Lifestyle > Train of Thought
Empire In Descent: The Deliberate Destruction Of America
Kal EL:
here's more
Iraqis want Saddam to run for election'
Pakistan Daily Times | December 1 2005
AMMAN: Iraqis have asked Saddam Hussein's defence team to mull the possibility of fielding the ousted dictator as a candidate for future elections, one of his lawyers said in remarks published on Wednesday.
"Iraqis have asked the defence team to study the legal conditions to present Saddam Hussein as a candidate for elections, first as an MP then as president," Jordan's Al-Dustour daily quoted former Qatari justice minister Najib al-Nuaimi as saying.
"If this contradicts the legal system then president Saddam will be nominated simply as a candidate," he said, without specifying if Saddam could try to run in the December 15 election.
Nuaimi is among three foreign lawyers along with former US attorney general Ramsey Clark and Jordanian lawyer Issam Ghazzawi who were sworn in by the Iraqi court as members of Saddam's defence at Monday's hearing.
Asked by AFP about Nuaimi's reported remarks, Ghazzawi said: "As we were leaving Iraq on Tuesday ordinary Iraqis at the airport approached us saying they wished that Saddam would return (as president)."
"These Iraqis said ‘we have lost security after Saddam, how we wish he would return'," Ghazzawi said.
Meanwhile, former US Attorney General Ramsey Clark, who has joined Saddam Hussein's defence team, said on Tuesday he had had no time to discuss legal issues or trial strategy at his first meeting with the Iraqi ex-president.
When they met for the first time on Monday, the day Saddam's trial in Baghdad briefly resumed, Saddam said he was "overjoyed" to meet Clark and his companions, a former Qatari justice minister and a Jordanian lawyer, Clark said.
"He was in very good spirits. He didn't want to talk about problems but was happy to have somebody to talk to. He said a little bit about the way he was treated," Clark said.
Clark, speaking on arrival in the Jordanian capital from Baghdad, said he expected to meet the toppled Iraqi leader again on Sunday to discuss defence strategy ahead of the next hearing on Dec 5, following a one-week adjournment.
Saddam and seven fellow defendants are on trial in a fortified courtroom in Baghdad for crimes against humanity. All have pleaded not guilty.
There was no discussion of tactics at Monday's meeting, Clark said.
Kal EL:
here's more proof
New Article Says U.S. Allowing Genocide In Iraq
Robert Parry, a Washington journalist who has been around for years, has a new article in which he makes the case that the Bush administration's is allowing "genocide" against the Sunni people in Iraq. Strong words indeed.
Parry argues that the United States is turning a blind eye on the increasing number of atrocities committed by the Shiite militias against their longtime enemies. The discovery in recent days of a Shia-controlled prison in Baghdad is cited as just a symptom of the problem.
Parry likens the existence of Shiite death squads to what was seen in Central America during the Reagan years.
As Parry sees it, the only hope for the Sunnis would be their acceptance of second-class citizenship, anything less risks genocide at the hands of the Shia. Bush is portrayed as being more or less down with this program, like Reagan in the 1980's:
For his part, Bush reiterated that he will only be satisfied with "complete victory,"” which suggests he is resolved to break the back of the Sunni resistance at whatever cost.
The Bush administration also wants to keep a tight hold on information that might put the U.S. war effort in a negative light. That means the American people can expect to be shielded from many of the worst secrets in Iraq, much as the White House has continued to fight release of video showing abuses at Abu Ghraib and other U.S.-run prisons in Iraq.
According to U.S. military experts I've interviewed, a great deal of emphasis in the future will be on "perception management,"” the concept of shaping how both Iraqis and the American people perceive the events in Iraq.
The idea of "perception management" fits right in with what has come to light in the last few days about the "Lincoln Group." Sen. John Warner of the Armed Services Committee has announced that he will conduct an inquiry into the propaganda for pay story. The last time we heard that was when Sen. Warner promised to get to the bottom of the Abu Ghraib prison scandal. We are still waiting.
Robert Parry's article is surely to be controversial, and much of his other work on Consortiumnews.com is certainly worth looking at if you are unfamiliar with his essays.
posted by Effwit at 12:05 PM 0 comments
here's more
Thursday, December 01, 2005
U.S. Reportedly Seeking Negotiations With Taliban and Al Qaeda
Reports are circulating in Pakistan that the United States, frustrated by an increasing casualty rate in Afghanistan, is attempting to negotiate a truce or cease-fire with the leadership of the former Taliban and with elements of Al Qaeda.
A typically (for the intelligence business) convoluted series of events involving a Pakistani politician and U.S. diplomats has revealed the outline of the plan.
The Pakistani politician, Javed Ibrahim Paracha, a leader of Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PNL-N), claimed that he was asked by U.S. and Pakistani intelligence officers to meet with undersecretary of State Karen Hughes during her recent trip to the Muslim world. Paracha alleged that he had been referred to the spooks by former ISI chiefs Gen. Ehsanul Haq and Gen. Hamid Gul. He originally reported that the meeting took place Nov 14 at the Serena Hotel in Islamabad. He said that the topic of the meeting was to induce him to make contact with leadership elements of the Taliban and Al Qaeda to begin peace negotiations.
Shortly after his comments were reported in the Pakistani media, Paracha says he received a telephone call about the matter from the U.S. embassy in Islamabad. Paracha has since changed his story. He claims now that he never met with Ms. Hughes, but rather with "U.S. businessmen" to discuss ways to safely get American troops out of Afghanistan.
The U.S. embassy expressly denies that Paracha met Karen Hughes during her visit. A spokesman for the Taliban also denies their involvement and says that only a full withdrawal of foreign troops in Afghanistan would be acceptable.
Paracha's claims could be dismissed by some as the paradise intoxicated ravings of a freedom-hating Muslim if not for the fact that Paracha is known to have good contacts with high-level Talibans and Al Qaeda. In late 2001, Paracha successfully negotiated the release of a large number of Arab captives charged with terrorism in Pakistan. That's the type of thing that contributes to the bona-fides of an "international type."
The question here is why, if this interpretation of events is correct, would the United States want to abandon the battle against the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan? This isn't a domestically unpopular war like our involvement in Iraq.
The answer would have to be that the U.S. knows that Osama bin Laden and the operational heads of Al Qaeda are not in Afghanistan and are never likely to return.
Kal EL:
no worries! I appreciate the response.
Eihtball:
--- Quote from: virtuoso on December 03, 2005, 12:03:34 PM ---one brainashed fool says oh right wing paranoia without evidence, then when you present further detail they dont want to know, you get compelte silence or perhaps Ron Paul doesn't exist.
--- End quote ---
Actually, I simply forgot that I had posted in this thread and didn't bother checking it again. So fuck off.
And his "futher detail" hardly proves his case. Yes, this is a unipolar world and some people don't like that. OK, I get the point, a lot of people hate us and will do stuff to spite us. That doesn't mean their hatred is part of some huge conspiracy to create a world government - ever thought that maybe we've done a lot of shit that upsets them, and that they have a right to be upset about it? It's hard to deny the hypocrisy that runs deep in America's supposed "pro-freedom" stances these days.
Kal EL:
true there is a hatred of america in certain places, however that is usually due to the policies that the american gov't has supported in those places. like creating and or supporting dictators and not saying anything about it until they cross our economic intrests in their areas.
here is a brief list of people that we empowered that later we deemed to be a problem
Fidel Castro
Sadaam Hussein
Mobutu Sese Seko (cia supported his takeover)
Dictator Country
Abacha, General Sani Nigeria
Amin, Idi Uganda
Banzer, Colonel Hugo Bolivia
Batista, Fulgencio Cuba
Bolkiah, Sir Hassanal Brunei
Botha, P.W. South Africa
Branco, General Humberto Brazil
Cedras, Raoul Haiti
Cerezo, Vinicio Guatemala
Chiang Kai-Shek Taiwan
Cordova, Roberto Suazo Honduras
Christiani, Alfredo El Salvador
Diem, Ngo Dihn Vietnam
Doe, General Samuel Liberia
Duvalier, Francois Haiti
Duvalier, Jean Claude Haiti
Fahd bin'Abdul-'Aziz, King Saudi Arabia
Franco, General Francisco Spain
Hitler, Adolf Germany
Hassan II Morocco
Marcos, Ferdinand Philippines
Martinez, General Maximiliano Hernandez El Salvador
Mobutu Sese Seko Zaire
Montt, General Efrain Rios
Guatemala
Noriega, General Manuel Panama
Ozal, Turgut Turkey
Pahlevi, Shah Mohammed Reza Iran
Papadopoulos, George Greece
Park Chung Hee South Korea
Pinochet, General Augusto Chile
Pol Pot Cambodia
Rabuka, General Sitiveni Fiji
Montt, General Efrain Rios Guatemala
Salassie, Halie Ethiopia
Salazar, Antonio de Oliveira Portugal
Somoza, Anastasio Jr. Nicaragua
Somoza, Anastasio, Sr. Nicaragua
Smith, Ian Rhodesia
Stroessner, Alfredo Paraguay
Suharto, General Indonesia
Trujillo, Rafael Leonidas Dominican Republic
Videla, General Jorge Rafael Argentina
Zia Ul-Haq, Mohammed Pakistan
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[*] Previous page
Go to full version