But first, what do y’all think of the new banner? It’s just a little geek tribute to the opening of Star Wars RotS. Don’t worry, the targeted T-72 will return shortly.
Author: Gunner
-
Al-Zarqawi Tape Defends Deaths
Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, terrorist leader and sub-human extraordinaire, is trying to convince followers of Islam that, hey, it’s cool with their god if he kills innocents among them.
An Internet audiotape posted Wednesday, purportedly by al-Qaida-in-Iraq leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, justifies the deaths of fellow Muslims in attacks against U.S. troops and their Iraqi allies by saying that jihad – or holy war – dwarfs all other concerns.
“God ordered us to attack the infidels by all means … even if armed infidels and unintended victims – women and children – are killed together,” the speaker said. “The priority is for jihad so anything that slows down jihad should be overcome.”
Realize that bombers in marketplaces are not targeting infidels — they are specifically aiming at the murder of innocent Muslims.
The defense of the deadly attacks could be aimed at bolstering the ranks of the insurgency with Sunni Arabs who may have initially shied away over concerns about innocent civilians being killed. The speaker claimed that top religious scholars have repeatedly sanctioned suicide bombings.
The tape was the first said to be from the Jordanian-born militant since a new, Shiite-dominated government was put in place in early May. In the past weeks, al-Qaida in Iraq and other militant groups have stepped up their campaign of car bombings, suicide attacks, shootings and kidnappings [apparently ordered by Zarqawi].
[…]
At the Pentagon, Gen. Richard Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said al-Zarqawi’s justifications for killing fellow Muslims showed he “has absolutely no moral foundation. It’s an outrage.”
“What he says is it’s OK for Muslims to kill Muslims, and not just any Muslims but innocents, men, women and children,” Myers told a news conference. “And that’s what he’s been doing. If you look at the statistics over the last couple of weeks, a lot of Iraqi men, women and children have died because this violent extremist is trying to convince others to do it.”
In the tape, the speaker denounced Shiites, accusing Shiite militias operated by parties that are now part of the government of assassinating Sunni Muslim figures, kidnapping Sunni women and seizing mosques since the U.S.-led invasion two years ago.
“These hateful brigades … deported Sunni families from the south, killed hundreds of the Sunnis, took over the mosques, and turned them to bastions of apostasy,” he said.
Shiites are “collaborating with the worshippers of the cross,” who invaded Iraq, corrupted the country and violated holy sites, the speaker said. “This is all taking place under of a state of apostasy among the rulers of this nation.”
[…]
“He said he’s trying to provoke a civil war. He’s trying to keep freedom from happening in the Middle East,” Myers told reporters.
Of course the terrorists are hoping to incite a civil war, as I’ve stated many times. The movement of these radical Islamist bastards is one that feeds on suffering, both as a weapon and as a recruiting tool. A successful democracy in Iraq would be a virus that would suck the life out of the likes of Zarqawi.
Chad has more over at In the Bullpen.
-
Iraq and Iran Pledge an Era of Cooperation
Warning: take this with a freakin’ major grain of salt.
Iraq and Iran pledged Tuesday to turn the page on nearly a quarter-century of war and bitter rivalry during a visit here by Iran’s foreign minister, who expressed support for Iraq’s new Shiite-led government.
“I have no doubt this visit will open up significant new horizons for cooperation between the two countries,” the Iraqi foreign minister, Hoshyar Zebari, told a joint news conference after talks with his Iranian counterpart, Kamal Kharazi.
“Post-Saddam Iraq is a new Iraq, at peace with its neighbors, far removed from its bellicose predecessor,” Zebari said.
Iraq may be at peace with its neighbors, but its neighbors, most notably Iran and Syria, are certainly not at peace with Iraq.
He also said Iran had pledged to cooperate on security and not provide any support to the insurgency.
Kharazi said: “We will not allow terrorists to use our lands to access Iraq. We will watch our borders and will arrest infiltrators, because securing Iraq is securing the Islamic Republic.”
I don’t believe Kharazi’s first sentence but do believe the second. It all depends on what one thinks Iran means by “securing” Iraq.
Iraq, struggling to contain insurgent attacks that have killed more than 400 people since a new government was unveiled three weeks ago, has accused neighboring countries of not doing enough to secure their borders.
Kharazi, the highest-ranking Iranian official to visit Iraq since the fall of Saddam Hussein two years ago, assured his counterpart that Iran would not interfere in its neighbor’s affairs.
“Iraqis are in charge of their own affairs,” he said. “Any interference would be an insult to the Iraqi people.”
“It is in Iran’s interest to support by all possible means the Iraqi government,” he added. “It is not in the interest of any of Iraq’s neighbors to see the current situation continue because it would have negative consequences on the entire region.”
Again, I don’t believe the first sentence of the last paragraph but have no problem accepting the truth in the Iranian’s following sentence, if one defines “current situation” as a growing, popular democracy. That is certainly something that would have negative consequences for the current radical rulers of Iran.
Baghdad and Tehran re-established diplomatic ties in September, although many issues, including a peace treaty, remain unresolved following the devastating 1980-1988 war that left about one million dead.
Relations between Iran, with a Shiite majority, and the interim Iraq government set up by the United States in June 2004 were awkward.
But the formation this month of a Shiite-dominated government has helped ease relations. Many of the new Iraqi ministers spent years in exile in Iran, an archfoe of Washington, and Zebari made a point of repeatedly speaking in Farsi during the news conference.
The need to counter-balance Iranian influence is a key part in why the inclusion of the Sunnis into the new government is needed. That is meant to buy short-term viability while working towards long-term stability.
Kharazi’s visit comes against a backdrop of increasing tension between majority Shiites and previously dominant Sunni Arabs in Iraq, where a recent series of tit-for-tat killings have raised the specter of a sectarian war.
Iran would love an Iraqi civil war, as the Shiites would crush the minority Sunnis and Iran-friendly radical clerics would potentially grow in popularity and influence. Syria would settle for a civil war, if only to prevent a free and economically successful Arab democracy as a neighbor.
-
Security Council Expansion Proposed
The nations of Brazil, Germany, India and Japan have unveiled their proposal for a large expansion of the United Nations Security Council, including more than doubling the number of permanent members.
Japan, Brazil, Germany and India – known as the Group of Four nations – who are seeking permanent seats on the U.N. Security Council, presented a draft resolution Monday calling for the council’s expansion.
The draft, unveiled at a meeting of representatives from about 70 countries, calls for the creation of an additional six permanent and four nonpermanent seats.
The draft also states the new permanent members should be elected at the U.N. General Assembly, which should then adopt a revised U.N. Charter bearing the names of the newly elected members no later than two weeks after the vote.
The four countries aim to have the resolution adopted by the end of June in the General Assembly and new permanent members to be elected in mid-July.
Two-thirds of the 191 U.N. member countries – or at least 128 votes – must vote for the resolution at the General Assembly for it to be passed.
Monday’s meeting, at Germany’s permanent representatives office in New York, aimed to explain the resolution and solidify support among the 70 or so countries believed to be in favor of the proposed expansion.
With approximately 70 countries viewed at favoring UNSC expansion, I feel that enough momentum can be attained to garner the others needed if the proposal is put forth in a flexible, go-along-to-get-along manner. A strong argument in its favor is the current make-up of the permanent members of the council, with its strong European representation and lack of membership for South America, Africa and the Arab nations. The Group of Four are all deserving nations when judged on their populations, economic strengths, and prominence globally and in their respective regions. These four obviously aim to be among the six new permanent members, but one wonders which six would eventually attain the prize. Germany would only add to the Eurocentricism already present, Africa and the Arab nations still must be considered but have no obvious candidates, and at least two unnamed nations must be selected. Expect Italy, also desiring a seat, to push for a voice in this matter.
Will the four nations go forward with enough flexibility to successfully manage passage? They will if they follow Japan’s lead.
The latest draft, which the four countries initially had expected to finish in early May, was delayed by almost two weeks, mainly due to prolonged debate between India and Japan, according to sources.
The sources said Japan and India had argued fiercely over the wording of the document as India insisted the new permanent members “shall have” the same veto rights as the so-called big five, while Japan supported a compromise under which new members “should have” veto rights.
Japan feared a direct demand for veto rights would inevitably invite opposition from such countries as the United States.
The current version states that the new permanent members “should” have the same “responsibilities and duties” as current permanent members.
But Japan’s proposal to insert “in principle” to further weaken the demand for veto rights was omitted.
Any new permanent nations should be happy with their constant presence on the council; expansion of the veto power would only serve to render the UNSC more hamstrung than it has already become. For that matter, though I expect it to pass in some form or other, I personally oppose this expansion. The greater the numbers involved in making a decision, the less likely a decision will be actually be made.
If expansion must be, I would argue for the inclusion of Australia, Brazil, India and Japan. Heck, throw in Israel and Syria, give them both veto power, pick up a six-pack and tune in to watch the UN dismantle itself.
-
Newsweek Retracts Quran Abuse Story
Yesterday, Newsweek backed off its hit piece aimed at the military and the Bush administration. Today, they completely retracted it. Tomorrow, the resulting riot victims will still be dead and the tarnished U.S. image will still be stained.
Newsweek magazine has retracted a story that said U.S. interrogators desecrated the Qur’an to get inmates at Guantanamo Bay to talk – a report that led to anti-American riots in which at least 17 people died.
“Based on what we know now, we are retracting our original story that an internal military investigation had uncovered Qur’an abuse at Guantanamo Bay,” the magazine’s editor, Mark Whitaker, said late Monday.
[…]
The report sparked the biggest outpouring of anti-American sentiment in Afghanistan since the fall of the Taliban in 2001.
At least 17 people have been killed over the past week as protests turned into violent clashes with police.
The May 9 article said American interrogators were placing copies of the Qur’an on toilets to rattle suspects, and in one case “flushed a holy book down the toilet.”
Guess what? Yeah, the damage is already done. This retraction is meaningless where it counts, the Islamic world. Chad at In the Bullpen points to a story showing Islamic clerics ain’t buying what Newsweek is now selling, and then goes on to explain why the retraction has no traction.
Again this comes not only from a group already believing the United States is in a war against Islam, something the MSM and several Left-leaning politicians and pundits advance ‘unwittingly’, but it also comes from people that only have the slightest clue of what a free press is. The lack of understanding that Newsweek is not controlled by the government is partially responsible for the same non-believing that a retraction was not pushed by the Bush Administration.
Chad goes on to show how the radical clerics have historically used such opportunities to their advantage.
Meanwhile, Phil at Shades of Gray agrees the piece was a political hit and repercussions will continue.
What to make of this? First, it seems that (once again) our highly reliable media has screwed up. Second, it seems that (once again) it has screwed up in a way that is, to say the least, unhelpful for the ongoing war on terror. Finally, it seems that (once again) this may blow over too quickly.
[…]
Thanks to this slap-dash journalism, we can expect even more bad blood between the US and her allies and groups within the Middle East and the like, as this story will no doubt enter into the great domain of the urban legend – sure, the story is wrong, but expect to hear various Middle Eastern sources to cite this non-incident as yet another example of the US’s evil.
Newsweek opened it’s own Pandora’s Box, and now we all have to wait and see how much of a butcher’s bill is to be extracted.
-
France Protests End of National Holiday
The fundamental problem of socialism and communism in a nutshell: lack of personal incentive impairs the public ability to provide. Just ask the French.
Teachers, transport workers and much of France ignored the government’s call to sacrifice a paid holiday to raise money for the elderly Monday — causing widespread disruption on a day meant to symbolize national unity.
Public transport in up to 90 cities and towns across France was disrupted. Many city halls and classrooms were closed, post offices scaled back services because of striking employees and many private companies gave their staff the day off. Polls showed more than half of the leisure-loving French planned to stay home.
The national “Day of Solidarity” — an extra work day in place of the annual Pentecost holiday — was part of the government’s response to a 2003 heat wave that killed 15,000 people, mostly elderly.
Under a new law, workers give up a holiday, while their employers pay into a government fund to improve health care for the aged and handicapped. The extra day of work was expected to reap about $2.5 billion a year in additional revenue for health care.
Many liked the idea of sacrificing for the greater good in the aftermath of the tragic heat wave. But in recent months, opposition to the plan became intermingled with discontent on issues ranging from high unemployment to budget cuts enacted by the unpopular Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin.
“On Monday, the government is going to feel the backlash from a totally unilateral measure made against the advice of unions and seen by workers as unjust, ineffective and hypocritical,” said Maryse Dumas, the No. 2 official at the communist-backed CGT union.
[…]
As for the day of solidarity — front pages declared it a failure.
“Pentecost: The Black Monday of Operation Solidarity,” read Le Figaro’s banner headline. The paper called the chaos a “social and political test for the government” as Chirac seeks to win a “yes” vote in France’s May 29 referendum on the EU constitution.
Want a little more proof of the power of personal incentive?
In Paris, bus and subway drivers were wooed to work with a special $125 bonus. It was one of few cities where the subway was running normally.
There’s a little bit more evidence to add to the wealth history has already accumulated.
-
Quote of the Week, 15 MAY 05
The politician should fall silent the moment mobilization begins, and not resume his precedence until the strategist has informed the King, after the total defeat of the enemy, that he has completed his task.
—Field Marshall Helmuth von Moltke, the Elder
-
Newsweek Backs off Quran Desecration Story
In a seeming rush to besmirch our anti-terror efforts, Newsweek published a little tidbit that sparked riots, resulted in deaths and wreaked havoc on our efforts in multiple Islamic countries. Does it matter now if the story is either the result of very poor journalism or possibly completely wrong?
Newsweek magazine backed away Sunday from a report that U.S. interrogators desecrated copies of the Quran while questioning prisoners at the Guantanamo Bay naval base — an account blamed for sparking violent riots in Afghanistan.
At least 15 people were killed and dozens injured last week when thousands of demonstrators marched in Afghanistan and other parts of the Muslim world, officials and eyewitnesses said.
The Pentagon said last week it was unable to corroborate any case in which interrogators at the U.S. Naval Station in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, defiled the Muslim holy book, as Newsweek reported in its May 9 issue.
“Top administration officials have promised to continue looking into the charges, and so will we,” Newsweek Editor Mark Whitaker wrote in the magazine’s May 23 issue, out Sunday.
“But we regret that we got any part of our story wrong, and extend our sympathies to victims of the violence and to the U.S. soldiers caught in its midst.”
Pentagon spokesman Larry DiRita blamed Newsweek’s report for the unrest in Muslim countries.
“People are dying. They are burning American flags. Our forces are in danger,” he told CNN.
We are a nation at war with troops engaged in the field. Why are the mainstream media so eager to endanger lives and undermine any progress? Even with a shred of truth to the story, it should have been axed or, at the very least, shelved until it could be thoroughly investigated and possible ramifications of publishing could be considered. The fine folk at Newsweek now needlessly have blood on their hands, earned by their desire to run a hit on the American military and their lagging journalistic professionalism.
Others blogging on the matter:
Outside the Beltway
Michelle Malkin
The Mudville Gazette
Blackfive
The Jawa Report, here and here
Captain’s Quarters
Power Line, here and here
INDC Journal keeps it short and sweet here -
Updating the Blogroll
Let’s start with two new additions:
And while I’m at it, and it’s quite obvious I’ve been slacking, here’s five current members of my blogroll that have moved:
-
Violence Flares in Uzbekistan
Protests and prisoners. Bloodshed and hostages. Uzbekistan teeters on the edge of a precipice and, of course, radical Islamists are involved.
Police opened fire on thousands of protesters in the central Asian state of Uzbekistan yesterday, after an armed mob stormed a jail to free 23 men accused of Islamist extremism.
At least 12 people were killed and dozens injured in the fighting in the eastern town of Andijan. Fifteen police officers were held hostage by rioters.
Demonstrators in the central square demanded the resignation of the authoritarian president, Islam Karimov. Some protesters had taken over the local administration building and were flanked by men armed with machine guns.
Yesterday afternoon, witnesses reported that a truck of soldiers drove into the crowd three times, firing into it or into the air. “I was lying down, but the guy next to me was dead,” said one witness. He said he had seen five people injured in the shooting.
The government claimed that protesters had opened fire on troops. It insisted it was in control of the town and had retaken the administration building in bitter fighting with armed protesters.
A government source told Reuters last night: “The square has been cleared. Protesters have left. The building has been freed from those who seized it. The search for weapons is under way.”
The witness said he and other protesters were fleeing the town. “It’s too dangerous here,” he said. The last gunfire had been at 7pm local time on a main road near the centre.
Protesters reportedly used a police hostage as a “human shield” when engaging troops. The authorities said in a televised statement: “The militants are sheltering behind women, children and hostages. They will not compromise with the authorities.”
Some reports said that 50 people had died in clashes with the police. Mr Karimov’s press service said he had rushed to the scene to negotiate. Officials said he had later returned to the capital, Tashkent.
The unrest threatened to spark wider popular revolt in Uzbekistan, an impoverished state of 26 million people. It borders Kyrgyzstan, where violent protests in March ousted the country’s authoritarian government. Uzbekistan, the most brutal dictatorship in the former Soviet Union, has cracked down on dissent since three protest-led regime changes swept through the region in the last 19 months.
Yes, this is one former Soviet republic that has played a very important role in the war against Islamist terror, particularly in the Afghanistan theater.
Uzbekistan has been a US ally in the war on terror since 2001, and hosts a vital airbase in the south. Critics say this has caused Washington to turn a blind eye to its torture record. The US last night called on the government and protesters to show restraint.
“We are concerned about the outbreak of violence, particularly by some members of a terrorist organisation that were freed from prison,” White House spokesman Scott McClellan said.
Much more information and analysis can be found at Captain’s Quarters, Publius Pundit and especially Registan, a blog I was previously unfamiliar with that is all over the story with several posts and updates, starting here.