Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Guardian) NewsFlash Suspected 9/11 mastermind arrested   ( guardian.co.uk) divider line
    More: NewsFlash  
•       •       •

15039 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 Mar 2003 at 2:20 PM (15 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»


Want to get NewsFlash notifications in email?

439 Comments     (+0 »)
 
 
2003-03-01 02:22:53 PM  
ic
 
2003-03-01 02:22:54 PM  
Hmph. My headline was better. Had the word "asshat."

:)
 
2003-03-01 02:23:03 PM  
Well, that's that, time to invade Iraq....
 
2003-03-01 02:23:04 PM  
Nice - fire up Ol' Sparky!
 
2003-03-01 02:23:22 PM  
you know, i'd love to turn on the tv and hear that osama was captured. i'd drink to that.

/non-cynical uncharacteristic of fark comment
 
2003-03-01 02:23:25 PM  
So that means I can call the FBI right now and claim my $25m?

/brb - on phone - 1-800-CALL-FBI
 
2003-03-01 02:23:35 PM  
agree, asshat is the appropriate term. Perhaps Master Asshat?
 
2003-03-01 02:23:39 PM  
Kick. Ass.
 
2003-03-01 02:23:40 PM  
I think they should opt for a public beheading. You know, make him feel at home.
 
2003-03-01 02:24:06 PM  
Watch your cornhole.
 
2003-03-01 02:25:25 PM  
Not sure I understand the headline. I thought they had to get all four colours in a row and in the right order? How can you only suspect you have a mastermind?

Fark the CIA. I say call in the Parker Bros.
 
2003-03-01 02:25:57 PM  
woohoo! (i guess)
 
2003-03-01 02:26:08 PM  
[image from battle.net too old to be available]

mastermind, you say?
 
2003-03-01 02:26:36 PM  
Um... I thought Osama was the 9/11 mastermind? The guy in the picture is not Osama.
 
2003-03-01 02:27:05 PM  
And what, exactly, does this have to do with Cheetos?
 
2003-03-01 02:27:26 PM  
I too, included the word "asshat". Seemed appropriate.

This is really great news. It's amazing how few of these little farkers we've caught so far. Hopefully, the helpless feelings from 9/11 can be lessened with the capturing and prosecuting of those responsible (directly responsible, you conspiracy theory nut-nuzzlers).
 
2003-03-01 02:28:06 PM  
I thought Osama was the mastermind too. I've never heard of this guy.
 
2003-03-01 02:28:13 PM  
playjim: youve spammed every set of comments today. go post somewhere else. please.
 
2003-03-01 02:28:15 PM  
What a poorly written, and uninformative article.
 
2003-03-01 02:28:50 PM  
Synesthesia: The dude busted is a high-ranking operative and he probably came up with this plan. Osama probably laughed a la Renfield and said go for it.
 
2003-03-01 02:29:16 PM  
Since when is Khalid Shaikh Mohammed head of the C.I.A.?

this poor bastard's just another patsy

</Oswald>
 
2003-03-01 02:31:32 PM  
Sung to the tune: "If You're Happy And You Know It Clap Your Hands"

If we cannot find Osama, bomb Iraq.
If the markets hurt your Mama, bomb Iraq.
If the terrorists are Saudi
And the bank takes back your Audi
And the TV shows are bawdy,
Bomb Iraq.

If the corporate scandals growin', bomb Iraq.
And your ties to them are showin', bomb Iraq.
If the smoking gun ain't smokin'
We don't care, and we're not jokin'.
That Saddam will soon be croakin',
Bomb Iraq.

Even if we have no allies, bomb Iraq.
From the sand dunes to the valleys, bomb Iraq.
So to hell with the inspections;
Let's look tough for the elections,
Close your mind and take directions,
Bomb Iraq.

While the globe is slowly warming, bomb Iraq.
Yay! the clouds of war are storming, bomb Iraq.
If the ozone hole is growing,
Some things we prefer not knowing.
Though our ignorance is showing!
Bomb Iraq.

So here's one for dear old daddy, bomb Iraq,
From his favourite little laddy, bomb Iraq.
Saying no would look like treason.
It's the Hussein hunting season.
Even if we have no reason,
Bomb Iraq.
 
2003-03-01 02:32:27 PM  
Heh, heh. Filter got "g0at5e"... Probably for the best.

Thank You Filter!!
 
2003-03-01 02:35:05 PM  
Haha, wow! You dislike Bush AND you can Ctrl-C/Ctrl-V a stupid poem that appears in nearly every Fark thread? Someone get this man/woman a medal!
 
2003-03-01 02:35:42 PM  
LMAO @ Joxette
 
2003-03-01 02:36:13 PM  
03-01-03 02:26:36 PM Synesthesia
Um... I thought Osama was the 9/11 mastermind?


Well, you thought wrong.


This is a big arrest. This asshat was involved in much more than 9/11, too.
 
2003-03-01 02:37:09 PM  
I'll have to go w/Zim1 on this one. Enough already.
 
2003-03-01 02:37:42 PM  
Maybe this will clear some things up: Osama is the head of Al-Qaeda, which was behind 9/11. I don't think it necessarily means that he thought up this scheme. Probably this asshat did and Osama's like, hey, let's work on that.
 
2003-03-01 02:38:07 PM  
Perhaps we can help you get to your destination.
 
2003-03-01 02:38:16 PM  
if you have not heard of this man, it does not make him a patsy. it makes you undeducated.
 
2003-03-01 02:39:31 PM  
He was caught in Pakistan, not Iraq. Huh. Go figure.
 
jph
2003-03-01 02:39:39 PM  
Uneducated, as well?
 
2003-03-01 02:39:57 PM  
Commodore69:

Zim1:

both correct.
 
2003-03-01 02:40:23 PM  
Here's the FBI page on him.
 
2003-03-01 02:40:25 PM  
Ditto to Vroomazoom</B?.
I just hope Khalid Shaikh Mohammed doesn't manage to kill himself before they get everything they can out of him.
 
2003-03-01 02:40:33 PM  
yeah, DrToast has the right idea. everyone saying "big deal, ive never heard of him" is being really moronic.

Joxette
YOU are definetely mediocre. That song pops up in every political FARK thread. Get over yourself.
 
2003-03-01 02:41:04 PM  
Jph:

is that a complete thought?
 
2003-03-01 02:41:18 PM  
sorry bout the unclosed tag
 
2003-03-01 02:41:53 PM  
03-01-03 02:31:32 PM Joxette [insert stupid song]

I think I've figured out why 68% of americans support the war (Info from a survey taken by MSNBC). Conservatives offer up fact based, poignant arguements, while Liberals wave signs, scream simplistic chants, and make up childish songs.
 
2003-03-01 02:42:33 PM  
Damn unfetchable links. Never mind, ignore me.
 
2003-03-01 02:44:11 PM  
So can we still nuke Iraq?

The news media says 68% of me wants the war. :P
 
2003-03-01 02:44:43 PM  
any body that thinks this man is not important check out the FBI link provided by B0rg9
 
jbc [TotalFark]
2003-03-01 02:45:45 PM  
This is a big one.

Though he is the leader of al Qaeda, calling Osama the "mastermind" of the 9/11 attacks makes no more sense than calling Dubya the "mastermind" of the war on terror.
 
2003-03-01 02:45:47 PM  
Just clicked on the link B0rg9 provided. That guy definitely looks familiar. Probably because I've visited the Most Wanted web site on occasion.
 
2003-03-01 02:45:50 PM  
Alexandra: LMAO @ Joxette

Same here...what a maroon.
 
2003-03-01 02:46:08 PM  
Dattaway: 0% of me wants the war so 136% of you must want it :P
 
2003-03-01 02:46:20 PM  
Squirrelw/nuts

good point... i think both left and right wing can get together and demand an end to stuff like that stupid song.

and although i havent seen that particular survey, 68% of Americans dont support the war. Every survey ive seen says the majority are against it, and certainly the sentiment seems to be shifting that way.
 
jph
2003-03-01 02:46:21 PM  
Vroomazoom: I'm just pointing out the irony in you calling someone uneducated, and yet managing to mispell the word.
 
jph
2003-03-01 02:47:14 PM  
Alph: You're kidding, right? What liberal rag did you get your statistics out of?
 
2003-03-01 02:47:26 PM  
I can't believe the nerve of this Saddam Hussien recruiting all these Saudis to attack the US.. Its almost like he wanted us to believe the saudis were responsible for all this.

Pure evil Genius
 
2003-03-01 02:47:33 PM  
Jph
pointing out a spelling error on FARK is the last resort of a desperate person.

There IS a difference between being uneducated, and mistyping something on a comment board. obviously.
 
2003-03-01 02:47:37 PM  
I agree with you SquirrelWithLargeNuts, but I think that the key words are "fact - based". I don't necessarily consider them to be factual any more than I consider the ONDCP's "fact - based" arguments against marijuana use to be factual.

lies, damn lies and statistics. spin. rinse. repeat as necessary to lull population into a stupor while selling them soap and beer and feminine hygene products.
 
2003-03-01 02:48:08 PM  
This is how Bush said it would work all along. We won't know whats going on- we'll just hear about stuff randomly. This is how its going to be with Bin Laden- we'll just wake up one day and he'll be dead.
 
2003-03-01 02:48:12 PM  
So, now it is only me or should maybe Pakistan consider changing the name of ISLAMaBAD to something more positive?

STRONGaBAD?
NOTsoBAD?
AMiBAD?

Just a thought...

...oh yeah - fry the farker, trials are for people with rights.

dj
 
2003-03-01 02:48:48 PM  
This guy's been on the most wanted list for over a year now. Sweet they finally caught one. One by one those assclowns will pay, one by one.
 
2003-03-01 02:49:11 PM  
Getting back on the subject at hand, I hope this Khalid asshat can lead us to bin Laden. After he talks, throw him in with general population and watch hilarity ensue.
 
2003-03-01 02:50:07 PM  
I hope more inroads are made on the real war on terrorism so that this Iraq conflict is put in perspective.
 
2003-03-01 02:50:08 PM  
03-01-03 02:41:53 PM SquirrelWithLargeNuts
03-01-03 02:31:32 PM Joxette [insert stupid song]

I think I've figured out why 68% of americans support the war (Info from a survey taken by MSNBC). Conservatives offer up fact based, poignant arguements, while Liberals wave signs, scream simplistic chants, and make up childish songs.

I dunno, I thought the song was funny. Pro-war or not it's worth a chuckle.
 
2003-03-01 02:50:17 PM  
From cnn.com:
One U.S. official has called Mohammed the Forrest Gump of al Qaeda because of all the attacks to which he's connected.

My mama always said Jihad is like a box of chocolates.
 
2003-03-01 02:50:49 PM  
Jph

Well, i go to a university, so it is entirely possible that all of the media i read is leftist slanted. I dont think my school lets you publish or distribute anything on campus if you arent left.
 
2003-03-01 02:51:14 PM  
"To march against the war is not to give peace a
chance. It is to give tyranny a chance. It is to give the Iraqi
nuke a chance. It is to give the next terrorist mass murder a
chance. It is to march for the furtherance of evil instead of
the vanquishing of evil." -- George W Bush


I am ashaimed to be an American right now for having a President who honestly believes this....
 
2003-03-01 02:52:12 PM  
LOL at Zim1! Good one!
 
2003-03-01 02:52:31 PM  
Terrorist punishment: Dig a Giant hole, put asshat terrorists at the bottom. Fly EVERYONE in the U.S. to this giant hole at their leisure to urinate on the asshats. Terrorists drown in America's piss.
 
2003-03-01 02:53:38 PM  
To the above cut-n-pasted stupid pome:

If you cannot find Phish tickets, protest Bush
If you hate your father and don't know it, protest Bush
If the Ramen hunger's packin'
And your GPA is slackin'
Nader deserves attackin'
Protest Bush
 
2003-03-01 02:54:03 PM  
The FBI profile page is actually just an overview. Just enough to let you know he is bad news. He's been in volved in many things over the last decade.

Here is an article with a little more detail of who he is.

The 'Forrest Gump' of al Qaeda
One U.S. official has called Mohammed the Forrest Gump of al Qaeda because of all the attacks to which he's connected. Gump was a movie character who found himself at the center of many key moments in modern U.S. history.
 
2003-03-01 02:54:07 PM  
Jph :

Is there any irony in trying to point out that I am uneducated with this literary abortion?

"Uneducated, as well?"

My point was clear, and nothing was lost due to my misspelling. You should not insult others spelling until you can complete a sentence, or at the very least produce a sentence fragment that has a discernable meaning.
 
2003-03-01 02:54:07 PM  
Hey, Joxette, just for you.




If You're Dopey and You Know It Help Saddam


If you don't know true evil, help Saddam.
If the real world is a bore, help Saddam.
If socialism is dreamy,
Kim and Castro are too seamy,
All you care is what's for me me,
Help Saddam.
If France won't back us up, let's Go Home.
If it gets hot there, let's go home.
We're just cowards making a fuss,
All the great ones died for us,
We're just here for dope on the bus,
Let's go Home.


 
2003-03-01 02:56:06 PM  
Alph: Here's a survey for you

And here are some thoughts from Iraqis about the war (Should be noted that they're not in Iraq, and so have nothing to fear from the government 'minders')
 
2003-03-01 02:56:12 PM  
Thanks DrToast for the better article, I just linked the top Google search for a quick look.
 
2003-03-01 02:56:40 PM  
On the issue of Iraq just ask yourselves, what would jesus do?


[image from ananova.com too old to be available]
"Surf's Up!"
 
2003-03-01 02:58:52 PM  
Sorry. I didn't realize that it had been posted to the point of overkill. I am no farkin hippy and I am not anti-Bush.

Carry on.
 
2003-03-01 02:59:11 PM  
BTW, SquirrelWithLargeNuts...if it is at all within your powers to banish forever the singing of tired lame and ineffective leftie protest songs ad nauseum, could you please start with:

"hey hey. ho ho. [fill in the blank] has got to go."

even when i support the cause i cringe.
 
2003-03-01 03:00:38 PM  
Good, now fly a plane into him.
 
2003-03-01 03:01:03 PM  
or

were here were queer and we arn't here to shop

/giggle
 
2003-03-01 03:02:12 PM  
al-qaeda! how 2002, everyone knows iraq is the new enemy for 2003.
 
2003-03-01 03:03:14 PM  
Mikey_B: I propose putting some of those terrorist asshats in a plane that's controlled by remote-control. Put more of those asshats into a building. Fly the plane into it. Poetic justice.
 
2003-03-01 03:03:26 PM  
excellent

/mr. burns voice

 
2003-03-01 03:03:34 PM  
Squirrelw/nuts

well, i dont know how much meaning the poll has either way... its not hard to realize how phone polls of 1000 people are fundamentally flawed.

But the other article is very good. Its essentially what I've been saying all along. The second Saddam is removed from power, the people will fill the streets in exaltation. I dont see how people cant realize that.
 
2003-03-01 03:05:06 PM  
al-qaeda! how 2002, everyone knows iraq is the new enemy for 2003.

Mediocre.
 
2003-03-01 03:05:23 PM  
47% of statistics are made up on the spot.
 
2003-03-01 03:06:04 PM  
Alph, but true.
 
2003-03-01 03:06:21 PM  
Feukulor: one word oil the rich get rich off the deaths of others
 
2003-03-01 03:08:47 PM  
Feukulor-
PRO-I've read too much history and seen too much to sit back and watch another Hitler grow.
 
2003-03-01 03:11:18 PM  
Feukulor: Basic human compassion. Saddam is a horrible, cruel dictator who threatens the rest of the region and supports terrorism.

This is what happens when you disagree with the Ba'ath party.
 
2003-03-01 03:11:29 PM  
WOOFYSF your joking right? If not it's hard to believe your not on Bush's side, you know being that Saddam is a dictator and kills his own people. But hey, as long as your not feeling the brute of his evilness it doesnt matter right?

p.s. AnonymousGuy's song is better.
 
2003-03-01 03:12:08 PM  
Bill_Wick's_Friend: BTW, SquirrelWithLargeNuts...if it is at all within your powers to banish forever the singing of tired lame and ineffective leftie protest songs ad nauseum

They aren't going to band lame songs--they know their crowd.
 
2003-03-01 03:12:10 PM  
Feukulor: 21st century nations should practice diplomacy first and should only be going to war when the cause is just. I don't think diplomacy has been exhausted as an option and I dont belive that, until it does, the cause is just.
 
2003-03-01 03:13:11 PM  
Walt-baby, one flaw in your argument. Hitler had the german manufacturing industry behind him. Hussein does not. In fact to maintain his oil industry, he had to import hundreds of millions of dollars of equipment. Guess who supplied it? Cheney via Haliburton.
 
2003-03-01 03:13:15 PM  
Caught one of the 9/11 organizers. In Pakistan. Boy, I sure am glad we're going to attack Iraq, though. Because, you know, they had so much to do with the whole thing.
 
2003-03-01 03:13:18 PM  
Feukulor: I'm a pacifist, and war, in my opinion, should only be a last resort.
 
2003-03-01 03:14:07 PM  
Why is it every time the arrest a terrorist he was a "mastermind?" Something tells me if these people are so easily duped the only things things they are "Masters" of is Jack and Sh*t.
 
2003-03-01 03:14:41 PM  
Feukulor
i tend to have a hatred of all females, and i know that anything which has a significantly higher proportion of female followers than male is fundamentally flawed.

e.g. NO BLOOD FOR OIL rants, other stupid political views, crappy movies, crappy music, etc.

Basically, women have bad taste in everything.

what?
 
2003-03-01 03:14:51 PM  
Canberra, don't forget bating.
 
2003-03-01 03:14:56 PM  
Mandrake: Are you aware that we would've let Saddam get off with self-exhile, but he refused?
 
2003-03-01 03:16:33 PM  
03-01-03 03:02:12 PM Inignot
al-qaeda! how 2002, everyone knows iraq is the new enemy for 2003.


Inignot: I'd laugh at that except for the sad reality of it. What ever happened to the aggressive ten-year plan to thwart terrorism? I'm guessing that too many countries are still harboring terrorists and not allowing us the leverage to push them out a la Afghanistan (and are they even completely gone there?). Combine that with the fact that it is still a huge world we live in and routing out terrorists, even within our own borders, can be difficult to impossible. I think 9/11 proved that with all the preparation that took place here in the US.

Short of turning half of the globe into glass we seem to be at the mercy of the terrorists outing themselves through indiscretion rather than being able to find them solely on our own.

I hope I'm wrong.
 
2003-03-01 03:17:05 PM  
Skail

so your reason for why Iraq had nothing to do with it is because these people were found in Pakistan?

You've got to be kidding
 
2003-03-01 03:17:24 PM  
Does this mean that we still get to bomb Iraq?


I blame all those hippy tree huggers who wouldn't let Bush drill a few holes up in the frozed wastelands of Alaska. They forced Bush to go looking for oil in other places. It's all the hippies fault that we will soon invade Iraq.
 
2003-03-01 03:17:53 PM  
Doccm9-
Regardless, the man has killed anybody that has openly disaggreed with him, not to mention over a million of his own people, that sounds like a Hitler in training to me!
 
2003-03-01 03:17:58 PM  
Guess_Who: OMG for what reason should i be on his side? he is worse then saddam he is a big bully to other nations and lets not forget about N. Korea they are the ones with the bombs and said they will use them at least saddam is dismantaling them ( sorry i am not a good speller )

/ anti-war
 
2003-03-01 03:19:15 PM  
This is great. Now we can interview him to fnd out why Al Qaeda hates us and what we can give them to buy their love.
 
2003-03-01 03:19:21 PM  
personally, I think anything we can do to better iraq needs to be done, and that includes removing someone who's into torture from power.

However, I think GW has a hidden agenda (addmittedly one that's not so hidden) and is being ignorant about the why and the when. As far as world events go, this was more or less out of the blue, and it reeks of 'war is peace'.
 
2003-03-01 03:19:26 PM  
SquirrelWithLargeNuts: no I hadn't been aware of that, but I'm not surprised that he refused. Also, my own ignorance of current events is what usually keeps me from spreading my mental faeces around when these fights come up.
 
2003-03-01 03:19:45 PM  
Mandrake, pacifists can only exist if others will do their fighting for them.

Lame. Lame. Lame.
 
2003-03-01 03:19:56 PM  
not a bad catch. this guy even tried to assassinate the Pope on his visit to Manila.

-guac
 
2003-03-01 03:21:43 PM  
GEAH: you're misunderstanding me, in the event that force is necesarry, I say we fark 'em up, but that force should always be a last resort.
 
2003-03-01 03:21:44 PM  
I say bring him to the U.S. and just release him at ground zero-after you notify the friendly folks of New York of his arrival. Vegas can take bets on how far he gets before he caught and skinned alive. Maybe some pay per view on HBO to boot.

Than it's off to the 72 virgins that await him.
 
2003-03-01 03:22:04 PM  
Hey Feuk, what was your point?
 
2003-03-01 03:23:37 PM  
Short of turning half of the globe into glass we seem to be at the mercy of the terrorists outing themselves through indiscretion rather than being able to find them solely on our own.
I hope I'm wrong.


Getting rid of every terrorist isn't something that is likely to be accomplished. What can be accomplished, hopefully, is to destroy the leadership of the terrorist organizations. If you take out the leadership of Al Qaeda and cut off their funding, you're still going to have the operatives left behind, but their ability to inflict mass casualties will be severly hampered if not destroyed.

You may never be able to stop someone from blowing up a bus every so often, but you probably can prevent attacks of the magnitude that occured on 9/11. Hopefully.
 
2003-03-01 03:25:01 PM  
Put him in a boxing ring with Mike Tyson, or 100 rabid wolverines, or a riled up bear or something.

Whatever we do, we should put it on pay-per-view.

I bet that would go some ways into paying back our national debt.
 
2003-03-01 03:25:30 PM  
Tktommy-
NO that's too easy, if he did do the things they say he did, put him in the biggest baddest Jersey State Pen, let the 72 virgins get him after 25 years of ass pounding that await him.
 
2003-03-01 03:26:29 PM  
Irascible Technically he wouldn't bother with the board...ya think?
[image from image.inkfrog.com too old to be available]
 
2003-03-01 03:26:32 PM  
DrToast:
"and cut off their funding, you're still going to have the operatives left behind"


that will soon rise up and become a leader them selfs

there will allways be terrorist's ALLWAYS
 
2003-03-01 03:27:20 PM  
Walt, he wouldn't last an hour. That would be perfect for pay-per-view.
 
2003-03-01 03:27:25 PM  
This guy doesn't know how lucky he is. In 5 years, he will be on a reality show on Fox.
 
2003-03-01 03:28:02 PM  
03-01-03 02:23:22 PM SDKaneda
you know, i'd love to turn on the tv and hear that osama was captured. i'd drink to that.

/non-cynical uncharacteristic of fark comment
_________________________________________

That's never going to happen. Years from now, it will be 'discovered' that osama never made it out of Torra Borra. It's true.

A very sharp old military guy from WWII (a regional commander) told me that you get the best info from your Seargents. Well, Seargents on the ground spotted Usama on a mule in a valley trying to escape Torra Borra right before they dropped a daisey cutter on his coordinates.

Osama's dead, we just can't make a martyer out of him. FWIW, these 'UBL' tapes are wishful thinking, and only serve our purpose, for as long as "Usama's out there", we have more leverage in operations overseas...much like the one that netted this asshole.

P.S. you idiots saying that you've never heard of this cat are showing your ignorance. Funny thing is that it's the same folks who are against deposing Saddam Hussein. Coincidence? Clearly you guys aren't paying attention...so why should we listen to you on Iraq? ...well?
 
2003-03-01 03:28:39 PM  
Lucidavid, that's a Zerg Overlord you putz, not a mastermind
 
2003-03-01 03:29:14 PM  
Begoggle
"Joe not a terrorist mastermind"
 
2003-03-01 03:29:31 PM  
DarkJohnson: You read my mind and put it in jpg format!
 
2003-03-01 03:30:31 PM  
Let's go Mengele on his ass until he spills the beans.
 
2003-03-01 03:30:40 PM  
Yes we do still get to fight Iraq. This has nothing to do with the fact that Iraq is still in breach of 1441 and there are still plenty of terrorists he could give his WMD to so they can attack us without his fingerprints.
 
2003-03-01 03:31:14 PM  
Feukulor-

Pro-war: I think claiming oil is a motive is idiotic. If anyone is motivated by oil it's the French. I support war because Saddam is a monster and his people want him gone. To paraphrase Three Kings, we can go show them the "bright shining light of American democracy". Or something =p I'm hopeful it will help spread political freedom in the region, with the resulting economic upturn creating more jobs for young Arabs, who can then stop turning to extremism.
 
2003-03-01 03:31:15 PM  
DeCypher44:

got one and thanks yes i am a He and in S.F. gotta love it here (EG)
 
2003-03-01 03:31:27 PM  
now there is a new number 3...
 
2003-03-01 03:33:10 PM  
that will soon rise up and become a leader them selfs

there will allways be terrorist's ALLWAYS


Uh...didn't I just say there will always be terrorists?

But you're mistaken if you think anyone can lead a terrorist organization. Al Qaeda is a unique group; they've pulled off things nobody has been able to. They've been able to because they have access to lots of money and they've been able to have free reign of a country for several years. Their country is gone and that has already clearly hurt them. Take away their leadership and their money and they'll become another group of extremists rather than a global threat.
 
2003-03-01 03:33:26 PM  
HOORAY!!! We captured the bad evil terrorists!

Can I have my civil rights back now?
 
2003-03-01 03:35:52 PM  
Feukulor:
Short-term: This won't be a new war, it will be the resumption of the '91 war. Saddam agreed to a shiatload of conditions for cease-fire back then and has spent the last 12 years not holding up his end of the deal. It's only now that we have an administration in place willing to insist that the game-playing be ended and that the U.N. stand up and enforce its own treaty.
Long-term: The Arab world is one huge festering armpit of corrupt regimes and the civilized world is seeing firsthand the spillover effects. If a stable, secular, reasonably democratic government can be established in one Arab state, and allowed to take root, others will eventually follow and the extremist influence will be marginalized. Iraq has a modern infrastructure and will offer a pretty decent opportunity for such cultivation.
I'm not saying this will be anything other than monumentally difficult, and there is no guarantee of success. But the long-term benefits to the world of a stable, functioning Middle East will be incalculable. It's time to Dare Greatly.
 
2003-03-01 03:36:53 PM  
DrToast:

i bow down to you. you are right! but i got a gut feeling that there is more groups out there that we should be afraid of as well
 
2003-03-01 03:38:11 PM  
it's been fun guys see you on the flip off work ..
 
2003-03-01 03:38:52 PM  
Code_Archeologist no shiat - I mean because of these aszhats one of my favorite freedoms is on the ropes.

Check this shiat out.
 
2003-03-01 03:39:00 PM  
Doc_attheRadarStation:

Right on. Who Dares, Wins.
 
2003-03-01 03:40:01 PM  
HOORAY!!! We captured the bad evil terrorists!

Can I have my civil rights back now?


yeah, i know somewhere in the constitution im guaranteed the right to fly without waiting in line at a security check for "too long"
 
2003-03-01 03:41:51 PM  
I've never seen the dumb song before....but I really do have a problem with fellow liberals and their seeming inability to create an intellegent argument against the war. I'm against the war, but i'm not posting silly parody songs, or pictures of poor little Iraqi children.

LittleCamel are you military? Where did you hear about that? Just interested. Thanks.

--TPR
 
2003-03-01 03:42:11 PM  
Interesting footnote to this: According to AOL news (I'm only using the free trial, then I'm going to People PC), this asshat's nephew was the guy responsible for the 1993 WTC bombing. Terrorism runs in that family big-time.
 
2003-03-01 03:42:47 PM  
Link dropped from my previous post, here it is fixed.

Check this shiat out.

If this isn't fixed, Aszhats like Khalid Shaikh Mohammed win another victory.

dj
 
2003-03-01 03:44:20 PM  
SquirrelWithLargeNuts
03-01-03 02:31:32 PM Joxette [insert stupid song]

I think I've figured out why 68% of americans support the war (Info from a survey taken by MSNBC). Conservatives offer up fact based, poignant arguements, while Liberals wave signs, scream simplistic chants, and make up childish songs.


Oh for farks sake dude, do you have to turn everything into a flame war? I think everyone, conservative or liberal, will be happy to hear this asshole is caught.

farking chill for a bit, ok?
 
2003-03-01 03:44:22 PM  
You are correct Alph there is no constitutional guarantee about short lines. But there is a right in there about unreasonable search and seizure... and personally I am getting tired of the body cavity searches and the suggestive winks the airport security people are giving me.
 
2003-03-01 03:44:26 PM  
Score one for the good guys
 
2003-03-01 03:45:20 PM  
The real reasons to invade Iraq.


-The annual military budget of Irak is estimated at 396 billion dollars. Nearly six times the millitary budget of Russia. Irak has a permanent Army of 1,5 million men as well as a reserve of 2 million soldiers.

-Iraq has the world's largest carceral population in the world with over 2 million men and women in jail.

-According to Amnesty international, Iraq has the forth largest execution rate in the world, behind China, Iran and Saudi Arabia. In the last decade 65% of all executions of young offenders took place in Iraq. As of 2002, Iraq is the only country in the world to execute people under the age of 18. Many among them, it has since been known, were innocent.

-In Iraq, individuals identified as « fighting adversaries » have no legal recourses. They can be held in small jail cell 24 hours a day without access to a lawyer or contact with their families. Any information regarding the date of their trial (if such trial is to happen) is kept from them.

-In 2002, Iraq has requested to foreign governments not to ratify an agreement stipulating that they will not deliver to the international penal court any Iraqi nationals accused of war crimes, genocide or crimes against humanity.

-Over the course of last year, Iraq as substentially augmented the surveilance of its own people under pretext of preserving national security. The Iraqi Government has looked for ways to established a national network consisting of informant who will report any «suspicious» behavior.

-Officialy, internet access is legal in Iraq, The Government annouced measures in order to establish a centralised system allowing to control a large portion of the web and, quite possibly, using it as surveillance of its users.

-In Iraq, private sector employees can be fired from their jobs for any reasons. Those employees can be subjected to drug testing and can also be punished for their political views. It is legal for the employer to exercise secret control of their employees by electronic means, be it video, computer and/or telephone surveillance.

-Iraqi police have the right to seize the personal property of any Iraqi citizens as long as the police has any « reasonable motive ». The police can seize the residence, vehicule and life savings of a citizen.

-In Iraq, the right to assembly is forbiden. A citizen who wishes to organize a public protest must request a permit. The name of that citizen can be filed in a permanent record.

The facts mentioned above are true. Anybody who values freedom and liberty can legitimately be outraged... and what is even more outrageous is the fact that all of this does not apply to Iraq but to the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
 
2003-03-01 03:47:22 PM  
Feuklor - I am anti-Bush, but I am actually pro-war, and for none of the reasons that Bush has given us. I think that if we don't go to war, Saddam will work hard at either retailiting, or gathering more allies in the region so that it would be much more difficult politically to attack him.

We are not invading because of oil. We are not invading because we feel bad for the Iraqis. I'm pretty darn sure that we're going to war because Bush jr. feels the need to clean up the mess that Bush Sr. left behind. I don't think he's going to get a lot of disagreements with Dick Cheney and Colin Powell as his aides (both who may feel personally responsible for letting Hussein live).
 
2003-03-01 03:47:31 PM  
LittleCamel:

Interesting theory, and i agree with you on your last point.
People are asking why go to war with Iraq if these guys are hiding in Pakistan. Pakistan has arrested hundreds of terrorists so far and Iraq has arrested 0. I would rather have Pakistan as an ally than Iraq.
 
2003-03-01 03:47:49 PM  
Very cool that this buttplug has been captured. For torture he should forced to watch the Anna NIcole show non-stop. Just loop a single episode and let the bastard's mind be consumed by the torture. He'd probably crack inside of 48-hours.

/seeker of technically 'humane' condition of imprisonment/interrogation
 
2003-03-01 03:48:19 PM  
I want my civil right to say, "Hi", to my friend Jack while seated in 8C.
 
2003-03-01 03:48:48 PM  
QuithEx
You do realize that Joxette's post was in response to someone who posted a non-sequitor, childish anti-war remark. Basically, someone had already initiated the flame war

Archeologist
true. and to be fair, the airport security system is moronic. maximum amount of inconvienence without any real security.
 
2003-03-01 03:50:32 PM  
TentaclePr0nRocks you want a good liberal arguement against going to war? Here is my best one. Twelve years of containment has worked so far, why invade now? Oh and here is another one. North Korea has admitted that they have a weapons program and are also in breach of UN resolutions and have nuclear weapons that CAN hit US interests and cities... so why are we invading Iraq? I have plenty of them...
 
2003-03-01 03:50:53 PM  
B0rg9 you forgot the "ta da bump" - but on a similar none you can say it to your buddy Gene and no one will complain.

cha ching

thank you, I'm here all weeek

dj
 
2003-03-01 03:51:11 PM  
Bashturn,

Hehe. That was Beautiful. I hope your comments fool cause a few flames from careless people. That would be quite amusing to see.
 
2003-03-01 03:52:01 PM  
Feukulor
There is a point to this question, so bear with me.

Nu? Your point was......?
 
2003-03-01 03:56:00 PM  
Why is it every time I see anti-USA propaganda, Bashturn is at the top of the shiate pile? Could he be the sultan of shiate?!? YES
 
2003-03-01 03:56:33 PM  
They arrested Karl Rove?

heh heh!
 
2003-03-01 03:57:13 PM  
Where were the people screaming for Saddam's head five years ago? Eight years ago? The man has been in a position of power since 1968, and has been dictator since 1979. How long have we known that he uses chemical weapons on the Kurds?
What nuclear weapons have we found in Iraq? I have yet see a headline on Fark saying Hans Blix has found anything. Why has Iraq, in the last year, become such a larger threat than usual? Becuase they are developing weapons of mass destruction? They've been doing that for years. Ohh, and they're linked to al-Queda? Who the hell isn't! Good god, one of the operatives they gave up in interrogation was a hispanic guy that worked in a Taco Bell!
Is Saddam evil? Yes. Does he need to be dealt with? Definitely. Is Bush dumber than smegma? Yup (I wanted McCain). It's like Ari said, "I can only say the cost of a one-way ticket is substantially less than that. The cost of one bullet, the Iraqi people taking it (on) themselves, is substantially less than that, the cost of war is more than that."

Do we really want to INVADE Iraq and create a whole new generation of people that hate and want to destroy us. We will never win the war on terror. It is an intangible. It will exist as long as there is hatred. All we can do is monitor our actions and work towards the dismantling of the network and ensuring it can build back up to its former strength. Saddam is not another Hitler, he is a Stalin.
And let's not forget all the military aid we gave him when he attacked Iran.
 
2003-03-01 03:59:11 PM  
WTF, I thought the mastermind was Jerry's friend Babo. So what it really turns out to be is "whoever is the last one arrested is the mastermind"????

Silly me... I thought OBL had something to do with it but then BushWacker43 sez it's Sadam. Can't get either of them so we settle for Babo's brother-in-law in Pakistran; thatis, for today anyway. Maybe tomorrow it will be Depak Chopra?
 
2003-03-01 03:59:15 PM  
Code
You cant have it both ways though... you imply that North Korea is more worthy of this action, but if we were doing the same to Korea, the same people who make that argument would be against it.

When you bring korea into it, you're grasping at straws, and making a logical fallacy.


Twelve years of containment has worked so far

i couldnt have said it better myself, which is why im in favor of this war.
 
2003-03-01 04:00:51 PM  
Can some conservative person please explain this to me:
In all seriousness, I'm not trying to start (or add to) a flame war, this is an honest question:
Human rights violations occur all over the world. Why, now, are we suddenly so concerned with them in Iraq, and not in so many other places? I think this is why many liberals believe there to be an ulterior motive (e.g. OIL) for attacking Iraq.
 
2003-03-01 04:02:46 PM  
Thanks, Code_Archeologist...I'll go read the rest of the thread now
;)
 
2003-03-01 04:03:37 PM  
Tusnami

Deepak Chopra. lol.
 
2003-03-01 04:03:52 PM  
Where were the people screaming for Saddam's head five years ago?

The offical policy of the United States has been to force a regime change in Iraq since the Clinton Administration (in 1998).
 
2003-03-01 04:05:48 PM  
DarkJohnson: That would suck. Here's one from my collection.

"You can have my C-65's when you pry 'em from my cold dead hands."
 
2003-03-01 04:06:12 PM  
...and this guy is related to iraq how?
 
2003-03-01 04:06:18 PM  
QuithEx
first of all, you shouldnt bash the liberals like that.

Liberals dont believe this war is for oil, morons do. It is an ignorant, uninformed viewpoint, and most people see through it.

you would be pretty hard pressed to find human rights violations on the same scale as Iraq...

... and we never said we were doing this out of compassion, that was one of the tertiary motives. We want to disable funding to terrorist organizations. Topplin Saddam would go a long way in accomplishing that.
 
2003-03-01 04:10:28 PM  
Feukulor-
Nice one! Personally I try and read everything I can find, the only time I don't read anti-war stuff is when they start out "Bush is out for oil" or if it's written by some celebrity.
 
2003-03-01 04:10:56 PM  
I'm against the war because there is no evidence. Even if there was evidence that Saddam has WMDs, there's no evidence that he's going to use them anytime soon. Contrast this to North Korea, which is not only known to have WMDs, but is shouting at the top of its lungs, "YES, WE HAVE WMDS AND WANT TO USE THEM, PLEASE PAY ATTENTION TO US!" Iraq is also not linked to al-Qaeda; in fact, al-Qaeda hates Saddam and the Ba'ath Party. Therefore, the only justifications I can come up with for this war are the want for oil and Bush's need for revenge for the planned assassination of his daddy.

As for the defense that the Iraqi government is evil: If that were a sufficient criterion for going to war with another sovereign country, we'd be at war with half of the world right now. There has to be something that makes Iraq more important than any other evil dictatorship, and I'm not seeing what it is.

How's that for a reasoned argument, those of you who base your entire perception of the left on stereotypes?

Rob
 
2003-03-01 04:11:41 PM  
A_Pinkus
obviously, it isnt. I mean, if the guy was found in Pakistan, there is no way that there could be ANY link to Iraq. None whatsoever.

And that somehow means our war in iraq is bogus, because all our reasons for it were predicated on the fact that this one guy lived in iraq. yup.
 
2003-03-01 04:11:56 PM  
LittleCamel must have sources of intell that no one else does...

But thats quite possible, since she was once in the military, I am sure that she has all kinds of contacts for this kind of information....
 
2003-03-01 04:12:47 PM  
But folks, the real important point here is "Who gets the 25 mil?"
 
2003-03-01 04:14:02 PM  
Alph
Explain to me why this war isn't (primarily) about oil. And please don't say that we don't get any oil from Iraq, I realize that. But he who controls the middle east controls the oil prices.


And thanks for calling me a moron.
 
2003-03-01 04:14:41 PM  
A reward is not automatic. If the CIA or the ISI was responsible for the intelligence leading to his arrest, there will be no reward.
 
2003-03-01 04:14:52 PM  
disabling terrorist fuding be a compassionate motive, by attempting to prevent people from being victimized by terrorism?

uuuuh... sure dude. if you want to make that connection. i dont care about other peoples slippery slopes.
 
2003-03-01 04:15:28 PM  
Alph here is my point about twelve years of containment. We have contained Iraq for twelve years and kept them pretty much unable to redevelop their weapons program or rebuild any army to speak of. We have also have a nuclear deterent that pretty much keeps Saddam from doing anything (and as insane as people say Saddam is he has shown a healthy respect for our ability to reduce his nation to a smouldering atomic dust pile by not using chemical weapons during Gulf War I). And our interests there in the Middle East (who are the ones really threatened by Iraq) presently have more than enough power to kick Saddam's arse if he decides to get uppity.

My biggest opposition to attacking Iraq though is that in our non-stop charge for Iraq we have squandered the unity of purpose we had through out the world in the war on terror. Now most of the world is willing to let us hang out to dry... we need to get our focus back on fighting terrorist organizations... and forget this Iraq bullshiat.
 
2003-03-01 04:15:54 PM  
For Allah's sake, people. It's SATURDAY. Lighten up a bit.
 
2003-03-01 04:16:07 PM  
In fact, LittleCamel is probably the one that tipped the authorities to Khalid Shaikh Mohammed's location :)
 
2003-03-01 04:16:43 PM  
Cool, they caught one of the head diaper heads....kick ass, let's put him in front of a firing squad...but first, show him naked women, shave his head and beard, and make him listen to Christian sermons...hehe
 
2003-03-01 04:17:56 PM  
Well folks it's been fun but I gotta run.

/I'll be baaack
 
2003-03-01 04:18:50 PM  
Propoganda aside, this is the man (NOT Osama, NOT Saddam) that planned the 9/11/01 terrorist attacks on America. Ive been waiting for his capture since that date. Its a shame that this proud moment is overshadowed by the partisan bickering. I hope that the people who lost loved ones on 9/11 can appreciate this moment.
 
2003-03-01 04:20:08 PM  
Variable
I agree. A very good thing happened here.
 
2003-03-01 04:20:51 PM  
Feukulor

I dunno. I would think that the US would release as much evidence as possible in order to get the support of other countries.

Rob
 
2003-03-01 04:21:29 PM  
Code
well, we presume we've limited his weapons development, but its not far fetched to believe he hasnt followed those guidelines.

i know he would never directly attack us, but i personally believe he contributes money and lots of other resources to organizations and entities and what have you with the goal of killing US citizens. Which is what i think we should stop.

Yeah, we dont have much unity, but keep in mind, the US and England are in agreement with the UN resolution. France and Germany, and those other states are in opposition. The agreement states that its not our job to show that Iraq has no WMD, its Iraq's job to show they dont have them.

We are simply going along with the resolution as planned. If other states get cold feet, it doesnt matter.

Lets face it, even if the other countries did support us, they wouldnt contribute any significant number of troops.
 
2003-03-01 04:23:07 PM  
Variable

Yeah, I don't know why we're talking about Iraq either. Seems like the capture of this guy is a lot more important.

Rob
 
2003-03-01 04:23:54 PM  
Feukulor

yeah, thats interesting theory, and ive always been fascinated by how two smart, rational people can come to different conclusions.

But the reality is that time will show one of these sides to be on the wrong side of history (so to speak)
 
2003-03-01 04:24:52 PM  
IamEvil
and make him listen to Christian sermons...hehe

Dear god, what kind of monster are you??!!
 
2003-03-01 04:26:57 PM  
no matter your thoughts on the war on iraq (ie: threadjacks aside) can we all agree that the capture of this asshat is a good good good thing?
 
2003-03-01 04:28:53 PM  
Here me now and believe me later... This flabby terrorist is about to get pumped up.


Just wanted to revive 1990-ish icons.
 
2003-03-01 04:30:39 PM  
B0rg9 SCHWEEET - An Estes Explorer Aquarius!!!

The ship that made the Kessel run in less than 12 parsecs, or so I'm told! (did I really say that?)

Anyway, I'm sure by now you've traced my links to see some of my fleet. Looks like you built it up nice.

dj
 
2003-03-01 04:31:04 PM  
BTW, I don't think it has as much to do with the reading of different articles as it does with basic personality differences between intelligent pro-war people and intelligent anti-war people. I personally don't find the idea of "acceptable losses" so acceptable, especially not in a war with as little solid justification as this one. Pro-war people, on the other hand, seem to tend towards the idea that people in the military are there because they want to be, therefore their dying for their country is not as important of a consideration. Pro-war people also seem to focus more on the short-term than anti-war people. Saddam is evil, therefore he must be stopped, even if stopping him accomplishes nothing because the next government is as bad or worse.

Rob
 
2003-03-01 04:31:46 PM  
QuithEx
Why, now, are we suddenly so concerned with them in Iraq, and not in so many other places? I think this is why many liberals believe there to be an ulterior motive (e.g. OIL) for attacking Iraq.

Because it's in our best interests. I heard about the women's rights violations in Afghanistan as soon as the Taliban came to power. It wasn't until it concerned us that we even bothered to invade Afghanistan. (I think the fact that it was just women also had something to do with it too...but I have PMS and therefore automatically hate everything male that crosses my path this week, including my cat.)

I was all for taking the Taliban out, and it wasn't because of 9/11. If we had gotten off of our asses before hand, and actually acted on the moral values that we claim to uphold, there may have not been a 9/11 to speak of. We aren't concerned about human rights violations, we're just concerned with our best interests.

Same with Iraq, there HAS to be an ulterior motive, because no one else wants to go to war with them, with the exception of the US and the UK. I just can't trust Bush...I've tried to, and I feel really stupid whenever I manage to trick myself into doing it.

I don't intentionally go against everything that is upheld by he government, I just see so much that's in need of improvement that it's sickening. I can't blindly follow a guy who can't make a compelling "factual" speech without making up a few reports to back him up. I can't watch the President say something about how he needs to uphold morals...blah...blah...take out the Axis of Evil...yadda yadda, same shiat every time, but I never believe it.

But at the same time, I know that Oil isn't really our main concern, either. I've actually had to explain where we get our oil to some of the more conservative people I know. Oil is another tool...which is why the FTC isn't really doing anything about those high gas prices. It's just another way to manipulate us into supporting impending war.

I've also seen a number floating around here, supposedly depicting the amount of people who support the war. There is no way I am going to believe that 68% of the population actually supports this. Polls can be very easily skewed, and you probably want to look at the article that accompanied the poll. If the article was more pro-war than not, then the pollers could have easily picked and called more traditionally conservative areas of the country. Also, if I'm not mistaken, the political party that you've declared is also public knowledge. How hard would it be to get a voting roster and call mostly Republican, or other conservative parties?

I'm not saying that these things definately happened, but you should think before you take poll numbers as gospel truth.
 
2003-03-01 04:32:02 PM  
Dammit I just came back to try and be the voice of reason but good ol' Variable beat me to it, war talk aside, fark saddam in his dildo hole, let's get back to ways of torturing this terrorist bastard for payback, last we left off, I said ass rape, FarkinFarker said drown in piss, and various others agreed it should be pay-per-view......now proceed....

/this time I am gone
 
2003-03-01 04:32:54 PM  
[image from 64.49.221.207 too old to be available]
 
2003-03-01 04:33:30 PM  
Don't capture kill
 
2003-03-01 04:36:00 PM  
Y' know, this is the least flame-filled thread about the war that I've seen on Fark. I'm proud of you guys.

Rob
 
2003-03-01 04:37:39 PM  
Pluvius
It's been civil because some of the All Star flame throwers aren't around.
 
2003-03-01 04:37:49 PM  
I prefer this kind of mastermind
[image from terra.es too old to be available]
 
2003-03-01 04:38:33 PM  
Code_Archeologist
Great post.

Feukulor
I'm against the war because that to me is like a default setting. I don't know much about it, I don't care if it has to do with oil or not, but something I do notice is that it's about power. Pretty much anything stems from the thirst of power. Can we or can we not wage this war. What does it take? Power. If it is about the euro, why would we want to preserve the dollar? Power. Why do we want to remove Saddam and install a friendly (to us) puppet regime? Power. Why are our civil liberties being curttailed? (Bongs being confiscated, etc.) Power. The government can do this because they can. Obviously there are some checks to prevent excessive power getting out of hand, but what happens when those checks no longer retain the authority they once had? In 1984, it is revealed to the protagonist that the ultimate ends is power. Power is not only a means, it is an end unto itself.

Fight the power.
 
2003-03-01 04:38:47 PM  
Boo farkin YAH!!

This motherfarker planned an attack (among many others) that flew a plane into my building.

I've been numb since I've heard the news and don't know whether to shout out with joy or break down and cry.

Flame on about Iraq or the U.S. and joke around all you want. One of the people who had a hand in murdering my co-workers has been caught and I'm going out to have a drink in their memory.
 
2003-03-01 04:39:37 PM  
Ya Baby! Glad to Here it!
 
2003-03-01 04:40:08 PM  
Alright, I'll bite on Bashturn's falem:



The annual military budget is estimated at 396 billion dollars. Nearly six times the millitary budget of Russia. They have a permanent Army of 1.5 million men as well as a reserve of 2 million soldiers. - Because of the enormous military buildup of the previous generations. The current Army, and the military as a whole, is currently being reduced, in order to free up some of the budget. But why is it so huge? Because the interest of America is spread over a very large area (worldwide), with political influence around the world, as well as a need to protect the homeland. Many soldiers are delegated to diplomates, while others ahve to be police in very hostile countries, where the current government is on the brink of losing control.
The world's largest carceral population in the world with over 2 million men and women in jail. - And we need more jails. Seriously, this is just a stupid farking point. The more people you have in a nation, the more people you're going to have behind bars.
According to Amnesty international, they have the forth largest execution rate in the world, behind China, Iran and Saudi Arabia. In the last decade 65% of all executions of young offenders took place there. As of 2002, they are the only country in the world to execute people under the age of 18. Many among them, it has since been known, were innocent. - You say many, I say less than 30%. Over half of them were guilty. Yes, it's a shame that the innocent were killed, but you're pointing out smaller facts within an entire truth. I say everyone above the legal age of 12, where the law says that right and wrong are officially distinguishable, should get the "opportunity" to face the death penalty in such cases that warrent it.
Individuals identified as fighting adversaries have no legal recourses. They can be held in small jail cell 24 hours a day without access to a lawyer or contact with their families. Any information regarding the date of their trial (if such trial is to happen) is kept from them. - Again, only a half truth. fighting advisaries are only declared when they fire upon a military target, or perform an act of terrorism. If you're stupid enough to fight against the military, you deserve the be flogged
In 2002, they have requested to foreign governments not to ratify an agreement stipulating that they will not deliver to the international penal court any nationals accused of war crimes, genocide or crimes against humanity. - Again, another half truth. This was a political action, not a more sinister action than you make it appear to be. The agreement was not very sound. Look it up, it had problems, lot's of them.
Over the course of last year, they have substentially augmented the surveilance of its own people under pretext of preserving national security. The Government has looked for ways to established a national network consisting of informant who will report any suspicious behavior. Once more, this has been taken out of context. The government, and every law-enforcing body, does surveilance. It's NOT NEW. The government has been almost powerless when it comes to internel surveilance, relying soley on city, state and county surveilance.
Officialy, internet access is legal. The Government annouced measures in order to establish a centralised system allowing to control a large portion of the web and, quite possibly, using it as surveillance of its users. I like how you interjected your own little bit at the end, when NOTHING the government mentions has anything to do with surveilance. It's just like idiots like you to automatically assume crap like that. Plus, that bill has died out. So, this argument is an outdated point of view.
Private sector employees can be fired from their jobs for any reasons. WRONG - You've obviously never run a business. If I fire somone because I "feel like it," they will come down on me with a crapload of lawyers so fast, it would make your head spin. When you're fired, there is a reason. Those employees can be subjected to drug testing and can also be punished for their political views. - ONLY if you contract for the government. I can support Al-CaCa and still work for Microsoft, but I CANNOT support them and contract out to the government, and for good reason: I wouldn't want somone who doesn't support our government making our bombs for us. It is legal for the employer to exercise secret control of their employees by electronic means, be it video, computer and/or telephone surveillance. AND IT DAMN WELL SHOULD BE. Running a business is tough enough, but with the OVERWHELMING ammount of people who work for a company just to steal from them is absolutly staggering. You're damn right I put security cameras everywhere, except bathrooms and the break room, not only that, but all data transmitted over the network is logged. We deal directly with customer information, and there is NO WAY I want to get screwed by some punk from the ghetto who want's to steal for a living.
Police have the right to seize the personal property of any citizen as long as the police has any reasonable motive. The police can seize the residence, vehicule and life savings of a citizen. - And wrongful seizure can be upheld in court. If you seize the property of somone who is innocent, there is a good chance you can recieve monetary rewards for damages.
The right to assembly is forbiden. Wrong, wrong wrong wrong wrong. The right to assembly is a right to gather in a place of meeting that you own. I cannot start an assembly outside of City Hall with thousands of people, because it will cause serious problems. Contingency is an issue you need to deal with, that's why we have permits. A citizen who wishes to organize a public protest must request a permit. The name of that citizen can be filed in a permanent record. - Yes, you need a permit to assemble in any public place. You do not need a permit to assemble in a private place, ie: a residence. If you want to do an anti-war protest at your house, you're more than welcome to, but if you want to protest out in front of the white house, you better damn well have a permit. Not only does it place responcibility on the person(s) filing it, it also gives government officials a chance to prepare for the ensuing chaos. Streets have to be cleared, and security must be set in place. All in all, it's a good thing that some goofball can't get a bunch of psychos together and start marching up and down 5th avenue, it would be chaotic.


I appologize in advance if any of the HTML tags are broken.


Laconia Bums Inc. - Damnit, after biting into that flame, I deserve a plug! >:(

 
2003-03-01 04:41:16 PM  
Pro-war people also seem to focus more on the short-term than anti-war people. Saddam is evil, therefore he must be stopped,

interesting. I view being anti-war as very short term. I'm willing to accept losses now, to avoid larger losses in the future. Thats the basic idea behind the war i thought.

Of course people are going to be against war at the current time... its like asking who wants to pay higher taxes. Just because you dont want to, doesnt mean you dont need to.
 
2003-03-01 04:41:24 PM  
[image from almostaproverb.com too old to be available]
 
2003-03-01 04:43:05 PM  
Walt-baby : Why is it every time I see anti-USA propaganda, Bashturn is at the top of the shiate pile? Could he be the sultan of shiate?!? YES

you know what ?... If my post stand out from the others that means I must strike a nerve with you... and I'm glad.
That post was not anti-US "propaganda"... it was an anti-war statement.

A true patriot must always question his government.
 
2003-03-01 04:43:20 PM  
Getting back to this Mohammed guy, I'm glad we finally caught him. Maybe we can get some useful information by tortu--I mean, interrogating him.

I also can't wait to see what Jon Stewart has to say, assuming that there's going to be a new show on Monday.

Rob
 
2003-03-01 04:45:03 PM  
Mohammed Asshat
 
2003-03-01 04:46:41 PM  
DrToast
Who's on the All Star team?
 
2003-03-01 04:50:02 PM  
Liberal: The war is about oil and it's wrong.

Non-Liberal: Err...what about the possibility that he has all those messed-up weapons? Doesn't Iraq have a little responsibility in avoiding this war? I mean...basically we are saying that their pride is worth a war? If not, why has he been so non-cooperative? Wouldn't simply being straightforward be worth a knock to your pride?

Liberal: But it's about oil. I just know it is.

Non-Liberal: Ok, so the whole thing about the weapons of mass destruction, chemical/biological weapons has nothing to do with it, despite the support we have from other nations?

Liberal: Uh...no, because Susan Sarandon and Sean Penn said it was about oil, and I just really, really think it's about oil. I can FEEL it. Hussein has such a great record as a leader that there is NO WAY possible that he has these weapons you...you WARMONGERS are talking about. Besides, I thought I have established that it is about oil and not those weapons...don't you listen? War isn't pleasant, and anything unpleasant should be avoided at all costs.

Non-Liberal: Ok. I think I see your point. America (and other involved countries) see a threat from Iraq in the form of a combination of a crazy leader and powerful weapons. We should abandon this operation because an even greater threat looms if IRAQ is the "bigger person" and let's the inspectors do their jobs and follow every demand given them by the UN...the threat of a hit to their pride and the reminder that they are answerable to the rest of the planet. Brilliant. I now see that our silly notion of a madman with hugely powerful weapons and an axe to grind pales in significance to that great man's pride.

I'm converted. It IS about oil. See, this way, problems are solved, and all that scary stuff goes away. I now realize that World War 2 was a war of American agression just to get Germanys cool cars. And we raped Japan of all their Pokemon. It was us all along. Share my shame, America.

Hehe...silly stuff. Stupid liberals.
 
2003-03-01 04:50:30 PM  
All right! Another one bites the dust.

We're gonna keep coming as long as it takes, muthafarkas!


/angry over 9-11
 
2003-03-01 04:56:18 PM  
Walt-Baby

Torture for this asshat? I believe we should take a page from the book of Marcellus:
"What now? Well let me tell you what now. I'm gonna call a couple of pipe-hittin' n*ggers, who'll go to work on homes here with a pair of pliers and a blow torch. Hear me talkin' hillbilly boy? I ain't through with you by a damn sight. I'm gonna get medieval on your ass."
 
2003-03-01 04:56:42 PM  
Ahhh, Jon Stewart will point out how Bush has basically caught the big meanie bad guy behind 9/11, but because he kept hammering home that Osama is the huge guy wanted dead or alive, this capture will have no effect on Shrub's '04 election hopes. Too bad.

Later.

RJS
 
2003-03-01 04:57:42 PM  
According to Amnesty international, they have the forth largest execution rate in the world, behind China, Iran and Saudi Arabia. In the last decade 65% of all executions of young offenders took place there. As of 2002, they are the only country in the world to execute people under the age of 18. Many among them, it has since been known, were innocent. - You say many, I say less than 30%.

Even if it was less than 1%, it would be a good argument against the death penalty. Why kill people when you can just imprison them for life?

I say everyone above the legal age of 12, where the law says that right and wrong are officially distinguishable, should get the "opportunity" to face the death penalty in such cases that warrent it.

Only if twelve-year-olds are allowed to vote.

Individuals identified as fighting adversaries have no legal recourses. They can be held in small jail cell 24 hours a day without access to a lawyer or contact with their families. Any information regarding the date of their trial (if such trial is to happen) is kept from them. - Again, only a half truth. fighting advisaries are only declared when they fire upon a military target, or perform an act of terrorism.

The problem is that "act of terrorism" is a vague phrase. Also, fighting adversaries deserve the same rights that any other criminal gets in the US justice system.

Over the course of last year, they have substentially augmented the surveilance of its own people under pretext of preserving national security. The Government has looked for ways to established a national network consisting of informant who will report any suspicious behavior. Once more, this has been taken out of context. The government, and every law-enforcing body, does surveilance. It's NOT NEW. The government has been almost powerless when it comes to internel surveilance, relying soley on city, state and county surveilance.

Yes, the government performs surveillance. However, the Patriot Act and TADS far surpass acceptable levels of surveillance. The fact that someone is allowed to perform surveillance does not mean that he should be allowed to perform any amount of surveillance that he wishes.

Officialy, internet access is legal. The Government annouced measures in order to establish a centralised system allowing to control a large portion of the web and, quite possibly, using it as surveillance of its users. I like how you interjected your own little bit at the end, when NOTHING the government mentions has anything to do with surveilance. It's just like idiots like you to automatically assume crap like that. Plus, that bill has died out. So, this argument is an outdated point of view.

Tell that to ISONews.

Rob
 
2003-03-01 04:58:12 PM  
DocToast and Variable, I couldn't agree more. Some people are so friggin' primed for the 'war in Iraq/no war in Iraq' argument that anything that even remotely touches on terrorism or politics automatically becomes license to pull out the old cyber quills and start attempting to make converts or just revel in flaming one another. Foo. Feh. Meh. Bleh. Do these folks not give a shiat about the fact that there's a real good chance that one of the dickweeds behind 9/11 will get what he has coming?
 
2003-03-01 04:58:31 PM  
interesting. I view being anti-war as very short term. I'm willing to accept losses now, to avoid larger losses in the future.

What evidence is there that there will be larger losses in the future if we don't attack now?

Rob
 
2003-03-01 04:58:44 PM  
And yeah, the put-it-on-PPV idea is great. Credit George Carlin for the massive ripoff, fellas. But yep, tell New Yorkers the day before that this dude's getting dropped off somewhere in Manhattan and look what happens. There goes the deficit.

Later.

RJS
 
2003-03-01 04:59:37 PM  
Way back when, Doccm9 wrote:

"47% of statistics are made up on the spot."

I believe that's actually supposed to be 74%.

(taking the day off from serious comment)
 
2003-03-01 04:59:50 PM  
Pluvious --

1. Without complete Iraqi cooperation, at what point can the inspectors be sure that they've found anything? And no, they haven't been cooperating. Destroying four out of an estimated one hundred twenty banned missiles isn't a very significant start; and scientists asking to be able to record their interviews with the UN "for their own protection" isn't, either (as, clearly, such recordings would be most useful to the Iraqi security services).

2. Once the inspectors leave, if they ever do, how do you ensure that Iraq stays on its best behavior? You can't afford to "cordon" an entire country for very long. Hell, large amounts of oil are getting smuggled out of Iraq, and oil isn't a very compact item; knowledge and small amounts of uranium should be far harder to detect than large amounts of oil.

3. What message does it send to the rest of the world if the UN backs down? You think that the negative consequences of that will be merely "short term"? Or do you think that it will merely encourage despots around the world to face down the UN, knowing full well that "humanitarians" will work against those who try to stop them?


"Peace", by itself, is not a good. There are acceptable peaces and unacceptable peaces, and failure to act does not absolve one from the consequences of that inaction.
 
2003-03-01 05:01:36 PM  
Feukulor

I was joking about the torture. I don't think torture is ever an acceptable form of interrogation, even if the asshat has it coming.

Rob
 
2003-03-01 05:02:32 PM  
Nah, I haven't read anything about who actually DID the capturing. Although I had a screwed up dream last night about some crazy Marine finding Osama in a cave, calling CNN, MSNBC, etc., it being broadcast all over the world that this one wacked dude got him, and then the dude demands $100B and the Twin Towers rebuilt instead of the Spire of Doom. Wacky.

Later.

RJS
 
2003-03-01 05:03:28 PM  
Robsul82

"...and their heads could roll down a little hill & fall into one of three numbered holes. We could gamble on it!"

/Carlin
 
2003-03-01 05:04:16 PM  
Too much reading...nothing new being said...wish I was blind and this was a boobies link in brail.

Well I do.

dj
 
2003-03-01 05:04:36 PM  
It was credited to a partnership between US intel officials and the Pakistanis, I believe.
 
2003-03-01 05:05:03 PM  
"We could start crucifying these fat, white, overstuffed, overpaid upper-class bankers to stop the drug traffic. Upside down, and naked! When? Halftime at Monday Night Football!"

/Carlin

Later.

RJS
 
2003-03-01 05:06:07 PM  
Lordkat : If you want to be selective about my post more power to you... where I stated facts, you stated opinions. Therefore this could hardly qualify as a debate
 
2003-03-01 05:10:45 PM  
Ok, how's this for a reasoned opposition to the war?

U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East has always dealt with oil as a paramount political force. It would be silly not to. But the other paramount political force -- a much more destablilizing one, to boot -- is the state of Israel. The United States has huge interests in the State of Israel's military superiority and nuclear hegemony in the region. The foreign policy of the United States says that if any of the Muslim countries of the Middle East acquires nuclear weapons, and by extension any WMD's, then the stability dynamic of the region will be irreparably compromised. The United States has built its regional policies on the fact that the region is disunified, poor, and wracked by infighting.

Now, one country in the region is developing WMD's. No sane person, even the CIA, thinks they are for offensive use. Hoewever, the capabilty to strike Tel Aviv in the wake of Israeli aggression, in a MAD scenario, is an unacceptable situation for the hawks in Washington, because it would mean that Iraq, as a potential champion of real economic development in the Middle East, could now use the leverage from his independence from the American masters that the rest of the region has to build an economic coalition free of US/British hegemony.

The Middle East has the cultural possibility to become as powerful, both economically and militarily, and as developed a nation as the United States. The US should, instead of playing all sides against each other, be working toward the goal of ensuring that, when that day comes, the men in power are just and the place is governed for the common good. A war in its present form is the farthest possible option than that, and the worst possible option for preserving any semblance of peace in the nation and probably in the world.
 
2003-03-01 05:13:07 PM  
Commodore69 --

Yeah, the BBC cites the White House as calling it a "successful joint operation" between the US and Pakistani authorities. The same article indicates that "...reports say [Mohammed] may be turned over to US authorities and interrogated in an undisclosed foreign country", which, under legal doctrines espoused by the current administration, would reduce the number of rights Mohammed would be entitled to.

He's a good catch. However, he's probably not a walking "Who's Who in al-Qaeda" despite his position, assuming that they're generally intelligent enough to compartmentalize information on a need-to-know basis, so breaking out the champagne would be premature...
 
2003-03-01 05:21:15 PM  
Korovyov--I might be a bit more on board for the coming festivities in the Middle-East if our leadership were a bit more honest about our motives. Wrapping ourselves in the broad cloth of the flag, mouthing platitudes, and then citing that we "know" better than anyone else isn't the way to sway me.

It is interesting that Powell has finally admitted that we would be administrating Iraq, until they could get their own government up and running, and releasing some of their oil reserves for sale, and essential re-building contracts would be laded out as well, something that the administration has been a bit reticient commenting on.

Of course we will put one of our boys into office. The consequences of the invasion will mean a dictator will either be killed or exiled, there will be significant loss of infra-structure, and in the mean time, fat contracts will be handed out to various businesses. Looking out for American interests in this manner, it behooves the US to get our feet in the door, as opposed to a rising EU, which is perhaps the most telling reason for coming war. We are playing some serious games with peoples' lives, and essentially for the joy of handing out trinkets to GW's cronies.

I liken it to pulling a woman from a burning car, and then feeling her up after you give her CPR.

I question GW's motives in this matter. I think it's less about wanting to help the poor Iraqi people than lining other peoples' pockets.
 
2003-03-01 05:29:27 PM  
Pluvious

obviously, thats the point. I have the same amount of evidence as you have evidence to suggest the other point. We've just arrived at different opinions, and of course, as far as I'm concerned, i know im right.

:)
 
2003-03-01 05:30:36 PM  
Joxette: You're now on record as opposing a just war. Your embarrassment is sure to follow.

You just hate The President, if Clinton bombed Iraq, you'd have no problem with it. Come to think of it, he did bomb Iraq during impeachment hearings, and he didn't consult the French. What say you?

You've lost the argument and your friend Saddam will lose the war despite the moral support you are giving him.

You coddle someone who tortures children while parents watch. The French side with the murderer for money and oil, you side with him for hatred and spite.

People such as you are the reason the great Democrat party is reduced to filibustering a qualified Hispanic in order to show off the meager power they have remaining.

Too bad for you, Saddam and the French. We don't take cr*p from people like you anymore.

The adults are in charge now and you are a sicko.
 
2003-03-01 05:30:50 PM  
Korovyov

Probably true, but I'll break out a vodka cran on this nice, sunny day here in Seattle. I'd guess this guy knows quite a bit, but may be more hardcore than the common foot soldier in giving up info. He'll probably off himself (if given a chance) or go to the chair without saying much. Then again, these guys are farked up (i.e. hijackers getting ripped, going to strip clubs before certain death, falling apart at borders [Rassam], etc.) - maybe he'll say something. In any event, if nothing else comes out of it, it's good that a big fish in this organization has been captured.
 
2003-03-01 05:31:44 PM  
As of 2002, they are the only country in the world to execute people under the age of 18. Many among them, it has since been known, were innocent.

Interesting... I've not heard of a single instance of a person under 18 being executed in this country. Much less, one who was later found to have been innocent. Can someone cite an example? ...one?
 
2003-03-01 05:32:16 PM  
I haven't read this whole thread (haven't had time), so I don't know if anyone pointed this out. The sonofabiatch they caught today went to a US university.

Traitor. I hope when they finish with him, there's nothing left to bury. Damn bastard.
 
2003-03-01 05:33:08 PM  
Elevation are you, as your name suggests, smoking something? Or was that an attempt at satire?
 
2003-03-01 05:34:39 PM  
Hubiestubert --

Yes, the aftermath could be quite interesting. In particular, the Turks have made some requests that could liven up the situation rather greatly, such as their intention to send troops into parts of northern Iraq -- allegedly, to disarm the Kurds. Given that Bush is asking the currently autonomous Kurds to take up arms and assist the invasion, this calls for careful diplomacy. I don't envy Colin Powell, who might well have the roughest job of any Cabinet member except, possibly, Tom Ridge.

It might be considered premature to talk about rebuilding contract assignments, in that it's unclear as to how much damage is to be expected -- and such estimates themselves may be overly suggestive of likely targets and tactics. On the other hand, should the invasion take place (and that's something I wouldn't bet against except at very, very extreme odds), it'll be up to the press and voters to maintain pressure for opennness. I'm inclined to think that invading a country for the benefits of one's fiscal cronies would be a sufficient abuse of power to justify impeachment and war crimes trials of the President and other conspirators.
 
2003-03-01 05:35:25 PM  
Well, if all the thread-jackers don't mind me stating my $.02:

Weekend with Mossad.

(Oh . . . we were talking about an Al Qaeda guy getting captured . . . remember?)

Now, as for the TJ:
I question GW's motives in this matter. I think it's less about wanting to help the poor Iraqi people than lining other peoples' pockets.

What's to question, Hubiestubert?
When have GW's motives been about anything but lining his and his friends' pockets?
Slam dunk bet of the year: that Haliburton will end up in control of Iraq's oil.
 
fb-
2003-03-01 05:35:27 PM  
The state of America is laughable. The jingoistic, brainwashed, goose-stepping, God invoking, Bush loving, blood thristy croud of people that make up the majority of the American populace is frightening. It's sick to see the fark job that Bush did on the majority of ignorant Americans after 9/11. Some of you moral majority, back woods, jesus loving dullards are so farking scared shiatless thanks to Bush working you over and exploiting your ignorance that you'll do anything he says at this point. Especially if he mentions 'terrah' and 'evil doers.'

I'm glad I got out of that farking country when I did.. just like anybody that values life, liberty, freedom and the pursuit of happiness probably has done or is seriously considering.
 
2003-03-01 05:37:31 PM  
Dorf11: "He was caught in Pakistan, not Iraq. Huh. Go figure."

Hey nitwit, We're in Pakistan - Duh.

Oh and we'll soon be in Iraq finding more terrorists.
 
2003-03-01 05:37:50 PM  
Well, it's another sunny day in George W. Bush's Amerika. Another country says no to his war, another MASTERMIND! of the 9/11 attacks pops up as captured.

Later.

RJS
 
2003-03-01 05:38:34 PM  
Fb- : From one former American to another ... Kudos !
 
2003-03-01 05:39:58 PM  
Sorry to be out of the loop, fb, but where did you leave for again?
 
fb-
2003-03-01 05:41:10 PM  
Zagloba,

A tiny caribbean island.
 
2003-03-01 05:41:39 PM  
"I'm glad I got out of that farking country when I did"

Yup, if there's a problem the best solution is to run away-you must have moved to France.
 
2003-03-01 05:41:47 PM  
Hey!! that's no Osama bin Laden.

I demand Bush stop banging the Iraqi war drums and actually catch this guy like he said he was going to!
 
2003-03-01 05:42:27 PM  
Robsul, azctually Carlin said Upside-down crucifixtions.
 
2003-03-01 05:42:41 PM  
Aztex999 --

Israeli interests aren't necessarily American interests; for instance, the temptation to tie al-Qaeda to the Palestinian intifada might be pretty strong... If the Mossad were at all involved in interrogation, I'd definitely want US personnel to be there observing, just to make sure that any intelligence product yielded is correct and complete.
 
fb-
2003-03-01 05:44:41 PM  
Shut........UP,

Yeah.. and the better solution is living in that polluted, backwards police-state that's nothing more than a giant strip mall and trailer park, smashing my head against a wall to try to change things that are so out of whack that they can never be fixed?!? No thanks.. I'm going somewhere that I'm free to live my life, somewhere that my vote matters.
 
2003-03-01 05:47:48 PM  
Zagloba: I skydive.

No satire. I'm not backing down, nor is Bush. Tough for you and your ilk.

For those who say the war is about oil, for the French it is. For us it's about freedom. Saddam would sell us all we wanted. The French have great development contracts with Saddam. We could also but we supported sanctions for 12 years while France broke them.

9/11 changed everything. Thank God for Bush.
Go ahead and protest while Republicans save your ass.
 
2003-03-01 05:51:53 PM  
Just out of interest, what happened to kinghorse and harmonia? Haven't seen them around for a couple of weeks.
 
2003-03-01 05:51:54 PM  
Fb-

time to move to Canada then
 
2003-03-01 05:52:34 PM  
Feukulor --

Some may not want to admit that war is, almost certainly, inevitable unless Saddam and his close followers do a sharp U-turn(*). Others might not want to admit that things could go quite badly wrong in a variety of ways, or how long the American commitment to the region might have to be -- e.g. Rumsfeld trying to quash the notion that several hundred thousand troops might be needed to occupy the country.

(*) Theoretically possible, but it seems unlikely. After all, Saddam still appears to be convinced that Iraq won the first Gulf War in a battle of wills -- perhaps it is incomprehensible to him the decision to stop at restoring the Kuwaiti monarchy was not a sign of fatal weakness or war fatigue, or the end of the US's capabilities.
 
fb-
2003-03-01 05:52:34 PM  
Feukulor,

Causes? What cause is going to change America?
 
2003-03-01 05:52:57 PM  
Chonny69 "I'm against the war because that to me is like my default setting."

Perfect. And lacks the flame value of calling yourself a 'pacifist.' Which I am. Please don't kill me.
 
2003-03-01 05:54:27 PM  
Elevation:

When Iraq made it's initial weapons declarating the United States immediately seized the document and distrubuted it around to the world, minus 8000 pages naming various worldwide companies that had dealt with Iraq. Many such companies were based in the US and some, such as Kodak and Hewlett-Packard supplied parts related to the production of long range missiles and nuclear weaponry.
 
2003-03-01 05:54:31 PM  
Feukulor
I think that means none.
 
fb-
2003-03-01 05:54:45 PM  
KnightShyfte,

Canada is too cold. There are lots of fine, warmer places available.
 
2003-03-01 05:56:06 PM  
Radicals in Turkey set aside a help the US vote, and the US is getting this guy... sounds like things are a wash today. Except we'll get Turkey yet, and if we don't its not a real show stopper. And on the balance, we're going to get alot of G2 out of this clown.

I take it back - its been a good day.
 
2003-03-01 05:56:14 PM  
I've heard Fiji is good this time of year... or any time for that matter :)
 
2003-03-01 06:01:05 PM  
Ruptured--Kinghorse got booted for some unkind words, and as far as I know, Harmonia usually posts from work, and being across the ocean, long ways away, these threads are a bit late for him--somewhere around midnight or so, and I suspect that he has a life away from the phosphor screen.
 
2003-03-01 06:02:55 PM  
KnightShyfte:

If the US removed 8000 pages how did you see them? In any case our involvment was before the UN sanctions. If any US companies broke the sanctions they will be prosecuted.

The French, Germans and Russians continued to help Iraq after the UN imposed sanctions, or at least it appears that they did. Time will tell, because we are going in.

I think Saddam is blackmailing France.
 
2003-03-01 06:04:16 PM  
KnightShyfte, pretty funny. You are being silly, aren't you? ObL is irrelevant these days. Is he alive or dead? It doesn't much matter. As you know, if he's buried deep in a cave in the Afghan mountains, no one will ever find him.
 
2003-03-01 06:05:49 PM  
Elevation:

Such things have a tendency to get out. The only reason I have even heard of these pages is due to some fantastic expository journalism on a UK reporter's part...

While these US companies traded with Iraq before the sanctions, the nuclear and missile related parts sold to Iraq makes them far more guilty.
 
2003-03-01 06:06:06 PM  
Hubiestubert Thanks for that.
 
2003-03-01 06:06:48 PM  
GEAH:

OBL is NOT irrelevant and everyone will realize this when he masterminds the NEXT big terrorist attack on US soil.
 
2003-03-01 06:06:55 PM  
KnightShyfte --

The permanent members of the UN Security Council, and the inspectors themselves, all received complete versions. The permanent members are all declared, confirmed nuclear powers so the additional information wouldn't assist nuclear arms proliferation in their hands. Giving the other members a guidebook as to arms procurement and what exact materials are helpful for nuclear weapons development might, in fact, violate the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, because the latter -- if memory serves -- prohibits not only the providing of physical materials but also of know-how.
 
2003-03-01 06:09:00 PM  
KnightShyfte --

And it wasn't exactly hidden, either. I only have access to public news services and it was all over television, print and web at the time it was happening. Syria's irritation was also a matter of public record at the time.
 
2003-03-01 06:09:08 PM  
Korovyov:

Do you even realize what was in that weapons declaration? There was no instructional material on how to build nuclear weapons at all.
 
2003-03-01 06:09:34 PM  
Elevation

I think Saddam is blackmailing France.

Interesting. Why do you say that?
 
2003-03-01 06:10:36 PM  
And the non-proliferation treaty does NOT restrict know-ho. Anybody can go to their local university library and access and large volume on how to construct a nuclear device (not like I've ever done such a thing... heheh)
 
2003-03-01 06:12:29 PM  
03-01-03 05:42:41 PM Korovyov
Aztex999 --Israeli interests aren't necessarily American interests

My comment was only half-serious (Well - eight tenths). However, I believe Mossad would be much more efficient at "extracting information", up to and including bin Laden's whereabouts (or at least his whereabouts up to 10 minutes after news of Mohammed's capture) than Americans ever will be. Of course I think Americans should be present at the "interrogation." It'll never happen, though.
 
2003-03-01 06:12:36 PM  
today is one of his two birthdates...

interesting..
 
2003-03-01 06:14:23 PM  
KnightShyfte --

I've followed accounts of it. And as for know-how... knowing which suppliers would provide equipment would certainly be helpful. For instance, knowing that you need a gas centrifuge to separate your uranium hexafluoride gas into U-235-based and U-238-based isn't very helpful information if you don't know how to build or buy such a centrifuge. Likewise, some companies might be more willing than others in overlooking the military purposes of dual-use equipment.
 
2003-03-01 06:17:09 PM  
Only far enough to build an old fashioned uranium-based implosion type weapon....
 
2003-03-01 06:18:23 PM  
Keyamb

He was probably arrested for trying to get a free birthday ice cream at the T.G.I.Fridays in karachi and then they realized who he was.
 
2003-03-01 06:18:25 PM  
Synesthesia --

Bin Laden never was the mastermind; he was the financier and in essence the CEO behind Al Quaeda. This bum they arrested today was the organizer of the 9/11 attack. The guy they really need to get now is an Egyptian doctor -- fellow named al Zawahiri IIRC. Al Zawahiri is the overall brains behind the entire organization, essentially their COO.
 
2003-03-01 06:20:40 PM  
http://www.fbi.gov/mostwant/terrorists/terkmohammed.htm
 
2003-03-01 06:22:18 PM  
KnightShyfte --

Wrong. The NPT bans "assistance", not just the providing of actual materials. Go read Article II of the text.

And a library book likely isn't going to give you the exact engineering diagrams. For instance, you still need to know how much material to use, how precise your manufacturing tolerances need to be, how to make the device small enough to make it useful, et al.
 
2003-03-01 06:23:15 PM  
Korovyov--Sadly, MOST of our wars have been about cold, hard valuta in the end.

The question has always been how do you couch the economic factors to balance out the emotional and ethical questions of taking up arms against folks. What is most profitable for the nation, or the party in power at the time. Clinton's crew had little invested in taking Saadam to the mountain, so there he sat. Now, we have a "Can Do" President, with a chip on his shoulder, and a lot of backers to pay back, and the clock is starting to run out on the first term, and he's been able to serve up some tasty tax breaks, some legislation that helps large business, and has rolled back the environmental policies that were hitting some of his friends in the pocketbook.

We can say we're doing it for the poor, beleaguered Iraqi people, or to protect our intersts, or to relieve the Middle-East from the spectre of WMD, but it's all lip service to get our boys and girls into the heart of region. Nothing new here, but I'd much rather see an administration just flat out say:

"We're going to take out Saadam, put in a friendly government, and when we're done, there are going to be Micky D's from Basra to Bursa. Oil rights are being purchased as we speak by primarily American held corporations, and we will be focusing on putting the knuckle on OPEC and the EU in the next few years. The next stop is Tehran!"

At least then the average American would understand why the EU and the rest of the world gets nervous when we start tossing our weight around.
 
2003-03-01 06:24:08 PM  
Quast147: Saddam threatened in 1992 to expose the French after they sided with the US in the last war. They didn't have a lot to fear then as sanctions hadn't been imposed.

If they have continued to arm Iraq after sanctions, they have much to fear. I think the truth will come out of the French collaboration once we go in.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/002/313y​cqje.asp

Registration may be required for this link but here is the gist of it.

"The threat by the Iraqi leader, published here for the first time in English, was reported in a 1992 French book, now out of print, titled "Notre Allié Saddam" (Our Ally Saddam). Here's what Saddam said:

As for financiers, industrialists and above all those responsible for military industry, the question must be put to French politicians: Who did not benefit from these business contracts and relationships with Iraq? . . . With respect to the politicians, one need only refer back to the declarations of all the political parties of France, Right and Left. All were happy to brag about their friendship with Iraq and to refer to common interests. From Mr. Chirac [now the center-right president] to Mr. Chevenement [the socialist former defense minister] . . . politicians and economic leaders were in open competition to spend time with us and flatter us. We have now grasped the reality of the situation [of France's support for the 1991 Gulf War, a betrayal in Saddam's eyes]. If the trickery continues, we will be forced to unmask them, all of them, before the French public."
 
2003-03-01 06:25:23 PM  
They arrested Dick Cheney? Woah!
 
2003-03-01 06:28:10 PM  
Hubiestubert --

I don't think the administration would last very long if they said that.

Of course, his speech to the American Enterprise Institute wasn't exactly very diplomatic, either -- it went far beyond the "get rid of WMDs" and "Saddam is eeeeeeevil" themes by declaring an intent to transform the entire Middle East. That is, he seemed to be talking about making Iraq into a thriving democracy and letting it serve as an example for the rest of the locals to aspire to...

It would not surprise me if American ambassadors to the various kingdoms and sultanates were immediately approached for clarifications on that point, as the monarchies were probably not thrilled at the prospect.
 
2003-03-01 06:33:12 PM  
PinkNoise Might've been funny if it hadn't be said already.

Double Plus unfunny
 
2003-03-01 06:37:54 PM  
Unless my ears deceived me (rather possible, as I'm splitting attention right now; might not have been the Pres but one of his aides) NBC's news anchor just reported that when the President was asked whether or not Mohammad was a big fish, the response was "He's a whale!".

/rolls eyes
 
2003-03-01 06:38:05 PM  
Korovyov--Regrets for the length of the following post, but this found its way to my mailbox recently, and I think it is a bit pertinent to this portion of the thread as it's moving.

The following is the text of John Brady Kiesling's letter of resignation to Secretary of State Colin L. Powell. Mr. Kiesling is a career diplomat who has served in United States embassies from Tel Aviv to Casablanca to Yerevan.

"Dear Mr. Secretary:

I am writing you to submit my resignation from the Foreign Service of the United States and from my position as Political Counselor in U.S. Embassy Athens, effective March 7. I do so with a heavy heart. The baggage of my upbringing included a felt obligation to give something back to my country. Service as a U.S. diplomat was a dream job. I was paid to understand foreign languages and cultures, to seek out diplomats, politicians, scholars and journalists, and to persuade them that U.S. interests and theirs fundamentally coincided. My faith in my country and its values was the most powerful weapon in my diplomatic arsenal.

It is inevitable that during twenty years with the State Department I would become more sophisticated and cynical about the narrow and selfish bureaucratic motives that sometimes shaped our policies. Human nature is what it is, and I was rewarded and promoted for understanding human nature. But until this Administration it had been possible to believe that by upholding the policies of my president I was also upholding the interests of the American people and the world. I believe it no longer.

The policies we are now asked to advance are incompatible not only with American values but also with American interests. Our fervent pursuit of war with Iraq is driving us to squander the international legitimacy that has been America's most potent weapon of both offense and defense since the days of Woodrow Wilson. We have begun to dismantle the largest and most effective web of international relationships the world has ever known. Our current course will bring instability and danger, not security.

The sacrifice of global interests to domestic politics and to bureaucratic self-interest is nothing new, and it is certainly not a uniquely American problem. Still, we have not seen such systematic distortion of intelligence, such systematic manipulation of American opinion, since the war in Vietnam. The September 11 tragedy left us stronger than before, rallying around us a vast international coalition to cooperate for the first time in a systematic way against the threat of terrorism. But rather than take credit for those successes and build on them, this Administration has chosen to make terrorism a domestic political tool, enlisting a scattered and largely defeated Al Qaeda as its bureaucratic ally. We spread disproportionate terror and confusion in the public mind, arbitrarily linking the unrelated problems of terrorism and Iraq. The result, and perhaps the motive, is to justify a vast misallocation of shrinking public wealth to the military and to weaken the safeguards that protect American citizens from the heavy hand of government. September 11 did not do as much damage to the fabric of American society as we seem determined to so to ourselves. Is the Russia of the late Romanovs really our model, a selfish, superstitious empire thrashing toward self-destruction in the name of a doomed status quo?

We should ask ourselves why we have failed to persuade more of the world that a war with Iraq is necessary. We have over the past two years done too much to assert to our world partners that narrow and mercenary U.S. interests override the cherished values of our partners. Even where our aims were not in question, our consistency is at issue. The model of Afghanistan is little comfort to allies wondering on what basis we plan to rebuild the Middle East, and in whose image and interests. Have we indeed become blind, as Russia is blind in Chechnya, as Israel is blind in the Occupied Territories, to our own advice, that overwhelming military power is not the answer to terrorism? After the shambles of post-war Iraq joins the shambles in Grozny and Ramallah, it will be a brave foreigner who forms ranks with Micronesia to follow where we lead.

We have a coalition still, a good one. The loyalty of many of our friends is impressive, a tribute to American moral capital built up over a century. But our closest allies are persuaded less that war is justified than that it would be perilous to allow the U.S. to drift into complete solipsism. Loyalty should be reciprocal. Why does our President condone the swaggering and contemptuous approach to our friends and allies this Administration is fostering, including among its most senior officials. Has "oderint dum metuant" really become our motto?

I urge you to listen to America's friends around the world. Even here in Greece, purported hotbed of European anti-Americanism, we have more and closer friends than the American newspaper reader can possibly imagine. Even when they complain about American arrogance, Greeks know that the world is a difficult and dangerous place, and they want a strong international system, with the U.S. and EU in close partnership. When our friends are afraid of us rather than for us, it is time to worry. And now they are afraid. Who will tell them convincingly that the United States is as it was, a beacon of liberty, security, and justice for the planet?

Mr. Secretary, I have enormous respect for your character and ability. You have preserved more international credibility for us than our policy deserves, and salvaged something positive from the excesses of an ideological and self-serving Administration. But your loyalty to the President goes too far. We are straining beyond its limits an international system we built with such toil and treasure, a web of laws, treaties, organizations, and shared values that sets limits on our foes far more effectively than it ever constrained America's ability to defend its interests.

I am resigning because I have tried and failed to reconcile my conscience with my ability to represent the current U.S. Administration. I have confidence that our democratic process is ultimately self-correcting, and hope that in a small way I can contribute from outside to shaping policies that better serve the security and prosperity of the American people and the world we share."
 
2003-03-01 06:39:30 PM  
Boobies
fark
 
2003-03-01 06:41:16 PM  
Wrap his entire body in a towell and light it on fire.
 
2003-03-01 06:41:29 PM  
A catch this big could lead to bin Laden. Any takers on how soon?

USA! USA! USA!
 
2003-03-01 06:43:45 PM  
Hubiestubert:

Wow, thanks for posting that letter. It's nice to know not all of the US goverment is composed of asshats.
 
2003-03-01 06:48:02 PM  
Hubiestubert --

I'm surprised that it took him twenty years inside State to make that decision -- US foreign policy was remarkably amoral during the Cold War, with cynical alliances with anti-Communist anti-democrats pretty much all the way up to the fall of the Soviet system. "Moral capital" hasn't been the nation's strong suit at any point, really, if you take into account its failure to promote its own allegedly democratic values and eagerness to compromise.
 
2003-03-01 06:49:41 PM  
KnightShyfte--Not my style. I'm wordy enough without having to forge credentials. Check out the NY Times article that it came from though.
 
2003-03-01 06:52:43 PM  
Here's an excellent 9,000 word story about Khalid Shaikh Mohammed from December 22nd of last year. (LA Times, may require free registration, I forget) Salient quote:

Pakistani and American officials say catching Mohammed now could turn the tide in the war on terrorism. The senior Pakistani intelligence official said: "If you catch Khalid Shaikh at this point, you will break the backbone of the entire network."
 
2003-03-01 06:55:01 PM  
KnightShyfte--Oops. Read your post completely wrong. Must sleep soon. Apologies.

Korovyov--Could be a collection of reasons that led to his breaking, as well as the differences between a firey young man filled with the knowledge of his inherent goodness, and the world weariness and cynicism of age. I just thought it might add spice to the pot.
 
2003-03-01 07:03:43 PM  
Eh. At least the US intelligence establishment actually succeeded in an operation they can admit -- seems much of the press 'bout them focuses on their all too frequent screwups. It's time to me to sign off and eat.
 
2003-03-01 07:08:44 PM  
Gotta love the folks like Bashturn who post the "facts"
 
2003-03-01 07:13:04 PM  
This is yet another reason to attack Iraq!
 
2003-03-01 07:14:19 PM  
so why didn't John Brady Kiesling resign during our involvement with bosnia, kosovo, et al?

I urge you to listen to America's friends around the world.

let's take away all of our foreign aid to the rest of the world and see how fast they change their tune.

I am resigning because I have tried and failed to reconcile my conscience with my ability to represent the current U.S. Administration.

buh bye. don't let the door hit you on your ass on the way out.
 
2003-03-01 07:22:01 PM  
I can see both sides of the pro/anti war argument. Although I do strongly disagree with the way we got here.



Anyway, I decided I'd support the war if Tony Blair sent his son in the first wave. Then I'd believe him that it's a just cause and a price worth paying.

 
2003-03-01 07:33:27 PM  
here's my bit on invading and occupying a sovereign nation:
Iraq did not threaten us. Did not attack us and does not have the capability to attack us. It's neighbors don't see them as a threat.

Our reason isn't about humanitarian reasons. We still sold military materials to him after we knew he gassed the kurds. And there are stil worse regimes around the world, some of which we helped to install.

there is no link between iraq and al-queada. Al-queada called for the death of the infidel, Saddam Hussein.

Saddam's military capacity is one third of what it was in 1991. Ours is ten times what it was.

50% of the Iraqi population is under the age of 15.

Being anti-war is not being pro-saddam. To say so is a straw-man argument. I wouold love to see the people of Iraq be free, but I don't think one cruise missile every 4 minutes for 48 hours into a city the size of LA is really going to help. Using tactical nukes won't either.

The comparison betwen Saddam and Hitler is ridiculous.

I think the greatest threat to the population of the world has to be a nation that has a military budget equal to the next 27 countries combined, yet is not under attack or risk of invasion by any other nation. This same country defies the UN, international community, and public opion over all and takes a stance of preemption as a viable option. This country also has discussed using nukes in this preemptive crusade.
 
2003-03-01 07:36:37 PM  
Um....yep, there it is, I said upside down. *cough*

Later.

RJS
 
2003-03-01 07:54:37 PM  
http://www.rense.com/general34/realre.htm

this is interesting. The guardian did an article saying the same thing
 
2003-03-01 08:02:27 PM  
I post this with a prayer that if you read nothing else about the ongoing "Showdown with Saddam", you will read the attached alarming piece by William Rivers Pitt, a high school teacher in Boston.

We are at a perilous point in our nations history. Our country has been lulled into sleep by corporate dominated media and government propaganda, while our armed forces prepare to unleash what they have named "Shock and Awe" on the Iraqi population, with is simply another name for pre-emptive blitzkrieg not seen since World War II. Hundreds of thousands of innocent people will be slaughtered as a result. Do you want some real answers to the questions "Why are we going to war on Iraq?", and "Who is running the show?" Please, read this article. Because the time has arrived for all of us to stop, think, and make some very difficult decisions about who we are, what we stand for, and what is truly means to be an American and a patriot.

Keep in mind, while reading, the recent Newsweek article detailing the Bush administration's attempt to cover up key evidence that Iraq destroyed most or all weapons of mass distruction back in 1991( http://www.fair.org/press-releases/kamel.html ), and their unreasonable defiance of the UN and the majority of the world who would seek a peaceful resolution.

And you won't get the truth on cable television (in the words of Gil Scott Heron, the revolution will not be televised...). The following regards CNN's recently imposed censorship policy regarding coverage of the conflict, i.e. what you don't know won't hurt them!: http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0225-08.htm

The author of the following piece is a high school teacher. We should follow his example, as professionals and/or educated individuals, and start speaking out loudly. Silence, at this point in time, is no longer an option. Again, please read this article, and if you are not feeling outrage, please email me and tell me why, because I must be missing something. And because we must challenge each other in times such as these! Thanks everyone.
----------------------------------------------------------------------​-------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------​-------- ---------------------------------
"Blood Money" William Rivers Pitt

George W. Bush gave a speech Wednesday night before the Godfather of conservative Washington think tanks, the American
Enterprise Institute. In his speech, Bush quantified his coming war with Iraq as part of a larger struggle to bring pro-western
governments into power in the Middle East. Couched in hopeful language describing peace and freedom for all, the speech was in fact the closest articulation of the actual plan for Iraq that has yet been heard from the administration.

In a previous truthout article from February 21, the ideological connections between an extremist right-wing Washington think tank and the foreign policy aspirations of the Bush administration were detailed.

The Project for a New American Century, or PNAC, is a group founded in 1997 that has been agitating since its inception for a war with Iraq. PNAC was the driving force behind the drafting and passage of the Iraqi Liberation Act, a bill that painted a veneer of legality over the ultimate designs behind such a conflict. The names of every prominent PNAC member were on a letter delivered to President Clinton in 1998 which castigated him for not implementing the Act by driving troops into Baghdad.

PNAC has funneled millions of taxpayer dollars to a Hussein opposition group called the Iraqi National Congress, and to Iraq's
heir-apparent, Ahmed Chalabi, despite the fact that Chalabi was sentenced in absentia by a Jordanian court to 22 years in prison on 31counts of bank fraud. Chalabi and the INC have, over the years, gathered support for their cause by promising oil contracts to anyone that would help to put them in power in Iraq.

Most recently, PNAC created a new group called The Committee for the Liberation of Iraq. Staffed entirely by PNAC members, The Committee has set out to "educate" Americans via cable news connections about the need for war in Iraq. This group met recently with National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice regarding the ways and means of this education.

Who is PNAC? Its members include:

* Vice President Dick Cheney, one of the PNAC founders, who served as Secretary of Defense for Bush Sr.;

* I. Lewis Libby, Cheney's top national security assistant;

* Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, also a founding member, along with four of his chief aides including;

* Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, arguably the ideological father of the group;

* Eliot Abrams, prominent member of Bush's National Security Council, who was pardoned by Bush Sr. in the Iran/Contra scandal;

* John Bolton, who serves as Undersecretary for Arms Control and International Security in the Bush administration;

* Richard Perle, former Reagan administration official and present chairman of the powerful Defense Policy Board;

* Randy Scheunemann, President of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, who was Trent Lott's national security aide and who served as an advisor to Rumsfeld on Iraq in 2001;

* Bruce Jackson, Chairman of PNAC, a position he took after serving for years as vice president of weapons manufacturer Lockheed-Martin, and who also headed the Republican Party Platform subcommittee for National Security and Foreign Policy during the 2000 campaign. His section of the 2000 GOP Platform explicitly called for the removal of Saddam Hussein;

* William Kristol, noted conservative writer for the Weekly Standard, a magazine owned along with the Fox News Network by conservative media mogul Ruppert Murdoch.

The Project for the New American Century seeks to establish what they call 'Pax Americana' across the globe. Essentially, their goal is to transform America, the sole remaining superpower, into a planetary empire by force of arms. A report released by PNAC in September of 2000 entitled 'Rebuilding America's Defenses' codifies this plan, which requires a massive increase in defense spending and the fighting of several major theater wars in order to establish American dominance. The first has been achieved in Bush's new budget plan, which calls for the exact dollar amount to be spent on defense that was requested by PNAC in 2000. Arrangements are underway for the fighting of the wars.

The men from PNAC are in a perfect position to see their foreign policy schemes, hatched in 1997, brought into reality. They control the White House, the Pentagon and Defense Department, by way of this the armed forces and intelligence communities, and have at their feet a Republican-dominated Congress that will rubber-stamp virtually everything on their wish list.

The first step towards the establishment of this Pax Americana is, and has always been, the removal of Saddam Hussein and the
establishment of an American protectorate in Iraq. The purpose of this is threefold: 1) To acquire control of the oilheads so as to fund the entire enterprise; 2) To fire a warning shot across the bows of every leader in the Middle East; 3) To establish in Iraq a military staging area for the eventual invasion and overthrow of several Middle Eastern regimes, including some that are allies of the United States.

Another PNAC signatory, author Norman Podhoretz, quantified this aspect of the grand plan in the September 2002 issue of his
journal, 'Commentary'. In it, Podhoretz notes that the regimes, "that richly deserve to be overthrown and replaced, are not confined to the three singled-out members of the axis of evil. At a minimum, the axis should extend to Syria and Lebanon and Libya, as well as 'friends' of America like the Saudi royal family and Egypt's Hosni Mubarak, along with the Palestinian Authority, whether headed by Arafat or one of his henchmen." At bottom, for Podhoretz, this action is about "the long-overdue internal reform and modernization of Islam."

This casts Bush's speech to AEI on Wednesday in a completely different light.

Weapons of mass destruction are a smokescreen. Paeans to the idea of Iraqi liberation and democratization are cynical in their
inception. At the end of the day, this is not even about oil. The drive behind this war is ideological in nature, a crusade to 'reform' the religion of Islam as it exists in both government and society within the Middle East. Once this is accomplished, the road to empire will be open, ten lanes wide and steppin' out over the line.

At the end of the day, however, ideology is only good for bull sessions in the board room and the bar. Something has to grease the skids, to make the whole thing worthwhile to those involved, and entice those outside the loop to get into the game.

Thus, the payout.

It is well known by now that Dick Cheney, before becoming Vice President, served as chairman and chief executive of the
Dallas-based petroleum corporation Halliburton. During his tenure, according to oil industry executives and United Nations records,
Halliburton did a brisk $73 million in business with Saddam Hussein's Iraq. While working face-to-face with Hussein, Cheney and
Halliburton were also moving into position to capitalize upon Hussein's removal from power. In October of 1995, the same month
Cheney was made CEO of Halliburton, that company announced a deal that would put it first in line should war break out in Iraq. Their job: To take control of burning oil wells, put out the fires, and prepare them for service.

Another corporation that stands to do well by a war in Iraq is Brown & Root, a subsidiary of Halliburton. Ostensibly, Brown & Root is in the construction business, and thus has won a share of the $900 million government contract for the rebuilding of post-war Iraqi bridges, roads and other basic infrastructure. This is but the tip of the financial iceberg, as the oil wells will also have to be repaired after parent-company Halliburton puts out the fires.

More ominously is Brown & Root's stock in trade: the building of permanent American military bases. There are twelve permanent
U.S. bases in Kosovo today, all built and maintained by Brown & Root for a multi-billion dollar profit. If anyone should wonder why the administration has not offered an exit strategy to the Iraq war plans, the presence of Brown & Root should answer them succinctly. We do not plan on exiting. In all likelihood, Brown & Root is in Iraq to build permanent bases there, from which attacks upon other Middle Eastern nations can be staged and managed.

Again, this casts Bush's speech on Wednesday in a new light.

Being at the center of the action is nothing new for Halliburton and Brown & Root. The two companies have worked closely with
governments in Algeria, Angola, Bosnia, Burma, Croatia, Haiti, Nigeria, Rwanda, and Somalia during the worst chapters in those nation's histories. Many environmental and human rights groups claim that Cheney, Halliburton and Brown & Root were, in fact, centrally involved in these fiascos. More recently, Brown & Root was contracted by the Defense Department to build cells for detainees in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The bill for that one project came to $300 million.

Cheney became involved with PNAC officially in 1997, while still profiting from deals between Halliburton and Hussein. One year
later, Cheney and PNAC began actively and publicly agitating for war on Iraq. They have not stopped to this very day.

Another company with a vested interest in both war on Iraq and massively increased defense spending is the Carlyle Group. Carlyle, a private global investment firm with more than $12.5 billion in capital under management, was formed in 1987. Its interests are spread across 164 companies, including telecommunications firms and defense contractors. It is staffed at the highest levels by former members of the Reagan and Bush Sr. administrations. Former President George H. W. Bush is himself employed by Carlyle as a senior advisor, as is long-time Bush family advisor and former Secretary of State James Baker III.

One company acquired by Carlyle is United Defense, a weapons manufacturer based in Arlington, VA. United Defense provides the Defense Department with combat vehicle systems, fire support, combat support vehicle systems, weapons delivery systems,
amphibious assault vehicles, combat support services and naval armaments. Specifically, United Defense manufactures the Bradley Fighting Vehicle, the M113 armored personnel carrier, the M88A2 Recovery Vehicle, the Grizzly, the M9 ACE, the Composite Armored Vehicle, the M6 Linebacker, the M7 BFIST, the Armored Gun System, the M4 Command and Control Vehicle, the Battle Command Vehicle, the Paladin, the Crusader, and Electric Gun/Pulse Power weapons technology.

In other words, everything a growing Defense Department, a war in Iraq, and a burgeoning American military empire needs.

Ironically, one group that won't profit from Carlyle's involvement in American military buildup is the family of Osama bin Laden. The bin Laden family fortune was amassed by Mohammed bin Laden, father of Osama, who built a multi-billion dollar construction empire through contracts with the Saudi government. The Saudi BinLaden Group, as this company is called, was heavily invested in Carlyle for years. Specifically, they were invested in Carlyle's Partners II Fund, which includes in that portfolio United Defense and other weapons manufacturers.

This relationship was described in a September 27, 2001 article in the Wall Street Journal entitled 'Bin Laden Family Could Profit
From Jump in Defense Spending Due to Ties to US Bank.' The 'bank' in question was the Carlyle Group. A follow-up article published by the Journal on September 28 entitled ' Bin Laden Family Has Intricate Ties With Washington - Saudi Clan Has Had Access To Influential Republicans ' further describes the relationship. In October of 2001, Saudi BinLaden and Carlyle severed their relationship by mutual agreement. The timing is auspicious.

There are a number of depths to be plumbed in all of this. The Bush administration has claimed all along that this war with Iraq is
about Saddam Hussein's connections to terrorism and weapons of mass destruction, though through it all they have roundly failed to establish any basis for either accusation. On Wednesday, Bush went further to claim that the war is about liberating the Iraqi people and bringing democracy to the Middle East. This ignores cultural realities on the ground in Iraq and throughout the region that, salted with decades of deep mistrust for American motives, make such a democracy movement brought at the point of the sword utterly impossible to achieve.

This movement, cloaked in democracy, is in fact a PNAC-inspired push for an American global empire. It behooves Americans to
understand that there is a great difference between being the citizen of a constitutional democracy and being a citizen of an empire. The establishment of an empire requires some significant sacrifices.

Essential social, medical, educational and retirement services will have to be gutted so that those funds can be directed towards a necessary military buildup. Actions taken abroad to establish the preeminence of American power, most specifically in the Middle East, will bring a torrent of terrorist attacks to the home front. Such attacks will bring about the final suspension of constitutional rights and the rule of habeas corpus, as we will find ourselves under martial law. In the end, however, this may be inevitable. An empire cannot function with the slow, cumbersome machine of a constitutional democracy on its back. Empires must be ruled with speed and ruthlessness, in a manner utterly antithetical to the way in which America has been
governed for 227 years.

And yes, of course, a great many people will die.

It would be one thing if all of this was based purely on the ideology of our leaders. It is another thing altogether to consider the
incredible profit motive behind it all. The President, his father, the Vice President, a whole host of powerful government officials, along with stockholders and executives from Halliburton and Carlyle, stand to make a mint off this war. Long-time corporate sponsors from the defense, construction and petroleum industries will likewise profit enormously.

Critics of the Bush administration like to bandy about the word "fascist" when speaking of George. The image that word conjures is of Nazi stormtroopers marching in unison towards Hitler's Final Solution. This does not at all fit. It is better, in this matter, to view the Bush administration through the eyes of Benito Mussolini. Mussolini, dubbed 'the father of Fascism,' defined the word in a far more pertinent fashion. "Fascism," said Mussolini, "should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power."

Boycott the French, the Germans, and the other 114 nations who stand against this Iraq war all you wish. France and Germany do not oppose Bush because they are cowards, or because they enjoy the existence of Saddam Hussein. France and Germany stand against the Bush administration because they intend to stop this Pax Americana in its tracks if they can. They have seen militant fascism up close and personal before, and wish never to see it again.

Would that we Americans could be so wise.

-------

William Rivers Pitt is a New York Times bestselling author of two books - "War On Iraq" (with Scott Ritter) available now from Context Books, and "The Greatest Sedition is Silence," available in May 2003 from Pluto Press. He teaches high school in Boston, MA
 
2003-03-01 08:04:01 PM  
http://www.innerx.net/personal/tsmith/IraqWar.html
here's a better one
 
2003-03-01 08:04:42 PM  
D8vo:You can believe Wesley Clark if you wish but I trust George Bush.

The actions after this war will prove Clark wrong.
The whole world will be free to develop the oil of Iraq,
because we won't force them to favor the US. The proof is Kuwait. They didn't favor the US after the war.
 
2003-03-01 08:05:32 PM  
BloBBrain: Shut the Fux Up Negro.
 
2003-03-01 08:07:24 PM  
Fedor

We are at a very important point in the history of our nation. If you don't care, go find some boobies.
 
2003-03-01 08:07:30 PM  
D8vo--Thanks for the link. I'll add that to my collection.

Night folks. Bed calls. Been an interesting evening.
 
2003-03-01 08:10:56 PM  
BlobBrain--Another good one. NOW I'm going to bed...
 
2003-03-01 08:15:52 PM  
Just remember to hook the red jumper cable up to his left nut and the black jumper cable to the right.
 
2003-03-01 08:17:15 PM  
Did not attack us and does not have the capability to attack us. It's neighbors don't see them as a threat.

Let me give you a hypothetical situation, which, though I hope it never happens, is very possible.

Saddam: Hey, Qaeda Al-Jihad, I've got some chemical weapons and some mustard gas...
OBL: Well, give them to me...I'll give you money to fight off the Great Satan
Saddam: Well, I suppose...

(two weeks later)

News reporter: We're very sad to report right now that 5 canisters of mustard gas were released in Times Square. Casualties are in the thousands, and steadily climbing. We aren't sure who's to blame yet...
 
2003-03-01 08:18:28 PM  
You unimaginative bastards.

Fire up old sparky. Hell.

How about 50 pounds of pork scrapple, a two inch food press and a jar of vaseline...?

Don't be constrained by tradition ;-)
 
2003-03-01 08:23:11 PM  
BlobBrain - That article contains the most logical arguments supporting the idea that war is about oil. I never believed that this war was about oil for a minute, but now that article is starting to make me think.

Damn you if you're wrong though.
 
2003-03-01 08:23:44 PM  
blobbrain, excellent article. thank you. where did you get it?
 
2003-03-01 08:25:06 PM  
BlobBrain: You're such a BlobBrain.

You championed this statement:

"France and Germany stand against the Bush administration because they intend to stop this Pax Americana in its tracks if they can. They have seen militant fascism up close and personal before, and wish never to see it again."
-----
Facism is evil and should be feared. Democracy is not evil and is welcomed. Free people will decide the course of world events.

To compare Facism to a world where individuals can vote and decide for themselves is itself evil.

Seriously, how can you be so deluded to think this is bad?

Are you a Communist or a Dictator? Democracy should be spread around the world by the only nation which can do it.

If that is Pax Americana, then too bad for you.
 
2003-03-01 08:27:52 PM  
SquirrelWithLargeNuts... you gotta be right... Invading Iraq is asure fire way to prevent anymore terrorists attack...

/as sarcastic as I have ever been


Fedor : You are class-A moron... Go back to your trailer
 
2003-03-01 08:28:47 PM  
03-01-03 08:17:15 PM SquirrelWithLargeNuts
Did not attack us and does not have the capability to attack us. It's neighbors don't see them as a threat.

Let me give you a hypothetical situation, which, though I hope it never happens, is very possible.


so under that logic i suppose if saddam is removed from power al-queada won't be able to get chem weapons? Saddam, if he does have any, would probably be harder to get them to al-queada than others. And don't you think an attack on the Middle East would encourage terrorists and possible create more?
 
2003-03-01 08:32:00 PM  
03-01-03 08:04:42 PM Elevation
D8vo:You can believe Wesley Clark if you wish but I trust George Bush.

'nuff said
 
2003-03-01 08:35:32 PM  
D8vo: Amen
 
2003-03-01 08:35:54 PM  
03-01-03 08:25:06 PM Elevation
BlobBrain: You're such a BlobBrain.

You championed this statement:

"France and Germany stand against the Bush administration because they intend to stop this Pax Americana in its tracks if they can. They have seen militant fascism up close and personal before, and wish never to see it again."
-----
Facism is evil and should be feared. Democracy is not evil and is welcomed. Free people will decide the course of world events.

To compare Facism to a world where individuals can vote and decide for themselves is itself evil.


did you read the article?
do you seriously think that we are the only nation capable of spreading democarcy and ythat is our intention?

chew on this...

Definition of fascism:
A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of the state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism. Did you catch that? merging of the state and business leadership.

Bush and Cheney are both former CEO's of oil companies.
Condi Rice sat on the board of Chevron and has a tanker named after her
Bush appointments?
Nominated David Lauriski - ex-mining company executive - to post of Assistant Secretary of Labor for Mine Safety and Health.
Appointed recycling foe Lynn Scarlett as Undersecretary of the Interior.
Nominated Linda Fisher - an executive with Monsanto - for the number-two job at the Environmental Protection Agency.
Nominated J. Steven Giles - an oil and coal lobbyist - for Deputy Secretary of the Interior.

So we have the corporation/government connection. Let's reflect on a quote from Mussolini.
"Fascism would better be called corporatism as it is the merging of corporations and government."

Wake up people. We are indeed the employed being governed by the employers.

But surely this alone doesn't make the freedom loving USA a fascist dictatorship. I mean, Fascist dictatorships don't just pop up over night. And we still have the right to dissent, don't we?

First we should look at the definition of a "terrorist" under the Patriot Act. The Patriot Act. A document sped through legislation in the wake of 9-11 that was voted on and approved before the legislators even had an opportunity to read it. IT WAS NOT MADE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW. Let's look at the definition of a "terrorist":
"One who appears to be intended to intimidate or coerce the government or government policy by any illegal means."
"appears to be intended to"? Read:"looks like they might kinda maybe".
So here's an example of a terrorist. Anyone who demonstrates or protests without a permit. That would fit the definition of "appearing to be intended to coerce government policy through illegal means". Organizing or participating in a non-state sanctioned demonstration now makes you a terrorist. And thanks to the Patriot Act and Der Fatherland Security bill for the first time in the history of the United states, any citizen arrested for such a crime as participating in a non-state sanctioned demonstration could be subject to secret arrest, secret detention, and secret trial without representation. Not only that but also at risk of having the house broken into in secret, property confiscated, all without your knowledge or even a receipt for your property.
This is how I define fascism.
But surely if one million of us marched on the capitol and laid our bodies down on Pennsylvania Avenue until the Act was repealed, they wouldn't be able to jail us all and the will of the people would be served, right? Wrong. The Fatherland Security Bill mandates that FEMA have working plans for camps to temporarily house up to 1 million people for a period of up to two years by January of this year. And they met that deadline.
This is how I define fascism.
Furthermore, any one of the agencies encompassed in the new Department of Fatherland security are not protected by the whistle-blower Act. The whistle blower act, the act that protects those who witness abuses of power and report it to the authorities or the media in their workplace from repercussions. Thus if you see any abuse of power and attempt to report it, you can be fired on the spot, no 30 warning, and replaced with someone else who is willing to tow the fundamentalist fascist line. This is how I define fascism.

If you don't believe any part of this do a google search. It's all there plain to see. But you won't hear about it in our corporate owned media. They have that too.
 
2003-03-01 08:37:40 PM  
"...organizer of the terror mission that sent hijacked passenger jets crashing into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and a Pennsylvania field, killing more than 3,000 people."

that poor field =(
 
2003-03-01 08:37:48 PM  
Elevation: Talk about missing the point completely... Need I remind you that Adolf Hitler was democraticly elected in 1933...
it was facism, even worst, it was democratic facism. Does it ring a bell ?
 
2003-03-01 08:42:54 PM  
Elevation - democracy's great and all, but what happens when an ignorant nation votes in an equally ignorant leader and in their collective ignorance inflict harm on themselves or the world.

i'm talking about nazi-germany of course. no yankee bashing from this canuck. =)


...yet
 
2003-03-01 08:44:53 PM  
Elevation
"Facism is evil and should be feared. Democracy is not evil and is welcomed. Free people will decide the course of world events."

Actually, Democracy was not evil and was welcomed.
Our agendas have changed.
 
2003-03-01 08:48:35 PM  
b>03-01-03 08:05:32 PM FedorBloBBrain: Shut the Fux Up Negro.

Wow, Fedor. If you're not simply just baiting for a flamewar you are one ignorant damn SOB that only deserves to be referred to as what you have tried to use as a slur against another. You must be a "Negro!"

/anyone who's immediately offended needs to take a look a Fedor's dumbass Weeners
 
2003-03-01 08:50:09 PM  
How come I can't get the bacon I cook at home to be crispyand chewy like they do at the Cornerstone restaurant? It's either raw and rubbery or as brittle as glass. Hmpf.

What's this thread about, again?
 
2003-03-01 08:55:13 PM  
Elevation

Go back and read the article again. Give up and find some boobies, or realize WE ARE ON THE SAME FREAKING SIDE and Bush and his cronies are on the other.

Thanks for playing!
 
2003-03-01 08:56:24 PM  
Lessee if a little html correction and additional vowel and consonant will get the original intent visible:


03-01-03 08:05:32 PM FedorBloBBrain: Shut the Fux Up Negro.

Wow, Fedor. If you're not simply just baiting for a flamewar you are one ignorant damn SOB that only deserves to be referred to as what you have tried to use as a slur against another. You must be a "Negro!"

/anyone who's immediately offended needs to take a look a Fedor's dumbass poost firsst
 
2003-03-01 08:57:27 PM  
D8vo: Trust Bush and stop your paranoid delusions. The laws enacted to defend America don't portend Fascism.

You act as if business leaders should never enter Government. I'd rather have someone who has run a business, lead our Government than someone who never created a bit of wealth or held a productive job in his lifetime.

Sorry but I think my men, Bush and Ashcroft are doing a great job. Your concerns are so trivial compared to the great dangers facing the world. I'm glad my guys are in power and not yours. Soon the world will be glad when Iran, Iraq, North Korea, and the new Palestine state are all free Democracies. These are worthy achievable goals. Go protest somewhere. Let the adults solve the world's problems.
 
2003-03-01 08:57:46 PM  
*gives GrumpyRabbit a hug*

Did you work at the WTC or are you at the Pentagon? I say put this asshat in a room with you and friends, relatives, and co-workers of those murdered and let you guys have at it.
 
2003-03-01 09:08:05 PM  
By the way the UK Observer was caught faking a letter from the US NSA. Who would have thought they would do such a thing. Thank you Drudge.
 
2003-03-01 09:10:57 PM  
03-01-03 08:57:27 PM Elevation
Trust Bush and stop your paranoid delusions. The laws enacted to defend America don't portend Fascism.
you realize that after the burning of the reichstag by "terrorists" Hitler used the destruction of this national symbol as a rally to get the people to back him in his effort to root out the enemy within their own borders. The people were convinced to give up these freedoms and liberties in the name of rooting out these evil doers. Sound familiar?
 
2003-03-01 09:14:15 PM  
Hey Fb-, don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out. :)

she who had Canadian ancestors
 
2003-03-01 09:14:54 PM  
You act as if business leaders should never enter Government. I'd rather have someone who has run a business, lead our Government than someone who never created a bit of wealth or held a productive job in his lifetime.

no sir, you are incorrect. PLacing industry executives in positions to police the very industries that they control is a conflict of interest to the detriment of the workers. go back. read it again and look who was appointed to what.
 
2003-03-01 09:15:50 PM  
If you compare trusting people who wanted to kill jews with those who want to kill terrorists, then no it doesn't sound familiar.