July 11, 2006
Echoes of London
CNN reports at least six blasts during the evening rush hour on commuter trains in India's financial capital of Mumbai:
At least six blasts have rocked commuter trains at rush hour in and around India's financial capital of Mumbai, with at least 15 deaths reported.
Dozens of people were injured in the blasts, which took place around 6:30 p.m. (1300 GMT) on Tuesday when the trains were packed with commuters making their way home.
A correspondent for CNN's sister network, CNN-IBN, reported seeing 15 bodies at the Matunga train station.
Video from one station showed people with blood on them being treated, other commuters carrying victims and some people lying motionless near train tracks.
At least one train was split in half by the explosion.
A major terrorist attack on a democracy's financial hub... must be those damn Methodists again.
Fox News is reporting seven bomb blasts.
The Bangkok Post is reporting that all the explosions took place in the first-class compartments of the trains.
Forbes, citing Indian television reports, states that dozens have been killed.
Based upon these breaking preliminary reports, I suspect the Mumbai bombers may have used similar explosives to the ten-pound TATP backpack bombs that hit London just over a year ago.
Pajamas Media is providing information as it comes in from Indian blogs and news reports, and seems to be ahead of the wire services. An Indian blogger, Deep Ganatra, is reporting at least 63 dead and 400 injured according to local television media reports.
As of 11:00 AM, CAIR remains focused on a Koran that someone shot up in Tennessee and then threw at a mosque.
Glad to see they have their priorities straight.
Update: A fleeting moment of honesty at the Democratic Underground:
Silence on this board stems from difficulty blaming this on George W. Bush.
That's the fact.
I'll pass on that $20 bet BTW, but I still think we should invade Canada.
Have faith, little liberal.
Your fellow DUers were able to blame Bush for the terror attacks in London, so I'm sure you'll be able to get your thought together long enough find an excuse to blame him for these attacks as well.
Update: Deaths now reported as 130+, and is likely to climb with more than 300 injured. Indian Islamists have been arrested.
CNN-IBN reports another bomb has been found and defused.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
10:00 AM
| Comments (18)
| Add Comment
Post contains 399 words, total size 3 kb.
1
Still, you have to take your honesty where you can get it in this world. Don't squash it, it's a fragile flower.
Posted by: Mr. Snitch! at July 11, 2006 11:03 AM (2CNDQ)
2
Bush isn't to blame for this. Mush might be.
Kashmiri separatists are likely behind it.
Posted by: Lint at July 11, 2006 11:05 AM (N1OwQ)
3
Drink enough of the kool-aid ("Tastes like Cindy Sheehan!") and you'll find that everything is about Bush.
Everything.
Posted by: Scott Kirwin at July 11, 2006 11:11 AM (wjyxM)
4
Rumsfeld was/is in Afghanistan. I'm sure that is close enough for the DU'ers to get a thread started.
Posted by: Dusty at July 11, 2006 11:20 AM (GJLeQ)
5
This is precisely the moment to take one of those CNN feel-good-about-Islam polls and ask the 64K question:
The train attacks in India were most likely the work
of:
1- Christian fundamentalists
2- Orthodox Jews
3- Radical atheists
4- The Secret Dick Cheney Brigades
4- Muslims
Posted by: Frank at July 11, 2006 11:27 AM (vxDHi)
6
Don't forget those failed missle launches by India. They just appeared more vulnerable. If Bush had given them better parts for those rockets then the terrorists would have seen that India mean't business and would have held back. So, see, it is Bushs' fault. Nah, nah, danahnah!
Posted by: Jack Lillywhite at July 11, 2006 11:29 AM (QWJUy)
7
I question the timing.
I can imagine KKKarl Rove arranged this to distract from the recent news that tax receipts have ballooned by a quarter trillion dollars this year because of Bush's tax cuts for the rich.
Um, I think I need to work on this theory a little more.
Posted by: equitus at July 11, 2006 12:09 PM (HizfW)
8
Well, that didn't take long. According to the latest (1:55 pm EST) DU postings, it was Bush and Rumsfeld who "fostered the climate" that permitted this latest atrocity. It'll only get better from here.
Posted by: chrisf at July 11, 2006 12:55 PM (dojdQ)
9
The US has been forging closer ties with India for the duration of this administration. Of course it's Bush's fault (or more accurately, Karl Rove's, Dick Cheney's and Halliburton's).
India is a natural ally against Islamofascism. The country has suffered the ravages of Mohammedan imperialism for centuries. The barbarians didn't just invade Austria, you know. India is now a vital bulwark against the expansionism of the Religion of Peace™.
Posted by: David Gillies at July 11, 2006 01:32 PM (RC1AQ)
10
France2 reports 147 dead and almost 500 injured.
Posted by: Fausta at July 11, 2006 01:58 PM (hBpZn)
Posted by: Toog at July 11, 2006 02:20 PM (IJedl)
12
You spoke to soon, they are already blamming Bush:
Excerpt:
"THERE WAR MAKING MACHINE IS MAKING OUR WORLD A MORE VIOLENT PLACE."
Link:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2381900&mesg_id=2382604
Posted by: Jay Thomas at July 11, 2006 02:58 PM (yU57S)
13
How do I join the "The Secret Dick Cheney Brigades"?
Posted by: Dan Roll at July 11, 2006 04:27 PM (jiktV)
14
If you're reading this blog, you're already a member.
Posted by: James M at July 11, 2006 10:20 PM (znH8f)
Posted by: KM at July 11, 2006 11:32 PM (YhKI9)
16
"France2 reports 147 dead and almost 500 injured."
Trampled to death in the rush to surrender? Tragic - that's almost as many as were lost in India.
Posted by: Scott Free at July 12, 2006 01:00 AM (7S2Zg)
17
Alas, I am too old to enlist in the Secret Dick Cheney Brigades. I bet they have some really cool uniforms, though.
Posted by: Barry at July 12, 2006 05:34 PM (QrzWy)
18
I left a trackback to your post from
It's not Cashmere it's Muslin - Bombs over Bombay, Excerpt: "It's quite simple. It's not border disputes; it's not sectarian violence; it's nothing to do with Kashmir.
Before I tell you, here's the background: The blogosphere is engorged again ..."
But there seems to be some "fruitcake" error with your trackback software.
Posted by: bernie at July 13, 2006 11:33 AM (f+OGU)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Military Recruiting Exceeds Goals
Military recruiting for June once again met or exceeded goals across
all four branches (h/t Paul at
Adventurepan:
- Marines: 105%
- Army: 102%
- Air Force:101%
- Navy: 100%
You'll note that the Marine Corps and Army, responsible for fielding most of the forces on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan, have exceeded their goals by the largest margins, despite having higher target numbers than the other branches. They achieved this in the face of a mainstream media attempting to portray the military as rapists, racists, and murderers based up the alleged actions of a handful of men.
Since October 1, all four branches have met or exceed their goals:
- Army: 104%
- Marines: 101%
- Air Force: 101%
- Navy: 100%
Reserve forces recruiting has not been as even, but interesting enough, the Reserve and Guard forces most likely to be called upon for ground combat overseas (Army National Guard, Army Reserves, Marine Corps Reserves) have been the most successful in recruiting.
Who are the recruits?
Despite myths to the contrary, today's military is a far cry from the Vietnam-era draftees. Today's volunteers (PDF) are better educated than their peers, come from middle-class or upper middle-class homes, and tend to come from suburban and rural areas.
Certain areas of the country are somewhat under over and underrepresented geographically according to recruiting data, with the southern and rural states over-represented, the urban northeast, north central and west coast states are under-represented. Interestingly enough, their seems to be a rough correlation to this map.
Make of it what you will.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
09:21 AM
| Comments (17)
| Add Comment
Post contains 255 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Who would have thunk that the most cowards and anti-americans live in the Northeast and far Western states? Say it ain't so.
Posted by: Scrapiron at July 11, 2006 09:37 AM (wZLWV)
2
This report by the Southern Poverty Law Center is tangentially related to your post. SPLC has made accusations that the screening process for extremists -- particularly those in hate groups -- has become more lax lately to meet recruitment goals. I don't know how much that affects these numbers (my guess would be that there hasn't been a substantial effect on recruitment goals) and obviously these extremists are a very small percentage of our soldiers, but the report raises some interesting questions.
Check out splcenter.org for the story
Posted by: Syd at July 11, 2006 12:57 PM (eQMA/)
3
A young man that I work with just joined the Marines. I hugged him and told him how proud I was of him.
He's only 19. I don't think he has enough peach fuzz to shave.
God bless our troops...
Posted by: lady redhawk at July 11, 2006 05:33 PM (SkAw4)
4
Yeah, we blue-state folks have decided to sit out Operation Great Social Engineering Project In The Desert. We'll wait for a real war, with an actual plan and a mission that doesn't involve babysitting a civil war.
Yes, CY, I know I'm pushing the envolope. But your derisive post asked for it. Fighting fire with fire is okay, right?
Posted by: Nate at July 11, 2006 11:50 PM (UlkGh)
5
This report by the Southern Poverty Law Center is tangentially related to your post.
Dees needs something new to pimp now that its apparent to even the worst drooling idiots that the SPLC's past dire warning about "militias" was a big bust.
Posted by: Purple Avenger at July 12, 2006 04:40 AM (Uwm0w)
6
Could have something to do with the lowered standards, which now allow in neo-Nazis and psychopaths, and recruiters telling naive kids living in boring towns and working dead-end jobs whopping lies about the travel and educational opportunities they'll get by joining. Along with equally false reassurances that if they join they won't get sent to Iraq.
The case of Suzanne Swift is instructive:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_david_sw_060707_command_rape.htm
Posted by: noborders at July 12, 2006 05:54 AM (sY9U8)
7
Look at the little liberals spit and moan!
Nate, I'm sorry if the military's own recruiting data happens to closely correlate to your voting patterns, but at least it has a historical basis. Most folks in that blue area known as NYC sat out that little spat in 1775-81, or openly sided with the enemy, so you have precedent on your side.
noborders, you should consider changing your name to "noliteracy." If you read the linked files, you'd note that the military is
better educated than their civilian peers, not less, and your one-off links citing anomalies in a massive system is a child's effort at relevancy. The simple fact of the matter is that standards are much higher for the military than MoveOn.org, whch seemingly has no standards at all.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at July 12, 2006 07:35 AM (g5Nba)
8
CY,
Actually the report doesn't say that millitary recruits are more educated than their peers. It asks that question and then provides a non-answer. The report stated that more recruits have high school diplomas than their peers (90% to 75%). Just having a high school diploma is not a sufficient measure of one's education. If it was then most hiring companies wouldn't want to know one's GPA. To say they were better educated, we would have to know what the avg GPA for a millitary recruit was vs their peers. For an extreme example, if the 90% of the recruits that had diplomas all made C's and D's and still graduated and 75% of their peers with diplomas had A's and B's, I dare say the peers were better educated.
Without GPA's, the claim that millitary recruits are better educated is baseless...
Posted by: matt a at July 12, 2006 09:01 AM (E+3yy)
9
matt a, that might not be the most stupid argument ever made on this site, but is certainly close. You are going to argue that high school dropouts have an higher GPA than graduates?
Dropouts typically have failing grades, have repeated a grade or more, and/or are older than other students in their classes. Soem studies have them potnetially idetifed fairly accurately by
third grade because of academic ad socialization issues, and you're going to argue that they have higher GPAs?
What a load of bull...
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at July 12, 2006 09:18 AM (g5Nba)
10
CY- Only one city? How about the entire region that didn't just fight for the enemy in 1861-1865, but was the enemy?
Again- fight is the wrong word here, since the fighting it largely over in Iraq. Max Boot from LA Times/Real Clear Politics on July 5th:
"Most of our resources aren't going to fight terrorists but to maintain a smattering of mini-Americas in the Middle East. As one Special Forces officer pungently put it to me: "The only function that thousands of people are performing out here is to turn food into [excrement].""
Posted by: Nate at July 12, 2006 10:01 AM (UlkGh)
11
CY,
I guess I won't have to ask what your GPA is. I'll try and type slower. I never mentioned anything about drop outs. Didn't even factor into my discussion. Nice try. I simply stated that the focusing on the percentage of recruits getting a diploma vs their peers doesn't mean that recruits are better educated. GPAs are the standard (defacto maybe) for determining one's quality of education, not simply obtaining a high school diploma. To claim that recruits are BETTER educated than their peers, the report needs to show comparitive GPAs of the corresponding GRADUATING groups. If the avg GPA of a graduating recruit is higher than the avg GPA of their graduating peers, then the claim of being better educated has merit.
Again, another extreme example to demonstrate the point (feel free to use fingers and toes (borrow a friend if needed) to follow along):
Lets say 200 students were in my senior year of high school and 100 decide to enlist in the millitary, 100 decide not. based on the statistics given in the report, at the end of the year, 90 of the students enlisting have diplomas, 75 of the students not enlisting have diplomas. So a total of 165 kids graduated. However, without the GPAs of the graduating kids, I can just as easily said the BOTTOM (GPA-wise) 90 kids graduating decided to enlist and the TOP (GPA-wise) 75 kids decided not to. WHOM do you think is better educated based on this example? Or better yet, whom do you think colleges/employers/banks/etc are better educated?
Now this was an extreme example to prove a point, as I know several smart people in and out of the military (my father was an Army staff sgt and one of the smartest men I know) so I don't believe that the example is accurate but merely to discribe the gap in the contention of the report.
The point is without the GPAs of each group measured in the statistic, the claim is meaningless...
Posted by: matt a at July 12, 2006 10:39 AM (E+3yy)
12
Matt a;
You're not terribly intelligent are you? I mean, you can make it sound like you are, if you really have to, but over time it becomes fairly apparent that you aren't.
Yes, your little scenario involving 200 seniors in high school does show that those who graduate with diplomas but do not go into the military could in fact have a higher GPA than those that graduate and go into the military. Congratulations, you have managed to grasp some elementary principles of logic. However, what you have failed to recognize is that when you take into account the two groups as a whole ( enlisting, non-enlisting), the enlisting group only has a 10% lack of diplomas, as opposed to their "peers" in the non-enlisting group, which has a 25% lack of diplomas. Now, if we were to combine all the GPAs of both groups, which group do you think would be higher, the one with 10% zeros, or the one with 25% zeros?
Hey man, feel free to use your fingers and toes on this one, and chances are you may need to borrow several friends to do it.
Posted by: mastashake at July 12, 2006 12:46 PM (Lg1wQ)
13
CY, as it happens I'm very literate, but discriminating in what I read. You mean to say you take at face value DoD propaganda? Like this "study" touting the high caliber of military recruit? Or the article that glowingly described how B Co. 1-502 had gained the trust of the locals and was keeping the streets of Iraq safe, accompanied by a photo of child-rapist and mass murderer Pfc. Steven Green?
http://www4.army.mil/ocpa/read.php?story_id_key=8316
(photo subsequently scrubbed, oddly enough)
In any case, the “study” is largely irrelevant to my first comment, which was a response to your post about the military’s alleged meeting of recruiting goals. My point is that, assuming the claim is true, they’re doing it by employing some pretty scandalous practices, preying on naïve and impressionable young people (usually bypassing their parents), promising them the world to get them to sign up, then shipping their asses to Iraq. Actually in this one respect the “study” candidly aknowledges that “incentives and bonuses are instrumental” in recruiting. What they don’t tell you is that they don’t necessarily abide by the incentives offered once people have been successfully lured in.
Much has been written about the tactics used. Recruiters under pressure to meet quotas even tried to sign up an autistic kid, concealing his disability:
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/twincities/news/nation/14519056.htm?source=rss
Reports of abuses like this are rife. And it’s a fact, not a myth, that the military is admitting people with “anti-social personality disorders” (in other words, your garden variety psychopath) and members of hate groups. These are not “just a few bad apples” or “anomalies”—it’s a pattern, and a growing problem. Even “normal” guys are turned into indiscriminate killers by the experience. Though as far as that goes I hold the guys higher up in the chain, right up to the top, responsible as much as the individuals themselves for the crimes committed.
And what awaits these fine recruits once the military is done with them? Assuming they survive at all, lifelong mental and physical disability, homelessness, joblessness, povertyÂ…
http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,104102,00.html
If you care about the American military (not to mention the Iraqi people), get these people out of Iraq.
By the way, what on earth is this comment of yours apropros of?
"The simple fact of the matter is that standards are much higher for the military than MoveOn.org, which seemingly has no standards at all."
Seems like a total non sequitur.
Posted by: noborders at July 12, 2006 01:15 PM (PmoaG)
14
Mastashake - Well the disputed claim was that recruits were BETTER educated based on diplomas so I merely used the same assumption that those NOT graduating weren't BETTER educated. But I'd be happy to include those that didn't graduate (doesn't mean their GPAs are zero by the way). But lets assume those that didn't graduate did have zero GPAs, the answer to your question is that in my example the peer group is still higher because ALL the peer GPAs in my example were higher than the recruits. Which again was to make a point.
As this is an acedemic exercise without actual GPAs, I'll have to make an assumption about the GPAs in both group. That would be that the zero's cancel out the top GPAs from each group so 25 zero's from peer group eliminate the top 25 GPAs from the peer group as well. 10 zeros from the recruit group eliminate the top 10 GPAs from the recruite group.
So basically, its the TOP 26-75 GPAs averaged against the avg of the BOTTOM 111-190 GPAs. Yeah, that's not really proving your point...
Again, my point is that simply having more diplomas on one side or the other does not prove which side is BETTER educated...
Posted by: matt a at July 12, 2006 01:38 PM (E+3yy)
15
LOL...
Ok, how does this sound?
Matt A, you are correct in your theory only if
1.) Every single one of the top graduates in a given class magically avoids the military.
2.) Every single one of the lower graduates in a given class magically joins the military.
So, yes, congratulations (golf-clap!) on finding and presenting a possible scenario in which case the recruits MIGHT NOT be better educated than the normal population.
So what this boils down to is that we need real data, hard facts about the GPAs of recruits and non-recruits before we can make a comparison. But based on the percentage of military that has a diploma vs. the percentage of the rest of the population that has a diploma, (90 to 75), it looks pretty concise.
BTW, if you find a real world example of your little scenario, I would be very happy to hear of it. However, good luck doing so, seeing as how your proposal evidently involves, well, magic...:-)
PS- All things being equal, would you rather fight an army whose diploma average is 75%, or one whose diploma average is 90%?
Posted by: mastashake at July 12, 2006 02:04 PM (Lg1wQ)
16
Mastashake - Thanks for agreeing with me. The point was not to say that the recruits weren't better educated merely that the evidence provided does not support the claim.
As far as my scenario goes, its not magic to avoid the millitary but rather deciding to choose other options. I feel the example was valid to make the point. Real world, given a normal graduating class of X number of seniors, predictably less then 50% will be enlisting (IMO). 50% was used to make the math easier. IMO, the percentage of seniors in a graduating class that would enlist would probably be around 20-30%. So the sample of GPAs for the "graduating" recruits would be much smaller than the peers. So using 200 seniors again, the recruits with diplomas would range about 18-27 people while the peers would be 128-135 people. Just as unlikely as it would be in my example that all the Peers would be in the TOP GPA bracket is it unlikely that the 20-30% becoming recruits are on TOP either.
the millitary could probably find these numbers if they wanted to. Obviously, they can access recruit GPAs, and I'm sure somewhere there is a study on what the national GPA is...
As far as which army to fight, I'd pick the one with the least amount of advanced weaponary, body armor, millitary leadership and experience, not the percentage of diplomas they have...
Posted by: matt a at July 13, 2006 08:58 AM (E+3yy)
17
You Edukated Guys get on my noives with your dagree papars. You learned to write nice unhoidrd,kolege woids,very impressive, Im sure Mommy and Daddy are glad the worked 5 jobs.
BUT--But be aware the Pappa doesnt have in it.
COMMON SENSE We dont lerne it werer born with it. Lack of intelugence is why youse are dragging the my Country down did I wast 4ys9mos of my teen years
Barney149
Posted by: Barney149 at July 17, 2006 07:14 AM (y6n8O)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 10, 2006
Soldier Beheading Video Released
If you can stand to watch it,
The Jawa Report has obtained graphic footage of the bodies of two U.S. soldiers captured, tortured and killed in Iraq several weeks ago, as released in an al Qaeda video.
Sadly, if the terrorists can be beleived, the attack was in response to the rape and murder of a nearby Iraqi girl as I theorized on July 3:
On March 12, five soldiers from the 502nd Infantry Division allegedly raped a 15-year-old Iraqi girl killed her and her family, and then burned her body in an apparent attempt to hide the evidence of their crime.
Roughly three months later, on June 23, one of those soldiers confessed after soldiers from the same platoon were ambushed, and two GIs captured in the ambush were horrifically tortured and killed. Was there a cause-and-effect, tit-for-tat exchange of atrocities south of Baghdad?
Claims made in the video to this effect only bolster my theory.
Update:
Via Fox News:
According to the SITE Institute, the statement by the insurgents said that as soon as fighters heard of the rape-slaying, "they kept their anger to themselves and didn't spread the news."
"They decided to take revenge for their sister's honor," the statement said. "With Allah's help, they captured two soldiers of the same brigade as this dirty crusader."
The Mujahedeen Shura Council is an umbrella organization of several Islamic extremist groups, including al Qaeda in Iraq. It claimed responsibility for shooting down a U.S. Apache helicopter in the Youssifiyah area in April.
U.S. investigators had said there was no evidence linking the deaths of the three soldiers last month to the alleged rape-slaying.
No physical evidence, perhaps, but the terrorists did cite the rape as their excuse, and they used what to my knowledge are new tactics to carry out the kidnapping. Time will tell.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
07:10 PM
| Comments (6)
| Add Comment
Post contains 314 words, total size 2 kb.
1
the attack was in response to the rape and murder of a nearby Iraqi girl
Since when did they need an excuse for their savagery?
Posted by: Russ at July 10, 2006 08:01 PM (utsLN)
2
If the rape story hadn't been in the news at the time, getting a stale pack of Twinkies at 7-11 would have been enough provocation otherwise.
Posted by: Purple Avenger at July 10, 2006 08:14 PM (Uwm0w)
3
EVERYTHING they do is in response to something we did that we shouldn't have done or something we didn't do that we should have done. It's always our fault. So if those soldiers hadn't done what they did, the terrorist attacks on our soldiers would simply be attributed to some other evil act we did.
Posted by: steve sturm at July 10, 2006 08:44 PM (XBWtm)
4
I only pray they were dead before the mutilations and torture began.
Regarding your thoughts that it was carried out to avenge the young girl and her family. I believe differently. I think they seized the moment .. so to speak. For example, from the NYT
"It is questionable whether the soldiers were actually killed out of
revenge. Iraqis around Mahmudiya, where the rape and murder took
place, believed at the time that the girl and the other three victims
— her younger sister and parents — were killed by other Iraqis in
sectarian violence, according to the mayor of Mahmudiya and American
military officials. The mayor said the possible involvement of
American soldiers only became apparent on June 30, when the American
military announced it had opened an investigation into the crime."
http://tinyurl.com/ntnzs
And then this ..
"Police in the district said they could not recall a case meeting the
description given by the U.S. military."
http://go.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=12708733&src=rss/topNews
Posted by: Bluangel at July 10, 2006 11:15 PM (XNw+R)
5
Blueangel, you should know better than to trust the accuracy of the
NY Times.
If you follow the link to my July 3 post, you'll note that a neighbor who was among those who found the bodies said he suspected the soldiers
that very day, based upon comments made by the mother in the days preceeding their deaths.
Just because he didn't trust the government doesn't mean he didn't share his suspicions with others.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at July 10, 2006 11:33 PM (psJM2)
6
Gateway Pundit (http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/) has the time line on this -- this was picked up as an excuse only after it appeared in the Western press. This, along with Haditha, is still very suspicious -- lots of "eyewitnesses" who show up well after the fact, but no real evidence. The worst part, however, is how this and any accusations against our soldiers are unquestioningly swallowed by the media.
Posted by: Lord Sutch at July 11, 2006 12:36 PM (yvMLq)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 09, 2006
"No Tears or Regrets"
A video message to America's liberals, from the U.S. Marine Corps and Hollywood agent turned combat filmmaker, Pat Dollard.
Not safe for work. Click the first video link.
Bonus: Pat on Hannity & Colmes.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
11:47 PM
| Comments (11)
| Add Comment
Post contains 42 words, total size 1 kb.
Posted by: Ric James at July 10, 2006 06:09 AM (b0uAZ)
2
Wow! I'll have to start following Pat Dollard more closely.
Posted by: Redhand at July 10, 2006 06:47 AM (7G9b2)
3
That's gotta be the greatest trailer I've ever seen; immediately makes me want to see the movie and buy whoever is singing that song's entire catalog.
Posted by: TC@LeatherPenguin at July 10, 2006 09:10 AM (kd/kM)
4
I love it!! And yes, that is the way our troops talk to one another.
Posted by: MCPO Airdale at July 10, 2006 12:22 PM (3nKvy)
5
I cried watching that.
I was that man once, but I am no longer that man. I LOVE, LOVE these men who stand for me, though at one time I called them brothers, now I'm just an observer. Some are more aged than I, and they actually stand for all the things I wanted to stand with, and to see that? It makes me cry, as I reminisce about who I was.
Those individuals in that preview, are EVERYTHING that we should aspire to be, and I hate myself for not being among them.
I can't do it anymore, I'm too weak now. These are not machines made of flesh for attrocity or murder, they are heralds for a dawning light of kindness, respect and decency. Just cuz they carry weapons, doesn't make them evil, like the opening scene depicts, it makes them human. They are hero's, they are all the more hero's than my grandad was, and he was a member of "the greatest generation" but these friggen TITANS of self sacrifice and national and global understanding are so underrated.
History will not judge these men that I wish I were, history will judge the press that worked so hard to minimalize (actually minimize) them. The press, so safe, and so special in their safety can HURT those heroes, and those individuals dedicated to a task will overcome the treason of the press.
The video, without sound is enough, the video with the sound, is abso-friggen-lutely perfect.
Posted by: Wikedpinto at July 10, 2006 12:52 PM (QTv8u)
6
NOTE:
I served, but I never served in wartime. I hate myself for not doing so. I LOVE those people who could have been me, and I hate myself for not STILL serving so that some of those kids could have a "normal" life.
Thats why I cry like a bitch. I'm too weak now to serve, because my mind couldn't handle it. I admit. I'm too weak now. I'm too weak, and too selfish, but I know that the anti-war crowd doesn't shed a single tear for those great men, and women. not one, it's a measure of them, especially when compared to those representatives of humanity.
Posted by: Wickedpinto at July 10, 2006 12:56 PM (QTv8u)
7
Correction
I LOVE those people who could have been me
thats supposed to be "who I could have been"
Posted by: Wickedpinto at July 10, 2006 01:01 PM (QTv8u)
8
ConfedYank: I can't thank you enough for posting this. I saw the trailed orginally at Dollard's site a couple of weeks ago, but was very pleased to see it made to You Tube. The Hannity & Colmes interview was priceless.
Wicked: Dude you have nothing to be ashamed of. You served and wore the uniform, in the place the wisdom of the Corps chose. That's more than most people and God bless you and everyone else who does it.
Posted by: John at July 10, 2006 07:11 PM (D5Sti)
9
I watched the video, and you know what I think? Thank God the military men and women I have met are so much more intelligent, dignified, and reasonable than the troops depicted in that film trailer and the guy that made it. It's perhaps good to have raw macho guys like that on the front line, but I sure as hell hope they aren't making any decisions of consequence in Iraq.
Another note: I hate to break to it some folks, but we're fighting FOR Paris Hilton, anti-war marches in San Francisco, MTV, Jesse Jackson, Howard Dean, Star Wars, spring break in Cabo, Hollywood, plastic surgery, and Hanoi Jane. That's the culture of capitalism, the culture of freedom and self-expression, the culture the Islamic fundamentalists want to destroy. You hate all that stuff? Well Osama hates it even more.
Posted by: Nate at July 10, 2006 08:25 PM (UlkGh)
10
Nate?
You are right, we are defending people like paris, but do you think only those DEFENDED are the ONLY ones who deserve recognition?
In 1943 when, Ted Williams Enlisted for the first time served the PARIS HILTON mentality? how about in '54? When the GREATEST hitter in all of baseball enlisted for the second time?
Babe Ruth would have been a second hand player, 50 years before mark mcquire, and barry bonds, had not Ted Williams not been a patriot. Ted wasn't the greatest player in Red Sox History, Ted, was the Greatest player since shoeless joe, and tye cobbe, and honas wagner, cuz Ted is the GREATEST player in the history of baseball.
I'm a WHITE SOX fan.
Posted by: Wickedpinto at July 12, 2006 02:44 AM (QTv8u)
11
It's impossible to say who would have been the best. Josh Gibson could have been better than Ted Williams had they let him play.
Pat Tillman left the NFL to join the service. And he was a bonfide blue-stater, from the city down the highway from me, San Jose. Long live his memory and sacrifice.
Posted by: Nate at July 13, 2006 07:59 PM (UlkGh)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 07, 2006
Deadly But Dumb
That short statement seems to be an accurate description of the terrorists in the
latest reported terrorist plot against New York City, where an al Qaeda member captured in Lebanon and his cohorts planned to detonate vehicle-borne explosives in an attempt to breach tunnels into New York City. Their goal was flooding lower Manhattan.
What idiots.
For starters, it is quite doubtful that Allah's brain surgeons could have managed to construct the kind of bomb that could breach the Holland or any other tunnel into New York City. I won't bother explaining all the multiple reasons (and there are many) that their plot would fail to breach the tunnel walls, but lets just for a second look at what would happen to the rest of lower Manhattan in the event of a tunnel detonation.
Â…
Â…
Â…
Did you see what happened?
Nothing.
Certainly, there would be panic and injuries and deaths inside the tunnel and I do not in any way want to minimize that. There would smoke from the blast from the bomb, and the noise and commotion of the emergency response from New York's Finest and Bravest, but there would be no measurable physical damage outside the tunnel, as lower Manhattan is above sea level.
The brain trust that came up with this cockamamie plan was hoping a blast under the riverbed—at a point lower than the bottom of the river—would somehow cause a Hurricane Katrina-like deluge that would flood the Financial District and collapse the U.S. economy. It would be laughable if they weren't planning this with such deadly earnest.
This is the latest al Qaeda plan to attack the United States, but there have been others.
A couple of homegrown Miami jihadi wannabes wanted to detonate an ANFO bomb to destroy the Sears Tower in Chicago, but only managed to enlist the FBI in their support. They're in jail. More than a dozen Canadian hopefuls had a similar plot Up North, but they were also quickly detained.
Just for the record, this plot was foiled by the NSA monitoring Internet communications between would-be jihadists. Funny. but I didn't feel my civil rights were trampled at all.
The simple fact of the matter seems to be that the best minds al Qaeda have long since been killed or have gone to ground, leaving us with thankfully incompetent terrorists to plan most of the attacks against us. Most are no seasoned terrorists. Most are committing their first attacks.
This makes them harder to find in some ways, and easier to foil in others.
They're pitting their "B" team against our best and brightest, the same men and women that put the vast majority of their "A" Team in the ground, and it shows.
They may still get lucky—we often heard say that they "only have to be right once"—but as each passing terrorist generation is ground to mulch in southwest Asia or sent packing for a federal prison, the odds of them getting everything right as they did on 9/11 grows increasingly remote.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
10:52 AM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 512 words, total size 3 kb.
1
Why CY? I actually and whole heartedly agreed with everything you just said! 911 was just some extremists with "butter-cutters" at best. They achieved spectacular results, but to consider this organization as "advanced" has been so blown out of proportion since 911 it has been ridiculous. Most of these cells are unrelated wannabees at best. Wannabees of what? If I see that video of those towel heads swinging across monkey bars supposedly training to kill America one more time, I think I will crack up! Al Qaeda is more of an anti-western idea, than it ever was an organized terrorist group. We like to run wild with our imaginations. Of course, it sounds cool to say authorities thwarted a plot to flood the financial district. Nice of you to point out the elevation of the district CY. Those dudes in Miami? I think I just saw them down at the corner convenient store the other day buying some nabs and a NuGrape soda. These guys saw Fight Club one too many times and couldn't even pay for rent and some electricity. Before anybody jumps in and attacks me. Is 911 tragic and real? Yes. Is is a tremendous tragedy? Yes. Are these miscellaneous guys serious to kill me or other Americans? Yes. Are they a threat to the U.S. national security and overall way of life? Well...Any man with "nothing to lose" is a dangerous man with an edge to him. Haters of American life will always have that advantage and can create some turmoil if they are willing to pay the price. Let's just keep it all in perspecive and carry on.
Posted by: Johnny at July 07, 2006 04:12 PM (Vtwo9)
2
"Let's just keep it all in perspecive and carry on."
Johnny, in other words, 9-11 was an acceptable loss (even though it was tragic); so we shouldnÂ’t get our panties twisted trying to take on the radicals?
Posted by: Old SOldier at July 07, 2006 04:24 PM (owAN1)
3
I'd expect my chicken hawk of a leader to chase after the party responsible for that episode, and that guy is not in Iraq! Meanwhile, his cousins are dreaming about making TV shows on American networks. I jokingly state sometimes that Osama is probably in the safest place possible....in a sea of liberals (Boston) where his kids went to school! If security is truly the name of the game, we'd be securing our borders, nab Osama, and directly engage nations who have proof of WMDs. Oh...I don't know...how 'bout long range missles being test fired in the air on national TV? That kind of proof will suffice in my book. As I have stated so many times before...our current leadership continues to show their hypocracy has no bounds....but they are predictable. If the proposed action has nothing in it for "them", then it clearly aint gett'n done!
Posted by: Johnny at July 07, 2006 04:42 PM (Vtwo9)
4
Why is there no outrage about his newstory's leaks to the media? No cries of "treason" even though this revelation disclosed and interrupted an ongoing investigation? Is it because this conveniently timed story is favorable to the Bush admin?
And no one is disputing whether the NSA should monitor communications -- this is a specious argument. People want such monitoring done LEGALLY.
Posted by: todd at July 07, 2006 06:14 PM (Kwn4z)
5
People want such monitoring done LEGALLY.
Then they should be pleased so far.
Tob
Posted by: toby928 at July 07, 2006 06:55 PM (PD1tk)
6
I wouldn't exactly downplay 20 terrorists with backpacks full of explosives timed to go off at the same time in a subway filled with hundreds of passengers. It would kill more and do more damage than anyone can imagine.
President Bush doesn't need any help from the leakers that are comitting treason. If i'm remembering my government lessons correctly, President Bush can't run for president again. Hey lefties, wake up and smell the damp air in the subways before it becomes smoke.
Now documentation has surfaced the show for a fact that Saddam and Osama were more that passing in the night buddies prior to 9-11. I'd say Saddam's order to attack American interest world wide 6 months prior to 9-11 included the attack on 9-11.
Documentation also shows that Iraq was developing and updating their WMD until a few months prior to the invasion. Hell, they were even paying bonuses to those involved in the development.
The mobile weapons development labs really were mobile WMD labs, set up so all evidence could be removed in a few minutes. Documentation on this is available.
One thing about the Iraqi terrorists government they kept really good records. They'll probably find where all the bodies are buried (the live bodies in the U.S. that were helping him) before they get all of them translated.
It's looking real cloudy over the left wing camp as each of the documents reveal that they are the liars/traitors and/or crazy.
Could the declassification of several documents be on the horizon for about Sept/Oct?
Posted by: Scrapiron at July 07, 2006 09:00 PM (y6n8O)
7
Johnny,
If you want this administration to go after N. Korea, you need to "fix the facts around" them having oil!!
Posted by: Robert at July 12, 2006 03:15 PM (VTtVl)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 06, 2006
New Docs Sugest Saddam May Have Trained/Equipped Taliban and Al Qaeda
Ray Robinson has been busy with his translators over at the Saddam Dossier, and has unearthed documents that an Arab regime—most likely Saddam's Iraq as these documents were found in Iraqi computers—supplied training manuals and military assistance to both al Qaeda and their Taliban hosts in Afghanistan prior to 9/11. Among the instructions passed along to the terrorists are
personal security instructions:
Respected brother,
Know that one of the main causes of information leaks is from personnel (translator's note: personnel talking), this is why we try to cooperate with you so that neither you or one of your brothers becomes the cause of a catastrophe that might hit one of the brothers or all of them.
Please follow these instructions:
1- Know as much as you need. (translator's note: don't ask too many questions)
2- Don't talk too much; it is said that "silence is wisdom."
3- It is recommended that all personnel wear Afghan clothing so they do not stand out from other people.
4- All the brothers should go to the market by themselves, alone.
5- It is not advised to move alone at night. (At night, walk the streets on foot)
6- As much as possible do not disclose your identity as an Arab.
7- Avoid excitement whether by glorifying or bashing.
8- Avoid being observed (translator's note: being followed and observed) and always notice who is walking behind you or following you from a distance; review the observation manual.
9- All brothers should be always armed even if with a small knife in their pockets.
10- Check your pockets and never leave important papers in them when moving around.
11- Always be careful in personal relations with Afghans or Pakistanis.
12- Avoid giving any information about the locations of your brothers.
13- It is forbidden to discuss work issues with the women.
14- It is forbidden to take children to parks and offices.
15- It is forbidden to talk about your work or the nature of your mission with anybody who is not related to it.
16- Beware of habit in your daily routine because the rule says, "Routine is the enemy of security."
17- If you are moving and have a large amount of money, beware of showing it in the market so you do not attract robbers.
18- Always beware when you are talking about the work because somebody not related to your work, the women or the children, might hear you.
19- Beware of rapid and spontaneous friendships with Afghans who speak Arabic.
20- In public places beware of talking about work issues because some Afghans know Arabic but you cannot notice this.
21- Always be forgiving when you are buying from, selling to or dealing with Afghans and avoid trouble.
22- Children are not allowed to go out by themselves whether to buy stuff or play.
23- Always make sure about the identity of your neighbors and classify them as regular people, opponents or allies.
While Robinson notes that it is not certain while Arab regime wrote these instructions along with the others contained in this translated document, he also states:
This document supports a few strong conclusions. It clearly proves that an Arab country was providing professional military assistance to Arab operatives in Afghanistan. While the document does not identify the country of origin of these Arab men, it's a logical omission since it wouldn't make sense to name the country in a memo whose purpose is to instruct how to hide one's nationality.
It is important to note, however, that in 1999, Iraq — along with Syria — was again identified by the U.S. Department of State as a government sponsor of terrorism, the only two Arab nations classified as state sponsors of terrorism at that time.
This document, of course, will be contested by those who refuse to believe that Saddam supported terrorism. These are the same people who refuse to acknowledge the fact that Abu Abbas and Abu Nidal, two of the preeminent terrorist masterminds prior to the emergence of Osama bin Laden, lived in Baghdad as Saddam's guest for many years. These are the same people who refuse to acknowledge the fact that the 1993 World Trade Center attack was made possible by an Iraqi-American bomb-builder, Abdul Rahman Yasin, who returned to Baghdad and continued to live in Iraq for a decade following his mission.
For people so deeply and philosophically invested in denial, Robinson's work can never openly be acknowledged as being correct. To do so would mean that Bush didn't lie, and that Saddam's ties to al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations was real.
For the rest of us, however, every document that Ray Robinson's team translates helps to build a picture of a Baathist regime every bit as dangerous as we thought it was.
Note: Mr. Robinson let me know he also taped an interview on Fox News television about these findings that will air every hour this morning.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
08:06 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 847 words, total size 5 kb.
1
Victor Davis Hanson once wrote an article in defense of the Iraq War saying that if you oppose the war, then you have the responsibility of defending what would have been the consequences of leaving Saddam in power. Some of those consequences would have been a further developing Sadddam-al Qaeda relationship and a further deterioration of UN sanctions due to the Oil for Food corruption, which in turn would have meant Saddam would have been free to get more WMDs. Not a pretty picture at all.
President Bush was critcized by the 9/11 Commission for not connecting the dots. As President Bush himself has said, he connected the dots as to Saddam. I think that it is high time that we realize that with the Iraq War, we have saved the world from what would have been a far more dangerous Saddam in league with al Qaeda able to operate freely in Baghdad.
Posted by: Phil Byler at July 06, 2006 10:58 AM (5rVtL)
2
This information is like the hundreds of WMD found in Iraq. It's over a day old so it don't count for the left winger's that are now proven to be liars instead of the President. What a turn of events. Wonder why the President isn't making a big deal out of it? The lefties have such short memories he's holding it until Oct so it'll be fresh in 50% of their minds in Nov, but still forgotten by the lamest 50%. Gonna be an interesting campaign starting about the 15th of Oct. when hundreds of classified documents are declassified and hundreds of facts come out every day. Conservatives will have to be very careful or we'll hurt ourselves from laughing too hard and too often.
Posted by: Scrapiron at July 06, 2006 06:36 PM (wZLWV)
3
Scrapiron -- we can put a fork in the recent WMD claims from Iraq. Here's Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC) on them:
"'They probably would have been intended for chemical attacks during the Iran-Iraq war,' said Dr. Kay who headed the UN weapons hunting team in Iraq from 2003 until 2004. He said experts in Iraqs chemical weapons are in almost 100% agreement that serin nerve agents produced from the 1980s would no longer be dangerous."
Certainly not a basis for war.
Posted by: Cyrus McElderry at July 06, 2006 07:45 PM (CwlIP)
4
I have never spent a day in the military or working in the intelligence field. Nonetheless, I have read enough spy novels and detective novels that even I could have writtin this "Training Manual". In fact, much of it could have been copied from the surveilance chapter of my circa 1968 Hardy Boys' Detective Manual. If this is the kind of cutting edge training that Saddam's men were delivering to Al-Queda, then how the hell did Al-Queda's leadership elude our troops in Afghanistan? What, prior to this kind of clever training, did Arabs in Afghanistan wear bright orange shirts with "ARAB" printed on them in florescent green?
Posted by: J Stuart at July 06, 2006 08:23 PM (LazQK)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 05, 2006
Farewell
When it's my turn, I stride slowly, execute a right face, and bring my hand slowly to my brow. As I bring my hand back to my side I'm aware of the moisture in my eyes, which turn down as I execute a left face and leave the platform. I see for the first time how full the room really is, as there are many soldiers standing along the back wall. It's all I can do not to run outside, into daylight, away from that monument that means that my friend will never see his dreams of becoming a drill sergeant, an underwater welder, a husband or a father come to life. Run away from the fear that one day my own picture will be in front of that monument, that I'll never see my fiancée or my parents or my brothers and sisters again. Run away from the fear that I'll never become a teacher and raise a family. But I don't run. I walk as quickly as discipline allows outside, where my friends wait and share my grief.
A fallen soldier is remembered by another in Iraq, at Blue Crab Boulevard.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
11:10 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 195 words, total size 1 kb.
Turning On Al Qaeda
Via
Captain's Quarters, one of the oddest requests so far of the Long War shows that the President is
winning the War on Terror:
Iraq's government is studying a request from some local insurgent leaders to supply them with weapons so they can turn on the heavily armed foreign fighters who were once their allies, according to two Iraqi lawmakers.
Leaders claiming to represent about 11 insurgent groups asked for weapons to fight foreign al-Qaeda elements in Iraq, said Haider al-Ibadi, a Shiite lawmaker and member of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's Dawa Party.
"They want to take part in the war against terrorists," said al-Ibadi, who supports the proposal. "They claim they could wipe out the terrorists and work with the government."
Many of us understood months or years ago that as the Iraqi Army matured, it would eventually force the various insurgent groups to the bargaining table. The Iraqi Army is better trained and better equipped than insurgent groups, in what is essentially a war of attrition that insurgent groups cannot realistically hope to win.
At the same time, "red on red" violence has been growing in Iraq for soem time, as native insurgents have increasingly turned upon foreign-led terrorist cells that often target Iraqi civilians.
The Iraqi government should, of course, refuse to arm the insurgents. Arms that target al Qaeda on day could easily be turned back on Iraqi forces the next. Better armed militias are not in the nation's best interests, no matter who they claim to support.
But the request tells us two things:
- The native insurgents feel they lack appropriate arms and ammunition. Desert conditions take a toll on even rugged Russian-designed arms, and tend to degrade ammunition. Coalition missions to dry up "rat lines" bring fresh weaponry from neighboring countries may be working.
- Foreign fighters and those loyal to them have worn out their welcome among native Iraqis. Even the mostly Sunni insurgency seems intent on driving out al Qaeda. The fact that this new willingness to publicly engage al Qaeda occurred after Musab al-Zarqawi's death is perhaps not accidental.
If talks between the Iraqi government and the various Sunni insurgent groups can reach an agreement and maintain that agreement, the Army can then turn its attention to the sectarian violence in Iraq, and assist in cleaning out and disarming the various militias.
Iraq may not be free of sectarian violence for some time to come, but the fact that the insurgency seems to be losing its desire to fight a losing war is a step in the right direction that even the most diehard liberal will find hard to ignore.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
09:39 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 445 words, total size 3 kb.
1
An excellent opportunity, it seems, to try out the Freely Elected Iraqi Government's amnesty proposal. The insurgent groups can help fight the foreign terrorists by showing the Iraqi Army where they are. In exchange, the insurgent groups get to join the political process and are not hunted down like rats themselves.
Posted by: Tim at July 05, 2006 11:20 AM (6cJ8H)
2
The only similarity between the war in Vietnam and the war in Iraq, (besides that an AK is an AK), is that the same people here who wanted the US to fail then, want the US to fail now! There is no Ho Chi Minh trail leading into Iraq with triple-canopy forest cover, and I.E.D.'s can only be used once!
Posted by: Tom TB at July 05, 2006 11:29 AM (y6n8O)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
What You've Heard About His Weapons Is True
From the
AP:
North Korea tests 7th missile amid furor
North Korea test-fired another missile Wednesday, intensifying the furor ignited when the reclusive regime launched at least six missiles, including a long-range Taepodong, earlier in the day.
Seven firings, none apparently lasting longer than six minutes, and the keystone was a spectacular failure that expired 40 seconds after launch.
Is this an impoverished Asisan dictatorship trying to project power, or Ron Jeremy's comeback tour?
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
07:51 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 90 words, total size 1 kb.
1
The North is just starving for attention.
Posted by: lawhawk at July 05, 2006 11:02 AM (m2RwJ)
2
Great Advertizing campaign. Buy our rockets, sure they suck, but they are cheap.
Posted by: David at July 05, 2006 02:23 PM (lK/7b)
3
Two pods of whales were duly terrorized and surrendered.
Posted by: Purple Avenger at July 05, 2006 06:35 PM (6gKLm)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 03, 2006
Iraq War Rape/Murder Suspect Arrested in Western NC
Via the
News & Observer:
Federal prosecutors charged a veteran of the Iraq war with murder and rape Monday following an investigation into the killing of an Iraqi woman and members of her family.
Steven D. Green, a 21-year-old former private first class who was discharged from the Army, appeared in a federal magistrate's courtroom in Charlotte Monday. Prosecutors said Green and other soldiers entered the home of a family of Iraqi civilians, where he and others raped a member of the family before Green shot her and three of her relatives to death.
The FBI said its agents arrested Green on Friday in Marion, N.C., and he is being held without bond pending a transfer to Louisville, Ky. Green had served with the 101st Airborne, based at Fort Campbell, Ky.
The case is being handled by federal prosecutors because Green has been discharged from the Army. According to an affidavit filed along with the criminal complaint, Green was discharged "before this incident came to light. Green was discharged due to a personality disorder."
Green was alleged to have killed three of the four family members, and participated in the rape. He could face the death penalty if convicted. He is the only soldier beign investigated in the Mahmudiyah rape/murder case to have been discharged.
Marion, NC is a small town near Lake James, west of Morganton.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
11:58 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 243 words, total size 2 kb.
This Sounds Familiar Somehow...
It's a regular
Bush vs. Gordita:
Mexico's presidential election was too close to call Sunday, with a leftist offering himself as a savior to the poor and a conservative free-trader both declaring themselves the winner. Officials said they won't know who won for days.
Electoral officials said they could not release the results of Sunday night's quick count of the votes, which they previously said would happen only if the leading candidates were within one percentage point of each other. Luis Carlos Ugalde, president of the Federal Electoral Institute, said an official count would begin Wednesday, and a winner will be declared once it's complete.
As Dafydd notes at Big Lizards, the leftist candidate says that according to his figures he won, while the more conservative candidate notes the official preliminary count is showing him with a slim but important lead.
Under Mexican law, in the event of a tie, a winner is selected based upon the best human sacrifice to Aztec god of civilization Quetzalcoatl.*
* Not actually true, but it would be considered by most international observers to be a more humane way to settle a presidential election that the U.S. court system.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
11:11 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 203 words, total size 1 kb.
The Amontillado Option
It was an affront to common sense, a willful and undermining misreading of the Geneva Conventions, and a blatantly unconstitutional stab at grabbing power from both the Legislative and Executive branches, but the Supreme Court's much disputed and reviled
Hamdan decision—which some have stated is on par with
Dredd Scott and
Pessy vs. Ferguson as "a great 'self-inflicted wound'"—might actually have a silver lining after all, as pointed out briefly by
Captain Ed:
The ruling from the Supreme Court that essentially grants terrorists Geneva Convention protections needs to get reversed as quickly as possible. The court's majority decision declared that the Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF) issued by Congress in 2001 somehow did not cover the establishment of military tribunals for unlawful combatants, which leaves Congress the opening to fill the gap.
I actually prefer the method that Justice Stevens explicitly left open to the Bush administration in his opinion: leave them detained until hostilities cease in the war on terror. Radical Islam does not leave many deterrents to its lunatic pawns. Death in combat or a summary execution suits them fine. Public trials give them the opportunity to exploit our civil justice system as platforms for their screeds, as Zacarias Moussaoui showed. However, the perpetual and anonymous detention offered by Stevens does give the terrorists the one situation they find most repellent -- and that could persuade at least a few of them that taking on the US holds nothing but a miserable stretch of decades in an iron cage, with no public outlet for their hatred.
I've mentioned in the past that if we are going to extend Geneva Protections to terrorists (who are disbarred from Geneva Protections due to Article 4.1.2, no matter what Justice Stevens says), then we should specifically use the portion of the Geneva Conventions that favors us the most.
The world has been at war with Islamic fundementalists at shifting borders for almost 1,400 years. More than millennia of precedent indicates that Islam—which divides the world into the House of War and House of Submission—will be at war with the rest of the world as long as it exists.
While President Bush was taking steps with the tribunals struck down by Hamdan to provide some sort of attempt at providing trials, perhaps he shouldn't have bothered.
Ironically, the Supreme Court now gives us a containment option straight out of a horror story.
Edgar Alan Poe's The Cask of Amontillado is perhaps one of the most classic horror stories; a man repeatedly wronged by another lures his victim into a dank catacombs where he first chains him, and then proceeds to wall him up alive.
Justice John Paul Stevens and the four other prevailing members of the Court have now set the stage for the terrorists we've captured to remain under U.S. custody without any sort of trial whatsoever for decades to come. They may conceivably be confined as prisoners of war—in good health, not bound in catacombs, mind you—until either they expire or jihad against the West ceases.
The Court has created the chance for the perpetual internment of captured terrorists without the mess of a jury trial. Somehow, I doubt liberals will be as happy with the Hamdan decision as they once were if this or following Administrations uses this option.
Frankly, I prefer tribunals, but I could force myself to live with this.
In pace requiescat!
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
10:35 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 572 words, total size 4 kb.
Random Acts?
On March 12, five soldiers from the 502nd Infantry Division allegedly raped a 15-year-old Iraqi girl killed her and her family, and then burned her body in an apparent attempt to hide the evidence of their crime.
Roughly three months later, on June 23, one of those soldiers confessed after soldiers from the same platoon were ambushed, and two GIs captured in the ambush were horrifically tortured and killed. Was there a cause-and-effect, tit-for-tat exchange of atrocities south of Baghdad? At least one key player seems to think so:
The official in Iraq whom the wire service quoted said the mutilation of the slain soldiers stirred feelings of guilt and led at least one of them to reveal the rape and slaying on June 22.
Would "feelings of guilt" mean that this soldier felt the torture and murder of men from his platoon was in retaliation for his own acts? Absent any other explanation, it seems a plausible assumption.
It is, of course, quite possible and even probable that the ambush and capture of Menchaca and Tucker at their Yusifiyah checkpoint was an act completely unassociated with the rape and murders down the road at Mahmudiyah. It seems that most of the neighbors were willing to believe this was a sectarian killing performed by Shiite militiamen.
But there was at least one notable exception.
Omar Janabi, a neighbor of the slain family, seems to be the star witness of this case, not only having conversations with the mother about here fears of a potential assault before the incident, but was also among the first to see the bodies.:
Janabi was one of the first people to arrive at the house after the attack, he said Saturday, speaking to a Washington Post special correspondent at the home of local tribal leaders. He said he found Abeer sprawled dead in a corner, her hair and a pillow next to her consumed by fire, and her dress pushed up to her neck.
"I was sure from the first glance that she had been raped," he said.
Despite the reassurances he had given the girl's mother earlier, Janabi said, "I wasn't surprised what had happened, when I found that the suspicion of the mother was correct."
And yet, three months passed without any indication that Janabi went to the Iraqi military or police to report his suspicions. Perhaps it was a cultural difference; perhaps it was fear of possible retribution, but in any event he believed U.S. soldiers from this unit was responsible for the capital crimes against his neighbors.
A Sunni in the heart of the Sunni insurgency, Janabi most likely "knew somebody who knew somebody" who would be capable of a retaliatory strike—perhaps a strike that took three months to reconnoiter, plan, and execute—that might send a message to the soldiers who committed these rapes.
Perhaps the tortuous deaths of men from Company B, 1st Battalion, 502nd Infantry Regiment weren't quite a random act of barbarity after all.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
12:57 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 500 words, total size 3 kb.
1
Exactly what is a "Washington Post special Correspondent? An unvetted stringer? An Islamist? A Baathist? An objective Journalist like Bill Keller?
Just asking.
Posted by: RiverRat at July 03, 2006 01:01 AM (oNFas)
2
It's simple. If they are guilty, I see good candidates for the death penalty (minimum of life in jail).
That crime dosen't excuse capture and torture at all. Two seperate crimes. Fry the torturers as well.
Posted by: Retired Navy at July 03, 2006 05:51 AM (y67bA)
3
Don't jump to conclusions about what are now allegations. To me, without knowing more, the story sounds fishy because it does not sound like the conduct of American soldiers. But we do know more: the place of the alleged incident is insurgent-riddled, the source of the story is a Muslim Sunni group with strong links to al-Zarquawi's group (sometimes referred to as al Qaeda's presence in Iraq), and one of the ploys of the terrorists is to concoct false stories of American atrocities, hoping to hit the My Lai button.
Posted by: Phil Byler at July 03, 2006 08:39 AM (/kIDl)
4
Hey tools
Raping and killing innocent women and children is now the American way, is it?
A 14 year old girl gang raped while her family is murdered in front of her....
These are the ideals American was founded for? This is the liberation you promised Iraqis?
And you wonder why the WHOLE WORLD (not just the Middle East), hates America? Go anywhere on this planet, even Canada, and tell them you are American and you will get nothing but hatred due to agression and militarism like this.
I can almost cry when I think of the horror and terror this little girl must have felt as she died. What a terrible world we live in....
Posted by: gfx at July 10, 2006 10:44 PM (uUuz/)
5
Yet, the best male enhancement method acting that is proved to be the mastering the items infra good to
you? As a issue of victimization since your "humanness"
is not the dimensions that you would wish it to be?
Posted by: penis advantage reviews at February 10, 2013 07:59 PM (73Wap)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
July 02, 2006
Bloodthirsty Knave Gets Unmarked Grave
He's
worm food now:
Iraqi National Security Adviser Mouwafak al-Rubaie told The Associated Press that al-Zarqawi had been buried in a "secret location" in Baghdad.
The U.S. military confirmed the burial but declined to give more details.
"The remains of Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi were turned over to the appropriate government of Iraq officials and buried in accordance with Muslim customs and traditions," the military said in an e-mailed statement. "Anything further than that would be addressed by the Iraqi government."
al-Zarqawi died approximately an hour after sustaining catastrophic injuries in a June 7 airstrike. The cause of death was listed as a primary (blast) injury to the lung.
The last thing he saw on this earthly plain was American and Iraqi soldiers standing over him, side-by-side. I take some small satisfaction in that.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at
08:53 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 143 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I would have thrown in some pig entrails, a couple pints of blood for jewish, hindu and christians, shredded the body and scattered the parts across the world.... no way he'd be getting to heaven and claiming his virgins. And I'd film it and broadcast it... just so his followers have a little something to think about.
Posted by: steve sturm at July 02, 2006 05:50 PM (XBWtm)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
108kb generated in CPU 0.0246, elapsed 0.1082 seconds.
61 queries taking 0.0916 seconds, 249 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.