Afghanistan

[Lamplighter]

I think I learned something today.

I used to believe the reason Muslim women covered their hair was due
to a religious argument about "the excessively excitable, sexual nature of men"
... that is, because men just could not handle the sight
of a woman's hair and stay in control of their sexual urges.
As of this morning, I don't believe that any more.

After reading several articles found by Google searches,
it seems there is a multitude of reasons Muslim women cover their hair,
none of which have to do with such silliness.

Here is an article that presents 17 reasons Muslim women cover their hair,
especially in the diasporic Western communities.

I have the feeling now it's more akin to a Christian woman wearing
a cross on a necklace in public...

[Clodfobble]

I once had a woman from the UAE assert to me that many women prefer widespread burka use... because the anonymity made things like extramarital affairs a snap, since no one could tell if it was his wife or his lover entering the house.

[Undertoad]

I imagine that in a society that doesn't respect women, the ability to hide might actually be empowering.

[orthodoc]

Perhaps, in the way that spitting in your master's drink might be empowering. Not taking issue with your comment, UT, because it's true. Just not the type of empowerment one would hope for.

[Lamplighter]

It is being reported that the Vatican has opened an new embassy in Miramar,
and is issuing a joint Statement with China regarding their forthcoming talks,
concerning changes in they will implement in the U.S. after the 2016 elections
when it is anticipated that all traditional Republicans will have been
replaced by newly elected TP congressmen.

All US embassy personnel in China-ruled countries are being withdrawn.
President Obama has issued a public statement in which the U.S. will boycott
all such talks unless the U.S. controls the talks and the State Department,
under the direction of Ambassador John Kerrym is in charge.

<snip>

Oh wait, wait.
It's the Taliban (not the Vatican) and the U.S. (not China)
that are having the talks, and President Karzi (not Obama)
that is boycotting the meetings.... Nevermind.

[Lamplighter]

Although I've heard many times that certain of the Gitmo prisoners are of greater "concern",
I don't think I've seen before who they are and what they are accused of doing.

Now, this business of the Taliban opening an "office" in Quatar exposes some of it,
made possible by the Wikileaks data exposed by Pfc. Bradley Manning.




NY Times
CHARLIE SAVAGE
June 20, 2013

Negotiations With Taliban Could Hinge on Detainees

These five prisoners at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, could be the key
to whether the negotiations the United States has long sought
with the Taliban are a success, or even take place.

A Taliban spokesman in Qatar said Thursday that exchanging them for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl,
an American prisoner of war who has been held by militants since 2009,
would be a way to “build bridges of confidence” to start broader peace talks.
<snip>
The five Taliban members are considered to be among the most senior
militants at Guantánamo and would otherwise be among the last in line to leave.
<snip>
The details of what the government believes about what the five
former Taliban leaders have done were made public in classified military files
given to WikiLeaks by Pfc. Bradley Manning, who is now being court-martialed
and faces a possible life sentence if convicted of the most serious charges against him.

Because the five men have never been given a trial, the quality of the evidence
and the credibility of the claims against them in the files
— some of which they deny — have not been tested.

The article goes on to describe each man and the "charges" against him.

[Lamplighter]

Not really Afghanistan, but still like Afghanistan
... Or is more akin to an October Surprise ?

Bloomberg
Nicole Gaouette & David Lerman
Aug 3, 2013

Al-Qaeda Threat Cited by U.S. in Issuing Global Travel Alert

The U.S. State Department issued a worldwide travel alert warning citizens of potential
terror attacks in the Middle East, North Africa and South Asia by al-Qaeda or its affiliates.

The U.S. will close 21 embassies and consulates in those regions this weekend as a precaution.

<snip>
The significance of Aug. 4 as a day to close embassies wasn’t spelled out
by the State Department, leaving room for speculation about possibilities.
Tomorrow is Obama’s birthday, and it’s also a holy day on the Muslim calendar
because it falls in the final 10 days of Ramadan, the month of fasting.
<snip>

But then, not everyone is taking this quite as urgently...

The warning surfaced as President Barack Obama’s administration argues
that National Security Agency surveillance programs are essential to fight terrorist threats.
<snip>
Delta Air Lines Inc. (DAL), US Airways Group Inc. and AMR Corp.’s American Airlines
are monitoring the travel situation and haven’t issued waivers
letting passengers rebook flights without paying fees, spokesmen said.
United Airlines, a unit of United Continental Holdings Inc., declined to comment.
<snip>

This part sounds more pausible to me...

The State Department warning came days after al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri
urged his followers in a speech posted on jihadist websites to attack U.S. sites
as a response to American drone strikes in Pakistan and Yemen,
according to the SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors terror groups.<snip>

In all, the U.S. has conducted almost 50 such strikes in Yemen since the beginning of 2012,
killing some of the group’s leaders, including its deputy emir, Said al-Shihri,
whose death the group acknowledged in a video last month.
<snip>
Documents purportedly from al-Qaeda fighters in Mali and obtained by the Associated Press
outline a strategy of kidnapping “in exchange for the drone strategy.”

Kidnappings would “bring back the pressure of the American public opinion in a more active way”
against drone strikes, according to the papers, which the New York-based news service
translated from Arabic. The document is focused on Yemen.

[Griff]

The warning surfaced as President Barack Obama’s administration argues
that National Security Agency surveillance programs are essential to fight terrorist threats.

My gut says this is the biggest factor.

[BigV]

Originally Posted by Griff

The warning surfaced as President Barack Obama’s administration argues
that National Security Agency surveillance programs are essential to fight terrorist threats.

My gut says this is the biggest factor.

My inner cynic has shouted down all other voices. This is what he's saying too.

[regular.joe]

Well guys, if you've paid attention to my posts in the past, I don't much like arm chair quarterbacks and as such am on my way to Afghanistan. I'm not anyone important, a cog in the wheel so to speak. I'll give you my take on events as they unfold form my little corner of the country. At least as much as the operational environment will allow me to post. I don't think that travel alert applies to me.

[BigV]

Be safe regular.Joe.

[Griff]

Watch your step over there Joe. Come back safe.

[Clodfobble]

We'll be thinking of you, Joe.

[Sundae]

I dunno. Talk about being in thrall to the enemy.
There is taking reasonable precautions and there is allowing empty words to affect day to day lives.

Pretty much every time I've switched on the news (generally mealtimes, although I listen to a rolling news radio station too) they mention threats, Embassy closures, people being brought home.

The IRA used a code word when they issued threats.
That didn't work either, because empty threats are very cheap for terrorists and cause maximum disruption. But to be fair to the IRA they were far more about killing than anything else.

Manchester for example, not enough time or information to clear the two sites, glass and debris raining down within a half mile radius.
Don't worry, although there were "buildings torn to shreds as though made of papier mache; water pouring out of twisted structures as though they had been crushed; holes pockmarked over building facades as though teams of demolition men had been trying to knock them down" only 65 innocent people with no connection to the politics of Northern Ireland were hurt.

ETA - Joe, I'm just on my usual hobbyhorse and none of the above applies to you!
Over the years I've met family and friends of squaddies who were in Northern Ireland and they were as far removed from the views of "movers and shakers" as I suspect you are.
You simply have my support as a person.

[Lamplighter]

Sunday, I'm in sympathy with your thinking.
Two guys talk on the telephone, and Osama Bin Laden gets what he wanted all along...

I've followed many of the news reports,
and they all repeat the same non sequiturs:

" specifics are vague "

But look at it this way, it's a WIN/WIN situation for the N.S.A..

If nothing happens:
" NSA reports thwarting terrorist attack "

If something happens:
" NSA successfully predicts terrorist attack "