Torture found rife in China

Torture found rife in China
December 3, 2005
From combined dispatches
BEIJING -- A United Nations rights investigator said yesterday that torture was still widespread in China and accused authorities of trying to obstruct his work on a historic fact-finding mission.
"Torture is on the decline, but it is still widespread," Manfred Nowak, the U.N. Human Rights Commission's special rapporteur on torture, told reporters at the end of his two-week trip.
"There is much that still needs to be done; there is a need for many more structural reforms," said Mr. Nowak, a law professor in Vienna, Austria.
Torture methods he cited include the use of electric-shock batons, cigarette burns, submersion in pits of water or sewage and exposure to conditions of extreme heat or cold.
In Tibet, Mr. Nowak was told that sleep deprivation was frequently used, in one case for 17 days.
The victims were usually "monks and nuns who still uphold their allegiance and support of the Dalai Lama and who are seen as endangering national security because they are often seen as separatists," he said.
Mr. Nowak said Chinese authorities had closely monitored and obstructed his work, which included interviews conducted in Beijing as well as in the restive regions of Tibet and Xinjiang.
"There was frequent surveillance of my interviews that I had outside prison with victims' family members," Mr. Nowak said.
He and his team were not allowed to bring photographic and electronic equipment into the prisons and their visits to correctional facilities were limited to the working hours of the staff.
"As the authorities were generally announced an hour in advance, the visits could not be considered to have been strictly 'unannounced,' " said a press release distributed at the end of Mr. Nowak's visit.
Mr. Nowak told reporters he also had received reports that victims' family members were prevented from meeting him -- as they were either put under house arrest, stopped physically from seeing him or simply intimidated.
While interviewing prisoners, Mr. Nowak said he observed "a palpable level of fear and self-censorship," he said.
"Unfortunately, a number of people did not wish to talk to me, which I regretted," he said.
However, the U.N. envoy said he was allowed to speak to any detainee he wished to meet. "Not one single request was actually refused by the prison authorities," he said.
During a two-week visit, Mr. Nowak met 30 detainees held in Beijing, Tibet and the Muslim-majority region of Xinjiang.
Beijing-based civil rights lawyer Gao Zhisheng said earlier that he was followed and monitored closely by security agents when he met with U.N. rights officials who came to China with Mr. Nowak.
At the beginning of his trip last month, Mr. Nowak praised China's leaders for acknowledging the widespread abuse of prisoners in the nation's jails, saying there was a growing awareness that improvement was needed.
Mr. Nowak came to China after receiving government assurances it would cooperate with him and allow him unannounced visits to prisons and private talks with prisoners.
In the early 1990s a U.N. special rapporteur on arbitrary detention visited prisons in Tibet, but prisoners were punished for what they told the investigator, rights group have said.
Beijing said Mr. Nowak's visit shows the government's commitment to banning torture.
"Through this visit, we can demonstrate our sincerity," Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said Thursday, the day before Mr. Nowak's press conference. "It is conducive to promoting understanding."

So there is at least 1 Democrat that understands National Security.....

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007611
Our Troops Must Stay
America can't abandon 27 million Iraqis to 10,000 terrorists.

BY JOE LIEBERMAN
Tuesday, November 29, 2005 12:01 a.m. EST

I have just returned from my fourth trip to Iraq in the past 17 months and can report real progress there. More work needs to be done, of course, but the Iraqi people are in reach of a watershed transformation from the primitive, killing tyranny of Saddam to modern, self-governing, self-securing nationhood--unless the great American military that has given them and us this unexpected opportunity is prematurely withdrawn.

Progress is visible and practical. In the Kurdish North, there is continuing security and growing prosperity. The primarily Shiite South remains largely free of terrorism, receives much more electric power and other public services than it did under Saddam, and is experiencing greater economic activity. The Sunni triangle, geographically defined by Baghdad to the east, Tikrit to the north and Ramadi to the west, is where most of the terrorist enemy attacks occur. And yet here, too, there is progress.

There are many more cars on the streets, satellite television dishes on the roofs, and literally millions more cell phones in Iraqi hands than before. All of that says the Iraqi economy is growing. And Sunni candidates are actively campaigning for seats in the National Assembly. People are working their way toward a functioning society and economy in the midst of a very brutal, inhumane, sustained terrorist war against the civilian population and the Iraqi and American military there to protect it.

It is a war between 27 million and 10,000; 27 million Iraqis who want to live lives of freedom, opportunity and prosperity and roughly 10,000 terrorists who are either Saddam revanchists, Iraqi Islamic extremists or al Qaeda foreign fighters who know their wretched causes will be set back if Iraq becomes free and modern. The terrorists are intent on stopping this by instigating a civil war to produce the chaos that will allow Iraq to replace Afghanistan as the base for their fanatical war-making. We are fighting on the side of the 27 million because the outcome of this war is critically important to the security and freedom of America. If the terrorists win, they will be emboldened to strike us directly again and to further undermine the growing stability and progress in the Middle East, which has long been a major American national and economic security priority.

Before going to Iraq last week, I visited Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Israel has been the only genuine democracy in the region, but it is now getting some welcome company from the Iraqis and Palestinians who are in the midst of robust national legislative election campaigns, the Lebanese who have risen up in proud self-determination after the Hariri assassination to eject their Syrian occupiers (the Syrian- and Iranian-backed Hezbollah militias should be next), and the Kuwaitis, Egyptians and Saudis who have taken steps to open up their governments more broadly to their people. In my meeting with the thoughtful prime minister of Iraq, Ibrahim al-Jaafari, he declared with justifiable pride that his country now has the most open, democratic political system in the Arab world. He is right.

In the face of terrorist threats and escalating violence, eight million Iraqis voted for their interim national government in January, almost 10 million participated in the referendum on their new constitution in October, and even more than that are expected to vote in the elections for a full-term government on Dec. 15. Every time the 27 million Iraqis have been given the chance since Saddam was overthrown, they have voted for self-government and hope over the violence and hatred the 10,000 terrorists offer them. Most encouraging has been the behavior of the Sunni community, which, when disappointed by the proposed constitution, registered to vote and went to the polls instead of taking up arms and going to the streets. Last week, I was thrilled to see a vigorous political campaign, and a large number of independent television stations and newspapers covering it.

None of these remarkable changes would have happened without the coalition forces led by the U.S. And, I am convinced, almost all of the progress in Iraq and throughout the Middle East will be lost if those forces are withdrawn faster than the Iraqi military is capable of securing the country.

The leaders of Iraq's duly elected government understand this, and they asked me for reassurance about America's commitment. The question is whether the American people and enough of their representatives in Congress from both parties understand this. I am disappointed by Democrats who are more focused on how President Bush took America into the war in Iraq almost three years ago, and by Republicans who are more worried about whether the war will bring them down in next November's elections, than they are concerned about how we continue the progress in Iraq in the months and years ahead.

Here is an ironic finding I brought back from Iraq. While U.S. public opinion polls show serious declines in support for the war and increasing pessimism about how it will end, polls conducted by Iraqis for Iraqi universities show increasing optimism. Two-thirds say they are better off than they were under Saddam, and a resounding 82% are confident their lives in Iraq will be better a year from now than they are today. What a colossal mistake it would be for America's bipartisan political leadership to choose this moment in history to lose its will and, in the famous phrase, to seize defeat from the jaws of the coming victory.

The leaders of America's military and diplomatic forces in Iraq, Gen. George Casey and Ambassador Zal Khalilzad, have a clear and compelling vision of our mission there. It is to create the environment in which Iraqi democracy, security and prosperity can take hold and the Iraqis themselves can defend their political progress against those 10,000 terrorists who would take it from them.

Does America have a good plan for doing this, a strategy for victory in Iraq? Yes we do. And it is important to make it clear to the American people that the plan has not remained stubbornly still but has changed over the years. Mistakes, some of them big, were made after Saddam was removed, and no one who supports the war should hesitate to admit that; but we have learned from those mistakes and, in characteristic American fashion, from what has worked and not worked on the ground. The administration's recent use of the banner "clear, hold and build" accurately describes the strategy as I saw it being implemented last week.

We are now embedding a core of coalition forces in every Iraqi fighting unit, which makes each unit more effective and acts as a multiplier of our forces. Progress in "clearing" and "holding" is being made. The Sixth Infantry Division of the Iraqi Security Forces now controls and polices more than one-third of Baghdad on its own. Coalition and Iraqi forces have together cleared the previously terrorist-controlled cities of Fallujah, Mosul and Tal Afar, and most of the border with Syria. Those areas are now being "held" secure by the Iraqi military themselves. Iraqi and coalition forces are jointly carrying out a mission to clear Ramadi, now the most dangerous city in Al-Anbar province at the west end of the Sunni Triangle.

Nationwide, American military leaders estimate that about one-third of the approximately 100,000 members of the Iraqi military are able to "lead the fight" themselves with logistical support from the U.S., and that that number should double by next year. If that happens, American military forces could begin a drawdown in numbers proportional to the increasing self-sufficiency of the Iraqi forces in 2006. If all goes well, I believe we can have a much smaller American military presence there by the end of 2006 or in 2007, but it is also likely that our presence will need to be significant in Iraq or nearby for years to come.

The economic reconstruction of Iraq has gone slower than it should have, and too much money has been wasted or stolen. Ambassador Khalilzad is now implementing reform that has worked in Afghanistan--Provincial Reconstruction Teams, composed of American economic and political experts, working in partnership in each of Iraq's 18 provinces with its elected leadership, civil service and the private sector. That is the "build" part of the "clear, hold and build" strategy, and so is the work American and international teams are doing to professionalize national and provincial governmental agencies in Iraq.

These are new ideas that are working and changing the reality on the ground, which is undoubtedly why the Iraqi people are optimistic about their future--and why the American people should be, too.

I cannot say enough about the U.S. Army and Marines who are carrying most of the fight for us in Iraq. They are courageous, smart, effective, innovative, very honorable and very proud. After a Thanksgiving meal with a great group of Marines at Camp Fallujah in western Iraq, I asked their commander whether the morale of his troops had been hurt by the growing public dissent in America over the war in Iraq. His answer was insightful, instructive and inspirational: "I would guess that if the opposition and division at home go on a lot longer and get a lot deeper it might have some effect, but, Senator, my Marines are motivated by their devotion to each other and the cause, not by political debates."

Thank you, General. That is a powerful, needed message for the rest of America and its political leadership at this critical moment in our nation's history. Semper Fi.

Mr. Lieberman is a Democratic senator from Connecticut.

Trouble for L'il Assad

Unsilenced Voices
Damscus’s road to Damascus.

By Nir Boms

With increasing international pressure over the U.N. investigation into the murder of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq Hariri, Syria's young president, Bashar al-Assad, has taken the identification of his country with the Assad name to new levels. In a recent speech he defiantly stated: "It will not be President Assad who will bow his head nor the head of his country. We only bow to God almighty." As he desperately calls for an emergency meeting of the Arab league that might help alleviate the growing international pressures, Assad is trying to reassert control in a troubled country that now must handle parallel attacks from the United Nations, United States, and, increasingly, the Syrian opposition

 
Just hours before the reported suicide of Syrian interior minister Ghazi Kanaan in his Damascus office, President al-Assad vehemently denied that his administration was linked to the February assassination of Rafik Hariri. "Any Syrian involved in the killing," said Assad, "would be guilty of treason." Kanaan, who ran the powerful network of Syrian agents that dominated Lebanese politics for most of the past 25 years, reportedly shot himself in his office following the release of Lebanese reports implicating him in fraud and corruption, and three weeks after he was questioned by a U.N. team investigating the Hariri assassination. It may be the case that Kanaan independently understood that treason in Syria is punishable by death. But recent evidence seems to indicate that somebody else in Syria understood this for him.

Kanaan had information that could have reached the wrong ears. One of his key rivals was none other than Assef Shawkat, the head of the Syrian military intelligence and a brother-in-law of the Syrian president. Shawkat is now considered one of the key suspects in the Hariri plot, according to a recently released U.N. report. Syrian sources noted that Kanaan's liquidation was possibly a direct result of fears amongst Shawkat and his subordinates that the U.N. indictment would lead to Kanaan's trying to remove Shawkat and his followers from power.

The U.N. report implicating Damascus in the Hariri murder is clearly disrupting Syrian domestic politics, stating as it does that "many leads point directly towards Syrian security officials as being involved with the assassination." "In Damascus, fear is now in the camp of power, the camp of Bashar," a senior official told the Washington Post. All this has not escaped notice by the Syrian opposition.

The Syrian opposition, a term that was a misnomer just two years ago, now has over 20 visible outlets with an increasing number of political activists who meet regularly inside and outside Syria. The Syrian Democratic Coalition — a dynamic group of ten Syrian opposition organizations led by Farid Ghadry — held a recent conference in Paris with representatives from political parties, human-rights organizations, tribes, and religious groups. The conference unveiled a registry for Syrians who are interested in voting and establishing a parliament-in-exile. The next conference — scheduled for mid-December — is expected to be the largest gathering of liberal Syrian activists, most of whom are under the age of 40. Ghadry is not the only one. Riyad al-Turk, a leading opposition politician publicly called on President Assad and his government to resign, and Rifaat al-Assad, the exiled uncle of Syria's current leader, is also positioning himself as possible successor to his nephew.

Inside Syria, a coalition of oppositions groups issued the "Damascus declaration." The declaration, signed by a number of opposition groups, including the extremist Islamic Brotherhood, calls for an end to Syria's emergency laws and other forms of political repression, and for a national conference on democratic change. The Brotherhood, however, was quick to release other statements against the participation of Kurds, Alawaites, and Syrian exiles in the process. The Syrian police responded with a series of raids on the opposition and by disrupting a campaign launching meeting in the office of 72-year-old lawyer and activist Hassan Abdul Azim. The Syrian police also arrested Kamal Labwani, a Syrian human-rights activist who had just returned from a trip to the U.S. Labwani, who is also the chairman of the Democratic Liberal Gathering in Syria was charged with spreading news outside the country that "threatened national unity."

But the opposition grows and the Assad regime is losing its grip on power. The United States should sit tight as President Assad, caught in a trap of his own making, will struggle to give answers to the U.N. prosecutor on the one hand, and to his growing circle of critics on the other. In the meantime Europe and the United States should pay attention and listen to the new Syrian voices. Unlike Assad, they belong to the future.

— Nir Boms is the vice president of the Center for Freedom in the Middle East.

The "Moral Authority" Canard

http://www.nationalreview.com/mccarthy/mccarthy200511280803.asp

The “Moral Authority” Canard
Senator McCain is heroic, awe-inspiring, and wrong.
By Andrew C. McCarthy
( a former federal prosecutor, is a senior fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.)

Key Passages:

I spent a number of years in the eye of the counterterror storm: prosecuting jihadists, putting my family through the attendant anxieties, and watching the criminal-justice system writhe through what the Clinton administration called its "war" on terror — a curious battle plan in which the enemy kills you and is then presumed innocent. I came away thinking the whole prosecution paradigm was a national-security debacle.

"THE TICKING TIME BOMB
Senator McCain well knows this. That's why the most telling part of his essay is his wholly dissatisfying answer to the so-called ticking-time-bomb scenario. Yes, he admits, "if we capture a terrorist who we have sound reasons to believe possesses specific knowledge of an imminent terrorist attack ... an interrogator might well try extreme measures to extract information that could save lives." "

"But why, Senator? You just got done telling us such information would be inherently unreliable — aside from its method of extraction somehow causing our own soldiers to be tortured by the same countries that foreswore such abuse when they solemnly signed the Geneva Conventions. Why is it that we "might well" try some rough stuff?"

"The best way, the honest, bright-line way, is to acknowledge that there are circumstances in which coercive interrogation would be appropriate; to be forthright about what those circumstances are and the lengths you would be willing to go; to require personal approval by a very high-ranking executive-branch official who would then be accountable; and to prove you mean business by aggressively prosecuting anyone and anything that does not meet the rigorous standards you've taken pains to establish."

Pop Quiz

Pop Quiz: 

Who said the following?
1.  "You, who have used nuclear weapons against innocent people, who have used uranium ordnance in Iraq, should be tried as war criminals in courts,"

        A. Michael Moore
        B. Cindy Sheehan
        C. Howard Dean
        D. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
   
Give up?  Surprisingly the answer is "D".   
Doesn't this illustrate the insanity of the American Left?  They are sharing the same talking points with the enemies of this country.  Apparently liberals have their conscious removed while in college.

Tehran raps U.S. as 'war criminals'
November 27, 2005

TEHRAN -- Iran's hard-line president said yesterday the Bush administration should be tried on war-crimes charges, and he denounced the West for pressuring Iran to curb its controversial nuclear program.

"You, who have used nuclear weapons against innocent people, who have used uranium ordnance in Iraq, should be tried as war criminals in courts," President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said.

    Mr. Ahmadinejad did not elaborate, but he apparently was referring to the U.S. military's use of artillery shells packed with depleted uranium, which is far less radioactive than natural uranium and is left over from the process of enriching uranium for use as nuclear fuel.

    Since the Iraq war started in 2003, American forces have fired at least 120 tons of shells packed with depleted uranium, an extremely dense material used by the U.S. and British militaries to penetrate tank armor. Once fired, the shells melt, vaporize and turn to dust.

    "Who in the world are you to accuse Iran of suspicious nuclear-armed activity?" Mr. Ahmadinejad said during a nationally televised ceremony marking the 36th anniversary of the establishment of Iran's volunteer Basij paramilitary force.

    Iran has been under intense international pressure to curb its nuclear program, which the United States claims is part of an effort to produce nuclear weapons. Iran denies such claims and says its program is aimed at generating electricity.

    Iran insists that it has the right to fully develop the program, including enrichment of nuclear fuel -- a process that can produce fuel for nuclear reactors or atomic bombs.

    State-run TV said more than 9 million Basij members formed human chains in different parts of the country to mark their militia's anniversary. Thousands linked hands to make a 12-mile chain along an expressway in northern Tehran.

    It is estimated that the Basij comprise 15 percent of Iran's population, or about 10 million people.
    Meanwhile, a leading German newsweekly reported that Iran has offered North Korea oil and natural gas as payment for help in developing nuclear missiles.

    A senior Iranian official traveled to the North Korean capital, Pyongyang, during the second week of October to make the offer, the Der Spiegel magazine reported yesterday, citing unidentified Western intelligence sources.

    It was not clear what North Korea's response was, the magazine said.
    Diplomats and intelligence sources say Iran is pushing ahead with plans to enrich uranium in defiance of international pressure to stop developing sensitive nuclear technology to calm fears it is seeking nuclear weapons.

    Iran's Shahab-3 missiles are based on North Korea's No-Dong rockets and Pyongyang is Tehran's most important partner in developing missile technology, Der Spiegel said.

Biting the Hand
Why is the ADL going after evangelical Christians?

BY DAVID BROG
Friday, November 25, 2005 12:01 a.m. EST

Earlier this month, Abraham Foxman took to the podium to address the key members of his Anti-Defamation League, the leading watchdog of anti-Semitism in America. In somber tones, Mr. Foxman sounded the alarm over the "key domestic challenge to the American Jewish community and to our democratic values." The threat he described was neither Islamic terror nor assimilation but a much more imaginative one. "Make no mistake," Mr. Foxman warned, "we are facing an emerging Christian Right leadership that intends to 'Christianize' all aspects of American life, from the halls of government to the libraries, to the movies, to recording studios, to the playing fields and locker room of professional, collegiate and amateur sports, from the military to SpongeBob SquarePants."

Mr. Foxman is an intelligent and experienced man. Thus one must marvel at his ability to scan the nation and determine that the key challenge facing American Jews comes from socially conservative Christians. The fate of beloved cartoon characters aside, there are very serious threats facing American Jews today, and they have nothing to do with social conservatives.

Al Qaeda and the home-grown cells who serve it have targeted Jews around the world, including in America. In 2002, the FBI warned Jewish leaders that al Qaeda was plotting to attack domestic Jewish targets with gasoline trucks. In 2003, the Bush administration raised the homeland-terror threat level to orange due in part to a large volume of threats against Jewish targets. And in August, the Justice Department secured the indictments of four American Muslims in a conspiracy to attack Los Angeles synagogues.

Outside of physical threats from without, Jewish life in America is seriously threatened from within by assimilation. The intermarriage rate has grown in every decade since 1970 and has now reached an alarming 47%. Only one-third of the children of these intermarriages are raised Jewish. These statistics, combined with the very low fertility rates of those Jews who do marry other Jews, explain why the Jewish population in America is steadily shrinking.

Far from being the source of such threats to American Jews, Christians are actually important allies in combating them. Conservative Christians surpass Jews as proponents of a robust war on terror at home and abroad. And when it comes to assimilation, these Christians demonstrate the only solution by their example. Evangelicals take their faith seriously: They go to church, teach religion to their children, and act on their faith through good works. If Jews followed their lead, assimilation rates would plummet.

More troubling than Mr. Foxman's misdiagnosis of the threats facing American Jews is his mischaracterization of Christian goals. Just because Christian activists are motivated by their Christian faith does not mean that they are seeking to "Christianize" America. As every schoolchild knows, Christian churches have been the driving force behind some of the most important social movements in America, from the abolition of slavery to the civil-rights movement. What is relevant, of course, is not a policy's source or motivation but its merits.

And there is indeed merit to the agenda pursued by Christian conservatives. Evangelical Christians are rock-solid supporters of Israel--a fact that the Jewish community has belatedly begun to acknowledge and appreciate. What remains unacknowledged, and certainly not appreciated, is the fact that socially conservative Christians have become the leading proponents of Judeo-Christian values--and, therefore, traditional Jewish values--in America.

When Christians recognize that human beings are influenced by the surrounding culture, and therefore seek to persuade the entertainment industry to stop degrading that culture, they are taking a stand for Jewish values. When Christians fight genocide in Darfur, Sudan, and raise funds for victims of natural disasters around the globe, they are acting out Jewish values. And yes, when Christians stand up for the sanctity of human life and oppose euthanasia or abortion as birth control, they are protecting the most fundamental of Jewish values. Jews are of course free to differ on all of the above issues, but they should not wrap themselves in the flag of Judaism when they do so.

In one of the most poignant moments in the Hebrew Bible, King David's son Absalom is killed while leading a failed rebellion against his father. When David weeps for his son, David's top lieutenant, Joab, argues that the king is disgracing all those who have just risked their lives to defend him, admonishing: "You love your enemies and hate your friends." American Jews have much to learn from this story. In some ways we are Absalom, rebelling against the conservative beliefs of our religious forebears. And in other ways we are David, mourning the loss of a beloved but destructive family member--liberalism--while ignoring the true friends that surround us and preserve us. Either way, we need to follow Joab's advice and dry our eyes.

Arabic Christian channel a hit?

Arabic Christian channel a hit?
By Julia Duin
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
November 26, 2005
The founder of the nation's first Arabic Christian TV channel says the programming is attracting phone inquiries from curious Muslims.

    The Southern California-based channel Alkarma, whose name means "the vineyard" in Arabic, premiered Oct. 17. It is the brainchild of Samuel Estefanos, an Egyptian-born businessman.

    The channel gets 10 to 15 calls a day from Arabic speakers with Muslim surnames who are intrigued that Alkarma would give away a movie known as the "Jesus Film" and other materials.

    "Some of them call and say they are Muslims and need to know more about Christ," Mr. Estefanos said. "Other people are Christians but say they don't know anything about Christ. In the Middle East, even though if your religion says 'Christian' on your identity card, that does not mean that you know Christ."

    Mr. Estefanos invested about $200,000, much of it his own money, to purchase airtime and equipment for the 24-hour channel. The station still needs about $40,000 a month to operate. Total contributions so far total about $10,000 a month.

    "I know this is a great station," he said, "and we are doing more productions. We are seeking to build a good foundation so we can grow more. I believe God will provide and we'll keep on going."

    He estimates there are 35 Arabic-language TV channels airing nationally, but none of them were Christian until Alkarma began. The channel, which reaches about a million Arabic speakers in the U.S., Canada and Mexico, is slowly attracting advertisers.

    "It's great," he said. "Some people call us and cry on the phone. They say, 'We knew Christ through this channel.' People send us e-mails and leave phone messages."

    The channel is one of 25 Arabic-language channels on the GlobeCast World TV satellite, which has 130 radio and TV channels in more than 30 languages. Alkarma, based in Seal Beach, Calif., is part of the nonprofit Media Dream. Its Web site is www.alkarmatv.com.

    Mr. Estefanos, who emigrated here seven years ago, said he began dreaming of such a station 15 years ago after he graduated from college in Egypt in 1990.

    Beginning in 2002, he said, God began directing him to start Alkarma.
    He has had to produce seven original programs in Arabic. One is named "Virtuous Women"; another is called "The Healing Touch"; a third is called "God and Christianity"; and an interview show is called "Where is the Truth?"

    "There are no debates between religions," he said. "Our goals are focused on two things: providing solid biblical teaching and programs for the family."

    Its Arabic programs are in various Syrian, Lebanese, Iraqi and Egyptian dialects. The channel also airs some English programming for children plus portions of "The 700 Club" from the Christian Broadcasting Network.

German esteem builder backfires

[ Remember, this is the country that the American Left want us to be more like.  We are somehow supposed to feel inferior to them.  I do feel sorry for all the copy writers in Germany, having to research everything they come up with to see if it's "Nazi-free" ]

German esteem builder backfires
By Kate Connolly
LONDON DAILY TELEGRAPH
November 26, 2005
BERLIN -- A multimillion-dollar campaign to boost Germans' low self-confidence has backfired after it emerged that its slogan was coined by the Nazis.
The $34 million "Du Bist Deutschland -- You Are Germany" -- campaign was devised to inspire Germans to stop moaning and do something good for their country.
Beethoven, Einstein and the sports stars Franz Beckenbauer and Michael Schumacher have been cited in advertisements encouraging Germans to take more pride in their homeland.
But a historian from Ludwigshafen has provoked an uproar with his discovery that the same "Du Bist Deutschland" cry was used at Nazi rallies in the 1930s.
Stefan Morz uncovered photographs of a 1935 Nazi convention in which soldiers display a banner reading, in Gothic script, "Denn Du Bist Deutschland (Because You Are Germany)." The slogan was topped with the head of Adolf Hitler. Leading Nazis such as Hermann Goring and Joseph Goebbels attended the event.
"Every time I see the slogan 'Du Bist Deutschland' I am reminded of this rather disturbing parallel with the past," said Mr. Morz, a historian and archivist.
Researchers have now set to work to discover how widespread the slogan was, even if most agree it was not one of the Nazis' official mantras. Its intended effect then is believed to be similar to that of the modern version: "You have the potential to make this country great once again."
The backers of the modern campaign, the brainchild of several blue-chip media companies, expressed shock at the discovery but quickly distanced themselves from the Third Reich connection.
Indeed, one of its aims is to release today's Germans from the collective guilt and depression they still feel about the Nazi era, they said.
The project's image has now been battered by that same legacy.
"We are not very happy," said Lars Christian Cords, the campaign's coordinator. "Our campaign stands for the values human dignity, democracy, respect of the individual and pluralism. 'Du Bist Deutschland' is a message to everyone that every one of us has a responsibility for the well-being and future of Germany."
The campaign has been compared to the "I'm Backing Britain" campaign launched during the economic depression in the late 1960s.
Studies show that Germans are among the world's most pessimistic and unhappy peoples. The gloom stems mainly from Germany's economic woes and chronically high unemployment.

So near in Iraq, so far at home - VDH

So near in Iraq, so far at home.

Victor Davis Hanson's weekly gutcheck

Key Passage:
First, are the metrics of this war in the terrorists’ or our favor? Are the Iraqi security forces growing or shrinking? Are elections postponed or on schedule? Are Europe, Jordan, Lebanon, and others more or less sympathetic to a war against Islamic terrorism in Iraq? Are bin Laden, Zawahiri, and Zarqawi more or less popular or secure after we removed Saddam? Is al Qaeda in a strengthened or weakened position? Is the Arab world more or less receptive to democracy in the Gulf, Egypt, Lebanon, and the West Bank? And is the United States more or less vulnerable to a terrorist attack as we go into our fifth year since September 11?

As usual you need to read it all

If you want to win the debate, win the war

If you want to win the debate, win the war.
Michael Ledeen

Key Passages:
The most dangerous, and paradoxically the most vulnerable, of the terror masters was, and likely still is, Iran. Most everyone agrees that Iran played a unique role in the terror war that has been waged against the United States for nearly a quarter-century. According to the State Department's annual survey, Iran has long been the world's leading sponsor of international terror. Both Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad are Iranian creations and clients, which is why Imad Mugniyah of Hezbollah and Aywan al Zawahiri of Islamic Jihad and al-Qaeda keep showing up in Tehran, along with Abu Musab al Zarqawi, the leader of the jihad in Iraq who had operated out of Tehran for many years. Unsurprisingly, the 9/11 Commission found hard evidence of collusion between Iran and al-Qaeda, going back into the mid-nineties.

What is the alternative? If we do not engage, we will soon find ourselves facing a nuclear Iran that will surely be emboldened to increase its sponsorship of al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Jamaah Islamiah, and Hamas, and will redouble its efforts to shatter Iraq's fragile democratic experiment. Which is the more prudent policy? Cautiously defending Iraq alone, or supporting the revolutionaries against the terror masters? Active support of the democratic forces in the Middle East would be the right policy, even if there were no terror war, and even if Iran were not a shallow breath away from atomic weapons. It is what America is all about.

Read it all here

A political rally dishonors a pioneer.

Death of a Funeral-A political rally dishonors a pioneer.

[More class from the Democrats]

Rosa Parks died in late October, 50 years after her brave stand on a segregated Alabama bus. Her defiant act was the symbolic push the civil-rights movement needed. Her legacy is inspirational, but her funeral was a shameful spectacle.
In Detroit on November 2, some 4,000 gathered at Detroit's Greater Grace Temple to celebrate the life of Rosa Parks. But sometime during the tribute to Parks, the ceremony fell into a graceless political rally.
The message of Rosa Parks's courage in 1955 is a nonpartisan one. And yet, fanatical politics found their way into the ceremony via left-wing stalwarts. Al Sharpton, who has run for president as a Democrat, seemed to get moving on a pulpit strategy for another campaign at the funeral. He declared: "I heard somebody say Jim Crow is who she fought and Jim Crow is still around. But Jim Crow is old. That's not who I'm mindful of today. The problem is Jim Crow has sons."
The crowd went wild.
"One we gotta battle," Sharpton continued, "is James Crow Jr. Esq. He's a little more educated. He's a little slicker. He's a little more polished. But the results are the same. He doesn't put you in the back of the bus. He just puts referendums on the ballot to end affirmative action when you can't go to school. He doesn't call you a racial name, he just marginalizes your existence. He doesn't tell you that he's set against you, he sets up institutional racism. Where you have a nation respond looking for weapons in Iraq that are not there but can't see a hurricane in Louisiana that is there."
Ah yes. President Bush — the same blind president who called the governor of Louisiana to insist on a mandatory evacuation of New Orleans — didn't even see hurricane Katrina coming. Regardless, he was probably still looking for the weapons in Iraq. You know, the ones most of the Democratic politicians (Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Bill Clinton ... ), who also spoke at Rosa Parks's funeral, thought were a threat too.
Sharpton went on to more specifically slap down the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative, which would amend the state's constitution to prohibit "state entities from discriminating or granting preferential treatment based on race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin." The Michigan Civil Rights Initiative is, in truth, the logical continuation of any struggle for civil rights in America — it's just. Al Sharpton would get that if he were a civil-rights leader. But don't let him fool you, he's just a left-wing demagogue.
Jesse Jackson, also a former Democratic presidential candidate, announced during his eulogy — the eulogy — that the president had nominated "an extreme right-wing judge, antithetical to everything Rosa Parks ever stood for." Presumably Jackson was talking about Judge Samuel Alito, who President Bush had nominated the same week to the Supreme Court. Alito is for segregation? That's news to ... everyone. Jackson must have gotten swept away. That sometimes happens at political conventions. People get silly and carried away demonizing the guy they want to beat. But, oh wait. This wasn't a political convention.
It was a funeral.
Rosa Parks deserved better. Americans who can be well served by her example for decades to come deserve better.
In the December issue of Glamour, Geraldine Ferraro has it right. Speaking of Rosa Parks, Ferraro tells Glamour, "I was very impressed when I met this giant of a woman, who was maybe 5'2." The Afghan and Iraqi women who are fighting for their rights are doing so in the tradition of Rosa Parks." I'm the type of gal that's conservative, Reagan-loving and rarely agrees with anything groups like the "National Organization for Women" have to say, but when the former Democratic vice-presidential candidate is right, she's right!
Ferraro gets it. While politicians play blame games over prewar intelligence, complete with childish public-relations stunts, and nonsensical rhetoric fills an otherwise beautiful event, folks here and abroad live the legacy of Rosa Parks, who refused to give up her seat at front of the bus, simply because it is was the right thing to do. It was the brave move someone needed to make. And she made it. No one — Democrat or Republican, black or white, American or Iraqi — should be segregated from that inspiration.

DoD Update from Iraq from LTG Vines

[Army Lt. Gen. John R. Vines briefed the Pentagon press corps today from Iraq. Lt. Gen. Vines is the commanding general of the 18th Airborne Corps. He has served in Iraq as the commander of the Multi-National Corps-Iraq since February. Following are highlights of his briefing.]

Governance Progress
ØSince January:
•A national election has been held; from this election the Transitional National Assembly was seated.
•A constitution has been drafted and subsequently ratified in a national referendum.
•There will be a national election for a permanent government on Dec. 15; this permanent government will help to provide a higher level of stability in Iraq.

ØIraqis are determining for themselves their own form of government.
•Iraqis are turning out to vote. In the October constitutional referendum, they voted in numbers that exceeded the participation levels in elections in Western democracies.

•Iraqis are not taking their security for granted: They recognize the terrorists and Islamic extremists want to impose their worldview on Iraq, and they recognize what is at stake.

ØSunnis are getting involved in the political process.
•Sunnis are choosing the ballot box rather than violence to influence their government.
•The leadership of the greater Sunni populace is committed to attempting to have a say in the outcome of their government.

Security Progress
ØIraqi soldiers and police are in the fight.
•Volunteers for the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) are risking their lives, and in some cases dying, to protect their fellow citizens.

•Iraqi Security Forces are accepted by the Iraqi people as legitimately protecting their security interests.
•One-third of Iraqi army battalions are responsible for their own areas of operation and the operations conducted in those areas.

•Eighty percent of Iraqi Security Forces are in the fight and participating in combat operations around the country.

ØIraqi forces are conducting operations, such as Operation Steel Curtain, that are helping to establish control over Iraq’s borders and denying sanctuary to foreign terrorists.

•The enduring presence that the security forces are establishing in these areas will help provide stability and security there.

Force Levels
ØRecommendations for U.S. force levels in Iraq will be made based on conditions on the ground.
•Included in the range of conditions are the capabilities of the Iraqi Security Forces, the government’s ability to sustain the ISF, and the state of the insurgency.

ØThe Coalition is in Iraq at the request of the Iraqi government.
•Although Iraqi forces are able to conduct operations in a large portion of their areas with limited Coalition support, they still require Coalition support, which will decrease over time.

•A precipitous pullout of Coalition forces would be destabilizing.

Terrorists and Foreign Fighters
ØThe hunt for Abu Mussab al-Zarqawi continues.
•Commanders have no reason to believe that Zarqawi, al Qaeda’s leader in Iraq, was killed during a recent raid in Mosul.

ØCommanders believe considerable progress is being made regarding foreign fighters in general.
•The number of foreign fighters showing up in a variety of venues could be half as many as this summer.

"Talibans with Oil and a Good P.R. Company"

“Talibans with Oil and a Good P.R. Company”
The dark kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

[Excellent way to put it- the Saudis are the Taliban with cash and p.r. - the more we face up to that and do something the better off we will be]

Lopez: Is Saudi Arabia our enemy? Is it fundamentally evil?

Murawiec: Let's look at facts rather than speeches. The Al-Saud family is indistinguishable from the Wahhabi sect. They have been wedded like Siamese twins since 1744. The sect lends Islamic legitimacy to the sword of the ruler, the ruler extends the writ of the sect. The one cannot exist without the other. The Wahhabi creed is a nasty, bigoted belief system. It considers itself the sole repository of authentic Islam, and views all other Muslins as heretics, apostates, and schismatics, hence, deserving of death. It considers Jews and Christians as Satanic enemies that should be killed when opportunity arises. Jihad is integral to Wahhabism. Whenever the Saudi royals have had opportunity to manifest and implement the creed, they have. King Faisal gave his every visitor a copy of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Read the sermons and the fatwas and the schoolbooks that pour out of Saudi mosques, universities, imams, and predicators, from TV and media: "death to Jews, Christians, Hindus, Shiites" is a permanent singsong. That's the Saudi-Wahhabi creed in action. Now, since they have needed us to protect them from regional predators, Iran, Saddam in his time, Nasser earlier and so on, they have honed in a nice trick which allows them to emit friendly noises from one corner of their mouth when they speak English, and in hateful tones from the other, Arabic side. When senior Saudi clerics issue fatwas that call for the killing of Americans in Iraq, when Saudi state TV airs these bloodcurdling calls for jihad against America, how can one but conclude that they are no friends, but enemies? The new Saudi ambassador here, Prince Turki, called our toppling of Saddam "a colonial war." Seventy percent of the jihadis we have captured in Iraq are Saudis. King Abdullah, Prince Nayef the interior minister, Prince Sultan and Turki have all repeatedly stated that Israel was behind 9/11 — not the 15 of 19 hijackers that were Saudis — and behind all terrorist incidents in Saudi Arabia! King Abdullah twice in the last few years threatened the U.S. with a new oil embargo. With such friends, who needs enemies? The Saudi royals? Talibans with oil and a good p.r. company. The regime? It is evil, and therefore it is our enemy, and it behaves accordingly.

…but wait there is more….

Read it all at http://www.nationalreview.com/interrogatory/murawiec200511220847.asp

Was Atta in Prague?

Atta in Prague?
An Iraqi prisoner holds the answer to this 9/11 mystery.
[Edward Jay Epstein provides the latest on this story at OpinionJournal.com]
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007584
...and the next day the BIS's source in the Iraqi Embassy dropped a bombshell. He told his BIS case officer that he recognized Atta as the Arab who got in the car with al-Ani on April 9. Mr. Ruzek immediately relayed the secret information to Washington through the CIA liaison. The FBI sent an interrogation team to Prague, which, after questioning and testing the source, concluded that there was a 70% likelihood that he was not intentionally lying and sincerely believed that he saw Atta with al-Ani.

China's 'peaceful' invasion

[absolute must read about China's ambitions in our hemisphere. ("This shit is chess, not checkers") The Panama Canal is merely posistioning for what they will do to us when/if we have to go at it over Taiwan. How outlandish is the scenario that they make a move on Taiwan and threaten the United States with severe consequences if we defend Taiwan? Keep an eye on this…..]

China's 'peaceful' invasion
By Kelly Hearn
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
November 20, 2005

BUENOS AIRES - China, striving to match the superpower status of the United States, is boosting military contacts throughout Latin America and eyeing the region as a market for its growing arms industry, U.S. officials say.
Chinese military officials made 20 visits to counterparts in Latin America and the Caribbean last year, says Gen. Bantz Craddock, who heads the U.S. Southern Command.
Gen. Craddock, in congressional testimony, reported that nine Latin American defense ministers visited Beijing during the same period.
"An increasing presence of the People's Republic of China [PRC] in the region is an emerging dynamic that must not be ignored," he said.
"The PRC's growing dependence on the global economy and the necessity of protecting access to food, energy, raw materials and export markets has forced a shift in their military strategy," he told the House Armed Services Committee.
Gen. Craddock added that Beijing's most recent outline of military strategy "departs from the past and promotes a power-projection military, capable of securing strategic shipping lanes and protecting its growing economic interests abroad."
The military dimensions of China's economic push into Latin America have grown since Gen. Craddock gave that assessment in March, U.S. officials say.
"Chinese strategic thinking, from the writings of Sun Tzu to classic games such as 'go' emphasize the value of setting the stage, as much as the battle itself," says Evan Ellis, a Latin American analyst with Booz Allen Hamilton.
"The idea is to position oneself at an advantage in all possible realms -- politically, militarily or physically -- so that if a tangible confrontation must occur, the adversary simply cannot prevail."
New arms sales
China appears to be pushing to sell arms and technology to Latin America, especially to Venezuela, a key ideological partner that is working to reduce dependence on the U.S. as a primary weapons supplier.
China recently offered to sell Venezuela its new FC-1 fighter, a potential follow-up on its failed bid in 2001 to sell Caracas its low-tech K-8 training aircraft, one U.S.-based intelligence source says.
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez signed deals to purchase long-range defense radars and a modern communication satellite from China.
In August, Venezuelan Defense Minister Orlando Maniglia and Qu Huimin, vice president of China's state-owned Electronics Import and Export Corp., signed a deal for the purchase of three Chinese JYL-1 mobile air-defense radar systems.
The contract provides for radars, a command-and-control center, technical support and leased access to a satellite communication network.
At least two of the radars will replace two U.S.-made models, according to Jane's Defence Weekly, a leading defense industry publication.
The radar deal and other technology transfers threaten to lock Venezuela into technological platforms that increase its dependency on Chinese technology, says Richard Fisher, a senior fellow at the Jamestown Foundation in Washington.
"We can anticipate that Chavez will soon be buying Chinese weapons," Mr. Fisher says of the Venezuelan president.
On Nov. 1, Mr. Chavez signaled a deepening military relationship with Beijing during a ceremony announcing a deal in which China will manufacture a communications satellite for Venezuela and train its technicians there.
Mr. Chavez also indicated he was looking for non-U.S. replacements for American-made F-16 fighter jets.
"Maybe we'll have to buy Russian or Chinese planes to defend ourselves," he said, complaining that the United States was blocking Venezuelan efforts to acquire spare parts for the planes.
U.S. officials deny his contention, saying they have kept to agreements to supply spare parts.
Mr. Chavez suggest he may give China and Cuba some U.S.-made military jets so they can study the technology.
The new communications satellite is to be launched in 2008 from China, and Venezuela says it will be used for peaceful purposes. But analysts warn that commercial technology deals could help both nations gather intelligence on the United States.
Spying and space
Analysts voice similar concerns over cooperative aerospace deals between China and Brazil.
The two nations jointly built and launched two earth-research satellites; they plan two additional launches in 2008.
The China-Brazil Earth Resources Satellite (CIBERS-1) was launched in 1999 and its successor last year.
CIBERS-1 was an environmental monitoring satellite that did not have significant military utility, according to a recent report prepared by Mr. Ellis for the U.S. Army War College.
However, the deal did "assist China in developing real-time digital photo technology, thus increasing the capabilities of Chinese military ... satellites and arguably helping China to gain a more comprehensive picture of the flight paths of U.S. satellites," Mr. Ellis wrote.
Rogelio Pardo Maurer, deputy assistant secretary of defense for Western Hemisphere affairs, recently told Congress that officials had no evidence "that Chinese military activities in the Western Hemisphere, including arms sales, pose a direct conventional threat to the United States."
But Mr. Maurer warned that the United States should be alert "to rapidly advancing Chinese capabilities, particularly in the field of intelligence, communications and cyberwarfare, and their possible application in the region."
Peter Brookes, a former deputy assistant secretary of defense, underscored the threat of China's using Latin America as a base to spy on the United States.
"The Chinese are undoubtedly active in Latin America and the Caribbean," Mr. Brookes says. "They are using Chinese front companies, students, visitors and professional intelligence officers to steal and exploit technology and commercial and industrial secrets of interest to enhance their growing military-industrial and military prowess, as well as their commercial economic competitiveness."
Cuban connection
One long-standing concern is that the Chinese are using key intelligence-gathering facilities in Cuba to intercept U.S. communications.
Rep. Connie Mack, Florida Republican, worries about intelligence on the United States flowing from Cuba to Venezuela.
"I am concerned that China will rebuild intelligence-gathering capacity that Cuba lost after the Cold War and then share intelligence with Chavez," Mr. Mack says.
Al Santoli, president of the Washington-based Asia-America Initiative and an author on military history, connects some of the dots.
"China's growing military ties in Latin America have a direct link to their international quest for energy and other vital natural resources," Mr. Santoli says, "as well as their efforts to reinforce the growing reach of Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez to create a counterweight to U.S. influence in the region."
The most significant military threats to the United States are the Russian electronic and cyber-warfare bases in Cuba, Mr. Santoli says.
"These bases not only permit enhanced electronic surveillance of broad areas of the U.S. at present," he says. "In the future they can be used to disrupt critical U.S. strategic communications during a period of conflict."
Exploiting a vacuum
Analysts suspicious of China's regional designs worry that it is expanding military ties to fill a vacuum: A U.S. law cuts military aid to nations that refuse to exempt U.S. soldiers from the International Criminal Court.
Gen. Craddock warns that the law, the American Service Members Protection Act, has cost the U.S. key contacts with Latin American militaries. Of the 22 countries cut off from the Pentagon, 11 are in Latin America, he told Congress.
In 2004, Chinese Defense Minister Cao Gangchuan visited Brazil, the region's largest and most populated country, calling for expanded military cooperation.
Also last year, the vice chairman of China's Central Military Commission, Xu Caihou, traveled to Cuba and Mexico, visiting troops and military academies in both countries.
In October, Mr. Cao met in Beijing with Antonio Justiniano, commander in chief of the armed forces of Bolivia. The Chinese defense minister called for increased ties between the two nations' armies, according to a Chinese newspaper.
The ban on U.S. military aid to countries that refuse to exempt American soldiers from the International Criminal Court stems from fears that the court will be used for politically motivated prosecutions.
"While Latin American states are disappointed in the ban and frustrated by it, militaries in the region are significantly less important than they were a decade ago or longer," says Cynthia Watson, a former associate dean at the National War College.
"Both for budgetary and political reasons, militaries have been put back in the barracks," she says. "Their roles in their individual societies are not nearly as important as they used to be."
But others worry that nations whose armed forces once were trained by the Pentagon, especially Venezuela, are in the position to pass along U.S. military procedures to Chinese soldiers.
Earlier this year, Venezuela ended a 35-year military relationship with the United States that included Special Operations training.
The Jamestown Foundation's Mr. Fisher warns that Venezuelan officers are in a position to instruct Chinese counterparts in what they learned.
"It is clear that Venezuelan Special Forces instructors are able to convey a deep familiarity with U.S. special-operations doctrine and operations," he says.
"As a consequence, PLA Special Forces will gain the benefit of this U.S.-developed and funded knowledge base," he adds, using the acronym for China's People's Liberation Army.
The Taiwan factor
Part of China's interest in Latin America stems from rival Taiwan's success in maintaining diplomatic relations with several nations in the region.
China continues to refashion its military for a potential attack on Taiwan, the democratic island nation that it regards as a breakaway republic. Officials and analysts widely agree that China's key political goal in the Western Hemisphere is to strangle Taiwan diplomatically.
"China is also interested in matching its economic power with political influence in the region," Charles Shapiro, deputy assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere Affairs, told Congress in recent testimony. "China's desire to compete with and ultimately isolate Taiwan diplomatically is a key factor in Latin America."
Mr. Shapiro expressed concern that Chinese weapons could wind up in the hands of insurgencies and criminals in the hemisphere.
The United States, he told lawmakers, "will apply our general policy of seeking transparency and accountability in these sales."
Beijing began making economic and cultural inroads about five years ago into Latin America -- in particular South America, which is rich in oil and other natural resources key to feeding China's growing economy.
A year ago, Chinese President Hu Jintao toured six countries, including Cuba, promising $100 billion in infrastructure investments to Argentina, Brazil and Chile, among others.
Among goals of the visit was to weaken Taiwan's diplomatic presence in the region.
Six nations of Central America -- Panama, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala -- retain full diplomatic relations with Taiwan.
Starting with Chile in 1970, however, all but one South American state, Paraguay, have moved to recognize Beijing.
Last year, the Dominican Republic, Haiti, St. Kitts and Nevis, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines switched diplomatic recognition from Taiwan to Beijing.
Eyeing the threat
U.S. trade with Latin America exceeded $445 billion last year, 10 times China's level, U.S. officials say.
Possibilities for U.S.-Chinese cooperation exist in the region, says Mr. Ellis of Booz Allen Hamilton, because "both nations have an interest in reducing political instability, criminality and violence."
"Nevertheless," he cautions, "China may be tempted to support destabilizing movements where it feels that the prevailing government is blocking it from achieving important economic or strategic objectives."
Others stress the economic and political dimensions of China's regional rise, deflecting military concerns.
Bates Gill of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, says China's military gestures in the region, including contribution of a contingent of troops to the U.N. peacekeeping force in Haiti, should be read as part of a broadening of Beijing's multinational profile, not as a specific attempt to gain hegemony in Latin America.
V. Manuel Rocha, a former U.S. ambassador to Bolivia, agrees.
"The current number one priority of Chinese government is economic and commercial," Mr. Rocha says. "It is, in my view, completely premature and alarmist to be highlighting military links."

Judgment Day for Zarqawi???

Judgment Day?Is the end here...or near...for Zarqawi?


[I have thought for awhile that Zarqawi was cutting his own throat (what a happy thought) by attacking Iraqis and then the Jordnians. Eventually the population (who lives in fear reprisal- much like mafia had over certain areas of the U.S. at one time- would turn on him and his Arab cohorts. The Annan bombings has merely accelerated it. His own tribe has dis-owned him, it's only a matter of time before he has to flee to Iran or Saudi Arabia or be killed.]

Why the Democrats are full of shit

Why the Democrats are full of shit

[Mac Owens is essential to refuting the Vietnam analogies to Iraq]

The Badlands of Al Anbar

The Badlands of Al Anbar
Cutting the ratlines and quashing the insurgency in Western Iraq.

[Excellent rundown on what is happening in western Iraq and the role the Iraqis are playing (sounds like the Kurds are the real deal), and who the bad guys consist of (why would hezballah and hamas be represented? hmmmm.sounds like a global war on terror to me. What do you think these guys would be doing without America in Iraq? let's see...blow up an IED in Ramadi or studying the Cotton Bowl's security?

I have always been an optimist about Iraq, and the corner is being turned, which would make sense because the military geniues and noted patriots -Congressional Democrats and the media want us to leave. It is a fact that the opposite what those pussies have said comes true, so judging by the level of hysterics we must be really close to winning]

Military fears critics will hurt morale

Military fears critics will hurt morale

[So again I ask- if the democrats aren't helping the U.S. military then who are they helping by default? Sorry but that is simple logic]

On the Ground in Iraq

On the Ground in Iraq
FrontPageMagazine.com November 15, 2005

[The following letter is written by a retired U.S. military officer]

Hello to all my fellow gunners, military buffs, veterans and interested guys. A couple of weekends ago I got to spend time with my son Jordan, who was on his first leave since returning from Iraq. He is well (a little thin), and already bored. He will be returning to Iraq for a second tour in early 06 and has already re-enlisted early for 4 more years. He loves the Marine Corps and is actually looking forward to returning to Iraq.
Jordan spent 7 months at Camp Blue Diamond in Ramadi. Aka: Fort Apache. He saw and did a lot and the following is what he told me about weapons, equipment, tactics and other miscellaneous info which may be of interest to you. Nothing is by any means classified. No politics here, just a Marine with a birds eye views opinions:
1) The M-16 rifle: Thumbs down. Chronic jamming problems with the talcum powder like sand over there. The sand is everywhere. Jordan says you feel filthy 2 minutes after coming out of the shower. The M-4 carbine version is more popular because its lighter and shorter, but it has jamming problems also. They like the ability to mount the various optical gunsights and weapons lights on the picattiny rails, but the weapon itself is not great in a desert environment. They all hate the 5.56mm (.223) round. Poor penetration on the cinderblock structure common over there and even torso hits can't be reliably counted on to put the enemy down. Fun fact: Random autopsies on dead insurgents shows a high level of opiate use.
2) The M243 SAW (squad assault weapon): .223 cal. Drum fed light machine gun. Big thumbs down. Universally considered a piece of shit. Chronic jamming problems, most of which require partial disassembly. (that's fun in the middle of a firefight).
3) The M9 Beretta 9mm: Mixed bag. Good gun, performs well in desert environment; but they all hate the 9mm cartridge. The use of handguns for self-defense is actually fairly common. Same old story on the 9mm: Bad guys hit multiple times and still in the fight.
4) Mossberg 12ga. Military shotgun: Works well, used frequently for clearing houses to good effect.
5) The M240 Machine Gun: 7.62 Nato (.308) cal. belt fed machine gun, developed to replace the old M-60 (what a beautiful weapon that was!!). Thumbs up. Accurate, reliable, and the 7.62 round puts em down. Originally developed as a vehicle mounted weapon, more and more are being dismounted and taken into the field by infantry. The 7.62 round chews up the structure over there.
6) The M2 .50 cal heavy machine gun: Thumbs way, way up. Ma deuce is still worth her considerable weight in gold. The ultimate fight stopper, puts their dicks in the dirt every time. The most coveted weapon in-theater.
7) The .45 pistol: Thumbs up. Still the best pistol round out there. Everybody authorized to carry a sidearm is trying to get their hands on one. With few exceptions, can reliably be expected to put em down with a torso hit. The special ops guys (who are doing most of the pistol work) use the HK military model and supposedly love it. The old government model .45s are being re-issued en masse.
8) The M-14: Thumbs up. They are being re-issued in bulk, mostly in a modified version to special ops guys. Modifications include lightweight Kevlar stocks and low power red dot or ACOG sights. Very reliable in the sandy environment, and they love the 7.62 round.
9) The Barrett .50 cal sniper rifle: Thumbs way up. Spectacular range and accuracy and hits like a freight train. Used frequently to take out vehicle suicide bombers ( we actually stop a lot of them) and barricaded enemy. Definitely here to stay.
10) The M24 sniper rifle: Thumbs up. Mostly in .308 but some in 300 win mag. Heavily modified Remington 700s. Great performance. Snipers have been used heavily to great effect. Rumor has it that a marine sniper on his third tour in Anbar province has actually exceeded Carlos Hathcocks record for confirmed kills with OVER 100.
11) The new body armor: Thumbs up. Relatively light at approx. 6 lbs. and can reliably be expected to soak up small shrapnel and even will stop an AK-47 round. The bad news: Hot as shit to wear, almost unbearable in the summer heat (which averages over 120 degrees). Also, the enemy now goes for head shots whenever possible. All the bullshit about the old body armor making our guys vulnerable to the IEDs was a non-starter. The IED explosions are enormous and body armor doesn't make any difference at all in most cases.
12) Night Vision and Infrared Equipment: Thumbs way up. Spectacular performance. Our guys see in the dark and own the night, period. Very little enemy action after evening prayers. More and more enemy being whacked at night during movement by our hunter-killer teams. We've all seen the videos.
13) Lights: Thumbs up. Most of the weapon mounted and personal lights are Surefires, and the troops love em. Invaluable for night urban operations.

Jordan carried a $34 Surefire G2 on a neck lanyard and loved it.
I can't help but notice that most of the good fighting weapons and ordnance are 50 or more years old! With all our technology, its the WWII and Vietnam era weapons that everybody wants! The infantry fighting is frequent, up close and brutal. No quarter is given or shown.
Bad guy weapons:
1) Mostly AK47s . The entire country is an arsenal. Works better in the desert than the M16 and the .308 Russian round kills reliably. PKM belt fed light machine guns are also common and effective. Luckily, the enemy mostly shoots like shit. Undisciplined spray and pray type fire. However, they are seeing more and more precision weapons, especially sniper rifles. (Iran, again) Fun fact: Captured enemy have apparently marveled at the marksmanship of our guys and how hard they fight. They are apparently told in Jihad school that the Americans rely solely on technology, and can be easily beaten in close quarters combat for their lack of toughness. Let's just say they know better now.
2) The RPG: Probably the infantry weapon most feared by our guys. Simple, reliable and as common as dogshit. The enemy responded to our up-armored humvees by aiming at the windshields, often at point blank range. Still killing a lot of our guys.
3) The IED: The biggest killer of all. Can be anything from old Soviet anti-armor mines to jury rigged artillery shells. A lot found in Jordan's area were in abandoned cars. The enemy would take 2 or 3 155mm artillery shells and wire them together. Most were detonated by cell phone, and the explosions are enormous. You're not safe in any vehicle, even an M1 tank. Driving is by far the most dangerous thing our guys do over there. Lately, they are much more sophisticated shape charges (Iranian) specifically designed to penetrate armor. Fact: Most of the ready made IEDs are supplied by Iran, who is also providing terrorists (Hezbollah types) to train the insurgents in their use and tactics. That's why the attacks have been so deadly lately. Their concealment methods are ingenious, the latest being shape charges in Styrofoam containers spray painted to look like the cinderblocks that litter all Iraqi roads. We find about 40% before they detonate, and the bomb disposal guys are unsung heroes of this war.
4) Mortars and rockets: Very prevalent. The soviet era 122mm rockets (with an 18km range) are becoming more prevalent. One of Jordan's NCOs lost a leg to one. These weapons cause a lot of damage inside the wire. Jordan's base was hit almost daily his entire time there by mortar and rocket fire, often at night to disrupt sleep patterns and cause fatigue (It did). More of a psychological weapon than anything else. The enemy mortar teams would jump out of vehicles, fire a few rounds, and then haul ass in a matter of seconds.
5) Bad guy technology: Simple yet effective. Most communication is by cell and satellite phones, and also by email on laptops. They use handheld GPS units for navigation and Google earth for overhead views of our positions. Their weapons are good, if not fancy, and prevalent. Their explosives and bomb technology is TOP OF THE LINE. Night vision is rare. They are very careless with their equipment and the captured GPS units and laptops are treasure troves of Intel when captured.
Who are the bad guys?:
Most of the carnage is caused by the Zarqawi Al Qaeda group. They operate mostly in Anbar province (Fallujah and Ramadi). These are mostly foreigners, non-Iraqi Sunni Arab Jihadists from all over the Muslim world (and Europe). Most enter Iraq through Syria (with, of course, the knowledge and complicity of the Syrian govt.) , and then travel down the line which is the trail of towns along the Euphrates River that we've been hitting hard for the last few months. Some are virtually untrained young Jihadists that often end up as suicide bombers or in sacrifice squads. Most, however, are hard core terrorists from all the usual suspects (Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, Hamas etc.) These are the guys running around murdering civilians en masse and cutting heads off. The Chechens (many of whom are Caucasian), are supposedly the most ruthless and the best fighters. (they have been fighting the Russians for years). In the Baghdad area and south, most of the insurgents are Iranian inspired (and led) Iraqi Shiites. The Iranian Shiia have been very adept at infiltrating the Iraqi local govt., the police forces and the Army. The have had a massive spy and agitator network there since the Iran-Iraq war in the early 80s. Most of the Saddam loyalists were killed, captured or gave up long ago.
Bad Guy Tactics:
When they are engaged on an infantry level they get their asses kicked every time. Brave, but stupid. Suicidal Banzai-type charges were very common earlier in the war and still occur. They will literally sacrifice 8-10 man teams in suicide squads by sending them screaming and firing AKs and RPGs directly at our bases just to probe the defenses. They get mowed down like grass every time. ( see the M2 and M240 above). Jordan's base was hit like this often. When engaged, they have a tendency to flee to the same building, probably for what they think will be a glorious last stand. Instead, we call in air and that's the end of that more often than not. These hole-ups are referred to as Alpha Whiskey Romeos (Allahs Waiting Room). We have the laser guided ground-air thing down to a science. The fast movers, mostly Marine F-18s, are taking an ever increasing toll on the enemy. When caught out in the open, the helicopter gunships and AC-130 Spectre gunships cut them to ribbons with cannon and rocket fire, especially at night. Interestingly, artillery is hardly used at all. Fun fact: The enemy death toll is supposedly between 45-50 thousand. That is why were seeing less and less infantry attacks and more IED, suicide bomber shit. The new strategy is simple: attrition.
The insurgent tactic most frustrating is their use of civilian non-combatants as cover. They know we do all we can to avoid civilian casualties and therefore schools, hospitals and (especially) Mosques are locations where they meet, stage for attacks, cache weapons and ammo and flee to when engaged. They have absolutely no regard whatsoever for civilian casualties. They will terrorize locals and murder without hesitation anyone believed to be sympathetic to the Americans or the new Iraqi govt. Kidnapping of family members (especially children) is common to influence people they are trying to influence but can't reach, such as local govt. officials, clerics, tribal leaders, etc.).
The first thing our guys are told is don't get captured. They know that if captured they will be tortured and beheaded on the internet. Zarqawi openly offers bounties for anyone who brings him a live American serviceman. This motivates the criminal element who otherwise don't give a shit about the war. A lot of the beheading victims were actually kidnapped by common criminals and sold to Zarqawi. As such, for our guys, every fight is to the death. Surrender is not an option.
The Iraqis are a mixed bag. Some fight well, others aren't worth a shit. Most do okay with American support. Finding leaders is hard, but they are getting better. It is widely viewed that Zarqawis use of suicide bombers, en masse, against the civilian population was a serious tactical mistake. Many Iraqis were galvanized and the caliber of recruits in the Army and the police forces went up, along with their motivation. It also led to an exponential increase in good intel because the Iraqis are sick of the insurgent attacks against civilians. The Kurds are solidly pro-American and fearless fighters.
According to Jordan, morale among our guys is very high. They not only believe they are winning, but that they are winning decisively. They are stunned and dismayed by what they see in the American press, whom they almost universally view as against them. The embedded reporters are despised and distrusted. They are inflicting casualties at a rate of 20-1 and then see shit like "Are we losing in Iraq?" on TV and the print media. For the most part, they are satisfied with their equipment, food and leadership. Bottom line though, and they all say this, there are not enough guys there to drive the final stake through the heart of the insurgency, primarily because there aren't enough troops in-theater to shut down the borders with Iran and Syria. The Iranians and the Syrians just can't stand the thought of Iraq being an American ally (with, of course, permanent US bases there).
Anyway guys, thats it, hope you found it interesting, I sure did

Where Are the Pentagon Papers?

The administration refuses to defend itself.
by Stephen F. Hayes


"Working outside formal Pentagon lines of inquiry, I soon learned more. Many of the documents from Doha had been entered into a database known as HARMONY. HARMONY is a thick stew of reports and findings from a variety of intelligence agencies and military units, and alongside the Iraqi documents were reports from contributing U.S. agencies. Eventually, I got a list of document titles that seemed particularly interesting:

1. Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) Correspondence to Iraq Embassy in the Philippines and Iraq MFA (Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
2. Possible al Qaeda Terror Members in Iraq
3. IIS report on Taliban-Iraq Connections Claims
4. Money Transfers from Iraq to Afghanistan
5. IIS Agent in Bulgaria
6. Iraqi Intel report on Kurdish Activities: Mention of Kurdish Report on al Qaeda--reference to al Qaeda presence in Salman Pak
7. IIS report about the relationship between IIS and the Kurdish Group Jalal Talibani [sic]
8. Iraqi Mukhabarat Structure
9. Locations of Weapons/Ammunition Storage (with map)
10. Iraqi Effort to Cooperate with Saudi Opposition Groups and Individuals
11. Order from Saddam to present $25,000 to Palestinian Suicide Bombers Families
12. IIS reports from Embassy in Paris: Plan to Influence French Stance on U.N. Security Council
13. IIS Importing and Hiding High Tech Computers in Violation of UN
14. IIS request to move persons, documents to private residences
15. Formulas and information about Iraq's Chemical Weapons Agents
16. Denial and Deception of WMD and Killing of POWs
17. 1987 orders by Hussein to use chemical weapons in the Ealisan Basin
18. Ricin research and improvement
19. Personnel file of Saad Mohammad Abd Hammadi al Deliemi
20. Memo from the Arab Liaison Committee: With a list of personnel in need of official documents
21. Fedayeen Saddam Responds to IIS regarding rumors of citizens aiding Afghanistan
22. Document from Uday Hussein regarding Taliban activity
23. Improvised Explosive Devices Plan
24. IIS reports on How French Campaigns are Financed
25. French and German relationships with Iraq
26. IIS reports about Russian Companies--News articles and potential IIS agents
27. IIS plan for 2000 of Europe's Influence of Iraq Strategy
28. IIS plans to infiltrate countries and collect information to help remove sanctions
29. Correspondence from IIS and the stations in Europe
30. Contract for satellite pictures between Russia, France and Iraq: Pictures of Neighboring Countries (Dec. 2002)
31. Chemical Gear for Fedayeen Saddam
32. Memo from the IIS to Hide Information from a U.N. Inspection team (1997)
33. Chemical Agent Purchase Orders (Dec. 2001)
34. Iraq Ministry of Defense Calls for Investigation into why documents related to WMD were found by UN inspection team
35. Correspondence between various Iraq organizations giving instructions to hide chemicals and equipment
36. Correspondence from IIS to MIC regarding information gathered by foreign intelligence satellites on WMD (Dec. 2002)
37. Correspondence from IIS to Iraqi Embassy in Malaysia
38. Cleaning chemical suits and how to hide chemicals
39. IIS plan of what to do during UNSCOM inspections (1996)
40. Secret Meeting with Taliban Group Member and Iraqi Government (Nov. 2000)

There are thousands of similar documents. Most of them are unclassified. That's important: Most of them are unclassified.

WMDs in Iraq

[excerpts from an interview]

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20154

Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Bill Tierney, a former military intelligence officer and Arabic speaker who worked at Guantanamo Bay in 2002 and as a counter-infiltration operator in Baghdad in 2004. He was also an inspector (1996-1998) for the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) for overseeing the elimination of weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles in Iraq. He worked on the most intrusive inspections during this period and either participated in or planned inspections that led to four of the seventeen resolutions against Iraq.

  ... A car tried to blow through an UNSCOM vehicle checkpoint at the gate.  The car had a stack of documents about two feet high in the back seat.  In the middle of the stack, I found a document with a Revolutionary Command Council letterhead that discussed Atomic projects with four number designations that were previously unknown.  The Iraqis were extremely concerned. I turned the document over to the chief inspector, who then fell for the Iraqis’ “reasonable request” to lay it out on a table for later discussion.  The Iraqis later flooded the room, and the document disappeared.  Score one for the Iraqis.

...we learned at another site that the unit responsible for guarding the biological weapons was stationed near the airport.  We immediately dashed over there before the Iraqis could react, and forced them to lock us out.  One of our vehicles took an elevated position where they could look inside the installation and see the Iraqis loading specialized containers on to trucks that matched the source description for the biological weapons containers. 

Another smoking gun was the inspection of Jabal Makhul Presidential Site.  In June/July 1997 we inspected the 4th Special Republican Guards Battalion in Bayji, north of Tikrit.  This unit had been photographed taking equipment for the Electro-magnetic Isotope Separation (EMIS) method of uranium enrichment away from inspectors.  The Iraqis were extremely nervous as this site, and hid any information on personnel who may have been involved with moving the equipment.  This was also the site where the Iraqi official on the UNSCOM helicopter tried to grab the control and almost made the aircraft crash. 

…..There was no question that Iraq had triggering mechanisms for a nuke, the question was whether they had enriched enough uranium.  Given Iraq’s intensive efforts to build a nuke prior to the Gulf War, their efforts to hide uranium enrichment material from inspectors, the fact that Israel had a nuke but no Arab state could claim the same, my first-hand knowledge of the limits of UNSCOM and IAEA capabilities, and Iraqi efforts to buy yellowcake uranium abroad (Joe Wilson tea parties notwithstanding), I believe the TWELVE years between 1991 and 2003 was more than enough time to produce sufficient weapons grade uranium to produce a nuclear weapon.  Maybe I have more respect for the Iraqis’ capabilities than some.

...While I was engaged in these operations in Baghdad in 2004, one of the local translators freely stated in his security interview that he worked for the purchasing department of the nuclear weapons program prior to and during the First Gulf War.  He said that Saddam purchased such large quantities of precision machining equipment that he could give up some to inspections, or lose some to bombing, and still have enough for his weapons program. 

 
...There was the missile inspection on Ma’moun Establishment.  I was teamed with two computer forensic specialists.  A local technician stood by while we opened a computer and found a flight simulation for a missile taking off from the Iraqi desert in the same area used during the First Gulf War and flying west towards Israel.  The warhead was only for 50 kilograms.  By the time we understood was this was, the poor technician was coming apart.  I will never forget meeting his eyes, and both of us realizing he was a dead man walking.  The Iraqis tried to say that the computer had just been transferred from another facility, and that the flight simulation had not been erased from before the war. The document’s placement in the file manager, and the technician’s reaction belied this story. UNSCOM’s original assessment was that this was for a biological warhead, but I have since seen reporting that make me think it was for a nuclear weapon.

 
….While working counter-infiltration in Baghdad, I noticed a pattern among infiltrators that their cover stories would start around Summer or Fall of 2002.  From this and other observations, I believe Saddam planned for a U.S. invasion after President Bush’s speech at West Point in 2002.   One of the steps taken was to prepare the younger generation of the security services with English so they could infiltrate our ranks, another was either to destroy or move WMDs to other countries, principally Syria.  Starting in the Summer of 2002, the Iraqis had months to purge their files and create cover stories, such as the letter from Hossam Amin, head of the Iraqi outfit that monitored the weapons inspectors, stating after Hussein Kamal’s defection that the weapons were all destroyed in 1991. 

 I was on the inspections that follow-up on Hussein Kamal’s defection, and Hossam said at the time that Hussein Kamal had a secret cabal that kept the weapons without the knowledge of the Iraqi government.  It was pure pleasure disemboweling this cover story.  Yet the consensus at DIA is that Iraq got rid of its weapons in 1991.  This is truly scary.  If true, when and where did Saddam have a change of heart? This is the same man who crowed after 9/11, then went silent after news broke that Mohammed Atta met with an Iraqi intelligence operative in Prague. Did Saddam spend a month with Mother Theresa, or go to a mountain top in the Himalaya’s? Those that say there were no weapons have to prove that Saddam had a change of heart.  I await their evidence with interest.