Friday, March 31, 2006

Cut Me a Break and You better show Me RESPECT!


All I'm gonna do is break into your house, eat about 25% of your food, tap your bank account for about 30% of what's in it and use your blue cross & blue shield card but don't worry the bills will still come in your name, oh and by the way I'm gonna live in your basement.

In exchange though I will clean your toilet since being a lazy American that job is beneath you. What I DEMAND of you is that you don't call the Cops and you show me the respect that I deserve.

That's the ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION issue in a nut shell.

That is what our POLITICIANS are telling us we must accept. If you don't accept it your a Bigoted Isolationist Racist member of the Klu Klux Klan.


This is NOT an immigration issue this is NOT a CIVIL RIGHTS ISSUE. This is a matter of LAW. Our fore fathers were immigrants. They came to this country LEGALLY. They didn't Break In and then DEMAND to be citizens.


The Republican Party has lost the 2006 election on this issue and this issue alone. The base will not vote for Democrats but they sure as Hell aren't going to vote for any of these clowns that are backing AMNESTY for the CRIMALIENS.

So we will spend the next two years dealing with the early withdraw of our troops in Iraq, Iran getting its Nuclear Bomb, The Repeal of the Patriot act, The end of ALL surveillance of Terrorists inside our country and Two years of Impeachment hearings.


This will also result in a Chemical or Nuclear Attack inside the Borders of our country with thousands dead and dying. All for the sake of guaranteeing a permanent class of SLAVES to pick strawberries.


Thank You John McCain (Traitorous Scum) and all the other Republican assholes in the Senate that are more worried about ILLEGALS that can't vote rather than the Millions of us that are going to refuse to come out and vote.

Thursday, March 30, 2006

Iran plans 'war games'

29/03/2006 21:44 - (SA)
Farhad Pouladi

Tehran - Thousands of Iranian troops will on Friday start a week-long military manoeuvre in the Gulf to ready armed forces for warding off "threats", a senior commander announced on state television.

The commander of the navy of revolutionary guards corps, Rear-Admiral Mostafa Safari, did not specify the nature of the threat although the manoeuvre comes amid increasing tensions with the West over Tehran's nuclear programme.

"The revolutionary guards corps navy and air force in collaboration with (Iran's regular) army, navy, (the volunteer militia) Basij, and the Iranian police will start a manoeuvre from 31 March until 6 April in the Persian Gulf and Sea of Oman," he said.

Iran has two armed forces in which both have their own ground, naval and air force all under the command of Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

He added: "We hope ... We will gain the necessary and needed readiness to decisively reply to any kind of threats."

Top Majlis official vows Iran will not abandon enrichment


Iran Focus

Tehran, Iran, Mar. 30 – A senior deputy in Iran’s Majlis, or Parliament, said on Thursday that the Islamic Republic would not abandon uranium enrichment “under any circumstances” hours after the United Nations Security Council unanimously adopted a “Presidential Statement” calling on it to suspend all uranium enrichment activity.

“Since we have entered the realm of power, retreat will be a lethal blow”, Heshmatollah Felahat-Pisheh told the website Aftab, which belongs to the allies of former President Ayatollah Ali-Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani.

Felahat-Pisheh, who is a member of Majlis’ National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, said, “We must move ahead as much as we can with our peaceful nuclear energy work and force [the West] to face a fait a compli”.

I Just Love This Guy

Bibi blew it, so now Israel suffers

NY Daily News
By Sidney Zion

If Benjamin Netanyahu had gone along with Ariel Sharon last fall, he'd be picking his cabinet today.

All he had to do was shut his mouth, raise his hand for the Gaza pullout and he'd be back again as prime minister of Israel.

Because he didn't do nothing, today he presides over a Likud Party that no longer means anything, a party reduced to a fourth-rate rump group in the newly elected Knesset.

What this means goes way beyond Bibi Netanyahu's career. The Israeli election practically guarantees political instability in the Jewish state.

If Bibi hadn't challenged Sharon in the Likud, Arik would have never left Likud, the party he created, to set up his new party, Kadima.

Kadima, a hybrid party, has depended on Sharon's charisma to be born and to survive.

Kadima in Hebrew is Forward but, without the guidance of Sharon, Backward is just around the corner.

If Bibi had stuck, Likud would have a Knesset majority that no other group could seriously challenge. And this would make Israel a democracy that would stand for years.

Sharon's stroke changed everything, but it wouldn't have been so severe had he not left Likud. There were those close to him who advised him to stay the course. They reminded him of his role as the boss, and if he fought Bibi and the dissidents, he'd have won.

The man who persuaded him to quit Likud was Ehud Olmert. Olmert hates Netanyahu, whom he viewed as his opponent in the race to be prime minister.

The world press presented Olmert as Sharon's close confidant, the man whom he would pick as his successor. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Arik never trusted Olmert, and while he had very good reason to feel the same way about Bibi, if pick came to choice, he'd go with Netanyahu.

But the way things go in Israeli politics, there'd be no choice.

If Likud was the winner, Bibi was the automatic new prime minister.

Except that Bibi forgot the rule he learned as a guy who grew up in America: When you go out to guzump the world, you finally run out of people and you end up guzumping yourself.

The Free Jack Idema Blogburst


One of the problems faced by those of us who campaign for the release of illegally-imprisoned American Special Forces soldier Jack Idema and his men (Brent Bennett and journalist Ed Caraballo) is the general belief that Afghanistan is now a functioning, modern democracy. Indeed, most casual observers could be forgiven for believing that the war against the Taliban in 2001 swept clerical fascists from power completely, and that anyone falling foul of the law in Afghanistan today would be treated fairly.

This week, however, the mask of moderation finally slipped, and the world got to hear about the case of Abdul Rahman, the man sentenced to death in Afghanistan for the 'crime' of converting to Christianity.

Although it now seems as though Mr. Rahman has been spared, the fact that this only came about because of huge international pressure, and that, further, the judge who sentenced him immediately went on record as urging ordinary Afghans to 'tear Rahman to pieces' upon his release, acted as a wake up call for many of the people who'd believed the days of the Taliban were over.

Of course, for those of us who've followed the Jack Idema story for a while, Mr. Rahman's brush with death came as less of a surprise -- It was a similar, 'ex'-Taliban judge who presided over the travesty of a trial that saw Jack and his team convicted of kidnap and torture in September 2004. Back then, the bearded lunatic presiding over Jack's case, Judge Abdul Baset Bakhtyari, behaved in the following, bizarre fashion:

  • Announcing to the press his intention to find Idema guilty before the trial had taken place
  • Refusing to allow Jack and his team to present any evidence in their defence
  • Allowing prosecution witnesses to give evidence without being sworn-in
  • Failing to take note of the fact that the prosecution failed to provide any physical evidence that Jack or his team had kidnapped or tortured anyone
  • Refusing to allow Jack and his team to cross-examine prosecution witnesses
  • Refusing to allow Brent's court-appointed, female, lawyer into the courtroom (she informed Brent she had been threatened with death if she dared show up)
  • Engaging in whispered conversations and note-passing with the prosecution team to which the defence were not a party
  • Refusing to allow interpreters to translate statements made by the defence
Back in 2004, it was near-impossible for Idema to get anyone to listen to his complaints -- It's to be hoped that the Rahman case will illustrate to everyone that they were entirely justified.

So what can we do? Well, anyone reading this with their own blog can sign up for the weekly Free Jack Idema Blogburst by emailing Cao or Rottweiler Puppy for details. I'd urge everyone to do this, as we're still terribly short on takers. If you want to know more about the story, Cao's Blog has a large section devoted to Jack Idema. There's also a timeline here, and, of course, a huge amount of information is available over at SuperPatriots;, without whose work none of us would have learned about Jack's story.

You can also contact the following people and make your feelings known:

Secret US EMBASSY Fax: – 301-560-5729 (Local US Fax: Goes RIGHT TO Ambassador)
c/o US Ambassador Ronald Neuman
6180 Kabul Place
Dulles, VA 20189-6180

US Consul Russell Brown – 011-93-70201908 (Fired)

US Consul Addie Harchik- 011-93-70201908 (denied them water and mail at Thanksgiving)

US Embassy Translator Wahid – new – 011-93-70201902

US Embassy Translator Bashir Momman– 011-93-70201923

US Consul (friend of Jack's Now fired) Dawn Schrepel– 011-93-70201908

Embassy of Afghanistan (Good guys, Northern Alliance)
2341 Wyoming Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20008
Ph: 202-483-6410, Fax: no. 202-483-6488

Ambassador Massoud Khalili (wounded with Massoud)
Islamic State of Afghanistan
Embassy of Afghanistan
New Delhi, India

H.E. Said Tayeb JAWAD (Afghan Ambassador- powerful in US)
Embassy of Afghanistan in Washington
2341 Wyoming Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20008
Tel: (+1-202) 483 6414
Fax: (+1-202) 483 9523

Mr. Jahed Hamrah, Consul General (pro-Taliban)
CONSULATE GENERAL OF
AFGHANISTAN IN NEW YORK
360 Lexington Avenue,
11th Floor New York,
New, York, NY 10017
Tel.: (+1-212) 972 2276 or 972 2277
Fax: (+1-212) 972 9046

Honorable Donald H. Rumsfeld
Secretary of Defense
1000 Defense Pentagon – Room # 3E880
Washington, DC 20301-1000
Ph: (703) 692-7100
Fax: (703) 697-9080

Lt General William Boykin
Deputy Undersecretary
of Defense for Intelligence
1800 Defense Pentagon – Room # 3E836
Washington, DC 20301
Ph: (703) 697-0170
Private Fax: (703) 697-9080

Stephen Cambone
Principle Deputy Secretary for Intelligence
1800 Defense Pentagon – Room # 3E
Washington, DC 20310-0100

General Peter J. Shoomaker
Chief of Staff, Department of the Army
200 Army Pentagon – Room # 3E528
Washington, DC 20310-0200
Ph: (703) 695-2077 / Fax: (703) 614-5268

The Honorable John D. Negroponte
Director National Intelligence
New Executive Office Building
725 17th Street, N.W., Room 4203
Washington, DC 20503

The Committee
On Homeland Security
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

Chairman Peter Hoekstra
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
H-405, U.S. Capitol
Washington, DC 20515-6415;
Office: (202) 225-4121 / Fax: (202) 225-1991
Toll Free: (877) 858-9040

M. Cherif BASSIOUNI
Independent Expert of the Commission on Human Rights
On the Situation of Human Rights in Afghanistan
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
UNOG-OHCHR;
CH-1211 Geneva 10
Ph: +41(0)22 917 97 27 Fax: +41(0)22 917 90 18
Email

Senator Steven Saland (Jack's Rep and Neighbor)
9 Jonathan Lane
Poughkeepsie, NY 12603

Senator Elizabeth Dole (Jack's Rep)
United States Senate
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 122
Raleigh, NC 27601
Ph: 919.856.4630
Fax: 919.856.4053

Senator Elizabeth Dole (Jack's Rep)
United States Senate
555 Dirksen Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Ph: 202.224.6342
Fax: 202.224.1100

Senator Richard Burr (of Interest)
United States Senate
217 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Phone: (202) 224-3154 / Fax: (202) 228-2981

Senator Bill Nelson (in the fight on Jack's Side)
United States Senate
Hart Senate Office Building
Room 716
Washington, DC 20510
Phone: 202-224-5274 / Fax: 202-228-2183
FL Fax 407-872-7165

Senator Dianne Feinstein (Bennett's Representative)
United States Senate
Hart Office Building, Room 331
Washington, D.C. 20510
(202) 224-3841

Representative Mike McIntyre (Jack's Representative)
United States Congress
2437 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-2731 / Fax (202) 225-5773

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (reference Captain Bennett- CA citizen)
State Capitol Building
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-445-2841 / Fax: 916-445-4633


Finally, PLEASE NOTE: The SuperPatriots; and Jack images on this site are used with WRITTEN COPYRIGHT PERMISSION and any use by any third party is subject to legal action by SuperPatriots.US;



Technorati Search for Jack Idema

The Free Jack Idema Blogroll:

The Pink Flamingo Bar & Grill
The Lone Voice
Red Hot Cuppa Politics
Kender's Musings
Irate Nate
The Devil's Kitchen
Cao's Blog
Big Dog's Weblog
Theodore's World
NIF;
Rottweiler Puppy
Making Headlines
My Newz n' Ideas
Right For Scotland
Freedom Folks
The City Troll
Sacramento Boxing
Acts of Aggression

Tuesday, March 28, 2006

Great Article from the Jerusalem Post

Our World: Of ideology and incompetence
By CAROLINE GLICK

Sunday evening Kadima Education Minister Meir Sheetrit proudly extolled Kadima's "uniqueness" as the one Israeli party which "has disengaged from all ideology."

Sheetrit proudly proclaimed: "We don't have the baggage of the heritage of Ze'ev Jabotinsky or Berl Katzenelson [the ideological founding fathers of Likud and Labor] on our back. We are looking only to the future."

When the polls close this evening, the most non-deliberative election campaign in Israeli history will be brought to an end. If the opinion polls bear out, Sheetrit's party will emerge as the uncontested ruling party of Israel. How is it that Israelis are expected to embrace a party that stands for nothing?
Read the Rest

The Bastards are giving them AMNESTY

Its time to clean house and cause an uproar like they have never seen. We The People need to make these Bastards sweat. Every AMERICAN Left or Right needs to contact their Senator and House Rep and FLOOD THEM WITH GRIEF.

The ILLEGAL ALIENS that have broken into our house do not deserve CITIZENSHIP the need to be DEPORTED.

Senate Panel Approves Immigration Bill

By DAVID ESPO
AP Special Correspondent
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Senate Judiciary Committee approved sweeping election-year legislation Monday that clears the way for 11 million illegal aliens to seek U.S. citizenship, a victory for demonstrators who had spilled into the streets by the hundreds of thousands demanding better treatment for immigrants. They are NOT immigrants they are ILLEGAL CRIMINALS that have broken into our house and are stealing our money, security, jobs, and bankrupting several states and our Healthcare system.

With a bipartisan coalition in control, the committee also voted down proposed criminal penalties on immigrants found to be in the country illegally. It approved a new temporary program allowing entry for 1.5 million workers seeking jobs in the agriculture industry.

"All Americans wanted fairness and they got it this evening," said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., who played a pivotal role in drafting the legislation. NO Senator Kennedy what you just did was give the OK to CRIMINALS to ROB US. This is NOT Fairness. Fairness is applying for PERMISSION to enter our Country. Like generation after generation has done before.

There was no immediate reaction from the White House, and Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. said he hoped President Bush would participate in efforts to fashion consensus legislation. "The only thing that's off the table is inaction," said Graham, who voted for the committee bill.
The 12-6 vote broke down along unusual lines, with a majority of the panel's Republicans opposed to the measure even though their party controls the Senate. AMNESTY is WORSE than inaction Senator. We would be better off if YOU did nothing than to BETRAY your country in this manner.

Committee chairman Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania was one of four Republicans to support the bill, but he signaled strongly that some of the more controversial provisions could well be changed when the measure reaches the Senate floor. That is "very frequently" the case when efforts to reach a broad bipartisan compromise falter, he noted. Specter your an ASS and I can't wait to vote against you and help Campaign for anyone that runs against you.

The bill would double the Border Patrol and authorizes a "virtual wall" of unmanned vehicles, cameras and sensors to monitor the U.S.-Mexico border. No build a real wall topped by an electric fence and sentries with 50 caliber machine guns.

The most controversial provision would permit illegal aliens currently in the country to apply for citizenship without first having to return home, a process that would take at least six years or more. They would have to pay a fine, learn English, study American civics, demonstrate they had paid their taxes and take their place behind other applicants for citizenship, according to aides to Kennedy. In other words NO PENALTIES for breaking into our house.

Arizona GOP Sen. John McCain, a potential presidential contender who worked with Kennedy on the issue, told reporters the street demonstrations had made an impact. "All those people who were demonstrating are not here illegally. They are the children and grandchildren" of those who may have been, he said. So now Mexican Tactics are what count in American politics. Mexico and other south American countries have protests like this all the time, it's the only way that their citizens can be heard. Well don't worry Senator you'll hear the American Public when you FAIL to get the nomination. You traitorous SCUM.

Senators on all sides of the issue agreed that illegal workers hold thousands of jobs that otherwise would go unfilled at the wages offered. BULLSHIT! Take away the ILLEGALS and the jobs will pay better or the companies will go out of business.

The agriculture industry is "almost entirely dependent on undocumented workers," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. So she's advocating Leagal Slavery as long as the Slaves are ILLEGALS

"America should not have to choose between being a welcoming society and being a lawful society," Bush said at a naturalization ceremony for new citizens. "We can be both at the same time." As long as they enter the country LEGALLY

Bush has said he favors a guest worker program, but it is unclear whether the administration would insist on a provision to require illegal immigrants already in the country to return home before they are allowed to apply for citizenship.

At several critical points, committee Democrats showed unity while Republicans splintered. In general, Graham, Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas and Sen. Mike DeWine of Ohio, who is seeking re-election this fall, voted with the Democrats. That created a majority that allowed them to shape the bill to their liking. ALL THREE OF THESE REPUBLICANS NEED TO BE VOTED OUT OF OFFICE EVEN IF IT COSTS US THE SENATE

This is the most important issue facing the country today. It is Equal to if not more important than the War On Terror. These people are not the backbone of America as they are being portrayed the are the Dregs of Mexican Society. Over 25% of Federal prisoners in this country are ILLEGALS. 95% of the outstanding MURDER warrants in the State of California are for ILLEGALS. Every day there are shoot outs and attacks on American citizens in our Border states involving ILLEGALS. These people are PISSING on the American Dream that your and My ancestors sought when they came to this country.
We The People that VOTE need to Punish these Politicians that are putting the Future of our Country at risk. WE CAN NOT BE SILENT ON THIS ISSUE!

if you would like to read the whole article that I took this information from please do so by following the Link.

Monday, March 27, 2006

Clinton chauffeur an illegal immigrant

NEWARK, N.J., March 27 (UPI) -- An embarrassing hole in security surrounding former U.S. President Bill Clinton turned up when one of his chauffeurs was found to be a wanted man.

Shahzad Qureshi, 42, was in one of three cars awaiting Clinton at Newark Airport last week when a Port Authority policeman happened to check license plate numbers.

The computer came back showing the Pakistani national had skipped a residency-status hearing in 2000, and a deportation order had been issued by the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the New York Post reported.

Qureshi was still in jail Monday awaiting immigration processing, the report said.

A Post from David Vance of A Tangled Web

TARGET: THE WHITE HOUSE!
Well Well. Al-Qaeda conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui has testified that he and would-be shoe bomber Richard Reid were supposed to hijack a fifth airplane and fly it into the White House as part of the attack that unfolded Sept. 11, 2001. Moussaoui's testimony on his own behalf stunned the courtroom. His account was in stark contrast to his previous statements in which he said the White House attack was to come later if the United States refused to release a radical Egyptian sheik imprisoned on earlier terrorist convictions. Moussaoui told the court he knew the World Trade Center attack was coming and that he lied to investigators when arrested in August 2001 because he wanted it to happen.
I trust this trial is expedited with all speed and his day of execution comes soon!

Sunday, March 26, 2006

More of Why I hate John McCain and consider him to be a Traitor

Among other things, the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says: "Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech...."

But John McCain and a few power-hungry Washington politicians apparently don't believe in freedom of speech.They want to abridge it and abridge itand abridge it - until people like you and me are bound and gagged and helpless.

That way, only government-approved folks like the New York Times or CBS News will be able to criticize politicians and analyze campaign issues without risking a stiff fine or an all-expenses-paid vacation to a federal prison.

Here's what's about to happen:
McCain-Feingold -- passed in 2002 - makes it next to impossible for non-profit issue-oriented groups like the National Rifle Association and the National Right to Life Committee (and the Center for Individual Freedom) to sponsor ads criticizing or supporting the legislative positions of our elected officials 60 days prior to federal elections.

In other words, it muzzles your voice and the tens of thousands of otheractivists at a time when it's most important - during an election.That same year, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) wisely voted 4-2 to exclude the Internet from these speech-stifling provisions.
But McCain, Feingold, and other liberal incumbents - outraged that freedom of speech still survived on the Internet -- went to court.

The venue: a federal court presided over by U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly - a Clinton nominated judge. Big surprise: Clinton's judgeruled that the FEC's exemption of the Internet was a violation of McCain-Feingold -- after all, the FEC exemption guaranteed free political speech to a lot of ordinary folks.

The House quickly introduced the Online Freedom of Speech Act (H.R. 1606) a bill to undo this anti-First-Amendment ruling, but at that time the bill required a two-thirds vote since it didn't go through committee. It passed by a solidmajority (225-182), but fell short of two-thirds.

Now H.R. 1606 is back in the House - and THIS TIME IT WILL TAKE ONLY A SIMPLE MAJORITY vote to pass. A similar bill (S. 678) is before the Senate.
But we have to ACT NOW because a vote -- to preserve free speech on the Internet -- will come ANY DAY NOW... possibly this week!

Use the hyperlink below to send your URGENT Blast Fax messages to President George W. Bush, the leadership of the United States Senate and the leadership of the United States House of Representatives.

Tell them that you are outraged that a federal judge ordered the FEC to extend McCain-Feingold to the Internet. Tell them that the Founding Fathers would be rolling over in their graves if they knew that incumbent politicians wanted to completely silence their critics.
Demand that they reaffirm the First Amendment by voting "yes" on H.R. 1606 and S. 678.
http://www.cfiflistmanager.org/hr1606.html

More proof of the INSANITY of the left

It would be funny if it wasn't said with a Straight Face
I just saw Teddy Kennedy say on C-Span that our current policy of Pre-emption in the war on Terror is the SAME as the Japanese Bombing Pearl Harbor and that makes us very dangerous and very wrong. "What the Japanese did in bombing Pearl was to pre-empt an American Naval presence in the Pacific". These are the people that want to lead us in War Time.

An Opinion from an Iraqi

Know your enemies, dudes!
From ITM

There are a few things that make me keep my optimism about a near end or at least a reduction of Iran's destructive game in Iraq.

One and actually the most important is that we have an American ambassador who recognizes Iran's role in supporting both ends of violence in Iraq; that's the Shia militias, namely the notorious Mehdi Army of Muqtada al-Sadr and the extreme terror groups like al-Qaeda's Ansar al-Sunna.
Knowing that ambassador Khalil Zad will be the one leading the talks with Iran makes me feel that the talks are in good hands that are aware of the scope of the conflict.
Many people find it difficult to agree with this theory that Iran has ties with al-Qaeda and its branches and affiliates in Iraq and that's because they think the ideology difference between Wahabism and Shiasm would make any cooperation between Iran and al-Qaeda a fairy tale or a ridiculous American excuse to justify a possible offensive on Iran.
But what really frustrates me is that we have people here who are supposed to be politicians aware of the behind the scenes game who refuse to accept this theory (which I consider a fact).

A few days ago a saw a prominent politician from the UIA talking on al-Hurra and when the point of Zad's accusations to Iran was raised his response was (not literal translation) "No sane person can think that Iran is supporting the terrorists who murder Shia Iraqis…".
It is this kind of blind conviction that make me lose faith in most of the political elites in Iraq; they have entrenched themselves behind their sects to the point that they cannot accept questioning the policies and intentions of their presumed friends forgetting that it's politics 101 to not put absolute trust in anyone.

They (our politicians whether Sunni or Shia) had been keen to have strong relationships with the regional powers, of course there's no objection on having balanced relationships with your neighbors but it's dead wrong to follow the plans of these neighbors when these plans are against Iraq's interests.
We see the Sunni while hate Iran have strong ties with Syria and depend greatly on Syrian support, on the other hand the Shia consider Iran their best friend while denouncing the Sunnis for being friends with Syria who they accuse of being responsible for terrorism.

I really wonder how those politicians forget (or give a blind eye to) the fact that Iran and Syria are the strongest allies to each other to the degree that Iran's president described Syria as "Our first front in the confrontation with our mutual enemies…" and both countries do not want Iraq to be stable and would do literally anything to stop Iraq from becoming a peaceful democracy because they think that keeping America pinned in a troubled Iraq can deplete America's determination and resources and discourage her from confronting the regimes in Damascus and Tehran.
Also it is Sunni Syria that supports the radical Shia Hizbullah and it is Shia Iran that supports radical Sunni Hamas, so why would anyone be surprised when someone suggests that Iran is supporting al-Qaeda or Ansar al-Sunna!?

And if politicians in question do not know this, then they are not qualified and must step down or be forced to step down, and if they know this but ignore it, then that makes them pure traitors.

The other thing that makes me optimistic is that the mullahs do not have much time left to continue their interference with Iraq's affairs; they are opposing the whole world with their persistent pursuit for nukes and they have entered a race against time in Iraq not realizing that the closer they get to their goals, the closer their end gets to them.

Posted by Omar

Democracy and Security

The Bush Doctrine is alive and well.

Sunday, March 26, 2006 12:01 a.m. EST

The publication earlier this month of the Bush Administration's National Security Strategy was greeted with a combination of media indifference and contempt. "Bush clings to pre-emptive force," was one news agency's sum-up of the 49-page document. Readers of these columns might prefer to draw their own conclusions by actually reading it: www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss/2006. What they'll find is a strategy that's admirably specific and, in the issues that matter most, broadly right.

This is especially important at a time when countries such as Iran, Syria and Egypt are betting that the Administration's domestic political weakness and its troubles in Iraq will see them safely through the 2008 election and what they hope will be a more pliant U.S. foreign policy. The document may now give those regimes second thoughts. Crucially, it reaffirms the Administration's first-term support of pre-emption: "When the consequences of an attack with [weapons of mass destruction] are potentially so devastating, we cannot afford to stand idly by as grave dangers materialize."

We'll take that to mean that the Bush Doctrine remains alive and well, despite persistent reports that it had been quietly shelved in favor of . . . well, no one has yet made clear what. Critics of the doctrine have argued that America's intelligence failure and difficulties in Iraq demonstrate the perils of pre-emption. Yet it is precisely because U.S. policy makers will never have perfect information about the capabilities and intentions of our enemies that pre-emption is sometimes needed, particularly when the threats are potentially catastrophic.

What distinguishes this document, however, is the emphasis it places on "effective democracy": that is, nations in which the institutions of democracy--regular and honest elections; representative and accountable government--serve as the armature of basic political, religious and economic freedoms.
Read the rest

U.S. Planning Base on Moon To Prepare for Trip to Mars

Scientists Hard at Work On Technological Hurdles

By Guy Gugliotta
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, March 26, 2006; A10

HOUSTON -- For the first time since 1972, the United States is planning to fly to the moon, but instead of a quick, Apollo-like visit, astronauts intend to build a permanent base and live there while they prepare what may be the most ambitious undertaking in history -- putting human beings on Mars.

President Bush in 2004 announced to great fanfare plans to build a new spaceship, get back to the moon by 2020 and travel on to Mars after that. But, with NASA focused on designing a new spaceship and spending about 40 percent of its budget on the troubled space shuttle and international space station programs, that timetable may suffer.

Still, NASA's moon planners are closely following the spaceship initiative and, within six months, will outline what they need from the new vehicle to enable astronauts to explore the lunar surface.

"It's deep in the future before we go there," said architect Larry Toups, head of habitation systems for NASA's Advanced Projects Office. "But it's like going on a camping trip and buying a new car. You want to make sure you have a trailer hitch if you need it."

Scientists and engineers are hard at work studying technologies that don't yet exist and puzzling over questions such as how to handle the psychological stress of moon settlement, how to build lunar bulldozers and how to reacquire what planetary scientist Christopher P. McKay of NASA's Ames Research Center calls "our culture of exploration."

The moon is not for the faint of heart. It is a lethal place, without atmosphere, pelted constantly by cosmic rays and micrometeorites, plagued by temperature swings of hundreds of degrees, and swathed in a blanket of dust that can ruin space suits, pollute the air supply and bring machinery to a screeching halt.

And that says nothing about the imponderables. Will working in one-sixth of Earth's gravity for a year cause crippling health problems? What happens when someone suffers from a traumatic injury that can't be treated by fellow astronauts? How do people react to living in a tiny space under dangerous conditions for six months?

"It's like Magellan. You send them off, and maybe they come back, maybe they don't," said planetary scientist Wendell W. Mendell, manager of NASA's Office for Human Exploration Science, during an interview at the recently concluded Lunar and Planetary Science Conference here. "There's a lot of pathologies that show up, and there's nobody in the Yellow Pages."

Saturday, March 25, 2006

A Circus Worthy of the Ringling Brothers

Welcome to the three ring Extravaganza called ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION unless of course your a Democrat or a member of the media, oh wait that's the same thing. Then of course it's just IMMIGRATION. The Debate begins in lack of earnest Monday because odds are not a damn thing will be passed. The idiots in the Senate are going to focus on the one part of the issue that the country does NOT want to focus on "Guest Worker Programs" in other words "Amnesty" for the 12 Million Crimaliens that have already broken into our house. The mood in the country that has been building for years is about the non-stop flow of Criminals that break into our home everyday. Every time this issue comes up it purposely gets derailed by boo hooing over what to do about the Crimaliens that are already here. That is NOT the issue the issue are the Bastards that are flooding over the Rio Grande.

The McCain-Kennedy proposal.
The Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act was sponsored by Senators John McCain (R-AZ) and Edward Kennedy (D-MA), with support from several key congressmen. The proposal would: * Grant three-year, renewable work visas to illegal immigrants for a $1000 fee.
* After six years of working legally, immigrants can pay another $1000 and apply for permanent work status if they haven't broken any laws and have studied English.
* Potential immigrants could apply for a $500 work visa if they can prove there is a job waiting for them.
Anything that has these two ASSHOLES names on it you know is bad for the country, and as you can see does nothing to secure our border.
The Cornyn-Kyl proposal.The Comprehensive Enforcement and Immigration Reform Act (PDF), sponsored by Senators John Cornyn (R-TX) and Jon Kyl (R-AZ), states that:

* Illegal immigrants can work in the United States for two years and then are required to go home for one year. After that, they have the option of coming back as temporary workers or on permanent visas.
* A guest-worker program for new immigrants would be set up. Those in it would have to go home every two years for at least one year and would not be able to apply for citizenship.
* Companies that continue to employ illegal immigrants would be fined.
This one has some good to it but once again rewards Crimaliens for breaking into our house.
The Specter proposal. A compromise proposal from Senate Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter would:

* Allow a three-year renewable guest-worker program with a six-year limit and no route to permanent legal status. Workers would have to be sponsored by employers who verify they tried to hire U.S. workers first.
* Allow immigrants who arrived before January 4, 2004, to be grandfathered into eligibility for permanent legal status.
* Make it a crime to be illegal or harbor an illegal immigrant.
* Require employers to verify the legality of new employees.
* Make sure illegal immigrants applying for green cards would not "cut the line" of people applying legally from their home countries.
* Increase the quotas on employment-based green cards from 140,000 to 290,000. It would also more than double the number of H1-B visas for skilled workers, from 65,000 to 150,000.
This Deranged Maniac that I have the pleasure of calling MY Senator is an even bigger ASS than McCain and Kennedy. Nothing this man has done or proposed including the "theory" that one bullet put 6 holes in 2 men and then fell out on a gurney in the hospital undamaged has ever made any sense and should be just dismissed outright. He hasn't even put the details of his proposal on paper just rhetoric as usual.

The House of Representatives passed the Border Protection, Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act (HR 4437) in December. It proposed strong steps against illegal immigration, including:

* Building a fence along 700 miles of the U.S.-Mexico border;
* Imposing stricter penalties on employers of illegal workers;and
* Making it a felony to be an undocumented worker.

The House bill would also make it a felony for groups like Humane Borders and other charity organizations to give water or other assistance to illegal immigrants crossing the border from Mexico. The bill has sparked protest rallies across the country and has earned the opposition of the Catholic Church, which is encouraging its adherents to defy it. Other critics say the House bill, with its focus on only one side of the immigration issue, will likely make the problem worse. "Enforcement is clearly an important part of the question, but enforcement alone is insufficient," Meyers says. Jacoby agrees. "You need tough but workable enforcement," she says. "The law-and-order Republicans [in the Senate committee] laughed the [idea of building the fence] out of the room."
This is the way to go. We must first secure our Border than we can start to talk about what to do to the ILLEGAL CRIMALIENS that are already here. What should have happened earlier this week when the ILLEGALS protested in several cities across the country, is that they should have raided the protests and deported every last ILLEGAL in the group.

Always worth a Read


Of Course It's a Civil War

By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, March 24, 2006; Page A19

Today's big debate over Iraq seems to be: Is there or is there not a civil war? Yes, say the defeatists, citing former prime minister Ayad Allawi, a man with an ax to grind against the current (elected) government, which excluded him.

No, not really, not yet, not quite, say U.S. officials and commanders, as well as Iraq's president, also hardly the most neutral of observers.

This debate appears to be important because the perception that there has been an outbreak of civil war following the Samarra bombing pushed some waverers to jump ship on their support for the war. Most famous of these is William F. Buckley Jr., who after Samarra declared that it is time for "the acknowledgment of defeat." Defeat? Yes, because of the inability of the Iraqi people to "suspend internal divisions" to allow a new democratic order to emerge.

This whole debate about civil war is surreal. What is the insurgency if not a war supported by one (minority) part of Iraqi society fighting to prevent the birth of the new Iraqi state supported by another (majority) part of Iraqi society?

By definition that is civil war, and there's nothing new about it. As I noted here in November 2004: "People keep warning about the danger of civil war. This is absurd. There already is a civil war. It is raging before our eyes. Problem is, only one side" -- the Sunni insurgency -- "is fighting it."

Indeed, until very recently that has been the case: ex-Baathist insurgents (aided by the foreign jihadists) fighting on one side, with the United States fighting back in defense of a new Iraq dominated by Shiites and Kurds.

Now all of a sudden everyone is shocked to find Iraqis going after Iraqis. But is it not our entire counterinsurgency strategy to get Iraqis who believe in the new Iraq to fight Iraqis who want to restore Baathism or impose Taliban-like rule? Does not everyone who wishes us well support the strategy of standing up the Iraqis so we can stand down? And does that not mean getting the Iraqis to fight the civil war themselves?

Hence the gradual transfer of war-making responsibility. Hence the decline of American casualties. Hence the rise of Iraqi casualties.

What we don't want to see is the private militias taking the law into their own hands. The army, by all accounts, has remained cohesive, with relatively good discipline. The problem is the police forces, which have been infiltrated by some of the Mahdi Army and other freelance Shiite vigilantes.

We cannot allow parts of the police apparatus to become instruments of Moqtada al-Sadr or other private interests. And not just because they act viciously and vindictively but also because their insubordination and independence are a threat to the very stability of the new Iraqi state.

But let's put this in perspective. First, this kind of private revenge attack has been going on at a low level since the beginning of the insurgency. Second, it does have the effect of concentrating Sunni minds on the price of their continuing support for the random, large-scale and heretofore unanswered slaughter of Shiites that they either actively or passively support.

And, third, if the private militias are the problem, it is a focused and relatively narrow problem. Creating discipline and central control over the security services is a more manageable issue than all-out Hobbesian conflict.

The principal issue, and measure of our success, is the shaping of disciplined and effective security forces. And that is why the political negotiations that have been dragging on are so critical. It is the political track that must secure leadership for both the defense and interior ministries that is nonsectarian and committed to a unitary force whose members do not answer to private warlords.

Civil wars are not eternal. This war will end not with an Appomattox instrument of surrender. It will end when a critical mass of Sunnis stops supporting the insurgency and throws its lot in with the new Iraq.

How does this happen? The stick is military -- the increased cost in Sunni blood of continuing the fight. But the carrot is political -- a place at the table for those Sunnis, some of whom are represented in parliament, who are prepared to abandon the insurgency for a share of power, a share of oil income, and a sense of security and dignity in the new Iraq.

This is doable. That is not to say it will be done. It is to say that those who have decided that because of "civil war" it cannot be done have been unreasonably panicked by something that has been with us all along.

letters@charleskrauthammer.com

Even ElBaradei Thinks the UN Security Counsel is USELESS

U.N. Security Council too often ineffective - ElBaradei
Sat. 25 Mar 2006

By Louis Charbonneau

KARLSRUHE, Germany (Reuters) - The U.N. Security Council has too often failed to act swiftly and effectively to contain international crises and needs to be reformed, the head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog said on Saturday.

"Too often, the Security Council's engagement is inadequate, selective, or after the fact," said Mohamed ElBaradei, last year's Nobel Peace Prize winner.

"The tragedies of recent years in Rwanda, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Darfur are cases in point," he told an audience of mostly German dentists.

His criticism of the U.N. body responsible for maintaining international peace and security comes as its five permanent members struggle to agree on a draft statement rebuking Iran for pressing ahead with its nuclear enrichment programme.

In an annual lecture organised by a Karlsruhe dental institute, the Egyptian diplomat said the 15-nation Security Council was still incapable of tackling violence in Sudan's troubled Darfur region.

" ... Darfur continues to suffer from the inability of the Security Council to muster sufficient peacekeeping troops and sufficient resources to prevent the continuing atrocities."

On Friday, the Council voted to speed planning for a new U.N. peacekeeping force to be sent to Darfur later this year to relieve underfinanced African Union troops.

Speaking before receiving an award from the institute for "global bridge building", ElBaradei said the Council's lack of success has also been visible in the field of arms control.

He said it "has made little effort to address nuclear proliferation threats in context, by dealing with the 'drivers' of insecurity that give rise to proliferation."

"In the case of Iraq, the Council for over a decade imposed a series of blanket economic sanctions -- which were manipulated to the advantage of the ruthless regime in power, and resulted in the death and suffering of hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians," he said.

In 2003, the Council was unable to agree on either the need or timing of the use of force in Iraq, said the director-general of the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

"It is clearly time for the Security Council to be reformed, expanded and strengthened, as part of the current efforts to reform and revitalise the United Nations," ElBaradei added.

U.N. RESOLUTIONS IGNORED

There was also the problem of past Security Council resolutions that have been ignored, ElBaradei said.

He mentioned resolutions demanding that India and Pakistan refrain from any further testing and development of nuclear weapons or that Israel open its nuclear facilities to the IAEA.

Unlike the official nuclear weapons states -- the United States, Russia, China, France and Britain -- India, Pakistan and Israel have never signed the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

In the case of North Korea, which may already be the ninth state to acquire the bomb, the Council was unable to agree on a response when the IAEA's governing board referred the matter to it in 2003 after Pyongyang expelled the IAEA and quit the NPT.

ElBaradei reiterated his doubts about Iran's insistence that its atomic plans were purely peaceful.

" ... the fact that its programme was conducted so long in secret, and particularly that aspects of it have not been clarified, has created a confidence deficit regarding its nature and its direction," he said.

Iran's plans to press ahead with its uranium enrichment programme, which can make fuel for electricity or bombs, could increase insecurity in an already unstable Middle East, he said.

Thursday, March 23, 2006

Suspect Atom Bomb Link

Updated: 21:04, Wednesday March 22, 2006

One of the suspected terrorists on trial for allegedly plotting a nationwide bombing campaign has been linked to a nuclear weapon.

An Old Bailey jury was told Salahuddin Amin had been involved in discussions to buy an atomic bomb.

The prosecution said contact had been made with the Russian mafia in Belgium to buy the radio-isotope device.

Seven men - all British citizens - are on trial accused of conspiring to cause explosion.

The prosecution claims the gang planned to blow up pubs, nightclubs, trains and also considered hitting the UK's power infrastructure.

They wanted to blow up "the biggest nightclub" in central London, prosecutor David Waters QC said.

In February, 2004, they were allegedly overheard discussing bomb targets.

Mr Waters said: "Jawad Akbar referred to attacks upon the utilities, gas, water or electrical supplies.

"Alternatively, a big nightclub in central London might be a target."

All the accused deny conspiring to cause explosions between January 1, 2003 and March 31, 2004.

Three of them also deny an additional charge of possessing an article for terrorism.

Mohammed Babar, a US citizen who pleaded guilty in New York to a role in a "British bomb plot", is expected to give evidence against the defendants.

Wednesday, March 22, 2006

The Free Jack Idema Blogburst


First off, we have some good news. After two anxious weeks without hearing from the three Americans illegally-imprisoned in Afghanistan, the SuperPatriots; have finally been able to confirm that Jack Idema, Brent Bennett and Ed Caraballo are doing okay.

Well, actually, Jack and Brent are doing more than just 'okay' -- They're well-protected by friends from the Northern Alliance and, in spite of the Karzai government's attempts to house terrorists alongside them, still have their quarters in the annex very much to themselves.

Jack's and the NA's best efforts notwithstanding, though, one person who isn't doing so well is Ed Caraballo:

But Caraballo, an Emmy Award-winning cameraman who said he was filming a documentary on the two others when they all were arrested, has been attacking prison guards and acting unstable, officials said.
[...]
Caraballo, who has converted to Islam and now goes by the name Najib, split from the men and lives separately, in Cellblock 1.
Almost three weeks ago, prisoners rioted and seized control of Cellblock 2 and tried to take over Cellblock 1. Many were said to be Al Qaeda and members of the Taliban. During the riot, Caraballo used his mobile phone to call reporters and say he was about to be beheaded.
Certainly, Ed's mental state has become a major concern of late -- Last week he even attempted to run out of the prison compound and had to be forcibly restrained. Right now, he is being kept under close watch by Northern Alliance personnel, who are becoming extremely concerned about Ed's state of mind.

Now, it has to be remembered that Caraballo is the least equipped of the three Americans to face the rigours of imprisonment. Unlike Jack and Brent, Ed isn't a soldier. He's a journalist. Back in 2004, he was making a documentary about Jack's work when he was arrested and accused of assisting with the 'torture' of Afghan prisoners. Of course, it should go without saying that since no torture actually took place, and no evidence was ever brought against any of Jack's team, this accusation is scarcely credible -- The Taliban judges who handled the 2004 case might just as well have accused Caraballo of helping Jack pull the wings off a flying pig.

What's more, Ed isn't some kind of two-bit hack -- He's a four-times Emmy Award winner, who's worked for CNN, CBS, NBC, ABC, HBO and with Anderson Cooper, Dan Rather, Mike Wallace, Peter Jennings, Diane Sawyer, Connie Chung, Chris Cuomo, Robert Krulwich, Leslie Stahl, and John Miller, the man who personally interviewed Osama bin Laden.

Yet, as Ed Caraballo slowly collapses under the pressure of his unlawful imprisonment, the rest of MSM, who set up squawking about human rights abuses at a moment's notice, are completely silent about his plight. Indeed, a search for 'Ed Caraballo' over at Reporters Without Borders, an organisation specifically set up in order to highlight the imprisonment of journalists, reveals the following:

Your search - Ed Caraballo - did not match any documents.
Nothing. Not one mention of Ed in two, long years. Not one mention of the fact that his conviction, along with Jack and Brent's, was quashed on appeal over a year ago, and that all three men are being held in a legal limbo. Not even a word about Ed when, three weeks ago, he was forced to give an interview from Pulacharke with an Islamist's sword to his throat. Well, so much for RWB's stated aim of protecting the right of journalists to 'seek, receive and impart information and ideas regardless of frontiers'.

And so much for Ed Caraballo.

So what can we do? Well, anyone reading this with their own blog can sign up for the weekly Free Jack Idema Blogburst by emailing Cao or Rottweiler Puppy for details. I'd urge everyone to do this, as we're still terribly short on takers. If you want to know more about the story, Cao's Blog has a large section devoted to Jack Idema. There's also a timeline here, and, of course, a huge amount of information is available over at SuperPatriots;, without whose work none of us would have learned about Jack's story.

You can also contact the following people and make your feelings known:

Secret US EMBASSY Fax: – 301-560-5729 (Local US Fax: Goes RIGHT TO Ambassador)
c/o US Ambassador Ronald Neuman
6180 Kabul Place
Dulles, VA 20189-6180

US Consul Russell Brown – 011-93-70201908 (Fired)

US Consul Addie Harchik- 011-93-70201908 (denied them water and mail at Thanksgiving)

US Embassy Translator Wahid – new – 011-93-70201902

US Embassy Translator Bashir Momman– 011-93-70201923

US Consul (friend of Jack's Now fired) Dawn Schrepel– 011-93-70201908

Embassy of Afghanistan (Good guys, Northern Alliance)
2341 Wyoming Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20008
Ph: 202-483-6410, Fax: no. 202-483-6488

Ambassador Massoud Khalili (wounded with Massoud)
Islamic State of Afghanistan
Embassy of Afghanistan
New Delhi, India

H.E. Said Tayeb JAWAD (Afghan Ambassador- powerful in US)
Embassy of Afghanistan in Washington
2341 Wyoming Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20008
Tel: (+1-202) 483 6414
Fax: (+1-202) 483 9523

Mr. Jahed Hamrah, Consul General (pro-Taliban)
CONSULATE GENERAL OF
AFGHANISTAN IN NEW YORK
360 Lexington Avenue,
11th Floor New York,
New, York, NY 10017
Tel.: (+1-212) 972 2276 or 972 2277
Fax: (+1-212) 972 9046

Honorable Donald H. Rumsfeld
Secretary of Defense
1000 Defense Pentagon – Room # 3E880
Washington, DC 20301-1000
Ph: (703) 692-7100
Fax: (703) 697-9080

Lt General William Boykin
Deputy Undersecretary
of Defense for Intelligence
1800 Defense Pentagon – Room # 3E836
Washington, DC 20301
Ph: (703) 697-0170
Private Fax: (703) 697-9080

Stephen Cambone
Principle Deputy Secretary for Intelligence
1800 Defense Pentagon – Room # 3E
Washington, DC 20310-0100

General Peter J. Shoomaker
Chief of Staff, Department of the Army
200 Army Pentagon – Room # 3E528
Washington, DC 20310-0200
Ph: (703) 695-2077 / Fax: (703) 614-5268

The Honorable John D. Negroponte
Director National Intelligence
New Executive Office Building
725 17th Street, N.W., Room 4203
Washington, DC 20503

The Committee
On Homeland Security
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

Chairman Peter Hoekstra
Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
H-405, U.S. Capitol
Washington, DC 20515-6415;
Office: (202) 225-4121 / Fax: (202) 225-1991
Toll Free: (877) 858-9040

M. Cherif BASSIOUNI
Independent Expert of the Commission on Human Rights
On the Situation of Human Rights in Afghanistan
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
UNOG-OHCHR;
CH-1211 Geneva 10
Ph: +41(0)22 917 97 27 Fax: +41(0)22 917 90 18
Email

Senator Steven Saland (Jack's Rep and Neighbor)
9 Jonathan Lane
Poughkeepsie, NY 12603

Senator Elizabeth Dole (Jack's Rep)
United States Senate
310 New Bern Avenue, Suite 122
Raleigh, NC 27601
Ph: 919.856.4630
Fax: 919.856.4053

Senator Elizabeth Dole (Jack's Rep)
United States Senate
555 Dirksen Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Ph: 202.224.6342
Fax: 202.224.1100

Senator Richard Burr (of Interest)
United States Senate
217 Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
Phone: (202) 224-3154 / Fax: (202) 228-2981

Senator Bill Nelson (in the fight on Jack's Side)
United States Senate
Hart Senate Office Building
Room 716
Washington, DC 20510
Phone: 202-224-5274 / Fax: 202-228-2183
FL Fax 407-872-7165

Senator Dianne Feinstein (Bennett's Representative)
United States Senate
Hart Office Building, Room 331
Washington, D.C. 20510
(202) 224-3841

Representative Mike McIntyre (Jack's Representative)
United States Congress
2437 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-2731 / Fax (202) 225-5773

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (reference Captain Bennett- CA citizen)
State Capitol Building
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-445-2841 / Fax: 916-445-4633

Finally, PLEASE NOTE: The SuperPatriots; and Jack images on this site are used with WRITTEN COPYRIGHT PERMISSION and any use by any third party is subject to legal action by SuperPatriots.US;



Technorati Search for Jack Idema

The Free Jack Idema Blogroll:

The Pink Flamingo Bar & Grill
The Lone Voice
Red Hot Cuppa Politics
Kender's Musings
Irate Nate
The Devil's Kitchen
Cao's Blog
Big Dog's Weblog
Theodore's World
NIF;
Rottweiler Puppy
Making Headlines
My Newz n' Ideas
Right For Scotland
Freedom Folks
The City Troll
Sacramento Boxing
Acts of Aggression

Tuesday, March 21, 2006

Here's a Laugh


Associated Press

By NASSER KARIMI

Associated Press Writer

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) - President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Monday said the West should apologize to Iran for accusing it of trying to develop a nuclear weapons program and said his country would continue to resist international pressure to halt its nuclear energy program.

``Today they tell our nation that nuclear energy is a bad thing and it is not necessary for our people to have it. But the nation of Iran has stood (for its right),'' he said in a televised speech to mark the Iranian New Year, which begins Tuesday. ``Those who head war and crimes accused the Iranian nation of war seeking. They insulted our nation. I do advise them to apologize.''

Iran insists its nuclear program is for peaceful energy purposes but Western countries who believe otherwise have pushed for United Nations action - including possible sanctions - against the country.

Ahmadinejad stressed that Iran would not give up its nuclear rights.

``Today we announce with pride that the peaceful knowledge and technology are at our disposal in order to be used for different purposes, including electricity generation, and we have not borrowed it from anybody that can take it away from us,'' he said.

Ahmadinejad reiterated that Iran should be compensated for a two and a half year suspension of its nuclear activities. Under heavy pressure from the West, Iran suspended its enrichment of uranium and related activities in 2003 and began negotiating with Germany, Britain and France to reach an agreed framework for its nuclear development. It resumed nuclear research earlier this year when talks failed.

The United States and its European allies want Iran to permanently abandon uranium enrichment and all related activities, a technology that can be used to produce nuclear fuel for reactors or materials for a nuclear bomb.

ADD ON From Reuters on same speech


"No one can take away our nuclear technology. The Iranian nation has obtained it and will preserve it. Some are against the Iranian nation's development," he said in a televised address to mark the start of the Iranian year on March 21.

"A while ago, they were against the nationalisation of our oil industry. They were saying that this (oil) smelt bad and is useless and you don't need it. That day the Iranian nation resisted, and today they are saying the same things about nuclear energy," he said.

"The Iranian nation will resist with God's help," he added.

They were hoping through propaganda and psychological war to take this (nuclear technology) away from us. I am suggesting to them to learn their lesson and apologise to the Iranian nation," he said.

"They should be sure that if they continue, they will regret continuing to make baseless propaganda against Iran," he said without elaborating.

Food for thought


The Los Angeles Times

They say intelligence suggests that the regime lets key figures plot. But the picture is cloudy.

By Josh Meyer

Times Staff Writer

WASHINGTON — U.S. intelligence officials, already focused on Iran's potential for building nuclear weapons, are struggling to solve a more immediate mystery: the murky relationship between the new Tehran leadership and the contingent of Al Qaeda leaders residing in the country.

Some officials, citing evidence from highly classified satellite feeds and electronic eavesdropping, believe the Iranian regime is playing host to much of Al Qaeda's remaining brain trust and allowing the senior operatives freedom to communicate and help plan the terrorist network's operations.

And they suggest that recently elected President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad may be forging an alliance with Al Qaeda operatives as a way to expand Iran's influence or, at a minimum, that he is looking the other way as Al Qaeda leaders in his country collaborate with their counterparts elsewhere.

"Iran is becoming more and more radicalized and more willing to turn a blind eye to the Al Qaeda presence there," a U.S. counter-terrorism official said.

The accusations from U.S. officials about Iranian nuclear ambitions and ties to Al Qaeda echo charges that Bush administration figures made about Iraq in the run-up to the U.S.-led invasion three years ago.

Those charges about Iraq have been discredited. And in the case of Iran, some intelligence officials and analysts are unconvinced that Al Qaeda operatives are being allowed to plot terrorist acts. If anything, they suggest, the escalating tensions between Shiite and Sunni Muslims in Iraq would logically cause Iran's Shiite government to crack down on Al Qaeda, whose Sunni leadership has denounced Shiites as infidels.

A U.S. intelligence official said he did not see any relaxation in Iran's restrictions on Al Qaeda members.

"I'm not getting the sense that these people are free to roam, free to plot," the official said.

Still, the official acknowledged that the relationship between Tehran and Al Qaeda officials within Iran was largely unknown to U.S. and allied intelligence, especially since Ahmadinejad's election last summer.

To some U.S. intelligence officials, what worries them most is what they don't know.

"I don't need to exaggerate the difficulty in determining what these people are up to at any given moment," the intelligence official said.

The U.S. counter-terrorism official was more blunt. "We don't have any intelligence going on in Iran. No people on the ground," he said. "It blows me away the lack of intelligence that's out there."

U.S., European and Arab intelligence officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the issues publicly.

Ties between Iran and Al Qaeda were highlighted by the Sept. 11 commission, which disclosed a wealth of details about such connections in its final report. The commission said Iran and Al Qaeda had worked together sporadically throughout the 1990s, trading secrets, including some related to making explosives.

Iranian representatives to the United Nations did not return repeated phone calls seeking comment.

In November, the State Department's third-ranking official, Undersecretary R. Nicholas Burns, said the U.S. believed "that some Al Qaeda members and those from like-minded extremist groups continue to use Iran as a safe haven and as a hub to facilitate their operations."

A year ago, Iranian delegates to a global counter-terrorism conference circulated a document describing Iran as "a major victim of terrorism." The document blamed links between drug trafficking and terrorism for "thousands of security problems," especially along Iran's eastern border with Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Al Qaeda operatives and family members have lived in Iran for years, many since late 2001, when they fled the U.S.-led bombing of Afghanistan. Many other Al Qaeda figures fled to Pakistan — a U.S. ally — and are believed to be there still.

Four months ago, Iran declared that no Al Qaeda members remained in the country, but U.S. officials reject the claim. At other times, Iranian officials said that Al Qaeda members were kept under house arrest and their activities monitored.

In Tehran, analysts said American officials were misreading Iran's intentions. The fact that the government has not heeded U.S. demands to turn over Al Qaeda suspects should come as no surprise given the state of relations between the two countries, said Nasser Hadian, a political analyst at Tehran University.

"They won't. Why should they" without receiving something in return? he said.

Some of the suspects have been indicted in the United States in connection with terrorist attacks, including the 1998 bombings of two U.S. embassies in East Africa, but Iran has refused to extradite them.

Among them is Saif Adel, believed to be one of the highest-ranking members of Al Qaeda, behind Osama bin Laden and Ayman Zawahiri. Whatever restrictions might be placed on the network's activities within Iran, Adel — who has a $5-million U.S. bounty on his head — was able last year to post a lengthy dispatch about Al Qaeda activities in Iran and Iraq that was widely circulated on the Internet. U.S. intelligence officials consider the posting authentic.

In the dispatch, Adel said he had used hide-outs in Iran to plot with Abu Musab Zarqawi to make Iraq the new battleground in the group's war against the United States. Iran had detained many of Zarqawi's men, Adel wrote, but they ultimately slipped into Iraq and began attacking U.S. forces.

U.S. officials say intelligence suggests that Al Qaeda operatives have engaged in at least some terrorist planning from Iran, including Adel's alleged orchestration of suicide bombings in Saudi Arabia in May 2003 and the masterminding of several attacks in Europe.

For several years, the U.S. counter-terrorism official said, satellite feeds have helped officials monitor some of the day-to-day activities and movements of Adel and other senior Al Qaeda operatives in Iran. The intelligence suggests that the Al Qaeda leaders have been monitored by Iranian authorities but could move and communicate somewhat, the official said.

U.S. officials also said that other senior Al Qaeda figures — including Zarqawi, now the group's point man in Iraq — had moved in and out of Iran with the possible knowledge or complicity of Iranian officials.

The Al Qaeda members in Iran include three of Bin Laden's sons. Some of his wives and other relatives are suspected of being there as well, as is Al Qaeda spokesman Sulaiman abu Ghaith, U.S. officials say.

Of special concern, they said, is the number of Al Qaeda operatives in Iran who are of Egyptian descent and loyal to Zawahiri, the Cairo-born physician who merged his Egyptian Islamic Jihad with Al Qaeda in the years before the Sept. 11 attacks.

Adel is a former Egyptian police official. In addition, U.S. officials confirmed intelligence showing that three other Al Qaeda operatives with Egyptian roots — Abdallah Mohammed Rajab Masri, also known as Abu Khayer; Abdel Aziz Masri; and Abu Mohamed Masri — are in Iran. Authorities believe them to be, respectively, the head of Al Qaeda's leadership council, a biological weapons expert who heads the network's effort to develop weapons of mass destruction; and its top explosives expert and training camp chief.

The U.S. counter-terrorism official said the Egyptians' presence was troubling because Tehran for more than a decade has supported Egypt's two largest militant groups — Egyptian Islamic Jihad and Gamaa al Islamiya — in their violent campaign to topple the Cairo government.

Though the Sunni-Shiite divide has prompted Tehran in the past to say it had "no affinity" with Al Qaeda, U.S. officials believe there is a history of cooperation between Iran and some Sunni militant groups, including Al Qaeda. Iran nurtures such ties, they say, to enhance its regional influence and punish Arab political foes through intimidation and violence.

Bin Laden sent Adel and others to Iran and Lebanon in the early 1990s to learn bomb making from Iranian intelligence and Hezbollah, the Iran-affiliated militant group, U.S. officials say. They fear he and other Egyptians may still have ties with Iran's military and intelligence services.

The Sept. 11 commission concluded that Iran had harbored Al Qaeda operatives wanted in the U.S. embassy bombings in East Africa and other terrorist attacks.

It quoted one top Al Qaeda official as saying Iran had made a "concerted effort to strengthen relations with Al Qaeda" after the 2000 attack on the U.S. warship Cole in Yemen.

Imprisoned top Al Qaeda operatives also have told U.S. officials that Iran let Islamic militants traveling to and from Afghanistan and Pakistan pass freely across its borders without passport stamps — including at least eight of the 19 future Sept. 11 hijackers, the nowdisbanded commission said.

The panel strongly urged the Bush administration and Congress to investigate the ties between Iran and Al Qaeda. Recently, commission member Timothy Roemer said in an interview that Washington still had not adequately addressed those ties.

U.S. and allied intelligence agencies say that, more recently, they have picked up indications of closer cooperation. The intelligence includes European wiretaps of militants discussing how Iranian officials would help them or look the other way.

U.S. officials fear Ahmadinejad may be strengthening ties with Al Qaeda with the help of Iranian intelligence and military agencies, particularly the Revolutionary Guards.

The intelligence official and others noted that Ahmadinejad himself rose through the ranks of the guards, an elite military unit. U.S. government officials have accused the guards of financing and orchestrating terrorist acts in the region by groups including Hezbollah, which is suspected of blowing up U.S. military facilities and embassies in the 1980s and killing hundreds of Americans.

Rep. Brad Sherman of Sherman Oaks, the ranking Democrat on the House International Relations subcommittee on terrorism and nuclear proliferation, who receives classified briefings on Iran, said U.S. intelligence indicated that Tehran was engaged in some kind of collaboration with Al Qaeda leaders.

"The cooperation is substantial," Sherman said. "Key operatives of the most successful terrorist organization in history are spending their time in the No. 1 state sponsor of terrorism…. That is of massive concern."

U.S. officials fear that an Iranian hard-line faction or even a rogue official could conspire with Al Qaeda or provide access to the country's military arsenal.

Despite the mutual antipathy between Sunnis and Shiites, some U.S. officials argue that the Iranian regime and Al Qaeda share a common enemy — the United States — and that both oppose the establishment of a pro-Western democracy in Iraq.

John D. Negroponte, the director of national intelligence, told Congress on Feb. 2 that Iran was engaged in a broad campaign "to disrupt the operations and reinforcement of United States forces based in the region, potentially intimidating regional allies into withholding support for United States policy toward Iran and raising the costs of our regional presence" for the U.S. and its allies.

Sunday, March 19, 2006

More News that is being BURIED

6,000 terror watch list hits inside U.S.

By SHAUN WATERMAN
UPI Homeland and National Security Editor
WASHINGTON, March 14 (UPI) --
The U.S. government's Terrorist Screening Center says there have been about 6,000 "encounters" inside the United States between law enforcement or other officials and people on the center's terrorist watch list since it was set up on Dec. 1, 2003.
Donna Bucella, the center's director, told reporters in Washington Tuesday that "about 6,000 individuals who are known or suspected international terrorists have been encountered within the United States."
She said that about 40-50 percent of the encounters were "repeats" -- i.e. the same person encountered more than once -- but declined to give the total number of individuals involved.
"I don't mean at our borders," Bucella added, saying the encounters could have happened as a result of traffic stops by state or local law enforcement, or when the watch-listed person applied for a gun permit or a commercial driver's license to haul hazardous materials.
She said there had been "a very small number" of arrests as a result of the encounters.
Other officials sought to play down the impression that thousands of terrorists were lose in the United States, saying that some of the individuals might have only a peripheral connection to some terrorism investigation.
"Not everyone in the database is Mohammed Atta," said Bucella's chief of staff, John Lightfoot.
"Among the 6,000 there are grades that go all the way from pale white to dark black and all the shades of grey in between," added John Miller, the FBI's head of public affairs, pointing out that the FBI's national security branch had between 15,000-20,000 open investigations at any one time, each of which might involve more than one person.
"These could be main subjects in a case, these could be early subjects in a case" that were later eliminated from the inquiry, Miller explained of people on the watch list.
Bucella said the center had received roughly 56,000 inquiries since it was set up on Dec. 1, 2003, and "about half" were positive, but most of these were from abroad, for instance when a person applied for a visa at a U.S. embassy or consulate.
The Terrorist Screening Center is an interagency unit set up to unify the dozen-plus watch-lists of terror suspects run by the U.S. government prior to the Sept. 11 suicide hijackings.
"This was something that law enforcement across the country was calling for" after Sept. 11, said Miller, describing the nation's 18,000 state and local law enforcement agencies as "a post Sept. 11 force multiplier" for U.S. counter-terrorism efforts.
Bucella said that the center had got positive matches from people that counter-terrorism officials did not know were in the United States.
The system is "a kind of radar" for counter-terrorism officials, "to show where these people are moving around," said Miller.
The screening center runs a database containing more than 350,000 names of people known or suspected to have ties to terrorism. In about 200,000 of those cases, Bucella said, there was enough information to enter the individual into the National Crime Information Center, or NCIC, an FBI-run database that local police and government agencies can check to see if individuals have a criminal record or are wanted by the authorities.
The NCIC is updated automatically in real time as names are added to or taken off the screening center's list, but with databases maintained by other agencies -- like the State Department's visa database, CLASS, or the Border Patrol's IBIS system -- center officials upload updated versions of the list every day, Bucella said.
When a check on NCIC or other database reveals a possible match with the watch list, screening center officials are contacted via its 24-hour toll free telephone number, and can then "reach down" into the underlying, classified data -- the so-called "derogatory information" -- that resulted in the person being placed on the list.
The center's Privacy Officer Lyn Rahilly said that it was up to the agency in question to take action based on the information.
"The agency doing the screening, they have their own legal authorities and limitations they have to operate under ... We help connect them with the agency that has the often classified derogatory information, and then based on that information -- not just the fact that they're on the watch list -- the agency" has to decide how to proceed.
Sometimes, officials said, individuals were removed from the watch list as a result of these encounters.
"In some case they'll say to (the center), you know, 'We've run that case out, so you can take that one down now,' or 'We've reformulated our opinion on that person,'" said Miller
"In a lot of cases ... the information collected during a standard encounter is sufficient to eliminate that person from suspicion and then they are removed from the list," added Lightfoot.

What We've Gained In 3 Years in Iraq



I just Love Rummy

By Donald H. Rumsfeld
Sunday, March 19, 2006; Page B07

Some have described the situation in Iraq as a tightening noose, noting that "time is not on our side"and that "morale is down." Others have described a "very dangerous" turn of events and are "extremely concerned."
Who are they that have expressed these concerns? In fact, these are the exact words of terrorists discussing Iraq -- Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and his associates -- who are describing their own situation and must be watching with fear the progress that Iraq has made over the past three years.
The terrorists seem to recognize that they are losing in Iraq. I believe that history will show that to be the case.
Fortunately, history is not made up of daily headlines, blogs on Web sites or the latest sensational attack. History is a bigger picture, and it takes some time and perspective to measure accurately.
Consider that in three years Iraq has gone from enduring a brutal dictatorship to electing a provisional government to ratifying a new constitution written by Iraqis to electing a permanent government last December. In each of these elections, the number of voters participating has increased significantly -- from 8.5 million in the January 2005 election to nearly 12 million in the December election -- in defiance of terrorists' threats and attacks.
One of the most important developments over the past year has been the increasing participation of Iraq's Sunni community in the political process. In the volatile Anbar province, where Sunnis are an overwhelming majority, voter turnout grew from 2 percent in January to 86 percent in December. Sunni sheiks and religious leaders who previously had been sympathetic to the insurgency are today meeting with coalition representatives, encouraging Iraqis to join the security forces and waging what violent extremists such as Abu al-Zarqawi and his al-Qaeda followers recognize as a "large-scale war" against them.
The terrorists are determined to stoke sectarian tension and are attempting to spark a civil war. But despite the many acts of violence and provocation, the vast majority of Iraqis have shown that they want their country to remain whole and free of ethnic conflict. We saw this last month after the attack on the Shiite shrine in Samarra, when leaders of Iraq's various political parties and religious groups condemned the violence and called for calm.
Another significant transformation has been in the size, capability and responsibility of Iraqi security forces. And this is vitally important, because it is Iraqis, after all, who must build and secure their own nation.
Today, some 100 Iraqi army battalions of several hundred troops each are in the fight, and 49 control their own battle space. About 75 percent of all military operations in the country include Iraqi security forces, and nearly half of those are independently Iraqi-planned, Iraqi-conducted and Iraqi-led. Iraqi security forces have a greater ability than coalition troops to detect a foreign terrorist's accent, identify local suspects and use force without increasing a feeling of occupation. It was these Iraqi forces -- not U.S. or coalition troops -- that enforced curfews and contained the violence after the attack on the Golden Dome Shrine in Samarra. To be sure, violence of various stripes continues to slow Iraq's progress. But the coalition is doing everything possible to see this effort succeed and is making adjustments as appropriate.
The rationale for a free and democratic Iraq is as compelling today as it was three years ago. A free and stable Iraq will not attack its neighbors, will not conspire with terrorists, will not pay rewards to the families of suicide bombers and will not seek to kill Americans.
Though there are those who will never be convinced that the cause in Iraq is worth the costs, anyone looking realistically at the world today -- at the terrorist threat we face -- can come to only one conclusion: Now is the time for resolve, not retreat.
Consider that if we retreat now, there is every reason to believe Saddamists and terrorists will fill the vacuum -- and the free world might not have the will to face them again. Turning our backs on postwar Iraq today would be the modern equivalent of handing postwar Germany back to the Nazis. It would be as great a disgrace as if we had asked the liberated nations of Eastern Europe to return to Soviet domination because it was too hard or too tough or we didn't have the patience to work with them as they built free countries.
What we need to understand is that the vast majority of the Iraqi people want the coalition to succeed. They want better futures for themselves and their families. They do not want the extremists to win. And they are risking their lives every day to secure their country.
That is well worth remembering on this anniversary of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

The writer is secretary of defense.

Saturday, March 18, 2006

Harvard study: AIPAC makes US act against own interests

I would love to read this study and know who its authors are. If what this article says is true, then according to the braintrust at Harvard we should be worrying about the Jews smuggling a Nuke into one of our cities not the Mad Mullahs both them and us are just victims of the evil Jews LOL

By NATHAN GUTTMAN JERUSALEM POST CORRESPONDENT

Washington

A new study, claiming that the pro-Israel lobby in America caused the United States to skew its Middle East policy in favor of Israel, is stirring controversy in the pro and anti-Israel communities in the US.
The 81-page report, written by John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt for the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, argues that the pro-Israel lobby in the US managed to convince American lawmakers, officials and US public opinion to support Israel, even though this support runs counter to America's own national interests.
"The overall thrust of US policy in the region is due almost entirely to US domestic politics, and especially to the activities of the 'Israel Lobby,'" the paper writes, adding that while other lobbies have tried to affect US foreign policy, "no lobby has managed to divert US foreign policy as far from what the American national interest would otherwise suggest, while simultaneously convincing Americans that US and Israeli interests are essentially identical."The academic paper, whose authors are well-known scholars in the fields of political science and government, sets out to dispute almost every argument of the pro-Israel activists in the US.
It argues that supporting Israel is not in America's best interest and furthermore, that it complicates the US's international stand and its ability to fight terror. "Israel is in fact a liability in the war on terror and the broader effort to deal with rogue states," the authors write, claiming that "The United States has a terrorism problem in good part because it is so closely allied with Israel, not the other way around." The paper also argues that the US would not be worried about Iran, Iraq and Syria, if not for its close ties with Israel.
The Harvard paper also argues that Israel is not a worthy ally for the US, that it is not a true democracy and that it uses torture methods that are against American values.
The main claim of the authors is that the powerful pro-Israel lobby in the US is the reason for a biased US foreign policy in the region that favors Israel. They point to The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)'s activity in Congress and in the executive branch and talk about how it allegedly "manipulates the media" and "polices academia" in order to make sure the US maintains a pro-Israel approach. The authors add that AIPAC also uses the claim of anti-Semitism, or "the great silencer" as they refer to it, to shut off any criticism of Israel.
The paper voices the claim that pro-Israeli officials in the Bush administration, namely Paul Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith and David Wurmser, were behind the push for war in Iraq and that the pro-Israel lobby was a driving force in encouraging the administration to go to war against Saddam Hussein.
The research has sparked instant controversy in the US. It was distributed over the weekend through several Web sites and list serves known for their anti-Israel approach and drew harsh criticism from pro-Israel activists.
An official with a pro-Israel organization in Washington said that the authors' disagreement "is not with America's pro-Israel lobby, but with the American people, who overwhelmingly support our relationship with Israel, and with Democrats and Republicans in successive administrations and Congress, who so strongly and consistently support the special relationship between the United States and Israel."