The CIA, Bin Laden, and a whole lot of Asphalt

One of the favorite rallying cries of the left when it comes to US Cold War Foreign policy is in regards to Osama Bin Laden. As we all know, the US armed the Afghan resistance and helped them to defeat the Soviet Union. Leftists love this because they can claim that 9/11 was America's fault. But is there claim legitimate? Well, first lets review the facts.

The US spent hundreds of millions of dollars on Soviet-style arms to funnel to the Afghan resistance. The weapons were received by the Pakistani ISI (Inter-Services Intelligence) and then transported into Afghanistan. As many people now know thanks to the movie "Charlie Wilson's War" the Saudis were matching all US funding. But, one thing not mentioned in the laugh-riot of a movie is that Saudi Intelligence did a little fundraising on the side involving some ultra-fundamentalist Saudi religious charities. This is where things get complicated.

The left, especially University Professors at an unnamed State University located in Northern Arizona and certain segments of the media love to state that the CIA recruited and funded Bin Laden. IE...the US radicalized Bin laden and taught him how to be a terrorist. This is completely false.



Lets take a look at Osama Bin Laden's past shall we? Osama Bin Laden is a member of the Bin Laden family (duh!). They a welathy and prestigious family in Saudi Arabia with numerous links to the Saudi royal family. The Bin Laden family are contractors. They had been hired on numerous occasions by the Saudi government to build public facilities, roads, etc. Quite simply, they are very successful construction contractors with alot of connections with the royal family. Osama Bin Laden, as a young man attended King Abdul Aziz University in Jedda. He graduated with a degree in economics and public administration which makes sense considering his families line of work.

So, most people wonder how a man who had everything became so radicalized? Well, one must look at his time spent at the prestigious (no women allowed) King Abdul Aziz University. Apart from being a Saudi university, two of Osama Bin Laden's professors stand out as being a bit radical one may say. The first one is Mohammed Qutb. He's not that famous, but his brother sure as hell is. Mohammed's brother, Sayyid Qutb was one of the founding members of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, which to this day remains one of the most mainstream radical Islamic organizations in the world. Hamas, is considered the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. Sayyid Qutb was executed by the Egyptian government for plotting to assassinate Egyptian President Anwar Sadat for daring to make peace with Israel. Needless to say, Mohammed Qutb is just as radical as his brother. He's famous for writing the book, Islam: The Misunderstood Religion in which he kindly describes how fundamentalist Islam is superior to the savage and perverted west.

The second professor was none other than Abdullah Azam, who later became one of the spiritual founders of Hamas. I would say its pretty clear that Osama Bin Laden got a healthy serving of fundamentalist dogma when he was attending King Abdul Aziz University. This is contradictory to that I've been told by left-wing media outlets and university professors. I've been consistently told that the US recruited and armed Osama Bin Laden, and I think that that is the prevailing belief amongst most Americans today. There are mixed reports as to when Osama Bin Laden first went to Afghanistan. However, it is known that he met Afghan rebel leaders at the annual Hajj in Saudi Arabia and was inspired by them.

But, lets move on. Back in Afghanistan the battle is raging and the Soviets are starting to lose ground to the Afghan resistance. It is important to note that the Afghan resistance was far from unified. There were moderates and fundamentalist groups both fighting the Soviets. The majority of the funding went to the extremists, because well, they fight better, or so the CIA said. There were a few reasons as to how the extremists got a greater amount of support. One was what I just stated, and the other was that the Saudi money that was being pumped into financing the Afghan resistance wasn't necessary;y under the control of the CIA. The Saudi GID, or General Intelligence Division saw this as not just an opportunity to give Russia bloody nose, but to push their political beliefs. Saudi Arabia, with the encouragement of then Pakistani President Zia, constructed hundreds of Saudi madrassas (religious schools) along the border. The madrassas were used to spread fundamentalist Islam in the region because as we already know the fundamentalists fight better.

In order to train the Afghan resistance, numerous training camps were set up along the border with Afghanistan. As we consistently here in the news these days, the border regions between Afghanistan and Pakistan are fairly primitive. Getting weapons and fighters to these camps was proving to be a problem. There needed to be someway to better get supplies to the camps, while keeping the existence of the camps a secret. This was surely a problem. If only there was a group that was experienced in constructing roads that could be trusted. Perhaps someone whom the Saudi Royal family knew and trusted. AHA! The Bin laden family. They were trusted and experienced. The perfect choice! Enter: Osama Bin laden.

Osama Bin Laden, being a bit radical, wanted to be a successful business man and do his part for the global jihad. So, he left to Pakistan to build a system of roads that would connect the numerous training camps along the border of Afghanistan. Who hired and sent him there? Saudi Intelligence. Was it to go jihading and get uber amounts of money from the CIA? No. It was to build roads. He had always been interested in Jihading since he graduated, but his official capacity in Pakistan was to build roads, or so Saudi Intelligence maintains.

This is where we get back to the issue of unilateral Saudi actions in Pakistan that I mentioned beforehand. Saudi intelligence funneled funding and weapons to Afghan commanders that it favored, outside of the control of the Pakistani ISI or the CIA. The ISI and the CIA both knew about it, but did little to really stop it. What was unknown however, was how strong Osama Bin Laden's connections with Saudi Intelligence really were. The Saudi GID holds that they had occasional meetings with Osama Bin Laden, but that he was not being used to funnel money and arms to resistance groups that were favored by Saudi Arabia. Nor do they claim that he was there to lead them into battle against the Soviets. All of this is a bit murky and has to be taken with a grain of salt considering the Saudi government is unlikely to admit that Osama Bin Laden was their agent and that they actively funded and encouraged him to battle the Soviets.

What is known is that Osama Bin Laden actively engaged in battle against the Soviets and made a reputation for himself amongst the Afghan resistance as a brave and capable commander. Upon the defeat of the Soviets in Afghanistan, Osama Bin Laden created his own terrorist organization. And the rest is history...

What is clear is that the CIA did not fund Osama Bin Laden. The CIA did not arm Osama Bin Laden. And most importantly, the CIA did not actively recruit Osama Bin laden to go to Afghanistan and lead Saudi-backed Afghan rebels into battle against the Soviets. It is evident that he had an interest in Jihad ever since he graduated from from his university. He appears to have worked under the auspices of Saudi Intelligence with the understanding that he was in Pakistan to build roads. Whether or not there was more to his job remains a question, but it is one that only the Saudi's can answer. Please note that I said the Saudis, and not the CIA. There has been no evidence whatsoever that links the CIA with Osama Bin Laden. Merely stating that the CIA funded the Afghans and that because Osama Bin laden took part in the war, does not mean in any way that he was funded by or recruited by them.


Want to know where I got my information? The majority of it is from "Ghost Wars, The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and Bin Laden. from the Soviet Invasion to September 10th, 2001." by Steve Coll. Specifically, chapters 4, 5, and 6.

US arming Fatah. Whats the worse that could happen?

And to think. There are people out there that think the Republicans are best qualified to fight the War on Terror.

Apparently, the US is sending money and arms to Fatah. Don't know who Fatah is? And you're a Republican? I rest my case.


We all hate Hamas. They refuse to recognize Israel's right to exist and have launched literally hundreds of rockets at Israeli towns in the last few weeks. They are Islamic extremists in every sense of the word. They are the Palestinian branch of the Egyptian based Muslim Brotherhood. They are dedicated to nothing less than the complete and utter destruction of Israel. However, notice that I didn't mention suicide bombings. Hamas definitely loves a good suicide bombing now and again, but they are hardly the only Palestinian faction to engage in that kind of action.

Fatah, which was founded by among others, Yasser Arafat. Fatah has a history of terrorist attacks and links to other terrorist organizations such as Black September. The current militant wing of Fatah, the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade is still a declared enemy of Israel. The only difference is that they are also an enemy of Hamas.

Some notable suicide bombings committed by the group were:

• March 2, 2002: Beit Yisrael, Jerusalem - 11 killed.
• January 5, 2003: Southern Tel Aviv central bus station - 22 killed.
• January 29, 2004: Rehavia, Jerusalem, bus line 19 - 11 killed.
• March 14, 2004: Port of Ashdod - 10 killed (together with Hamas).

On October 16, 2005, the al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades claimed responsibility for a shooting attack at the Gush Etzion Junction, killing three Israelis and wounding three others.

but, back to the Fatah-Hamas thing. The US hates Hamas. They have connections with Islamic terror organizations across the globe and there are persistent rumors that they are being armed and trained by Iran and Syria. Not to mention they are vehemently anti-American. So, in the spirit of NSC-68, the US is doing what it does best. Arming the enemies of our enemies. Anyone with a working knowledge of Cold War history should shudder at this idea.

We did this in Afghanistan. And after having read a few books on US involvement in the Soviet-Afghan war, I'm convinced it was the right move because our primary enemy was the Soviet Union. BUT, that isn't to say these decisions don't come back to haunt us. The CIA calls this "blowback." We (along with the Saudis) funded the most fanatical of the Afghan resistance groups because as the CIA stated "Fanatics fight better." The Soviets ended up losing and it was sweet sweet revenge considering they armed our enemies in Vietnam. However, after the Soviet withdrawal the fanatical Afghan groups seized control of Afghanistan and the moderate Afghan groups were marginalized. Today, we know the fanatics as a different name, the Taliban.

Want another example. How about the fact that we armed Saddam Hussein and provided Iraq with satellite photos of Iranian military positions during the Iraq-Iran war. Probably not our best move either. Don't get me wrong, Iran is America's enemy in every sense of the word, but that doesn't mean Iraq wasn't either.


Over the last year Hamas has seized complete control of the Gaza Strip. Fatah still controls the West Bank. In effect the two sections of the Palestinian territories are controlled by two different parties. Of course, Bush in all his wisdom has deduced that if the US sends arms to Fatah than they can do battle with Hamas. Interesting idea, but it disregards the fact that there is collusion between Fatah and Hamas members. Which has already become clear due to the fact that Hamas has come into possession of the weapons meant for Fatah. Whoops!

Hamas is definitely more dangerous than Fatah, but what makes us think that Fatah is itself not an enemy. Israel is America's closest ally on the planet, and Fatah is still an enemy of Israel. Remember the enemy of our enemy is our friend idea that so well characterized the alliance between the US and USSR during WWII? We aren't the only country that uses that line of reasoning. The Middle East has such an incredibly dynamic geo-political climate that we have no idea what is in store for us down the road. Even if Hamas were to lose power to Fatah, there is still the rising power of Iran and Syria to deal with. Not to mention the increasingly overt actions of Hezbollah. Only an idiot would think that Fatah would be our partners in peace once Hamas is gone. Israel's enemies are gaining power like never before, and they'll be damned if they let Fatah cozy up to Israel and America now. If presented with the opportunity to destroy Israel don't think for a second that Fatah wouldn't jump at it. Their entire history says they would. And when we are drug into another conflict in the Middle East, don't be surprised when our enemies are shooting at us with our own weapons.

Hezbollah says presence of US warships threatens regional stability

Apparently the Middle East has been stable prior to this. Who knew?

read the article here

Chairman of Gazpron elected President of Russia.

In other news, Putin still maintains that Gazprom is not a tool of the Russia government.





read about Gazprom here

Montana threatens to take its ball and go home.

Montana threatens to secede. No one notices.




Secretary of State of Montana writes letter to the Washington Times. Informs the US that if the Supreme Court rules against gun rights in D.C v. Heller case Montana will have to review its contract with the United States government.


If Montana actually secedes do you know what this means? Yeah, you got that right. I'm buying stock in Flag making companies.


No news on whether or not the Supreme Court is skerred. Letter from Montana Secretary of state below.

Second Amendment an individual right

The U.S. Supreme Court will soon decide D.C. v. Heller, the first case in more than 60 years in which the court will confront the meaning of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Although Heller is about the constitutionality of the D.C. handgun ban, the court's decision will have an impact far beyond the District ("Promises breached," Op-Ed, Thursday).

The court must decide in Heller whether the Second Amendment secures a right for individuals to keep and bear arms or merely grants states the power to arm their militias, the National Guard. This latter view is called the "collective rights" theory.

A collective rights decision by the court would violate the contract by which Montana entered into statehood, called the Compact With the United States and archived at Article I of the Montana Constitution. When Montana and the United States entered into this bilateral contract in 1889, the U.S. approved the right to bear arms in the Montana Constitution, guaranteeing the right of "any person" to bear arms, clearly an individual right.

There was no assertion in 1889 that the Second Amendment was susceptible to a collective rights interpretation, and the parties to the contract understood the Second Amendment to be consistent with the declared Montana constitutional right of "any person" to bear arms.

As a bedrock principle of law, a contract must be honored so as to give effect to the intent of the contracting parties. A collective rights decision by the court in Heller would invoke an era of unilaterally revisable contracts by violating the statehood contract between the United States and Montana, and many other states.

Numerous Montana lawmakers have concurred in a resolution raising this contract-violation issue. It's posted at progunleaders.org. The United States would do well to keep its contractual promise to the states that the Second Amendment secures an individual right now as it did upon execution of the statehood contract.

BRAD JOHNSON

Montana secretary of state

Helena, Mont.

I am Iran, Hear me Roar!

Iranian President Ahmadenijad calls Iran the world's "Number One Power"


I'm speechless...

US deploys single warship to Lebanon as show of support.

Wow, this warship must be Uber. It could probably take on the entire Iranian Navy at once. I'll bet its a Carrier. Wait, no, I forgot that carriers don't travel alone. Ok, its probably a battleship or atleast a guided missile crusier. Those things are can really blow shit up.

...wait.....wtf....

they sent a destroyer? A single destroyer? Thats it? Does it atleast come stocked with Navy SEALS? Well, just one destroyer can't really be that big of a target for terrorists. Its not like attacking it would be a major PR win for the terrorists, after all its only a destroyer. Its not like the World Trade Center where the first attack failed so they became determined to try again. Right? No, you don't agree? Why is that?...

...no way...

Its the USS Cole? As in the USS Cole that got bombed by Al Qaeda in 2000 while docked in Yemen. What, were there no other ships available? Is this the best the United States can do to show its support for Lebanon? Send in a guided missile destroyer that was almost sunk by Al Qaeda eight years ago. Seriously, this is just like bad fiction writing.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7270102.stm

Wilders anti-Islam film to be released on March 1st

The Dutch MP Geert Wilders who is the leader of the right-wing Dutch Peoples Party has stated that he will release his new anti-Islam film entitled Forbidden on March 1st. Remember, this film was announced last year and it was due to come out in january, but had since been delayed.

The Dutch government has already been threatened by Iran to make sure that this film is not released. But the Dutch are sticking to their ideals of freedom of expression and have made no move to abr the film's release. This is expected to be a repeat situation of the Mohammed cartoons that spakred fierce riots in the Islamic world and made Denmark a target of Jihadists. The film is reported to possible feature a scene in which a Koran is being torn apart. The last person to release a film of this nature was the Dutch film maker Theo Van Gogh who was later stabbed to death in Amsterdam by a Muslim attacker. The Dutch government is said to be in a panic over the potential Muslim reaction to this film. Geert Wilders has been warned that he will likely have to leave the Netherlands as his security may not be able to be guaranteed there.

Here is a a believed teaser trailer of the film. This is one of the two videos that led to Pakistan banning youtube.


In other news, John Edwards no longer has the best hair in politics.

Supreme Court Rejects ACLU lawsuit

Because ya know, illegal wiretapping of US citizens isn't really a big issue for the almighty US supreme court.

Council on American Islamic Relations annouces Joe McCarthy as new spokesman

Just kidding. But the way that CAIR had been acting lately, I'd say that they learned a thing or two from Senator McCarthy about witch hunts.

CAIR has gone on a jihad (an internal spiritual struggle, of course) to sue and/or try and have anyone who criticizes Islam arrested. Of course them being named unindicted co-conspirators in the Holy Land Foundation case, in which the Feds showed that CAIR was helping to fund Hamas. Not to mention many of their senior members have been arrested for funding Islamic terrorist organizations.

Lately though, they've stooped to a new low. And that is asking the FBI to charge bloggers with hate crimes because visitors to their blogs (Note: not the bloggers themselves) posted remarks that advocated violence against Islam. Now, I think most of us can agree that supporting violence against Muslims and Islamic structures here is hateful and in very poor taste. But, the people posting the comments were visitors. Did that stop CAIR? Nope, they've had the popular blog Little Green Footballs on their radar screen for a while. They went all out, asking the FBI to investigate the blog and charge the owner with hate crimes. A good idea on CAIR's part. It'll distract the FBI from doing any further investigating into CAIR's ties with Islamic terror groups.

Of course, CAIR had its lemming like followers who love to blame anyone but the minority (in this case, Muslims) for the wrongs of society. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch wrote a scathing article of Little Green Footballs.

CAIR has gone all out on attempting to stifle any criticism of Islam or Islamic influence in America. If you are too critical of Islam, then you're guilty of hate crimes, which I discuss below.

McCarthy would be proud of CAIR's tactics.

Read more...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_on_American-Islamic_Relations
http://www.anti-cair-net.org/
http://www.pipelinenews.org/index.cfm?page=elashi120506.htm

Kosovo comes Independent

Unless you've been in a blackhole for the past few days, you've likely heard that Kosovo gained its independence. The US, and about half of Europe have recognized Kosovo as independent, much to the dismay of the Serbs. The primary issues at stake here are that the Serbs feel that Kosovo is part of Serbia and that no one can take it away from them. NATO disagrees. The other issue is that this set potentially bad precedent. If Kosovo can get independence from Serbia then why can't the Basques get independence? Why can't South Ossetia gain independence from Georgia? And shit, what about the Palestinians? No doubt they'll stop launching missiles into Israel for a moment to whine about how they are still being oppressed.

Russia has had a few select things to say about all of this (don't they always?). Asside from letting us all know that THE MOTHERLAND is powerful, they would like us to know that they view this as a breach of international law in the highest possible manner. As if this Kosovo incident is a bigger deal than genocide. But really, Russia is just posturing. They're trying to flex their muscles and remind everyone about THE MOTHERLAND. We all know that the one thing that pisses Russia off the most is one of their former republics tells them to fuck off. Like Poland did, Estonia did, Georgia did, and the Ukraine is thinking about doing. They apparently did not get the memo about leaving the Motherland. Someone probably forgot to put the proper headers on those darned TPS reports again. Don't they know that they are causing an international incident?

Well, there are two regions in Georgia (no, the other Georgia) that want to leave. Russia would love nothing more than to swallow those regions up and get some revenge on Georgia. Allowing Kosovo to be independent doesn't really hurt Russia. What it does do is give Russia an excuse to start pushing for those regions to leave Georgia and come back to THE MOTHERLAND. Russia is just being Russia. If it can flex its muscles and make some headlines, it will.

So, the question remains. Was giving Kosovo its independence wise? Afterall, Kosovo is now the poorest country in Europe. But they are free. I guess thats something.


****In a bit of updated news
Serbians in Belgrade torched the US embassy, along with a few other embassies.

Tears for China

The US Department of Defense announced today that it has struck the failing spy satellite with an anti-satellite missile fired from a cruiser near Hawaii. Apart from the initial reaction of "OMG thats awesome" there are other issues that have to be discussed. The biggest issue is why? Why did the US shoot down its own satellite when it has never shot down spy satellites in the past that had failed and were going to come tumbling back down to earth? Its pretty simple I think. This is a satellite that was launched in December of 2006 and was supposed to be the pinnacle of US espionage technology.

It goes without saying that the US doesn't want this satellite landing in Siberia where the Russians could get at it. The odds of the satellite falling to earth and landing in an urban area are pretty big. I don't think any educated person would actually buy that excuse. But hey, we probably scored some points with Green Peace for pretending to care about the environment, so thats good. Mmmm.....whale toffee.

Also, there is the little issue of China shooting down a satellite last year without telling anyone ahead of time. The satellite was not in a decaying orbit, and China merely wanted to see if they could do it. Alot of people got pissed off at that. So, we have to assume that its possible that the US saw this as opportunity to show the world that it could shoot down satellites too. Which brings me to the point of this post. China is demanding that the US provide technical data of the event to prove that it wasn't just shooting down a satellite to show everyone that they can do it.

China has also blasted the US for working towards militarizing space by shooting down a satellite.

......wtf??? Didn't China do that last year without telling anyone beforehand and without letting the satellite's orbit degrade enough so that its destruction wouldn't pose a major threat to other satellites? Seriously China.......cry me a fucking river.

House rejects telecom immunity after Senate approved the measure.

The House of Representatives has passed the Restore Act, which facilitates broad surveillance of foreign terror groups while restoring the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Court's oversight of communications between foreign and domestic surveillance targets. The Restore Act controversially does not include a provision granting telecom companies retroactive legal immunity for their involvement in the NSA wiretap program.

The major telecom companies that cooperated with the NSA are accused by privacy advocates of violating federal laws that restrict disclosure of phone records. The companies face costly and embarrassing litigation as several cases wind their way through the courts. The telecoms have been lobbying heavily for retroactive immunity grants that would excuse them of any wrongdoing.

read the rest of it here


Suck it Senate.


We have the FISA court for a reason.

Conservatives could still back third party

Apparently this rumor of Christian conservatives wanting to line up their own candidate is back again. This was originally discussed last year in case Rudy Guiliani got the nomination, but it is being discussed again. According to an article headline I just read there are some powerful conservatives thinking of backing the candidate from the Constitution Party. What the F' is the Constitution party?
.
.
.
.
.
googling
.
.
.
.
.
Oh, ok. Well whatever. They can do what they want I suppose. Can you say Democratic victory?

Middle East Meltdown

An update on the shituation brewing in the Middle East...

As I briefly mentioned in a below post, a Hezbollah mastermind was killed in a carbombing in relatively secure Syria. No one has taken responsibility and Syria is still shocked that this could happen. They want to know how their security was breeched and how one of the most wanted terrorists in the world, whom they were harboring, got blown into pieces.

Well, this happened in 2004 to a senior Jihad Islami operative in Syria. Pretty much everyone thinks that Israel was behind it. And today, the Hezbollah terrorist was buried. Interestingly his funeral was on the same day as the three year commemoration of the assassination of Lebanese PM Rafik Hariri. An assassination widely believed to have been ordered and carried out by Syria. So, there were two memorials on the same day attended by groups who hate each other.

Oh, and the best part....Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah declared "open war" on Israel. He's declared that the forces of jihad will defeat them and that if they want war, than thats what they get. You know. The usual.

Israel is said to have put its defense forces on full alert and rushed reinforcements to its northern border with Lebanon.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7245042.stm
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23159882/


***Ok, a little update. It is important to note that there are rumors of involvement by American Intelligence. They are only rumors, but god I hope they're true

Bush proves right on Darfur

So, President Bush did an interview with the BBC yesterday and among many things, he was questioned on why the US has not intervened in Darfur. And he answered the question just he way I would have. The answer being..."Are you a fucking idiot?" "Why the hell do you think that the US should in any way intervene militarily in that conflict?"

Now, this poses a dilemma for the ever fickle human rights groups. Do they ask the US who they don't want to be the world's policeman to go police Darfur? I'm sensing some inherent contradictions here. But oh well... On to the part that really matters.

The War on Terrorism.

Yeah, its that thing again. Because while the civilized world will see this as a chance to stop genocide. After all, thats all it is because Darfur doesn't have alot in the way of natural resources except for water. (The oil that is heavy in that region isn't in Darfur)

Note that Sudan is an Arab Muslim country. The Arab world has already proven that they don't care about the genocide. Arab Muslims are never wrong apparently in each others eyes, and they all can agree that the Jews are behind it all.

And here is where it gets controversial. In my view, the US military serves to protect US interests, primarily the US homeland. There are no US interests in Darfur. Why would we send in soldiers only to have the Muslim world declare another jihad against the Great Satan because it invaded another Arab nation? So, not only would we be sending US troops into a region that is not vital to our security, but now we've opened another front in the war on terror. We'd be merely giving Jihadists another chance to shoot at our already over-extended military.

Remember, Sudan used to give safe haven for Osama Bin Laden and his cohorts. This is after he was a wanted man for the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. Sudan has shown what its opinions on the US are and in what regards it holds the West.

And for those "What about the refugees?" people out there. Having Darfur become a battleground between US forces and Jihadists from around the Muslim world doesn't exactly benefit the humanitarian situation there. God, some people are just too stupid.

link to the BBC interview...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7245002.stm

Excellent article on the Arab media's attempt to blame everything on the Jews and Christians.
http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=IA42208

Why Che Guevara was as bad as Stalin

The fact that there is this personality cult around the memory of Che Guevara certainly shows that leftists don't mind the tactics used by Hitler or Stalin, so long as it is done in support of what they want.

The truth is that Che Guevara was no better than the men he replaced. Che Guevara was assigned the role of "supreme prosecutor", overseeing the public show trials and executions of hundreds of military and civilian leaders associated with the previous government. And here is the best part....he founded Cuba's labor camps. Or perhaps a better word for them would be gulags, since he styled them after the Soviet prison camps. Gays, AIDS patients, and political dissidents, these are only a few examples of the kinds of people that would end up in Che's forced labor camps. Che Guevara was absolutely opposed to freedom and liberty. He merely wanted an authoritarian regime that matched his personal beliefs. Human rights were obviously not a priority.

In many ways its hilarious that he has become a pop culture icon. Its ironic that corporations that use child labor are making millions off of selling t-shirts of Che and every other trinket they can think up. Its absolutely fitting for his memory.

read more...

http://www.slate.com/id/2107100/

Oh the irony of it all

Top Hizbullah Commander wanted for bombing of the US Marine and French Army barracks in 1982 killed in carbombing in Syria. Oooohhh the Irony...

Israeli Mossad believed to be behind the assassination.

Hilarious video from Pat Condell on the UK Sharia law fiasco

The Superpower Tango

So, just the other day, Russian Bear bombers overflew a US carrier strike group. Historically you don't invade the airspace of a fleet that could pwn a small third world country in a matter of hours, but the Russians did. Why? Well shit, because they can. What better way to show the world that you are once again a major power on the world stage than fuck with the world's only superpower? Nonetheless, the Russian bombers were escorted out of the area by fighters from the USS Nimitz. All pleasantries were of course observed. Seriously, just because there are nukes on my wings, theres no reason we can't be friends.

When the Russian Defense Ministry was asked about the incident, they kindly replied that the situation was under control, as apparently, the USS Nimitz was not at battle stations at the time.













WTF?


**The above picture was taken long ago and is in no way related to the incident in question