Iraq: US dropped nuclear bomb near Basra in 1991, claims veteran

October 9, 2008

An American veteran of the first Gulf War in Iraq claims that the United States dropped a five-kilotonne nuclear bomb in 1991 in a deserted area outside the southern city of Basra on the Iranian border.

The claim by US war veteran Jim Brown was made during an interview included in a 30-minute current affairs report to be broadcast by Italian state news channel RaiNews24 on Thursday.  Brown told the Italian news channel that the bombing took place on the last day of the war in Iraq on 27 February 1991. >>>>>

How ironic and despicable if true.  We attack a whole country and kill more civilians than a non-culpable military many times over in order to ‘seek out weapons of mass destruction;’ only to find that there were no WMDs; and upon defeating the people we wrongfully attacked, we make our point by actually unnecessarily and criminally dropping a nuclear bomb.  When people around the world here this, it brings about a greater sense of urgency for justice and disdain for the cheerleaders for terms like “human rights,” “democracy,” “freedom,” “we only seek to offer humanitarian aid…”

Guantanamo techniques applied on US soil: civil rights groups

October 9, 2008

The military documents, including regular emails between military officers, were obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, and detail the detention and interrogation at naval prisons in Virginia and South Carolina.

They focus on three “enemy combatants:” two US citizens, Jose Padilla and Yaser Hamdi, and a legal resident, Ali al-Marri.  >>>>>

Former ambassador of Taliban to Pakistan, Mull Abdul Salam Zaeef rejected the reports of talks between Taliban and Afghan government in Saudi Arabia

October 8, 2008

Asked what was the solution of the problem, Zaeef said, “I believe talks should be held without putting any condition by either sides. Putting condition by Afghan government for talks with Taliban is not right. The government’s condition means to recognize the government which Taliban will not accept.”

“The talks should be unconditional and the US should also present their stance while the withdrawal of foreign troops, the future of Afghanistan and several other issues should be discussed,” he stated. >>>>>

Should not that have been the position taken from the onset, when the Taliban were the government and others would not accept them?  Someone is not being honest.  Who or what were to be gained by falsely reporting the original story?

Seven Years in Afghanistan: From “War on Terror” to “War of Terror”

October 7, 2008

October 7, 2008. Seven years ago today the U.S. began the assault on Afghanistan that toppled the Taliban regime and produced the present mess. Abetted by U.S. bombing and commando operations, the Northern Alliance took Kabul on November 13, 2001. This was the initial U.S. response to 9-11, an assault on the U.S. by Saudi Islamist fanatics based in Afghanistan. The al-Qaeda attacks killed 3000 people. By March 2002 the U.S. bombing had produced that many Afghan civilian fatalities. This was just the beginning. >>>>>

Woman Describes Experience Under Wahhabi Islam in Book

October 7, 2008

“You realize at once how insignificant a human being really is in the scale of creation, and at once you realize the vastness of your creator,” Dr. Ahmed said. “But for me especially I realize the diversity in Islam. And it’s so extraordinary that that diversity is manifested year after year in the cradle of Islam, in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which does not espouse diversity broadly in its own society.”

Dr. Qanta speaks of the orthodox version of Islam that is the kingdom’s state religion. She links Wahhabism, as it is called, to militant jihadists such as Osama bin Ladin, which some scholars dispute. “This is not Islam,” Dr. Qanta said. “This is a bastardization of Islam, a horrendous word to use. I’m not going to make any friends doing that, but that’s what it is.” >>>>>

Without saying what my personal opinion is on Wahhabism, the interviewer gives quotes of two people, who are anti-Wahhabi.  They are both presumably of Indo-Pakistani descent, living in Western countries that are involved in the attacks of ‘non-Wahhabi’ nations, and are intent on continuing with the War on Terror in Iran, and even Pakistan (our ally) – and the other hijab and non-hijab wearing nations.

With the lack of quotes from anyone who is pro-Wahhabi and possibly lives in Saudi Arabia, it is difficult to see this book as something more than a propaganda piece pandering to the West.

While most Muslims around the world may agree that the niqab (a more conservative covering for women than hijab) is something that is not required Islamically, those very same Muslims would agree that not wearing hijab (something the author displays in her interview) is clearly a sin in Islam.

This book acts as the debate toward ‘moderate Islam,’ something that leaves room for grave innovations, bida. Her interview even seeks to go as far as seeking to modernize Islam.

While recognizing that it is her personal choice, her public display of moderation and modesty is actually contrary to even moderate Muslims, for she doesn’t wear hijab.  This would not be of public importance, except that she is pushing for a moderation while she seems to be at the other extreme, not center of the issue.

Aside from her physical, non-modest appearance, it is her notion of jihad that disturbed me.  If it was a given (and it’s not), that Osama bin Laden and all the other Muslim terrorists (patsies) of the world were indeed guilty of the all the crimes alleged since 9/11, she ignores the Western ‘Crusade’ that has killed and maimed people tens-of-thousand-times over more Muslims than those acts have — and most of those victims were non-combative civilian men, women and children.

Jihad in the minds of Muslims includes anyone defending their homeland, and even own homes from tyranny, occupation and murder.  The pre-emptive attacks by the West are somehow justified in their own jihad, which is a term not recognized by themselves simply because it is a word that comes from a different language.  But whatever the West understands the term jihad to be — their actions and intentions have superceded even the widely-misunderstood, yet accepted corrupted definition of the term jihad.

The interview alone, without having read the book, is one that speaks volumes of the author’s perspective.

Sources: Taliban split with al Qaeda, seek peace

October 6, 2008

The talks — the first of their kind aimed at resolving the lengthy conflict in Afghanistan — mark a significant move by the Saudi leadership to take a direct role in Afghanistan, hosting delegates who have until recently been their enemies.

They also mark a sidestepping of key “war on terror” ally Pakistan, frequently accused of not doing enough to tackle militants sheltering on its territory, which has previously been a conduit for talks between the Saudis and Afghanistan.  >>>>>

This story actually legitimizes the notion that Al-Qaeda and the Taliban had a marriage.  In effect, there is no al-Qaeda.  There is merely a response to an invasion, ethnic cleansing, torture and other horrors against humanity.  These very same people who have been defending their own homeland, have been conveniently lumped together to be identified by the West as Al-Qaeda.

The Taliban, or the government of Afghanistan at the time of that country’s invasion and occupation, are a group of people whom have been focusing internally – and simply desire to live out their own culture, under their own sovereignty.

The continued connection between the two groups, with Osama bin Laden purported to be acting as liaison, is something that the West needs in order to continue its marching orders on the War on Terror.  Interestingly enough, Pakistan and Afghanistan are commencing to ‘flip-flop’ on roles that neither wanted to take on, regardless of which side of the spectrum they fall on.

Muslim cleric wants one-eyed veil

October 6, 2008

Sheikh Muhammad al-Habadan has said that Saudi Arabian women are encouraged to use eye makeup and look seductive when allowed to wear a veil that exposes both eyes.

How much of their face Muslim women expose differs from country to country and is an area of contention.  >>>>>