Friday, October 12, 2007
Podcasting
With a ton of things going on behind the scenes, one of my more frequent requests is a podcast of the site. I am currently looking into this and I have a few people in mind that I wish to bring to the site for additional points of view.
As a side note, I'd like to thank everyone who's submitted ideas on how to make the site better as well as constructive criticism. I'm always open to new ideas and corrections, so keep them coming!
Travis
Does Blackwater Play By Its Own Rules in Iraq?
The colonel was furious. "Can you believe it? They actually drew their weapons on U.S. soldiers." He was describing a 2006 car accident, in which an SUV full of Blackwater operatives had crashed into a U.S. Army Humvee on a street in Baghdad's Green Zone. The colonel, who was involved in a follow-up investigation and spoke on the condition he not be named, said the Blackwater guards disarmed the U.S. Army soldiers and made them lie on the ground at gunpoint until they could disentangle the SUV. His account was confirmed by the head of another private security company. Asked to address this and other allegations in this story, Blackwater spokesperson Anne Tyrrell said, "This type of gossip has led to many soap operas in the press."
If even one ounce of this is true, those who did that and everyone involved need to go to jail and be fired from Blackwater. If this is an ongoing type of thing, then they need to lose their government contract and they need to be removed from Iraq.
You simply do NOT draw your weapons on US soldiers and get away with. I certainly wouldn't have thought twice if one of those soldiers fired upon the Blackwater personnel if what they say is true.
Responsible for guarding top U.S. officials in Iraq, Blackwater operatives are often accused of playing by their own rules. Unlike nearly everyone else who enters the Green Zone, said an American soldier who guards a gate, Blackwater gunmen refuse to stop and clear their weapons of live ammunition once inside. One military contractor, who spoke anonymously for fear of retribution in his industry, recounted the story of a Blackwater operative who answered a Marine officer's order to put his pistol on safety when entering a base post office by saying, "This is my safety," and wiggling his trigger finger in the air. "Their attitude was, 'We're f---ing security; we don't have to answer to anybody'."
Well the bigger question is, do they do this type of behavior to Iraqi citizens? If so, I can completely understand why they would want us out of Iraq. Is Blackwater in the Anbar province? If not, it certainly would explain a lot. Al-Qaeda killing and mutilating the locals, US soldiers coming to their aid, and Blackwater nowhere to be found, all has a recipe for success in that area.
If that is what's going on, then Blackwater should be removed because they are hampering our efforts to maintain the peace and get Iraq back on it's feet.
This is all of course, if these accusations are true. If they aren't, and it's just a few bad apples, then they need to be removed so we can move forward. If not, Blackwater should be in hot water.
Travis
Putin Says Missile Plan Risks Relations
Yes, because things are going swimmingly right now with Russia. With their critics dying in "mysterious" ways, their push to claim the arctic for it's natural resources, and it's spying at unprecedented levels against us, why should we be kissing their asses?
In a tense start to talks on a range of thorny issues, President Vladimir Putin on Friday warned U.S. officials to back off a plan to install missile defenses in eastern Europe or risk harming relations with Moscow.
Addressing Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary Robert Gates, the Russian president appeared to mock the U.S. missile defense plan, which is at the center of a tangle of arms control and diplomatic disputes between the former Cold War adversaries.
"Of course we can sometime in the future decide that some anti-missile defense system should be established somewhere on the moon," Putin said, according to an English translation. "But before we reach such arrangements we will lose the opportunity for fixing some particular arrangements between us."
Yeah, go ahead and put your "missile defense system" on the moon. I dare you, hell I double dare you to do it. You'll bankrupt your country doing it. Plus, it takes around 3 days for anything to reach the moon, so you don't think we can't see a missile coming from the moon?
Putin is full of shit. They are trying to reestablish themselves as a world superpower and with a missile defense shield in their backyard, they can't threaten neighbors like they used to be able to.
The Russian government sees the U.S. missile defense plan, which Washington describes as a hedge against the threat of missile attack from Iran, as a worrisome step toward weakening Russian security. It has been a longstanding dispute, and Putin's remarks seemed to raise the level of tensions.
How is it weakening their security? We INVITED THEM to be a part of the program.
This is merely Russia trying to weaken our hand while strengthening theirs. How about you stop your spying and hacking of our military computers and we'll look into other areas to build the defense shield?
To get something, you have to give something Putin, you should know that by now. You simply aren't in a position to make demands and give nothing in return.
Travis
Al Gore Wins 1/2 The Nobel Peace Prize
"for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change"
Telling everyone how they should be conserving our precious natural resources, but at the same time, being one of the biggest hypocrites on the subject with his home, private jets, and his son doing 100+mph in a Toyota Prius.
Ok the last one isn't his fault, but I'll put it on him anyways simply because I can.
But seriously, this guy needs to understand the word "hypocrite". It's the same thing when Madonna and Barbara Streisand tell us how we should be conserving but they don't do it themselves:
So until you practice what you preach, you can screw off. I don't preach a ton of things on this site because I practice them myself.
For example, I love to go to the fights (boxing, UFC, Sport Fight) with friends and have a few drinks. I have a designated driver and I don't ever drive drunk. So you won't hear me complaining about "those rowdy types" here. I AM one of those rowdy types.
I love strippers. Gasp all you want, but the bottom line is, I may be a Republican, but I'm still a man. I love women. Blonde, Brunette, tall, short, fat, or skinny. I love em all. I love going to strip clubs with a fist full of one dollar bills and have a few drinks (usually less then 4 drinks at any event I go to..what can I say, I'm a lightweight) and see naked girls.
So when a politician is seen leaving a strip club, I think "So? It's his business what he does".
What you read on here is what I am like in real life. Occasionally I'll go off the deep end and say some things that piss people off. I'm like that in real life.
Travis
30 reasons why we hate the French - Telegraph
Well at least they are being open about their hostility.
Notice no one bats an eye when they say they hate the French? Or Americans? Or whoever is the "hated" moment of the day? What would you think would be the firestorm if they came out with a list that said:
"30 reasons why we hate the Muslims".
Hate mail from around the world and threats against the author. So why is it ok to do the same against the French?
Oh God, I'm defending the French. I apologize and it will never happen again.
That above sentence is sarcasm for those of you are firing up your email accounts ready to hit me with hate mail. :)
Travis
Commentary: Stealth nuke effort should be stopped
I swear to Christ, you can't please these fucking environmentalist types.
They want clean power, yet they don't want nuclear power.
The push for new nuclear plants is full of irony. The terror attacks of September 11, 2001, made it clear no reactor can be protected from a jet crash. The first plane that hit the World Trade Center flew directly over the Indian Point reactors, 45 miles north of New York City. Had it hit the nuke complex, the death toll would by now be in the hundreds of thousands, based on a study by the environmental group Riverkeeper.
Unfortunately for them, they're wrong. What they are talking about is the cooling towers for those reactors. Those reactors can and sometimes are, built underground. That's more then adequate protection from hijacked aircraft. Plus, the death toll wouldn't be "hundreds of thousands". Chernobyl's death toll wasn't that high and it had a massive failure.
Meanwhile, a major earthquake has hit the world's largest reactor facility, at Kashiwazaki, Japan. The quake exceeded the reactors' design safeguards, and caused radiation releases and a significant amount of damage to the reactors. Experts are concerned about much stronger quakes there in the future. At least one U.S. reactor -- at Perry, Ohio -- was affected by an earthquake two decades ago, as well as last year. The nuclear facilities at Indian Point, at Seabrook, New Hampshire, and at Diablo Canyon and San Luis Obispo, California, are also on or near major fault lines.
Meanwhile, a cooling tower at the Vermont Yankee reactor has simply collapsed, spewing hundreds of thousands of gallons of hot water into the Earth. The reactor was recently allowed to upgrade its power level, and the collapse may have been caused by improper supports, rotted wood beams and an "insufficient" inspection program. Twenty-one other towers there are at similar risk.
So here's a thought: Don't build reactors in earthquake zones. The quake they are talking about happened 20 years ago and safety and building codes have been revamped significantly. Just like 20 years ago, building codes for homes was very different then what it is now.
But that's just one aspect. If they don't like nuclear power, what do they like? Well they don't say. They don't mention solar, wind, or hydroelectric power.
Environmentalists even have a problem with hydroelectric power. I don't mind if we build a bypass stream for the salmon and other wildlife, but how can you possibly have a problem with hydroelectric power? You're harnessing the power of a flowing river.
What about solar? Surely we can use the power of the sun in bright areas like California, Texas, Arizona, and Florida. What about wind? In Washington state, along the border with Oregon, there's one of the consistently windiest places on earth. The Columbia River Gorge is very popular with wind surfers, so why not bump the electrical grid with that? They have wind farms out in that area, but why not bump it up significantly?
If people want to be taken seriously for their protests, don't just complain, come up with an alternative.
Travis
Angry Turks ready to cut U.S. ties
See what I mean about bringing up things that were over 100 years ago? Now Turkey is pissed at Congress for bringing up the "genocide" that happened during WWI.
With Turkish-U.S. relations strained, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Friday that Turkey would not be deterred by the diplomatic consequences if it decides to stage a cross-border offensive into Iraq against Kurdish rebels.
"If such an option is chosen, whatever its price, it will be paid," Erdogan told reporters in response to a question about the international repercussions of such a decision, which would strain ties with the United States and Iraq. "There could be pros and cons of such a decision, but what is important is our country's interests."
Erdogan also had harsh words for the United States, which opposes a Turkish incursion into northern Iraq -- one of the country's few relatively stable areas.
"Did they seek permission from anyone when they came from a distance of 10,000 kilometers and hit Iraq?" he said. "We do not need anyone else's advice."
What was the point in calling Turkey out like this? What point does it prove? Now we get them wanting to hit Northern Iraq in the Kurdish areas, and there's really not a lot we can do to stop them. Sure, we could defend the Kurds, but then we'd be at war with Turkey.
I swear, sometimes you wonder what's going through the heads of members of Congress sometimes.
Travis
Thursday, October 11, 2007
This Is Getting Old
Well now I've got the biggest name of them all: Hillary Clinton.
Hillary Rodham Clinton called Barack Obama naive when he said he'd meet with the leaders of Iran without precondition. Now she says she'd do the same thing, too.
During a Democratic presidential debate in July, Obama said he would be willing to meet without precondition in the first year of his presidency with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea.
Standing with him on stage, Clinton said she would first send envoys to test the waters and called Obama's position irresponsible and naive.
But asked about it Thursday by a voter, the New York senator said twice that she, too, would negotiate with Iran "with no conditions."
So which is it Hillary? Is it naive for Obama to want to talk to them? Or did you lie to the American public once the spotlight was on you? Did you say Obama was naive to make him look like an inexperienced guy so you would look better? I get the feeling that it's a little of all the above.
A little advice Hillary: The world is connected in ways you cannot imagine. If you said something, somewhere, we know about it. Soon afterwards, the world knows about it. For example, I have readers in the UAE, France, Russia, China (even though I'm blocked by the Great Firewall of China), and many other far off nations.
It's a completely connected world, and you can't simply say one thing and then say another a little while later. With so many eyes on the upcoming Presidential election, every word you say must be carefully thought out.
In other words, you need to lie better Hillary. Your bullshit is starting to stink up the place.
Travis
Hillary Clinton vows to check growing presidential power - The Boston Globe
Clinton recently floated the idea of issuing a $5,000 bond to each baby born in the United States to help pay for college and a first home, but it immediately inspired Republican ridicule and she quickly said she would not implement the proposal.
She defended that decision yesterday, saying she is focusing on proposals with more political support and she is not formally proposing anything she can't fund without increasing the deficit: "I have a million ideas. The country can't afford them all."
Well at least Hillary admits that she's going to try to bankrupt the country. We can't even afford her universal health care or baby bonds idea. So what makes her think we can afford any other "nanny state, pie in the sky" kind of ideas?
Why can't she even have the guts to say "My ideas won't benefit illegal immigrants"? Because she's going to try to use that vagueness to get illegal's and their families to vote for her. Then, she'll have a change of heart, and say "the Republicans in Congress won't let me have my ideas that would benefit you". And of course, they'll buy into it.
In the wide-ranging interview, the senator, a Democrat of New York, also said her policy on Russia would focus on influencing that nation's role in the world rather than trying to halt its internal move away from democracy. She would seek Russia's help negotiating with Iran over its suspected nuclear weapons program, she said, and try to prevent Russia from "being a problem in the Middle East" or bullying its neighbors.
Good luck with that Hillary. Russia is trying to get back onto the world stage and they are doing every underhanded thing they can to get there. Russia has already said they aren't going to do jack about Iran, so I would be very curious on what she plans on doing to change their minds.
Of course, this is all probably just her typical political grandstanding. "Vote for me! I'll make everything all rainbows and happy puppy land!" I vaguely remember this before....Oh yeah! John Kerry said the same thing!
How about your plan on getting this country out of debt? How about you telling us how you plan on reducing or eliminating the federal deficit? The trade deficit? What about all your "nanny state" ideas? How do you plan on paying for them? Don't you think the rich already pay enough taxes? How about increasing taxes across the board instead of making successful people pay for things that poorer people get to take advantage of. How is it fair that my taxes get increased to pay for a program I can't use?
How about you pay for my mortgage but don't get to live there? How about you pay for my groceries, but don't get to eat any of them?
Why do poor people deserve every "bend over backwards" government program, yet those of us who paid attention in school, went to college, worked hard, sacrificed, and didn't overextend ourselves get a poke in the eye?
Why don't you introduce a program where poorer people get job training or jobs? Why do they get handouts and I get the bill?
When are you going to give your own money in higher taxes to poor folks? You've written books, your husband has a lucrative speaking career going, why not give all that money towards universal health care if it's so important to you?
Why does your new health care plan only mention exercise ONCE, when it mentions prescription drugs many, many times? Why is diet and exercise such a bad thing? I'm doing it right now and I've dropped 19.4 pounds in 10 weeks. Sure, I would have loved to go out to dinner all the time and eaten anything I wanted, but I got tired of the extra flab. When I have a problem, I find out how to fix it and then get off my ass and fix it. I don't wait for the government to hand hold me and fix my problems for me. But then again I was raised by a real American and by real parents. Everyone talks about "the greatest generation", but do you know why they were called that? Because they wouldn't let crap get them down. They found workarounds. They sacrificed. They did whatever it took to reach their goals. When you teach people that the government is supposed to hand hold you from cradle to grave, you're stifling everything that makes this country great. Math, Science, Literature, all were moved forward by people who thought for themselves and when they had a problem, they worked hard through that problem.
This guy's got it completely right:
My concern for the long term is that we're raising a nation of oversensitive, wimpy kids who will be poorly equipped to face adversity the way Americans did during the Great Depression, World War II and other trying times.
Aside from an occasional scraped knee, bruised arm or wounded pride, I can't recall any serious injuries. The playground served as an important social development tool. We learned how to make friends, share and play fair. We also did some teasing and got into fistfights, but again, I don't recall any serious injuries, emotional or physical.
So if you think I'm going to allow you to pussify America, you're more delusional then I thought Hillary.
Travis
Muslims tell Christians: 'Make peace with us or survival of world is at stake'| News | This is London
Sounds vaguely like a threat doesn't it?
The Muslim scholars state: "As Muslims, we say to Christians that we are not against them and that Islam is not against them - so long as they do not wage war against Muslims on account of their religion, oppress them and drive them out of their homes."
Oh, so if there's even a single Muslim being "oppressed", then Christians and American's can be jihaded against?
It seems like Muslim leaders are falling for Osama's line of bullshit: American's and Christian's are "oppressing" us. "They are fighting a war against Islam!"
"They have no right to be pissed even though we killed 3,000 innocent people and cut heads off of captured telecommunications workers".
If you're going to threaten us, how about you man up and actually do it? How about you save your "we want peace" bullshit for someone who'll believe you?
You and I both know that Muslims are generally a peaceful religious group, but with more and more of their "leaders" threatening Christians and Americans, sooner or later you have to wonder out loud "when are we going to stop pussy footing around" and fight back?
Prominent Muslim scholars are warning that the "survival of the world" is at stake if Muslims and Christians do not make peace with each other.
"Survival of the world" sounds awfully like a threat to me. Maybe they didn't mean it as a threat. If so, then perhaps they should reword their statement and apologize for the misunderstanding. But that is, of course, if they truly want peace.
Travis
MASTERMIND OF FIRST TWIN TOWERS ATTACK CLAIMS HE HAS CONVERTED TO CHRISTIANITY
Well, personally, I could give a shit what religion he's converted to. He killed 6 people, injured 1,000 and almost caused the World Trade Center to collapse into another building, making 9/11 look like a scrapped knee.
Of course, they want to pull their "poor me" bullshit. But in ADX, that doesn't fly:
Pelley also speaks with a corrections officer inside ADX-Florence, who tells him what she heard on 9/11 after terrorist prisoners saw the destruction on their televisions. "We had a lot of them jump up and down. ...scream and yell and clap and they were very excited," says Barbara Batulis, who heads the prison's staff union. She also characterizes the Muslim extremists as needy. "They want more than what they have coming," she says. "They want extra toilet paper...writing paper...extra envelopes and if you can't give them, they want to see a supervisor right then and there."
Batulis would rather work among the other prisoners because she is female. "It's very obvious, [Muslim extremists] just look at you with sheer disdain." Hate can turn into threats. "A terrorist inmate threatened to kill my family, because I was doing my job," Batulis tells Pelley. Batulis says the prison needs more officers. "...We are very short staffed. I firmly believe that staff lives are at stake," she says.
Threatening a corrections officer? Maybe that heating and air conditioning in the cells needs to be "adjusted". Maybe they need to be kept in their cells 24 hours a day. Maybe they should be able to communicate with only their lawyers.
I'm just sick to death over these guys who want to cause thousands of deaths and then have the nerve to ask for extras and complain about it. Perhaps we should bring jail back to the old days. No TV, no exercise equipment, no commissary, nothing that would make their lives easier or nicer. Don't like it? Tough shit, you should have thought about that before you filled a Ryder truck up with explosives hoping to kill thousands of people.
Maybe Sheriff Arpaio would like to be Warden Arpaio?
Travis
The Raw Story | Lesbian files lawsuit after being booted from ladies room for manly appearance
Ok, I may sound insensitive here, but tell me how someone couldn't make this mistake with this woman?
She looks like a guy doesn't she?
A 28-year-old lesbian is filing a gender-discrimination lawsuit after being booted from a New York City restaurant by a bouncer who mistook her for a man in the women's restroom.
Khadijah Farmer and her girlfriend had stopped by Greenwich Village's Caliente Cab Company this past June -- right after attending a gay pride parade -- but trouble started when a female patron complained that a man was using the ladies room. Farmer was then forced to leave.
"I told him I was a woman, and I tried to show him my I.D.," Farmer told AP about the bouncer who confronted her in the bathroom. "He refused to look at it. I was extremely uncomfortable and quite humiliated."
Let's be honest here. New York has some creepy people living in it. Most major cities do. So it's not inconceivable that a man, with a fake ID, wouldn't be creepy enough to try to get into the ladies room. Even the woman who reported her thought she was a man.
Take a look at the video. She even sounds like a guy in a way. Personally, depending on what really happened, I can't say I blame the restaurant for booting her. That being said, I'd love to hear what the restaurant has to say what happened.
However, the bouncer should have investigated a bit further, found out the truth, and apologized. If he had done that and she still filed a lawsuit, she'd have really no case.
Travis
Excite News - Murder-for-Hire Admission Dooms TV Show
Oh how I'm glad this wasn't the cancellation of the upcoming US TV show.
Tuesday was the final day for the show, in which contestants attached to a lie-detector machine answered 21 increasingly invasive questions to win up to $50,000.
A U.S version called "Moment of the Truth" is still expected to be launched on Fox in the coming months, along with spin-offs in England, Australia, Germany, Italy and Spain, according to Howard Schultz, the Los Angeles-based creator of the show.
Oh how can you not love the premise of a show like this? People being put on the spot to admit things that they had in their past right in front of loved ones. I'm going to be right in front of my TV with a bag full of popcorn when this comes on TV here in the States.
What I really can't wait for is to see the look of disgust on people's faces when they admit some pretty horrible things to their families for what amounts to a year's worth of salary. I'm sure someone wouldn't mind admitting they cheated on their wife to her face on national television and ruin their marriage over $50k.
Now put it up to say $500k and then you'll start seeing some real entertainment.
But that's just the side of me that loves watching UFC and boxing fights with friends and getting a hotdog and a beer.
Travis
Bali bombers feast at cop barbie | The Daily Telegraph
CONVICTED Bali nightclub bombers have feasted on kebabs with Indonesia's anti-terrorism chief at an evening party held at his house.
The party, which brought together more than 20 Muslim hardliners and former terrorists who have shown "regret" for their actions, was the latest "soft" strategy in Indonesia's anti-terror campaign to try and turn former militants into informers, or advocates of religious moderation.
"We approach the terrorists with a pure heart," Brigadier General Surya Dharma, the head of Indonesia's anti-terror unit and host of the party, told Associated Press.
"We are all Muslims. We make them our brothers, not our enemy."
What. The. Fuck.
Mubarok, who is serving a life sentence for planning and carrying out the Bali bombings, was temporarily released from prison to attend the party, which was free of armed guards. He led the prayers at the celebration, timed to coincide with the breaking of the fast during the holy month of Ramadan.
"We did not stop to think, what if one of our family was caught up in the blasts? Now we are aware what we did was wrong," Mubarok, who goes by a single name, said.
So because it was Australians and other tourists that got killed in the blast it's ok? So NOW you realize it was wrong? Over 200 people are dead and this guy is going to parties WITHOUT ARMED GUARDS.
Corruption at it's worst. Simply because these people are Muslims, they give them a pass. If they were Christian or Jewish bombers, they would have been executed long ago.
It does make one think twice about handing over suspected terrorists to Indonesia now that they are partying with the anti-terrorism chief. Perhaps they would be better off in an American prison with members of the Aryan Brotherhood? Just a thought. :)
Travis
Turkey recalls ambassador over genocide resolution - CNN.com
Turkey recalled its ambassador to the United States in response to a House resolution that uses the word "genocide" in reference to what it calls the Turkish massacre of Armenians during World War I, the Turkish Foreign Ministry said Thursday.
The House Committee on Foreign Affairs passed the measure 27-21 Wednesday, even though President Bush and key administration figures lobbied hard against it. The full House is expected to vote on it, possibly Friday.
Is there really a point to call out Turkey for genocide that happened almost 100 years ago? That's only going to piss people off and Turkey has been more or less a decent ally in recent times.
It would be like if England or France called us for slavery that happened in the 1700s-1800s. None of us alive were responsible for it, therefore, why should we be condemned for it?
Sometimes I wonder what the hell Congress is up to when they come up with these stupid resolutions. We have more important things to worry about then something that happened a century ago and involved no one who's alive today.
Travis
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Bush throws down gauntlet to China with Dalai Lama meeting - Yahoo! News
US President George W. Bush will risk angering China by attending a ceremony next week to award a Congress medal to the exiled Tibetan leader, the Dalai Lama, at the bastion of American democracy.
This will be the first time that a sitting US president will appear with the Dalai Lama in a public event, a move that could anger China, diplomats said.
China reacted angrily when the US Congress announced the award last year.
The award "has sent very serious, wrong signals to the Tibetan independence forces, seriously interfered into China's internal affairs and damaged China-US relations," Beijing said then.
Fuck em. They spy on us at a rate that's astounding. They make attempts to steal our military technology. They try to hack into Pentagon computers. They keep their currency artificially low. They use slave labor for manufacturing. They snub us on the issue of Iran. They knife us in the back at every turn they can. So guess what China? Fuck you.
Travis
Aide: Iran president misquoted on gays - Focus on Iran - MSNBC.com
Iran’s president was misrepresented by Western media when he was quoted saying there were no gays in Iran, and actually meant there were not so many as in the United States, a presidential aide said on Wednesday.
Does anyone actually believe this line of bullshit? If he was "misquoted" like they say, then why not say that a day or two after the speech? They had to have known what the translation says within hours of his speech.
Funny, this also appears quite familiar. Oh yeah, the whole "wipe Israel off the map" bit that liberals love to say he was misquoted about. Multiple times. From multiple translators.
Also, if he was "misquoted", why did he follow it up with this statement: “In Iran we don’t have this phenomenon.”
Was he "misquoted" there too? I call shenanigans.
Travis
Sarkozy fails to soften Russian backing for Iran
Oh it's about to get uglier when it comes to Iran's nuclear program. The recent IAEA report is also not helping the US side of the argument.
Russian President Vladimir Putin refused Wednesday to bend to Western pressure over Iran, saying after talks with French President Nicolas Sarkozy that he did not believe the Islamic republic was trying to build a nuclear bomb.
"We do not have information that Iran is trying to create a nuclear weapon. We operate on the principle that Iran does not have those plans," Putin told journalists after the end of the talks with Sarkozy who was in Moscow seeking to ease tensions.
He added that Russia shared the West's desire for Iran's nuclear programme, in which Russia is building the first civilian power station, to be "absolutely transparent."
Well if Russia truly wants the program to be "absolutely transparent", then how about delivering them fuel that cannot be used for nuclear weapons and accounting for all spent fuel rods?
Also, if Russia wants the program to be "absolutely transparent", then how about backing sanctions against Iran because of their onsite enrichment? They can have a nuclear program for electricity, but not for weapons. Why can't they simply say "we're going to support sanctions against you for your enrichment. Get rid of that, and we can work out a deal".
But the Iranians won't go for that. They want to enrich their own Uranium and do experiments with Plutonium to try to get a nuclear weapon. If it was for electricity only, then what's the big deal in using a third party nation to give you nuclear fuel that can't be used for nuclear weapons?
I still want to know about the contamination at the university in Tehran.
Travis
House Democrats defy Bush, approve spy bill
Normally I disagree with Democrats on many levels. However, they are dead on with this one.
House Democrats rejected a bid by Bush's fellow Republicans to provide retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies that cooperated in the president's warrantless spying program secretly begun shortly after the September 11 attacks.
Bullshit. The telecom's knew they were breaking the law and did it anyways. Now they are being hung out to dry for their efforts and are trying to weasel their way out of responsibility. It would be like me robbing someone and then asking Congress to make it legal after the fact. There's a reason why Qwest didn't comply with the government's request a few years ago for this information.
Just hours after Bush warned Democrats they would be rolling back efforts to protect the United States, the House of Representatives Judiciary and Intelligence committees approved legislation to ensure congressional and court oversight of the surveillance of suspected enemy targets.
Bullshit again. They aren't rolling back efforts, they are holding companies feet to the fire over their illegal activities. Even if the government requests it, you still have the moral obligation to say "no".
You really have to show me convincing evidence that what these telecom's did was right and was directly responsible for thwarting an attack to change my mind even a little bit.
Yes those companies may have believed that they were merely helping the US government, but they also have a legal responsibility towards their customers. Too many times telecom's have abused customers and now they are in deep trouble for trying to stick it to them over their privacy.
Well tough shit. You knew it was wrong, so now you have to deal with lawsuits.
Travis
Judge rules Gore climate film requires guidance notes
High Court judge Michael Burton's decision follows legal action brought by a father of two last month claiming the former US vice-president's film contained "serious scientific inaccuracies, political propaganda and sentimental mush".
Well now wait a minute. I personally haven't seen the film, but if Global Warming is indeed real, why would Al Gore make a movie that was filled with lies? Why would they fudge the science? The data should speak for itself right?
This to me seems like the same thing you'd expect from Michael Moore. A lick of truth, and a lot of spin and half truths.
But it is funny that a judge has said that it's filled with bullshit. Al's got to be pissed about that.
Travis
Taiwan stages military parade - Yahoo! News
Fighter jets streaked across overcast skies Wednesday as Taiwan held a National Day military parade for the first time since it halted such displays of war-fighting prowess in 1991 to ease tensions with rival China.
Before the parade, President Chen Shui-bian denounced China's "totalitarianism" and its recent military buildup while renewing his vow to seek membership in the United Nations, saying his self-ruled island has the right to rejoin the world body despite objections from its communist-ruled neighbor.
In other words, "try to attack us, and we'll fuck you up". We all know China is gearing up for a fight for Taiwan, it's just a matter of how bad they are willing to take a black eye and a fat lip to get it.
Travis
Abbas lays out land demands - Israel News, Ynetnews
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas on Wednesday laid out his most specific demands for the borders of a future independent state, calling for a full Israeli withdrawal from all territories captured in the 1967 Mideast war.
I guess he's never heard of the "spoils of war". Regardless though, what are the Palestinian government offering the Israeli's in return?
Israeli government spokeswoman Miri Eisin declined to comment, saying she did not want to prejudice negotiations. But the Palestinian demands appear to exceed anything that Israel would be willing to offer.
In a television interview, Abbas said the Palestinians want to establish a state on 6,205 square kilometers (2,400 square miles) of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. It was the first time he has given a precise number for the amount of land he is seeking.
Ok, so they want 2,400 square miles of land. And where's the comment of "and in return, we'll do X"?
What I'd love to hear from the Palestinians is "We'll disband Hamas permanently. All rocket attacks will cease. Trade relations will open up. And we'll get along."
But they won't do that. They'll say "we want X amount of land" and not offer anything in return. You don't have to believe me. Just keep an eye out in the news. I dare the Palestinians to prove me wrong.
Travis
Fireworks over taxes, war powers punctuate GOP debate - CNN.com
Tuesday night's debate, Thompson's first since officially joining the race last month, involved nine GOP candidates and touched on trade, taxes and a range of economic and security issues.
"I've got to admit, it was getting a little boring without me, but I'm glad to be here now," Thompson said.
The former U.S. senator from Tennessee was largely spared direct fire from the other candidates in the debate, which CNBC and The Wall Street Journal sponsored.
Hate to burst your bubble Fred, but it's still pretty boring. I find myself still underwhelmed at the current line up of Presidential candidates.
"I brought taxes down by 17 percent. Under him, taxes went up 11 percent per capita," said Giuliani, the front-runner in most national polls. "I led; he lagged."
"It's baloney," said Romney, who leads the polls in key early voting states of Iowa and New Hampshire. "Mayor, you've got to check your facts."
Who's right? It's a bit difficult to tell, but the fact that Guiliani so specified the context "per capita", I find very telling. Why couldn't he have said "I lowered taxes, he raised them" and left it at that? Perhaps that's not the case.
When someone does that, red flags go up in my head. But the other story was internet boy toy Ron Paul got a bit of applause:
The other topic that sparked fireworks was a provocative, albeit hypothetical, point of constitutional interpretation -- would the U.S. president need Congress' permission before launching an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities?
Responding first, Romney said as president, "you sit down with your attorneys" to determine whether such authorization is needed, but he said, "Obviously, the president of the United States has to do what's in the best interest of the United States to protect us against a potential threat."
Romney's answer drew an incredulous retort from Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, who said the president would "absolutely" need Congress' OK before striking Iran.
"This idea of going and talking to attorneys totally baffles me. Why don't we just open up the Constitution and read it?" Paul said. "You're not allowed to go to war without a declaration of war."
But unfortunately, Ron Paul is wrong. We're not talking about declaring war, we're talking about attacking a nuclear facility that may be a front for nuclear weapons. For that, Representative Duncan Hunter is correct.
"If you have a very narrow window to hit a target, the president's going to have to take that on his shoulders," said Rep. Duncan Hunter of California. "He has the right to do that under the Constitution as the commander in chief."
And that's why Ron Paul is so low in the polls. He sounds good on paper, but if it comes time to act, I get the feeling he'd be bogged down in some committee begging for permission to do anything that he already has the right to do.
Travis
Whoopi Calls On Sharpton To Apologize To Duke Players
Normally I see The View as a place where a bunch of yenta types get together and bash men, President Bush, and the military. However, Whoopi Goldberg hit this dead on the head, so I thought I would share it with you.
In it, she calls on Al Sharpton to apologize to the Duke Lacrosse team players who were wrongfully accused of rape.
But Whoopi is right. If Al's going to ask people such as Isaiah Thomas and Don Imus to apologize for their perceived wrongs, then Al needs to apologize to the Duke players. Otherwise he'll just reinforce my beliefs that he's merely a professional con artist who's only claim to fame is a small time radio show and a constant "I'm offended" attitude.
Travis
Carter says U.S. tortures prisoners - CNN.com
The United States tortures prisoners in violation of international law, former President Carter said Wednesday.
Former President Carter says the U.S. "has abandoned the basic principle of human rights."
"I don't think it. I know it," Carter told CNN's Wolf Blitzer.
Really Jimmy? With your memory lapsing left and right and your historical revisionism towards Democrats at an all time high, I tend to doubt your claims. That being said, do you call your listed techniques "torture"? I certainly don't.
So you're trying to tell me that simply asking nicely will get the intelligence that we need?
Sorry if I'm a bit skeptical from the same guy who let American take one on the chin when Iran was messing around with our diplomats and American citizens for over a year.
Travis
Tuesday, October 09, 2007
Jimmy Carter's Full Of Shit
Just some of his comments, please note, I'm paraphrasing as the official transcripts haven't been released.
"North Korea had given up it's nuclear weapons program until the current (Bush) administration took on backwards policies"
Wrong Jimmy, North Korea jumped ship in the 90's and reneged on an existing deal that they struck with the Clinton administration. Stop being a historical revisionist.
A caller called in and told Jimmy flat out that had he taken a tougher stance during the hostage situation when he was President, we wouldn't be dealing with an emboldened Iran like we are today. I was a small boy when this was going on, and now that Jimmy's actions are coming to haunt us, I want to make sure we crush anyone that poses a threat to us so the children in my life don't have to deal with the monsters of the world like we are having to deal with now.
Thanks for leaving the Iranian problem to my generation Jimmy. Fucking asshole.
As a side note, check here for an official transcript when it is released.
Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com
Obama Attacks Hillary Over Iran Vote; Camp Hillary Hits Back
"Senator Clinton obviously in 2002 voted to authorize the war in Iraq," Obama told ABC News' Sunlen Miller. "And her willingness to once again extend to the president the benefit of the doubt I think indicates that she hasn't fully learned some of the lessons that we saw back in 2002."
"We have to be very cautious in how we approach these kinds of issues, because we've already seen enormous damage done to U.S.'s prestige around the world, the U.S.'s strategic interests in the world," he added. "Part of the reason Iran has been strengthened is because of that war that had been authorized in Iraq."
While I can appreciate his attacks on Hillary, there's one this he's neglecting to tell you. During this "important debate" that Obama is throwing Hillary under the bus for, HE DIDN'T VOTE ON IT.
Obama, let's not mince words here. This is the second time you've claimed to want to do what's right and tried to second guess your opponents vote in Congress over an important issue and you weren't there to vote for it. You weren't there to vote for the Iraq war, but claimed you were against it from the beginning.
That very well may be true, but you weren't there to see all the evidence against Saddam and put into the hot seat to make a difficult decision.
Well now you're there and you can't complain about your opponents vote if you couldn't be bothered to vote yourself on the very same issue. Voters in Illinois voted you in to be Senator, so how about, you know, just for a change, you actually do your fucking job?
Hillary and I disagree on so many issues that I've lost count at about 1,500, but I respect her in the very least that she has a tough job and has to make tough decisions.
I have the right to second guess her because she's a representative to me as an American and I vote.
So you can talk about "the audacity of hope" all you want at political rallies, but I would respect you a whole lot more if you were in your office, doing your job instead of badmouthing opponents while you skipped town on an important vote.
Travis
Iran and the IAEA
I picked this document up from the IAEA's website and it appears that their upcoming November report will show that they are seeing Iran only doing "peaceful use" nuclear programs.
There's so many questions that this document raises, I don't know where to begin. Here's a summary of what it entails.
1. These modalities cover all remaining issues and the Agency confirmed that there are no other remaining issues and ambiguities regarding Iran's past nuclear program and activities.
2. The Agency agreed to provide Iran with all remaining questions according to the above work plan. This means that after receiving the questions, no other questions are left. Iran will provide the Agency with the required clarifications and information.
3. The Agency's delegation is of the view that the agreement on the above issues shall further promote the efficiency of the implementation of safeguards in Iran and its ability to conclude the exclusive peaceful nature of the Iran's nuclear activities.
4. The Agency has been able to verify the non-diversion of the declared nuclear materials at the enrichment facilities in Iran and has therefore concluded that it remains in peaceful use.
5. The Agency and Iran agreed that after the implementation of the above work plan and the agreed modalities for resolving the outstanding issues, the implementation of safeguards in Iran will be conducted in a routine manner.
What about non-declared nuclear materials? What about the contamination at a university in Iran? There are continued unresolved questions, but the IAEA is saying that a lot of things look ok when it comes to Iran.
Unfortunately we've heard the rhetoric before. If Iran really, truly wants to use it's nuclear facilities for peaceful purposes only, then they shouldn't have a problem using nuclear fuel provided by the US that cannot be used for nuclear weapons.
We're even willing to set up a third party nation to take care of that kind of thing, but they've rejected it.
So, who do we believe? The Iranians and the IAEA? Or do we believe the mounting evidence that they are simply giving the IAEA a snow job?
I get the feeling that the Russians and the Chinese are going to use this report to drag their feet on sanctions. I just find it extremely difficult to believe that Iran isn't hiding, or trying to give the appearance of hiding a nuclear weapons program. Either way, their past support of terrorist groups should be reason enough for us to be concerned.
Travis
Tom Gilroy: How Pelosi Ended 'The War With Iraq'
All of you know, or should know, that when I post, I post with the truth and am backed up by sources or verifiable facts. I don't just go spouting off things that simply aren't true.
However, that bit of journalistic integrity isn't found with Huffington Post blogger Tom Gilroy. Check out this line of bullshit:
Try and sit through a single newscast or reading of the international page without finding a reference to how Iran is the real 'enemy' over there; whether it's the nuclear bomb there's no evidence of them developing, the IEDs there's no evidence of their government smuggling across the border to harm the agents of our benign humanitarian effort in Iraq, or how Ahmadinejad's denial of the facts of the Holocaust means he's ready to wipe out the free world---or at least America, which can't really be called the free world anymore. But I digress.
Well let's start out with Iran's nuclear weapons shall we? "no evidence"? Well then explain to me how the IAEA has found Iranian documents that can only be used for nuclear weapons?
They've denied supporting insurgents in Iraq, but then one of their own admitted it to the Iraqi ambassador?
We've shown time and time again pictures of weapons that were found on insurgents and in raids that definitively came from Iran.
How much more evidence do you need? Or are you too blinded by your hatred to take an unbiased look?
Mel Gibson denies the facts of the Holocaust, too, but unless he's planning on wiping out the free world by boring them to death with shitty movies, I don't really see him as much of a global threat.
He isn't a threat because he isn't the leader of a nation that supports terrorist organizations and doesn't have access to a decent sized military. Using him as an example just shows how much you're grasping at straws to prove your point.
But if you scan any of the news for idiots---The NY Daily News say, or CNN--- you'd think Ahmadinejad had actually flown the planes into the World Trade Center and that he literally walks around Tehran with American blood dripping off his bib. When he spoke at Columbia the other week, the conservatives who run American mainstream media spun it like Hitler had spoken at ACLU headquarters in the middle of the Blitz.
No one claims he's responsible for the terror attacks of 9/11. However, when he spouts off threats and tries to play the "I'm a good guy" routine, you tend to take the guy seriously as to what he says.
Of course, you're the same kind of guy who'll say "why didn't we do more" if we're attacked by Iran or one of it's supported terrorist groups.
Then our new friend Tom goes off on a tangent:
The rebranding of War With Iraq into War With Iran is only Phase I of a multi-phased rebranding strategy that will go on for years, a strategy that is in fact prepping us for the big hand-off to a Democratic White House that needs its own public spin for staying in Iraq until we've met the one and only (private) benchmark we've had all along; a permanent force in the world's largest military base securing the theft of the world's second largest deposit of oil. But don't take it from me--ask Alan Greenspan, that liberal.
If you doubt the existence of this strategy, than you must've missed the emergence of Phase II last week, when all three of the leading presidential candidates from the 'opposition party'--- the party that supposedly has a mandate from the American people to end the war---furrowed their collective brow and professed dismay that it just seemed too darn unrealistic---and no doubt unpresidential--- to get troops out of Iraq any earlier than--are you ready?--2013.
Why not just let Bush stay president? It's what he wanted all along.
Of course the troops the Dems plan to keep there won't be 'combat' troops, because the 'war' will be over---at least rhetorically. They'll be a 'stabilization force'--that's Phase III of the rebranding.
Phase III will last 50 years, and you'll never hear the word 'combat,' only 'stabilization', but on the ground, the facts will be the same they've always been; unwelcome Americans kids getting killed and maimed by a debilitated local populace who hate them. Desperate Iraqis--armed and otherwise--with no water, sanitation, electricity, protection or hope will still be slaughtered in the streets or made into internal or external refugees. And of course there'll be the big cherry on top we've wanted all along; control of the oil.
Yes Tom, that's what it's all about. You caught us. Now only if we hadn't spent more than $600 billion to get that oil huh? So if Iraq has around 112 billion barrels of oil at $80 per barrel, that's roughly 9 trillion dollars worth of oil. You'd think that'd be a bargain right?
Well unfortunately, we could have easily bought out tons of oil from various places and undermined the global price of oil if we really tried.
So that $80 a barrel could have easily been dropped to around $25 a barrel. That seems like an easier way to get at that precious oil doesn't it? Besides, if we were really after the oil, like you said, I think the Iraqi's would notice they weren't making DIME ONE from oil sales.
Oh and your little example of Alan Greenspan is taken out of context. No surprise given you're a liberal. However, let's take a look at the WHOLE comment shall we?
“I was not saying that that’s the administration’s motive,” Greenspan said in the interview conducted on Saturday. “I’m just saying that if somebody asked me, ’Are we fortunate in taking out Saddam?’ I would say it was essential.”
So before you go quoting someone, perhaps if you leave it in the context to what it is, you'd appear to be a more informed, and be better ethically as a journalist.
Travis
Democratic Concessions Are Expected on Wiretapping - New York Times
Wait, I thought the Democrats were going to only agree to this if they could make massive changes?
Two months after vowing to roll back broad new wiretapping powers won by the Bush administration, Congressional Democrats appear ready to make concessions that could extend some of the key powers granted to the National Security Agency.
Bush administration officials say they are confident they will win approval of the broadened wiretapping authority that they secured temporarily in August as Congress rushed toward recess, and some Democratic officials admit that they may not come up with the votes to rein in the administration.
So you mean to tell me that Democrats lied to the American people about getting the Bush administration to ease off of spying on Americans?
As the debate over the N.S.A.’s wiretapping powers begins anew this week, the emerging legislation reflects the political reality confronting the Democrats. While they are willing to oppose the White House on the conduct of the war in Iraq, they remain nervous that they will be labeled as soft on terrorism if they insist on strict curbs on intelligence gathering.
Oh you guys have earned that reputation and label LONG before this debate. With your lack of direction, your consistent appeasement of any direct opposition, and lack of the intestinal fortitude, you guys have well deserved the label of being "soft" on terrorism.
I mean if Nancy Pelosi wants to throw in the towel on Iraq, do any Democrats out there actually believe that she'll accomplish what she said she would on the NSA's spying on Americans?
During the 2004 and 2006 elections, Democrats kept saying "elect us, we'll change the world and make everything right again". Well not enough people John Kerry during the 2004 Presidential election, so Democrats lost. However, during the 2006 elections, they won and they won big.
So where's the campaign promises that they made to the American public? They literally have accomplished ONE of those goals; raise the minimum wage. And even then they had to tack it to a military spending bill.
So why should the American public listen to Clinton, Obama, and Edwards when they say "elect me, I'll change the world and make everything right again"? People absolutely HATE Hillary and it certainly appears that she'll be the Democratic nominee. If that's the case, I expect Hillary to lose in a big way.
Travis
Qatar says oil prices should top 100 dollars
Here's the exact reason why everyone's excited about plugin hybrids and cars like the Chevrolet Volt.
Qatar's energy minister said crude oil prices, which have surged recently to record levels above 80 dollars a barrel, should be more than 100 dollars.
"If we take into account inflation from 1972 to the present day, the real and fair price for oil should be more than 100 dollars," Abdullah bin Hamad Al-Attiyah said in remarks aired by Al-Jazeera television on Tuesday.
Oh, well we should be GRATEFUL then that oil is at $80 a barrel? There is literally NO REASON for oil to be this high. The only reason's cited so far is the war in Iraq, Iran's nuclear issue, and terrorism.
The "hurricane season" that had people "worried" didn't do anything. So why doesn't the cost go down to levels BEFORE the "hurricane season"? Because there's a demand and OPEC and other oil producers are pushing the boundaries of what people are willing to pay.
This is exactly why I'm looking for an electric car or something along the lines of the Chevy Volt. The SECOND a car comes down the pike that let's me commute without paying a dime in gas costs (other than simple oil changes if necessary), I'm pulling out my Visa and buying that car.
I have an electrician friend who can install several solar panels on the roof of my house, so I'm not even going to be paying for extra electricity.
Keep it up OPEC nations, you're pushing me and everyone else towards alternative energies that don't involve you. One of the main reasons the Middle East is even relevant on the world stage is because of their vast energy supplies. Pull that away and you'll watch them shrivel up to a speck of what they are today.
Travis
NABJ to Citadel and Fox: End Imus Talks
"NABJ remains outraged after the racially inflammatory insults made by Don Imus last spring. He used his free speech to broadcast hate speech. To put him back on the air now makes light of his serious and offensive racial remarks that are still ringing in the ears of people all over this country," said Barbara Ciara, NABJ president.
Fair enough. When are you going to condemn Jesse Jackson for his "hymietown" comments? He said this blatantly towards the Jews.
When are you going to take the "Black" out of your organization's name? That in of itself is racist.
Until you resolve these matters, go fuck yourself.
Personally, I don't care for Imus. He's boring as hell and lacks any kind of on air personality.
However, I'm getting sick and tired of everyone trying to play the race card and trying to be professional "victims" and "I'm offended" types.
If you don't like it, don't listen to him. But save your "I'm offended" speech for someone that gives a shit. I'm all for an even playing field, regardless of race, color, or sexual orientation. Everyone who's a reader here knows that. But it gets a bit old when you hear rap stars and comedians use the word "nigger" left and right, and no one says a thing simply because they are black.
But if a white person says it, then there's an uproar from all the usual suspects. You don't hear white people using the word "cracker", "honky", or "white devil" do you? Then why do you think you can get away with using certain words and having freedom of speech and no one else can simply because of the color of their skin? That's racist.
Travis
Ex-Mexico Prez: Racists Stop Immigration
Former Mexican President Vicente Fox said Monday that the United States is letting racism dictate its policies, especially when it comes to immigration.
"The xenophobic's, the racists, those who feel they are a superior race ... they are deciding the future of this nation," he said, without naming names, in an interview with The Associated Press.
Oh yeah? Then why is it that Mexico denies any non Mexican citizens even the basic rights that you ask of America for Mexican citizens? How about YOU pay for the health care that Mexicans seek when they come here illegally?
How about you pay the medical bills of US citizens if they are illegal immigrants?
Fucking hypocritical racist. If you live in a glass house....
Travis
Leak Severed a Link to Al-Qaeda's Secrets
A small private intelligence company that monitors Islamic terrorist groups obtained a new Osama bin Laden video ahead of its official release last month, and around 10 a.m. on Sept. 7, it notified the Bush administration of its secret acquisition. It gave two senior officials access on the condition that the officials not reveal they had it until the al-Qaeda release.
Within 20 minutes, a range of intelligence agencies had begun downloading it from the company's Web site.
By midafternoon that day, the video and a transcript of its audio track had been leaked from within the Bush administration to cable television news and broadcast worldwide.The founder of the company, the SITE Intelligence Group, says this premature disclosure tipped al-Qaeda to a security breach and destroyed a years-long surveillance operation that the company has used to intercept and pass along secret messages, videos and advance warnings of suicide bombings from the terrorist group's communications network.
This is completely unacceptable. The level of incompetence here is astounding. Leaking an Osama video before it's released has GOT to be known to let them know we're on to them. Also, who the FUCK leaked it?
I want a name. I want his or her ass in jail. I want them publicly shamed for the extreme lack of seriousness when it comes to fighting a group that killed 3,000 of my fellow countrymen. If it's a public official, I want them impeached or fired.
"Techniques that took years to develop are now ineffective and worthless," said Rita Katz, the firm's 44-year-old founder, who has garnered wide attention by publicizing statements and videos from extremist chat rooms and Web sites, while attracting controversy over the secrecy of SITE's methodology.
I don't give two shits about their methodologies, I want Osama's head in a box. I want Al-Qaeda decimated. This isn't about politics, this is about doing the right thing and if someone on my side of the political aisle did this, then I have no problem feeding them to the wolves.
They deserve whatever fate they get.
To the media that reported this? Thanks a lot. Now everyone knows we're looking into their websites and they'll be more careful next time. Sure, the cat's out of the bag now, but sometimes sitting on a story is the best thing to do.
As a side note, I'd like to thank SITE for their efforts in bringing down Al-Qaeda. Maybe I can get a part time job with them. I'd love to help out in that realm. :)
Travis
Leak Severed a Link to Al-Qaeda's Secrets - washingtonpost.com
A small private intelligence company that monitors Islamic terrorist groups obtained a new Osama bin Laden video ahead of its official release last month, and around 10 a.m. on Sept. 7, it notified the Bush administration of its secret acquisition. It gave two senior officials access on the condition that the officials not reveal they had it until the al-Qaeda release.
Within 20 minutes, a range of intelligence agencies had begun downloading it from the company's Web site.
By midafternoon that day, the video and a transcript of its audio track had been leaked from within the Bush administration to cable television news and broadcast worldwide. The founder of the company, the SITE Intelligence Group, says this premature disclosure tipped al-Qaeda to a security breach and destroyed a years-long surveillance operation that the company has used to intercept and pass along secret messages, videos and advance warnings of suicide bombings from the terrorist group's communications network.
This is completely unacceptable. We're at war with an organization that has murdered 3,000 people and getting intelligence on them is difficult to come by. Who the FUCK leaked this?
This is borderline treason. I want this person in jail serving a LONG sentence.
"Techniques that took years to develop are now ineffective and worthless," said Rita Katz, the firm's 44-year-old founder, who has garnered wide attention by publicizing statements and videos from extremist chat rooms and Web sites, while attracting controversy over the secrecy of SITE's methodology.
I don't give two shits what their methodologies are. I want Osama found and killed along with everyone involved with or a member of Al-Qaeda.
I want this story on the front page of every newspaper in the country to publicly let the Bush administration know that this is not acceptable and those responsible for it are found and sent to jail.
As for the media that published it? Well now that it's out in the open, the cockroaches have scattered. They should know better then to publish something like this, but Al-Qaeda already knows they've been penetrated, so it makes almost no difference.
I'm extremely angry at the level of incompetence here. They are supposed to be smarter then this. They are supposed to be long term thinkers when it comes to things like this. Failure to do so in such a spectacular way means you should lose your job, and your freedom.
Travis