SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (806)12/7/2004 11:08:48 AM
From: cirrus  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 224779
 
Terrorist attacks have increased in Iraq because Jan 30 is approaching swiftly.

We were told a few months ago that terrorist attacks had increased because the handover of power to Iraqis was near.

The attacks continued unabated afterwards, with the new reason being the elections.

We were told the battle for Falluja was intended to clean out the terror hideouts and secure Iraq for the elections. That hasn't happened, judging by the increased number of attacks.

After the elections, we will be told to expect increased terror attacks prior to installation of an elected government.

After the installation of an elected government, we will be told to expect an escalation of attacks as the insurgents try to destabilize the new government.

It may well be that the intense efforts by American troops may yet somehow break the back of the insurgency. That is my hope, of course, but the numbers suggest that there is a long way to go before that happens, if ever.

That merely encourages them to hold on until those Americans whose hobby it is to constantly criticize Pres Bush's policies, grow ever louder.

That's the last line of defense fir a failed policy - say critics of the president encourage the enemy.



To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (806)12/7/2004 11:47:12 AM
From: cirrus  Respond to of 224779
 
WASHINGTON, Dec. 6 - A classified cable sent by the Central Intelligence Agency's station chief in Baghdad has warned that the situation in Iraq is deteriorating and may not rebound any time soon, according to government officials.

The cable, sent late last month as the officer ended a yearlong tour, presented a bleak assessment on matters of politics, economics and security, the officials said. They said its basic conclusions had been echoed in briefings presented by a senior C.I.A. official who recently visited Iraq.

The officials described the two assessments as having been "mixed," saying that they did describe Iraq as having made important progress, particularly in terms of its political process, and credited Iraqis with being resilient.

But over all, the officials described the station chief's cable in particular as an unvarnished assessment of the difficulties ahead in Iraq. They said it warned that the security situation was likely to get worse, including more violence and sectarian clashes, unless there were marked improvements soon on the part of the Iraqi government, in terms of its ability to assert authority and to build the economy.

Together, the appraisals, which follow several other such warnings from officials in Washington and in the field, were much more pessimistic than the public picture being offered by the Bush administration before the elections scheduled for Iraq next month, the officials said. The cable was sent to C.I.A. headquarters after American forces completed what military commanders have described as a significant victory, with the retaking of Falluja, a principal base of the Iraqi insurgency, in mid-November.

The American ambassador to Iraq, John D. Negroponte, was said by the officials to have filed a written dissent, objecting to one finding as too harsh, on the ground that the United States had made more progress than was described in combating the Iraqi insurgency. But the top American military commander in Iraq, Gen. George W. Casey Jr., also reviewed the cable and initially offered no objections, the officials said. One official said, however, that General Casey may have voiced objections in recent days.

The station chief's cable has been widely disseminated outside the C.I.A., and was initially described by a government official who read the document and who praised it as unusually candid. Other government officials who have read or been briefed on the document later described its contents. The officials refused to be identified by name or affiliation because of the delicacy of the issue. The station chief cannot be publicly identified because he continues to work undercover.

Asked about the cable, a White House spokesman, Sean McCormack, said he could not discuss intelligence matters. A C.I.A. spokesman would say only that he could not comment on any classified document.

It was not clear how the White House was responding to the station chief's cable. In recent months, some Republicans, including Senator John McCain of Arizona, have accused the agency of seeking to undermine President Bush by disclosing intelligence reports whose conclusions contradict the administration or its policies. But senior intelligence officials including John E. McLaughlin, the departing deputy director of central intelligence, have disputed those assertions. One government official said the new assessments might suggest that Porter J. Goss, the new director of central intelligence, was willing to listen to views different from those publicly expressed by the administration.

A separate, more formal, National Intelligence Estimate prepared in July and sent to the White House in August by American intelligence agencies also presented a dark forecast for Iraq's future through the end of 2005. Among three possible developments described in that document, the best case was tenuous stability and the worst case included a chain of events leading to civil war.

After news reports disclosed the existence of the National Intelligence Estimate, which also remains classified, President Bush initially dismissed the conclusions as nothing more than a guess. Since then, however, violence in Iraq has increased, including the recent formation of a Shiite militia intended to carry out attacks on Sunni militants.

The end-of-tour cable from the station chief, spelling out an assessment of the situation on the ground, is a less-formal product than a National Intelligence Estimate. But it was drafted by an officer who is highly regarded within the C.I.A. and who, as station chief in Baghdad, has been the top American intelligence official in Iraq since December 2003. The station chief overseas an intelligence operation that includes about 300 people, making Baghdad the largest C.I.A. station since Saigon during the Vietnam War era.

nytimes.com



To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (806)12/7/2004 5:25:27 PM
From: Gersh Avery  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 224779
 
Hi Ann

Started a new thread

Subject 55370



To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (806)12/7/2004 6:19:03 PM
From: lorne  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 224779
 
Dutch lawmaker lives in fear for his life
By Gareth Harding
insightmag.com

THE HAGUE, Netherlands, Dec. 1 (UPI) -- Geert Wilders is a marked man. Ever since the slaying of Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh on Nov. 2, the controversial anti-Islam politician has been living in fear for his life. He has had 20 to 30 death threats -- including one offering 72 virgins in paradise to any Muslim who beheads him -- and after the brutal murder of Van Gogh, Dutch police are taking no chances. Wilders is driven to a different safe house every night in an armored car, is permanently protected by a posse of bodyguards and only sees his wife two or three times a week. "Politically it's quite an interesting time, but personally it's terrible," he tells United Press International in a rare interview in the Dutch House of Representatives in The Hague. "Every morning I wake up, wonder where I am and what's going to happen to me. It's like the worst B-movie ever."

Wilders, a 41-year-old former speechwriter with a boyish face and a shock of peroxide-bleached hair, says he is afraid for himself and his family, but refuses to be intimidated by the mountain of death threats. "I will never make any restraints on my freedom of speech. On the contrary, I will be even stronger and tougher saying the things I have to say because if we choose to moderate our voice or stop talking about these subjects, the people who use violence, bullets and knives to get their way will win." When it comes to Islam and how to deal with the Netherlands' one million Muslims - more than 5 percent of the population -- Wilders certainly pulls no punches. "I have a big problem with Islam but not with Muslims," says the populist politician, who has worked and traveled widely in the Middle East. "I believe that democracy and Islam are totally incompatible and will always be incompatible. There is not one country in the Middle East which is a democracy or is governed by the rule of law." Like Pim Fortuyn, the openly gay former columnist who rocked Holland's cozy political establishment with his anti-immigration rhetoric before he was gunned down in May 2002, Wilders believes Islam is a "backward religion" that has not gone through the same reformation as Christianity or Judaism and makes no separation between divine and earthly powers. "The political culture of Islam is retarded, and we should keep it as far away from us as possible. It is not our culture and religion, so it should not become dominant in the Netherlands or Europe."

With studies predicting that if present trends continue Muslims will become the majority in the Netherlands' four largest cities by 2020, Wilders says the only way to prevent the native Dutch from becoming a minority in their own land is to halt all immigration from non-Western countries for five years. "The day there are more Muslims than Christians in the Netherlands, I will leave this country whether I am a parliamentarian or not," he said. "I wouldn't feel it was my country any more."

Wilders says he has no problem with the majority of Muslims who are "moderate and have nothing to do with terrorism." But he believes the Dutch government should follow the example of Britain, France and Germany and be "as tough as possible with the growing minority of radical Muslims," which he estimates makes up 10 percent of the Muslim population. Describing radical Islam as "fascistic" for preaching that "all non-believers have to be eliminated," the outspoken politician says: "I am sure we will lose our country -- if we have not lost it already -- if we don't show who's in charge in the Netherlands, what are the boundaries of our law and what happens when people step over the mark."

Since Fortuyn's murder, the center-right government of Premier Jan-Peter Balkenende has clamped down on illegal immigrants and bogus asylum seekers and made Dutch citizenship more difficult and expensive to obtain. But Wilders says authorities have been too soft on radical Muslims for too long.

"We were tolerant to the intolerants and we only got intolerance back. Weakness is bad because it doesn't protect Dutch families, because it doesn't protect our norms and values, our society and our constitution and because it doesn't help the majority of moderate Muslims in the Netherlands. The Islamo-fascists who want to kill the rule of law do not deserve to benefit from the rule of law."

Wilders' solution is to strip hate-preaching imams of their nationality, close the "20 or so" mosques that promote the jihad and arrest the 150 most dangerous extremists tracked by Dutch security services -- even if they have not committed a crime yet.

Critics accuse the right-wing populist of inciting racism, trampling on human rights and encouraging a "clash of civilizations" in the Netherlands, but Wilders' hard-line message is increasingly popular with disillusioned voters. In September, the former Liberal legislator set up his own political party, and polls suggest it could become the country's second biggest force in parliament if it maintains its current support.

Wilders' political future looks bright, but the death threats hanging over him cast a long and dark shadow over both the once-famously-tolerant Netherlands and its most provocative lawmaker. "I am happy I can do my work in parliament, but once I leave this building I cannot go home, I cannot see my family as much as I want, I cannot visit friends or appear in public. My life has been turned upside down."



To: Ann Corrigan who wrote (806)12/8/2004 8:24:32 AM
From: Richnorth  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 224779
 
According to you in a post to me a while back, you insisted that only a handful of bad hats/bad apples among the US forces were responsible for gross and disgraceful acts perpetrated in Iraqis. I have learnt that, on the contrary, US forces are routinely taught to regard ALL Iraqis as potential enemies and that US forces often killed Iraqis, even unarmed women and children, indiscriminately.

To be sure, the following article will make many an American proud.......................... NOT??????

Read on:-


U.S. army killed unarmed Iraqis in defiance of law, war-dodger hearing told
--------------------------------------------------------------
By COLIN PERKEL

Jeremy Hinzman speaks in this recent file photo. (CP Archive/Darryl James)

TORONTO (CP) - A former United States marine told a refugee hearing for an American war dodger Tuesday that trigger-happy U.S. soldiers in Iraq routinely killed unarmed woman and children, and murdered other Iraqis in violation of international law.

In chilling testimony intended to bolster the asylum claim of compatriot Jeremy Hinzman, former staff sergeant Jimmy Massey recounted how nervous soldiers trained to believe that all Iraqis were potential terrorists often opened fire indiscriminately.

"I was never clear on who the enemy was," Massey, 33, told the hearing.

"If you have no enemy or you do not know who the enemy is, what are you doing there?"

On several occasions, his soldiers pumped hundreds of bullets into cars that failed to stop at U.S. military checkpoints, killing all occupants - who were later found to be unarmed, Massey said.

On another occasion, marines reacted to a stray bullet by killing a small group of unarmed protesters and bystanders, said Massey, who said he suffers from nightmares and post-traumatic stress disorder.

"I was deeply concerned about the civilian casualties," he said.

"What they were doing was committing murder."

Massey's statements echoed earlier testimony from Hinzman, who says he fled the U.S. military because he believed the invasion of Iraq was illegal, and any violent acts he committed there would be unconscionable.

"This was a criminal war," Hinzman said.

"Any act of violence in an unjustified conflict is an atrocity."

Hinzman, 26, deserted his regiment in January just days before being deployed to Iraq, and fears he will be unfairly court-martialled if returned to the United States.

Hinzman told the Immigration and Refugee Board hearing that the U.S. military regarded all Arabs in the Middle East - Iraqis in particular - as potential terrorists to be eliminated.

"We were referring to these people as savages," Hinzman testified.

"It fosters an attitude of hatred that gets your blood boiling."

While a federal government lawyer said U.S. deserters often get about a year in jail, Hinzman countered he would be treated more harshly because of his views on the Iraq war.

"Serving even one day in prison for refusing to comply with an illegal order is too long," Hinzman said.

"I would be prosecuted for acting upon a political belief ... for refusing to do something that was wrong."

A Washington Post reporter covering the hearings said Americans are extremely sensitive to Hinzman's request for asylum because of parallels to the Vietnam War.

"There's a great deal of worry that Iraq is beginning to look a little like Vietnam," said Doug Struck.

"Americans are very worried when their servicemen start saying, 'No, we're not going to go.' It sends alarms off."

Hinzman, whose only prior knowledge of Canada came from CBC radio broadcasts, admitted it is seemingly "preposterous" for an American to seek asylum in Canada.

He said he chose to go public with his claim to head off any possibility of being quietly sent home.

"I felt that (Canadian) authorities could say, 'You are an American. What the hell are you doing? Go back.'"

Hinzman's lawyer, Jeffry House, said Canada has allowed deserters from other countries to stay and compared Hinzman's situation to that of the former Soviet Union.

"People used to be prosecuted for their political opinions and activities," House said in an interview.

"That was persecution. It is fundamentally wrong."

Hinzman enlisted voluntarily for four years in November 2000. He was a crack infantryman with the 82nd Airborne Division based in Fort Bragg, N.C., until he deserted after his application as a conscientious objector failed.

Brian Goodman, who is chairing the three-day hearing that ends Wednesday, indicated he will likely decide Hinzman's claim early in the new year.