"People will be surprised," said a senior Pentagon official, speaking on condition of anonymity. "We'll have a coalition that will include a bunch of countries."I counted 27 in that list in the box. Let's Roll !
Great post my FRiend. Let's see, 27 against the France/Germany peace train plan. This week will be a media circus over all the support the appeasement plan will get.
Our eye is on the ball however, and the concentration will NOT be broken.
(can anybody hack into that list and add France and Germany...just to torque 'em?....snicker, snicker)
Unless you've been lodging on planet Mars these past couple of days, by now you know the nation's threat alert status was raised a notch Friday, from Elevated to High ("Level Orange"), the second-highest level, in response to what officials characterized as new, specific intelligence backed by multiple sources. The move marks the second time the alert level's been raised, and corresponds with Islam's Hajj, an annual pilgrimage of hundreds of thousands of Muslims to Mecca for a week to honor Muhammad.
Here's my problem with this: The administration still doesn't get it. Did Bush seek U.N. approval before this headlong rush to war, oops, um, rush to ramp up security? What does Kofi Annan think of this reckless unilateralism? And Germany? What about France?
And don't give me the 'Apples and Oranges' routine, either. Raising America's security alert is War on Terrorism stuff, meaning global, meaning tightening security at airports (effecting countless peaceful foreign tourists -- Mohamed Atta and other paragons of non-violence and conflict resolution spring to mind), hotels (also impacting foreign travelers -- peace-loving Alhmazmi and Almihdhar, two other 9/11 hijackers, similarly spring to mind), to say nothing of heightened security at U.S. embassies and consulates, many located in bastions of pro-Americanism like Damascus, Syria.(No word yet on whether or not the American Embassy in Berkeley will be closed.)
Another problem: How does one define "terrorism", anyway? Has the administration consulted Reuters for the "true" definition?
Meanwhile, Newsweek reports the reason behind the move to step up security: "New intelligence reports that point to the possibility of multiple, imminent attacks by al-Qaeda against Jewish groups and Jewish-owned businesses in the U.S."
Hold it! Stop the tape! Attacks on Jewish groups? And Jewish-owned businesses? Now how could this possibly be? The New York Times and Eleanor Clift and Nina Totenberg assure us that Muslim fanatics aren't motivated by anti-Semitism (only Tobacco-chewing, gun-touting right-wing red-necks hate Jews); that Islamists aren't animated by hatred of Jews, per se, but nationalism (ah, yeah, that's the ticket!), so Jews would never be a terror target specifically. Ergo, the administration must be 'making it up' -- the New York Times, home of journalistic titans a la Maureen Dowd, would never, ever lie!
Meanwhile, speaking of Kofi, the U.N. Secretary General, in a surprise move, warned the White House Saturday not to make the crippled and dysfunctional U.N. appear crippled and dysfunctional in its dealing on Iraq.
A bold and assertive U.S. is detrimental to the U.N.'s self-esteem and sense of self-worth, diminishing its great strides forward in promoting peace and harmony, among them: Putting Libya in charge of human rights and Iraq in control of its disarmament commission. (Zimbabwe is rumored next in line to head up the U.N. Commission on Racial integration & diversity and Michael Jackson will be leading a week-long U.N. symposium on effective baby-sitting).
"We all need to understand that the United Nations is not a separate or alien entity...the [U.N.] is us; it is you and me." We are the world, we are the children, just you and me.
"[Colin Powell] should apologize!...we need an apology from Colin Powell!" a C-Span caller screamed hysterically Saturday. (Is it me, or do C-Span callers these days sound like a tag-team of LaRouchites and Farrakhanoids?)
She cited a "report by the BBC and CNN" showing "how Colin Powell quoted a student term paper as part of an intelligence report to the U.N. We're trumping up charges to go to war against Iraq based on a student paper!"
I thought to myself, 'whoa! Some student we've got here.' I mean, this "student" apparently owns a network of spy satellites (big part of Powell's report based entirely on this "student term paper"); this "student" managed somehow to tap elite Republican Guard phones in Baghdad (also a big part of Powell's report based entirely on this "student term paper"); this student also got informants to sing like canaries (also a big part of Powell's report based entirely on this "student term paper.")
Gee, whiz, make that student President!
Meanwhile, Hans Blix, tireless U.N. inspector-for-life, reports "very substantial" progress Saturday in talks with cronies of the Butcher-of-Baghdad.
"Instead of gassing hundreds of thousands of women and children to death, president Saddam promised to trim that number down next time to, say, tens of thousands of women and children," said one upbeat official of the U.N. negotiating team that is not negotiating.
Mohamed ElBaradei, the other tireless 'Inspector-for-life' and head of the U.N.'s watchdog I.A.E.A, called the negotiations which aren't negotiations critical, but not the last chance for Peace In Our Time, either -- rebuking Washington which holds that U.N. resolutions which call on Iraq to disarm means Iraq should disarm and other such ridiculous non-sense.
In their marathon negotiating sessions which are not negotiating sessions, ElBaradei and Blix took a surprisingly tough line with Baghdad, begging for concessions on overflight rights for U-2 reconnaissance planes and allowing private meetings with deadly Baby Milk weapons scientists to continue, after comprehensive coaching sessions, of course.
Anyway, that's...
My two cents...
"JohnHuang2"