Mumbai (attacks)

Allthough yesterday i tried to get what was happening from little information, trying to acces all was less of a help then you'd expect. However a few things cleared up.
The attack on the jewish centre eg. I now think it was possibly genuine, for two reasons mainly, the centre is a landmark building (i thought of it as some office annex guesthouse), and that it is not over yet, or at least not when the indians announced it. You would expect a violent rampage not to immediatly release any ultraorthodox jew they caught. So that story gained credibility.

Yet there is something wrong, with these attacks. For one thing contrary to alJ (and i assume international news, first announced, the confirmed nr of attackers sticks at 18, sidenote, that could be a few more by now , as the building are not all (completely) cleared. Next there are supposed to be 10!! targets. and a few random bombings.. the attacks started 15 minutes from another, the station (wich is a genuine incident i think now), first. About the station i am not sure, but it did have the characteristic of sacrificial attack, apparently it concerned only two attackers and not the nr the carnage initially suggested to me. (say 8-10). At the hotels the situation was not much agrevated by security forces initially, the guys stormed in guns blazing. (appears confirmed by some of the pictures and that it was moreless in the news all the time)


This puts a questionmark at the seriousness of the hostage taking, and indeed the demand was outrageous, (if sincere) the release of all mujahedheen in india prisons.
all?? no nr was mentioned. For some time apparently the attackers were in contact with the media untill the police made it impossible.

A few incidents still need scrutiny, the boat loaded with explosives, its doubtfull a well organised group would need an extra boat with explosives they have no use for.

Militairy explosives in a restaurant close. Suspect since the indications bombs have been used are minor. The kind of explosions mentioned are hard to get, except in the militairy. Since they tried to set fire at the hotels(?) and had no problems with using a lot of grenades, one would assume they would use the explosives before leaving all of them behind in a not connected place.

So thats a no so far,(the computer crashed and apparently exposive charges are now exploding..) such events, or non events appear to suggest the situation escalated not only through the attackers, they are 'criminalised' after all, people want to make it worse then it was..
yet this theory, what initially happened at the hotels or any other place is somewhat unclear.

Next problematical issue, there have been two attacks (?) one of them including hostages, on a childrens hospital and some other hospital.
In the pattern of actions this makes no sense, all other targets have an obvious profile (rightly or perhaps wrongly applied) except the station, that was apparently attacked first. Beside that i found not a single story in the newspapers confirming attacks on the hospital took place. I found indications something happend there, people were glad to have escaped, but not a single descriptive account wich is suspect when all tv stations of the world are on a newshunt.

About the other supposedly attacked hospital i havent seen even a single fact, allthough i think wikipedia mentions a name. Even if a better articulated story is later released (like today) i insist it is suspect the media knew no other contribution earlier, i am not in mumbai and not a police chief there, so i have to be reserved about what is true and what not.

The attack on the police station also goes without description, apparently it was the most professional part of the action as it succeeded in killing 3 high profile cops.
I must guess it was well prepared and they knew to intrude in the right offices, still then taking the total suggested nr of attackers, its quite a miracle 1 or 2 man came through the defences of a policestation. So perhaps it was even better planned or coordinated, and the killed guys were just getting out.

peculiar detail, also about this event i found none but the vaguest descriptions in the media. 'policestation got attacked', and high profile cop killed, but not one description of the event altho article's relate the killed cops to the attack on the policestation it does not mention how, or any other circumstance.

Soo what are the conclusions? Firstly due to the lousy overall picture during a session of massive media representation i have a strong feeling there is more behind this. But what? The story as it stands now suggest to me still a dehumanising of the attackers, random bombs. extra weapons and even extra attacks belong to the evidence for that. Sometimes not related events are in the course of the action related by the police, if for example an armed man took hostages at a hospital, (it's happened before) the police might think it is a related attack.
That leaves us with the other hospital, since i know nothing factual yet about these 'attacks' i think they are suspect.

There are a few other incidents that are being related to these events, none of these have been exactly well described in the media, none of them lead to facts, and except the ones i already mentioned in my first post, none of those apparently claimed deadly victims. (perhaps i missed a victim at some bombing, apparently there have been a few bombings in mumbai, one would guess not through the known attackers (dead or alive), but perhaps still as the 15 minutes pause between actions suggests timing and leaves some space for actions.

I am annoyed that with so much fuzz so little facts are actually displayed, it takes like 10 articles to find out there are 18 known attackers for example.
(one article mentioning the dead , two others prisoners, (3 ,9 resp.) similarly only after a rather long period i find that there have been only two attackers at the station. Reading 30 articles (including some rather comprehensive ones), i am yet to find the first descrption of the police station event.

Such limited informations actually suggest a story is being prepared. The credibility of reports arising after the crisis is less then the ones yet released. (that could be checked in reality at least partly.)

Allthough not evrything is clear yet , are the jewish hostages free?, news said that through more then a day now, or are they not? some sources in alJ say the event at the 'jewish tower' is not over yet, and apparently in the hotels as well some shooting still took place today.

That would make some sense, the whole operation could hardly been carried out by 8 -18people, assuming even only half of these attacks were carried out by one group, one team. curiously estimates of nr of attackers lack, the only revealing source are their casualty's and prisoner nr's.

Today 3 captured attackers have declared or stated to be from kashmir, suggesting all would be, and although i see a more indian wide perspective behind these attacks it surely appears the most logic one group so organised (that what they did was well organised) comes from one place. Speaking against that is the apparent nr of attackers are higher then the nr accounted for, for example apparently today there has been another incident at the station, (i consider that incident genuine after finding out it concerned two attackers only) i think what is called copy cat action.

Like other events suggested inside mumbai there are also people (moreorless) willing to violently rise up to make a statement. This is kept out of the news, yet it explains why the indian government plans immediate emancipatory action.

good for a laugh when an interviewed westerner in another building stayed covered in a darkened room when actually 1000s of indians were moving about on the same street.
Also good for a laugh, the interviewer found that a wow , smart thing to do, the indian policeman commenting ,who's voice sounded suspectedly amused no matter that he tried to restrain it to a professional sound said, well ofcourse it is practical if people follow the government directions...

At the moment i am less certain about far reaching government involvment in the actions, but i still suspect infiltration, infiltration usually takes place (but not starts always) on a higher then 'soldier' level. The secret service is there for influence.

This effect is twohanded, altho the infiltration serves to expose the group and hinder it's violence, to gain a credible position within such a group a regular infiltrator (vying for influence) usually promotes escalation. A less inspired militant would stand out, but also not gain a lot of credibility.
The other side is still, that the police wanting to expose the pressure group would try to steer it in more violent ways often. Ofcourse under the premisse of being able to control and expose the group.

There are a lot of scenarios that secret services would opt to let this attack pass through (lets be optimistic, thus preventing other, easily worse attacks, like bombs on markets and streets). It has all the looks of such an action, with these obscure side events that defy description(hospitals?, jewish hostages rescued thrice?, the *not a bomb* attack in the station, most every yurpean routinely escaping with all but 1 indians staying back, a very probable police assault during the rescue of the westerners, the murder of a rumouredly moderate police officer?

Like someone rightly pointed out, actions like this serve to instill fear, and as such facilitate repressive measures.

I hope the indian government manages a reaction that proofs me wrong. (they appear to be doing that through adressing the fact india does have some problems with its treatment of minority's)

What we can learn of this? That unbiased and unhindered reporting are not a reality in india,(the financial capitals of the world), even with major parts of the world press assembled. I think things would look much better now, if journalism had had more resources, whatever will now be the reported outcome of events, none of it has been confirmed in actuality, and the facts will be so much harder to proof.

The whole great 'life'show i didnt witness seems mostly aimed at emotionally touching people, more then 100 poor people die in india every day, why is that less of a problem then when for once a hundred rich die? It is definetly not that the two problems are not related.

oh i foget i tried to reconstruct the events that must have facilitated the 40 parlementarians escape. Not a pretty picture, bunches of security guys around, a very calm (waiting an hour ) escape through a door that later seems used as an escape still, (a rather natural exit then). it suggest a level of control of the movements of the attackers inside the building. That would ofcourse be also the case when city police attacked the hotels from the outside (in rather obvious with the security agents as they were active inside) It cannot be wholly excluded this suggests some form of contact between some of the attackers and the securty agents, a form of contact i would think several others had no knowledge off. It may mean that at least one of the security personal inside had some knowledge of the attack ahead.
Overall if the descriptions of the weaponry etc, fit and the deathcount etc. at the hotels is correct (i think that it means like 85 people killed in the hotels),
the atack wasn't aiming at maximal casualty's.

oh yes i stopped thinking about all teh other attacks but the ones on the hotels because i think they carry less information of the intends, wishes and mentality of the attackers. Perhaps the attack on the jewish building must be excluded, but i still consider it untypical, possibly a different (sub)story.

for the station attack i have a keen eye if other figures of the attackers arise, and you could try and find out if it was meant as a distraction, but that seems obvious.

Anything they will still tell about the 'hospital hotels' will turn me highly sceptical.

Also statements of the captured persons i regard as highly doubtfull, you have to realise that to cover any story such statemets will be (ab)used.
witness"statements" are a necessary element in any cover up.

Even when only or mostly kashmiri's sympathise with some pakistani group, wich i think is easily explained through representation usually, it doesnt mean people from kashmir are not dissatisfied.

Rumour again.. but some voices tell us there is definetly discontent in kashmir, and it is an old complaint, in india clearly better understood in material terms then here. Scetching all these people as some anonymous monster with farfetched intends will create animosity first among us, the west, and immediatly in india that is forced into some western policy of fighting the muslims between the black sea and mumbai (decca in fact). Such animosity obviously already exist among afghani's and pakistani and us (..), we tend to overlook that the one does not go without the other,
and it's the easiest of all things to now involve kashmir into such a onedimensional picture.

Piracy (mumbai)

Have it happen, the first day you'd write about piracy , the next day there is a naval attack against mumbai. Everyone blames the muslims and we must assume it were not the tamils, but it could be anything, the few pictures of 'attackers' show moreless indian types. I think a taiwanese pirate trawler mothership did this, and india is just lucky to shoot the next before it came into action against new delphi.

Incredible how corruption in south asian politics affects the indian stockmarkets, btw. did you see that boat? it had tibetan colours, yellow and black, it must have been a covert operation of the chinese then.

and a jewish family meeting... oh wow, storm into the indian mainstation shooting??
that is sth i would trust an indian police force, it's either a police or rightwing kind of action, storm the railways and blame the lefties, a very old scenario.

storm the hotels of the rich with suicide like commandos? thats typically islamist at least when it happens at this moment of time in india, so there i think we meet the suicide bomber mentality of radicalised islam (checks if usia is at war with india.. no, by proxy?? mh .. maybe..)checks if japan is at war with india? mh .. (maybe over trawlers, but i didn't think that.)

the picture isn't very clear yet, part of the attackers escaped, (from the trainstation i bet, t' was either the indian or the western police after all),

guys inside the hotels blew up stuff, theirselves? TV's? Others? just the hotel?
it's casino? all of that? i'm curious. There is also the rare fact that people already identified as europeans escaped when being seperated from the interior of the building, sth. that you would expect only the indian police to easily facilitate.

It get's weirder, there is a slight reluctance from any indian authority to act, at first, to say anything, i think it is because they sympathise with what they personally perceive as the most logic reasons for this attack, at least slightly.

That's natural, i do that to, i really wonder how life looks when you are in kashmir.
It's anyhow a characteristic of secret services in the region to have troubled loyalty issues, for some reason indeed in the ISI for example there is a fool for evrything, the idea can hardly be so nuts not a single ISI guy identifies with it.
Some events in afghanistan suggest similar operative values, and even iraq showed only you can trust not a single militia or any army.

For me pakistans alliance with the usa war on terror is to blame, if you get an automatic weapon for shooting a nr of 'terrorists' (tribal elements or god knows what?) it's a good declaration of total war. Not much is unethic anymore, and a weaponsdeal belongs to these options.

The complaint of the kasmiri people is a prolonged one, altho i think in administrative ways they get what they need, their complaints about discrimination , poverty and discrimination related poverty are substantial.

So i think kashmir could be governable to kashmiri as it is, but the muslim population needs emancipation, (and to find that without intrusion of other people's liberty's probably).

In the discussion someone mentioned asantavari(?) islam, that is very interesting,
if you are free to interprete the koran, the horrendic social construct of islamism suddenly turn's muhammed's a more deserved place as a rationalist (modernist even) counterweight for religious bigotry, but i guess that is beside the point.

India is meant to be a model state by the british, it's some dream of ongoing hindu emancipation (plausible and a bit shallow) and multiculturality and multireligiousness, possibly not in the last place cus christianity with it's direct appeal to peacefullness and friendship usually does well in a nation where islam is on equal footing with others. At least i read today there are supposed to be 160 million christians in india. I think of india as a budhist nation.. so that's pretty multicult.

The real india is an attempt to a 'that kind of model state' so i guess the controversy's are exagerated, the indian 'hindu' majority tending to associate the muslim part of the population as a great factor in the struggle with pakistan and their owns, for wich there isn't enough reason.

The kashmiri otoh suffer from the resulting discriminating situation because it 'continues to proof' their second rate position is artificial.

It won't turn every indian or kasmiri mad, but it might confuse some. The indian middle class is so formal it is almost backward, and i wouldn't be sure they have a large understanding of the situation. (they rely on the western stratification of their societys a lot)

That is if you dare to regard it in an indian context, wich it obviously at least partly is not. The attack has similar characteristics as the attack on a pakistani hotel, i think it is part of a ploy using similar strategy's, that it appears a diffuse and incoherent action i would interprete as a sign of (more) involvment of (secret) police agency's, because it is inconsistent with the more efficient operations in pakistan.

So the worst case scenario is the indian police needs to have had a hand in this,
(it would mean india is in for an effort to start a war "on" terror.)
I think this could be forensically reconstructed from the station. ALso foreign service may have had a hand in it, as witnessed by the unrepresentative attack on a jewish orthodox group, necessarily this means then a western agency has involved, because the israelians wouldn't operate without the western parameters.

This in turn suggest something about the professionality of the services in pakistan,
and it runs a questionmark for all the recent talk about the ISI.

then again, i don't like the ISI, i am a humanist and the current ISI is undoubtedly a result of (amongst) musharaf, and the afghani ... mh aha found the link..
so through the western involvment in afghani intelligence operations, the spearhead of 'fbi' activitys in the region is greatly depending on the israeli's.. mh. could be more true then it appears at first glance,

ok in that model what does it want to proof? That jews are still a victim?
or that anti capitalism is anti semitism? (it's definetly has an antizionist effect on me). I think it wants to proof you can blame an anticapitalist over antisemitism even if that is not true.

Anyhow it so also proofs what it proofs to me, thus that crime is perceived as minor compared the incidents in the hotel and station.
Brutally put, we are secretive sneaks, but at least they didnt target the complete innocentest (didn't we minimise the damage to yurpeans), and beside showing their real character (hindu police shooting hindus and islam/hindu militants shooting hindu's because the yurpeans escaped thx to the jews (uhm indian police that was precluded through the uhm... some service with contacts with the ISI?

(this or a bloodbath), it's quite possible,

next point, what with the hostages, it's not natural like the story stands, there are hostages but no negotiations, no ransoms or demands?

maybe there have been and they kept quiet, wich tells us something. Had the demands been just outrageous there had been no need to keep quiet. Money then??

concerning the hostage taking efforts that would occur to me quickly, it also suits the pirates mind, the only thing would be, it would be so farfetched to start a naval landing for it. mh the attraction of taking the 'bussinesest' hostages could be great,
and the current policy is not to pay.. well indeed you can't expect the world to unite all potential pirates of every sea to take hostages evrywhere, so if that happened, the tale becomes to big for even ISI to connect.

Neway the hostage taking operation in the hotels apparently immediatly failed, security operatives and perhaps infiltrants must have interfered with the events more then the (it appears much smaller then 100) attackers on the hotels (the 'genuine' organisation inhere) anticipated, or i think could handle.

No demands were made public, so if it wasn't about money it must have been about india's internal matters, because anything that would not be sensitive in that respect, would be as outrageous it could be broadcasted or relatively harmless (internationalist rhetorics just like....).

The only statement around that so far comes from exactly the wickiest event, the jewish hostages. The person there appears to make the kind of statement one would expect. a bit to much even so, it's a bit like an alquaida osama tape. But if it's that it is well acted, the young man seems to reach for a terminology he learned, phrases he needs to apply , and his statements are very integer. Very authentic, at least partly, and not religious at all in the first place.

So that suggests the hostages served for the hostagetakers to get broadcasted.
Wich any sane government would admit to...
But! they had already opened the attack on the hotels, or opened it after the station was clear again (the restaurant as well?),
most probably after someone from inside signalled them it was the proper moment to start interfering, wich must at some point have failed. (the attackers stayed active inside the hotels). Since they were not so many they must have regrouped, possibly without the infiltrators, but more certainly with losses. It would have escalated the violence, (or) caused random people to get hurt in the shooting.

So very probably the attackers made use of the hostages at that point, and for the hostages or something else (explosive charges?) the municipal police didnt press on the attack , yet.

The attackers gained some control of the hotels, that have 100s of rooms, many many more then there are attackers. strangely people keep foremostly escaping, it's not like some reign of terror broke loose. Seems to me the attackers were still serious about their attempts on hostage taking, and must have gathered people in some larger rooms away from where the most blood had flown. although the media doesn't report so much about that period, there must have been a period the scene was in relative calmth, with only many, many people escaping from the hotels still.

occasionally there was fire from the inside, at people outside (escaping?) but i don't understand that lead to much bloodshed. So the question rises, where have these "100" people been killed? mostly at the station?

at the restaurant? the description of the station event. well prepared heavily armed man going rampok with hardly (yet attemptedly) policeopposition, is dramatic, the picture i saw tells a bloody story, the 30 odd police in action do carry rifles but nothing decent, peculiar in an enormous city like mumbai, with security services etc. abound.

Reports suggest some attackers (quite some) escaped, but don't yet tell from where.
a policestation was attacked, yeah why not.. that could easily turn a bit bloody on either side, it's quite undoable even, perhaps a superficial local attack? not what the paper suggests but the lack of drama makes it still an option.

this attack fits nicely in the pattern off taking it out on the real enemy's,
something only the station and the jews case don't express (concerning the bloodbath elsewhere the 'jews' wouldn't have survived such a same attack so easily seems to me).

It might also have tactical value, and provide some escapee's, since there are no descriptions of that event, i would guess it achieved much of what you should expect,
very little.. (imagines slowly aggrevating loads of fire from a policestation and it's surrounds), also when the police got attacked in the fashion the hotels did,
(intrusive) or the station did (bloody) the police would from that point be warned to equip its personal with what they had, and not what is the regulation in cases of public disorder. (allthough that again is very respectfull in a confused hostage taking case, it is completely irresponsible and inapropriate in response to automatic fire.)

If the attempt on the station was a sacrificial one we would see that confirmed,
if many of these attackers escaped , there is plenty room for doubt.
The attack on the policestation appears a distraction, perhaps a part of the plan or
a more coincedentual event, or alliance. It could serve to win some time for a hostage taking action. Or an escape from the station ...

i have to find out in what ordre the things happened. More on this later (i guess)
it's a strange story and so widely broadcast i must be able to find some more information.

piracy (something against)

every coastal nation knows piracy is great. Piracy has always been the way to clear some goods from the aggressive empires, when you live in a delta you also know piracy is an excellent means of defence against foreign agression. Is? well, was maybe, nowadays boats are a blot on a screen.

In that sense i, with some apparent seafarer blood in me, can only say piracy is great, it's good that pirate radio's, pirate music and pirate software replace the bronze age mechanism of piracy in an economic and folkoristic sense, because the empires still don't clear the goods to distribute the wealth.

This is an honourable cause. The pirates that brave so much of the fire of the greatest warships that it apparently became uneconomic to shoot them all, what a drama.

Being an honourable pirate i wonder if piracy is still the right word, perhaps it is valiance beyond what can be requested in the cause of duty.

A million things left to right

My mind buzzes, i don't know how i do this now but i overflow it with informations even if i see nothing i have to think about. Perhaps some of you, or all, know i regularly contribute on the your views page of aljazeera. I love the medium, perhaps i even love the fame, but it's the kind of blog i feel ok with, many opinions and from evrywhere in the world, so many new things viewpoints occur.

However there is a limit to its uses, not to bitch alJ. one is the western bias in censorship. Recently i come to wonder if its even usefull to, again and again, be abused just for wanting things in the open. Defy one lie, the next springs up to bother you in the same boring and annoying way.

So the next limit is where I run into repetituous argument, and it does that a lot.
actually enough to make me mad about ziofascism right here.

However there is not one lie in the world i think is more strongly defended then the "zionism is modern" lie, "zionism is anything but fascism".

I am even very sorry for the israelis and the jews, i am glad my affiliations are not theirs, i am glad not to be in a position where i would smear all the world to hold up one lie. (this suggest that "1 lie" is israels right to exist)

So thats what i think, an archaic racist and authoritarian set of values dominates the discussion on these subjects, as soon as you are against them(zionists/israelis), no word is bad enough to insult you, these are really the least constructive discussions on that forum.

I am one elaborate target of that strategy and it annoys me plenty to let know, sideways like this, i had it with racists calling me fascist.
fascists with a fascist mindset calling me fascist.

That discussion is so dead it is not a funny history anymore.

So let's switch subjects, leave the israeli mess for what it has been since 1917 or thereabouts ('terrorism' amongst), and throw an eye on the real world.

Kongo

Tough, will kongo be news untill solved? the recent examples of irak and pakistan
don't stem greatly optimistic. "Kongo" is also a thing that has been going on for years, everyone "knows", but noone accounts for it, bothers, contemplates.

There is certainly a worldwide consensus the problem is at least partially caused by the resource policys of EU, US, kagame, kabila and a couple more.

However the details , and those are details i know off for almost a decade now!,
escaped public scrutiny, i think they are basically secret, no head of state would be accountable for "allowing local geniocides to extract tin" or buying from the cheapest armed faction. otoh each party in those games is well aware thats how the ball rolls, what follows is there is some kind of secrecy involved.

That there is some kind of secrecy involved is quite obvious from a researcher pov.
The shit happens, but there is no publicity about why and how these agreements work.

Also many parties have knowledge of some aspects of these resource deals, but the most comprehensive picture i have so far seen is belgian (former coloniser) older generations research, wich would neither naturally always have acces to all sources of information (it's quite competent tho), nor be unbiased in every aspect.

This i will for goodness sake try to describe, it could be a bias to hold on to research conclusions reached in a dedicated contex but to long ago, at least that would be the typical for such researches even if you think me a bragger.

So there only i would know to look for more detail.

The un doesn't impress me, like amnesia international and other (zionist?(1)) cover ups, it plays on the goodwill of people including it's personnel, it uses some mantra of emergency-aid helpfullness, definetly a resource hard to deny in an area in crisis.

Obesanjo appears an enthusiastic, and i must say nkunda tries to show principle on many occasions, yet... we at least i do not have the informations that would warrant to embrace nkunda. So thats a matter of trust.

What i ask obesanjo is twofold, do you think nkunda escalated the conflict as it evolved after the rwanda crisis? Do you think nkunda's actions dislodge the sense of security and future, "possibilties", as it took shape when kongo accepted kabila?

I just ask, the real background of social injustice centered around capitalist tools,
"contracts", weapon "aid", diversion, and resource "security", needs different solutions then a political kongolese make-up.

Okay the last point i make in this post is the same as the first, i tell it all,
it just continues, the obvious conclusions are not handed to the (any) public, and the people are not informed to sway opinions. Elaborate negotiations and agreements may follow, but so far the real issues have never been adressed , the wars went on and on and on...

what shows secrecy better?




(1) some zio nazi equated some perceived succes , forgot what cus it was actually bragging, as a reason to praise amnesia into heaven today, good pr for a bad memory.
made little sense, obviously implied the zio-guy tried to regain credibility for amnesia, perhaps he's looking for pay. hardcore conservative, propagandist guy.

a very strange detail about zio-nazism on aljazeera is the guys are all affluent, rhetorical, derogatory and extremely labelling, once you got used to it it's actually so stupid i really don't easily understand how this fools the world. They are also all guys.

One reason i am so angry is they apply their hate schemes to every discussion to a greater extend then any of their opponents, except a very few individuals and even these appear more reluctant to apply it everywhere. Worse then being a bore and a liar in one discussion it is when you waste all the discussions with the same dumb scheme.

Strangely usually progressive thought, is immediatly confronted by zio fascism, it seems themselves they don't notice. but when they apply rascist rightwing schemes to every situation, they are a fascist. I don't so much blame the "jews" as the conservatives.
Perhaps from the rightwing pov the jews became a usefull distractor again. "Who cares what happens to them". Just calling names cus it confuses and poors unwanted attention on the jews.

go figure mossad. what i think now has been said before to the jews, and who tells me the reason wasn't the same.


Anyway, everyone! be warned!

terrorism

Jay! 100th post .. congratulations Barak this one is for you..

I witnessed today how barak for the second time to my knowing, used the word terrorist adverbial, 'terrorist groups' it was about iran.

From the iran point of view these people may be "freedom fighters", as *opposed* to terrorist groups.

Now this has to do with credibility fo iran, but let me explain.

In rwanda the us supports basically the tutsi's, these killed a load of hutus in recent years, mostly outside rwanda. Now the government there has a name for their victims..

Usia uses the same word (there).. terrorists.

terrorist don't exist, only in the american dream, and when you talk about a thing that doesn't exist to much, you make it true for yourself,
can we have a president that doesnt want terrorists for once?

cheers!

Historical day

thanks!

thanks for having a historical day,
nothing compares

gorbatjov tho,
he, the people and his duma besides,(1)

i worked at that to,
for me this is more emotional.

Jesse Jackson ! cheers! You deserved it well,
a brave man to. Whoopy! I always trusted you.

I think Bill Clinton performed! Man i am enthusiast,
i even admire hillarys dedication now , perhaps it was the best thing after all.

all the people of the world have been working this,
the children, and sometimes the animals even..

i am glad i didnt go that deep into it!

wow people (..)
animal kiss.

Good luck with it all,

we have to hold our promise.
Congratulated Barack, it would be great to meet you i am sure.
I have never said that of anyone 'important'.

so take it as a compliment, you remind me of a friend, 'Frits', you must be smarter though, maybe you can do with a lesser appeal of fame.(2)


personally, i hope your secret service 'annoying policies' will be a bit moderate.

Maybe i should say something about reagan, (uh bush..) it's always a bit personal,

you know bush is a bad guy, rather a bad one, but, in one thing and it is a thing many 'bad' people are not of the worst, he has been respectable.

he respected sillyness, people being human, really.., i guess zardari is like him,
and occasionally that could be a compliment, a bad guy , out for cash, but not without the idea to make a better world, otherways this couldn't have happened.

It couldn't for Jesse, chances are we have to forgive bush ..

Good luck world:P
we are there.

historical day!
hugs for all.

(1) salt accords could have been and done better and more easy from guess what side ..)
(2) to much to do with motivation ..