Hey, good stuff. I agree that police work since 9/11 has been good and that that's the main reason we haven't been attacked. That part of the war on terror is going good.

The foreign segment of the war on terror will not work, IMO. The cultural differences are just too large -- our very presence stimulates the viloence.

And oh man, I really wish they'd get OBL so we could finally see that it really won't make much difference. A little bit of revenge satisfaction and then back to business as usual.

__________________
1986 300SDL, 362K
1984 300D, 138K

My take is that they don't want to rebuild to our specs, with us as the overlord. And meanwhile, we keep piping in huge bucks which plenty of them are able to siphon off.

On Vietnam, there was a large body of Vietnamese willing to stand up and take control of its destiny. Unfortunately for LBJ, Nixon, et. al., it was not the faction under the sway of our puppets but those holding up the banner of Ho Chi Minh.

__________________
1986 300SDL, 362K
1984 300D, 138K

The original Al Qaeda motivation was primarily based on the disdain for Western (US) armies on Islamic soil.

Why anyone thought that moving a much larger Western army to a neighboring country was somehow going to improve matters is beyond me. OBL, as much as I despise his smirking face and way limited understanding of the universe IMO, has managed to leverage the 9/11 attack into a huge gain for his cause, with a major assist from Dubya and the whole PNAC crowd.

__________________
1986 300SDL, 362K
1984 300D, 138K

I like how North Vietnam agreed to a peace treaty and observed it right up until the US Congress quit supporting S. Vietnam. Then the North invaded with regular army forces, violating another part of the treaty they signed, and the US likewise ignored the terms of the same treaty and failed to come to S. Vietnam's aid.

It's really cool how so many Vietnamese were fortunate enough to attend re-education camps to become productive members of the proletariat. Those that weren't murdered or that didn't go into permanent exile, I mean.

It was cool.

B

More failure.

Bot


----------------------------------------------------------

U.S. citizen gets 10 years for receiving terrorist training

Associated Press - July 20, 2007 12:05 PM ET

HOUSTON (AP) - A U.S. citizen convicted of receiving training with Al-Qaida members at a terrorist camp in Somalia has been sentenced to ten years in prison for trying to help overthrow the Somali government.

Twenty-8-year-old Daniel Joseph Maldonado received the maximum sentence in a Houston federal court today. He pleaded guilty in April to a charge of receiving training from a foreign terrorist organization.

The Muslim convert admitted traveling in December to a terrorist camp in Somalia. There, he says he trained to use firearms and explosives to help topple the Somali government and install an Islamic state. Members of al-Qaida were present at the camp.

Maldonado was captured by the Kenyan military while trying to flee Somalia in January and returned to the United States in February.

Maldonado grew up in New Hampshire and lived in Houston for four months in 2005 before moving with his wife and three children to Cairo, Egypt.

In statements made to FBI agents after his arrest, Maldonado said he had "no problem" with killing Americans or with the September Eleventh, 2001, attacks on the United States.

I have no doubt it was ugly.

Apparently history began at that point with you, or perhaps around the time of the Gulf of Tonkin incident. Perhaps you can share with us your knowledge of the decades of groundwork that was laid by the French, that would be the groundwork that gave the commies room to garner public support.

This should have given ample evidence on the folly of thinking we or any other nation can impose our will through force of arms and then think that that will will continue to hold sway after the force is removed.

(that that will will -- cute, huh?)

Watch out. Re-run in progress.

__________________
1986 300SDL, 362K
1984 300D, 138K

I agree.

Oh? Do you agree that vision up front was faulty or that we are going to cowardly abandon our "allies," that would be the allies who are happy to take our money but can't seem to find the proper muster?

__________________
1986 300SDL, 362K
1984 300D, 138K

Are you still beating your dog?

Has anybody seen the thread I started about western Pakistan?

I think it might have been deleted.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/20/world/asia/20cnd-pakistan.html?_r=1&ref=world&oref=slogin
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, July 20 — The ground beneath Gen. Pervez Musharraf’s feet unsettled considerably today, as the Supreme Court ruled that his suspension of the country’s chief justice earlier this year was “illegal.”

Oliver Matthys/European Pressphoto Agency
Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry in Islamabad after the ruling today.
The seemingly abstruse constitutional case over the fate of the chief justice, Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, is a watershed for the nation. Mr. Chaudhry’s very challenge to the president, who summoned him to Army headquarters on March 9 and pressed him to resign, had come to be seen as a proxy protest against nearly seven and a half years of military rule.

The case also bears on the fate of General Musharraf, one of Washington’s most enduring allies in the war on terror. The general, who took power in a coup in 1999, is likely to be challenged in the Supreme Court if he seeks re-election as president while continuing to hold the title of army chief of staff. He is also likely to face a legal challenge if he insists on being re-elected by the sitting parliament before his term expires this year.

General Musharraf’s critics had accused him of sidelining Mr. Chaudhry so he could install a judge who would be more likely to bend to his authority.

The case, or reference, as it is known, against Mr. Chaudhry centered around charges of misconduct, including demanding a later-model Mercedes as his official car. Mr. Chaudhry refused to resign, insisting that he was innocent. He then challenged his suspension in the Supreme Court, arguing that the Pakistani constitution gave neither the president nor the military chief the power to remove the chief justice. His supporters seized on the case as a battle for judicial independence. Even more, the judge became an emblem of mounting discontent against military rule.

Immediately after the verdict was read out, around 4:15 p.m. today, and the 13-member bench filed out, courtroom No. 1, packed full, exploded into revelry. Supporters fell upon Mr. Chaudhry’s chief counsel, Aitzaz Ahsan, all crushing each other in a joyous scrum that is a rare sight in modern-day Pakistan. They poured out of the courtroom, quivering with delight. “Mubarak,” they said, Urdu for congratulations. “Pakistan is saved,” one man shouted.

“It’s a spurious reference, it had to go,” declared Mr. Ahsan at twilight, as he milled with supporters in the backyard of Mr. Chaudhry’s house. “It’s a big blow to the Musharraf regime. It’s a big blow to dictatorship.”

Having said that, Mr. Ahsan, who is a prominent leader of the opposition Pakistan People’s Party, said he would refrain from making political comments until later.

Mr. Chaudhry did not appear in court, nor did he react publicly, except to step briefly onto his back patio, as members of his staff doled out traditional sweets in celebration. Shortly thereafter, when the crowd of journalists had thinned out, he came out again, and embraced his well-wishers one by one.

In a unanimous opinion, the court ruled that the president had exceeded his constitutional authority by placing Mr. Chaudhry on “compulsory leave” and acted illegally by suspending him from the post of chief justice and installing an acting chief justice. In the opinion, 10 of the 13 members ruled that Mr. Chaudhry should be reinstated to his post.

General Musharraf had suffered a setback already when Mr. Chaudhry won the right to have his case heard before a full bench of Supreme Court judges, rather than a judicial council of five hand-picked judges, three of whom the lawyers said were pro-government and would have ruled against him.

The Prime Minister’s office promptly issued a statement saying all Pakistanis ought to “accept the verdict with grace and dignity reflective of a mature nation.”

“This is not the time to claim victory or defeat,” it went on. “The Constitution and the law have prevailed and must prevail at all times.”

In the statement was also a condemnation of “the current wave of extremism and militancy” and a nod to elections later this year. “The government on its part shall spare no effort to ensure that the democratic process remains on track.”

Even if the chief justice now recuses himself from the cases involving the president, it would not necessarily make things easier for General Musharraf’s election plans, when challenged in court. “The fact is, it has strengthened the hand of judiciary,” said Talat Masood, a retired general. “They will try to do justice. They know they have support of the people.”

The minister of state for information, Tariq Azim Khan, praised the verdict as having strengthened the judiciary, which is “free and independent in the country.”

Asked what he believed the chief justice would do when faced with cases relating to the government, he said: “We hope he’ll do justice when matters come into his hand.”

Salman Masood contributed reporting from Islamabad.

__________________
-Marty

1986 300E 220,000 miles+ transmission impossible
(Now waiting under a bridge in order to become one)

Reading your M103 duty cycle:
http://www.peachparts.com/shopforum/showpost.php?p=831799&postcount=13
http://www.peachparts.com/shopforum/showpost.php?p=831807&postcount=14

Thank You

Which part makes you most thankful?

B

Sometimes when you cannot back your beliefs with facts you thank those that agree with you. Just like the thank you thread always give thanks.


thanks

Anybody who thinks that the democratic congress isn't part and parcel to US imperialistic intent is a fool.

They are all on the same team. The whole US political system is a cherade. This is no better personafied than by H. Clinton herself.

So ... what's your alternative?