Soldier Charged With Aiding Iraq Enemy

Lieutenant Colonel Faces 9 Charges; Suicide Blasts And Roadside Bombs Kill 25

(CBS/AP)  A senior U.S. Army officer has been charged with nine offenses, including aiding the enemy and fraternizing with the daughter of a detainee while he commanded a military police detachment at an American detention facility near Baghdad, the U.S. military announced Thursday.

Lt. Col. William H. Steele was accused of providing "aid to the enemy" by supplying an unmonitored cell phone to detainees, a U.S. statement said.

Steele was the commander of the 451st Military Police Detachment at Camp Cropper, a U.S. detention center on the western outskirts of Baghdad where former leader Saddam Hussein was held, when the offenses allegedly occurred between October 2005 and February, military spokesman Lt. Col. James Hutton said.

Steele was being held in Kuwait pending a grand jury investigation, Hutton said.

The other charges included unauthorized possession of classified information, fraternizing with the daughter of a detainee, maintaining an inappropriate relationship with an interpreter, storing classified information in his quarters and possessing pornographic videos, the military said. Steele also was charged with improperly marking classified information, failing to obey an order and failing to fulfill his obligations in the expenditure of funds, the military said.

Camp Cropper, located near the Baghdad airport, replaced the notorious Abu Ghraib prison as the main detention facility in the capital area. Saddam was held there, along with other members of his ousted regime, until his Dec. 30 execution.

In Other Developments:

A suicide car bomb attack on an Iraqi army checkpoint in northern Iraq killed 10 soldiers Thursday, police said. The attack, which also wounded 10 Iraqi soldiers and five civilians, occurred about 9 a.m. in Khalis, 50 miles north of Baghdad, in the Diyala province. Diyala has been the site of some of the worst recent violence.

U.S. ground and air forces killed four suspected insurgents in a battle near Taji, a U.S. air base 12 miles north of Baghdad; two Iraqi women and two children apparently died in the crossfire. "Unfortunately al Qaeda in Iraq continues to use women and children in their illegal activities," U.S. military spokesman Christopher Garver said.

Also Thursday, two suicide bombers attacked an office of the Kurdistan Democratic Party of Massoud Barzani, leader of the autonomous Kurdish region in Iraq, killing three of its guards and wounding five, police said. The casualties could have been higher if guards had not opened fire on the two attackers, forcing them to detonate their explosives at least 50 yards from the office, police said. The attack occurred in Zumar, a town 45 miles west of Mosul, the capital of Ninevah province. It was the second suicide attack this week aimed at the KDP in that area.

Radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr joined growing criticism of a 3-mile-long, 12-foot-high concrete wall the U.S. military is building in Azamiyah, a Sunni stronghold of Baghdad that has been targeted by mortar and rocket attacks by Shiite militiamen. Al-Sadr called the wall a "sectarian, racist and unjust" plot by the Americans to divide Iraqis, while his supporters demonstrated in Sadr City, chanting "No, no to division." Regardless, a spokesman for the U.S. military told the Associated Press on Thursday that work was continuing on the wall. Col. Don Farris said that the Iraqi government had asked them to resume building the structure. The building had been temporarily suspended by the Iraqi Prime Minister. "Since then it has been communicated to me through the chain of command that the prime minister and the Iraqi security force commanders have authorized the work to continue," said Farris. An al-Sadr aide, Sheik Salah al-Obaidi, told reporters in the Shiite holy city of Najaf that other demonstrations condemning the wall were planned.

President Bush next week is expected to receive, and swiftly reject, legislation ordering U.S. troops to begin coming home from Iraq this fall. The veto could fall on the fourth anniversary of the president's Iraq "victory" speech. The House, in a 218-208 vote Wednesday passed a $124.2 billion supplemental spending bill that contains the troop withdrawal timetable. The Senate was expected to follow suit Thursday.

Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said Wednesday that Iran still has not decided whether to attend the upcoming summit on Iraq in Egypt. Iraqi foreign minister Hoshyar Zebari had come to Tehran Wednesday with "clarifications" for Iran about the May 3-4 conference in Egypt's Sharm el-Sheik resort. "We will study them, and we will announce our opinion on the conference soon," Mottaki said at a press conference alongside Zebari.

In central Baghdad, a roadside bomb missed a passing police patrol on Thursday morning but killed four civilians and wounded nine in a commercial district, police said.

At 3:45 p.m., a parked parked car bomb exploded near Baghdad University, killing eight civilians and wounding 19, including some students, police said.

On Thursday, a funeral procession was held in Baghdad's Shiite neighborhood of Sadr City for an Iraqi who locals said was killed in an attack by the U.S. Air Force early that morning. Associated Press Television News footage showed three large craters in the ground of the commercial area and the windows of some of its stores had been blown out. The U.S. military said it was checking the report, but could not immediately confirm it.

© MMVII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Share:

• Share
• Yahoo! Buzz
• Twitter
• Mixx

More From Iraq After Saddam

• Chief Pentagon Auditor Forced from Post
• AP: Military Contractor Oversight Too Lax
• Top Saddam Aide Gets Second Conviction
• Bombs Claim 50 in Iraq
• Biden Meets with Key U.S. Leaders in Iraq
• Senate Investigates Blackwater Subsidiary
• Celebration, Carnage Mark Handover in Iraq

• 

  PhotosExplosions Rock Baghdad

• 

  PhotosIraq Photos:July 13?July 19

Add a Comment

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• next

See all 88 Comments

by radiob-2009 April 27, 2007 9:15 AM EDT

lars The elderly lady that was stripped searched intensifly was a survivor of the holocaust and was stripped searched by the Israelis. She is about 82 years old now and this happened about 4 years ago.

Reply to this comment

by feelfree1 April 27, 2007 3:14 AM EDT

It seems that there are multiple U.S. military officers named Steele, who are up to no good in Iraq:

-Under the "Salvador Option", Negroponte had assistance from his colleague from his days in Central America during the 1980s, retired Colonel James Steele. Steel, whose title in Baghdad was counselor for Iraqi security forces, supervised the selection and training of members of the Badr Organization and Mehdi Army, the two largest Shi'ite militias in Iraq, to target the leadership and support networks of a primarily Sunni resistance.-

-Planned or not, these death squads promptly spiraled out of control to become the leading cause of death in Iraq. Intentional or not, the scores of tortured, mutilated bodies that turn up on the streets of Baghdad each day are generated by the death squads whose impetus was Negroponte. And it is this US-backed sectarian violence that largely led to the hell-disaster that Iraq is today.-

www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IA11Ak03.html

Reply to this comment

by feelfree1 April 27, 2007 3:10 AM EDT

Re: "The other charges included unauthorized possession of classified information, fraternizing with the daughter of a detainee"

Were they enjoying some tea together, or was Lt. Col. William H. Steele raping the daughter of this prisoner? Does it relly seem likely that she was consensual in this "fraternizing".

Reply to this comment

by zootallures2 April 26, 2007 8:56 PM EDT

Should promote him. At least it was the opposite gender.

Like Bush said, "I win by low expectations. It's amazing when I can put a sentence together. If I can say hi I'm George W Bush, it's a big accomplishment"

Reply to this comment

by zootallures2 April 26, 2007 8:53 PM EDT

Since when 'is' s e x and stupidity frowned on in America?

Reply to this comment

by jimibear April 26, 2007 8:31 PM EDT

(cont.)

Before you say that we don't generate the hatred that leads to terrorism, you need to do a lot more reading about our history in the Middle East. You know how encouraging democracy there is so important to us? Why, then, in 1953 did the CIA remove the democratically elected government of Iran and replace it with the Shah, who was a tyrant of Hussein-esque proportions? It's no coincidence that it was after the Islamic fundamentalists ousted the Shah, they seized the American embassy. They have excellent reason to hate us.

Why, if Hussein was such a bad guy, did we help him to come to power, support, arm and fund him, and even provide him the poison gas he later used against the Kurds?

Why did we imagine that the Palestinians, or Arabs as a whole, would be ok with the wetern powers essentially stealing their country and handing it over to the Jews? Sure, the jews had suffered and deserved their own countries; but couldn't you say the same of the Palestinians now?

Bottom line, if you trespass in other peoples' business, you can't call them evil for striking back without being highly hypocritical.

Reply to this comment

by jimibear April 26, 2007 7:48 PM EDT

(cont.)

The objective of terrorism is to force us to change our way of life, and we are doing just that, eagerly and blindly. In that sense, the terrorists have already one, and I often wonder if the "terrorists" aren't really headquartered in the White House.

Use of fear and scapegoating of an enemy group to promote nationalistic fervor is hardly a new trick. Ask Stalin, Hitler or Mao. Read 1984. The tactics of propaganda and manipulation are frighteningly familiar, right down to the demonizing of the enemy with phrases like "axis of evil" and turning complex issues into simple slogans. The intellect is bypassed by appealing to fear of an enemy so that emotion rules and lies can be turned into the perception of truth.

Reply to this comment

by jimibear April 26, 2007 7:43 PM EDT

(cont.)

Instead, we continued in the gunboat diplomacy tactics which have caused so many of the problems in the past, and in fact cranked it to the max with an unjustified invasion of a country unconnected to 9/11 or Al Qaeda. A certain faction in this country (many of whom seem to post on this board) took the attacks as an excuse to direct their general bullying, hateful tendencies towards Arabs. 70 years ago, it would have been Jews, 40 years ago it would have been blacks - some scumbags can't exist without someone to hate. That's the saddest insult to the 9/11 victims of all, actually; to turn their deaths into justification for mindless prejudice. Now, after the mass murder of several hundred thousand Iraqis, we wonder why yet more people hate us.

And perhaps worse than that, in terms of the survival of the American ideal, we rush to hand over our rights to privacy to the same incompetents who allowed or abetted the 9/11 attacks in the first place. This is where I disagree with you; I think the provisions in the Patriot Act, etc. have little to do with curbing terrorism and a great deal to do with allowing our government more access to and control over our private lives.

Reply to this comment

by jimibear April 26, 2007 7:37 PM EDT

"We haven't been attacked again since 9/11; that's not because they haven't tried, its because of tools like the ones I discuss!!"

Really? How do you know this? That's like wearing elephant repellant in Iowa and then claiming it works because no elephants are around. It's really tough to prove a negative.

I read your post, and I see some points I agree with; the smart prosecution of the war on terror, for instance. That would include, to my mind, the capture of Bin Laden when we had him cornered. It would include the destruction of the booming opium/heroin industry in Afghanistan, as that is a prime source of funding for terrorism. It would include targeted attacks on cells and training camps, not wholescale war and slaughter.

However, it would also include meaningful diplomacy with established governments in the Middle East, trying to secure their cooperation in ridding their own countries of terrorists.

In the world-wide horror and sympathy after 9/11, we could have made these governments allies in that war, and initiated a process of long-term improvements in mutual understanding and peace. We could have realized that we had to take some responsibility for the interference in Arab affairs which had sparked hatred against us in the first place.

Reply to this comment

by jimibear April 26, 2007 7:28 PM EDT

"this guy is a good example of why we do not want or need the draft...... all those liberals nancying around getting in the way of getting the job done..... all they do is help the enemy...... just like turncoat hanoi jane kerry did.... better they stay right here running their mouths like monday morning quarter backs......lol... right skippy.....
hahahahahahahahaha

Posted by lars008 at 02:04 PM : Apr 26, 2007"


You know what is really sad, Lars? Among all your other cut & pastes, ready-to-hand, which are sad enough themselves, the fact that you had the above cut & pasted, up to and including the "lol ... right skippy" is just plain pathetic.

I always kind of scoffed at these people who said you were a stooge paid to stir up trouble and spark controversy, or a right-wing agitator; now I am starting to wonder, though. No normal person keeps their points ready in a document to cut and paste over ... and over ... and over ...

And it must have taken quite a time to collect all the links to anti-Islamic propaganda you have assembled as well. Tends to make me think that you are a professional agitator, have devoted months/years to constructing and maintaining a delusional system of belief, or both.

Reply to this comment

by lars008-2009 April 26, 2007 7:12 PM EDT

(20) You don't appreciate the multicultural need for Methodist grandmothers to be body-cavity searched before boarding aircraft
(21) You claim to understand the words "Slay the unbelievers wherever you find them", even though you don't speak Arabic
(22) You object to taxpayers' money being spent for terrorists to hold a festival to commemorate the anniversary of their massacres
(23) You have reservations about %u2018faith schools%u2019 where the kids will be taught that you and your family are najis (excrement), at public
expense
(24) You don't understand why flying your country's flag has become a hate-crime
(25) You don't appreciate why it is so insensitive and offensive for the police to prevent oppressed minorities venting their frustration
by mass murder.
EVALUATING YOUR SCORE
How many of the questions did you answer 'YES' ?
On a scale of 0 to 25
0 you are a Dhimmi
01 to 05 you are a Najis Kaffir
06 to 10 you are an Islamophobe
11 to 15 you are a Thought Criminal
16 to 20 you are an Enemy of Allah
21 to 25 you are a Zionist Crusader offspring of pigs and monkeys.

Reply to this comment

by lars008-2009 April 26, 2007 7:09 PM EDT

You may be an Islamophobe if...
(01) You refer to the midwinter holiday as 'Christmas'
(02) You save loose change in a p***y-bank
(03) You allow your children to read unexpurgated versions of Winnie the Poo
(04) You doubt whether it's politically correct to stone rape victims
(05) You believe that the earth is round
(06) You think there's something weird about a 50 year old man marrying a six year old girl
(07) Your children have Barbie dolls or Teddy Bears
(08) You object to being a second class citizen in your own country
(09) You fail to celebrate cultural diversity when your daughter is gang-raped for not wearing a headscarf
(10) You think government policy should be determined by your elected representatives rather than a howling mob
(11) You object to your taxes being used to support people who are plotting to kill you
(12) You aren't convinced that 'Jihad' means 'Inner Spiritual Struggle'
(13) You don't understand why the Jews must be exterminated
(14) You allow your children to play with LEGO
(15) You aren't married to at least one of your cousins
(16) You sometimes have doubts about BBC reporting
(17) You occasionally wonder what's inside those walking tents
(18) You realise that taqiyya is not a Mexican beverage
(19) You believe moderate Muslims ride unicorns

Reply to this comment

by lars008-2009 April 26, 2007 7:00 PM EDT

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." -- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1584/is_9_10/ai_59021377

Adversarial Myopia
http://www.federalobserver.com/archive.php?aid=8570

Reply to this comment

by agnim April 26, 2007 6:59 PM EDT

"Soldier Charged With Aiding Iraq Enemy"

Oh please! LOL

Are those the most incriminating charges that could be brought against this soldier, a REAL HUMAN for a change? LOL

At least he can come home to safety.
By whatever means, "bring them home"!

Reply to this comment

by lars008-2009 April 26, 2007 6:56 PM EDT

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." --Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
http://www.fas.org/news/iraq/1998/02/20/98022006_tpo.html

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." --Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
http://www.usatoday.com/news/index/iraq/iraq172.htm

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton, signed by: -- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
http://www.house.gov/pelosi/priraq1.htm

Reply to this comment

by lars008-2009 April 26, 2007 6:53 PM EDT

the war is legal

the resumption of hostilities was only a matter of time since iraq broke the ceasefire agreement.....

blame saddam for iraq%u2026%u2026. Even clintoon and the dems wanted the resumption of hostilities back in 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." - Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
http://www.house.gov/pelosi/priraq1.htm

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." - President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
http://www.cnn.com/US/9802/04/us.un.iraq/

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." - President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/02/17/transcripts/clinton.iraq/

WASHINGTON (Feb. 18) -- In preparing the nation for a possible war with Iraq,
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/02/18/iraq.political.analysis/

Reply to this comment

by fredgrad2000 April 26, 2007 6:45 PM EDT

Cont'd...MY concern is with those who even having the absolute knowledge of this war being waged against us are ready to revert back to the tactics that if not led, certainly abetted, the 9/11 tragedy. This isn't a question of party or patriotism in my mind, its simply judgment. To revert back to a law enforcement mentality of reaction rather than preemption (and I mean smart pre-emption, not misadventures like Iraq)and a mentality that OUR actions drive this terrorism (that we breed it with Iraq, support for Israel, etc.) is DANGEROUS! To revoke those tools we have developed and used effectively since 9/11 (Patriot Act, NSA surveillance of terrorists, SWIFT finance tracking, etc.) which we know certain politicians in one party DO want to revoke and/or curtail is DANGEROUS! We haven't been attacked again since 9/11; that's not because they haven't tried, its because of tools like the ones I discuss!! Its because we have denied them safe havens (which a withdrawal from Iraq would allow them anew), fought them OFF our shores with our best asset (our military), and because we realized that the hardcore Al-Qaeda terrorists do not care about our politics or foreign policy - they will attack us until we withdraw from the world and give up our position as a bulwark against their aims of establishing and expanding an Islamic Totalitarian caliphate across the world.

Reply to this comment

by fredgrad2000 April 26, 2007 6:43 PM EDT

You know, I see a lot of posts here about which party's politicians did what and who knew we were at war first. To be honest, 9/11 changed everything, and in HINDSIGHT, there is tons Bill Clinton could have done in the 90's and some Bush could have continued or done in his 8 months in office before 9/11, but I'm inclined to give a pass to those who weren't fortune-tellers in our post Cold War victory nation.

Reply to this comment

by cmp271 April 26, 2007 6:36 PM EDT

Terrorism against the US has been going on for a number of years and is traceable back into the 80's. Where have you people been? Why do you think we bombed Libya. Under Clinton terrorism was able to grow. He was not a strong President.

We need Gorbechov, Thatcher and the ghost of Ronald Reagan to deter terrorism. Notice under their regimes we did not have these problems. Since all the trouble is based on religion, I have news for all of these terorists. WE are all under the same God, it is just his prophets that are different in different times in different places, yet their stories all sound the same!! Only the names are different.

Reply to this comment

by cfin5 April 26, 2007 6:27 PM EDT

Thanks lars008! You beat me to it. Good history with sources too!

Reply to this comment

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• next

See all 88 Comments

Add a comment

Comment SUBMIT

Click here to add another comment.

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.

Comment reply

Submit Cancel

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.

Report offensive content:

If you believe this comment is offensive or violates the CBSNews.com Terms of Use, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the comment). Once reported, our staff will be notified and the comment will be reviewed.

Select type of offense:

Offensive: Sexually explicit or offensive language

Spam: Advertisements, commercial links, or repetitive posts

Disruptive posting: Flaming or offending other users

Illegal activities: Promote cracked software, or other illegal content

Off-topic: Commentary unrelated to the storyline

Comments (optional):

Report Cancel

E-mail this comment to a friend.

E-mail this to: (Separate multiple e-mail addresses with commas. Limited to 10 addresses.)

Your e-mail address:

Send me a copy of this message

Note: Your e-mail address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the e-mail and in case of transmission error. Neither your address nor the recipients's address will be used for any other purpose.

Add your own personal message: (Optional)

Hi, I found this user's comment on CBSNews.com and thought you might be interested in reading it. Send e-mail Cancel

[radiob-2009]

lars The elderly lady that was stripped searched intensifly was a survivor of the holocaust and was stripped searched by the Israelis. She is about 82 years old now and this happened about 4 years ago.

[feelfree1]

It seems that there are multiple U.S. military officers named Steele, who are up to no good in Iraq:

-Under the "Salvador Option", Negroponte had assistance from his colleague from his days in Central America during the 1980s, retired Colonel James Steele. Steel, whose title in Baghdad was counselor for Iraqi security forces, supervised the selection and training of members of the Badr Organization and Mehdi Army, the two largest Shi'ite militias in Iraq, to target the leadership and support networks of a primarily Sunni resistance.-

-Planned or not, these death squads promptly spiraled out of control to become the leading cause of death in Iraq. Intentional or not, the scores of tortured, mutilated bodies that turn up on the streets of Baghdad each day are generated by the death squads whose impetus was Negroponte. And it is this US-backed sectarian violence that largely led to the hell-disaster that Iraq is today.-

www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/IA11Ak03.html

[feelfree1]

Re: "The other charges included unauthorized possession of classified information, fraternizing with the daughter of a detainee"

Were they enjoying some tea together, or was Lt. Col. William H. Steele raping the daughter of this prisoner? Does it relly seem likely that she was consensual in this "fraternizing".

[zootallures2]

Should promote him. At least it was the opposite gender.

Like Bush said, "I win by low expectations. It's amazing when I can put a sentence together. If I can say hi I'm George W Bush, it's a big accomplishment"

[zootallures2]

Since when 'is' s e x and stupidity frowned on in America?

[jimibear]

(cont.)

Before you say that we don't generate the hatred that leads to terrorism, you need to do a lot more reading about our history in the Middle East. You know how encouraging democracy there is so important to us? Why, then, in 1953 did the CIA remove the democratically elected government of Iran and replace it with the Shah, who was a tyrant of Hussein-esque proportions? It's no coincidence that it was after the Islamic fundamentalists ousted the Shah, they seized the American embassy. They have excellent reason to hate us.

Why, if Hussein was such a bad guy, did we help him to come to power, support, arm and fund him, and even provide him the poison gas he later used against the Kurds?

Why did we imagine that the Palestinians, or Arabs as a whole, would be ok with the wetern powers essentially stealing their country and handing it over to the Jews? Sure, the jews had suffered and deserved their own countries; but couldn't you say the same of the Palestinians now?

Bottom line, if you trespass in other peoples' business, you can't call them evil for striking back without being highly hypocritical.

[jimibear]

(cont.)

The objective of terrorism is to force us to change our way of life, and we are doing just that, eagerly and blindly. In that sense, the terrorists have already one, and I often wonder if the "terrorists" aren't really headquartered in the White House.

Use of fear and scapegoating of an enemy group to promote nationalistic fervor is hardly a new trick. Ask Stalin, Hitler or Mao. Read 1984. The tactics of propaganda and manipulation are frighteningly familiar, right down to the demonizing of the enemy with phrases like "axis of evil" and turning complex issues into simple slogans. The intellect is bypassed by appealing to fear of an enemy so that emotion rules and lies can be turned into the perception of truth.

[jimibear]

(cont.)

Instead, we continued in the gunboat diplomacy tactics which have caused so many of the problems in the past, and in fact cranked it to the max with an unjustified invasion of a country unconnected to 9/11 or Al Qaeda. A certain faction in this country (many of whom seem to post on this board) took the attacks as an excuse to direct their general bullying, hateful tendencies towards Arabs. 70 years ago, it would have been Jews, 40 years ago it would have been blacks - some scumbags can't exist without someone to hate. That's the saddest insult to the 9/11 victims of all, actually; to turn their deaths into justification for mindless prejudice. Now, after the mass murder of several hundred thousand Iraqis, we wonder why yet more people hate us.

And perhaps worse than that, in terms of the survival of the American ideal, we rush to hand over our rights to privacy to the same incompetents who allowed or abetted the 9/11 attacks in the first place. This is where I disagree with you; I think the provisions in the Patriot Act, etc. have little to do with curbing terrorism and a great deal to do with allowing our government more access to and control over our private lives.

[jimibear]

"We haven't been attacked again since 9/11; that's not because they haven't tried, its because of tools like the ones I discuss!!"

Really? How do you know this? That's like wearing elephant repellant in Iowa and then claiming it works because no elephants are around. It's really tough to prove a negative.

I read your post, and I see some points I agree with; the smart prosecution of the war on terror, for instance. That would include, to my mind, the capture of Bin Laden when we had him cornered. It would include the destruction of the booming opium/heroin industry in Afghanistan, as that is a prime source of funding for terrorism. It would include targeted attacks on cells and training camps, not wholescale war and slaughter.

However, it would also include meaningful diplomacy with established governments in the Middle East, trying to secure their cooperation in ridding their own countries of terrorists.

In the world-wide horror and sympathy after 9/11, we could have made these governments allies in that war, and initiated a process of long-term improvements in mutual understanding and peace. We could have realized that we had to take some responsibility for the interference in Arab affairs which had sparked hatred against us in the first place.

[jimibear]

"this guy is a good example of why we do not want or need the draft...... all those liberals nancying around getting in the way of getting the job done..... all they do is help the enemy...... just like turncoat hanoi jane kerry did.... better they stay right here running their mouths like monday morning quarter backs......lol... right skippy.....
hahahahahahahahaha

Posted by lars008 at 02:04 PM : Apr 26, 2007"


You know what is really sad, Lars? Among all your other cut & pastes, ready-to-hand, which are sad enough themselves, the fact that you had the above cut & pasted, up to and including the "lol ... right skippy" is just plain pathetic.

I always kind of scoffed at these people who said you were a stooge paid to stir up trouble and spark controversy, or a right-wing agitator; now I am starting to wonder, though. No normal person keeps their points ready in a document to cut and paste over ... and over ... and over ...

And it must have taken quite a time to collect all the links to anti-Islamic propaganda you have assembled as well. Tends to make me think that you are a professional agitator, have devoted months/years to constructing and maintaining a delusional system of belief, or both.

[lars008-2009]

(20) You don't appreciate the multicultural need for Methodist grandmothers to be body-cavity searched before boarding aircraft
(21) You claim to understand the words "Slay the unbelievers wherever you find them", even though you don't speak Arabic
(22) You object to taxpayers' money being spent for terrorists to hold a festival to commemorate the anniversary of their massacres
(23) You have reservations about %u2018faith schools%u2019 where the kids will be taught that you and your family are najis (excrement), at public
expense
(24) You don't understand why flying your country's flag has become a hate-crime
(25) You don't appreciate why it is so insensitive and offensive for the police to prevent oppressed minorities venting their frustration
by mass murder.
EVALUATING YOUR SCORE
How many of the questions did you answer 'YES' ?
On a scale of 0 to 25
0 you are a Dhimmi
01 to 05 you are a Najis Kaffir
06 to 10 you are an Islamophobe
11 to 15 you are a Thought Criminal
16 to 20 you are an Enemy of Allah
21 to 25 you are a Zionist Crusader offspring of pigs and monkeys.

[lars008-2009]

You may be an Islamophobe if...
(01) You refer to the midwinter holiday as 'Christmas'
(02) You save loose change in a p***y-bank
(03) You allow your children to read unexpurgated versions of Winnie the Poo
(04) You doubt whether it's politically correct to stone rape victims
(05) You believe that the earth is round
(06) You think there's something weird about a 50 year old man marrying a six year old girl
(07) Your children have Barbie dolls or Teddy Bears
(08) You object to being a second class citizen in your own country
(09) You fail to celebrate cultural diversity when your daughter is gang-raped for not wearing a headscarf
(10) You think government policy should be determined by your elected representatives rather than a howling mob
(11) You object to your taxes being used to support people who are plotting to kill you
(12) You aren't convinced that 'Jihad' means 'Inner Spiritual Struggle'
(13) You don't understand why the Jews must be exterminated
(14) You allow your children to play with LEGO
(15) You aren't married to at least one of your cousins
(16) You sometimes have doubts about BBC reporting
(17) You occasionally wonder what's inside those walking tents
(18) You realise that taqiyya is not a Mexican beverage
(19) You believe moderate Muslims ride unicorns

[lars008-2009]

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." -- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1584/is_9_10/ai_59021377

Adversarial Myopia
http://www.federalobserver.com/archive.php?aid=8570

[agnim]

"Soldier Charged With Aiding Iraq Enemy"

Oh please! LOL

Are those the most incriminating charges that could be brought against this soldier, a REAL HUMAN for a change? LOL

At least he can come home to safety.
By whatever means, "bring them home"!

[lars008-2009]

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." --Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
http://www.fas.org/news/iraq/1998/02/20/98022006_tpo.html

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." --Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
http://www.usatoday.com/news/index/iraq/iraq172.htm

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton, signed by: -- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
http://www.house.gov/pelosi/priraq1.htm

[lars008-2009]

the war is legal

the resumption of hostilities was only a matter of time since iraq broke the ceasefire agreement.....

blame saddam for iraq%u2026%u2026. Even clintoon and the dems wanted the resumption of hostilities back in 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." - Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
http://www.house.gov/pelosi/priraq1.htm

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." - President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
http://www.cnn.com/US/9802/04/us.un.iraq/

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." - President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/02/17/transcripts/clinton.iraq/

WASHINGTON (Feb. 18) -- In preparing the nation for a possible war with Iraq,
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/02/18/iraq.political.analysis/

[fredgrad2000]

Cont'd...MY concern is with those who even having the absolute knowledge of this war being waged against us are ready to revert back to the tactics that if not led, certainly abetted, the 9/11 tragedy. This isn't a question of party or patriotism in my mind, its simply judgment. To revert back to a law enforcement mentality of reaction rather than preemption (and I mean smart pre-emption, not misadventures like Iraq)and a mentality that OUR actions drive this terrorism (that we breed it with Iraq, support for Israel, etc.) is DANGEROUS! To revoke those tools we have developed and used effectively since 9/11 (Patriot Act, NSA surveillance of terrorists, SWIFT finance tracking, etc.) which we know certain politicians in one party DO want to revoke and/or curtail is DANGEROUS! We haven't been attacked again since 9/11; that's not because they haven't tried, its because of tools like the ones I discuss!! Its because we have denied them safe havens (which a withdrawal from Iraq would allow them anew), fought them OFF our shores with our best asset (our military), and because we realized that the hardcore Al-Qaeda terrorists do not care about our politics or foreign policy - they will attack us until we withdraw from the world and give up our position as a bulwark against their aims of establishing and expanding an Islamic Totalitarian caliphate across the world.

[fredgrad2000]

You know, I see a lot of posts here about which party's politicians did what and who knew we were at war first. To be honest, 9/11 changed everything, and in HINDSIGHT, there is tons Bill Clinton could have done in the 90's and some Bush could have continued or done in his 8 months in office before 9/11, but I'm inclined to give a pass to those who weren't fortune-tellers in our post Cold War victory nation.

[cmp271]

Terrorism against the US has been going on for a number of years and is traceable back into the 80's. Where have you people been? Why do you think we bombed Libya. Under Clinton terrorism was able to grow. He was not a strong President.

We need Gorbechov, Thatcher and the ghost of Ronald Reagan to deter terrorism. Notice under their regimes we did not have these problems. Since all the trouble is based on religion, I have news for all of these terorists. WE are all under the same God, it is just his prophets that are different in different times in different places, yet their stories all sound the same!! Only the names are different.

[cfin5]

Thanks lars008! You beat me to it. Good history with sources too!