Slashdot Mirror

On Al-Jazeera - the only TV channel with access to Afghanistan, and one of the few 'independant' channels in the Arab world.

[BTW, I'm still not too sure what I think of Colin Powell asking Qatar to muzzle their 'free press'...]

A good piece on airdropping aid and other issues.

And a piece on why it is about Islam (and about the USA, not the whole Western world).

Some interesting views there. Especially the facts and figures for those aid drops, which at least partly undermine Bush & Blair's humanitarian claims.

On Al-Jazeera - the only TV channel with access to Afghanistan, and one of the few 'independant' channels in the Arab world.

[BTW, I'm still not too sure what I think of Colin Powell asking Qatar to muzzle their 'free press'...]

A good piece on airdropping aid and other issues.

And a piece on why it is about Islam (and about the USA, not the whole Western world).

Some interesting views there. Especially the facts and figures for those aid drops, which at least partly undermine Bush & Blair's humanitarian claims.

On Al-Jazeera - the only TV channel with access to Afghanistan, and one of the few 'independant' channels in the Arab world.

[BTW, I'm still not too sure what I think of Colin Powell asking Qatar to muzzle their 'free press'...]

A good piece on airdropping aid and other issues.

And a piece on why it is about Islam (and about the USA, not the whole Western world).

Some interesting views there. Especially the facts and figures for those aid drops, which at least partly undermine Bush & Blair's humanitarian claims.

Sometimes not even when conclusive proof is offered. Excerpt from a recent Guardian (UK) article by Arundhati Roy:

From what is known about the location of Bin Laden and the living conditions in which he operates, it's entirely possible that he did not personally plan and carry out the attacks - that he is the inspirational figure, "the CEO of the holding company". The Taliban's response to US demands for the extradition of Bin Laden has been uncharacteristically reasonable: produce the evidence, then we'll hand him over. President Bush's response is that the demand is "non-negotiable".

(While talks are on for the extradition of CEOs - can India put in a side request for the extradition of Warren Anderson of the US? He was the chairman of Union Carbide, responsible for the Bhopal gas leak that killed 16,000 people in 1984. We have collated the necessary evidence. It's all in the files. Could we have him, please?)

I have to admit that I'd almost forgotten about Bhopal. Twice as many dead as the WTC bombing, albeit through (alleged) criminal corporate negligence, not terrorism. But I can see why India, definitely no friend to the Taliban, might perceive a slight double standard here...

Arundhati Roy
Guardian

[...]
Here's the rub: America is at war against people it doesn't know, because they don't appear much on TV. Before it has properly identified or even begun to comprehend the nature of its enemy, the US government has, in a rush of publicity and embarrassing rhetoric, cobbled together an "international coalition against terror", mobilised its army, its air force, its navy and its media, and committed them to battle.

The trouble is that once America goes off to war, it can't very well return without having fought one. If it doesn't find its enemy, for the sake of the enraged folks back home, it will have to manufacture one. Once war begins, it will develop a momentum, a logic and a justification of its own, and we'll lose sight of why it's being fought in the first place.
[...]

Okay, if we can't believe everything seen on CNN, what about

• The BBC .
• The Boston Globe
• The Chigago Tribune
• The Guardian (UK)

Also, don't forget the fact that some Palestinians kidnapped one of the cameramen that recorded the cheering, and the Palestinian Authority couldn't guarantee his safety if the footage was broadcast. Heard this on both The Jerusalem Post and also corroborated on NPR. Can't find a link to the stories, though.

Secondly, just go to their site. You won't get very far unless you have javascript turned on. Javascript is such an insecure technology, it makes MS Windows look secure.

Anybody trusting Safeweb is just itching to get burned. All IMHO of course.

An article in the Guardian suggests that it was an inside job, intended to discredit the director of the Bletchley Park Trust, Christine Large, who had been sacked and reinstated in controversial circumstances. The full details of the theft have yet to emerge, but as they may be a long time in coming it makes sense to cover this development.

It seems the terrorists didn't even bother to encrypt their emails either according to this article in the UK Guardian newspaper.

"FBI investigators had been able to locate hundreds of email communications, sent 30 to 45 days before the attack....According to the FBI, the conspirators had not used encryption or concealment methods. Once found, the emails could be openly read."

Hope that helps

FBI investigators had been able to locate hundreds of email communications, sent 30 to 45 days before the attack. Records had been obtained from internet service providers and from public libraries. The messages, in both English and Arabic, were sent within the US and internationally. They had been sent from personal computers or from public sites such as libraries. They used a variety of ISPs, including accounts on Hotmail.

According to the FBI, the conspirators had not used encryption or concealment methods. Once found, the emails could be openly read.

The Guardian Unlimited has a nice article which sums up a few views on encryption and the WTC attack: http://www.guardian.co.uk/waronterror/story/0,1361 ,558371,00.html. Basically it says the terrorists did not use strong crypto and had good reasons not to do so.

"FBI investigators had been able to locate hundreds of email communications, sent 30 to 45 days before the attack. Records had been obtained from internet service providers and from public libraries. The messages, in both English and Arabic, were sent within the US and internationally. They had been sent from personal computers or from public sites such as libraries. They used a variety of ISPs, including accounts on Hotmail.

According to the FBI, the conspirators had not used encryption or concealment methods. Once found, the emails could be openly read."

It said in the guardian[www.guardian.co.uk] that they used web based email accounts including hotmail and didn't encrypt anything.

The second requires the hacking be used for monetary or material gain beyond just gaining unauthorized access to the computer (unless access is valued over $5000).

And you think that the amount will never be reached? Do you think that the system owners won't inflate any amounts so it becomes over this amount?

How about Randal Schwartz? For what he did he had to pay $68K. Do you really think that stealing a little computer time and access was worth that much?

And how about Kevin Mitnick? One of his crimes was
"downloading of Sun's source code cost the company $80m"

Yes, that right, the same code you can now get for free from Sun. Do you really think that he could have caused that much damage to Sun?

If you attacked my server at home, I could easily make up a figure close to that of $5,000, based on my normal hourly billing rate and making up an amount of time it took to rebuild my system.

If you truly believe that this law will not be used unjustly, then let me tell you about this nice bridge I have for sale.... hardly used, going cheap....

Maybe someone should take that information which Larry thinks the government should have, and pretend to be Larry Ellison. Oh, wait, it's already been done...

Sure, we'll provide the server software. Oh? GMAC wants to jack into it? Guess you'll be client software, huh?

You want someone with credentials? Read this article by a former SAS-man who fought there over here . Basically, the terrain is so rugged that carrying or flying around any equipment is a hindrance. There is no way to do anything except by doing a ground-war with infantry, in which case the US will be DOA, since the afghanistan people are so much more trained for fighting in the high (think 4000m) mountains.

Aren't the US looking for control? See this article at the guardian , which says that the US has plans, involving installing 86 year old King Zahir Shah as ruler.

-db

If you haven't yet listened to or read President Bush's speech to Congress, I highly recommend doing so.

I'm getting the distinct impression that Bush is planning on liberating Afghanistan. There are even reports that this is the case. Combine that with the ongoing British diplomacy with Iran, Iran's calling for an international fight against terrorism, and unprecedented sympathy towards the terror attack victims. And note how we haven't dropped any bombs yet, 11 days after the WTC mass murder. It looks like we're going to do the job right this time.

Peace with Iran, the liberation and rebuilding of Afghanistan... it's going to be tough to pull off, but if it can be done, wow...

Just been reading todays Guardian, another item: A conflict like no other seen before

Just been reading todays Guardian, another item: A conflict like no other seen before

The Guardian a few days ago had an interesting item from a former SAS member sent there:

"We were there to assess their fighting capability and to retrieve Soviet equipment. It was 1979 and the Afghans were fighting a superpower with tactics they had used against the British before the first world war..."

The Guardian a few days ago had an interesting item from a former SAS member sent there:

"We were there to assess their fighting capability and to retrieve Soviet equipment. It was 1979 and the Afghans were fighting a superpower with tactics they had used against the British before the first world war..."

Osama bin Laden and the Taliban received threats of possible American military strikes against them two months before the terrorist assaults on New York and Washington, which were allegedly masterminded by the Saudi-born fundamentalist, a Guardian investigation has established.

The threats of war unless the Taliban surrendered Osama bin Laden were passed to the regime in Afghanistan by the Pakistani government, senior diplomatic sources revealed yesterday.

The Taliban refused to comply but the serious nature of what they were told raises the possibility that Bin Laden, far from launching the attacks on the World Trade Centre in New York and the Pentagon out of the blue 10 days ago, was launching a pre-emptive strike in response to what he saw as US threats.

The warning to the Taliban originated at a four-day meeting of senior Americans, Russians, Iranians and Pakistanis at a hotel in Berlin in mid-July. The conference, the third in a series dubbed "brainstorming on Afghanistan", was part of a classic diplomatic device known as "track two".

It was designed to offer a free and open-ended forum for governments to pass messages and sound out each other's thinking. Participants were experts with long diplomatic experience of the region who were no longer government officials but had close links with their governments.

"The Americans indicated to us that in case the Taliban does not behave and in case Pakistan also doesn't help us to influence the Taliban, then the United States would be left with no option but to take an overt action against Afghanistan," said Niaz Naik, a former foreign minister of Pakistan, who was at the meeting.

"I told the Pakistani government, who informed the Taliban via our foreign office and the Taliban ambassador here."

The three Americans at the Berlin meeting were Tom Simons, a former US ambassador to Pakistan, Karl "Rick" Inderfurth, a former assistant secretary of state for south Asian affairs, and Lee Coldren, who headed the office of Pakistan, Afghan and Bangladesh affairs in the state department until 1997.

According to Mr Naik, the Americans raised the issue of an attack on Afghanistan at one of the full sessions of the conference, convened by Francesc Vendrell, a Spanish diplomat who serves as the UN secretary general's special representative on Afghanistan. In the break afterwards, Mr Naik told the Guardian yesterday, he asked Mr Simons why the attack should be more successful than Bill Clinton's missile strikes on Afghanistan in 1998, which caused 20 deaths but missed Bin Laden.

"He said this time they were very sure. They had all the intelligence and would not miss him this time. It would be aerial action, maybe helicopter gunships, and not only overt, but from very close proximity to Afghanistan. The Russians were listening to the conversation but not participating."

Asked whether he could be sure that the Americans were passing ideas from the Bush administration rather than their own views, Mr Naik said yesterday: "What the Americans indicated to us was perhaps based on official instructions. They were very senior people. Even in 'track two' people are very careful about what they say and don't say."

In the room at the time were not only the Americans, Russians and Pakistanis but also a team from Iran headed by Saeed Rajai Khorassani, a former Iranian envoy to the UN. Three Pakistani generals, one still on active service, attended the conference. Giving further evidence of the fact that the Berlin meeting was designed to influence governments, the UN invited official representatives of both the Taliban government in Kabul and the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance. Dr Abdullah Abdullah, the Northern Alliance's foreign minister, attended. The Taliban declined to send a representative.

The Pakistani government took the US talk of possible strikes seriously enough to pass it on to the Taliban. Pakistan is one of only three governments to recognise the Taliban.

Mr Coldren confirmed the broad outline of the American position at the Berlin meeting yesterday. "I think there was some discussion of the fact that the United States was so disgusted with the Taliban that they might be considering some military action." The three former US diplomats "based our discussion on hearsay from US officials", he said. It was not an agenda item at the meeting "but was mentioned just in passing".

Nikolai Kozyrev, Moscow's former special envoy on Afghanistan and one of the Russians in Berlin, would not confirm the contents of the US conversations, but said: "Maybe they had some discussions in the corridor. I don't exclude such a possibility."

Mr Naik's recollection is that "we had the impression Russians were trying to tell the Americans that the threat of the use of force is sometimes more effective than force itself".

The Berlin conference was the third convened since November last year by Mr Vendrell. As a UN meeting, its official agenda was confined to trying to find a negotiated solution to the civil war in Afghanistan, ending terrorism and heroin trafficking, and discussing humanitarian aid.

Mr Simons denied having said anything about detailed operations. "I've known Niaz Naik and considered him a friend for years. He's an honourable diplomat. I didn't say anything like that and didn't hear anyone else say anything like that. We were clear that feeling in Washington was strong, and that military action was one of the options down the road. But details, I don't know where they came from."

The US was reassessing its Afghan policy under the new Bush administration at the time of the July meeting, according to Mr Simons. "It was clear that the trend of US government policy was widening. People should worry, Taliban, Bin Laden ought to worry - but the drift of US policy was to get away from single issue, from concentrating on Bin Laden as under Clinton, and get broader."

Mr Inderfurth said: "There was no suggestion for military force to be used. What we discussed was the need for a comprehensive political settlement to bring an end to the war in Afghanistan, that has been going on for two decades, and has been doing so much damage."

The Foreign Office confirmed the significance of the Berlin discussions. "The meeting was a bringing together of Afghan factions and some interested states and we received reports from several participants, including the UN," it said.

Asked if he was surprised that the American participants were denying the details they mentioned in Berlin, Mr Naik said last night: "I'm a little surprised but maybe they feel they shouldn't have told us anything in advance now we have had these tragic events".

Russia's president Vladimir Putin said in an interview released yesterday that he had warned the Clinton administration about the dangers posed by Bin Laden. "Washington's reaction at the time really amazed me. They shrugged their shoulders and said matter-of-factly: 'We can't do anything because the Taliban does not want to turn him over'."

So measures introduced for "the duration" could potentially be there for a very long time...

One new measure which I've not seen mentioned on here, btw - increased scrutiny of all foreign students studying in the USA. See this link for a British newspaper report on it - and this one for a very good piece on politicians supporting whatever the President says for fear of being seen as apologists or unpatriotic (it concentrates on defence and foreign policy, but the logic also applies to rights issues)...

So measures introduced for "the duration" could potentially be there for a very long time...

One new measure which I've not seen mentioned on here, btw - increased scrutiny of all foreign students studying in the USA. See this link for a British newspaper report on it - and this one for a very good piece on politicians supporting whatever the President says for fear of being seen as apologists or unpatriotic (it concentrates on defence and foreign policy, but the logic also applies to rights issues)...

Note the key phrase "purple-skinned" - the flesh is white.

BugBear

Note the key phrase "purple-skinned" - the flesh is white.

BugBear

Check this article from British paper The Guardian for a good account of why a lot of occupying soldiers will be killed if they attempt to hold Afganistan...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4 259230,00.html

A search or two indicates that they have strong links with the Irish Republican Army (IRA) which is regarded as a terrorist group within the mainland UK.

Whether the IRA are terrorists or freedom fighters is a question for the individual. What is not beyond question is that large numbers of their members have (and still do) advocate violence against property and individuals.

Blake Morrison on why the attack on America has transfixed us all.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/wtccrash/story/0,1300,55 1618,00.html

1. Bin Laden comes home to roost - about the militant's CIA training
   
2. Bush's Faustian Deal With the Taliban - Opinion, references the $43 million in 2001
   
3. $70 million in aid to Afghanistan in 1997 - according to the CIA itself.
   
4. Who is Osama Bin Laden?
   
5. They can't see why they are hated - Opinion
   
6. Arab-Americans feel a backlash
   
7. Arab-American community 'keeping its head down'
   
8. Acts of Terrorism the Ultimate 'Faith-Based Initiative' - Opinion
   
9. Charity receives hate calls
   
10. Falwell says 'ACLU's got to take a lot of blame for this'
    

The key phrase is "for doing his job". Did you SEE his face? Europe did.

Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson blaming the events on liberals, feminists, etc. etc. etc.

While I wholly condemn the actions of the terrorists I do have to critically ask, "Did the government of the United States of America have this coming?

You'd have to be blind to see that the U.S. government has been supplying arms and training and money to factions around the world for over 50 years. You'd have to be blind to see the American government change its mind mid-stride -- first by supporting a group (again, with weapons and money), then by turning face, cutting off support or even condemning the actions of the group they supported.

You'd have to be insane to believe the 1973 crap propaganda article by Gordon Sinclair is a clear and frank view of the United States of America and its leaders and their policies.

The government of the United States of America has been bullying and harassing nations for a very long time, flaunting themselves as a superpower which is untouchable. They've stuck their noses in other nations' business too many times and someone had decided to cut it off.

I don't agree entirely with this Guardian article but it does rise a very strong and important point: The U.S. must change the way it carries itself in foreign affairs. The American people must stand up and take active interest in their nation's government. The American media must stop downplaying foreign affairs.

an aside: the Canadian people aren't much (any) better in this regard. Canadian readers: How much interest do you show in your government??

I do not believe that this is the act of one nation, or even of a nation. And I am frightened because I do not think this is the last.

The U.S. government and media is running around crying "Why me? Why us?" and you have the President standing frail and shaken, telling his nation that "He's gotta do what he's gotta do" instead of analyzing the situation properly and keeping cool.

I must give Bush credit -- he did not spout off about Arabs or "them guys" as Clinton did with OKC -- Bush remained calm and rational. I fear that this is quickly fizzling out because his anger is taking over and as President, he is not allowed to have those emotions. He is a man with the power of a very large, wealthy and military nation. He is not allowed to be angry. I think he is grappling with those emotions and his reserve is failing.

As a Canadian, I demand retribution for what happened in the United States this week. I am not saying "forgive and forget." Blood will be shed, and rightly so. Check out my /. userpage for views on what I personally feel is acceptable for retaliation. I also think the President should send a strong message that it is not acceptable to hate the middle eastern people -- Just as there was no witchhunt against all white people with OKC, there should be no anger towards the Arab, Muslim and other middle-eastern people within or outside the U.S. This is not an attack by the middle eastern people nor their religion; this is an attack by terrorists and cowards too cowardly to stand up and fight.

And I fear that we will be brought into a world war because of it.

"These are people that come from a country where it's a crime if you teach a woman, that's right, you go to JAIL if you teach a woman.. A country that sends you to jail if you don't have a beard.. A place where you can't give woman rides, dancing is illegal and playing any music other then music approved by the government will also land you in prison.."

None of which was the case before the USA, UK and Pakistan destabilised Afghanistan to get at the USSR, laying the groundwork for the Taliban to get into power in the first place...

"It was the Americans, after all, who poured resources into the 1980s war against the Soviet-backed regime in Kabul, at a time when girls could go to school and women to work. Bin Laden and his mojahedin were armed and trained by the CIA and MI6, as Afghanistan was turned into a wasteland and its communist leader Najibullah left hanging from a Kabul lamp post with his genitals stuffed in his mouth."

Quoted from the UK's Guardian newspaper - the full (rather cynical) article is here

this story from the UK sums it up, rather accurately.
Sad, but true

Two things I've seen about this come from the UK:

BBC Q&A about the situation
and The Guardian saying "They can't see why they are hated"

--stanza

Only if we want it to. Or can be 'convinced' to want it in a moment of weakness. Like now.

an illusion of separation from the rest of the world

What gives you that idea? What are all of those international airplane flights? Where do all those boxes come from at the store? How stupid do you think Americans are?

transportation and communications, which are usefull tools for terrorists.
And for *competent* government. Which we are sorely lacking.

Get used to it
NO. That's what the Nazis said.

you live in the big bad world now

And we and our government helped to make it that way.

It is true that we should increase domestic security, i.e. security on the airlines. However, I think that this incident could have been prevented if only our government took a more even view in foreign policy. There are hundreds of postings all over the net about retaliation and vengence, however, few postings actually ask why this event actually happened. Of course we can't retroactively change US foreign policy, but I urge that all of us should convince our government to adapt policies that would acheive a balance of domestic as well as foreign peace. Here is a link from the Guardian that gives a different view of the WTC disaster:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,551 036,00.html

From the Guardian: Anti-Islamic sentiment has turned to violence in pockets across the world following Tuesday's terrorist attacks, despite the fact that no group has claimed responsibility or been officially blamed. A Molotov cocktail was thrown at an Arab-American community centre in Chicago, a firebomb was hurled at a mosque in Montreal, and in Australia, aggressors threw stones and bottles at a busload of Muslim schoolchildren. In New York, a 75-year-old drunken man tried to run over a Pakistani woman in a shopping mall parking lot. He then followed her into a shop and threatened to kill her for "destroying my country". In Illinois 300 protesters, some waving American flags, tried to march on a mosque in this south-west Chicago suburb last night. Three demonstrators were arrested as police worked to keep the crowds away from the Muslim place of worship. "I'm proud to be American and I hate Arabs and I always have," said 19-year-old Colin Zaremba, who marched with the group. Tamara Alfson, an American working at the Kuwait embassy in Washington, spent yesterday counselling frightened Kuwaiti students attending schools across the United States. "Some of them have already been harassed," she said. In a show of patriotism, 45 people from Tampa, Florida's Islamic community yesterday registered to donate blood and 30 members of the Muslim Students Association at the University of South Florida signed up. Abu Nahidian, director of the Manassas mosque in Virginia, said his congregation has been the target of insults and hate messages left on the office answering machine. "We have some recordings in our tapes that say, 'We hate you so-and-so Muslims and we hope you die'," he said. Several other incidents were reported in Canada, where five school children with Arabic-sounding names were assaulted in Oakville, Ontario. In Australia, the school bus attack took place in Brisbane. In Sydney, a Lebanese church was daubed with swastikas and an attempt was made to burn it down. Queensland state's Islamic council chairman, Sultan Deen, said public outrage over the attacks had also led to abusive phone calls to mosques. "It is very disturbing. They are saying things like: 'You will be held responsible' and 'We'll get you,'" Mr Deen said. An Islamic group in Singapore today urged people not to lay blame too quickly for the terrorist attacks. "The process of scapegoating started immediately after the crashes," the Muslim community organisation Fateha said in a statement. "We note, with terrible unease, the way Arabs and Muslims are treated in America, before any real evidence has been established on the perpetrators of this horrendous crime," the statement said.

The following UK newspaper reference explains what I am talking about much more eloquently that I could:
Link to Guardian Story

(http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604, 55 1036,00.html)

I`m not trying to start a flamewar or stir up trouble but there are other ways of protecting your interests without pissing everybody else off in the process.

Yeah, they raided InfoCom Corp., formerly at www.infocomcorp.com. InfoCom denies any connection with this; I don't think the govt. has said anything either way.

I posted a story (rejected) yesterday to slashdot about a "pro-Palestinian" web hoster being raided by an anti-terrorism unit. This was in Texas .
One of the knock-on effects of terrorism is the extension of powers to security forces - lots of incredible changes were made to U.K. legislation in response to the P.I.R.A.: things like removal of the right to silence, the ability to be held on suspicion(!) for up to two weeks, trial by non-jury courts.
I hope that American citizens aren't bamboozled into giving their security forces undue powers that can be misused.

Quote from the ...

"But Professor Paul Rogers, of Bradford University's peace department, warned against assuming Middle East extremists were behind the tragedy.

"We've been here before. With Oklahoma, everybody assumed it was Middle East [terrorists], then it turned out to be home-grown Timothy McVeigh," he said. "Again with the pipe bomb in Atlanta, it
turned out to be domestic."

• Google Directory has an entire section on the topic.
• BBC story: "Alarm grows over cancer deaths"
• BBC: Depleted uranium 'threatens Balkan cancer epidemic': A British scientist says the Americans' use of depleted uranium weapons in the war with Serbia is likely to cause 10,000 extra deaths from cancer.
• The Yugoslav President, Vojislav Kostunica, announced yesterday that he would meet the chief prosecutor of the UN war crimes tribunal next week to discuss Nato's use of depleted uranium shells as a war crime against civilians. Note to the clue-impaired: Kostunica is the POST-Milosevic leader who was lead the rebellion against his regime.
• Robert Fisk: In another Bosnian town two small boys lie in their hospital beds. Is this collateral damage? (Note: Robert Fisk is an EXTREMELY respected war correspondent with over twenty years' experience.)
• Euro MPs defy Nato and seek ban on DU: The European Parliament called for a suspension of the use of depleted uranium (DU) munitions yesterday, rejecting safety assurances from Nato and heightening pressure for a formal moratorium.
• Belgrade Law Centre DU archive
• Eighth Italian soldier dies in DU scare
• Are the governments of Nato guilty of committing a heinous war crime?
• 'Mr Blair, Mr Clinton, Lord Robertson and the rest don't want to know about the dying Serbs of Bosnia'
• Nato calls for DU medical inquiry in all 19 alliance countries
• Ministers of White Noise vie for title of most vacuous public servant
• A Labour MP warned the Government yesterday of his fears over the risks to service personnel who have been exposed to depleted uranium. Note: Labour is the party of government; this MP just blew his entire career by making this statement.
• NATO could face a criminal investigation into the use by its forces of depleted uranium ammunition, the chief prosecutor of the UN war crimes tribunal said yesterday.
• Where the streets are littered with DU shells
  The snow clings to the burnt rafters of the old military factory at Hadjici and slithers off the fir trees that survived Nato's 1995 bombing.
• Sick, bleeding and losing nails: the girl who played with Nato uranium: Sladjana Sarenac remembers the pieces of a depleted-uranium bomb that she picked up outside her home in Sarajevo.
• The Surgeon-General's office of the US army warned almost eight years ago that military personnel exposed to dust from depleted uranium ammunition risk developing lung and bone cancer.
• I see 300 graves that could bear the headstone: 'Died of depleted uranium'Robert Fisk in Bratunac, Eastern Bosnia
• Guardian special report

The thing that makes me really sad is how certain most of the replies to my original post were that I was trolling, or talking shit. Your first instincts were: "It's our army, and we're the GOODIES for heaven's sake! This guy MUST be talking thru' his arse." It seems that's the only way for you to resolve the cognitive dissonance. The NATO armies are mostly composed of the citizens of those countries. Where do you think the expression "cannon fodder" comes from?

I wonder whether an apology is too much to ask for?

I can't remember the last time I got this angry after reading something on Slashdot. I'm trying not to resort to name-calling because I want to believe that some of you are intelligent and open-minded enough to admit that you were, at the very least, gullible to parrot the official line pedalled by the (US) mass media. We all know how committed THEY are to truth and justice, right? Oh, so long as it doesn't conflict with government wishes. Which means corporate interests.

Right, I'm done ranting now. If that hasn't got me a Special Branch file, I want my taxes back ;)

Some links (I went to the Independent and Guardian newspaper sites first because one of them - the Gruaniad I think - ran a massive front page lead feature on "the cover-up and scandal of the Kosovan war". We in the UK have been "lucky" enough to have found out about a whole string of Govt. coverups in the last few years, from BSE/CJD, foot & mouth, arms to Iraq (which only broke thanks to Ollie North being a moron)... we tend to be a bit sceptical when they assure us that there's nothing to worry about and everything's under control.

• Bosnians fall victim to Nato's deadly legacy. This is a medical horror story.
• Scientists find plutonium in Nato shells fired in Kosovo
• Halt use of Uranium weapons (editorial)
• Nato brings out big guns to kill off cancer scare: "Nato yesterday launched a massive damage limitation exercise it hopes will defuse growing concern that its use of armour-piercing depleted uranium-tipped shells in Kosovo may be the cause of unexplained cases of cancer among its troops."
• British, Australian and New Zealand servicemen may have been exposed to depleted uranium, which has been blamed for higher cancer rates in Gulf War veterans, during British nuclear tests in Australia and the Pacific in the 1950s
• Water in Kosovo could be poisoned with depleted uranium, says UN
• The Ministry of Defence faced fierce criticism yesterday after it renewed test-firing of depleted uranium shells
• Minister admits troops were not told of DU risk
• The story Nato's newspaper does not want to tell
• At last, ministers take depleted uranium seriously

  These are all from UK quality broadsheet newspapers.

  Full disclosure: my girlfriend is Serbian; however she (and I) have no sympathy for, and place less than zero credibility in, anything coming from the Milosevic regime (indeed, she was teargassed by them in '91 & forced into exile.) The people mostly dying of cancer, apart from the NATO PBI (poor bloody infantry), are mostly Kosovan civilians.

  It might come as a shock, folks, but YOUR GOVERNMENT IS LYING TO YOU. Why is this so hard to grasp when it happens in an area unconnected with IP, computers or the Internet? '"Here's American Gladiators. Here's 500 channels of this shit. Go back to sleep America, your government is in control." And oh the light of the TVs glow through millions of American windows... ' (Bill Hicks.)

Some links (I went to the Independent and Guardian newspaper sites first because one of them - the Gruaniad I think - ran a massive front page lead feature on "the cover-up and scandal of the Kosovan war". We in the UK have been "lucky" enough to have found out about a whole string of Govt. coverups in the last few years, from BSE/CJD, foot & mouth, arms to Iraq (which only broke thanks to Ollie North being a moron)... we tend to be a bit sceptical when they assure us that there's nothing to worry about and everything's under control.

• Bosnians fall victim to Nato's deadly legacy. This is a medical horror story.
• Scientists find plutonium in Nato shells fired in Kosovo
• Halt use of Uranium weapons (editorial)
• Nato brings out big guns to kill off cancer scare: "Nato yesterday launched a massive damage limitation exercise it hopes will defuse growing concern that its use of armour-piercing depleted uranium-tipped shells in Kosovo may be the cause of unexplained cases of cancer among its troops."
• British, Australian and New Zealand servicemen may have been exposed to depleted uranium, which has been blamed for higher cancer rates in Gulf War veterans, during British nuclear tests in Australia and the Pacific in the 1950s
• Water in Kosovo could be poisoned with depleted uranium, says UN
• The Ministry of Defence faced fierce criticism yesterday after it renewed test-firing of depleted uranium shells
• Minister admits troops were not told of DU risk
• The story Nato's newspaper does not want to tell
• At last, ministers take depleted uranium seriously

  These are all from UK quality broadsheet newspapers.

  Full disclosure: my girlfriend is Serbian; however she (and I) have no sympathy for, and place less than zero credibility in, anything coming from the Milosevic regime (indeed, she was teargassed by them in '91 & forced into exile.) The people mostly dying of cancer, apart from the NATO PBI (poor bloody infantry), are mostly Kosovan civilians.

  It might come as a shock, folks, but YOUR GOVERNMENT IS LYING TO YOU. Why is this so hard to grasp when it happens in an area unconnected with IP, computers or the Internet? '"Here's American Gladiators. Here's 500 channels of this shit. Go back to sleep America, your government is in control." And oh the light of the TVs glow through millions of American windows... ' (Bill Hicks.)

Some links (I went to the Independent and Guardian newspaper sites first because one of them - the Gruaniad I think - ran a massive front page lead feature on "the cover-up and scandal of the Kosovan war". We in the UK have been "lucky" enough to have found out about a whole string of Govt. coverups in the last few years, from BSE/CJD, foot & mouth, arms to Iraq (which only broke thanks to Ollie North being a moron)... we tend to be a bit sceptical when they assure us that there's nothing to worry about and everything's under control.

• Bosnians fall victim to Nato's deadly legacy. This is a medical horror story.
• Scientists find plutonium in Nato shells fired in Kosovo
• Halt use of Uranium weapons (editorial)
• Nato brings out big guns to kill off cancer scare: "Nato yesterday launched a massive damage limitation exercise it hopes will defuse growing concern that its use of armour-piercing depleted uranium-tipped shells in Kosovo may be the cause of unexplained cases of cancer among its troops."
• British, Australian and New Zealand servicemen may have been exposed to depleted uranium, which has been blamed for higher cancer rates in Gulf War veterans, during British nuclear tests in Australia and the Pacific in the 1950s
• Water in Kosovo could be poisoned with depleted uranium, says UN
• The Ministry of Defence faced fierce criticism yesterday after it renewed test-firing of depleted uranium shells
• Minister admits troops were not told of DU risk
• The story Nato's newspaper does not want to tell
• At last, ministers take depleted uranium seriously

  These are all from UK quality broadsheet newspapers.

  Full disclosure: my girlfriend is Serbian; however she (and I) have no sympathy for, and place less than zero credibility in, anything coming from the Milosevic regime (indeed, she was teargassed by them in '91 & forced into exile.) The people mostly dying of cancer, apart from the NATO PBI (poor bloody infantry), are mostly Kosovan civilians.

  It might come as a shock, folks, but YOUR GOVERNMENT IS LYING TO YOU. Why is this so hard to grasp when it happens in an area unconnected with IP, computers or the Internet? '"Here's American Gladiators. Here's 500 channels of this shit. Go back to sleep America, your government is in control." And oh the light of the TVs glow through millions of American windows... ' (Bill Hicks.)

The Concorde has a history of tire problems. When the crash happened last year, it was due to debris from the Concorde's own blown tire perforating the fuel tank, which led to the ignition of the leaking fuel.

Now, I'm no aeronautical engineer, but i'd say that when a flying chunk of blown tire can punch a hole in your fuel tank and lead to the loss of the entire aircraft and the death of all souls aboard, that's a pretty Goddamned major design flaw.

You might as well have said, "...the Ford Pinto's tendency to go up in flames was always due to a rear-impact, not a major design flaw."

~Philly