Free Republic Commentary 7/30-8/21

Three Iranian factories 'mass-produce bombs to kill British in Iraq'
Posted by humint to Eagle74
On News/Activism 08/21/2006 10:35:04 AM PDT · 79 of 82

Also if we destroy their oil industry putting them on foot and in the dark, how can their threat of pulling their oil off the market be a problem?

It's a chicken or egg argument. Do we take it out of the equation first or do they? Their contribution to energy markets is real leverage against us for a reason. The big picture here is that we want more energy on the market, not less. Yes, you are right, there are energy alternatives coming online but those are taking time – time that we don’t have. They are using this time to accelerate their nuclear program. The application of diplomatic pressure on Iran can be and should be incremental. If we strike too soon and at the wrong targets, the outcome could create a situation far worse than what we have today. Recognizing that petroleum is Iran's primary economic pillar you should consider the mechanics of Iranian statecraft. What would be the impact on their ability to conduct the behavior we intend to force them to stop? Putting the Iranian people in the dark and on foot may enhance the ayatollahs’ asymmetric advantage. Two things to consider 1) the black-market petro-trade will keep the ayatollahs’ lights on ---- and 2) Asymmetric warfare is not expensive. Remember, 9/11 cost our enemies approximately 3Years, 20 lives and $500K. Our reactions to 9/11 cost the terrorists far more than the operation itself but then again, consider their timeline. They are thinking in terms of struggling for generations while the West has to provide results to constituents with Attention Deficit Disorder in an election cycle. To sustain Asymmetric operations one only needs people desperate for change and receptive to an assignment of blame for current conditions. Who is Iran’s rhetorical nemesis? – The Great Satan.

To win, I’m convinced we are going to have to take the asymmetric war to the Ayatollahs’ doorstep. We need to replace their bankrupt fascist ideology with faith in liberty and the rule of law at the community level. This is not a luxury as some suggest. If we cannot operate as allies of the Iranian community then we need allies that can. Every other alternative is a plan that in its best case delays the coming ideological conflict. The longer we wait, the bloodier it will be.

In short – the more the West challenges Iran to join the community of nations the more the Iranian regime escalates the conflict. The reason why rational requests generate irrational responses is a function of what the Iranian government is. They are fascists. Irrational reactions such as air strikes would tend to validate their fascist tendencies. There are only three things you can do to destroy a fascist regime 1) Expose it 2) Humiliate it and 3) Replace it. IMO, putting all Iranians on foot and in the dark is not the best way to do these three things…

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies

Iran flexes military muscle and says uranium enrichment goes on
Posted by humint to middie
On News/Activism 08/20/2006 10:49:02 PM PDT · 15 of 15

Air power does not win wars alone. It creates the environment that makes boots' job more efficient while the sky above the ground fight is empty of hostile aircraft and enemy long-range indirect artillery fire is suppressed. Air power can interdict an enemy's logistical support. All of those things the IDF Air Force did well, but only infantry and armor put the winning touch to the fight.

In a classic warfare scenario aerial bombardment softens targets. In this environment, employing airpower may harden some targets. That said insurgents haven't rendered war tech obsolete... on the contrary, modern war machines evolved to fight the enemy’s modern war machines. Most people don't realize that In the GWOT Americans are just as capable of fighting asymmetric warfare as any of our enemies. The fact is we've come to rely on tech, as our Cold War adversaries relied on tech. I believe we have to raise an ideological army to win – the prophets of liberty. Sure, we need boots on the ground… we have to have our ideas on the ground to win. This is a war of ideas isn’t it?

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies

Three Iranian factories 'mass-produce bombs to kill British in Iraq'
Posted by humint to familyop
On News/Activism 08/20/2006 10:25:26 PM PDT · 63 of 82

FAMILYOP: Have a look at some of the history of this commander. We'll need another one like him soon, IMO. Light intensity tactics don't work for every scenario.

HUMINT: Thanks for the link. Patton's spirit is the order of the day. That spirit can be applied to tactics aligned to the GWOT.

Patton Speaks To The Troops - England, May 31, 1944

Now I want you to remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. You won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country. Men, all this stuff you've heard about America not wanting to fight, wanting to stay out of the war, is a lot of horse dung. Americans traditionally love to fight. ALL REAL Americans, love the sting of battle. When you were kids, you all admired the champion marble shooter, the fastest runner, the big league ball players, the toughest boxers . . . Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser. Americans play to win all the time. I wouldn't give a hoot in Hell for a man who lost and laughed. That's why Americans have never lost and will never lose a war. Because the very thought of losing is hateful to Americans. Now, an army is a team. It lives, eats, sleeps, fights as a team. This individuality stuff is a bunch of crap. The bilious bastards who wrote that stuff about individuality for the Saturday Evening Post, don't know anything more about real battle than they do about fornicating. Now we have the finest food and equipment, the best spirit, and the best men in the world. You know . . . My God, I actually pity those poor bastards we're going up against. My God, I do. We're not just going to shoot the bastards, we're going to cut out their living guts and use them to grease the treads of our tanks. We're going to murder those lousy Hun bastards by the bushel. Now some of you boys, I know, are wondering whether or not you'll chicken out under fire. Don't worry about it. I can assure you that you'll all do your duty. The Nazis are the enemy. Wade into them. Spill their blood, shoot them in the belly. When you put your hand into a bunch of goo, that a moment before was your best friends face, you'll know what to do. Now there's another thing I want you to remember. I don't want to get any messages saying that we are holding our position. We're not holding anything, we'll let the Hun do that. We are advancing constantly, and we're not interested in holding onto anything except the enemy. We're going to hold onto him by the nose, and we're going to kick him in the ass. We're going to kick the hell out of him all the time, and we're going to go through him like crap through a goose. Now, there's one thing that you men will be able to say when you get back home, and you may thank God for it. Thirty years from now when you're sitting around your fireside with your grandson on your knee, and he asks you, "What did you do in the great World War Two?" You won't have to say, "Well, I shoveled shit in Louisiana." Alright now, you sons of bitches, you know how I feel. Oh! . . . I will be proud to lead you wonderful guys into battle anytime, anywhere. That's all."

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies

Crossfire War - Iran Commences 2nd Stage to Five Week Wargames-(tin foil Iran vs India etc)
Posted by humint to Flavius
On News/Activism 08/20/2006 10:06:58 PM PDT · 2 of 3

ARTICLE: With this deliberate timing it is obvious Tehran does not intend for its military to be idle after these series of wargames are over.

Tehran already spent much of its proxy force in Lebanon however they still have a few tricks up their sleeve. I believe they'll spend everything fighting for the implementation of their Islamic utopia. The leadership in Iran is fascist… They've made too many steps in the direction of war to turn back now. They have to fight – unless everything they’ve said for the last 27 years has meant nothing. It cannot be ignored that their identity depends on conflict.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies

Three Iranian factories 'mass-produce bombs to kill British in Iraq'
Posted by humint to dirtboy; skyman; claudiustg; Billthedrill; arjay; TomGuy; pageonetoo; Doctor Raoul; Argus; ...
On News/Activism 08/20/2006 9:27:42 PM PDT · 60 of 82

General Macarthur, April 19, 1951

Military alliances, balances of power, leagues of nations, all in turn failed, leaving the only path to be by way of the crucible of war. The utter destructiveness of war now blocks out this alternative. We have had our last chance. If we will not devise some greater and more equitable system, our Armageddon will be at our door. The problem basically is theological and involves a spiritual recrudescence, an improvement of human character that will synchronize with our almost matchless advances in science, art, literature, and all material and cultural developments of the past two thousand years. It must be of the spirit if we are to save the flesh. But once war is forced upon us, there is no other alternative than to apply every available means to bring it to a swift end. War's very object is victory, not prolonged indecision. In war there is no substitute for victory.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies

Three Iranian factories 'mass-produce bombs to kill British in Iraq'
Posted by humint to Eagle74
On News/Activism 08/20/2006 9:04:30 PM PDT · 57 of 82

We should destroy the Iranian oil industry. By Bombing all oil transportation facilities, pipelines, storage tanks, tanker trucks, rolling stock, refinery’s etc… we can cripple the funding of numerous terrorist organizations, Hezbollah, Hama’s, Sadr’s militia, Syria, as well as make it more difficult for Iran to buy missiles and such from North Korea, China, and Russia.

Iran regularly threatens to use the so called “oil weapon”. What they’re implying they’ll do is shut down the straights of Hormuz and probably pull their daily contribution off of the petroleum market. I believe this is a credible threat that we do not want to see exercised. I also believe this is Iran’s only deterrent against external pressure to reform their belligerent policies. Their pursuit of nuclear WMD, advanced ballistic delivery systems and underground bunkers is a blatant attempt to diversify their deterrent portfolio. Why do they need solid deterrents? They need deterrents to facilitate the continued propagation of what they call, "the Islamic Revolution". The fascist ideological engine that corrupted the 1979 Revolution is still very much alive there. Exporting Islamic revolution is the principal strategy of Iranian foreign policy. Rhetorical and financial support for terrorism is that country’s primary tool of statecraft. Energy economics are what allows that government to sustain its existence and therefore its behavior.

I believe we should incrementally deprive them of their capacity to do harm in the region. Directly depriving that nation of energy in the form of refined petroleum is a tool in our toolbox, but not a very good one. Attacking those facilities would be a direct thing the West could do. I’m afraid there are far fewer things the West can do directly to reduce Iran’s ability to do harm. There are however a number of things that could be done "indirectly". I think the contents of this article represent the potential of indirectly limiting Iran’s capacity to do harm. The location of its IED factories and the people who are running them are now known to the world. This knowledge has provided options to tacticians that they presumably didn’t have before. Operations like this one conducted by dissidents inside Iran deserve greater attention from Western officials and Western media. At a minimum, American leaders should demonstrate to Iran, overtly or covertly, they have the capacity to absorb and react appropriately to this kind of information.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies

Three Iranian factories 'mass-produce bombs to kill British in Iraq'
Posted by humint
On News/Activism 08/20/2006 2:22:58 PM PDT · 81 replies · 1,298+ views

telegraph ^ | 20/08/2006 | Toby Harnden in Washington
Three factories in Iran are mass-producing the sophisticated roadside bombs used to kill British soldiers over the border in Iraq, it has been claimed.The lethal bombs are being made by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps at ordnance factory sites in Teheran, according to opponents of the country's theocratic regime. Designed to penetrate heavy armour, the devices being manufactured in Iran involve the use of "explosively formed projectiles" or EFPs, also known as shaped charges, often triggered by infra-red beams.The weapons can pierce the armour of British and American tanks and armoured personnel carriers and completely destroy armoured Land Rovers, which...

Read | Comments

What Is 'Islamofascism'? A history of the word from the first Westerner to use it.
Posted by humint to WildBill2275
On News/Activism 08/18/2006 6:08:16 PM PDT · 22 of 26

Unfortunately, the American President was too concerned about the distraction in his knee well to pay attention and deal appropriately with bin Laden’s repeated provocations...

Your comment expresses rather well what I meant about the West not caring about the problem of Islamic Fascism (as well as the jargon) before 9/11. You made my point for me - and still called it ludicrous? That’s just silly. There were excellent books written by Westerners on the topic of Islamic Fundamentalism before 9/11 but that literature was not representative of Western attitudes back then. These days, the West is demonstratively more aware of the “threat” [by whatever name you want to call it] than before 9/11. The important thing here is that calling the threat “Islam” in its entirety is wrong. Organized religion is no more a threat to your life and liberty than any other organized ideology. There are more than 1 billion Muslims in the World and if they were all trying to kill you, you’d probably be dead already. Yes, there are some “Fascist” Muslims who are trying to organize all other Muslims to kill you, but it hasn’t worked yet. Give the fascists time and it may work. Call all Muslims the enemy and fight them as such and the fascists may indeed convince other Muslims to fight you. How many do you think the fascists need to convince to kick start a major war? I think they’re getting close. How many do you think the fascists have already convinced that live right down the street from you? You don’t know do you… You’d have to ask them wouldn’t you? Try it… say to him or her --- “Pardon me neighbor, are you Muslim and are you plotting to kill me?”

History is clear on this point – we can’t do anything to influence a fascist that wants to kill us. Fortunately there aren’t many of them. That’s not to suggest stopping them is going to be easy. What we can do is make sure fascists are denied the ability to flourish. Using appropriate tactics is critical to successfully stopping these bastards. The first step toward denying the fascists comfort is specifically identifying who they are. There are a few Westerners who’ve been able to identify them but again, like before 9/11, the West is in a dangerous cognitive position. We’re in danger because most Westerns cannot conceptualize nor articulate the core threat to their life and liberty. History is clear on this point as well; if the situation remains this way, expect the West to be conquered and ruled by a tyrant.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies

What Is 'Islamofascism'? A history of the word from the first Westerner to use it.
Posted by humint to Chili Girl; WildBill2275
On News/Activism 08/18/2006 3:25:08 PM PDT · 19 of 26

Once again, we are wasting time on justifying a term that the Muslims will never accept.

Not true... Notice this author claims to be the first Westerner to use the term. The absolute first to equate fascism to radical Islamists were Muslims. The West couldn't have cared less about the term or the problem until a few passenger jets collapsed a few buildings one sunny day almost five years ago. Mass murder is always a wakeup call. Honestly, I couldn’t care less who’s at the head of the class [first to come up with a colloquial]. School's in session now! Let's hope the West doesn't fail the final exam.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies

What Is 'Islamofascism'? A history of the word from the first Westerner to use it.
Posted by humint
On News/Activism 08/18/2006 1:30:30 PM PDT · 25 replies · 753+ views

weeklystandard ^ | Stephen Schwartz
"Islamic fascists"--used by President George W. Bush for the conspirators in the alleged trans-Atlantic airline bombing plot--and references by other prominent figures to "Islamofascism," have been met by protests from Muslims who say the term is an insult to their religion. The meaning and origin of the concept, as well as the legitimacy of complaints about it, have become relevant--perhaps urgently so. I admit to a lack of modesty or neutrality about this discussion, since I was, as I will explain, the first Westerner to use the neologism in this context. In my analysis, as originally put in print directly...

Read | Comments

When Clever Gets Dumb - Washington’s Iran deal is an exercise in futility.
Posted by humint to DoctorMichael; defenderSD
On News/Activism 08/17/2006 11:28:08 AM PDT · 13 of 15

JMHO: The leaders of Iran need to be assassinated

I stand corrected. I made the erroneous assumption that the leaders of Iran would be alive to see the results of these nuclear negotiations. How European of me. Anyway, given the scenario stated by DR. M_ we need not have a security clearance to know what Iranian leaders would or would not do, they’d be dead. Predicting the repercussions of such an operation would be another guessing game altogether - but you make a valid point Dr. We always have to ask ourselves, what are the worst possible consequences if we guess wrong? Is the worst case, worse or better with the fascist Ayatollahs dead, and does it matter who’s credited for their killing? The article is alarmist, true, and it should be. We cannot overlook the nature of these Iranian leaders when we make an offer of this kind. Iranian officials use industrial cranes for public executions… that should be a hint to anyone offering industrial technology to Iran. Iran has not abided by international agreements in the past and is unlikely to abide any in the future. When someone lays out the worst case scenario, as this author has tried to do, you can bet the Iranian regime is going to trump it with a royal flush of bloody hearts. They’re building a utopia for Islamic Fascists and surprise! we’re not in it.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies

When Clever Gets Dumb - Washington’s Iran deal is an exercise in futility.
Posted by humint to defenderSD
On News/Activism 08/17/2006 10:28:41 AM PDT · 9 of 15

2) Iran would have accepted this offer by now, which they have not done.

You must have a Zenith Level Security Clearance to know what Iran would or would not do. It’s in my interest as an American to get this nuclear crisis solved so send your address and I'll mail you a plane ticket to Geneva. You can go mind meld with Larijani and sort this entire nuclear mess out over tea - on my dime... How about it? Are you ready to go yet?

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies

When Clever Gets Dumb - Washington’s Iran deal is an exercise in futility.
Posted by humint to MNJohnnie
On News/Activism 08/17/2006 9:29:23 AM PDT · 5 of 15

And the solution to the problem is what?

Confront the root causes aggressively, with all we've got. To summarize this article, quit pulling punches and appeasing - Start protecting national, and in this case international, security. If you've got your bunker built already feel free to nap through legitimate assessments of potential future catastrophe. The rest of us are presumed to be responsible for our own destiny and have an obligation to inform our representatives of threats to our liberty and national security.


  • 300 cans refined beans --- CHECK
  • 100 cans tomato paste --- CHECK
  • 200 boxes of mac&cheese --- CHECK
  • 20 rolls TP --- CHECK
  • 1 pillow --- CHECK
  • 1 blanket --- CHECK

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies

When Clever Gets Dumb - Washington’s Iran deal is an exercise in futility.
Posted by humint
On News/Activism 08/17/2006 8:44:31 AM PDT · 14 replies · 273+ views

NRO ^ | Henry Sokolski
Although it’s not widely appreciated, the nuclear deal Washington is currently dangling before Iran to entice it to halt its declared uranium-enrichment program is a cure nearly as awful as the disease. To be sure, Iran’s enrichment effort, if unchecked, could bring Tehran within days of acquiring a bomb. But Washington’s latest overture to Tehran—offering advanced large nuclear reactors, hundreds of tons of lightly enriched uranium, and a pass on Iran’s violation of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty—will only make it tougher to toe a hard line against Iran later this fall. And it could literally blow up in our faces...

Read | Comments

Iran President Ahmadinejad: Israel and its supporters must compensate for Lebanon's damage
Posted by humint to HAL9000
On News/Activism 08/16/2006 11:15:10 PM PDT · 21 of 31

The Goebbels technique, also known as argumentum ad nauseam, is the name given to a policy of repeating a point until it is taken to be the truth (see Big Lie). For example, when Goebbels took ownership of the Der Angriff (The Assault) newspaper, he attacked Berlin Police President Bernhard Weiss, calling him "Isidor" Weiss. To German ears, Isidor at the time was a name with strong Jewish connotations. Eventually the public believed Isidor was Weiss' real given name and he became a figure of ridicule.[citation needed] Goebbels also pioneered the use of broadcasting in mass propaganda, promoting the distribution of inexpensive single frequency radio receivers (the so-called Volksempfänger (People's radio) to the German public which ensured that millions of people heard the output of the Reich's propaganda ministry while being unable to receive news and other broadcasts from outside Germany. Meanwhile his ministry busily broadcast Nazi propaganda around the world by shortwave radio. Newsreels, movies and books were impossible to publish without prior approval and censorship by Goebbels' ministry. He is credited by historians with developing the techniques of modern communications and propaganda. He had a strong influence on German propaganda motion pictures throughout the Nazi era.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies

Palestinian? Pure Fiction. No Such thing, nor people
Posted by humint to FARS
On News/Activism 08/16/2006 10:37:31 PM PDT · 33 of 46

This is interesting. It reminded me of a conversation I had with an interesting civilian I met while serving overseas. Let me share the story. – In a bar I was approached by a woman who was interested in my accent. She asked where I was from. – her accent sounding very much like mine. I said "America, where are you from?" She replied, "no really, where are you from?" I thought it was odd that she would repeat herself and she was forcing me to do the same… Giving her the benefit of doubt I said, "seriously, I’m from America, I’m American". I’d been in that country a long time and had picked up a modicum of the local accent; I was thinking --- maybe she thought I was local but well traveled ---. She said, "No, you’re North American like me. I’m Canadian" and in a snotty sort of way, she said "I’ve never understood why people from the U.S. claim the entire Western hemisphere as their homeland." I quickly overlooked her snotty attitude and we began discussing national identity as well as U.S.-Canada relations. All in all, it was an enjoyable experience. Her snotty intro was trite but forgivable. I’m familiar and even comfortable with such folks. On many occasions I’ve overlooked an individual’s self aggrandizement in order to separate wheat from chaff, if you know what I mean. Some people boost their own confidence by emphasizing their importance while touting the insignificance of others. C’est la vi - Not everyone was born with high self esteem...

Personal shortcomings aside, this work has a problem with its major premise. It’s exactly the same as the problem with my Canadian’s argument. She was right but I’m not going to stop identifying myself as American. Honestly, who the hell cares that she was right? Identity is not so easily forged or dismantled by waving around the truth. Another point to back me up… Steven Colbert pointed out about a week ago that the Constitution clearly says – "We the People of the United States" – suggesting that the citizens of Washington DC (A district not a state) are not Americans. It was absurdly funny, but absurd.

This work has another problem in that the "Holy Land" has a long and turbulent history. Setting that aside - What should be clear to everyone is that position is 9/10th of the law. Who ever has it now, owns it! Done! There are those that can’t deal with that. There are a number of groups and experts that selectively parade their version of the region’s history to feed their agenda. There is no value in that, only more bloodshed.


As a geographic unit, Palestine extended from the Mediterranean on the west to the Arabian Desert on the east and from the lower Litani River in the north to the Gaza Valley in the south. It was named after the Philistines, who occupied the southern coastal region in the twelfth century B.C. The name Philistia was used in the second century A.D. to designate Syria Palestina, which formed the southern third of the Roman province of Syria.

Emperor Constantine (ca. 280-337) shifted his capital from Rome to Constantinople in 330 and made Christianity the official religion. With Constantine's conversion to Christianity, a new era of prosperity came to Palestine, which attracted a flood of pilgrims from all over the empire. Upon partition of the Roman Empire in 395, Palestine passed under eastern control. The scholarly Jewish communities in Galilee continued with varying fortunes under Byzantine rule and dominant Christian influence until the Arab-Muslim conquest of A.D. 638. The period included, however, strong Jewish support of the briefly successful Persian invasion of 610-14.

The Arab caliph, Umar, designated Jerusalem as the third holiest place in Islam, second only to Mecca and Medina. Under the Umayyads, based in Damascus, the Dome of the Rock was erected in 691 on the site of the Temple of Solomon, which was also the alleged nocturnal resting place of the Prophet Muhammad on his journey to heaven. It is the earliest Muslim monument still extant. Close to the shrine, to the south, the Al Aqsa Mosque was built. The Umayyad caliph, Umar II (717-720), imposed humiliating restrictions on his non-Muslim subjects that led many to convert to Islam. These conversions, in addition to a steady tribal flow from the desert, changed the religious character of the inhabitants of Palestine from Christian to Muslim. Under the Abbasids the process of Islamization gained added momentum as a result of further restrictions imposed on non-Muslims by Harun ar Rashid (786-809) and more particularly by Al Mutawakkil (847-61).

The Abbasids were followed by the Fatimids who faced frequent attacks from Qarmatians, Seljuks, and Byzantines, and periodic beduin opposition. Palestine was reduced to a battlefield. In 1071 the Seljuks captured Jerusalem. The Fatimids recaptured the city in 1098, only to deliver it a year later to a new enemy, the Crusaders of Western Europe. In 1100 the Crusaders established the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, which remained until the famous Muslim general Salah ad Din (Saladin) defeated them at the decisive Battle of Hattin in 1187. The Crusaders were not completely evicted from Palestine, however, until 1291 when they were driven out of Acre. The fourteenth and fifteenth centuries were a "dark age" for Palestine as a result of Mamluk misrule and the spread of several epidemics. The Mamluks were slave-soldiers who established a dynasty that ruled Egypt and Syria, which included Palestine, from 1250 to 1516.

In 1516 the Ottoman Turks, led by Sultan Selim I, routed the Mamluks, and Palestine began four centuries under Ottoman domination. Under the Ottomans, Palestine continued to be linked administratively to Damascus until 1830, when it was placed under Sidon, then under Acre, then once again under Damascus. In 1887-88 the local governmental units of the Ottoman Empire were finally settled, and Palestine was divided into the administrative divisions (sing., mutasarrifiyah) of Nabulus and Acre, both of which were linked with the vilayet (largest Ottoman administrative division, similar to a province) of Beirut and the autonomous mutasarrifiyah of Jerusalem, which dealt directly with Constantinople.

For the first three centuries of Ottoman rule, Palestine was relatively insulated from outside influences. At the end of the eighteenth century, Napoleon's abortive attempt to establish a Middle East empire led to increased Western involvement in Palestine. The trend toward Western influence accelerated during the nine years (1831-40) that the Egyptian viceroy Muhammad Ali and his son Ibrahim ruled Palestine. The Ottomans returned to power in 1840 with the help of the British, Austrians, and Russians. For the remainder of the nineteenth century, Palestine, despite the growth of Christian missionary schools and the establishment of European consulates, remained a mainly rural, poor but self-sufficient, introverted society. Demographically its population was overwhelmingly Arab, mainly Muslim, but with an important Christian merchant and professional class residing in the cities. The Jewish population of Palestine before 1880 consisted of fewer than 25,000 people, two-thirds of whom lived in Jerusalem where they made up half the population (and from 1890 on more than half the population). These were Orthodox Jews (see Glossary), many of whom had immigrated to Palestine simply to be buried in the Holy Land, and who had no real political interest in establishing a Jewish entity. They were supported by alms given by world Jewry.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies

It’s Time to Review-- "...the West is NOT fighting a "war on terror."
Posted by humint to Poincare
On News/Activism 08/11/2006 9:11:48 PM PDT · 10 of 15

I think Bush made a good move in that direction by naming Islamic fascism.

I agree... Muslims are too ideologically diverse to call the WOT a holy war. Those that do are feeding into similar media distortions that are facilitated by Al-Jazzera and Al-Manar. What most Westerners know of Islam is related to terrorist violence discussed in Western Media. There are many non-violent dimensions to the cultures and subcultures where Islam is the predominant religion. It is a fact that those dimensions rarely make their way into Western media. Even if they do happen to find their way into an educational segment, you can bet that its coverage is not accompanied by the same drama that naturally comes with a story about blood, guts and death. There is no conspiracy here, that’s just how the brain works. It’s a dangerous cycle with consequences. Bush made a good move to call a duck a duck, so to speak, but a difficult one. He’s fighting an uphill battle against a commonsense perception. It is essential that he and others take leadership on this because there are leaders in the Muslim world who accentuate violence to increase their power, in the name of Islam. They seek to dominate the globe to forge their utopia at the expense of every one else, including other Muslims. That’s fascism, no doubt about it.

B. RUSSELL: What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies

The ghosts of the Cold War
Posted by humint to FARS; odds
On News/Activism 08/10/2006 8:07:54 PM PDT · 3 of 4

Do you believe the MEK were among those supported by the Soviets to overthrow the Shah? Looking at the original docs now it is not at all clear that intelligence agencies of the West were able to dissociate the various groups and their ideologies. It looks as though they were labeled “bad guys” and no one ever looked back. These days, a great many of us are. Looking back now it’s clear why this group remains while the communists and Marxists imploded. Either way you look at this issue, it's been hard on Soviet inventions after the USSR broke down. Those groups with no legs of their own aren't standing any more any way.

RESEARCH EXCERPT 1: CIA Saw Rebel Group Winning in Iraq

Takeover could compound U.S. problems, '84 memo reported - LA Times March 19, 1987


According to a CIA memo cited by the presidential commition headed by former Sen. John Tower (R Tex.), the agency's deputy director for operations considered the group known as the Moujahadeen "to be well organized, influenced by the Sovites and likely to succeed Khomeini."


RESEARCH EXCERPT 2: Interview with Masoud Rajavi of the Mojahedine e-Khalq, Merip Reports, March-April 1982.


Q: You are accused by your opponents of being "Islamic Marxists." What is your relation to Marxism?

A: These are two things which I would like to make absolutely clear. The first is that we are not Marxists: we reject the materialism of Marxism. But we are willing to discuss with Marxists. The sixth Imam in the kaaba in Mecca and debated with the materialists. Secondly, we are not allied to the Soviet Union. We are an independent organization. Those in Iran who are allied to the USSR are the Tudeh Party and Ihe so-called Majority fedayi: these groups have no social base and have had to seek protection under Khomeini. We condemn their policies.


Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies

The ghosts of the Cold War
Posted by humint
On News/Activism 08/10/2006 7:30:30 PM PDT · 3 replies · 134+ views

asia times ^ | 10 August 2006 | Najum Mushtaq
A core component of the United States' foreign policy since the September 11, 2001, attacks on the US has been educational reform in Muslim countries to check the influence of extremist ideologies and fundamentalism. International obligations under the United Nations Security Council's anti-extremism resolutions also require curricular reform. Pakistan, as the birthplace of the Taliban and home to many a militant Islamic movement, finds itself at the center of policy debates and projects on curbing extremism and promoting "moderate Islam" through education. A growing pile of policy proposals in the United States, including a recent report from the US Institute...

Read | Comments

Israel shows video of Hezbollah fighter
Posted by humint to humint
On News/Activism 08/07/2006 3:24:07 PM PDT · 5 of 11

Presidential Briefing?-Iran

  1. Iran continues its nuclear enrichment program and the latest top mullah pronouncements are that Iran will never give up its nuclear program.
  2. Most foreign observes believe that Iran sent orders to its Revolutionary Guards training Hezbollah to start the current conflict in Lebanon to distract the UN from the Iranian nuclear bomb building program. The conflict started the day the UN was to start debate on a resolution condemning the Iranian nuclear enrichment program with potential sanctions if Iran did not live up to the resolution.
  3. Iran has stated that they will use the “oil weapon” if anyone tries to stop their nuclear program.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies

Israel shows video of Hezbollah fighter
Posted by humint to humint
On News/Activism 08/07/2006 3:18:08 PM PDT · 4 of 11

Hezbollah attacks seen as Iran diversion

The Washington Times - By Rowan Scarborough - Hezbollah's July 12 attack on Israel is seen by some Bush administration officials as a bid to break the West's unified focus on forcing Iran to stop enriching uranium for use in nuclear weapons.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies

Israel shows video of Hezbollah fighter
Posted by humint
On News/Activism 08/07/2006 3:05:01 PM PDT · 10 replies · 773+ views

Associated Press ^ | SARAH EL DEEB
JERUSALEM - Israel's army released a video Monday purporting to show the interrogation of a Hezbollah fighter acknowledging his part in the raid on an Israeli army patrol July 12 - the spark that ignited the current conflict in Lebanon. In the video, Hussein Ali Suleiman, 22, said the seizure of the two Israelis was the second time he had taken part in such an attempt, following an unsuccessful raid in 2005. He also spoke about training in Iran. The tape shown on Israeli television appeared to be heavily edited, and some answers were cut off in mid-sentence. He appeared...

Read | Comments

Posted by humint to FARS; odds
On News/Activism 08/06/2006 9:24:34 PM PDT · 18 of 19

FARS:You read history in a slanted version. I watched it unfold and participated in it. Big difference, so I posit my version is a lot closer to the truth. My knowing the man did not diminish my unbiased evaluation, it provided me with insight on an almost daily basis on matters to which you will never be truly privy and if you were would change your opinion and mind set in the blink of an eye. There is too much to say to post here.

HUMINT: This has been an interesting exchange and is more valuable than I can express... I’d like to mention however that my interpretation of history is a function of data I've absorbed from multiple sources, you included. For that reason my interpretation keeps changing. Admittedly, my interpretation of history could move further away from the truth. Be that as it may, the intent of a dynamic interpretation like mine is to asymptotically approach truth. To be reasonable, you’ll have to acknowledge this fact; perception plays a heavy role in any recorded history --- even yours. Having experienced what you have, I’d be surprised if your interpretation of Iranian history were as dynamic as mine. Your perception is a function of your role in Iran and is unique to you, that time and that place. Your interpretation should be static so that amateur historians like me might assess your interpretation of events in a greater context of both Iranian and world affairs. Although yours cannot be verified IMO, your story is as valuable as, for example, Ali Shariati's. No matter though, this is just a casual exchange on a blog, nothing more, nothing less. Although interesting, the stories of pseudonyms on blogs do not warrant research material for a doctoral thesis. Not yet anyway…

You asked what I would've done in your shoes; I suppose I would've reread the Prince and done my best. I’ve no desire to second guess you. You’d need to provide much more information than you have for me to second guess you. The fact is, there are some assignments destined to failure and maybe yours was one of those. With adversaries as formidable as the Soviets and leadership as inept as Carter, I might have faired no better. You must realize however that you are blaming J. Carter for what he didn’t do, not what he did. Carter was repulsed by events in Iran and retracted American support. What this suggests is that the Shah had no legs of his own and therefore faltered. Regardless, I can empathize with your circumstance. On your watch the United States lost a close ally and valuable trading partner. The weight on your shoulders must be nearly unbearable. Worse still, the ghosts from the Iran-Iraq War must haunt you. That war never would've occurred had you and Mr. P succeeded in maintaining the dynasty. If I were in your shoes I would hope that after experiencing such failure, I would be less prone to blame others and less dismissive of amateur historians like me. The root of my challenging your interpretation is curiosity. Fortunately I’m not one to take ad hominem personally.

I do however have a few questions. Why was there no democracy movement in Iran at that time? Why, on every shelf that held an illegal text [or every shelf in Iran for that matter] was there not a well documented and concise analysis of the American Revolution, American Civil War, the American role in World War I and or the American role in World War II? What purpose did American petroleum dollars serve if not to help foster a less slanted interpretation of liberal democracy, American history and the American people --- oft blasphemed as Imperialist? It’s that slanted interpretation of the United States that has facilitated violence toward Americans and American interests the world over. Did you consider fostering an obvious alternative to the communist threat, namely popular sovereignty, without spilling blood? It’s asinine to call my interpretation of history slanted when by nothing more than the admissions you've made in this thread and your own logic with regard to personal responsibility, the blame for the lives millions might literally lay at your feet. How's that for an interpretation? Clearly you being responsible for the deaths of millions is not my interpretation of history because IMO, you and J. Carter are only responsible for the acts you committed, not the ones others think you should've but you didn’t. Which brings me to my last question; were you prone to blaming and dismissing the interpretations of others before the Shah fell? If you were, depending on your rank at that time, maybe you should be awarded more responsibility for the fall of the Shah and the post revolutionary bloodshed.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies

Posted by humint to FARS
On News/Activism 08/04/2006 11:50:00 AM PDT · 10 of 19

Take it from someone who knew him well, despot is so far from the truth it's ridiculous.

Granted, he may not have been personally despotic but the implementation of his policies were perceived to be despotic by many of his subjects --- hence the revolution! Honestly, my comment was not a personal attack against him personally; rather it was an acknowledgment that his policies in concert with foreign pressure brought the Iranian public to the boiling point. That should be clear… A king is not a man. A king represents a system. Also, my reading of Iranian history suggests Carter is given much more credit for the Shah's downfall than he deserves. Another slight of hand historians pull is to call what happened an Islamic Revolution. The engine of that revolution was not the Khomeinists. It was the leftists who effectively defined an alternative future so brilliant indeed that the people came out against the system in droves. When the Shah fell, what remained of the state was extremely fragile. It was then that the Khomeinists maneuvered into power with violence… they did so well after the fact. Clearly, you’ve a different, more personal interpretation of Iranian history. The crux of this debate may be that you knew the Shah himself [rare indeed] while I know many who lived under him [extremely common]. Your experience is unique and personal while mine is common and impersonal. When it comes to revolution, which do you suppose is a better barometer? In any case, your experience reads incredibly well and I am pleased to learn of it. Many thanks…

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies

Posted by humint to FARS
On News/Activism 08/03/2006 8:07:39 PM PDT · 7 of 19

A case study would support a theory that the value accorded to any given regime should be measured in light of its inevitable successor and the ability of the latter to improve conditions and ills of which they accused the predecessors. As they ask in American politics, are you better off now? Iranians would certainly say "no".

This is an erroneous conclusion formed from bad logic. The transition from despotism to anything else is an abandonment of the present. No one can predict the future which is precisely why revolutions occur. Therefore it is bogus to suggest the theocratic fascism we are witnessing now was the inevitable successor to the Pahlavi Dynasty. The Shah of Iran was a despot and such the 1979 revolution was legitimate. The results of that revolution were manipulated on many fronts, some of which are only coming to light today.

The pre79 Iranian Diaspora community has something to offer after the current Iranian government implodes but recognize, nostalgia is not the engine of change. Consider the tens of thousands who regularly protest for regime change in Europe! The US could very well miss a chance at allegiance and influence in future Iran if it continues to ignore that growing movement. This was a thought provoking post... Thanks for the ping.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies

Victor Davis Hanson: It's Not Just About Land
Posted by humint to Tolik
On News/Activism 08/02/2006 10:22:30 PM PDT · 11 of 30

American cash aid, Israeli concessions, windfall petrol profits and, most of all, appeasement of radical Islamists can do nothing to alleviate these perceived grievances. Instead, there will be no peace in the general Middle East until Iranians and Arabs have true constitutional government, free institutions, open markets and the rule of law. Without these reforms, they will continue to fail, seeking easy refuge in the shreds of mythical ancestral honor -- and this pathetic neurosis of blaming nearby Israel for the loss of it.

Reforms like that would require revolutions march through the region like Sherman through Georgia.

To the Citizens of Atlanta: General Sherman instructs me to say to you that you must all leave Atlanta; that as many of you as want to go North can do so, and that as many as want to go South can do so, and that all can take with them their movable property, servants included, if they want to go, but that no force is to be used; and that he will furnish transportation for persons and property as far as Rough and Ready, from whence it is expected General Hood will assist in carrying it on. Like transportation will be furnished for people and property going North, and it is required that all things contemplated by this notice will be carried into execution as soon as possible.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies

Blair disputes Bush's global tactics (BBC BARFS after Tony gets it right about Islamic Threat)
Posted by humint to sergey1973
On News/Activism 08/02/2006 7:47:04 PM PDT · 17 of 18

ARTICLE: He did not however address in detail the contradiction that some might see in this speech. How do you extend the values of moderation by pursuing war, as in Iraq, which might in itself increase the level of extremism in response?

No contradiction at all... Here's the step by step for the uninitiated:

  1. Depose the dictator
  2. Encourage all moderates to participate democratically
  3. Enforce the rule of law --- [In other words, kill the extremists]
  4. Repeat steps 2 and 3 until extremist responses end

This is a simple four step recipe to extend the values of moderation… Be patient though --- history suggests this recipe needs plenty of time and a lot of blood. As unappetizing as that may sound, it’s far more appealing than dictatorship.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies

Condi in Diplomatic Disneyland
Posted by humint to A. Pole; Wuli
On News/Activism 08/01/2006 9:20:38 PM PDT · 40 of 41

[The] American system, although born from revolution is not designed to make a new revolution. You need a very determined small leadership to conduct a large change.

REVOLUTION: The overthrow of one government and its replacement with another.

I disagree with Mr. Pole on the basis that ideas and examples incite revolution. The origin of revolution is not people but ideas and American political ideas and processes continue to be feedstock for revolution around the world. How many liberal democracies have arisen since 1789? The examples of governance set by the United States have exerted incredible influence over a global revolution toward democracy. The definition of revolution does not require revolutionaries be indigenous, nor a small group. You are correct Mr. Pole in describing how revolution tends to work but you’ve restricted the concept of revolution. I believe you are dead wrong to suggest the American system is not designed to make new revolution. The fact is the very existence of the United States incites revolution in places like Iran. The government of Iran is forced to react, isolate and vilify liberal democracy. Why? If Iran does not, its pillars of fascist power will rot and collapse under the weight of its people's ideas. All people are hungry to adopt successful changes they know occur every day in other parts of the free world. Why should Iranians be left out?


  • Sovereignty of the people.
  • Government based upon consent of the governed.
  • Majority rule.
  • Minority rights.
  • Guarantee of basic human rights.
  • Free and fair elections.
  • Equality before the law.
  • Due process of law.
  • Constitutional limits on government.
  • Social, economic, and political pluralism.
  • Values of tolerance, pragmatism, cooperation, and compromise.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies

When the devil dislikes the stink of brimstone
Posted by humint to ksen
On News/Activism 08/01/2006 8:20:03 PM PDT · 2 of 2

What cards does Tehran have left to play? It can:

  1. further destabilize Iraq
  2. deploy terrorists against Israeli and US targets outside the theater
  3. make good on its threat to wield the "oil weapon"

Spengler left out the cards Iran continues to play…

  1. remain the word’s most active state sponsor of terror without consequence
  2. move forward with its nuclear weapons program without consequence
  3. continue abusing the human rites of its citizens without consequence

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies

Money Can’t Buy Us Democracy
Posted by humint to A. Pole
On News/Activism 07/31/2006 10:32:30 PM PDT · 13 of 14

ARTICLE: What we need in our fight for freedom is not foreign aid but conditions that would allow us to focus all of our energies on the domestic struggle and to rest assured that no one is encouraging the regime’s oppression.

The Iranian government, through its constitution and its acts, defines itself by oppressing the Iranian people. It is not necessary to encourage oppression when every institution in that system is oppressive. One need only express this fact anywhere in the world to feel the regime's reprisals. Its intolerance of criticism touches legitimate journalists from all corners of our planet. Once facts critical of the dictatorship are published… forget about getting a journalist Visa to visit.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies

Money Can’t Buy Us Democracy
Posted by humint to TeenagedConservative
On News/Activism 07/31/2006 10:17:22 PM PDT · 11 of 14

Haha, I suspect that only worked one way. Washington specifically said we were not to get involved in foreign entanglements.

Certainly he did, shortly after the birth of these United States but how relevant is that warning under the auspices of globalization? Washington, as other founders, warned of threats too their young republic. Those alarms must be tempered with contemporary context as well.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies

Money Can’t Buy Us Democracy
Posted by humint to NutCrackerBoy
On News/Activism 07/31/2006 10:12:06 PM PDT · 10 of 14

I don't 100% agree with his Op/Ed. To my mind, it should have waxed more Natan Sharansky. But it is excellent for this to appear in The New York Times. Now maybe the world's elite will be a little more cognizant of the freedom movement.

I agree with you. Ganji lacks moral clarity in this work. It is not altogether clear why the Iranian government let this particular former political prisoner jet set around the planet. Add to that, he's got the nuclear issue dead wrong. His story is however an effective focal point to raise awareness about Iran.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies

Money Can’t Buy Us Democracy
Posted by humint to TeenagedConservative
On News/Activism 07/31/2006 10:04:02 PM PDT · 6 of 14

I seriously doubt the Founders would have given money to other countries to help them fight their governments.

Why? They solicited assistance from the French.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies

Money Can’t Buy Us Democracy
Posted by humint to humint
On News/Activism 07/31/2006 9:58:12 PM PDT · 2 of 14

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies

Money Can’t Buy Us Democracy
Posted by humint
On News/Activism 07/31/2006 9:53:31 PM PDT · 13 replies · 199+ views

NYTimes ^ | August 1, 2006 | AKBAR GANJI
IN February, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice asked Congress for $75 million to help Iran’s democratic opposition. In Iran, her request was widely discussed in the news media and in opposition circles. It became particularly controversial after an article in The New Yorker on March 6 suggested that this money might be used in an attempt to change the regime in Tehran with the help of Iranian democrats, particularly those living abroad. ... What we need in our fight for freedom is not foreign aid but conditions that would allow us to focus all of our energies on the domestic...

Read | Comments

Condi in Diplomatic Disneyland
Posted by humint to A. Pole
On News/Activism 07/31/2006 8:42:50 PM PDT · 35 of 41

These "VOCAB" is good for making slogans. What about providing a good definition?

WILL: The mental faculty by which one deliberately chooses or decides upon a course of action

I’ve provided my definition of freedom. I’ve provided the recognized definition of liberty and freedom. I’ve provided synonyms, antonyms and words similar or related to liberty and freedom. I have the will to continue this thread but you’ll have to demonstrate the capacity to absorb and process valid information. In other words, you’ll have to help me help you understand what freedom is [from my perspective of course] if this thread is to make any progress. Here’s a hint… consider what you believe freedom is, articulate it and then ask me, “Hey HUMINT, how is your version different than mine?” --- Just a suggestion...

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies

Condi in Diplomatic Disneyland
Posted by humint to Wuli
On News/Activism 07/31/2006 8:21:53 PM PDT · 34 of 41

It is not blasphemy to acknowledge Rice's manifold failures. Ideas are one thing, having the knowledge and know how to maneuver among the realities of the Middle East to keep those ideas on track, instead of constantly being derailed by events you should have, but failed to anticipate does not make Rice a revolutionary, it makes her a bumbler.

We all make mistakes. We know we make mistakes. I don't know any military commander, who is honest, who would say he has not made a mistake. There's a wonderful phrase: "the fog of war." What "the fog of war" means is: war is so complex it's beyond the ability of the human mind to comprehend all the variables. Our judgment, our understanding, are not adequate. And we kill people unnecessarily. Wilson said: "We won the war to end all wars." I'm not so naieve or simplistic to believe we can eliminate war. We're not going to change human nature anytime soon. It isn't that we aren't rational. We are rational. But reason has limits.

The question isn't if what she's done are mistakes, but if she knows we are at war? I believe she does. Revolutions emerge when great leaders abandon advice that maintains the present; pursue a clearly defined future while achieving intermediate goals aligned to that future - never abandoning strategy - constantly changing tactics.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies

Condi in Diplomatic Disneyland
Posted by humint to A. Pole
On News/Activism 07/31/2006 7:56:23 PM PDT · 31 of 41

Great. So How do you define Liberty ? Or of what does Liberty consist?


  • GLOBALIZATION: To make global or worldwide in scope or application.
  • FREEDOM: Liberty of the person from slavery, detention, or oppression.
  • LIBERTY: The right and power to act, believe, or express oneself in a manner of one's own choosing.
  • IDEOLOGY: A set of doctrines or beliefs that form the basis of a political, economic, or other system.
  • GOVERNMENT: A system or policy by which a political unit is governed.
  • POLITICS: The art or science of government or governing, especially the governing of a political entity, such as a nation.
  • COMMUNITY: A group of people living in the same locality and under the same government.
  • EXPRESION: The act of expressing, conveying, or representing in words, art, music, or movement; a manifestation.
  • JOURNALISM: The style of writing consisting of direct presentation of facts or occurrences with little attempt at analysis or interpretation.
  • AUTONOMY: A self-governing state, community, or group.
  • DEMOCRACY: Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.
  • ELECTORATE: A body of qualified voters.
  • INFLUENCE: Power to sway or affect based on prestige, wealth, ability, or position
  • CITIZEN: a native or naturalized member of a state or other political community
  • RIGHTEOUS: Morally upright; without guilt or sin.
  • MORALITY: A system of ideas of right and wrong conduct.


  • ISOLATIONISM: A national policy of abstaining from political or economic relations with other countries.
  • FASCISM: A system of government under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship.
  • DICTATORSHIP: Absolute or despotic control or power.
  • OLIGARCHY: Government by a few, especially by a small faction of persons or families.
  • OLIGOPOLY: A market condition in which sellers are so few that the actions of any one of them will materially affect price and have a measurable impact on competitors.
  • THEOCRACY: A government ruled by or subject to religious authority.
  • RELIGION: A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
  • TRIBE: A unit consisting of a number of families, clans, or other groups who share a common ancestry.
  • SECTARIAN: Adhering or confined to the dogmatic limits of a sect or denomination; partisan.
  • APOSTATE: One who has abandoned one's religious faith, a political party, one's principles, or a cause.
  • POLITICAL PRISONER: A person who has been imprisoned for holding or advocating dissenting political views.
  • SUBJECT: One who is under the rule of another or others, especially one who owes allegiance to a government or ruler.
  • CONTROL: To exercise authoritative or dominating influence over; direct.
  • SLAVE: One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence.
  • DOGMATIC: Characterized by an authoritative, arrogant assertion of unproved or unprovable principles.
  • SOCIOPATH: One who is affected with a personality disorder marked by antisocial behavior.
  • DETENTION: A forced or punitive delay.
  • OPPRESSION: The act of oppressing; arbitrary and cruel exercise of power.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies

Condi in Diplomatic Disneyland
Posted by humint to A. Pole
On News/Activism 07/31/2006 3:56:30 PM PDT · 27 of 41

How do you define freedom? Or of what does freedom consist?

I hold these truths to be self-evident, that all people are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People and their elected representatives to alter or to abolish despotic regimes, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles of justice, liberty and the rule of law — and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is justice, it is duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for future security.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies

Condi in Diplomatic Disneyland
Posted by humint to A. Pole; Wuli
On News/Activism 07/31/2006 2:30:34 PM PDT · 25 of 41

RICE: her rejection of the call for an immediate cease-fire on the grounds that "whatever we do, we have to be certain that we're pushing forward to the new Middle East, not going back to the old Middle East" — carry a revolutionary ring that scares the hell out of America's allies in the region. It was revolutionaries like Lenin and Mao, after all, who rationalized violence and suffering as the wages of progress, in the way a doctor might rationalize surgery — painful, bloody, even risking the life of the patient, but ultimately necessary.

This is one of the best articles I’ve read in a long time. It’s one of the first to fully recognize the shift in American foreign policy. Of course this author is afraid and like her colleagues quick to blaspheme Rice and the America she represents. Secretary Rice IS in fact the spokesperson for the global revolution. Change can be frightening for some but no longer is Rice just an American diplomat. The global revolution has been underway for years, but as yet had no spokesperson. None before this journalist has made note that an American, specifically Secretary Rice, is the revolution's official spokesperson. Journalists are people too and in any group of people, there are some visionaries and some who are blind to their surroundings. History points out that American revolutionaries established constitutional freedom of the press, and spilled blood to protect it. The idiotic parallels --- between Lenin, Mao --- this fool makes may be entirely lost on her and on Time Magazine altogether, but they are not lost on revolutionary Americans. Despotism and acompaning moral relativism are responsible for more blood, pain and subjugation than any other human activity. Moral relativism has played a major role in obstructing the march of freedom across much of Eastern Europe, Asia, Africa and the Middle East. However, it comes as no surprise that moral relativism hasn’t stopped freedom's march. Freedom is the natural state of human affairs! I am proud to know that a revolutionary American is now its official spokesperson! Thank you Secretary Rice!

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies

Is the Oil Era Coming to an End?
Posted by humint to spinestein
On News/Activism 07/30/2006 11:15:11 PM PDT · 14 of 35

Correct. Fossil fuels will never again be cheaper than they are now but must become progressively more expensive, as the supply is nonrenewable and the demand for energy can only increase exponentially. At some point in the next few decades, alternatives will make more economic sense for everyday mass energy use, and gasoline will be a luxury fuel, like when "Grampa Steve" takes his antique 2006 Dodge Viper out for a spin.

The impact of energy on our economy has an evolutionary effect. The specialization that certain fuels allow becomes like pillars propping up our economy. When the supply of those fuels is threatened… recall the extinction of the dinosaurs? Entire swaths of our economy will become extinct, virtually over night. The folks whom are eager to say alternatives are the answer, are rarely engineers. If they are, they should be aware of the kind of the incredible lifestyle changes their alternative will require. I’m an engineer and when I talk lifestyle changes I’m referring to the kind of changes people do not make unless they are forced to make them. Necessity is the mother of invention. Necessity is measured in blood and starving children. This most recent generation of Americans is numb to such things…

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies

Is the Oil Era Coming to an End?
Posted by humint to 308MBR
On News/Activism 07/30/2006 10:49:59 PM PDT · 9 of 35

ARTICLE: The money paid by oil importing nations to exporters over the past decade looks like the largest transfer of wealth from one part of the world to another since the Spanish looted South America's gold and silver.

308MBR: Bring on the $8.00/gal gasoline and diesel! Until then, stop whining.

Look past the pump for a sec. When you fill up, who gets your treasure? What do you suppose they do with it? Gas will never make it to $8.00/gal because the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corp will have enough resources to aggravate you to death.

Obedience to Khamenei is obedience to Imam Khomeini

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies

Is the Oil Era Coming to an End?
Posted by humint
On News/Activism 07/30/2006 10:23:17 PM PDT · 34 replies · 858+ views

Asharq Alawsat ^ | 30/07/2006 | Amir Taheri
Within the next weeks, the British government is expected to unveil its strategic energy plan for the next quarter of a century. According to those familiar with the draft, the plan is build around a single motto: energy security. The United Kingdom is not the first major industrial power to put energy security top of its national agenda. In the United States, President George W Bush made that a priority of is administration over two years ago. Since then France, Germany and Japan have also begun to rethink their long-term energy strategies. In every case, the strategy adopted is aimed...

Read | Comments

Iranian Alert - July 28 - Iranian people angry over government support of Hezbollah
Posted by humint to Continental Soldier
On News/Activism 07/30/2006 9:29:57 PM PDT · 21 of 21

the government in Iran is well on its way toward "1984."

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies

ANALYSIS - Iran may think twice before quitting nuclear treaty
Posted by humint to Flavius
On News/Activism 07/30/2006 9:20:22 PM PDT · 4 of 4

VIENNA (Reuters) - Nuclear inspectors fear Iran may make good on veiled threats to eject them over a U.N. demand it halt uranium enrichment, but analysts say Tehran is likely to stop short of a step that would make it an international pariah.

If Iran isn't already an international pariah, what kind of pariah is it? Mahmud Ahmadinejad, Bashar Al-Assad, Hugo Chavez and Kim Jong-Il regularly host "international pariah" parties. They're all very proud pariahs. It's not as if Iran pulling out of the NPT is going to be the straw that finally breaks the camel's back.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies

Iran‘s Jews caught again in no man‘s land
Posted by humint to humint
On News/Activism 07/30/2006 5:22:18 PM PDT · 3 of 11

Iranian Jews face no restrictions on their religious practices, but they must follow Islamic codes such as head scarves for women in public. The same rules apply to the larger Christian and Zoroastrian communities.

All religious minorities suffer varying degrees of officially sanctioned discrimination, particularly in the areas of employment, education, and housing. The Government does not protect the right of citizens to change or renounce their religious faith. Apostasy, specifically conversion from Islam, may be punishable by death; however, there were no reported cases of the death penalty being applied for apostasy during the reporting period.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies

Iran‘s Jews caught again in no man‘s land
Posted by humint
On News/Activism 07/30/2006 5:15:59 PM PDT · 10 replies · 333+ views

The Benton Crier ^ | 30 July, 2006 | BRIAN MURPHY
TEHRAN, Iran - Nothing in the office of Iran ‘s sole Jewish lawmaker calls attention to his faith — no Star of David, no menorah or other symbol of Judaism. But like nearly every public building in Iran, it has a portrait of the Islamic Revolution‘s patriarch, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. Moris Motamed‘s political headquarters highlight the well-practiced survival skills of Iran‘s remaining 25,000 Jews — caught again in a political no man‘s land by the fighting between Israel and the Iranian-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon. "We are Iranians. We work for what‘s best for Iran. The fighting, fortunately, does not affect...

Read | Comments

Iranian Alert - July 28 - Iranian people angry over government support of Hezbollah
Posted by humint to Gopublican
On News/Activism 07/30/2006 2:40:02 PM PDT · 18 of 21

But the recent American deeds in Afghanistan, Iraq and especially Kurdistan should have given the sign that America IS interested in Democracy and Freedom for the Middle East.

They're distracted by the blood and the ambiguities of their emerging pluralism. To the people of the ME, do you think the events in Iraq and Afghanistan smell like freedom or civil war facilitated by a superpower? The people of the ME have always had legitimate reasons to fear great power. Americans are giving their blood and treasure in order to establish credibility among the redeemable, and kill those that cannot be redeemed. Like them, we're easily distracted by blood but we must be vigilant in this fight or eventually we'll lose our pluralism.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies

Recalling history's lessons [Bring Iran Justice Now!]
Posted by humint to TomasUSMC
On News/Activism 07/30/2006 1:43:27 PM PDT · 5 of 6

Not worth the price... costs deferred until July 2006.

Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies

Leanne Piggott: The Contrarian
Posted by humint
On News/Activism 07/30/2006 12:13:07 PM PDT · 1 reply · 161+ views

abc ^ | Leanne Piggott
Tonight - that rarest of creatures. A Middle East specialist who is an optimist. Dr Leanne Piggott looks through the horrific outbreak of bombings iand the death of a young Australian to see a way forward. Despite everything, she is predicting an outbreak of lasting peace between the Israel and the Palestinians. ... LEANNE PIGGOTT:What I am seeing happening at the moment, is that there is a regional player, Iran that is making a bid for regional hegemony very openly, very publicly. It's been saying that for many years, and choosing the time to do so very carefully. And I...

Read | Comments




  • Free Republic Commentary 7/30-8/21

    01.90   06.90   09.90   01.91   05.91   09.94   08.95   01.97   09.97   08.98   11.99   01.00   05.00   07.00   03.01   09.01   01.03   03.03   05.03   06.03   07.03   09.03   10.03   11.03   03.04   05.04   06.04   07.04   09.04   10.04   11.04   12.04   01.05   02.05   03.05   04.05   05.05   06.05   07.05   08.05   09.05   10.05   11.05   12.05   01.06   02.06   03.06   04.06   05.06   06.06   07.06   08.06   09.06   10.06   11.06   12.06   01.07   02.07   03.07   04.07   05.07   06.07   07.07   08.07   09.07   10.07   11.07   12.07   01.08   06.08   09.08  


  • Best of Google Vid
  • Iraqhurr Radio Free Iraq
  • Kurdistan TV
  • RFE Radio Liberty
  • Radio Free Iraq
  • 1st Headlines
  • Al Bab
  • Al Bawaba - ARABIC
  • Al Bawaba - ENGLISH
  • Al Iraqi
  • Aswat al Iraq - ARABIC
  • Aswat al Iraq - ENGLISH
  • Aswat al Iraq - KURDISH
  • Big News Network
  • EIN News
  • Electronic Iraq
  • Inside Iraq
  • Iraq Crisis Bulletin
  • Iraq Daily
  • Iraq Economy
  • Iraq Energy
  • Iraq Journal
  • Iraq Net
  • Iraq Photos
  • Iraq Sport
  • Iraq Updates
  • Iraqi News
  • Iraqi Papers
  • Moreover
  • One World
  • RUSI
  • Sotal Iraq
  • Topix
  • Yahoo
  • Zawya
  • Baghdad Bulletin
  • Economist
  • Az Zaman - ENGLISH
  • Iraq Today
  • Guardian
  • Al Mannarah
  • Al Ahali
  • Al Fourat
  • Al Itijah Al Akhar
  • Al Ittihad
  • Al Sabah
  • Al Tariq
  • Alef Yaa
  • Baghdad
  • Baghdad
  • Iraq Today
  • Radio Dijla
  • humint

    This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?