LIBERTAS comments

I have always liked Jimmy Carter as a person. He was and is too nice of a guy to be a successful US politician. Now if we could just pick up his message of "Peace, not Apartheid" the world would be a much better place.

This internal strife in the GOP is a microcosm of what's happening in the USA at large. A house divided shall not stand. One has to ask cui bono? Who benefits from fomenting all this internal strife, division and fratricide? Not the ordinary Joe's and Josephine's that's for sure.

"Rekindling memories of the days when insurgents ruled the streets."

They still do. Muqtadr al Sadr's Mahdi homies rule the entire land. Ain't liberation (from life) just great?

Might be his last hurrah. Given his state of health, this may be a one-way trip, a la Arafat.

Last I looked a citizen of a country that claims to be democratic has the right to enter and leave that country. (Non-democratic countries often have the word "People's" or "Democratic" in their official names, so they don't really count as democracies; PRC, DPRK, DRC, etc.) But commonwealth countries? And by a tax authority, no less? Shame on you Oz!

If the bill is in dispute, then go to court and sort it out like gentlemen.

Myth 1. As of this month, the United States no longer has combat troops in Iraq.

Not even close.

Myth 2. Thanks to the troop "surge," Iraq is secure enough that it will not fall back into civil war as U.S. forces pull out.

Security in Iraq has improved enormously since the darkest days of 2005-2006, but the jury is still out on what will happen in the months and years ahead.

Myth 3. The United States is leaving behind a broken political system.

If some on the right want to claim (incorrectly) that the surge stabilized Iraq to the point that civil war is impossible, their counterparts on the left try to insist (equally incorrectly) that the change in U.S. tactics and strategy in 2007-2008 had no impact on Iraq's politics whatsoever.

Myth 4. Iraqis want U.S. troops to stay. Or they want them leave.

Be very, very careful with Iraqi public opinion.

Myth 5. The war will end "on schedule." Much as we should want the Obama administration to succeed in Iraq, this statement by the president in a speech to veterans this month should make us wary. If uttered in the first act of a Greek tragedy, it is exactly the kind of claim that would end in a Sophoclean fall.

Courtesy of Sunday's Washington Post. Worth a read.

THE “ground zero mosque,” as you may well know by now, is not at ground zero. It’s not a mosque but an Islamic cultural center containing a prayer room. It’s not going to determine President Obama’s political future or the elections of 2010 or 2012. Still, the battle that has broken out over this project in Lower Manhattan — on the “hallowed ground” of a shuttered Burlington Coat Factory store one block from the New York Dolls Gentlemen’s Club — will prove eventful all the same. And the consequences will be far more profound than any midterm election results or any of the grand debates now raging 24/7 over the parameters of tolerance, religious freedom, and the real estate gospel of location, location, location.

Here’s what’s been lost in all the screaming. The prime movers in the campaign against the “ground zero mosque” just happen to be among the last cheerleaders for America’s nine-year war in Afghanistan. The wrecking ball they’re wielding is not merely pounding Park51, as the project is known, but is demolishing America’s already frail support for that war, which is dedicated to nation-building in a nation whose most conspicuous asset besides opium is actual mosques.

You’d think that American hawks invested in the Afghanistan “surge” would not act against their own professed interests. But they couldn’t stop themselves from placing cynical domestic politics over country. The ginned-up rage over the “ground zero mosque” was not motivated by a serious desire to protect America from the real threat of terrorists lurking at home and abroad — a threat this furor has in all likelihood exacerbated — but by the potential short-term rewards of winning votes by pandering to fear during an election season.

We owe thanks to Justin Elliott of Salon for the single most revealing account of this controversy’s evolution. He reports that there was zero reaction to the “ground zero mosque” from the front-line right or anyone else except marginal bloggers when The Times first reported on the Park51 plans in a lengthy front-page article on Dec. 9, 2009. The sole exception came some two weeks later at Fox News, where Laura Ingraham, filling in on “The O’Reilly Factor,” interviewed Daisy Khan, the wife of the project’s organizer, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf. Ingraham gave the plans her blessing. “I can’t find many people who really have a problem with it,” she said. “I like what you’re trying to do.”

Fueling that instability is neighboring Iran which, Odierno said, continues to fund and train Shiite extremist groups.

Just imagine if Iran invaded Mexico. You think Americans would just sit there and continue to watch TV unmoved? No, they'd seek to influence the situation in their own best interest. As is Iran with Iraq. Good enough for the USA, then good enough for Iran.

The astute leaders of Iran, following the examples of N. Korea, India and Pakistan, have learned a wonderful lesson, for which Iraq paid the tuition: Those who don't stand up to bullies get pushed around. Having adequate defence capabilities against a regime like the ones which successively occupy Washington DC and Tel Aviv is a necessity these days.

The uranium fuel Russia has supplied for Bushehr is well below the more than 90% enrichment needed for a nuclear warhead. Iran is already producing its own uranium enriched to the Bushehr level—about 3.5%. It also has started a pilot program of enriching uranium to 20%, which officials say is needed for a medical research reactor.

Salehi said Iran will continue to enrich uranium to 20%, but had no intention to continuing the higher level of enrichment forever.

Key point here. The IAEA has accepted this deal. The US Govt. has accepted this deal. Be rational people, or is fear/warmongering just part of the game? Iran is obviously the enemy du jour.

So what did Ahmadinejad actually say? To quote his exact words in farsi:

"Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad."

That passage will mean nothing to most people, but one word might ring a bell: rezhim-e. It is the word "Regime", pronounced just like the English word with an extra "eh" sound at the end. Ahmadinejad did not refer to Israel the country or Israel the land mass, but the Israeli regime. This is a vastly significant distinction, as one cannot wipe a regime off the map. Ahmadinejad does not even refer to Israel by name, he instead uses the specific phrase "rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods" (regime occupying Jerusalem).

So this raises the question.. what exactly did he want "wiped from the map"? The answer is: nothing. That's because the word "map" was never used. The Persian word for map, "nagsheh", is not contained anywhere in his original farsi quote, or, for that matter, anywhere in his entire speech. Nor was the western phrase "wipe out" ever said. Yet we are led to believe that Iran's President threatened to "wipe Israel off the map", despite never having uttered the words "map", "wipe out" or even "Israel".

Wise up WilliB. Perpetuating a lie doesn't change the fact that it's still a lie.

No, the real sticking point is that the Zionist project, the Eratz Israel dreamed of by Theodore Hertzl will never concede land or peace to the original Palestinian people. Nor will successive "israeli" governments.

Quotations like the following are drilled into Israeli children's heads from the time they're small. Bibi is a good example: "When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do about it will be to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle." Raphael Eitan, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defence Forces, New York Times, 14 April 1983.

Read the whole nauseating list here: http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/palestinians.html?q=palestinians.html

Bibi has proudly declared how he sunk the Oslo accord during a cabinet meeting recently. Bibi wants land and water by any means necessary. And heaven help anyone who stands in his way. His words, not mine.

Moderators: When you permit comments like these:

They are going to get their nuclear bombs soon. Then you have another fortress like North Korea in the middle east!

and:

The Mohammedan marched with swords and now Iran is marching with Nuke(s).

You really do a disservice to your profession. One has to ask what kind of offensive and mindbogglingly stupid racist stereotypes your are promulgating. Or how ignorant you show the (mostly) American readership of this page to demonstrate themselves to be. And shamelessly so at that.

Moderator: Those comments are within the rules of the discussion board. If you wish to refute them, then please do so as a mature adult and refrain from posting remarks like "stupid racist stereotypes" which reflect badly on yourself.

Keith Olbermann has a great comment, clearing up any issues on this: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article26189.htm Balanced, detailed and rational. Not hype.

What, they want it AT Ground Zero?

No, they don't. It's several blocks away. It's a non issue made up to distract from much more serious problems. Blown way out of proportion.

Well, on youtube BHO admitted that he was Muslim. (Obama: "My Muslim Faith") The key question is, "So what?" Can he do the job as President, that's the real issue, or should be.

Isn't it interesting to see BP's oily, blood soaked hands involved in this too? Remember, BP originated in Iran as the British oil company involved in installing the Shah. What's the bets they're up to no good now as they try for regime change against President ArmoredDinnerJacket?

When I used to teach primary/elementary in Japan we had about a dozen or so children of Japanese and non-Japanese parents. Sometimes they were derisively called "hafu" by their classmates. I always asked the classmates, "Hafu? Which hafu? Top or bottom? Right or left?" When asked to explain, obviously they couldn't. It died out real fast, and over the course of a few weeks it wasn't an issue anymore. What DID get their goat, though, was a 100% non-Japanese sensei who didn't take any crap from anyone. They soon learned that good behavior was expected from the "wholes" and the hafus" regardless. It should be that way among Japanese adults too.

Rights need no court to support them. They're not given and taken away by monarchs as of old. So much for a Republican Democracy!

It is plain to see that, in the absence of a Federal Govt. meeting its responsibilities, the state of Arizona has overstepped its mandate by trying to perform federal functions. America, it would appear, becomes more dysfunctional by the day. From the top down and from the regions on up. If the US actually HAD an immigration system, instead of a judgment by whim of whatever uneducated armed goon like one meets at US border crossings, this could all be avoided. Like in Canada, Oz or NZ.

Violence has dropped sharply in Iraq, but Iraqi security forces and civilians continue to face daily attacks.

Who writes this drivel? Violence is attacks. Attacks is violence. What?

Gordon Duff at Veterans Today is reporting, "There never were plans for a mosque at “ground zero.” The entire story is made up by a public relations agency working with the Israeli government and the GOP. There are plans for an Islamic center in an old Burlington Coat Factory store blocks away. That far down the island of Manhattan, a couple blocks away is 'across town.'"

Fool you once.....

Given that a majority of Americans believe these two false ideas: (1)The point of the victory mosque is of course to build it right there. And everybody, except bleeding-heart Western liberals, knows that. (2) Is this mosque going to have a banner condemning the 9/11 attacks which were carried out in the name of Islam?

It's one thing for people to think Americans are fools. It's quite another for them to put this in print and prove the point. How do you deal with a nation of people who choose ignorance, and who simply do not want to see the truth of 9/11? Or that the antipathy that many around the world, not just in Muslim countries feel for the USA, is borne simply because the USA has the habit, verifiable by history, of messing around with other people's countries and stealing their resources. All in the name of democracy.

There are none so blind as those who do not wish to see.

and lacking in knowledge.

Yup!

Jefferson and the Founding Fathers must be rolling in their graves. Wasn't religious freedom one of the first freedoms granted. When fundy bozos like CUFI here: http://cufi.convio.net/site/PageServer?pagename=homepage have the kind of belligerent influence they have in Washington, it makes a mockery of the First Amendment. It's either freedom for all, or freedom for none. Which is it? Can't have one group more equal than others, now, can we?

One has to ask how a traveler on an out of date Israeli passport got into the US, and managed to get clearance to leave it too? Great DHS work, no doubt! With allies like this, who needs terrorists? Oops, we got 'em!

Former UK & US military commanders have admitted to the BBC that "Al-Qaeda" is a CIA/MI5/Mossad construct, used to do what governments daren't do in public. The former President of the Italian Republic, Fracesco Cossiga, is on parliamentary and media record as confirming their claims. Why are we still chasing an non-existent organization led, supposedly, by a White House admitted dead guy, almost ten years later? If these attacks were directed against Sunnis and done by Al Qaeda, this would make no sense at all. OBL and his followers lean towards Wahabi Islam, and it is Al Sadr and his Shias who would stand to gain, not the cave-dwelling-goat-herders in Tora Bora, who win or lose nothing by this kind of bloodletting.

And none of this has anything to do with Islam, of any stripe. This is politics, as un-pure and bloodly as it gets.

Evidence is emerging that this guy wasn't involved at all in the Lockerbie incident. Keep your eyes peeled, there's more to this story than BP.

Why are they even there?

How many more families Stateside or in allies' countries need to hear this news before this unwinnable war for oil is brought to an end? What do you tell the last man to die? And for what? Lies.