Further ruffling the feathers of our putative Friend and Ally. "Suspected U.S. missile hits Pakistan," by Alamgir Bitani for Reuters, November 7 (thanks to Jeffrey Imm):
PESHAWAR, Pakistan (Reuters) – Suspected U.S. drones fired missiles into a Pakistan border region on Friday killing 13 militants, including five foreigners, officials said, the latest in a series of strikes that has infuriated Pakistan.There have been nearly 20 attacks by suspected missile-firing pilotless U.S. drones since the beginning of September, but Friday's is the first since Tuesday's U.S. presidential election.
Pakistan objects to the strikes as not only a violation of its sovereignty but counter-productive to its efforts against militants behind surging violence in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
A senior government official in the region, Latif-ur-Rehman, told Reuters the missiles hit a militant compound in the Kamsham area of North Waziristan.
"It was an accurate strike and the compound has been destroyed," said Rehman.
At least 13 militants were killed, another senior government official and an intelligence agency official said.
"It's remote so information is coming slowly but we can confirm that four missiles killed eight Pakistani Taliban and five guests," said the intelligence official, referring to five foreign militants.
There was no information about the nationality of any of those killed but North Waziristan is known as a sanctuary for Taliban and al Qaeda militants....
Pakistan hopes the new U.S. administration will be more sensitive to its concerns, although President-elect Barack Obama made comments in his campaign suggesting he would take a hawkish approach toward the border area militants....
President-elect Barack Obama made comments in his campaign suggesting he would take a hawkish approach toward the border area militants....
The campaign is over. Scratch whatever he said. That was politics. Wink, wink.
Has anyone else noticed the increase in strikes against the bad guys over the last few months? Get'em while you can Mr. President.
Lan astalem,
GoingThere
Instead of "jihadists" what about writing "violent jihadists" so that one alludes constantly to the other kind -- those participating in Jihad, directly or indirectly, as they are required to do by the tenets of Islam -- and thus to make sure that no one forgets for a minute that Jihad can be conducted by means other than laying down I.E.D.s in Anbar Province, or raining down rockets into Israel from Gaza, or running around with AK-47s in Waziristan.
It is not only, or mainly, those at present conducting Jihad by violent means who are the greatest threat to the countries of Western Europe or North America. Where Muslims already control neighboring states, then -- as with the assaults on India from Pakistan (and the aid given to Muslims within India to attack Hindus and undermine the nation of India), and the attacks on Israel (from various Arab neighbors, and with the aid given to Muslims within Israel, to murder Jews and undermine the state of Israel). But in Western Europe, there are no such Muslim-dominated states (other than the very weak, and still-dependent on Western goodwill, Albania and Kosovo) in a position to serve as bases for attacks on circumjacent Infidel lands.
Instead, other means must be used.
And the Anti-Shariah Conference in Washington is being held precisely to draw attention to the fact that even non-violent means -- the spread of the seemingly-innocuous Shariah finance, appealinng to those sufficiently greedy in the West to wilfully overlook the political aspects and threat -as the scholar Timur Kuran has so lucidly analyzed -- of Shariah finance, which is part of a Total System, and which inexorably, inevitably, helps to increase the power, and influence, of Muslims as they push, here and there and everywhere, taking advantage of the greed of the Western financiers, the Islamic program in which everything connects, tout se tient.
Speaking of Sharia finance (another oxymoron in the making), I would how much of that oil wealth is spent on infidel political candidates who cater to Muslims in not-so-obvious dhimmitude?
I think Obama and the Demoncratic leadership gave the Bush Administration Political cover to actually conduct these cross border strikes.
Obama made himself quite clear early on in his campaign what he would do about Pakistan. The Nancy and Harry it show, never rebuffed the policy or addressed its ramifications.
Bush has a free pass to Cylon just about anyone he pleases. No matter what the target country thinks?
I see a lame Duck stirring a pot of Stew for the Chicken who lays the Golden Eggs.
'"It's remote so information is coming slowly but we can confirm that four missiles killed eight Pakistani Taliban and five guests," said the intelligence official, referring to five foreign militants.'
If he's correct about the identification of those killed, he ought to be congratulating the U.S., not complaining. They all wanted to overthrow the Pakistani gov't, so we just made Pakistani security's job a bit easier.
The Obama doctrine at work. Looks like the messiah was right
Ok, lets call this a test salvo. My first post here. Let's see what is publicly splattered on the page. Saturday night so, probably won't see much for - ?
Test salvo? Hmmm. You're not a troll, are you?
ABS
لن استسلم