Rice Meets With Syria

Condi met with the Syrian foreign minister and discussed the issue of border control between Syria and Iraq.

The NY Sun labeled the talks constructive, Iraq was said to be pressing for the talks, the Brits also met with the Iranian foreign minister. Meanwhile, in Baghdad, U.S. Maj. Gen. William Caldwell said Syria appears to be taking steps to slow the flow of foreign fighters into Iraq.

BUT ... while praising the meeting, the Israeli Deputy Defense Minister pointed out that intel suggests Syria is arming intensely.

Finally, one previously unknown member of the Syrian delegation, Sheik ALi-bash Bush Tancredi said he was genuinely interested in any helpful suggestions an American President might have to offer as regards serious border control.

SHARM EL-SHEIK, Egypt (AP) - In a diplomatic turning point for the Bush administration, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice met Thursday with Syria's foreign minister and expressed U.S. concerns about the country's porous border with Iraq.

``I didn't lecture him and he didn't lecture me,'' Rice said after the first Cabinet-level talks in years between the countries.

Prospects dimmed for a more dramatic face-to-face discussion between Rice and Iran's foreign minister. ``We haven't planned and have not asked for a bilateral meeting, nor have they asked us,'' she said.

The administration has resisted talks with Syria and Iran despite the recommendations of allies, the Iraq Study Group and U.S. lawmakers from both parties.

``It's a start,'' Foreign Minister Walid Moallem said after the 30-minute session.

Comments

[ec1009]

Condi negotiating with terrorists? Isn't it treasonous to talk with Syria or are Republicans held to different standards?

[Cindi]

You really didn't ask that question? lmao. Do you even know what Ms. Rices position is?

[Hard Right]

Treasoness? Not in this case because it part of her job, retard.

However it IS repulsive, useless, and tremendously stupid. WTF was Bush thinking? He sure makes it hard to support him sometimes.

[Hard Right]

Treasoness? I meant treasonous.

[sashal]

Dick Cheney Rips Condoleeza Rice For Talking With Syrians.

Secretary of State Condolezza Rice met with the Syrian Foreign Minister today, incurring the wrath of the administration and conservative pundits. Leading the criticism was Vice President Dick Cheney.

In an interview with ABC News, Vice President Dick Cheney said Assad has "been isolated and cut off because of his bad behavior, and the unfortunate thing about the "Secretary of State's meeting" is it sort of breaks down that barrier."

Conservative pundits and the White House itself further piled on the Secretary of State. The criticism was direct, clear and very personal.

White House spokesperson Dana Perino strongly criticized "Rice's planned meeting" saying, "We think it is a really bad idea. People should take a stop back and think about the message it sends and the message it sends to our allies," Perino said.

The Heritage Foundation is particularly upset at the incident.

"Rice's meeting is likely to undermine the Bush administration's foreign policy and help the Syrians go back to business as usual - much to the dismay of our Lebanese, Iraqi, and Israeli friends, all of whom want the United States to take a tougher stand against Syria," Jim Phillips, a research fellow for Middle Eastern Affairs at the Heritage Foundation, told Cybercast News Service .

[Zifnab]

"Do you even know what Ms. Rices position is?"

Does Ms. Rice know? She could, perhaps, start acting like it.

[Fred Beloit]

al-Sash. Where is that good lady jamie today. She reminds me of a poem. Oh, not a love poem but another kind of poem. It was written by the famous Anonymous. The title is TOM-A-BEDLAM'S SONG. I'll borrow jamie's slash to identify line ends. The beginning and a couple of lines from memory. "From the hag and hungry goblin/that into rags would rend ye/And the spirit that stands by the naked man/In the Book of Moons defend ye/ That of your five sound senses you never be forsaken/ To wander from yourselves with Tom abroad to beg your bacon...The weak the white the gentle me handle, touch and spare not/But those that cross Tom Rhinoceros/Do what the panther dare not." If you are unfamiliar with Bedlam, it is no doubt a wikigoogle. Then google the poem and enjoy. It is one truly of a kind.

[Fred Beloit]

"By a host of furious fancies/whereof I am commander/With a burning spear and a horse of air/to the wilderness I wander/By a knight of ghosts and shadows/I summoned am to tourney/Ten leagues beyond the wide world's end/Methinks it is no journey." The version at Wiki is the best in my view. Might be titled TOM A BEDLAM.

[Fred Beloit]

Yeah, I'm off topic. Except sometimes the Congress seems to be a Bedlam.

[sashal]

Thanks, Fred it-Belo,very nice

[Phoenix]

Does anyone ever entertain possibilities beyond what they see in front of them? For instance, just maybe Rice's visit is to preclude any whining by the dems that 'Bush didn't try to talk!' If we need to take military action, Bush can say - "Hey, we tried your appeasement/talking gig and it didn't work." (I'd like it if he added a 'fuck you', but he's too civil.) Note that Ms. Rice said, "I don't count on talk, I count on action." (not verbatim)

[Zifnab]

"For instance, just maybe Rice's visit is to preclude any whining by the dems that 'Bush didn't try to talk!'"

On the contrary, I suspect that's exactly why she went down there. Pelosi was making inroads with Middle Eastern leaders, and Condi had to rush down and steal as much credit as she could for any advances that were made.

[Kelvin]

Syria? Isn't that where the idiots here said the highly elusive WMDs are?? Maybe Condi's 'smokin them out'??

[Hard Right]

Pelosi made no inroads jackass. In fact Syrians are seeing their guy's refusal to make any concessions as validated by pelosi's vist. Rice visting will only encourage them to further dig their heels in. What a disaster. How stupid can Rice be?

Phoenix, Bush had allready made prior efforts to talk and it was obvious Syria didn't want peace. Trying to do a CYA (if he is) is a bad idea at this point.

[Zifnab]

got rice, bitch? got rice?
got food, got soup, got spice?
got brains like us? got skills like us?
got cars? got clothes? got girls like us?
wassup we the shit and we kill ya'll fools
we got money in the bank from our family jewels
can we help it if we raid and corrupt the schools?
it don't matter fuck the law shit we break the rules
we jack cars, pop games, yo we got the tools
flip it up, break it down then we shoot some pool,
you fuck with me, you fuck with all bitch, don't think it's cool
one on one fuck that it's three on one no duels

~AZN PRIDE

http://www.lyricsdownload.com/azn-pride-got-rice-bitch-lyrics.html

[Hard Right]

More stupidity by Zifnab. Interesting how she always believes and defends the dictators and terrorists over anyone else.

[Zifnab]

Hahaha.
Cause nothing says "I'm against terrorism" like supporting Bush for six years.

[Jeff]

Ziffy is right. Democrats are against terrorism, but they are all for the terrorists.

Why else would they want them out of Gitmo?

OK, some Democrats are strongly against terrorism. Some probably even hated 9/11. But one nearly universal truth for Democrats is that the rights of terrorists (humanistic rights) are just as important as my rights. Furthermore, the Constitution provides that terrorists deserve the rights that our forefathers fought for.

In the eyes of Democrat... (The would make a good song)

[nowinger]

Yeah, its a damm good think we kept an INNOCENT CHEF from England at Gitmo for 4 years before releasing with no strings, no charges no nothing.

Glad to see Bush is keeping the world safe from sissified haute cuisine!

[nowinger]

The chef, who worked in restaurants around London for 16 years, was detained in Pakistan in 2002 and, according to testimony to a US military tribunal, sold for a $5,000 bounty to the CIA.

At Guantanamo Bay, the internment camp at a US naval base on Cuba, the American guards nicknamed him “The General” in the mistaken belief that he was an al-Qaeda commander.

Information from an unidentified source alleged that he had been an al-Qaeda training camp in July 2001. But Mr Errachidi’s British lawyers were able to produce payslips and witnesses to show that during that month he had been cooking at the Westbury Hotel on Bond Street.

Clive Stafford Smith, legal director of Reprieve and Mr Errachidi’s lawyer, said: "Ahmed's case is an exhibit of everything that is wrong with Guantanamo Bay. The US military relied on false intelligence, saying Ahmed was the 'General' of al-Qaeda when he was only a chef from London.

“The US said Ahmed was training terrorists in Afghanistan at a time when he was cooking in a London hotel. When Ahmed was suffering from a mental breakdown in prison the US military continued to interrogate him. When the British government could have helped prove his innocence, they remained supine. When Ahmed asked to come back to England, where he worked for 18 years, the British government refused him the most basic humanitarian assistance.

[Zifnab]

"At Guantanamo Bay, the internment camp at a US naval base on Cuba, the American guards nicknamed him “The General” in the mistaken belief that he was an al-Qaeda commander."

I bet it was the chef's hat. I always find myself wanting to salute at that thing whenever I see it.

[nowinger]

Can you imagine? Having proof you were NOT in Afganistan at any training camp but cooking at your job in London and still being imprisoned, 'interrogated' and likely tortured four FOUR FUCKING YEARS?

If these guys can't tell an innocent cook from a terrorist, WHY O WHY does anyone think they're 'winning' anything?

[Hard Right]

Another "balanced" post from no-Brain. (roll eyes)

[nowinger]

The man was held at Gitmo for four years on a charge with no factual basis. What kind of balance do you want? He wasn't a terrorist, deal with it.

[charles]

The chef, who worked in restaurants around London for 16 years, was detained in Pakistan in 2002 and, according to testimony to a US military tribunal, sold for a $5,000 bounty to the CIA.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article1743801.ece

there's a good bit of info missing from that article,,,,,,,,,,

i'm sure they grabbed him out of a local paki cafe where he was working in the kitchen making some nice felafel. or maybe a chole battura, or he could have been an ace dosa maker cause that ain't easy, and the pakis were willing to pay him large for it

cause you know a morrocan guy who's worked in london kitchens for 16 (or 18?) years can't wait to uproot himself and peacefully cook in pakistan cause it's just so much better than london

and look what a surprise his lawyer says he's innocent - shocking

so what's the article to prove again?

[nowinger]

You wingers can't have it both ways.

1) EVERYONE at Gitmo is guilty, a terrorist and the worst of the worst, in which case this man who was released WITHOUT CHARGES is really a terrorist that our gov. let go, not even bothering to charge or try him. Did we let a dangerous Al Quaeda 'general' out of Gitmo without bothering to charge him with any crimes?

2) Not everyone at Gitmo is a terrorist, some were picked up on the word of shady informants and bounty hunters, held for many years until being released. This chef isn't a terrorist and was held for four years when the dates in which he was alleged to have been at a terrorist camp he could prove beyond any doubt he was cooking in London. That would mean our government held an innocent man for four years, 'harshly interogated him' all for nothing, he was innocent.

He has to be EITHER a dangerous terrorist we mysterously let go without charges or trial, or he's an innocent man who was wrongly detained on false information.

Since he wasn't charged with any crimes, wasn't tried by the military tribunal and was released to Morrocco where all charges were also dismissed it would appear he's INNOCENT.

Do you want me to walk you through it a third time, or do you get it now?

[charles]

"1) EVERYONE at Gitmo is guilty, a terrorist and the worst of the worst," -false

"2) Not everyone at Gitmo is a terrorist, some were picked up on the word of shady informants and bounty hunters" - true

"Did we let a dangerous Al Quaeda 'general' out of Gitmo without bothering to charge him with any crimes?"

there are several instances where subjects who were released without charges were subsequently picked up or killed on the battlefield, perfection would be nice but it just doesn't happen often in real life

He "has to be EITHER" a dangerous terrorist we mysterously let go without charges or trial, or he's an innocent man who was wrongly detained on false information.

change that to "could be" read my statement above and maybe we can agree

"Since he wasn't charged with any crimes, wasn't tried by the military tribunal and was released to Morrocco where all charges were also dismissed it would "appear" he's INNOCENT

appear, yes

article still doesn't explain what a morrocan who worked for 16/18 years in london was doing in pakistan - except of course some quotes from his lawyer

and you want to draw your thesis from this article?

ok fine

"You wingers can't have it both ways."
not trying to, however, i seriously doubt anything i may type will change your mind

if he's innocent, as you say i'm glad for him that he's sprung - sorry he was in the wrong place at the wrong time - shit happens
if he's not innocent maybe he's had a change of heart, and that's ok -mission accomplished heh
if he's not innocent and returns to the jihad -oops-and i hope he gets those virgins he's pining for

so here's a preemptive "whatever"

ps the anger management class isn't working

[nowinger]

A chef who cooked in London restaurants for 16 years has been released from Guantanamo Bay and flown secretly to Morocco after ministers refused to intervene to secure his return to Britain.

Ahmed Errachidi’s lawyers were told of his release yesterday but US sources said he arrived in Morocco on Tuesday.

Neither his legal team nor his family have been able to make contact with him and they fear that he has been taken to a secret detention centre.

Mr Errachidi, 40, who suffers from bipolar disorder, was held for five years in the US military internment camp on the basis of a false claim by an unidentified informant that he received military training at a terrorist camp in Afghanistan in July 2001. But The Times has seen payslips, bank documents and witness statements that prove that Mr Errachidi was working at the five-star Westbury Hotel in Mayfair that month and sending money to his relatives in Morocco.
\Diplomatic negotiations about his release began but the Foreign and Commonwealth Office declined to participate because, although he had lived in Britain since 1984, Mr Errachidi was not a British citizen.

Clive Stafford Smith, Mr Errachidi’s lawyer, condemned the FCO’s stance and said that the Government must take steps to discover where he was.

“It is crucial that Britain contacts Morocco urgently to establish Ahmed’s whereabouts and seek assurances about his treatment,” said Mr Stafford Smith.

Emily Thornberry, Mr Errachidi’s constituency MP, also appealed for the Government to help him. “I’m very worried that he could just disappear into the Moroccan prison system,” said Ms Thornberry, Labour MP for Islington South and Finsbury.

Mr Errachidi came to London from Morocco in the mid1980s and took his first kitchen job as a grill chef at the Hard Rock Cafe in 1985. In 1997 he became head chef at Centuria, an Islington gastropub. Mr Errachidi married a British woman but the marriage ended in divorce and he remarried, to a Moroccan woman with whom he has two sons.

He visited them in Morocco but continued to work in London and in 2000 instructed solicitors to apply to the Home Office for indefinite leave to remain in Britain. That application was still tied up in the bureaucracy of the Immigration and Nationality Directorate when a family crisis struck in September 2001. His youngest son became seriously ill and Mr Errachidi wanted to be at his side.His friends say Mr Errachidi came up with a scheme to raise money to pay for his son’s medical treatment by buying silver cheaply in Pakistan and selling it for profit.

In late September, he has told his lawyers, he flew to Pakistan to buy the silver. He was there when the USled coalition began bombing Afghanistan and felt moved to cross the border to perform his Islamic duty of zakat [charity].

Mr Stafford Smith said: “The biggest question you can ask about Ahmed’s story is why did he end up going to help people in Afghanistan when his son was ill at home. But you have to remember that he has bipolar disorder and that condition affects his judgment and makes him susceptible to having unrealistic ideas about what he can do. He thought he was going to save people.”

[charles]

His friends say Mr Errachidi came up with a scheme to raise money to pay for his son’s medical treatment by buying silver cheaply in Pakistan and selling it for profit.

But you have to remember that he has bipolar disorder and that condition affects his judgment and makes him susceptible to having unrealistic ideas about what he can do. He thought he was going to save people.”

and you still want to base your thesis on this?

to me this story sounds way too fabricated

sorry i'm so cynical - but thanks for trying

[charles]

"gastropub" wtf?

doesn't sound like a place i'd like to eat in ;)

[Hard Right]

BTW No-Brain, even if he was innocent, how does that mean all the others in Gitmo are innocent? And what proof do you have in claiming he was probably tortured other than your desire for that to be true so your hatred of Bush is justified?

[Fred Beloit]

Gee, maybe he is innocent (of what?). It is very, very unusual for a person's defense lawyer to claim his client is innocent.

[nowinger]

Charles,

His story does have a lot of strange twists, he's married but the family is in Morroco while he is in London, he goes to Pakistan to buy silver, then he goes to Afganistan to help the war victims.

However, I would contend that it doens't take four years to check out his story. It shouldn't have taken more than a few months to document whether or not he was being treated for bipolar disorder in London or whether this was an after the fact 'diagnosis, shouldn't have taken more than a few weeks to verify from the payslips and witness statements that he wasn't in Afganistan during the time he was alleged to have been at a training camp, shouldn't have taken more than a few weeks to verify whether his son did or did not have a serious medical condition as he says. All of these facts were easy to verify or discredit and would have been public record, no national security issues involved at all.

My guess is nothing was investigated until the Gimto detainees were finally given access to lawyers, either civil or military.

My further belief is that the only reason the guy was let go is because the Gitmo detainees have been granted the right to a theoretical trial and so the gov. is slowly releasing the innocent people in a trickle. If the supreme court hadn't ruled against Bush, my belief is this guy would still be in prison and so would all the other detainees, innocent or guilty.

If ANYONE who has been detained at Gitmo is factually innocent, not unprosecutable, or evidence is lacking, but can factually prove they are not a terrorist, were not where they were alleged to be and are nothing more than an innocent bystander it calls into question the entire winger premise that you don't care what happens to the Gitmo detainees because "terrorists don't deserve rights"...it means that the government, even in something as important as finding terrorists and separating fact from fiction, has proven to be wrong multiple times. If this doesn't make a clear case for why these detainees need legal protections, nothing will.

I believe we are torturing the Gitmo detainees, I believe this is susbtantiated in the statements of known Al Quada operatives and what those who have been released say about their treatment and what the various human rights groups have said about the facility.