Special Training Class for Those Just Waking Up [Archive] - Page 2

SFC(R)L

January 16th, 2006, 1:56 pm

Phares, who regularly conducts Congressional and State Department briefings, added, “The Saddam-Al Qaeda cooperation was centered around weakening the U.N.-sponsored, U.S.-British-backed sanctions against Iraq. Al Qaeda would strike U.S. interests, prompting a U.S. withdrawal from the region. Iraq would in-turn provide some facilities and other services to Al Qaeda’s operatives and local allies without necessarily becoming their main supplier or strategic partner.”

Consequently, international terrorists like Jordanian-born Abu Musab al Zarqawi were able to access many locations in Iraq prior to 2003. If nothing else, Zarqawi’s direct links to both Al Qaeda and Ansar al Islam, directly linked post-invasion Iraq and Al Qaeda. There is simply no way around that.

But there is much more to consider than Zarqawi, his crowd, and their freedom-of-movement. Intelligence gathered since the U.S. invasion indicates that as early as the late 1990’s, Iraq’s Unit 999 (a special branch of the old regime’s army) was directly involved in the training of foreign terrorists inside Iraq. Intelligence about U.S. and other Western forces was shared between operatives of the Iraqi intelligence services and Al Qaeda. And foreign terrorists operating in the region (outside of Iraq) who needed medical attention or other support received it once inside Iraqi borders.

Additionally, previously positioned operators – the “connections” – would have been necessary to coordinate the reception of Al Qaeda operatives crossing into post-invasion Iraq. Any student of guerrilla operations knows the former must assist the latter to establish deep bases, recruit new members, and develop some semblance of trust in an untrusting tribal society.

So let’s forget for the moment any weapons of mass destruction (and the verdict is still out over whether or not WMDs were spirited across the borders). Forget the fact that Saddam was providing monetary support to the Palestinian families of suicide bombers. Forget the fact that he had violated umpteen U.N. resolutions since the end of Gulf War I. Forget the fact that his air-defense forces were regularly shooting at American and British pilots. Forget that he was a brutal dictatorial thug whose henchmen systematically raped, tortured, and murdered anyone who so much as hinted at any domestic political opposition. Forget all of the collaterally related geo-strategic reasons for gaining a foothold in the middle of the Islamist-fascist world during a global war against Middle-Eastern-based terrorism.

Instead, let’s consider the question that continues coming back to me:

Why is the White House not jumping all over the fact that terrorists were indeed training in pre-invasion Iraq as defensible proof of why we had no choice but to invade that country?

The answer is simple and unfortunate: Many in the mainstream media have been so successful at debunking any evidence, proof, or substantive facts as they relate to the Saddam-Al Qaeda connection, that any new information supporting any facts those of us in-the-know already know will simply be rejected. The new information will be seen as desperate backtracking on old ground. The White House, which is committed to winning the war, will be seen as being in a defensive mode regarding issues that now have no strategic or tactical relevance in the future prosecution of the war. And the general public, which has been fed a steady diet of Iraq-is-the-wrong-theater since 2003, no longer knows what to believe.

Opponents of the war say the only Al Qaeda elements in Iraq prior to the U.S. invasion were those in Kurdish areas not controlled by Saddam. This simply is not so, but for the sake of argument, let’s say it is. And if so, would not the U.S. – as a critical front in the global war on terror – have to invade those areas to shut down the Al Qaeda cells? Of course. And that in itself would have been a far more dangerous “limited war” with Iraq involving a direct ground confrontation with Saddam’s army anyway.

“Those who have decided that the Iraq-Al Qaeda connection claims (along with WMD) were ginned up by Bush to bolster the rationale for going into Iraq, are so firmly invested in those beliefs that they wouldn't believe any corroborating evidence anyhow,” says Divine.

True, but the facts are still with us, and the evidence for those facts – now supported by a growing body of post-invasion intelligence – is getting stronger. And to be fair to Hayes, the confirmation by 11 government officials of some two-million “exploitable items,” including notes, documents, tapes, CDs, floppies, and hard drives connecting the dots, is indeed a new revelation reinforcing what we already knew.

“There were terrorists training in Iraq prior to our invasion of that country,” said retired U.S. Army Lt. Gen. John Bruce Blount, former chief of staff of Allied Forces Southern Europe, in a phone conversation on Friday. “No question about it. There also were many things Saddam was doing – money, passports, visas, you name it – to further the terrorists ability to operate in other places throughout the world.”

Even more disturbing is what U.S. Congressman Joe Wilson (R -S.C.) said to me back in September 2004: “If this is what we know, imagine what we don’t know.”

W. Thomas Smith Jr. is a Townhall.com columnist.

http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/WThomasSmithJr/2006/01/16/182446.html

SFC(R)L

January 16th, 2006, 1:57 pm

The Saddam-Al Qaeda Connection
The pre-war link between Saddam and Al Qaeda had to be addressed.
Jan 16, 2006
by W. Thomas Smith, Jr.

The recent revelation by Stephen F. Hayes in The Weekly Standard that Iraq under Saddam Hussein had ties to – and was training thousands of – terrorists in the years prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, is actually no revelation at all. It is being treated as such by many Americans, cautiously praised by the White House, and dismissed as groundless by those opposed to the war.

Don’t get me wrong: Hayes’ assertions are on the mark. But those with connections to the U.S. special operations community have long known that the pre-war link between Saddam and the Al Qaeda terrorist network is not only a fact, but one that had to be addressed as part of the global war on terror.

I first began writing about this in August 2004 after a conversation with a good friend of mine, Commander Mark Divine, a U.S. Navy SEAL officer who had just returned from Iraq, where he was tasked with evaluating joint operations between SEALs and a then-developing Marine Corps special ops team. Divine told me, and I subsequently reported in National Review Online, “There is tremendous evidence to suggest there were terrorist training camps in Iraq before 9/11.”

I also wrote about the publicly and journalistically glossed-over 9/11 Commission Report that clearly stated, “[Osama] bin Laden himself met with a senior Iraqi intelligence officer in Khartoum in late 1994 or early 1995.” Bin Laden asked the Iraqi official for weapons procurement assistance and – get this – permission to establish terrorist training facilities in Iraq.

Granted, the Commission did say, “There is no evidence that Iraq responded to this request.” But my question today is: what about any evidence to suggest Iraq did not respond? There is no such evidence, and to me that is a far more important question, considering the fact that the Commission concluded, “The ensuing years saw additional efforts to establish connections.”

Moreover, there was Ansar al Islam, an Al Qaeda-affiliated terrorist group with training camps in Northern Iraq prior to 2003. This group was hoping to establish an Islamist state in Iraq. But the – again, rarely read – 9/11 Commission Report clearly states, “There are indications that the Iraqi regime tolerated and may even have helped Ansar al Islam against the common Kurdish enemy.”

But don’t take my word for it, or the Commission’s.

In her book, Masters of Chaos, author and U.S. News & World Report senior writer Linda Robinson describes an attack on Sargat – an enormously significant international terrorist training camp in northeastern Iraq, near the Iranian border. The camp was being run by [B]Ansar al Islam, and based on Robinson’s conversations with the U.S. Army special operators who led the attack, it is indeed "more than plausible" that Al Qaeda members trained there.

“[A Special Forces sergeant] believed, given the heavy fortifications, ample weaponry, and quality of the fighters, that his team had just invaded the world’s largest existing terrorist training camp since the fall of the Taliban in Afghanistan,” writes Robinson. “This was no way-station, in his view. It was remote yet in the heart of the region, so radicals could wreak havoc all over the Middle East.”

According to Robinson, the American Green Berets discovered among the dead in Sargat: foreign ID cards, airline-ticket receipts, visas, and passports from Yemen, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Oman, Tunisia, Morocco, and Iran.

Sargat wasn’t the only terrorist camp discovered by U.S. forces.

As Hayes reported, “Secret training took place primarily at three camps — in Samarra, Ramadi, and Salman Pak — and was directed by elite Iraqi military units.”

At Salman Pak, a facility south of Baghdad, “videos and other materials turned up after the invasion that showed terrorist training footage, where the targets were clearly Americans, along with other Jihadist propaganda,” Divine, who also operates NavySEALs.com, told me last week, “If this were an Iraqi military training site, or even a secret police site, it would not have had Jihadist focus, nor been visited by Arab members of Al Qaeda, as had been reported by several intelligence agencies.”

About the time Divine and I were having our initial conversation about the Saddam-Al Qaeda connection, Dr. Walid Phares – a senior fellow with the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and author of Future Jihad – was poring over captured Iraqi intelligence documents (written in Arabic).

Last week, Phares told me he concluded from the documents, “There obviously were connections and talks, not only between Baghdad and the Jihadists of Osama Bin Laden, but between other Arab regimes such as Sudan, Syria and officials in Saudi Arabia and the radical Islamists who would later form Al Qaeda. In this regional maze, everybody talks to everybody and explores possibilities, plans.”

This is key to understanding the nature of terrorist organizations in the Middle East: Alliances are often ad hoc, opposing groups often train together, and the terrorists themselves switch loyalties depending upon whose leading what organization and what propaganda is being fomented by whom. To think otherwise would be dangerous for America and the world. And those on both sides of the U.S. political divide recognize Phares’ grasp of the complexities of global terrorism, particularly as they relate to the complex relationships that have existed in the Middle East for thousands of years.

SFC(R)L

January 16th, 2006, 2:00 pm

yup, those military guys made it up...

Loyal American

January 22nd, 2006, 5:52 am

Bump! :D

waynevan

January 22nd, 2006, 8:59 am

What "everyone with a functioning brain" also knows is that the role Saddam played in 9/11 was grossly exaggerated by the Bush adminstration in the months leading up to the invasion specifically to justify the war and avoid the real debate over a policy of regime change.

Bush NEVER CLAIMED that Saddam had any role whatsoever in 9-11, why are you lying?

waynevan

January 22nd, 2006, 9:01 am

Also, I have a question for anyone who can answer it;

In the articel,"The Great Terror," Goldberg also provided a comprehensive account of Saddam's massive conventional, chemical, and possibly biological attacks on the Kurds in the late 1980s, during which as many as 200,000 Kurds in northern Iraq were killed, out of a population of about four million.

What happened to 5000 Kurds killed in Saddam's chemical attacks? 200,000 is wildly different than 5000.

Loyal American

January 22nd, 2006, 10:07 am

Wayne, couple good posts there! :cool:

Gee, you are "A Great American" :flag: ....... ;)

waynevan

January 22nd, 2006, 11:40 am

Wayne, couple good posts there! :cool:

Gee, you are "A Great American" :flag: ....... ;)

Gracias. I am REALLY curious about that 200,000 number.

Loyal American

January 22nd, 2006, 11:48 am

Gracias. I am REALLY curious about that 200,000 number.

Yup me too, really curious that is! ;)

SFC(R)L

January 26th, 2006, 8:30 pm

Determined to inflict maximum damage, detainees have groped under the protective face masks of the guards, clawing their faces and trying to gouge eyes and tear mouths.

Keep in mind that our soldiers – young men and young women – are absolutely forbidden from responding in kind. They are constrained to maintain absolute discipline and follow humane operating procedures at all times, at risk of serious punishment.

Documents recently obtained by The Associated Press through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit show that one detainee punched a guard in the mouth, knocking out his tooth, then began to bite the MP. Several guards were required to repel the prisoner’s attack; one soldier who came to the rescue delivered two blows to the inmate’s head with a handheld radio.

For this he was dropped in rank to private.

In a different incident, an MP doused with toilet water responded by spraying the offending inmate with a hose. For this he was charged with assault.

Another American soldier was disciplined for cursing at inmates. One guard punched a detainee after being struck and spit on while placing the man in restraints in the prison hospital in October 2004. (“My instincts took over after the hitting and spitting,” the soldier wrote in his report.)

He was recommended for a reduction in rank to E-4, loss of a month’s pay, and extra duty for 45 days.

How cooperative a detainee is determines where he is housed, how much free time he is given, whether he lives alone or in a group, and what color clothing he wears. The most dangerous wear orange jumpsuits. Those who heed instructions earn beige jumpsuits, and those who are deemed to be fully compliant wear white. The latter groups have daily recreation periods, live in groups of as many as 10, and receive extra privileges.

The compliance rating, by the way, has nothing to do with cooperation with interrogators. Indeed, many fully compliant detainees have maintained stoic silence, while some of the most notorious, dangerous prisoners speak freely with interrogators.

Nearly all of these hardened terrorists have been well-coached on how to be an American captive. Given any opportunity, they will all claim torture and human-rights violations. They have been schooled on counter-interrogation techniques, on how to construct and maintain a cover story, and other subterfuges to fool or deflect interrogators.

Some detainees, including one classified as a “high-value intelligence source” whom I was able to observe, take pride in discussing their activities and capabilities with interrogators. The man I saw brags about Americans he has killed, other Muslims he has terrorized, attacks he has planned and carried out, and what he will do to the Americans if he has a chance.

He is a leader, and affirms his high rank within the al-Qaeda chain. He has started or ended riotous behavior by fellow prisoners on more than one occasion.

With twisted irony, this individual condemns prisoners who maintain silence for being “ashamed” of their past. “They ought to proclaim their feats as proof of their commitment to the cause of Islam,” he tells interrogators, while munching continuously from a box of doughnuts provided by the interrogator.

Why the doughnuts?

“He throws his food at the guards,” Gen. Hood says, “so he loves to eat the doughnuts during the interrogation sessions.”

Functional leniency?

We asked Hood if he was possibly being too lenient with these men. “This system of rapport-building works,” Hood assures us. In support of the soft-handed approach, he cites an extraordinary amount of actionable intelligence that continues to flow out of the interrogation rooms of Gitmo.

His revelation was a surprise to me. During my own career in the U.S. Army Special Forces, I had been taught that intelligence, like bread, gets stale quickly. That may be true for tactical intelligence of the sort I used in the field. Strategic intelligence, however – the kind that we continue to collect at Gitmo – seems to have a much longer shelf life.

Today’s interrogators are succeeding at mapping out the complex organizational and financial structure of al-Qaeda in increasing detail, thereby uncovering networks that need to be attacked and dismantled. They are uncovering new “sleeper” cells. They are learning of temporarily shelved plans for new terrorist attacks, some of which have subsequently been thwarted by law enforcement authorities in America and Europe.

Another surprise for me was learning that many of the U.S. interrogators are women. We have all heard the salacious stories about using women to tease or embarrass the detainees. I saw a different reality. The camp behavioral expert, a female Ph.D. who has more than two years of experience at Gitmo, informed me that female interrogators have been very effective.

“We assume the role of sister or mother,” she explained, “something that is quite acceptable and natural in their culture.” She dresses demurely for her sessions. “I wear long sleeves, an ankle-length dress, and little makeup.” The interrogation room she enters is sparsely furnished with leg cuffs to secure the prisoner, a one-way mirror, cameras and a distress button to summon help if needed.

“We review what we know of their backgrounds, try lots of approaches, and work on them to find something that they can relate to.”

It is a long, complex process requiring great patience, and more than a little human empathy. It categorically rejects the use of drugs, coercion or duress.

Intelligence gleaned from Gitmo is blended with information from other sources to connect dots. We learned that one noncooperative detainee had his cover penetrated just last month by having his photo identified by a freshly captured fighter in Afghanistan. Once confronted with his real identity, he began to talk.

It is important to keep in mind that these men, while exceedingly dangerous and even pathological in their desire to kill Westerners, are generally well-educated and broadly traveled. Several detainees have advanced degrees in law, engineering and medicine from American and European schools.

Others are highly skilled technical experts with advanced training and knowledge of electronics and demolitions. (Some of these are contributing to our knowledge of al-Qaeda bombs found in Iraq.) Many of these men occupied the top al-Qaeda echelons and met frequently with bin Laden.

A lot of these men came from middle-class or wealthy families. They come from 17 different countries, but a great many are Saudi Arabian. They are not driven by poverty, unemployment or class deprivation. They are motivated by a virulent form of Islam that promotes jihad and death to Western civilization. They will kill Americans – including women and children – without conscience, for they are convinced that restoration of the Islamic caliphate is their sole mission on this earth.

Many readers will have heard stories about detainees sleeping in air-conditioned berths, while the American troops guarding them sweated in tents. You may have heard that American soldiers were eating MREs while the terrorists dined on three “hots” daily, providing about 2,600 calories of carefully varied food. Those stories were correct.

Conditions for camp guards have been improved dramatically, however. I ate heartily with the soldiers and sailors working the camps (the Navy supplies a large number of experienced masters at arms), and learned how they feel about their mission. Universally, they are proud of their work, although somewhat disappointed that the American public is not more aware of the difficulties they undergo to keep us safe.

One young woman at my table, an Army private first class, was asked what she thought about rhetoric in the American media, and from the mouths of elected officials like Sens. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., and Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., describing our servicemembers at Guantanamo as “Nazis.”

Frowning, she answered, “It hurts my feelings to hear that junk. We try to do as good a job as possible down here. These detainees are dangerous. They try to kill us every time we get close to them, and would certainly kill Americans if released.”

I asked her if morale was affected by such political statements. “I’ll tell you this,” she replied, breaking into a grin. “Every time we get called those names we decide we’re going to show ’em. We focus on our mission and work harder.”

Guards pull several days of duty inside the wire and are then rotated out. They need the relief from the intense pressure inside. But the time outside is not R&R; training continues on a constant basis. Gitmo has some of the most detailed and comprehensive procedural rules in the military. Supervision is constant, random inspections are common, all supervisors in the chain of command are held responsible for the actions of subordinates, and soldiers are schooled to report infractions.

The American servicemembers at Guantanamo do not have the satisfaction of tossing grenades or shooting back at the terrorists in their midst. They will not be recognized when awards for valor are bestowed.

In the face of vile abuse they must respond with supreme restraint, aware that even the slightest infraction will draw the fury and condemnation of hyperbolic politicians and reporters who loathe our military and want nothing more than to embarrass and damage American interests in this war.

For defense against irresponsible and slanderous charges, these men and women rely on ordinary Americans – those of us who rest at home in the shadow of safety they cast.

Gordon Cucullu, a former Special Forces lieutenant colonel, is a frequent television commentator on military issues.

SFC(R)L

January 26th, 2006, 8:32 pm

The American Legion Magazine
January, 2006

The Truth About Gitmo

Soldiers and sailors working inside the wire endure abuse from rabid jihadists.

BY GORDON CUCULLU

GUANTANAMO BAY, CUBA – In the fall of 2001, the U.S. Naval Facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (“Gitmo” to those who live here), was teetering on the edge of oblivion, with a skeleton crew of fewer than 2,000 servicemembers on duty. Now a contingent of more than 10,000 resides here. Behind that surge: the need for secure confinement of a collection of human debris snatched from the battlefields of Afghanistan in early 2002.

These “detainees” are not innocent foot soldiers, or confused Afghan opium farmers drafted by the Taliban. They are Islamic fundamentalists from across the Middle East, rabid jihadists who have dedicated their lives to the destruction of America and Western civilization.

Among the residents are al-Qaeda organizers, bomb makers, financial specialists, recruiters of suicide attackers, and just plain killers. Many of these men met frequently with Osama bin Laden. The terrorist Maad Al Qahtani – a Saudi who is a self-confessed collaborator with the Sept. 11 hijackers – is one of many infamous captives.

In the opening salvos of the global war on terror, our forces took a lot of prisoners from the battlefield. Estimates are that more than 70,000 Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters were captured and screened. Of that number, approximately 800 were deemed of such high value for intelligence purposes, or such a severe threat in their own person, that they needed to be interrogated and confined in a secure locale from which they could not easily escape or be rescued.

Welcome to the new Gitmo.

I was able to observe conditions at the detention facility, firsthand, at the end of June, when I was invited to join a group of 10 former military and intelligence analysts on an inspection tour. Briefings commenced aboard our aircraft shortly after takeoff and continued until landing.

We were met planeside by Brig. Gen. Jay Hood, the commanding officer of Joint Task Force Gitmo, whose soldiers are responsible for the security, interrogation, housing and oversight of all the terrorists confined there. Gen. Hood and his staff fielded all questions and criticisms, and were very forthcoming.

Who are these men?

While we observed absolutely no evidence of torture of prisoners at Gitmo, it is clear that the daily atmosphere is rife with harsh abuse: the prisoners are constantly assaulting the guards.

Our young military men and women routinely endure the vilest invective imaginable, including death threats that spill over to guards’ families. All soldiers and sailors working inside the wire have blacked out their name tags so that the detainees will not learn their identities. Before that step was taken the terrorists were threatening to tell their al-Qaeda pals still at large who the guards were.

“We will look you up on the Internet,” the prisoners said. “We will find you and slaughter you and your family in your homes at night. We will cut your throats like sheep. We will drink the blood of the infidel.”

That is bad enough, but the terrorist prisoners throw more than words at the guards. On a daily basis, American soldiers carrying out their duties within the maximum-security camp are barraged with feces, urine, semen and spit hurled by the detainees. Secretly fashioned weapons intended for use in attacking guards or fellow detainees are confiscated regularly.

When food or other items are passed through the “bean hole” – an opening approximately 4 inches by 24 inches in the cell doors – the detainees have grabbed at the wrists and arms of the Americans feeding them and tried to break their bones.

When guards enter the cells to remove detainees for interrogation sessions, medical visits or any number of reasons, detainees sometimes climb on the metal bunks and leap on the guards. They have crammed themselves under the bunks, requiring several guards to extract them. Some have attacked unsuspecting soldiers with steel chairs.

Loyal American

January 26th, 2006, 8:56 pm

Twitch23

January 26th, 2006, 10:08 pm

Tue, November 1, 2005
World warned

The Iranian president's threat -- no, it's not just a threat, it's a promise -- has even stirred Prime Minister Paul Martin.

Martin's and Jean Chretien's Liberal government, faced with 113 anti-Israeli motions in the UN, supported 78 of them, and simply abstained on the other 35.

Not once, until now, have the Liberals felt for Israel's plight.

Now, a flabbergasted Martin says: "This is the 21st century and Canada will never accept such such hatred, such intolerance and anti-Semitism of this kind."

He added: "We vigorously condemn what the Iranian president said."

That's a bit hypocritical, since the stance of both Martin and his predecessor Chretien has been to ignore time-after-time and year-after-year those similar expressions of hatred against Israel in the UN.

Foreign Minister Pierre Pettigrew also appears to have woken from his slumbers in his apartment in Paris to threats Arab sheikdoms have been making against Israel are real.

"This is becoming just too dangerous," he said. "It's a very explosive combination. Racist ideology and nuclear weapons."

If anyone can do me a favor and point me to somewhere I can get more info on this (especially specific resolutions and official response from Canada) I would LOVE it... would make a rather huge Blog entry tomorrow am. I am looking into it myself and hope to have more to go on by the am when I make my next entry. TIA

Twitch23

January 26th, 2006, 11:08 pm

What's even scarier is those freaking Libtoids being so wraped up in trying to destroy the President, and throwing hissy fits like they did today, that our government has to be focused on all their bull ****, instead of them all getting together and saying " what are WE as the Leaders of this Country going to do about the threat that has been made against us".

Oh I guess after another attack on our soil kills thousands more of our innocent citzens they will all want to stand on the steps of the capitol and hold hands and sing Cum by Ya...... and act like they are so concerned. YEAH RIGHT. 6 months later they will draw their political daggers and start stabbing away again.

I say we should wright these son's of bitches and tell them if they don't put their childish games away, and start acting like the Leaders they are supposed to be, and worry about security.... That the next time a 9-11 happens, WE THE PEOPLE are going to have them all tried for treason, and acessories to Murder.

WAKE UP.... WE ARE AT WAR.... AND NOT JUST IN IRAQ... BUT WITH TERROIST ALL OVER THIS WORLD WHO WANT TO KILL US JUST BECAUSE TO THEM WE ARE INFIDELS... CAN'T YOU STUPID IDIOTS SEE THIS..... WE MIGHT CAN TRY TO EXCUSE OURSELVES FOR 9-11 ..... BUT WHEN IT HAPPENS AGAIN... THERE WILL BE NO EXCUSE !!! BLOOD WILL BE ON ALL WHO HAVE STOOD BACK AND SAID, WE SHOULD NOT FIGHT.

Now sleep on that one. :mad:

Good post SFC(R)L Sorry to go off, but I have children..... and I take their saftey and future very serious. Please forgive my ranting.

IhateCNN .... I don't see any need for you to apologize. AFAIAC you only put into words what is in my heart, and I am certain there are many others out there who feel likewise. I totally understand about kids, I have 3. My oldest boy was just under a year old on Sept 11 2001, and I'm gonna share a story with you about that.

On Sept 10 2001 I went to bed a self-affirmed liberal, or so I thought. I thought we had no business meddling in the affairs of sovereign countries such as Iraq, etc. In fact, I'm not proud of this, but somewhere out there in a newspaper archive is a photo of me as a young idealistic naive kid of about 18 or 19, in a fringe leather jacket and long hair, leading a protest march against Gulf War #1. I believed that all religions, including Islam, brought a message of peace and co-operation. I thought Rush Limbaugh was a nutjob based on having heard him once for about 10 minutes etc etc etc you get the general idea.

Sept 11 2001 I woke up a completely different person. Within less than 10 minutes of waking I realized how wrong I was. My child was in danger of growing up in a world where it was very possible that he would forever be looking over his shoulder for the man or woman, who had never met him, could be waiting with a suitcase full of explosives, or planes could just drop out of the sky, because his religion states that people who don't believe as they believe are infidels and must die, because they feel displaced and miserable in their country and decide to take it out on the rest of the world, and for a host of other reasons having nothing to do with him. My son would live in fear if someone didn't do SOMETHING to stop this stupidity, and I knew then and there that there would be no "loving" this problem out, or appeasing, that we were truly dealing with radical, fundamentalist nutjobs.

Children are amazing, mine changed my whole philosophy of the world just by being. I decided to join the Canadian Military, quite a long process here. By the time I was almost finished I realized, this was not where I would be able to be of any service in protecting my children from these nutjobs. SO I tried (and am still trying) the US military.

This awakening didn't just stop there though. It was a gradual process of education, which for any who would like to know, was completely self directed, the culmination of which ocurred whilst working with my Uncle, a resident of Florida, an avid listener of Limbaugh, Hannity and Boortz (the latter whom I have never actually heard). We listened to Hannity every afternoon and I couldn't believe my ears... here I hear this guy talking about all kinds of really important issues, sharing his views on it and I'm going yeah, yeah, yeah.... I swear if I were in church I might have screamed out "testify brother". But this guy is a Conservative, and I am not, I still thought that Conservative was a bad word (in Canada many will tell you it IS a bad word). But hey, if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, swims like a duck... well you get the idea.

This is why I tell folks I am a recently discovered Conservative, not recently converted. My beliefs have not grown any more conservative in the last 5 years, I just didn't realize how truly profoundly, completely, and permanently 9/11 changed me. (My Uncle also attributes this to my age... apparently it is quite common to shift from liberal to conservative @ 30-40 yrs of age, I was 31 on 9/11 32 just a few months later (was it Churchill who said if you are 40 and not a conservative you haven't a brain, if you are 20 and not a liberal you haven't a heart) Of course, even though I am Canadian, I am actually geographically closer to New York than many US citizens are. It is literally a 1/2hr or less walk from my front door to New York State. This happened practically in my back yard.

I ran the gamut of emotions on 9/11, disbelief (I worked late nights then, so when my roomate's friend kept calling and telling me to watch the news I thought he was playing apractical joke) intense grief as I watched the towers fall (I am a large and rough looking man, I was in tears for quite a while) horror, anger, hatred and finally it was all replaced by resolve. A resolve that if there were anything I could do about it my children would never have to witness or fear a similar even happening ever ever again. That resolve remains to this day.

Many of my former friends no longer talk to me, to them I am a Right Wing Totalitarian (because I believe that giving people freedom is a just and noble cause... kind of specious logic that),a Lover of Americans (yes I do love you all, I am extremely grateful that despite my own wishy washy Govt. you are scarificing your men and women in an endeavour which while ultimately not engaged for that purpose, I believe is helping to ensure that my children need never know what a 9/11 feels like) and a host of other insults I am certain have been heard by others here many many times.... Meh so what. My kids are the most important people on the earth... to me anyway.

I am now a right wing activist, I spread information wherever I can. I got my centrist wife, who has never before voted in her entire life (I showed her what Iraqis had to endure for this right, and how many of them did and that got her up and going), out to the polls. I don't know what she voted, she says Conservative, I don't really care, I'm just glad that she got out and exercised her right to do so. I gave her the information, all the pamphlets and websites of ALL the parties, because I did not want her to just vote what I voted (though Hannity is on 3 hrs a day in this house and I do rant quite often about what idiots the Liberal Party of Canada are :) ).

Sorry for the length of this post, I just had to share, the comment about the children set it all off, as the change in my entire belief system began with my children and what was best for them. Thank you for your post, and as I said, no need to apologize my friend :)

BTW on the subject of children and political beliefs.. I was wondering how many have this experience I have...... all except one of my leftist friends are childless. The one who actually does have children has no contact with them whatsoever. Is this common. Might it be that those without children have the luxury to afford being Liberal, socially and economically (I know many if not all of my economic and social views are driven by the fact that I have children to provide for).

If you read this far thanks, and sorry if I sidetracked the thread, just wanted to share that with the fellow who went off for the sake of his children, to let him know he's not alone, and has no need to apologize, and to thank him for speaking what was written on my heart.

SFC(R)L

January 27th, 2006, 5:41 pm

SFC, those post(s) are interesting and seem very unfair to our troops. We have high standards and we expect them to conduct themselves professionally but some of those situations seem like self defense. Yet, they are punished and suffer loss of pay and rank "?"

We must maintain the highest possible standards in dealing with these murderers. We cannot afford to make mistakes.

Therefore, the rules, procedures and protocols are very strict and breaking them results in disciplinary actions.

The article does not amplify the incidents, but I don't believe that simple self-defense results in punishment, and the punishments listed do not match those normally imposed, so maybe the author is a little fuzzy in this point. I am sure only those who retaliate, or strike first are disciplined.

SFC(R)L

January 27th, 2006, 5:44 pm

Some people may be destined to be sheep and others might be genetically primed to be wolves or sheepdogs. But I believe that most people can choose which one they want to be, and I'm proud to say that more and more Americans are choosing to become sheepdogs.

Seven months after the attack on September 11, 2001, Todd Beamer was honored in his hometown of Cranbury, New Jersey. Todd, as you recall, was the man on Flight 93 over Pennsylvania who called on his cell phone to alert an operator from United Airlines about the hijacking. When he learned of the other three passenger planes that had been used as weapons, Todd dropped his phone and uttered the words, "Let's roll," which authorities believe was a signal to the other passengers to confront the terrorist hijackers. In one hour, a transformation occurred among the passengers - athletes, business people and parents. -- from sheep to sheepdogs and together they fought the wolves, ultimately saving an unknown number of lives on the ground.

There is no safety for honest men except by believing all possible evil of evil men. - Edmund Burke

Here is the point I like to emphasize, especially to the thousands of police officers and soldiers I speak to each year. In nature the sheep, real sheep, are born as sheep. Sheepdogs are born that way, and so are wolves. They didn't have a choice. But you are not a critter. As a human being, you can be whatever you want to be. It is a conscious, moral decision.

If you want to be a sheep, then you can be a sheep and that is okay, but you must understand the price you pay. When the wolf comes, you and your loved ones are going to die if there is not a sheepdog there to protect you. If you want to be a wolf, you can be one, but the sheepdogs are going to hunt you down and you will never have rest, safety, trust or love. But if you want to be a sheepdog and walk the warrior's path, then you must make a conscious and moral decision every day to dedicate, equip and prepare yourself to thrive in that toxic, corrosive moment when the wolf comes knocking at the door.

For example, many officers carry their weapons in church.? They are well concealed in ankle holsters, shoulder holsters or inside-the-belt holsters tucked into the small of their backs.? Anytime you go to some form of religious service, there is a very good chance that a police officer in your congregation is carrying. You will never know if there is such an individual in your place of worship, until the wolf appears to massacre you and your loved ones.

I was training a group of police officers in Texas, and during the break, one officer asked his friend if he carried his weapon in church. The other cop replied, "I will never be caught without my gun in church." I asked why he felt so strongly about this, and he told me about a cop he knew who was at a church massacre in Ft. Worth, Texas in 1999. In that incident, a mentally deranged individual came into the church and opened fire, gunning down fourteen people. He said that officer believed he could have saved every life that day if he had been carrying his gun. His own son was shot, and all he could do was throw himself on the boy's body and wait to die. That cop looked me in the eye and said, "Do you have any idea how hard it would be to live with yourself after that?"

Some individuals would be horrified if they knew this police officer was carrying a weapon in church. They might call him paranoid and would probably scorn him. Yet these same individuals would be enraged and would call for "heads to roll" if they found out that the airbags in their cars were defective, or that the fire extinguisher and fire sprinklers in their kids' school did not work. They can accept the fact that fires and traffic accidents can happen and that there must be safeguards against them.

Their only response to the wolf, though, is denial, and all too often their response to the sheepdog is scorn and disdain. But the sheepdog quietly asks himself, "Do you have and idea how hard it would be to live with yourself if your loved ones attacked and killed, and you had to stand there helplessly because you were unprepared for that day?"

It is denial that turns people into sheep. Sheep are psychologically destroyed by combat because their only defense is denial, which is counterproductive and destructive, resulting in fear, helplessness and horror when the wolf shows up.

Denial kills you twice. It kills you once, at your moment of truth when you are not physically prepared: you didn't bring your gun, you didn't train. Your only defense was wishful thinking. Hope is not a strategy. Denial kills you a second time because even if you do physically survive, you are psychologically shattered by your fear helplessness and horror at your moment of truth.

Gavin de Becker puts it like this in Fear Less, his superb post-9/11 book, which should be required reading for anyone trying to come to terms with our current world situation: "...denial can be seductive, but it has an insidious side effect. For all the peace of mind deniers think they get by saying it isn't so, the fall they take when faced with new violence is all the more unsettling."

Denial is a save-now-pay-later scheme, a contract written entirely in small print, for in the long run, the denying person knows the truth on some level.

And so the warrior must strive to confront denial in all aspects of his life, and prepare himself for the day when evil comes. If you are warrior who is legally authorized to carry a weapon and you step outside without that weapon, then you become a sheep, pretending that the bad man will not come today. No one can be "on" 24/7, for a lifetime. Everyone needs down time. But if you are authorized to carry a weapon, and you walk outside without it, just take a deep breath, and say this to yourself...

"Baa."

This business of being a sheep or a sheep dog is not a yes-no dichotomy. It is not an all-or-nothing, either-or choice. It is a matter of degrees, a continuum. On one end is an abject, head-in-the-sand-sheep and on the other end is the ultimate warrior. Few people exist completely on one end or the other. Most of us live somewhere in between. Since 9-11 almost everyone in America took a step up that continuum, away from denial. The sheep took a few steps toward accepting and appreciating their warriors, and the warriors started taking their job more seriously. The degree to which you move up that continuum, away from sheephood and denial, is the degree to which you and your loved ones will survive, physically and psychologically at your moment of truth.

SFC(R)L

January 27th, 2006, 5:45 pm

On Sheep, Wolves, and Sheepdogs

By LTC (RET) Dave Grossman

Honor never grows old, and honor rejoices the heart of age. It does so because honor is, finally, about defending those noble and worthy things that deserve defending, even if it comes at a high cost.

In our time, that may mean social disapproval, public scorn, hardship, persecution, or as always,even death itself. The question remains: What is worth defending? What is worth dying for? What is worth living for? - William J. Bennett - in a lecture to the United States Naval Academy November 24, 1997

One Vietnam veteran, an old retired colonel, once said this to me:

"Most of the people in our society are sheep. They are kind, gentle, productive creatures who can only hurt one another by accident." This is true. Remember, the murder rate is six per 100,000 per year, and the aggravated assault rate is four per 1,000 per year. What this means is that the vast majority of Americans are not inclined to hurt one another. Some estimates say that two million Americans are victims of violent crimes every year, a tragic, staggering number, perhaps an all-time record rate of violent crime. But there are almost 300 million Americans, which means that the odds of being a victim of violent crime is considerably less than one in a hundred on any given year. Furthermore, since many violent crimes are committed by repeat offenders, the actual number of violent citizens is considerably less than two million.

Thus there is a paradox, and we must grasp both ends of the situation: We may well be in the most violent times in history, but violence is still remarkably rare. This is because most citizens are kind, decent people who are not capable of hurting each other, except by accident or under extreme provocation. They are sheep.

I mean nothing negative by calling them sheep. To me it is like the pretty, blue robin's egg. Inside it is soft and gooey but someday it will grow into something wonderful. But the egg cannot survive without its hard blue shell. Police officers, soldiers, and other warriors are like that shell, and someday the civilization they protect will grow into something wonderful.? For now, though, they need warriors to protect them from the predators.

"Then there are the wolves," the old war veteran said, "and the wolves feed on the sheep without mercy." Do you believe there are wolves out there who will feed on the flock without mercy? You better believe it. There are evil men in this world and they are capable of evil deeds. The moment you forget that or pretend it is not so, you become a sheep. There is no safety in denial.

"Then there are sheepdogs," he went on, "and I'm a sheepdog. I live to protect the flock and confront the wolf."

If you have no capacity for violence then you are a healthy productive citizen, a sheep. If you have a capacity for violence and no empathy for your fellow citizens, then you have defined an aggressive sociopath, a wolf. But what if you have a capacity for violence, and a deep love for your fellow citizens? What do you have then? A sheepdog, a warrior, someone who is walking the hero's path. Someone who can walk into the heart of darkness, into the universal human phobia, and walk out unscathed

Let me expand on this old soldier's excellent model of the sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs. We know that the sheep live in denial, that is what makes them sheep. They do not want to believe that there is evil in the world. They can accept the fact that fires can happen, which is why they want fire extinguishers, fire sprinklers, fire alarms and fire exits throughout their kids' schools.

But many of them are outraged at the idea of putting an armed police officer in their kid's school. Our children are thousands of times more likely to be killed or seriously injured by school violence than fire, but the sheep's only response to the possibility of violence is denial. The idea of someone coming to kill or harm their child is just too hard, and so they chose the path of denial.

The sheep generally do not like the sheepdog. He looks a lot like the wolf. He has fangs and the capacity for violence. The difference, though, is that the sheepdog must not, can not and will not ever harm the sheep. Any sheep dog who intentionally harms the lowliest little lamb will be punished and removed. The world cannot work any other way, at least not in a representative democracy or a republic such as ours.

Still, the sheepdog disturbs the sheep. He is a constant reminder that there are wolves in the land. They would prefer that he didn't tell them where to go, or give them traffic tickets, or stand at the ready in our airports in camouflage fatigues holding an M-16. The sheep would much rather have the sheepdog cash in his fangs, spray paint himself white, and go, "Baa."

Until the wolf shows up. Then the entire flock tries desperately to hide behind one lonely sheepdog.

The students, the victims, at Columbine High School were big, tough high school students, and under ordinary circumstances they would not have had the time of day for a police officer. They were not bad kids; they just had nothing to say to a cop. When the school was under attack, however, and SWAT teams were clearing the rooms and hallways, the officers had to physically peel those clinging, sobbing kids off of them. This is how the little lambs feel about their sheepdog when the wolf is at the door.

Look at what happened after September 11, 2001 when the wolf pounded hard on the door. Remember how America, more than ever before, felt differently about their law enforcement officers and military personnel? Remember how many times you heard the word hero?

Understand that there is nothing morally superior about being a sheepdog; it is just what you choose to be. Also understand that a sheepdog is a funny critter: He is always sniffing around out on the perimeter, checking the breeze, barking at things that go bump in the night, and yearning for a righteous battle. That is, the young sheepdogs yearn for a righteous battle. The old sheepdogs are a little older and wiser, but they move to the sound of the guns when needed right along with the young ones.

Here is how the sheep and the sheepdog think differently. The sheep pretend the wolf will never come, but the sheepdog lives for that day. After the attacks on September 11, 2001, most of the sheep, that is, most citizens in America said, "Thank God I wasn't on one of those planes." The sheepdogs, the warriors, said, "Dear God, I wish I could have been on one of those planes. Maybe I could have made a difference." When you are truly transformed into a warrior and have truly invested yourself into warriorhood, you want to be there. You want to be able to make a difference.

There is nothing morally superior about the sheepdog, the warrior, but he does have one real advantage. Only one. And that is that he is able to survive and thrive in an environment that destroys 98 percent of the population. There was research conducted a few years ago with individuals convicted of violent crimes. These cons were in prison for serious, predatory crimes of violence: assaults, murders and killing law enforcement officers. The vast majority said that they specifically targeted victims by body language: slumped walk, passive behavior and lack of awareness. They chose their victims like big cats do in Africa, when they select one out of the herd that is least able to protect itself.

Loyal American

January 28th, 2006, 11:36 am

If you want to be a sheep, then you can be a sheep and that is okay, but you must understand the price you pay. When the wolf comes, you and your loved ones are going to die if there is not a sheepdog there to protect you. If you want to be a wolf, you can be one, but the sheepdogs are going to hunt you down and you will never have rest, safety, trust or love. But if you want to be a sheepdog and walk the warrior's path, then you must make a conscious and moral decision every day to dedicate, equip and prepare yourself to thrive in that toxic, corrosive moment when the wolf comes knocking at the door.

This deserves to been seen all by itself!

Loyal American

January 28th, 2006, 11:40 am

This business of being a sheep or a sheep dog is not a yes-no dichotomy. It is not an all-or-nothing, either-or choice. It is a matter of degrees, a continuum. On one end is an abject, head-in-the-sand-sheep and on the other end is the ultimate warrior. Few people exist completely on one end or the other. Most of us live somewhere in between. Since 9-11 almost everyone in America took a step up that continuum, away from denial. The sheep took a few steps toward accepting and appreciating their warriors, and the warriors started taking their job more seriously. The degree to which you move up that continuum, away from sheephood and denial, is the degree to which you and your loved ones will survive, physically and psychologically at your moment of truth.

There are still many who need to understand this! Great Post SFC!

eaglewings

January 28th, 2006, 11:58 am

Funny though thoroughly non pc audio, thanks to lgf.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEQc2y3BR30

SFC(R)L

January 28th, 2006, 12:09 pm

Loyal American

January 28th, 2006, 12:16 pm

Here is how the sheep and the sheepdog think differently. The sheep pretend the wolf will never come, but the sheepdog lives for that day. After the attacks on September 11, 2001, most of the sheep, that is, most citizens in America said, "Thank God I wasn't on one of those planes." The sheepdogs, the warriors, said, "Dear God, I wish I could have been on one of those planes. Maybe I could have made a difference." When you are truly transformed into a warrior and have truly invested yourself into warriorhood, you want to be there. You want to be able to make a difference.

When 9/11 happened my daughter called me from Germany angry that we had so many troops in Germany and they weren't here to defend the homeland.....as if it would of made the difference. I don't know what makes a person a "sheepdog" but I thank God daily for each and everyone of them.
I'm just an old grandma who can only defend and appreciate the American sheepdog but believe me at heart I am and have always been a sheepdog! God Bless our Armed Forces and our Police, they have a very difficult job!:flag:

Loyal American

January 28th, 2006, 12:18 pm

I am a sheepdog.

WOOF

Didn't see you posted!

Yes Sir, you are a sheepdog.......WOOF WOOF back at ya!

Loyal American

January 28th, 2006, 12:22 pm

Funny though thoroughly non pc audio, thanks to lgf.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEQc2y3BR30

Well, that was a real pleasure to listen to!:eek:
OMG, thank you for our SHEEPDOG'S!!!!

SFC(R)L

January 28th, 2006, 12:30 pm

WOOF

I am a Drill Sergeant

I will assist each individual in their efforts to become a highly motivated, well disciplined, physically and mentally fit soldier, capable of defeating any enemy on today’s modern battlefield.

I will instill pride in all I train. Pride in self, in the Army, and in Country.

I will insist that each Soldier meets and maintains the Army standards of military bearing and courtesy, consistent with the highest traditions of the U.S. Army.

I will lead by example, never requiring a Soldier to attempt any task I would not do myself.

But first, last, and always, I am an American Soldier - Sworn to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, both foreign and domestic.

I am a Drill Sergeant

eaglewings

January 28th, 2006, 4:21 pm

You're welcome, have a t-bone to celebrate.

wwrwtw

January 29th, 2006, 11:30 am

I finally read thru this entire thread last night and all I can say say is...

WOW! GREAT thread SFC...I have learned alot from it and alot about the non responsive libs :)

SFC(R)L

January 29th, 2006, 11:42 am

I finally read thru this entire thread last night and all I can say say is...

WOW! GREAT thread SFC...I have learned alot from it and alot about the non responsive libs :)

You are now an honorary sheepdog

Loyal American

January 29th, 2006, 12:10 pm

You're welcome, have a t-bone to celebrate.

LOL, this place has made me hungry three times in the last 24 hours, who is your "t-bone to celebrate" order to me or SFC? :think: I think I know what I want for din now!:))

Loyal American

January 29th, 2006, 12:12 pm

You are now an honorary sheepdog

WW is an awesome honorary sheepdog! I have learned a great deal from her SFC, she is cool!:cool:

This thread is cool too! I can't even tell you how many times I've come in here to grab some post you've made to back up some e-mail I am sending to my dearly elected. I hope this thread never goes poof!

wwrwtw

January 29th, 2006, 12:39 pm

You are now an honorary sheepdog

WOOHOOO!!!!

http://bestsmileys.com/dogs/2.gif

SFC(R)L

January 29th, 2006, 12:49 pm

WW is an awesome honorary sheepdog! I have learned a great deal from her SFC, she is cool!:cool:

This thread is cool too! I can't even tell you how many times I've come in here to grab some post you've made to back up some e-mail I am sending to my dearly elected. I hope this thread never goes poof!

You are welcome and you are now an honorary sheepdog, too

Twitch23

January 29th, 2006, 7:39 pm

WW is an awesome honorary sheepdog! I have learned a great deal from her SFC, she is cool!:cool:

This thread is cool too! I can't even tell you how many times I've come in here to grab some post you've made to back up some e-mail I am sending to my dearly elected. I hope this thread never goes poof!

Not gonna happen as long as I have anything to say about it. There is just far too much good info in here to let it slip away. Thanks again SFC

rhet 2

January 29th, 2006, 8:44 pm

Not gonna happen as long as I have anything to say about it. There is just far too much good info in here to let it slip away. Thanks again SFC

And thanks, Twitch, for pulling it back up again. Good work, folks.

Hey, if I go "woof," can I be a dog, too? Only I want to be a Kuvasz--big, shaggy white, guards sheep only because its guarding the shepherd, wouldn't work a flock for anything. :))

Now, if I would ever approve of torture--which I do NOT--to get info, it'd be Hussein (new synonym for saddism: saddamism).

SFC(R)L

January 29th, 2006, 8:52 pm

And thanks, Twitch, for pulling it back up again. Good work, folks.

Hey, if I go "woof," can I be a dog, too? Only I want to be a Kuvasz--big, shaggy white, guards sheep only because its guarding the shepherd, wouldn't work a flock for anything. :))

Now, if I would ever approve of torture--which I do NOT--to get info, it'd be Hussein (new synonym for saddism: saddamism).

Welcome back, Rhet.

As one who has suffered from a lost drive, I can sympathize.

Before this gets out of hand, recommend we come up with some standards for honorary sheepdogs.

Any ideas?

SFC(R)L

January 31st, 2006, 8:08 pm

Report: Iran has 'extremely advanced' nuclear program

Facility violates non-proliferation pact, sources say

Monday, March 10, 2003 Posted: 3:00 AM EST (0800 GMT)

The Natanz facility is shown in this commercial satellite image.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- According to a Time magazine report, Iran has a nuclear program that is far more advanced than has been previously disclosed.

Citing unnamed diplomatic sources, Time says U.N. weapons inspectors have discovered that Iran's uranium-enrichment facility is "extremely advanced," to the point that it violates the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty [NPT].

On a visit last month to Iran, Mohamed ElBaradei, director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, visited the facility designed to enrich uranium that Iran is building near Natanz.

But diplomatic sources quoted by TIME say he found the plant much further advanced than previously believed. The sources say work on the plant is "extremely advanced," involves hundreds of gas centrifuges ready to produce enriched uranium and "the parts for a thousand others ready to be assembled."

Iran has confirmed that two facilities, the one in Natanz and another near Arak, are indeed nuclear plants, but it says the country's nuclear program is aimed at building nuclear power plants.

"Iranian experts have acquired the knowledge for civilian application of the nuclear technology," President Mohammed Khatami said in February. The Iranian leader added that nations have a right to do so.

Sources told Time that the IAEA, the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog, found that Iran has added uranium to some centrifuges as a test -- in "blatant violation" of the NPT, to which Iran is a signatory.

"If Iran were found to have an operating centrifuge, it would be a direct violation [of the treaty] and is something that would need immediately to be referred to the United Nations Security Council for action,"Jon Wolfstahl of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace was quoted as saying in the article.

The IAEA has neither publicly released the information nor responded to the Time report.

U.S. officials have long accused Iran of trying to develop nuclear weapons.

In December 2002, the State Department said recent satellite photos reinforced the belief that Iran was "actively working" on a nuclear weapons program. However, the IAEA said that Iran had notified it of its intentions and invited it to inspect the facilities.

Referring to Sunday's report, Secretary of State Colin Powell said on CNN's "Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer," "Here, we suddenly discover that Iran is much further along -- with a far more robust nuclear weapons development program -- than anyone said it had, and now the IAEA has found that out.

"We've provided them information, they have discovered it, and it shows you how a determined nation that has the intent to develop a nuclear weapon can keep that development process secret from inspectors and outsiders."

National security adviser Condoleezza Rice said the news "does not surprise us at all."

"We've said all along that there are real problems with Iran and its so-called peaceful nuclear programs," she said on ABC's "This Week." "It's been couched as a peaceful program, but we've been one of the lone voices that said the Iranians are a problem."

Last year, President Bush called on Russia to end its work with Iran on nuclear reactors, insisting that Tehran was trying to develop nuclear weapons. Moscow refused.

"We've talked to the Russians about it," Rice said Sunday.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi cited Iran last week in presenting her argument that regime change in Iraq will not ensure its disarmament. Iraq is "in a very dangerous neighborhood," the California Democrat said. "The Iranians are developing weapons of mass destruction. Practically every country in the region is developing weapons of mass destruction and the capability to launch them."

Israel, which is widely believe to have developed nuclear weapons and which destroyed an Iraqi nuclear plant in Osirak in a 1981 raid, says it is deeply alarmed by the developments.

An Israeli official told Time that the news is "a huge concern" because Iran denies Israel's right to exist and is a principal sponsor of Hezbollah, which has carried out attacks against Israelis and is considered a terrorist organization by the United States.

Time magazine is a unit of AOL Time Warner, which also owns CNN.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/09/iran.nuclear/

Why are liberals acting stunned?

Loyal American

January 31st, 2006, 8:21 pm

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi cited Iran last week in presenting her argument that regime change in Iraq will not ensure its disarmament. Iraq is "in a very dangerous neighborhood," the California Democrat said. "The Iranians are developing weapons of mass destruction. Practically every country in the region is developing weapons of mass destruction and the capability to launch them."

:))

Gee, wonder why you posted about nuclear programs tonight!;)

SFC(R)L

January 31st, 2006, 8:27 pm

Loyal American

January 31st, 2006, 8:30 pm

Just trying to help out.

They think we don't remember.

They rewrite history and we are suppose to buy it, don't you get it? :rolleyes:

SFC(R)L

January 31st, 2006, 8:37 pm

They rewrite history and we are suppose to buy it, don't you get it? :rolleyes:

no

The History of Iranian Sponsored Terrorism

Al-Qaida's Links to Iranian Security Services

Yael Shahar
ICT Researcher

Since the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran, terrorism has served the regime of the ayatollahs as a tool of both domestic and foreign policy. This policy was directed against Iranian citizens inside Iran, as well as against advocates of opposition views in exile. Iran's sponsorship of terrorism has bridged ideological gaps and political divides; Teheran has provided arms and training to such groups as the Gama'a al-Islamiyah, the Egyptian al-Jihad, and the Algerian G.I.A. Al-Qaida too, has benefited from Iranian support and expertise for more than a decade. More recently, this support has taken the form of free passage for al-Qaida activists seeking to establish a foothold in Lebanon. There are also signs that al-Qaida has sought the help of Iran in deepening it involvement in Palestinian terrorism against Israel.

Iran's support of Terrorism

Iran views terrorism as a legitimate means to further its ideological and strategic aims, including:

"Exporting the Revolution"

Assisting Islamic groups and organizations worldwide, especially in the Middle East

Furthering the destruction of Israel and attempting to sabotage the political process

Destabilizing the regimes of the more pragmatic Arab countries

Eliminating the Iranian regime's opposition.

http://joshuawoody.com/iran.htm

SFC(R)L

January 31st, 2006, 8:41 pm

ELBARADEI: Sure. And if they have the nuclear material and they have a parallel weaponization program along the way, they are really not very far - a few months - from a weapon. We need to revisit the treaty, because that margin of security is unacceptable. But specifically on Iran, the board is saying, "You have a right under the treaty to enrich uranium, but because of the lack of confidence in your program and because the IAEA has not yet given you a clean bill of health, you should not exercise that right. In a way, you have to go through a probation period, to build confidence again, before you can exercise your full rights."

http://www.iaea.or.at/NewsCenter/Transcripts/2006/newsweek12012006.html

How did THIS go relatively UNREPORTED?

SFC(R)L

February 2nd, 2006, 10:53 pm

The Pentagon has identified Russia as Iraq's top arms supplier, along with France and China. U.S. military officials have said Russian military suppliers sold Iraq special electronic jammers that were designed to thwart attacks by U.S. satellite-guided joint direct attack munitions, or JDAMs.

The jammers were bombed by the JDAMs, after the global positioning systems satellites signals used to guide them were boosted.

John A. Shaw, deputy undersecretary of defense for international technology security, said this week that two European intelligence services have obtained documentary evidence indicating Russian spetsnaz, or special forces, troops were involved in a covert program to shred documents on Russian arms sales to Iraq, and to move weapons out of the country to Syria, Lebanon and possibly Iran.

The Russians were hired by the Iraqis to protect special Russian weapons and to organize the removal of arms through truck convoys. The Russian special forces troops were working for the GRU military intelligence service and wore civilian clothes, defense officials said.

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20041029-110322-3343r.htm

Landsknecht

February 3rd, 2006, 2:27 am

Gee, isn't this a lot like the Russians that were flying fighter sorties for North Korea against us? :shhh:

SFC(R)L

February 4th, 2006, 11:46 am

Iran Promises Retaliation for Referral to U.N. Security Council
Saturday, February 04, 2006

VIENNA, Austria — The U.N. nuclear watchdog on Saturday reported Iran to the U.N. Security Council in a resolution expressing concern Tehran's nuclear program may not be "exclusively for peaceful purposes." Iran said it would retaliate immediately.

The landmark decision by the International Atomic Energy Agency's 35-nation board sets the stage for future action by the top U.N. body, which has the authority to impose economic and political sanctions.

Still, any such moves were weeks if not months away. Two permanent council members, Russia and China, agreed to referral only on condition the council take no action before March.

Twenty-seven nations supported the resolution, which was sponsored by three European powers — Britain, France and Germany — and backed by the United States.

Cuba, Syria and Venezuela were the only nations to vote against. Five others — Algeria, Belarus, Indonesia, Libya and South Africa — abstained, a milder form of showing opposition.

Among those backing the referral was India, a nation with great weight in the developing world whose stance was unclear until the vote.

Javed Vaeidi, the deputy head of Iran's powerful Security Council, said his country would "immediately" retaliate.

He said that after approval by the Iranian council, Iran would stop honoring an agreement with the IAEA allowing its inspectors broad powers to monitor and probe Tehran's nuclear activities and would start work on full-scale uranium enrichment — an activity that can produce the fissile core of nuclear warheads.

Iran says it wants to enrich only to make nuclear fuel, But concerns that it might misuse the technology accelerated the chain of events that led to Saturday's Security Council referral, after Tehran took IAEA seals off enrichment equipment Jan. 10 and said it would resume small-scale activities.

Vaeidi on Friday said referral would mean his country would no longer consider an internationally supported plan to move his country's enrichment to Russia as a way of depriving Iran direct access to the technology. On Saturday, however, he said his country was still considering a response to the Russian plan.

The resolution refers to Iran's breaches of the nuclear nonproliferation treaty and lack of confidence that it is not trying to make weapons.

It expresses "serious concerns about Iran's nuclear program." It recalls "Iran's many failures and breaches of its obligations" to the nonproliferation treaty. And it expresses "the absence of confidence that Iran's nuclear program is exclusively for peaceful purposes."

It requests IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei to "report to the Security Council" steps Iran needs to take to dispel suspicions about its nuclear ambitions.

The resolution calls on Iran to:

— Reestablish a freeze on uranium enrichment and related activities.

— Consider whether to stop construction of a heavy water reactor that could be the source of plutonium for weapons.

— Formally ratify an agreement allowing the IAEA greater inspecting authority and continue honoring the agreement before it is ratified.

— Give the IAEA additional power in its investigation of Iran's nuclear program, including "access to individuals" for interviews, as well as to documentation on its black-market nuclear purchases, equipment that could be used for nuclear and non-nuclear purposes and "certain military-owned workshops" where nuclear activities might be going on.

The draft also asks IAEA director general Mohamed ElBaradei to "convey ... to the Security Council" his report to the next board session in March along with any resolution that meeting might approve.

Agreement on the final wording of the text was achieved only overnight, just hours before Saturday's meeting convened, after Washington compromised on Egypt's demand that the resolution include support for the creation of a nuclear weapons-free zone in the Middle East. Egypt and other Arab states have long linked the two issues of Iran's atomic ambitions and Israel's nuclear weapons status.

The resolution recognized "that a solution to the Iranian issue would contribute to global nonproliferation efforts and ... the objective of a Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction, including their means of delivery."

A Western diplomat at the meeting said the United States felt strongly about not linking Israel to nuclear concerns in the Middle East when it considers Iran the real threat. But the Americans relented in the face of overwhelming European support for such a clause.

Support for Iran shrank after Russia and China lined up behind the United States, France and Britain — the other three permanent council members — earlier in the week.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,183802,00.html

Loyal American

February 4th, 2006, 11:59 am

SFC(R)L

February 4th, 2006, 12:03 pm

Still, any such moves were weeks if not months away. Two permanent council members, Russia and China, agreed to referral only on condition the council take no action before March.

I just am not getting why Russia and China are asking for no action till March!:think: ...... :confused:

They are foot dragging as they are deeply invested in Iran and its oil, as well as the nuclear technology they sold to Iran.

Loyal American

February 4th, 2006, 12:03 pm

Cuba, Syria and Venezuela were the only nations to vote against. Five others — Algeria, Belarus, Indonesia, Libya and South Africa — abstained, a milder form of showing opposition.

This blow me away! I certainly get Cuba, Syria and Venezuela.....No surprise!
BUT, those abstaining, especially Algeria and Indionesia.....can't believe they didn't vote a resounding YES!

SFC(R)L

February 4th, 2006, 12:06 pm

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ir.html#Econ

Loyal American

February 4th, 2006, 12:07 pm

The resolution calls on Iran to:

— Reestablish a freeze on uranium enrichment and related activities.

— Consider whether to stop construction of a heavy water reactor that could be the source of plutonium for weapons.

— Formally ratify an agreement allowing the IAEA greater inspecting authority and continue honoring the agreement before it is ratified.

— Give the IAEA additional power in its investigation of Iran's nuclear program, including "access to individuals" for interviews, as well as to documentation on its black-market nuclear purchases, equipment that could be used for nuclear and non-nuclear purposes and "certain military-owned workshops" where nuclear activities might be going on.

This is going to be another Iraq, isn't it?:cry:

Loyal American

February 4th, 2006, 12:10 pm

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ir.html#Econ

OMG, this link is so cool.......saving it to my desk top immediately! THANKS!

SFC(R)L

February 4th, 2006, 12:11 pm

SFC(R)L

February 4th, 2006, 12:12 pm

OMG, this link is so cool.......saving it to my desk top immediately! THANKS!

Be advised that it is open data, available to the public.

it does not contain any classified data.

Loyal American

February 4th, 2006, 12:16 pm

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ir.html#Econ

SFC, is there a link that would give me all the ME countries? I just did a search and I am getting NOTTA! I'd like to give such info to Robert as it would be a great fact finder and could be used for reports, so on.

SFC(R)L

February 4th, 2006, 12:23 pm

SFC, is there a link that would give me all the ME countries? I just did a search and I am getting NOTTA! I'd like to give such info to Robert as it would be a great fact finder and could be used for reports, so on.

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/index.html

On this page, there are several neat links as well as the drop down menu for most countries in the world.

:shifty:

Loyal American

February 4th, 2006, 12:41 pm

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/index.html

On this page, there are several neat links as well as the drop down menu for most countries in the world.

:shifty:

Just sent this link to my son-in-law to put on Robert's lap top, what neat site!
Again, Thanks!

SFC(R)L

February 4th, 2006, 7:31 pm

Just sent this link to my son-in-law to put on Robert's lap top, what neat site!
Again, Thanks!

You are most welcome

Loyal American

February 4th, 2006, 9:03 pm

SFC, here is a little update I just read related to your post 298:

Iran Vows Enrichment After U.N. Referral
By GEORGE JAHN, Associated Press Writer
2 hours ago

Great Britain's Ambassador to the IAEA Peter Jenkins delivers ...
VIENNA, Austria - The International Atomic Energy Agency reported Iran to the U.N. Security Council on Saturday over fears it wants to produce nuclear arms, raising the stakes in the diplomatic confrontation and prompting Tehran to threaten immediate retaliation.

Of the board's 35 member nations, 27 voted for referral, reflecting more than two years of intense lobbying by the United States and its allies to enlist broad backing for such a move.

http://www.comcast.net/news/index.jsp?cat=GENERAL&fn=/2006/02/04/319330.html

The last paragraph is below, shouldn't the IAEA know for sure that Israel has the 6th largest stockpile before saying so? Should'nt they know, anyway? Guess I don't fully get what the IAEA knows and/or doesn't know!:confused:

Israel, which is not an IAEA board member, welcomed Iran's referral and the call for a nuclear-free Middle East. Experts say Israel has the world's sixth-largest stockpile of nuclear weapons, but the Jewish state neither acknowledges nor denies having such a program.

SFC(R)L

February 4th, 2006, 9:09 pm

Clearly they are seeking a conflict with the international community.

We must proceed with caution, as they may already have WMD.

SFC(R)L

February 11th, 2006, 11:46 am

Solid Momentum Continues in Military Recruiting, Retention
By Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Feb. 10, 2006 – All the military services exceeded their recruiting goals for January - a trend that's continued for eight consecutive months, Defense Department officials announced today.
The January figures reflect continued recruiting successes since last June, Air Force Lt. Col. Ellen Krenke, a Pentagon spokesperson, told American Forces Press Service. "These successes are helping the services build the momentum they need as they approach the springtime months, which are traditionally slower times for recruiting," she said.

Recruiting typically rebounds again during the summer months, following high school graduations, Krenke noted.

During January, the Army recruited 8,337 new members, 103 percent of its goal; the Navy, 2,726, 101 percent; the Marine Corps, 3,234, 106 percent; and the Air Force, 2,915, 101 percent, Krenke said.

In addition, three of the six reserve components met or exceeded their January goals. The Army National Guard reached 113 percent of its goal. Both the Marine Corps Reserve and Air Force Reserve met 100 percent of their goals.

The Army Reserve, Navy Reserve and Air National Guard fell slightly short of their January goals, achieving 96, 88 and 90 percent of their goals, respectively, Krenke said.

Krenke credited a variety of initiatives - from pumping up the recruiting force to providing more generous incentives and more creative programs - with helping the services maintain recruiting success.

The January successes come at a time when retention remains high throughout the military, she noted.

This reflects the commitment many servicemembers feel toward the military, Krenke said, as well as the professionalism of the force.

"Once people join the military, there's a strong tendency for them to want to stay," she said. "They recognize that military service is a total package - one that allows them to serve their country, be a part of a professional organization and enjoy a good quality of life, not only for them, but also for their families."

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Feb2006/20060210_4177.html

SFC(R)L

February 11th, 2006, 11:48 am

rhet 2

February 11th, 2006, 11:53 am

Rumsfeld: Terrorists Continue to Kill, But Also Continue to Fail
By John D. Banusiewicz
American Forces Press Service

TAORMINA, Italy, Feb. 10, 2006 – Terrorists have racked up failure after failure in their efforts to keep democracy from taking root in Iraq, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said here today.
The secretary spoke at a news conference wrapping up two days of informal meetings among NATO defense ministers.

"The terrorists tried to stop them from having an election in January (2005), and they failed," Rumsfeld said. "They tried to stop them from drafting a constitution, and they failed. They tried to stop them from having a referendum on the constitution, and they failed. They tried to stop them from having an election in December, and they failed.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Feb2006/20060210_4180.html

And they keep trying to drive us out so they can conquer Iraq and establish an Iraqi-styled Taliban--and they fail.

Thanks, SFC. Rummie is, as usual, sharp, precise, and no fluff- and-guff, despite the best efforts of the fluff-and-guff MSM.

And the best part of the article is that this was a REAL reporter, not a fluff-and-guff salesman, writing the report.

SFC(R)L

February 11th, 2006, 11:56 am

The terrorists want to defeat us in Iraq and reclaim it for their own, a major defeat of peace and freedom, an irreversible propaganda coup.

It cannot be allowed.

SFC(R)L

February 12th, 2006, 9:46 pm

26 September 2003

Bremer Says U.S. Forces Have Captured 19 Al-Qaida Terrorists In Iraq
Defense Department Report, September 26: Foreign Fighters Held

Washington -- Nineteen al-Qaida terrorists are among some 248 foreign fighters that have been captured by U.S. forces after infiltrating Iraq, says Ambassador Paul Bremer, the U.S. administrator of the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq.

At a Pentagon briefing September 26, Bremer said that of the 248 foreign fighters, 123 are Syrians, and he said some of the other foreign fighters being detained are from Iran and Yemen.

Loyal American

February 12th, 2006, 10:52 pm

Oh my! :eek:
Somebody doesn't know post 317 yet? :whistle:

SFC(R)L

February 19th, 2006, 12:21 pm

Oh my! :eek:
Somebody doesn't know post 317 yet? :whistle:

Apparently not...

Iraqi Army, U.S. Forces Detain 106, Discover Weapons Caches

American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Feb. 16, 2006 – Iraqi and U.S. forces conducted raids on two targets in Iraq's Diyala province and a raid west of Baghdad that netted a total of 106 individuals and a weapons cache, Multinational Force Iraq officials said.
The 2nd Battalion, 2nd Brigade, 5th Iraqi Army Division, advised by U.S. Army Special Forces soldiers, conducted assaults on two targets Feb. 12 in Diyala. The troops detained 102 persons of interest - 25 were on the Iraqi security forces "most wanted" list. They also killed two insurgents and discovered a large weapons cache.

The combined Iraqi and U.S. forces cordon-and-search missions were designed to capture key insurgents and disrupt multiple insurgent cell operations. The targets were chosen based on intelligence that specific individuals wanted for planning and facilitating insurgent activities would be in the targets, officials said.

While beginning a search of the first target house, an Iraqi army assault team encountered four armed insurgents and came under heavy fire. Though the team was forced to withdraw outside of the house for cover, one of the team's sergeants stayed in the house, killing one insurgent and wounding two more before falling back to regroup with his team.

Those three insurgents were taken into custody. The two wounded detainees received immediate medical treatment, though one later died while en route to receive additional medical care.

A weapons cache discovered during the operations included a rocket, artillery and mortar rounds, rocket-propelled grenades and an RPG launcher, AK-47 assault rifles, and a collection of IED-making materials, including electrical wire and fuses.

One Iraqi army soldier was wounded by enemy small-arms fire during the operation. Iraqi and U.S. medical personnel treated him on the scene.

On Feb. 11, west of Baghdad, the Iraqi army's 1st Battalion, 4th Brigade, 1st Division conducted its first full battalion-sized operation, netting four suspected insurgents.

The operation, advised by U.S. special operations forces, was a cordon-and-search mission designed to track insurgents and sweep for weapons caches.

None of the combined forces were killed or injured during the operation.

SFC(R)L

February 19th, 2006, 12:23 pm

Spread of Democracy Will Yield Peace, Bush Says
By Samantha L. Quigley

American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Feb. 17, 2006 – "The world is changing because freedom is on the march. And we shouldn't be discouraged about ... short-term setbacks," President Bush told an audience in Tampa, Fla., today.
That march began with the removal of the Taliban from Afghanistan, Bush said. It continues as democracy emerges in Afghanistan as well as in Iraq.

"We have an opportunity to lay the foundation of peace for generations to come," he said. "Democracy can yield the peace we all want."

The president had arrived in town earlier in the day to meet with senior leaders at nearby headquarters for U.S. Central Command and U.S. Special Operations Command, both key components in the fight against terrorism.

Terrorists continue to attack innocent people in their attempts to return the Middle East to a terrorist stronghold, Bush said. They also believe the United States is soft and weak and will eventually give up.

"In order to win the war against the enemy, you got to understand the nature of the enemy," the president told the civilian audience. "First of all, these people are cold-blooded killers, people who will kill the innocent in order to achieve a tactical objective and a strategic objective.

"They have no conscience. You can't negotiate with these people. You cannot reason with them. You must bring them to justice."

Secondly, he said, these terrorists have an ideology that allows no dissent, no different point of view and "no sense of history other than their dim view of history."

"They've made it clear (they think) it's just a matter of time before we vacate parts of the world that they can then occupy in order to be able to ... plot attacks against the United States of America," he said.

The president said that scenario would not happen, and outlined the U.S. strategy to win the war on terror.

"The best way to deal with this enemy is to defeat them overseas so we don't have to face them here at home, and to stay on the hunt," he said, adding that efforts also are being made to cut off access to funding. "It makes it kind of hard to operate when you can't get (to) your bank accounts full of money."

Denying terrorists safe haven is the second part to the strategy, he said. The United States is leaning on governments to help with this key element by declaring that harboring terrorists makes the government as bad as the terrorists themselves.

This declaration was reinforced with action, Bush said.

"When a president says something like, 'If you harbor a terrorist you're equally as guilty as the terrorists,' those words mean nothing unless you act upon them," he said. "And I said that to the people of Afghanistan, the Taliban. They didn't listen, and so we acted."

When Saddam Hussein refused to "disclose and disarm," Bush said, he suffered the serious consequences he was promised if he failed to comply, Bush said.

"Removing Saddam Hussein has made America safer and the world a better place," he said.

The last key to the strategy of winning on the Iraq front of the war on terrorism is training the Iraqis to defend themselves, Bush said. "In order to achieve our objective, the Iraqis are going to have to fight the enemy," he said.

Coalition forces are making progress on this front, he said. Iraqi forces are improving and able to take over more and more responsibility for their own defense, and a command and control structure is being put in place, he added.

"As this military's getting better and better, we're turning over a lot of territory to the Iraqis," Bush said. "They now have two divisions ... that are capable of taking the fight nearly on their own."

Though the training mission is progressing successfully, Bush said, he would not be swayed by outside influences when it came to troop levels committed to the global war on terrorism.

"The troop levels will be decided by this administration, and this administration is going to listen, not to politicians, but to the commanders on the ground (about) what we need on the ground in order to win this deal," he said.

The president said the United States will, in the short term, succeed in Iraq. But there has to be a long-term strategy to win the war on terrorism as well, he added.

"That long-term strategy is to liberate people and give them the chance to live under the greatest system of government, and that's democracy," he said. "Make no mistake about it. We're going to win the war on terror."

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Feb2006/20060217_4240.html

SFC(R)L

February 19th, 2006, 2:27 pm

(f) Emergency orders
Notwithstanding any other provision of this subchapter, when the Attorney General reasonably determines that—
(1) an emergency situation exists with respect to the employment of electronic surveillance to obtain foreign intelligence information before an order authorizing such surveillance can with due diligence be obtained; and
(2) the factual basis for issuance of an order under this subchapter to approve such surveillance exists;
he may authorize the emergency employment of electronic surveillance if a judge having jurisdiction under section 1803 of this title is informed by the Attorney General or his designee at the time of such authorization that the decision has been made to employ emergency electronic surveillance and if an application in accordance with this subchapter is made to that judge as soon as practicable, but not more than 72 hours after the Attorney General authorizes such surveillance. If the Attorney General authorizes such emergency employment of electronic surveillance, he shall require that the minimization procedures required by this subchapter for the issuance of a judicial order be followed. In the absence of a judicial order approving such electronic surveillance, the surveillance shall terminate when the information sought is obtained, when the application for the order is denied, or after the expiration of 72 hours from the time of authorization by the Attorney General, whichever is earliest. In the event that such application for approval is denied, or in any other case where the electronic surveillance is terminated and no order is issued approving the surveillance, no information obtained or evidence derived from such surveillance shall be received in evidence or otherwise disclosed in any trial, hearing, or other proceeding in or before any court, grand jury, department, office, agency, regulatory body, legislative committee, or other authority of the United States, a State, or political subdivision thereof, and no information concerning any United States person acquired from such surveillance shall subsequently be used or disclosed in any other manner by Federal officers or employees without the consent of such person, except with the approval of the Attorney General if the information indicates a threat of death or serious bodily harm to any person. A denial of the application made under this subsection may be reviewed as provided in section 1803 of this title.

gratuitous, vanity bump

rhet 2

February 19th, 2006, 2:32 pm

SFC(R)L

February 25th, 2006, 10:41 am

QAEDA CLAIM: WE 'INFILTRATED' UAE GOV'T

By NILES LATHEM

February 25, 2006 -- WASHINGTON — Al Qaeda warned the government of the United Arab Emirates more than three years ago that it "infiltrated" key government agencies, according to a disturbing document released by the U.S. military.

The warning was contained in a June 2002 message to UAE rulers, in which the terror network demanded the release of an unknown number of "mujahedeen detainees," who it said had been arrested during a government crackdown in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks.

The explosive document is certain to become ammunition for critics of the controversial UAE port deal, who fear the Dubai-based firm could be used by terrorists to sneak money and personnel into the United States.

Little is known about the origins or authorship of the message.

"You are well aware that we have infiltrated your security, censorship and monetary agencies, along with other agencies that should not be mentioned," the message said.

"Therefore, we warn of the continuation of practicing . . . policies which do not serve your interest and will only cost you many problems that will place you in an embarrassing state before your citizens.

"Your homeland is exposed to us. There are many vital interests that will hurt you if we decided to harm them."

The document was among a batch of internal al Qaeda communications captured by U.S. forces in the war on terror.

They were declassified and released earlier this month by the Center for Combating Terrorism at West Point.

"If it's real, the document shows that the UAE really is trying to cooperate with the U.S. in the war on terrorism, because they were being threatened by al Qaeda," said terrorism expert Lorenzo Vidino.

"But it also reveals that even though they [the UAE] are our friends, al Qaeda seems to have people on the inside in the UAE, just as it has in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Qatar and Kuwait."

niles.lathem@nypost.com

Loyal American

February 25th, 2006, 11:26 am

Helllllooooo SFC, can I link your last post in other threads when the need arises!:lol:

jdoty

February 25th, 2006, 11:51 am

another citizen miguided with fear.....so sad :cry:

as opposed to a dope sitting on the tracks who doesn't see the train coming?

jdoty

February 25th, 2006, 11:55 am

And they keep trying to drive us out so they can conquer Iraq and establish an Iraqi-styled Taliban--and they fail.

Thanks, SFC. Rummie is, as usual, sharp, precise, and no fluff- and-guff, despite the best efforts of the fluff-and-guff MSM.

And the best part of the article is that this was a REAL reporter, not a fluff-and-guff salesman, writing the report.

Where the terrorists have failed, the Democrats will succeed!

rhet 2

February 25th, 2006, 2:54 pm

Where the terrorists have failed, the Democrats will succeed!

The terrorists are winning, thanks to Democrats who keep handcuffing professional military and law enforcement personnel.

Shut up with the political propaganda or go back to WP where there are asshats who believe such tripe.

SFC(R)L

February 25th, 2006, 4:21 pm

http://www.nypost.com/news/worldnews/64126.htm

QAEDA CLAIM: WE 'INFILTRATED' UAE GOV'T

SFC(R)L

February 25th, 2006, 5:38 pm

Feb 25, 3:57 PM EST

Homeland Security Objected to Ports Deal

By TED BRIDIS
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Homeland Security Department objected at first to a United Arab Emirates company's taking over significant operations at six U.S. ports. It was the lone protest among members of the government committee that eventually approved the deal without dissent.

The department's early objections were settled later in the government's review of the $6.8 billion deal after Dubai-owned DP World agreed to a series of security restrictions.

The company indefinitely has postponed its takeover to give President Bush time to convince Congress that the deal does not pose any increased risks to the U.S. from terrorism.

Some lawmakers have pressed for a new and intensive review. Despite persistent criticism from Republicans and Democrats, the president has defended his administration's approval of the ports deal and threatened to veto any measures in Congress that would block it. Hearings are to continue this week.

A DP World executive said the company would agree to tougher security restrictions to win congressional support only if the same restrictions applied to all U.S. port operators. The company earlier had struck a more conciliatory stance, saying it would do whatever Bush asked to salvage the agreement.

"Security is everybody's business," senior vice president Michael Moore told The Associated Press. "We're going to have a very open mind to legitimate concerns. But anything we can do, any way to improve security, should apply to everybody equally."

The administration approved the ports deal on Jan. 17 after DP World agreed during secret negotiations to cooperate with law enforcement investigations in the future and make other concessions.

Some lawmakers have challenged the adequacy of a classified intelligence assessment crucial to assuring the administration that the deal was proper. The report was assembled during four weeks in November by analysts working for the director of national intelligence.

Rudolph Giuliani, former New York mayor, in interview: Giuliani says the controversy surrounding the port arrangement is having a positive effect by focusing more attention on security.

The report concluded that U.S. spy agencies were "unable to locate any derogatory information on the company," according to a person familiar with the document. This person spoke only on condition of anonymity because the report was classified.

Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., and others have complained that the intelligence report focused only on information the agencies collected about DP World and did not examine reported links between UAE government officials and al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden before the Sept. 11 attacks.

The uproar over DP World has exposed how the government routinely approves deals involving national security without the input of senior administration officials or Congress.

President Bush, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and even Treasury Secretary John Snow, who oversees the government committee that approved the deal, all say they did not know about the purchase until after it was finalized. The work was done mostly by assistant secretaries.

Snow now says he may consider changes in the approval process so lawmakers are better alerted after such deals get the go-ahead.

Stewart Baker, a senior Homeland Security official, said he was the sole representative on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States who objected to the ports deal. Baker said he later changed his vote after DP World agreed to the security conditions. Other officials confirmed Baker's account.

"We were not prepared to sign off on the deal without the successful negotiation of the assurances," Baker told the AP.

Officials from the White House, CIA, departments of State, Treasury, Justices, and others looked for guidance from Homeland Security because it is responsible for seaports. "We had the most obvious stake in the process," Baker said.

Baker acknowledged that a government audit of security practices at the U.S. ports in the takeover has not been completed as part of the deal. "We had the authority to do an audit earlier," Baker said.

The audit will help evaluate DP World's security programs to stop smuggling and detect illegal shipments of nuclear materials at its seaport operations in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia.

The administration privately disclosed the status of the security audit to senators during meetings about improving reviews of future business deals involving foreign buyers. Officials did not suggest the audit's earlier completion would have affected the deal's approval.

New Jersey's Democratic governor, who is suing to block the deal, said in his party's weekly radio address on Saturday that the administration failed to properly investigate the UAE's record on terrorism.

"We were told that the president didn't know about the sale until after it was approved. For many Americans, regardless of party, this lack of disciplined review is unacceptable," Jon Corzine said.

Bush's national security adviser, Stephen Hadley, said there was no going back on the deal.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/P/PORTS_SECURITY?SITE=7219&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2006-02-25-10-37-13

SFC(R)L

February 25th, 2006, 7:09 pm

They want you dead
Jack Crenshaw
March 26, 2003

I have two messages for the American people in general--and also for those sincere, dedicated Americans who are still protesting the Iraqi war.

The first message comes from my somewhat different perspective as someone who lived through--though too young to serve in--WWII. On 9/11/01, as I sat there and watched in horror as the WTC towers fell, I said to my wife, "This is Pearl Harbor all over again."

Only those of us who remember WWII really know what that means. It means, plainly and simply, OUR LIVES HAVE CHANGED FOREVER. No matter how much you wish it to be true, you can never, ever go back to the days of pre-9/11. They can never be recovered.

If we as a country are making one serious mistake, I think it's the fact that many of us still don't get that message. We still want our reality TV and our beer commercials. We still want to fight over silly political correctness issues. We still want our cellphones and our BMW's. We still want the Dow over 10,000. We want life to be good again.

Well, that's a normal desire, and someday we will have, again, all those things. Life became good again after WWII. But it never, ever, became the same, and it won't this time, either. Get used to it, get over it, and get on with it. Like it or not, you're in a war. Go deal with it.

The second message goes with the first, and echoes the thoughts of most Americans: This is a war we absolutely must win.

That, also, is like WWII. We could have elected not to get involved in N. Korea in the 50's. We could have passed on Panama and Kosovo and all the other places where our best and finest went into harm's way. But in WWII, we had no choice. The rulers of Japan, Germany, and Italy wanted only one thing: to rule the world. Our decisions were really quite simple: Win, or Perish.

This one is the same. We have no choice. To all those demonstrating against the war, let me say simply: Don't you get it? Do you think you're going to sit down over tea with Saddam and Osama, and negotiate with them? These people want you DEAD. What is it about DEAD that you don't understand?

As I type this, I had just learned last night of the slaughter of some 10 American POW's, and the live ones being paraded across the screens of Arab TV. We can anguish over the loss of life, we can tsk-tsk about the behavior of the animals who pretended to surrender, only to turn against their supposed liberators. But we should not be surprised.

As I've said before, these people have different moral values than we in the West. They are barbarians, still living in the days of the Crusades. They may even be devout in their faith, but unlike those in civilized society, they don't see any conflict between being a devout follower of one's faith, and lying, cheating, killing, and torturing their enemies. That's because, plainly and simply--please be sure you get this--to them, we are not fit for their consideration as human beings. We are Infidel Dogs, and therefore not fit to live. They want you DEAD.

Get it?

A parting thought, continuing the parallel with WWII. Before that war, there were apologists for Adolph Hitler and the Nazis. We had our share of celebrity admirers (Charles Lindbergh was one), apologists, and appeasers. FDR had his share of political opponents. Great Britain had even more of all stripes, up to and including Prime Minister Chamberlain.

But, one big difference: When the war started, those opponents SHUT UP. They either shut up, or were labeled forever as part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Tom Daschle, Nancy Pelosi, Barbra Streisand, and the rest of their ilk need to have the good sense to shut up, too. In WWII, they would have been considered unpatriotic, and their careers would have been over.

At the time, the word patriotism used to mean something. Sadly, it doesn't seem to anymore.

Hear it one more time: This is a war we cannot afford to lose. We didn't ask for it, we didn't start it, but we're in it. We must Win, or Perish. Anyone who seeks to make the war more difficult is anti-American. They're aiding and abetting a dangerous enemy, and should be treated accordingly.

Does this strike you as too harsh, too McCarthy-ish, too HUAC-ish? If so, you're still living in your pre-9/11 mindset. Get used to it, get over it, and get on with it. You can't go back.

http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/index.php?030326crenshaw

This may already be here, but worth repeating.

Loyal American

February 25th, 2006, 8:23 pm

SFC you made some interesting posts tonight, that last one is well worth repeating! Thanks!

SFC(R)L

February 26th, 2006, 11:01 am

September 9, 2003
Hope & Prayer: The State of Seaport Insecurity

By Deborah Gage, John McCormick and Randy Barrett, eWEEK

A thin plastic security strip is sometimes all that protects a ship against the introduction of illicit materials.

Every day, 1,500 containers arrive at the Port of Oakland, ready to be moved swiftly onto the rails and highways that will take their contents into the heartland of america. While they are being unloaded, a terrorist in a rowboat can paddle in uncontested, set off a bomb and rock the heart of the harbor with an explosion. Meanwhile, u.S. Customs officials, who have to verify the contents of those 19-ton packages of goods, in the end have to trust that the captains of arriving ships are telling the simple truth about what's on board.

Ray Boyle still admires the rugged beauty of the Port of Oakland. The harbor is filled every day with all manner of sleek vessels—from 10-foot kayaks, to 30-foot sloops, to oceangoing cargo ships that stretch almost 1,000 feet from stem to stern.

The wake from the giant ships laps lazily against the docks, where 200-foot-high cranes perch like giant heron ready to pick containers off their massive decks. Near the foot of the lifts, the Northern California sun glints off a small fleet of diesel-powered 18-wheel trucks, waiting to receive their loads.

Oakland is a productive port. Its mission is to move commercial freight "quickly, at the best possible cost, to generate the best profit," as Boyle, the port's general manager of maritime operations, puts it. Last year, it handled more than 1.7 million cargo containers, trailing only the ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach, Calif., and New York-New Jersey.

But security has never been part of its mission—or that of any port. The idea of slowing down cargo to check it for destructive contents, Boyle says, "is alien to a certain extent."

That has left the nation's system of seaports "very vulnerable," according to Rear Admiral Larry Hereth, the Coast Guard's director of port security. Much like airports were before Sept. 11, 2001.

No longer does Boyle—a 30-year veteran of the Port of Oakland—regard a kayak as simply a recreational craft. He wonders whether suicide bombers might be rowing underneath the docks. He thinks about Al Qaeda operatives being smuggled aboard one of those giant cargo vessels. If that's not enough to turn his gray head of hair white, he contemplates the possibility that weapons of mass destruction could be hidden in one of the approximately 1,500 containers that get trucked out of the port each day.

This kind of exposure at seaports puts a foundation of the U.S. economy at risk.

Ninety-five percent of the $827 billion of trade done with countries outside of North America comes in by ship. That is 7.6% of the $10.4 trillion of goods and services consumed annually in the United States. In addition, the $104 billion worth of oil imported annually to power factories, retail stores, schools and vehicles of all sizes and shapes comes in by ship.

If something was to happen to Boyle's port, it would affect ports across the country. In the event of an attack, the federal government likely would order all the nation's 360 harbors shut down. The ripple effects of such a move were seen last fall, when a 10-day strike by dockworkers at Oakland and 28 other West Coast ports cost U.S. businesses $2 billion a day in lost sales, according to the American Association of Port Authorities.

Port managers are working feverishly to prevent a dockside doomsday. For his part, Boyle is assessing port vulnerabilities and tightening up perimeter defenses with motion-detector equipped fences and surveillance cameras. He's also looking at gate-control mechanisms that ultimately could include everything from smart cards to biometrics.

But Oakland needs to do a lot more—and Boyle knows it. He doesn't have the funds to set up an emergency communications network that would connect the 11 container terminals in his harbor with the Oakland Police Department. Nor does he have the money for a vessel that would patrol Oakland's 19 miles of waterfront. Those projects could run into the millions of dollars. Boyle says, "We don't have that much money."

Oakland made what it says was a fair and accurate assessment of its needs and applied for more than $150 million in federal port security grants to pay for fences, barricades, surveillance cameras and many other projects. So far, the port has received just $6.4 million—$4.8 million in a first round of aid and $1.6 million in a second.

But securing the port's perimeters is only half of Boyle's battle. The most worrisome threats won't be stopped at the port's gates nor its docks—if a container loaded with radioactive or biological weapons gets anywhere near the port's 35 container cranes, it's probably too late for Boyle or anyone else in Oakland to do anything about it.

http://www.baselinemag.com/print_article/0,3668,a=61313,00.asp?rsDis=Print_Article

Loyal American

February 26th, 2006, 11:14 am

Meanwhile, u.S. Customs officials, who have to verify the contents of those 19-ton packages of goods, in the end have to trust that the captains of arriving ships are telling the simple truth about what's on board.

A concern!:think:
AND even an honest, trusting "captain" may not even know if something harmful has been loaded, right?

Loyal American

February 26th, 2006, 11:16 am

But security has never been part of its mission—or that of any port. The idea of slowing down cargo to check it for destructive contents, Boyle says, "is alien to a certain extent."

That has left the nation's system of seaports "very vulnerable," according to Rear Admiral Larry Hereth, the Coast Guard's director of port security. Much like airports were before Sept. 11, 2001.

:think:

Loyal American

February 26th, 2006, 11:18 am

But securing the port's perimeters is only half of Boyle's battle. The most worrisome threats won't be stopped at the port's gates nor its docks—if a container loaded with radioactive or biological weapons gets anywhere near the port's 35 container cranes, it's probably too late for Boyle or anyone else in Oakland to do anything about it.

Reality? :think:

SFC(R)L

February 26th, 2006, 11:19 am

http://www.marad.dot.gov/Programs/training%202002.html

SFC(R)L

February 26th, 2006, 11:51 am

The Sunday Times February 26, 2006

Total war: Inside the new Al-Qaeda

Last week’s desecration of a Shi’ite shrine moved Iraq towards civil war. Abdel Bari Atwan, who has had unique access to Osama Bin Laden, explains why Al-Qaeda wants to divide Islam

Osama Bin Laden, who had been sitting cross-legged on a carpet, placed his Kalashnikov rifle on the ground and got up. He came towards me with a warm smile that turned into barely repressed laughter as he took in the way I was dressed.

I had been kitted out in baggy trousers, a long shirt and a turban for my clandestine journey to his hideout in southern Afghanistan. The turban in particular made me feel self-conscious, as I had never worn such a thing in my life.

I spent three days with Bin Laden in Tora Bora, the only western-based journalist to spend such a significant amount of time with him, before or since. I talked at length to him, slept next to him in his cave and shared his modest food.

Listening to him during that visit 10 years ago I realised he was no ordinary figure, but it didn’t occur to me for one moment that this polite, soft-spoken, smiling and apparently gentle person would become the world’s most dangerous man, terrorising western capitals, inflicting hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of damage on the United States, threatening its economic stability and embroiling it in wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

As I had been eating so badly since coming to Afghanistan I was looking forward to our first meal. I’d imagined we would feast on roast deer or goat. When I saw what was available at the Eagle’s Nest, as his base was called, I thought chicken was perhaps a more likely dish.

It was still a great surprise to discover that dinner on the first night consisted of Arab-style potato chips soaking in cottonseed oil; a plate of fried eggs; salty cheese of a variety long extinct even in the villages of upper Egypt; and a bread bun that must have been kneaded with sand, as my teeth screeched and ground whenever I chewed it.

After a few bites I pretended that I did not usually eat dinner for health reasons.

Another meal featured Bin Laden’s favourite, bread with yogurt and rice, served with potatoes cooked in tomato sauce. Animal fat floated on the surface, and I could hardly force it down my throat. Afterwards I was sick under a pine tree outside the cave.

I was puzzled by Bin Laden’s chosen path. What motivates this man, from a well-known and honourable family in possession of billions, to lead such a comfortless life in these inhospitable and dangerous mountains, awaiting attack, capture or death at any moment, hunted by so many regimes?

We spoke about his wealth, and while he avoided saying exactly how much he was worth he acknowledged he still managed an extensive investment portfolio through a complex network of secret contacts. But this wealth, he said, was for the umma (the global Islamic community).

“It is the duty of the umma as a whole to commit its wealth to the struggle,” he said. “The umma is connected like an electric current.” (Surprising imagery for a man who would wish to take us back 1,500 years.) I discovered that, in contrast with the primitive accommodation, the base was well equipped with computers and up-to-the-minute communications equipment. Bin Laden had access to the internet, which was not then ubiquitous as it is now, and said: “These days the world is becoming like a small village.”

This modernity was quite at odds with the austerity recommended by the more extreme forms of Islamic fundamentalism and in particular that of his hosts, the Taliban. One of his aides laughed and said the base was “a republic within a republic”.

The next day Bin Laden took me on a guided tour, sporting the Kalashnikov so dear to him. (He told me it had belonged to a Soviet general killed in one of the Afghan jihad battles.) We walked through the trees and he explained that he loved mountains. “I would rather die than live in a European state,” he declared.

He told me about past Al-Qaeda attacks on the Americans — including the 1993 ambush on American troops in Mogadishu, which he said had been wrongly blamed on the Somali warlord Mohamed Farah Aidid.

More attacks were in the planning stages, he said, and he emphasised that these “operations” took a long time to prepare. He hinted at a strike at the Americans on their home territory, but I confess I did not register the enormity of what he implied when he came out with an unforgettable statement: “We hope to reach ignition point in the not-too-distant future.”

Bin Laden also explained his long-term anti-American strategy. He told me he knew he would never be able to defeat America on its own soil using conventional weapons. He had another plan, one that would take years to reach fruition.

“We want to bring the Americans to fight us on Muslim land,” he said as we walked through the woods in the high mountains at Tora Bora. “If we can fight them on our own territory we will beat them, because the battle will be on our terms in a land they neither know nor understand.”

We are witnessing part of that plan now, in the battlefields of Iraq, which has become a breeding ground for the most ruthless and militant Al-Qaeda fighters we have seen. In the process we are discovering the new face of Al-Qaeda, as a movement involved in bloody sectarian strife against fellow Muslims.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2092-2058597_1,00.html

wwrwtw

February 26th, 2006, 11:55 am

SFC(R)L

February 26th, 2006, 12:07 pm

We've Lost Sight Of His Vision

By John Brennan
Sunday, February 26, 2006; Page B04

Osama bin Laden's plan to use terrorism to trigger an Islamic reawakening that will challenge Western dominance of world events and assure the ascendancy of Sunni extremists is moving forward -- at an alarming rate.

Hibernating securely somewhere along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, bin Laden and his Egyptian sidekick, Ayman al-Zawahiri, must be deriving warmth from the fact that the Iraqi insurgency has taken on a decidedly Sunni extremist coloration; that Hamas has successfully exploited political opportunities in Palestine; that radicals within Europe's Muslim communities are gaining strength and destructive force; and that caricatures of the prophet Muhammad have led to violence even among Muslims not inclined toward terrorism.

Terrorism, in bin Laden's strategy, is only a tactic, a means to achieve what he believes is a providentially ordained objective -- global domination by an Islamic caliphate. Yet dangerously, the United States is focusing on countering that tactic, missing the growth of the extremist Islamic forest as we flounder among the terrorist trees. Maybe it's because we have led ourselves to believe that the term "al Qaeda" means "Kill Americans." It doesn't. It means "foundation" or "base" in Arabic. Bin Laden chose the word intentionally and cleverly. He knew that his battle-hardened core of veterans from the Soviet-Afghan war of the 1980s would serve only as the foundational wellspring to irrigate fields of political, social and economic discontent among the Muslim masses.

He also recognized that the global explosion of mass media outlets over the last decade gave al Qaeda a ready recruitment vehicle. Headline-grabbing violent attacks against the West, especially the United States, broadcast by al-Jazeera, CNN or the BBC -- and abetted by instantaneous Internet communication -- were certain to impress and win adherents.

Bin Laden has also insidiously convinced us to use terminology that lends legitimacy to his activities. He has hijacked the term "jihad" to such an extent that U.S. and other Western officials regularly use the terms "jihadist" and "terrorist" interchangeably. In doing so, they unwittingly transfer the religious legitimacy inherent in the concept of jihad to murderous acts that are anything but holy.

While al Qaeda has been rocked by a well-financed and increasingly successful international counterterrorism effort, there is no equivalent successful campaign to counter bin Laden's strategic plan and vision. Sunni extremist activists roam virtually unchallenged in the Islamic world, spreading political and ideological seeds among a younger generation thirsting for attention, power and celestial reward.

Leaders of Islamic countries, organizations and local communities have most of the burden, as well as the best chance, of steering Muslim hearts and minds away from bin Laden's world vision. Yet while most distance themselves from his terrorist acts, their penchant for engaging in fiery rhetoric castigating the West helps breed greater intolerance of non-Muslims. The wide disparity between the haves and have-nots in the Middle East also fuels the fires of Islamic activism.

It would be in the United States's best interests to locate and deal with bin Laden sooner rather than later, to undercut his image of invincibility among his followers. But whether his ultimate demise is the result of a well-targeted missile, disease or old age, his days are numbered. His strategic plan, however, has the disturbing potential to live on -- unless we are able to ensure that his vision, his values, his followers and he himself are discredited in the Islamic fields he has so adeptly cultivated.

jbrennan@theanalysiscorp.com

John Brennan, former head of the National Counterterrorism Center and the Terrorist Threat Integration Center, retired from the CIA in November after a 25-year career. He is president and CEO of The Analysis Corporation of McLean.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/24/AR2006022402303.html

RedStatePaPa

February 26th, 2006, 12:16 pm

Loyal American

February 26th, 2006, 12:40 pm

SFC(R)L

February 26th, 2006, 1:38 pm

Bin Laden has also insidiously convinced us to use terminology that lends legitimacy to his activities. He has hijacked the term "jihad" to such an extent that U.S. and other Western officials regularly use the terms "jihadist" and "terrorist" interchangeably. In doing so, they unwittingly transfer the religious legitimacy inherent in the concept of jihad to murderous acts that are anything but holy.

I question this point. Jihad is very clearly and it was not created by OBL. It isn't just OBL and the sunni's who dreamed the concept up. Read the Qur'an and you'll see the world domination plan was put into effect 1400 years ago. When all effort to succeed fail "Jihad" can take the most evil form and it's okay according to the Islamic ideology! As I see it religious legitimacy, jihad and terrorism go hand in hand.......it is the inherent and acceptable concept to world domination. Maybe I am reading this incorrectly???

Islamists have hijacked the Muslim religion in order to justify their criminal and uncivilized behavior.

They seek to impose their views on the rest of the world, and are indoctrinating the young with their lies to do it. Notice that the "leaders" in this movement don't blow themselves up, as they seek to get others to do it for them, so they remain and can assume power as they overthrow the duly elected governments of the countries they infest.

Loyal American

February 26th, 2006, 1:47 pm

Islamists have hijacked the Muslim religion in order to justify their criminal and uncivilized behavior.

They seek to impose their views on the rest of the world, and are indoctrinating the young with their lies to do it. Notice that the "leaders" in this movement don't blow themselves up, as they seek to get others to do it for them, so they remain and can assume power as they overthrow the duly elected governments of the countries they infest.

My only point is it wasn't "hijacked", the religious ideology is solid and there for the use of those who want to use it. The Islamists use it and it is clearly definded in the Qur'ran. Yes, they want to make others follow the ideology which puts many Muslims in danger far more so than the Jew or Christian. It is my believe that the so called "moderate" muslim comes from those who actually dont follow the scripture to it's fullest degree so it's hard for me to see the "hijacked" claim.

SFC(R)L

February 26th, 2006, 1:58 pm

My only point is it wasn't "hijacked", the religious ideology is solid and there for the use of those who want to use it. The Islamists use it and it is clearly definded in the Qur'ran. Yes, they want to make others follow the ideology which puts many Muslims in danger far more so than the Jew or Christian. It is my believe that the so called "moderate" muslim comes from those who actually dont follow the scripture to it's fullest degree so it's hard for me to see the "hijacked" claim.

A Christian religious extremist reads the 10 Commandments.

"Thou shalt not kill."

The extremist decides that a doctor who performs abortions is in violation of this Commandment.

The extremist observes the doctor, learns his habits, then follows him home, and murders him in his driveway, in a hail of bullets, in the name of God.

The extremist, who defends his actions with the 10 Commandments, fails to understand that he broke the Commandment himself.

The extremist firmly believes that he has acted as God would have.

The extremist has hijacked Christianity,interpreted and applied it as he saw fit to jusify his uncivilized bahavior, and believes everything he did was justified, in spite of the classic, widely accepted view and interpretation by his fellow Christians that everything he did was wrong, and blasphemous.

Loyal American

February 26th, 2006, 2:16 pm

wwrwtw

February 26th, 2006, 2:21 pm

Islamists have hijacked the Muslim religion in order to justify their criminal and uncivilized behavior.

ahhhh..I love ya SFC but you cannot prove that from Islamic scripture. The violent jihadists are acting and warring EXACTLY as expressed in Islamic text.
They are emulating the prophet to a "T".

SFC(R)L

February 26th, 2006, 2:25 pm

The extremist in your story broke the Law of the land and will be punished. No where in the bible did he get permission to do what he did. The Qur'an gives permission for Jihad. The infidel must submit, pay jizya or be killed. No where in the Bible does it tell me all those who are not Christian must sumit, pay or die. To me there is the difference.

Doesn't matter...the analogy holds.

The extremist pulled it out of his head in both cases, we must deal with the results.

The quran forbids murder as well, if I recall correctly.

As with Cain and Abel, there are many ways one can interpret verse.

While our distrust of the Islamic world may be justified, and jihad is certainly a problem, we must understand that both tracts were written by men.

SFC(R)L

February 26th, 2006, 2:27 pm

ahhhh..I love ya SFC but you cannot prove that from Islamic scripture. The violent jihadists are acting and warring EXACTLY as expressed in Islamic text.
They are emulating the prophet to a "T".

And the millions who are not jihadists, what about them?

I love you too, but let's not throw out the baby with the water.

Let's focus on our enemy.

SFC(R)L

February 26th, 2006, 2:34 pm

ahhhh..I love ya SFC but you cannot prove that from Islamic scripture. The violent jihadists are acting and warring EXACTLY as expressed in Islamic text.
They are emulating the prophet to a "T".

Who among us has emulated our prophet to a "T"?

Have we foregone our worldly wealth to travel the countryside, on foot, to preach the Gospel?

No.

Our enemy are those who have interpreted their prophet as they wish to justify their behavior.

Loyal American

February 26th, 2006, 2:34 pm

Doesn't matter...the analogy holds.

The extremist pulled it out of his head in both cases, we must deal with the results.

The quran forbids murder as well, if I recall correctly.

As with Cain and Abel, there are many ways one can interpret verse.

While our distrust of the Islamic world may be justified, and jihad is certainly a problem, we must understand that both tracts were written by men.

This has to be a first, I don't agree with you!:eek:
Maybe another look at Islamic ideology is in order????:think:
Qur'an is not in any kind of Historical order and jumps around a lot. When ya have time maybe take a look at this book as it covers each scripture in historical order and explains each scripture's meaning. An easy read! Then if you are interested I have countless other documents, books and files I can share with you! :angel:

http://www.prophetofdoom.net/toc

Cygnus X-1

February 26th, 2006, 2:36 pm

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/052.sbt.html

wwrwtw

February 26th, 2006, 2:39 pm

The quran forbids murder as well, if I recall correctly.

MUhammed was the ULTIMATE murderer. He took part in and ordered the beheading of over NINE HUNDRED men and boys of the Quraiysh (sp) and took the female children and women as slaves...and raped and ordered the rape of them.

Killing the infidel is not murder...it is ordained and condoned in Islamic text as is terrorism

Tabari IX:69 “Killing disbelievers is a small matter to us.”

Tabari VIII:141 “The battle cry of the Companions of the Messenger of Allah that night was: ‘Kill! Kill! Kill!’”

Bukhari:V5B59N512 “The Prophet had their men killed, their woman and children taken captive.”

Ishaq:489 “Do the bastards think that we are not their equal in fighting? We are men who think that there is no shame in killing.”

Noble Qur'an
2:190. And fight in the Way of Allâh those who fight you, but transgress not the limits. Truly, Allâh likes not the transgressors. [This Verse is the first one that was revealed in connection with Jihâd, but it was supplemented by another (V.9:36)].

2:191. And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah is worse than killing. And fight not with them at Al-Masjid-al-Harâm (the sanctuary at Makkah), unless they (first) fight you there. But if they attack you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers.

2:192. But if they cease, then Allâh is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

2:193. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allâh) and (all and every kind of) worship is for Allâh (Alone). But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zâlimûn (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)

9:5. Then when the Sacred Months (the Ist, 7th, 11th, and 12th months of the Islâmic calendar) have passed, then kill the Mushrikûn (see V.2:105) wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and prepare for them each and every ambush. But if they repent and perform As-Salât (Iqâmat-as-Salât), and give Zakât, then leave their way free. Verily, Allâh is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

Tabari VII:97 “The morning after the murder of Ashraf, the Prophet declared, ‘Kill any Jew who falls under your power.’”

Ishaq: 676 “‘You obey a stranger who encourages you to murder for booty. You are greedy men. Is there no honor among you?’ Upon hearing those lines Muhammad said, ‘Will no one rid me of this woman?’ Umayr, a zealous Muslim, decided to execute the Prophet’s wishes. That very night he crept into the writer’s home while she lay sleeping surrounded by her young children. There was one at her breast. Umayr removed the suckling babe and then plunged his sword into the poet. The next morning in the mosque, Muhammad, who was aware of the assassination, said, ‘You have helped Allah and His Apostle.’ Umayr said. ‘She had five sons; should I feel guilty?’ ‘No,’ the Prophet answered. ‘Killing her was as meaningless as two goats butting heads.’”

Tabari VII:85 “Muhammad killed many Quraysh polytheists at Badr.”

Loyal American

February 26th, 2006, 2:39 pm

Our enemy are those who have interpreted their prophet as they wish to justify their behavior.

Qur'an demands one be like the prophet Muhammad, they are to be just like him in their behavior........in that lies the problem. You need to read that POD and see who Muhammad was. Please.

wwrwtw

February 26th, 2006, 2:47 pm

Who among us has emulated our prophet to a "T"?

Have we foregone our worldly wealth to travel the countryside, on foot, to preach the Gospel?

No.

Our enemy are those who have interpreted their prophet as they wish to justify their behavior.

Many so-called "moderate organizations"...and many of them in THIS country..

http://discoverthenetworks.org/viewGroups.asp?catId=8

I have no idea which follower of Muhammed is my enemy and which is not..

JUst because a muslim is not blowing up **** does that mean he does not have the same goal as the jihadists?
The ultimate goal is for Islam to dominate the world until "all worship is for allah" It is totally scriptural and totally inline with what Muahmmed preached.
There is not ONE unabrogated verse in the quran that says Islam is a religion of peace.
You can't find it..I can't find it and neither can the best Islamic scholars. It does not exist

rhet 2

February 26th, 2006, 2:48 pm

Qur'an demands one be like the prophet Muhammad, they are to be just like him in their behavior........in that lies the problem. You need to read that POD and see who Muhammad was. Please.

YES! Well said! :clap:

Further, when the imams claim that Muhammed was a human being but was infallible and without flaw, they elevate Muhammed to divine status and begin worshipping Muhammed as a god.

By their own theological proclamations, they commit and teach and force idolatry on others.

THIS is their achilles heel: if Muhammed is only a man, then he committed sins and MUST be closely examined in order to determine what is and is NOT valid in his teachings. Once you've won that single point, then muslim thinking is opened to the examination of his life and the recognition that Muhammed broke every single commandment of the Mosaic law. A close look at Muhammed's life collapses the entire koran as the evil misrepresentation of divine revelation that it is.

Islam rose on the back of that single claim, and will collapse on that single claim, that mo-butt is a perfect, infallible man.

SFC(R)L

February 26th, 2006, 3:03 pm

This has to be a first, I don't agree with you!:eek:
Maybe another look at Islamic ideology is in order????:think:
Qur'an is not in any kind of Historical order and jumps around a lot. When ya have time maybe take a look at this book as it covers each scripture in historical order and explains each scripture's meaning. An easy read! Then if you are interested I have countless other documents, books and files I can share with you! :angel:

http://www.prophetofdoom.net/toc

I am simply pointing out that not all Muslims are our enemy.

I am already well familiar with the scripture, I require no reminders.

If you want to avoid charges of bias, xenophobia, and racism, you must focus here.

Our argument isn't with the millions of Muslims in Indonesia.

wwrwtw

February 26th, 2006, 3:08 pm

SFC(R)L

February 26th, 2006, 7:14 pm

My argument is not muslims..it is Islam...Islam in EVERY country...including my own.
By looking at scripture and what is allowed to futher the agenda of the spread of Islam ANYTHING, and I mean ANYTHING is allowed.
Lying, deception, they can even deny their faith if the "don;t mean it in their heart" to further the cause.
My problem is how in the heck do you tell the difference? How do you know what they "mean in their heart" when they are out partying in Vegas like the 9/11 murderers?

It is important to remember that it was I that brought a lot of you to your senses on this issue, and I now tell you that the actions of those around you are the discriminator.

Is it wise to be cautious, even fearful?

Certainly.

Should we aggress Muslims who have done us no viewable harm?

Our enemy is clear.

Loyal American

February 26th, 2006, 7:36 pm

It is important to remember that it was I that brought a lot of you to your senses on this issue, and I now tell you that the actions of those around you are the discriminator.

Is it wise to be cautious, even fearful?

Certainly.

Should we aggress Muslims who have done us no viewable harm?

Our enemy is clear.

Ahhhh, that would be me you brought to my senses (THANK YOU!)......and I have worked very very hard to learn what I know now. Got lots more to go to catch up to the others but I think I know who the enemy is now. :cool:

The enemy who is actively involved in the "silent Jihad" gives me far more concern at this time. Wolf in sheep clothing practicing taqiyya and kitman........"beware!" :shifty: :shifty: :shifty: :shifty:

SFC(R)L

February 26th, 2006, 7:39 pm

Ahhhh, that would be me you brought to my senses......and I have worked very very hard to learn what I know now. Got lots more to go to catch up to the others but I think I know who the enemy is now. :cool:

The enemy who is actively involved in the "silent Jihad" gives me far more concern at this time. Wolf in sheep clothing practicing taqiyya and kitman........"beware!" :shifty: :shifty: :shifty: :shifty:

Please, let not our zeal be misconstrued as bigotry through an unfocused message.

Remember, we are sheepdogs, not sheep.

Loyal American

February 26th, 2006, 7:47 pm

Please, let not our zeal be misconstrued as bigotry through an unfocused message.

Remember, we are sheepdogs, not sheep.

Ooooops, you quoted me before I slipped in the "Thank you" part.
I try to be careful not to come off like a "bigot", I try real hard, honest! :angel: Can't be a bigot for recognizing an evil ideology, that's not a people.

However, I guess one can call you a bigot because ya don't like the port deal, it's suppose to mean ya don't like Arabs!...........:doh:

Woof!:cool:

wwrwtw

February 26th, 2006, 7:52 pm

I call things as I see them. If people wish to see me as a bigot then so be it.
My enemy is the true bigot but they NEVER see that because they are uninformed about the TRUE nature of that enemy.
But hey...when I was in their shoes I probably would have said the same thing about me...but then I woke up and began to understand just what makes the enemy tick..what their mindset is and what their agenda is.
I am under no obligation to tolerate that which is intolerant.
I will speak out against it with my last breath.

SFC(R)L

February 27th, 2006, 8:49 pm

For Want of a Warrant
By Ed Morrow
FrontPageMagazine.com | February 27, 2006

It was in September when the American military intercepted a man traveling through New York. Without a search warrant and despite his bearing a letter from a high ranking Army officer giving him explicit permission to travel unhindered, the traveler was detained without being permitted to speak to a lawyer. He was unceremoniously searched, and private correspondence found upon him was confiscated. It was about to be read by a military officer when an outraged lawyer from the ACLU interceded. Faced with the threat of legal action, the military released the traveler with his private papers unviolated. Shortly thereafter, the American Revolution ended with a British victory. George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, and all those other troublesome Founding Fathers were rounded up and hanged. And today, we're all Canadians.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=21421

Loyal American

February 27th, 2006, 9:04 pm

I liked that article SFC, pretty good!:D

SFC(R)L

March 3rd, 2006, 8:14 pm

Separate Iraq Operations Net 62 Terrorism Suspects
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, March 3, 2006 – Coalition and Iraqi forces operations in Iraq northeast of Fallujah and in Anbar province recently resulted in the detention of 62 suspects, military officials reported.
On March 1, Iraqi soldiers from 2nd Brigade, 9th Iraqi Army Division, and U.S. soldiers from 1st Battalion, 66th Armored Regiment, 1st Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, detained a suspected terrorist northwest of Baghdad based on a tip. The detainee is suspected of being a member of a bomb-making cell responsible for a roadside bomb attack that killed a U.S. soldier in February. The incident is under investigation.

Northeast of Fallujah, coalition forces conducted multiple raids Feb. 27 to capture al Qaeda facilitators involved in the logistical support of suicide bombers, foreign fighters and the funding of terrorist activities. Based on intelligence and reporting, coalition forces targeted numerous safe houses. The raids resulted in the detention of 61 individuals who will be questioned regarding their knowledge of, or involvement in, terrorist activities. A large number of weapons and ammunition found during the raids were destroyed in place.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Mar2006/20060303_4381.html

SFC(R)L

March 5th, 2006, 1:44 pm

Special Ops school moves from Jordan to Iraq

March 1, 2006

AMMAN, Jordan (Army News Service, Feb. 28, 2006) – The seventh and final group of soldiers graduated from an elite counterterrorism course in Jordan last week, bringing to an end a special operations training partnership among Iraq, Jordan and the U.S. that taught more than 500 Iraqi troops since 2003.

During the Feb. 23 graduation ceremony, 77 new Iraqi special operators – among them Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds – completed the three-month Operator Training Course which will now move to a permanent training base in Iraq.

With graduation, the Iraqi soldiers became the newest members of the Iraqi Counterterrorism Force, one of two battalion-sized components of the Iraqi Special Operations Forces Brigade. Created in 2004, the ISOF Brigade holds responsibility for conducting special operations missions throughout Iraq.

The role of Jordan and the United States in building Iraq’s ability to fight terrorism within its borders is not only important to Iraq’s homeland security, but to the stability of all three countries for the sake of peace and freedom, said Lt. Col. Adnan al-Abbadi, commander of Jordan’s 71st Counterterrorism Battalion. Adnan’s unit also runs Jordan’s Counterterrorism Training Center, which hosted the Iraqis and Americans for the training.

“The ICTF graduates … are among the best hopes for building Iraq’s future,” said David Hale, the U.S. ambassador to Jordan, during the graduation ceremony.

“You are the front line in building the defense of freedom and Iraqi unity,” Hale said to the graduates. “This class was selected from hundreds of candidates, and now, as graduates, you join the most capable Iraqi unit in the field.”

U.S. Army and Navy special operations forces have served as advisers during each class, but most recently functioned largely as observers because four ICTF soldiers – all graduates of previous OTC classes – served as primary instructors, along with four Jordanians.

“It was helpful having the ICTF guys step up as instructors, because they know the tactics and techniques and have experience” in fighting terrorists all over Iraq, said one U.S. Army Special Forces adviser.

Hale said that the ICTF training program had been so successful that the time was right to move it to Iraq, where “it will be in the very capable hands” of Col. Fadhil Jameel al-Barwari, the commander of the ISOF Brigade, who also attended the ceremony.

Upon leaving Jordan, the Iraqis will assume control of the OTC’s administration and instruction, with U.S. special operations forces again serving as advisers to assist the ICTF trainers as needed.

The lead U.S. adviser, a Special Forces captain, said the most important education during the course wasn’t on military tactics, but Iraqi-to-Iraqi relationships.

“Many of them had never even held a gun, but right now they can accurately engage threats moving at a fast pace, which is a phenomenal feat,” the captain said. “Here, they have learned advanced (close quarters battle) techniques, they’ve learned hand-to-hand combat. But above all, they’ve learned trust, and they’ve learned that they can live with each other, whether (they are) a Sunni, or a Shi’a, or a Kurd.”

“None of this would have been possible without the professionalism and competence of the Jordanian and Iraqi instructors, or the help of my fellow American advisers,” he added.

Jordan, whose military includes a robust special operations component, is a key ally of both the United States and Iraq in the war on terrorism, officials said.
http://www4.army.mil/news/article.php?story=8645

TheFallGuy

March 6th, 2006, 5:01 am

Edit: Crack kills.

Show us where he screwed up the overall mission. Your allegations are as brilliant as your dullard attitude.

Iraq is improving. Afghanistan is improving. Keep your head buried in a liberal crevice for all the good it's doing you.

sgtmac_46

March 6th, 2006, 5:21 am

3rd ID stretched to Baghdad while Nasiriya and Basra remained unsecure, allowing Fadayeen entry into the Southern cities.

No plan for post-action operations involving an obvious insurgency. They even admiteed that they didn't factor it in.

Rumsfeld not sending enough troops -- Shinskei fired for advocating 300K troops -- which is clearly what it needs.

Awful strategy. A five year old could do better. No plan survives first contact with the enemy. Perhaps you could point out a flawless strategy of similar magnitude in history.

TheFallGuy

March 6th, 2006, 5:27 am

sgtmac_46 check your PMs.

:D

Landsknecht

March 6th, 2006, 5:42 am

I have hope for a free Iraq, having been there. But I have to say, the plans thus far have been incredibly moronic.

Let me guess....Human shield?

sgtmac_46

March 6th, 2006, 5:45 am

Really? NO plan? Hmmm, I dunno, boss, the Powell Doctrine sure seemed to work. Of course, there we had defined goals -- not nation building -- which is what Bush took on as a platform to get elected (the opposition of.) Face it, man, Rummi and Cheney (who are CLEARLY running this show) have failed miserably in the strategy department. The Powell doctrine worked to do what? Saddam Hussein was defeated. This is not the Iraq war, it's a post-war insurgency. In case your little brain hasn't been following world history, we still have troops in Germany and Japan, does that mean we lost WWII?

I have hope for a free Iraq, having been there. But I have to say, the plans thus far have been incredibly moronic. Funny, Jimmy, your standard of failure is asinine. If we consider the body count (2000 US dead in 3 years) then what kind of Collosal failure was D-Day? We lost over 2000 on the morning of June 6, 1944 on Omaha beach ALONE?! What a collosal route that must be by your definition.

sgtmac_46

March 6th, 2006, 5:51 am

I'm talking about STRATEGY, not overall body counts, Commie Boy. Know the difference. Perhaps you before you start lecturing on matters that you are obviously ignorant on, you should read a little von Clausewitz. :wall: :doh:

Better yet, perhaps you could enlighten us on what your strategy would have been then...and just for kicks, what you'd do now.

TheFallGuy

March 6th, 2006, 6:02 am

How quickly the left forgets how fast the Iraqis folded. That was part of the problem and why that solution wouldn't work.

Landsknecht

March 6th, 2006, 6:05 am

Yeah, Lands, that's right. A human shield protecting oil. Except I had plenty of ammo. Dolt.

Yea, but was it 5.56 or 7.62X39? :think:

Seriously.
So who were you with over there?

sgtmac_46

March 6th, 2006, 6:07 am

What we SHOULD have done is take Nasiriya and Basra, and 20 klicks North of the river -- seal this area with 2 extra divisions and roll in tons of organized humanitarian aid, and baited the Iraqis to move South, which Hussein would have done and he would have still been in control. Pulverize the Southward forces and create shifting forward bases of relief efforts enroute to Baghdad. At the same time, 2 divisions in the North moving through Turkey to secure Mosul/Tikrit and to secure Kurdish troops to aid in securing Baghdad, as well as Shi'a southern guard which we would recruit. Take Baghdad with these troops in conjunction 2-3 months later, after having had the time to build support in the Southern regions. Then oust the regime, and move the humanitarian aid forward. Throughout the invasion, secure all ammunition depots and destroy them. That's one idea. That is the biggest bunch of crap i've heard in a long career of hearing crap. Tell me you didn't put any thought in to that, you just started talking out of your anus. :wall: :doh:

sgtmac_46

March 6th, 2006, 6:09 am

"Folded"? Nope. Go read the accounts, Jack. An insurgency is not folding -- we just lost the armor threat. An insurgency of the sort encountered in Iraq is a Public Relations threat. It is only effective so long as it is perceived as effective....that it encompasses roughly three provinces out of the entire country is irrelavent, so long as the PR machine pumps out it's alleged effectiveness.

What we've failed to do, however, is deal effectively with the insurgency...but not for the reasons you list. We need look at history to understand that the fuel of an insurency is the population. An insurgency can be crushed by simply taking the population supporting the insurgency and placing them in concentration camps. Without civilian support, an insugency collapses in short order. They either decide to throw down their arms, and accompany their women and children in to the camps, or they decide to stay out and fight.....where they are easily identified and killed or captured.

This is the method that the British used to defeat the Boer guerillas. We don't have the guts for it.

TheFallGuy

March 6th, 2006, 6:11 am

The Iraqi military folded. The "insurgency" as you want to put it really isn't. Go look up the definition, it might improve your intellect.

What exists are foreign terrorists trying to cause as much havoc and destruction as they can. And everyone over there is getting sick of them.

And I'm not Jack.

But the fact that Generals have rebutted your hypothesis goes to show - you ain't no strategist and you don't know history very well.

sgtmac_46

March 6th, 2006, 6:15 am

Commie, you are only thinking in militaristic terms of victory. If ignoring the "PR" machine that are recruited terrorists is a viable strategy, we should have just bombed the living crap out of everything and rolled in nothing but tanks and shock troops bent on annihiliation. We did not. Thus, even the NeoCon advocates would disagree with your assessment, because creation of new enemies is usually not a goal of any modern victory. I'm not only focused on military victory. In order to gain total victory, however, requires something that we are incapable of doing....controlling the media. The core of our problem is our lack of resolve.'

The PR machine is our own media fighting the war against us. That you are a cheerleader for that cause is clear. But it's important to know who the enemy is....and it isn't just the guerilla holding an AK-47 on the streets of baghdad. ;)

sgtmac_46

March 6th, 2006, 6:16 am

What Genreral, Jack? The Iraqi "military" was never a real threat -- they weren't even a viable threat on Day 2 of the Gulf War. Not interms of a sustainable victory, for certain. By the way, the evidence that they are all "foreign" is a fallacy. See Falluja. 12 year olds have a hard time crossing international borders. You think Iran and Syria restrict guerillas from crossing their borders? HAHAHAHAHA

sgtmac_46

March 6th, 2006, 6:24 am

Oh, Jesus, now we're going to blame strategical failures on the media. Well, maybe that nut job Geraldo can get some, for sure.

That NeoCon media bashing blame-all is such trite drivel it astounds me. Why do all of you NeoCon sycophants fall into line whenever someone chants, "Blame the media!"

Excuses, excuses, excuses. You are excused. Think you already acknowledged that the PR (i.e. the perception of victory) on the part of the insurgency was more important than the reality....you already lost. :wall: :doh:

SFC(R)L

March 6th, 2006, 6:43 pm

Iraqi People Pulled Back From Civil War Abyss, Pace Says
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, March 5, 2006 – The Iraqi people responded to terrorist outrages by pulling back from the abyss of a civil war, Marine Gen. Peter Pace said on NBC's Meet the Press today.

Marine Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, responds to a question from Tim Russert, host of NBCÕs Meet the Press during an interview, March 5. DoD photo by Staff Sgt. D. Myles Cullen, U.S. Air Force (Click photo for screen-resolution image);high-resolution image available.

Pace, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the February 22 bombing of the Golden Mosque in Samarra, was an act of desperation on the part of the terrorists.

The growth of democracy and the political progress leaders of the country are making in forming a government has made terrorists desperate. "So desperate that they would destroy one of their own most sacred shrines in an attempt to cause civil war and strife," Pace said. "The Iraqi people ... have walked up to that abyss, looked in and said, 'That's not where we want to go.'"

Pace said the Iraqi security forces have maintained calm and Iraqi leaders are urging all to stay calm.

Pace put events in Iraq in perspective and said he is pleased with the progress being made in the country. "I wouldn't put a great big smiley face on it, but things are going very, very well," he said.

On the political side, he said the three elections over the past year show the Iraqi people want democracy. On the military side, there were a handful of Iraqi battalions last year; there are now more than 100 battalions and 31 brigades in the field. "No matter where you look - at their military, their police, their society - things are much better this year, than last," he said.

He said the military must work harder to get the good news in Iraq out to the American people. The only images the American people see from Iraq entail attacks and explosions. "People don't get a chance to see or hear about the good things that are happening," he said.

Pace said that Iraq is not out of danger yet. He told Tim Russert - the host of the program - that he agrees with the U.S. commander in Iraq Army Gen. George Casey that, "anything can happen" in the country. "But having said that, I think the Iraqi people have shown in the last week to 10 days that they do not want a civil war," he said. "They are not attacking each others' mosques. There were reports that there were hundreds of mosques attacked. Not true. The number is somewhere around 30 and less than half a dozen actually had significant damage done."

He said the Iraqi people have shown they want calm, and they are working to maintain that calm.

Iraqi militias are a problem even though the government has stated all units must be subordinate to the government. "That is something to be dealt with, but it is not a major long-term problem as long as the Iraqi armed forces and the Iraqi police continue to be loyal to the central government," Pace said.

Pace said the combating the insurgency in Iraq is more than simply applying military power. "If you have the opportunity to get a job and feed your family, you are much less likely to accept $100 to plant a bomb on the side of the road," he said. "The insurgency is not about ideology, it's about assisting the families in many cases. Once the Iraqi government is functioning the way it is supposed to, I think you will see the vast majority of those who were willing to participate in insurgent-like activity, will not longer do so."

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Mar2006/20060305_4394.html

SFC(R)L

March 6th, 2006, 6:55 pm

Iraqi Police Graduates Demonstrate Abilities
167 Recruits graduate from the Najaf Police Academy.

By U.S. Army Cpl. Michael Molinaro
2nd Brigade Combat Team
FORWARD OPERATING BASE KALSU, Iraq, March 6, 2006 — The Iraqi police force continues to grow in strength as 167 recruits graduated from the Najaf Police Academy and joined their brothers in arms.

"Today marks another step in the journey towards a safer, independent Iraq, and the graduates of the Iraqi Police Academy are leading the way."

U.S. Army Lt. Col. Michael Hilliard

Abd Razak Shaed, the Iraqi Police general inspector, along with Lt. Col. Michael Hilliard, commander, 3rd Battalion, 16th Field Artillery Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, attended the event.

“Today marks another step in the journey towards a safer, independent Iraq, and the graduates of the Iraqi Police Academy are leading the way,” said Hilliard. “This graduation is another demonstration of the abilities of the new Iraqi
government, which continues to make landmark strides on a regular basis.”

After the ceremony, Hilliard met with Assad Sultan Al-taee, Najaf governor. The two leaders discussed a variety of issues, including the continuous support from Coalition Forces on the security of Najaf and its people.

Both leaders also agreed that a new Iraqi Police academy, designed specifically to train and equip the new government’s security forces, is essential. Some potential Iraqi Polic travel to Jordan to receive their training. Keeping the trainees in Iraq will provide better quality police, said Al-taee.

“You have made a choice to protect the good people of Najaf – and for that, your country is proud,” Hilliard told the graduates. “Iraqi citizens should know that their continued support of the local and national government is critical to maintaining this type of progress.”

http://www.defendamerica.mil/articles/mar2006/a030606tj2.html

SFC(R)L

March 7th, 2006, 7:26 pm

Press Exaggerations Test American Will
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, March 7, 2006 – The will of the American people is the center of gravity for the war on terror, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said during a Pentagon news conference today.
Exaggerated reporting is giving the American people a false picture of what is happening in Iraq, the secretary said. "Interestingly, all of the exaggerations seem to be on one side," he said. "It isn't as though there simply have been a series of random errors on both sides of issues. On the contrary, the steady stream of errors, all seem to be of a nature to inflame the situation and to give heart to the terrorists and to discourage those who hope for success in Iraq."

Rumsfeld pointed to reporting that exaggerated the number of mosques attacked and the number of Iraqis killed in the violence that followed the bombing of the Golden Mosque in Samarra Feb. 22.

Fomenting a civil war was the impetus behind bombing the sacred shrine, and press stories exaggerating the violence that followed played into terrorists' hands, he said. "It has been and remains a time of testing for the Iraqi people, but the Iraqis are meeting that test thus far successfully, I would say, and defying the seeming rush to ... proclaim exactly what the terrorists seek, namely a civil war," he said.

A recent poll shows most Americans believe Iraq is already involved in a civil war. Joint Chiefs Chairman Marine Gen. Peter Pace said the Iraqi people looked "into the abyss" of civil war and stepped back.

The truth in the country is those who want civil war in Iraq are disappointed, the secretary said. "First, the Iraqi security forces have taken the lead in controlling the situation," Rumsfeld said. Coalition forces assisted Iraqi soldiers and police.

"Second, the Iraqi government leaders took a number of key steps that have had a calming effect in the situation," he said. "They imposed a curfew, and the leaders of most of the major parties have stepped forward to publicly urge restraint on all parties."

Reports after the bombing indicated that sectarian groups had burned and sacked thousands of mosques. This was wrong, the secretary said echoing information passed by Army Gen. George Casey, commander of multinational forces in Iraq. Further, contrary to reports, Iraqi security forces behaved well and provided security in Samarra, as well as in Shiite and Sunni areas of the country, Rumsfeld said.

Overall levels of violence in Iraq have not increased substantially as a result of the Golden Mosque bombing, officials in Baghdad said. However, violence continues and continues to affect formation of the Iraqi government.

"In the coming months, Iraqis will face difficult obstacles in controlling illegal militias, and we know that," Rumsfeld said. "They're working to try to strengthen their ministries, and we're trying to help them.

"And their effort to fashion a unity government that will represent all elements of their society is clearly being delayed by the situation in Iraq," he continued.

"Nonetheless, the leadership being shown by the Iraqi security forces, by the Iraqi government officials in the wake of these attacks against the shrine has to be seen as encouraging, despite the apparent unwillingness of some to accept it."
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Mar2006/20060307_4417.html

SFC(R)L

March 7th, 2006, 7:28 pm

Iraqi Air Force Stands Up New Al Muthana Air Base
By Spc. Rick Czepka, USA
Special to American Forces Press Service

BAGHDAD, March 7, 2006 – The Iraqi air force, along with its coalition partners, officially opened a new air base in Baghdad today.

U.S. airmen from Multinational Security Transition Command Iraq's Coalition Air Force Transition Team stand in formation during the formal stand up of the new Al Muthana Air Base in Iraq March 7. Photo by Master Sgt. Will Ackerman, USAF (Click photo for screen-resolution image);high-resolution image available.

The Al Muthana Air Base, near the international airport, provides a foundation on which Iraq's air force can rebuild with help from its allies, U.S. officials said.

On display were two C-130E transport aircraft, paid for by both the United States and Iraqi governments as part of a U.S. and foreign military sales program, said U.S. Air Force Maj. David Barna, a deputy base unit support adviser. The planes will be used to support the Iraqi armed forces in rapidly deploying equipment and personnel and in monitoring Iraq's borders, he said.

Russian-made Mi-17 helicopters, paid for by the Iraqi Ministry of Defense, were also displayed at the new air base. The helicopters will be integrated into the Iraqi air force's existing helicopter squadron and will be used in a support capacity, Barna said.

"It is important for Iraqis," said Iraqi Maj. Gen. Kamal of the base. "It is important for them to see tangible results and cooperation," he said. "Building up an air force takes so much work, finance and dedication."

Although Iraq's air force is much smaller now compared to during Saddam Hussein's era, now it is better than before, Iraqi Col. Jabber said. "Now our air force supports the government and the people. In the past the air force only supported Saddam," he said. "We are humanitarian now."

The Iraqi air force flew its first cross-border humanitarian mission last month, taking five children to Turkey for eye surgery.

The new air base, although operational, is still undergoing construction and will be the backbone of Iraq's air power, Jabber said.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Mar2006/20060307_4419.html

Loyal American

March 7th, 2006, 7:49 pm

Great posts SFC! THANKS!

How about Def.Sec. Rumsfeld? I know many take issue with him but I like him. He just tells it like it is. I like that he took some shots at the press. Good for him!:clap:

SFC(R)L

March 7th, 2006, 7:54 pm

Great posts SFC! THANKS!

How about Def.Sec. Rumsfeld? I know many take issue with him but I like him. He just tells it like it is. I like that he took some shots at the press. Good for him!:clap:

Hmmmm....

Moussaoui Riveted by Sept. 11 Transcript
By MICHAEL J. SNIFFEN, Associated Press Writer

ALEXANDRIA, Va. - Reading from radiophone transmissions, a federal prosecutor transfixed the courtroom at Zacarias Moussaoui's sentencing trial Tuesday with a minute-by-minute account of al-Qaida's hijacking of American Airlines' Flight 11 and the plane's journey into the north tower of the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001.

"We are flying low. We are flying very very low. We are flying way too low," flight attendant Amy Sweeney told ground controllers who had asked at 8:44 a.m. where the plane was. Then a few seconds' pause, and finally: "Oh my God, we are way too low!" The phone went dead at 8:46 a.m. as the Boeing 767 jetliner hit the tower in the first of four crashes by hijacked jetliners that day.

Moussaoui, the confessed al-Qaida conspirator who is facing a life-or-death decision, was as electrified as the jury and the audience.

Leaving the courtroom for a recess moments later, the 37-year-old Frenchman of Moroccan descent surged from his chair, pumped his right fist in the air and shouted: "Allah Akbar! God curse America! Bless Osama bin Laden!" He usually mutters these invocations when leaving court.

The actual audio recordings of radiophone calls by flight attendants on Flight 11 have been played in public before. But to avoid inflaming the jury at this sentencing trial, prosecutors and defense attorneys agreed instead to read an account of the flight, including major sections of the phone call transcripts.

Nevertheless, the reading by Assistant U.S. Attorney David Raskin riveted the jury and audience — all the more so because it came after two hours of mind-numbing testimony by FBI agent James M. Fitzgerald about how the bureau tracked the hijackers after Sept. 11.

Around the courtroom, heads had been left nodding by Fitzgerald's detailed and precise description of innumerable hotel receipts, phone call records and financial transactions between 19 men with unfamiliar Arab names, which the FBI gathered to reconstruct how they circled the globe and arrived in the United States.

That changed when Raskin took over and opened with the first transmission from flight attendant Betty Ong aboard Flight 11 to American Airlines ground workers at 8:19 a.m.: "The ****pit is not answering. Somebody's been stabbed in business class. I think we've been Maced. We can't breathe."

The point of Fitzgerald's long description of the pre-attack behavior of the Sept. 11 hijackers was to show how similarly they acted: 13 got new passports to remove telltale indications they had visited Pakistan, 10 used e-mail accounts and public computers, 15 signed up at fitness gyms, five bought short-bladed knives, four trained on jet simulators and five bought flight training computer discs. Nearly all communicated with an al-Qaida cell in Hamburg, Germany, and got funds wired to them in this country from one of three al-Qaida operatives.

At some point, prosecutors will bring on witnesses to show that Moussaoui also did many of those things and got money from the same source, but Fitzgerald never mentioned Moussaoui in his testimony. Nor did he say there was any contact whatsoever between Moussaoui and the 19 hijackers, a point the defense has already stressed.

Earlier, defense attorney Edward MacMahon got FBI agent Michael Anticev to acknowledge on cross-examination that the FBI was aware years before Sept. 11 that al-Qaida had plans to fly airplanes into prominent buildings.

Moussaoui's lawyers are portraying him as a pathetic loner who dreamed of becoming a terrorist but was shut out of Sept. 11 planning and considered by one al-Qaida leader "cuckoo in the head."

The defense also wants to show the government knew far more about brewing al-Qaida plots than Moussaoui did, and in that vein pressed Anticev on what the FBI was doing to follow up on warning signals before Sept. 11.

Anticev at first asserted, "I don't think anybody was looking at using aircraft as weapons," but acknowledged under questioning that the FBI had been aware before Sept. 11 that an Algerian group linked to al-Qaida planned to fly airliners into the Eiffel Tower and into a cathedral in Strasbourg, France.

He said he also knew that an al-Qaida operative arrested in the Philippines in 1995 had told investigators of plans to fly a plane into CIA headquarters, but Anticev said he personally did not hear that until after Sept. 11.

Clad in a red scarf and sweater, Moussaoui's mother, Aicha, sat three rows behind her son in the courtroom most of the day; he glanced at her when she entered but ignored her thereafter. She said later he was angry with her for speaking to his court-appointed lawyers, whom he has disavowed.

Moussaoui pleaded guilty in April to conspiring with al-Qaida to hijack planes and commit other crimes. The jury will choose between execution or life in prison without possibility of release.

To obtain the death penalty, prosecutors must first prove Moussaoui took an action that led directly to deaths on Sept. 11. Moussaoui denies he had any role in Sept. 11 and says he was training for a possible future attack on the White House.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060307/ap_on_re_us/moussaoui

SFC(R)L

March 7th, 2006, 8:33 pm

Iraqi Tribes Strike Back at Insurgents
In Turbulent Areas, Zarqawi's Fighters Are Target of Leaders and a New Militia

By John Ward Anderson
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, March 7, 2006; A12

BAGHDAD, March 6 -- First they killed the chief of the Naim tribe and his son. Then they killed a top tribal sheik who headed the Fallujah city council. Then they assassinated the leader of the al-Jubur tribe.

And now the reported killers of all these men -- al-Qaeda in Iraq, the insurgent group of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi -- have a powerful new enemy.

Tribal chiefs in Iraq's western Anbar province and in an area near the northern city of Kirkuk, two regions teeming with insurgents, are vowing to strike back at al-Qaeda in Iraq, a Sunni Arab-led group that is waging war against Sunni tribal leaders who are cooperating with the Iraqi government and the U.S. military. Anbar tribes have formed a militia that has killed 20 insurgents from al-Qaeda in Iraq, leaders said.

Separately, more than 300 tribal chiefs, politicians, clerics, security officials and other community leaders met last week in Hawijah, about 35 miles southwest of Kirkuk, and "declared war" on al-Qaeda in Iraq. In a communique, the participants vowed "the shedding of blood" of anyone involved in "sabotage, killings, kidnappings, targeting police and army, attacking the oil and gas pipelines and their transporters, assassinating the religious and tribal figures, technicians, and doctors."

"Hawijah was never a hideout for terrorists and fugitives," the statement added. "Anyone who provides refuge to terrorists will be considered and dealt with like a criminal and terrorist."

Last month at a briefing in Baghdad, Maj. Gen Rick Lynch, a U.S. military spokesman, said Zarqawi "finds these tribal leaders who have opted to embrace the democratic process . . . and he works to assassinate" them.

"What we're finding is indeed the people of al-Anbar -- Fallujah and Ramadi, specifically -- have decided to turn against terrorists and foreign fighters," he said. "The tribal leaders, if you will, said, 'Okay, that's enough, let's take out Zarqawi and his network and get them out of our cities.' " Lynch said "local insurgents" had killed six Zarqawi deputies in Ramadi since September.

Anbar province is a center of the insurgency and the deadliest region of the country outside of Baghdad for Iraqi civilians and U.S. forces. Tribal chiefs there said their militia, the al-Anbar Revolutionaries, has killed 20 foreign fighters from al-Qaeda in Iraq and 33 Iraqi sympathizers who aided the insurgents with arms and money in the past two months.

"Forming the group did not come from nothing," said Khalaf al-Fahdawi, a leader of the Sunni Albu Fahd tribe in Anbar. "It came from a need to destroy al-Qaeda, which we thought the Marines might have been able to do. We were wrong, since these armed men became stronger and raped other cities."

Leaders in Anbar and south of Kirkuk said they opposed both Zarqawi and the American military occupation of Iraq, describing them as feeding off each other to the detriment of the country.

"We are a group of the Anbar people who want to get rid of Zarqawi . . . because this is the only way to make the Americans withdraw from Ramadi or Iraq in general," said Ahmed Abu Ilaf, 30, a welder and member of the new Anbar militia from Ramadi, about 60 miles west of the capital.

"We are against Zarqawi and his followers because they aim to extend the presence of the occupation and hurt our forces to make them weak," said Hussein Ali al-Jubouri, a Sunni tribal leader and Hawijah city council member.

Hawijah leaders said they, too, wanted to create a militia to enforce their threats, but that U.S. military officials were opposed to the idea. For the time being, they said, they would intensify their cooperation with Iraqi military and police units.

Members of the Anbar militia said the group comprised about 100 people who have had relatives slain by al-Qaeda in Iraq. The group is led by Ahmed Ftaikhan, a former Iraqi intelligence officer from the now-disbanded Iraqi army who lives in Ramadi.

Fahdawi, the sheik from the Albu Fahd tribe, said the militia was forged in a series of secret meetings among tribal leaders, each of whom was asked to help form the group. Some contributed men, some money, Fahdawi said. U.S. military officers attended some of the meetings, he said, and helped "with "all kinds of financial support."

Lt. Col. Barry Johnson, a U.S. military spokesman in Baghdad, denied that American forces were funding the militia.

"All military activity is conducted through the legitimate structures of the Iraqi government and security forces," he said in an e-mail. "We are working hard to ensure these structures function properly, and funding a program such as this would only undermine that process."

A fighter in Zarqawi's group, calling himself Abu Azzam, said the al-Anbar Revolutionaries "are collaborators and dogs for America. They kill the mujaheddin to get money from the American crusaders. They are cowards and we have killed a lot of them. . . . All the people here support us and our jihad against the Americans and their followers."

Fahdawi said, "I cannot say that all the people in Ramadi support us, but I can say 80 percent of them do."

Ilaf, the militia member and welder from Ramadi, said the group has had real success.

"We have killed a number of the Arabs, including Saudis, Egyptians, Syrians, Kuwaitis, Syrians and Jordanians," he said. "We were also able to foil an attack by Zarqawi's men who were trying to attack an oil pipeline outside Ramadi. We killed four Iraqis trying to plant the bomb under the pipeline."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/06/AR2006030601596_pf.html

Loyal American

March 7th, 2006, 8:58 pm

Zarqawi better get out of Iraq while he can!

SFC(R)L

March 8th, 2006, 8:14 pm

Zarqawi better get out of Iraq while he can!

Preferably in pieces.

SFC(R)L

March 8th, 2006, 8:45 pm

COMMENTARY
The Wake of Success

By U.S. Army Gen. George W. Casey Jr.
Multinational Force-Iraq Commanding General

BAGHDAD, March 6, 2006 — The crisis generated by the bombing of the Golden Dome in Samarra has subsided. As I said last week, Iraq has passed a crucial test in their journey to becoming a democratic country. There is a terrorist threat here that will stop at nothing to undermine the formation of this constitutionally elected government, a government of national unity and a government that that represents all Iraqis. They tried to make the bombing of the Golden Dome mosque the straw that broke the camel’s back and it failed. Iraqis rose to the occasion. Have no doubt, there are still sectarian tensions that the Iraqis will have to work through. However, throughout this sensitive period the Multi-National Force - Iraq will continue to monitor the situation and support the government of Iraq.

The mosque incident provides insights into the changing situation in Iraq. First, we saw a return to the killing of innocent civilians as evidenced by the desperate terrorists’ attempts to subvert the government by all means. Over a three-day span in Baghdad during the unrest there were 71 deaths and 62 others injured because of a blitz of vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices, a suicide vest attack and an improvised explosive device. These were senseless attacks from an enemy that is desperate to stop Iraq from coming together as a nation. These attacks are in line with a trend that we continue to see, an increased amount of civilian casualties.

Second, we saw a maturing capability by the Iraqi Police and Iraqi Army to cooperate and operate effectively in providing domestic order during demonstrations and in dealing with militias around the country.

Iraqi security ministries and Iraqi Security Forces leadership directed the operations and the Coalition responded in a supporting role. The Iraqi Transitional Government reacted decisively by imposing curfews, driving bans, making public calls for calm and effectively bringing down the levels of violence countrywide.

Along with those insights, the changing nature of the conflict and the reactions by the government and its security forces provides a glimpse into the future of Iraq. The people of Iraq will not blindly follow the lead of the terrorists - they are consciously ignoring the temptation for unrest and moving toward democracy. Additionally, this incident highlights the need for the Iraqi government to deal with the militia issue in the very near future. That is a good thing. While some may have seen militias as their protectors in the past, the proven abilities of the ISF during this incident shows the reason, and time, for militias has come to an end. Ultimately, Iraq cannot succeed until the Iraqi Security Forces - the police and the military - are the only ones in Iraq with guns.

Those difficult few days in Iraq came at a sensitive time. While the danger is not completely past, the Iraqis have again risen to the occasion against the terror that is trying to deny them their future, and they won.

Editor's note: Gen. Casey's commentary appears as a weekly column in "This Week in Iraq," published by Multinational Force-Iraq ( http://www.mnf-iraq.com/ ).

SFC(R)L

March 9th, 2006, 8:52 pm

President Bush Signs Patriot Act Extension Into Law
By Gerry J. Gilmore
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, March 9, 2006 – President Bush put his signature on documents reauthorizing the USA Patriot Act at a White House ceremony here today.
"The Patriot Act has accomplished exactly what it was designed to do," Bush remarked to reporters at the White House before he reauthorized the Patriot Act. "It has helped us detect terror cells, disrupt terrorist plots and save American lives."

Bush signed an extension of the original Patriot Act law established soon after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States.

"The bill I sign today extends these vital provisions. It also gives our nation new protections and added defenses," the president said.

Bush said the Patriot Act extension enables U.S. intelligence and law enforcement officials to continue to share information used to catch terrorists, drug dealers and other criminals. "Over the past four years, America's law enforcement and intelligence personnel have proved the Patriot Act works," Bush said. Federal, state and local law enforcement agencies have used the Patriot Act to break up terror cells in Ohio, New York, Oregon and Virginia, he said.

"We've prosecuted terrorist operatives and supporters in California and Texas, New Jersey, Illinois, Washington and North Carolina," said he added.

The reauthorization of the Patriot Act, like the original, "will improve our nation's security while we safeguard the civil liberties of our people," Bush said.

New Patriot Act legislation also creates the position of assistant attorney general for national security at the Justice Department, the president said. "This will allow the Justice Department to bring together its national security, counterterrorism, counterintelligence, and foreign intelligence surveillance operations under a single authority," Bush said. This change will assist authorities to preempt possible future terrorist strikes against the homeland, he said.

Bush said the new Patriot Act bill contains provisions that will assist law enforcement agencies crack down on methamphetamine manufacturers in the United States. Methamphetamine, known as meth, is a highly addictive drug that can be made in basement laboratories using chemical elements found in over-the-counter cold remedies. "The bill introduces common-sense safeguards that would make many of the ingredients used in manufacturing meth harder to obtain in bulk and easier for law enforcement to track," Bush said.

In addition to fighting drug dealers, America also remains at war with global terrorists who will stop at nothing to kill innocent citizens, Bush said. Bush said Americans "saw the terrorists' destructive vision for us when they killed nearly 3,000 men, women and children" during the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks against the United States.

"We will confront this mortal danger; we will stay on the offensive; and we're not going to wait to be attacked again," Bush vowed.

SFC(R)L

March 9th, 2006, 8:54 pm

Iraqis Fed Up With Insurgency, General Says
By Samantha L. Quigley
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, March 9, 2006 – The people of Iraq are rising up against an insurgency bent on derailing democracy in the country, a Multinational Force Iraq spokesman said today.
"The people of Iraq are uniting against the insurgency," Army Maj. Gen. Rick Lynch said during a news conference from Baghdad. "Out in al Anbar, the terrorists and foreign fighters have become the enemy to the people."

People in that province have collectively turned against Jordanian terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and his network, Lynch said. Seven of Zarqawi's leaders have been killed in Anbar since September, and insurgent access to Ramadi has been physically blocked, he added.

Another way Iraqi citizens, as a whole, are uniting against the insurgency is by giving coalition members and Iraqi security forces "actionable tips." Lynch described actionable tips as those that provide information that coalition and Iraqi forces can do something with. Of all calls to the national tip line, 98 percent are actionable, he said.

"Based on these kinds of tips, since November, we have been able to kill or capture 41 bomb makers," Lynch said. These kinds of tips also have led to the discovery of more than 1,500 weapons caches across Iraq.

Iraqis are fed up with Zarqawi and his network's attempts to discredit the Iraqi government and disrupt the political process, Lynch said. "He's trying to tear Iraq apart at the seams to keep it from unifying as a nation," he said. "He's trying to stop the democratic process, but he can't."

Insurgents' attempts come at great cost to Iraqi civilians. Of 290 casualties in Iraq since Feb. 25, 239 were Iraqi civilians, Lynch said. Those casualties were the result of 40 car bombs that detonated while Iraqis were in line at gas stations or on their way to the market or school, Lynch said.

There were 555 attacks against coalition members, Iraqi security forces and civilians last week, he said. Yesterday alone, there were 80, he said.

In general, attacks were up in Anbar last week, but were isolated around Ramadi and Fallujah, he said. The north saw a drop in attacks against civilians, though there has been an increase in direct-fire attacks against Iraqi security forces, Lynch said.

Southern Iraq and Baghdad also have seen a reduction in attacks. In Baghdad, however, they have resulted in a greater number of casualties, Lynch said. He predicts more attacks as the Iraqi government prepares to seat its council of representatives March 12. "Remember, democracy equals failure for the insurgency," he said. "There's going to be more attacks to discredit the Iraqi government and derail the democratic process."

Lynch said he expects the government to react to any future attacks as it did to the Feb. 22 bombing of the Golden Mosque in Samarra -- as a capable Iraqi government directing a capable Iraqi security force that now numbers 240,000. This, he said he believes, will prevent the enemy from achieving its goals.

Those 240,000 Iraqi security forces participated in 461 operations across Iraq last week, Lynch said. Of those, Iraqi forces independently planned, resourced and executed 34 percent.

Lynch also updated numbers related to the sectarian violence that began with the Golden Mosque bombing. "As of today, we can confirm 452 civilian deaths since the 22nd of February," he said, adding that the number could be greater, and deaths directly attributable to sectarian violence were unclear.

Of 81 reported mosque attacks, it was confirmed that 23 sustained significant damage, and of those, eight were totally destroyed, Lynch said. The coalition confirmed 17 had light damage, and 41 had no damage. He also confirmed that there were 83 demonstrations since Feb. 22, with only five resulting in any acts of violence.

As the insurgency tries to re-establish an Islamic state in Iraq, Lynch said, the coalition is keeping a close eye on two of Iraq's neighbors. "We are concerned about two specific neighbors that seem to be particularly unhelpful, Syria and Iran," he said. "There are clear indications that Iran is supporting the insurgency in Iraq."

Despite this, Lynch noted Iraq is at peace with its neighbors. It is an ally on the war on terrorism, has a representative government that can respect human rights of its citizens, and has a security force capable of maintaining domestic order and denying the country as a safe haven for terrorists, he said.

RedStatePaPa

March 9th, 2006, 8:57 pm

In keeping with the theme...

Some Sunnis Targeting al-Qaida in Iraq
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060309/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_fighting_al_zarqawi
BAGHDAD, Iraq - Residents reported curious declarations hanging from mosque walls and market stalls recently in Ramadi, the Sunni Muslim insurgent stronghold west of Baghdad. The fliers said Iraqi militants had turned on and were killing foreign al-Qaida fighters, their one-time allies.

A local tribal leader and Iraq's Defense Ministry have said followers of Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, leader of al-Qaida in Iraq, have begun fleeing Anbar province and Ramadi, its capital, to cities and mountain ranges near the Iranian border.

"So far we have cleared 75 percent of the province and forced al-Qaida terrorists to flee to nearby areas," said Osama al-Jadaan, a leader of the Karabila tribe, which has thousands of members living along the border with Syria.

He claimed his people have captured hundreds of foreigner fighters and handed them to authorities. The drive, dubbed Operation Tribal Chivalry, is designed to secure the country's borders with Syria, Jordan and Saudi Arabia to prevent foreign fighters from crossing in.

After the U.S. invasion in March 2003, residents of the province — which also includes cities like Fallujah, Haditha and Qaim — became known for their violent anti-American sentiments. The province is still the most dangerous in Iraq for U.S. troops. In the past two days alone, two U.S. Marines were killed by hostile fire there.

Relations between residents and the foreign fighters started to sour, however, when the foreigners started killing Iraqis suspected of having links to the Americans or even for holding a government job.

The rift became an outright split four months ago, with a wave of assassinations and bombings that killed scores of Anbar residents. The attacks were blamed on al-Qaida.

"We were fed up with the situation," said one Ramadi resident, complaining about closed roads, unemployment and a lack of security. The resident spoke on condition of anonymity because he feared for his life.

In late November, tribal and religious leaders, former army officers and hundreds of ordinary Iraqis met in Ramadi with U.S. military commanders for a first-ever comprehensive dialogue on what could be done to speed a U.S. withdrawal.

Afterward, gunmen began killing some of those who had met with the Americans or who had urged Sunnis in the region to vote in the U.S.-backed parliamentary elections on Dec. 15. Several top clerics and a tribal leader were killed.

The deadliest attack — a suicide bombing Jan. 5 among a line of police recruits in Ramadi — killed at least 58, including U.S. troops.

Stunned city residents turned on al-Qaida, and al-Jadaan, of the Karabila tribe, announced an agreement with the U.S.-backed Iraqi government to help with security.

The moves by al-Jadaan's men and Iraqi army units against al-Qaida forced many of the foreign fighters to flee to central and eastern areas of Iraq — some to the mountains near Iran — that have large Sunni populations, al-Jadaan said.

That prompted tribes in the central city of Hawija, where some al-Qaida fighters sought refuge, to issue a statement earlier this week openly declaring war on foreign al-Qaida members.

The declaration was prompted by the killing a week ago of tribal leader Suhaib Abdullah al-Obeidi. Al-Qaida also killed three Shiites — a father and his two sons — and a Communist Party boss.

"We are against the killing of civilians for sectarian or ethnic reasons. That's why we are shedding the blood of Muslim extremists, especially al-Qaida," said Abul-Rahman Mansheed, a top Sunni politician in Hawija.

Army Maj. Gen. Anwar Mohammed Amin, in the nearby city of Kirkuk, said the military soon would launch a major attack, with help from the local tribesmen, to clear that region of al-Qaida as well.

Claims such as those issued by the tribesmen and local military officers are nearly impossible to confirm, but the considerable drop in suicide bombings throughout the country recently indicates operations by al-Qaida foreigners have been hampered.

Al-Jadaan, the Anbar tribal leader, looked confidently to the future and — if his prediction comes true — what likely will be a hero's role in the eyes of the U.S. military.

"Under my leadership and that of our brothers in other tribes, we are getting close to the shelter of this terrorist," al-Jadaan said of al-Zarqawi. "We will capture him soon."

Loyal American

March 9th, 2006, 9:19 pm

All good news post(s) tonight! Thanks SFC and RedState!
I love this thread! ;)

SFC(R)L

March 11th, 2006, 12:11 am

Nine-Month Trend in Recruiting, Retention Success Continues
By Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, March 10, 2006 – Recruiting and retention statistics released today reflect continued across-the-board success and continuation of a nine-month trend, officials said.
A top Pentagon official called that a testament to hard work by recruiters and broad public respect for the military in light of the economic boom under way.

"February, in recruiting, was another really solid month," said Bill Carr, deputy undersecretary of defense for military personnel policy, during an interview with the Pentagon Channel.

In active-duty recruiting, the Army achieved 102 percent of its February goal, bringing more than 6,100 soldiers into the force. The Navy and Marine Corps both achieved 104 percent of their goals, recruiting almost 2,700 and more than 1,700 new members, respectively. The Air Force met 101 percent of its goal, recruiting more than 2,300 airmen.

Reserve and National Guard recruiting remained strong, too, particularly for the Army, which represents 80 percent of the entire reserve-component force. The Army National Guard met 101 percent of its February goal, with almost 6,600 recruits, and the Army Reserve attracted almost 2,300 new members, 97 percent of its goal. The Air Force Reserve achieved 117 percent of its goal, recruiting 573 airmen.

Three reserve components fell short of their February goals. The Air National Guard reached 88 of its goal; the Marine Corps Reserve, 86 percent; and the Navy Reserve, 81 percent. These components recruited 680, 469 and 710 members, respectively.

Carr called the overall recruiting picture amazing, particularly in light of a strong national economy that offers potential recruits a wide range of opportunities. He credited much of this success to recruiters "doing a bang-up job" in high schools, colleges and local communities. "There is a lot of talk about the all-volunteer force, but the recruiters will quickly remind you that it is an all-recruited force," Carr said.

Recruiters "have worked with young people (and) conveyed the message of the services and ... sparked the interest and imagination of young people," he said. "That is hard to do, and they did it well."

It's important for recruiters to have continued access to colleges, especially because more young people go to college now than a decade ago. "We have to fish where the fish are, and they are in colleges increasingly," he said.

High public confidence in the military as an institution doesn't hurt recruiting, either, Carr said. The latest Harris Poll shows the military continues to be the most admired institution in America, with 47 percent of respondents saying they have a "great deal" of confidence in the military.

This response shows widespread public recognition of the professionalism, ethics and performance of the military when it's called to carry out a mission, Carr said. "They recognize that, and they know what the military delivers," he said. "And I think they are proud of the military and their leaders."

High retention rates service-wide show that people who decide to join the military appear to agree with this assessment, Carr said. "I think the message there is that those who know us best are making a decision to stay," Carr said. "It's a tribute to those who are in the service, their families, to the family support groups, and to their unit leadership that they feel the way they do about this noble institution."

Loyal American

March 11th, 2006, 12:24 am

Oh the war is going soooooo badly, I just know they are going bring the "draft" back soon! :doh: :rolleyes: :boohoo: :whistle: ................ :angel:

rhet 2

March 11th, 2006, 12:27 am

Oh the war is going soooooo badly, I just know they are going bring the "draft" back soon! :doh: :rolleyes: :boohoo: :whistle: ................ :angel:

Just close your cake crumb depository, Rangel! (Just kidding! You I love. Him I despise.)

SFC(R)L

March 13th, 2006, 9:33 pm

March 13, 2006

INJURED SERGEANT SOLDIERS ON

Col. Thomas Borris examined Sgt. Michael Morphis’ cheek and jaw at Fort Carson in October. Morphis belonged to the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment when he was shot Feb. 26, 2004 — the day he was to leave Iraq after a nearly yearlong tour. Morphis was shot in the face and has had numerous surgeries to essentially rebuild his lower face.

By CARY LEIDER VOGRIN THE GAZETTE

It’s been two years since he was shot in the face, and Sgt. Michael Morphis couldn’t tell you how many surgeries he’s had — just that he’s scheduled for yet another one today.

His surgeon, Col. Thomas Borris, doesn’t know either. “Oh boy, ask me an easy question. TNTC: Too numerous to count.”

Morphis’ former unit — the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment — has since come home from Iraq, redeployed and come home again while he’s been recovering at Fort Carson.

Over the past two years, his lower face has essentially been rebuilt. But he said he never once thought about getting a medical discharge from the Army.

Morphis loves being a soldier, loves the Army. The pain he can take; what bothers him most is that he hasn’t been with his unit.

“I didn’t join the Army to sit around post and collect dust,” he said.

While recuperating, Morphis has been assigned to administrative duties at Evans Army Community Hospital — not what he considers his ideal job.

He’s been there so long that Borris, the chief of oral and maxillofacial surgery at Evans, can’t think of any other patient whom he’s seen for a longer stretch.

In addition to Morphis, there are 30 other soldiers assigned to Medical Holding Detachment, USA MEDDAC — soldiers who are awaiting medical board evaluations, said Dee McNutt, Fort Carson spokeswoman.

Morphis, 33, said he has been medically cleared and is expecting to transfer to a post in California, but he has not yet been attached to a new unit.

“Sgt. Morphis — he’s a strapping, strong young man, and there’s really nothing that would prevent him from jumping out of airplanes and doing all the things that soldiers like to do,” Borris said.

Morphis was shot Feb. 26, 2004 — the day he was to leave Iraq after a nearly yearlong tour.

“I was three to five hours from leaving. When we were leaving we got ambushed,” he said.

While he was riding in a Humvee, a bullet ripped through his right cheek, went through his tongue and came out on the left side of his face.

He lost 13 teeth, and bone from his hip was used to refashion his jaw. He has a titanium bar, molded in a “U” shape, in his chin. Metal implants screwed into his jaw have formed platforms for new porcelain teeth he has yet to get.

His bottom lip and chin are numb, and speaking was at first very difficult.

“I remember after some conversations I’d be winded and have to sit down for a while,” he said.

Morphis said he’s been restless — even a bit lonely.

In addition to his hospital duties, he’s tried to keep busy with other hobbies and even another job. He takes Vee Arnis Jujitsu martial arts classes and took on part-time work as a cook at a Culver’s restaurant near his apartment.

Today’s surgery will involve putting in yet another implant, but the end is near.

“We’re actually coming down the home stretch for him finally,” Borris said. “If everything goes according to plan, this really would be the last big surgery we need.”

It’ll be another six months or so until Morphis actually can smile and show off new teeth, Borris said.

Morphis looks forward to getting back to being a soldier — he even wants to deploy again.

“I don’t like sitting around post — the paper cuts are excruciating,” he said.

http://www.gazette.com/display.php?id=1315554

SFC(R)L

March 13th, 2006, 9:45 pm

U.S. Strategy Built for New Threats, General Says
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, March 13, 2006 – The U.S. military has sculpted its strategy to account for the different threats, cultures and circumstances posed by the global war on terror, the Joint Staff's chief of strategic plans and policy said in an interview here.
Air Force Lt. Gen. Victor E. "Gene" Renuart Jr. said that while the Defense Department does focus a great deal of effort on Iraq and Afghanistan, the war on terrorism reaches well outside the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility. "And each portion of that around the world has a different flavor and different requirements," the general said.

The key tenets of the strategy are protecting the United States from attack, finding and rooting out terrorist organizations around the world and finding ways to enable the voices of the moderates - especially moderate Muslims - to help counter the terrorist ideology, he said.

In different parts of the world, different portions of the strategy move to the forefront.

"Countering the ideology could be something as visible as the tsunami relief," the general said. The world rushed to the rescue when the tsunami struck the Indian Ocean area in December 2004. The United States sent sailors and airmen to shuttle supplies to the stricken areas of Indonesia. U.S. servicemembers helped airlift victims and clear roads in the country.

The shared experiences have helped the United States and Indonesia repair damaged relations, Renuart said. And the help the U.S. government, U.S. servicemembers and U.S. nongovernmental agencies provided Indonesia had a significant impact on the way the citizens of the nation viewed America and Americans.

The Indonesian government has begun to reach out in ways it has never done in the past, and the United States has reciprocated with elements of military-to-military, international and economic engagement.

"Some may say that's not part of the war on terrorism," Renuart said. "Actually that's at the heart of the war, because it is creating in the minds of those who might choose the extremist ideology the idea that the West really are forces for good and will come to their aid when they have a tragedy like that."

The general said it is a much better investment to create friends than it is to defeat an enemy. "It's certainly a lot less expensive in lives and treasure," he said.

The U.S. response to the earthquake in Pakistan is a similar example. "The idea that the No. 1 toy for kids in Pakistan is a Chinook helicopter speaks volumes about the change in perception (in Pakistan)," he said. The children American servicemembers helped may think twice before accepting the extremist view of America they could learn at certain religious schools.

Renuart said terrorist threat clearly is present in Southeast Asia, Central Asia and Africa. These are centered on "ungoverned areas" - areas where the national and state governments are ineffective. He said groups like al Qaeda buy their ways into these areas - in effect paying hush money so the groups can train, plan and refit in the areas. Somalia could become one of those regions, as could countries in the southern Sahara and sub-Saharan Africa, he said.

In Africa, there is a dividing line between Christians and Muslims. "Finding ways to solve those problems prior to conflict are a critical element of the strategy," the general noted.

Small U.S. teams in the Horn of Africa and in West Africa work to build up the counterinsurgency effort of the nations. Other teams may dig wells or conduct medical exercises. These small projects, the general said, directly benefit the people. These are aspects that the U.S. military would traditionally have put into an unconventional warfare category.

"Today, we are doing it with Marines and soldiers - conventional soldiers trained to do these missions," he said. "Doing that helps build these governments and helps preclude growth of terrorism in those regions."

But one size does not fit all. Each nation has a different economic, political and military capacity. In many cases, the nations themselves do not "stand on a strong foundation," Renuart said. Conducting these recurring military activities with the governments helps the citizens to see the central state as a confident, competent, democratic entity, he said.

DoD works very closely with the U.S. State Department and the country teams in these nations, the general said.

The recurring nature of the events is important. "The countries need to see the United States as an ally who will not be here today and gone tomorrow," he said. "We need to engage with them on a routine basis for an extended period of time."

And Americans must remember, he said, that democracy can be messy. "Sometimes it won't go the way we hope," he said. "There are a lot of unforeseen circumstances out there. But the president's initiatives on freedom and democracy remain pretty consistent, and that is to give people the opportunity to choose a representative form of government. You have to acknowledge that sometimes the people who get elected may not represent exactly the position you have, but you continue to keep a dialogue."

Terrorism affects everyone in the world, the general said. This means that even countries that don't agree on many things can still operate and have discussions on the common ground of counterterrorism, illicit trade, counternarcotics and nuclear proliferation, he said. "We need to create relationships that can endure the ups and downs of political relations in the military-to-military contacts, humanitarian relief and so on," he said.

"We cannot focus on one part of the world so much that we forget about others," he said. "Every nation of the world has to pay attention to how deal with extremism."

http://www.dod.mil/news/Mar2006/20060313_4476.html

SFC(R)L

March 13th, 2006, 9:51 pm

Iraqi Leaders Make Progress Toward Unity, U.S. Ambassador Says
By Tech. Sgt. Elaine Wilson, USAF
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, March 12, 2006 – Iraqi leaders took a "very positive step" today toward establishing a government of national unity, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq said moments after an emergency meeting with Iraqi leaders.
"It was a good day today in Baghdad," Zalmay Khalilzad said today in an interview from Baghdad on CNN's "Late Edition" with Wolf Blitzer.

The meeting, called to initiate progress in the formation of a new government, was an indicator that leaders "are taking the problems of the country seriously," the ambassador said.

Khalilzad said he was encouraged by the meeting's results. "Leaders decided to bring forward the opening of the assembly now rather than on the 19th," he said, adding that the first session of the new parliament will be held March 16.

Leaders from all factions also agreed there is "no red line in terms of the inclusion of any faction in the formation of the government," the ambassador added.

Khalilzad said leaders plan to meet continuously as of March 14 until there is agreement on the government, including a prime minister, one of the primary concerns of the country's leaders. "Everyone agrees the prime minister has to be someone who can bring this country together, someone who is competent in terms of dealing with the problems of Iraq," he said.

"That is one of the key issues in the coming days that Iraqi political leaders will have to decide on; there was a lot of flexibility on all sides," he said.

Khalilzad said he was unable to predict just how long decisions like the selection of a prime minister would take. "This decision, the formation of a government of national unity is extremely important," he said. "If they (Iraqi leaders) make the right decision forming a national unity government -- competent ministers, good process with a good program governing from the center -- it will put Iraq on the right trajectory; it will be a major step forward for Iraq."

However, he said, "It's still going to take a bit of time.

"We'll work with them and do it as quickly as possible. They understand it's an urgent matter."

Khalilzad also commented on a neighbor to Iraq that has been prominent in the headlines - Iran. "We have concerns with regards for their support for some of the militias and some of the extremist groups," he said. "We want good relations between Iraq and all its neighbors. And, at the same time, we do not want any of its neighbors to dominate Iraq, and that is our policy with Iran as well."

The ambassador said Iraqi leaders are "concerned about aspects of Iranian policy which supports extremists and interferes with the development of a successful democratic Iraq."

Khalilzad also expressed his sorrow over the death of peace activist Tom Fox, who was taken hostage by terrorists in Iraq in 2005. American forces found Fox's body March 9 in Baghdad.

"Terrorists want nothing good, and they go after innocent people," Khalilzad said. "They cannot confront our forces or Iraqi forces directly so they want to make life difficult by provoking sectarian war.

"We're very much committed to defeating terrorists here, very much committed to building a democratic state, an Iraq that is successful, and for all communities, including the Shiites, to have the appropriate place, rights respected and protected.

"We're on the right track," Khalilzad said.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Mar2006/20060312_4463.html

Loyal American

March 13th, 2006, 10:13 pm

Good posts tonight SFC!
The Sgt. Michael Morphis story made me cry. It reminded me of a young man I had as a patient many years ago who lost better than 2/3's of his jaw in a motorcycle accident. I understand how one will lose count of the countless surgery procedures that follow major facial trauma. I know after losing contact with that patient and running into him several years later I was absolutely amazed how wonderful he looked. He knew me and I had no clue who he was till he told me. I wish that type of success for Sgt. Morphis and I hope he's back pounding sand as soon as he's up to it too! God bless his dedication!:flag:

SFC(R)L

March 13th, 2006, 10:16 pm

Loyal American

March 13th, 2006, 11:01 pm

Where do we get such men?

God Bless America.

http://joemonahansnewmexico.blogspot.com/uploaded_images/American%20flag%209-1-722003.jpg

SFC(R)L

March 13th, 2006, 11:15 pm

http://www.army.mil/SoldiersCreed/flash_version/index.html

Loyal American

March 13th, 2006, 11:25 pm

http://www.kgw.com/news-local/stories/L_IMAGE.f391221e43.93.88.fa.7c.81622c21.jpg

SFC(R)L

March 13th, 2006, 11:51 pm

I will never leave a fallen comrade.

I am a guardian of freedom and the American way of life.

I am a sheepdog.

Loyal American

March 14th, 2006, 12:13 am

Woof Woof!

SFC(R)L

March 15th, 2006, 7:49 pm

Iraqi soldiers making progress, on track for independent operations in Al Anbar Province
Submitted by: 1st Marine Division
Story by Staff Sgt. Jim Goodwin

CAMP AL ASAD, Iraq (March 15, 2006) -- Iraqi soldiers are right on schedule with training requirements that will allow them to eventually relieve U.S. military forces in western Al Anbar Province, according to Marine officials here.

Soldiers from the 2nd Brigade, 7th Iraqi Army Division - one of two Iraqi Army brigades in western Al Anbar Province - have spent months now learning the administrative and decision-making processes they’ll need to function as a military headquarters element to the three Iraqi infantry battalions which will eventually be under their charge.

Partnered with a Military Transition Team - groups of Marines assigned to track and guide each Iraqi military unit’s transition to full control - the Iraqi soldiers here are learning the skills required to operate as a command staff, such as administration, logistical procurement, command and staff relations and tactical decision making.

Marines from Regimental Combat Team 7, who arrived in Iraq about a month ago to relieve the Camp Lejeune, N.C.-based Regimental Combat Team 2, have spent the past 30-plus days here evaluating, training and mentoring the Iraqi soldiers.

Progress is steady

So far, the Marines are pleased with what they’ve seen.

“In that month’s time, we’ve seen big progress,” said Lt.Col. Jeffrey J. Kenney, who spearheads the Marines’ military transition team for the 2nd Brigade. “There are a lot of things they couldn’t do before that they can do now. It’s a sign they’re really doing better.”

The progress of Iraqi military units is not limited to just Iraqi soldiers here. The top U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. George W. Casey, Jr., told reporters at a recent press conference that the Iraqi Army and Iraqi Police both performed well overall during recent sectarian strife, quelling violence in eight provinces in Iraq.

“This demonstrates a maturing capability to cooperate and operate effectively in providing domestic order, and we saw this in several places around the country,” said Casey.

“The men who attacked the mosque (in Samarra) want to make a civil war between Iraqis. We will not let this happen,” added Chief Warrant Officer Zahra Ar-Raheem, 41, who added that he is fed up with violence caused by insurgents. The recent sectarian violence around the country has reinforced his will to serve in the Iraqi Army, he said.

On the path to independent operations

Iraqi soldiers’ goal: a terrorism-free Iraq

Inside one of the dozens of aircraft hangars of this barren airbase, Iraqi soldiers have spent days getting their hands dirty working underneath the hoods of High Mobility Multi-Wheeled Vehicles, or “Humvees.” They’re learning how to conduct basic maintenance on the military vehicles – changing fluids, replacing parts, checking basic vehicle operations.

Soon, the Iraqis will be receiving their own Humvees – an upgrade in protection from the small pick-up trucks and other commercial vehicles they currently use for transportation.

Huddled in groups underneath the hoods and bellies of the Humvees, which bare a spray-painted Iraqi flag on the doors, the soldiers speak frantically to one another in Arabic, and resemble a group of surgeons on deadline to perform life-saving surgery.

Though most say they’ve joined the Iraqi Army to “kill the terrorists and free Iraq,” some have been affected by insurgent attacks firsthand.

During a soda break from working under the hood of beige Humvee, Iraqi Warrant Officer Fatima Muhammed, 24, recalled several occasions of violence near his home, such as random shootings, bombings, kidnappings and thievery. His friendly demeanor turns quite serious on the subject.

“The terrorists are just like Saddam,” he said. “Explosions, killing, robbery – all terrorism. If I had authority, I would kill the terrorists directly.”

He said most of the Iraqi soldiers here are truly dedicated to the new Iraqi government, and are not part of Iraq’s new Army “just for the money.”

“We are all eager to serve Iraq and be a part of Iraq’s future,” said Muhammed, who added that voting in last year’s national elections was a freedom he never thought he’d live to see in Iraq. “I was afraid to show my (ink-stained) finger because the terrorists, they could kill me.”

“Only thing we want is safety. I want my family to walk down the streets without any guards or any protection,” said Muhammed. He said he is anxiously waiting for that day, but for now, Iraqis “don’t have that freedom.”

A family affair

But while some of the soldiers are still weary of insurgent threats against their families and friends, many are beginning to exude confidence and pride of their service in the Army, despite any threats of retribution for their service. These soldiers see their progress as a sign of an already free Iraq, one in which they control, not terrorists or sectarian leaders.

“Even our families have asked us to be hard workers in the military,” said Ar-Raheem.

Undeterred by insurgents, Ar-Raheem” spoke of a photograph he took while holding an M16 rifle of a U.S. Marine; a photo he proudly shows his families and friends in his neighborhood as proof that he is serving in Iraq’s Army.

Hassan Al-Saheeed, an Iraqi private, agrees with Muhaymin. The 40-year-old said that the country is now safer since the 2003 fall of Saddam Hussein, but more importantly, his family is safe, and he and two of his five sons now freely serve in Iraq’s military.

Al-Saheeed said he is less concerned with terrorist threats against his family for his service in the Iraqi Army than he is with taking care of his family while he undergoes training “so far away” from his home. His family relies on him to provide food and to bring the children to the local hospital when they’re sick, which is hard to do when he’s not there, he said.

But his family’s sacrifices for his service are for an important cause, said Al-Saheeed.

“Until the country is safe, I try to make protection for all the people,” he said. “My family told me, ‘Go and help the country.’”

“They (Americans) are helping us, but we will be in full control (soon),” added Ar-Raheem. “When we control everything, we will succeed. Our efforts will be in the right direction.”

http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf/main5/65178E0B17D4378C85257132001F4D1F?opendocument

rhet 2

March 15th, 2006, 7:54 pm

SFC(R)L

March 15th, 2006, 7:56 pm

"“Until the country is safe, I try to make protection for all the people,” he said. “My family told me, ‘Go and help the country.’”

And Iraq is a lost cause? Not while MEN like these are hunting the hyenas! Way to go, Al-Saheeed! That's telling it like it is, Ar-Raheem!

I wish there was a way to tell these Iraqi HEROES how much we approve and admire them for what they do!

The full article is excellent...too long for this posting.

SFC(R)L

March 15th, 2006, 7:58 pm

March 15, 2006

Bill would limit protesters' access to military funerals
By Kyle Henley The Gazette

DENVER – Colorado’s move to join the states that curtail protester access to military funerals is a direct response to a memorial service in Colorado Springs last weekend.

Members of a Kansas church led by the Rev. Fred Phelps protested Saturday at the funeral of Sgt. Gordon Misner, who died in a roadside bomb attack in Iraq. The group picketed the funeral with signs claiming soldier deaths were God’s punishment for America's toleration of homosexuals.

On Wednesday, Rep. Michael Merrifield, D-Manitou Springs, said he will introduce legislation that would limit protester access to military funerals.

“It is appalling and disrespectful to the families of those who have made the ultimate sacrifice for our country to have

the privacy of their funeral disrupted,” Merrifield said. “This bill will attempt to protect freedom of speech and protect the rights of families.”

The bill would require protesters to remain 300 feet away from funerals and would ban them from demonstrating for 30 minutes before a funeral starts and for 30 minutes after the funeral ends.

Similar legislation has been approved in South Dakota, Kansas, Oklahoma, Indiana and Kentucky. Twelve other states – including Pennsylvania and Illinois – are considering such legislation.

Misner’s wife, Christina, said she welcomes the move in Colorado.

“I think it was rude and disrespectful,” she said. “He (Phelps) is entitled to his free speech, but he can do it somewhere else. If it wasn’t for our soldiers, he wouldn’t have the right to speak his mind.”

Phelps is the pastor at Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kan. He’s made a name for himself in recent years by protesting at the funeral of gay men and women.

Shirley Phelps-Roper, his daughter and an attorney for the church, said they will sue Colorado if a law limiting protester access to military funeral is approved.
http://www.gazette.com/display.php?id=1315642

Loyal American

March 15th, 2006, 9:37 pm

SFC the Marine link was awesome. I think by some of the comments being made by the Iraqi Soldiers there is more than maintenance, marksmanskip and first responder training going on. They are helping them find "pride" in what they are doing too. I wish them all the very best.
__________________________________________________ _______________
The Colorado law is really going to be on shaking ground if they leave the 30minutes before and after in it. I'd really rather see them go with more distance and drop the "minutes" thing. I like that a lot, don't get me wrong, but I have discovered that all these bills are treading on thin ice and if contested will probably not hold up in a court of law.

Indiana's bill landed up being a fraction of what it originally was because lawyers said we wouldn't have a chance if contested. I still think a stronger National bill would help the states but my elected wrote many of us back that they pretty much want the states to do it. Only time will tell but my state reps. have told me that they don't think our bill will hold up if someone takes us to court.

It's sick that we have to take such measures let alone not being able to do it in a manner that could totally prevent the problem.

p.s. What gets me is that it would seem that a person has freedom of speech but also the right to be heard.............distance can even be a problem if they can't be heard. No freedom of speech or can't be heard for 30 minutes before and after will never work. SAD, I know.

SFC(R)L

March 16th, 2006, 7:49 pm

Rice Says Victory Requires Time, Patience, Sacrifice
By John D. Banusiewicz
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, March 16, 2006 – Past victories over ideologies of hatred serve as a reminder that such triumphs require time, patience and sacrifice, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said in Australia today.
In an interview with Kerry O'Brien on the Australian Broadcasting Company's "7:30 Report," Rice said there's no choice but to win. Australia is Rice's final stop on a weeklong visit to Latin America and the Pacific.

"We've won these struggles before against ideologies of hatred, but it's always taken time; it's taken patience; unfortunately, it's sometimes taken sacrifice. It's also taken good friends and allies like we have here in Australia," Rice said. "But we've triumphed because we've stayed true to our values. We've triumphed because we have believed in those who were trying to seek freedom's promise. And we've triumphed because we've recognized that there is no alternative than to confront this ideology of hatred and to defeat it."

Acknowledging that the road to democracy in Iraq continues to be rough, the secretary also noted that the Iraqi people have continued to move forward.

"I think if you look at what the Iraqi people have actually achieved in the last three years, it's quite remarkable," Rice said. "Yes, they are experiencing great difficulty in making their way to democracy. But democracy is never easy. I think we in the United States and probably in Australia, people should be humble about our own path to democracy, which was difficult and had its own false starts and its own mistakes.

"But the Iraqis, in a place where for really most of their existence they solved their differences by violence or by repression or by dictatorship, they've now turned to politics to try to do that," she added. "And yes, it's hard, but they are going to form a government of national unity."

Rice said she doesn't believe the Iraqi people are on the brink of civil war, despite the best efforts of fugitive Jordanian terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi to pit Iraqi against Iraqi. "There are clearly those who would like to stoke the sectarian strife, but they're people like Zarqawi, the terrorist," she said. "The Iraqis themselves have voted three times, including ratifying a constitution, and now they're in the process of forming a government. I think they've made a remarkable showing."

The secretary praised the way Iraqis have responded to terrorists' attempts to drive a wedge between religious groups in their country, such as the Feb. 22 bombing of the Golden Mosque in Samarra.

"There's no doubt that there are those who would try to tear them apart," she said. "But every time they've gone to the precipice, every time there has been a major incident like the Samarra bombing, they have tried to come together rather than tearing themselves apart. And that's something to be admired."

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Mar2006/20060316_4510.html

SFC(R)L

March 16th, 2006, 8:10 pm

Guard, Reserve troops on active duty hit new low

By Robert Burns
The Associated Press

WASHINGTON The ranks of National Guard and Reserve troops on active duty for Iraq and the global fight against terror has fallen to just under 118,000, the lowest level since before the U.S. invasion of Iraq three years ago.

The reduction is a welcome trend for Americas citizen-soldiers, who have been called to combat duty in numbers not seen in decades and who were further strained by last years hurricane relief efforts on the Gulf Coast. Advertisement

The driving reason for the drop, Pentagon officials say, is that more active-duty combat units like the Armys 4th Infantry Division are returning to Iraq after extensive reorganizations. Guard and Reserve units, the bulk of whom are in Iraq and Afghanistan, were filling more combat positions while the active-duty force was being reconfigured for the kinds of conflicts the Pentagon expects in the years ahead.

The Pentagon says the decline in Guard and Reserve call-ups also reflects that some troops whose specialties make them among the most frequently deployed have served their required time.

Lt. Col. Ellen Krenke, a Pentagon spokeswoman, said some high demand units such as military police, military intelligence and special operations forces have completed their 24 months of mobilization time. This means they are no longer available unless they volunteer.

The military says it does not expect the two-year mobilization limit to create a major problem unless the United States becomes involved in another major conflict.

One reason: the Army is shifting more military police positions from the Guard and Reserve to the active-duty force, so there will be more flexibility for the Army to use MPs without having to go to the reserves.

As of Wednesday, the number of Guard and Reserve from across the military who were on active duty had dropped to 117,988. That is the lowest number since the Iraq war began in March 2003. The peak was in April 2003, at 224,528.

The number on active duty in the Army National Guard and Army Reserve, troops who have borne much of the burden in Iraq, has slipped below 100,000 for the first time in that period, according to Defense Department statistics.

At some points during 2005, the Guard and Reserve represented nearly half of the total force in Iraq. They are now down below 20 percent.

SFC(R)L

March 18th, 2006, 11:05 am

Saddam's Philippines Terror Connection

And other revelations from the Iraqi regime files.
by Stephen F. Hayes
03/27/2006, Volume 011, Issue 26

SADDAM HUSSEIN'S REGIME PROVIDED FINANCIAL support to Abu Sayyaf, the al Qaeda-linked jihadist group founded by Osama bin Laden's brother-in-law in the Philippines in the late 1990s, according to documents captured in postwar Iraq.

An eight-page fax dated June 6, 2001, and sent from the Iraqi ambassador in Manila to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Baghdad, provides an update on Abu Sayyaf kidnappings and indicates that the Iraqi regime was providing the group with money to purchase weapons. The Iraqi regime suspended its support--temporarily, it seems--after high-profile kidnappings, including of Americans, focused international attention on the terrorist group.

The fax comes from the vast collection of documents recovered in postwar Afghanistan and Iraq. Up to this point, those materials have been kept from the American public. Now the proverbial dam has broken. On March 16, the U.S. government posted on the web 9 documents captured in Iraq, as well as 28 al Qaeda documents that had been released in February.

Earlier last week, Foreign Affairs magazine published a lengthy article based on a review of 700 Iraqi documents by analysts with the Institute for Defense Analysis and the Joint Forces Command in Norfolk, Virginia. Plans for the release of many more documents have been announced. And if the contents of the recently released materials and other documents obtained by The Weekly Standard are any indication, the discussion of the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq is about to get more interesting.

Several months ago, The Weekly Standard received a set of English-language
documents from a senior U.S. government official. The official represented this material as U.S. government translations of three captured Iraqi documents. According to this source, the documents had been examined by the U.S. intelligence community and judged "consistent with authentic documents"--the professionals' way of saying that these items cannot definitively be certified but seem to be the real thing.

The Weekly Standard checked its English-language documents with officials serving elsewhere in the federal government to make sure they were consistent with the versions these officials had seen. With what one person characterized as "minor discrepancies," they are. One of the three documents has been posted in the original Arabic on the website of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. A subsequent translation of that document is nearly identical to the English-language text that we were given.

These documents add to the growing body of evidence confirming the Iraqi regime's longtime support for terrorism abroad. The first of them, a series of memos from the spring of 2001, shows that the Iraqi Intelligence Service funded Abu Sayyaf, despite the reservations of some IIS officials. The second, an internal Iraqi Intelligence memo on the relationships between the IIS and Saudi opposition groups, records that Osama bin Laden requested Iraqi cooperation on terrorism and propaganda and that in January 1997 the Iraqi regime was eager to continue its relationship with bin Laden.

The third, a September 15, 2001, report from an Iraqi Intelligence source in Afghanistan, contains speculation about the relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda and the likely U.S. response to it.

http://weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/011/990ieqmb.asp

Loyal American

March 18th, 2006, 11:26 am

Well, it's about time somebody send a notification to the "left" that they have lost a great deal of their "talking points" because they can't seem to stop with their ridiculous rant.

SFC(R)L

March 18th, 2006, 12:13 pm

Slain al-Qaida leader vowed to attack U.S
3/18/2006, 10:31 a.m. CT
By NADIA ABOU EL-MAGD
The Associated Press

CAIRO, Egypt (AP) — The slain leader of al-Qaida in Saudi Arabia vowed in his final testament that his group would overthrow the royal family and stage more attacks against the kingdom and Americans in the region, according to a video released Saturday.

The video showed Fahd Faraaj al-Juwair wearing a white headscarf and robes as he read his will in front of a map of Saudi Arabia with the slogan, "Expel the infidels from the Arabian Peninsula." Elsewhere in the video, he appears smiling, wearing a red T-shirt and what appears to be a belt of explosives.

Addressing the Saudi royal family, al-Juwair said, "If you know what the youth are preparing for you, you would be rushing to escape this peninsula."

The video was sent to The Associated Press in an e-mail. In it, al-Juwair also warned the Americans: "Get out of Muhammad's peninsula, get out of all Muslim Lands, stop supporting the Jews in Palestine, halt supporting Christians in Muslim lands, or else you'll have nothing but killing, destruction and explosions."

Al-Juwair was reported killed by Saudi security forces along with four other leading militants in a Feb. 27 raid in the capital, Riyadh. The raid was launched in the wake of an al-Qaida attack on the Abqaiq oil complex, the largest oil processing facility in the world.

The e-mail accompanying the video confirmed his death, with the phrase, "May God accept him as a martyr," and identified al-Juwair as the former head of al-Qaida's branch in the kingdom and as the supervisor of the attack on Abqaiq.

The authenticity of the e-mail, signed by "The Voice of Jihad for Media Production" could not be independently confirmed.

In the video, al-Juwair addressed Saudi police who have been pursuing militants, urging them to join al-Qaida's jihad, or holy war.

"What are you going to tell God when you kill a holy fighter in defense of the Americans or if you are killed while you are defending the despots?" he said. "Stop working for the oppressors and join the mujahedeen (holy warriors)."

Al-Qaida militants launched a campaign of violence in 2003 in Saudi Arabia, the birthplace of group leader Osama bin Laden. Saudi security forces have carried out a heavy crackdown since, killing or capturing most of the group's leaders.

The Feb. 24 suicide bombing on Abqaiq was the first attack on Saudi Arabia's vital oil infrastructure. The kingdom is the world's largest producer of oil.

Bombers in two explosives-laden vehicles tried to ram through the facility's gates but were stopped by guards who opened fire on them, detonating the vehicles.

http://www.nola.com/newsflash/topstories/index.ssf?/base/international-29/114269816144820.xml&storylist=topstories

SFC(R)L

March 19th, 2006, 2:59 pm

Sectarian Violence Diminishing in Iraq, General Says
By Sgt. Sara Wood, USA
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, March 17, 2006 – The sectarian violence that surged after the Feb. 22 bombing of a Shiite mosque in Samarra, Iraq, has tapered off, and Iraqis are optimistic about the future, a top U.S. commander in Iraq said today.
Violence is now at a lower level than it was before the mosque bombing, and the attacks are of the same type they were then, Army Lt. Gen. Peter Chiarelli, commander of Multinational Corps Iraq, said during a video news conference from Iraq.

"I don't want to downplay the tragedy of the violence that has occurred; however, it may be unfair to characterize every post-Feb. 22 event sectarian in nature," Chiarelli said. "Some of those events are sectarian, but far fewer than are being reported. Most of the events are a combination of the work of al Qaeda in Iraq, insurgent attacks designed to prevent progress in building the government, and pure, unadulterated crime."

Chiarelli stressed that civil war is still far away for Iraq, as most of the people there do not see the sectarian divisions that are being stressed by the media. "Many Iraqis are part of mixed marriages and live in mixed neighborhoods and consider themselves Iraqis first," he said.

The Iraqi security forces' response to the recent sectarian violence is just another indicator of their continued progress, Chiarelli said. The Iraqi army is increasingly taking the lead in operations and taking responsibility for battle space, he said. In current operations, such as Operation Swarmer, Iraqi forces take on the majority of the responsibility, with U.S. and coalition forces in supporting roles, he said.

"We're finding Iraqi units, with our support, can be used in just about any operation we do in a counterinsurgency role," he said. "This is a force we have built and the Iraqis have built for that counterinsurgency fight, and I think they're particularly well-prepared, well-trained, and have the ability to do that in just about any area."

The goal is for Iraqis to control about 75 percent of the battle space by the end of summer, Chiarelli said, and all indications are that they will meet that goal. "We're doing a very, very good job, and the Iraqis are doing a great job moving forward," he said.

U.S. and coalition forces will spend extra time this year training the Iraqi police, Chiarelli said. Police training teams, unit partnerships and mentoring will be used to help develop the capability of the police force, which will eventually take responsibility for urban areas, he said.

The U.S. is working with the Iraqi government to build ministerial capacity so the government can provide essential services for all Iraqis, Chiarelli said. Provincial reconstruction teams will work with provincial governments in developing economic systems and building infrastructure so Iraqis can have clean water, electricity, fuel, proper sewage systems and trash removal, he said.

Iraqi citizens remain confident about the future and the progress their country is making, Chiarelli said. The seating of the Council of Representatives yesterday was a big step toward a national unity government, which the citizens are looking forward to, he said.

"I remain convinced that the resiliency and optimism of the Iraqi people will keep Iraq moving in the right direction," he said.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Mar2006/20060317_4524.html

SFC(R)L

March 20th, 2006, 11:43 pm

Iraqi President Says New Agreements Disprove Civil War Fears
By Donna Miles
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, March 19, 2006 – Agreements announced today regarding Iraq's unity government "prove that the civil war is out of the question and that the Iraqi people will not accept [for] a civil war to take place," Iraqi President Jalal Talabani said during a Baghdad news conference today.
Talabani's assessment came on the third anniversary of Operation Iraqi Freedom, and corresponded with agreements on the policy statement for national unit government and on the concept of a political national security council to participate in running the country's affairs.

Only minor issues regarding the council's powers have yet to be worked out, he told reporters today.

"We reached an agreement on the major issues," Talabani said. "We have also discussed other issues on proposed amendments to the laws in the future."

Talabani declared the agreements a big step forward for the country.

"We have passed through difficult times, during which the situation in the country was tense," Talabani said. He credited the Iraqi people, who he said in concern for their national unity have "foiled the attempts of those who sought to foment sectarian sedition."

"We are far from a civil war," the Iraqi president said. "We are also heading toward a complete and comprehensive national accord [and] we will also form a national unity government soon."

Talabani said the Iraqis have agreed to work together to promote their security, police and army forces "so as to be able to bid the coalition forces farewell as soon as possible."

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Mar2006/20060319_4549.html

SFC(R)L

March 23rd, 2006, 8:44 pm

Iraqi Police, U.S. Soldiers Patrol Streets
Peacekeepers work to gain confidence of residents during daily missions.

By Spc. Michael Pfaff
133rd Mobile Public Affairs Detachment

KIRKUK, Iraq, March 23, 2006 — Iraqi police and soldiers from Charlie Company, 2nd Battalion, 327th Infantry Regiment, 1st Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division patrolled a neighborhood in Kirkuk in order to show a presence and let the people know that they are not only here to protect them, but also serve them.

“We’re trying to let the Iraqi police take the lead on these patrols,” said 2nd Lt. John Vickery, 1st platoon leader for Company C. “It helps the locals feel safer in their neighborhood and more willing to call the police if there’s any trouble.”

“The Iraqi police understand they’re not here just to protect people. They’re also here to serve and look after other problems. That’s the future and that’s what we’re working towards.”

2nd Lt. John Vickery, 1st platoon leader for Company C

Vickery explained that the people of Kirkuk are timid about coming to the authorities with problems because the idea of not living under a dictatorship that might punish them for such complaints is new to them.

“You have to understand, a lot of these people have been living under a dictator for a long time, so they’re kind of afraid to come out and express problems without getting in trouble,” Vickery explained. “We want them to feel like they have the freedom to do that now. And, I feel like if they understand that, and understand that the Iraqi military and police will back them up, the country can work on its own without us.”

Getting to a point where the people can fully trust the police and military will take time though, Vickery said. But, the Iraqi police are making strides in the process of garnering the trust of the people.

The police are starting to take the lead on many patrols, and today’s patrol is no exception. The Iraqi police led the patrol with only a few American soldiers providing additional security.

Sgt. James A. Connelly, a team leader with 1st platoon, was in the lead with the police on the patrol.

“We wanted to get the Iraqi police out here and mingle with the populace to let them know they are out here doing their jobs and find out if the people need anything done,” Connelly said.

U.S. Army 2nd Lt. John Vickery, Charlie Company, 2nd Battalion, 327th Infantry Regiment, 1st Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division, speaks with an Iraqi teenager during a presence patrol with Iraqi police. U.S. Army photo by Spc. Michael Pfaff

Another thing Connelly said they wanted to get out of the mission was to get a reaction from the people to see how they felt about the Iraqi police.

“A lot of the reactions are good; they have a lot of things to say,” he said. “A lot of people feel that the Iraqi police are doing their patrols and they are doing what they need to be doing. The consensus is that the Iraqi police are doing a good job. They’re doing what they need to be doing.”

In addition to patrolling to protect the people from anti-Iraqi forces, the Iraqi police have the responsibility of making sure the needs of the people are met. Getting the people to open up and share their problems is the first step to assuming that responsibility.

“The people are starting to bring their problems to the police now, which is what we want them to do,” he said.

Today’s patrol is a reflection of a daily commitment the Iraqi police and coalition forces have to make not only toward securing Iraq, but serving its citizens.

“The Iraqi police understand they’re not here just to protect people,” Vickery said. “They’re also here to serve and look after other problems. That’s the future and that’s what we’re working towards.”

http://www.defendamerica.mil/articles/mar2006/a032306wm1.html

NeoConned

March 24th, 2006, 9:10 am

....so if all of this info presented is true, his trial should have been a "slam-dunk" and be charged with conspiracy! Why is his trial still going on?

SFC(R)L

April 2nd, 2006, 11:54 am

DoD Committed to Stopping Spread of Weapons of Mass Destruction
By Samantha L. Quigley
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, March 30, 2006 – The Defense Department is taking a new approach to combat the threat of weapons of mass destruction in a complex and uncertain world, a DoD official said here yesterday.
"This approach is reflected in our strategic guidance, in our realigned operational structure, and in the way we carry out our day-to-day activities, Peter Flory, assistant secretary of defense for international security policy, said in testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee's emerging threats and capabilities subcommittee.

Strategically, DoD is focused on three pillars of combating weapons of mass destruction: nonproliferation, counterproliferation and consequence management, Flory said.

Nonproliferation, the first pillar, is meant to prevent the spread of weapons of mass destruction by impeding access to or distribution of sensitive technologies, material and expertise, he said.

Counterproliferation refers to actions to defeat the threat weapons of mass destruction being used against the United States, its armed forces, allies or partners, Flory said.

Consequence management, the third pillar, refers to mitigating the effects of an attack or event and restoring essential operations and services at home or abroad, he added.

"In addition to a new strategic framework, we have also revised our organizational structure to better position us to combat WMD," Flory said.

In January, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld designated U.S. Strategic Command as DoD's lead for synchronizing and focusing operational efforts in support of combatant commanders' efforts to combat weapons of mass destruction. "We see ourselves in a position of advocating for the doctrine; the organization; the material solutions; the tactics, techniques and procedures that will serve and benefit the regional combatant commanders," Marine Gen. James Cartwright, commander of U.S. Strategic Command, said.

"The objective here is to give the regional combatant commanders the capability, all the way from what we call phase zero, (from) ... engagement activities within theater, through combat operations and, if necessary, through the consequence management (phase)," Cartwright said.

Flory said all DoD components have been directed to realign themselves to help combat weapons of mass destruction. The Quadrennial Defense Review views these activities as either preventive or responsive. The preventive aspect includes nonproliferation treaties and export-control measures, which have been and will remain integral to combating weapons of mass destruction, he said.

"While these regimes are an important first line of defense, not all countries are members of all regimes, and many countries that are members of regimes cheat," he said.

Countries like Iran and North Korea highlight the need for additional measures, such as interdiction, Flory said. In 2003, President Bush launched the Proliferation Security Initiative to help focus interdiction efforts and build the capacity of like-minded governments around the world. There are currently 70 partners to the initiative, and more have indicated support, Flory said.

DoD is also working through the Cooperation Threat Reduction program to accelerate U.S. security work at Russian nuclear warhead storage sites. The anticipated finish date of 2008 is four years ahead of schedule, but that acceleration requires additional funding during fiscal 2006, he said.

As for the response aspect the Quadrennial Defense Review addresses, the 2006 budget submission adds $2 billion to the previous $7.6 billion fiscal allocated to fund the Chemical-Biological Defense Program from this year to 2011, Flory said.

"Another element of the responsive dimension is the establishment of an Army headquarters tasked to provide technically qualified chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and high-yield explosives ... response forces to support geographic combatant commanders," he said. Those forces have the capability to locate, secure, disable and safeguard an adversary's weapons of mass destruction program, Flory said. The Army's 20th Support Command currently has this job.

Anticipating the continued evolution of the weapons-of-mass-destruction threat, DoD is taking forward-looking steps. First is a broad-spectrum vaccine or remedy against a class of threats, thereby getting away from the "one drug, one bug" theory, Flory said. The department is expanding its work with potential partner countries in this arena.

It also is continuing to develop bilateral discussions with international partners on counterproliferation issues ranging from policy and operation to technical cooperation. "We can't do everything. We shouldn't have to do everything," Flory said. "And in a number of cases, arguably it's better if somebody else does it.

"The idea of developing capabilities and developing capabilities of partner nations is something that runs throughout our entire approach here," he said.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Mar2006/20060330_4660.html

SFC(R)L

April 2nd, 2006, 11:57 am

Iraq Veterans Proud to Serve, Eager to Deploy Again
By Capt. Steve Alvarez, USA
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, March 30, 2006 – With the war on terror in its fifth year, U.S. military personnel continue to pack duffle bags and don desert camouflage uniforms -- many not for the first time.
"I am proud of what I accomplished during my tour in Iraq and would be proud to return, on sea or on land," Navy Lt. Cmdr. David Bitler, a surface warfare officer, said. Bitler is assigned to the USS Tarawa, which returned from a Middle East cruise in February.

"Most of all, I'd be honored to work again alongside the Iraqi people, whose bravery and courage in the face of continual barbarism and anarchy is our best hope for long-term success and, I believe, our survival," Bitler said.

Bitler was assigned to the Coalition Military Assistance Training Team in March 2004 for six months as an individual augmentee in Baghdad. In 2005, just months after returning from Iraq, Bitler found himself afloat on the USS Tarawa, halfway through the ship's seven-month deployment to the Arabian Gulf to support operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom. The ship also supported relief operations after a devastating earthquake in Pakistan in October.

"On a personal level, ... I was in the middle of buying a new house, which required signing over a power of attorney to my brother ... to complete the process," Bitler, an Ohio native, said. "Professionally, I had to drop out of my night-time MBA program I had just been accepted to, preventing me from getting my master's degree, vital in making promotion to O-5.

"But the personal and professional benefits were just as significant," Bitler was quick to note.

During his first tour, in Baghdad, he was assigned to a new department overseeing the logistics of standing up new bases around Iraq and rebuilding the Iraqi Ministry of Defense. "Having trained my entire career to destroy things, I suddenly had an opposite task, to help build and create an organization - almost out of thin air - that could defend a nation of 30 million people."

Army Sgt. Jared Zabaldo understands the personal sacrifices and personal and professional benefits of deployment too, he said. The Army Reservist, assigned to the 1st Battalion, 413th Regiment, 7th Brigade of the 104th Division (Institutional Training), at Vancouver Barracks, Wash., volunteered for a nine-month tour in Iraq in 2004. He is headed back to Iraq in 2007 to serve with Multinational Security Transition Command Iraq.

"I joined the Army Reserve to do something for my country, and in the reserve system either you're training to do something or actually doing it," Zabaldo said. "I was in the latter half of a semester in law school, and the Army Reserve called me up one day and said they needed a journalist in Iraq, and I jumped on it."

Zabaldo, an Army journalist, will likely deploy as a battalion training team member and help train and advise Iraqi forces, a role he is prepared for based on his previous service in Iraq.

"One thing I always remember is a mission I went on with the Iraqi 2nd Battalion outside of Taji, Iraq, in June 2004," he said. "My first experience with them was rolling silently through the back roads outside Taji at 2 a.m. We were heading into a suspected insurgent operation out in the countryside, and I couldn't have felt safer with the guys."

Marine Corps Lt. Col. David Flynn, from Loogootee, Ind., served a yearlong tour with the Marine Corps Training Assistance Group of the U.S. Military Training Mission in Saudi Arabia. He was the senior military adviser for 2nd Brigade of the Royal Saudi Naval Infantry, in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, a mission he volunteered for. After war broke out in Iraq, he volunteered for duty there and spent 14 months.

"I was the senior adviser to the Iraqi Intervention Force and the Iraqi 1st Mechanized Brigade," Flynn said. "I extended there because I wanted to see the mission completed. Of course, your family would prefer that you were with them, but my family was totally supportive and provided me that support throughout all of these deployments and many more over the past 22 years."

Like many others in uniform, Zabaldo also is putting aside his educational development to serve in Iraq. "This deployment (in 2007) will make life tougher because it appears that it might occur just a couple months before I'm scheduled to graduate from law school," he said.

Despite the setback, he is optimistic about putting the mission first. "There are soldiers with much tougher situations than me, people with families. But this mission is so important to get right that I would really consider it an honor to be brought back and inserted into the mix again. The law school will always be there," the Milwaukie, Ore., soldier said.

Despite the obvious sacrifices being made by service personnel who deploy, many of them are driven to serve in Iraq because of fond wartime recollections and their sense of duty.

"The Iraqis I worked with and who are my friends sacrificed much for their new country and have risked their lives ... to work with the Americans to bring about peace and democratic freedoms," Bitler said. "I love working for an organization where 'honor, courage, commitment' aren't just bywords, but necessary characteristics for surviving and succeeding through never-ending challenges and obstacles."

Zabaldo, one of the many men and women who joined the U.S. military after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, said he shares the same patriotic perspective. "I think the majority of our servicemen and women are patriots, and they are proud to serve," Zabaldo said. "There's also something to be said with having worked with the Iraqis before.

"I do feel compelled to go back, because it's important to ensure Iraq has the ability to protect its freedom from whoever would seek to destroy it," he added. "I can't imagine that a successful exit from Iraq wouldn't be a catalyst for something much bigger and much better over the long term."
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Mar2006/20060330_4656.html

A bump for the student needing stuff for class.

kanoman

April 2nd, 2006, 12:33 pm

"Michael Moore is a fat lazy bastard who needs his ass kicked." - Dennis Miller

I've always had a curious fascination with who's back pocket DM found comfort in.

While I think Michael Moore does make some lavish accusations, I think DM is worse with his "Cunning" brainless attitude.

jdoty

April 2nd, 2006, 3:02 pm

The 911 (coverup) Commission couln't find conclusive evidence if it was handed to them in a file marked "Conclusive Evidence-Please Read"
Their motto should be, "Don't Confuse Me With The Facts"

Loyal American

April 2nd, 2006, 4:31 pm

The 911 (coverup) Commission couln't find conclusive evidence if it was handed to them in a file marked "Conclusive Evidence-Please Read"
Their motto should be, "Don't Confuse Me With The Facts"

You need to read the entire thread.:rolleyes:

SFC(R)L

April 10th, 2006, 6:13 pm

Iraqis fought for freedom

By SALIM MANSUR

We are seeing a curious development on the third anniversary of Iraq's liberation: The liberators of that once-wretched gulag -- the Americans, specifically the Bush administration -- are now being scorned by many for base motives and misguided thinking.

Critics of President George Bush and the war have been relentless in their opposition since the removal of Saddam Hussein. They blame the U.S. for the bloody-minded insurgency that is now pitilessly unsheathing its barbarity to extinguish the first whiff of freedom in a culture overburdened by a long history of tyranny.

Historians will argue over details of the war, faulting the planning and execution through wisdom garnered in hindsight. They will reach their tentative conclusions with the perspective of time. Similarly, those of us who supported freedom for Iraqis, as I did, and remain unmoved by the critics, have also come to a twin understanding of history and human nature in general.

Iraq is diverse ethnically and religiously. But from the beginning of Arab-Muslim history until the overthrow of Saddam, Iraq -- land of the two rivers -- was ruled by despots from the minority Sunni Arab tribes.

Every Iraqi knows the words of al-Hadjadj ibn Yusuf, sent from Damascus as governor of Iraq (694-714 CE) following one of many rebellions in the area. Here are a few words from his memorable speech:

"By God, O people of Iraq, people of discord and dissembling and evil character ... I shall strip you like bark, I shall truss you like a bundle of twigs, I shall beat you like stray camels ... I swear by God that you will keep strictly to the true path, or I shall punish every man of you in body."

For 13 centuries the political culture of this area and surrounding region was shaped by despots. Hence, as shriveled lungs require time to reacquire the ability to breathe naturally, so do people who have never experienced freedom to build democracy.

It is not surprising that segments of Iraqi Arabs, belonging primarily to the Sunni sect, in collusion with radical Islamists from abroad, have turned a portion of Iraq into a Hobbesian world of murder and mayhem.

What has been remarkable is the instinct for freedom that has led most Iraqis to resist falling into the hell that descendants of al-Hadjadj ibn Yusuf want to push them into -- with sectarian provocations, suicide-bombings and incitement against their liberators.

History is non-linear, its progress accompanied with any number of momentary reversals, its heroes prey to assassins' weapons, its freedom songs never fully concordant with children's dreams and their parents' prayers.

In September 1943, Winston Churchill traveled to Boston to receive an honorary degree from Harvard. The future of freedom's struggle against fascism hung in the balance as Churchill reminded the assembled audience: "The price of greatness is responsibility. If the people of the United States had continued in a mediocre station... absorbed in their own affairs... they might have remained forgotten and undisturbed beyond their protecting oceans.

"But one cannot rise to be in many ways the leading community in the civilized world without being involved in its problems, without being convulsed by its agonies and inspired by its causes... The people of the United States cannot escape world responsibility."

In defeating and rebuilding Germany and Japan, Americans displayed, despite lapses, responsibility in extending freedom's frontiers.

Similarly, Bush's decision to remove Saddam from power in the post-9/11 world has been vindicated -- despite what the critics say -- by Iraqis acquiring freedom. Now they must learn the inherent risks of freedom -- risks they must either responsibly avoid, or, failing that, for which they must be accountable without blaming others.

http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Mansur_Salim/2006/04/08/1525277.html

SFC(R)L

April 15th, 2006, 10:20 am

declassified CIA reporting on WMD and Iraq’s links to Al Qaeda… “We have solid reporting of senior level contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda going back a decade,” Tenet wrote… “we have solid evidence of the presence in Iraq of Al Qaeda members…we have credible reporting that Al Qaeda leaders sought contacts in Iraq who could help them acquire WMD…”

Captured documents recently translated revealed that thousands of radical Islamists trained in camps at Samarra, Ramadi and Salman Pak four years prior to Operation Iraqi Freedom. Those documents and others can be found here and here.

Now let’s look at some of the text of House Joint Resolution 114, passed October 12, 2002, which listed the indictments against Saddam’s regime. They make a convincing argument that the Butcher of Baghdad was not being kept in his “box” as the war plan critics allege.

Whereas Iraq, in direct and flagrant violation of the cease-fire, attempted to thwart the efforts of weapons inspectors to identify and destroy Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction stockpiles and development capabilities, which finally resulted in the withdrawal of inspectors on October 31, 1998…whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the United States, including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate former President Bush and by firing on thousands of occasions on United States and coalition armed forces engaged in enforcing the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council….

HJ Res. 114 contains much more, of course, including the fact that Saddam used WMD on neighboring countries and on his own people. As for WMD, both the Duelfer and Kay reports concluded that while Saddam might not have any large stockpiles, he retained, he planned for, the ability to reconstitute WMD programs as soon as all inspectors left.

Then there was the matter of Saddam’s programmatic deception and concealment efforts. As Duelfer wrote in his report:

Iraq was never able to convince us that they had stopped concealment, and in fact, we were convinced of the opposite, that they still retain weapons.

We need to remember here that Saddam began his Guinness Book UNSCR violations record right after we expelled his army from Kuwait. He signed a cease-fire agreement in 1991 promising to destroy all his WMD.

All of this historic context, all of these facts, are ignored by the war plan critics. I am reminded of a comment by an Iraqi, frustrated by the WMD debate, who opined that “Saddam Hussein himself was a weapon of mass destruction.” Through it all, the US worked with the UN, then formed a coalition to liberate Iraq, putting the lie to charges that President Bush acted unilaterally.

The carping critics erect a rhetorical, if not imaginary, entity so they can bash it with charges of “not enough troops” and other hindsight insight. The perfect war plan devised by omniscient planners has never existed. And as Donald Rumsfeld has acknowledged on several occasions, no plan, however perfect, survives first contact with the enemy. But since tactical flexibility was inherent in the plan, commanders on the ground adapted to changing circumstances. And now, a little over three years later, we see the tremendous success that Coalition and Iraqi forces have achieved.

President Bush put it this way in an April 10 speech at Johns Hopkins University:

We have learned from our mistakes. We’ve adjusted our approach to meet the changing circumstances on the ground; we’ve adjusted depending upon the actions of the enemy. By pursuing a clear and flexible strategy in Iraq, we helped make it possible for Iraqis to choose their leaders and begin to assume the responsibilities of self-government and self-defense.

The most recent war plan critic is retired Lt. Gen. Greg Newbold, who, up to four months prior to the launch of OIF, was the Pentagon’s top planner. He left in part due to his opposition to the plan. He now alleges that other top Pentagon officers who opposed the plan did not speak up, that they are culpable for an “invented war.”

At an April 11 press conference Joint Chiefs chairman, Gen. Peter Pace answered Newbold and other like-minded critics about how the process worked building up to Iraq:

First of all, once it became apparent that we may have to take military action, the Secretary of Defense asked Tom Franks, who was the commander of Central Command, to begin doing some planning, which he did. Over the next two years, 50 or 60 times, Tom Franks either came to Washington or by video teleconference, sat down with the Secretary of Defense, sat down with the Joint Chiefs and went over what he was thinking, how he was planning. And as a result of those iterative opportunities and all the questions that were asked not once was Tom told, “No, don’t do that; no, don’t do this; no, you can’t have this; no, you can’t have that.” What happened was, in a very open roundtable discussion, questions (were raised) about what might go right, what might go wrong, what would you need, how would you handle it, and that happened with the Joint Chiefs, and it happened with the Secretary. And before the final orders were given, the Joint Chiefs met in private with General Franks and assured ourselves that that plan was a solid plan and that the resources that he needed were going to be allocated.

That agreement on resources having been reached, the Joint Chiefs went to Rumsfeld and then to President Bush, assuring them about the plan and the necessary resources. Pres. Bush asked specific questions about whether the proper amount of resources had been allocated.

He did that with us and then again when all the combatant commanders were in from [around] the globe well before a final decision was made.

Gen. Pace stressed the fact that there was every opportunity for anyone with qualms or disagreements to speak their minds. He concluded:

I wanted to tell you how I believe this system works, and I wanted to tell you how I have observed it working for five years, because the [critical] articles that are out there about folks not speaking up are just flat wrong.

There are some who choose to believe that Saddam never presented a threat to America or the Middle East, that he was safely contained in his “box,” that he had no connections with Al Qaeda or other terrorist groups, that neocon zealots hijacked US foreign policy, that the war plan was fatally flawed due to silent top ranking officers and “Pentagon dictator” Donald Rumsfeld, that the liberation of Iraq was an invented war, and that the Saddam-Iraq chapter of our history began with President Bush, are entitled to their opinions.

They are refuted by the facts which they and their media allies refuse to acknowledge.
http://americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5414

SFC(R)L

April 15th, 2006, 10:21 am

The Hidden History of the Iraq War Critics
April 14th, 2006

“The plan has been through the combatant commanders, it has been through the National Security Council process. General Myers and General Pace (chairman and vice-chairman, Joint Chiefs) and others, including this individual, have seen it in a variety of iterations. When asked by the president or by me, the military officers who’ve reviewed it have all said they thought it was an excellent plan. I stand by the plan…I think it’s a brilliant plan.”

Donald Rumsfeld on the plan for Operation Iraq Freedom, March 30, 2003 NewsHour.

We are in the midst of a spring offensive by Iraq war plan critics such as COBRA II authors Michael Gordon & retired Lt. Gen.Bernard Trainor, retired Gen. Anthony Zinni, and now retired Lt. Gen. Greg Newbold. As calls for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s resignation echo throughout the drive-by media, here is a little pop quiz.

Who said this?

What if Saddam fails to comply (with UN sanctions), or we take some ambiguous third route which gives him yet more time to develop this (WMD) program? He will conclude that the international community has lost its will… [that] he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction. And some day, I guarantee you, he’ll use this arsenal.

Answer: President Bill Clinton in February 1998.

Okay then, who said this?

The United Nations believes that Saddam Hussein may have produced as much as 200 tons of VX (nerve gas)… we face a clear and present danger… terrorists who bombed the World Trade Center in New York City had in mind the destruction and deaths of 250,000 people….

Answer: Clinton Defense Secretary William Cohen on November 15, 1997.

Who said this?

The world hasn’t seen, except maybe since Hitler, somebody quite as evil as Saddam Hussein. If you don’t stop a horrific dictator before he gets started too far, he can do untold damage….

Answer Clinton Secretary of State Madeline Albright on February 20, 1998.

Just one more now. Who expressed the view that the containment of Saddam Hussein could not succeed over the long run; that “even a contained Saddam was harmful to stability and positive change in the region”? Hint: the same person who said

“For the last eight years, American policy towards Iraq has been based on the tangible threat that Saddam poses to our security. That threat is clear.”

Answer: Clinton National Security Council advisor Sandy Berger in December 1998 speech at Stanford.

War critics either downplay, skim over, or completely ignore this historical context. The prior administration’s beliefs and policies towards Iraq were consistent with the threat assessment motivating our war with Saddam. They would have you think that it all began with Bush, who was driven to war by neocon zealots who hijacked US foreign policy.

They do not tell you, for obvious reasons, that the Clinton administration in November 1997 launched a public campaign to build support for a possible war against Iraq. The do not mention that on October 31, 1998, President Clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act, which stated that

it should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power.

And, that in 1998, Congress authorized President Clinton to

…use US armed forces pursuant to UN Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 678 to achieve implementation of UNSCRs 660-667.

Saddam was then on his way to setting the Guinness World Record for most resolutions violated. Wanting to indict President Bush, Donald Rumsfeld and senior Pentagon officers for “an invented war,” as former top planner Lt.Gen. Newbold now puts it, they dare not admit that the Bush administration was, in fact, looking at the threat posed by Iraq in much the same way its predecessor did… the difference being that while Bill dallied, W. took on the threat.

As President Bush said in his January 28, 2003 State of the Union speech:

Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words,, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option.

In a speech the following month, the President said:

In Iraq, a dictator is building and hiding weapons that could enable him to dominate the Middle East and intimidate the civilized world – and we will not allow it. This same tyrant has close ties to terrorist organizations and could supply them with the terrible means to strike this country – and America will not permit it…the danger must be confronted…if it does not (fully and peacefully disarm per UN resolutions), we are prepared to disarm Iraq by force. Either way, this danger will be removed.

The critics allege that Iraq was a diversion from the real war on terror. They refuse to acknowledge the proven links that existed between Saddam’s regime and al Qaeda as documented by Stephen F. Hayes in his book The Connection and in his Weekly Standard articles on this subject. In his September 8, 2003 article “Saddam’s Al Qaeda Connection” Hayes wrote about a letter by CIA Director George Tenet that

SFC(R)L

April 15th, 2006, 10:45 am

Troops Help Iraqi Farmers Team Up With Co-op
By Spc. C. Terrell Turner, USA
Special to American Forces Press Service

RASHIDIYAH, Iraq, April 14, 2006 – Multinational Division Baghdad soldiers worked with residents and farmers here to create a farming co-op that held its grand opening April 6.

The tractors shown were provided as part of the building of a local farming co-op that opened its doors in Rashidiyah, Iraq, April 6. The co-op will provide support to about 3,000 acres in the Rashidiyah region. Photo by Spc. C. Terrell Turner, USA

The co-op is a major step in stabilizing and strengthening the agricultural output in the region. Local farmers joined together and created a business plan that will consolidate their resources to benefit the entire community.

The new facility provides local farmers with tractors, various types of plows, fertilizer and seeds. Sharing the resources will allow the farmers to "lower costs, increase production and improve the agricultural situation in this area," said Capt. Wendy Weinell, civil affairs team leader, Company A, 490th Civil Affairs Battalion.

A local sheik and the city leaders helped to begin the co-op project about 18 months ago. The project will provide agriculture support to about 3,000 acres of local farmland in the Husseniya, Rashidiyah and Sheiksad areas.

The region produces a variety of fruits and vegetables, including date palms, citrus plants, okra, tomatoes, corn and cucumbers. Plans include expanding the facility to provide support for 6,000 square acres, Weinell said.

Iraqi soldiers and police worked alongside coalition forces to provide security for the grand opening.

"More than 200 members signed on to be a part of the co-op after an initial election," Weinell said. "There's a board of directors of which Sheik Mohan is the current chairman. He's worked with coalition forces since we first got here, and was instrumental in making the co-op happen."

Lt. Col. Rocky Kmiecik, commander of 1st Battalion, 66th Armor Regiment, 1st Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, sat with Sheik Mohan and several board members at the grand opening ceremony. Kmiecik and local farmers enjoyed a guided tour by a board member involved in the project.

For one local man, the co-op is a hands-on opportunity to help the community.

"I used to be a security guard at a local power plant," Mohammed Waleed said. "Eight months ago when the project was approved, I signed up to be the caretaker. Because they knew I was a good guard, they appointed me here."

Waleed, who lives nearby with his family, also helped in the construction of the facility. "He would point out deficiencies to me that he felt I should know about," Weinell said.

Adnan Najeen, 56, said he has been a farmer since he was born, and that he sees the new building as a way to bring more opportunities to the area. He remembers the area the facility now occupies as bare ground, lying in front of an aged water tower next to greenhouses built in the 1970s. The new building will enable farmers to grow various plants throughout the year.

"This has been a very successful project and will provide us with fertilizer and seeds," Najeen said. "All the farmers will benefit, as it raises the living standard of all the farmers. This will be a much easier time for us than in the time of former President Saddam Hussein."

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Apr2006/20060414_4816.html

SFC(R)L

April 15th, 2006, 10:48 am

Iraqi Forces Take Lead in Operation Cobra Strike
American Forces Press Service

FORWARD OPERATING BASE ISKANDARIYAH, Iraq, April 14, 2006 – Iraqi army soldiers are gradually taking the lead in all operations in Haswah and Iskandariyah, stabilizing the northern Babil province, military officials in Iraq reported.
Soldiers from 4th Company, 2nd Battalion, 4th Brigade, 8th Iraqi Army Division, recently conducted Operation Cobra Strike with soldiers from Company B, 2nd Battalion, 8th Infantry Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division.

"We are increasingly pushing the Iraqi army to the foreground while we stay in the background," said Capt. Colin Brooks, Company B commander.

Cobra Strike was a mission intended to locate the suspected leader and financier of a terrorist cell working in the area. The suspected terrorists were implicated in murders, kidnappings and the emplacement of roadside bombs throughout Haswah and Iskandariyah.

Iraqi leadership planned the scheme of maneuver for the operation. Coalition forces were on hand to advise and to block positions on the outer cordon of the objectives.

"It was good to actually plan an entire mission without the help of others," said Capt. Hazem, the Iraqi company's commander. "Although the Cobras are our brothers, my men needed to do something like this to prove to everyone that we are capable of defending our region."

The Cobra soldiers and their Iraqi counterparts, the Sabers, have conducted combined missions since 2nd Battalion, 8th Infantry Regiment, arrived in theater in early December. This was the first mission in the area solely orchestrated by the Iraqi army.

"It is critical that they are seen as a credible fighting force in the region," said Brooks. "We are approaching the day very soon that they take control of the area's battlespace and have minimal help from coalition forces."

Hazem maintained efficient communications during the operation with his soldiers, who were working at two separate objectives, and with Brooks. The successful planning resulted in the capture of the cell leader. The financier was not at home during the operation.

"Every time we catch an intended target, the confidence increases in my men," Hazem said.

The successes the Iraqi army continues to achieve has resulted in a shift of enemy attacks, now aimed more toward Iraqi security forces rather than coalition forces, Brooks said. It is a testament, he added, that the Iraqi forces pose a viable threat to terrorists.

"Our goal is to work ourselves out of a job in the Haswah and Iskandariyah area," Brooks said. "We are almost there. (The Iraqi soldiers) can see a brighter future, and they are proud to play a role."

"I couldn't be any more proud of the way my men have performed," added Hazem. "Terrorists are not welcome in Iraq. If they want to test us, they will end up in jail like the man we captured this night." (From a Multinational Force Iraq news release.)
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Apr2006/20060414_4814.html

SFC(R)L

April 16th, 2006, 1:36 pm

Professor Explains Legal Logic of Decision
BY John C. Yoo
Monday, June 14, 2004

Official Washington, D.C., has been struck by a paroxysm of leaking. It involves classified memos analyzing how the Geneva Conventions, the 1994 Torture Convention and a federal law banning torture apply to captured al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters. Critics suggest that the Bush administration sought to undermine or evade these laws. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., claimed last week that the analyses appeared "to be an effort to redefine torture and narrow prohibitions against it."

This is mistaken. As a matter of policy, our nation has established a standard of treatment for captured terrorists. In February 2002, President Bush declared that the detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, would be treated "humanely and, to the extent appropriate and consistent with military necessity, consistent with the principles (of the Geneva Convention)." Detainees receive shelter, food, clothing, healthcare and the right to worship.

This policy is more generous than required. The Geneva Convention does not apply to the war on terrorism. As a treaty, It applies only to conflicts between its signatory nations. Al-Qaeda is not a nation; it has not signed the convention; and it shows no desire to obey the rules. Its very purpose-inflicting massive civilian casualties through surprise attack-violates the core principle of the laws of war to spare innocent civilians and limit fighting to armed forces. Although the convention applies to the Afghanistan conflict, the Taliban militia lost its right to prisoner-of-war status because it did not wear uniforms, did not operate under responsible commanders, and systematically violated the laws of war.

It is true that the definition of torture in the memos is narrow, but that follows the choice of Congress. When the Senate approved the international Torture Convention, it defined torture as an act "specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering." It defined mental pain or suffering as "prolonged mental harm" caused by threats of physical harm or death to a detainee or a third person, the administration of mind-altering drugs, or other procedures "calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality." Congress adopted that narrow definition in the 1994 law against torture committed abroad, but it refused to implement another prohibition in the convention-against "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment"-because it was thought to be vague and undefined.

Physical and mental abuse is clearly illegal. But would limiting a captured terrorist to six hours' sleep, isolating him, interrogating him for several hours or requiring him to do physical labor constitute "severe physical or mental pain or suffering"? Federal law commands that al-Qaeda and Taliban operatives not be tortured, and the president has ordered that they be treated humanely, but the United States is not required to treat captured terrorists as if they were guests at a hotel or suspects held at an American police station.

Finally, critics allege that the administration wants to evade these laws by relying on the president's commander-in-chief power. But the 1994 statute isn't being evaded, because the president's policy is to treat the detainees humanely. Besides, that statute does not explicitly regulate the president or the military. General criminal laws are usually are not interpreted to apply to either, because otherwise they could interfere with the president's constitutional responsibility to manage wartime operations. If laws against murder or property destruction applied to the military in wartime, for instance, it could not engage in the violence and destruction that are a necessary part of war.

But suppose Congress did specifically intend to restrict the president's authority to interrogate captured terrorists. As commander in chief, the president still bears the responsibility to wage war. To this day, presidents from both political parties have refused to acknowledge the legality of the War Powers Resolution, which requires congressional approval for hostilities of more than 60 days. (President Clinton ignored it during Kosovo.) And in the war on terrorism, Congress has authorized the president to use "all necessary and appropriate force."

By exploring the boundaries of what is lawful, the administration's analyses identified how a decision maker could act in an extraordinary situation. For example, suppose that the United States captures a high-level al-Qaeda leader who knows the location of a nuclear weapon in an American city. Congress should not prevent the president from taking necessary measures to elicit its location, just as it should not prohibit him from making other strategic or tactical choices in war. In hearings last week, Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., recognized that "there are probably very few people in this room or in America ... who would say that torture should never, ever be used, particularly if thousands of lives are at stake."

Ultimately, the administration's policy is consistent with the law. If the American people disagree with that policy, they have options: Congress can change the law, or the electorate can change the administration.

This piece originally ran in the Los Angeles Times on June 13. John C. Yoo is a professor at Boalt Hall School of Law. He worked from 2001 to 2003 at the U.S. Justice Department, where he analyzed the Geneva Convention's applicability to terrorism detainees. Respond at opinion@dailycal.org.

http://www.dailycal.org/sharticle.php?id=15459

coaster

April 16th, 2006, 2:57 pm

No No this can't all be true it is a QUAGMIRE I tell you it is a terrible terrrible QUAGMIRE.
Almost as terrible as putting the Gitmo detainees under about the same stress as a basic trainee.
Thanks guys.

SFC(R)L

April 16th, 2006, 3:31 pm

Explanations for evil
Bradley R. Gitz

Posted on Sunday, April 16, 2006

The standard explanations for Islamist terrorism—blowback from Western imperialism, pervasive poverty, a reaction to oppression, etc. — contain kernels of truth but ultimately fail to satisfy. Such explanations identify some of the problems afflicting Muslim societies but don’t adequately explain why so many in those societies have responded with terrorism when others afflicted throughout history by similar problems haven’t.

The search for a more comprehensive explanation might begin with the proposition that the fusion of church and state that Islamism represents is actually part of a broader absorption of all aspects of life into a religiously defined existence. The idea that religion explains everything about existence is as central to the more extreme versions of Islam as it is foreign to other cultures, including Christianity, where religion seldom provides all of the answers to life’s dilemmas or such an all-encompassing form of personal identity. For many Muslims, Islam is not only a comprehensive belief system and object of allegiance, but also the only aspect of life that provides meaning and dignity.

Within this scenario, the “Islamification” of Islamic societies witnessed in recent decades represents a turn to religion in response to a range of undesirable social and political conditions, including tyranny, poverty and perceptions of foreign domination. Having retreated into religious piety and dogmatism as a means of providing meaning to otherwise dismal lives, Islamists must then find a way to explain the discrepancy between Islam’s allegedly superior tenets and the all too often ugly reality of Islamic life. For Islamists, Islam is not simply one belief system among many; rather, it is the one and only belief system, such that all other beliefs constitute blasphemy and insults to the integrity and truth of Islam.

Any explanation of the fanaticism of the suicide bomber must start, then, with an understanding of the special religious zeal and intolerance that defines Islamism and is found in virtually no other sects.

But therein also lies the conundrum. If Islam is superior, then how to explain the horrific conditions in and the palpable weakness of most Islamic societies ? How can a belief system that is superior produce so much political tyranny, economic backwardness and social decay ?

Within this context, much of the Islamist rage against the external world can be encapsulated in the fact that tiny Israel every year produces more scientific patents and publishes more books than all of its Muslim neighbors combined.

The cognitive dissonance produced by the gap between belief in the superiority of Islam and the reality of the backwardness of Islamic societies is so profound as to require a reinterpretation of the failures of Islamic societies in such a manner as to absolve Islam.

We come, then, to the fundamental source of Islamist terrorism—the need to find scapegoats outside of Islam in order to retain a belief in Islam’s superiority. Only Western perfidy and deceit can explain the appalling real-world conditions of Islamic societies, never any elements intrinsic to Islam. Put differently, a psychological need is satisfied by blaming Western imperialism, Israel and the “Great Satan” for the decay of Muslim civilization.

Within this context, governments like those in Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Pakistan that maintain good relations with the West are culpable for both consorting with evil and for failing to properly implement Islam in their realms. If Western predations are to blame for the problems of Islamic societies, then any means of resistance can be considered justified, including terrorism, jihads and the videotaped beheading of captives.

Because they operate under such powerful psychological impulses and with such all-consuming hatred, Islamists feel that no aspect of Western life is innocent or immune from attack.

At the risk of being overly flippant, it is Flip Wilson’s claim that “the devil made me do it” which lies at the heart of Islamist rage and violence. Retention of belief in the superiority of Islam in the face of countervailing evidence requires the identification of real-world devils. What we consider Islamist evil, Islamists view as a legitimate defense against evil.

Islam has met the devil and the devil is us.

http://www.nwanews.com/adg/Editorial/152057/

Sound familiar?

SFC(R)L

April 17th, 2006, 9:22 pm

It turns out Bush was right about Iraq's quest for uranium
Apr 17, 2006
by John Leo ( bio | archive | contact )

In a surprising editorial, The Washington Post deviated from the conventional anti-Bush media position on two counts.

It said President Bush was right to declassify parts of a National Intelligence Estimate to make clear why he thought Saddam Hussein was seeking nuclear weapons.

And the editorial said ex-ambassador Joseph Wilson was wrong to think he had debunked Bush on the nuclear charge because Wilson's statements after visiting Niger actually "supported the conclusion that Iraq had sought uranium."

In the orthodox narrative line, Wilson is the truth-teller and the Bush is the liar. But Wilson was not speaking truthfully when he said his wife, Valerie Plame, had nothing to do with the CIA sending him to Niger. And it obviously wasn't true, as Wilson claimed, that he had found nothing to support Bush's charge about Niger when he (Wilson) had been told that the Iraqis were poking around in that uranium-rich nation.

Testifying before the Senate intelligence committee, Wilson said that the former prime minister of Niger told him he had been asked to meet with Iraqis to talk about "expanding commercial relations" between the two countries. Everybody knew what that meant; Niger has nothing much to trade other than uranium.

Christopher Hitchens made the latter point last week in a muscular column subtitled "Sorry, everyone, but Iraq did go uranium shopping in Niger." The "Sorry, everyone" phrase indicates the strength of the reigning orthodoxy -- that Bush simply lied when he uttered the famous 16 words in his 2003 State of the Union speech: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

Hitchens made these points: Saddam Hussein had already acquired a large amount of uranium from Niger once before, in 1981, so he knew where to go. Amid suspicions that Saddam was trying to revive his nuclear program, Iraqis made a 1999 visit to Niger. The head member of the visiting Iraqi team was Saddam's senior public envoy for nuclear matters. Hmmm.

Defenders of orthodoxy have a fair point to make here. They say that the alert French, who were in total control of Nigerian uranium, would never have allowed it. Maybe, but the alert French turned out to be the payoff-oriented French on a very large scale in the oil-for-bribes scandal.

Hitchens made another point. The forged documents claiming an Iraq-Niger connection were so crude that they could never have fooled the CIA or British intelligence for very long. Who would do this, and do it so badly? Nobody knows. But if the forgeries were meant to distract from other evidence that Bush was right, then they certainly worked. Look around in American journalism, and you will find great certitude that the forgeries destroyed Bush's claim.

That certitude can only be founded on the belief that Tony Blair, the U.S. Senate intelligence committee and the special investigative team of Parliament were all liars when they said there was substantial non-forged evidence backing Bush's claim. The investigative team was headed by the highly regarded Lord Butler, who served as a Cabinet minister under five prime ministers. It concluded that Bush's 16 words about Iraq's uranium shopping were "well-founded."

Actually, there is one other way to discount the Butler report: Either muffle or don't mention it in your news columns. The New York Times opted for muffling. A database search finds no mention of "well-founded" in the Times reporting, and only one barely scrutable paragraph about uranium in the Butler report, way down in the 11th paragraph of a story buried well inside the paper.

For you collectors of embarrassing journalism, here is paragraph 11: "It (the report) also defended British officials in the case of an apparently erroneous British report on Iraq's nuclear ambitions that made its way into President Bush's State of the Union speech last year claiming that Iraq had sought to purchase uranium in Niger. The Butler report confirmed that Iraqi officials had visited Niger in 1999, and the British government had several different sources insisting that the purpose was to buy uranium. But it added, 'the evidence was not conclusive that Iraq had actually purchased, as opposed to having sought, uranium, and the British government did not claim this.'"

Note the Times' careful denial of something nobody had claimed -- that Iraq had recently bought, not sought, uranium in Africa.

In truth, Bush handled the issue badly. He dithered, couldn't find the words to explain himself, and weirdly withdrew the 16 words when the pressure came. And it is surely arguable that the uranium-in-Africa charge was too flimsy for the weight Bush gave it in his speech.

But as columnist Robert Novak once argued, the burgeoning "Bush lied" mantra was heavily dependent on the uranium claim. So the liar label was most firmly attached on an issue Bush was right about. Go figure.

John Leo is a columnist and editor for U.S. News & World Report and a contributing columnist on Townhall.com.

http://townhall.com/opinion/columns/johnleo/2006/04/17/193811.html

SFC(R)L

April 19th, 2006, 8:54 pm

Cradled in Faith

By Emily Baker
Fort Hood Herald

The freedom-laced history contained in the sands of Iraq is almost as old as time itself.

Abraham, who led the Hebrews after they escaped slavery in Egypt, was born there about 3,000 years ago. Jesus, who gave freedom from the condemnation of sin when He rose from the dead, lived not far away about 1,000 years later.

Today, as it tends to do, history is sort of repeating itself. Freedom has returned to Iraq, and the military personnel helping to protect it are gaining a new perspective on Passover and Easter as they celebrate so close to where their faiths began, chaplains said.

"That's what this war is all about, bringing freedom and a better life and democracy to a people who have known great tyranny and also to protect the people of America," said Cmdr. Mitch Schranz, a rabbi and Navy chaplain assigned to Multinational Force-Iraq, during in a telephone interview from Baghdad.

http://www.theforthoodherald.com/

Sneaky SF Dude

April 19th, 2006, 9:04 pm

SFC(R)L

April 19th, 2006, 9:09 pm

No lib responses to this one?

nope...all they know how to do is call me names.

Sneaky SF Dude

April 19th, 2006, 9:15 pm

nope...all they know how to do is call me names.
Well, some of them aren't very bright.

SFC(R)L

April 19th, 2006, 9:15 pm

Iraqi Army Assumes Control in Salah al Din

Iraqis assume control of an area of responsibility that encompasses Balad,
Al Duluyah and Yethrib, as well as the smaller villages surrounding these cities.

By U.S. Army Sgt. Zach Mott
4th Infantry Division Public Affairs Office

BALAD, Iraq, April 18, 2006 — Iraqi soldiers assumed control of part of Salah al Din Province from the U.S. Army 1-8 Combined Arms Battalion in a Transfer of Authority ceremony at an Iraqi army outpost near Balad, Iraq, April 15.

"Their efforts in fighting the terrorists that threaten the citizens of Iraq have not gone unnoticed and their discipline, training and dedication are setting a tremendous example for their fellow soldiers. It will be an honor for me to stand on the same field as these brave soldiers."
U.S. Army Col. Brian D. Jones

The 3rd Battalion, 1st Brigade, 4th Iraqi Army Division is assuming control of an area of responsibility that encompasses Balad, Al Duluyah and Yethrib, as well as the smaller villages surrounding these cities.

“We’re not pulling out of here right away; we’re out here to be by their sides,” said Command Sgt. Maj. Daniel Dailey, 1-8 CAB, 3rd Heavy Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, Task Force Band of Brothers. “But, (to) put them in the lead and set them up front so the people notice that they’re out front, out leading, (that) they care about their people.”

With an Iraqi face on the forces that provide security it has allowed the joint force to improve security not just for the soldiers but for the Iraqi people who call this region northwest of Baghdad home.

“This battalion could not conduct this operation without the cooperation from all the citizens in the area,” said Lt. Col. Hamed, commander, 3rd Battalion, 1st Brigade, 4th Division. “By this cooperation we are creating a safer environment for all Iraqis.”

The cooperation of the citizens, as well as the cooperation with coalition forces, has allowed the 3rd Battalion to be successful in providing security in this region as well as ridding it of insurgents.

“The battalion has conducted many operations to capture insurgents,” said Col. Shojaa, the 1st Brigade, 4th Iraqi Army Division commander. “During this operation, we have found numerous amounts of weapons, IED materials and we have captured many terrorists. Our battalion also conducted security operations during the elections.”

Iraqi Army Col. Shojaa, commander 1st Brigade, 4th Iraqi Army Division, and U.S. Army Col. Brian D. Jones, commander, 3rd Heavy Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, Task Force Band of Brothers, render honors to the national anthem during a transfer of authority ceremony at an Iraqi army base near Balad, Iraq, April 15, 2006.

The accomplishments of this battalion are helping secure Iraq as the country is stabilizing its government.

“Their efforts in fighting the terrorists that threaten the citizens of Iraq have not gone unnoticed and their discipline, training and dedication are setting a tremendous example for their fellow soldiers,” said Col. Brian D. Jones, commander, 3rd HBCT, 4th Infantry Division. “It will be an honor for me to stand on the same field as these brave soldiers.”

The 3rd Battalion played an instrumental role in the successes enjoyed during Operation Cowpens - a month-long operation on the Jabouri Peninsula that yielded numerous caches and seriously hampered the insurgent efforts to create chaos.

“I believe that doing (Cowpens) jointly was a great factor (in transferring authority of this region to the battalion),” Dailey said. “The people saw that their people were there. I don’t think it could have been done without the Iraqi army help.”

The 3rd Battalion, 1st Brigade, 4th Iraqi Army Division was established in December 2003 and was formerly known as the 203rd Iraqi National Guard Battalion prior to its current designation.

http://www.defendamerica.mil/articles/apr2006/a041806tj2.html

Balad is bad guy land no more.

SFC(R)L

April 19th, 2006, 9:18 pm

Iraqi Village Gets Clean, Fresh Water

New pipeline improves water pressure and water accessibility for the village.
The new water tower has a three-to four-day storage capacity.

By Staff Sgt. Kevin Lovel
363rd Mobile Public Affairs Detachment

CAMP LIBERTY, Iraq, April 19, 2006 — The Iraqi residents of Airport Village, located near Baghdad’s International Airport, can now safely drink the water thanks to the completion of the Airport Village Water Tower and Pipeline project, which was commemorated at a “turn on the valve” ceremony April 15.

"This is the biggest gift from the (Coalition) Forces to this village,"
Esam Al Askar, managing director and chief executive officer, Al Fulq Ltd. Co.

Al Fulq Ltd. Co., the firm awarded the contract for construction of the project, built the tower and pipeline with the help of village resident workers. It was funded by the Overseas Humanitarian Disaster and Civic Aid program.

Coalition Forces coordinated funding for the project at the request of the village leadership, said 1st Lt. Emily Siegert, civil military affairs officer, 1st Battalion, 320th Field Artillery Regiment, Multi-National Division – Baghdad.

“The mayor (of the village) had approached the (soldiers). They had negative water pressure, which allowed sewage to get into the drinking water,” said Siegert.

“This is the biggest gift from the (Coalition) Forces to this village,” said Esam Al Askar, managing director and chief executive officer, Al Fulq Ltd. Co. Al Askar is also a resident of the village. “People used to be very, very sick in the village. When the water pipes were rotten, sewage was leaking (into the water supply).”

The project replaced the old Airport Village water network with an 8-inch pipeline that improved the water pressure and water accessibility for the village. The new water tower, built using technology brought in from the United Arab Emirates, expands the ability of the village to have water during the shortage peak periods of the summer months and has a three-to four-day storage capacity, said Al Askar.

“We’re really honored to do this and leave this here as a symbol of sacrifice. (Coalition) Forces sacrifice their lives here to help us,” said Al Askar.

“It’s the least we could offer this village. We wanted this project to be a source of daily bread,” he said.

Village boys play and cool themselves off after the "Turn on the Valve" ceremony at the commemoration of the new Airport Village Water Tower and Pipeline project in Baghdad. The project was funded by the Overseas Humanitarian Disaster and Civic Aid program. U.S. Army photo by Staff Sgt. Kevin Lovel

Residents of Airport Village and media members observe the village's new water tower. U. S. Army photo by Staff Sgt. Kevin Lovel

Approximately 60 of the village men worked on the project.
“It was a good opportunity for the unemployed in our village,” said Al Askar.

“The villagers are very pleased with the project. They appreciate having fresh water,” added the village’s mayor, who requested that his name be withheld.

The project completes phase one of two planned water projects in the village. Phase two will replace the inner water network within Airport Village, allowing residents to connect their homes to the new internal water network, said Al Askar.

The current inner water network is outdated and corroded, leading to contaminated drinking water. The new system, when installed, will provide two 8-inch main pipelines with 4-inch branches from the recently completed mainline, explained Al Askar.

The village, built in the 1970s at the time the Baghdad International Airport was constructed, was originally “built to serve 400 people,” he said. The village is currently home to approximately 2,500 residents, and many of the working men in the village are employed at Baghdad International Airport.
The project was started in July of 2005 by the 2nd Battalion, 299th Infantry, Hawaii Army National Guard, said Maj. John Gentry, Victory Base Defense Operations Center effects coordinator and member of the 122nd Rear Operations Center, Georgia Army National Guard.

The soldiers of 1st Battalion, 320th Field Artillery Regiment, MND-B then assumed project management responsibility in January, which was then transferred to the 17th Field Artillery Brigade, based out of Fort Sill, Okla.Since the unit took over responsibility of the Victory Base Complex and the surrounding neighboring areas, it has recommended five additional projects and has been approved for more than $580,000 of Commanders Emergency Response Program funds.

http://www.defendamerica.mil/articles/apr2006/a041906ms1.html

Loyal American

April 19th, 2006, 9:46 pm

Well, some of them aren't very bright.

Nope, not too many shinning stars!:rolleyes:

Loyal American

April 19th, 2006, 9:47 pm

I love this thread! :flag:

SFC(R)L

April 19th, 2006, 11:22 pm

Well, some of them aren't very bright.

I am simply trying to point this out.

SFC(R)L

April 20th, 2006, 8:55 pm

Iraqi, U.S. Soldiers Provide Medical Aid
By Spc. C. Terrell Turner, USA
Special to American Forces Press Service

CAMP TAJI, Iraq, April 20, 2006 – While the fight against enemy insurgents continues, Iraqi and Multinational Division Baghdad soldiers provided medical and humanitarian relief to local nationals caught in the middle and those without means to provide care for themselves.

Army Sgt. Allen Hill, a civil affairs specialist with Company A, 490th Civil Affairs Battalion, hands out humanitarian supplies to local residents. An Iraqi translator and members of the Iraqi army assisted the soldiers during a medical operation at the Taji soccer stadium April 11. Photo by Spc. C. Terrell Turner, USA (Click photo for screen-resolution image);high-resolution image available.

Iraqi soldiers secured the immediate area as the U.S. soldiers provided desperately needed care at the Taji soccer stadium April 11.

After arriving at the location, the soldiers secured the surrounding area and set security checkpoints to ensure safety and security for local nationals entering the area for treatment. MNDB soldiers then drove around broadcasting a message in Arabic to let people know about the operation and invite them to seek help.

As coalition and Iraqi medics provided care, physician assistants diagnosed problems, and dental technicians saw patients needing dental care.

"We're here to provide medical aid to local nationals, specifically the ones who live in the local Fedayeen camp," said Army Capt. Casey Coyle, commander of Headquarters and Headquarters Troop, 7th Squadron, 10th Cavalry Regiment, 1st Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division.

He said the medical teams treated about 300 people. Most ailments the teams treated were skin infections and nose and chest congestion problems, Coyle said.

During the mission, civil affairs and Iraqi army personnel provided humanitarian supplies to locals after the families received medical care. "Our mission was to distribute humanitarian assistance," said Army Master Sgt. Ronnie Reece, civil affairs noncommissioned officer-in-charge of Company A, 490th Civil Affairs Battalion. "And if any of the area tribal leaders come, we engage them about economic, security and infrastructure issues."

The clothing, office supplies and soccer balls were donated by an assortment of organizations. Locals who took part in the operation were pleased about the care and assistance they received.

"I appreciate the help. I had eye trouble and back pain, and they gave me some medicine," Nehiah, a local woman, said. "Someone told us the American soldiers were here to help, and I came. God bless them."

Iraqi soldiers handed out water to those waiting in line to receive treatment and provide assurances to the people. "It's a good day. We like to help the people and give them what they need," said Barry, an Iraqi army platoon sergeant from the Nassariya area. "I think they need more stuff: some new medicines, clean water and power to live a better life. I hope that we can provide that for all the people in the future."

As much help as the people receive, there are limits on what coalition forces can provide at one time.

"This is the sixth or seventh (mission like this) we've done. It's always very positive when we do this," Reece said. "The hardest part is whenever we run out of supplies and we have to turn people away. Over the last year, we've incorporated the Iraqi army. It fosters positive relations between the Iraqi army and local nationals."

For Spc. Khalid Bouassel, heavy vehicle mechanic with Company B, 4th Support Battalion, 1st BCT, 4th Inf. Div., the translator work he did with the local nationals felt good. "It was a good day. There were a lot of families here -- mothers, kids and pregnant women," he said. "There were a lot eye problems and infections. Some people came here for treatment from injuries from a mortar attack. It's a good idea, and I look forward to coming out to help as much as possible."

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Apr2006/20060420_4877.html

SFC(R)L

April 21st, 2006, 1:15 pm

Iraqi Police Take the Lead in Baghdad

The Iraqi Police Force fights a faceless enemy but demonstrates
daily the ability to rapidly respond to terrorist and criminal activity.

By U.S. Army Staff Sgt. Brent Williams
4th Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division

BAGHDAD, April 21, 2006 — The structure stands as an endearing symbol of the Iraqi police’s dedication and commitment to the citizens of the Al Dora and Al Bayaa neighborhoods; painted flat white with blue trim, it is pock-marked with the scars of vehicle-borne improvised-explosive devices, rocket-propelled grenades and small-arms fire.

Despite several attacks against the police station in southern Baghdad, Iraqi police and Coalition Forces have rebuilt the headquarters for the IP who are sworn to protect and serve.

The Multi-National Division – Baghdad’s 21st Military Police Company, one of three MP companies attached to the 4th Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, work with Iraqi police in Al Rasheed and Karradah districts of Baghdad. They bring together all the elements necessary to run a successful police force, said Capt. Sally Gonzales, provost marshal, 4th BCT.

“Last year I worked at an IP [Iraqi Police] station, and if we went out on patrol, the IPs followed behind. This year, we follow behind the IPs, and they basically handle everything."

U.S. Army Sgt. Gerald Gregory

U.S. Army Military Police, deployed in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom, work with the Iraqi police on a daily basis to support the most essential of services for the nation’s capitol – law and justice.

The soldiers are providing oversight to help them take the lead, said Gonzales.

There are many different goals to meet. The desired effect is to teach the Iraqi police to coordinate with higher elements and work together, she said. “The IPs are demonstrating daily the ability to rapidly respond to terrorist and criminal activity.

The progress is valuable to the Iraqi police force, which is fighting a faceless enemy in Baghdad, said Staff Sgt. Adam Gossner, squad leader, 21st MP Co. The Iraqi police have, in the past, trained more like a para-military force than the conventional police officer.

“It’s really hard for them to do like American policing because they have to roll out in force,” said Gossner.

U.S. Police Transition Teams continue to work with the police officers, training them in police techniques as simple as handcuffing and making arrests, he said, to better prepare them for their conventional role.

Gossner, a native of Appleton, Wis., said he is proud of the soldiers he leads in the personal security detachment and the work they have done with the Iraqi police.

Just a week ago, members of the team, most of them on their second deployment, were working in the stations, training police officers on how combat criminals, roadside bombs and an enemy that indiscriminately kills Baghdad’s citizens, he explained.

Traveling from station to station to check on the police force’s progress, the soldiers see first-hand what the Iraqi police face.

Two years ago, Sgt. Gerald Gregory, personal security detail platoon leader, 21st MP Co., conducted sweeps and raids with the mechanized infantry’s 1st Cavalry Division in Baghdad and Fallujah.

“This year, we do a lot more administrative work than we are used to,” said Gregory, a native of Jacksonville, Fla., of his current role in Operation Iraqi Freedom. “For example, last year I worked at an IP station, and if we went out on patrol, the IPs followed behind. This year, we follow behind the IPs, and they basically handle everything. We just observe how they handle the situation,” said Gregory.

The MND-B MPs see a huge improvement in the Iraqi police force currently operating in Baghdad.

The Al Dora/Al Bayaa Police Station pictured here in April 2006. The police station serves the residents of the Al Dora and Al Bayaa neighborhoods of South Baghdad, Iraq. Over the past three years, terrorist forces have attacked the station several times. Despite the attacks Iraqi police and Coalition Forces have rebuilt the headquarters for the Iraqi Police each time. U.S. Army photo by Staff Sgt. Brent Williams High-Res Image

The Al Dora/Al Bayaa Police Station was devastated after a vehicle-borne improvised-explosive device detonated in the parking lot of the police station in July 2003. Over the course of the next three years, terrorist forces attacked the station several times in efforts to undermine security in the region. Despite the attacks Iraqi police and Coalition Forces have rebuilt the headquarters for the Iraqi Police each time.

“So much,” said Gregory, “that now, the primary responsibility for the military police company is to train key leadership – in the training of Iraqi police officers – to become more self-reliant.”

The IPs are training hard to build upon their training and need every bit of their confidence in their capabilities, said Spc. Michael Sward, driver, 21st MP Co., and a native of Lincoln County, Ga. Sward, until recently, was responsible for in-processing new police officers at the station in Al Dora.

“We are training them, building up their tactics, techniques and procedures as far as what to look for: how to conduct and set up their patrols and what to do if they do find an improvised-explosive device.”

The recent spate of violence in south and west Baghdad, especially Rasheed’s Al Dora neighborhood, is due to terrorists working to undermine the security in the city, said Sward.

“It looks like they are targeting the IPs as well as the U.S. Forces,” he added, standing amidst Iraqi police vehicles, many riddled with bullet holes in their doors and windshields. “They are trying to undermine the Iraqi people’s confidence in the IPs.”

Yet, the Iraqi Police are rising to the challenge, he said.

“They take their bumps and bruises just like we do, but they understand that they have a job to do. So they go straight back out, flood the area where they just got hit, and try to get whoever did it. Their presence says – ‘Hey we’re not going to back down,” he added.

Because of this, Sward said he believes the Iraqi police are going to succeed in establishing law and order in Iraq.

“They’ve got heart. The Iraqi police love their job,” he said. “The majority of them are fighting for their families, their communities, where they live. This is their home.”

http://www.defendamerica.mil/articles/apr2006/a042106ls1.html

SFC(R)L

April 22nd, 2006, 10:06 am

Sergeant Re-Enlists After Losing Hand in Iraq IED Attack
Tuesday, April 11, 2006

Returning to her camp near Baghdad, Sgt. 1st Class Juanita Wilson's last supply run turned out very differently than the other missions in her seven-month tour in Iraq.

"We got everything we needed and [were] on our way back … about an hour from our camp … that's when something happened to our vehicle," recounted Wilson, a full-time member of the Army Reserve whose unit deployed to Iraq in March of 2004.

That 'something' was an improvised explosive device (IED) that wounded her and several members of her convoy in August of 2004. The explosion cost Wilson her left hand and some of her arm.

"My driver kept saying, 'Something's wrong with my leg, something's wrong with my leg!' … I didn't know anything was wrong with me. I was trying to figure out what was wrong with him," she explained.

Wilson knew they had been attacked and told the driver to get them out of the "kill zone" — the area where attackers expect to kill many of the enemy. Once the vehicle was in a safer position, she started to realize something else was wrong.

"I started to feel this tingling in my hand … I looked down and that was when I realized OK, I don't have a hand here,'" Wilson said. A combat medic rushed over and began patching her up but the attack wasn't over. The U.S. convoy then got hit with small-arms fire. Other soldiers with Wilson began returning fire and radioed for helicopter gunship support.

Wilson and her driver were severely wounded and could only wait for the medical evacuation team to arrive. To Wilson, listening to the battle and waiting for the MEDEVAC seemed like "the longest amount of time."

Over the next four days, Wilson made her way to Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Bethesda, Md., where she spent the next year in intensive therapy and making many decisions about her medical care and the type of life she wanted to live.

Wilson was a unit supply specialist with the 411th Engineer Battalion, an Army Reserve unit from Hilo, Hawaii. The unit had been building roads and infrastructure such as schools around Iraq since its deployment.

While recuperating at Walter Reed, one option Wilson would not consider was leaving the Army, despite the long road to recovery that lay ahead of her.

"From Day One, my decision was, 'I'm not getting out,'" Wilson said, adding that she still has things she wants to accomplish in the military. "My support channel has been there for me and I'd like to give that back to the soldiers of the future."

Wilson underwent a year of both occupational and physical therapy before a medical review board cleared her for further service. She explained that an individual isn't even considered to appear before the board until at least a year of therapy.

"They want to see if you're really ready to return, which is a good thing," Wilson said. "It's really great at Walter Reed. They don't want you to leave there with the idea that 'nobody helped me or asked me what I wanted to do.'"

Wilson, originally from Clarksdale, Miss., now lives in Maryland and works at Walter Reed. The 32-year-old volunteers as a peer visitor for other soldiers in situations similar to hers.

More than 600,000 patients a year pass through the Walter Reed Army Medical Center and its clinics; it’s the Army’s largest healthcare facility. Walter Reed boasts more than 1,600 full-time physicians, nurses, and other health care providers. Its Orthotic and Prosthetic Appliance Laboratory constructs artificial limbs, correction braces and other devices

Now, nearly two years after the IED attack in Iraq and after therapy, numerous operations and a new prosthetic hand, Wilson made good on her decision to stay in the Army. She and 37 others re-enlisted in a ceremony held on the steps of the U.S. Capitol on April 6. Wilson wasn't the only veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom who re-enlisted, nor was she the only wounded soldier among them.

Wilson understands the circumstances that have drawn media attention to her, but doesn’t consider herself to be that special.

"I hope to represent every soldier in the Army Reserve — and my daughter — in a positive way. If you put your feet in Iraq or Afghanistan, your service is just as meaningful and just as appreciated," Wilson said.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,191390,00.html

Loyal American

April 22nd, 2006, 10:51 am

While recuperating at Walter Reed, one option Wilson would not consider was leaving the Army, despite the long road to recovery that lay ahead of her.

"From Day One, my decision was, 'I'm not getting out,'" Wilson said, adding that she still has things she wants to accomplish in the military. "My support channel has been there for me and I'd like to give that back to the soldiers of the future."

How many stories have we heard like this? I wish SFC Wilson the very best and I pray she accomplishes everything she desires in her career. I admire her strength, determination and dedication. There is no way to repay her and others for serving our country but I hope they all realizes just how much they are appreciate.

http://www.thecampaignstore.com/images/products/big/Photo204.GodBlessTroopsV2.jpg

SFC(R)L

April 22nd, 2006, 3:12 pm

How many stories have we heard like this? I wish SFC Wilson the very best and I pray she accomplishes everything she desires in her career. I admire her strength, determination and dedication. There is no way to repay her and others for serving our country but I hope they all realizes just how much they are appreciate.

http://www.thecampaignstore.com/images/products/big/Photo204.GodBlessTroopsV2.jpg

There are a great many in our country who could learn a great deal from this NCO.

SFC(R)L

April 22nd, 2006, 11:20 pm

4th ID soldier died for freedom, family says
By Emily Baker
Killeen Daily Herald

HARKER HEIGHTS When Capt. Ian Weikel deployed to Iraq late last year, he told his wife to look into their infant son's eyes when she misses him.

He told her that every time little Jonathan smiles at her, he would be smiling at her, too.

When the three-year anniversary of the beginning of the war came last month, Ian wrote home about why he thought the war was worth fighting.

"No sacrifice is easy, and the loss of every soldier is heart-wrenching," Ian wrote in his last update to his troop's families. "However, the liberty of 26 million people is worth it."

Ian explained that the Iraqis were oppressed under Saddam Hussein's leadership and that the well-being of children who greet soldiers with requests for chocolate and soccer balls is worth the fight.

http://www.kdhnews.com/docs/daily/headlines.aspx?ad=1&sid=10085

SFC(R)L

April 29th, 2006, 10:15 am

No More Vietnams
This time, let's finish the job.
by David Gelernter
05/08/2006, Volume 011, Issue 32

The United States has no tradition of running away. The left had better get this straight: Vietnam was an aberration. There will be no more Vietnams.

American character is on the line. For the sake of this nation--of its good name, its big heart, the sacrifices of its many brave defenders, the genius of its creators--of its greatness, in short--conservatives had better not lose this fight.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/151alsid.asp

Loyal American

April 29th, 2006, 1:35 pm

"Not many nations get a second chance to show the world and themselves that they are serious after all, that their friends can trust them and their enemies ought to fear them. There is no way we can atone for the blood and death we inflicted (indirectly) on South Vietnam by abandoning it to Communist tyranny. That failure can never be put right. But we can make clear that "No More Vietnams" is a Republican slogan. It means that we will never again go back on our word and betray our friends, our soldiers, and ourselves."

AMEN! :flag:

rhet 2

April 29th, 2006, 1:45 pm

SFC(R)L

April 30th, 2006, 7:30 pm

Hiding Docs from the U.N. Team"

Document dated March 23, 1997

A letter from the Iraqi intelligence service to directors and managers advising them to follow certain procedures in case of a search by the U.N. team, including:

Removing correspondence with the atomic energy and military industry departments concerning the prohibited weapons (proposals, research, studies, catalogs, etc.)

Removing prohibited materials and equipment, including documents and catalogs and making sure to clear labs and storages of any traces of chemical or biological materials that were previously used or stored.

Doing so through a committee which will decide whether to destroy the documents Removing files from computers.

The letter also advises them on how they should answer questions by U.N. team members. It says the intelligence service should be informed within one week about the progress made in discarding the documents.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/IraqCoverage/story?id=1734490&page=1

From a MARCH 2006 Article...still learning stuff...LIKE WHY WOULD IRAQ NEED PROCEDURES TO HIDE PROHIBITED WEAPONS IF THEY DID NOT HAVE THEM?

SFC(R)L

May 3rd, 2006, 8:27 pm

Bush: 'Evil Will Not Have the Final Say'

By TERENCE HUNT, AP White House Correspondent
Wednesday, May 3, 2006
(05-03) 15:58 PDT WASHINGTON (AP)

President Bush said Wednesday the verdict rejecting the death penalty for al-Qaida conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui "represents the end of this case but not an end to the fight against terror."

Without commenting directly on the jury's decision, Bush declared, "Evil will not have the final say. This great nation will prevail."

A federal jury in northern Virginia decided Moussaoui must spend life in prison for his role in the deadliest terrorist attack in U.S. history.

The verdict was a setback for the government, which had sought the death penalty for the only person charged in this country in the four suicide jetliner hijackings that killed nearly 3,000 people on Sept. 11, 2001. Three jurors decided Moussaoui had only limited knowledge of the Sept. 11 plot and three described his role in the attacks as minor, if he had any role at all.

Bush issued a lengthy statement but did not comment directly on the trial's outcome, saying only that "our thoughts today are with the families who lost loved ones."

Bush said the nation continues to grieve for the victims of Sept. 11.

"We are still deeply touched by the memory of rescuers who gave all, the passengers who ran a hijacked plane into the ground to prevent an event greater loss of life and the frightened souls who comforted one another during their final moments on earth."

Bush said, "The end of this trial represents the end of this case but not an end to the fight against terror.

"The enemy that struck our shores on Sept. 11th is still active and remains determined to kill Americans," the president said. "We will stay on the offensive against the terrorists. We will end their ability to plot and plan. We will deny them safe haven and the ability to gain weapons of mass murder."

"In these four and a half years, with good allies at our side, the United States has killed or captured many terrorists, shut down training camps, broken up terror cells in our own country, and removed regimes that sponsored terror," the president said. "We have many dedicated men and women fully engaged in this fight in the military, intelligence and homeland security; law enforcement personnel; and federal investigators and prosecutors who gather the evidence, make the case and ensure that justice is done. They are doing superb work every day to remove this danger and to protect our country.

"We have had many victories, yet there is much left to do, and I will not relent in this struggle for the freedom and security of the American people," Bush said. "And we can be confident. Our cause is right, and the outcome is certain: Justice will be served. Evil will not have the final say. This great nation will prevail."

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/05/03/national/w142830D64.DTL

SFC(R)L

May 6th, 2006, 9:35 pm

Iraqi WMD Mystery Solved
By Jamie Glazov
FrontPageMagazine.com | March 2, 2006

Mauro: The tapes are extremely significant in that they prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that as of the year 2000, Saddam Hussein had a secret plasma program to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons, or "special bombs" as he calls them. The Duelfer Report previously concluded that this type of enrichment program ended in the 1980s, but here we have Saddam and his top advisors discussing using a power plant in the area of Basra for the program. The scientists involved in the program are not known to the UN, leaving Western intelligence clueless.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=21489

SFC(R)L

May 6th, 2006, 9:41 pm

Another speaker at the conference was John Shaw, former deputy undersecretary of defense for international technology security, who charged that Saddam's stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction were moved by Russian special forces into Syria and Lebanon.

According to Mr. Shaw, former Russian intelligence boss Yevgeny Primakov came to Iraq in December 2002 in order to supervise "cleanup" operations to remove WMD production materials from the country.

This operation, carried out by GRU military intelligence and Russian "spetsnaz," or special forces, troops, was designed to make it possible for critics of the war to be able to claim that Iraq had had no WMD.

Mr. Shaw claims that officials in the Pentagon and the CIA, who were fearful of alienating Moscow, actively worked to discredit his efforts to bring this story to light, and that some derided it as "Israeli disinformation."

It is apparent that the American public has much more to learn about Moscow, Damascus and WMD and precisely when Saddam's nuclear weapons programs actually stopped.

http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20060219-092126-1788r.htm

SFC(R)L

May 7th, 2006, 1:28 pm

"United 93' and why we took the war to Iraq

Sunday, May 7, 2006
By Michael Bowers, Star columnist

Last weekend in Chicago Ridge I saw "United 93." It's outstanding. The violence is not gratuitous. "Let's roll" is more an offhand comment than a battle cheer. Considering the subject, the movie is extremely restrained. This makes it more powerful, not less. The events of the day speak for themselves. They don't need added theatrics.

My strongest emotion was dread, knowing what was going to happen to these passengers before they ever had a clue. Once they found out, the dread dissipated and all that was left was to watch a desperate death match. I almost wanted it to hurry up and be over, because I didn't want to see the passengers suffer anymore. Everyone's last, weeping phone message was the same. "Tell my family I love them."

But this doesn't mean "United 93" is a bad movie. It's superior from start to finish. It hurts, but you must see it anyway. We mustn't forget what these horrid creatures did to innocent Americans. And all the while, they truly thought God was smiling upon them. For me, the movie is a needed reminder of why we invaded Iraq.

Yes, Iraq. Cue the Bush-haters to start screaming. "Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11! The hijackers were Saudi Wahhabites!" This may be true. But this is truer: In the Arab world, national boundaries are largely artificial. The French and British carved them from the defeated Ottoman Empire in 1919 after the Great War. They were motivated by political expedience, not concern for self-determination of the Arab people.

Thus we have independent nations labeled Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, Iraq and Saudi Arabia. But the essential energy of these nations comes not from their differences, but from their commonalities. They share a culture, a language and a religion. And if you know anything about Islam at all, you know that it is not just a religion, but a structure of life.

Further, the Arabs are united by two overpowering impulses. One is the drive, perhaps understandable, to be free of meddling by Western nations. The other is the preternatural drive to wipe out Israel.

Thus, in Cairo in 1945, seven Arab states signed the pact of the Arab League. Thus, in 1958, Syria and Egypt attempted a union. Thus, in the same year, Iraq and Jordan attempted a federation. Thus, pan-Arabism remains a potent motive today.

Saddam may not have any links to 9-11. But he had links to al-Qaida, and he had links to terrorism. Close enough. On 9-11, our true enemy was not the Saudis or the Wahhabites. Our enemy was that perverse segment of Arabs who want to kill Americans at any opportunity — because Israel continues to exist, and because Britney Spears doesn't wear enough clothing on stage.

As the rubble of the Twin Towers smoked, President Bush knew he must destroy this segment. He was not the only American who thought so. So also did Thomas Friedman, one of the world's foremost experts on the Middle East, who writes for the New York Times, and who is no conservative.

In January 2004, Friedman wrote: "The real reason for this war — which was never stated — was to burst what I would call the 'terrorism bubble,' which had built up during the 1990s.

"This bubble was a dangerous fantasy, believed by way too many people in the Middle East. This bubble said that it was OK to plow airplanes into the World Trade Center, commit suicide in Israeli pizza parlors, praise people who do these things as 'martyrs' and donate money to them through religious charities.

"This bubble had to be burst, and the only way to do it was to go right into the heart of the Arab world and smash something -- to let everyone know that we, too, are ready to fight and die to preserve our open society. Yes, I know, it's not very diplomatic — it's not in the rule book — but everyone in the neighborhood got the message: Henceforth, you will be held accountable.

"Why Iraq, not Saudi Arabia or Pakistan? Because we could — period."

Bush knew he had to take the fight to the enemy. But the enemy does not live in one land anymore; it suffuses the world. And so he chose to start the war in Iraq. Now, fortuitously, the enemy has come to us.

Bush-haters complain bitterly: "Now Baghdad is the front line!" Well, indeed it is. This is a bad thing? Where do they want the front line to be? New York? Chicago?

Bush said "Bring 'em on," and for this he was mocked. Who mocks Gen. Patton for saying the same thing, in different words? That is: "I like when the enemy shoots at me; then I know where the bastards are and can kill them."

Still, the lunatic segment of Arabs may not be the paramount culprits. They are bad. But the self-hating Americans who protect them and attack their own country are worse. You expect the enemy to be evil. You don't expect your own side to carry their water.

But they do. They believe nothing is worth fighting for. They believe that no matter how atrocious the provocation, America is never allowed to strike back. No matter the facts, people with lighter skin are always the oppressors, and people with darker skin are always the oppressed.

Fortunately we have a president who despises these sentiments. For nearly three more years, we have a president who will burst terror bubbles wherever he finds them. We have a president who tells our enemies: Henceforth, you will be held accountable. Yes, we too are ready to fight and die to preserve our open society.

Appreciate this courage while you can. It will last only as long as it takes the Democrats to win back the White House. That's what I see in "United 93."

http://www.starnewspapers.com/star/spedit/bowers/x07-bow.htm

SFC(R)L

May 10th, 2006, 9:03 pm

NCOs Note Differences Between What They See and What They Hear
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

CAMP LIBERTY, Iraq, May 10, 2006 – It's the e-mails and calls from home that gave the soldiers of the 4th Infantry Division their first clue that something is becoming different about the will of the American people.
"All this time I thought we were winning," said a sergeant first class sarcastically. "Seems folks back home have already run up the white flag."

Some 4th Infantry Division noncommissioned officers were discussing the flood of e-mails they receive from family members and friends about the constant danger they are facing in Iraq. Though they asked not to be identified by name for this article, the NCOs said they believe the news media highlight explosions and murders over any sign of progress in Iraq.

"I see progress every time I go outside the wire," said a platoon sergeant. "Just look at the progress the Iraqi army has made."

The NCOs, many with years of infantry experience, said the Iraqi army has made tremendous strides since standing up just two years ago. The difference between the Iraqi National Guard that first stood up in the aftermath of the fall of Saddam Hussein and today's Iraqi army is night and day, said an NCO who served with the 101st Airborne Division in 2003's initial combat in Iraq.

He said the old Iraqi military hardly even fired its weapons. "We joked that the safest place to be was where they were aiming," he said.

But today's Iraqi army has developed the professional warrior ethos needed to be an effective fighting force. The men said the Iraqi NCOs are taking charge of their units and tending to 'NCO business.'

"In the old army, being an NCO just meant you were paid more," said an NCO. Now the Iraqi NCOs are serious about training their troops and ensuring they are cared for.

One NCO spoke about an incident in Baghdad that the Iraqi army handled without any help from the coalition. "There was a (car bomb) attack and the Iraqis handled it," he said. The Iraqi soldiers rushed to the scene, delivered aid to those wounded, cordoned off the area and searched it for other threats, and secured the site while Iraqi police conducted the investigation.

This is not to say there aren't problems, the NCOs said. While the Iraqi army has made tremendous progress, the Iraqi police - especially the local police - have a long way to go. But they're continuing to make progress, the NCOs said.

The special police units - now called the national police - are almost as professional as the military, the NCOs said. And the young recruits to the local police understand what is required of them and have embraced the training. "If that continues when they get on the street is the test," an NCO said.

These NCOs are not ready to leave Iraq, and they resent suggestions that they aren't doing good in this war-weary country.

"I have yet to speak to (an American) here who thinks we're losing," an NCO said. "Trust me. (No soldier) wants to be here, but no one wants to cut and run either."

"Leaving would just send the wrong signal to our enemies," he said.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/May2006/20060510_5076.html

SFC(R)L

May 11th, 2006, 8:56 pm

N.D. Guard team trains for WMDs

By Mike Nowatzki
The Forum of Fargo-Moorhead

(5/10/2006) — Preparing for the worst meant giving their best Tuesday for members of a North Dakota National Guard team training to deal with industrial accidents and weapons of mass destruction.

The 81st Civil Support Team was created last year to deal with chemical, biological and radiological emergencies.

The team's 22 members descended on Fargo's 119th Fighter Wing Tuesday for a training exercise as part of their path to certification.

North Dakota is among the last states to form a Civil Support Team, said Master Sgt. David Somdahl, public relations officer for the 119th.

When a train derailed and spilled anhydrous ammonia in Minot, N.D., in January 2002, it was Minnesota's 55th Civil Support Team that responded from Minneapolis.

Once certified, the Bismarck-based North Dakota team will respond to industrial accidents or terrorist attacks involving weapons of mass destruction, such as dirty bombs or anthrax, at any time.

"They live on-call now," Somdahl said.

Ten members of the Minnesota team, which has been certified since 2001, were on hand Tuesday to evaluate the 81st Civil Support Team.

Sgt. 1st Class Richard Axelson observed as the 81st team members assembled a three-stage decontamination area, complete with stretcher, a shower and a diesel-powered water heater. A green bag containing a gas mask hung off the waist of each black-vested soldier.

The team was judged on how well and how quickly it completed the required tasks, Axelson said.

"This is different than how we do it, but it still has to meet this set of guidelines, so how they do it is up to them," he said.

Members of the 81st had to assemble the "decon" area in 90 minutes and have it certified before they could send a team into the "hot zone" - the 119th's firefighter training building - to find and identify the fake hazardous material.

The 81st hauls its equipment around in about half a dozen blue military vehicles, including a communications truck, a medical truck and a mobile chemical lab for identifying substances.

Commanding the 81st is Lt. Col. Larry Shireley, who left his job as state epidemiologist to lead the unit. If the team passes its final test in Bismarck in August, he said it will apply to the secretary of Defense for certification, which could come in November or December.

"So, this will provide us with some guidance about where we are in our training," he said.

http://www.ngb.army.mil/news/story.asp?id=2272

SFC(R)L

May 15th, 2006, 9:57 pm

Iraqi Tank Brigade Assumes Combat Responsibility
By Jim Garamone
American Forces Press Service

CAMP TAJI, Iraq, May 15, 2006 – As the new Iraqi army attains capability, more units are taking over security responsibility within their country. The latest example is the Iraqi 2nd Brigade of the 9th Mechanized Division, which assumed responsibility for security in the Taji area during a ceremony here today.

Soldiers hold the flag of the Iraqi 2nd Brigade, 9th Mechanized Division, during an assumption of responsibility ceremony May 15. The brigade will have responsibility for 150 square kilometers around Camp Taji. Photo by Jim Garamone (Click photo for screen-resolution image);high-resolution image available.

The brigade will be "in the lead" in defending 150 square kilometers of the region, including the cities of Saab al Bour and Hor al Bash.

The 2nd Brigade, which is the only Iraqi armored unit with T-72 tanks and BMP armored personnel carriers, is called the "jewel of Iraq" by military leaders in the country, said U.S. Army Maj. Jeremy Hoffman, a military transition team officer for the brigade.

During the ceremony, U.S. Army Lt. Col. David Thompkins, commander of 7th Squadron, 10th Cavalry Regiment, turned over responsibility for the territory to Iraqi Col. Jamal Mal-Allah Ahmed.

"This is a great day for the 9th Mechanized Division," Iraqi Maj. Gen. Ayoub Bashar, commander of the division, said through an interpreter. "A lot has been achieved by this young division, achievements that have done a lot to increase the division's combat capabilities."

Soldiers of the 7-10 Cavalry have been serving as mentors, coaches and battle partners to the 2nd Brigade since January, Thompson said. "We have fought together shoulder to shoulder for the past few months against the enemies of a free Iraq," the colonel said. "With the 2nd Brigade now in the lead, we look forward to continuing our partnership to provide security for the Iraqi people."

The Scorpions, a U.S. military training team, has worked with the brigade since it formed in October. The brigade had no personnel, weapons, uniforms, housing or tanks just seven months ago, said U.S. Army Lt. Col. Carl Grunow, senior advisor to the 2nd Brigade. American and Iraqi soldiers worked together closely to build the brigade capabilities, he said.

Bashar spoke of the role the U.S. team played in helping the brigade. "I especially thank the American MTT team, who worked day and night, hand in hand with their brothers of the 2nd Brigade," he said.

The military training team and the 7-10 Cavalry will not simply turn responsibility over to the Iraqis and leave the area. Grunow said his team and its successor will continue to mentor and coach the Iraqi unit in training and in combat. The soldiers of the 7-10 Cavalry also will continue to operate with their Iraqi counterparts in the region.

The 2nd Brigade will report to the commander of the U.S. 1st Brigade, 4th Infantry Division. Officials expect that next month this command arrangement will change as the Iraqi 9th Mechanized Division is validated and assumes responsibility for the area covered by both the 1st Brigade and 2nd Brigade.

The 9th Division commander said he is looking forward to that day, and is working with 4th Division soldiers and military training teams to speed its arrival. "We should be the pioneer to sacrifice and defend the Iraqi nation, its freedom and achievements against terrorists and those who may attempt to violate Iraqi freedom and trespass its land and violate its earth," Bashar said.

The commander looked directly at Iraqi military Chief of Staff Gen. Babakir Shawkat Zebari and said the division is "prepared to carry out their motto: 'Iraq First.'

"These men are dedicated to keeping Iraq safe," he said.

After the ceremony, Babakir said he is pleased with the unit's capabilities and proud of its soldiers. He said more and more Iraqi units are working to assume security responsibilities. By the end of the year, all Iraqi divisions will be up and running and "in the lead," he said.

Bashar told the soldiers of the brigade that he has full trust in them to succeed in their mission. "You will go after the terrorists and intruders who are trying to break down Iraq," he said. "You are going to give terrorists a painful lesson in this area. That will cause the terrorists to stay out of this area or else be killed."

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/May2006/20060515_5137.html

SFC(R)L

May 15th, 2006, 9:58 pm

Coalition Forces in Iraq Kill, Detain Dozens of Terrorists
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, May 15, 2006 – Coalition forces killed more than 40 terrorists and detained 13 suspected terrorists in various raids May 13 and yesterday throughout Iraq, military officials in Iraq reported.
Coalition forces conducted a coordinated ground and air attack against an enemy safe haven in Yusifiyah yesterday, killing more than 25 terrorists, detaining four, and destroying three safe houses and a vehicle loaded with weapons and ammunition.

Upon initiating the attack in the afternoon, coalition troops immediately killed two terrorists in response to hostile activity from a suspected safe house and an associated vehicle. Once the threat was suppressed by an air strike on both the car - resulting in secondary explosions - and the structure, ground troops searched the targeted areas. The troops found two dead terrorists, detained four suspects and provided medical treatment to three injured civilians.

One adult female and one teenage female were treated for wounds and medically evacuated with their uninjured maternal escort via helicopter to the 10th Combat Support Hospital in Baghdad. Additionally, one girl was treated on-site for a superficial wound to the head. She required no further medical care and remained with her mother.

The terrorists fired at the departing helicopters, including the transport carrying the injured civilians. The ground forces called in close-air support to suppress the threat, and several sorties of fixed and rotary wing aircraft attacked enemy positions and killed about 20 terrorists.

During the fighting, terrorists in a truck tried to penetrate the security perimeter and were engaged by the ground troops. The three enemies who occupied the vehicle were killed. One was wearing a suicide vest and detonated it after he was shot by the ground troops, injuring no one and killing himself.

Elsewhere, coalition forces conducted a series of raids May 13 and yesterday near Latifiyah, killing known terrorist Abu Mustafa and 15 other suspected al Qaeda associates and detaining eight suspects. Abu Mustafa was wanted for his involvement in the shooting down of an AH-64 helicopter earlier this year.

In the evening on May 13, coalition forces initiated four associated raids. The initial raid resulted in the killing of Abu Mustafa and an unknown affiliate, who were located near Latifiyah, a village about 25 kilometers southeast of Baghdad.

Intelligence officials identified several other areas connected to Abu Mustafa's cell members. Coalition troops assaulted three of those sites, located about six kilometers north of where Abu Mustafa had been killed the day before. Upon arrival at the first site, coalition forces engaged more than 15 al Qaeda terrorists who were attempting to establish defensive positions or escape. Coalition forces confirmed 14 suspected terrorists were killed and also discovered Abu Mustafa's body, which had been moved to this new site.

Coalition troops also found several women and children inside the house. Two women and two children were inadvertently wounded by shrapnel. The troops immediately treated the injured. One of the women and one child required no further treatment. After initial treatment for a wound to her abdomen, the second woman, who is pregnant, was medically evacuated to the 10th Combat Support Hospital in Baghdad for additional medical care. The other child, 20 months old, was also evacuated to the hospital with her uninjured mother. All evacuated to the hospital are in stable condition.

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/May2006/20060515_5135.html

Josey

May 16th, 2006, 4:53 pm

Is the source of this article a blog? lmao
http://www.thebookden.com/images/de-tag1.jpg

tenzerra

May 16th, 2006, 10:52 pm

Interesting Thread. Sounds like this game of chess had all of the pieces knocked off the board when we went into Afganistan and Iraq. Like him or hate him but you have to admire the fact that Bush is acting on issues most Presidents would have (and definately did do in the case of Clinton and in the case of Carter actually acted in a way that brought us more danger) stayed away from because they were difficult, scary, and hard to actually accomplish. I think we should be more aggressive but I do respect OUR President for having courage where others in his position did not act for political reasons instead of acting for OUR future regardless of which party you belong too. But thats just me.

SFC(R)L

June 2nd, 2006, 2:17 pm

Ethnic Upheaval Boosts Calls to Oust Iranian Regime
By Patrick Goodenough
CNSNews.com International Editor
June 02, 2006

(CNSNews.com) - Ethnic unrest continues in parts of Iran, prompting some exiled members of Iranian minorities to step up calls for a concerted effort to topple the clerical regime.

Largely eclipsed by the international attention on Tehran's nuclear program, the latest spate of protests -- and the violent state response -- was sparked by the publication last month of a newspaper cartoon deemed insulting by members of Iran's large Turkic Azeri minority.

The Persian (Farsi)-language Iran Daily, produced by the official Irna news agency, printed a sketch in a children's supplement depicting a boy speaking in Persian to an uncomprehending ****roach, which asks "What?" in the Azeri tongue.

The accompanying text discussed ways of dealing with ****roaches -- first attempt civilized discourse, but if the bugs don't understand, then cut off their "food source" of human excrement.

Azeris, who are prohibited from using their language in Iranian schools and view their ancient culture as being under threat, reportedly were incensed. (Azeris comprise between one-quarter and one-third of Iran's 68 million people, 51 percent of whom are Persian.)

Protests erupted in Azeri regions, prompting a harsh security force response. According to independent Iranian media, exiled groups and news outlets in neighboring Azerbaijan, many protestors have been injured and detained, and unconfirmed reports say up to 20 were killed.

The independent online news service Rooz said the focus on protests then shifted from the newspaper to official symbols, with demonstrators attacking government buildings and demanding the resignation of local officials and police officers.

In a bid to defuse the crisis, authorities apologized, suspended the newspaper and arrested the cartoonist and editor.

"Based on their response, Iranian officials fear domestic unrest could destabilize the ruling regime in Tehran," said Azeri political analyst Taleh Ziyadov, writing in the Jamestown Foundation's Eurasia Daily Monitor on Wednesday.

"Leaders were quick to play up ethnic harmony inside Iran and argue that only an outside force could disrupt that unity."

Senior officials have accused foreign elements of instigating the protests and linking them to Western pressure over Iran's nuclear activities.

"Those who have failed to block Iranians from achieving progress through pressure, conspiracies, and misuse of international organizations have now launched a strategy to foment discord and disillusion among Iranians in order to prevent them from realizing their goals," Irna quoted President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as saying last week.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader who is himself an Azeri, said in a televised speech Iran's "desperate" enemies were resorting to provoking ethnic unrest.

But observers say Azeris have long-held and legitimate grievances.

"When, despite their pride in their language, the Turkish-speaking Iranians are denied the right to officially learn their language and read their books ... it is only natural for a cartoon to be the catalyst and spark for deeply suppressed feelings and pain in the chest of every Azeri," wrote prominent reformist Ali Afshari in a Rooz column.

Azeris have played an important role in major events in Iran's history, including the 1979 revolution, but their influence has been curtailed under the Islamic Republic.

There are about three times more Azeris in Iran than in the former Soviet republic of Azerbaijan itself, and since the Soviet Union's collapse, Tehran has worried that the presence of an independent Azerbaijan on Iran's north-west border could inflame nationalism and secessionism among Iran's Azeris.

"Tehran believes that increased ethnic awareness among ethnic groups in Iran could weaken the religious and national (Iranian) identities -- two pillars of Iran's current establishment," said Ziyadov.

"It could also lead to domestic disorder and threaten Iran's territorial integrity," he said.

"But what scares Tehran the most is the fact that some U.S. observers view the Azeri community in Iran as a domestic force that could potentially bring about regime change in Iran."

Multiple challenges

In another internal headache for Ahmadinejad, student protests flared up again at Tehran University late last month, and Rooz reported Thursday that "a large number" of student activists have been detained.

Tehran also faces challenges from other ethnic minorities.

Anti-regime protests have been held this year by ethnic Kurds, who comprise nine percent of the population.

In Khuzestan, an oil-rich region bordering Iraq, bomb blasts and sabotage occurred in mid-2005 and again last October. Khuzestan is home to Iran's ethnic Arab minority (three percent of the total population.) Tehran blamed the West, but the region has experienced unrest linked to Arab fears the government would flood Khuzestan with non-Arab Iranians.

Yet another minority claiming discrimination, the Sunni Turkmen (two percent), is also restive.

The Azeri Press Agency this week published a statement from a Iranian Turkmen nationalist movement expressing support for the Azeris, and accusing "Farsi chauvinists" of trying to carry out a policy of assimilation against ethnic minorities.

The Turkmensahra Liberation Organization said current developments around Iran showed that ethnic minorities were ready to defend their identity and heritage.

"The accumulation of such reactions will soon destroy the dominant Farsi leadership."

In Washington this week, organizations representing Iranian minorities held a conference to discuss the "road to democracy" in Iran.

One of the participants, Kurdish Democratic Party of Iran (IKDP) secretary-general Mustafa Hejri, called for the international community to "speak with one voice" on Iran.

"So far, the regime has gained the most from the differences in approach between Europe and America in dealing with Iran," the Turkish Daily News quoted him as saying.

"They must redirect their support to the democratic opposition forces both inside and outside Iran."

Hejri said the peaceful removal of the terrorist-sponsoring regime in Tehran would help stabilize the region, particularly Iraq.

Another group taking part, the Kurdish American Committee for Democracy in Iran, said in a statement that Iranian Persians as well as ethnic minorities had been deprived of their freedom.

"Ethnic opposition groups and sectarian political parties must unite to bring an end to this reign of terror in Iran," it said. "This responsibility is even greater now with the looming danger that this regime might develop nuclear weapons in the near future."

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForeignBureaus.asp?Page=/ForeignBureaus/archive/200606/INT20060602a.html

SFC(R)L

June 7th, 2006, 9:21 am

Iran's lurking enemy within
By Mahan Abedin

The recent upsurge of ethnic unrest in Iran highlights serious vulnerabilities in the country's security system, and there is widespread consensus among security circles in Tehran that the whole intelligence apparatus needs to be radically restructured to combat this new generation of threats.

Without such serious and wide-ranging intelligence reform, Iran risks facing a generation of ethnic unrest on its periphery and possibly disintegration further down the road.

This comes at the worst time possible, when Western intelligence services are aggressively targeting the country in general and its civilian nuclear establishment in particular.

While ethnic separatism is not - in the short term at least - a serious threat to Iran's cohesion and territorial integrity, it is widely feared that ethnic tensions could be exploited by Western powers, some of which are already active in intelligence-gathering and sabotage operations in some provinces.

This seriously weakens Iran's position in negotiations with Western powers to head off the crisis over the country's controversial nuclear program.

Yet while the elites in Tehran recognize the urgent need for intelligence reform, there is no agreement (as yet) on how to go about this.

Ethnic troubles

In Iran it is often taken for granted that the country has no real ethnic problem. Iranians point out their country's millennia-old history and are at pains to explain how the concept of "Iran" acts as a super-narrative, thus effectively suppressing any serious separatist impulse.

While this argument has many merits, it is ultimately a half-truth. By and large Iran's various ethnic minorities (who together make up 40% of the country's population) see themselves as part of the Iranian nation and are relatively well integrated, especially in comparison with neighboring countries' ethnic minorities. Significant ethnic unrest in Iran dates to the emergence of the modern Iranian state and its irrepressible drive to centralize, at the expense of local autonomy.

The center-periphery divide has been one of the most prominent (and troublesome) features of the modern Iranian nation-state forged by Reza Shah in the 1920s and 1930s. This divide usually comes to the fore when the periphery senses the center's weakness.

The immediate aftermath of the Islamic Revolution of 1979 is the best case in point as the collapse of the shah's regime temporarily weakened the legal and administrative structures of the country. This in turn led to serious ethnic unrest in Iranian Kurdistan, Khuzestan, the Torkaman areas in the northeast, Balochistan, and to a lesser extent Azerbaijan.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/HF08Ak03.html

more straws on the camel's back

SFC(R)L

June 9th, 2006, 2:05 pm

Douglas Hanson was a US Army cavalry reconnaissance officer for 20 years, and is a Gulf War I combat veteran. He has a background in radiation biology and physiology, and was an Atomic Demolitions Munitions (ADM) Security Officer, and a Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Defense Officer. As a civilian analyst, he has worked on stability and support operations in Bosnia, and helped develop a multi-service medical treatment manual for nuclear and radiological casualties. He was initially an operations officer in the operations/intelligence cell of the Requirements Coordination Office of the CPA, and was later assigned as the Chief of Staff of the Ministry of Science and Technology.

Douglas Hanson

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=3399

SFC(R)L

June 9th, 2006, 2:05 pm

Case Not Closed: Iraq’s WMD Stockpiles
March 2nd, 2004

In the summer of 2003, I served as Chief of Staff in the Iraqi Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST), an organization formerly called the Ministry of Atomic Energy. The Ministry had a small staff of Americans and Iraqis, and was one of several ministries of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) in Baghdad. One of our key tasks was to transition several thousand Iraqi scientists and engineers from military and state-owned enterprises to private enterprises involved in more peaceful endeavors. Working there, I enjoyed a unique vantage point on the activities of the Iraqi Survey Group (ISG), the inspection agency headed by Dr. David Kay, charged with finding WMD. Dr. Kay’s recent report and his testimony before Congress have helped fuel flames of criticism of the Bush Administration, and of 12 years of prewar intelligence on Iraq.

We at the MOST were a vital link in the WMD reporting chain, and in coordinating interviews by the ISG with the scientists of the ministry. In addition, we had resident scientific and technical expertise, and some of our people also had extensive experience working with intelligence organizations in the conduct of tactical ground and maritime reconnaissance operations. Based on this background, I want to report to my fellow Americans on some of the problems and missed opportunities I observed in the work of the ISG. In doing so, I speak only for myself, not for my colleagues, or for any organ of the CPA, or for any agency of the United States Government.

The ISG’s search for significant stockpiles of WMD has so far come up empty. It may be that there are no large stockpiles, as Dr. Kay has stated. But from my perspective in the MOST, this lack of a positive finding may also be the result of unfocused and uncoordinated ISG search operations. It is entirely possible that the much sought-after WMD stockpiles may be literally right under the feet of coalition forces, and until a properly coordinated search effort is completed, no firm conclusions about their presence or absence can be reached. The case remains open.

In his recent testimony, Dr. Kay pronounced that there are no large stockpiles of WMD. This is a pretty bold assertion considering that actual surveys of sites we were familiar with were haphazard and uncoordinated. Also, according to his own interim report published in October of 2003, the ISG had not even searched 120 of the 130 known ammo storage points, much less any underground sites. In addition to these known sites, “neighborhood” arms caches are discovered all the time in Iraq. It is entirely possible that WMD stockpiles were moved out of Iraq, or that they were dispersed in Baghdad neighborhoods and throughout Iraq. All of this may even have been accomplished while the unfocused search operations were ongoing.

My most fundamental criticism of the ISG is that previous intelligence assessments, however partial or inadequate they may have been, were not used to provide an operational focus to the search efforts.

Before Dr. Kay’s arrival, the ISG, and its predecessor in the search, the 75th Exploitation Team, were supposedly operating off a list of locations to search for WMD. Presumably, this list was developed based upon pre-war intelligence assessments. However, many of the US intelligence analysts who had been working on Iraq’s WMD, and knowledgeable UNSCOM personnel who had conducted United Nations searches for WMD, were not initially present on the ground in Iraq.

When Dr. Kay arrived, he shifted the focus from the list of sites to interrogating scientists; not just certain scientists based upon a focused plan, but any and all scientists, as the developing trail would lead. It was apparent that the ISG was largely conducting a massive collection exercise without an operational search scheme to guide it.

The effort to interrogate scientists was obviously necessary, and promised to be a valuable source of information. But the shotgun approach was inefficient. The ISG was swamped by the amount of potentially corroborating documentation, which should have been used to shape interview priorities and test the validity of the scientists’ stories, as they were told. It was not until the Fall of 2003, however, that the Defense Intelligence Agency finally contracted out for assistance to go through the reams of documentation available to the Coalition.

The scientists who were interrogated provided information which was suspect at times, due to several factors. Outright deception on their part was always a possibility. People who were themselves incriminated, or who knew of incriminating data, had a very real fear of long-term detention and sequestering by the ISG, not to mention ultimate trial as war criminals. One supposedly cooperative scientist was held incommunicado for weeks, without even telephonic contact with his family. This sort of treatment hardly provides an incentive for others to spill their beans.

Fear of reprisal from Baathist Party “dead-enders” and enforcers was another very powerful inducement to lying and covering up important information. Lacking corroborating documents to trap liars, scientist interrogation became another collection effort with no strategy for identifying and checking on the veracity of key personnel.

In addition, there was apparently little operational control of the search activities which did take place. For example, a report came into the Ministry about a potential biological warfare (BW) equipment cache in the house of a scientist, only blocks away from the palace HQ of the CPA. The ISG operative came to the Ministry and was briefed on the specifics, points of contact, and so forth. The man then went and met with the scientist. Eventually, he gained access to the house. His initial reports back to us were enthusiastic about the equipment and substances he found. For about a week, we heard nothing further, until we received an email from the ISG, stating that he had gone on two weeks leave. Could we please let no one into the house while he was gone?

This sort of ball-dropping, unfortunately, was standard operating procedure for the ISG. There was little or no operational coordination with Combined Joint Task Force-7 (CJTF-7) , which is the headquarters of the Coalition military forces in Iraq, or the tactical units responsible for the area of operations that could have actually secured suspected WMD sites.

Dr. Kay has concluded that Iraq’s key scientists had ended up working directly for Saddam in development of WMD programs, and that they had fooled him into believing in non-existent weapons. My experience, and the character of day to day life in Iraq, indicate just the opposite. We at the MOST have been trying to put 8000 scientists and engineers back to work without their Baathist enforcers and “project managers.” It has been a Herculean task. While the scientific knowledge of the individuals is intact, actually managing complex programs is well beyond the reach of these people.

To assert that the scientists bypassed the Baathist infrastructure, the Iraqi Intelligence Service, and Special Republican Guard commanders, all the while fooling Saddam is, to put it mildly, a real stretch. To this day, many still fear the consequences of cooperating with the ISG. We would need to see the detailed rationale for Dr. Kay’s conclusions on this matter to gauge if Saddam was really fooled by scientists scared to death of him and the Baath Party, or if he ran one of military history’s most successful deception operations. If he did the latter, we must also ask why he would risk the toppling of his regime, and his death or capture, over non-existent WMDs. The only alternative explanation to these two questionable scenarios is that WMD stockpiles did in fact exist, but that they have been hidden, and/or spirited out of the country.

Dr. Kay and the ISG have already proven that Iraq was in violation of several UN resolutions. Their findings include, among others, that Iraq was involved in manufacturing of the biotoxin Ricin “right up to the end,” the restarting of Saddam’s nuclear program, and the development of BW “seed” agents, such as botulinum, that could be used to regenerate stockpiles of BW agents once UN sanctions were lifted.

Unfortunately, several factors worked against the ISG in locating actual stockpiles of WMDs. These factors included lack of analysis of historical data and preparation of an operational framework to focus the search, over-reliance on unsystematic interrogation of scientists, and poor operational monitoring and coordination of the search effort.

Some factors were beyond the ISG’s control. For example, the ISG faced a lack of resources (especially evident in the WMD and hazardous material clean-up effort), poor security of suspected WMD sites on the part of CJTF-7, and failure of US forces to prevent looting.

While the US examines the validity of national intelligence as it relates to Iraq’s WMD, it is also important to analyze the lessons of the ISG’s search operations. It would stand to reason that any continuing effort to find banned weapons would need to rely more on sound tactical intelligence preparation, and a careful handoff to experienced operational units. High-level intelligence assessments and collection efforts are not enough.

SFC(R)L

June 10th, 2006, 9:46 am

Morals in A Combat Zone

By Peter Kilner
Sunday, June 11, 2006; Page B07

The differing reactions to the alleged killing of noncombatants by American soldiers in the Iraqi town of Haditha reveal a troubling ignorance about the moral reality of war. Much of the national dialogue about the incident is being dominated by people whose approaches to making moral judgments on wartime actions are fundamentally flawed.

In one corner are those who are so convinced this war is wrong that they see only the bad things soldiers do in it. Such people are blind to all the good our soldiers and the war are accomplishing, and they revel in exploiting any incident of misbehavior by soldiers to smear all members of the armed forces and the entire war effort. By their logic, abuse of detainees by one platoon in one prison in 2003, or the alleged killing of civilians by one squad in one town in 2005, is conclusive evidence that the entire war effort is evil. These people are unable to reconcile the fact that unjust actions can and do occur within a war that nonetheless is morally justified.

In the other corner are those so convinced of the rightness of our cause that they refuse to acknowledge that our soldiers sometimes make choices that are clearly wrong and for which they should be held accountable. These people equate supporting the laws of war with being unpatriotic and disdainful of the troops. What they fail to recognize is that their implicit argument is both insulting to soldiers and corrosive to the foundation of the military profession. My fellow soldiers and I recognize fully that we are responsible for our individual actions, and that our permission to do violence to other human beings is constrained by our obligation to do so only when it is morally justified.

These polar positions are not novel. They are consistent with schools of thought that military ethicists refer to as the war-pacifist and war-realist positions, both of which fall outside the mainstream of the just-war tradition. What is disturbing is the way these competing perspectives have been hijacked by groups with political agendas and thus given a wider hearing than they deserve.

We should all reject such simplistic approaches to judging soldiers' actions in war. A combat zone is not some parallel universe where the nature of human beings or moral judgment is different. Combat is a human endeavor, and like any human activity it can be carried out morally or immorally, and moral judgments can be made on it.

In simplest terms, when soldiers are careful to target only enemy combatants and to limit unnecessary destruction and suffering, they fight morally. If they intentionally or negligently fail to abide by these restrictions, they fight immorally.

A harsh reality of war is that it involves large numbers of people making life-or-death decisions in very stressful conditions. Inevitably, as in all areas of life, some don't always conduct themselves as they should. Those who commit crimes should be held accountable, keeping in mind the extenuating circumstances of combat.

The circumstances of this war's battlefields are terribly complex. Soldiers find themselves conducting a wide range of operations, from war-fighting to policing, often during a single patrol, and those different operations require different principles for the use of force. It is often difficult for soldiers to discern which approach is appropriate and when. Not infrequently, a well-intentioned soldier ends up killing a noncombatant because of mistaken identity or some other factor caused by the fog of war. In such circumstances, we can say that the action is neither justified nor unjustified but that it is excusable. Not every wrongful death in combat is a war crime.

The good news is that well-trained, well-led soldiers can and do overcome the moral challenges of war and conduct themselves with great honor, and the great majority of American soldiers are well trained and well led. Although we fight an enemy who intentionally violates all norms of human decency and goads us to follow him into the abyss of wanton killing, America's soldiers continue to exhibit remarkable restraint.

What explains the difference between units that commit war crimes and units that don't? Leadership. This is the critical factor in ensuring moral conduct in war. When junior officers and senior noncoms train their soldiers to do what is right, maintain their composure and lead by example, their soldiers are able to retain their moral bearings despite the temptations and frustrations of battle. American military history reminds us that war crimes can be prevented by small-unit leaders with moral courage and judgment.

The incident at Haditha is not likely to be the last time that we as a nation find ourselves judging the actions of our soldiers at war. All Americans should resist the calls of those who seek to condemn all soldiers based on the actions of a few, just as we should reject any claims that soldiers are immune from judgment. Instead, we should judge each soldier and situation on the merits, paying special attention to the circumstances in which the fateful decisions were made and to the actions of the soldier's leaders.

The writer is a major in the U.S. Army. The views expressed here are his own.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/09/AR2006060901503.html

SFC(R)L

June 12th, 2006, 6:31 pm

Mauro: In my speech, I said that Duelfer’s conclusion that Iraq disarmed in 1991 as based on:

A) The failure to find WMD stockpiles. This is easily explained by their movement to Syria. I should also mention that there are Pentagon reports and testimony of several people that point to numerous problems in how the ISG operated and was put together, thus hampering the search.

B) The lack of documentation on the programs after 1991. Yet, in the same report, Duelfer says that much of the widespread looting was a cover for Iraqi intelligence to destroy documentation and loot weapons sites. Even the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission told the Security Council in the summer of 2004 that satellite imagery showed the Iraqis dismantling suspected weapons sites before, during and after Operation Iraqi Freedom began. Destroyed material and metal was then shipped throughout Europe and the Middle East at a rate of 1,000 tons of metal per month. Dismantled missiles and related components, they said, had already been discovered in several countries—some with UN inspection tags still on them.

It is also likely documents were moved outside of Iraq. The Russian ambassador to Baghdad, Vladimir Titorenko, got together a convoy carrying Russian staff from the embassy and headed to Syria, and suddenly got fired upon by American forces. Titorenko and his three closest intelligence officers flew directly to Moscow after escaping, and used the same flight to return immediately to Damascus. There are widespread reports, even in the Russian press, that sensitive intelligence documents were in the convoy.

C) The lack of testimony from detainees. Duelfer relies upon the interviewing process—the same process he harshly criticizes as deeply flawed—to reach his conclusion. The detainees are afraid to talk out of fear for retribution, their testimony being used against them in war crimes trials, and simply because there’s no incentive. I could go into deeper detail as to some of the criticisms of the process. We also know many, many regime figures and scientists are in Syria and to a lesser degree, Iran.

It was easy for Iraq to move people around. Most of the regime figures were in Syria, including Saddam’s sons, until American pressure hit a breaking point and they were expelled in the later part of spring 2003. As the war commenced, 23 of Iraq’s 60 diplomatic posts were still operating, including in Amman, Moscow, Damascus, Beirut, Minsk and Tehran. It is possible that personnel are in Belarus as well. Many Iraqi regime figures that were captured [had] Syrian and Belarusian (and often, Libyan) passports. There were reports that people escaped from Syria to Belarus and Libya. Limousines usually used by the Baath Party were seen entering Syria, and then flew aboard a military transport to Libya.

Regarding Belarus, another very close ally of Russia, there was an incident on March 29, 2003. A chartered cargo flight took off from Saddam International Airport when the air space was closed and flew to Minsk. Originally, some suspected it [was] Saddam or his sons were aboard as only the highest officials could get clearance.

Glazov: Mr. Mauro thank you for joining us again.

Mauro: Thank you for having me.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=21489

SFC(R)L

June 12th, 2006, 6:31 pm

My book was the first to make the claim that Russia was involved in moving Iraq's WMDs to Syria. After all the nay saying and criticizing I received for it, testimony at the Summit confirmed that this was true.

Glazov: What exactly is the evidence that Iraq moved its WMD into Syria?

Mauro: It has been confirmed across the board that 18-wheelers were seen going into Syria before the war, crossing the border soon after Iraqi intelligence replaced the border guards and cleared nearby areas for their passage. There are also eyewitness reports of the trucks going into Syria, and eyewitness reports of their burial in Lebanon.

The trucks with the weapons were tracked to three locations in Syria and Lebanon's Bekaa Valley, currently controlled by the Syrians, Iranians and Hezbollah. Sources I've spoken with that have seen satellite photos of the movements confirm that the WMD in Syria are at military bases, while the ones in Lebanon are buried. A fourth site in Syria, the al-Safir WMD and missile site, should also be looked at. From spring to summer 2002, there was a lot of construction here involving the expansion of underground complexes.

We have tremendous testimony as well, by General Georges Sada, the former second-in-command of Saddam's Air Force that 56 flights took place on converted Iraqi Airways planes in the summer of 2002 to transport weapons, along with a ground shipment. He claims to know the pilots involved. A second Iraqi general, Ali Ibrahim al-Tikriti, in an interview I published, confirmed in detail the movement of WMD into Syria saying that discussion on such a move went back to the 1980s. He claims his sources for this include Iraqi scientists and others in the regime that were very close to him even after he defected. He confirmed to me that Russian vehicles, including ones equipped to handle hazardous materials, were used. Reports of WMD being moved out of Iraq to Syria go back to 1997, and it is believed by many that weapons were moved in and out of Iraq using Syria routinely since the mid-1990s.

The Italian media also reported that their intelligence services had information indicating that in January and February of 2003, Iraqi CDs full of formulas and research work along with tubes of anthrax and botulinum toxin were sent off to Syria. By the end of February, Iraqi WMD expertise was already in Syria including a top nuclear physicist.

An Iraqi scientist also led Coalition forces to hidden stockpiles of precursor chemicals that could be used to make chemical and biological weapons. The scientist said some facilities and weapons were destroyed, and the rest were sent to Syria. Syrian defectors are also claiming that Syria is where the weapons are, along with Representative Curt Weldon's source in his new book. The Prime Minister of Albania even stated that based on information he has which is not available to the media, he cannot rule out such a transfer.

There is also a report that an Iraqi medium-range al-Hussein missile on a truck moved into Syria, and in the early stages of the war, was spotted briefly coming into Iraq, operating its radar overnight, and returning to Syria. Most reports about the transfer indicate missiles were included in the transfers.

Glazov: Why do you think Russia was involved?

Mauro: In my book, “Death to America: The Unreported Battle of Iraq,” I detail Russian involvement in Iraq’s WMD programs and intelligence services. Inspectors have described the Russians employed on UN inspection teams as being very paranoid, with some even suspecting the Russians helped the Iraqis thwart inspections. I believe that as more documents are translated we will find this to be true.

My immediate suspicions that the Russians were involved in cleansing operations began back in early 2003, after I learned about how two Soviet generals had arrived in Iraq and been awarded with medals. Igor Maltsev, known as a leading expert in air-defense, and Vladislav Achalov, an expert in rapid-reaction forces, were accompanied by Yevgeny Primakov, a long-time friend of Saddam Hussein from his days as the head of the Soviet foreign intelligence service and later, prime minister. This occurred as I simultaneously received the first reports of WMD going to Syria, leading me to speculate on such a connection. I became convinced when Ion Mihai Pacepa, the former chief of Communist Romania’s intelligence service, and highest ranking Communist intelligence officer to ever defect, wrote about a plan the Soviet Union had entitled “Sarindar,” or “Operation Emergency Exit.”

The plan was drawn up after the Soviet Union decided to use its rogue state allies, specifically Libya and Iraq, to sponsor terrorism. The Soviets would help them make WMD in return, believing that would prevent Western retaliation. The head of the KGB, Yuri Andropov, told Pacepa that Russian advisors ran these countries intelligence services. Primakov was the central figure in dealing with Iraq, Pacepa said, and pointed to his presence in Iraq in the months before the war.

“Sarindar” was drawn up first for Libya, and then expanded to include Iraq, with the aim of stripping the rogue state of evidence of WMD activity and especially Russian involvement in illegal programs. The operation also “would frustrate the West by not giving them anything they could make propaganda with,” said Pacepa. The plan went so far as to involve an offensive propaganda campaign aimed at discrediting politicians making the accusations against Russia’s allies.

From that, I became convinced. Then later on, John Shaw, the former deputy undersecretary for defense for international technology, reported to the media that Russian Spetsnaz units moved Iraqi WMD into Syria and Lebanon. He said that U.S. intelligence knew the names of the units involved. The Washington Times had other Pentagon officials report that Russian Special Forces helped Iraq perform counter-intelligence operations to thwart the West from knowing what was going on.

We must also consider the huge Russian involvement in the Oil-For-Food Scandal. So Russia’s relationship with Iraq was beneficial for them on multiple levels, including financially.

Glazov: Do we have the details of the Russian involvement?

Mauro: At the Intelligence Summit, Shaw revealed even more detail I was unaware of. Shaw discussed how two Russian ships left the Umm Qasr port in the months before the war and went to the Indian Ocean, carrying materials that he believes included WMD from southern Iraq. He also said his contacts told him of barrels containing hazardous materials being moved to a hospital basement in Beirut, Lebanon.

Shaw discussed that Achalov and Maltsev had visited Baghdad at least twenty times in the previous six years. The final planning meeting before their last trip to Baghdad took place in Baku and was chaired by the Russian Minister of Emergency Situations.

Shaw said that much of the information came from a source close to the head of Ukraine’s intelligence service, who was thankful to the United States for securing the country’s independence from the Soviet Union.

Glazov: What has been the intelligence community's reaction to the allegation of Russian involvement?

Mauro: Shaw said that often this information was dismissed as Israeli disinformation. Although I’m sure it happened to him on a much larger scale, I can confirm this happened. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve brought this up with experts in the field who dismissed it as Israeli garbage, or a fantasy of “Russophobes” and conspiracy theorists. “The Cold War is over” was said to me on several occasions, bringing the debate to a close. I can only hope that deep inside the community they know about all this and are acting upon it in a secretive way.

Glazov: So if all this evidence is credible, why wouldn't the Bush Administration take advantage of this information?

Mauro: There are multiple ideas out there. I tend to believe that the foreign policy implications of these revelations explain the Administration’s silence. The politicians don’t want to feel obliged to take strong action against Syria, and certainly don’t want to offend Russia. On several issues, Russian cooperation is a great asset if it can be achieved. There’s a debate as to whether Russia ever really helps us. Every country we seem to have problems with has close ties to Russia. It’s likely part of their strategic plan to counter American dominance. Yes, they’re pressuring Iran through negotiations, but Russia is closely tied to the Iranian regime, so one must ask in light of these revelations, is Russia simply “cooperating” as part of a game to buy time for her allies? Or does Russia genuinely want Iran to end its nuclear program?

Glazov: Why do you think Duelfer missed all this?

SFC(R)L

June 12th, 2006, 6:32 pm

Iraqi WMD Mystery Solved
By Jamie Glazov

FrontPageMagazine.com | March 2, 2006

Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Ryan Mauro, who spoke at the recent 2006 International Intelligence Summit on Iraq. He is the 19-year old author of Death to America: The Unreported Battle of Iraq and founder of WorldThreats.com. He was originally hired at age 16 as a geopolitical analyst for Tactical Defense Concepts. He is also a volunteer analyst and researcher for the Northeast Intelligence Network and the Reform Party of Syria and believed to be the youngest hired geopolitical analyst in the country.

Glazov: Mr. Mauro, nice to have you here again.

Mauro: Thank you. It's always great working with you.

Glazov: The recent Intelligence Summit released 12 hours of audiotapes of Saddam Hussein and his key officials discussing their WMD programs from the mid-1990s onwards. What do you make of the significance of these tapes? How do they square with your claim in your book that Russia helped move Iraqi WMD into Syria?

Mauro: The tapes are extremely significant in that they prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that as of the year 2000, Saddam Hussein had a secret plasma program to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons, or "special bombs" as he calls them. The Duelfer Report previously concluded that this type of enrichment program ended in the 1980s, but here we have Saddam and his top advisors discussing using a power plant in the area of Basra for the program. The scientists involved in the program are not known to the UN, leaving Western intelligence clueless.

On the tapes, you hear Saddam discussing the assistance of Russia and Brazil in dealing with the United Nations. He laughs off inspections, as his son-in-law who later defects, Hussein Kamil, reports how as late as 1995 their chemical and biological programs were being hidden from the world. They also discuss keeping the ingredients for these weapons separate, so that should they be found, they will be looked at as innocent dual-use items. They were not destroyed in 1991 as the Duelfer Report concludes. There are even indications on the tapes that Iraq may have had a role in the 2001 anthrax attacks.

Loyal American

June 13th, 2006, 12:57 am

Interesting post(s) SFC! ;)

SFC(R)L

June 13th, 2006, 9:34 am

Interesting post(s) SFC! ;)

Simply proof that we have been right all along as the evidence now proves.

Talismen

June 13th, 2006, 10:01 am

rhet 2

June 13th, 2006, 10:09 am

Although it still ticks me off...I can understand why, if this WAS kept secret, what the reasons were for doing so.

This could very well fuel the recent indications of the Cold War creeping back upon us.

I frankly could care less, IMO.
I've never trusted Russia, and I never will.

Putin IS KGB --and KGB has been hip-deep in islamic terrorism from the year dot.

What can you say: totalitarianists LOVE each other.

SFC(R)L

June 22nd, 2006, 1:06 am

A) The failure to find WMD stockpiles. This is easily explained by their movement to Syria. I should also mention that there are Pentagon reports and testimony of several people that point to numerous problems in how the ISG operated and was put together, thus hampering the search.

B) The lack of documentation on the programs after 1991. Yet, in the same report, Duelfer says that much of the widespread looting was a cover for Iraqi intelligence to destroy documentation and loot weapons sites. Even the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission told the Security Council in the summer of 2004 that satellite imagery showed the Iraqis dismantling suspected weapons sites before, during and after Operation Iraqi Freedom began. Destroyed material and metal was then shipped throughout Europe and the Middle East at a rate of 1,000 tons of metal per month. Dismantled missiles and related components, they said, had already been discovered in several countries—some with UN inspection tags still on them.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=21489

IhateCNN

June 27th, 2006, 1:09 am

Hey Glad to see you are still educating those willing to learn..

Keep up the good work!

rhet 2

June 27th, 2006, 1:44 am

Hey Glad to see you are still educating those willing to learn..

Keep up the good work!
Hey! Long time no see. Glad you bumped this. It should not be lost.

tjvh

June 27th, 2006, 1:48 am

Nice post!

SFC(R)L

July 12th, 2006, 1:29 pm

Hey Glad to see you are still educating those willing to learn..

Keep up the good work!

Iraq Pre-War Intel Being Ignored, Says Top Republican
By Monisha Bansal
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
July 12, 2006

(CNSNews.com) - The Republican chairman of the U.S. House committee with jurisdiction over foreign intelligence, conceded Tuesday that the many documents discovered by the U.S. military in Iraq following the toppling of Saddam Hussein's regime are no longer a priority for most intelligence experts.

Those documents, as Cybercast News Service previously reported, included memos containing the letterhead of the Iraqi Intelligence Service and revealing Saddam's purchase of mustard gas and anthrax - both considered weapons of mass destruction - as recently as the summer of 2000 and his extensive ties to al Qaeda.

"I believe there is still a tremendous amount of stuff on pre-war Iraq that we do not know and that we do not understand," said U.S. Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.), chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

Hoekstra said many intelligence experts consider the information irrelevant. "Everything that I'm working on within the intelligence community on pre-war Iraq and better understanding pre-war Iraq, tells me it is no longer a priority for the intelligence community," he said.

Last month Hoekstra and U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) cited the declassified portion of an intelligence report as evidence that approximately 500 weapons of mass destruction had been destroyed by American-led coalition forces since 2003 and that the U.S. and its allies were in a race against terrorist groups trying to control the remaining weapons.

In February Hoekstra's committee began examining 48,000 boxes of Iraqi documents that had not yet been translated or catalogued. The search reveals that "Saddam Hussein was not only trying to hide his illegal weapons program from the world, but was also interested in aiding international terrorists," Hoekstra said Tuesday.

"Information collected after Saddam's fall indicates that he may have been looking to build a terror network to take down America and our allies," he added. "One document in particular is an Iraqi Intelligence Service memo discussing a period from 1994 to 1997 when the Iraqi intelligence official made repeated attempts to build a relationship with Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda."

The Cybercast News Service report from Oct. 4, 2004, cited 42 pages of Iraqi Intelligence Service memos detailing the numerous relationships that Saddam's regime had cultivated with the world's most notorious terrorist groups, including al Qaeda.

On Tuesday, Hoekstra said he was realistic about any future revelations from the Iraqi documents. "I recognize the limitations of what we may find in these documents," he said. "I believe that the really good stuff -- that would have given us the most information -- has probably been destroyed."

He noted that Saddam's regime had a policy of destroying documents. "There was a standing order to destroy documents relating to special weapons since 1992," Hoekstra said.

U.S. Rep. Jane Harman of California, the ranking Democrat on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, believes that Saddam Hussein did not possess any weapons of mass destruction at the time of the U.S. invasion of Iraq in March 2003.

/sa240 She also dismissed the claims made by Hoekstra and Santorum during their news conference last month. "There is nothing new here. Nothing in this report -- classified or otherwise -- contradicts the Duelfer Report, which assessed that we would find degraded pre-1991 weaponry in Iraq," Harman stated.

The Duelfer report of 2004, named for its author, Charles Duelfer, is widely recognized for declaring that no stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq. Other details of the report, however, provided what some Iraq experts said was Saddam Hussein's attempt to continue to wage war against the U.S. after the first Persian Gulf War ended in 1991.

In her June 21 statement, Harman also accused the Bush administration of selectively declassifying documents to suit its purposes, especially its rationale for invading Iraq in 2003.

"When the intelligence community disseminated classified intelligence conclusively establishing that one of the Vice President's much-touted justifications for war was blatantly wrong, my request to declassify that information was denied," Harman stated.

"When the request comes from Republicans and can be spun in an attempt to support a Republican position, however, the answer is markedly different," she added.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200607/POL20060712a.html

SFC(R)L

July 12th, 2006, 1:36 pm

Iraqi army takes charge of Diyala province

Story and photo by Spc. Lee Elder
133rd Mobile Public Affairs Detachment

Iraqi Army Maj. Gen. Ahmed (left) grasps his division's colors during the 5th Division's Transfer of Authority ceremony. He was given the colors by British Maj. Gen. Peter Everson, deputy commanding general, Multi-National Corps-Iraq.

KIRKUSH — The Iraqi Army’s 5th Division officially took charge of military operations in northern Iraq’s Diyala province from Coalition forces during a ceremony on July 3.

The division’s colors, a symbolic flag, were unveiled and presented to its commander, Maj. Gen. Ahmed Klepos Awad Majhool al-Kozaee by British Maj. Gen. Peter Everson, who serves as deputy commanding general, Multi-National Corps - Iraq.

The Iraqi division earned its colors after being trained and recognized as a viable fighting force by the 101st Airborne Division.
“I’d like to say that this division will be successful because it is composed of the full spectrum of Iraqi people,” al-Kozaee said. “It represents the hand of the government that carries the weapon and the olive branch at the same time.”

The Iraqi unit, also known as the “Hadeed” Division, was formed in April 2004 and was fully operational in February 2005.

The division has a headquarters and three brigades.
Al-Kozaee promised his division would be “the strong hand of the Iraqi people in defeating the insurgency.” He pledged to remain with the division as their “brother, teacher and commander.”
Everson said the 5th Division was the first Iraqi Army division in the Multi-National Division - North qualified to conduct independent combat operations. It is the fourth division to attain that status.

“Gen. (al-Kozaee)’s Soldiers have worked hard for the day that this division would be prepared to assume responsibility for this large complex province,” Everson said.
“And that day has come.”

Diyala province spans from the eastern edge of Baghdad to the Iranian border and covers 70,000 square miles. It is home to more than 1.7 million Iraqis.
One of the division’s units, the 1st Brigade, was qualified in April, and has maintained security for the eastern part of the province.

The qualification, or 'validation' in military terms, changes the roles of both Iraqi and Coalition forces. The division will now assume full responsibility for the province while Coalition forces will take on a supporting role.

Col. William Gothard, an Army Reserve Soldier with the Richmond, Va.-based 80th Division, commands the Military Transition Team in charge of training the division.
His unit members work and live with their Iraqi Army counterparts and prepared them for the responsibility.

"They conduct combat operations on their own with us providing support where they request it,” Gothard said.

He said the walk toward validation has not been an easy one.
In addition to training, the division’s Soldiers have seen combat in Diyala and in neighboring Fallajah, Samarra and Baghdad.

Both al-Kozaee and Everson praised the efforts of Coalition forces to train the division. A moment of silence was observed for both Coalition and Iraqi forces who have lost their lives in combat operations with the division.

“I would like to express my thanks and appreciation to my brothers in the Coalition forces - the 101st Airborne Division; 3rd Heavy Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division and all of our other friends,” al-Kozaee said.

http://www.mnf-iraq.com/feature/Jul/060708c.htm

SFC(R)L

August 16th, 2006, 12:11 am

Iraq’s 4th Brigade assumes security responsibility in Baghdad neighborhood
Tuesday, 15 August 2006

Soldiers from the 4th Brigade, 6th Iraqi Army Division capture insurgents during a demonstration of military ability that took place at Forward Operating Base Mahmudiah South Monday.Story and photos by Sgt. Trevor Snyder
124th Mobile Public Affairs Detachment

BAGHDAD — Iraqi forces took control of another area of Baghdad on Monday after the latest in a series of transfer of authority ceremonies near the capital.

Army Col. Claude Ebel, commander of the 2nd Brigade, 101st Airborne Division said responsibility for Forward Operating Base Mahmudiyah South, a base of operations for security forces south of the capital, was transferred to the 4th Brigade, 6th Iraqi Army Division, dubbed the Desert Lion Brigade. The Iraqi unit will have full responsibility for the Baghdad areas of Mahmudiyah and Rutifiyah, Ebel said.

The ceremony, which included a demonstration of Iraqi military capability and martial prowess, comes as joint Coalition and Iraqi operations continue to rid the capital of death squads and insurgent violence.

“They’re a superb unit. They’re the most developed unit since we first arrived,” Ebel said of the Iraqi brigade.

“What really makes (the brigade) special is their soldiers. These are the sons of average Iraqi citizens who choose to fight for all of Iraq.”

http://www.mnf-iraq.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2151&Itemid=18

SFC(R)L

August 16th, 2006, 12:13 am

Bush: National Counterterrorism Center Making America Safer
By Steven Donald Smith
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Aug. 15, 2006 – The federal government’s duty is to protect the American people, and the work being done at the National Counterterrorism Center is doing just that, President Bush said today.
“I want to thank all the people in this building and around our government who spend an incredible amount of time and energy and effort to do a very difficult job, and that's to protect the American people,” Bush told the nation’s counterterrorism team at the center’s headquarters in McLean, Va.

Bush said the U.S. is safer now than in the past, but he was quick to point out that the country is still not completely safe because U.S. enemies have the luxury of having to be effective only once to achieve their goal.

“We've got to be right 100 percent of the time to protect the American people,” he said.
The president said the center’s work bore fruit when a plot to bomb commercial airplanes was thwarted last week.

“Because of the good work in Great Britain and because of the help of the people here at NCTC, we disrupted a terror plot, a plot where people were willing to kill innocent life to achieve political objectives,” Bush said.

That plot is indicative of the challenges the United States faces in the war against terrorism, he said. The best asset the U.S. has in combating the terrorist threat is its people -- “people represented right here in this building,” he added.

The president established the multi-agency National Counterterrorism Center in 2004 to serve as the primary U.S. organization for integrating and analyzing intelligence pertaining to terrorism and counterterrorism.

http://www.defenselink.mil/News/NewsArticle.aspx?id=462

SFC(R)L

August 16th, 2006, 12:19 am

CSM,

Thank you for sending this article. It is truly a piece of inspiration.

Today I attended the Qartaja Girls School ribbon cutting ceremony. I gave a short and to the point speech about the school. After all the photos had been taken and the formalities finished, the women asked to speak with me privately. I had such a wonderful conversation with them. Although I have spoken with the principals and staff before, today the conversation really stuck with me. They explained to me that they feel so embarrassed around the male Soldiers. When they see me, however, they always feel a connection. Layla, the principal for the high school students, told me that I give them a sense of hope and pride they never felt before. She said it makes a difference for the students to see me in uniform, giving speeches, holding a position of rank, and talking to male figure heads (i.e. the mayor, governor). I was blown away by her comments; and blessed to have made an impact on the lives of others.

I told her that I was extremely excited about helping the school. I explained that an education is one of the best gifts that we can receive. Not only does it provide a sense of accomplishment; but it also opens the doors of opportunity. CSM these women have proven their commitment to education and continue to strive for excellence. They have been teaching in a building that had no power, running water, and decaying walls. Although their salaries are very low, they paid out of pocket so the girls could have supplies for class. They even made their own books. Ribbon was used to bind the books together.

I went to the school thinking I was doing my small part to help. I left knowing that I contributed something far greater than that building or school supplies. Take care.

K.H.
1LT, OD
Maintenance Control Officer
G FSC 204th SB (3-16 FA)
FOB Duke, Iraq

Loyal American

August 16th, 2006, 1:03 am

Some good posts tonight SFC! Maybe some of our new honored guests will enjoy them!

No Fear In The Valley

August 16th, 2006, 1:11 am

. ...She said it makes a difference for the students to see me in uniform, giving speeches, holding a position of rank, and talking to male figure heads (i.e. the mayor, governor). I was blown away by her comments; and blessed to have made an impact on the lives of others.

...these women have proven their commitment to education and continue to strive for excellence. They have been teaching in a building that had no power, running water, and decaying walls. Although their salaries are very low, they paid out of pocket so the girls could have supplies for class.

Absolutely honorable.

This stuff makes a difference, whether nay sayers believe it or not. I wish folks like these were recognized more often.

IMPACT…..

.

SFC(R)L

August 16th, 2006, 7:04 pm

Absolutely honorable.

This stuff makes a difference, whether nay sayers believe it or not. I wish folks like these were recognized more often.

IMPACT…..

.

This goes on, every day, in Iraq, by your troops

judysonny8

August 16th, 2006, 7:40 pm

Wow this is great,

Loyal American

August 16th, 2006, 9:41 pm

Wow this is great,

It is an excellent thread and well worth the time it would take to read it.
Welcome to Hannity's judysonny8! Can we call you Judy for short? :think:

jvn

August 16th, 2006, 10:13 pm

I grow so weary of you right wingnuts repeating the same drivel over and over again and electronically pleasuring yourselves and others of your ilk.

I thank God that most of the country has seen the light, and I look forward to this November and November 2008 when the country can vote to rid itself of the politicians who feed their greed with your ********...

REMOVED!

That was a clear case of vulgar abusive posting. In researching your posting history I found a fairly recent word filter bypass as well. Since your posting here is sporadic I am give you two weeks of timeout to clean the filth out of your mouth....
LEE

jwil59

August 16th, 2006, 10:17 pm

Someone needs to get laid^^^^^^^^

Loyal American

August 16th, 2006, 10:18 pm

jvn....blah, blah, blah...........meet ya at the polls my dear! :lol:

SFC(R)L

August 16th, 2006, 11:30 pm

Someone needs to get laid^^^^^^^^

abusive posting

on ignore for a reason

SFC(R)L

August 16th, 2006, 11:36 pm

They want you dead

Jack Crenshaw Jack Crenshaw
March 26, 2003

I have two messages for the American people in general--and also for those sincere, dedicated Americans who are still protesting the Iraqi war.

The first message comes from my somewhat different perspective as someone who lived through--though too young to serve in--WWII. On 9/11/01, as I sat there and watched in horror as the WTC towers fell, I said to my wife, "This is Pearl Harbor all over again."

Only those of us who remember WWII really know what that means. It means, plainly and simply, OUR LIVES HAVE CHANGED FOREVER. No matter how much you wish it to be true, you can never, ever go back to the days of pre-9/11. They can never be recovered.

If we as a country are making one serious mistake, I think it's the fact that many of us still don't get that message. We still want our reality TV and our beer commercials. We still want to fight over silly political correctness issues. We still want our cellphones and our BMW's. We still want the Dow over 10,000. We want life to be good again.

Well, that's a normal desire, and someday we will have, again, all those things. Life became good again after WWII. But it never, ever, became the same, and it won't this time, either. Get used to it, get over it, and get on with it. Like it or not, you're in a war. Go deal with it.

The second message goes with the first, and echoes the thoughts of most Americans: This is a war we absolutely must win.

That, also, is like WWII. We could have elected not to get involved in N. Korea in the 50's. We could have passed on Panama and Kosovo and all the other places where our best and finest went into harm's way. But in WWII, we had no choice. The rulers of Japan, Germany, and Italy wanted only one thing: to rule the world. Our decisions were really quite simple: Win, or Perish.

This one is the same. We have no choice. To all those demonstrating against the war, let me say simply: Don't you get it? Do you think you're going to sit down over tea with Saddam and Osama, and negotiate with them? These people want you DEAD. What is it about DEAD that you don't understand?

As I type this, I had just learned last night of the slaughter of some 10 American POW's, and the live ones being paraded across the screens of Arab TV. We can anguish over the loss of life, we can tsk-tsk about the behavior of the animals who pretended to surrender, only to turn against their supposed liberators. But we should not be surprised.

As I've said before, these people have different moral values than we in the West. They are barbarians, still living in the days of the Crusades. They may even be devout in their faith, but unlike those in civilized society, they don't see any conflict between being a devout follower of one's faith, and lying, cheating, killing, and torturing their enemies. That's because, plainly and simply--please be sure you get this--to them, we are not fit for their consideration as human beings. We are Infidel Dogs, and therefore not fit to live. They want you DEAD.

Get it?

A parting thought, continuing the parallel with WWII. Before that war, there were apologists for Adolph Hitler and the Nazis. We had our share of celebrity admirers (Charles Lindbergh was one), apologists, and appeasers. FDR had his share of political opponents. Great Britain had even more of all stripes, up to and including Prime Minister Chamberlain.

But, one big difference: When the war started, those opponents SHUT UP. They either shut up, or were labeled forever as part of the problem, not part of the solution.

Tom Daschle, Nancy Pelosi, Barbra Streisand, and the rest of their ilk need to have the good sense to shut up, too. In WWII, they would have been considered unpatriotic, and their careers would have been over.

At the time, the word patriotism used to mean something. Sadly, it doesn't seem to anymore.

Hear it one more time: This is a war we cannot afford to lose. We didn't ask for it, we didn't start it, but we're in it. We must Win, or Perish. Anyone who seeks to make the war more difficult is anti-American. They're aiding and abetting a dangerous enemy, and should be treated accordingly.

Does this strike you as too harsh, too McCarthy-ish, too HUAC-ish? If so, you're still living in your pre-9/11 mindset. Get used to it, get over it, and get on with it. You can't go back.

http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/crenshaw/030326

this one just keeps getting better

SFC(R)L

August 16th, 2006, 11:38 pm

Have you forgotten

how it felt that day

Loyal American

August 16th, 2006, 11:45 pm

Have you forgotten

how it felt that day
Nope!

http://www.fdnylodd.com/BloodofHeroes.html

No Fear In The Valley

August 16th, 2006, 11:58 pm

Have you forgotten

how it felt that day

Those who forget perplex me.

But maybe not as much as those who never got it.
_______________________________________________

Regarding the forgetful: Time heals, but it also distorts.

We see it all the time. Is that murdering filth in prison still the freak who unloaded on innocent people?

Or since it's been decades, maybe now he has somehow switched places with the victims he killed. So we sympathize with the killer and pardon his bloody deed and forget the life left floating in its wake.

.

SFC(R)L

August 17th, 2006, 7:12 am

Jonah Goldberg: The Swastika and the Scimitar
Anti-Semitic paranoia is alive and well among Muslims.
August 17, 2006

THE JEWS everywhere are "the Muslim's bitter enemies," said a prominent Islamic leader. Throughout history, the "irreconcilable enemy of Islam" has conspired and schemed and "oppressed and persecuted 40 million Muslims," he said. In Palestine, the Jews are establishing "a base from which to extend their power over neighboring Islamic countries." And, he proclaimed, "this war, which was unleashed by the world Jewry," provided "Muslims the best opportunity to free themselves from these instances of persecution and oppression."

Sound like Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah? Or perhaps Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? Nope. It was the grand mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin Husseini, in 1942. An ardent Nazi supporter, Husseini delivered his speech at the opening of the Islamic Institute in Berlin, one day after the Allies denounced the Nazis for "carrying into effect Hitler's oft-repeated intention to exterminate the Jewish people in Europe." Husseini's address was approved by Nazi Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop, and Joseph Goebbels was in attendance. The Reich press office widely distributed the comments.

ADVERTISEMENT
President Bush undoubtedly didn't have any of this in mind this week when he dubbed our enemies in the war on terror "Islamic fascists." But his comments — analytically flawed as they may be — added some much-needed moral clarity to our current struggle. They also helped to illuminate a much-overlooked point: Islamic fundamentalism and Nazism are historically and intellectually linked. (When the Israelis caught Adolf Eichmann, an architect of the Final Solution, a leading Saudi Arabian newspaper read: "Arrest of Eichmann, who had the honor of killing 6 million Jews.") Perhaps unsurprisingly, Bush's remarks seem to have struck a nerve.

The Saudi government warned "against hurling charges of terrorism and fascism at Muslims without regard to the spotless history of Islamic civilization." Of course, no civilization is without sin, but it takes particular chutzpah for Saudis to preen, considering their civilization is as spotless as a leopard.

Still, the point isn't to dredge up ancient history about Muslims and Nazis. Many Swedes got along swimmingly with the Nazis but who worries about the Swedes today? The Muslim world is another matter. And unlike the Swedes, the similarities between Nazism and Islamic fascism are not all in the past. In what may be the most important book on the Holocaust in a generation, historian Jeffrey Herf explains why.

According to the standard Holocaust narrative, the Final Solution was the product of "hate" or racism or, often, both. Anti-Semitism became popular in the 19th century; the Nazis expanded on it, constructing a pseudo-scientific biological racism that saw the Jews as a "cancer" on the body politic and the Holocaust as an attempt to excise the tumor. Herf does not so much debunk this version of history as cut through it.

In "The Jewish Enemy: Nazi Propaganda During World War II and the Holocaust," he concedes that hatred and racism were important, but he argues that they don't explain Germany's unique efforts to destroy the Jews. It's not as if no one hated the Jews until the 1930s.

The real answer isn't hate, but fear. Poring through miles of speeches, private comments, journal entries, party memoranda and all 24,000 pages of Goebbel's diaries, Herf concludes that the Nazis really believed that the Jews ran the world and wanted to destroy Germany. They believed that Jews controlled not only the Bolsheviks to the east but the capitalists to the west. President Franklin D. Roosevelt was a mere pawn of his Jewish friends and advisors. The British Parliament, Goebbels wrote in one diary entry, was "in reality a kind of Jewish stock exchange." The "Jewish-plutocratic enemy" was everywhere, benefiting from, and responsible for, every piece of bad news for Germany. In fact, the Nazis were sure that the Jews had declared war on Germany first, giving them no choice but to respond to the Jewish campaign to "exterminate the Germans." This paranoia led the Nazis to believe that rounding up millions of Jews and gassing them was an act of self-defense.

What is so frightening is how similar this is to the sounds from the Middle East today. Ahmadinejad — dismissed by "sophisticated" academics as a blowhard — calls the Holocaust a myth. Indeed, there is no Jewish conspiracy theory too outlandish in the Muslim world. Huge numbers of Muslims — even 45% of British Muslims — believe that the Jews were behind 9/11. Theories that the Mossad is behind every bad headline, from the Indonesian tsunami to bad soccer performances, are common on the Arab street. According to Herf, this is only the second time the world has seen this sort of radical anti-Semitic paranoia. And, again, too many in the unspotless West are saying, "they can't be serious.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-goldberg17aug17,0,2651457.column?coll=la-opinion-rightrail