web analytics

THE IRAQI THREAT…

By ATWadmin On September 20th, 2007

Did you see that Abu Omar al Baghdadi, the fictitious name given to the head of Al Queda in Iraq, has offered a reward of $100,000 for the assassination of Swedish cartoonist Lars Vilks for drawing a picture of a dog with Mohammed’s head on it. He also has offered $50,000 for the assassination of the editor of the newspaper that published the cartoon. As the Foundation for the Defence of Democracy says…

"Can we now, finally, dismiss the notion that al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) has nothing to do with the global al-Qaeda movement and would not be a problem is American troops would just “redeploy” out of Iraq? Also can we recall that AQI was responsible for the hotel bombings in Jordan in November 2005 and, according to British intelligence, was behind the recent failed attacks against London and Glasgow? And it would be nice if anyone in the MSM could bother to note that the most recent National Intelligence Estimate calls AQI the “most visible and capable [al-Qaeda] affiliate and the only one known to have expressed a desire to attack the [U.S] Homeland.”

89 Responses to “THE IRAQI THREAT…”

  1. Speaking of people getting all upset about something frivolous, where’s mahons’ post "Over Here" gone?

  2. Am I going blind? Now I can’t find the post about Ahmadinejad’s visit to Ground Zero either!

    This must come from looking at that second picture Alison posted last night!

  3. Noel: Due to a rather heated comments, I thought it best to hit comments off last night on the "Over Here" post to allow for a cooling off period. Apparently, that further aggravated certain individuals.
    It is David’s site and I am a guest so I thought he would prefer that the virtulent discourse cease. I suspect since there seems to be certain control issues someone thought it best to remove the entire post.
    Quite a start for my Over Here Series. I am a fan of ATW so I’ll await the official word.

  4. >>Quite a start for my Over Here Series. <<

    mahons, best comment was IMO by Charles: "This thread is like General Sherman’s advance through Georgia!"

    So here we are, we let the Yanks in on it and within 24 hours the place is a shambles!

    And they want to sort out Iraq!

  5. BTW, it looks like David also granted Ahmadinejad editing rights!

  6. Noel: Sadly, I missed that one (perhaps lost in the f bombs deployed in my direction). Charles has a quick wit.

    Lars Vilks is lucky he doesn’t have these problems. He’s only got a price on his head from Al Quaeda.

  7. Mahons, what the hell happened?

  8. Frank: I am uncertain. Apparently Typhoo was granted certain site control privileges by David and there is some sort of confusion/disagreement over the protocols. It came to a head late yesterday evening on the "Over There" post. I presume the post was removed as the thread went ballistic. The whole mess is counter to the spirit of my participation in ATW. David’s a gentleman and I am sure he’ll sort it all out.

  9. Mahons, I enjoyed your debut very much. I hope what happened will not discourage you from future commentaries.

    I couldn’t believe my eyes, and swore until I came back today, that I had drank one too many!

  10. So here we are, we let the Yanks in on it and within 24 hours the place is a shambles!

    And they want to sort out Iraq!

    LOL.

  11. Pinky: Cheers. No worries, sticks and stones etc. At least here unlike Iraq you aren’t calling for an American pullout.

  12. Also mahons and tom tyler made an accusation that I brought the site down deliberately. An unsubstantiated, false hood! Therein lies the problem.

  13. OMG … Thank god all of you regulars have such good senses of humor…makes this disappearing thread mystery easier to swallow…

    Mahons: great thread, BTW…I mean it.

  14. Yes it was a good thread.

  15. With draw the accusation and we have no problem!

  16. Typhoo: Are you God?

  17. No don’t want to be god, but I’m not going to be vilified like andrew mc cann either. mahons made the allegation I brought the site down deliberately, I’d like to know on what he bases his allegation, or anyone who said it.

    Are you god patty?

  18. Waht the glark is going on? Mahons? Dammit I missed your post.

  19. Typhoo: I think if you review what I wrote, you’d note that I indicated the crash was unintentional but that the censoring of my comments was intentional. Obviously it hit you the wrong way because your reaction was over the top. This is a site in which the topics are often race, religion, war, and politics and I’d suggest a more temperate approach even when you disagree. You’ll enjoy it more.

  20. Umm, just on the original topic…sorry and all that…

    ‘the most recent National Intelligence Estimate calls AQI the “most visible and capable [al-Qaeda] affiliate and the only one known to have expressed a desire to attack the [U.S] Homeland.” ‘

    Is it still not the case that Al Qaeda in Iraq didn’t exist prior to the overthrow of Saddam and the less than firm management of the ensuing chaos?

    I read that excerpt as some form of argument that the US was right to pursue the war against Saddam because in fact and ante his removal, Al Q were a functioning outfit in Iraq. How so?

    To be clear removing Saddam on WMD grounds is still for me both necessary and sufficient. Why though the need to wrap an Al Q presence in Iraq into the causus belli?

    However, still wondering why the belli wasn’t against Iran. Always better to take down the larger threat…see WWII and priorities there.

  21. Fatmammycat: I am afraid that like Camelot, my little post had too short a life. Next week I am considering "Iowa Wheat Prices Effect on the Presidential Campaign" to tone down the volume.

  22. I’ll disagree on politics or any other topic, I will not agree to allow you to defame me. You stated that I brought this site down intentionally and that is what caused my ‘over reaction’. I went to great lengths to fix a minor problem I caused, other than that I could have done the work in steps, and built it up,. Yes I was nervous working on a site with so much traffic, but I was capable of the work. It was unfortunate but not intentional, I will accept nothing but a complete withdrawal of the comment. Then we can move on!

    I was also prepared to go to great expense and persoanl bother as well as inconveniencing others! How dare anyone insuniate differently to DV or anyone else, that i was some sort of saboteur.

  23. Dog with bone alert!

  24. Exactly! I won’t be accused wrongly. My husband has spoken to David Vance this morning and he has agreed there was no intention on my part re the disturbance to the site, it was not a crash. If mahons disagrees then provide the proof.

  25. At least here unlike Iraq you aren’t calling for an American pullout.

    I do not advocate an American pull-out from Iraq.
    In fact quite the opposite- they should be forced to stay there until they fix the mess they created- and bear the consequences of their invasion.

    ( Now that’s putting the cat among the pigeons, isn’t it?)

  26. Typhoo,
    Can I respectfully ask that you stop introducing your bone to every single blog. I understand you are upset and standing up for yourself, but this is getting quite tedious.
    Please return to your normal excellent blogging and resolve the issue elsewhere- then announce the results?

  27. I didn’t introduce it here, frank and mahons were discussing it prior to me posting. Another one who gets his facts wrong. I suggest you read the post.

  28. Typhoo: You have access to what I wrote. Read it again and I think you’ll see that I did not accuse you of intentionally causing the crash. If there is still some confusion I will happily state categorically that you did not intentionally cause the site to crash.

    I pointed out that the crash was unintentional but that the censoring of comments was intentional and therefore far worse. Perhaps you felt it was within your authority to do so and perhaps you had the authority to do so, fine and dandy. But I don’t want my comments modified because it mischaracterizies what I have written.

    What you wish to accept or not accept is entirely your own business. It has no effect on me.

  29. Pinky -I agree we have a responsibility in Iraq due to the chaos we helped create.

  30. ok mahons happily state it.

  31. and then we’re done!

  32. Typhoo: As my husband often advises me when I’m angry — which is more often than I care to admit — it helps to take a step back from the argument and just sort of review the situation.

    Help us by trying to understand.

    You must understand, we often argue. Bitterly, meanly, sometimes cleverly…but noone wants to censor anybody else.

    Regulars at ATW (myself included) love this site; the beauty of the site is that there is no censorship (except for obvious trolling, spamming, personal threats, etc.) SO if you start to censor without warning and possibly ban people without warning, you effectively change the nature of the site — it’s equivalent to entering a pub and throwing china around.

    Suddenly it’s intimidating to comment. Noone wants to lose their privilege to comment.

    Please try to understand this and join the fun and value of brawling on the internet without censorship and without personal offence taken.

    Thanks for listening. 🙂

  33. Patty and mahons, please read.

    Hotspur/Diathio,

    I’ve censored nothing – except one of Paul’s more offensive comments! However, ATW is not about childish personal insults and bad language so in future, I have made arrangements to make sure these things get vanish! It doesn’t add to the site in any way to have someone call another person names.

    And if you don’t like it why you can just go and…have a lie down!

    Monday, September 17, 2007 at 10:50PM | David Vance

  34. Would you like to see the e mails as well?

  35. Typhoo,
    Why would you share personal communications to make a point?

  36. Typhoo,

    Get over it love!!

  37. I did not share personal communications to make a point but two sentences. You don’t like it thats your problem.

    Now I’m done with this issue as you rightly say, stop posting about it in every blog pinky. DV will deal with it on his terms.

    End off…

  38. Billy

    Read your own comments re republicans in the Omagh thread, and then apply them to your self.

    then you get over it.

  39. Typhoo: Help us! We like this site. Take a step back and use some judgement. It’s not cool to share personal emails.

  40. 1. With a smile on my face and a song in my heart I state without reservation that Typhoo did not intentionally cause the ATW crash. Furthermore, I never said she did.

    2. I further state Typhoo’s ludicrous reaction, unnecessary foul language and inability to comprehend what I had written demonstrates an unfortunate lack of judgment, common sense and proportion.

    If that is is clear enough, good luck. If not, God Bless.

  41. Typhoo,

    Thanks for showing me up with the reprint of DV’s written warning!

    Don’t you realise I’m in enough trouble with Noel and his chum stalking me!!

  42. BTW mahons I was accused of closing the thread,and called a control freak for it, when it had nothing to do with me and that led to heated comments from certain individuals, not me. Just to be clear!

  43. Hotspur, lol

  44. End off…

    Let’s hope so.

  45. Mahons,

    Spot on.

  46. Thats not bad mahons,

    and I state, that further to mahons closing the thread and being dishonest about it, caused more problems this morning which led to me contacting DV. His dishonesty at owning up to it is symptomatic of an individual obsessed what comments look like who obviously has a paranoia about authority. Pity that, his mean comments threw his own thread, but I ‘ll overlook his mean ness, sice he has now retracted!! Not an apology but near enough for me.

  47. Typhoo:Increase your meds. :).

  48. Could u gimme some of yours?

  49. Typhoo: I think you are a bully.

  50. No. Never have been, but I won’t be blamed in the wrong, either about the site crash, or closing of threads, I was called a control freak for mahons closing the thread when it had nothing to do with me! I was called a saboteur, and a lot of other stuff. I’m no bully but I’m no push over either.

    Now since mahons has retracted and the other matters cleared up do you have anything else to say other than insults?

  51. Typhoo: "Now since mahons has retracted and the other matters cleared up do you have anything else to say other than insults?"

    No. Am I excused?

  52. You are what you want to be Patty. But nice chatting to you.

  53. Sigh. For the record, I have retracted nothing (for a defintion of "retract" I refer one and all to the Oxford English Dictionary). I have explained, clarified and elucidated.

  54. It’s close enough for an apology for me. You errm explained, clarified and elucidated, enough times here for it to get accross to most. I’m satisfied.

  55. Let’s move on kids. Life’s too short.

  56. If you didnt close the thread, sabaotage etc then fair enough for wanting to insist on that Typhoo – the comments thing needs Davids clarification as its his site – so leave it to him to clarify and lets everyone move on for f*** sake (ironic..)

  57. Would it be wise for me to say anything ? 🙂

  58. Alison,

    I thought that was self evident…..I’d already moved on. for f***sake (ironic)

  59. I’d still like to know what happened to the post I published this morning creating a free thread for all to comment on things and discuss censorship etc. It vanished about 5 minutes after publication! And we’ve still yet to hear from David on any of this. Until I hear from him on this, I for one will not consider this question settled.

  60. Would it be wise for me to say anything ? 🙂

    There once was a wise old bird, the more he said the less he heard, the more he heard the less he said….

    Now wasn’t he the wise old bird

  61. Smithy I emailed DV that I was taking it down, since it was going to end up about me. Now he has said he will deal with the confusion re the moderating when he returns. Just for the record, I never asked, nor did I seek to moderate, I was asked, if DV wants his ‘moderating’ powers back, he’s welcome. Just for the record. So lets leave it until he returns. But nice try at demonising me. Just for the record, Andrew has left, if you need a new bone to chew on, find somebody else.

  62. Demonising you, Typhoo? Hardly. I didn’t mention your name at all. For all I know, some mischievous little gremlin could have crawled up into ATW to sow distrust and fear by messing around.

    And yet… you jump immediately to defend yourself from an attack that didn’t happen. That I find interesting.

  63. You took down Mr Smith’s post becasue it was going to be about you? Golly, talk about having a persecution complex, how very…Andrew.

  64. to discuss censorship or shit stir? Let David explain about censorship, its his call.

  65. What you find interesting or boring is nothing to me,

    FMC consider a diet eh!

  66. Alison,

    To discuss censorship, since you ask. Every now and again I like to have a discussion without an alterior motive. You may find it hard to believe, but it is true.

  67. Typhoo: When censoring and taking down posts, I would recommend telling people publically what you are doing, and why. Transparency might be the key to happiness here.

    For example, you could write: "I have removed Mr. Smith’s thread on censorship until David Vance returns. I have removed it because it most likely will contain reference to "typhoo" and I don’t want this.

    Or, you could write: "I kindly request that commenters refrain from reference to "Typhoo" until D. Vance returns. If not, postings will be removed. Take up complaints with D. Vance."

    Because, believe it or not, we are not mind readers. We do not know what you are doing, or why.

  68. In this instance it’s hard to believe. Tell us now smiffy, was it coincidental?

  69. Mr. Smith

    ‘I’d still like to know what happened to the post I published this morning creating a free thread for all to comment on things and discuss censorship etc. It vanished about 5 minutes after publication! And we’ve still yet to hear from David on any of this. Until I hear from him on this, I for one will not consider this question settled.’

    That’s interesting. I’ve been batting stuff back and fore with Alison about what’s porn on that Advert thread. It’s really less about porn – at least in my mind – than it’s about censorship.

    Pity your thread is gone and that really does read as ludicrous Typhoo. A pre-emptive strike on a vacant thread for god’s sake.:).

    May as well take down about three other threads where there actually is comment about you.

    3…2…1…

  70. I don’t have the authority to post, and I don’t over step my limits. patty. Otherwise I could be called a control freak or accused falsely. Transparency is one thing, going about it when there are no powers are another.

  71. Typhoo: You don’t have the authority to comment on your actions? You just have authority to act? That belies common sense.

    Surely you can write: "If you use the word f***k one more time I will delete all of your comments on this post." Can’t you?

    Or, "Mr. Smith’s open thread should not contain reference to Typhoo or it will be deleted."

  72. Typhoo,

    Coincidental? Of course not, your flagrant abuses of power brought the issue right to mind. It served (and serves) as what one could call an ‘object lesson’. Here is an excellent example of pointless and damaging censorship, which brought the issue to mind as I say, but I did not use it in the post.

    All I said in the post was that Mahons’ post was gone, that I had been following the discussion, and that perhaps we could discuss censorship.

    Jeff,

    An interesting point, should the images have been allowed? Personally I think yes. On ATW, at least, since they are raw material in the public domain, informing the discussion (or, rather, being the basis of the discussion) on the suitability of adults. We must never shirk from reality, I think.

    Anyone,

    I’m heading home now, will check back later. If this thread is still here, that is!

  73. I refused to be demonised in the same way Andrew McCann was. Smith put the post up to do just that, he hasn’t the integrity to admit it but that is what it boils down to. find some other scapegoat smith!

    Now until DV returns and says what he has to say, I’m signing off.

    Good evening.

  74. Patty

    For a ravening neocon, your comment seems entirely rational.

    <Grin>

    And in today’s environment I guess I should repeat…<Grin>

    I plead precedence…if it’s OK for black folk to call each other n*****, then it’s OK for one neocon to use the n***** word to another…what a delightful coincidence of first letter.:)

  75. Patty,

    "You must understand, we often argue. Bitterly, meanly, sometimes cleverly…but noone wants to censor anybody else."

    I know what you mean however your facts are wrong.

    For a long time now there has been arbitrary, capricious, inconsistent and partisan deletion and even editing of comments on ATW. The difference with the recent editing is only one of scale. You just haven’t noticed it before, or you thought it was always "trolls" (it isn’t).

    Of course as I have posted before, DV can do that on his own site if he wishes and if he wants to restrict commenting only to those who know the lyrics to "Oliver’s Army" then that’s his perogative (I would pass this test 🙂

    "Moderation" is a dangerous game however as when you take away you are then answerable for what you leave behind. For example despite removing innocuous "personal stuff", the moderator has somehow seen fit to leave Mr Smith’s recent lies and violent fantasies about myself untouched. (I don’t actually mind that they weren’t edited because I would like newcomers to know how disturbed Smith is, I just mention this to highlight the inconsistency. Also to be crystal clear my remark is aimed at the idea of censorship moderation, and not the moderator!).

    Still though the irony of ‘moderation’ leading to all hell breaking loose is priceless, and the fact of the ‘moderator’ apparently starting a bunfight rather than stopping one is almost as funny as Smith complaining about censorship.

  76. You being stalked Hotspur?

    I’m truly shocked to hear that! But you do rather leave yourself open to it. I have a vision of you behind your triple baby-buggy, a (virgin) yummy-mummy) bravely tryiing to blank out the jeers of uncivicly minded corner boys who, as you pass by, sing
    such ribald ditties as

    ‘Virgin Hotspur full of grace,
    Whip down your knickers
    And sit on my face…’

    While, as you’d expect, the coloured boys go…

    ‘Do-de-do, de-do…hey Hotspur, take a walk on the wild side…’

    Of course, I heartily concur..

  77. we should all stop using fucking asterisks then and stop fucking censoring eh?

  78. Mr. Smith

    ‘An interesting point, should the images have been allowed? Personally I think yes. On ATW, at least, since they are raw material in the public domain, informing the discussion (or, rather, being the basis of the discussion) on the suitability of adults. We must never shirk from reality, I think.’

    I agree. We are adults. We live in a society that favors free expression. That may upset some but it’s a damn sight better than living in the more repressive societies floating around.

    I just can’t get too excited about porn – that seems to be open to an unfortunate interpretation but you know what I mean – with all the other crap that goes on.

    Hell, it almost makes Global Warming look important.:)

  79. Frank that is the most sensible post I’ve read all day!

  80. Jeff..in showing the images here i decided david has kids, its his site not mine and thought maybe i should be a teeny weeny bit judicious about it – i employed a ‘watershed’, and threw them behind an link today but if it helps the images are on my site (with my eeek, feminist opinion) here:

    http://adirtymartini.typepad.com/my_weblog/

    To hell with judicious its no holds barred from here on in!

  81. Alison

    No problem – go for it.:) Down with judicial holds!

    It’s just the ad-hominems that annoy me. Any point being made just disappears into a morass of he said – she said that may be vital to the participants but just leaves me bored. Well to be honest, eventually bored. It was funny for a time.

  82. like all walks of life, those who ask for power are probably the ones who shouldnt be granted any.

  83. I agree daytripper, those who ask for it shouldn’t be granted any!

  84. Jeff,

    "I just can’t get too excited about porn"

    Suggests someone’s not doing their job right, then.

  85. MrSmith

    Yeah, yeah.:)

    Now for some real ‘hot’ stuff…it’s a pleasant cool breezy 85F day in Florida. No hurricanes this year as was last year…damn that Global Warming is importante.

  86. Sorry, Jeff, it had to be said. 🙂

  87. I think i just threw up a bit in my mouth

  88. As has been said before, swallow Alison, swallow! 😉

  89. >>we should all ..stop fucking censoring eh?<<

    But only yesterday you were talking about censoring fucking!

    >>His dishonesty at owning up to it is symptomatic of an individual obsessed what comments look like who obviously has a paranoia about authority.<<

    Phew! Thank goodness we won’t be hearing much more of THAT!