Saturday, August 06, 2005

U.S. State Department Declares a Worldwide Caution for Americans

Deadalus told me about this.

The Department of State remains concerned about the continued threat of terrorist attacks, demonstrations and other violent actions against U.S. citizens and interests overseas. Americans are reminded that demonstrations and rioting can occur with little or no warning.

What is the our country coming to when we have to tell our citizens that the whole world is so dangerous that a travel warning was needed. The warning goes on to state:

Current information suggests that al-Qaida and affiliated organizations continue to plan terrorist attacks against U.S. interests in multiple regions, including Europe, Asia, Africa and the Middle East. These attacks may employ a wide variety of tactics to include assassinations, kidnappings, hijackings and bombings. Extremists may elect to use conventional or non-conventional weapons, and target both official and private interests. The latter may include facilities where U.S. citizens and other foreigners congregate or visit, including residential areas, business offices, clubs, restaurants, places of worship, schools, hotels and public areas.

I am sure that some would say that this couldn't be the fault of America, they might even go as far as saying that it must be the world's fault. I am glad right now that my family is inside the U.S. and not abroad


Anonymous said...

the power of nightmares, everybody is out to get the Americans wooooo.
You actually think your family are safer in America, everybody in the world would be safer if the USA would stop invading and occupyping foriegn countries & murdering thier women in children.
I thought you were forward thinking human being, your just another Bush clone that thinks the world revolves America's international business deals how pathetic.

Anonymous said... the State Department sure about this? Are Americans really safer in, say, New York or Los Angeles than in Stockholm or Zurich for example? Get a grip, guys. Countries like Iraq, Afghanistan or Pakistan may be very bad places to be a Westerner right now, but you're probably safer in most European cities (even London or Madrid, woooo!) than in many large American cities. But maybe the US government needs you to be scared so you don't ask too many questions about why terrorism is getting worse, 5 years into the War On Terror? And the more you see of the world (preferably not at the point of a gun), the less inclined some of you might be to swallow the xenophobic propaganda of your government. And we can't have that, can we?


Anonymous said...

yo znack attack,

are you cia, looking for leads on the bad thinkers?

i wrote before........... if you're against all this, tell them, calmly, slowly, publicly so you dont get fragged.

otherwise, probably would be best to flag this blog as a pep rally for the death and destruction squads, of which you ARE a member.

dumb amerikans....... pitiful, sheep brained amerikans

Mike Crichton said...

Look, Zack, trolls! Don't worry, they really just need hugs. Or maybe drugs, of the psychiatric sort.

Anonymous said...

"Trolls"? Take that back, you bounder! I am a *nerd*, you cad!

Mmmm...lovely drugs...

Peace and the usual wishes for safety to all in Iraq.


Zach Attack said...

Um, perhaps you all are mistaking my sarcastic last line about how it MUST be the world's fault. It was to be taken as obvious sarcasm.

Anonymous said...

i'm just glad i traveled both inside and outside the u.s. EXTENSIVELY long before this all came down AND lived in nyc & d.c. when it was fun and not an armed camp. this patriot act actually allows the govt to decide any american citizen is a terrorist or terrorist supporter at which point they can put you away forever with no trial or even telling you what the charges are. they can also confiscate all your property. a VERY low profile is in order these days dearies. you definitely want to be flying well under the radar screen. they just renewed this baby for 10 years.....

Anonymous said...

I caught your sarcasm, but I think some people just see what they want to see. Trolls and nerds need to get out and Interact(not internet) with human beings a little more often in order to catch such subtleties

Kristen said...

Zach, by now you should know that you will never be right with a good 30-40% of the people on here. Don't feel like you have to explain your posts to ANYONE, especially since they only hear what they want to anyways. The only way you will ever appease them is to give in and do what they wish of you, which you and I both know, will not and can not ever happen if you want to get back to your family without landing on the Go Directly to Jail space on the Monopoly board.
And Taff you are exactly right, which is why my family has never and willnever live near a major US city. Sure there is no guarantee any of us are safe in Podunk, Idaho, population 32.5. But it sure is a heck of a lot safer than downtown NY or LA. Americans like to live in their "It will never happen to me" bubble and most would argue that by changing the way you would live your life shows cowardice and enabling the terrorists to win. I say if it keeps my son alive for one more day, its worth it.

/akoto said...

its really sad to hear our world is on crisis; hearing all the terrorists attacks and such that alarmed most countries. There's no place now that can be consider as safe, even homes were being bombed especially in middle east, even schools where childrens were suppose to learn is also in danger because of these terrorists. so all of us here needs caution. all of us here need to be unified. and this is the only way to kill terrorism. thanks for the info zach :).

Anonymous said...

Your dry humour and irony is much appreciated, Zach. But you're right. It is the World's fault. We've been a very naughty world, and we're very sorry, and we won't do it again. Please come and visit us, Americans - we know you're not all as loony as your government!

Anonymous said...

yo zach,

sarcasm wont wash the blood from your hands or the hands of your gi buddies. and wont do much for the DU munitions you're helping spread around the planet.

ask hurria, or any of her neighbors, if she/they appreciate your sarcasm.

how long you gonna sit on the fence? kill em, smell the blood and enjoy it and quit the whining. or do the co paperwork and make a stand for something moral.

rah rah ziss cum bah, you and the workin class gi buddies be makin iraK safe for demoKracy!!! chucron chucron.

pitiful, amoral behavior on your part and those of your compatriots. pathetic.

(send us all some sympathy now kristen and snag; tell us how its difficult for "the tropps". leave the moral issues and decisions for mr butch and co.) pathetic

Anonymous said...

A Young Man's Death
What Have We Come To?


In our small town of Columbus, Texas (pop.3900), we buried one of our local sons on his 19th birthday. He was killed in action in Iraq. He was a friend of my two oldest sons and his father a friend of mine.

There is not a lot for a young man to do in our town, and most leave for college, jobs... etc. Christopher came to see me at his father's request prior to enlisting last summer. I am an Air Force vet from Southeast Asia. I talked blue in the face to try to get Christopher to go with me to an Air Force or Navy recruiter. In fact, I told him in no uncertain terms that the Army would put a gun in his hand and send him out to be a target. No soap.

His head was already filled with a lot of crud from the recruiter about being a scout, riding a 4-wheeler ATV around -- big fun! (Christopher was an Eagle Scout.) He had an acquaintance who had been doing that (not in Iraq), and I got the sense that this acquaintance was giving him the hard sell too. I wonder if the Army has a referral bonus system. Do you know?

Christopher also had this inexplicable desire to "go shoot some ‘Raqis." Some latent desire maybe from too much video gaming. I heard that in the weeks before his death, he was involved in a brief fire-fight and froze in terror. No doubt reality caught up to him at the speed of a 7.62. Too bad his recruiter or buddy had not told him about the fear he would experience when he realized someone wanted to really hurt him or kill him.

When I learned of Christopher's death, I was sitting at a PC in a hotel lounge in Manhattan. (I'm an airline pilot and was on a layover in New York.) I broke down and cried. There were lots of others around and I'm sure they were wondering… but none asked. I found I was crying not so much for the senseless loss of a young life, or even the grief our friends would bear. As I thought about it, I was crying for our country. What have we come to?

As I mentioned, there is not much for a young man to do in small towns like ours after high school. Christopher had mentioned to me when we talked last, before his enlistment, about riding that 4-wheeler ATV around as an Army scout and having a good time. His recruiter had him hooked. He also mentioned going to shoot some "'Raqis."

This is my sadness. Our children are being weaned on hatred and violence in this country. It starts with television, gets reinforced and is refined with violent video games (one, in particular, produced and distributed by the U.S. Army), and finally the infection spreads through violent team sports in high school. Football in the South is the battlefield training ground for the next generation of cannon fodder. Kids are told to go out there and "hurt ‘em, tear ‘em up, kill ‘em." It is ingrained.

(Careful now, don't get me confused with the liberal left. I own guns and support the right. There is a huge difference between defense of home and property and exporting violence to other countries.)

As I travel in other countries I see no parallel. There are of course team sports, but violence and undercurrents of hatred that lurk within are, as much as I can tell, not there.

Christopher didn't know it, but as a small town southerner he was being trained for his death since early childhood.

Our little town votes mostly Democrat on local elections, but typically Republican in presidential races. Discussion or debate about policy in public is seldom heard and somewhat discouraged. What a shame. Most people around here take a passing interest in national or foreign policy for a week or two prior to an election, then just turn back to football, or whatever is covered on the sports page that day.

The notion of death or dismemberment at the hands of an enemy is so foreign as to be incomprehensible to most American youth. Our media does such a precise job of keeping images and details of such things out of the public eye. Not so for many foreign presses. Our schools would never consider teaching children about anything so morbid or unpleasant.

The thought that a boy like Christopher would so lightly desire to kill some people he knew nothing about is very distressing to me. On the one hand, Christopher was a pretty gentle and easy-going kid. If someone said to him, "Hey let's go shoot some kids from Sealy," a rival school, he would obviously have said, "You're crazy -- get lost!" But Iraqis, why it's open season.

He only saw the differences. He had somehow developed enough hatred to override his sense of right and wrong, and any teaching of love of fellow man. He went to the Southern Baptist Church here, and I know it was taught to him. On the other hand, the president of the Southern Baptist convention declared this a "just war." A little hypocrisy there and probably confusing for Christopher. We left that Church, by the way.

I know of a few men and women who knew Christopher, who have been supporting the occupation, and are beginning to change their minds. His death is the second our rural county has experienced in the last few months. It is beginning to change some attitudes here -- but too late I'm afraid.

I hope that we learn sooner than we did in Vietnam that we can't successfully force our ideals on another society unwilling to adopt them or defend them for themselves.

There just aren't enough Christophers to go around.

Chris Christensen

Anonymous said...

Now the people who live in United States are the best people in the world and they're unable to do bad things???
Give me a break!
The people in United States are exactly like anyone else in any country in the world, don't have differences, we all love violence, we all love to kill each other, we all do anything to get money and power.
You people in US like to see your country as the only one country in the world where everything is perfect and everything you do is right, God love you all, all the another countries are the worst thing in the world and all the world must be like US, if isn't will be wars to make it happen.
Just because i'm not from US, it makes me a terrorist?Bad person?Killer?I don't think so but in your opinion i'm, now probably you people in US will want to make a war in the country where i live because we're not like you in form and shape and in another points.
Never say that violence is something that only happens in the countries that US hates, in US happen anything that happens in another countries.
The only places in our planet where are really safe is where don't have any human being living in it.

And i almost forgot, Zach, good post ;)

Jack said...

Hey Zach,

This is a great blog you have. I was interested to know what you do as an Arabic linguist. What are your duties? Do you believe the situation would be much better if more soldiers spoke Arabic? Do Iraqi citizens trust you more when they hear you speak their language? What is their response?

- Jack

Anonymous said...

Oil is almost $64 a barrel today, as the UK and Australia say there are multiple, credible reports of attacks that will take place inside Saudi Arabia.

-roamer in mich

Daedalus said...

The Wash Post had an article today about the Pentagon drafting war plans for attacks here. (I posted about it on my blog.)

I have a sick feeling that what good is left in America is about to be destroyed, as freedom and security already have been. Perhaps it's our own kharma coming back to bite us in the butt. The only thing we as individuals can do is work to make sure we represent what is good about this country. You are doing that, Zach, keep it up.

Trevor said...

Wow, you're attracting some pretty poor quality commenters these days, Zach. I'm inclined to agree that America should mostly butt out of the affairs of other nations. Problem is, the world keeps getting to be smaller and smaller. Minding our own business thus becomes harder and harder.

Hurria said...

"Minding our own business thus becomes harder and harder."

On the contrary, Trevor, learning to behave like a decent member of the world community instead of the schoolyard thug becomes more and more necessary.

Anonymous said...

Jack above asks about your work as an army linguist - some of you might be interested in the following advert from a linguist recruitment website


Provide operational Arabic language support to U.S. Army linguist operations in IRAQ. Provide general linguistic support for military operations. Interpret and translate written and spoken communications. Transcribe and analyze verbal communications. Perform document exploitation. Scan, research, and analyze foreign language documents for key information. Translate and gist foreign language documents. Identify and extract information components meeting military information requirement list criteria. Provide input to reports. Linguist may be required to travel worldwide as ad hoc missions dictate.

An excellent command of Modern Arabic or Arabic-Egyptian as well as strong verbal and written American English skills (grammar, vocabulary, idiomatic expressions, and spelling); linguist work products are prepared in English. A 3/3 Arabic-Egyptian in listening/reading comprehension rating, according to the ILR scale and as measured by the DLPT or comparable language test vehicle, is required.

Must hold a current U.S. passport. Must hold a current U.S. passport. Must possess a SECRET security clearance or be clearable to SECRET. Must be willing to travel/deploy/work in various locations worldwide. Familiarity with and ability to conduct oneself in accordance with the local culture and customs.

Willingness to work shifts and extended hours in support of 24 x 7 Operations.

3+/3+ Arabic-Egyptian DLPT rating. Skilled in one or more Arabic dialect

Additionaly a pre-existing SECRET security clearance. A thorough knowledge of cultural, economic, geopolitical, and military issues of the area and surrounding region. Previous operational experience as linguist in support of government operations. An ability to operate standard and specialized office automation equipment to process foreign language material.Experience in US military is helpful.

Send resume in WORD format to


Safe home and peace to all.


Hurria said...

All I can say is that I hope the military's Arabic linguists are better than the ones the American Occupation Authority (aka CPA) hired. Those people were absolutely pathetic. Some of the stuff they put up on their Arabic-language website was so bad it was downright hilarious. We used to check it out once a week when we needed a good laugh.

Anonymous said...

'Liberal Media Bias' Inspires Launch of New Blog
By Jered Ede Correspondent
August 09, 2005

( - America's most prominent media watchdog plans to launch its own blog on Tuesday with a goal of further exposing and combating the perceived liberal bias in the media. is the latest project of the Media Research Center, which is also the parent organization of Cybercast News Service. The new blog will feature posts by some of the nation's most widely read experts on the issue of media bias, an issue that Michael Chapman, communications director for the Media Research Center, said "is almost overwhelming."

"Thirty to 40 million viewers are getting news from sources with a liberal bias," Chapman said, referring to the "old media" such as broadcast network giants NBC, CBS, ABC and cable titan CNN.

"This is a huge audience when compared to, say, FOX," Chapman explained. Though such conservative pundits as Bill O'Reilly receive approximately 2.7 million viewers per night, according to Chapman, this is slight compared to the broadcast network news audiences, which reach "20 million people a night" with news that "is supposed to be objective reporting, not commentary."

Concentrating on the news media's treatment of the war, Supreme Court nominations and elections, the blog will seek to answer the question, "Where is the balanced coverage?" hopes to fill a void in the blogosphere, Chapman said, despite the more than 60 million blogs that already exist, according to a report in May in the Blog Herald, an online publication that monitors the activities of blogs.

That number notwithstanding, "this is the first time ever than an established policy research organization has joined hands with some highly respected bloggers to create one site as the clearinghouse for liberal media bias," Chapman said.

Greg and Matthew Sheffield, brothers and founders of, the former blog site devoted to exposing the alleged bias of former CBS News anchorman Dan Rather, were hired by the Media Research Center to manage the blogging content on

"This offers a more instantaneous response to bias that happens," Greg Sheffield told Cybercast News Service.

Blogs have frequently been criticized for the credibility of their published content, but Sheffield said that should not be a concern in the case of The content for the website will come from individuals who have already proven themselves credible in the business of monitoring the media, he said.

Other blogs, Chapman added, "don't have the research, the sources, and the documentation to back up a lot of what they are doing in the same way we can." All posted items, Chapman said, will be properly cited and only come from trusted sources.

The blog's launch Tuesday is part of the Media Research Center's larger "Tell the Truth!" campaign, which challenges journalists in the words of Media Research Center founder L. Brent Bozell III, to "strive for objectivity at all times."

Anonymous said...

All posted items, Chapman said, will be properly cited and only come from trusted sources.

Well, that would be a novelty for the right-wing media. Anybody remember all those WMD reports from "trusted sources"?

Anonymous said...

Re: liberal media:
""Thirty to 40 million viewers are getting news from sources with a liberal bias," Chapman said, referring to the "old media" such as broadcast network giants NBC, CBS, ABC and cable titan CNN."

You are aware that, "for example, that NBC, MSNBC and CNBC are owned by General Electric, one of the largest defense contractors in America. General Electric does very well by war, and yet we are expected to trust their "news" organizations to report objectively on Iraq and Afghanistan, two wars that GE is making money off of.

Look at CNN, and their owners AOL/TimeWarner. Look specifically at all the subsidiaries of that parent company, all the subsidiaries of those subsidiaries, and remember all the advertisers associated with all of them. It is almost impossible for CNN to report objectively on something without that report affecting its parent company, a subsidiary or an advertiser," I take it?


Snag said...

The whole "lberal media" claims stagger the mind and aren't really worthy of any serious debate. Aside from being corporately owned, there's myriad of reasons they're going to distort reporting in favor of the controlling powers. One is money from sensationalism. But that's really the business managers end of the industry.
However, should journalism actually do its job and question the powerful's propaganda, here's some points:
Reporters have been found from respected, standarized surveys to be of the highest ethical character, scoring only less than doctors and clergy.
If you want information that supports the government's positions, you only need to read their press releases. If you actually want someone to ask questions of those policies, and report additional information and perspectives then you need a free unfettered press.
The fourth estate's very nature has been to counter the government's postion. It's called checks and balances. Remember, the govenment answers to us and not the other way around.
If the current administration speaks for you, good for you. But if it doesn't then those voices need to be heard also.
Cults don't like members to question their authority either.
Slamming the press for it's "liberalism" is akin to pissing on Benjamin Franklin, who was a really liberal publisher, once he realized his King George just didn't give a crap about us colonists.
Get a clue. The whole "let's undermine the media" move is such a transparent attempt to silence any questioning of government policy.
Now that's unAmerican, and not what generations of my family had fought for.

Anonymous said...

"Reporters have been found from respected, standarized surveys to be of the highest ethical character, scoring only less than doctors and clergy."


Snag said...

You forgot to mention Rush Limbaugh, Dr.(Sen.) Frist, Dr. Kissenger, and the evangalist Rev. Jimmy Swaggart.
However, to begin a short list of those with outstanding ethics: Edward R. Murrow, Woodward and Bernstein, Dr. Saulk, Dr. Pasteur, Dr. Einstein, Mother Theresa to name just a very few in a very long list.
You provide a very short list of subjects to support a very thin, two-dimensional argument that only furthers the agenda of those that have considerably more ethical lapses.
Dan Rather makes a mistake and resigns. That's a lot more than can be said for anyone in this adminstration.
Come back when your argument is more than overly simplified parroting of talk radio along with the school yard "LOL, LOL, LOL ...."

Terrible said...

Zack, I definitly got the sarcasm. And thought I'd add a little of my own. But thought I'd better state that that's what it is since many of the anti-American Bush supporters don't understand the concept and I'd hate for them to think I too was living in their fantasy world. Sarcasm follows:

Thank God the bush administration has made the world safer by violating US law and illegally invaded and occupied a nation that was never a threat to the United States.

Back to straight: The DU contamination does indeed spread around the entire world. Minute particle size makes it travel extremely easily as well as making it more easily absorbed through human skin. If the Bush administration 'supported' US troops even a tiny bit these kinds of weapons wouldn't be in our arsenals. It wouldn't be an exaggeration to say that the government has murdered tens of thousands of US troops by using DU munitions. And what a slow painful death cancer can be. And very thoughtful of them to cut funding for research into cures too.

Terrible said...

Just saw the BS about the supposed "liberal bias" in the media and want to thank snag for pointing out it's all a crock of shit. Even there most liberal main stream media I've seen is definitly and undeniably biased towards the current anti-American residents of the White House.

Anonymous said...

Oh,... I Forgot, about talk radio... AIR AMERICA! LOL, LOL, LOL, LOL, LOL, LOL,
"Crock Of Shit" LOL, LOL, LOL, LOL,

Anonymous said...

( - America's most prominent media watchdog plans to launch its own blog on Tuesday with a goal of further exposing and combating the perceived liberal bias in the media. is the latest project of the Media Research Center, which is also the parent organization of Cybercast News Service. The new blog will feature posts by some of the nation's most widely read experts on the issue of media bias, an issue that Michael Chapman, communications director for the Media Research Center, said "is almost overwhelming."

Hmm. Intriguing. Let's take a closer look.

L. Brent Bozell III, president of the above-mentioned CNSNews *and* the Media Research Center, also "serves as Executive Director of the Conservative Victory Committee (CVC). An independent multi-candidate political action committee, the CVC has helped to elect dozens of conservative candidates over the past ten years. He has also served as National Finance Chairman for the Buchanan for President campaign, and Finance Director and later President of the National Conservative Political Action Committee."

The Media Research Center website "is quickly becoming one of the most popular conservative web sites."

Source: ... Bozell's own bio.

Hmm. Ok. So, CNSNews, an online conservative-leaning news outlet whose motto is The Right News Right Now, ran a piece to promote the Media Research Center, a conservative group which CNSNews has no ethical qualms about calling "America's most prominent media watchdog" in spite of the fact that MRC is their parent company, in the Media Research Center's creation of still another web site dedicated to combating alleged liberal bias in the media?

And all of the above is presided over by a partisan conservative activist who proudly helps to put right-wingers into office in his spare time?

What can I possibly say?


That'll do.

Anonymous said...

You can't be afraid of a little competition for, can you?