25
Nov 02

Full text: bin Laden’s ‘letter to America’

From the Observer:

In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful,
“Permission to fight (against disbelievers) is given to those (believers) who are fought against, because they have been wronged and surely, Allah is Able to give them (believers) victory” [Quran 22:39]

“Those who believe, fight in the Cause of Allah, and those who disbelieve, fight in the cause of Taghut (anything worshipped other than Allah e.g. Satan). So fight you against the friends of Satan; ever feeble is indeed the plot of Satan.”[Quran 4:76]

Some American writers have published articles under the title ‘On what basis are we fighting?’ These articles have generated a number of responses, some of which adhered to the truth and were based on Islamic Law, and others which have not. Here we wanted to outline the truth – as an explanation and warning – hoping for Allah’s reward, seeking success and support from Him.

While seeking Allah’s help, we form our reply based on two questions directed at the Americans:

(Q1) Why are we fighting and opposing you?
Q2)What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you?
Continue reading →


25
Nov 02

Joe Bob Brigg’s on the Draft

I enjoyed his column in the San Antonio Current when I was a busboy. Joe Bob’s America: Draft Insanity:


    Actually, I don’t even think this discussion has anything to do with the needs of the military. I got the impression, from the comments and emails, that the people in favor of a compulsory draft were more interested in indoctrinating young people than in beefing up the armed services.

    “There are no free rides in life!” was the sacred mantra from several of them. The idea was that 18-year-olds should be forced to go through military training because it would teach them some kind of lesson about how grateful they should be. For the ones unfit for military service, there was talk of sending them into ghettos, hospitals and nursing homes as a kind of domestic Peace Corps. There were constant references to Boot Camp, as though it were some kind of end in itself. The idea is that someone who goes through Boot Camp ends up a better person. They come out disciplined and patriotic and moral.

    What a wonderfully Soviet idea — that we have the power to MAKE people become good citizens. All those famous soldiers who passed through the rigors of Boot Camp — Lee Harvey Oswald, Charles Whitman, Timothy McVeigh, John Muhammad — no doubt cheated on their pushups or they would have become community leaders. The fact is, Boot Camp can be just as destructive as it is constructive, depending on the person. We’ve all seen “Full Metal Jacket.”

    So what is this about really? I think it’s about fear and sacrifice. The vast middle class is fearful and paranoid. They want to offer some sacrifice to the gods of self-denial. So they offer up their children — or, more cynically, other people’s children.

    We should heed the words of a famous man who explained just exactly why the compulsory permanent draft violates our freedoms. That kind of conscription, he said, “rests on the assumption that your kids belong to the state. If we buy that assumption then it is for the state — not for parents, the community, the religious institutions or teachers — to decide who shall have what values and who shall do what work, when, where and how in our society. That assumption isn’t a new one. The Nazis thought it was a great idea.”

    Who said it? Some long-haired 60s draft resister? Some pacifist Harvard professor? Ronald Reagan said it. I had no idea he was such a wussy-boy.


25
Nov 02

Score one for the Afghans!

Two US bases in Afghanistan hit by rockets. Luckily no one was hurt. Send those American mercenaries home.


24
Nov 02

Rare courage

Robert Byrd of West Virginia on last Tuesday: Byrd, at 85, Fills the Forum With Romans and Wrath:


    ASHINGTON, Nov. 19 — As his colleagues hurriedly tried to give the president a domestic security bill, Senator Robert C. Byrd took the floor this morning to tell them of a “truly great” senator from the first century A.D. named Helvidius Priscus. One day this Roman was met outside the senate by the emperor Vespasian, who threatened to execute him if he spoke too freely.

    “And so both did their parts,” Mr. Byrd said. “Helvidius Priscus spoke his mind; the emperor Vespasian killed him. In this effeminate age it is instructive to read of courage. There are members of the U.S. Senate and House who are terrified apparently if the president of the United States tells them, urges them, to vote a certain way that may be against their belief.”

    Mr. Byrd, of course, is not one of those timid souls, and his recent speeches have been extraordinary even for the maestro of senatorial rhetoric, who turns 85 on Wednesday. While his colleagues have debated the fine points of the domestic security bill, he has been virtually alone in asking the larger question: Why is this new department suddenly so necessary? What will the largest and hastiest reorganization of the federal government in half a century do besides allow politicians to claim instant credit for fighting terrorism?

    “This mon-stros-ity,” Mr. Byrd has been calling the bill, repeatedly lifting its 484 pages above his head with trembling hands and flinging them down on his desk with the fury of Moses smashing the tablets. Mr. Byrd used to be known less for his distaste of federal bureaucracy than for his love of federal aid — he once vowed to be West Virginia’s “billion-dollar industry,” while his critics crowned him the “prince of pork.” But now he is riffing against big government.

    “Osama bin Laden is still alive and plotting more attacks while we play bureaucratic shuffleboard,” Mr. Byrd told the Senate. “With a battle plan like the Bush administration is proposing, instead of crossing the Delaware River to capture the Hessian soldiers on Christmas Day, George Washington would have stayed on his side of the river and built a bureaucracy.” Mr. Byrd imagined Nathan Hale declaring, “I have but one life to lose for my bureaucracy,” and Commodore Oliver Perry hoisting a flag on his ship with the rallying cry, “Don’t give up the bureaucracy!”


24
Nov 02

Surveillance tactics used by FBI remain ‘mysterious,’ ‘quiet’

If the FBI ever breaks into my house I hope they’d catch a lungful of whatever it is growing in my sink.


    WASHINGTON – They have broken into homes, offices, hotel rooms and automobiles. Copied private computer files. Installed hidden cameras. Listened with microphones in one couple’s bedroom for more than a year. Rummaged through luggage. Eavesdropped on telephone conversations.

    It’s the FBI, operating with permission from a secretive U.S. court in a high-stakes effort pitting the nation’s premier law enforcement agency against the world’s spies and terrorists.

    Most Americans never see this side of the FBI.


23
Nov 02

US Government to Redesign Internet?

Bastards. Via BoingBoing.net:


    Darpa hired a consulting firm, SRI, to investigate the feasibility of re-designing the Internet to eliminate online anonymity to catch terrorists and evil underpants gnomes. The consultants gathered a whack of experts from various disciplines who told them it was stupid all around: bad for privacy, bad for the Constitution, technologically unsound, and unlikely to provide any assistance to the nation’s intelligence agencies whose problem isn’t an absence of information, but rather an absence of analysis — you don’t get faster analysis by throwing more chaff into the radar-field.

    Anyway, the snake-oil consultants decided that the group was far too negative and basically made up its own conclusions, submitting them to Darpa as the “consensus” of the august experts they met with — a positive outlook would mean more consulting dollars.

    And then someone leaked the whole story to the NYT.


23
Nov 02

My life with the Smiths

mesmith.jpg


19
Nov 02

Quotations for today

You’re probably tired of hearing Voltaire, but he happens to be one of my favorites so tough luck! Enjoy.

Love is a canvas furnished by nature and embroidered by imagination.

The instruction we find in books is like fire. We fetch it from our neighbours, kindle it at home, communicate it to others, and it becomes the property of all.

We are rarely proud when we are alone.

Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so, too.


18
Nov 02

Rumsfeld evasive during call in show with Americans

From DefenseLink:


    Caller: Hello to Secretary Rumsfeld, and thank you to Infinity Radio for putting this together. My question, how does our national security have anything to do with Iraq, and has the United States illegally armed Iraq?

    Rumsfeld: Has the United States illegally armed Iraq? I don’t know quite what you mean, but no, I don’t know of anything the United States has done that’s illegal at all. If you’re asking, has the United States ever provided arms to Iraqis, as opposed to the Iraqi government, the answer is yes, there are various Iraqis that are in opposition to the Saddam Hussein regime and it is correct that some time, in past years, they have provided some military capabilities to some Iraqi opposition forces. And then there’s the Kurdish forces in the north, and I believe that the United States, again, going back some years, provided some military equipment to the Kurdish forces in the north.

    Kroft: I think he may be talking about when the United States was backing Iraq in the Iran-Iraq war.

    Rumsfeld: Well, I am told that we did not, but I don’t know, I was not in the government during that period. I saw an article in Newsweek that reported on some — I think it was various types of biologicals. And I’m told that they went through a medical relationship that we had with many countries in the world, and they were for medical purposes. But, I don’t know of any weapons that went to Iraq. I do know that the United States government in the 1980s, I’m told, as I said, provided intelligence to Iraq.