'cookieChoices = {};'

The Right of the People to be Secure in their Persons, Houses, Papers, and Effects,
Against Unreasonable Searches and Seizures,
Shall Not Be Violated


Saturday, October 10, 2009

Israeli News Source, YNet: Israel Will Attack Iran If Sanctions Not In Place By Christmas

From Ynet:

Iran's ambassador to the UN, Mohammad Khazaee, sent a letter of protest to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moonin which he wrote that "there is no explanation for Israel's continuing threats against Tehran".

He was referring to an interview given by former Deputy Defense Minister Ephraim Sneh to the Sunday Times in which he said that if Iran were not further sanctioned by this Christmas Israel would attack the country.

Sneh told the paper that if Israel were forced to attack the Islamic Republic on its own it would do so, remarks the Iranian ambassador deemed "irresponsible".

He said he hoped the UN would take steps against such comments. "Remarks such as these, stated once in a while by Israeli leaders, are no more than sorry excuses aimed at avoiding supplying answers regarding Israel's nuclear arsenal and deflecting public awareness from the crimes and terror Israel commits in the region," he said.

Khazaee once again stressed that his country's nuclear program was intended for peaceful purposes and said that "the only threat in the region is Israel's nuclear arsenal, which remains unsupervised to this day".
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 2 Comments

Anti-Islamist Demonstration In Streets Of Manchester , England

Once again, these demonstrations appear to be led by the English Defense League (EDL), who claim they are an anti-racist organization.

During the demo, members of the EDL appear to have clashed with members of the UAF (Unite Against Fascism). The UAF claim to be against Fascism, but they are commonly caught beating people in the street whom they disagree with.

Is there a right side in this? I believe there is, but only in the ideological sense. I'll break it down this way. I am against Racism of any kind. And, I am against Islamic Jihadism.

Certainly, there are plenty of Brits who would agree with me, and I'm guessing that they are falling on one side or the other here in these clashes.

It would be better if they joined up and formed a real human-rights protecting party which was "United Against" fascism in all it's forms, including Islamic Jihadism

(Note, BabbaZee wrote a cautionary piece on the EDL. Right now, I can not seem to find it. When I do, I will link it here.)

From the BBC News:

Mounted police, dogs and officers act as a barrier between the groups of protesters

At least 2,000 people are protesting in two political demonstrations in Manchester city centre.

About 700 members of the English Defence League (EDL) and 1,400 members of Unite Against Fascism (UAF) are separated by a line of riot police.

The EDL members are protesting against Islamic extremists - prompting a counter-protest from the UAF.

Police said 34 people had been arrested in Manchester on suspicion of public order offences.

One arrest was also on suspicion of carrying an offensive weapon.

Both sets of demonstrators are facing each other in Piccadilly Gardens and are separated by a line of police officers, dogs and mounted police.

Police and protestors in Manchester city centre
Police officers arrest one of the 18 taken into custody

Mat Trewern, from BBC Radio Manchester, said the atmosphere had turned "quite nasty" compared to earlier on in the day.

He said: "The police are trying to keep the two groups separate and it has been working so far.

"Some members of the UAF tried to break the police line between the two groups, which in turn angered the EDL members.

"Trouble had started when 100 members of EDL arrived at Piccadilly Gardens and they were immediately met with shouts of 'racists' and 'off our streets' by members of the UAF, who had already congregated at Piccadilly.

"The atmosphere is tense."

'Hell-bent on confrontation'

He said the number of protesters from the UAF outnumber those from the EDL by about two to one.

Assistant Chief Constable Garry Shewan said: "The presence of so many protesters in the city has proved a challenge and while many have turned out to protest peacefully, the police reaction has been necessary in order to prevent the few hell-bent on violent confrontation.

Police and protestors in Manchester city centre
Protesters are being separated by rows of police officers

"Today we've made arrests, many of whom were thought to be agitators and trouble-makers."

Greater Manchester Police confirmed one man, believed to be heading to the protest, had been arrested in Birmingham on suspicion of distributing racially aggravated material.

Muslim leaders had renewed appeals for people to avoid the demonstrations.

A recent EDL event in Birmingham led to counter-demonstrations and bricks being hurled at riot police. Up to 90 people were arrested.

Nanu Miah, a community leader from Oldham, said: "We are not encouraging people to go, we don't know who EDL is and what could happen."

Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 16 Comments

Senator DeMint's Honduras Analysis

Via the Wall Street Journal:
What I Heard in Honduras

Our ambassador is the only person I met there who thinks there was a 'coup.'



In the last three months, much has been made of a supposed military "coup" that whisked former Honduran President Manuel Zelaya from power and the supposed chaos it has created.

After visiting Tegucigalpa last week and meeting with a cross section of leaders from Honduras's government, business community, and civil society, I can report there is no chaos there. There is, however, chaos to spare in the Obama administration's policy toward our poor and loyal allies in Honduras.

That policy was set in a snap decision the day Mr. Zelaya was removed from office, without a full assessment of either the facts or reliable legal analysis of the constitutional provisions at issue. Three months later, it remains in force, despite mounting evidence of its moral and legal incoherence.

While in Honduras, I spoke to dozens of Hondurans, from nonpartisan members of civil society to former Zelaya political allies, from Supreme Court judges to presidential candidates and even personal friends of Mr. Zelaya. Each relayed stories of a man changed and corrupted by power. The evidence of Mr. Zelaya's abuses of presidential power—and his illegal attempts to rewrite the Honduran Constitution, a la Hugo Chávez—is not only overwhelming but uncontroverted.

As all strong democracies do after cleansing themselves of usurpers, Honduras has moved on.

The presidential election is on schedule for Nov. 29. Under Honduras's one-term-limit, Mr. Zelaya could not have sought re-election anyway. Current President Roberto Micheletti—who was installed after Mr. Zelaya's removal, per the Honduran Constitution—is not on the ballot either. The presidential candidates were nominated in primary elections almost a year ago, and all of them—including Mr. Zelaya's former vice president—expect the elections to be free, fair and transparent, as has every Honduran election for a generation.

Indeed, the desire to move beyond the Zelaya era was almost universal in our meetings. Almost.
In a day packed with meetings, we met only one person in Honduras who opposed Mr. Zelaya's ouster, who wishes his return, and who mystifyingly rejects the legitimacy of the November elections: U.S. Ambassador Hugo Llorens.

When I asked Ambassador Llorens why the U.S. government insists on labeling what appears to the entire country to be the constitutional removal of Mr. Zelaya a "coup," he urged me to read the legal opinion drafted by the State Department's top lawyer, Harold Koh. As it happens, I have asked to see Mr. Koh's report before and since my trip, but all requests to publicly disclose it have been denied.

On the other hand, the only thorough examination of the facts to date—conducted by a senior analyst at the Law Library of Congress—confirms the legality and constitutionality of Mr. Zelaya's ouster. (It's on the Internet here)

Unlike the Obama administration's snap decision after June 28, the Law Library report is grounded in the facts of the case and the intricacies of Honduran constitutional law. So persuasive is the report that after its release, the New Republic's James Kirchick concluded in an Oct. 3 article that President Obama's hastily decided Honduras policy is now "a mistake in search of a rationale."

The Hondurans I met agree. All everyone seemed to want was a chance to make their case, or at least an independent review of the facts.

So far, the Obama administration has ignored these requests and instead has repeatedly doubled down. It's revoked the U.S. travel visas of President Micheletti, his government and private citizens, and refuses to talk to the government in Tegucigalpa. It's frozen desperately needed financial assistance to one of the poorest and friendliest U.S. allies in the region. It won't release the legal basis for its insistence on Mr. Zelaya's restoration to power. Nor has it explained why it's setting aside America's longstanding policy of supporting free elections to settle these kinds of disputes.

But these elections are the only way out—a fact even the Obama administration must see. The Honduran constitution prohibits Zelaya's return to power. The election date is set by law for Nov. 29. The elections will be monitored by international observers and overseen by an apolitical body, the Supreme Electoral Tribunal, whose impartiality and independence has been roundly praised, even by Ambassador Llorens.

America's Founding Fathers—like the framers of Honduras's own constitution—believed strong institutions were necessary to defend freedom and democracy from the ambitions of would-be tyrants and dictators. Faced by Mr. Zelaya's attempted usurpations, the institutions of Honduran democracy performed as designed, and as our own Founding Fathers would have hoped.

Hondurans are therefore left scratching their heads. They know why Hugo Chávez, Daniel Ortega and the Castro brothers oppose free elections and the removal of would-be dictators, but they can't understand why the Obama administration does.

They're not the only ones.

Mr. DeMint, a Republican senator from South Carolina, is a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Labels: , , , , ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by Carlos Echevarria at permanent link# 1 Comments

Krauthammer Slams Obama's View of America

Bookmark and Share
posted by Carlos Echevarria at permanent link# 0 Comments

If He Wanted To Destroy The United States of America, Would He Be Acting Any Differently?

From Atlas Shrugs:


Obama order of merit gif

Part of Obama's continuing plan to fund jihad.

Energy Independence Dept of the Interior Blocks Oil Drilling at 60 Sites in Utah

How are we going to get off foreign oil if we can't drill our own?
Why can China drill our oil off the Florida coast (thank you Fidel), but we can't?
Why can Ahmadinejihad have nuclear energy but we can't? (And that's with Iran's oil reserves -- third largest in the world).

Another post proving that Obama does not have America's best interests at heart, TO SAY THE LEAST:

Obama Advisor On Muslim Affairs: Women Love Sharia Law

So, let;'s count this up. In the last few months, Obama has appointed

1) a self-avowed Black Nationalist - Van Jones

2) John Holdren, who has called for forced abortions and sterilization.

3) Mark Lloyd, Chief Diversity Officer of the FCC, who has called for the enforced Liberalization of Talk Radio.

4) Cass Sunstein who, it was realed today, says that the only reason America has not become a Socialist nation is because white people in America are too racist.

5) Kevin Jennings, the "Safe-School Czar" who has praised the Founder of the North American Man/Boy Love Association.

6) Dalia Mogahed, supporter of Sharia law

And, this is a short list. But, I'd say we're getting the picture. Obama is ok with all these things. If he is ok with racism, "Black Nationalism", the stereotyping of white people as being too racist to

be decent, Pedophilia, and anti-free speech legislation, then it seems to me we have a lunatic as a President.

I mean to say that, in my opinion, he is a lunatic in the sense that Stalin, Hitler, Castro, and Pol Pot were lunatics. I'm am not saying he is insane in the Clinical sense of the word, but that his policies and associations are outside the norm of human morality.

Barack Obama is, in my opinion, racist, anti-human, morally-bankrupt and, quite possibly, dangerously so.

I think he is proving he has the motive and the means to do almost anything.

Obama is amassing his legions. The question is what does he intend to do with them?

No matter what he intends to do, no matter if he gets away with it, we can already see that he and his friends are very, very dangerous.

Barack Obama may be a very, very dangerous man. We have cause for real concern. I don't know what to say beyond that. I am astonished at what we are witnessing.

Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 2 Comments

Obama and The Democratic Congress Will Continue To Work With ACORN

From Don Surber at the Daily Mail:

October surprise: ACORN gets federal money again beginning on Nov. 1

Ah yes, that congressional de-funding of ACORN ends on Oct. 31. The offer was good for only one month only, Republican Congresswoman Michele Bachmann reported.

It is not even Halloween and taxpayers have been tricked — and ACORN treated.

The video (it’s really an audio):

Doc Drop: A rare copy of an ACORN training manual-”ACORN Community Organizing Model” Circa 1970’s

Hot stuff! ACORN was founded in 1970 by the infamous Wade Rathke, so it was but a fledgling organization when this training manual was written in 1973. This is rare opportunity to peek inside the scandal ridden organization’s training methods.

Some choice pull quotes:

Role of an organizer:

(one of the roles listed)

–Responsible for the total goals of ACORN even above and beyond the local group goals.

Color coded drives:

The first drives are going to have to be all ‘white’ or predominantly white. Pick up the black with subsequent drives once you have established the image of the organization. It is nearly impossible to do the opposite.

“How you handle the racial stuff…

…Only go black first if you never want a white membership in the area. Or if the area is all black.

CLICK image to read The ACORN Training Manual online at Docstoc

CLICK image to read The ACORN Training Manual online at Docstoc

While I can’t of course vouch for the 100% legitimacy of this document. I will say it sure looks and reads like the real deal.

You think the ongoing scandal with ACORN is bad ... they also are associated with an anti-Semitic Hezbollah terrorist supporter and propagandist

Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 0 Comments

'Worked up into a fine froth'? LGF's rage vs. the cheerful laugher of conservatives

From R.S. McCain:

Over at the Unlinkable Land of Liberal Lizards, Charles Johnson sneered at thereaction to Obama's Nobel Prize for Nothing, prompting another spectacularly laughable act of sycophantic fellatio by the aptly named Sharmuta:
Posted in: A Peace Prize for the President
»30 Sharmuta
10/09/2009 8:43:23 am
Of course, Republican pundits are worked up into a fine froth over it.
Certainly rains on their Olympic Failure celebration.That was short lived. Perhaps it's karma.
Notice the liberal chop-logic involved here:
  • Obama fails to win the Olympics;
  • Conservatives laugh;
Ergo . . .
  • Conservatives are hateful.
Input different data into the LGF Chop-Logic Dispenser, and still it produces the same conclusion:
  • The Nobel committee bestows an unmerited laurel on the eminently unaccomplished novice;
  • Conservatives laugh;
Ergo . .
  • Conservatives are hateful.
The liberal argument is not actually an argument, but rather an unsupported assertion and a demand: "Liberalism is good! Stop laughing, you haters!"

Their anti-logic begins with the conclusion and accepts any "evidence" to prove it, ignoring all contrary evidence nor even bothering to test the alternative hypothesis

McCain's post is great, though he and I do not seem to see eye to eye on GoV (but, that's another story). Go read the whole thing.

By the way, Gateway Pundit points out something interesting:

I actually think Gateway is wrong, because in my opinion, Arafat also encourage Genocide.

But, that does not excuse Obama, , nor does it excuse the Nobel Committee.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 1 Comments

Maybe of Interest

A few posts back there was mention about Rachel Ehrenfeld and her book Funding Evil, documenting Khalid bin Mahfouz,s alleged financial support of terrorism, and Mr Justice Eady entered a default judgment in favour of Khalid bin Mahfouz in his "libel tourism" case against Rachel Ehrenfeld.

Several months ago there was a case involving a blogger by the name of Night Jack who was exposed by The Times reporter Patrick Foster.

Night Jack had sought an injunction to stop The Times from revealing his name

NightJack was revealed by the Times as detective constable Richard Horton, of the Lancashire Constabulary. In a landmark high court decision, Mr Justice Eady refused to grant an order to protect Horton from being identified, saying that the mere fact that the blogger wanted to remain anonymous did not mean that he had a "reasonable expectation" of doing so, or that the Times was under an enforceable obligation to him to maintain that anonymity.

Times Reporter Patrick Foster

Horton, identified by the Times journalist Patrick Foster, was disciplined by his force and stopped his blog after describing the day he was discovered as "easily the worst afternoon of my life". To some this smacked of censorship, although the Times argued that Horton was publishing confidential material about criminal proceedings that could identify those involved, such as sex offences against children

In April, NightJack won an Orwell Prize for political writing, and his blog was admired as a gritty, insider's view of modern day policing.

Thanx to Mr Justice Eady Night Jack is no more

A few more judgements from

In December 2004 Eady ruled in favor of MP George Galloway after the Daily Telegraph newspaper reported on documents found by journalist David Blair in Baghdad.

The documents appeared to show that Galloway had received money from Saddam Hussein's regime. In its defence, the newspaper claimed that the public interest in Galloway's actions was of sufficient public interest to outweigh the damage caused to the MP's reputation.

Eady ruled in favour of Galloway, on the basis that he had not been given a fair or reasonable opportunity to make inquiries or meaningful comment upon the documents before they were published.

In the 2006 case of Jameel v Wall Street Journal Europe Eady ruled in favor of the plaintiff, a Saudi Arabian banker. The Wall Street Journal had listed Jameel among several Saudi businessmen who were allegedly being monitored for support of terrorism. In 2009 the Law Lords overturned Eady's ruling, with Lord Hoffman accusing Mr Justice Eady of being "hostile to the spirit of Reynolds", a reference to the public interest defence established in Reynolds v Times Newspapers Ltd.
Bookmark and Share
posted by shiva at permanent link# 1 Comments

Get Down To Bacon Boogie

Bookmark and Share
posted by shiva at permanent link# 0 Comments

Known by the Company We Keep

Khalid Abdul Muhammed was National Assistant to Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam and National Chairman of The New Black Panther Party. He had support from the likes of Al Sharpton, Keith Ellison and Cynthia McKinney.

Where does the latest Nobel Peace Prize Winner stand on the Nation of Islam and the New Black Panther Party?

Christian Soldier sent this to me.


Bookmark and Share
posted by midnight rider at permanent link# 17 Comments

Report: Obama's Safe Schools Czar Kevin Jennings Wrote the Foreward to a Pedophilia Book ...Update: Book Also Endorsed By Bill Ayers

From Gateway Pundit:

It's worse than we thought...
According to radio host and activist Sandy Rios from the Culture Campaign, Safe Schools Czar Kevin Jennings wrote the foreward to a pedophilia book.

UPDATE: Bill Ayers also endorsed this child sex book.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 5 Comments

No More Rev'noor Man

painting "Moonshine Running" by Ian Guy. Lots more like it at his site. Good stuff.

Copper Kettle
(Frank Beddoe)

Get you a copper kettle
Get you a copper coil
Fill it with new made cornmash
And never more you'll toil

You'll just lay there by the juniper
While the moon is bright
Watch the jugs a filling
In the pale moon light

Build your fire with hickory
Hickory, ash, and oak
Don't use no green or rotten wood
They'll catch you by the smoke

My daddy, he made whiskey
And my granddaddy did too
We ain't paid no whiskey tax
Since seventeen ninety two

Written in 1953 for a folk opera, "Go Lightly, Stranger"

American Spectator:

Shine On
By Christopher Orlet on 10.9.09 @ 6:08AM

My daddy, he made whiskey; my granddaddy, he did too.
We ain't paid no whiskey tax since 1792.
-- Albert Frank Bedoe

This week the nation's last illegal whiskey unit was shut down due to budget cuts. The team was based out of Franklin County, Virginia, long known as the "moonshine capital of the world." So proud are the locals that the slogan can be seen everywhere, emblazoned on T-shirts and roadside billboards and in the moonshine museum on the campus of a local Methodist college.

Some might be surprised to learn that folks are still cooking up white lightning in the Blue Ridge Mountains of ole Virginny, but the fact is they are induced by a powerful economic incentive. After all, more than half the retail price of a bottle of distilled spirits consists of taxes, and with legislators constantly seeking new forms of revenue, that percentage is expected to rise.

Moonshining has a long, proud history in Virginia. The original Celtic inhabitants of the Appalachians brought with them the practice of distilling alcohol. It might have died out had whiskey been freely available in the south, like it was elsewhere. However, Methodist and Baptists preachers were busy at their work, and the south was soon largely dry. Where it wasn't dry -- as in Tennessee -- the locals had another incentive to distill their own "white mule" or "stump whiskey" when the federal government slapped a tax on distilled spirits in the 1790s. The southerners were so put out by the tax that they started an insurrection, which was eventually put down when President George Washington strapped on his sword and a led a large militia force against the whiskey rebels.

The Whiskey Rebellion began when Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton convinced Congress to tax whiskey and carriages to pay off the Revolutionary War debt. Because of the way the tax was set up, small whiskey producers were more adversely affected than were large producers. (Washington, it should be noted, ran a large distillery.) Hamilton, a New York banker, had little idea that the hardscrabble "cohee" farmers had built their entire existence around whiskey, and probably wouldn't have cared anyway. In the western Appalachians, whiskey was bartered like any other form of currency. More important, there were few if any mountain roads to drive the grain to eastern markets, therefore excess grain was distilled into the more portable whiskey.

The tax was a failure in every way. It encouraged the distillation of corn liquor (or Bourbon) in the lawless frontier states of Tennessee and Kentucky. It also succeeded in driving supporters from Washington and Hamilton's Federalist Party to Thomas Jefferson and James Madison's Democratic-Republican Party. The tax was repealed in 1803 under the Jefferson Administration.

FROM ITS VERY beginning, the federal government seemed intent on manipulating the actions of its citizenry to fit its own moral specifications. Like today's sin-taxers and junk food banners, "Nanny" Hamilton was more interested in social engineering than in paying down the debt, or, as he put it, his tax was "more as a measure of social discipline than as a source of revenue."

To Hamilton, the federal government's enforcement of social discipline was a religious matter, but to today's über-paternalists it is disguised as a health matter. Individual citizens must be protected from their own choices. Education is not enough. The government demands legislation. Today 40 states tax soda or junk food. New York City will soon join Los Angeles, Chicago and cities and counties in California, Utah, Louisiana, and Maine in banning smoking in most outdoor parks and beaches (though short of banning automobiles, it is unclear how they are going to prevent people from breathing in auto emissions.) In a recent essay, Slate's William Saletan asked how far one's right to clean air extends:

[D]oesn't that justify a ban on smoking absolutely anywhere? Forget parks and beaches. If you smoke in your backyard, aren't you violating my airspace? In fact, aren't you violating my airspace by lighting your grill or driving your car down my street?

Meanwhile, Louisville's new anti-littering law is so strict newspapers can no longer be tossed out onto your lawn in the morning. (Newspapers must be placed in a "designated area" like a mail slot.)

For the first time since the Whiskey Tax of 1790, Virginia's moonshiners can relax a little, at least until the economy picks up. But elsewhere the revenuers and cigarette cops will be out in full force, taxing soda pop and candy bars and writing up tickets for outdoor smoking and unlawful newspaper delivery. One way or another, the government is determined to save us from ourselves. The question now is, who will save us from the government?


Steve Earle - Copperhead Road
Uploaded by UniversalMusicGroup. - Music videos, artist interviews, concerts and more.


Bookmark and Share
posted by midnight rider at permanent link# 2 Comments


From Reliapundit the Astutest of all Bloggers:

What happened to global warming?

This headline may come as a bit of a surprise, so too might that fact that the warmest year recorded globally was not in 2008 or 2007, but in 1998.

But it is true. For the last 11 years we have not observed any increase in global temperatures.

And our climate models did not forecast it, even though man-made carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be responsible for warming our planet, has continued to rise.

So what on Earth is going on?

Climate change sceptics, who passionately and consistently argue that man's influence on our climate is overstated, say they saw it coming.

They argue that there are natural cycles, over which we have no control, that dictate how warm the planet is. But what is the evidence for this?

During the last few decades of the 20th century, our planet did warm quickly.

Sceptics argue that the warming we observed was down to the energy from the Sun increasing. After all 98% of the Earth's warmth comes from the Sun.

But research conducted two years ago, and published by the Royal Society, seemed to rule out solar influences.

The scientists' main approach was simple: to look at solar output and cosmic ray intensity over the last 30-40 years, and compare those trends with the graph for global average surface temperature.

And the results were clear. "Warming in the last 20 to 40 years can't have been caused by solar activity," said Dr Piers Forster from Leeds University, a leading contributor to this year's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

But one solar scientist Piers Corbyn from Weatheraction, a company specialising in long range weather forecasting, disagrees.

He claims that solar charged particles impact us far more than is currently accepted, so much so he says that they are almost entirely responsible for what happens to global temperatures.

He is so excited by what he has discovered that he plans to tell the international scientific community at a conference in London at the end of the month.

If proved correct, this could revolutionise the whole subject.



Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 4 Comments

Anti-Semitic Guardian (of Mohammedans) Removes Israeli Names From List of Nobel Peace Prize Winners

From Reliapundit the Astute Blogger:

All three of them, like they never even existed.

Via Melanie Phillips:
Q: Which three names are omitted from the Guardian list ( even though they do appear on the Nobelprize.org list which the Guardian has purportedly reproduced)?***

A: Menachem Begin, Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin.

And what is the common link between these three names? Precisely.

It appears someone at the Guardian actually went to the effort of removing the names of the three Israeli statesmen who won the prize. Facts are sacred?
And whaddaya know? They're back on the list.
Bookmark and Share
posted by Pastorius at permanent link# 4 Comments

Friday, October 09, 2009

Robert Cray
Poor Johnny

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share
posted by midnight rider at permanent link# 0 Comments

Tick Tock Tick Tock Tick Tock

Michael Travis sent this. From MEMRI:

Ahwazi Organization: Iran is Planning to Attack the Gulf Countries; Iran is Producing Chemical Weapons and Burying the Waste in Ahwaz

On October 5, 2009, Alarabiya.net posted an interview with an Arab Ahwazi man who was presented as a former undercover agent for the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC). The man claimed that 40,000 well-trained operatives, mostly Shi'ites, are in the service of Iran in the ArabGulf states - 3,000 of them in Kuwait alone. He stated that the cells formed by these operatives were trained to collect intelligence, sabotage installations in the Gulf region, and assassinate senior officials. He added that Iranian Al-Qods forces commander Qassem Suleimani had prepared a plan to take over 22 embassies, both in Iran and outside it, if Iran were to be attacked.

This interview is in line with a July 14, 2009 intelligence report posted by the Ahwazi Islamic Sunni Organization on its website ( http://www.sonnaalahwaz.org/ ). The organization claimed that the report was based on classified Iranian Air Force information, according to which Iran has a comprehensive military plan to attack the Gulf countries using the MiG-31 aircraft that it had purchased from Syria. Thus, it said, Iran is preparing secret airports and camps in Ahwaz province, as well as forces in the northwest of the province, in order to attack Iraq, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia.

The report also revealed a purported IRGC plan to carry out terrorist operations in the Gulf countries, and alleged that Iran was developing chemical weapons in two top-secret plants in Ahwaz province, and was burying the chemical waste products in the province. Also according to the report, Iranian special forces belonging to the IRGC and acting outside Iran have the capability and the access to carry out biological and chemical weapons attacks, and had conducted joint maneuvers with Hamas and Hizbullah as well as with Yemeni Houthi forces, and also with Iranian sleeper cells in Iraq and in the Gulf countries.

It should be noted that this organization claims to be operating with Saudi backup and support.

Following are the main points of the report: [1]

"In direct cooperation with the National Research Center in Ahwaz, and with direct support of the Saudi National Association [sic], we have succeeded in obtaining an important classified document issued by Iranian air force headquarters, signed by the commander [Gen. Hassan Shah Safi] and sent to the commander of the airbase in the city of Al-'Amidiyya, known as 'Airbase No. 5.' In addition, we disclosed a plan by IRGC [to attack the Gulf countries from its military bases located] near the city of Al-Hamidiyya [in western Ahwaz], which is detailed below…"

MiG-31 Warplanes Expected to Arrive at Al-'Amidiyya Airbase

According to the report of the Ahwazi Islamic Sunni Organization, on November 2, 2008, Iranian Army Air Force commander Gen. Hassan Shah Safi sent Al-'Amidiyya airbase commander Shahryar Hosseini Nejad a classified military document with instructions to prepare for the arrival of three MiG-31 warplanes. The instructions stated that all the pilots on base must prepare for special military maneuvers, and that all the information - "photos, films, and geometrical maps indicating the storage and deployment of missiles with chemical warheads - [must be forwarded to] Ali Qaramlaki, chief expert on weapon manufacture."

The document sent by Iranian Army Air Force commander Gen. Hassan Shah Safi to Al-'Amidiyya airbase commander Shahryar Hosseini Nejad, as posted at http://www.sonnaalahwaz.org/:

The Ahwazi organization went on to state that the Al-'Amidiyya airbase houses three F-7 jets launched from underground installations equipped with special tunnels for takeoffs and landings. It assessed that the expected arrival of the MiG-31 warplanes is proof that they were purchased by Iran from Syria approximately 18 months ago. Furthermore, the organization revealed Iran's military plan to connect all the airbases in Ahwaz province, to set up additional bases for logistical support, and to connect the Al-'Amidiyya airbase to three islands belonging to Ahwaz province, as well as to the three islands contested by Iran and the UAE (Greater Tunb, Lesser Tunb, and Abu Moussa), apparently in order to build airfields there, as part of Iran's military plan - as is evident from satellite photographs taken by the UAE.

Satellite photo of Al-'Amidiyya airbase, as posted at http://www.sonnaalahwaz.org/:

Iran Is Developing Chemical Weapons in Ahwaz

The Islamic Ahwazi Sunni Organization's report stated: "In the past, numerous reports by [various] elements claimed that, in addition to nuclear weapons, Iran has a program to develop chemical weapons inside Iran," in violation of the Treaty for the Prevention of the Proliferation of Nuclear and Chemical Weapons [sic, probably NPT and CWC]. Furthermore, "after the April 15, 2005 intifada [the Ahwazi rebellion against the Iranian regime], it was repeatedly reported that chemicals were conveyed to southern Ahwaz for unknown reasons. However, it has now been discovered that Iran is developing chemical weapons and that the transporting [of chemicals] to Ahwaz four years ago was for the purposes of burying the waste from their manufacture."

The organization stated that in Iran, there are two plants for the production of chemical weapons: the Aghajeri chemical plant, situated between Al-'Amidiyya and Behbahan, and the Shaznad plant, situated next to the Arak factories in northern Ahwaz. It also said that, according to Western reports issued several months ago, Iran transferred its first sea transport of chemicals as part of its missile program, including missiles installed on warplanes, which Iran is now trying to adapt for carrying chemical warheads. The organization further claimed that Iran is trying to obtain sulfur for military use.

The Al-Hamidiyya Plan: Attacking Targets in the Gulf States

The Ahwazi organization also reported that the IRGC had established, in the western Ahwaz city of Al-Hamidyyia, four camouflaged military bases spaced some two kilometers apart. It said, citing an IRGC source nicknamed "Al-Dalil Al-Amel," that the bases' access roads were secret and difficult to negotiate, and that only IRGC personnel were permitted to use them. Likewise, said the report, the area is surrounded with observation posts and night-vision surveillance cameras, and training sheds are scattered throughout. It said that these bases were set up for training local elements from the Persian Gulf as well as special forces, which would in future operate in their respective countries - Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the UAE, and Bahrain.

According to the report, these forces had been trained to carry out operations in the Gulf countries, particularly Saudi Arabia and Kuwait - operations that would be rapid and unpredictable, would cause great damage, and would not arouse any suspicion of Iranian involvement. The organization said that the headquarters of these bases were situated entirely in the Gulf region; that they had maps of and information about the targets in this region; and that these headquarters had confirmed that 12 cells had already been trained and had begun to carry out operations for Iran: smuggling large quantities of weapons, ammunition, explosives, and drugs into Iraq and from there to Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, and storing smuggled weapons in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait so that no Iranian connection could be discerned.

The organization said that the bases' supreme leadership belonged to the IRGC, but were actually led by Hizbullah, and that their training methods were identical to the defense and warfare methods used by Hizbullah. It said that this was because of a decision by Iran to establish fighting groups like Hizbullah that were, like Hizbullah, capable of waging internal war in the cities and streets in time of war.

According to the report, the four bases in Al-Hamidiyya are:

1) A base in the south of the city, for logistical support, with civil and military services such as garages for repairing military vehicles, a hospital with a full medical staff, and mobile hospitals for time of need.

2) South of the above base is a base belonging to it, with fortified storehouses of weapons, equipment and fuel; it is heavily guarded by IRGC special forces.

3) A base north of the city, also for providing logistical support; in 2003, a military airport was set up in it, for use by aircraft for attacking specific targets in the Gulf, Kuwait, southern Iraq, eastern Saudi Arabia, and Bahrain.

4) A base with hidden warplanes and missiles equipped with warheads banned by international treaties, as well as surface-to-surface missiles.

The path leading to the military bases in western AhwazProvince

The Iranian Special Forces

The Ahwazi Islamic Sunni Organization notes in its report that Iranian special forces are responsible for training birun marzi ("outside the country") forces operating outside Iran, such as Hizbullah, Hamas, and Houthi (Yemen) forces, as well as sleeper cells in the Gulf and Arab countries. It says that these forces can provide their operatives with diplomatic passports, and possess advanced weaponry and the latest vehicles. Their operatives speak several languages, including fluent Lebanese Arabic, and are responsible for assassinating senior officials. The organization adds that these forces have the capability to carry out operations using biological or chemical weapons, and that they have a direct line to the IRGC leadership and coordinate with Iranian intelligence apparatuses. These forces, it says, have received and deployed dozens of platforms for launchers equipped with Fajr-2 and Shihab-2 missiles that can reach southern Iraq, Kuwait, and eastern Saudi Arabia, and that they can strike specific targets.

The organization also says that in October 2008, three military maneuvers were held that included all aerial and land forces in the four bases at Al-Hamidiyya with the participation of Arab army personnel under IRGC command - including Hamas, Hizbullah, and special Iranian forces, and several groups of independent Iranian sleeper cells in Iraq and in several regions of the Gulf. According to the report, these maneuvers included a presentation of all plans concerning attacks on targets in the Gulf, including American targets, immediately upon receiving orders from the IRGC leadership. It also said that the readiness of the forces, missiles, and aircraft that would participate in the attack had already been ascertained.

Hizbullah and Iranian special forces training buildings:

Discovery of Chinese Radar Systems at Al-Hamidiyya

The organization claimed that six months ago, the IRGC had obtained a sophisticated Chinese radar system (originally called Rakib) and had installed it at the Al-Hamidiyya bases, and that its radar covered most of the western and southern areas of Ahwaz. It said that the system was explosion-proof and could identify stationary and moving objects such as aircraft, ships, and armed forces encircling the region. It could also disrupt enemy communications and withstand enemy attempts to disrupt communications during military activity. The organization said that the Al-Hamidiyya military bases had massive defenses, including antiaircraft missiles, and that in addition to its ground defenses, there are closely-spaced air defense forces, armed with Mithak-2 shoulder-fired missiles.

In conclusion, the organization states:

"The dangerous armament programs now being prepared and implemented in Ahwaz [province] attest to the beginning of impending conflict, in which Al-Ahwaz will serve as a base and starting point for attacking our brothers across the Arab homeland, and in particular in the Arab Gulf. Accordingly, the Ahwazi Islamic Sunni Organization [appeals to] the Saudi National Association [for Human Rights] with the following demands:

"1) To [lobby for] international intervention to inspect the Al-'Amidiyya base, the Arajeri plant situated between Al-'Amidiyya and Behbahan, and the Shaznad plant in northern Ahwaz.

"2) To take steps to dismantle chemical weapons that Iran is producing in Ahwaz, because those harmed first by this are the Ahwazi people and the land of Ahwaz, and after that the Gulf countries and the Arab Gulf.

"3) To take serious steps to condemn Iran and to prosecute it for violating international law concerning the ban on the use of chemical weapons.

"4) To take steps to dismantle Iran's weapons throughout Ahwazi territory.

"5) To protect the Ahwazi Arab people from the consequences of [the military nature of life] in Al-Ahwaz."


[1] The full report was posted at http://www.sonnaalahwaz.org/Central-Archives/Al-Q/20090714-04.html.


Bookmark and Share
posted by midnight rider at permanent link# 5 Comments

Free Speech Under Foreign Assault – by Robert Spencer

Does the United States Constitution protect the freedom of speech of American citizens, or does it not? In this era of globalization, the answer is becoming increasingly muddled. Thursday, an American citizen, Paul Williams, went on trial in Canada. He is charged with violating Canadian libel laws in charges he made in his book The Dunces of Doomsday about a jihad terror cell at McMaster University in Ontario. Likewise in Brazil, an American business writer, Joseph Sharkey, is on trial for what he wrote about Brazilian air-traffic controllers after he survived an airplane crash in Brazil.

Williams and Sharkey both live in the United States, which guarantees that its citizens’ freedom of speech not be infringed. Should Canadian and Brazilian libel laws apply to them? Williams has already had to pay enormous amounts of money for his defense, and Sharkey is likely to be found guilty and given a $500,000 fine. McMaster University wants a cool two million dollars from Williams.

Shouldn’t the United States government protect American citizens from such bullying by foreign powers?

If nothing is done, the problem is certain to get worse — for Williams and Sharkey are not the first American victims of the tactic that has come to be known as “libel tourism.” The late Saudi billionaire Khalid Salim bin Mahfouz sued Rachel Ehrenfeld, founder and director of the American Center for Democracy, several years ago. Bin Mahfouz was upset about Ehrenfeld’s book, Funding Evil, in which she wrote that he was involved in funding Hamas and al Qaeda – a charge for which there was abundant evidence from Western intelligence agencies. Nevertheless, taking advantage of British libel laws that place the burden of proof on the defendant, rather than the plaintiff, bin Mahfouz sued not in the United States, where Ehrenfeld lives and published her book, but in Britain, where neither he nor Ehrenfeld lived and where his entire case depended upon a handful of copies sold in that country mostly through special orders from Amazon.com, and the appearance of one chapter of the book on the Internet, where could have been read by British readers. A British court awarded bin Mahfouz $250,000, and Ehrenfeld had to devote the bulk of her time for years to fighting this judgment.

Now Senator Arlen Specter (D-PA) has introduced the Free Speech Protection Act of 2009, which would shelter American writers from libel judgments by courts in countries that do not value the freedom of speech the way America does. But this bill faces an uphill battle – it seems unlikely that Barack Obama will give it his support after he just last week had the United States co-sponsor an anti-free speech resolution at the United Nations. Approved by the U.N. Human Rights Council, the resolution, cosponsored by the U.S. and Egypt, calls on states to condemn and criminalize “any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.”

“Hatred” and “incitement” are, of course, in the eye of the beholder — or more precisely, in the eye of those who make such determinations. The powerful can decide to silence the powerless by classifying their views as “hate speech.” The ability to dissent, publicly and without fear of imprisonment or other reprisal, is a cornerstone of any genuinely free society. Yet no less distinguished a personage than the President of the United States has now given his imprimatur to the quashing of such dissent.

But we still have the First Amendment, right? Legal expert Eugene Volokh explains that it isn’t that easy: “If the U.S. backs a resolution that urges the suppression of some speech, presumably we are taking the view that all countries — including the U.S. — should adhere to this resolution. If we are constitutionally barred from adhering to it by our domestic constitution, then we’re implicitly criticizing that constitution, and committing ourselves to do what we can to change it.”

Is that the change that Americans were hoping for when they voted for Barack Obama in such large numbers in 2008? Specter and the other Democrats who have introduced and support the Free Speech Protection Act should recognize how inconsistent it is with their own party leader’s actions as President of the United States, and call upon him to end all support for any legal measure anywhere that restricts free speech.

Our survival as a free people could depend upon it.

The Last Crusade adds: In a country of over 300 million citizens, we find it disturbing that when it comes to Constitutional issues and the preservation of American Freedom, we hear only the voices of the same dozen or so brave commentators. The Islamic world has declared the U.S.A. “A Nation of Cowards”. They may be correct.


Bookmark and Share
posted by midnight rider at permanent link# 7 Comments

Older Posts Newer Posts