Iran Threatens Transfer of Nuclear Knowledge

Iran has threatened to transfer it's knowledge of nuclear know how to other countries if sanctions are impossed.

Iran's supreme leader, meanwhile, said in a meeting with Sudan's president that Tehran was ready to transfer its nuclear technology to other countries.
Iran's warning to the U.N. watchdog agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency, came from Tehran's top nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani. They were the strongest words of defiance yet ahead of a Friday deadline, set by the Security Council, for Iran to suspend enrichment of uranium, a process that can produce fuel for nuclear reactors or material for warheads.

Full Story

Is there any doubt now about why the world should end Iran's nuclear program?

The United Nations--A Portrait of Failure (update 5/18/06)

Born out of the crucible of World War II, the United Nations was in idealistic and sober response to the 55 million deaths that war wrought. The world witnessed Hitler's death camps, Japan's mass murders and rapes in China, and finally the American Atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Recoiling with horror, the world vowed to end war for all time.

Following the first World War, a similar well-intentioned organization had been established, The League of Nations. Established as an article of the Treaty of Versaille, ending the war, the League of Nations was supposed to end war and suffering. With no army or means of enforcement, their only weapon was sanctions against member nations. Sanctions, then as now, proved to be totally ineffectual. With the lessons learned from its first attempt, the world hoped the UN would prove to be a more effective body. The world was wrong!

In the preamble to the United Nations Charter the noble intentions of the fledgling organization are evident.

WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED
to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,
AND FOR THESE ENDS
to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours, and to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest, and to employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples,
HAVE RESOLVED TO COMBINE OUR EFFORTS TO ACCOMPLISH THESE AIMS
Accordingly, our respective Governments, through representatives assembled in the city of San Francisco, who have exhibited their full powers found to be in good and due form, have agreed to the present Charter of the United Nations and do hereby establish an international organization to be known as the United Nations.

And for all its noble intent, the United Nations has been a dismal failure nearly from its inception. An excellent and nearly complete listing of the UN failures can be found here.

The fatal flaw of the United Nations then, as now, was in its moral relativism.

One of the strengths of Western Democracies is that they are not, in fact, democracies, but Representative Republics. The people elect representatives to govern, by the consent of the governed. Tyrants, potentates, despots and theocracies all rule by force, imposing their will upon the people. The United Nations sees no difference between a duly elected government and a tyrant. A dictatorship that tortures and terrorizes its own people has the same force of law within the UN as the United States of America, a beacon of freedom for the entire world.

The United Nations itself is nearly a true democracy, which is to say: Mob rule! Each country within the governing body has a vote on every measure, and since nearly two thirds of the nations of the world are tyrants, thugs, potentates and theocracies, the mob is greater than the legitimate governments of the world.

Fortunately, there is a block within the structure of the UN that works to thwart the will of the mob. That block, the five permanent members of the security council, which hold veto power over the council, is both a strength and a failing of the UN.

The five permanent members are France, Russia, the United Kingdom, United States, and Communist China. Originally, the Republic of China held that final permanent position on the council, but the UN in it's infinite wisdom, chose to replace the small democracy now situated on the island of Taiwan, with the thugs who overthrew them. This revolution, the overthrow of a charter UN member member, took place before the very eyes of the UN, with no action taken to stop it.

As demonstrated in the link above, the failures of the UN are legion, but here I wish to focus on just one of their early failures, and their most recent ones. The first failure to explore is the UN failure to the Jewish people of Israel.

The Establishment of the State of Israel

Beginning in the 1700s, Jewish settlers began returning to the Holy Land to make their homes. In the late 1870s, spurred by the periodic pogroms and persecutions of Europe this trickle of people soon became a tide known as Zionism. The Zionists bought their land from the Ottomans and established farms vinyards and orchards in the desert. It is important to note, that at that time, there were no Palestinian people, as we now know them.

Palestine at that time was populated by Arabs, Christians and Jews who had immigrated there from hundreds of different countries, speaking dozens of different languages. The land was owned by absentee landowners living in Damascus, Beirut or Constantinople. The landowners imported peasants from throughout the Arab world to work their orchards, vinyards and farms, at subsistence wages.

During the first world war, the British who controlled Palestine made promises to the Jewish settlers, promising a Jewish Homeland in exchange for fighting with the British against the Ottoman Empire. The Jewish forces within the British Army fought heroically. In 1917 the British issued the Balfour Declaration.

The original text of the declaration had read "Palestine should be reconstituted as the National Home of the Jewish people." After Montagu's attack, the text was changed to read "the establishment in Palestine of a Home for the Jewish people." A clause was also added protecting the rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine and more curiously, a clause was added protecting the rights of Jewish communities outside Palestine.

Making similar promises during World War II, the Jewish settlers once again answered the call to arms. At the end of hostilities, the Jews put pressure on Britain to honor the promises made. Enter, the United Nations.

The United Nations effectively created the state of Israel by its vote for partition on Nov 29, 1947.

Jamal Husseini, the Arab Higher Committee's spokesman, had told the UN prior to the partition vote the Arabs would drench "the soil of our beloved country with the last drop of our blood . . . ."

Almost immediately after the UN vote, Egypt, Syria, Transjordan, Lebanon and Iraq invaded Israel. When Israel declared its Independence on May 14, 1948 the Arab countries declared war.

The UN blamed the Arabs for the violence. The UN Palestine Commission was never permitted by the Arabs or British to go to Palestine to implement the resolution. On February 16, 1948, the Commission reported to the Security Council:Powerful Arab interests, both inside and outside Palestine, are defying the resolution of the General Assembly and are engaged in a deliberate effort to alter by force the settlement envisaged therein.

In 1948 the United Nations passed 16 resolutions calling for truces, cease-fires, condemnations and sanctions. Does this sound familiar to anyone? Sixteen resolutions without accomplishing a thing. Had the UN been effective in 1948, we would not have the turmoil we still have today throughout the Mideast.

The UN: A Real Culture of Corruption!

Now, fast forward through decades if failure to the 1990s. Saddam Hussein defies the UN, ignoring sanctions, playing cat-and-mouse with weapons inspectors, firing at US airplanes guarding the no-fly zone, and rearming his forces.

The UN has taken a strong stand on Human Rights around the world. The UN Commission on Human Rights is one of that bodies most important committees. What nations are on that commission? Well, as of 2003, not the United States!

53 member UN Commission on Human Rights. Yet, who are its members?Incredibly, the membership includes some of the worst mass murderers and violators of human rights, including Cameroon, China, Congo (DRC), Cuba, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Uganda, Vietnam, and Zimbabwe. The Chairman of the Commission for 2003 is the terrorist state, Libya. And the United States, one of the best exemplars of civil rights and political liberties and foremost proponents of human rights, was kicked off the Commission for the 2002 session.

Why was the United States, one of the true bastions of freedom in the world, excluded, while thugs and murderers were included? The answer might be here:

According to Joanna Weschler, the UN representative of Human Rights Watch, America lost the vote because "there has been a growing resentment toward the United States (because of) votes on key human rights standards, including opposition to a treaty to abolish land mines and to the International Criminal Court, and making AIDS drugs available to everyone."

As a Reuters report puts it, "the 53-member commission (is) turning into an 'abuser solidarity' group with more and more countries with questionable human rights records gaining election and then voting as a bloc against singling out individual nations for human rights abuses."

The more things change with the UN, the more they stay the same. Finally admitting that the UN Human Rights Commission was a sham, a new body, the UN Human Rights Council has been formed. This new body, strongly resembles the old corrupt commission. From UN Watch:

Geneva, April 11, 2006 - An international coalition of 15 human rights groups including former political prisoners and torture victims in Libya and Cuba expressed outrage today over Switzerland's nomination of Jean Ziegler, founder of the "Muammar Khadhafi Human Rights Prize," as an expert for the UN's new Human Rights Council....Mr. Ziegler's current term as UN hunger expert "embodied everything that was discredited about the old Commission on Human Rights: gross politicization, selectivity, lack of professionalism and lack of credibility." Ziegler has been accused of paying little or no attention to regions with actual hunger crises, and instead devoting his attention to polemics against the West, capitalism, the U.S., and Israel.

And then there is this from FrontPage Magazine.com:

Iran has put itself forward as a candidate for a seat on the new United Nations Human Rights Council in its inaugural election of forty-seven members scheduled for May 9th. Insiders believe that Iran will be voted in by the General Assembly, because it is grouped with the Asian bloc of nations that are allotted thirteen seats on the forty-seven seat Council. Although members will be voted on individually, each region has a fixed number of guaranteed seats in order to ensure "equitable geographic distribution." So far, only nine countries in the Asian bloc, including Iran, China, and Pakistan, have decided to declare their interest for any of the reserved thirteen “Asian” seats.

That is correct. The new Council on Human Rights will likely include Iran, China and Pakistan. Do we really need to know anything else about that body? The UN, once merely ineffective, has by this time become corrupt as well! In the last several years the UN has distinguished itself for scandal and corruption.

AND, as though that wasn't enough evidence to make my point, now Cuba has been added to the new Council. That's right, Cuba will now sit in judgement of the US and other world powers on the issues of human rights! The inmates are indeed running the asylum!

Rwanda

In 1994 the Hutu regime in Rwanda began an active genocide against the Tutsi tribe. The United Nations responded, but not in a decisive manner that might have prevented the genocide from occurring. Critics, even those within the UN itself charged that the UN was slow to react, and failed to anticipate the genocide. What began as "mass killings" degenerated into genocide.

There were also "organizational problems" in the Secretariat in New York, he said. He also drew attention to certain States, "including my own country" [Sweden], who turned their backs on Rwanda altogether.

It would "always be difficult to explain" why the United Nations decided to reduce its peacekeeping troop presence in Rwanda once the genocide had started, and increase it again only once it was over, Mr. Carlsson told journalists.

The responsibility spread out to include the Secretary-General, the Security Council, UNAMIR and Member States, he said, adding that an "action plan" intended to prevent genocide in the future would have to include a clear statement that "without adequate resources there will be no peacekeeping".

Failure to act is one thing. Being criminally part of the problem is quite another. It has been charged that before he was Secretary Genreal Boutros Boutros-Ghali actually instigated the genocide by providing arms to the Hutu regime.

Former United Nations Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali's tenure was marked by scandalous charges that he played a leading role in supplying weapons to the Hutu regime that carried out a campaign of genocide against the Tutsi tribe in 1994.

As minister of foreign affairs in Egypt, Boutros-Ghali facilitated an arms deal in 1990, which was to result in $26 million of mortar bombs, rocket launchers, grenades and ammunition being flown from Cairo to Rwanda. The arms were used by Hutus in attacks which led to up to a million deaths. The role of Boutros-Ghali, who was in charge at the U.N. when it turned its back on the killings in 1994, was revealed in a book by Linda Melvern. In "A People Betrayed: The Role of the West in Rwanda's Genocide," Boutros-Ghali admits his role in approving an initial $5.8 million arms deal in 1990, which led to Egypt supplying arms to Rwanda until 1992. He says he approved it because it was his job as foreign minister to sell weapons for Egypt.

So, while Boutros-Ghali helped supply arms to the Hutus, the UN made sure that the Tutsis were unarmed.

"Lt.-Gen. Romeo Dallaire, the former commander of Canada’s UN ‘peace-keeping’ mission to Rwanda in 1994, revealed that he had sent a fax to Annan’s office warning that Rwandan security officials had been ordered to ‘register’ the (predominantly Christian) Tutsis as an obvious prelude to mass liquidation. Annan’s office ordered Dallaire to ‘assist in the recovery of all weapons distributed to or illegally acquired by civilians,’ which, in effect, meant disarming the intended victims!" The result of the disarmament is another dismal chapter in history. The Rwandan government waged a massive genocidal campaign against the Tutsis while the UN looked on and washed its hands of responsibility in the matter.

Darfur

In 2003 the Janjaweed, an armed Islamic group in Sudan began the systematic "ethnic cleansing, " or genocide of the Christian population of the Darfur region in Sudan. The Sudanese government denies any support for the Janaweed, however evidence supports the claim that the government is arming and supporting the action.

The Arab nomads never came with cars and helicopters. This is not Arab nomads. This is the government. We had a self-defense unit, but when we saw the cars we said ‘This is the government’ and we ran. We didn’t fight. The government doesn’t like black people.

Estimates are now that over a million persons have been displaced from their homes, while an estimated 300,000 have died, over half from starvation. What his the United Nations done to stop the bloodshed? Un peacekeepers, unable to stop the slaughter have been forced to stand by and watch government forces massacre civilians using machetes and bayonets. This is the United Nations at it's finest!

After years of ineffectual response by the UN, with thousands of additional deaths and displacements, the United States has finally been called upon to end the tragedy. In fact, the left in this country has demanded that the US place troops in harm's way, in an action guaranteed to fail, and that is of absolutely no vital interest to our country. This, it would appear, is the only purpose the left can find for the US military.

With US diplomatic involvement, it would appear that a cease-fire and peace agreement has finally been reached in the region.

After a frenetic all-night negotiating session, the Sudanese government and the largest of the Darfur rebel groups signed a hard-fought peace agreement on Friday intended to end three years of misery and bloodshed in Dafur. But two much smaller rebel groups angrily demurred, leaving open the possibility that they would threaten the accord.

Congo


In 2004 there was a civil war and the mass murders in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. And again, UN peacekeepers are under armed, under manned, and over restricted by rules of engagement. Some three million Congolese have been killed so far, but all UN peacekeepers have done is stand by and watch them being murdered.

That would be bad enough. But there was more to taint the UN image.

U.N. "peacekeepers" from Morocco based in Kisangani – a secluded town on the Congo River – are notorious for impregnating local women and girls. In March, an international group probing the scandal found 82 women and girls had been made pregnant by Moroccan U.N. staffers and 59 others by Uruguayan staffers. One U.N. soldier accused of rape was apparently hidden in the barracks for a year.

Most of the sexual abuse and exploitation, says the report, involves trading sex for money, food or jobs. However, some victims say they were raped, but later given food or money to make the incident appear to have been consensual – "rape disguised as prostitution."

...Despite the fact that the U.N.'s sexual code of conduct is prominently displayed on U.N. facilities Congo – forbidding sex with prostitutes or women under 18 – the U.N. continues to hand out free condoms to "peacekeepers" to protect them from AIDS.

Somalia

Somalia, which was effectively been without a government since the 1980s, has been torn by violence and civil war, as competing warlords battle for power. When UN relief efforts and workers were threatened in 1992, the US put troops into the area, under the UN, to restore order and protect the workers. This effort was named Operation Restore Hope. The result of this mission of peace was the now infamous "Blackhawk Down" incident in which the bodies of 18 servicemen were dragged through the streets of Mogadishu.

The troops originally sent by President GHWB, were immediately pulled out by newly elected President Bill Clinton. Osama bin Laden, who was in Somalia at the time working with the warlord Aidid, saw the US flee when confronted with American deaths, and took from that the fact that America was a paper tiger. He decided that the US did not have the stomach to lose American casualties, and he was emboldened.

But, more than just a peacekeeping failure, Somalia has degenerated into a UN sanctioned scandal of epic proportions. The peacekeepers themselves have become the oppressors.

Back in 1997, there were reports Belgian U.N. troops roasted a Somali boy. A military court reportedly sentenced two paratroopers to a month in jail and a fine of 200 pounds for the offense.

Another Belgian soldier reportedly forced a young Somali to eat pork, drink salt water and then eat his own vomit. Another sergeant was accused of murdering a Somali whom he was photographed urinating upon. Another child, accused of stealing food from the paratroopers' base, died after being locked in a storage container for 48 hours. Fifteen other members of the same regiment were investigated in 1995 for "acts of sadism and torture" against Somali civilians.

The pattern of abuse was not confined to Belgian troops. Belgium was actually the third country in the peacekeeping group to charge troops with serious crimes against Somali citizens -- including rape, torture and murder. In 1995, a group of Canadian paratroopers were investigated for torturing a Somali to death and killing three others.

Gruesome photos were published in a Milan magazine of Italian soldiers torturing a Somali youth and abusing and raping a Somali girl. Paratroopers claim they were specifically trained in methods of torture to aid interrogation. According to one witness, Italian soldiers tied a young Somali girl to the front of an armored personnel carrier and raped her while officers looked on.

Iran

From today's headlines we can see that the UN is still unable to effectively to a world threat. Iran, thumbing it's nose at the wolrd, the US and the United Nations, has promised to continue it's nuclear program, despite UN opposition. And the UN is powerless to stop it!

U.S. Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns said that most of the countries that took part in the talks -- the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council and Germany on Tuesday, the Group of Eight industrialized countries on Wednesday -- favored imposing sanctions on Iran if it doesn't stop its nuclear program.

"Everybody talked about the need to consider actions. The majority said sanctions,'' Burns said.

But China and Russia, who as permanent members of the U.N. Security Council can veto any proposal, still remain opposed.

As if to underscore its position, Russia confirmed that it would sell 29 mobile air
defense missiles to Iran -- a step Burns criticized.

There are so many other failures that this article could become a book. All over the world, UN efforts have consistantly failed.And this is not to even mention the greatest UN scandal of all time, The Food For Oil Scandal, involving Saddam Hussein. This scandal was so all encompassing and widespread, that it will have to deserve an article all its own! There is just too mch detail, to many play actors, and too much deceit to chronicle here!


Is There An Answer

People who support the United Nations and condemn the actions of the United States sometimes ask, "Do you want the US to be the policeman of the world?"

My answer would be, NO! I don't want the US to have to be the policeman of the world, by itself. But sometimes it just has to be that way! If you look out your window, and see a group of thugs raping women, how many calls to 911 have to go unanswered, with the police never showing up, before you get together with your neighbors to take action on your own? The UN has not been answering the calls!

It has become all too apparent that the UN cannot function. The United States needs to lead a pullout of the United Nations by all the truly democratically elected nations of the world. The US needs to cut off all funding to the UN and expell the UN from New York. If the body wishes to continue operating, let them set up shop in Uraquay or Pango Pango. The US should withdraw US forces from any and all UN "peacekeeping" missions and/or relief efforts.

Of course, the US would be condemned for any such action. The UN might even call for sanctions! But, since the United States is the only nation that ever upholds UN sanctions, it would clearly be a toothless weapon.

It is a fact, that the United States military does most of the heavy lifting in any UN action, and always has. The fact that the US has not had UN backing in Iraq, and quite probably will not, in Iran, is of little consequence. The nations that the US can count on will be there with or without the UN!

The US then should set up another body, sort of a "coalition of the willing" which is limited to demonstrably democratically elected governments. A good beginning might include, The US, Canada, Great Britain, France (with reservations), Germany, Belgium, The Netherlands, Denmark, India and Japan.

Unlike the United Nations, not all nations would be eligible for this coalition, but only those deemed worthy by the member nations. Other nations could apply for membership. In a few years, through United States leadership, Afghanistan and Iraq might well qualify.

The first order of business for this new organization, would be the war on terror, eliminating terrorist cells and states where ever they arise. This coalition of the democratic nations of the world, could and would act as "policeman of the world," taking decisive action to stop mass murders and atrocities across the globe. Then ccan do not worse than the failed United Nations, and can, in my opinion, probably do much better!

Al-Qaeda to 'move fight' to Saudi Arabia

From the Daily Telegraph

A SUSPECTED senior Al-Qaeda operative who escaped from a US airbase in Afghanistan last July called on members overnight in a video statement to move to fight in Saudi Arabia, predicting they would soon overcome US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"You must have a precise programme in mind: we will soon conquer America (the United States) in Afghanistan and Iraq. We must then head directly towards the peninsula of Mahomet (Saudi Arabia)," Saudi Mohammad al-Qahtani, said in the video statement released on the internet.

"We will have acquired great military experience...We call on our brothers who are fighting at the moment in the peninsula of Mahomet to continue their fight. We will soon be there," he said.

Al-Qahtani was one of four Al-Qaeda members who escaped from the US Bagram airbase last July.

The escape of the four men, described by the US army as "dangerous combatants", is a source of embarrassment at the main US base in Afghanistan.

I am not sure why this guy thinks that they are winning in Iraq and Afghanistan, unless this is a desperate call for help among the al-Qaeda members that have been hiding in caves without TV or the Internet for the last couple of years.

It is interesting however, that they seem to be targeting Saudi Arabia, first the attack on the oil depot and now more promised attacks in the kingdom. Is their plan to further disrupt the oil supply? After all, this guy is a Saudi, I just don't get it.

Arabs Worried About Iran

It seems the Arab world is becoming increasingly worried about the stance the Iranian's have taken in the Middle East. With Iraq already changing things there, they seem to be extremely worried that Iran will further adjust the status quo in the region. The Arab nations in the region seem to like things the way they are and don't want the changes, for reasons obvious to anyone that understands how things run there.

It is evidenced by this article on Monsters and Critics.

Already worried at Iran`s political influence in Iraq and its crisis with the West over Tehran`s nuclear program, the week-long military exercises in what they call the Arab Gulf waters enhanced Arab insecurities.

The neighboring oil-rich Arab states have made a point of not making their concerns public about the new missiles and torpedoes the Iranian Armed Forces and the Islamic Revolution Guards tested and showed off on their official television channels for one obvious reason: They sought to avoid appearing as if they were now siding with Israel against an Islamic country.

M & C Article

Can the tide be turning against Iran? Can the Arabs put enough pressure on Ahmadinejad and the Mullahs to change things? Methinks not...they seem bent on the destruction of all infidels throughout the world, but why now? Because of Ahmadinejad's visions? It would seem so.

Ahmadinejad Can't Keep His Mouth Shut

and so Iran has entered the melee of oil prices. Less than an hour ago, he made a statement that oil presently lower than it's value.

Ahmadinejad: Oil Price Is Lower Than Value

TEHRAN, Iran - Wading into oil politics for the first time, Iran's hard-line president said Wednesday that crude oil prices -- now at record levels -- still are below their true value. In statements likely to rattle world oil markets, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad also said developed countries, not producing countries like Iran, are benefiting the most from the current high prices.

Full Ranting and Ravings Here

The link contains a picture of his Supremeness...you have been warned!

Just what we need, this nut job stirring the oil pot. God, I wish someone would bomb this nutball.

There Was Torture At Abu Ghraib

In a story largely ignored by the mainstream media, sordid details of widespread torture at the notorious Abu Ghraib prison have emerged. Evidence proves that the president not only knew about, and condoned the torture, but had videotapes made so that he could review the results at his leisure.

The torture went far beyond simple “hazing” to include beatings, broken bones, amputations, cattle prods applied to genitalia and inserted into the body, nitric acid drips, murder and widespread rape.

All of these took place by the express command of the president!

Alright, lest you fear that I have gone over to the dark side, the president in question was Saddam Hussein, president of Iraq. In the ongoing and seemingly never-ending furor over the US treatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib, the inhuman torture of the Hussein regime has been largely buried and ignored by the MSM.

Most reports start with the obligatory “In the era of Saddam Hussein, Abu Ghraib, twenty miles west of Baghdad, was one of the world's most notorious prisons, with torture, weekly executions, and vile living conditions.” (thank you Sy Hersch) Then they launch into scathing attacks on “American abuses” at the prison.

But what is nearly ALWAYS missing from reports, is what actually constituted torture under the Saddam Hussein regime. In the MSM frenzy to BlameAmericaFirst™ reporting of real torture would only detract from the story line.

But, let us now examine what Abu Ghraib was really like, when the bad guys were in charge. In this NRO article a four minute tape distilled down from nearly two hours of footage details horrific acts of barbarism, common during the Saddam Hussein years. The transcript is graphic, the video unimaginable. And that is part of the problem, in this country it is impossible for us to imagine the cruelty that was commonplace in Iraq.

The first film clip opens with the camera showing a man standing in a bland, mostly empty room. The camera pans down to show his right hand. Folded rugs are visible in the background. The clip jumps to footage of scrub-clad "surgeons" with rubber surgical gloves severing the man's hand at the wrist. First the skin is peeled away with surgical knives and tweezers; ligaments, tendons, muscle, and bone underneath are exposed. Then the gloved hands wielding the knives begin to slice, shredding through the sinews, slashing muscle, breaking bone, until the hand is ultimately detached and plopped onto a green cloth, as yellow, pulpy tissue spills forth.

"You don't appreciate what happened in that prison until you see it."
The next clip opens amid Saddam Fedayeen — Fedayeen means "those willing to die for Saddam" — chanting loudly: "With blood and spirit we will redeem you Saddam." The Fedayeen stand barking and clapping in a courtyard. A blindfolded prisoner, forced to his knees and held in position has his arm outstretched before him along a low concrete wall. A masked member of the Fedayeen raises high a three-foot-long blade and ferociously slams down on the man's hand, slicing through his fingertips. The victim is wailing, howling, screaming in agony. The swordsman-torturer, not sufficiently satisfied with his first effort, raises the sword again and drives down once more on the man's immobile hand. This time he severs the fingers closer to the knuckles as blood spurts cartoonishly from his hand spilling over and down the concrete slab. The victim emits a wail I have never heard — could never imagine hearing — from a grown man, this time louder, harder than the first.
The camera then turns to the assembled Fedayeen as they continue rhythmically chanting.

"You don't appreciate what happened in that prison until you see it."
In the third clip, a prisoner sits on the ground, his arm tied with white cloth, strips to a wooden board resting on a gray concrete slab. A man stands before him with a sword, this blade is wider than the last. He, too, strikes down on the man's hand, severing it from his right arm as the prisoner recoils in pain. The camera then quickly darts to the man's hand resting on the dusty ground several feet away as it was launched a considerable distance from the prisoner due to the force of the torturer's chop.

"You don't appreciate what happened in that prison until you see it."
When Mel Gibson's movie The Passion was released, several critics harped on the scenes where Jesus is flogged mercilessly by Roman soldiers. The brutality was so extreme, critics charged, the depiction bordered on parody — it was not a credible rendering of what could have happened to Jesus. In the fourth clip in the Saddam torture film, it's clear Gibson's cinematic vision of just how depraved men can be was not divorced from reality. A tall prisoner, stripped to the waist and blindfolded has his arms tied before him to a white pole, his bare back exposed. Black-clad Saddam Fedayeen surround him, jackal-like, as one begins to pound on his back with a black
rubber whip. With the man screaming, his scourged back arching backward, shoulders and arms frantically struggling to block the blows, one of the Fedayeen torturers is heard to say "no situation more honorable than truth over falsehood." Thwack! Thwack! Thwack! The prisoner's knees buckle as he crumbles into a hump on the ground from the blows, crying out in pain. Another Fedayeen grabs his hands and pulls him up the pole to receive further lashes.

"You don't appreciate what happened in that prison until you see it."
"In the name of Allah the merciful," intones the beret-topped loyalist to Saddam's "secular" regime in the next segment. He introduces to the viewer and the assembled butcher squad to another prisoner. The loyalist-narrator reads from Koran, Sura 2:179: "And there is a saving of life for you in the Law of Equality in punishment. O men of understanding, that you may become the pious." "The
Fedayeen, Saddin Ezzedin al-Arousi," he goes on, "was charged with a special mission in which he betrayed his duty in the mission. The head of the Fedayeen has ordered the following: He is expelled from Fedayeen work and his arms are to be broken in front of his unit. Tarik Juman will personally undertake the breaking of his arms. Thank you." The camera jumps to al-Arousi sitting with one arm tied behind him as his right arm is extended out to his side. His right elbow rests on acinderblock and his right fist is supported by another cinderblock. Nothing supports his forearm in between. While a Fedayeen holds the prisoner's elbow in place, Tarik Juman crashes a three-inch-thick pipe down on his old compatriot's forearm, bending the forearm in a 'V' shape and shattering the bones within. This procedure is repeated for his left arm as well.

"You don't appreciate what happened in that prison until you see it."
In another clip a hooded and blindfolded prisoner is led to a room where he is forced to kneel, hands tied behind his back. Another man sits before the prisoner with thick metal tweezers and a scalpel. With his left hand he grabs the tip of the prisoner's tongue with the tweezers and pulls it forward from his head. With the scalpel in his other hand he slices through the prisoner's tongue, cutting it out of his mouth and then dropping it on the floor. This ritual is repeated for more prisoners who are lined up, squatting in a row like parts on an assembly line waiting for processing, sitting ducks surrounded by dozens of men bearing witness to a Baathist tongue lashing.

"You don't appreciate what happened in that prison until you see it."
In the final clip we see a blindfolded prisoner being led to his fate as the assembled men around him sing "Happy Birthday, long live the leader, eternal gift to the people." Again with arms tied behind his back he is shoved to the ground, bent over stuffed burlap sacks. A black-clad Fedayeen loosens the prisoner's shirt exposing his back and neck, while another stands two feet from him holding a long silver blade at its curved handle. He raises his arms and strikes, hacking the prisoner's head from his body, tumbling it to the ground. He picks up the severed head by the hair and places it ceremoniously on the dead man's back as the camera pans in closer and closer and you can make out the victim's now lifeless and bloodied face.

As terrible as these accounts are, photos tell an even more horrific tale. In this link to The Jawa Report are graphic photos showing prisoners being tortured and implements of torture. They are NOT for the faint of heart, or those with a weak stomach.

One photo depicts a naked prisoner being tortured in a slow nitric acid shower. Another image portrays an Iraqi athlete tortured for failure to win. Still another photo shows a man’s amputation while another shows a severed head. Other photos display implements used to torture.

I defy any rational human being to equate Abu Ghraib under Saddam Hussein with the prison scandal of today.

Finally we have the Iraqi businessmen, right hands removed, for breaking Saddam’s laws regarding trading in foreign currencies.

As one Iraqi familiar with the case described the chaotic nature of regulation under Saddam, "a law would be passed one day, then another would amend it the next." As a result of unclear law and the open operation of other currency exchanges, the nine men believed they were conducting a legal business.

These men have come to the US and been fitted with prosthetic hands. At the time there was small fanfare, and even smaller interest from the MSM.

It would seem that American “abuses” are of much more import than the widespread terror inflicted by a tyrant upon the people of Iraq.

Yes, I know, the United States should be held to a higher standard than the despots of the world. That is the precise reason that American soldiers faced charges and are now serving sentences for their crimes. But let us not lose sight of the fact that a murderous thug, who DID pose a serious threat to his neighbors in the region, and to the world, is no longer torturing his own people.

Some indications are that the new Iraqi government has returned to many of the practices learned through more than three decades of tyranny. Whether Iraq returns to barbarism is now in the hands of the Iraqi people. We hope they choose wisely.

Nuclear Weapon in 16 Days

For all those doubting Thomas' that say "So What, it'll take them a long time to make a bomb"...that ain't the way it is according to the State Department.

Iran Could Produce Nuclear Bomb in 16 Days, U.S. Says
April 12 (Bloomberg) -- Iran, defying United Nations Security Council demands to halt its nuclear program, may be capable of making a nuclear bomb within 16 days, a U.S. State Department official said.

Iran will move to ``industrial scale'' uranium enrichment involving 54,000 centrifuges at its Natanz plant, the Associated Press quoted deputy nuclear chief Mohammad Saeedi as telling state-run television today.

Full Story Here

That's 54,000 centrifuges, not 375 that they told the IAEA about. The article says they are in Natanz, but they are in a dead and hard site.

And don't forget about the secret parallel program. The world is going to be sorry if something isn't done soon.

They don't have to reinvent the bomb, like we did. Pakisatn and NK have given them all the necessary research info.

Come on people WAKE UP! (Not intended for RS readers, just lurkers of the Blue kind)

We Are Losing The Global War on Terror

Evidence suggests that we are unable to keep up with the changing tactics of the Global Jihad and although we have caused the Jihadists considerable losses regionally, we are in fact losing the war on terror on a global scale. There are many reasons why we are not gaining ground globally and in order to win the war and not just a few battles, we MUST change our tactics and our laws to enable our agencies charged with our protection to do their job effectively.

One of the major reasons we are losing this war is because of the constraints that are placed on our intelligence gathering and this is a fact the enemy knows well. The Italians recently thwarted an attempt to bomb a church and a subway, by monitoring calls, arresting the perpetrators and deporting them, all BEFORE notifying the media.

How were they able to accomplish this? Because they shared intelligence, they acted swiftly and were not constrained by laws that prohibit the monitoring of suspicious activity and a key point, NO media involvement until the incident was over. Jihadist groups monitor the media more closely than just about any other group of people, and they use the intelligence gathered from this source. All too often we publicize our weaknesses, mistakes and downfalls, all in the name of keeping the people informed. It's high time we stopped doing that and learned to keep our mouths shut. Remember the old saying put on posters and hand bills at the ship yards and defense factories during the Second World War, "Loose lips sink ships"?

If a test of security finds a flaw in a system, such as the recent story about agents being able to get cesium-137 through border checkpoints in December of 2005, a press release is issued and it's "Film at 11:00!"

Why do we do that? We are inviting a terrorist to hop in his rental car and bring in a load, before we fix the problem. Full disclosure should be done AFTER the problem is fixed, not before. Instead, we play the blame game and point fingers and all too often these incidents are used as pawns in the political chess game.

The war on terror is an ongoing effort that will last for many years into the future, and perhaps a lifetime. We must remove the barriers that are binding our government in order to stay ahead of the constantly shifting tactics of the Global Jihad. We must learn to think differently in the way we act and react to situations. We must tighten security EVERYWHERE and we must do it quickly.

All too often we are running around putting out fires instead of preventing them in the first place. Terrorists exploited a weakness in our air transportation system, so we went gung-ho fixing that problem. We are just chasing the rat to a different hole. The problem is complex and vast, but these are different times and the enemy is highly capable of thinking on their feet and changing the play in mid-count, like a quarterback calling audibles when the defence comes to the line of scrimmage.

The solution will be just as complex and vast as the problem, and winning public support of those changes may be the most difficult task of them all. It takes money, lots and lots of money to affect these changes and that is the pitfall. How do you make the ordinary citizen understand the need to spend many billions of dollars when they have felt safe for so long and consider themselves safe? How many days like September 11, 2001 will it take to change the public perception of safety?

Once again politicians come into play by showing their voter base how the chess game is coming by making statements such as, "The radiation detection system at the borders will take 'n' dollars to implement by 2009, we just don't have that kind of money." A seemingly harmless statement of boosting to ones constituents that you are on fiscal guard duty. To a terrorist it say, "Ah, I have more time to work on my plan."

How, specifically, are we losing the war?

Terrorists are using Democracy to gain control of governments and their people. A case in point is the recent election of Hamas to power in the Palestinian parliament. They are using the very ideal we are trying to institute in Afghanistan and Iraq to their advantage. Now that they are in power in Gaza over the Palestinian people, they will use their authority to institute Sharia law and eliminate democracy completely. This victory in Palestine has given encouragement to other Jihadist factions to duplicate the Hamas tactic.

Presently, this same tactic, is being used to undermine the Jordanian government by yet another Muslim Brotherhood created faction, the Islamic Action Front Party. Hamas has warned the Jordanian regime not to interfere with the Democratic progress of the IAF and is evidenced by the election of Zacki Bani Irshid as general secretary of the IAF. Irshid has close ties with Hamas.

In fact, Azaam al-Huneidi, the head of the IAF bloc of the Jordanian parliament sees the Hamas victory in Gaza as an important model for Islamic takeover of other Arab governments.

Here at home we cannot stem the flow of money out of the country and through Iranian banks to the Hezbollah, al-Qaeda, Hamas or just about any other Jihadist group you care to name.

With all this funding, they are arming themselves to the teeth to continue their Global Jihad. On April 3rd, Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau turned off a 3 Billion Dollar pipeline and is pursuing one of the biggest banks in NY.

Last week a smuggling operation was uncovered in the Michigan area and was shut down. Initial reports indicate that it was part of a nearly 9 Billion dollar operation. That is a total of 12 Billion dollars in just these two cases.

al-Qaeda continues its Jihad, although diminished from it's former numbers by the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. They have enjoyed renewed funding from direct sources such as Iran and indirect sources such as the smuggling operations outlined above. They are gaining a foot hold in Gaza and are recruiting and training new members rapidly.

Intelligence as recent as the 1st week of April, 2006, reports that new recruits in Hezbollah, al-Qaeda, Hamas and others are being trained directly by the Iranian Republican Guard inside the borders of Syria.

al-Qaeda and Hamas differ fundamentally in their approach to spreading the Global Jihad. al-Qaeda sees terror as the most effective way of rejecting western culture from the world, while Hamas is content with exploiting western Democratic rules, at least on the surface. Hamas still adheres to al-Zawahiri's past wishes and will not give up armed struggle or make a peace with Israel, ever.

One of the least talked about and most dangerous of all the terror groups is the Muslim Brotherhood. One of the oldest and most prolific, founded in 1928, of all anti-western groups, the Muslim Brotherhood is the father of such groups as Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, to name a few.

The election of Hamas in Gaza marks the first success the Muslim Brotherhood has had in the electoral to take virtually exclusive control of an Arab regime in the very heart of the Arab world. (Previously, Hassan Turabi rose to power through the Muslim Brotherhood in Sudan.) In the past the Muslim Brotherhood had sought to replace secular regimes in Egypt and Syria, but were unsuccessful.

Israeli intelligence views Hamas' rise as an extremely significant event in the Muslim Brotherhood movement, which is hard at work in Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, and Syria. The current leader of the international Muslim Brotherhood, Mahdi 'Akef, admitted openly "that the Brotherhood is a global movement whose members everywhere share a basic, similar religious worldview (spreading Islam until it takes over the whole world)."

Until the US went into Afghanistan, the Muslim Brotherhood actually had training camps where it worked with Kashmiri militants and sought to expand its influence in Central Asian states, especially Tajikistan.

This organization has been this active for almost 80 years, and they continue unabated and one hardly ever hears a word mentioned about them, from the Media or the administration. They must be taken into account seriously, yet we have seemed to side stepped them completely. Or have we?

Fear not bravehearts, all is not lost.

We will soon begin to turn the tide and gain ground in this war on terror. Iran has been funding all of these groups and allowing them sanctuary and the use of it's banking system to move money from around the world to the coffers of these groups.

Their insistence on obtaining nuclear weapons, under the veil of building a peaceful power source, will be their undoing. The western world will not allow them to have their weapons and are preparing to deal with the problem. In dealing with the problem of nuclear weapons, we will make a huge leap forward toward winning this war. Crippling Iran will cripple, by default, many terror groups.

Eliminating Irans power will eliminate a major axis of evil however, it will not be the end of the war. It will be a huge set back to be sure, but there is much more to do. The next battleground of the war on terror will in all likelihood be the South Pacific, and specifically Jemaah Islamiya. Much of the planning of the 9/11 attacks on the United States was done in Jemaah Islamiya's back yard.

There are more Muslims in this part of the world then anywhere else and this makes it is a fertile environment for the further development of a huge terror organization. Funding has been tough to come by, but terrorism has a way of finding the money. Although the exact strength of JI is not known, more and more are being arrested everyday. With thousands of islands at their disposal it is an easy place to protect and produce terror. JI is believed to have cells spanning Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Philippines.

Remember, a second round of plane missile attacks, exactly like the ones on 9/11/01 was planned using Asian terrorists, because Osama Bin-Laden knew we would be looking for Arabs.

The administration has recently stated that they are taking a long hard look at terrorism in Europe. You can be sure that they are looking just as hard at the South Pacific as well.

Alarming Iranian Development - Parallel Nuke Program

An alarming development is beginning to show itself in the Iranian nuclear process. It seems that Iran has completely fooled the IAEA with it's facilities in Natanz and Isfahan. It allowed them to padlock them until recently and it was all a gimme'. Their fained compliance to the NPT was all a game while they continued development at a secret location

The Bush administration and Iranian resistance organizations have contended for some time that the Iranian's have a parallel nuclear development program and el Baradei and the IAEA have dismissed the notion completely. It makes good sense to have a parallel program in the case of the loss of one facility, either accidentally or on purpose.

However, recent disclosures by Pakistan now has el Baradei heading back to Tehran and possibly with a threat in hand. Pakistan has disclosed that it has given far more information, technology and designs to the Iranians than the Iranians have disclosed to the IAEA.

Here is the problem....according to sources this parallel site is a deep and hard site....and we don't know where it is....yet!

This fact could quite possibly be the reason that action has not yet been taken against Iran, we need to know where that other facility is.

They have watched Saddam Hussein closely it would seem, and they were able to fool the UN just as easily as he did.

Israel Calls Irans Bet - And Raises

Ehud Olmert has begun to speak a little tougher now that the election is behind him and he is firmly in power.

Bravo for Olmert and all of Israel, we are with you step for step.

WASHINGTON, April 9 (Itar-Tass) -- Israel will not allow Iran to come into possession of nuclear armaments, Israeli acting prime minister Ehud Olmert said in an interview published by the Sunday issue of the newspaper Washington Post.

Asked whether Tel Aviv is considering the use of military force for stopping Tehran’s development of nuclear warheads, he said, Israel would not wait until Iran develops nuclear weapons that might be used against it. He said he hopes that they would not go that far to strike on Iran, and Tehran would be stopped with diplomatic methods.

Read the Article Here

The Rush To War (Updated 4/6/6)

If the Twentieth Century was a century of the clash of ideologies, as Capitalism fought with Communism for the hearts and minds of the world population, The Twenty-first Century marks a battle of civilizations. Or, more properly, a battle FOR civilization! Freedom and democracy stand fast against a virulent strain of Islamofascism, bent on turning back the clock to the seventh century.

It is important to remember that the jewel of civilization of that earlier era was the Roman Empire. Rome was not conquered by a superior civilization, but by barbarians dressed in skins, swinging as weapons, the thighbones of the animals they had killed.

Now imagine those same barbarians armed with chemical, biological or even nuclear weapons, provided by a rogue, state-sponsor of terrorism. Not a promising thought, but a real possibility in this war we wage today. And that was the very real possibility faced by our President as he contemplated war with Iraq.

The Barbarians ARE at the Gates!

For the last two years we have repeatedly heard how President Bush took the United States into Iraq with a “rush to war.” “Rush to War” has become such an uncorrected talking point, that its use today is unquestioned by the main stream media.

President Bush first laid the groundwork for an Iraq invasion with his State of the Union Address on January 29, 2002. US troops crossed the border into Iraq on March 20, 2003. If this was a “Rush to War” it was one of the slowest rushes on record.In that address to the nation, in naming Iraq along with North Korea and Iran as an Axis of Evil, the President said this:

Iraq continues to flaunt its hostility toward America and to support terror. The Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax, and nerve gas, and nuclear weapons for over a decade. This is a regime that has already used poison gas to murder thousands of its own citizens -- leaving the bodies of mothers huddled over their dead children. This is a regime that agreed to international inspections -- then kicked out the inspectors. This is a regime that has something to hide from the civilized world.

When the critics of our President say “rush to war” what they are really suggesting is that the President took our nation to war against Iraq without proper cause. The implication they are making is that the President is a war monger, who made up his mind to invade Iraq before he was even elected. A little history might be in order here. United Nations Resolution 687 effectively declared a cease-fire between the US-led United Nations forces and Iraq, ending Gulf War I in 1991.

That resolution detailed the provisions that Saddam Hussein needed to honor to end hostilities. It is important to realize that this was not a United States resolution, but a United Nations resolution. This was not the United States and President George H W Bush trying to impose its will on a "sovereign nation" but the full force of the United Nations.

This is an important distinction only for the fact that critics of this President keep citing the "fact" that President George W Bush has taken us to war against Iraq "illegally" and "unilaterally." This argument dismisses the fact that a state of war had, in fact, existed between the United Nations and Iraq ever since 1991. Only by adhering to the terms of the cease-fire, as laid out by UN Resolution 687, was Saddam Hussein spared hostilities. The problem was, Saddam Hussein had never lived up to the terms of that cease-fire agreement!

Playing games of hide and seek, and bait and switch, Saddam kept the United Nations running in circles, while he circumspectly began rebuilding his armaments and laying his plans. His terrorist camps, such as the infamous Salman Pak served as training grounds for thousands of terrorist from many different countries, and from divergent terrorist groups!

The General, who had been the Security Officer in charge of the camp also reported that there were mixed nationality units including Saudi‘s, Egyptians and Chechens at Salman Pak. Usually about 40 strong, these terrorist units received up to five months of intensive training. However the terrorist units were actually under the control of Iraq‘s Al- Mukhabarat Intelligence Service and in particular a section called the Division of Special Operations. Much of this was also confirmed by Captain Khodada.

The foreign fighters were segregated from Iraqi military personnel and Saddam Husseins own Fedayeen, except during certain specific training sessions. The overall training program included assassination, kidnapping, sabotage or hijacking of aircraft, buses, trains, sabotage of public utilities and most importantly of all, in the use of Chemical, Biological and possibly crude nuclear devices.

While Saddam played the United Nations inspectors as fools, the UN security council passed resolution after resolution, demanding that he comply, knowing full well he would not, making the UN an accomplice in his charade.

United Nations Resolutions 1060 (6/12/96), 1115 (6/21/97), 1134 (10/23/97), 1137 (11/12/97), 1194 (9/9/98), 1205 (11/5/98), 1284 (12/17/99, all demanded, with growing stridency, that Saddam comply or face dire consequences. Saddam thumbed his nose at the UN while continuing his rearmamant.

And then came 9/11! And the world changed. President Bush declared war on terrorists. Following the successful Routing of the Talaban and the expulsion of al Qaida from Afghanistan, the President cast his eye upon the Axis of Evil. He settled upon Iraq and Saddam Hussein as the next logical front in the War on Terror.

Following his State of The Union speech, he began working with the United Nations, trying to got THAT body to back up its own Resolutions with action. With urging by the United States, the UN passed additional resolutions, again calling for Saddam to comply, finally culminating on 11/8/02 with Resolution 1441!

Throughout the summer the President made his case to the American people for his bold vision of a new Mideast. He laid out several compelling reasons for removing Saddam Hussein from power.

1. His possession of, and past use of Weapons of Mass Destruction.
2. His refusal to comply with UN Resolution 687, and his continued firing upon US and UN airplanes enforcing the No-fly zone.
3. His support for terror and terrorist as a state-sponsor of terrorism.
4. His brutal oppression of his own people, through murder, rape and torture.

A fifth, and even more compelling reason was the President's bold vision of a new face for the region, by spreading the seeds of democratic freedom to the peoples of the Mideast.

In his weekly radio address on 10/02/02 he said;

The danger to America from the Iraqi regime is grave and growing. The regime is guilty of beginning two wars. It has a horrible history of striking without warning. In defiance of pledges to the United Nations, Iraq has stockpiled biological and chemical weapons, and is rebuilding the facilities used to make more of those weapons.

Saddam Hussein has used these weapons of death against innocent Iraqi people, and we have every reason to believe he will use them again. Iraq has longstanding ties to terrorist groups, which are capable of and willing to deliver weapons of mass death. And Iraq is ruled by perhaps the world's most brutal dictator who has already committed genocide with chemical weapons, ordered the torture of children, and instituted the systematic rape of the wives and daughters of his political opponents.

In a s speech in Cincinnatti on 10/07/02, he said this about Saddam Hussein:

And that is the source of our urgent concern about Saddam Hussein's links to international terrorist groups. Over the years, Iraq has provided safe haven to terrorists such as Abu Nidal, whose terror organization carried out more than 90 terrorist attacks in 20 countries that killed or injured nearly 900 people, including 12 Americans. Iraq has also provided safe haven to Abu Abbas, who was responsible for seizing the Achille Lauro and killing an American passenger. And we know that Iraq is continuing to finance terror and gives assistance to groups that use terrorism to undermine Middle East peace.

We know that Iraq and the al Qaeda terrorist network share a common enemy -- the United States of America. We know that Iraq and al Qaeda have had high-level contacts that go back a decade. Some al Qaeda leaders who fled Afghanistan went to Iraq. These include one very senior al Qaeda leader who received medical treatment in Baghdad this year, and who has been associated with planning for chemical and biological attacks. We've learned that Iraq has trained al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases. And we know that after September the 11th, Saddam Hussein's regime gleefully celebrated the terrorist attacks on America.

Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists. Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints.

Congress insisted that the President needed to consult them before considering expanding the conflict into Iraq. After considerable debate on the floor of the Capital, the 107th Congress passed a bipartisan resolution granting the President the authority to take military action against Iraq. Still giving Saddam Hussein a chance to avoid conflict, the President, on 10/16/02, at the signing of that resolution laid out the terms by which that conflict could be forestalled.

Compliance will begin with an accurate and full and complete accounting for all chemical, biological and nuclear weapons materials, as well as missiles and other means of delivery anywhere in Iraq. Failure to make such an accounting would be further indication of the regime's bad faith and aggressive intent. Inspectors must have access to any site in Iraq, at any time, without pre-clearance, without delay, without exceptions. Inspectors must be permitted to operate under new, effective rules. And the Iraqi regime must accept those rules without qualification or negotiation.

To ensure that we learn the truth, the regime must allow witnesses to its illegal activities to be interviewed outside of the country. These witnesses must be free to bring their entire families with them, so they're beyond the reach of Saddam Hussein's terror, Saddam Hussein's torture, Saddam Hussein's murder.

In addition to declaring and destroying all of its weapons of mass destruction, Iraq, in accordance with U.N. Security Council demands, must end its support for terrorism. As the U.N. demands, Iraq must cease the persecution of its civilian population. As the U.N. demands, Iraq must stop all illicit trade outside the oil-for-food program. Iraq must also release or account for all Gulf War personnel, including an American pilot whose fate is still unknown.

The United States takes the resolutions of the Security Council seriously. We urge other nations to do the same. We're working to build the broadest possible coalition to enforce the demands of the world on the Iraqi regime. I've told all the members of the United Nations, America will play its historic role in defeating aggressive tyranny.

I hope the good people of Iraq will remember our history, and not pay attention to the hateful propaganda of their government. America has never sought to dominate, has never sought to conquer. We've always sought to liberate and to free. Our desire is to help Iraqi citizens find the blessings of liberty within their own culture and their own traditions. The Iraqi people cannot flourish under a dictator that oppresses them and threatens them. Gifted people of Iraq will flourish if and when oppression is lifted.

When Iraq has a government committed to the freedom and well-being of its people, America, along with many other nations, will share a responsibility to help Iraq reform and prosper. And we will meet our responsibilities. That's our pledge to the Iraqi people.

Finally, on March 20, 2003, with the failure of all diplomatic attempts; with the United Nations paralyzed with inaction; the Coalition of the Willing, composed of the United States and 40 other nations, crossed the border into Iraq, marking the end of one of the most brutal regimes in the history of the Mideast.

Those who would claim that there was a rush to war over look the 14 months of failed deplomacy, and the failed UN resolutions leading up to that war. Those who claim the United States acted unilaterally, dismiss the sacrifices being made even today by the 40 other nations who made up the Coalition of the Willing.

(update 4/6/6)
Now, because of their actions and provocations, it would appear that the President will have to cast his eye toward Iran. Again, the United Nations has not proven up to the task of dealing with this crisis. The same body that has castigated the United States for its actions in Iraq, is now calling upon this great nation to do something to forestall the Iranian nuclear proliferation.

It is not difficult to predict the reaction of critics in this country. In fact, a foreshadowing can be found in this article from the LATimes.

The accusations from U.S. officials about Iranian nuclear ambitions and ties to Al Qaeda echo charges that Bush administration figures made about Iraq in the run-up to the U.S.-led invasion three years ago.

Those charges about Iraq have been discredited. And in the case of Iran, some intelligence officials and analysts are unconvinced that Al Qaeda operatives are being allowed to plot terrorist acts.

Perhaps, in a rare effort at objectivity, after seeking to discredit any connection between al-Qaeda and Iran the Times article does grudgingly admit:

Ties between Iran and Al Qaeda were highlighted by the Sept. 11 commission, which disclosed a wealth of details about such connections in its final report. The commission said Iran and Al Qaeda had worked together sporadically throughout the 1990s, trading secrets, including some related to making explosives.

This excerpt from a NYSun article, a translation from recently released Iraqi documents would suggest that the September 11 commission might indeed be right.

One of these was a handwritten account of a February 19, 1995, meeting between an official representative of Iraq and Mr. bin Laden himself, where Mr. bin Laden broached the idea of "carrying out joint operations against foreign forces" in Saudi Arabia. The document, which has no official stamps or markers, reports that when Saddam was informed of the meeting on March 4, 1995 he agreed to broadcast sermons of a radical imam, Suleiman al Ouda, requested by Mr. bin Laden.

So, unless the MSM can find a way to discredit the Saddam Hussein documents being translated in Iraq, a link has been established between al Qaeda and both Iraq and Iran. This will not prevent, nor even slowdown the BushLied™ orchestra, but it should, at least, mute some of the criticism.

Dave Hinz
Team Member

Are You Ready for War...Again?

The invasion of Iran will be difficult and cost many lives. This is not a war that can be won with cruise missiles and bombs. Iran has planned their assent to nuclear power carefully. Before they began to make it known what their desires were, made sure that the fruits of their labors would be well protected.

They have just completed an entire underground command and control center in the north of Tehran, complete with all the things necessary to withstand a prolonged attack. It has been likened to an entire underground village.

They have also buried the majority of their manufacturing capacity in deep caverns under the city of Isfahan, which makes bombing them, even with deep penetration ordinance, nearly impossible.

That means that the only way to "take out" their capability, would be to do it with "boots on the ground", often the preferred method to military commanders anyway. Although not popular with civilians, troops on the ground is the only way to "win" a war, simply bombing the begeezes out of the enemy will not do the trick.

Now that they consider themselves ready to face the world, they have begun to boast about their capabilities. They have chosen to use war games this week to reveal several new missile technologies
to the world. Weather or not this is news to western intelligence we'll probably never know, as that would show our ability to gather that information. However, I suspect our intelligence knew all about them long before Iran showcased them to the world.

With the successful completion of their latest war games, they are furthering their defiance of western opinion by making this statement.

This is an extremely strong statement:

"The missile command of the Guards' naval force ... via positioning various types of surface-to-sea missiles, is able, while defending the coastlines and islands, to confront any extra-territorial invasion," the official Islamic Republic News Agency quoted Safavi as saying.

It is contained in the article referenced below.

TEHRAN, Iran - A top Iranian military official said Tuesday the country can now defend itself against any invasion originating from outside the region — a clear reference to the United States — as it tested a second new radar-avoiding missile.

The new surface-to-sea missile is equipped with remote-control and searching systems, state-run television reported. It said the new missile, called Kowsar after the name of a river in paradise, was a medium-range weapon that Iran had the capability to mass-produce.

It also asserted that the Kowsar's guidance system could not be scrambled, and it had been designed to sink ships.

Read The Full Story

If you thought the opposition of the Iraqi war was loud, wait until you hear the noise from this one. We have learned greatly from the war in Afghanistan and Iraq and we will not make the errors we did there again.

We must proceed with this war, and others to come if the loss of lives we have sustained in Afghanistan and Iraq have any meaning at all, and they certainly do mean everything. The loss of lives, American and others, is all that stands between freedom and anarchy.

As so eloquently put by an unknown to me author, "Our sons and daughters must die in war, so that others may have life and dwell in peace, happiness and freedom."

Gordon Taylor
Team Member

The Magnitude and the Simplicity of This Statement is Awesome

This is the text of an email that was forwarded to me by a dear friend.

Cindy Sheehan asked President Bush, "Why did my son have to die in Iraq?"

Another mother asked President Kennedy, "Why did my son have to die in Viet Nam?"

Another mother asked President Truman, "Why did my son have to die in Korea?

Another mother asked President F. D. Roosevelt, "Why did my son have to die at Iwo Jima?"

Another mother asked President W. Wilson, "Why did my son have to die on the battlefield of France?"

Yet another mother asked President Lincoln, "Why did my son have to die at Gettysburg?

And yet another mother asked President G. Washington, "Why did my son have to die near Valley Forge?"

Then long, long ago, a mother asked, "Heavenly Father, why did my Son have to die on a cross outside of Jerusalem?"

The answers to all these are similar -- "that others may have life and dwell in peace, happiness and freedom.

"IF YOU DON'T STAND BEHIND OUR TROOPS, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO STAND IN FRONT OF THEM!!

Gordon Taylor
Team Member

Saudi's Nuclear Program Still in the Works?

The race is on to obtain nuclear weapons in the middle east. That Saudi Arabia has been pursuing a program is not new news, as evidenced from this article, which is no longer available online.

Pakistani President General Pervez Musharraf's June 25-26, 2003 unscheduled trip to Saudi Arabia has raised many an eyebrow in Islamabad's diplomatic circles, where it is believed the visit was meant to seek the assistance of the kingdom to circumvent the ongoing International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) investigations into reports that the Saudis might have purchased nuclear technology from Pakistan. The speculation goes that Musharraf aimed to chalk out a joint strategy on what stance the two leaders should adopt to satisfy the IAEA and address its concerns.

Saudi Arabia is under increasing pressure to open its nuclear facilities for inspection as the IAEA suspects that its nuclear program has reached a level (with Pakistani cooperation) where it should attract international attention. The pressure has also come from Europe and the United States, which want Riyadh to permit unhindered access to its nuclear facilities.

Well before the IAEA probe began, the US had been investigating whether or not the father of Pakistan's nuclear program, Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan, sold nuclear technology to the Saudis and other Arab countries. Acting under extreme pressure from the IAEA, the Saudi government signed the Small Quantities Protocol on June 16, which makes inspections less problematic. However, the US, European Union and Australia want it to agree to full inspections. The Saudi stand is that they will agree to the demand only if other countries do so, including Israel.

International apprehensions that Saudi Arabia would seek to acquire nuclear weapons have arisen periodically over the past decade. The kingdom's geopolitical situation gives it strong reasons to consider acquiring nuclear weapons: the volatile security environment in the Middle East; the growing number of states (particularly Iran and Israel) with weapons of mass destruction; and its ambition to dominate the region. International concerns intensified in 2003 in the wake of revelations about Khan's proliferation activities. The IAEA investigations show that Khan sold or offered nuclear weapons technology to Saudi Arabia and several Middle Eastern states, including Iran, Iraq, Libya and Syria.

Last year's unearthing of the black market nuclear technology network increased international suspicions that Khan had developed ties with Riyadh, which has the capability to pay for all kinds of nuclear-related services. Even before the revelations about Khan's activities, concerns about Saudi-Pakistani nuclear cooperation persisted, largely due to strengthened cooperation between the two countries. In particular, frequent high-level visits of Saudi and Pakistani officials over t