Sunday, 3 January 2010

Underpants Bomber is Intelligence Patsy...


Video Courtesy of Aangirfan

The BBC are reporting the US and Britain intend to 'counter Islamist military across Yemen'. Where is the EU in all this? Are they unable to make any contribution because they're still on holiday?

Craig Murray has an excellent piece on the Yemen and Somalia. He reiterates what many may think - 'Unfortunately, the West seems to have forgotten that policy responses other than military force exist, so what we will in fact see is an attempt to solve Yemen's problems by killing more people with drones.'

19 comments:

Goodnight Vienna said...

The peace-loving muppets, Brown/Obama, are opening up another front on the WoT but we're spread too thinly as it is. As you say, the EU is still on holiday - nothing will happen until Spain recovers from the Three Kings on the 6th. Even then they'll give as much support as they're currently giving in Afghanistan, ie the minimum they can get away with.

subrosa said...

Aye GV, along with the other countries in the EU who know they'd be voted out if any/more support was given.

Oldrightie said...

Come on, we are the slaves, the EU the masters. End of!

Billy said...

As I have said before Subrosa all of this terrorism nonsense is coming from the US and UK governments, only it is just near thing stuff by incompetent "terrorists" now as they know they have been rumbled with regard to 911 and 7/7. The killing has been done then it is just the threat that they need now to keep up the scaring.

tris said...

I heard that there have been frantic calls between Brown and the White House over this (although of course he will only be speaking to some official as the President has been in Hawaii). I image that he is desperate to keep it between them and not involve the EU, otherwise maybe he wouldn’t get to do the press conference with Obama. If France gets involved then clearly Mr Sarkozy will get 2nd billing as he outranks Brown. Brown wants this for his election campaign which has already kicked off.

subrosa said...

The EU are being very quiet about this though OR. In fact haven't read a word anyone there has contributed.

subrosa said...

Yes Billy and we were warned weren't we. But I for one didn't believe it. I do now.

subrosa said...

Brown needs this for his election campaign Tris, not just wants it.

The man will stop at nothing to boost his flawed ego.

stewartcowan said...

Webster Tarpley was on the Alex Jones show on Friday - I have added the first part of the interview
to my blog. All six parts are on Alex's YouTube channel.

Ted Foan said...

My international sources tell me that Brown is looking to open another front (a la Thatcher in the Falklands in 1982) to improve his election chances. (It worked for Blair in Sierra Leone as well so why not for him?)

I do love a conspiracy theory!

subrosa said...

Wouldn't surprise me in the least Ted. You're not the only one to think that way. Now they've got blood on their hands why stop?

Alec said...

Just as I've got you pegged, Rosa, as a quiet SNP-fundamentalist leaning Liberal, you come out with stuff like this.

Al Qaeda says this is revenge for the raid in Yemen? Quite apart from the fact that said raid was against Anwar al Awlaki, and this attempted attack was against 300 ordinary joes on Xmas Day, they could be lying, you know. Such an plan would have been instigated *beforehand*.

"Craig Murray" and "excellent post" really are four words I do not expect to see together. His claim to fame is that he repeated, albeit in undiplomatic terms, effective the then FCO position on a country; but was then unfairly stitched up for his increasingly irrational behaviour, and cast out in the cold with a mere three years salary in lieu.

Here're his views on the Xmas Day attack:

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2009/12/silly_nigerian.html

>> I just saw an eyewitness on BBC TV News recount that the Nigerian man who set fire to his leg on a Delta flight was shouting "about Afghanistan". Which proves yet again that by occupying Afghanistan we are provoking, not preventing, attempted terrorism.

Hilarious buffoon.

He is clutching at straws, nothing else. Given that you recognize the significance of the promotion of Osama Saeed, it strikes as downright weird that you should promote this odd little man who does everything he can to deny such threats.

subrosa said...

Alec, I doubt if many liberals would agree with you. :)

Do you believe what every eye witness has said? I don't. Also I don't always agree with Craig but he does put his point succinctly and deals with some subjects others won't touch with a bargepole because they don't wish to be classed as non-PC.

I posted this video because I don't devour what politicians say without a few gulps of Gaviscon and if I'm still feeling slightly off colour, I'll see what the rest of the world thinks.

It wasn't posted because I entirely agree with it. It was posted to show there are others who think differently.

subrosa said...

Alec, I should have added I do think we've done far more harm to this country by taking military action in countries without total justification. More and more that view is being proved the correct one.

However what can the public do? If we take to the streets we play straight into the hands of Gordon Brown.

Alec said...

Oh, ever careful, Rosa, I capitalized the l-word!

No miltary action abroad is going to have "total justification", but the likes of Afghanistan (with UN blessing, mind) or Sierra Leone (again, continuation of our duties under the UN) and Kosova (bypassing the UN on account of its patent failure to implement its own rules over Bosnia) came pretty darn close. I doubt the former really featured as a more than a blip on the voting public's minds, unlike the Falklands [1] - although talk of flashing a British passport in Freetown and not having to buy a drink all night wouldn't be unwelcome - and we're too close to a GE for another action to have any effect.

Yet, Iraq was a folly not because the removal of the Ba'athists was a consumation dearly to be wished for, but because this was far too great a task embarked upon with far too poorly formed an end game (although the disgusting pro-victory StWC didn't help).

My objections to the video and Murray's opining (the less said about Alex Jones the better - he should have stuck to parodying himself in PKD adaptations) are two fold:

... first, I have little desire to take al Qaeda, or whatever passes for it, on its word.

... anyone who would kill 300 Xmas travellers to avenge the death of such a worthless character as al Awlaki *deserves* to be pursued with maximum discretion. The Talibs and their buddies are the principle killers of civilians in Afghanistan, and pre 2001 committed some truly horrific acts when in control - so anyone who would kill 300 Xmas travellers in support of these groups merely demonstrates the need to eliminate them.


[1] Tony Benn et al. have made some appalling remarks, but supporting a fascist junta's assault on British inhabitants who wished to remain democratic was a bit of a first.

subrosa said...

I noticed Alec but I'd thought I'd respond to your inner beliefs lol.

Of course there's never total justification for military action in other countries, but there are cases when the public would find it acceptable. One which quickly springs to mind is if our country was threatened by another, which of course is the lie pumped at us daily by Gordon Brown at present.

Iraq was a folly. Not only was the end game poorly formed, the war was poorly formed from the beginning. Ask some in the British military and they will tell you orders could change many times during the course of a week far less a month. Tony Blair was only prepared to listen to his pal George and no one else.

We'll never know the truth about the Nigerian on Christmas Day. All sorts of stories will fly around for years. Was it a ploy to divert public attention from Afghanistan etc or was it a true threat.

If I'd been on that plane obviously I would have thought it a true attempt to kill me.

Let's not forget Alec, it's not so long ago the US were providing the arms for the Taliban.

Alec said...

>> Let's not forget Alec, it's not so long ago the US were providing the arms for the Taliban.

Only through inattention ;) Those parts of the anti-Soviet forces which the US was in direct contact with were the Uzbek and Tajik led Northern Alliance.

Mullah Omar's Taleban - until that Arab hothead, OBL came along - was based in the Pashtun south and the bastard child of the Pakistani and Saudi military intelligence who were stirring-up a hornet's nest to set upon Indian Kashmir.

Alec said...

I should add that after the Soviets left, the proto-Taleban - with Saudi and Pakistani backing - started doing what they do best... started killing other Afghans (if they'd been doing anything else over the previous 15 years).

It has to be said, the Pak-Saudis did have standards, and drew the line at lunatics like Gulbidden Heymatyar's mob. The Borders Agency, however, took some time to come to the same conclusion.

One single event which may well have given the green light for a terror act was the assassination of Northern Alliance Mahmed Shah Masood on 9 September 2001.

subrosa said...

Alec, I've been looking at your place to see if you've done a history of the Yemen and Somalia but can't find anything.

If you did do one I'd be happy to link to it.

Related Posts with Thumbnails