EIGHT shots at a man already pinned down! Police action?

Jean Charles de Menezes was shot EIGHT times, not five as earlier reported. This was confirmed yesterday by a medical inquest into his death.

He was shot seven times in the head, SEVEN!!! times (what does that tell you about the man who pulled the trigger) and once in the shoulder by an undercover officer at Stockwell Tube station in south London.

PM Tony Blair said he was 'desperately sorry' for the death of Menezes, and added:

"At the same time, therefore, in expressing our sorrow and deep sympathy for the death that has happened, it is important that we allow the police …….. and support them in doing the job they have to do in order to protect people in this country."

Fair enough. At least it's not as moronic and insensitive as Charles Clarke's 'congratulations' to the police.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission promised a fair investigation of Menezes' killing. Its chairman declared:

"We enter this with open minds, as we search for the truth, and we have accepted the full co-operation of the Metropolitan Police service, which they have pledged. Firearms officers have a unique and awesome responsibility. I believe they and the public accept they must be accountable for how they exercise that responsibility."

Now, he's talking!

"But I think that both the police service and public expect that the process of accountability should be proportionate and fair, and that those who judged — with hindsight and in the comfort of an office — the actions that firearms officers take when split-second life-and-death decisions have to be made, do so with great care and a degree of humility."

He's right. We cannot exclude the possibility of extenuating circumstances, but the investigation ought to look at the following points:
(1) 8 shots on a bloke who was already pinned down - one wonders about the professionalism, training and state of mind of the police officer responsible.

(2) If the police had trailed him from the house under surveillance, and they had reasons to believe he was a suicide bomber, meaning he had explosives strapped under his jacket, why wasn't he stopped earlier? Why wait until he entered the Tube? It's all very dodgy.

As one reader in a Sydney newspaper wrote (basically what I mentioned in a previous post):

"One shot at close range to the head sounds like an action to eliminate a terrorist threat. Five shots at close range to the head sounds like an execution."

Eight shots? Sounds like an execution conducted with over-the-top violence a la the Israeli doctrine.

Jolly Good Show, Old Boy, that Dago Business!

What outraged many people around the world, especially Brazilians, have been the shocking callous attitude of the British Home Secretary Charles Clarke.

In the face of public and international shock, disbelief and outrage at the deplorable slaying of an innocent man he has the gall to 'congratulate' police in their work.

Has he lost his bloody mind, praising police for excessive use of force in the multiple shooting of an electrician by a plain clothes policeman? No wonder the headline in O Estado de Sao Paulo read: "British government's attitude irritates Brazil" while Jornal do Brasil wrote: "Instead of apologising, the English authorities came out in defence of those responsible for this disastrous [police] action."

How can one 'congratulate' the police for killing an innocent man?

An expression of regret, certainly. An admission of mistake made in the heat of action, OK. A tragic case of split-decision making with regrettable results, understandable. A cautious "We are still investigating", best answer. Even a shrug of the shoulder with a "Shit happens", hardly palatable but just still barely tolerable.

But 'congratulations'? Congratulations? It's disgusting.

One congratulates someone for praiseworthy and commendable performance. When someone kills an innocent man, where's the commendable act? Someone, namely the policeman, has f***ed up real good, and that's a fact. OK, sh*t happened, and there may be mitigative circumstances but congratulations? What utter callous drivel.

The unfortunate nonsense seems to be that Britain has not only joined the USA in its oppressive adventure in Iraq, it has also adopted its transatlantic cousin's devious art of sinister euphemism, with the unfortunate added element of British stiff upper lip.

I am just waiting for Charles Clarke to say "Nasty job, that Dago business. It's those confounded Pakis. Damn those cads. But generally, our boys in blue did a jolly good show. Absolutely rippling, old boy."

An Indian Hakkenden?

A baby girl in Bengal has been married by her father to a dog, to ward off the evil eye. Hindu priests have recommended the weird wedding. Her mum objected but we are talking about India so she obviously has no say.

Disha is only 6-month-old but she has early or premature appearance of her teeth, that is, before her annoprasan or rice ceremony - a function when the baby is fed solids for the first time. Because of this, their holinesses reckon the omens aren’t auspicious at all for her.

The solution, it seems, has been to marry her off to someone with lots of teeth, a canine by the name of Pomi (and I hope no Pommies blame the Aussies for this story).

This reminds of a Chinese myth of an immortal dog (or dog fairy?) marrying a woman to produce warrior sons to save the nation. As usual the Japanese borrowed and turned it into an all-time best seller of Hakkenden. The story of Hakkenden is as follows:

"In an area of Japan known as Awa province, there are two families that control the area, the Satomi and the Anzai. The Satomi fall upon hard times and ask the Anzai for help.

Rather than sending aid, Lord Anzai sends troops to destroy the Satomi, who, facing starvation and the Anzai forces, barricade themselves within their castle. Finally, after numerous failed attempts to assassinate Lord Anzai, the Satomi realize that they have no other choice than to surrender.

In desperation, Lord Satomi promises to give the house dog Yatsufusa his daughter Fuse's hand in marriage if Yatsufusa brings him Lord Anzai's head, but this was all in jest. Astonishingly, the dog goes off and returns with Lord Anzai's head.

With their leader dead, the remaining Anzai lose hope and are defeated by the Satomi. However, Yoshizane refuses to uphold his promise, but Fuse insists upon upholding it and leaves with Yatsufusa for the mountains.

A year passes, and Fuse learns in a vision that she is bearing Yatsufusa's offspring and that there is a curse upon the Satomi. About this time, a former retainer Daisuke Kanamari of the Satomi clan comes to rescue Princess Fuse. Tragically, in his attempt to shoot and kill Yatsufusa, he instead shoots both Fuse and Yatsufusa.

Fearing what she may give birth to, Fuse, near death, kills herself. At the moment of her death, the eigth spirit beads from the necklace she is wearing disperse into the four winds.

These eight beads represent the eight dog warriors, who will be born in the following years. Each of them will embody the very ideal inscribed in their beads. In the years following their birth, the 'litter of eight' will encounter one another and learn of their predestined fate - lift the curse on the Satomi."

We trust in the case of baby Disha, her future doesn't evolve into an Indian Hakkenden.

Schapelle Corby Defence - One Confession Too Many

John Ford, an Australian convict flown across to Bali to testify for Schapelle Corby in her initial trial, averred in court that while in prison he heard a couple of other convicts named the man responsible for the marijuana in Corby’s boogies bag. In other words, Ford provided hearsay evidence of another piece of hearsay evidence.

He must have eventually named the villain as former prisoner Ron Vigenser.

Because now Visenger claims he has been bashed by men who want him to give evidence in Schapelle Corby’s appeal. He was beaten with a lump of timber in Melbourne late last week, resulting in facial wounds.

Vigenser said he knows nothing about the marijuana.

He related how two men beat him up and threatened him with dire consequences if he didn’t own up to save Corby.

Vigenser told a TV programme that he had been a target for abuse since he was named as the bloke who placed the marijuana in Corby’s boogie bag. He is being ostracized by Melbourne restaurants and those members of the public who recognize him.

Meanwhile, Corby's Indonesian lawyer, Hotman Paris Hutapea claimed that a Sydney drug ring member has agreed to testify via video-link to a Bali court that Corny was done in by the corrupt airport baggage handlers in Australia. But the witness wants immunity from prosecution.

So we have Vigenser of Melbourne and a mystery witness from Sydney who both were responsible for Schapelle Corby's sorry case of being caught with marijuana in Bali.

With the Corby’s story, it’s an eternal circus (not circle).

Shoot-to-Kill: Then you don't see it, Now you do!

The family of Jean Charles de Menezes, a luckless victim of an unexplained police slaying, may sue the British police for their untowards action. Police officials continued the old line that the threat by suicide bombers made such police execution necessary.

How could they continue to peddle the unacceptable argument when the victim was an INNOCENT man.

I reckon what has brought about the unfortunate event has been either an Israeli indoctrination, or a reckless gungho plainclothes police officer, or a combination of the two factors. The fact was until the slaying, the police denied they had a shoot-to-kill order, but that denial was cast aside immediately AFTER the killing, with the shoot-to-kill order becoming a national rule of engagement.

Someone suggested that he was killed because his skin was brown.

Ironically, Menezes had expressed his fear of the London Tube bombers to his friends, even mentioning that he might avoid the Tube by getting a bike. Had he done so, he would be still alive today. Fickle Fate decreed for him to be killed not by the bombers he feared but by a policeman that he had expected to protect him.

His cousin denied that Menezes didn’t stop when challenged by police. He stated that in Brazil, if one didn’t stop when challenged, the police would shoot one in the back. And he added with bitterness, just like the British police shot Menezes in the back.

He dismissed the idea that his cousin would have ignored a police challenge or that he would not have understood it, considering Menezes had been stopped three times before on his moped and once at Brixton station, his usual stop, when a police sniffer dog showed interest in his bag. Then, the police instructed him to open his bag which he complied with immediately. Therefore the claim that Menezes ran away from police just doesn’t hold water.

I am inclined to believe that the plainclothes policeman was too hasty and eager to “get one”. Pumping 5 bullets into a man’s head when he was already pinned down tells you a lot about the policeman’s anger or over-enthusiasm.

The big brasses have now closed ranks behind the cop responsible for the tragedy, and even turned a non-policy into a standing rule of engagement of shoot-to-kill, which I believe is not a typical British approach.

London Police Rules of Engagement (2) - the Israeli Connection

Continuing from London Police Rules of Engagement (1) - the Five Bullets.

An interesting item came to light when Massoud Shadjareh of the Islamic Human Rights Commission revealed that British police officers had been being sent to Israel to receive training on how to prevent suicide bombings. He stated that the impetuous killing was a direct consequence of Israeli practice, which was basically a shoot to kill attitude (when afterall the opposition were bloody Arabs and hardly Israelis).

A former London police chief John Stevens, who sent British police to Israel to be trained, defended the tactics (but of course he would, wouldn’t he?). He said that the terrible truth was that: "There is only one sure way to stop a suicide bomber determined to fulfil his mission - destroy his brain instantly, utterly. That means shooting him with devastating power in the head, killing him immediately."

Isn’t that feral approach typically Israeli towards a Palestinian? The Israeli connection in British police training may explain why I have been wrong in my faith in the British police rules of engagement. When one absorbs and adopts Israeli attitude to the perceived 'enemy', invariably one has to expect rather unmitigated excesses and brutalities.

But let's be clear about one point, Menedes, the bloke who had 'his brain destroyed instantly, utterly, with the devastating power of 5 bullets in the head, killing him immediately', as prescribed by John Stevens, the former London police chief who sent British police to Israel to be trained, was an innocent man, not a suicide bomber! So much for Steven's tactics, which imperilled innocent people like Menedes.

Considering that the wrongly identified person was already pinned down, couldn’t a bash on his head with the gun butt be sufficient to knock him senseless? And why the excessive force of pumping FIVE bullets into his head? Was there an element of unconscious hatred, either from the British officer’s own anger of the London bombings or inculcated by Israeli doctrine, which has always been hatred for the other side?

London's Mayor Ken Livingstone and British politicians have all supported the police, saying that the mistake was within the perceived need to protect the lives of the public. What could they say otherwise but to dig in deep and bunker down tight? Can anyone defend the killer of an innocent man? Of course they can't, but they have to hold the fort and support the police, for to do otherwise would be to undermine the security forces' morale in such troubling times.

As another example of this defensive behaviour, the Metropolitan police chief warned that Menezes might not be the last to die. He stated, rather stubbornly in the face of criticism, "Somebody else could be shot. But everything is done to make it right. This is a terrifying set of circumstances for individuals to make decisions." Everything is done to make it right? Balderdash, that's British double-speak if I ever heard one!

In fact last week, the police had denied a shoot-to-kill policy, but Sir Ian, the police chief performed what the newspapers termed as a complete U-turn in that policy. He now has changed his mind to a shoot-to-kill policy being in place across the country, not just in London.

There is no doubt that his reversal of his earlier stand has been to defend the terrible action the plainclothes policeman had perpetrated. In other words, pretend there has always been a shoot-to-kill rules of engagement, therefore tough sh*t for Menedes.

But sadly, most British newspapers also supported the action regardless of how tragic an innocent death such an impetuous action had resulted in. This reminds me of how the normally vociferous and independent-minded American press succumbed to utter subservience to the dictates of the Bush Administration in the immediate to medium period after the 9/11 incident.

Yes, it’s a bloody hard call though most people are willing to accord the policeman the benefit of the doubts, but I find the 5 bullets the most damning evidence of unmitigated police ferocity (and perhaps hatred). A professional needs only one, at most two bullets. Was it, as I mentioned earlier, a result of a policeman's expression of anger at what he thought to be a bomber, or has it been an adoption of Israeli doctrine of attacking the opposition with hatred.

If the former, let us pray it has been only an isolated incident, but if the latter, the British police need to remember that an Israeli doctrine is not suitable for Britain, but more for the clear cut black and white environment the Israelis see themselves in, of us against them, of Israelis against Arabs. Britain is not a wholly homogeneous society, but has a population of diverse ethnic groups and international visitors.

But the most stupid statement has been by the Mail on Sunday which stated: "And bear in mind that if the Stockwell suspect had been wearing a suicide belt, the officers who shot him would be lauded as heroes and loaded with medals, as well as the thanks of a grateful public."

What an moronic f***ing 'IF'.

FACT - Menedes was NOT wearing a suicide belt nor a suicide bomber, so why posited he could have been? The sly hypothesis is unjustified, underhanded, and unmitigated. It has been nothing more than a red herring that shamelessly seeks to be argumentative in the worst possible manner rather than offer any real mitigative reasoning. It's a shameless descent right into the gutter to pin a notional situation on a dead man who cannot answer back and who shouldn't need to.

It has not been only baseless but insensitive to the Menedes family. It’s akin to saying:

"And bear in mind that if the world has known what trouble the Israelis would cause in the Middle-East, Adolf Hitler and his SS Einsatzgruppen, by their actions at Treblinka, Auschwitz-Birkenau, Dachau, Chelmno, Sobibor, Belzek and Majdanek, would have been lauded as heroes and loaded with medals, as well as the thanks of a grateful world.”

How dreadful and horrendous such an unwarranted hypothesis would be! It's just plain revulsive. And that is exactly how the Menedes family would feel.

When an innocent man has been summarily executed without him even knowing why, there is no room to play with self-serving (to the British) and imbecilic IF’s. It’s a time to more appropriately reflect on whether the cop in question had acted excessively outside the rules of engagement, or whether the rules of engagement have been correct, or whether the criteria and conditions to meet the rules of engagement need to be examined.

London Police Rules of Engagement (1) - the Five Bullets

Tall, dark, handsome (he really was) and unfortunately very dead, Jean Charles de Menezes, a 27-year-old electrician living in London for three years, has been killed by British police who mistook him for a terrorist bomber.

London Metropolitan Police chief Sir Ian Blair accepted full responsibility for the fatal mistake and expressed regrets to Menezes’ family, but these polite correctness are of small comfort to them. How did this drastic event come about?

Let’s examine the case, in particular the British rules of engagement. Traditionally the British police have been very conservative, cautious and careful in its employment of firearms. Unlike its American counterparts some most British police don’t even carry guns. The old Malayan (not Malaysian) police was like its British tutor.

In the earlier and more peaceful days of my father, policemen outside the 'black areas' carried mainly truncheons. My father used to smirk at Thai and Indonesian policemen when he saw how heavily armed they were in comparison to Malayan law guardians. “Just like cowboys”, he would say. That has all changed today. Similarly, and especially in the wake of the London bombings, the rules of engagement for British police would have changed too. The person defining the rules of engagement would have to balance two competing objectives, the ability to use force effectively to accomplish the task and the need to avoid unnecessary force.

What has been disconcerting has been the report that the policeman pinned the poor innocent bloke down and pumped 5, not one, not two, but FIVE bullets into his head. I believed, given even the difficult circumstances the police would have been working under, that was way over the top.

Secondly, Menedes spoke and understood good English, as averred by his cousin and the fact that he stayed in london for 3 years, working as an electrician. He certainly would have understood police instructions in English very well. Another cousin stated that Menedes did not have a past that would make him run from police, thus the family finds it hard to believe Menedes ran when challenged by police, as alleged, as if he was a guilty man.

I heard on TV that one of the undercover policemen had been the one who killed him. Could it be that the cop in mufti did not identify himself as a policeman when he pointed a gun at Menedes, causing the victim to believe he was threatened by a criminal, thus resulting in his running away? Or, was the claim that Menedes ran away from a police challenge nothing more than a lie to cover up some gungho action by a trigger-happy policeman?

I find it hard to believe newspaper claim that the rules of engagement would have changed to a 'shoot-to-kill' policy in confronting suspected bombers. British (and indeed Australian and New Zealand) values don’t work like that a la American common practice. The British has had considerable experience with the equally ferocious IRA. While not denying themselves the ultimate right to 'shoot to kill', there would always be safeguards in the form of some stringent criteria being met and/or conditions being fulfilled.

To be continued with London Police Rules of Engagement (2) - the Israeli Connection

Terrorism - A Challenge to some Malaysian Bloggers

When 9/11 and 7/7 occurred, some Malaysian bloggers ‘flew’ the Stripe & Stars and the Union Jack on their blogsite. That’s commendable and symbolic of the universal sympathy and ‘togetherness’ with the victims and particularly their sorrowful families.

Now we have the dreadful bombings at Sharm el Sheik in Egypt where 88 victims of various nationalities perished. On a daily basis, Iraqis have been slaughtered on a scale far worse that what London or New York had suffered. The Afghans too have suffered members of their families becoming that dreadful American term 'collateral damage' or the more vogue classification 'terrorist suspects', to American bombings, reckless shooting and Gestapo-style torturing.

All were victims of terrorism, like the NY-ers and Londoners.

I hope to see the Egyptian, Iraqi and Afghan flags flying at those websites, or I’ll be forced to think that those bloggers are suffering from severe cultural cringe, by demonstrating respect only for victims of terrorism in the West.

I realise we live in Boleh-Land, but at least let's not make it into Bodek-Land.

London Bombings - Police Killed Innocent Man

Well, it seems that the Pakistani-looking bloke shot very very dead at Stockwell Tube station by British police, as I blogged in London Copycat Bomber shot Dead, has now turned out to be a Brazilian and totally unrelated to the London Tube bombings.

The police have basically gunned down an innocent man. Earlier we had read that a policeman pumped 5 bullets into the petrified man as he was held down - not once, mind you, but bang bang bang bang bang!

Police have confirmed that the 27-year-old Brazilian, Jean Charles de Menezes, had nothing to do with the London bombings, and admitted they have shot the wrong man. No wander the victim was reported to have looked ‘petrified’ just prior to his execution.

According to his cousin, Menezes had lived in London, legally mind you, for three years. He spoke English very well, and would have understood police instructions, if any at all, was issued to him. He was going to his electrician job when he was pinned down and shot in the head several times.

In the USA, the Sikhs might have gotten the wrong end of the red-neck American wrath, a la KKK-style execution, but in London, a Brazilian copped it, and from the police too. Swarthy tall looking blokes are no longer 'tall, dark and handsome' guys - they are potential bombers.

Tidal Waves hit Aceh

3-metres high tidal waves have just struck coastal villages in Aceh, Indonesia. Dozens of homes have been destroyed but but no injury were reported.

Many thousands from the villages of Tapak Tuan, Sawang and Samadua have fled to higher grounds, fearing the devastating effects of another tsunami.

But tidal waves are not tsunamis. The former are caused by full moon tides and strong winds while the latter are by undersea earthquakes.

The True Obsession of Pakistan!

I have often stated this. Now even the Paki press are publishing it.

Pervez Musharraf may be an American ally against terror, but his military continues to allow certain Islamist extremist groups to be trained at military-style camps in Pakistan.

The camps are used by Pakistan-based militant groups such as Jaish-e-Muhammad (Army of Muhammad) and Lashkar-e-Toiba (Army of the Pure). The chief culprit in the double-headed game has been the Pakistani Inter-Services (or Joint) Intelligence Directorate. It actually nurtures those groups and uses them to attack India.

As I averred before, it’s all about their principal obsession, Kashmir. Their chief target is India, and not so much the Americans. But since the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, these groups are quite happy to conduct a little extra targeting of the US (and other European) military or citizens and property in Afghanistan and Europe (and perhaps the USA) as well.

Prior to the American invasion of Afghanistan, the Pakistani government had considered the Talibans as part of its strategic reserves, and the territory of Afghanistan as its strategic space in depth. Strategic ‘space in depth’ means that, should India, a far larger and more powerful nation, choose to invade Pakistan in a war, the Pakistani would be able to withdraw or retreat into Afghanistan but continue to fight back, making it difficult for the Indian armed forces to corner it. In other words, the Talibans and Afghanistan are part and parcel of a ‘Greater’ Pashtun Pakistan.

While the Pakistani government might have demonstrated to the Americans it has been hunting down Arab and other non-Pakistani al Qaeda militants, it has silently refused to do so with their kinfolks, the Afghan Talibans or the Pakistan-based terrorist groups. The Pakistani security services even have those groups renamed themselves so as to avoid western or Indian monitoring and tracking of them and their activities.

The 2 countries that will cause headaches for the USA and Europe will be Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, ironically so-called US’ allies. Don’t forget what were the nationalities of most of the attackers on 9/11. Next time, the Americans may see the Paki-Pashtuns as well, as the Brits already have.

Chinese Lover?

British motorcar maker, Rover, is a household word not only in Britain but throughout the Commonwealth of Nations. Rover has produced classic models under the Jaguar, Mini and MG brands during its 100-year history. It’s a joy to see the once formidable mini Cooper back in production.

But financially the car firm has collapsed, and the once British pride has been sold to Chinese company Nanjing. Rover staff are of course delighted though they would have preferred the larger Chinese car producer, Shanghai Automotive Industry Corporation (SAIC) to take over, as then more jobs could be saved.

KTemoc heard on the grapevine that the new company will be re-named Lover – pronounced Low-Ver, not Luv-ver. But then with such a new name the car would kill two birds with one vroom.

OK, I made up the last bit! ;-) and I'm not being racist 'cause I'm in fact Chinese.

Rice Keeps Steady Eye on Sharon

I am glad Condoleezza Rice is keeping a close watch on Ariel Sharon as the Israelis pull back from Gaza. One can never trust the Israeli old fox, who won’t missed an opportunity to sabotage anything that benefits the Palestinians.

Rice flew into Israel to see what’s going on with the pullout, and took the opportunity to praise Mahmoud Abbas’ efforts in curbing the Arab militants. That should choke Sharon.

The Israelis put on a brave face and described the visit as one to show US involvement in the pullout was serious, following criticism that it was not doing enough.

But it seems that Rice wants a wider scope to the whole affair, intending to see the US roadmap back on track. Sharon sabotaged the roadmap in earlier days when Yasser Arafat was still alive, and an inexperienced George Bush listened to everything Sharon told him including nasties about Arafat. Rice isn't going to be satisfied with just a Gaza pullout and intends to see a more comprehensive peace. She knows that the USA needs to mitigate its disastrous Iraqi adventure in the eyes of the Arab-Muslim world, and one way would be by swinging something in favour of the long suffering Palestinians.

She wants to hold an US-Russia co-sponsored international peace conference on the region by engaging Israel with Europe and the Gulf States. This is not going to sit too well with Ariel Sharon as he prefers, for obvious reasons, to deal with the US alone behind the Palestinians' back. An international conference and subsequent participation means there will be many eyes watching for and noting Ariel Sharon's monkey tricks.

But Rice isn’t going to tango with the Israeli.

The only country that can exert pressure on Israel to behave is the USA, with its deep pockets, gargantuan military logistics and superpower political status. Without the USA's backing, Israel won't last too long. True to form, the Israeli Pm put out his grubby hands to Rice for a couple of billion dollars handout.

Rice seems to be on top so far but she needs to watch her back with those staunch pro-Israel lobbyists in Washington, as Colin Powell found out too late. Well, my darling Condoleezza, as they say, there's many a slip 'twixt cup and lip.

US Military in Iraq: We're OK, But We're Screwed!

Amazing. As the media put it, the US military department has given itself a pat on its back.

According to the Pentagon, it’s a case of ‘eight bells and all’s well’ in the land of the 2 rivers. It told US Congress that progress toward establishing democracy in Iraq is all honky dory despite the insurgent wolves at the doorsteps.

Only snag is it refuses to provide an estimate to Congress as to when the US could withdraw its 130,000 plus troops from the self-created hell in the Middle East.

The Pentagon’s director of strategic plans for the Joint Chiefs of Staff stated that specific measuring tools are useful in gauging the combat capabilities of Iraqi forces. From those tools, the Pentagon would be able to estimate when the Iraqis can stand on its own, and accordingly plan its withdrawl. However, it refuses to publicly disclose specific data, even to Congress. It claimed that "The enemy's knowledge of such details would put both Iraqi and coalition forces at increased risk."

Essentially, it has admitted so much already to the infuriated Democrat Congressmen that they (both Americans and Iraqis, especially the latter) are so screwed the true details cannot be disclosed.

Related:
Iraq’s Phantom Army vs Insurgents

Schapelle Corby Defence: Alas, Again!

I had debated whether I ought to blog anymore on Schapelle Corby’s case because each time I read what’s going on with her defence, I get very depressed and feel sorry for her.

Her legal counsel, Mr Hotshot … eh sorry … I mean, Hotman Paris Hutapea claims to have a mystery witness who will confess to “everything” including placing the 4.1 kg of marijuana in her boogie bag. That most certainly will exonerate Schapelle Corby but of course put that man into hot soup.

Aha, there’s a catch. Hutapea wants the Australian authorities to grant immunity to the mysterious witness, so that he won’t be prosecuted for illicit drug trading after he confesses.

Two flaws in this arrangement I see is that (1) a criminal drug merchant gets away with legal prosecution by virtue of the unprecedented immunity, and (2) which I believe to be the real issue, anyone, everyone, someone could walk in and say “Hey, I was the one who did it. Please excuse me, I have a 9:30 pm show now to catch. See you guys later.”

Now, Hutapea wants to quit because he feels everyone is giving him the runaround and refusing to cooperate. I wonder who’s been giving everyone the runaround.

London Copycat Bomber Shot Dead

British police killed a man, whom witnesses said look like a Pakistani, at Stockwell London Underground station today. He was believed to be one of the bombers who escaped after yesterday's attack.

Waiting passengers said police chased him, and shot him 5 time after he jumped over a security barrier at that station and attempted to board a stationary Tube train

An al Qaeda linked group, Abu Hafs al Masri Brigade, claimed responsibility for both series of the London bombings. Police haven’t confirmed the authenticity of the cliam.

The Brigade stated that they would not relent until the European governments leave the "land of the two rivers", referring to Iraq's Euphrates and Tigris rivers.

(information also derived from the Times)

Terrorism: What Goes Around Comes Around

Ken Livingstone, the Mayor of London, the city that had recently suffered multiple terrorist bombings twice over, said what Tony Blair won't ever admit. For Blair to say what Livingstone said, he would be admitting to personal culpability for unnecessarily importing terrorism into Great Britain and causing the needless deaths of British Service people in Iraq, not to mention countless thousands of innocent Iraqi men, women and children.

Blair or as I would like to call B-liar should have been more wary of his transatlantic Rambo cousin. He should have stuck to the traditional British pro-Arab policy that his predecessors had adopted for British interests.

Livingstone put the blame for the rise of Islamic extremism squarely on what everyone knows already, namely, a century of unscrupulous Western interference in the oil-rich Middle East and Central Asian regions and the perceived unfair treatment of Arabs. Those Muslim adherents see terrorism as the only way to make the big powers sit up and notice them. They are fedup of being ignored by arrogant powerful western nations who think it's their God-given right to trample over everyone in the Arab and Iranians' own neighbourhood.

Livingstone was even more specific about Western governments not being satisfied enough with just getting the oil but wanting to control its supply as well. Hence the West, particular the USA has frequently intervened, for example, in creating and supporting nasty dictatorships and overthrowing those they believed weren't sympathetic enough. I blogged on a similar example for the Vietnam of 1956 in Appeasement? Absolutely Not!

Needless to say, Blair rejected his comments.

Livingstone condemned all suicide bombings but was brave enough to admit to the fact of the USA recruiting and training the Talibans and Osama bin Laden to kill the Russians in Afghanistan, and now suffering from the phenomenon of "what goes around comes around."

Then Livingstone went directly to the kernel of the truth – he said:

"I have not the slightest doubt that, if at the end of the First World War we had done what we promised the Arabs, which was to let them be free and have their own governments, and kept out of Arab affairs, and just bought their oil, rather than feeling we had to control the flow of oil, I suspect this wouldn't have arisen."

"I have watched Western governments, so terrified of losing control of their fuel supplies, that all my life there have been interventions in the Middle East by Western governments."

"It is the double standards that flow from that. We initially welcomed Saddam Hussein to power, our intelligence services gave him lists of trade unionists and communists - as did the CIA - that we wanted killed, and he then turned on us."

"You have also got this running sore of the Palestine Israeli conflict. A lot of young people see the double standards, they see what happens in Guantanamo Bay, and they just think that there isn't a just foreign policy."

Livingstone's comments basically supported the report of the leading British foreign policy think tank, Chatham House.

Ken Livingstone and George Galloway are two British politicians who have the decency to speak the truth.

4 London Copycat Bombers on the Run!

4 failed bombers in London are on the run from police – ‘failed’ because the bombs in their backpacks either didn’t go off as planned or more probably, to just create chaos, as one analyst, Professor Hans Michels of the pretigious Imperial College, pointed out that it was extremely unlikely that all four devices would have failed to explode.

London newspapers called them suicide bombers, which I think may be a bit premature – they haven’t shown any suicidal characteristics as yet.

Meanwhile in Pakistan, police claimed they might have nabbed the mastermind of the bombings. But of the 228 “suspects” the Pakis denied they hold the one British police wants, namely 30-year old Haroon Rashid Aswat, a former aide to one of Britain's most militant Islamic clerics, Abu Hamza al-Masri, the blind, one-armed militant cleric who preached jihad, but was arrested last year.

Envoys in Iraq Kidnapped Again!

The BBC reported that 2 Algerian diplomats in Baghdad have been kidnapped. They were seized outside a restaurant in the western Mansour district by attackers in two cars.

I blogged recently on how envoys were departing by the droves in Iraq told Envoys to Hang on to their B*lls.

If we go by what happened to the late Egyptian diplomat, this sure doesn't look good for the 2 Algerian envoys.

London Copycat Bombing - 2 Arrested

Two men have been arrested for yesterday’s London Copycat Bombing against 3 trains and 1 bus.