Anonymous sure does sound like a lot of DUer's to me

[NNN0LHI]

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0406/23/wbr.00.html

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR (voice-over): Anonymous: he hunted bin Laden, and he's still a top CIA officer. And his new book claims the U.S. is losing the war against terrorism.

<snip>The book is entitled "Imperial Hubris." The author, a veteran of the CIA for more than two decades, is identified only as "Anonymous."

<snip>"ANONYMOUS," CIA OFFICIAL: Because I'm pretty certain, sir, that the message has not been delivered to our senior most elected officials of the extraordinarily large dimensions of al Qaeda's organization, the durability of it in terms of being able to absorb attacks and replace fallen leaders with great rapidity.

<snip>In many ways, the primary goal of bin Laden is neither to destroy the United States or destroy our liberties or our freedoms. It's simply to get us out of the Muslim world. And until we come to grips with that, we are going to be defeated regularly by Osama bin Laden, who is a much more patient opponent and a much more powerful opponent than we've yet recognized.

ENSOR: President Bush says that they hate us for our freedom. You say he's wrong.

ANONYMOUS: I say that perhaps he is being ill-served by his briefers, his senior bureaucrats.

There is no indication in the corpus of bin Laden's work, of his statements or the nature of his attacks that indicates he hates us for what we are. The Ayatollah Khomeini hated us for what we are, and he ranted about elections and women in politics and women going to school and our movies. Very few people died for that issue.

Bin Laden hates us for what we do in terms of our foreign policy, our presence on the Arabian Peninsula, our support for Muslim tyrannies, from the Atlantic to the Indian Ocean, our support for Russia, China, Uzbekistan and India in their efforts to suppress Muslim populations. He's focused the Muslim world on very tangible, visual activities by the United States. And Islamic resentment of those activities is what powers bin Laden, not hatred of our system of government or our voting or anything of that nature.

more

[eaprez]

1. WRONG, WRONG, WRONG

..haven't you been watching the news for 2.5 years? Its because he hates our freedom and way of life!!

[Gom Jabbar]

2. Could this be Ray McGovern?

[w13rd0]

5. I'm under the impression...

...Anonymous is still with "the Agency"...

Which answers some of our questions about CIA response.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

14. You are correct.

[Must_B_Free]

6. Must not be Ray McGovern

He looked like this to me

[WilliamPitt]

10. Hang on

How is this person 'Anonymous' if Must_B_Free can put his fucking picture in a DU post?

:wtf:

[varun]

3. Finally...

...someone has started saying it like it is...

Dubya (and the neocons) has made us more UNSAFE since 9/11

[mzmolly]

4. The only statement he made that is un DU-ish is that we have to

drill in Alaska to relieve our foreign independence on oil.

I'd rather focus on alternative fuels myself. But much of what he says is very compelling.

[lovedems]

7. For those of you who haven't yet read, "The Lies of George W. Bush"

by David Corn, I suggest you do.

He starts with the lies when he first ran for Gov. and continues all the way up to the WH and post 9-11. Of all the lies he has told, the most damaging in the lie "they hate us for our freedom." It implies there isn't a solution to the problem. In reality, like Anonymous states, it is geo-political. The main goal is to get us out SA and they hate our alliance with Isreal.

It is an *excellent* book and I strongly recommend it for your summer reading.

[Columbia]

8. Strangely

One stated goal of OBL was to get our troops out of Saudi Arabia. And that happened last year. Of course, now we have troops in Iraq, but after they leave then what will OBL harp on next? Probably our support of Israel. I guess we could stop supporting them. Do you think OBL will be our friend then?

[givemebackmycountry]

9. I'll tell you one thing...

This guy is pissed!

[merh]

13. When we "return" Iraq to Iraq, we have not intentions of leaving it.

They are building 14 state of the art bases in Iraq. One of the construction sites has caused the Iraqis and other Middle Easterners great concern because they were building on an archeological site of ancient Babylon. That's our nation. Its yours, we will just stay here indefinitely!!!

Iraq was invaded for the oil and to acquire land to build our new bases to move them out of Saudi Arabia. The Saudis look good to their folks cause we are no longer on their land and we get to keep our presence in the Middle East.

WORLD DOMINATION - of course, it is ours if we demand it! <sarcasm or reality?>

[Columbia]

16. I guess we shall see

I'll have to call you on your ancient Babylon tidbit though. Saddam has already utterly descretated the Al-Hillah ruins by attempting to rebuild it in honor of himself. Not to mention the gaudy palace that overlooks the site itself.

[NNN0LHI]

17. Which goes to prove the US is a little bit better than Saddam

I guess?
:shrug:

Don

[Columbia]

18. Well

I see no evidence of any so-called construction on these sites. As far as I know, we have been trying to clean that place up as much as possible and protect the site from further degradation.

[merh]

20. 14 bases -- long term

14 `enduring bases' set in Iraq
Tue Mar 23, 9:40 AM ET

By Christine Spolar Tribune foreign correspondent

From the ashes of abandoned Iraqi army bases, U.S. military engineers are overseeing the building of an enhanced system of American bases designed to last for years.

Last year, as troops poured over the Kuwait border to invade Iraq (news - web sites), the U.S. military set up at least 120 forward operating bases. Then came hundreds of expeditionary and temporary bases that were to last between six months and a year for tactical operations while providing soldiers with such comforts as e-mail and Internet access.

Now U.S. engineers are focusing on constructing 14 "enduring bases," long-term encampments for the thousands of American troops expected to serve in Iraq for at least two years. The bases also would be key outposts for Bush administration policy advisers.

(snip)

http://www.peaceredding.org/14%20%60enduring%20bases'%20set%20in%20Iraq.htm

==============
Chicago Tribune March 23, 2004

14 `enduring bases' set in Iraq
Long-term military presence planned

In-Depth Coverage
By Christine Spolar

From the ashes of abandoned Iraqi army bases, U.S. military engineers are overseeing the building of an enhanced system of American bases designed to last for years.

Last year, as troops poured over the Kuwait border to invade Iraq, the U.S. military set up at least 120 forward operating bases. Then came hundreds of expeditionary and temporary bases that were to last between six months and a year for tactical operations while providing soldiers with such comforts as e-mail and Internet access.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2004/040323-enduring-bases.htm

[Columbia]

22. Well, you don't want shanty towns for the troops while they are there

Well built structures do not by themselves imply the duration of stay. You don't want them falling apart before the troops leave. Additionally, they can serve as bases for the Iraqi Civil Defense Corps after the troops do leave.

[merh]

26. Sarcasm? (n/t)

[Columbia]

27. Nope

[Media_Lies_Daily]

34. Personally, I don't think we should have ANY troops in Iraq...

Building permanent structures does indeed imply that we will be there for a long time. Even the Pentagon NeoCons have stated publicly that we will be there a long time.

As far as who will be occupying those structures after we leave, my money is on some kind of Islamic fundamentalist militia. The idea that we are going to bring "democracy" to Iraq is just as idiotic now as it was when our invasion of Iraq was in full swing.

[Columbia]

35. Would you rather...

Have structures that are destroyed in a matter of weeks or months by the heat and sandstorms? Then we would be criticizing the ill treatment and housing of the deployed troops. It's already bad enough that there were shortages of SAPI plates earlier, no need to deprive them of a decent place to live during their tour.

"The idea that we are going to bring "democracy" to Iraq is just as idiotic now as it was when our invasion of Iraq was in full swing."

Do you think Iraqis or Arabs in general are somehow incapable of sustaining a democracy?

[merh]

24. See post 19. (n/t)

[merh]

19. Okay, so Camp A is the camp for the Polish forces in Iraq, but the U.S.

had it first. And as we all know, this is the U.S.'s war on terror, the Poles are just lending a helping hand.


The Springfield News-Leader
Published June 12, 2004
Construction may have damaged Babylon ruins
By Jim Krane
Associated Press

Baghdad, Iraq — The expansion of a military base may have damaged remains of the ancient city of Babylon, and the U.S.-led coalition's leaders said Friday that they have halted construction and ordered an investigation.

(snip)

The remains of Babylon, one of the world's most important archaeological sites, were occupied since the early days of the invasion by U.S. Marines and, since September, soldiers from Poland and other countries.

The two occupation leaders ordered all contractors working in or around the Babylon site to halt any work that could damage the ancient sites, a coalition spokeswoman said on condition of anonymity.

Investigators reported there "might possibly have already been some damage" and that any further expansion of the Polish-run base would infringe on the archaeological site, the spokeswoman said.

(snip)

There was "superficial" work done two months ago to expand a helicopter landing zone to accommodate U.S. troops housed at the site, Polish army spokesman Lt. Col. Robert Strzelecki said. "The superficial work was done under archaeological supervision and there was no deep digging involved," Strzelecki said. He said soldiers are warned about "grave consequences for picking up the tiniest stone."

(snip)


http://www.news-leader.com/today/0612-Constructi-110048.html

Of course after this came out in the (limited press) the pro-war propoganda machine put its spin on this.


Hussein 'ruined' ruins of Babylon
Submitted by: I Marine Expeditionary Force
Story by: Computed Name: Sgt. Colin Wyers
Story Identification #: 2003611115748

CAMP BABYLON, Iraq(June 11, 2003) -- Editor's note: This is the first in a series of three articles on how the rise and fall of Saddam Hussein affected Babylon, Iraq. Part one focuses on the ruins of the ancient city, part two examines the surrounding community, and part three looks at Hussein's palace in Babylon.


http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf/0/0ad98a4d082b961085256d420057afee?OpenDocument

[Columbia]

21. From the same article

"Polish military officials said they were unaware of the investigation or any damage and that great care had been taken to secure and protect the ruins."

I know that the coalition has been extremely protective of any archaelogical sites to avoid any bad PR. So, I'll withhold judgment until the results of the investigation come out.

Also, I'm not sure how you are saying "the pro-war propoganda machine put its spin on this" when that 2nd article was written a full year before the first one.

[merh]

28. I'm sorry, I worded my post inaccurately. The spin was after their

main bombardments and destruction (not to mention looting) but before this blunder.

Please don't hold your breath on the results of that investigation. The investigations that are being conducted into the abuses and other atrocities in Iraq are numerous and I doubt if we will ever know the "truth" or see the full reports.
Blue is a bad face color for anyone.

(Edited to check spelling, but spell check will not work so please forgive any typos and spelling errors you might find. I am tired.)

[Columbia]

29. Ok

You're right, the media will probably never cover the results of the investigation since they barely touched the calling of the investigation itself. I have some channels I may be able to use though to find out, but it probably won't be awhile.

[merh]

30. Please let me know what, if anything, you discover.

I would like to know if an investigation is or has been conducted. I guess I am just curious. :shrug: Thanks.

[Columbia]

33. Will do

[merh]

39. As a follow up, check out this morning's post

and the link provided.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1848140

http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1973682

[drdtroit]

31. So that makes it ok for US

to take a shit all over Iraq. I love the way you think. :wtf:

[Columbia]

32. Did I say that?

No, I did not.

Great care is taken to protect these sites and that is how it should be.

[AntiCoup2K4]

25. Sure, why not?

He's been friends with the Bush Criminal Empire since the 60's.

[DrBB]

11. STRONGLY disagree

Check out the guest columns on TPM, if you haven't. This guy thinks our only choice now is a Sherman-style scorched-earth all-out-war against Islam.

The enemy of my enemy is NOT my friend in this case. Not MY friend, anyway.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

12. Got a link?

[geek tragedy]

15. Yeah, the guy is part of the 'Nuke Mecca' crowd

Move on folks, nothing to see here.

[G_j]

36. I read the same thing

but I forget where, he sounds like an extreme hawk. will look for a link..

[geek tragedy]

38. Look at

Kevin Drum--www.washingtonmonthly.com

or

www.talkingpointsmemo.com

[G_j]

40. thanks, and the NPR interview this morning

verified this for me. scary...

[DrBB]

37. "With killing must come a Sherman-like razing of infrastructure"

From Anonymous, via TPM:

Without the option to work for reform, a large portion of what Anonymous advocates is essentially a policy of brutal and unforgiving war.

To secure as much of our way of life as possible, we will have to use military force in the way Americans used it on the fields of Virginia and Georgia, in France and on Pacific islands, and from skies over Tokyo and Dresden. Progress will be measured by the pace of killing …

Killing in large numbers is not enough to defeat our Muslim foes. With killing must come a Sherman-like razing of infrastructure. Roads and irrigation systems; bridges, power plants, and crops in the field; fertilizer plants and grain mills--all these and more will need to be destroyed to deny the enemy its support base. … Such actions will yield large civilian casualties, displaced populations, and refugee flows. Again, this sort of bloody-mindedness is neither admirable nor desirable, but it will remain America's only option so long as she stands by her failed policies toward the Muslim world.

So, um, let's step back from this a little....

On edit: That last qualifier seems to be an out, but if you read the whole thing, it appears that scorched earth is what he thinks we need to do now, having left ourselves no choice. There's been a couple of important discussions of this guy in recent days, and they begin with this TPM posting. People should get up to speed on this guy before leaping to embrace him.

[Tatiana]

23. Wouldn't surprise me.

After hanging around here for so long, certain CIA agents have probably been persuaded to come forth with the truth we already know.