of the document.

Two of the European investigators said that, if authenticated, they would consider the faxed message to be indirect proof that the facilities existed and an additional indication that some governments in Europe may not have revealed everything they know.

The two officials said the lead investigator, Dick Marty, had received a copy of the document from the Swiss secret service and was trying to confirm independently that it was genuine.

The Strasbourg-based council began its investigation after allegations surfaced in November that US agents had interrogated key al-Qaida suspects at clandestine prisons in eastern Europe and transported some suspects to other countries via Europe.

Mr Marty is to present his findings to the parliamentary assembly of the Council of Europe later this month.

Source here

I was wondering if you would like to exchange links with me i have a Hoodia site and you can link with me at

By Blogger Posters, at January 11, 2006 6:14 am  

Um, what you don't seem to understand is it's okay to "torchure" the bad guys. Dude, which is worse, a little torchure and I'm not talking cutting off fingers and such - or - cutting off human heads and blowing up innocent people via suicide bombers? The two aren't even on the same level - if you knew that getting some information from someone (via "torchure" - say blasting rap music at them for 18 straight hours) would save the life of your mother and sister, would you do it? 99% of the people say yes, if you don't there is something seriously wrong with you.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at January 11, 2006 8:16 am  

Torturing people sucks! Invading Iraq only because Bush's administation felt like it, was Wrong! Especially because He invaded Iraq in the name of DEMOCRACY!!! come on! Invade-democracy... in the same phrase???

I'd like to see all War criminals brought to justice...and not only Milocevic, Mladic etc

By Blogger Memento aka a moment in life, at January 11, 2006 11:14 am  

Anon, your post is a joke, right? First off, the torture we are taking about had it's start before the Iraq war. Second, the unnecessary Iraq war is the reason the abductions and executions are occuring. Third, torture leads to bad intel. Fouth, it is utterly immoral and inexcusable. Fifth, we are not talking about playing music to people, we are talking about incidents in which physical pain was inflicted upon people (if you don't know that, then you are utterly ignorant). Sixth, save my "mother and sister" from what? A hypothetical situation that has never occur and will never occur?

By Blogger DJEB, at January 11, 2006 2:51 pm  

Compare Taoiseach's office/Jack Straw

By Blogger Gary, at January 11, 2006 3:04 pm  

more investigations..

the whole world will be investigating Bush before this is over.

By Blogger Hype, at January 11, 2006 4:02 pm  


you seem to have far to much trust in what you have been told ( or seen on television ) , torture doesnt work , as Djeb stated it just leads to false intel ...

The effectiveness of torture( or lack of I should say) has been debated many times on this site and a quick look through the archives will present plenty of evidence from every conceivable source (including the US military)


I concur , nice site BTW , i like your photos , thats a great shot of the Eiffel Tower ....

Djeb , what can i add to that :-) , straight to the hub of the comment made by Anon and if he/she does not understand your points then "there is something seriously wrong with" them ..

Gary ,

great site and links on the renditions issue , if you find anything new please let me know ( email in my profile) and i would be happy to link to your articles


It will not be long before the list of countries investigating the Bush government will out number those that are not

By Blogger _H_, at January 12, 2006 3:53 am  

The Depraved Heroes of 24

A great piece by Slavoj Zizek without his usual obscure references.

The Depraved Heroes of 24 Are the Himmlers of Hollywood: The message of the TV series, that torturers can retain their human dignity if the cause is right, is a profound lie
by Slavoj Zizek

On Sunday, the fifth season of the phenomenally successful television drama 24 will start in the US. Each season is composed of 24 one-hour episodes and the whole season covers the events of a single day. The story of the latest series is the desperate attempt of the LA-based Counter Terrorist Unit to prevent an act of catastrophic magnitude and the action focuses on the unit's agents, the White House and the terrorist suspects.

The "real-time" nature of the series confers on it a strong sense of urgency, emphasised by the ticking of an on-screen clock. This dynamic is accentuated by technical tricks, from the use of hand-held cameras to split screens showing the concurrent actions of characters.

Almost a third of each episode is taken up by commercial breaks, which contribute to the sense of urgency: the breaks are part of the one-hour temporal continuity. Say the on-screen clock reads "7.46" before the break, we return to the series with the clock saying "7.51" - indicating the real length of the break, as if a live transmission has been interrupted. It is as if the continuity of the action is so urgent that it cannot even be interrupted for advertisements.

Such a sense of urgency has an ethical dimension. The pressure of events is so overbearing, the stakes so high, that they necessitate a kind of suspension of ordinary moral concerns; displaying such concerns when the lives of millions are at stake means playing into the hands of the enemy. The CTU agents, as well as their terrorist opponents, live and act in a shadowy space not covered by the law, doing things that "simply have to be done" to save our societies from the threat of terrorism. This includes not only torturing terrorists when they are caught, but even torturing members of CTU or their closest relatives if they are suspected of terrorist links.

In the fourth season, among those tortured are the defence secretary's son-in-law and son (both with his full knowledge and support), and a female member of the CTU wrongly suspected of passing on information to terrorists. (When her innocence is revealed, she is asked to return to work immediately and accepts.) The CTU agents, after all, are dealing with the sort of "ticking-bomb" scenario evoked by the Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz to justify torture (why not torture someone who knows the location of a bomb that is just about to kill hundreds of thousands of people?).

The agents treat themselves as expendable, ready to put their lives at stake if this will help to prevent an attack. Jack Bauer, the agent and central character played by Kiefer Sutherland, embodies this attitude. He not only tortures others but condones his superiors putting his own life at stake.

In the fourth season, Bauer agrees to be delivered to China as a scapegoat for a CTU covert operation that killed a Chinese diplomat. He knows he will be tortured and imprisoned for life but promises not to say anything that might damage US interests. When he is informed by the ex-president of the US that someone has ordered him to be killed, his two closest CTU friends fake his death. Both terrorist and CTU agents operate as examples of what the political philosopher Giorgio Agamben calls homo sacer- someone who can be killed with impunity since, in the eyes of the law, their life no longer counts. While they continue to act on behalf of the legal power, their acts are no longer constrained by the law. It is here that we encounter the series' ideological lie: in spite of the CTU's ruthlessness, its agents, especially Bauer, are warm human beings - loving, caught in the emotional dilemmas of ordinary people.
24 should not be seen as a simple popular depiction of the sort of problematic methods the US resorts to in its "war on terror". Much more is at stake. Recall the lesson of Apocalypse Now. The figure of Kurtz is not a remnant of some barbaric past. He was the perfect soldier but, through his over-identification with the military, he turned into the embodiment of the system's excess and threatened the system itself.

The problem for those in power is how to get people do the dirty work without turning them into monsters. This was Heinrich Himmler's dilemma. When confronted with the task of killing the Jews of Europe, the SS chief adopted the attitude of "somebody has to do the dirty job". In Hannah Arendt's book, Eichmann in Jerusalem, the philosopher describes how Nazi executioners endured the horrible acts they performed. Most were well aware that they were doing things that brought humiliation, suffering and death to their victims. The way out of this predicament was that, instead of saying "What horrible things I did to people!" they would say "What horrible things I had to watch in the pursuance of my duties, how heavily the task weighed upon my shoulders!" In this way, they were able to turn around the logic of resisting temptation: the temptation to be resisted was pity and sympathy in the presence of human suffering, the temptation not to murder, torture and humiliate.

There was a further "ethical problem" for Himmler: how to make sure that the executioners, while performing these terrible acts, remained human and dignified. His answer was Krishna's message to Arjuna in the Bhagavad-Gita (Himmler always had in his pocket a leather-bound edition): act with inner distance; do not get fully involved.

Therein also resides the lie of 24: that it is not only possible to retain human dignity in performing acts of terror, but that if an honest person performs such an act as a grave duty, it confers on him a tragic-ethical grandeur. The parallel between the agents' and the terrorists' behaviour serves this lie.

But what if such a distance is possible? What if people do commit terrible acts as part of their job while being loving husbands, good parents and close friends? As Arendt says, the fact that they are able to retain any normality while committing such acts is the ultimate confirmation of moral depravity.

So what about the response to this hair-splitting? Some argue that at least the US is now more open and less hypocritical about its behaviour towards terrorist suspects. To this, one should reply: "If US representatives mean only this, why are they telling us? Why don't they silently go on doing it, as they did it until now?" What is proper to human speech is the gap between the enunciated content and its act of enunciation. Imagine a couple who have a tacit agreement that they can have discreet extramarital affairs; if, all of a sudden, the husband openly tells his wife about an affair, she would have good reason to wonder why he was telling her. The act of publicly revealing something is never neutral; it affects the reported content itself.

The same goes for the US's recent admission that it is using torture. When we hear people such as Dick Cheney making statements about the necessity of torture, we should ask ourselves why he has decided to make a public statement about it. The question to be raised is: what is there in this statement that made the speaker decide to enunciate it? This is 24's real problem: not the content itself but the fact that we are being told openly about it. And that is a sad indication of a deep change in our ethical and political standards.

that is one of the reasons I stopped watching it.

i liked the first season.

'necessity of torture'

we used to play torture when we were kids here in texas...

as i grew up i realized how wrong this was. looks like i am the minority.


By Blogger Hype, at January 11, 2006 4:05 pm  

Great find Djeb , I have not read any of Slavoj's work before ( or if i have i was not aware)

a thought provoking read ...

By Blogger _H_, at January 12, 2006 4:04 am  

No comment, jeannie? Too much to read, perhaps.

By Blogger DJEB, at January 16, 2006 2:19 am  

Hmmmm. excellent commentary on a series that will most likely grow in popularity because we humans are morbidly interested in the ever sickening condition of life on earth in a very singular manner we identify with "sacrifice" for the so called greater good. In this series the the viewer identifies self with fascism.In nearly every case the ends are created to to endorse the perverse means applied to them as if necesssary to preserve an additional 24 hours of life to destroy every human construct and boundry we have elections to create, historically and hysterically. For the sake of 24 more.
I like this series. It exposes us for what we are. I am surprised that the "suits" in hollywood have allowed the brilliant Mr. Sutherland to push the wool over their eyes. I don't at all think that Kiefer as producer is endorsing the practice of lieing , torture, terrorism or the horrors that follow them. What he portrays is simple and true.what he produces is a commodity. A very lucrative, exciting, and entertaining commodity. It is a sick sad world that has not changed much, and shall change ever more slowly as time permits. Without good, EVIL is impotant. this is ART immitating life. Kiefer Sutherland is an artist. It is his job to show us the error of our ways. It is the job of humankind to recognize exactly what DJEB has recognized, and feel it deeply and passionately. Then, present an effective argument to sway us all into understanding what it is we are doing to ourselves. Without DJEB, without Kiefer Sutherland, without you, and most certainly without me, there is no hope, no ART, no one watching our reflection, no future worth living through. 24 reflects our world.If you don't like it, change it. The channel changing is the easy part. The world changing is the challenging part. With Sutherland's 24 it mayhap be the reverse. Per_verse!

Without prejudice.

By Anonymous qonnor, at January 17, 2006 10:21 am  

I saw a boring episode or two and couldn't believe that Tommy Douglas's grandson was playing this part...

By Blogger DJEB, at January 17, 2006 3:23 pm  

Tuesday, January 10, 2006

National Security Agency mounted massive spy op on Baltimore peace group

In an outrageous misuse of US government funds and resources, the National Security Agency has been spying on a Baltimore anti-war group, reporting even on the status of balloons being inlflated during a demonstration

According to Raw Story 'Documents turned over by the NSA indicate that the group was closely monitored. In one instance, the agency filed reports approximately every 15 minutes from 9:30 AM to 3:18 PM on the day of a demonstration at the National Vigilance Airplane Memorial on the NSA Campus in Maryland.'

Read the documents for yourself Page 1 , Page 2 , and note the irony of the entry made at 1300 hours on July 4. which reads, “The Soc. was advised the protestors were proceeding to the airplane memorial with three helium balloons attached to a banner that stated, 'Those Who Exchange Freedom for Security Deserve Neither (and) Will Ultimately Lose Both.'

There's the evidence that DanS. wanted. What are the odds of him actually living up to his word, _H_?

By Blogger DJEB, at January 10, 2006 11:38 pm  

Hasta yo puedo ser terrorista, ¿o no puedo?

By Blogger Etznav 6, at January 10, 2006 11:39 pm  

until 'who' can be a terrorist Etznab 6 ?

my spanish is not that good please try to write in english

escriba por favor el inglés

Djeb , like most i am sure he had his rant , assumed he was correct and went back to Fox News , this kind of evidence passes straight through the ears of certain right wing types ,

we said they wouldnt stop at spying on 'claimed' terrorists , so who is next on the list ? people who log on to american government sites ? ... ooops they were doing that too ....

By Blogger _H_, at January 11, 2006 12:04 am  

.......yeah.......evil is everywhere......kill'em with kindness.......truth and love our weapons.

By Blogger Oberon, at January 11, 2006 12:06 am  

'Impeach Blair' - General Sir Michael Rose

Prime Minister Tony Blair should be "impeached" over the war in Iraq, a former top British soldier has said. The ex-UN commander in Bosnia General Sir Michael Rose said Mr Blair had to take responsibility for his actions.

"To go to war on what turns out to be false grounds is something that no one should be allowed to walk away from," he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.

in a Channel 4 television documentary, Iraq: The Failure Of War, General Sir Michael tells former war correspondent and independent MP Martin Bell: "Blair should be impeached."

The general told Today the consequences for Iraq and the war on terror had been "quite disastrous", he added , "Certainly from a soldier's perspective there can't be any more serious decision taken by a prime minister than declaring war," he said.

He claimed Mr Blair's actions were "somewhere in between" getting the politics wrong and acting illegally. "The politics was wrong, that he rarely declared what his ultimate aims were, as far as we can see, in terms of harping continually on weapons of mass destruction when actually he probably had some other strategy in mind.

"And secondly, the consequences of that war have been quite disastrous both for the people of Iraq and also for the west in terms of our wider interests in the war against global terror."

General Sir Michael said he would not have led troops into a war he believed was wrong. "You cannot put people in harm's way if you don't believe the cause is right or sufficient," he said. But he added it would be wrong to just walk away from Iraq now.

Last month, more than 100 MPs from across the Commons backed a call for an inquiry by senior MPs into the handling of the Iraq war and its aftermath.

The motion, proposed by Plaid Cymru MP for Carmarthen East and Dinefwr, Adam Price, called for a special committee of seven senior MPs to review the decision-making process.

The committee would be members of the Privy Council and therefore able to look at sensitive intelligence material.

On Monday, Mr Price said it was "essential a committee is established to investigate the matter thoroughly If a government is not held to account for its actions, then democracy cannot be upheld. This government, who are willing to lead us into a war, must also be willing to take responsibility for those actions."

Audio here Source here ( both BBC)

Nice blog

By Anonymous Anonymous, at January 10, 2006 3:20 am  

To go to war on what turns out to be false grounds ----
We don't feel Saddam was "false grounds"

By Blogger starbender, at January 10, 2006 3:21 am  

'This government, who are willing to lead us into a war, must also be willing to take responsibility for those actions.'

my thoughts exactly.


By Blogger Hype, at January 10, 2006 4:49 am  

Stabender? You mean Truthbender. The "single issue" was the WMD issue which was debunked before the war started.

By Blogger DJEB, at January 10, 2006 9:51 am  

uh- No one should be impeached over the "fake war of iraq except President George W. Bush himself!

By Anonymous Anonymous, at January 10, 2006 6:31 pm  

and his accomplice.. Tony Blair.

By Blogger Hype, at January 10, 2006 6:38 pm  

suicide bombers kill 28 at Iraqi Ministry

BAGHDAD Two suicide bombers dressed as senior police officers blew themselves up inside the Iraqi Interior Ministry compound in Baghdad on Monday, killing 28 people and wounding 25 as officials marked National Police Day.

Police said one bomber had been wearing the uniform of a major while the second was dressed as a lieutenant-colonel. Both had difficult-to-obtain security passes which enabled them to enter separately through the main checkpoint.

As one of the bombers walked away from the checkpoint, Interior Ministry guards became suspicious because he appeared to be "too fat", police told Reuters.

They opened fire, shooting him in the back and hitting the bulky explosives belt he was wearing beneath his uniform, causing him to explode. As the guards gathered around the blast site, the second bomber, who had not yet apparently aroused suspicion, detonated his explosives, blowing up policemen and ministry civilian staff.

"We want to know where they got their security badges from," a police source told Reuters.

Read more here

oh my...

the right wingers were predicting the so called civil war in Iraq to come to a close after the elections.. even some this weekend were noting comments out of Iraq that would seem to support this view. however, the odds are not in their favor. the destruction we are seeing is more complicated than we imagined and there is most likely not a solution that would bring us to a friendly conclusion.


By Blogger Hype, at January 10, 2006 12:37 am  

Monday, January 09, 2006

U.S. Copter Down in Iraq; 12 Believed Dead

BAGHDAD, Iraq - A U.S. Army Black Hawk helicopter went down in northern Iraq, killing all 12 Americans believed to be aboard in the deadliest crash in nearly a year, while five U.S. Marines died in weekend attacks, the military said Sunday.

The latest deaths followed an especially bloody week in which about 200 Iraqis and a dozen U.S. troops were killed. Iraqi politicians, meanwhile, claimed headway in forming a stable coalition government following the Dec. 15 elections, whose final results may be released this week.

U.S. military officials said the UH-60 Black Hawk crashed just before midnight Saturday about seven miles east of Tal Afar, a northern city near the Syrian border that has seen heavy fighting with insurgents.

"All (those killed) are believed to be U.S. citizens," military spokesman Lt. Col. Barry Johnson said.

Read more here

yeah and the health of Sharon was the front story on most everything yesterday. the right wing blogs show their support for Israel and oddly enough Pat Robertson. I found comments like Sharon was executed by Jesus. on a side note i also found a discussion about the suicide of Europe and the West. apparently we are not having enough babies to keep up with the muslims and latinos. i disagree with them completely. it seems to me they fear losing power.. and by they i mean white people.. they fear immigration and they even look at integration as a bad thing. i told them they sound racist. white people have no more right to rule than non-white people. also Christianity has no more right to rule or be the majority religion than any other religion. i told them things change. look at history. the one thing you can count on is everything changes. racism will not solve any problems.

i think Sinclair Lewis was exactly right when he said fascism would come to America wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross.


By Blogger Hype, at January 09, 2006 2:44 pm  

Agreed. It's all ebb and flow. I imagine much of the right-wing discussion you mention is inspired by Buchanan's "Death of the West" which focuses on that same, curiously biological argument. Low birth rates among white Europeans etc. It is indeed a natural result of social and economic changes. The more well-off and better educated a group is (in this case Western white caucasians) the fewer children they tend to have, choosing instead to invest more time and money into one or two offspring - i.e. private colleges. Poorer minority groups tend to be more religious and have more children which leads them to eventually become the majority. I wouldn't worry about causcasians disappearing entirely. It'll probably just become the case that in 200 years a white minority will be pumping gas and cleaning toilets, while America's well-to-do hispanic majority worries about illegal white immigrants from Canada stealing their jobs and driving down wages. Ebb....and flow.:P

By Blogger stefan, at January 09, 2006 5:43 pm  

so when should i immigrate to Mexico?

By Blogger Hype, at January 09, 2006 11:22 pm  

Way, way off topic here (and you are welcome to delete it, _H_). I once had a right-winger tell me that the illegal immigrants streaming across the border into the U.S.A. are part of a clandestine plot by the Mexican government to take over the southern United States of America. I shit you not.

As for the babies, nothing lowers the birth rate like the empowerment of women.

By Blogger DJEB, at January 10, 2006 1:59 am  

German Chancellor says Guantanamo "should not exist"

German Chancellor Angela Merkel says the US detention camp at Guantanamo Bay "should not exist", in an interview days before she meets George W Bush.

In the interview to be published on Monday, Mrs Merkel criticises the US camp in Cuba, saying "An institution like Guantanamo can and should not exist in the longer term. "Different ways and means must be found for dealing with these prisoners."

Source Here

Well I am no fan of Angela Merkel and she of course will not actually get round to mentioning such a thing when she meets the president this week , but it should at least make the White House a little uncomfortable as well it should ....

I agree. Torture prisons are bad. m'okay

enemy combatants. sounds like something they would call the protestors outside the ranch.


By Blogger Hype, at January 09, 2006 2:25 pm  

I was under the impression that it is not meant as a permanent holding facility, but only a temporary facility until they find a suitable location and/or situation for the detanees.

Aside from conjecture and supposition, does anyone have evidence to the contrary? If not, then it can be assumed that Mrs. Merkel is just trying to placate the liberal factions of her nation while not actually contradicting any particular stance of the current Administration. Remember, she was elected under the premise that she would warm relations with the US, not make them worse.

By Blogger G_in_AL, at January 09, 2006 5:47 pm  

so exactly how long is temporay G ?

the camp was constructed in February 2002

On June 16, 2005, the U.S. Department of Defense announced a unit of defense contractor Halliburton will build a new $30 million detention facility and security perimeter around the base.

the base is being expanded G , there is no evidence that this is a temporary camp

next month the camp will have been in use for 4 years , so how long will we have to wait before you agree its perminant ?

Of course it will be closed down but i can not see that happening with your current government

By Blogger _H_, at January 09, 2006 9:49 pm  

all bases are eventually closed down.. you know after the land, water and environment have been destroyed, they have no use for it anymore...

if Gump means temporary, as in three years a Democratic President will put a stop to this, then yeah, the base is temporary.


By Blogger Hype, at January 09, 2006 11:25 pm  

"I was under the impression that it is not meant as a permanent holding facility, but only a temporary facility until they find a suitable location and/or situation for the detanees."

A temporary facility in which they will hold prisoners permanently...

"Aside from conjecture and supposition, does anyone have evidence to the contrary?"

That's easy. Just read what the White House has said and done wrt the matter. Removal of Habaes Corpus, military commisions, less than ten out of hundreds of detainees ever even charged after years of being held. The evidence points to a permanent storage for prisoners.

By Blogger DJEB, at January 10, 2006 1:51 am  

the germans are jealous,they're thinking copywrite infringement here on this type of camp.

By Blogger Table Mountains, at January 10, 2006 8:25 pm  

It just seems so unholy putting Merkel's head on Angelina's body...

By Blogger DJEB, at January 15, 2006 12:15 pm  

Sunday, January 08, 2006

US: Specter expects Attorney General to testify in domestic spying hearing

WASHINGTON - The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee said Sunday he has asked Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to testify during open hearings on the legality of the Bush administration's domestic spying program.

A prominent conservative on the committee said he is troubled by the legal arguments the administration has presented for establishing the National Security Agency program.

The committee chairman, Sen. Arlen Specter said senators will examine that issue and other legal questions in hearings scheduled for early February. Gonzales' testimony is being sought because he is the principle spokesman for the administration's position, Specter said.

Asked on CBS's "Face the Nation" if Gonzales had agreed to appear, Specter said, "Well, I didn't ask him if he had agreed. I told him we were holding the hearings and he didn't object. I don't think he has a whole lot of choice on testifying."

Read the full article here

That is funny. "I don't think he has a whole lot of choice on testifying."

The media should be asking better questions than that.


By Blogger Hype, at January 09, 2006 2:24 pm  

i agree hype , lets just hope they dont try and pull the executive privilege out of the bag and hide behind that...

we know its coming , i am suprised it has not been said already

By Blogger _H_, at January 09, 2006 9:52 pm