May 10, 2008

Barack Obama sacks adviser over talks with Hamas

Barack Obama had criticised former President Jimmy Carter for holding direct talks with Hamas

Tom Baldwin in Washington

One of Barack Obama’s Middle East policy advisers disclosed yesterday that he had held meetings with the militant Palestinian group Hamas – prompting the likely Democratic nominee to sever all links with him.

Robert Malley told The Times that he had been in regular contact with Hamas, which controls Gaza and is listed by the US State Department as a terrorist organisation. Such talks, he stressed, were related to his work for a conflict resolution think-tank and had no connection with his position on Mr Obama’s Middle East advisory council.

“I’ve never hidden the fact that in my job with the International Crisis Group I meet all kinds of people,” he added.

Ben LaBolt, a spokesman for Mr Obama, responded swiftly: “Rob Malley has, like hundreds of other experts, provided informal advice to the campaign in the past. He has no formal role in the campaign and he will not play any role in the future.” The rapid departure of Mr Malley followed 48 hours of heated clashes between John McCain, the Republican nominee-elect, and Mr Obama over Middle East policy.

Mr Obama, who has been trying to assuage suspicion towards him among the influential Jewish and pro-Israel lobby, spoke at a Washington reception marking the 60th anniversary of Israeli independence on Thursday when he promised that his commitment to the country’s security would be “unshakeable”. However, Mr McCain has high-lighted the Democrat’s pledge to negotiate directly with nations such as Iran – whose leaders talk of wiping Israel off the map – and a statement from Hamas saying that it hoped that Mr Obama would win the presidency.

This was denounced as an offensive smear by Mr Obama, who repeated earlier statements saying that Hamas was “a terrorist organisation [and] we should not negotiate with them unless they recognise Israel, renounce violence”.   Excerpted from The Times  (UK) Online at : http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3897414.ece

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

In Islam, religion passes from the father to the child. Barack Hussein Obama, Sr. (1936–1982) was a Muslim who named his boy Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. Only Muslim children are named “Hussein”.

His stepfather, Lolo Soetoro, was also a Muslim. In fact, as Obama’s half-sister, Maya Soetoro-Ng explained to Jodi Kantor of the New York Times: “My whole family was Muslim, and most of the people I knew were Muslim.”

An Indonesian publication, the Banjarmasin Post reports a former classmate, Rony Amir, recalling that “All the relatives of Barry’s father were very devout Muslims.”

Nedra Pickler of the Associated Press reports that “documents showed he enrolled as a Muslim” while at a Catholic school during first through third grades. Kim Barker of the Chicago Tribune confirms that Obama was “listed as a Muslim on the registration form for the Catholic school.”

A blogger who goes by “An American Expat in Southeast Asia” found that “Barack Hussein Obama was registered under the name ‘Barry Soetoro’ serial number 203 and entered the Franciscan Asisi Primary School on 1 January 1968 and sat in class 1B. … Barry’s religion was listed as Islam.”

Paul Watson of the Los Angeles Times learned from Indonesians familiar with Obama when he lived in Jakarta that he “was registered by his family as a Muslim at both schools he attended.” Haroon Siddiqui of the Toronto Star visited the Jakarta public school Obama attended and found that “Three of his teachers have said he was enrolled as a Muslim.”

In his autobiography, Dreams of My Father, Obama relates how he got into trouble for making faces during Koranic studies, thereby revealing he was a Muslim, for Indonesian students in his day attended religious classes according to their faith.

Obama’s half-sister recalled that the family attended the mosque “for big communal events.” Watson learned from childhood friends that “Obama sometimes went to Friday prayers at the local mosque.”

Barker found that “Obama occasionally followed his stepfather to the mosque for Friday prayers.” One Indonesia friend, Zulfin Adi, states that Obama “was Muslim. He went to the mosque. I remember him wearing a sarong” (a garment associated with Muslims).

Indonesians differ in their memories of him. One, Rony Amir, describes Obama as “previously quite religious in Islam.” 

 

Barack Obama's Catholic school in Jakarta.

Barack Obama's public school in Jakarta.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Excerpted from:Barack Obama's Muslim Childhood." http://www.danielpipes.org/article/5544

 

 

Barack Obama with his public school classmates in Indonesia.

From: "Confirmed: Barack Obama Practiced Islam"

 

Other Daniel Pipes Articles: "Was Barack Obama a Muslim?"

                                                     

                                                      "Confirmed: Barack Obama Practiced Islam"  

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

“John McCain has not talked about my Muslim faith...”

George asked him about the comment from the “Saddleback” debate concerning the abortion question where Obama answered “This is above my pay grade”.

George asked if that was a “flippant answer”...Obama agreed and then went on to talk about his Christian theological views...and then OOPS! there goes a slip about “My muslim faith”...........

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGMQ5DpVVTM

Here’s the interview:  http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/09/obama-to-stepha.html

McCain supporters, claiming they rescued 12,000 miniature American flags from the site of Barack Obama’s nomination acceptance speech last Thursday, redistributed the orphan flags to audience members ahead of a McCain rally in Colorado Springs on Saturday.

The move was an overt swipe at Obama from a campaign whose motto has been “country first.” But Democratic convention organizers claimed the flags were not going to be discarded — but instead were snatched from the site of Obama’s historic address to carry out a “cheap political stunt.”

McCain supporters said the flags were discovered by a vendor at Denver’s Invesco Field after the conclusion of the Democratic National Convention. The vendor supposedly found trash bags full of flags in and near garbage bins, and turned them over to the McCain campaign.

Boy Scouts were sorting through 84 bags of flags in Colorado on Saturday, before a McCain supporter had veterans distribute them to the audience.

“We want to find good homes for these flags,” radio host Dan Caplis said at the rally, adding that whatever flags remained would be placed at memorials throughout Colorado.

Audience members, who booed when Caplis announced that the flags were left in Denver, waved the flags and chanted “U.S.A” before McCain arrived at the rally with his running mate, Sarah Palin.

Damon Jones, spokesman for the Democratic National Convention Committee, released a statement saying McCain should applaud the fact that thousands of American flags were “proudly waved” at their convention.

“But instead his supporters wrongfully took leftover bundles of our flags from the stadium to play out a cheap political stunt calling into question our patriotism,” he said.

Obama has faced attacks on his patriotism since the beginning of the Democratic primary race and has set up a Web site specifically designed to fight such charges.

The McCain campaign has denied questioning Obama’s patriotism, and even released a statement Friday calling Obama’s most recent comments on the matter “hysterical.”

Democrat Presidential frontrunner Senator Barack Obama has responded to a question posed by an Infowars reader regarding government complicity in the September 11th 2001 terrorist attacks.

Three months after the reader sent Obama a correspondence outlining her great concern that criminal elements of the government were directly complicit in the attacks, the Senator sent the following response via email, which was then forwarded to us:

Dear Penny:

Thank you for contacting me regarding your belief that the U.S. government was complicit in the terror attacks of September 11, 2001. I appreciate hearing your passionate views on this matter.

While I do not believe the U.S. government was complicit in the attacks, I do think it should be held accountable for the unacceptable mistakes it made in the run-up to that terrible day. The blunders that occurred prior to the 2001 attacks were inexcusable and often outrageous. The series of clear warnings about the potential use of hijacked planes as weapons is just one example of why the "surprise" of 9/11 should have been anticipated. In my view, proof of government complicity is not necessary when making the argument that the U.S. should accept some responsibility for what happened on 9/11.

Thank you again for writing.

Sincerely,

Barack Obama
United States Senator

 

Excerpted from http://infowars.net/articles/february2007/150207Obama.htm

___________________________________________________________________________

Editorial From IBN on 9/11/2008

Obama And 9/11 (Excerpted from:http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=305938574972157)

 

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Wednesday, September 10, 2008 4:20 PM PT

The Anniversary: Eight days after terrorism declared war on America,
 a young state senator blamed it on "a failure of empathy"
 — yet another reason why Barack Obama should never be commander in chief.

The July 20 issue of the New Yorker magazine got a lot of attention
 for its cover, which carried a "satirical" cartoon depicting Michelle
 and Barack Obama that Obama supporters found tasteless and offensive.
Buried inside that issue's feature story, however, was a reaction
 by Obama to 9/11 that all voters should find even more tasteless and offensive.

The article reprised a piece published in Chicago's Hyde Park Herald
 on Sept. 19, 2001, and written by a then-unknown and otherwise
 undistinguished state senator from Illinois.
The senator, a former community organizer, wrote that after
tightening security at our airports and repairing our intelligence
networks, we "must also engage . . . in the more difficult
task of understanding the sources of such madness."

According to Barack Obama, the madness that
 drove terrorists to turn passenger jets into manned cruise missiles
 aimed at our centers of finance, government and military power
 "grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair."

As if the answer to the attacks should have been food stamps for al-Qaida.

Sen. Obama advised caution and warned of overreacting.
"We will have to make sure, despite our rage, that any U.S. military
 action takes into account the lives of innocent civilians abroad,"
he wrote. "We will have to be unwavering in opposing bigotry
or discrimination directed against neighbors and friends of Middle Eastern descent."

We should also be just as concerned, he felt,
with American anger and bigotry as we were about al-Qaida.

 

In an opinion piece in Commentary magazine,
writer Abe Greenwald commented on Obama's belief that the 9/11 attacks
were rooted in poverty and despair. "Strange," he called it,
"considering our attackers were wealthy and educated, connected and ecstatic."

 

As Greenwald put it, Obama
"could have asked (terrorist and colleague) Bill Ayers,
'Bill, did your 'failure of empathy' stem from your impoverished
upbringing as the son of the CEO of Commonwealth Edison?
" Did poverty and despair also cause the Weather Underground member
and host of Obama's first fundraiser to bomb government buildings?

Fact is, the roster of terrorists and their handlers reads like a list of of Ivy Leaguers:

Osama bin Laden, the son of a Saudi billionaire, studied engineering.
Khalid Sheik Mohammed, architect of 9/11 and other major attacks,
has a degree in mechanical engineering. Mohammed Atta,
who flew a jet into the World Trade Center, is the son of a lawyer
and earned a master's degree in urban planning at Hamburg University.
Ayman al-Zawahri is an eye surgeon. Seven doctors were involved in
the London-Glasgow bomb plots.

You get the idea, even if Barack Obama doesn't.

In a speech before a joint session of Congress on Sept. 20, 2001,
President Bush pointed out the real reasons Islamofascists hate us:
"They hate what they see right here in this chamber —
a democratically elected government. Their leaders are self-appointed.
They hate our freedoms: our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech,
our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other."

 

Bush aptly called the 9/11 terrorists and their ilk
"the heirs of all the murderous ideologies of the 20th century."

 

"By sacrificing human life to serve their radical visions,
by abandoning every value except the will to power,
they follow in the path of fascism, Nazism and totalitarianism," he said.

 

[... Bush gets it. So does John McCain. This is one thing we shouldn't want to change.]

Excerpted from: http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=305938574972157

On February 17 2008, Al-Ekhlaas which is the largest terrorist forum on the internet published an Al Qaeda document that talks about the life of Abou Musaab Al Zarqawi and indicates that Zarqawi came to Iraq before the war to prepare the terrorist insurgency against the US troops. According to the document Zarqawi arrived to the Sunni areas in central Iraq. This document was written by one of Al Qaeda top leaders called “Saif Al Adel”.

There were many accounts about Zarqawi presence in Iraq before the war in particular in Northern Iraq with “Ansar Al Islam” an active Al Qaeda affiliated terrorist group that was present in the Kurdish areas of Iraq long before the war started. The document also proves that Ansar Al Islam helped Al Qaeda members establish themselves in Iraq before the war started.

The author of the document wrote that there were no relations between Saddam regime and Al Qaeda but this does not negate at all the most important fact that Al Qaeda was in Iraq before the war for the sole purpose of preparing for its most important front to fight the U.S and it is now in Iraq where Al Qaeda is suffering its most crushing defeat since its existence.

It is very important to note that despite the author of the document denial of a relationship between Saddam regime and Al Qaeda it does not mean that Saddam regime was not aware of Al Qaeda presence in Iraq. In fact the documents clearly points out that Zarqawi went to the Sunni areas in Central Iraq before the war and these areas were totally controlled and loyal to Saddam regime and it very hard to imagine that Zarqawi stayed and prepared his terrorist sleepers cells in these Sunni areas without the approval of Saddam regime.

El-Ekhlaas terrorist forum is a password protected so you cannot access the document unless you are registered there as a member.

Below is a partial translation of Al Qaeda document written by “Saif Al Adel”.

… " We started the work and the contact with the leadership, and we began to support and help the leadership again, and this was our goal after we left Afghanistan. We began establishing the fighter groups. On one hand to return to Afghanistan and conduct planned operations there, and on the other hand we began to study the situation of the groups and bothers to find new places for them. After long discussions, brother Abou Mussab with his Palestinian and Jordanian companions decided to go to Iraq because of their dialects they can quickly mix and assimilate in the Iraqi society. Our analysis was that the Americans were going to make the mistake sooner or later to invade Iraq, that this invasion will lead to the fall of the regime, and that we should play an important role in the confrontation and resistance, and that this is our historical chance to establish the Islamic State who will have the biggest role in removing injustice and establish justice in this world allah willing. I was in agreement with brother Abou Mussab regarding this analysis. There were no relation between Al Qaeda and Saddam regime that is worth mentioning, as opposite to what the Americans are saying so they can create excuse and legal justifications according to their laws that they imposed on the world that is enslaved by the West, the Israelis and the Anglo-Saxons.

The plan was to have our brothers enter Iraq from the North, where the road is not controlled y the regime, and then go down South to the Sunni areas where we have some of our brothers. Also the brothers in “Ansar Al Islam” showed their willingness to give us any help to achieve this goal.

The Americans noticed that the Iranians were having a blind eye against our activities in Iran so they began a media attack against Iran accusing them of helping Al Qaeda and international terrorism. The steps taken by the Iranians had confused us and had caused 75% of our plans to fail. Many of our comrades were arrested. 80% of Abou Musaab Al Zarqawi group members were arrested. There should be a quick plan to arrange the escape of Zarqawi and the remaining of his group, the destination was Iraq and the route was the Northern borders between Iraq and Iran. The goal was to reach the Sunni areas in central Iraq and the beginning of the preparation to confront the US invasion and defeat it allah willing. The choice was not arbitrary but a studied one.

When he said goodbye to me leaving for Iraq, Abou Musaab has added a new dimension to his personality. This new dimension focused on punishing the Americans for the crimes that they committed in their bombing of Afghanistan and that he witnessed in his own eyes, the hate and hostility that Abou Mussab had for the Americans guaranteed to form new traits to Abou Musaab personality."

The memo, dated October 27, 2003, was sent from Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith to Senators Pat Roberts and Jay Rockefeller, the chairman and vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. It was written in response to a request from the committee as part of its investigation into prewar intelligence claims made by the administration. Intelligence reporting included in the 16-page memo comes from a variety of domestic and foreign agencies, including the FBI, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the National Security Agency. Much of the evidence is detailed, conclusive, and corroborated by multiple sources. Some of it is new information obtained in custodial interviews with high-level al Qaeda terrorists and Iraqi officials, and some of it is more than a decade old. The picture that emerges is one of a history of collaboration between two of America's most determined and dangerous enemies.

According to the memo--which lays out the intelligence in 50 numbered points--Iraq-al Qaeda contacts began in 1990 and continued through mid-March 2003, days before the Iraq War began. Most of the numbered passages contain straight, fact-based intelligence reporting, which some cases includes an evaluation of the credibility of the source. This reporting is often followed by commentary and analysis.

The relationship began shortly before the first Gulf War. According to reporting in the memo, bin Laden sent "emissaries to Jordan in 1990 to meet with Iraqi government officials." At some unspecified point in 1991, according to a CIA analysis, "Iraq sought Sudan's assistance to establish links to al Qaeda." The outreach went in both directions. According to 1993 CIA reporting cited in the memo, "bin Laden wanted to expand his organization's capabilities through ties with Iraq."

The primary go-between throughout these early stages was Sudanese strongman Hassan al-Turabi, a leader of the al Qaeda-affiliated National Islamic Front. Numerous sources have confirmed this. One defector reported that "al-Turabi was instrumental in arranging the Iraqi-al Qaeda relationship. The defector said Iraq sought al Qaeda influence through its connections with Afghanistan, to facilitate the transshipment of proscribed weapons and equipment to Iraq. In return, Iraq provided al Qaeda with training and instructors."

One such confirmation came in a postwar interview with one of Saddam Hussein's henchmen. As the memo details:

4. According to a May 2003 debriefing of a senior Iraqi intelligence officer, Iraqi intelligence established a highly secretive relationship with Egyptian Islamic Jihad, and later with al Qaeda. The first meeting in 1992 between the Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) and al Qaeda was brokered by al-Turabi. Former IIS deputy director Faruq Hijazi and senior al Qaeda leader [Ayman al] Zawahiri were at the meeting--the first of several between 1992 and 1995 in Sudan. Additional meetings between Iraqi intelligence and al Qaeda were held in Pakistan. Members of al Qaeda would sometimes visit Baghdad where they would meet the Iraqi intelligence chief in a safe house. The report claimed that Saddam insisted the relationship with al Qaeda be kept secret. After 9-11, the source said Saddam made a personnel change in the IIS for fear the relationship would come under scrutiny from foreign probes.

I.   OSAMA BIN LADIN AND IRAQ, CORRIERE DELLA SERA, FEB 1
II.  OSAMA BIN LADIN AND IRAQ, NEW YORK POST,  FEB 1
III. OSAMA BIN LADIN AND IRAQ [1], GUARDIAN, FEB 6
IV.  OSAMA BIN LADIN AND IRAQ [2], GUARDIAN, FEB 6
The NYT, yesterday, reported that no traces of the VX precursor,
Empta, nor its degradation product, Empa, could be found in 13 samples
taken from the al-Shifa pharmaceutical plant and its grounds last Oct.
That work was supervised by the chairman of the Boston U. chemistry
department, hired by the law firm representing Salih Idris, owner of the
plant.  Also, Idris' lawyers hired Kroll "to conduct a detailed review
of the Shifa controversy.  In their report, made available to the New
York Times, Kroll Associates found no evidence of a direct link between
Idris and bin Ladin," even as the White House maintained, "We stand by
our evidence linking this plant to bin Ladin's network."
Vincent Cannistraro, former Chief of Counterterrorism Operations for
the CIA's Counterterrorism Center, has suggested a very sensible and
quite clever explanation for what was going on at al-Shifa--why it
turned out to be a pharmaceutical factory; why the US had compelling
evidence linking it to VX; and why it can't be found now.

When US officials were obliged to defend their decision to attack the
al-Shifa plant, after the Aug 20 strike, they revealed an Iraqi link to
al-Shifa, as reported, for example, in the NYT Aug 25.  US officials
also revealed the existence of other sites in Khartoum thought to be
associated with Iraq and VX production. Clinton chose al-Shifa as a
target, because it was the only VX-related site not near a populated
area.   







Although the CIA did not know al-Shifa made pharmaceuticals, the
State Dept did, because al Shifa was authorized by the UN sanctions
committee to ship medicines to Iraq.  Cannistraro suggested that Empta,
manufactured at another Khartoum site, was stored, even perhaps
packaged, at al-Shifa, to be sent to Baghdad, under UNSCR 986, looking
to all the world like a pharmaceutical product.












That would explain how Empta could be found in a soil sample outside
the facility-a leak/spill?; but also why extensive tests in the facility
subsequently, including of the septic tank, did not detect it.  It would
also explain why Iraqi CW personnel had contact with a pharmaceutical
plant.  Moreover, Iraqi intelligence would think of something like that.
Indeed, Scott Ritter, in his Sept 3 Senate testimony [see "Iraq News,"
Sept 7], explained that Iraq was importing proscribed and dual use
material under cover of UNSCR 986.





Finally, given the proximity of Iraq's angry suspension of UNSCOM
inspections, Aug 5, and the simultaneous terrorist assaults on the two
US embassies, Aug 7, it would seem that in the Aug 20 strikes, the US,
hit two targets--Osama bin Ladin, in Afghanistan, and Iraq, in Sudan,
even as the White House has tried to blur that, with the claim that bin
Ladin was linked to the al-Shifa plant.  The White House did something
similar in June, 1993, in that, when it struck Iraqi intelligence
headquarters then, it did not clearly and fully explain the several
reasons for the attack [see "Iraq News," Jan 27].
On the Jim Lehrer News Hour, Jan 21, 1998, over a year ago, as the
second Iraq crisis began, Clinton, warning of the danger Iraq posed,
said, "Think how many can be killed by just a tiny bit of anthrax, and
think about how it's not just that Saddam Hussein might put it on a Scud
missile, an anthrax head, and send it on to some city he wants to
destroy. Think about all the other terrorists and other bad actors who
could just parade through Baghdad and pick up their stores.  . . . This
is a serious thing with me, this is a very serious thing. You imagine
the capacity of these tiny amounts of biological agents to cause great
harm; it's something we need to get after."

Clinton understands the danger, but apparently does not want to
address it in the only way that it can be properly addressed--by getting
rid of Saddam. Clinton also said on that program, justifying the
seemingly tough line he was taking then, "What's the issue? Weapons of
mass destruction. What's the answer? The U.N inspectors."   And he also
said that he did not have sex with that woman.  It is all of a piece.
"Iraq News" has learned what precipitated the earlier rash of
articles about Bin Ladin and Iraq [see "Iraq News," Jan 27].
A senior Iraqi intelligence official, Farouk Hijazi, newly appointed
as Iraq's ambassador to Turkey, did visit Osama bin Ladin in Afghanistan
in December, as several of those articles reported.
There has been more reporting on bin Ladin and Iraq.  All of it
included the suggestion that Iraq is coordinating with bin Ladin on CBW
terrorism.  

The Italian paper, Corriere della Sera, reported Feb 1, "Terrorist
cells belonging to the network organized by Osama bin Laden . . . are
ready to go into action in the countries of the Persian Gulf and Europe.
According to a confidential report, the list of targets is ready.  It
was agreed in Kandahar (Afghanistan) 21 December by Osama himself and
Farouk Hijazi. . .  The new recruits, together with the veterans of the
wars in Afghanistan and Bosnia, form the secret army that is expected to
use its weapons against all those who oppose the rais of Baghdad.  In
order to make them even more dangerous, traditional training has been
supplemented with training in the use of chemical weapons, toxins, and
viruses . . ."

The New York Post, Feb 1, reported, "Saddam Hussein-battered,
humiliated and increasingly isolated-plans to resort to terrorism in
revenge for US airstrikes against his country. . .  US officials say the
CIA has received 'credible and reliable' intelligence reports that
Saddam is forging alliances with some of the Middle East's most
bloodthirsty terrorists-including Osama Bin Ladin and Abu Nidal-as part
of an apparently new campaign to strike American targets and possibly
destablise Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. . . . US officials are concerned
about the possibility that Saddam could not only help with funding and
logistics for Bin Ladin's far-flung network, . . . but he could also
help the group acquire chemical and biological weapons."

   The Guardian, Feb 6, carried two articles.  The shorter article
began, "Saddam Hussein's regime has opened talks with Osama bin Laden,
bringing closer the threat of a terrorist attack using chemical,
biological or nuclear weapons."  But as Ahmed Allawi, a senior INC
official, advised, that it is not new, "There is a long history of
contacts between the Mukhabarat [Iraqi secret service] and Osama bin
Ladin." 

The longer Guardian article, entitled, "The Western nightmare: Saddam
and Bin Ladin versus the World," reporting on the Hijzazi-Bin Ladin
meeting, observed, "Thus, the world's most notorious pariah state, armed
with its half-built hoard of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons,
tried to embrace the planet's most prolific terrorist.   . . .
"But it is not just the US which finds itself in the putative firing
line.  Since RAF bombers took part in air strikes in Iraq in November
[sic], British citizens have also become primary targets.  Talking to
the London-based Arabic newspaper, Asharq al-Awsat, a month after the
air strikes on Iraq, Mr. Bin Ladin explicitly added British civilians to
his 'divinely-ordained' list of targets. 'The British and American
people have widely voiced their support for their leaders' decision to
attack Iraq, which makes all those people, in addition to the Jews who
occupy Palestine into people warring [against God],' he said. .  . .


Still, as one British-based expert cautioned, "It's dangerous to
characterize [bin Ladin] as the be all and end all of this problem . . .
Political Islam is on the rise and terrorist groups will continue to
organise in spite of all the security measures.  And bin Ladin has
faithful lieutenants so even if he's assassinated the phenomenon isn't
going to go away."

Indeed, that would be particularly true, if, as "Iraq News" believes,
the very worst of the terrorism of the Militant Muslim Fundamentalists,
including bin Ladin, is carried out with the technical assistance and
support of terrorist states, and Iraq in particular, as Saddam has some
very major complaints and very big scores to settle. Excerpt from: http://www.fas.org/irp/news/1999/02/990210-in-terror.htm

Dutch Intelligence Calls Back Spy From Iran / US has decided to attack Iran within Weeks

Written by De Telegraaf

Saturday, 30 August 2008

De Telegraaf   The U.S. have decided to bomb strategic targets in Iran with unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV). Daily paper 'De Telegraaf' (Telegraph) learnt that the attacks are to expected within the coming weeks.  Dutch Intelligence Calls Back Spy From Iran / US has decided to attack Iran within Weeks One of the agents, who under the supervision of the Dutch intelligence agency AIVD managed to infiltrate into the Iranian industry, has recently been recalled, because in the U.S. the decision has been taken to attack Iran within a few weeks with unmanned aircraft. The U.S. have decided to bomb strategic targets in Iran with unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV). Daily paper 'De Telegraaf' (Telegraph) learnt that the attacks are to expected within the coming weeks. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. have decided to bomb strategic targets in Iran with unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV). Daily paper 'De Telegraaf' (Telegraph) learnt that the attacks are to expected within the coming weeks. http://www.elsevier.nl/web/10201261/Nieuws/Buitenland/Amerika-heeft-plannen-voor-luchtaanval-op-Iran.htm I'd like to state that Elsevier is a reliable source and not some kind of tabloid.

De Verenigde Staten hebben besloten om met onbemande vliegtuigen doelen in Iran te bombarderen. Dagblad De Telegraaf meldt dat we de aanval binnen enkele weken mogen verwachten.

Dat concludeert De Telegraaf aan de hand van goed ingevoerde bronnen' in de omgeving van de Nederlandse inlichtingendienst AIVD. De AIVD heeft volgens de krant de afgelopen jaren een 'ultrageheime' spionagemissie uitgevoerd.

Infiltrant
Een agent van de inlichtingendienst zou zijn geïnfiltreerd in de Iraanse nucleaire industrie. Deze spion is enkele dagen geleden teruggeroepen 'omdat in de VS de beslissing zou zijn genomen binnen enkele weken met onbemande vliegtuigen Iran aan te vallen.'

Doelwit van die aanval zijn nucleaire facaliteiten en militaire installaties. Het Westen maakt zich grote zorgen over het Iraanse atoomprogramma, zo bleek al halverwege juli, en dreigt met sancties. Maar Iran geeft 'geen jota' toe.

Dreiging
Sterker nog, het islamitische land uit dreigende taal richting Amerika en Israël, en test lange- en middellange afstandsraketten, met wisselend succes.

Toch is het niet waarschijnlijk dat Amerika de aanval zelf uitvoert, meldt de BBC. Amerikaanse generaals raden een aanval af: Amerika raakt dan op te veel fronten tegelijk betrokken.

Oefeningen
Een aanval op Iran zal eerder worden uitgevoerd door Israël, aldus de BBC. De Engelse nieuwszender baseert dat op het gegeven dat de Israëlische luchtmacht de laatste weken geoefend heeft op grootschalige missies.

De Israëlische vice-premier en minister van Transport Shaul Mofaz gaf eerder deze zomer al aan dat wanneer Iran het atoomprogramma niet zou staken, dat militair ingrijpen door Israël 'onvermijdelijk zou zijn'.

Lees ook de weblog Westen moet oorlog met fascistisch Iran vrezen door Afshin Ellian.

The candidate indicated he favored teaching both abstinence education as well as sexual education and he appeared to be hard-pressed to come up with something else to say when he brought up his daughters.

"When it comes specifically to HIV/AIDS, the most important prevention is education, which should include -- which should include abstinence education and teaching the children -- teaching children, you know, that sex is not something casual," he said.

"But it should also include -- it should also include other, you know, information about contraception because, look, I've got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old," he added.

"I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby," Obama said.

Excerpt from

Barack Obama Would Back Daughters' Abortion, "Don't Punish Them With a Baby"

Email this article Printer friendly page RSS Newsfeed

 by Steven Ertelt ,LifeNews.com Editor  Excerpted from: http://www.lifenews.com/nat3827.html

 

Interesting graphics posted by blogger on FreeRepublic.com in discussion of this article:

 

posted on Tuesday, September 02, 2008 1:08:15 PM by Salvation  Found at: Barack Obama Would Back Daughters' Abortion, "Don't Punish Them With a Baby" Life News ^ | 3/08/08 | Steven Ertelt   http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2072881/posts

Bill Clinton Gets Dissed by Hillary and Kisses Obama