Tuesday, 27 September 2005
Civil War in the Anti-War Movement
Topic: Iraq War
I find I continually underestimate the extremes of one side of the Political Spectrum
This from LGF Dissent in San Diego
and THE INDEPUNDITFracture LinesJAMAL KANJ, a fiery Palestinian from a group called Al-Awda, takes the podium. “We Palestinians,” he begins, “have been subjected to GENOCIDE at the hands of the Israelis for generations.“ He rants on. ”In 1948, they forced us out of our homes, and today we must DRIVE THE JEWS from PALESTINE!”
Suddenly, a middle-aged man wearing a black “F the President” T-shirt rushes the stage, screaming at Kanj, “I’m TIRED of this CRAP! You people keep bringing this up! This is supposed to be an ANTI-WAR rally, not an ANTI-ISRAEL rally!”
Kanj yells back, into the microphone. Others in the crowd stand up and join in the shouting match.
The Arab-Israeli conflict has arrived in San Diego.
Red-vested “peace monitors” converge on T-shirt Man, trying to contain this sudden outburst of dissent. They are followed closely by the San Diego Police Department, who quickly take control of the situation and lead the man away.
AT LEAST A THIRD of the crowd has departed. Others remain behind only to express their disappointment and disgust. The organizers argue amongst themselves.
Let me see if I have this straight,
An Anti-War Protester
Was Lead away from an Anti-War Protest by the Police.
He was Protesting
That the Anti-War Protest
Was not Protesting the War?
You can NOT make up stuff this good!
We need a Protest like this in every
city in the Nation, so folks can see just what these people are really like, not filtered thought the media.
Or better yet, how about Jerry Springer producing
a new Reality Show called the Protest?
Where the members eliminate each other?
Wow what a Challenge that would be for Karl Rove
to sneak in some Protest Warriors and fix it so THEY would win. LOL
(Do go to Indepundit and check out the whole story and the photos!)
Monday, 26 September 2005
They Came For Us
Topic: Out of Flyover Land
Those who study History are doomed to see it repeated by those who don't.
We never learn.
First they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out - because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the communists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me - and there was no one left to speak for me.
New and updated version
When they came for the Fourth Amendment, I did not say anything - because I had nothing to hide.
When they came for the Second Amendment, I did not say anything - because I did not own a gun.
When they came for the Fifth and Sixth amendments, I did not say anything - because I had committed no crimes.
When they came for the first Amendment - I could not say anything.
On Protein Wisdom there is thread about the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on the nomination of John Roberts for Chief Justice.Bobbing Roberts
For me the most important, the most dangerous concepts which have arisen during this confirmation hearing were--On the final day of the Roberts hearings, Sen. Richard J. Durbin of Illinois tried one last time: “If you’ve made one point many times over . . . the course of the last three days,” he told the judge, “it is that as a judge you will be loyal and faithful to the process of law, to the rule of law.” But “beyond loyalty to the process of law,” he asked Roberts, “how do you view [the] law when it comes to expanding our personal freedom? . . . That’s what I’ve been asking.”
And so, in various ways, had Durbin’s Democratic colleagues been asking about such matters--ones “beyond loyalty” to the rule of law. In response to Durbin, Roberts stuck to the point he had indeed made “many times over.” Reframing the senator’s question so as to reach the core issue, Roberts said, “Somebody asked me, you know, ‘Are you going to be on the side of the little guy?’ And you obviously want to give an immediate answer. But as you reflect on it, if the Constitution says that the little guy should win, the little guy is going to win in court before me. But if the Constitution says that the big guy should win, well, then the big guy is going to win, because my obligation is to the Constitution. That’s the oath. The oath that a judge takes is not that ‘I’ll look out for particular interests.’ . . . The oath is to uphold the Constitution and laws of the United States, and that’s what I would do.
Good intentions can be the
most dangerous thing. Actions for the Greater Good can be as dangerous.
The LAW is never supposed to be FOR someone, never biased nor adversarial, lawyers can and must be, but the Law and Judges should never be.
When we cross that line we are no longer governed by Law and the Constitution, but by fiat. I do not care how well intentioned a persons motives are this opens the gate for and oppression because there is NO guarantee that once the Law is perverted to be biased towards one element of Society it cannot be biased towards others. In the end it will be biased towards those who can muster the most power and the FUNDAMENTAL principle of our Nation that ALL rights are the Inalienable attribute of the Individual has been sacrificed to whatever the current political desire is. There can be no other outcome.
In Kelo versus New London the protections of the V Amendment
"nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
Public use become to "benefit" the Public, there for Eminent Domain may now be used to take one person's property, NOT for the use
of the Public, but to turn it over to other private individuals to develop and the increased Tax Revenue will be for the Greater Good of all, but the RIGHTS of an individual are now gone.
But their intentions
were caring so I guess that makes this sundering of the rights of the individual all OK.
When McCain-Feingold first reared its ugly head few cared because it only effected the "Rich", not that it seems to have hindered George Soros much, but the public perception was we needed to be protected by undue influence by the "Rich" for the Greater Good as usual.
But what is the reality, what does all this mean
? The ACLU and Court Action has decreed that burning the American Flag is protected speech, freedom of expression.
Has anyone ever heard the phrase, "Put your money, where your mouth is."? How can there be any more important speech or expression in a Democracy than supporting a Political Platform or Politician that you believe in?
But you say but=== No, you either BELIEVE in the Constitution and the Rights enumerated or you DON'T.
For me it is that simple. Can there be abuses? Yes there can and they, the abuses will be illegal.
But as Benjamin Franklin stated.
"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security
Most of the Nation was willing to give up part of our basic rights of Freedom of Speech, because HEY it was only going to effect the "Rich" not any of us regular people. Right? Then they came for us
The FEC started thinking that the same statutes should be applied to bloggers. That could even include someone on minimum wage who blogs from a free computer in a library.
But don't worry we are told, they are not going to apply the new interpretations to the "little guy" we are going to have TWO sets of Law in this country?
When they came after us it was different wasn't it?
We NEED men like Judge Roberts on the Supreme Court.
We NEED men who are willing to uphold the Constitution from US
I tried to illustrate how Kelo versus New London and
McCain-Feingold are perversions of our Basic Rights and the Principles this Nation were founded upon.
I doubt there are many who will disagree with me about Kelo versus New London.
For those who still labour under the illusion that McCain-Feingold is still just as long as it is only applied to the "Rich"
I ask this one simple question.
Whatever makes you think that if the Rights of Speech, Assembly and Association of those deemed "Rich" can be sundered so easily and willingly,
are still intact?
And then they came for us and there was no one left to say anything.
Saturday, 24 September 2005
I am on the same side as Hilary Clinton?
Got another email from our friends and neighbors at
I have to be honest folks, ANY ally in this struggle is welcome aid, but when I read the first line of the following my reaction, WAS a startled.
I'm on the same side as Hilary Clinton?
But its really a good sign, I mean if the US Senator whose helicopter in Afghanistan,when she did a tour of the country, was given the nickname buy the troops, "Broom Stick One" I mean if SHE is opposing a Leftist Cause, it must have overwhelming opposition in the Country.
At the Time of this post, 10:20 PM CDT Saturday 24,2005 here are the results so far of the Newsday poll.
Yes, it will be a learning tool. (274 responses)
No, the site should be used as a memorial only. (12469 responses)
Not sure. (143 responses)
12886 total responses
We can do better folks, spread the word.
Speaking of word here is the word from the New York Post and Take Back the Memorial dot Org on Hillary Clinton's Position.
HILLARY COMES OUT AGAINST FREEDOM CENTER
By DEBORAH ORIN
WASHINGTON - Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton yesterday dealt a crushing blow to the International Freedom Center planned for Ground Zero, saying she wants the project canned for failing to listen to the 9/11 families.
"I cannot support the IFC," Clinton declared last night in a strongly worded statement in response to an inquiry from The Post.
Her tough comments are Clinton's first significant remarks about the controversy raging at Ground Zero over the Freedom Center, which 9/11 families and other critics fear will become a center of anti-Americanism.
"While I want to ensure that development and rebuilding in lower Manhattan move forward expeditiously, I am troubled by the serious concerns family members and first responders have expressed to me," Clinton said.
"The LMDC [Lower Manhattan Development Corp.] has authority over the site and I do not believe we can move forward until it heeds and addresses their concerns."
The family members of victims, as well as unions representing the city's cops and firefighters, want nothing less than the Freedom Center being booted from Ground Zero.
Given her influence, Clinton's hard line could spell doom for the Freedom Center's hopes of remaining at the World Trade Center site.
Clinton spoke out the day after the IFC released a plan intended to save its spot at the site, but it was met with immediate opposition from 9/11 families.
Clinton won't support any plan unless the families and first responders back it, said her spokesman, Philippe Reines.
Many relatives of 9/11 victims denounced the Freedom Center plan as an insult to the 2,749 people who diedat the Twin Towers because it would paint them as a little more than a footnote to the world's march toward freedom.
The families, cops and firefighters say the IFC's plan to use hallowed land at Ground Zero to highlight poverty as a barrier to freedom diminishes the tragedy of 9/11.
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) also voiced concern yesterday and called for a compromise ? although he didn't state flat-out opposition to the Freedom Center.
"There's got to be a way to meet the families' sincere and real needs and build a center that honors the freedom that the victims died for. We hope that the LMDC will find some common ground quickly," Schumer said.
Gov. Pataki ? who wields strong influence over the LMDC, which will soon decide the Freedom Center's fate ? is traveling abroad and has yet to take a stand on the Freedom Center's latest proposal. Pataki has said thathe won't support any plan that offers a forum for anti-Americanism.
Clinton's opposition means that the anti-IFC push is now a bipartisan cause. Three New York Republicans ? Reps. John Sweeney (Saratoga), Peter King (L.I.) and Vito Fossella (S.I.) ? are already challenging it as a "blame America first" project.
Yesterday, the trio of Republicans formally requested a congressional oversight hearing as a step toward blocking the IFC from getting any of the $2.7 billion in federal funds allocated for Ground Zero.
"The whole thing was hijacked. If you asked people on the street what they wanted at Ground Zero, this would be the last thing that they wanted," Sweeney said.
Hillary's home run
Friday, 23 September 2005
TAKE BACK THE MEMORIAL - VOTE IN THE NEWSDAY POLL
I just recieved this message from
Take Back the Memorial dot Org
Newsday is conducting an online poll regarding the IFC. Vote Now! And Make Your Voice Heard!
News Day Poll
Freedom Center rejoins fight to stay at Ground Zero
BY MONTY PHAN
September 23, 2005
A 49-page report released Thursday on a controversial plan to house a freedom museum at Ground Zero detailed how the International Freedom Center intends to address the Sept. 11 attacks as part of a wider historical context, again drawing the ire of victims' families, who say such exhibits don't belong there.
The report, which the Lower Manhattan Development Corp. had asked to be submitted by Thursday, said the Freedom Center would have exhibits dedicated to "the international outpouring of solidarity and sympathy for the victims of Sept. 11"; a tribute to "great documents of freedom," including the Declaration of Independence and the Magna Carta; and "The Freedom Walk," a concourse "offering a physical and emotional journey through the history of freedom as a global narrative of hope."
By choosing to examine Sept. 11 as an "essential element" of "the story of freedom," the plan has disappointed and angered many victims' families, who believe that the center is unrelated to the terror attacks. Tom Bernstein, the museum's chairman, defended the plan, saying that by telling the story of Sept. 11 "in the context of greater history," it would "honor those who were lost."
"The alternative is a very narrow one, in our view, and doesn't stand the test of time," Bernstein said.
The museum will present the plan at a meeting of the LMDC Families Advisory Council next week and at two public meetings. The LMDC then will use the feedback to determine whether it will keep the museum at the site.
Anthony Gardner, who heads the Coalition of 9/11 Families, said he doesn't object to the museum's message, but instead its location on hallowed ground. He and other family groups had hoped the museum would agree to relocate, just as the Drawing Center -- another museum that was selected to be housed at Ground Zero but that families had objected to -- already has said it would do.
"We maintain that it doesn't belong on the site," Gardner, who lost his brother Harvey Gardner in the attacks, said of the Freedom Center. "It doesn't belong on sacred ground. Politics do not belong on this sacred place."
But Bernstein said the museum never considered moving, especially because so many people had given time to "try to do the right thing" with the museum.
Poll: Freedom Center debate
Freedom Center backers say it will help people understand 9/11 sacrifices. Victims’ families say controversy surrounding the museum will dishonor the dead. Do you think it belongs at the WTC site?
Yes, it will be a learning tool. (31 responses)
No, the site should be used as a memorial only. (1548 responses)
Not sure. (13 responses)
(At the time of this post)
Which Historical Lunatic Are You?
You are Joshua Abraham Norton, first and only Emperor of the United States of America!
Born in England sometime in the second decade of the nineteenth century, you carved a notable business career, in South Africa and later San Francisco, until an entry into the rice market wiped out your fortune in 1854. After this, you became quite different. The first sign of this came on September 17, 1859, when you expressed your dissatisfaction with the political situation in America by declaring yourself Norton I, Emperor of the USA. You remained as such, unchallenged, for twenty-one years.
Within a month you had decreed the dissolution of Congress. When this was largely ignored, you summoned all interested parties to discuss the matter in a music hall, and then summoned the army to quell the rebellious leaders in Washington. This did not work. Magnanimously, you decreed (eventually) that Congress could remain for the time being. However, you disbanded both major political parties in 1869, as well as instituting a fine of $25 for using the abominable nickname "Frisco" for your home city.
Your days consisted of parading around your domain - the San Francisco streets - in a uniform of royal blue with gold epaulettes. This was set off by a beaver hat and umbrella. You dispensed philosophy and inspected the state of sidewalks and the police with equal aplomb. You were a great ally of the maligned Chinese of the city, and once dispersed a riot by standing between the Chinese and their would-be assailants and reciting the Lord's Prayer quietly, head bowed.
Once arrested, you were swiftly pardoned by the Police Chief with all apologies, after which all policemen were ordered to salute you on the street. Your renown grew. Proprietors of respectable establishments fixed brass plaques to their walls proclaiming your patronage; musical and theatrical performances invariably reserved seats for you and your two dogs. (As an aside, you were a good friend of Mark Twain, who wrote an epitaph for one of your faithful hounds, Bummer.) The Census of 1870 listed your occupation as "Emperor".
The Board of Supervisors of San Francisco, upon noticing the slightly delapidated state of your attire, replaced it at their own expense. You responded graciously by granting a patent of nobility to each member. Your death, collapsing on the street on January 8, 1880, made front page news under the headline "Le Roi est Mort". Aside from what you had on your person, your possessions amounted to a single sovereign, a collection of walking sticks, an old sabre, your correspondence with Queen Victoria and 1,098,235 shares of stock in a worthless gold mine. Your funeral cortege was of 30,000 people and over two miles long.
The burial was marked by a total eclipse of the sun.
(I feel oddly akin with this guy, tried to disolve Congress? And stood up for the downtrodden? Cool!)Which Historical Lunatic Are You?From the fecund loins of Rum and Monkey.
Wednesday, 21 September 2005
Don't Get Stuck On Stupid.
Topic: Out of Flyover Land
I have to say this is a refreshing change,
to Link The Political Teen
(Hat tip: Instapundit)
“You are stuck on stupid, I’m not going to answer that question”
- - General Honore to reporter."
Transcript and audio HERE
Don't get stuck on stupid, reporters. We are moving forward. And don't confuse the people please. You are part of the public message. So help us get the message straight. And if you don't understand, maybe you'll confuse it to the people
Male reporter: General, a little bit more about why that's happening this time, though, and did not have that last time...
Honore: You are stuck on stupid. I'm not going to answer that question. We are going to deal with Rita
Lot of "Stuck on Stupid" going around these days.
Do check the links for the video AND the full text of the transcript.
Mind you this is not the ONLY time the Press has gotten chewed out by this man.
Monday, September 05, 2005
LT. GENERAL RUSSEL "RAGIN CAJUN" HONORE TAKES THE PRESS TO THE WOODSHED
"That's B.S. It's B.S.," Honore raged.
"I can tell you that is B.S. We have got 300 helicopters and some of the finest EMS workers in the world down there.
"You need to get on the streets of New Orleans, you can't sit back here and say what you hear from someone else."
Read more here
'John Wayne dude' general blasts Katrina complaints as 'B.S.'
BATON ROUGE, United States (AFP) - Lieutenant General Russel Honore lived up to his 'John Wayne dude' nickname, blasting complaints that red tape or poor security were snarling relief efforts as "B.S."
and see the press conference
They Start Calling You Names When They Run Out Of Ideas.
I have gotten myself a new label on Cao's BlogIdiot Dan the Islamofascist
What is so comical is that the last time I got under the skin of someone in an online dialog it was on the CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) Discussion Board before they nuked it. We were winning I think in the debate and THEY also gave me a label it wasKentucky Fried Caffir
They also informed me at the time that quote:
"There are now hundreds of the Faithful Praying to Allah daily, that your Soul be Ripped Shrieking from your Body and thrown into the Bottomless Pit of Endless Torment by the Angel of Darkness"
They even included specific directions on exactly how to perform this prayer so that Allah would hear and be more likely to grant it.
I recall at the time my response was that this did not sound to me to be All Merciful, All Compassionate and All Loving. Man do I wish I had kept a screen capture of that exchange but who knew that the would Discussion Board would just disappear some day?
So one might understand the bemusement I experienced with being called an Islamofascist, it would also come as a big surprise to some with whom I have knocked heads with over the years on Islam-Online.net
Some on that website would be greatly offended to have me lumped in with them. The funny thing was on both of those forums there were those who used extreme language and their posts went through, while mine were sometimes censored, particularly when I used Muslim sources and websites to make my points.
Oh and I got called my fair share of names there too.
They call you names when they run out of ideas.
My sin on Caos Blog was that I do not think a case has been definitely made that Ahmadinejad was one of the guards and torturers at the American Embassy in Tehran.
Now I have been very clear that the man is indeed a Murdering, Facist Thug. I have no doubt of that the record is clear and their is certainly enough information, For instance his part in the assassination of Kurdish dissidents in Vienna in which he received a small wound.
The record is also clear that he was on the Islamic Students Association.
Ms Caos did off her list send me a very interesting information source.
Iran's President-Elect Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
Here is the pertinent part
"# Enrolled Elm-o Sanaat University 1975 studying engineering
# Became leave of student activist group at Elm-o Sanaat University
# Founded the Islamic Students Association at Elm-o Sanaat shortly after fall of shah
# 1979 became representative from Elm-o Sanaat at the Office of Strengthening Unity between Students and Theological Seminaries (OSU) (OSU set up by Ayatollah Mohammad Beheshti, top confidant to Ayatollah Khomeini
# Ahmadinejad and other members of OSU central council including Ibrahim Asgharzadeh, Mohsen Mirdamadi, Mohsen Kadivar, Mohsen Aghajari, and Abbas Abdi regularly met with Khomeini
# Mirdamadi and Abdi suggested to OSU that US embassy be stormed. Ahmadinejad recommended storming the Soviet embassy at the same time.
# During 1980 "Islamic Cultural Revolution" Ahmadinejad and the OSU assisted in purging dissident lecturers and students - many arrested and later executed.
# 1980 - Ahmadinejad joined Revolutionary Guards"
As I understand things "Ahmadinejad recommended storming the Soviet embassy at the same time."
because some of the Student Counsel wanted the attack on the US Embassy to drive Iran closer to the Soviet Union, he wanted a distance from both Satans.
So yes he was involved in the Student Counsel, yes he was a torturer and murderer later after he joined the
Revolutionary Guards in 1980, but was he a Guard and a torture at the American Embassy?
The record is not fully clear on that point. It has been many years since I have had day to day contact with Iranians. But I do comprehend some facets of the Culture in that region.
Ahmadinejad has never denied any of his actions over the years, as a matter of fact he is quite proud of his blows against the Great Satan, neither has he ever made any claim to have been one of the actual Guards and Torturers at the American Embassy and he denies have been one now.
Why is that so? I mean we ARE talking about the type of person who thinks for instance blowing up children in the cause of the Faith is something to be proud of and he has done the same or worse to many Iranians and Kurds since then.
So why hide for all these years and deny now what in his Culture is a Badge of Honor.
It is too simplistic to think of men like this as mindless unthinking robots. Many of them are highly intelligent, highly motivated and True Believers. The fact that I also think of them as rabid dogs who would be best put down, does not diminish my appraisal of their capabilities and dedication to their own Cause.
For Ahmadinejad to deny he was there if he was, would be to deny everything he believes in.
"Ahmadinejad and other members of OSU central council including Ibrahim Asgharzadeh, Mohsen Mirdamadi, Mohsen Kadivar, Mohsen Aghajari, and Abbas Abdi regularly met with Khomeini"
It would be to deny Khomeini the Revolution and to lose the Respect of all who WERE there and involved at the time.
If he were NOT there to claim he was, would be to lose the Respect of those who were there as well.
In that Culture and in his position to lose Respect in those manners would be a fate worse than Death and actually probably fatal.
During the Taliban's reign in Afghanistan an action team hit a Shi'ai village, They killed and skinned a young 16 year old boy you can find the story on the website of the
Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan
A scuffle arose among the men as to who got to dip their hands in the blood and become Ghazzi Warriors and assured of Paradise.
This is the value placed by fanatics on actions such as the torture of Infidels, Shi'ais being Apostates are rated about as low as we are.
No a man such as Ahmadinejad would either proudly proclaim his actions had he been there or deny it if he were not.
That he is a Brutal Savage Murdering Lying Monster notwithstanding he can still be expected to behave in a manner consistent with his own moral code, no matter how disgusting it is to us.
He is guilty of many atrocities and his hands is stained with the blood of a multitude of innocents, but in this case I do not think a complete case has been made, nor do I think it is likely he had hands on participation, involvement definitely, and that is damning enough.
And this belief make neither Amir Taheri nor me Islamofascists.
Previous information I have posted on this topic here on my site is in
Former US Embassy Hostages ID Ahmadinejad
PS I bought my firs Quran and started following these issues shortly after my Cousin Casey bought the farm in Beirut in 1983.
To paraphrase a line from a CW song
"I was anti-terrorist before anti-terrorism was cool"
Like I said, I have been called plenty of names over the years but never an Islamofacist, usually BY Islamofascists and even as upset as some of them on the CAIR or Islam=Online got, debating these issues, never been banned before LOL
Never too late for new experiences and learning opportunities
Wow she has really gone off the deep end
"Update: Through email Dan admits he met with Russian muslims in Russia. He is officially through his own admission, an Islamofascist who is spreading propaganda in favor of Islamofascist terrorists like Ahmidinejad. I have banned him from the server level and changed his comments to ?Idiot Dan the Islamofascist?, removing his linkage."
Actually it was BASHKORTOSTAN and we among other things discussed what they referred to as "Those to the South who say, Believe as We say or Die" I did not just meet them, I had tea in their homes, sashleek too, their version of shishkabob.
Wonder how I read the above if I am banned at the server level?
I am tempted to give Ms Caos a back but it would be redundant.
PPS if you link from here over to there, try not to get the poor girl more excited than she already is.
Best leave her alone or she will start checking under her bed for me and my Islamofacsist pals.
Tuesday, 20 September 2005
Former US Embassy Hostages ID Ahmadinejad
You know? One of the trickiest and most subjective things can be eye witness testimony.
I have NO doubt the Embassy Hostages are convinced beyond any doubt that this man was one of their tormentors.
I am also well aware from personal experience how tricky Post Traumatic Stress Triggers can be. My own experience has been a situation close but not the same can trigger and episode, where you do not exactly remember events you actually re-experience them.
That said, I find it hard to understand, why he would deny that event in his past if it were true.
Being at the Embassy in Tehran at that time, would be like a Bolshevik being on the Aurora or taking part in the Storming of the Winter Palace.
One could make the claim that it would be denied for present political concerns, but why would it have been hidden and denied for all these years when in that Society, that experience would give one a claim to Herodom?
He insists he was not there
and several known hostage-takers - now his strong political opponents - deny he was with them.
His website says he joined the Revolutionary Guards voluntarily after the revolution, and he is also reported to have served in covert operations during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war.
That Ahmadinejad was involved
in those events goes without saying.
In 1979, Ahmadinejad
was the head representative of IUST to the unofficial student gatherings that occasionally met with the Ayatollah Khomeini. In these sessions, the foundations of the first Office for Strengthening Unity (daftar-e tahkim-e vahdat), the student organization of which several members behind seizure of the United States embassy which led to the Iran hostage crisis, were created. Ahmadinejad became a member of the Office of Strengthening Unity. Before the seizure of the embassy, Ahmadinejad had suggested a simultaneous or similar attempt against the Soviet Union embassy, but was voted down, resulting in independent pursuit of the idea by its proponents.
US embassy siege
As a young student, Ahmadinejad joined an ultraconservative faction of the Office for Strengthening Unity, the radical student group spawned by the 1979 Islamic Revolution and staged the capture of the US Embassy.
According to reports, Ahmadinejad attended planning meetings for the US Embassy takeover and at these meetings lobbied for a simultaneous takeover of the Soviet Embassy.
To my mind being on the planning committee is more involvement than being a Guard at the Embassy, but I guess it is not as dramatic.
The Bulk of my view was influenced by an article on
founded by Eleana Benador, is located in New York City as well as in Paris and London. However, the activities of the firm are expanding throughout the American continent, as well as in Europe and the Middle East.
Each of our experts is nationally and internationally recognized on issues of the Middle East and national security, among others. We are confident each of them makes your event, radio or television show a unique one
A source which does NOT have a reputation as an Apologist for Fascist Thugs in the Mideast. Amir Taheri, is a leader in the struggle against International Extremist Jihadism.WHO ARE THE MEN IN THIS PHOTO?
July 4, 2005
Even before the polls had opened in Iran's recent presidential election, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the eventual winner, was at the centre of controversies regarding his past
This November 9, 1979 photo shows one of 60 US hostages being displayed to the crowd outside the US Embassy in Tehran by Iranian hostage takers
He makes no secret that he is a professional revolutionary, having spent all his adult years in the service of the Khomeinist movement.
But was he the chief interrogator of American diplomats held hostage during the occupation of the United States Embassy in Tehran in 1979-80? And was he involved in the assassination of three dissident Kurdish leaders in Vienna in 1989?
On the basis of research in the past few days, it is almost certain Ahmadinejad was not directly involved in the US embassy episode.
But it is equally clear he was present when the three Kurdish leaders were gunned down by a hit-list from Tehran.
The allegation that Ahmadinejad was one of the hostage-holders at the American embassy is based on an Associated Press photo unearthed and published by a pro-Rafsanjani website hours after the election.
In it a bearded youth, holding the arm of a blindfolded American, is identified as Ahmadinejad. But anyone with the slightest understanding of morphology would realize the man in the photo is not Ahmadinejad.
The man in the photo has almost slanted eyes with eyebrows that point upwards. Ahmadinejad, however, has almond eyes with almost drooping eyebrows.
In any case the man in the photo has already been identified as Jaafar Zaker, one of the student leaders during the embassy raid.
Zaker's younger brother Mohsen told journalists in Tehran last Saturday that he recognized his brother who died in the Iran-Iraq war in 1984.
The second youth seen in the photo has been identified as one Ali Ranjbaran who was executed for his alleged links with the Mujahedin Khalq Islamic Marxist group.
That Ahmadinejad was not personally involved in the hostages drama is also borne out by his denials.
The occupied US Embassy in Tehran became a seeding ground for a new generation of radicals thirsting for action to gain revolutionary credentials.
Of the 400 or so students involved in the operation, nearly half died in the eight-year war against Iraq. The rest had differing fortunes. A few dozens were executed after being linked with leftist groups.
Some, like their ideological mentor, the dentist Habiballah Peyman, lapsed into an eclipse produced by disillusionment.
Others, however, used the episode as the centrepiece of their CV to claim senior posts in the new regime.
Maasumeh Ebtekar, the group's spokeswoman, operating under the code-name of "Sister Mary", became Assistant to the President for Environmental Affairs under Mohammad Khatami.
Reza Shaikh Al Islam, known to the hostages as "the tooth" and regarded as the most vicious of the captors, became deputy foreign minister and ambassador to Syria.
Mohammad-Reza Khatami, a brother of President Khatami, became a vice-speaker of the Islamic Majlis (parliament).
Mohsen Kadivar transformed himself into an ideologue for the self-styled "moderate" wing of the establishment.
Javad Zarif became ambassador to the UN. Abbas Abdi, Hashem Aghajari and Bijan Abidi joined the regime's loyal opposition. The remaining occupy high places in the Khomeinist nomenklatura.
Not personally involved
They all assert that Ahmadinejad, although a member of the Central Committee of the so-called Office of Consolidating Student Unity (OCSU) at the time, was not personally involved in the holding of the hostages.
It is almost certain that had Ahmadinejad been involved, he would have trumpeted the fact as part of his "glorious" Khomeinist background..
Instead, he has always said that he was opposed to the embassy raid because he saw it as a manoeuvre by the pro-Soviet left to provoke a clash with the United States and force the new regime into Moscow's arms.
Iranian author Amir Taheri was the editor-in-chief of Kayhan, the most important Iranian daily under the Shah. He is also a member of Benador Associates.
The rest of this article deals with the assassination of Kurdish dissidents in Vienna in
Correction for the record I originally researched this topic a couple of months ago and in posts and emails recently, I mistakenly stated that the Kurdish Hit took place in Switzerland, I was WRONG in that statement
If there are doubts about Ahmadinejad's involvement in the embassy raid, his presence at the killing of the Kurdish leaders in Vienna on 13 July 1989 is an established fact.
Ahamdinejad was wounded in the shoot-out and spent a day in a Vienna hospital before being whisked out of Austria with a diplomatic passport.
Iranian author Amir Taheri was the editor-in-chief of Kayhan, the most important Iranian daily under the Shah. He is also a member of Benador Associates.
Now I got into a little flurry on this subject over at
I presented from memory some of the above and the responce was.
If you can?t understand what it is I?m trying to say, I?m sorry?but don?t call me ?emotional? when you?re not being logical and examining the facts.
You?re measuring a lying terrorist scumbag by your own standards (saying he isn?t guilty because he hasn?t admitted his guilt) and Arab terrorists do not fit within our standards of thought. Obeidi wrote about that in his book when he was able to get what he asked for from the American University.
These guys don?t tell the truth; they LIE to further the cause of Jihad and Islam.
That?s not ?emotional?, that?s ?FACT?.
If you?re not familiar with that you should monitor what Robert Spencer writes over at Jihadwatch.
I am familiar with Jihadwatch, but I also prefer the testimony of Secular MidEasternors such as Taheri and Heggy and others.
I fail to comprehend where I dissolve this man of any guilt. But somethings he DID and somethings he did NOT do.
That in one instance memory may have played false with some of our fellow Americans held hostage all those years ago, in no means absolves him of a just label as a Brutal, Oppressive, Murdering, Torturing Fascist Thug, It just means that in this instance he was one of those who planned and directed it but did not engage in hands on activities.
Now if someone wants to disagree with the above and has verifiable sources we can discuss?
I welcome the input, my aim is to find the reality of a situation, not to defend an intellectual turf,
I will try not to descend to ad hominen attacks and if you have pc problems or are maybe tired and thumb fingered when you post?
I value substance over form any day.
"There is something wrong with your spacing, what?s the matter, did the cut and paste not work very well?
Actually I was very tired and having PC problems.
OK Cupid Politics Test
See where YOU stand
I am a
You are best described as a:
You exhibit a very well-developed sense of Right and Wrong and believe in economic fairness.
You know this test for me at least seems spot on.
I recall once going to the minature golfcourse with my step-daughter and at the time future Ex-wife.
We came to one hole that had a register, the sign said if you rang the bell you got an extra stroke,'
My wife looked at my step-daughter and said,
"Dan is so into business he is going to get that extra stroke for sure."
So I address my golfball carefully and rang the bell AND got a hole in one for two extra strokes.
Yep mark me down as a Capitalist. ;-)
| You are a |
You are best described as a:
Link: The Politics Test on Ok Cupid
What's Wrong With This Picture?
Topic: Out of Flyover Land
A little something that is in the local Las Vegas news, but if it hits National, it will be drastically edited.
Hat tip toTim Covington at
De Opresso Liber
Picketers for Hire
The strange business of protesting jobs that may be better than yours
By Stacy J. Willis
Photo by Iris Dumuk
The shade from the Wal-Mart Neighborhood Market sign is minimal around noon; still, six picketers squeeze their thermoses and Dasani bottles onto the dirt below, trying to keep their water cool. They're walking five-hour shifts on this corner at Stephanie Street and American Pacific Drive in Henderson?anti-Wal-Mart signs propped lazily on their shoulders, deep suntans on their faces and arms?with two 15-minute breaks to run across the street and use the washroom at a gas station.
They're not union members; they're temp workers employed through Allied Forces/Labor Express by the union?United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW). They're making $6 an hour, with no benefits; it's 104 F, and they're protesting the working conditions inside the new Wal-Mart grocery store.
Below Area Standards, picketer and former Wal-Mart employee Sal Rivera says about the notorious working conditions of his former big-box employer: "I can't complain. It wasn't bad. They started paying me at $6.75, and after three months I was already getting $7, then I got Employee of the Month, and by the time I left (in less than one year), I was making $8.63 an hour." Rivera worked in maintenance and quit four years ago for personal reasons, he says. He would consider reapplying.
The group has no transportation to go elsewhere?they are dropped off by a union van and picked up later. On weekends, they have to find their own transportation, Greer said.
Inside, the store manager at the Stephanie Wal-Mart Neighborhood Market says he's perfectly happy with his job, and that his insurance is fine.
"The average rate of pay for Nevada Wal-Mart workers is $10.17 an hour. We have a good insurance program, and every associate?even part-timers?are eligible for the 401k," says Mark Dyson. "There's actually different levels of insurance, dental and medical?I have a $500 deductible, but there's no cap on it. Some other companies' plans have a $1 million cap, but here there's no cap. For example, not long ago we had an associate whose husband needed a liver transplant, and that alone was $600,000; but they didn't have to worry about a cap.
In Dyson's market, the air-conditioning is cool, business on this day seems brisk, and the employees seem not so miserable; two checkers chat it up as they ring up customers.
This is not lost on the picketers outside.
Rivera removes his watch to show the dark tan his arm has gotten working in the sun; he talks about how he takes three buses to get to this work site on weekends; it takes two hours to get there and two hours to get home?a nine-hour day including that transportation for a gross pay of $35.
"I asked him (union organizer Hornbrook), I said, 'How come we're working here for $6 an hour? I need you to help us find a better job. I want information on the union,'" Rivera said.
I clipped out just part of the story, go to the website and read it all.
What sticks out to me is that these people are walking long hours in the hot sun for next to nothing for a pittance. They are protesting working conditions that compared to theirs look like paradise.
What happens if they do a REALLY good job? Well then the Union calls the Temp Agency and tells it they do not need these workers anymore, BUT if they can get jobs in a Union shop all by their own efforts?
Why the Union will be HAPPY to represent them and collect their dues.
At least the Union is being smart, they are using Temps. They are therefore not obligated to pay Workman's Comp. Unemployment benefits and ALL the little details that they demand and insist Employers be responsible for.
Let us call a spade a spade they are running a literal sweatshop operation outside in 100+ temperatures and when they no longer need these workers, they will discard them.
The Union justifies their actions with this sentiment
"This is an informational picket line only," Hornbrook said. "We're paying these people. They were out of work before (joining their picket lines). This is an in-between-jobs stop.
I see. They were out of work, so they are being done a favor by having this job, otherwise they might not be working at all, OR they might have gotten jobs with someone who would treat them like human beings with decent wages, raises, benefits and working conditions.
If I were Walmart, I would pull all my employees up front, point at the picket lines, point out some of the items I listed above, and ask them, Who around here is treating the people working for them like YOU want to be treated? Us in here or the Union out there.
What is WRONG with this picture?
Newer | Latest | Older