BMEWS
 
Sarah Palin is the only woman who can make Tony Romo WIN a playoff.

calendar   Monday - June 23, 2008

History will say that we underestimated George W Bush

I haven’t a clue if that’s correct and won’t be around to find out. But this fellow believes it to be so.
He’s a noted historian and writer, so maybe he has something valid here.  I hope so.  Some do argue with him however, as you may note from the comments that follow his remarks in the link below.

By Andrew Roberts
Last Updated: 11:01pm BST 21/06/2008

Read comments: link below

As he leaves the White House at the end of his second term, the President has a poll rating of only 23 per cent, and is widely disliked and even despised. His foreign policy has been judged a failure, especially in view of the long, painful, costly war that he declared, which is still not over.

History may place President Bush in a far better
light than he currently enjoys


He doesn’t get on with his own party’s presidential candidate, who is clearly distancing himself, and had lost many of his closest friends and staff to scandals and forced resignations. The New Republic, a hugely influential political magazine, writes that his historical reputation will be as bad as that of President Harding, the disastrous president of the Great Depression.

I am writing, of course, about Harry S Truman, generally regarded today as one of the greatest of all the 43 presidents, and the man who set the United States on the course that ended decades later in the defeat of Communism.

If the West wins the modern counterpart of that struggle, the War Against Terror, historians will look back in amazement at the present unpopularity of George W Bush, and marvel at it quite as much as we now marvel at the 67 per cent disapproval rates for Truman throughout 1952.

Presidents are seldom remembered for more than one or two things; the rest slip away into a haze of historical amnesia. With Kennedy it was the Bay of Pigs and his own assassination, with Johnson the Great Society and Vietnam, with Nixon it was opening up China and the Watergate scandal, and so on.

advertisementGeorge W Bush will be remembered for his responses to 9/11 in Afghanistan and Iraq, but since neither of those conflicts has yet ended in victory or defeat, it is far too early categorically to assume - as left-wingers, anti-war campaigners and almost all media commentators already do - that his historical reputation will be permanently down in the doldrums next to poor old Warren Harding’s.

I suspect that historians of the future will instead see Bush’s decision to insist upon a “surge” of reinforcements being sent into Iraq, combined with a complete change of anti-insurgency tactics as configured by General Petraeus, as the moment when the conflict was turned around there, in the West’s favour.

No one - least of all Bush himself - denies that mistakes were made in the early days after the (unexpectedly early) fall of Baghdad, and historians will quite rightly examine them. But once the decades have put the stirring events of those years into their proper historical context, four great facts will emerge that will place Bush in a far better light than he currently enjoys.

The overthrow and execution of a foul tyrant, Saddam Hussein; the liberation of the Afghan people from the Taliban; the smashing of the terrorist networks of al-Qa’eda in that country and elsewhere and, finally, the protection of the American people from any further atrocities on US soil since 9/11, is a legacy of which to be proud.

While of course every individual death is a tragedy to the bereaved families, these great achievements have been won at a cost in human life a fraction the size of any past world-historical struggle of this magnitude.

The number of American troops killed and wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan is equivalent to the losses they endured - for a nation only a little over half the size in the mid-Forties - capturing a single island from the Japanese in the Pacific War.

British losses of 103 killed over seven years in Afghanistan bears comparison to a quiet weekend on the Western Front in the Great War, or the numbers the Army loses in traffic accidents in peacetime. History can lend a wider overall perspective to what are nonetheless, of course, immeasurably sad events.

History will also shine an unforgiving light on those ludicrous conspiracy theories that claim that the Iraq War was fought for any other reason than to implement the 14 UN resolutions that Saddam that had been flouting for 13 years.

The CIA and MI6 believed, like almost every other intelligence agency in the world, that Saddam had WMD, and the “Harmony” documents seized and translated since the fall of his regime make it abundantly clear that he was also supporting almost every anti-Western terrorist organisation imaginable.

Historians will appreciate how any War Against Terror that allowed Saddam to remain in place would have been an absurd travesty.

When the rise of al-Qa’eda is considered by historians like Philip Bobbitt and William Shawcross, it will be President Clinton’s repeated refusal to act effectively in the 1990s, rather than President Bush’s tough response after 9/11, that will be held up as culpable.


Judging by the rise in the value of the Iraqi dinar, the huge drop in the number of Iraqi deaths in the insurgency, the number of provinces now cleansed of al-Qa’eda, and the level of arms confiscations by the Iraqi Army in Sadr City, the new American “clear and hold” tactics have succeeded far better than the cynics ever thought possible even 12 months ago.

Give Iraq five, ten or twenty years, and Bush’s decision to undertake the surge - courageously taken in the face of all bien pensant and “expert” opinion on both sides of the Atlantic - will rank alongside some of Harry Truman’s great decisions of 1945-53.

If that happens, the time will come when George W Bush will be able to say what Lord Salisbury called the four cruellest yet sweetest words in the English language: “I told you so.”

http://tinyurl.com/3rjps6


avatar

Posted by Drew458   United Kingdom  on 06/23/2008 at 08:24 AM   
Filed Under: • HistoryUKWar On Terror •  
Comments (2) Trackbacks(1)  Permalink •  

calendar   Thursday - June 12, 2008

The shifting battle against the Taliban

Busier then a duck in a flood and under the weather with spring sniffles but ....this is (I believe) a darn interesting piece and so just had to blog it.

Afghanistan Analysis: The shifting battle against the Taliban
By Tom Coghlan in Camp Bastion, Helmand Province
Last Updated: 1:21PM BST 12/06/2008

Britain’s counter-insurgency campaign against the Taliban is shifting from one phase into another.

The war of pitched battles is all but over. The Taliban’s leadership structures have been ravaged by covert British special forces raids; their ability to coordinate operations largely curtailed.

The insurgents have been pushed out of the fixed positions that they were able to hold in Garmser in the south of the province and Musa Qala in the north.

They take a bloody nose wherever they choose to stand and fight. They know they cannot win outright.

So instead the Taliban appear to have accepted that they must play the long game. The political will of governments in the face of public opposition to costly, distant wars is the Achilles Heel of Western democracies.

The technological know how of Taliban roadside bombs is improving and their numbers are up 34 per cent on last year, possibly thanks to help from Iran’s government.

And steady attrition through roadside bombs and suicide bombs are the means that Taliban fighters will use to try to ensure that a steady flow of Nato body bags ultimately undermines the political will of Western countries to ‘stay the course’.

The Taliban have been suppressed but they cannot be defeated entirely while they continue to operate out of safe havens in Pakistan; not unless the Afghan people decisively reject them and force them out. And not until there are viable Afghan government structures and security forces that the populous are prepared to put their faith in.

As British commanders are fond of saying, “the population is the prize.”

There is little love for the Taliban amongst the majority of Helmandis. But equally there is little love for foreign troops on the part of a people that distrusts outsiders of any hue. And there is the complicating problem of the region’s vast narcotics economy.

Britain is theoretically in charge of destroying this even as its troops on the ground are charged with making the people like and trust them.

Building a viable government, infrastructure and security forces is, then, the task that lies ahead of the British government and its army and the wider international community.

Western governments are gathering in Paris for a major conference that will address the huge hurdles to the creation of these structures. It will also see the Afghan government requesting a further $51billion in aid.

The challenge is far greater than the military work that has already been accomplished by British soldiers on the ground. It is the work of a decade, perhaps two; particularly given the poverty of Afghanistan (compared to Iraq) in educated human resources and economic potential, as well as the staggering corruption problems its narco economy helps to drive.

Nonetheless, if the first step is creating credible security forces, the Afghan army shows promise. In Kabul a huge US funded training programme is churning out trained soldiers at a rate of one battalion, 700-800 men, every week. The army is expected to reach around 70,000 men by the end of this year.

On the frontline in Helmand those soldiers, mentored by British and American soldiers, are being equipped not just with boots and helmets, but also with new flak jackets, M-16 rifles, helicopters, trucks and Humvee armoured cars.

Of course this could turn out to be another Western trained army with ‘all the gear, but no idea’.

Shiny new battalions of South Vietnamese soldiers rolled out of US army training programmes with state of the art equipment in the early 1970s to crumble ignominiously in battle.

But the signs so far are that the Afghan National Army has the will to fight, and increasingly the skills. Three weeks ago Afghan National Army soldiers mentored by the Royal Irish Regiment conducted their own sweep operation through the dangerous ‘Green Zone’ south of the town of Sangin, establishing a new base in previously Taliban dominated territory and then beating back several Taliban attacks.

British officers and NCOs may have fretted over their failure to converse food, their refusal to carry adequate water and ammunition, and their unwillingness to train when back at base. But when the bullets flew the ANA fought back.

From two battalions of Afghan troops in the province in 2006 there are now seven. And while British forces are rarely much more than tolerated, the Afghan National Army appears to command a degree of respect and even affection.

These are early days and it is a process that will take a great deal of time.

The irony is that perhaps the biggest single threat to the British mission in Afghanistan, is not the Taliban, the drug smugglers, corrupt Afghan politicians or the malign influence of other regional powers, but simply the will of the public in Western countries to keep supporting a distant war that has now killed 100 British soldiers and is likely to kill a great many more.

http://tinyurl.com/48pmdc


avatar

Posted by Drew458   United Kingdom  on 06/12/2008 at 10:50 AM   
Filed Under: • TerroristsUKWar On Terror •  
Comments (0) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

calendar   Monday - June 09, 2008

100 British dead in Afghanistan: A moment for sombre reflection

Because I think it’s important enough.  The numbers may be small by comparison, but the consequences and the angst of the families are the same as ours.
And maybe more so because so many really don’t understand why they are there. 

By Con Coughlin
Last Updated: 1:27AM BST 09/06/2008

The confirmation that the British death toll in Afghanistan has officially reached the 100 mark should be a moment for sombre reflection on a mission that has far exceeded expectations in terms of the demands it has made on our Armed Forces.

image

It is just two years since the government first committed British troops to southern Afghanistan as part of Nato’s mission to assist the Afghan government with the reconstruction of the country after thirty years of almost incessant civil war.

At the time Downing Street’s spin-doctors went into over-drive in their attempts to persuade a sceptical British public that, if all went according to plan, not a shot would be fired in anger as the mission was all about reconstruction and the eradication of the country’s poppy crop – which accounts for 90 per cent of the heroin sold on Britain’s streets – rather than joining battle with the Taliban.

Thankfully senior British officers on the ground such as Brigadier Ed Butler, who commanded 3 Para battlegroup during Britain’s initial deployment in the summer of 2006, realised that nothing would be achieved in the country’s lawless and inhospitable Helmand province unless British forces physically evicted the Taliban from the towns and villages it had been allowed to re-occupy in the south of the country.

Brig Butler, 48, whose untimely resignation from the British Army was announced at the weekend, went on to cause the government further embarrassment by unhelpfully pointing out that the invasion of Iraq had prevented British forces from securing Afghanistan much sooner because vital resources were diverted to overthrowing Saddam Hussein’s regime before the Taliban had been properly dealt with.

Consequently, far from failing to fire a shot in anger, for the past two years British front line troops have been involved in the fiercest combat operations experienced since the Falklands war, and suffered significant casualties in the process.

While British forces have succeeded in destroying the Taliban’s fighting capability, they have also paid a heavy price in terms of dead and injured.

The lengthening death toll will no doubt lead to calls for Britain to end its contribution to a war many argue can never be won. But to do so would not only have catastrophic consequences for Afghanistan, it would seriously compromise our national security.

The reason our troops are fighting in Afghanistan is to prevent Islamic extremists rebuilding the terrorist infrastructure that enabled them to carry out the September 11 terror attacks against the United States.

Many of the subsequent terror plots against the West – including attacks against Britain, such as the London bombings of July 2005 – originated from the lawless tribal areas on the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

This is no time for the government to lose heart. Instead it must ensure that it provides our dedicated and courageous service men and women with the support and equipment they need to ensure the sacrifices of the past two years are not in vain.

http://tinyurl.com/46jy6w


avatar

Posted by Drew458   United Kingdom  on 06/09/2008 at 03:10 PM   
Filed Under: • MilitaryUKWar On Terror •  
Comments (2) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

calendar   Sunday - June 08, 2008

Vikings 15, Towely-Ban 0

Just checking the latest scores from Afghanistan ...




Rats. It turns out this video is quite a few months old already. Still, it’s nice to see something from one of our allies over there. I betcha the MSM could run videos like this just about every day if they wanted to. After all, Afghanistan isn’t the “unilateral” BushCo ware that Iraq is, right?


Ok, this one is a bit more recent. Nice soundtrack. Good pics of the Danes in and around Helmund, doing their part. And paying the prices, sadly.


image



via Malkin via Gates of Vienna.


avatar

Posted by Drew458   United States  on 06/08/2008 at 04:50 PM   
Filed Under: • War On TerrorWar-Stories •  
Comments (0) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

calendar   Saturday - June 07, 2008

A Little Support for Bush

Again, sort of via Power Line, this article by the blog’s author in today’s NY Post:



Bush vs Terror Attacks: A WIN

It’s an article of faith on the left that the Bush administration has done nothing that has enhanced our security - rather, its alleged blunders have only contributed to the number of jihadists who want to attack us.

Empirically, however, something clearly has made us safer since 2001. Successful attacks on the United States and its interests overseas have not increased, as had been widely predicted, but instead dwindled to virtually nothing.

A steady stream of terrorist attacks on America and US interests abroad were launched from the 1980s forward. A partial history:

1988: Marine Lt.-Col. William Higgins, chief of the UN Truce Force in Lebanon, murdered by Hezbollah. Pan Am flight 103 blown up, killing 270, including a number of US military personnel.

1991: American University in Beirut bombed.

1993: Pakistani terrorist kills two agents and wounds three outside CIA headquarters. World Trade Center bombed, killing six and injuring more than 1,000.

1995: Operation Bojinka, al Qaeda’s plan to blow up 12 airliners over the Pacific, discovered. Five Americans killed in attack on US Army office in Saudi Arabia.

1996: Truck bomb at Khobar Towers kills 19 American servicemen and injures 240.

1997: Terrorists murder four American oil-company employees in Pakistan.

and the list, a LONG list, goes on and on ...  but Post-9/11, things have somehow changed

2003: Suicide bombings in Saudi Arabia kill 36 Americans.

2004: No successful attacks by terrorist groups inside the United States or against American interests abroad.

2005, 2006, 2007: No successful terror attacks inside the US or against US interests abroad.

2008: So far, no successful attacks inside the US or against US interests abroad.

(The above list omits a few “lone wolves” like the DC snipers - because the issue here is organized terrorism.)

He then lists quite a few reasons why. That Article of Faith on the left is more like an Article of Bullshit. What else is new?


avatar

Posted by Drew458   United States  on 06/07/2008 at 09:38 AM   
Filed Under: • No Shit, SherlockWar On Terror •  
Comments (0) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

calendar   Monday - June 02, 2008

Women plead with al-Qa’eda to join jihad.  Heck of a sight on a Monday morning but ….

This is what our world is filled with these days.

Last Updated: 8:14PM BST 01/06/2008
Women are challenging al-Qa’eda’s refusal to include – or acknowledge – females in its ranks as an “equal rights” debate rages in the Muslim terrorist organisation.

Muslim extremist women are challenging al-Qaida’s refusal to include – or acknowledge – females in its ranks as an “equal rights” debate shakes the terrorist organisation.

In response to a female questioner, al-Qa’eda second in command Ayman Al-Zawahri said in April that a woman’s role limited to caring for the homes and children of al-Qa’eda fighters.

His remarks have since prompted an outcry from fundamentalist women, who are fighting or pleading for the right to be terrorists.

One woman, who dubbed herself a “companion of weapons”, wrote a 2,000-word essay of protest at the organisation’s position.

“How many times have I wished I were a man ... When Sheikh Ayman al-Zawahri said there are no women in al-Qa’eda, he saddened and hurt me,” she wrote. “I felt that my heart was about to explode in my chest...I am powerless.”

Such postings have appeared anonymously on discussion forums of websites that host videos from al-Qa’eda leader Osama bin Laden.

Many appear to represent computer-literate women arguing for rights within a feudal version of Islam, said the SITE group, which monitors the forums.

And despite the pronouncements, several women have been used as suicide bombers in Iraq. Hamas, meanwhile, is open about using women fighters. At least 11 Palestinian women have launched suicide attacks in recent years.

“A lot of the girls I speak to ... want to carry weapons. They live with this great frustration and oppression,” said Huda Naim, a prominent women’s leader, Hamas member and Palestinian MP in Gaza.

“We don’t have a special militant wing for women ... but that doesn’t mean that we strip women of the right to go to jihad.”

Zawahiri said a Muslim woman should “be ready for any service the mujahideen need from her,” but advised against travelling to a war front like Afghanistan without a male guardian.

His first wife and at least two of their six children were killed in a US airstrike in the southern Afghan city of Kandahar in 2001. He later accused the US of intentionally targeting women and children in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“I say to you ... [I have] tasted the bitterness of American brutality: my favourite wife’s chest was crushed by a concrete ceiling,” he wrote in a 2005 letter.

http://tinyurl.com/6emddw


avatar

Posted by Drew458   United Kingdom  on 06/02/2008 at 01:39 AM   
Filed Under: • RoPMATerroristsWar On Terror •  
Comments (0) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

calendar   Saturday - May 31, 2008

Be Afraid. Be Very Afraid

And be angry too. This woman, Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House, is 2nd in line to succeed to the Presidency if some catastrophe should befall Bush and Cheney.

The woman is stark raving mad AND a drooling moron AT THE SAME TIME. I didn’t think that was possible. The only amazing thing is that she didn’t choose Memorial Day to give this talk. I guess she was confused about the holiday, just like Obama.

Go over to Ace and read it. Pull up the podcast and jump to the 62 minute mark. And prepare to heave.

More can be read here.

Of course, Nancy isn’t actually totally wrong. She’s just a total douchebag who is only 95% wrong. But her remarks show that we are in an active state of war with Iran. Active. State of War. So whatcha gonna do Booosh? Whatcha gonna do?*







* I’d suggest nuking San Francisco as a start. Hey, it couldn’t hurt. Just make sure the Navy is out of town first.


avatar

Posted by Drew458   United States  on 05/31/2008 at 09:22 PM   
Filed Under: • MilitaryWar On Terror •  
Comments (3) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

calendar   Wednesday - May 07, 2008

Have Islamists infiltrated the Defense Department?

This was forwarded to me by a friend who recently finished a couple of years in Iraq. My friend is in Army Intelligence and is obviously on some intelligence-related Yahoo groups. He’s currently stationed in Germany.

At his request, I’ve deleted all identifiers from this post.

All I can say is that with this kind of idiocy at the Pentagon, including having an Islamic extremist on the staff of the Deputy Defense Secretary, we are doomed to lose the war.

See More Below The Fold

avatar

Posted by Christopher   United States  on 05/07/2008 at 08:02 PM   
Filed Under: • TerroristsWar On Terror •  
Comments (1) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

calendar   Friday - May 02, 2008

Baghdad fighting focuses on Sadr City Wall

Leaving aside the Pink Floyd references that jump to mind, there has been a very intense level of fighting going on in Baghdad over the past few weeks. Coalition forces are trying to build a wall around one of the worst areas of the Sadr City slum zone, to control egress. Our troops are building a wall while under nearly continuous assault. The wall is supposed to isolate the area and keep insurgents (sorry, they’re called “criminals” now) from being able to range the Green Zone with mortar fire. This is what you get from fighting a “gentle war”. Maybe a wall, or that way, isn’t the best course of action right now?

The large majority of the direct attacks by the Mahdi Army against US and Iraqi forces in Sadr City are occurring on Qods Street, where a barrier is being erected to separate the Iraqi Army and US controlled sections in the south from the northern portion of the district, the US military told The Long War Journal. The Mahdi Army is attempting to stop the building of the barrier.
image...The Mahdi Army is desperately trying to stop the barrier from being built, and is focusing its attacks on US engineers and patrols as they work to complete it. The Mahdi Army has launched complex attacks and ambushes using small-arms, machine guns, rocket-propelled grenades, and roadside bombs.

“[The barrier is] a magnet,” said Lieutenant Colonel Steven Stover, the chief Public Affairs Officer for Multinational Division Baghdad in response to email questions on the recent fighting in Sadr City. “In that area, for the past three days we’ve seen some pretty heavy, prolonged engagements.
...
“As the engineers were emplacing the barriers an M1A1 Abrams fired a main gun round at militants across the street,” Stover said. “We fired 5 Hellfire missiles and dropped two JDAMs from fixed wing aircraft. It got a bit hot today, but our Soldiers continued emplacing the barriers.”

Please go read the rest over at Bill Roggio’s Long War Journal. For a nearly constant stream of press releases about things going on in Iraq, visit Operation Iraqi Freedom, the website of MNF Iraq.


avatar

Posted by Drew458   United States  on 05/02/2008 at 11:21 AM   
Filed Under: • IraqWar On Terror •  
Comments (1) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

calendar   Wednesday - April 16, 2008

An Impressive Lecture

Rancino sent me the link ... this is something else again. Wow.

If you’ve got half an hour, go visit Austin Bay and watch an impressive lecture on the whole Iraq situation. He does a review from the beginning, up to today’s situation, with the goal of looking ahead to what a rapid withdrawl of US troops would mean. (Which is what Obama and Clinton are calling for). I don’t know if this is what the old Austin Bay Blog has become, as I haven’t read that site in several years. (no, it isn’t.  That blog still exists and is doing fine.) This is something new, called The Arena.

What you do is log on as Guest using the link, then click the Editor’s Choice ... and you get this, only full size:


image




It’s a pop-up window with a 22 minute video lecture in one corner, with a coordinated slide show in the other. And a whole bunch of links to background info. And you can take part in a survey and even provide some feedback.

It is a superb lecture that explores 7 scenarios of what could happen. Just as impressive is the delivery vehicle itself. I don’t know if he ginned this up himself or not, but the concept is perfect. This is how the news ought to be delivered. Add a download link for the slideshow as notes, and this is how college classes ought to be given.

You can also access a short piece on Korea.

I’d call this a double winner. Great lecture, great use of technology. Totall worth a bookmark if he churn one of these out every couple of weeks.

Thanks again Rancino!


avatar

Posted by Drew458   United States  on 04/16/2008 at 02:53 PM   
Filed Under: • EducationWar On Terror •  
Comments (2) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

calendar   Thursday - April 10, 2008

afghanistan progress causes MSM to go into “TET offensive” mode

Afghanistan: better than the MSM tells you

I don’t know why I’m posting this. Any regular BMEWS reader knows the media are a bunch of lying leftist sacks of shit. The “news” is their agenda, not the truth. Via Malkin, here’s a link to an excellent post by Ray Robinson over at The Two Malcontents that examines the latest NATO reports and spells out the real truth:

the revelations in the report shred the media template to the point of making it incontestable that the American public is the victim of journalistic malpractice concerning Afghanistan.

Ray cuts through the media spin, replacing “feelings” with facts, and goes on to list 12 crucial facts that the media somehow just isn’t telling you.

Here’s the link. Go read the whole thing. It will only take you a minute. It’s a good reminder that the media is still in full spin mode, even though coverage of Iraq and Afghanistan has decreased significantly in the past months. Because we’re winning.

Kinda makes me want to smack a reporter or three. I think they’re all secretly hippies anyway.

smallish updatey comment: wow, The Two Malcontents is a great blog! I’m blogrolling them. 


avatar

Posted by Drew458   United States  on 04/10/2008 at 06:24 PM   
Filed Under: • Media-BiasWar On Terror •  
Comments (6) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

calendar   Wednesday - April 09, 2008

Deportation ruling blow to terror strategy

Deportation ruling blow to terror strategy

By Andrew Porter, Political Editor
Last Updated: 6:59pm BST 09/04/2008

Plans to deport terror suspects have been dealt a devastating blow after judges ruled that it was wrong to return suspects even if a memorandum of understanding existed between Britain and another country.
Uncertain World:
The Home Office was forced to abandon plans to deport 12 other suspects being held in Britain as a result.

Abu Qatada will not be deported
It came as in a separate ruling, Abu Qatada, the firebrand preacher once described as “Osama bin Laden’s right-hand man in Europe”, won his fight against deportation from Britain that could lead to him being released from prison.

Qatada has been convicted in his absence in Jordan of involvement with terror attacks in 1998, and of plotting to plant bombs at the Millennium.

The radical cleric once called on British Muslims to martyr themselves, and tapes of his sermons were found in a flat in Germany used by some of the September 11 hijackers.

Previously, the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (Siac) dismissed Qatada’s appeal against deportation to Jordan on the grounds that his human rights would not be breached because Amman had signed an MOU.

Both Gordon Brown and Tony Blair had promised that the new “memoranda of understanding” (MOUs) with other nations would ensure that they could be deported even if those countries sometimes carry out torture. The Government would have assurances that the men returned home would not be tortured.

advertisementLord Justice Buxton, giving the ruling of the panel of judges, concluded that because of the issue of evidence obtained by torture in Jordan, Siac had misdirected itself in law and its decision could not stand.

Tony McNulty, the Home Office minister, said: “I am pleased that the courts dismissed all but one of Abu Qatada’s reasons for appeal.

“We are seeking to overturn that point, and I believe that we will be able to secure his deportation to Jordan and we will push for it as soon as possible.

“In the meantime, he remains behind bars.”

In a separate case, two Libyans known only as AS and DD won their appeals against deportation. The decision led the Home Office to drop the deportation case against them and 10 other Libyans suspected of terrorism.

It is believed that AS and DD, who were previously on bail from SIAC, have now been handed control orders. Other steps - including further control orders - have been imposed on the other 10 Libyans, it is understood.

The development is highly damaging to the Government’s policy of seeking agreements with foreign countries to deport terror suspects. The so-called MOUs are designed to give reassurance that countries with poor human rights records will not torture or ill-treat anyone returned to their soil.

The ruling in the case of AS and DD leaves the MOU with Libya - signed in October 2005 - effectively in tatters.

Shadow Home Secretary, David Davis, said: “This deals a major blow to the Government’s assurances that Memorandums of Understanding are the answer in seeking to deport terror suspects. The Government should focus on prevention and prosecution rather than just trying to deport these individuals once they are here.

“They should answer our calls to establish a dedicated UK border police to secure our borders and prevent foreign terror suspects from entering the country in the first place.

“They should also allow the use of phone tap evidence in terror trials and make good on their promise to allow terrorism suspects to be interviewed after charge so that we can secure more prosecutions.”

A Home Office spokesman said: “We have already taken steps to protect the public.”

image

http://tinyurl.com/6d3ahf


avatar

Posted by Drew458   United Kingdom  on 04/09/2008 at 06:14 PM   
Filed Under: • CrimeRoPMATerroristsWar On Terror •  
Comments (2) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

calendar   Tuesday - April 01, 2008

George Bush murdered on Hamas puppet show

Just the thing to put the little tykes to bed with. 
This isn’t simply a few sickos. It’s a cuture. It’s ingrained. It’s in their genes and if it wasn’t Bush and America that was the enemy, if Israel never existed,
these sub-humans still would.  And I fear the West is doomed because it refuses to act in it’s own interests.  Nukes are the answer and be certain folks, once those walking apes, those grizzly bearded, lice infested maggots get em, they won’t hesitate for one single second.  It’s in the genes. And has been for a thousand years.

By Matthew Moore
Last Updated: 1:37pm BST 01/04/2008

A children’s puppet show in which a Palestinian boy stabs George W Bush to death has been broadcast on a Hamas-owned television station in the Gaza Strip.

In full: Transcript of the puppet show (translated by Memritv)
The boy declares “I place my trust in Allah. I need to kill you”, before stabbing the US president in the chest, in the programme on the al-Aqsa station.

Watch: George W Bush murdered on Hamas puppet show
The clip, which was broadcast on Sunday, will increase concerns that the isolated Hamas regime is using modern propaganda techniques to encourage children to launch terrorist attacks.

The puppet show - an amateurish production filmed in front of a beige cloth - shows the Palestinian boy entering the White House to confront Mr Bush over the deaths of his father and mother during recent wars in Iraq and the Lebanon.

“You and the criminal Zionists also killed my younger and older brothers in the Gaza holocaust. I’m an orphan, you criminal!” he says.

“I have come to take revenge with this sword – revenge for my mother and my sisters,” he continues.

“You took everything from me, Bush! I must take revenge on you, with this sword of Islam, the Prophet’s Al-Battar sword.”

The quaking Bush puppet - which bears little physical resemblance to the US president - begs for his life to be spared, offering the boy “food and toys” for all his friends at the White House if he is allowed to live.

But the Palestinian child informs him that the White House has already been taken over by Muslims and has been turned into a “great mosque” which Mr Bush is too “impure” to inhabit.

“I will kill you just like Mu’az killed Abu Lahab. I will kill you, Bush, because that is your fate,” the child exclaims, before stabbing the puppet repeatedly.

The clip - translated by The Middle East Media Research Institute (Memri), an independent monitoring organisation - ends with the boy’s words: “Ahhh, I killed him”.

Last year al-Aqsa prompted a similar controversy by broadcasting a show featuring a Mickey Mouse-like character who urges Palestinian children to support armed resistance.

The Israeli foreign ministry denounced the programme and issued a lengthy statement accusing the programme-makers of using seeking to “indoctrinate Palestinian children to violence, hatred and murder”.

The issue of what children are exposed to in Israel and the occupied territories is highly sensitive. History books in Israeli schools contain maps that do not mark the so-called “Green Line” surrounding Gaza and the West Bank and which, critics say, suggest Israeli children are being taught that the occupied territories are Israeli.
http://tinyurl.com/yoef72


avatar

Posted by Drew458   United Kingdom  on 04/01/2008 at 04:50 PM   
Filed Under: • RoPMATerroristsWar On Terror •  
Comments (1) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

calendar   Friday - March 21, 2008

El Al: better to argue over money than provide safety

Airline finally gets around to starting to install missile defenses, years after threat becomes apparent

Defense officials say Israel will begin outfitting some of its passenger aircraft with missile defense systems within weeks.

The plans have been in the works since 2002, when an Arkia passenger jet was targeted after takeoff by militants firing missiles in Mombasa, Kenya. The missiles missed, but the attack spurred Israel to consider equipping passenger aircraft with defense systems similar to those already used by the air force.

The officials say the system fires flares that disrupt an incoming missile’s heat-seeking mechanism.  It will be installed first on airplanes flying to destinations considered dangerous, especially in Africa and parts of Asia.

The officials say the plans were held up until this month by arguments between government ministries over who would foot the bill.

But now that hezbollah is making threats of revenge everywhere, the Israeli government has agreed to cover most of the cost. I wonder how many more years El Al would have kept the argument going if the gov hadn’t given in? Until one of their planes was shot down? Two? Twelve?

Ok, this isn’t a knock against El Al specifically, but come on already. Flare and chaff launchers have been around forever. These are off the shelf parts, and self-contained units. The cost out to be minimal and the retrofit should be quite simple. Yet it took 5 years to debate who was going to pay for it? Puh-leez. I’m simply amazed that El Al didn’t install these things ages ago. Hell, I’m surprised their airliners don’t have radar jamming electronics and a few air-to-air missiles secretly mounted.

And these guys are probably leading the pack. Does any other airline have any kind of active defenses installed? Not that I know of. But in a more perfect world, I wouldn’t want to know about it. Put the things in, and keep your damn mouth shut. Crazy people have been hijacking, bombing, and shooting down airliners for more than 30 years now. Wise up.

Cruise ships have started getting hassled by pirates lately. I see no reason why they aren’t armed a little bit too. Once upon a time, back in the old days, all merchant vessels were armed. Out there on the high seas you were truly Over The Line, and you were responsible for your own safety. Frankly I’d rather travel in a ship or plane that was set up for self defense, and I’d be willing to pay a little more for that too. But remember what happened post-9/11 when US airline pilots wanted to be armed? Screaming monkeys flinging poo everywhere. Not much happened, though I’ve heard the flight attendants got some judo training. I hope they got tasers and stun guns too, but I doubt it.


avatar

Posted by Drew458   United States  on 03/21/2008 at 01:48 PM   
Filed Under: • War On Terror •  
Comments (1) Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  
Page 26 of 26 pages « First  <  24 25 26

Five Most Recent Trackbacks:

The Brownshirts: Partie Deux; These aare the Muscle We've Been Waiting For
(2 total trackbacks)
Tracked at 香港特首曾荫权和部分高管分别用步行或搭乘公共交通工具的方式上班
西安电加热油温机 香港盛吹“环保风” 专家指市民已从被动变主动 中新网9月29日 淮安导热油电加热炉 电 据香港中通社报道,9月29日晚由香港某环保团体举行的“无冷气夜”,吸引了5万名市民及超过60间企业承诺参加。这是香港最近环保活动不断升温过程中的大型活动之一。 进入九月,香港各界环保活动渐入高潮,层出不穷。特首高官与各界市民齐齐参与,是其中一个最大特色。…
On: 03/21/18 12:12

meaningless marching orders for a thousand travellers ... strife ahead ..
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Casual Blog
[...] RTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPL [...]
On: 07/17/17 04:28

a small explanation
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at yerba mate gourd
Find here top quality how to prepare yerba mate without a gourd that's available in addition at the best price. Get it now!
On: 07/09/17 03:07

The Real Stuff
(2 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Candy Blog
[...] LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE J [...]
On: 06/11/17 06:40

when rape isn't rape but only sexual assault
(1 total trackbacks)
Tracked at Trouser Blog
[...] took another century of Inquisition and repression to completely eradicate the [...]
On: 06/06/17 11:37



DISCLAIMER
Allanspacer

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:
  1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
  2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
  3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
  4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere
It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.


Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner



GNU Terry Pratchett


Oh, and here's some kind of visitor flag counter thingy. Hey, all the cool blogs have one, so I should too. The Visitors Online thingy up at the top doesn't count anything, but it looks neat. It had better, since I paid actual money for it.
free counters