PDA

View Full Version : Long Posts In World News



FatBastard
01-23-2004, 11:49 AM
Who cares? Here's another one ...

Saddam Hussein didn't want to believe what his intelligence networks were saying. Before the war last spring, says a former colonel in the Iraqi intelligence service, Saddam's analysts presented him with classified reports predicting a decisive U.S. victory. The documents described how the Iraqi security forces, already outmatched, had been undermined by Washington's success in recruiting Iraqi spies and double agents. Internal intelligence reported to Saddam that Iraq's defenses would probably collapse. "We diplomatically suggested he should not stay here," the colonel says, "because we couldn't tell him outright that he had to step down." Even as U.S. troops moved into his capital, Saddam struck a resilient pose, appearing on Iraqi TV one day wading through a worshipful Baghdad crowd, grinning broadly, pumping his fist in the air, stopping to kiss a child.

Five days later, the Iraqi leader could no longer keep up his staunch facade. His orders largely unheeded, his soldiers declining to fight, Saddam went out for a look at his falling capital, a secretary who accompanied him recalls. Saddam stood on Zaitun Street, the boulevard decorated with monumental statues of two muscular forearms holding swords that cross above the roadway. As he turned to leave, he paused. Using an Arabic expression of utter disillusionment, he muttered, "Even my clothes have betrayed me."

Indeed, the quick and relatively painless U.S. overthrow of Saddam's regime was achieved not just by military means but also by betrayal. Before a shot was fired, the U.S. recruited and dispatched Iraqi collaborators to uncover Saddam's plans and capabilities, and hobble them. Deals were done; psychological warfare was waged; money was paid; and even blackmail was used. While the Bush Administration's post-Saddam planning has proved wanting, in this area of prewar thinking, Washington's strategies paid off. By the time the first U.S. tanks crossed the Kuwaiti border, top Republican Guard officers had been won over, and the secret police had been penetrated. Spies had infiltrated, and spotters had been dispatched to help guide American bombs. "You'd be surprised at what these guys achieved," says a Pentagon official in Iraq, referring to the Iraqi collaborators.

Even if Saddam was the last to know, many of those in his inner circle understood how deeply the Iraqi security services had been penetrated. At a funeral for two junior military officers midway through the war, mourners asked the commanders present how things were going. "They told us we were losing," one mourner remembers, "that there was a kind of treason in the army and the Republican Guard."

A side effect of the mass Iraqi desertions during the war has been that remnants of the regime survived to cause trouble in post-Saddam Iraq. Last week saw a fair share of mayhem. Suicide bombers drove an explosives- packed car into a Baghdad police station, killing eight people, and a Spanish diplomat was shot to death at the gate of his home in the capital. Resistance to the American occupation has been such that 188 U.S. troops have died in Iraq since President Bush declared an end to major hostilities on May 1. Still, the U.S.'s swift dispatch of Saddam undoubtedly saved both U.S. and Iraqi lives. This is the story of America's secret campaign to sabotage the regime from within and of the Iraqis who waged it.

INFILTRATING IRAQ
al-jaburi had the right connections to serve as an American spy. Stocky, fit and in his early 40s, al-Jaburi—who prefers not to have his first name published—served for almost a decade in the regime's most feared agency, the Special Security Organization (SSO). In the late 1980s, he was purged from the SSO after Saddam accused his clansmen of plotting a coup. In 1999 al- Jaburi defected to Jordan. There he joined an opposition group, the Iraqi National Accord (I.N.A.), which has a well-established relationship with the CIA.

According to Ibrahim Janabi, one of the I.N.A.'s main liaisons with the CIA in Amman, the CIA began ramping up for war in October 2002. "They asked us to contribute some tough, hardworking people to train for missions inside Iraq," says Janabi. "So I gave them al-Jaburi." The introduction, al-Jaburi recalls, was made in a coffee shop in Amman on Oct. 18. Al-Jaburi says CIA officers, with the aid of a lie detector, questioned him for days on a range of topics, including whether he was volunteering or being coerced to join. One question probed what he would do if he found his brother fighting against him. "I'd kill him," al-Jaburi says he answered. On Nov. 22, al-Jaburi says, he signed a contract guaranteeing him monthly payments of $3,000, with $9,000 paid in advance. Two days later he boarded a small jet bound from Jordan to Washington.

His class of 13 recruits, containing Iraqis and Lebanese, was flown from Washington to a secluded facility of temporary buildings hours away, al-Jaburi recalls. They were told they were in Texas. For two months they trained with some 20 instructors in physical fitness, intelligence gathering, report writing and surveillance. At a separate naval facility, recruits learned about explosives— how to sabotage armored vehicles, tanks, oil pipelines, electricity pylons and railways.

In February, al-Jaburi says, he flew to Kuwait, staying in a villa with his CIA handlers. They equipped him with $50,000 in American currency, a gps locator, satellite phones and a forged Iraqi identity card showing completion of military service so that he could move around Iraq unhindered. Al-Jaburi says he left for Iraq on March 11, guided across the border by smugglers arranged by Kuwaiti intelligence. "I'd been in the SSO, so I knew how dangerous this was going to be," al-Jaburi says. "But I also knew I had to do it."

The bulk of the $50,000 the CIA had provided al-Jaburi was for buying accomplices. He started with "Ahmed" (not his real name), an SSO officer in the main presidential compound whom al-Jaburi already knew. "I told him everything," says al-Jaburi. "I told him I'd listed his name with the CIA, and I had $5,000 for him." Ahmed proved an easy sell, replying, "What do you want from me?" The SSO man described where the Republican Guard had been posted in Baghdad and its environs, and revealed that it had been ordered to pull back into the city if attacked. In fact, after the U.S. bombed the Guard's positions early in the war, many of its officers abandoned their men, who then deserted en masse. Ahmed also identified the location of heavy-gun emplacements and missile batteries around the capital, targets the Americans hit with great effect during the air campaign.

Faced with the task of scouting the locations Ahmed had listed, al-Jaburi turned to an old friend and contact, A. Mashadani. Al-Jaburi had recruited Mashadani, a major in the mukhabarat, Iraq's main intelligence agency, soon after joining the I.N.A. For two years Mashadani, who had access to some of the mukhabarat's best secrets, had been feeding the CIA—through al-Jaburi —information on Iraqi missiles, antiaircraft systems and troop movements. Mashadani weighed the risks of helping al-Jaburi now. He had watched the execution of a colleague accused of spying for Iran. "Iran wasn't going to save that guy, or anyone," he says. "But we felt the U.S. could get rid of Saddam."

Using a mukhabarat sedan to which he had access as an officer in the organization, Mashadani and al-Jaburi visited as many of the locations Ahmed had identified as they could. Standing at the site, al-Jaburi would discreetly activate his gps locator, which searches the sky for satellites to triangulate its position, and then note the coordinates. At an appointed hour each night, he would use his satellite phone to contact the CIA and relate what he had found out. This required caution. Just possessing a satellite phone could result in death under Saddam's regime.

From the beginning, al-Jaburi's primary mission had been to scope out Saddam International Airport, one of the keys to taking Baghdad. Ahmed had a way in. He had a friend, "Mahmoud," who he says commanded the SSO's 3rd Battalion and was in charge of airport security. Ahmed knew Mahmoud had cursed Saddam privately, so he took him out for drinks, drawing him out on his views. The airport commander was sufficiently negative about Saddam to warrant a three-way drinking date with al-Jaburi. At a third session, al- Jaburi asked Mahmoud to cooperate and offered him $15,000. The commander, al-Jaburi says, agreed to help.

At sundown on March 23, with the war raging in the south and Baghdad under nightly bombardment, the airport commander drove al-Jaburi, in a military uniform, and Mashadani, bearing his mukhabarat ID, into the airport compound. In an SSO car, the trio crisscrossed the tarmac, mapping every building and bunker, counting every soldier and weapon they could see. Following the CIA's instructions, they repeated the exercise three times over three nights to confirm their sketches. By the time they had finished, U.S. battle planners had a detailed picture of the situation at the airport, from the weak points in the Iraqi defenses to the safest landing zones for American choppers.

On March 26 an exhausted al-Jaburi took a break to visit his family in his hometown near Tikrit. The next day his brother, an engineer at the Bayji oil refinery, was summoned to the plant to remove documents before the Americans got there. Al-Jaburi decided to go too, hoping to get papers of use to the U.S. It was a trap. Saddam's secret police surrounded al-Jaburi's car. He learned later that they had acted on a tip from one of his relatives eager to collect a reward. Taken to Baghdad's notorious Abu Ghraib prison, the last stop for many of the regime's opponents, al-Jaburi was sure he was going to die. His jailers, he said, placed a hood over his head and hung him from the ceiling by his arms, which were bound behind him. They hit him repeatedly with wire cords and clubs, smashing his feet.

Meanwhile, Mashadani was informed by his superiors that they had a special duty for him. At the meeting place, a mukhabarat facility, he says, "I found my duty was facing a lot of hands with guns." For six hours, Mashadani was grilled about his dealings with al-Jaburi. "All the senior bosses were coming to my interrogation," he says. "Everyone went crazy that a mukhabarat officer had been meeting a spy." At daylight, his jailers took him to see the beaten al- Jaburi. Both say they admitted nothing.

For four days, al-Jaburi says, his jailers tortured him: beating him, shocking him, smashing his hand. Mashadani gives a similar account. At one point, interrogators dragged al-Jaburi's mother and wife into the prison for questioning. Al-Jaburi could hear them wailing through the cell door. The sessions went on for six to eight hours at a time. Al-Jaburi says he was grilled about other spies, information he had relayed before his capture, gps coordinates he had sent. He says his cia training prepared him to give away nothing of importance. But he feared that time was running out. With the regime collapsing, Saddam's execution squads were working double time, plucking five to 10 men from their cells every hour. "It was like a slaughterhouse," says al-Jaburi.

As the war's front changed, al-Jaburi and Mashadani were moved from Abu Ghraib to prisons in Fallujah and then Ramadi. On April 11 the last guard at the Ramadi jail fled the advancing Americans, and locals came to set the two men free. Half-crippled and waving a white flag, they staggered up to an American unit. "I told them that we had just got out of prison and that we worked for the CIA," says al-Jaburi. A military-police humvee whisked them to Baghdad airport, which was under U.S. control. A CIA officer appeared with open arms. "Don't touch my back," al-Jaburi yelped, the wounds from his interrogation still fresh. He remembers the officer saying, "You are the heroes of the airport, the keys to Baghdad. Your future is assured."

ENTICING THE GAMBLERS
as an underground operative of the opposition Iraqi National Congress (I.N.C.), Wael Abu al-Timman spent years hiding from Saddam's henchmen. Now, with the war fast approaching, al-Timman was recruiting them. His instructions from the I.N.C., which worked closely with the U.S. before and during the war, were to find men not only willing to provide information about Iraqi defenses but also willing to see to it that the Iraqi forces failed to fight. Having served as a captain in the Republican Guard, al-Timman, who was based in Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq but traveled often to Baghdad, turned to his old comrades. He was astonished by how many were willing to switch allegiances. "They knew it was their last chance (to join the likely winners)," he recalls. "We called them the gamblers."

Once the U.S. began bombing Baghdad, al-Timman's mission changed. He raced from one bomb site to the next, noting the physical damage and assessing casualties, keeping an eye out for leadership figures among the dead and wounded. At an appointed time each night, using a satellite phone, he called in his assessments to an I.N.C. contact, who passed them on to the Americans, who could then decide whether to hit old targets again or move on to others. "I considered it the most important thing I could do because it would bring an end to the war sooner," al-Timman says. On April 7 he milled with bystanders as rescuers dug through the rubble of several destroyed houses in the Baghdad suburb of al-Mansur. The Pentagon, thinking Saddam was inside, had struck the buildings. But the rescuers told al-Timman that Saddam had just been there briefly to inspect the damage and offer condolences for those killed. Al-Timman made sure that Saddam's body was not among those retrieved, then phoned in what he had learned so the hunt for Saddam could continue.

THE BLACKMAIL CARD
the operations chief for the I.N.C. goes by the name of Abu Ranin. His job before the war was to crack the mukhabarat. His tactics were hardball. The I.N.C. had done surveillance on Iraqi missions around the world, making educated guesses about who was an intelligence agent. From these lists, the I.N.C. narrowed down its targets. "We chose them for their weaknesses, setting out to get something on them and force them to work for us," says Abu Ranin, who was then based in Jordan.

In a West European capital, Abu Ranin says, he collected evidence on a mukhabarat station chief who was selling government property on the black market. When Abu Ranin threatened to alert Baghdad, he says, the officer rolled over. Abu Ranin would not say what information the man provided. Abu Ranin's greatest coup, he says, was in Romania. As he tells the story, he discovered a mukhabarat officer in Bucharest who had two useful qualities: he oversaw the regime's East European agents, and he had a weakness for prostitutes. Posing as a wealthy businessman based in Europe, Abu Ranin befriended the officer. He rented a villa and threw a private party with five prostitutes and ample alcohol. The mukhabarat officer brought four colleagues. Abu Ranin secretly audiotaped their drunken boastings and cajoled them into a few snapshots with the women. Blackmail, however, proved unnecessary. When his guests were distracted, Abu Ranin grabbed the officer's cell phone and downloaded its address book.

Over ensuing weeks, Abu Ranin called the names in the address book and concluded that he had the identities of 65 agents—either Iraqis based abroad or their contacts in foreign intelligence services, particularly Syrian and Palestinian. He then traipsed around the Middle East, arranging meetings with the Iraqi agents on various pretenses. Once, for example, he posed as a diamond trader looking to sell gems. Instead of showing up for the assignations, he would hide near the meeting place and surreptitiously photograph the agents. When his dossier was complete, he forwarded it up the I.N.C. chain of command. Exactly what use was made of his work, Abu Ranin isn't certain, but the data would have offered scores of prospects to the Americans working on turning Iraqi agents. And as the story of al-Jaburi, Ahmed and Mahmoud illustrates, one spy can beget another who begets another and so on.

A SINKING SHIP
As war approached and the Iraqi collaborators intensified their work, the underpinnings of Saddam's regime began to quiver noticeably. In the offices of Saddam's son Qusay, commander of the Republican Guard, "a lot of officers told us the coalition had called them or their families, telling them to surrender and offering money," says a former staff member who asks to be called Mohammed. It was the same at the mukhabarat. "Many told us they had been offered money or guarantees of safety or promises of positions of authority in the new government," says a member of the staff in the mukhabarat director's office. More telling was the number of officials who did not report the calls. "We know the Americans called virtually all the senior officers and a lot of the lesser ranks right down to lieutenants, but most of them did not come and tell us," says Mohammed.

When it came to war, most of Saddam's armies either chose flight over fight or were neutered by commanders who had agreed to accommodate the coalition. Colonel Ali Jaffar Hussan al-Duri was not one of them, but his ultimate superior was. Once the fighting had begun, Hussan's division of the al-Quds army, an official Iraqi militia, received what he called "an incredible" order to send half the men home on leave. He challenged the edict with his brigadier, who was equally bemused. They attempted to verify it, but communications had been cut. So they dismissed half the unit and watched the other half vanish soon after. "One top commander, a traitor, can make the whole army disappear," Hussan says, ashamed of his comrades' performance. With the U.S. briefed on the locations of many of Saddam's forces, the Americans devised novel ways to intimidate troops who might have stood their ground. "They broke into our (field) radio and told us they knew our precise locations," says a junior Republican Guard officer.

In Baghdad, Mohammed, of Qusay Hussein's office, was ordered a few days before the capital fell to tour the antiaircraft batteries in the area that had, by and large, stopped firing. When Mohammed asked soldiers sitting in their bunkers why their guns were silent, they answered, "Our general told us not to shoot." Mohammed told them Saddam had ordered that any crew failing to fire that night would be executed. In the morning he returned, bellowing at the units to explain why they had not fired at the U.S. jets. "Because straight after you left yesterday, the general came around," one man replied. "He told us not to listen to you guys."

DAY-AFTER GRUMBLES
not all the secret agents got away with subversion. "Sultan," a captain in the SSO, says he became suspicious of a man claiming to be a mukhabarat official who was telling colleagues that the Iraqi army was losing and that the Americans were everywhere. Sultan suggested the man come and speak to his unit. "We took him to real mukhabarat officers. They sniffed him out immediately and took him," says Sultan proudly, sipping tea in a back-street cafe in Tikrit.

The suspected spy probably met the same fate as an undercover I.N.C. man called Lieutenant Ali, a close friend of al-Timman's. He was caught when the man who smuggled him to Baghdad from Kurdistan sold him out to the regime. After the war, al-Timman learned that Ali was imprisoned for weeks before being taken to Ramadi, where he was propped against a wall and shot on April 9, the day Saddam's statue came down in Baghdad's Firdos Square.

Some undercover agents who helped the U.S. are dissatisfied with the price they have paid. Disillusioned by their prospects in the new Iraq and threatened by an increasingly bold resistance movement, they feel abandoned by the Americans, for whom they risked their lives and betrayed their country. A mukhabarat colonel who spied for the I.N.C. now sits in a bare office. He has a nominal position with a minimal income and no real authority. He is bitter, claiming he was promised more. "If they don't give the Iraqi groups power, we can liberate ourselves from the Americans and engulf Iraq in fire," he threatens.

Al-Jaburi and Mashadani, the CIA's heroes of the battle for the airport, feel left out in the cold as well. Al-Jaburi says he was paid $75,000 for his efforts, Mashadani $60,000—good money in a country where the average yearly income is $2,500, as well as in the U.S., where the per-capita income is $23,000. Still, the two men feel that they are highly exposed and that the U.S. is not doing enough to protect them. Al-Jaburi's name has appeared on a death list—obtained by Time—kept by the remnants of the Fedayeen Saddam militia. Two of his relatives were shot dead while driving his car. He complains that the U.S. has not given him a license to carry a gun to protect himself. Without such a permit, Iraqis with arms are subject to arrest at U.S. checkpoints.

"The Americans are good-hearted. When they love you, they really love you," says al-Jaburi, "but when you finish your job, they forget you." Replies an officer of the CIA, who would not comment on the contributions of any particular Iraqi: "The people who have worked for us have been well treated. If there's some unhappiness, I suspect that it is from people who are either exaggerating their role or inventing promises that were never made." The greatest pledge the U.S. made to these people, of course, was that it would take down Saddam. That it did, with their considerable assistance.

— With reporting by Timothy J. Burger/ Washington

From the Oct. 20, 2003 issue of TIME magazine

TIME Magazine. (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101031020-517693,00.html)

Barbarossa
01-23-2004, 05:10 PM
To answer you original question........


No! :helpsmile:

100%
01-23-2004, 08:01 PM
To answer you original question........

YES, OFCOURSE
(long post=information=knowledge=understanding of the world today=intellectual discussion)



eschew.net
« News day! | Main | News Day! »
January 14, 2004

One of those long posts..
This is going to be one of those long, drawn out posts that people usually ignore, but I fear there is some things that need to be said. I know what I'm about to say won't make a difference, but I think there's a lot that needs to be said about what I'm going to talk about. And for those reading the short version, it has nothing to do with family or anything.

The "War on Terror" is a sham. Not because of what it is trying to accomplish, not because of what it's done so far, but where it's going. My assertion is not based on our President or anyone connected with the President. It is not based on my opinion about the military or the countries we currently have a military presence in.

Let me explain why I assert that we're going the wrong way. Iraq doesn't have nukes. Iraq was and continues to be a secular nation. Afghanistan's only threat was to the human rights of their own people. They didn't have anything that could hurt the US aside from a terrorist camp or two, and while that is a threat to National Security, so are the likes of the Unibomber and Timothy McVeigh who never stepped foot in a terrorist camp.

The unfortunate facts are that Pakistan and Iran pose a much greater threat to us than Afghanistan and Iraq did, even when Osama bin Laden was cranking out terrorists by the thousands. Why do they pose a threat? Simple. Nukes and religious fanaticism.

Pakistan has at least a dozen and quite possible up to 150 weapons in its nuclear arsenal. Knowing that I read somewhere that the Taliban and al Qaeda are enjoying an 80%+ approval rating in Pakistan, what do you think will happen when they finally assassinate Pakistan's President (they've tried twice already)?

So once the Taliban and al Qaeda get ahold of Pakistan's Nuclear arsenal, who do you think they are going to target?

Iran, on the other hand, does not have nuclear weapons (or so they claim), but US intelligence believes they are working on them. Russia has supplied Iran with a nuclear reactor, and we all know this is the first step to creating fissile material (there's already been traces of weapons-grade uranium found at a nuclear reactor site in Iran). So Iran is in the same boat as Pakistan. How long until some zealot with an itchy trigger finger decides to take out Eastern Europe?

Kids, this is not going to be pretty if we continue to piddle around the Middle East. We are going after the wrong people. The Middle East will not turn into another Vietnam, it will turn into another Pearl Harbor except this time, the Japanese will be Terrorists, the bombers will be our own commercial jets, and the bombs will be far more deadly: nuclear.

The US is headed for some really tough times, and things are only going to get worse. Our dependence on oil, our extraordinarily hedonistic lifestyles, our plain arrogance will destroy this country and kill millions of people. As the LT said in "Full Metal Jacket", "It's a big shit sandwich and we're all gunna have to take a bite.."

It's not so much that we're all gunna die(!!!) and there's nothing we can do. We need to refocus the political and strategic expectations of the War on Terror to include plans to quickly invade and squelch any kind of uprising in Pakistan and Iran that may pose a nuclear problem.

And don't blame the terrorists, either. Osama bin Laden once said that a good Muslim would take up Jihad and fight the enemies of Islam. That is absolutely true. Muslims are directed by the Quaran to destroy non-Muslims. I have been reading Prophet of Doom by Craig Winn (the book is available for FREE online), who eloquently explains that Islam is not a "religion of peace", but is a "religion of violence" and a "religion of slavery".

It's about 1,000 pages long, but he does share the same opinions that I have formed over the past few months. Basically, my opinions are the abridged version. :)


Posted by darkrose at January 14, 2004 01:50 PM | TrackBack


OkaY FatBastard????

http://www.neowin.net/forum/html/emoticons/sleeping.gifhttp://www.neowin.net/forum/html/emoticons/sleeping.gifhttp://www.neowin.net/forum/html/emoticons/sleeping.gif

FatBastard
01-23-2004, 08:28 PM
http://www.uploadit.org/BillyDean/chimp.gif

hobbes
01-24-2004, 02:11 AM
We already have a book world, would you like to also add a Copy and Paste World? Start a poll!

FatBastard
01-24-2004, 05:59 AM
Originally posted by hobbes@24 January 2004 - 11:11
We already have a book world, would you like to also add a Copy and Paste World? Start a poll!
Sounds like a good idea, but can it apply to everyone this time, and not just my family?

Thank you for your contribution to this thread. :lol:

hobbes
01-24-2004, 06:14 AM
Originally posted by FatBastard+24 January 2004 - 06:59--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (FatBastard &#064; 24 January 2004 - 06:59)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-hobbes@24 January 2004 - 11:11
We already have a book world, would you like to also add a Copy and Paste World?&nbsp; Start a poll&#33;
Sounds like a good idea, but can it apply to everyone this time, and not just my family?

Thank you for your contribution to this thread. :lol:[/b][/quote]
I do what I can.
http://www.poormanshabit.com/images/case_m2.jpghttp://www.auction.72rus.ru/lots/302.jpg

Here&#39;s two bits for your case.

Samurai
01-24-2004, 06:30 AM
Firstly, posting your entire article in bold font is considered extremely unconsiderate. Bold fonts should be used as a titles, or perhaps to outline a particular word you want remembered.

Secondly, if people wanted to read the news, this is not the first place I&#39;d come to read it. So why the hell would you copy and paste the entire post? I suggest you brush up on your &#39;Netiquette&#39; skills.

Here is a decent way to post your articles as an example...


NASA Gets Signals From Damaged Mars Rover

PASADENA, Calif. - NASA&#39;s Spirit rover lay in critical condition Friday on Mars, coughing up only a few gasps of data, as engineers struggled to diagnose the ailment and also deal with the impending arrival of its twin spacecraft on the Red Planet.

Controllers heard three times from Spirit after two days in which the six-wheeled vehicle transmitted only gibberish or sporadic beeps to acknowledge commands from Earth. The last batch of data, relayed to Earth by the 2001 Mars Odyssey spacecraft, indicated Spirit&#39;s power system was OK, said Ed Weiler, NASA associate administrator for space science. More data was expected early Saturday.

For More Information... (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040124/ap_on_sc/mars_rover&cid=624&ncid=716)

FatBastard
01-24-2004, 07:27 AM
Thank you for that drivel, please come again. :frusty:

Samurai
01-24-2004, 08:58 AM
Is that the pre-teenage response equal to a "Whateverrrr"???

Grow up, or at least act your age and take in what I have taught you my learned friend.

100%
01-24-2004, 10:02 AM
http://www.neowin.net/forum/fun/timeline.jpg

FatBastard
01-24-2004, 10:06 AM
Here&#39;s another one for the Japanese kid. It&#39;s not as long as the first one, but still a good read. :lol:

Of course the White House fears free elections in Iraq

Only an appointocracy can be trusted to accept US troops and corporations

Naomi Klein
Saturday January 24, 2004
The Guardian

"The people of Iraq are free," declared President Bush in his state of the union address on Tuesday. The previous day, 100,000 Iraqis begged to differ. They took to Baghdad&#39;s streets, shouting: "Yes, yes to elections. No, no to selection."

According to Iraq occupation chief Paul Bremer, there really is no difference between the White House&#39;s version of freedom and the one being demanded on the street. Asked whether his plan to form an Iraqi government through appointed caucuses was heading towards a clash with Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani&#39;s call for direct elections, Bremer said he had no "fundamental disagreement with him".

It was, he said, a mere quibble over details. "I don&#39;t want to go into the technical details of refinements. There are - if you talk to experts in these matters - all kinds of ways to organise partial elections and caucuses. And I&#39;m not an election expert, so I don&#39;t want to go into the details. But we&#39;ve always said we&#39;re willing to consider refinements."

I&#39;m not an election expert either, but I&#39;m pretty sure there are differences here that cannot be refined. Al-Sistani&#39;s supporters want all Iraqis to have a vote and the people they elect to write the laws of the country - your basic, imperfect, representative democracy.

Bremer wants his Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) to appoint the members of 18 regional organising committees. These will then choose delegates to form 18 selection caucuses. These will then select representatives to a transitional national assembly. The assembly will have an internal vote to select an executive and ministers, who will form the new government. This, Bush said in the state of the union address, constitutes "a transition to full Iraqi sovereignty".

Got that? Iraqi sovereignty will be established by appointees appointing appointees to select appointees to select appointees. Add the fact that Bremer was appointed to his post by President Bush and Bush to his by the US Supreme Court, and you have the glorious new democratic tradition of the appointocracy: rule by an appointee&#39;s appointee&#39;s appointees&#39; appointees&#39; appointees&#39; selectees.

The White House insists its aversion to elections is purely practical; there just isn&#39;t time to pull them off before the June 30 deadline. So why have the deadline? The favourite explanation is that Bush needs a "braggable" on the campaign trail: when his Democratic rival raises the spectre of Vietnam, Bush will reply that the occupation is over, we&#39;re on our way out.

Except that the US has no intention of actually getting out of Iraq: it wants its troops to remain, and it wants Bechtel, MCI and Halliburton to stay behind and run the water system, the phones and the oilfields. It was with this goal in mind that, on September 19, Bremer pushed through a package of economic reforms that the Economist described as a "capitalist dream".

But the dream, though still alive, is now in peril. A growing number of legal experts are challenging the legitimacy of Bremer&#39;s reforms, arguing that under the international agreements that govern occupying powers - the Hague regulations of 1907 and the Geneva conventions of 1949 - the CPA can only act as a caretaker of Iraq&#39;s economic assets, not its auctioneer. Radical changes - such as Bremer&#39;s order 39, which opened up Iraqi industry to 100% foreign ownership - violate these agreements and so could be easily overturned by a sovereign Iraqi government.

This prospect has foreign investors seriously spooked, and many are opting not to go into Iraq. The major private insurance brokers are also sitting it out. Bremer has responded by quietly cancelling his plan to privatise Iraq&#39;s 200 state firms, instead putting up 35 companies for lease (with a later option to buy). For the White House, the only way for its grand economic plan to continue is for its military occupation to end: only a sovereign government, unbound by the Hague and Geneva conventions, can legally sell off Iraq&#39;s assets.

But will it? Given the widespread perception that the US is not out to rebuild Iraq but to loot it, if Iraqis were given the chance to vote tomorrow, they could well decide to expel US troops immediately and to reverse Bremer&#39;s privatisation project, opting instead to protect local jobs. And that frightening prospect - far more than the absence of a census - explains why the White House is fighting so hard for its appointocracy.

Under the current American plan for Iraq, the transitional national assembly would hold on to power from June 30 until general elections are held "no later" than December 31 2005. That&#39;s 18 leisurely months for a non-elected government to do what the CPA could not legally do on its own: invite US troops to stay indefinitely and turn Bremer&#39;s capitalist dream into binding law. Only after these key decisions have been made will Iraqis be invited to have their say. The White House calls this "self-rule". It is, in fact, the very definition of outside-rule, occupation through outsourcing.

That means that the world is once again facing a choice about Iraq. Will its democracy emerge stillborn, with foreign troops dug in on its territory, multinationals locked into multi-year contracts controlling key resources, and an economic programme that has left 60-70% of the population unemployed? Or will its democracy be born with its heart still beating, capable of building the country Iraqis choose?

On one side are the occupation forces. On the other are growing movements demanding economic and voter rights in Iraq. Increasingly, occupying forces are responding to these forces by using fatal force to break up demonstrations, as British soldiers did in Amara earlier this month, killing six.

Yes, there are religious fundamentalists and Saddam loyalists capitalising on the rage, but the very existence of these pro-democracy movements is itself a kind of miracle; after 30 years of dictatorship, war, sanctions, and now occupation, it would certainly be understandable if Iraqis met further hardships with fatalism and resignation. Instead, the violence of Bremer&#39;s shock therapy appears to have jolted hundred of thousands into action.

This courage deserves our support. At the World Social Forum in Mumbai last weekend, the author and activist Arundhati Roy called on the global forces that opposed the Iraq war to "become the global resistance to the occupation". She suggested choosing "two of the major corporations that are profiting from the destruction of Iraq" and targeting them for boycotts and civil disobedience.

In his state of the union address, Bush said: "I believe that God has planted in every heart the desire to live in freedom. And even when that desire is crushed by tyranny for decades, it will rise again." He is being proven right in Iraq every day - and the rising voices are chanting: "No, no USA. Yes, yes elections."

The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1130138,00.html)


Read and learn&#33; :lol: :lol: :lol:

J'Pol
01-24-2004, 03:04 PM
Originally posted by hobbes@24 January 2004 - 03:11
We already have a book world, would you like to also add a Copy and Paste World? Start a poll&#33;
:lol: :lol: :lol:

All it does is clutter up the database, no-one actually reads the stuff he cuts and pastes anyway. Not even him.

He thinks it makes him look intelligent, when all it does is prove the reverse.

leftism
01-24-2004, 03:37 PM
Originally posted by J&#39;Pol
&nbsp;
All it does is clutter up the database, no-one actually reads the stuff he cuts and pastes anyway. Not even him.

He thinks it makes him look intelligent, when all it does is prove the reverse.

If only you&#39;d pointed that out to j2k4 a few days ago...

:lol: :lol: :lol:

FatBastard
01-24-2004, 04:15 PM
Originally posted by leftism@25 January 2004 - 00:37
If only you&#39;d pointed that out to j2k4 a few days ago...


He won&#39;t do that, he only follows me around, 1234 does J2K4. :lol:

j2k4
01-24-2004, 10:09 PM
Originally posted by FatBastard+24 January 2004 - 12:15--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (FatBastard @ 24 January 2004 - 12:15)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-leftism@25 January 2004 - 00:37
If only you&#39;d pointed that out to j2k4 a few days ago...&nbsp;


He won&#39;t do that, he only follows me around, 1234 does J2K4. :lol: [/b][/quote]
True enough. ;)

FatBastard
01-25-2004, 06:17 AM
l love the new eagle j2, it seems to fit better with the way l perceive you, it&#39;s somehow more Republican that your avatar. ;)

j2k4
01-25-2004, 09:46 PM
A very good friend did it for me.

Kinda surprising, eh?

It so successfully captures my id, I may actually strike out in search of another av, like you all do on occasion.

I feel it necessary to express myself. B)

Biggles
01-25-2004, 10:53 PM
Forgive me J2 but I do tend to associate your avatar (and, I suppose, your new signature) with the eagle from the Muppets.

This is in no way an insult as I loved the Muppets and the eagle was one of my favourites.

FB your signature is frankly disturbing. One of those pictures should be placed in every chip shop in Scotland that sells deep fried mars bars.

hobbes
01-25-2004, 11:02 PM
Originally posted by Biggles@25 January 2004 - 23:53
Forgive me J2 but I do tend to associate your avatar (and, I suppose, your new signature) with the eagle from the Muppets.

This is in no way an insult as I loved the Muppets and the eagle was one of my favourites.

FB your signature is frankly disturbing. One of those pictures should be placed in every chip shop in Scotland that sells deep fried mars bars.
Actually, his signature was Jonno&#39;s some time back. It followed the Jonno/Baz/Britney Spears photo at a bar. Not that it is any less disturbing now.

j2k4
01-25-2004, 11:13 PM
I must say, gents-

We are doing ourselves great credit with all these short posts.

I&#39;m tempted to forego punctuation in a misguided effort at conciseness. ;)

That smiley was probably gratuitous, huh?

Opinions?

Biggles
01-25-2004, 11:21 PM
Originally posted by j2k4@25 January 2004 - 23:13


I&#39;m tempted to forego punctuation in a misguided effort at conciseness. ;)


Ah&#33;

So that is what some of our fellow contributers are doing.

I feel ashamed that I thought ill of their ability to remember the simplest of grammatical rules.

As a rule J2, I prefer punctuation and as you are one of the few that actually seem to bother I vote you continue to swim against the tide.

As to length of posts, content is the key. A well written long piece is far more enjoyable to read than a badly written short piece (and takes less time).

j2k4
01-25-2004, 11:28 PM
Originally posted by Biggles@25 January 2004 - 19:21
As a rule J2, I prefer punctuation and as you are one of the few that actually seem to bother I vote you continue to swim against the tide.

As to length of posts, content is the key. A well written long piece is far more enjoyable to read than a badly written short piece (and takes less time).
Thanks, Biggles-I believe I will, as it suits me, I think. ;)

Your last is so exactly on point that I will continue to silently assent to it after I have selected "Add Reply". :)