 sj |
||
|
||
BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised?
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: GUEST,Crazy Eddie Date: 06 Dec 02 - 05:19 AM If Tia is correct that "that Bush has signed an order sying it's okay to assasinate American citizens if they're involved with terrorists this raises someinteresting questions. What if some OTHER government assasinates a US citizen, because (they say) he is a terrorist? How would the US administration feel about that? I mean, they might JUST accept James Bond (007 licensed to kill), acting on orders from Tony Blair; but what if it's a Russian agent, or a member of those nice Iraqui secret police? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Amos Date: 05 Dec 02 - 10:04 AM Welcome to DIsneylandia, where the cartoon creatures are out in force. Take solace in the beauty of the Mudcat CD's. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: TIA Date: 05 Dec 02 - 09:47 AM Turns out one of those killed was an American citizen. Also turns out that Bush has signed an order sying it's okay to assasinate American citizens if they're involved with terrorists. Administration spokesperson said something like "don't worry any assasination of a US citizen will be approved at the highest level...probably by the Prez himself". Geez, now I'm not worried. How many of our freedoms and rights will these jerks demolish to ensure that terrorists don't threaten our freedoms and rights. Did I just fall through a looking glass? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: InOBU Date: 05 Dec 02 - 08:39 AM To remove the BS. prefix... Ghosts of our nation words, Lorcan Otway all rights reserved Tune The Shamrock Shore. Farewell to the land, of Jefferson and Franklin Farewell to the dreams of the good Thomas Paine We have sacrificed our freedom, on the altar of security and I fear we may not soon see the likes of both again, For this land was more than a flag or a slogan this land was more than its rocks or its clay This land was a gift given us by great thinkers a dream which lesser men have now cast away The rule of law is hobbled and no rights are now held sacred except the right to steal and plunder in the name of corporate greed While bible thumping patriots, in the guise of elder statesmen rob for the wealth of few from the people in most need Now our prisons are full of the men of no property and back alleys are filled with the hopeless and insane but still we are told, that this is the land of liberty and told to ignore those whom our country causes pain Who can hold up their head, and proud proclaim their homeland while leaders whet the assassins knife by stealth upon the road this is not the act of a land of law and of justice no mater who the target, we must live by legal code What light of hope now shines in the halls of Philadelphia what words of bravery speak out from the senate floor what black thoughts now taint with blood, the hopes of a nation when politician pimps make sweet liberty their whore But I cast my gaze, to the hills of our history, while I stake my few hopes on the words of our past For while a spark shines on, in the ashes of these ruins the light of freedom's fires may dispel the shadows cast And each one of you, who remembers where we came from proclaim your love liberty and reject the cynics sneer cast fear upon the pyre of the promises of tyrants turn away from craven cowards, and true hearts now draw near. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Clinton Hammond Date: 05 Dec 02 - 12:48 AM From Neil Gaiman's "Americna Gods" How do you know that the CIA wan't invloved in the Kennedy assassination? He's dead, isn't he... :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Troll Date: 05 Dec 02 - 12:39 AM This is slightly off the topic, but I have seen several references to WWII Japanese Admiral Yamamoto and his death. In one post it was referred to as an asassination. Now maybe I'm a little naive and I'm certainly not courant on the latest revisions but I was under the impression that Adm. Yamamoto was killed when the transport plane that was taking him back to Japan was shot down by American fighters. As I recall, we were at war with Japan at the time. I have read that US intelligence had intercepted messages that told the Navy that the flight was taking place. So they knew where to look and that was that. The theory has been advanced that he was going home to persuade the Japanese government to stop the war. Since he was a Hero, his words would have had great weight, the war would have been ended much earlier, and there would have been no need for the A-bomb. So far, so good. But now it gets interesting. There is a theory that the American Govt. KNEW that he was going to do this and killed him so he couldn't stop the war. If anyone has any info on this whole mish-mosh, I'd be interested in seeing it. My personal opinion is, if it was true that he was going home to try to stop the war, he would have been given the same choice that Field Marshall Rommel was given. Because he WAS a Hero. troll troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: GUEST Date: 05 Dec 02 - 12:01 AM AT WORK!!!
Yes, any beaurarcry at work is a surprise. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Teribus Date: 07 Nov 02 - 12:36 PM Little Hawk what I have got is that your analogy is over simplistic to the point of total irrelevance. You are also not unique in considering that other people's lives are valuable. I would also like to know what you perceive as being Al-Qaeda's basic beliefs, and what you feel would be the best way to resolve the points of difference other than complete and utter capitulation. It is also extremely comforting to know that those responsible for the attacks on the WTC (twice), the Pentagon, USS Cole, a couple of US Embassies and the nightclub in Bali, are only "misguided". Now regarding this reactionary, misguided War on Terrorism, for the first time since the end of the Second World War, terrorist organisations dotted all over the world are learning that they cannot continue to murder, maim and intimidate innocents with impunity - as they more or less have been able to do. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: PeteBoom Date: 07 Nov 02 - 12:23 PM Bobert - there's no DOUBT that Georgie-Peorgie will have his own "splendid little war." As one of my former bosses used to say, "The ones that have never been shot at, or have never picked through a shell hole looking for bits of friends, are the ones who are the most eager for a war." He was a retired Marine bird-colonel. He was actually a good guy to work for, always looking out for his "boys" in an environment where politics reigned supreme. Ah well... Pete |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Bobert Date: 07 Nov 02 - 12:11 PM Well, not to play devil's advocate, BUT if these guys were in such an isolated area of Yemen then why not an Apache helicopter or two and an attempt to...ahhh... capture these folks? Hey, if they fired at ya' then it would have sealed their fate but if they didn't then you'd have possibly six bad guys with a lot fresher Al Queda information to attempt to extract than the information that is available from folks who have been detasined for the last year. Upside #2: It would have been a more "civilized" and demonstrated a patience that the US must maintain in it's fight against bad guys. Upside #3: It would have demonstrated the US core values of law and due process. Upside #4: it would have gone along way toward enhancing other government's motivation to cooperate with the US. Heck, it has probably had the opposite effect. Now I realize that there are a lot of folks who just can't wait for the big fire-works show but that's not a good enough excuse fir this ol' hillbilly. Be patient! Bush will get you all your war! And you can take that to the bank... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Little Hawk Date: 07 Nov 02 - 11:53 AM teribus - Again, it's simple. I have a sense of proportion. I use the minimum force necessary to stop an attacker, and only as long as I MUST use it in my own defense. While I might counterpunch you (if absolutely necessary for self-protection), I would not follow it up by stabbing you with a knife, splitting your skull with a baseball bat, or shooting you. I have a sense of proportion. The next thing I would do after that is try and find out why you wanted to punch me in the first place, since like all people you would surely have a reason which YOU thought was a good one. I'd talk with you about it, and see if we could come to some resolution. Given a little time, I imagine we could. We could not, however, by screaming further threats at each other, could we? The sense of proportion I alluded to in my first paragraph is partly based on the fact that I consider other people's lives valuable too, not just my own (or those in my own country)...and I don't consider other people "evil" just because their actions seem not to be in my interest at a given moment. I may consider them misguided, but not evil. These crises are not a question of morality, they are a question of differing (and usually quite unrealistic) BASIC BELIEFS. Got it? Now regarding the War on Terrorism. I consider it rather misguided, as it is merely a reaction to a previously misguided attack on the USA, rather than a serious attempt to resolve longstanding social, political, and economic issues. AND...it's an over-reaction. It will in its time produce counter-reactions which also fail to address the real underlying issues. And they will also be over-reactions. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: PeteBoom Date: 07 Nov 02 - 11:47 AM The funny thing is that it was leaked/reported by unnamed sources/whatever - at all. The real point is that in the pre-Ford administration, this would have been a "freak auto accident." The real message to the world is that the CIA's Ops Directorate is back in the saddle - and THAT is why it was publicly, but not openly, said to be a CIA op. Look for more unusual accidents in the near future. Close that flak jacket and strap on the kevlar helmet, its going to get interesting - Particularly since Friday's story that the USNS Bob Hope, and others, are steaming to undisclosed points loaded for bear, armor, self-propelled artillery, the whole shebang. Its going to get very hot "somewhere", very soon. Pete |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Big Mick Date: 07 Nov 02 - 09:52 AM Claymore, read the intel that has been released. They had been tracking these guys for a period of time, waited for the right minute, and took them out. Nicely done. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: GUEST,Claymore Date: 07 Nov 02 - 09:43 AM I find it hard to believe that we persuaded a couple of the killers from the Cole incident to be happily driving down a deserted road on the eve of an election, so we could smack them with a missle. But if we did, the current Administration has to be much better than the Clinton crowd, who at the height of the Lewinsky affair, took out a baby food factory... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Big Mick Date: 07 Nov 02 - 09:40 AM Yeah, Wolfgang, you pretty much have the way of it. There are many theoretical answers, but the real answers lie in a complicated haypile. It takes a lot of patience, and sometimes backtracking, to sort them all out. Mudcat, in the Northern Irish threads, has changed much of how I react to this stuff. My good friends from England have had much to do with this. My view as to the solution in the North haven't changed, but what I view as acceptable in the fight has. Which leads me to the point of this post. We are supposedly at war with Terrorism. Note the capitalized "t". In order to prosecute this type of war, we must be able to accurately what "Terrorism" is. If we do the typical American thing of generallising, then anything that GW does is OK. For myself, that won't work. I have chosen to define Terrorism as a violent act, aimed at advancing ones political/religous views, carried out against unarmed civilians of any country. That distinction allows me to make my own judgements. When an armed group blows up a car bomb in a civilian area, and that weapon is designed to be indiscriminate or to target civilians, I am appalled and want to go after these folks and stop them using any means necessary. Before anyone asks, Yes, that means I am opposed to any bombings by Republicans/Nationalists that are aimed at civilians. That does not mean that I don't understand the concept of collateral deaths. Those are a fact of struggle, and tragic, but unavoidable. Having said that, I have no problem with hunting down and using the missile to get these folks. They took the first shot, and we waited until we had them in a place where there wouldn't be collateral deaths. Nicely done. Mick |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Wolfgang Date: 07 Nov 02 - 09:09 AM Larry (but not only), I actually did think last night for a long time about the ethics of this situation. My position is in fact quite different from the film as I understand it (I don't know it and I don't have TV). The ethical position in that film is much too rigid and all-or-none for my taste. My position is better described by 'situation ethics' developed by German theologician Karl Rahner shortly after the war. We Germans have the peculiar situation that we do punish murder and nevertheless approve of the failed attempts to kill Hitler (each year, we praise these men and women and we name schools, ships and whatever after them). I thoroughly approve of tyrant murder when it can save a lot of lives as the killing of Hitler might have. I don't know whether I would have had the balls to do it, given the opportunity, but nevertheless these people are my heroes. So are, e.g., the jews in the Warsaw ghetto who did not want to go without a fight. In extreme situations, I approve of murder/killing when I think that a lot of lives can be saved this way and when there is no other alternative. I could kill without the slightest remorse when I could prevent this way the ignition of a nuclear bomb on human targets. But this position is restricted to extreme cases without other means of success. In general, I have much more sympathy for the methods of Gandhi or Mandela to free their people than let's say for the methods of the IRA (with exceptions, in this example), for I think that usually there are other alternatives when you are creative enough. In this particular case, my position is a clear 'don't know'. I'm appaled by a thoughtless 'kill the bastards wherever you find them' reaction and I don't follow a knee-jerk 'blame the CIA' position. If, for instance, the attack was timed for the election and there was no imminent threat, I'd call it a crime. If there was a good reason to assume that this killing has prevented an imminent attack or probably can save some lives in the long run, I'd approve of it if there was no other option. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Teribus Date: 07 Nov 02 - 06:21 AM bert, wrt your concerns: 1. Has America invaded the Yemen ?? All reports I have read contend that the Yemeni Government is co-operating with the US Government in their war against terror. The official Yemeni stance is that the presence of Al-Qaeda in the Yemen is unwelcome and undesireable. In France, Germany or Canada, I think the approach would have been more in line with Troll's, "....nice quiet disappearance that lets the other side wonder if they defected." - A much more disruptive solution. The strike as initiated, does send the message that safe places for those and such as those are getting fewer and fewer with the passage of time. Gives the opposition the dilema - do we stay still or do we keep moving - there are inherent risks for them, no matter what they decide on. 2. The occupants of the car had been under observation by Yemeni security forces for some time. They probably passed on the target information to the CIA. The location of the attack is in an area of the country that is regarded as fairly lawless and beyond the scope of what would be considered as normal law enforcement techniques. If the occupants of the car had been innocent Yemenis, I think we would have heard about it immediately, plus the fact the number and types of arms found in the wreckage of the car suggests that the occupants were who the Yemenis/CIA claim. 3. I daresay, by way of checks and balances, that this operation like most is covered by clearly defined "Rules of Engagement". If the very American phenomenon you refer to calls for the debating of each situation then your best option is to surrender now - you've already lost. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Bert Date: 07 Nov 02 - 02:57 AM Doug, you say, "So are you saying, Ebbie, that it was the wrong thing to do?" It might well have been the right thing to do, but I have a some concerns. 1. Should we be invading Yemen in this way? If those guys had been in France or Germany or Canada, would we have killed them. 2. There wasn't much left of the car after the missile hit it. Whose word do we take that the occupants were terrorists. A taxi cab carrying innocent Yemenis would have looked equally destroyed. 3. How do we introduce that very American phenomenon of Checks and balances into situations like this? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Teribus Date: 07 Nov 02 - 02:37 AM Little Hawk: "It's simple, teribus. You believe in the Old Way that has been used for the past many thousands of years. Reaction and counter-reaction." "Now, this does not mean I will not raise my hand to block you if you try to punch me. Count on it. And it does not mean that I will not counterpunch if that is what will dissuade you from trying again to punch me. No sir." From your two statements above, your new way does not appear to be all that different from the Old Way. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Coyote Breath Date: 07 Nov 02 - 01:16 AM Bobert is possibly correct when he says that the timing is a little too convenient. The CIA probably gained some ground in the PR race too. They hadn't been scoring too many points lately. I find it quite intriguing that one of the "new" TV shows is about the CIA. The Agency. This show presents the CIA as a very capable, high tech, unstoppable organization. There will be more of this. I don't LIKE it but it certainly makes sense, given the nature of terrorist activity we have experienced thus far. Even with unwarranted arrests of foreign nationals suspected of being sympathetic to Al Quaida, this is still the most open of countries. That openess allows for almost unmonitorable actions against us. When the device detonated is nuclear and the death rate climbs into the MILLIONS how open do you think we will remain? I fear this more than anything I have ever feared. The USA is going to become a police state. We came close to such a fate during the cold war when almost NO real internal threat existed. Now there is a genuine internal threat. We are screwed! CB |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: DougR Date: 07 Nov 02 - 12:50 AM So are you saying, Ebbie, that it was the wrong thing to do? DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: WFDU - Ron Olesko Date: 06 Nov 02 - 09:29 PM You know how much money that bomb cost? For one car? Firestone tires aren't good enough anymore? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: InOBU Date: 06 Nov 02 - 01:10 PM Sorry for the missreading Wolfgang. Cheers Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Little Hawk Date: 06 Nov 02 - 01:00 PM It's simple, teribus. You believe in the Old Way that has been used for the past many thousands of years. Reaction and counter-reaction. I don't. I believe in a New Way. I can well understand that it makes no sense to you and that you find it unrealistic. Now, this does not mean I will not raise my hand to block you if you try to punch me. Count on it. And it does not mean that I will not counterpunch if that is what will dissuade you from trying again to punch me. No sir. But what it does mean is that I look upon all humanity as one family, and I try to move in that direction in the arena of political action. I believe you still see it as "us and them". I don't. I only see "us". As for defeated groups seeking their vengeance...well, they do, but they do it in whatever way they think will be effective and they sometimes take it out on someone else entirely rather than on the ones who persecuted them in the first place! Consider Israel when I say this. Consider the man whose boss has chewed him out, who then gives the finger to another driver on the way home, fights with his wife over supper, and kicks his dog. Consider the kid who is bullied at home by his dad, goes to school and bullies smaller kids mercilessly. Got it? The Japanese have found other ways than military means to sublimate the shock to their esteem that they received in 1945, and so have the Germans. A thousand million other ways. Count on it. The repercussions go on and on. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Wolfgang Date: 06 Nov 02 - 12:31 PM Larry, you seem to make the unfounded assumption that when I post what I think shall happen I agree it should happen. But if you want to know, I'm not a pacifist though a proud conscientious objector. But that would be a theme for another thread. A commentary from 'Frankfurter Rundschau' (my translation): The world is our home. Now, the CIA can say that again about itself. And it says it loud - with the explosion of a van in Yemen. In it was sitting a presumed Al Quaeda terrorist, who is dead now, same as five fellow passengers. These were possibly terrorists as well, but nothing is known about that. The Agency has arrived in the past again. For a long time it had - at least officially - to watch idly when something in the world went another way than it thought it should. The war against terror has ended this politically enforced restraint. First in Afghanistan, but that was a war. Not in Yemen, but the front seems to be everywhere where terrorists are. Presumably, the Yemen government has approved of the missile attack, possibly the murderer of 17 US soldiers has been killed in the attack, it even could be that the other dead were guilty in the sense that they might have been sentenced in a fair trial. We shall never know. For indictment/prosecution (both translations possible here), trial and sentence have been negotiated and decided in a not public proceeding at and by the CIA. We know parts of the indictment, and we know the sentence that has been carried out publicly by the CIA. Israel's same-type liquidations of presumed Palestine terrorists are routinely condemned by the USA. Which is no question of principle, as we now know. Only a questions of what suits. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: InOBU Date: 06 Nov 02 - 11:39 AM Dear guest, the definition of a barbarian is the other guy with a club, just as a terrorist is the other guy who will murder for his beliefs. A nation of laws takes the trouble to be civilized. Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Teribus Date: 06 Nov 02 - 11:33 AM That Osama Bin Laden and his Al-Qaeda organisation has declared war on the United States is a well documented fact. Anyone declaring war must realise that it follows as naturally as night follows day that rank and file represent legitimate targets. I note that the Swedish Foreign Minister did not go into print with regard to the violation of the human rights of the US Marines killed in Kuwait. The two situations are markedly different in nature, particularly with regard to potential consequence. One, the Yemeni incident, is fairly simple and contributes nothing to the cycle of violence. These men were Al-Qaeda operatives and their deaths will not increase the level or degree of hatred felt towards the United States within that organisation or it's supporters. The other, the Palestinian/Isaeli situation, is far more complex as practically all IDF strikes have resulted in an inordinate number of civilian casualties. The consequence of these attacks is a widening of the support base for Hezbollah and Hamas. The operation in the Yemen was conducted with the help of the Government of the Yemen and my understanding is that there were no civilian casualties. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Bobert Date: 06 Nov 02 - 11:15 AM Hey, in the big scheme of things bullies fight until they are defeated. My friend, T, points out that Japan, Germany and Italy are out of the game and for now, that is very much true. But look at the "allies" (for a lack of a better term). They weren't beaten and so, ahhhh... *the beat goes on*, and *on*, and *on*. Well, folks might think that the US can not be beaten. Yeah, ya' look at Vietnam and think, "Well, the Vietnamese didn't invade and conquer the US, did they?" Well, no, they didn't but they did point out that the US has vulnerabilities. One major concern I have for the future here in the US is that I see it playing into the hands who get their jollies recruitin' young people who are willing to strap explosives on and blow themselves and civilians up. Now, I have no problems with using police actions against murderers and if these folks in Yemen were such, then, since the Yemen government was helping, I think these folks could have been captured rather easily. But by blowing these folks up I think just created a longer line of recruits. And my fear is that if we don't act as a nation which respect law and due process, then it won't be too long before those recuits show up at *a theater near you*. And I think with every similar action Americans get a little more desensitized to violence as the way we solve problems. This carried to an extreme, with the suicide bombers in our midst and a desensitized populace is the right combinaiton for America to defeat its own self. And that should be a real concern to everyone as the drum beaters beat their drums incessently for war. Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Willie-O Date: 06 Nov 02 - 10:38 AM Hey, they already had their revenge, Teribus. Did OK, too. Cause they didn't choose to make it a military contest. Speaking of consistency, here's a piece of it from the World's Only Superpower: Despite Yemen operation, U.S. maintains opposition to Israel's targeted killings Copyright © 2002 AP Online By BARRY SCHWEID, AP Diplomatic Writer WASHINGTON (November 5, 2002 7:44 p.m. EST) - The Bush administration renewed its opposition Tuesday to Israel's assassination of terror suspects, even after a U.S. missile killed a top al-Qaida operative and five other people in his car in Yemen. Sunday's strike in Yemen was the first such overt attack outside Afghanistan and could signal a new U.S. strategy against anti-Western terrorists. Israel, which pioneered targeting militants for assassination, sometimes also killing and injuring civilians in the attacks, has been admonished publicly and regularly by the State Department for the tactics. On Tuesday, while declining to discuss the U.S. operation in Yemen, spokesman Richard Boucher said, "Our policy on targeted killings in the Israeli-Palestinian context has not changed." Suggesting the two situations were not comparable, Boucher said, "The reasons we have given do not necessarily apply in other circumstances." While criticizing Israel for targeting suspected Palestinian terrorists, the State Department usually has suggested the preferred approach would be some form of prosecution. Also, State Department officials generally have coupled the criticism with calls for restraint while endorsing Israel's right to defend itself. For the most part, the State Department worries that assassinations contribute to a cycle of violence. The U.S. assassination of Qaed Salim Sinan al-Harethi and five of his associates Sunday in northwestern Yemen drew criticism from Swedish Foreign Minister Anna Lindh. "If the U.S.A. is behind this with Yemen's consent, it is nevertheless a summary execution that violates human rights," she said. "If the U.S.A. has conducted the attack without Yemen's permission it is even worse. Then it is a question of unauthorized use of force," Lindh told Swedish news agency TT during an official visit to Mexico. "Even terrorists must be treated according to international law. Otherwise, any country can start executing those whom they consider terrorists," she said. U.S. counterterror officials say al-Harethi was al-Qaida's chief operative in Yemen and a suspect in the October 2000 bombing of the destroyer USS Cole. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Teribus Date: 06 Nov 02 - 10:31 AM After the attacks on the World Trade Centre on 11th September, 2001, the President of the United States gave the nations of the world and their leaders a simple, but stark, choice. The incident referred to in the original post of this thread was executed by the CIA with the help and assistance of the Yemeni Government - all indications are that they supplied the target information. Subsequent to the fall of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, Al-Qaeda has found itself very much on the defensive. There will be more attacks both by Al-Qaeda and by counter-terrorist groups. Co-operation between law enforcement agencies and intelligence organisations will continue to improve as sources of information expand. Larry voices his concerns about operating outwith the law - whose law? theirs or ours? This attack was certainly legitimate within Al-Qaeda's terms of reference. As our Guest rightly points out above: "We declared war on an agressor. When war is declared and a target aquired we destroy, neutralize, incapacitate, disrupt, kill." Little Hawk above says: "I chose a wide variety of incidents from World War II, just to show that ALL nations have fallen into the kind of reactive self-righteous our-way-is-best thinking and behaviour that leads nowhere but to conflict, death and despair. They call it "victory". They're wrong. Victories are temporary pauses to catch breath between the last great folly and the next, during which one righteous set of killers licks its chops and hands out medals to the survivors, while the other set plots its future vengeance." The German, Italian and Japanese people are plotting their future revenge??? Don't think so. In observing the situation LH makes no differentiation between the response, to a direct attack, of an elected government on behalf of it's people, to the activities of a fanatical terrorist group who have been elected by no-one and who represent no-one other than themselves. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Willie-O Date: 06 Nov 02 - 10:05 AM Interesting quote from Orwell, mostly because it's from Orwell. It is internally contradictory. One cannot be both a pacifist, "intellectual" or otherwise, and a supporter of totalitarianism. So Orwell is referring to persons who may profess pacifism, but clearly are no such thing, but partisans. This type of remark is often used to discredit genuine pacifists, who have a philosophy which LH has just outlined quite well. Pacifists are most noticed for speaking against military actions of their own government, which is of course the one they should have the most likelihood of influencing. When they speak against the violence committed by the other side, nobody takes much notice cause they sound like everyone else. W-O |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: GUEST Date: 06 Nov 02 - 08:40 AM "There is a minority of intellectual pacifists whose real though unadmitted motive appears to be hatred of Western democracy and admiration of totalitarianism. Pacifist propaganda usually boils down to saying that one side is as bad as the other but if one looks closely at the writings of younger intellectual pacifists, one finds that they do not by any means express impartial disapproval but are directed almost entirely against Britain and the US. Moreover they do not as a rule condemn violence as such, but only violence used in defense of Western countries." - George Orwell (in 1945), quoted in a letter to The Spectator |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: HuwG Date: 06 Nov 02 - 08:37 AM InOBU, here is a good link to A man for all Seasons The quote you mentioned doesn't appear in the "Memorable Quotes" section for that film, though I suspect that Moore (played by Paul Schofield) actually quoted it to Richard Rich, a trimmer rather than a zealot; or perhaps to Thomas Cromwell, I don't remember the film well enough. I do remember my favourite quote from the film though. Richard Rich has just finished giving evidence against Moore.
Moore: "One moment. I notice that you wear a chain of office, now. May I see it ?" He examines the chain closely "A red dragon ?" Rich: "I am Attorney-General for Wales." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: GUEST Date: 06 Nov 02 - 08:33 AM Bobert you may be right about PR within the US but I'm not sure what people in other countries think. I am starting to see American arrogance and a belief that they are a world police force who have the rights to be judge, jury and executioner however or wherever they see fit. As a non American, I find this disturbing. Jon Freeman |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: GUEST Date: 06 Nov 02 - 07:41 AM We declared war on an agressor. When war is declared and a target aquired we destroy, neutralize, incapacitate, disrupt, kill. They were a legitimate target and they got what they deserved. Had they the means to capitulate, we would have treated them far more humanely than we would be treated by them. Barbarism is the problem Larry; but I do not believe we invented it, or ever condoned it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: InOBU Date: 06 Nov 02 - 07:30 AM Guest, Wolfgang et al.: I want you to think long and hard before you reply to this... in fact go out and rent the film which I am about to paraphrase... Man for all seasons. Thomas Moore says to a young zealot, Would you deny the devil the law? The zealot says of course, and Moore replies, and then when you corner the devil and he turns on you... what will YOU hide behind. This is the difference between Oliver Cromwell and Moore. Moral outrage must be tempered by wisdom. We may yet wish we had the law to hide behind when the US finds itself actually facing terrorism on the scale that say Isreal does. Will we think it was a good idea to wake the bear without a plan other than try and kill him and hope there are no other bears in the cave. Fact is most Americans do not realize the impression such illegal actions give the rest of the world. Some folks will react to it as a call to war, and the sad part is they are as wrong as we are, and in the end, you and I no longer have the law to hide behind. We are in a world spinning towards barbarism. We have open the gates to the vizagoths, and called them statesmen. Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: GUEST Date: 06 Nov 02 - 06:24 AM Bobert, Try reading their rights to them while they kill you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Little Hawk Date: 05 Nov 02 - 07:56 PM Yeah, Gareth. When you're a soldier in the middle of the action, you don't have time to decide on the niceties...usually. My point was this. All people agree that it is basically wrong to kill other people...and they call it murder. Or do they? Depends on the circumstances, doesn't it? So maybe they don't call it murder, once they have rationalized themselves into a position of some sort where they fell they HAD to do it for some reason. If you scratch beneath the surface of any of our chosen "moral" notions, you will find the same thing. Contradiction, confusion, and extreme rationalization...depending on the temporary conditions. I am not taking sides in this dispute. I am merely observing that one group of people (American military personnel engaged in a "war on terrorism") and another group of people (muslim zealouts engaged in a jihad which they believe is a war on terrorism)...are busy trying to kill each other for much the same reasons. They have both decided that the other guy is a threat to their existence, that he is WRONG, that he is EVIL, and that they must defend themselves by killing him or his people when and where they can...until FINAL VICTORY! I'm suggesting they are both caught up in the same unproductive thinking, and are missing the much larger picture. They are also failing to understand how it happened or where it came from, and totally failing to understand this: had they been born amongst the "enemy" population, their roles might very well be exactly reversed at this moment. I don't believe what they believe. I am no threat to either one of them. Were I an Arab, I would be no threat to you, because I do not wish to force some other population to abandon their way of life in favour of mine. For the same reason, I am no threat to the Arabs. There are plenty of people like me among the Arabs or anyone else you could care to name, but the news gives them no attention, because they don't KILL people! I'm suggesting that there is a better way. A way of avoiding imitating each other's worst behaviours and a way of overcoming fear and achieving coexistance with those who are culturally different. That is to say: Our way is not BETTER than your way. It's just different. There is plenty of room for both our way and yours in this world, and we have much good that we can share with one another and still be different. I chose a wide variety of incidents from World War II, just to show that ALL nations have fallen into the kind of reactive self-righteous our-way-is-best thinking and behaviour that leads nowhere but to conflict, death and despair. They call it "victory". They're wrong. Victories are temporary pauses to catch breath between the last great folly and the next, during which one righteous set of killers licks its chops and hands out medals to the survivors, while the other set plots its future vengeance. That's what you've got happening in this war, and I don't support either side in their killing schemes. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Gareth Date: 05 Nov 02 - 07:25 PM Bobert - CONCUR !!!! GAreth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Bobert Date: 05 Nov 02 - 07:11 PM Danged, GUEST, thanks fir the assist, my friend. I guess I don't have to do as much *roving* with folks like you going around getting the low-down on all this stuff. All I pointed out was that a car full of folks got blown up. My point was less about their identities and more about the suspicious timing, being reported on the eve of the US elections. I mean, here is a President who flat out stole an election without the slightest hint of guilt, who has demonized folks for,ahhh, expressing their opinions, has inilaterally decided to invade another country, so I don't think it is a Menza stretch to see that the timing was 90% PR, maybe 10% War on Terrorism and maybe 0% War on Terrorism. Speakin' of the War on Terrorism, GUEST, I gotta agree with LH. It's all about perspectives. Terrorist? Rebel. Terrorist? Freedom fighter. Terrorist..... Bobert |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Gareth Date: 05 Nov 02 - 06:46 PM Well we hope they hit the right car. But all wars are dirty, and LH, why signal out Stalingrad or the Assasination of Yamamato ??? My late father gave fire orders many a time at targets. He believed they were occupied by the Enemy, they could have been occupied by civilians. But if youve got a church tower, or factory chimney acting as a potential Oberservation Position, you owe it to your own conscripted troops to flatten it- fast. Gareth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: GUEST Date: 05 Nov 02 - 06:37 PM According to Mudcat'S roving reporter Bobert, the car was full of innocent freedom fighters, who were only delivering leaflets inviting all peace loving Arab folk singers to a peace rally in Makkah (aka Mecca) To demonstrate against Bush and his right wing vote/oil grabbing Texan murderers... Personally, i'm glad they hit the right car and not a bus load of kids out for a joy ride. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Little Hawk Date: 05 Nov 02 - 05:50 PM Very nicely done. Just like a mafia hit, only more Hi-tech. Ah well, murder is murder, and one guy's freedom fighter is another guy's terrorist, let's not forget. The Israelis and the Arabs are also quite good at "taking out" the individual "bad guys", and very proud of themselves after the bloody act is done, too. Wolfgang - Yep, it's a dirty war. All wars are dirty, as soon as one side isn't getting exactly what it wants, and fast! Remember Nanking, Dresden, Buchenwald, Stalingrad, Hiroshima, the Bataan Death March, and the death of Admiral Yamamoto? All wars are dirty. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: GUEST,Claymore Date: 05 Nov 02 - 05:32 PM Ya got love these people; ought to call this "Operation Burning Turban" with a message on the side of the missle "Caution: Smoking Camels is Dangerous to Your Health." Mammoud the Dude has got to be quaking in his sandals. Other great missle messages; "When you care enough to send the very best" "Muslim Terrorists Should be Judged by God; This Should Arrange The Meeting" "Allah is Pissed", and of course "Don't Run, You'll Only Die Tired" Hey, do you think Saddam sucks up a seat cover every time he sees a glint in the sky... Lets start a rumor that all those exploding gas tanks on the Ford Pintos were... er, test flights? My hat is off to the Cookie Farm, Good Hunting! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: M.Ted Date: 05 Nov 02 - 04:52 PM Let us only hope that we don't find out, after the election, of course,that the car was in fact occupied by Canadians-- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Steve in Idaho Date: 05 Nov 02 - 02:49 PM Yes I agree Wolfgang - Steve |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Wolfgang Date: 05 Nov 02 - 06:18 AM More things of this kind will happen in the next few years and that should not surprise anybody. Neither will I be surprised if a future sinking of a tanker, a plane crash, a firebombing of a synagogue or whatever can be traced to Al Quaeda. It is a dirty war and it will be a long war. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: katlaughing Date: 05 Nov 02 - 05:51 AM A "Hellfire" missile no less. That must make them quake in their boots. Oh, kat, don't be so cynical! Thanks for posting this, Ebbie. Apparently this is nothing new. This is from a more extensive AP article: Since the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on the United States, the CIA has used remotely operated Predator drone aircraft to make pinpoint strikes on al-Qaida leaders and do reconnaissance. Mohammed Atef, bin Laden's military chief and a Sept. 11 organizer, was killed in November near Kabul in a joint airstrike by a Predator and U.S. military aircraft. A Predator targeted Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar at the start of the war on Afghanistan, but military lawyers could not decide whether he could be struck, officials have said. Its missiles were ultimately fired near him, but not to kill him. In May, a CIA Predator attacked Afghan warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar near Kabul, missing him but killing some followers. Hekmatyar had offered rewards for those who kill U.S. troops. The former Afghan prime minister is said by U.S. counterterrorism officials to be loosely associated with al-Qaida. Besides Yemen, other concentrations of al-Qaida operatives have emerged since the war in Pakistani cities and along a remote area of the Afghanistan-Pakistani border. Of those, the only previously acknowledged U.S. successes against al-Qaida were in Pakistani cities. This year, al-Qaida's operations chief, Abu Zubaydah, and a Sept. 11 planner, Ramzi Binalshibh, were taken in raids conducted jointly by U.S. and Pakistani authorities. Both are in U.S. custody. ––– Associated Press writers Robert Burns in Washington and Ahmed al-Haj in Marib, Yemen, contributed to this story. © 2002 The Associated Press |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Troll Date: 05 Nov 02 - 04:35 AM It probably was the CIA. It's just the sort of high profile take-out that they would delight in. Sort of "Look what we can do. Aren't you scared you'll be next?" Much more satisfying that a nice quiet disappearance that lets the other side wonder if they defected. Hell no! Blow 'em up with a missle. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: CIA at Work- Anyone Surprised? From: Bobert Date: 04 Nov 02 - 10:11 PM Hey, Spawzer, as blind as I is, I gotta wear *special glasses* to pee in the dark. Now that's purdy danged blind... Bobert |