"War on Terror" Thread

[Theo Huxtable.]

Obviously you are the biggest clown in this forum or just a skilled practitioner of losing arguments and looking stupid on purpose

 

Here is one source for Theo

 

http://www.gwu.edu/~jaysmith/nicus3.html

 

When things are general knowledge it means you don't have to have 'sources' like if I were to ask someone to explain what a horse was I would not require them to back up their arguments with a journal entry from a biology journal.

 

Alternatively if you weren't such a fucking stupid cunt you could just Google any of the key terms I used in that post.

 

 

But it's apparent that you're being ridiculous, sarcastic, and condescending. You can't compare one's "general knowledge" of the anatomy of a horse, to the ability to "guess" that your vague statements were referring specifically to the US-Nicaraguan contra affairs. This fits in with you claiming that the average 10-year-old is knowledgable about this topic.

[lord_casek]

iraq is a quagmire

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07322/834685-373.stm

[smooth bruce]

I guess that was supposed to be an insult. You know full well that the average "ten year old" doesn't know about the verdict of "The Republic of Nicaragua v. The United States of America". There's no way that I will know about and remember everything, which is why I asked you to specify and cite a reference. But I was aware that the CIA sponsored anti-communist contras to conduct terrorist attacks against merchant shipping targets in Nicaragua. Still, there was no way I could've guessed that this is what you were referring to, since you weren't specific (e.g. using generic jargon to refer to the ICJ, etc.).

 

It wasn't supposed to be I was merely highlighting the fact that for a country, and by extension is people, so concerned with terrorism, what constitutes it, who is doing it, etc Nicaragua V the US should be text book knowledge. Perhaps I was being over generous to ten year olds, lets say high school kids.

 

Secondly, the US was not the only country to be "found guilty" of sponsoring terrorism; Libya was found to have been a sponsor of the terrorist attack on the PanAm flight in 1988, as determined by the ICJ, the UN Security Council, and the international community as a whole -- as international sanctions were placed on Libya as punishment for continuing to harbor these suspects, under the authority of the aforementioned entities.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/60495.stm

 

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C03E3DF1F3EF93BA15751C0A96E958260

 

As far as I'm aware, including both those articles, Libya have not been found guilty of state terrorism, two Libyans have been found guilty of a terrorist act.

 

But it's apparent that you're being ridiculous, sarcastic, and condescending. You can't compare one's "general knowledge" of the anatomy of a horse, to the ability to "guess" that your vague statements were referring specifically to the US-Nicaraguan contra affairs.

 

It isn't a vague statement, it is actually a very specific statement.

 

The US have carried out countless terrorist acts against places and people and that would be an ambiguous thing to guess. But the case where they were essentially charged with state terrorism, and then vetoed all consequences over and over, in the highest possible court should be as well known to a country who so dictate what is and isn't terrorism as their knowledge of farm yard animals is. At least to anyone who cares to enter even the briefest discussion on terrorism.

 

This fits in with you claiming that the average 10-year-old is knowledgable about this topic.

 

Ok what age are the high school kids, I will be a little less cynical and say 15 year olds.

[Theo Huxtable.]

As far as I'm aware, including both those articles, Libya have not been found guilty of state terrorism, two Libyans have been found guilty of a terrorist act.

 

 

And the Libyan convicted was an intelligence agent for the Libyan government. Libya also admitted responsibility and paid compensation to the families a couple years ago, being removed off the international terror list.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdel_Basset_Ali_al-Megrahi

[smooth bruce]

They admitted it, it was their agent and they paid compo (I guess you have to when you don't have veto power) but still Libya itself was not convicted of terrorism in the ICJ as far as I can tell.

[WORDISM45]

i've bookmarked that doco u posted for a later watch theo it looks interesting. This is a very ambitious thread good luck.

[Theo Huxtable.]

not an ICJ ruling itself, but by the UN & international community & Security Council, whom imposed international sanctions against Libya for terrorist activities.

[urban art 415]

watch this

 

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5547481422995115331&q=zeitgeist&total=1979&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

[russell jones]

Anyone seen Loose Change? check that out!

 

 

Check this out too

 

nope... never... nobody on this board has ever seen it or discussed it, ever. Really.

[russell jones]

theo likes sources.

 

 

as everyone should. without a source, its just ether.

[lord_casek]

as everyone should. without a source, its just ether.

 

 

i agree, i like sources, too.

[Theo Huxtable.]

Blackwater Guards Subpoenaed by Federal Grand Jury Probing Iraq Shooting

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,312242,00.html

Monday , November 19, 2007

 

Sixteen contractors with the Blackwater security firm have been subpoenaed by a federal grand jury investigating the shooting of 17 Iraqi civilians in Baghdad in September, FOX News has confirmed.

 

The grand jury was impaneled in Washington, D.C., several weeks ago and has been in session every day, sources told FOX News. The subpoenas were issued following the return of FBI agents to Washington from Baghdad, where they concluded their on-site investigation of the incident. Federal sources told FOX News that federal prosecutors are using the findings of the FBI investigation as the foundation for building their case against the Blackwater guards.

 

Blackwater officials told FOX News Monday that they are cooperating fully with the FBI and grand jury investigations. No Blackwater officials have been subpoenaed, only the firm's security contractors.

 

Seventeen Iraqis were killed on Sept. 16 after Blackwater guards opened fire in Baghdad’s Nisoor Square. Several members of the Blackwater security detail have been implicated for allegedly using excessive force and discharging their weapons without cause

 

The contractors are expected to appear before the grand jury at a hearing in December.

 

The grand jury is being convened, and the Blackwater employees subpoenaed, under the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act, a law that says federal contractors working for the Defense Department overseas can be held accountable for their actions under U.S. law, even though their actions were committed extra-jurisdictionally overseas.

 

However, Blackwater was contracted by the State Department, not the DOJ, and whether or not the U.S. has the authority to prosecute the case under MEJA remains a legal question. Sources told FOX News Monday that there may be loopholes in the law that could make MEJA applicable to State Department contractors.

 

Prosecutors could still determine that MEJA does not give them jurisdiction in the case, but other legal options could apply, sources told FOX News. The contractors could be prosecuted under the War Crimes Act of 1996, which provides for prosecution of “grave” violations of the Geneva Conventions, sources said.

 

Rep. David Price of North Carolina has proposed legislation that extends MEJA to agencies other than the Defense Department. The bill has passed the House, but not the Senate. The Bush administration opposes the legislation because it could interfere with ongoing intelligence operations using foreign contractors.

 

FOX News' Jennifer Griffin contributed to this report.

[Theo Huxtable.]

I think this is a brilliant idea. This worked in the Al-Anbar province in Iraq, it would be a great blow to al-Qaeda and the Taliban if this tactic works in Pakistan.

 

US plans to train Pakistani tribes to fight Al-Qaeda, Taliban: report

22 hours ago

 

WASHINGTON (AFP) — Drawing from its experience in Iraq, the US military has developed a plan that calls for recruiting Pakistani tribal leaders to fight Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, The New York Times reported on its website.

 

The United States has used this tactic in Anbar province in Iraq, where the military has been able to enlist some local Sunni tribal leaders to back it in combating Al-Qaeda in Iraq and other foreign fighters.

 

Citing unnamed US military officials, the newspaper said Sunday the plan had been outlined in a strategy paper prepared by the staff the Special Operations Command, but has not been formally approved by the command's leaders.

 

However some elements of the strategy, The Times said, have already been given the green light in principle by the Pentagon and its Pakistani partners.

 

These include a 350-million-dollar proposal to train and equip the Pakistani Frontier Corps, a paramilitary force that currently has about 85,000 members coming mostly from border tribes.

 

The report came amid unrest in Swat, a scenic northwestern valley, where pro-Taliban cleric Maulana Fazlullah is leading a campaign for the imposition of harsh Sharia law in the valley.

 

Fazlullah is nicknamed "Mullah Radio" because he runs a pirate FM radio station that calls for a holy war on government forces.

 

Up to 500 Islamist fighters were believed to be holed up in the Swat valley, led by a "hardcore" of 50 mostly foreign militants, especially Uzbeks, according to the Pakistani military.

 

Insurgent advances in and around Swat have embarrassed the government of President Pervez Musharraf, who cited growing Islamic militancy as one of the key reasons for imposing emergency rule two weeks ago.

 

He has since ordered the regular army -- rather than the locally recruited paramilitary forces -- to take the lead in tackling the unrest.

 

In light of these developments, The Times said, some US counterterrorism experts are wondering if Anbar-style partnerships can be forged without a significant US military presence on the ground in Pakistan.

 

It is also unclear whether the Pakistani tribes would be willing to offer enough cooperation, the report said.

[El Mamerro]

^Yeah, but when young Abdul Aziz from Pakistan, enemy of Al-Qaida, friend of the USA, eventually goes extremist, establishes a mass following, and begins launching terrorist attacks on the West you'll never hear the end of "ABDUL AZIZ WAS TRAINED BY AMERICA!!" like we're constantly reminded with Bin Laden.

[WORDISM45]

^Yeah, but when young Abdul Aziz from Pakistan, enemy of Al-Qaida, friend of the USA, eventually goes extremist, establishes a mass following, and begins launching terrorist attacks on the West you'll never hear the end of "ABDUL AZIZ WAS TRAINED BY AMERICA!!" like we're constantly reminded with Bin Laden.

 

yup spot on

[lord_casek]

i don't regularly read the huffington post, but i have read the speech in question

 

"the biggest lie told to the american people"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sam-sedaei/the-biggest-lie-told-to-t_b_70248.html

[Stereotype V.0002]

^Yeah, but when young Abdul Aziz from Pakistan, enemy of Al-Qaida, friend of the USA, eventually goes extremist, establishes a mass following, and begins launching terrorist attacks on the West you'll never hear the end of "ABDUL AZIZ WAS TRAINED BY AMERICA!!" like we're constantly reminded with Bin Laden.

 

It’s a different situation, these are locals fed up with people getting strung up for shaving etc, instead of previously indoctrinated jihadists who traveled there to kill the godless russians. Rudimentary small unit tactics and a meager paycheck aren’t going to add much to mr aziz’s future terrorist empire, although people on the interweb will be able to use it to prove how the CIA funds terrorism etc.

[urban art 415]

the movie i posted earlier

 

Zeitgeist

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5547481422995115331

 

the source page

 

http://zeitgeistmovie.com/sources.htm

[WORDISM45]

zeitgeist is the biggest piece of crap i have ever seen

[Dawood]

It’s a different situation, these are locals fed up with people getting strung up for shaving etc, instead of previously indoctrinated jihadists who traveled there to kill the godless russians. Rudimentary small unit tactics and a meager paycheck aren’t going to add much to mr aziz’s future terrorist empire, although people on the interweb will be able to use it to prove how the CIA funds terrorism etc.

 

 

do you keep your job even after Bush is out of office?:confused:

[Theo Huxtable.]

zeitgeist is the biggest piece of crap i have ever seen

 

btw, yumone, what did you think of "Hijacking Catastrophe"?

[Guest shai_hulud]

It's funny that no one has pointed out the fallacy of a "war on terror".

 

Where does it end? Roller coasters? Slasher films? Letters from the IRS? You can't fight terror, it's part of the human condition.

 

It's like "fighting communism". You can fight COMMUNISTS, but you cannot eradicate Marxist ideology.

 

That's the scariest thing about all this. Every president until Bush the Second has understood the concept behind that fact.

 

There's always going to be plenty of have-nots in this world that capitalism has not only left behind, but completely run roughshod over...and there's going to be a Bin Laden, or a Ho Chi Minh. or a Castro that can rally them to action. All it takes is a charismatic leader and a cause.

 

But, you don't rush in with guns blazing just because you can- sometimes, you need to take the longer view, and sit down with the enemy and try to work out a plan to live together...or at least not kill each other. Same difference. Nobody wants war, and nobody wants to die, even if they feel what they believe in is worth dying for. Ten out of ten people would probably agree with me on this one.

 

Sadly, it seems diplomacy- or genuine good faith, or understanding- has yet to enter the picture in Afghanistan or Iraq. I don't think the Taliban or Saddam Hussein were very good leaders, but it's been FIVE YEARS and I don't see any real progress towards a lasting peace. Maybe Anbar Province is less violent than the rest of Iraq as a whole, but that isn't saying much when there's a civil war going on (yes, that's what it is).

 

Let's not forget about Afghanistan, which is on its way to being a new and improved Colombia- without the Taliban to keep the opium trade in check, there's all kinds of tax-free money for guns...but not a whole lot for food, shelter and education for the other 99% of the population who might as well be living in the 14th century.

 

Don't even get me started about Pakistan. Trusting Musharraf (sp?) to do the right thing was a bad idea from the jumpoff. Plus, he has nukes...and from what I can tell, very few scruples.

 

And, let's look at what else is popping off-

 

-Somalia

-Sudan (Darfur)

-Iran

-Syria

-North Korea

-China

-Turkey

-Venezuela....and the list goes on, I'm sure.

 

All those countries have a bone to pick with the US, mostly over our foreign policy and how it relates to/affects them.

 

So, no...I'm not afraid of terrorists.

 

I'm afraid of my government, and what it might do next.

[WORDISM45]

btw, yumone, what did you think of "Hijacking Catastrophe"?

 

yeah i really enjoyed it. Added a lot of specific information to events that i was only vaguely aware of. It made really strong arguments without getting mired down into too much politics. thanks for the link.

[Theo Huxtable.]

Iraq War photos:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[WORDISM45]

very nice variety there

[MayorMeanBeans]

purple mushroom how can you say international law is the highest form of law????

 

that sounds more like your personal belief than anything reflective of history. the only thing remotely successful in international law is nuremberg.

 

i don't think anyone seriously can say that international law is of a higher standing in politics than a state's sovereignty, except in very specific cases (genocide). i'd love for you to give me examples to the contrary, but i guarantee you that for every specific case you give, i'll have three showing the contrary. to start:

 

Darfur.

North Korea.

Pakistan/India's nukes.

Iran's nuke program.

China's Cultural Revolution.

Cambodia.

 

(Yugoslavia falls on both sides of the coin).

[Dawood]

 

Damn, this picture is intense....Inna Lillahi wa inna layhi raajioon.

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

The internet has made me like so used to images of that nature. It doesn't bother me. However in person would probably be a whole different story.

[smooth bruce]

purple mushroom how can you say international law is the highest form of law????

 

With regards to the interaction of countries? Because it is

 

the only thing remotely successful in international law is nuremberg.

 

That is a corner stone of international law, yes.

 

i don't think anyone seriously can say that international law is of a higher standing in politics than a state's sovereignty, except in very specific cases (genocide). i'd love for you to give me examples to the contrary, but i guarantee you that for every specific case you give, i'll have three showing the contrary. to start:

 

Public international law is the highest bureaucratic level of relations between nation states. You will have to be more specific or give a detailed example because so far what your asking doesn't make sense.

 

Darfur.

North Korea.

Pakistan/India's nukes.

Iran's nuke program.

China's Cultural Revolution.

Cambodia.

 

You just listed Places, events, items, programs and time periods. What about them?

[Blood Feast Island Man]

sort of related to the war on terror......

pakistan barred from the commonwealth

 

Pakistan has been suspended from the Commonwealth because of its imposition of emergency rule, the organisation has announced after a meeting in Uganda.

 

Secretary General Don McKinnon said Pakistan was being suspended "pending restoration of democracy and the rule of law".

 

A senior Pakistani official said the government regretted the suspension.

 

He said the emergency rule will be ended according to internal requirements, not outside pressure.

 

Earlier Pakistan's Supreme Court dismissed a legal challenge to Pervez Musharraf's re-election as president.

 

The president has said that would allow him to step down as head of the army.

 

In recent days Gen Musharraf's regime has also released more than 3,400 people who had been detained under the emergency rule which the president imposed earlier this month.

 

'Regretted'

 

And following a visit by US envoy John Negroponte, opposition leader Imran Khan was freed.

 

But the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG), the group reviewing the status of Pakistan's membership, decided that despite these changes, not enough had been done.

 

 

We're all clear that the choice is for Pakistan now, to make the changes that are in its interest nationally and internationally, and then to re-enter the Commonwealth as a proud and valued member

UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband

 

Flying the flag for democracy

 

The BBC's Peter Biles in Kampala says that some Asian nations had reportedly resisted the suspension.

 

The decision was not put to a vote, our correspondent says, but after a day of fraught negotiations an agreement was eventually reached.

 

Mr McKinnon said the 53-member Commonwealth had reached the decision by consensus.

 

"CMAG agreed that notwithstanding some progress by the Pakistan government since its last meeting, the situation in Pakistan continued to represent a serious violation of the Commonwealth's fundamental values," Mr McKinnon said, reading from a statement.

 

Though there has been no official reaction yet from Islamabad to the suspension, Pakistan's ambassador to Washington Mahmud Ali Durrani told the BBC the government regretted the decision.

 

He said the authorities were committed to lifting the state of emergency as soon as possible, but that would be done according to Pakistan's timetable, not under threat from

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7108543.stm