Afghan President Hamid Karzai has said he wants to hold a jirga (council) of Pashtun tribes from Pakistan and Afghanistan to end Taliban violence. The two countries disagree on how to fight the Taliban mostly drawn from the Pashtun tribes on their border.
Afghan ministers and officials are however concerned that such a meeting may be 'manipulated' by Pakistan.
Karzai said he expected both he and Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf to attend the meeting by the end of the year. Afghan ministers and officials are however concerned that such a meeting may be manipulated by Pakistan. I am thinking of a meeting between Afghan civil society, Afghan elders, tribal chiefs, clergy and Afghan spiritual leadership plus the intellectuals. From the Pakistan side I am hoping for the same thing, Karzai told a BBC correspondent in an exclusive interview, adding, It should be a gathering of the people from one end of the Afghan border with Pakistan to the other end.
Karzai said the jirga would attempt to revive Pashtun civil society on both sides of the border in order to combat what he called the growing Talibanisation of the region.
The traditional secular Pashtun leadership of Pakistan has been undermined systematically and violently. The killing of 150 Pashtun leaders in North Waziristan is a clear indication of that.
The traditional secular Pashtun leadership of Pakistan has been undermined systematically and violently, said Karzai. The killing of 150 Pashtun leaders in North Waziristan is a clear indication of that. This can only stop if we support civil society, he said.
A jirga means representative and those not representative cannot be there or called to attend...
The Afghan president said that if Pakistan was transparent about the jirga, it could bring peace between the two countries. A jirga means representative and those not representative cannot be there or called to attend. Nobody can fake a jirga in Afghanistan...and I hope there is similar transparency on the Pakistani side, said Karzai.
Pakistan has long stated that it wants Afghanistan to recognise the Durand Line, the 2,640km (1610 miles)-long border between the two countries. Afghans say the British-drawn, colonial era boundary line robs Afghanistan of Pashtun territory, now inside Pakistan. No Afghan government, including the Pashtun-dominated Taliban regime, which was recognised by Pakistan, has felt strong enough to recognise the Durand Line.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Pakistan has long stated that it wants Afghanistan to recognise the Durand Line, the 2,640km (1610 miles)-long border between the two countries. Afghans say the British-drawn, colonial era boundary line robs Afghanistan of Pashtun territory, now inside Pakistan. No Afghan government, including the Pashtun-dominated Taliban regime, which was recognised by Pakistan, has felt strong enough to recognise the Durand Line.
And yet President Karzai calls a jirga for his people on both sides of the line. Hmmm.
KABUL: The Taliban's fugitive leader, Mulla Mohammad Omar, is alive and leading the anti-government insurgency from inside Afghanistan, a purported top spokesman for the militant chief said Saturday. "Mulla Omar has been in Afghanistan and still is in Afghanistan and will remain here to lead the jihad against the American troops," said a man claiming to be Taliban spokesman Abdul-Hai Mutmaen.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I wonder if it's his Pakistan address that the NATO generals are providing Pervez Musharraf when they come to call with their maps and satellite photos and all? I can't imagine he's one of the Young Turks who've been insisting on gathering in their myriads to be mown down by the NATO troops.
#2
I'm sure we all know that Omar is living in an ISI safe-house in Quetta. I'm sure the US knows the address, down to the four-digit extension to the zip code. I wish someone had the stones to do something about it. Preferably, I'd suggest a dozen-ship formation of Buffs with everything they could carry, including a kitchen sink. The neighbors will be upset, but maybe that's what it will take to keep them from opening their arms to another madman.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
10/08/2006 22:22 Comments ||
Top||
#3
neighbors? you mean outer-cordon informants
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/08/2006 22:33 Comments ||
Top||
#1
Between July and October 2005, the Saudi daily Al-Madina published a series of antisemitic articles by Saudi columnist Najah Al-Zahhar, titled The Serpent Around Our Necks. The articlesargue that The Protocols of the Elders of Zion must be authentic because the current situation in the world fully corresponds to what is described in them.
When are we going to attach a price tag to the publication of such blatantly fabricated horseshit like this? There needs to be a mysterious explosion at Al-Madina's central printing facility.
That Islam continues to pump out filthy shit like this whilst simultaneously hosting rabid Cartoonifadas over the most bland counter-offerings, must earn them crushing retaliation.
The Church of England has launched an astonishing attack on the Government's drive to turn Britain into a multi-faith society.
In a wide-ranging condemnation of policy, it says that the attempt to make minority "faith" communities more integrated has backfired, leaving society "more separated than ever before". The criticisms are made in a confidential Church document, leaked to The Sunday Telegraph, that challenges the "widespread description" of Britain as a multi-faith society and even calls for the term "multi-faith" to be reconsidered.
It claims that divisions between communities have been deepened by the Government's "schizophrenic" approach to tackling multiculturalism. While trying to encourage interfaith relations, it has actually given "privileged attention" to the Islamic faith and Muslim communities.
Continued on Page 49
#3
"Written by Guy Wilkinson, the interfaith adviser to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams,...",
Slereper, I'm assuming this was leaked by Wilkinson or someone sympathetic precisely because self-confessed "beardy leftie" Williams probably wouldn't have taken this report this any further.
#8
BD - We've certainly got a full plate in need of fisking or explaination, heh. Lots of stuff coming out of NATO / Afghanistan, MoD, and the usual Beeb & similar dementia that is damned hard to make heads or tails out of.
And there have been a few Murat sightings, as well. Everybody needs a chew toy, but especially a Bulldog, lol. :-)
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/08/2006 18:57 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Murat?, the Murat? - "They seek him here, They seek him there, Those Frenchies Rantburgers seek him everywhere. Is he in heaven? Or is he in hell? That damned elusive Pimpernel Murat!"
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
10/08/2006 19:02 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Lol, Frank. Now now, you've had your fill, next sighting belongs to BD. :-)
#12
Geez, everyone wants a piece! IIRC, he last last here about a month ago - and it was likely a fake Murat, but the nym alone generated the usual feeding frenzy, lol.
The Financial Services Authority is urgently scouring Britain's banking system for evidence of Iranian terrorism funding following an alert from the US authorities.
Officials at the FSA were shown American intelligence indicating that suspicious Iranian funds were being funnelled through the City of London
The move comes after officials at the FSA were shown American intelligence indicating that suspicious Iranian funds were being funnelled through the City of London and other financial centres.
Hank Paulson, the US Treasury Secretary, claimed last month that Iran was using the western banking system to sponsor international terrorism and nuclear procurement. Paulson warned that 'blue chip banks' were being unwittingly used by a network of 'more than 30 front companies' controlled by Tehran. America also recently accused the Iranian bank Saderat of channelling hundreds of millions of dollars to Hizbollah and other violent Palestinian groups.
The FSA declined to comment on its communications with US agencies this weekend, but expressed confidence that its normal regulations were effective in detecting money-laundering.
UBS and Credit Suisse are among the western banks reported to have faced US government pressure to cut their links with Iran, although there is no suggestion that either has been used as a conduit for illegitimate funds. Other international banks and some EU countries are thought to consider Paulson's warning alarmist.
It's alarming all right -- might cut into profits.
North Korea performed its first-ever nuclear weapons test Monday, Yonhap news agency reported, citing government officials.
South Korean officials couldn't immediately confirm the report.
The director of South Korea's monitoring center that is watching for a test with sound and seismic detectors declined to immediately comment on the reported test. The U.S. Geological Survey said it had detected no seismic activity in North Korea, although it's not clear if a blast would be strong enough for its sensors.
#3
If it was a nuclear test, we already know. The envelope shape is unmistakable. The news has yet to be released, that is all. An underground test's shockwave reflects through the entire earth several times.
Umm, where does it say that? There's been no activity on the peninsula -- at least as far south as Pusan -- for a week. Unless you saw something and they took it down?
#14
Japan has a solid-fuel satellite launcher (Mu-5) that's almost a dead ringer for the Peacekeeper ICBM. Stick a nuke in the payload bay and you've got your own instant strategic deterrent--and it wouldn't take long for Japan to whip up a few nukes in the machine shop.
Posted by: Mike ||
10/08/2006 23:44 Comments ||
Top||
#15
I was trying to figure out why Kim would do this (assuming the reports are true). It's not for internal consumptions, as he doesn't give a damn about his people. It's not to pressure the US as this will give him LESS leverage and guarantee the US goes to the UN. It makes China look powerless and foolish - so it's certainly not going to win Kim friends in Beijing.
But, suppose Kim wanted to sell one or more nukes. The buyer would surely want proof that they worked before forking over say 100 million bucks (or more). As for buyers - Iran might decide it wants a nuke sooner rather than later. Also, Syria, Venzuela, even the Saudis. Then there's (non-state) terrorists - such as Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, and Hamas. Sure hope we're watching shipping in / out of North Korea (though a nuke could also go by rail through China).
#16
Mike: Japan has a solid-fuel satellite launcher (Mu-5) that's almost a dead ringer for the Peacekeeper ICBM. Stick a nuke in the payload bay and you've got your own instant strategic deterrent--and it wouldn't take long for Japan to whip up a few nukes in the machine shop.
Japan doesn't need nukes for the same reason Germany did not need nukes - they fall under the American nuclear umbrella. Which is another way of saying that a nuclear attack on Japan will draw an American nuclear response. And a Japan that has nukes will no longer be part of the American nuclear umbrella. I seriously doubt Japan is going to undertake the multi-billion dollar expense of creating a second rate (compared to the US arsenal) nuclear force when the cost will be the US Japan alliance.
HT to Austin Bay RTWT
The North Korean refugee had one request for her captors before the young Chinese soldiers led her back across the steel-girdered bridge on the Yalu River that divides two socialist allies.
She asked for a comb and some water because she said that if she was going to die she could not face going to heaven looking as dirty and dishevelled as this, recounted a relative of one soldier who was there.
What happened next is testimony to the rising disgust in Chinese military ranks as Beijing posts more troops to the border amid a crisis with North Korea over its regimes plan to stage a nuclear test.
The soldiers, who later told family members of the incident, marched the woman, who was about 30, to the mid-point of the bridge. North Korean guards were waiting. They signed papers for receipt of the woman, who kept her dignity until that moment. Then, in front of the Chinese troops, one seized her and another speared her hand the soft part between thumb and forefinger with the point of a sharpened steel cable, which he twisted into a leash.
She screamed just like a pig when we kill it at home in the village, the soldier later told his relative. Then they dragged her away.
Such stories are circulating widely among Chinese on the border, where wild rumours of an American attack on nuclear test sites have spread fears of a Chernobyl-type cloud of radiation and sparked indignation at the North Koreans. Ive heard it a hundred times over that when we send back a group they stab each one with steel cable, loop it under the collarbone and out again, and yoke them together like animals, said an army veteran with relatives in service.
As international tensions over North Korea have soared, China has deployed extra combat units of the Peoples Liberation Army (PLA) to man the border from the Yalu River in the south to the Tumen River near Russia - evidently fearing the risk of chaos and collapse.
The troop trains were rolling even on the Chinese mid-autumn festival on Friday. Civilian traffic on a main line was halted to allow one train to pass, with carriages jammed with glum soldiers in camouflage uniforms and flat cars carrying olive-green military vehicles.
And while a few off-duty men strolled with their sweethearts under the full moon along the banks of the Yalu, others watched from outposts at the silent, darkened shores of the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea.
All visits by Chinese have recently been stopped, said a local official. They gave us no reason for it.
The bomb test could come as early as today, the eighth anniversary of Kim Jong-ils ascent to the top of the North Korean Workers party and one day before South Koreas foreign minister, Ban Ki-moon, seeks election as secretary-general of the United Nations.
Last Friday, North Koreas traditional allies, Russia and China, joined in a UN security council warning that a weapons test - likely to be in a disused mine 6,000ft underground in Shijung district near the Chinese border -would attract universal condemnation. It has put the Chinese under maximum pressure to restrain Kim. Japans new prime minister, Shinzo Abe, is due in Beijing today to urge on the effort and the leader of South Korea is coming to make the same plea on Monday.
Chinas dilemma is that its ruling elites are still bound to those of North Korea by a like-minded political authoritarianism. President Hu Jintao has even praised North Korea for keeping to its Stalinist politics, a view he may be repenting now that Kim has brought China to the brink of a nuclear crisis.
Beijings main fear is that if Kim tests a bomb - the CIA believes he has enough plutonium for four; other US experts think more - then Japan will feel it has no choice but to acquire its own atomic arsenal. That would destroy the balance of power in northeast Asia that has kept the peace since the end of the second world war.
Chinas secondary fear is that if Kims regime collapses, hundreds of thousands of desperate, hungry North Koreans, some armed, will flood across its border to sow unrest and instability.
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/08/2006 18:23 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It was all fun and game allowing the NORKS to be probleatic to the US until now. I hope the cloud flows North, they are getting what they gave.
Posted by: 49 Pan ||
10/08/2006 18:56 Comments ||
Top||
#2
What what!? - I thought the Chinese were supposed to be infallible when it came to geopolitics. I think the CIA has a term for when this happens - blowback.
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
10/08/2006 18:59 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Japans new prime minister, Shinzo Abe, is due in Beijing today to urge on the effort and the leader of South Korea is coming to make the same plea on Monday.
I'd love to be a fly on the wall for that merry little chat.
"So, Japan is thinking of going nuclear too. Who do you recommend we get our bomb designs from? The North Koreans or the United States?"
"Well, er, uh, hommina hommina ..."
Nobody should ever fool themselves that North Korea is anything but a sock puppet of China's politburo. Everything they do has the Chinese Mandarins' black border two-week-in-advance approval. Any concern or contrition shown by China is purely for avid consumption by the UN.
#4
China's mounting a propaganda effort to mislead the West into thinking that its interests are aligned with theirs. The fact is that China owns Kim via free food and fuel and could stop him by simply turning the lights out and removing the feed tube. See my comments here.
#5
T: What what!? - I thought the Chinese were supposed to be infallible when it came to geopolitics. I think the CIA has a term for when this happens - blowback.
I don't think you should underestimate Chinese geopolitical skill, which is as polished as its military is inept. This is not to say that Chinese diplomats are people you would enjoy having over for dinner - just that the cocktail of blustery threats and insincere flattery they wield has achieved Chinese foreign policy goals far more successfully than their crappy military.
Our mutual defense pacts in East Asia are contingent on local powers not having nukes. What isn't commonly known is that Uncle Sam shields them under his nuclear umbrella, which is another way of saying that any attack on them with nukes will bring a nuclear response from Sam. However, this umbrella - and the mutual defense pacts Uncle Sam has with them - is contingent upon those states remaining non-nuclear - any other option subjects the US to too many unpredictable risks. If Japan and South Korea get their own nuclear arsenals, they are effectively on their own. There is no way they are going to replicate either the US nuclear armory or American conventional might. This is why I believe China has calculated just about right - that Japan and South Korea aren't going to do anything for fear of being expelled from the alliance, and China will have added a new risk to Uncle Sam's strategic calculations.
#6
Nothing is ever so clear cut. I suspect that they give the Norks food to keep most Norks home, not crossing to China. For his part, Nero Jong Il has so often given the finger to the Chinese, I imagine that a good part of their army would love nothing better than to kick his annoying ass.
Not only has he been stealing Chinese relief supply trains, but he has done everything short of taking a crap on one of their banquet tables to offend them.
Into that situation, if the US comes forward with a discrete suggestion of how China could be rid of the dork, they may seriously consider it.
#9
This from the SKors: S. Korea detects signs of N. Korea's nuke test
South Korea received intelligence on Monday that North Korea might have conducted a nuclear test, officials here said.
"President Roh Moo-hyun called in an emergency meeting of related ministers on Monday to discuss the North Korean nuclear issue," Foreign Ministry spokesman Choo Kyu-ho said. "The meeting comes as there has been a grave change in the situation involving the North's nuclear activity."
He refused to go into further detail, citing the sensitivity of the issue.
#10
More from Kimmie: North Korea Says Nuclear Test Successful North Korea said Monday it has performed its first-ever nuclear weapons test. The country's official Korean Central News Agency said the test was performed successfully and there was no radioactive leakage from the site.
"The nuclear test is a historic event that brought happiness to the our military and people," KCNA said.
South Korea's Yonhap news agency said the test was conducted at 10:36 a.m. (9:36 p.m. EDT Sunday) in Hwaderi near Kilju city, citing defense officials.
Seems there's never a Mod cop around when you need one.
#13
A: Nothing is ever so clear cut. I suspect that they give the Norks food to keep most Norks home, not crossing to China.
Like I said, China can absorb the entire North Korean population without breaking a sweat. In case you hadn't heard, China's booming coastal cities are running out of low cost labor. North Koreans would kill to get those jobs and those work conditions.
And China has plenty of room - to match Hong Kong's population density, China's population would have to rise from 1.3b people to 60b people. Note that China is about as densely populated as Britain.
A: For his part, Nero Jong Il has so often given the finger to the Chinese, I imagine that a good part of their army would love nothing better than to kick his annoying ass.
Kim Jong Il hasn't given the finger to the Chinese. The Chinese are using Kim to give the finger to Uncle Sam. A good part of the Chinese military would love nothing better than to kick Uncle Sam in the ass. And providing nukes to Uncle Sam's adversaries is their way of doing so without getting stomped by the US. Don't kid yourself - North Korea is viewed with a great deal of affection by average Chinese whereas the US is viewed with contempt bordering on hatred. They like our technology and our movies, but view us as the primary impediment to Chinese greatness, i.e. they are poor because we are rich, and they are weak because we are strong.
#14
Nuthin' official yet here [Guam time] save for Pyongyangs offi announcements of a test + the USGS picking up of some kind of seismic actvity which as of this post has NOT YET been confirmed to be a de facto Norkie nuke test. Hopefully, Dubya + INTEL Boyz have accurate analyses of the NorKor's intents vv CHINA. WHN AND IFF THE NORKIE TEST IS CONFIRMED, NORTH KOREA'S AND CHINA'S EAST-SOUTH ASIAN + PACIFIC NEIGHBORS HAVE ALL THE MOTIVATION THEY NEED TO GO NUCLEAR + PARTICIPATE IN US GLOBAL GMD, which in turn means China's ambitions for Chinese-centric, Commie-centric Asian=Pacific hegemony has flown the proverbial coop. China must now deal wid poten [future]nuclearized JAPAN + SOUTH KOREA + now NORTH KOREA, not to mention VIETNAM, PHILIPPINES, THAILAND, + MALAYA-INDONESIA, ETAL. NUCLEAR TAIWAN!? MONGOLIA? MANCHURIA? There's the old "SILK ROAD(S)" across Central Asia but INDIA + MADMOUD=RADICAL IRAN IS THERE. COMMIE CHINA MUST EITHER GIVE UP ITS AMBITIONS FOR HEGEMONY, e.g. IMPLODE LIKE THE USSR, OR ELSE WAGE WAR TO ACHIEVE IT. BEIJING > There's always taking over ETHNICALLY SUFFERING/DYING RUSSIA vv PERVASIVE CHINESE IMMIGRATION.
The nuclear weapon that North Korea intends to detonate in an underground test is big enough to kill up to 200,000 people were it ever to be used against a city such as Seoul or Tokyo, Russian military experts have revealed.
They say that the weapon, with the same 20-kiloton yield as the bomb dropped on Nagasaki, is about 10ft long and weighs four tons. It is too big to fit on to any missile Kim Jong Il's regime currently possesses but if it were detonated above ground it could destroy everything within five square miles.
I would say that carrying out a nuclear test any time soon is not to North Korea's advantage.
Russian military officials in Pyongyang say they have received information that North Korea intends to give the US up to three months to lift financial sanctions imposed last year and to begin negotiations before carrying out its threat. "If Americans don't start bilateral dialogue with Pyongyang and lift sanctions, then Kim Jong-il is expected to give the order to carry on with the test, most likely in the second half of December or early January," one official said.
The Russians dismissed reports that the tests would take place this weekend. "Normally, if Pyongyang makes an important and provocative announcement, it tries to heat up the tension to the maximum point, and then suddenly falls silent for a long time," one analyst said. "It needs to carefully monitor the situation, watch the reaction of the rest of the world and weigh all the pros and cons again. I would say that carrying out a nuclear test any time soon is not to North Korea's advantage."
The Russians believe the test, if it happens, is likely to be carried out in a horizontal tunnel more than a mile below ground at Kilju, in North Hamgyon province, in the north-east of the country where US military satellites have detected recent activity.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/08/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
North Korea intends to give the US up to three months to lift financial sanctions imposed last year and to begin negotiations before carrying out its threat
Blackmail, writ large. In eight weeks, we need to have import tariffs ready to levy against China. (Too bad all of our politicians are bought off by Chinese interests.) In nine weeks, we need to have strategy in place for a comprehensive bombardment of the Kilju (Kill-Jew?) facility. I vote for a strike using fuel-air bombs during the pre-detonation testing rehersals so we suck the lungs out of their senior scientific staff.
#2
Article: They say that the weapon, with the same 20-kiloton yield as the bomb dropped on Nagasaki, is about 10ft long and weighs four tons. It is too big to fit on to any missile Kim Jong Il's regime currently possesses but if it were detonated above ground it could destroy everything within five square miles.
Here's the catch - without either missiles or aircraft able to deliver it to its destination, there is no way that North Korea can inflict anything like 200,000 deaths. As to radiation sickness and fallout, let me point out that Nagasaki and Hiroshima have, respectively, twice and three times the populations they had when Uncle Sam dropped A-bombs on them in 1945.
#4
It is, however, damned good propaganda, as it gets everyone rattled like all hell. The NKors will use that for all it's worth.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/08/2006 1:09 Comments ||
Top||
#5
A ground burst would create radioactive fallout. I don't know how much.
Now we know how NorK intends to feed its gloriously starving masses.
If the NorKs do end up with a bomb and a mysterious nuclear explosion happens somewhere, even if Iran has a bomb, I feel in all liklihood that anything of any importance in NorK will probably suffer the same fate, as well as Iran.
#8
I seem to recall reading that some Hiroshima deaths were from exposure to the black rain.
Posted by: john ||
10/08/2006 8:26 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Here's the catch - without either missiles or aircraft able to deliver it to its destination, there is no way that North Korea can inflict anything like 200,000 deaths.
Remember the story a couple of years ago about a NKor freighter dropping bales of drugs off the Australian coast to be picked up by local drug dealers? The NKors don't need a bomb that fits into an aircraft or missile, not so long as the world doesn't sink ships leaving NKor harbors as a matter of routine.
What would happen to the US economy if a freighter taking on grain for "famine relief" carried a nuke into one of our major harbors?
Our response should be simple: let them know that an underground nuclear test will be met with an open-air test of our own, over Pyongyang.
Posted by: Rob Crawford ||
10/08/2006 8:43 Comments ||
Top||
#10
RC: What would happen to the US economy if a freighter taking on grain for "famine relief" carried a nuke into one of our major harbors?
The 200,000 deaths requires an airburst. That means missiles or aircraft.
#12
#11: "And if it's detonated in a Japanese port..."
Then GFL for the NorKs - the Japanese ain't that pacified, constitution or no, and they don't give a rat's ass what the "world: thinks of them.
And you can be sure we'd give them whatever (military) help they needed.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/08/2006 12:38 Comments ||
Top||
#13
The NKors don't need a bomb that fits into an aircraft or missile, not so long as the world doesn't sink ships leaving NKor harbors as a matter of routine.
Which is why I've long advocated a complete and total blockade of all maritime, ground and aviation traffic in and out of North Korea.
The 200,000 deaths requires an airburst. That means missiles or aircraft.
A freighter based detonation could be augmented by proximity to other flammable sources, like a bulk CNG (Compressed Natural Gas) storage facility, a CNG supertanker or a major petroleum refinery. Still, ground effects and adjacent buildings or structures would constrain a blast's wavefront expansion and significantly limit damage. Nothing beats an airburst for unrestricted energy distribution.
#14
I'm calling bullshit on these "Russian military experts". A 10 ft long bomb implies a gun type design (unless it is a hydrogen bomb). Plutonium bombs must use implosion to set it off. The Nork uranium enrichment program fiarly new and unlikely to have produced enough for a bomb. Mostly likely, no one outside NK has a clue what is going on.
Posted by: ed ||
10/08/2006 14:31 Comments ||
Top||
#15
"Nothing beats an airburst for unrestricted energy distribution."
Not true. Counterintuitively, more destruction is caused to drag sensitive targets e.g. buildings, vehicles, etc. with a ground burst. An overpressure wave is caused by a ground burst, and is not nearly as effective with an airburst; It increases the level of ground destruction dramatically. I can find citations for you, but it's Sunday. Perhaps later today.
Moreover, if your goal is radiation contamination, a blast a bit under water is your best bet. Again, citations will be researched later.
Posted by: Mark E. ||
10/08/2006 14:54 Comments ||
Top||
#16
OK....I can't write without citations....
Targets in the vicinity of ground zero may actually be subjected to two blast waves: the initial or incident wave, followed slightly later by a secondary reflected wave. This limited region close to ground zero in which the incident and reflected waves are separate is known as the region of regular reflection.
Beyond the area of regular reflection as it travels through air which is already heated and compressed by the incident blast wave, the reflected wave will move much more rapidly and will very quickly catch up with the incident wave. The two then fuse to form a combined wave front known as the Mach stem. The height of the Mach stem increases as the blast wave moves outward and becomes a nearly vertical blast front. As a result, blast pressures on the surface will not decrease as the square of the distance, and most direct blast damage will be horizontally directed, e.g., on the walls of a building rather than on the roof.
As the height of burst for an explosion of given yield is decreased, or as the yield of the explosion for a given height of burst is increased, Mach reflection commences nearer to ground zero and the overpressure near ground zero becomes larger. However, as the height of burst is decreased, the total area of coverage for blast effects is also markedly reduced. The choice of height of burst is largely dependent on the nature of the target. Relatively resistant targets require the concentrated blast of a low altitude or surface burst, while sensitive targets may be damaged by the less severe blast wave from an explosion at a higher altitude. In the latter case a larger area and, therefore, a larger number of targets can be damaged.
A surface burst results in the highest possible overpressures near ground zero. In such a burst, the shock front is hemispherical in form, and essentially all objects are subjected to a blast front similar to that in the Mach region described above. A subsurface burst produces the least air blast, since most of the energy is dissipated in the formation of a crater and the production of a ground shock wave. From Globalsecurity.org
In other words, surface burst increases damage to targets hit, but hits fewer targets....
Posted by: Mark E. ||
10/08/2006 15:04 Comments ||
Top||
#17
Agree with ed on the Russian "experts".
Fact - the Libyans handed over plans for what is known as CHICOM4, the fourth Chinese test, a missile deliverable, 1 m diameter, implosion weapon using HEU (or modified for Pu) that weighed 500 kg.
The blueprints were wrapped in a plastic bag from Dr AQ Khan's dry cleaners in Rawalpindi. They included copious notes in Urdu and Chinese, explaining fabrication procedures of each componant.
Fact - General Aslam Beg, then head of the Pak army, authorized AQ Khan to trade this design, along with stolen URENCO centrifuge technology, in exchange for North Korean missile technology.
NoKo has the design for a deliverable nuke
Posted by: john ||
10/08/2006 15:17 Comments ||
Top||
#18
Not true. Counterintuitively, more destruction is caused to drag sensitive targets e.g. buildings, vehicles, etc. with a ground burst. An overpressure wave is caused by a ground burst, and is not nearly as effective with an airburst; It increases the level of ground destruction dramatically. I can find citations for you, but it's Sunday. Perhaps later today.
Uh ... Mark E., did you carefully read your own subsequent post?
However, as the height of burst is decreased, the total area of coverage for blast effects is also markedly reduced. The choice of height of burst is largely dependent on the nature of the target. Relatively resistant targets require the concentrated blast of a low altitude or surface burst, while sensitive targets [like cities] may be damaged by the less severe blast wave from an explosion at a higher altitude. In the latter case alargerareaand, therefore, alargernumberof targetscanbedamaged.
We're talking about maximizing the damage to a metropolitan region. As I said (vis a ship-based atomic bomb):
"ground effects and adjacent buildings or structures would constrain a blast's wavefront expansion and significantly limit damage"
The North Koreans wouldn't be going after a hardened military target with one of their puny fission bombs. They would be trying to kill the most civilians possible. My scenario still holds.
#19
The North Koreans will go with what they can get away with, not refine to achieve maximum effect. If that means bringing the thing in on a ship, and trailing it in the water at her bow rather than a missile to get the in-air explosion, they'll accept worse damage in a more limited area.
#22
They don't have to keep it on the same ship. They can hand it off to a terrorist group if they want. That's a big part of the reason they don't want rogue states to get their hands on this stuff. That way we won't have so many rogue states to blast when push comes to shove.
North Korea was preparing to test a nuclear weapon in an abandoned coal mining factory, but was waiting to see if it could first garner additional concessions from the US government, Reuters reported Saturday morning. The report was based on a Chinese source who had recently visited the North Korean capital of Pyongyang.
On Friday, the UN Security Council urged North Korea to cancel its planned nuclear test and return immediately to talks on scrapping its nuclear weapons program, saying that exploding such a device would threaten international peace and security.
A statement adopted unanimously by the council expressed "deep concern" over North Korea's announcement.
A statement adopted unanimously by the council expressed "deep concern" over North Korea's announcement. It was read at a formal meeting by the council president, Ambassador Kenzo Oshima of Japan, and warned of unspecified council action if North Korea ignores international calls not to conduct a test.
Oshima indicated that the North could face sanctions or possible military action...
Oshima indicated that the North could face sanctions or possible military action under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter if it detonates a nuclear device. Chapter 7 outlines actions the council can take to deal with threats to international peace, and he stressed that the statement clearly says a nuclear test would constitute such a threat.
Japan, which would be in close proximity to any North Korean nuclear test, proposed the initial text. Oshima had pressed to have it adopted before Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe travels to Beijing on Sunday and Seoul on Monday with a message that the North should stop testing. "It's good that the council has come up with a very clear, strongly worded message warning against a nuclear test" before the "very important" Japan-China summit meeting, Oshima said.
US Ambassador John Bolton said the US priority now is to stop a North Korean test. "North Korea should understand how strongly the United States and many other council members feel that they should not test this nuclear device," Bolton said, "and that if they do test it, it would be a very different world the day after the test ... because there would be another nuclear power. This would be proof positive of North Korea having nuclear weapons. It would be an example of nuclear proliferation that we're very much concerned about."
Russia's UN Ambassador Vitaly Churkin said threatening or conducting a nuclear test "would not help anybody including North Korea."
Russia's UN Ambassador Vitaly Churkin said threatening or conducting a nuclear test "would not help anybody including North Korea." "This message is very clearly conveyed in the useful presidential statement which we today adopted," he said. "Let's hope that things will cool off and that everybody will return to six-party talks."
The statement urges the North not to carry out the test, saying it would not help the North address its concerns, especially strengthening its security. It warns North Korea that a nuclear test would bring international condemnation, "jeopardize peace, stability and security in the region and beyond," and lead to further unspecified council action.
The council said it "deplores" the pursuit of nuclear weapons by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. "The Security Council will be monitoring the situation closely," the statement says. "The Security Council stresses that a nuclear test, if carried out by the DPRK, would represent a clear threat to international peace and security and that should the DPRK ignore calls of the international community, the Security Council will act consistent with its responsibility under the Charter of the United Nations."
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Seems about time to give Kimmie something to worry about. Maybe we should put a mine in one of his many harbors, and let some NKor ship "find" it. Or maybe run a couple of B-1s at supersonic speed along the DMZ, and see what breaks. We need something big enough to make Kim soil his diapers, but not so big that China will over-react. If he DOES go ahead with his nuke test, I'll second the call for a scheduled sunrise over Kimmie's palace, preferably a 10-MT surface burst at midnight.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
10/08/2006 23:09 Comments ||
Top||
South Korea's Foreign Ministry said Saturday it supports a UN Security Council statement urging North Korea to cancel plans for a nuclear test. South Korea also called on the North to return to six-nation talks on ending the reclusive communist nation's nuclear weapons program, the ministry said in a statement.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Foreign Minister Ben Bot said on Friday North Korea's threat to conduct a nuclear weapon test was a "totally wrong precedent".
Bot said after the weekly Cabinet meeting that everything possible should be done to prevent North Korea carry out the test. The Christian Democrat CDA minister urged the US and Japan to wage a tough campaign against North Korea. "The situation is dangerous," Bot said.Bot also said China should apply pressure to the North Koreans. In the past, China has advocated quiet diplomacy, along with Russia.
The foreign minister is convinced that North Korea can be persuaded against carrying out the nuclear test if sufficient international pressure is brought to bear.
Anybody else notice he hasn't mentioned any EU pressure?
"The country cannot expect our food aid and humanitarian support if the money is wasted on these sorts of projects," he said.
AUSTRALIA is a Muslim nation, the head of Prime Minister John Howard's Muslim advisory board says. Dr Ameer Ali says most Australians practise Muslim values but the Muslim community is being alienated and disadvantaged by Islamophobia.
Dr Ali said multiculturalism was Australia's destiny but Muslims, as latecomers, were being disadvantaged. "We would like to remain in this country as citizens like anybody else, but with cultural individuality preserved," he said. "We want an Australia which is like a fruit salad with a nice juice in it, not a mega fruit juice."
Before addressing a conference on national identity today, Dr Ali said Muslim values were practised in Australia. "When I go abroad, they ask me where do I come from? I say I come from a Muslim country," he said. "Which country, they say. Australia.
"That's not a Muslim country. Yes it's Muslim country.
"For the value that my religion preaches, these people practise.
"So I see Islam here but (the people) may not be Muslims, but in (other) countries I see Muslims but not Islam.
"So when I come back to Australia, I've been told to respect Australian values and now I am confused, because I see no contradiction at all.
"Values are universal. Human values - there is no such thing as Australian values."
Dr Ali has denied a report in The Australian newspaper last week which quoted him as saying that Muslims should not blindly follow the Koran and that Mohammed was not the perfect model and had human flaws. But Dr Ali said the comments and a caption underneath a photograph saying "Muslim minds closed" were deeply offensive to all Muslims.
Federal parliamentary secretary for multicultural affairs, Andrew Robb, said Dr Ali should be congratulated for the comments.
But Dr Ali has been inundated with complaints from angry Muslims since the story appeared and Australia's most senior Islamic cleric called for him to be ostracised. "I have received a number of emails from my fellow Muslims who have taken this opportunity to ridicule me and I do not deny their right to do so," Dr Ali said. "The description projected by the article in The Australian totally misrepresents the noble character of the Holy Prophet who was sent as a model to humanity.
"Any part that I may have unwittingly played in this depiction is deeply regretted."
"Please don't kill me!"
Dr Ali's term on the Muslim advisory board expired last month.
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/08/2006 7:55 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Cultural imperialism.... PLUS muslim theological hubris ("islam is the default religion of humanity, existing in its perfection since the very beginning of time, Alexander the Great or Jesus were muslim, babies are born muslim but are taken into false religions, so converting to islma is returning to the One True Master Religion, when earlier scriptures contradicts the koranic version, it's because the perverted jooooos and christians altered them to disobey allan, etc, etc...).
#3
Poor deluded Muslims. They have yet to realize the one true religion is Scientology. In fact, any truths in the beautiful poetry of the Qo'ran (emphasize foreign sounding pronuciation here) merely anticipate the world-shattering wisdom of the Prophet L. Ron Hubbard.
Well, they may not get there is this life-time but one fine day their Thetan infestation with be dealt with if you know what I am saying. Scientology is a Religion of Peace, btw.
#4
I'm very confused... I've watched The Ultimate Source Of Wisdom (aka "South Park") over the years, movie included, and my impression was the One True Religion followers were the mormons (and this one even confirmed in the "Captain Orgazmo" flick).
I won't dwell on TUSOW's take on scientology, I haven't seen yet the eps.
#5
Mr Robb has been considering the make-up and structure of the board and an announcement is expected this week.
If they have any sense, the announcement will be "there is no need for a Muslim advisory board", and they'll stop pumping cash into the jihadis and jihadi-wannabes.
Posted by: Rob Crawford ||
10/08/2006 8:37 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Here's a suggestion for the Muslim Advisory Board: "We advise all Muslims that they have two choices in Australia: convert to a different religion or go back to country of ethnic origin. If you fail to voluntarily choose within six weeks from this date Australia will involuntarily deport you back to country of origin. Our advice is to choose quickly."
Posted by: mac ||
10/08/2006 8:59 Comments ||
Top||
#7
They are staking claim openly. Either they will receive pushback OPENLY or .... eventually Australia too will be lost.
#8
I think Aussies won't tolerate this Mooselimb porpaganda/horseshit. If fact, the reason this raghead is piping up is because he sees the blowback cresting the hill and heading right for the Muzzie dungheap.
#9
Taqqiya yes, but it is the most Moderate Muslim statement I have read from an leader in a while. Sure to cause the the spittle to fly during the Friday sermons. Better keep a sharp lookout for a dagger in your back Ali.
Posted by: ed ||
10/08/2006 12:08 Comments ||
Top||
Turkey has begun deploying bystanders peacekeeping troops, 260 model train combat engineers, in south Lebanon. No more than a thousand Turkish tourist troops will go on vacation to Lebanon. This is a major there they go again moment disappointment for the United States, which had hoped for at least a brigade of sissies soldiers (approximately 4000 to 5000 troops) from Turkey. The Turkish government has also said that the Turkish troops will retreat be withdrawn from Lebanon if they are asked to do anything disarm their fellow muzzies Hezbollah fighters. Not my Yob!
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/08/2006 12:53 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Ummm, are not these the same Turks that fought so fiercely at Gallipoli? They've either lost their nerve or have an alterior motive. Hmmmm .... lemme guess...
#3
Sh*t! *ulterior* Okay, that's it. I admit to being utterly incapable of chewing gum and walking at the same time. It's off the Rantburg and on to the Skins' game.
The youth branch of Denmark's third biggest political party - known for its populist anti-immigration stance - regrets that some of its members mocked the Prophet Muhammad during a summer camp earlier this year, it said Friday.
Despite the regret, the group said it was "OK to poke fun" at religious and political figures. Kenneth Christens, chairman of the Danish People's Party Youth refused to apologize Friday for the actions of its members...
Despite the regret, the group said it was "OK to poke fun" at religious and political figures. Kenneth Christens, chairman of the Danish People's Party Youth refused to apologize Friday for the actions of its members, but acknowledged they were problematic.
Shortly after word spread about the drawings, Egypt's largest Islamic group, the Muslim Brotherhood, denounced what it called "new Danish insults" to Islam and urged the world to boycott countries that allow offenses to all religions. "Muslims are shocked by this new Danish insult," the Muslim Brotherhood said in a statement issued Saturday. It described the drawing as "the ugliest for God's most honorable human being, peace be upon him."
The Brotherhood, which enjoys wide popularity in Egypt and across the Arab World, urged Muslims on Saturday to boycott products from Denmark and any other country that would allow such an "insult." It also called on Muslims to "express denouncement through peaceful means, by demonstrations and protests."
"The repetition of such actions is evidence of the depth of enmity carried by certain sectors in the West toward Islam and the prophet," the Brotherhood statement said.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Only because you idiots keep trying to force that ridiculous religion of yours on us. It's almost as stupid as Scientology.
#3
Egypt's largest Islamic group, the Muslim Brotherhood, denounced what it called "new Danish insults" to Islam
Renewed orchestrated seething, riots and tramplings in 5 ... 4 ... 3 ...
"The repetition of such actions is evidence of the depth of enmity carried by certain sectors in the West toward Islam and the prophet," the Brotherhood statement said.
Nope. "The repetition of such actions is evidence of" just how much fun we have ridiculing your phony-assed religion and your humiliation at getting ass-kicked with the regularity of an atomic clock.
#5
Yes, but thetans are most probably actually gnostic archons, if I believe john Lash. And if you can't believe John Lash, who can you believe, I ask you?
The European Union does not intend to admit new members "in the foreseeable future" other than those who have already begun adhesion discussions, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said Saturday.
And since we've slow-rolled the talks with Turkey, they're out of luck.
One day after returning from a trip to Turkey, where the country again made clear its desire to become a member of the European Union, Merkel came out against rapid expansion of the bloc after Romania and Bulgaria join at the beginning of 2007.
"We currently have adhesion discussions with Croatia and with Turkey, but we also know that in the foreseeable future, we can't accept any other member states," Merkel said in her weekly video podcast, which outlined German priorities as rotating president of the EU in 2007.
Those priorities are expected to be discussed Wednesday in Berlin, during a meeting between the German government and European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso.
During her six months as EU president Merkel said Germany would try to "make Europe closer to its citizens," by attempting to answer the "skeptical questions" Europeans are asking themselves about the union.
"Isn't there too much bureaucracy? Can Europe protect our security? Are we not out of our depth, because we can't clearly establish our borders?" the German chancellor asked, citing several such questions she want to answer.
She also urged Europe to delineate its borders, and called for open discussions with Turkey.
"The adhesion negotiation with Turkey should take place without any preconceived objective," Merkel said.
Ah, yes - the old "talk but no action" gambit. Turkey's been had by the Euros, big time. Unfortunately, while I agree with European concerns about admitting them to the Union, this will strengthen the hand of the fundamentalists I suspect.
Turkey's potential membership is a divisive issue within the 25-member block, and some countries are deeply skeptical about admitting the large and populous Muslim state. Merkel is one of the leading proponents of offering Turkey a '"privileged partnership" instead of full EU membership.
It's not a bad idea, but it's too little, way too late. They should never have held out the possibility of full membership if they weren't ready to follow through. A reasonable alternative which might have been embraced will now be seen as a serious insult.
#1
While I understand the idea that it may be important to get supposedly secular Turkey into the EU fold, maybe it's better for Europe to begin turning a cold shoulder to Muslim-majority nations in general. It would certainly make sense as part of a more comprehensive plan to begin ousting Muslims from the European continent.
#2
Zenster, you foolish foolish boy, that would mean that the EuroElites would have to give up their not-so-subtle JUDENHASS and butt out of the Arab-Israeli fracas.
Not gonna happen.
Posted by: Ernest Brown ||
10/08/2006 0:50 Comments ||
Top||
#4
As I've remarked to snooty Europeans who've upbraided me over GWOT: there's a reason world wars keep happening on European rather than American soil. Europeans' ingrained passivity causes them to do nothing, react too late, and wind up using a hammer for what could have been fixed with tweezers.
This is why I predict that Europe's "more comprehensive plan to begin ousting Muslims from the European continent" will come, eventually, in the form of renewed fascism. Europe prances about now with its nose in the air, too good for us cowboys, but in 5 or 10 years I bet they'll seriously discuss firing up the gas chambers again. I'm not saying I approve; I'm just observing that, at that point, they'll have few options left.
And when that breaking point comes, I think Europe will react a lot like their sports cars: they'll go from powdered-wig diplomacy to cattle-car fascism in about 4 seconds flat. Meanwhile, the rest of us will have to decide which is worse: Islamic fascism or European fascism? And hope we can live with the answer.
#6
exJag - more like the break-up of Yugoslavia, except all over Western Europe. I predict outright civil war between Muslim populations trying to establish a European caliphate and the remainder of the European population that hasn't already fled. Not clear who will win. If it comes to this point, we'd be wise to keep out of it.
#8
DMFD, I'd considered the same scenario, because vigilantism escalating to civil war is likely how it would go down in the US.
But Europeans aren't Americans, either in their attitudes or means. For myriad historical reasons, Europeans on the whole are astonishingly passive, while European governments have equally astonishing power.
Further, gun ownership is prohibited just about everywhere, and guns thoroughly demonized. But more importantly, defending oneself against intruders is also prohibited; the attitude is, that's what the police are for. Clock a burglar with a brass lamp and you're as likely to get prosecuted as the burglar -- and get the same sentence.
Things like this reinforce the cycle of passivity. Europeans' options are psychologically, as well as materially, limited. Leaving is about the only good one -- but Europeans don't just pick up and move as much as Americans do, and so many won't see that as a realistic option either.
I think the point we differ on here is who will do the responding: European governments or European citizens. I think it will be -- has to be -- governments. And what is fascism, but institutionalized vigilantism? Either way, it will get ugly, and there I don't disagree at all.
#9
Not clear who will win. If it comes to this point, we'd be wise to keep out of it.
No, it wouldn't be wise to keep out of it because a Muslim Europe is not in your interest given that you'd probably be next. Better to have it out on somebody else's front yard than your own, ain't that right? If you despise the Europeans and Muslims that much, you can do what the Russians have been fond of doing and wait until one side is almost dead before entering the fray. Then you can finish off the Muslim horde, if you wish, or spare whatever is left of the Europeans.
#10
Americans tend not to realize how unique we and the Australians and a few others are. Those who settled here could *own land* and make their own fortunes. They could, like Ben Franklin, start their own businesses and thrive.
For most of Europe's history, most landed property belonged to the state or to a few feudal landowners. Through the middle ages and into the Renaissance, over 95% of the population were peasants who never travelled more than 5 or 10 miles from home their entire lives. They knew perhaps 200 other people, 400 if there was a market town nearby. If they lived in an urban area, their choice of profession was determined by the guilds, and guild membership tended to be limited to the sons of guild members.
On the other hand, it was the feudal lord's responsibility to fight wars, protect his domain and shelter peasants during wars. They didn't always do it well or effectively and peasants suffered horribly -- famine, plague, wars. Estimates by historians based on detailed records of crops etc. are that over 75% of Europeans went hungry every day of their lives from 1100 through 1500 and later.
There simply is not the deep historical experience of either personal freedom and opportunity or personal responsibility in Europe, at least not to the degree and of the sort that formed the US and Australia. Passive indeed -- and sad to say, the US encouraged that passivity during the cold war. It served us well to demand they fall in line with our leadership of NATO, in the UN and elsewhere. It prevented another Hitler and it eventually brought down the successors to Stalin.
#15
In our judgement. And judgement is called for here IMO.
By the way, ex-JAG is *living* in Europe, GH. I've done business there for extended periods of time. Other regulars here have similar experience that underlies our judgements.
#17
ex-Jag,
I think you're pretty much on target again. The power is strongly retained by the ruling elite/governments in Eurabia. Citizenry remains fairly passive. Certainly,in France, the only real response must come from the government/ military. The police are already outmanned. The elite sentiment has not turned yet in Britain, as they still allow all sorts of outrages by their Muzzie population. I have the opinion that the populist sentiment carries a bit more weight in the germanic areas,ie; Germany and Denmark. You're there, do you see unrest among the Germans yet ?
#18
GH, there are hundreds of ways in which continental Europeans (and increasingly, British as well) are taught to yield responsibility and initiative to the state and/or state-controlled "enterprises".
Americans wouldn't put up with months-long waits to have telephones installed. But then, we have a legal and economic system in which the state-controlled monopoly was forced into a competitive marketplace. Markets have limitations, especially when they are distorted either by oligopolies or by bad regulation. But they do have the advantage of presenting alternatives to consumers.
The welfare states in Europe encourage economic passivity as producers, too. It is possible to live ones' whole life without ever contributing to the society economically. But -- and this is telling -- it is extraordinarily difficult to start a small business in order to improve your circumstances beyond the bare minimum of the dole. Just ask the older generation living in the banlieus outside of Paris, who found it difficult to get decent paying jobs in established companies and impossible to create their own.
Others here have pointed out the most egregious passivity inculcated by the state: that of personal defense. The official guidance in the UK, which has been enforced in court, is that if one is attacked one must curl into a ball and hope that the attacker leaves off before doing serious harm.
NO state or other authority IMO has the right to demand that a person not protect his or her person against physical attack. The right of self defense is as central a human right as may be claimed to exist. And yet millions of Europeans passively accept deep limitations on that right -- and get lousy protection from the state in return, as in the violence and intimidation that has spread out from the banlieus in France, for instance.
I could go on at great length, but those are some starting points.
#19
Other regulars here have similar experience that underlies our judgements.
But it is, still, an American judgement. Europeans do the same thing. They are completely bewildered about the American way. Neither side is capable of understanding the other.
When looked at objectively, it's useless to claim one side is better.
#20
On the contrary, it is CRITICAL that we each make careful judgements and evaluations. I understand the European perspective -- I've interacted with Europeans for long periods of time, am married to a man most of whose family lives in Europe and whose American relatives spend a good deal of time there.
What is useless is to think that the fact of differing perspectives makes judgements invalid. Failure to evaluate carefully and decide for yourself is the most passive stance of all.
A note: I almost married a German. Almost. I bailed and broke his heart at the last minute, and I'll feel like shit about it forever. But he knew, too, that our union was doomed. He was a decent man, like most Europeans I know, and taught me a lot.
It's hard to assess how much unrest there is in Germany -- it varies by region, by generation, etc. The first thing I'd note is that the level of Islamic violence isn't out of control yet; there's the occasional rape or honor killing (and one attempted train bombing). I feel fortunate to be here, instead of France or the UK.
But. Privately, many Germans I know are outraged, and scared. A few months ago, I saw political posters that declared bluntly, "Islamisten Raus." And the NPD makes gains in every election cycle (mainly in the former east, but then, Berlin is where most of the Muslims are).
Germans tend to keep their heads down and stay in their lane. Go to work, tend the garden, wash the car, walk the dog, drink beer with friends, and gripe only privately. At least where I am, there isn't anything close to a mutiny brewing. Yet.
#22
What is crystal clear is that one's own self-interest demands that an individual take responsibility for his own self defense. Anyone who delegates that responsibility to someone else (who will almost certainly take that responsibility less seriously) deserves what they get.
Euros get robbed, beaten and raped in job lots because they foolishly trust their inefficient and politically-correct police to protect them. Most Americans (except for the idiot blue-state lefties) know better and have guns in their homes. Difference: criminals in America very seldom try breaking into occupied homes because they know that they stand a damned high likelihood of running into an armed homeowner who will kill them if he gets half a chance--and who will walk away scott-free if he does. In Europe there are more robberies of occupied residences than of unoccupied ones. Euro criminals know they don't have to worry about armed resistance from the Euro sheeple and they act accordingly.
Americans never understand how the Jews could just get on the trains to the death camps so quietly and peacefully. Euros understand it all too well. They're conditioned to submit to violence because the idea of fighting back is so strongly discouraged by their culture. Euros have two choices. They'll either change that attitude or they'll be taken over by the Islamic horde. It's that simple.
Posted by: mac ||
10/08/2006 12:57 Comments ||
Top||
#23
lotp, all of what you state is true to some degree, but there's a flaw in your argument. You are talking about state passivity and how the state imposes itself on the people. Are the people intrinsically passive, to the extent that you believe? Take away the welfare state, the state safety net, and will these people perish under your assumption? I doubt it.
For example, it's true that the welfare state discourages the creation of small businesses. Does that mean that small businesses do not exist? Or that people don't try? Evidence of this is most readily seen in Eastern Europe, a region that is now mostly a social copy of Western Europe, but where I'd say passivity is not the norm.
Now, as far as personal safety goes, I'm afraid that is a bit of an American exaggeration borne out of your bias toward gun ownership and the environment in which you live. For instance, I bet someone who curls up into a ball has a much greater chance of survival in Europe than if they did it in the US. For the sake of argument (and only that) is this really such bad advice in Europe?
Honestly, I think your (unfair) criticism of Europeans stems from your biasedness. You think they're weird because you come from an entirely different background. Any person who is objective on this matter will find it extremely difficult to claim one side is better. Or at least, they wouldn't do it in a condescending manner.
#24
Americans never understand how the Jews could just get on the trains to the death camps so quietly and peacefully.
Put yourself in the Jews' perspective. They were outnumbered. Do you revolt and risk certain defeat and certain death, or do you stay quiet in the belief that you have a good chance of surviving? Make your decision in an environment of chaos.
Not everyone shares your penchant for death, European, Jewish, or other.
It's a matter of socialization, not of genetics, if that's what you mean. The question isn't whether the Europeans would perish without the welfare state, it's whether they would consider abolishing it of their own accord or reforming it. And the clear evidence of the last few election cycles has been "No".
You are kidding yourself when you suppose you are "objective" in refusing to make judgements. Humans are, above all, the beings who can and must make judgements and take moral stances. And cultural differences become *moral* issues when they result in deep effects on the lives of others.
The welfare state in Europe is a Ponzi scheme. The current older generations are irresponsibly siphoning off overly generous benefits while leaving the younger generation to bear an impossible burden to fund those benefits -- impossible not only because of the unaffordability of the benefits which have been promised, but also because so many Europeans could not be bothered to take on the inconvenience of having and raising children to join that younger generation workforce.
When one's choice to siphon off personal comfort comes at the cost of damning a younger generation, that is not a matter of cultural difference that "objective" observers are unable to evaluate.
That is a *moral* choice for which the choosers bear responsibility.
#27
The same argument holds, even more strongly, for self defense. I will be more impressed by your reasoning when you explain to me why it is acceptable for the "curl into a ball" Europeans to look the other way as forceable rapes have skyrocketed in Malmo and similar cities, as violence and intimidation against very young and very old Jews becomes increasingly overt in France, as a 15 year old boy in Scotland is kidnapped, burned and stabbed to death by a man with an immigrant background because someone else from the boy's neighborhood threw a bottle at the man the night before.
When one's choice of passivity in the face of violence encourages violence against those who have no choice in the matter, then it becomes a *moral* issue for which the choosers bear responsibility.
And it is OUR responsibility to pass judgement on such choices.
#29
"Are the people intrinsically passive, to the extent that you believe?"
GH is arguing that inside of every Eurpopean is an American struggling to get out...
"Put yourself in the Jews' perspective. They were outnumbered. Do you revolt and risk certain defeat and certain death, or do you stay quiet in the belief that you have a good chance of surviving? Make your decision in an environment of chaos.
Not everyone shares your penchant for death, European, Jewish, or other."
Oh, my. Did you just say that? I think you just made the case for the opposite side. At the time, European Jews and those sympathetic with them (I know several of them, Jews and non jews who lived in Germany before the war) would rather just stay quiet and hope the trouble passes. And if the neighbors shop is burnt or they disappear, they won't do anything.
As Rick said in Casablanca, "There are parts of New York I wouldn't advise on invading." Contrairily, There is no part or Europe that would defend itself. Hell, cops there won't even stop kids from burning cars. If someone tried to set cars on fire in my neighborhood, they'd probably be shot anonymously from a window. And that isnt' an exaggeration. But get a couple of teenagers on a train travelling in Europe, and nobody will stop them from raping and stealing, not even the police.
Posted by: Mark E. ||
10/08/2006 13:54 Comments ||
Top||
#30
The right of self defense is as central a human right as may be claimed to exist.
Not according to the United Nations. (Which is yet another reason to kick those despot-coddlers out of the US).
#31
Further, gun ownership is prohibited just about everywhere
Not true until the 1930's or so IIUC.
Until then, gun ownership was rather common in most of Europe, I even think it was encouraged in France right until WWI (JFM the historian will know better than porn-addict me), so to avoid the small arms shortage of the 1871 war.
Honest citizens could pack some heat, if you want, and that included army issue rifles (I've seen early 20th "Manufrance" mail-order catalogs where the lay froggie could buy a Lebel, order a 11mm revolver, etc, etc...).
And weapons were still available on a reasonable basis until late in the 20th, at least for long arms.
My grandmother mailorder catalog "La Redoute" or "Les 3 suisses" (quite the mainstream for middle class hicks, with a circulation of maybe 2 millions copies a year) carried perhaps 5 pages of shotguns, rifles, gunpodwer cans, ammo-reloading tools,... and there was a weapon rack in the supermarket, again with pump-action shotguns, hunting double-barreled shotguns, ad "carabines" (IE hunting rifles in 7mm Remington, 7,62, .243, etc, etc...), which were avaialble for every adult customer... my 10 000 souls province town used to have two gunshops.
BUT, I agree, access to firearms has become stricter with time (for example when Charles Pasqua was interior minister back in 1993 I think, shotguns were first limited in capacity, no more than 3 shots, and then only with a permit), especially with each "big" shooting, like the... 1998? 1999? 2000? Richard Durn shooting, which caused the socialist gvt to even further restrict the access to handguns (if one wishes to become a recreational sport shootist with actual guns, not .22 LR match pistols, probation is about 1 year of regular attendance and control at a gun club).
And France isn't even the strictest one (one may still own long guns with an hunting permit), compared to Germany I think, or to UK for sure.
"Europe" didn't restrict the RTKBA and the right to self-defense, the nanny State did.
The Jews revolted in the concentration camps, they revolted in the Warsaw Ghetto, holding off the Nazi army consideragly longer than the rest of the country, formed their own Partisan units when they discovered the locals would rather murder them or turn them over for the reward than allow them to join the fight. My mother's father, while in hiding in Amsterdam not far from Anne Frank and her family, forged documents, advised the young Dutch Resistance members who were protecting them of targets of opportunity and how best not to get caught, based on his own experiences in WWI, for which he was awarded an Iron Cross, and facilitated the hiding of numerous other Jews and Underground members from the Nazis. Other members of my family were involved -- and killed -- in numerous other acts of resistance across Europe. The "Passive Jew" is a stereotype preferred by those who prefer not to see the Jewish reality.
A small part of that history can be read in my grandmother's war memoir, archived at the Holocaust Museum in Washington, DC, Yad Vashem in Jerusalem, and about to be added to the curriculum of the high schools in her home county in Germany.
#34
TW, I agree with you about specific individual cases, but I bet you that in each case, those fighing were wondering where everyone else was...
"formed their own Partisan units when they discovered the locals would rather murder them or turn them over for the reward than allow them to join the fight."
Precisely. They were probably thinking, "If we keep out heads down and simply turn over the Jews, the Nazis will leave us alone." That is, if they weren't in outright sympathy with the Nazi goal of Judenfrei. Individual cases of heroism are trumped by the general lack of resistance to the Nazis throughout much of Europe.
Posted by: Mark E. ||
10/08/2006 14:22 Comments ||
Top||
#35
They came for the Jews, but I wasn't a Jew; they came for the Gypsies, but I wasn't a gypsy........
That saying didn't just get invented for no reason.
#36
Mark E, in many cases these were organized. Not enough to forstall the murder of 1/3 of the Jews on the planet, but outside help nonetheless.
Partisan units -- quite a few of these were eventually connected to the Jewish Haganah (which morphed into the Israeli Army in 1948) in British Mandate Palestine. The poet Hannah Senesh was sent in to help them, amongst others. The rebellions in the camps were organized by groups of various sizes, some with outside help (there was a constant flow of people being transferred from one camp to another for various reasons, and they brought their planning and connections with them). Small but ongoing sabotage by the workers in the camp-connected factories was partly individual, but mostly organized by experts amongst the captives. The Warsaw Uprising actually had some outside help, Poles who looked past religion to see humanity, even if the governments refused to bestir themselves. My grandparents -- and my mother separately -- were hidden by the Dutch Underground organization, and the document forgeries my grandfather did were at their service, as were my mother's little errands as an Underground runner.
Much of Europe, and many Europeans, did passively accept the Nazi government. And in the post-WWII world most law abiding Europeans have accepted the increasingly restrictive laws on possession and use of weapons for self-defence, leaving that to the professionals, along with so much else.
Gettin back to the GH's original point, that European ways and American ways are merely equally benign alternatives, I beg to differ. When we lived in Brussels, the trailing daughters went to the American-style international school there (and we do appreciate that Mr. Wife's corporation paid the outrageous fees). Our neighbors, a lovely Danish family, sent their daughters to the same school. One day the wife came to me in a fury -- it appeared that her daughter could not learn her letters because the previous years at that school she had never learnt to draw a face properly; apparently without learning to place the eyes, noes and mouth in proper relationship, the concept of letters cannot be mastered. This lovely lady, who adored her children, had never sat down with her children to draw with them, had never read to them, had never played with them. She was now furious not only that the child hadn't learnt what was necessary, but that she was going to have to find a tutor to hire. Why didn't she just sit down and draw with the girl until she mastered faces, I asked. She was paying the school to teach her children, and neither working with them on the side, nor checking their progress were her responsibility. This lady was no prole dole collector, but the wife of the chief financial officer of a significant European corporation.
In this case a young child's education was delayed, at the risk of her learning to see herself as stupid. When defence is reserved to the professionals, people get hurt and killed if they happen to get into situations when the police are occupied elsewhere -- which is most of the time. Unfortunately, passively leaving things to the professionals is not an equal alternative, but leads to a significantly less functional society.
a5089 dear, that was simply efficient communication. Cold fury is a bit... more intense.
#37
Oh, my. Did you just say that? I think you just made the case for the opposite side.
What case? Which side? I wasn't arguing that Jews during WW2 weren't passive (and TW has just proven otherwise). But Jews were not the whole of Europe.
I really don't understand this American (or Republican) reasoning. Are you not demanding a little too much of others? Or is this some form of insincerity? If there is a 90% chance of failure vs 50%, which action would you take? It's reasonable to assume a rational person would take the 50%. So are you now faulting people for acting rationally?
#38
Well, decision theory says you should start by identifying the option with the greatest "expected value" -- which for each option is calculated by multiplying the likelihood of the event times the payoff if that event happens.
If what is at stake is avoiding negative results rather than gaining postivie ones, then payoffs are negative and you still want the larger expected value - i.e. the least negative number.
So your analysis is meaningless as it stands. 90% chance of WHAT occurring, with what consequences, vs. 50% chance of WHAT OTHER alternative??
However, simple calculation of expected value is not sufficient either. The final piece of decision theory has to do with value or utility functions, i.e. how much is an increase in payoff worth to you? This is where each decisionmaker will vary. Value curves simply capture incremental value as payoff increases. Utility curves also capture the risk preference/aversion of the decisionmaker.
Decision theory is a well-established, objective discipline, by the way, and has nothing to do with politics of any sort.
In business, decision trees are drawn up with one measure of value: money. In most other areas of life, decisions are difficult decisions when we have multiple things we care about at once, i.e. when there are tradeoffs to be made.
In this case one uses multiple attribute (or criteria) decision analysis.
#39
As I've remarked to snooty Europeans who've upbraided me over GWOT: there's a reason world wars keep happening on European rather than American soil. Europeans' ingrained passivity causes them to do nothing, react too late, and wind up using a hammer for what could have been fixed with tweezers.
exJAG, everything in your post # 4 is absolutely spot on and encapsulates nearly all of the points being made later in this thread.
GH, I can drive a truck through the majority of your ill-informed crap.
lotp, thank you so much for doing most of the truck driving, heavy lifting in this thread. I really wasn't up to another round of hosing off the sidewalks today.
trailing wife, thank you so much for making sure that people never forget how the Holocaust wasn't just quietly accepted by all involved. My mother's family fought in the Danish resistance and some of her relatives paid with their very lives. It is almost heartbreaking to see what was once the brave Dutch people go like sheep into an era of Islamic domination.
#40
So your analysis is meaningless as it stands. 90% chance of WHAT occurring, vs. 50% chance of WHAT OTHER alternative??
90% chance of being killed by taking part in a revolt, vs. 50% chance of being killed otherwise. It's the relativity that matters, not the numbers, unless you dispute that as well.
I'm working on the assumption of your standard Cobb-Douglas indifference curves, or, where the utility functions give rise to convex sets. Typical human behaviour, in other words.
Now, are my eyes playing tricks on me, or did you just edit your comment, #38? Ah, the privileges of being a mod.
#41
"What case? Which side? I wasn't arguing that Jews during WW2 weren't passive (and TW has just proven otherwise). But Jews were not the whole of Europe."
Yes...that case. People in Europe in general are sheep when it comes to gov't action. Not in the individual, particularly when someone's boot is on their neck, but in general.
"I really don't understand this American (or Republican) reasoning. Are you not demanding a little too much of others? Or is this some form of insincerity? If there is a 90% chance of failure vs 50%, which action would you take? It's reasonable to assume a rational person would take the 50%. So are you now faulting people for acting rationally?"
Ok...two points. Republican, huh? Now I know what your issue is; Do you just hate Bush, or all Americans?
Second, am I demanding too much of others? No more than I am willing to give of myself. Or my Father was willing to give. Or his Father. We Americans are like that; How about you?
Going off to die with some level of great certainty, or taking some with me and certianly dying. Should I board the train willingly, just on the off chance the train will derail and I will dodge the machine gun bullets and escape into the forest. I wouldn't, but I can guess from what you said which you would choose; I'm hopeful that what you said was rhetoric. But that decision is weak, in more ways than one.
Posted by: Mark E. ||
10/08/2006 16:45 Comments ||
Top||
#42
To be less formal and objective about it, your comment about "acting rationally" contains a multitude of assumptions regarding possible outcomes, their value and their likelihood.
You may not be clear or explicit about those assumptions. Many people aren't. And some who are clear nevertheless have difficulty when faced with complex decisions in which there are multiple goals in tension with one another.
Hence the usefulness of decision analysis techniques even if applied informally. When I think about self-defense, for instance, I find that my choice of action must address several goals at once. I want to protect myself from immediate harm, but I also want to deter attacks on myself and others in the future. These goals may be in tension with one another, or they may be complementary -- it matters a lot how prepared I am (mentally, physically and otherwise) to fight back.
#43
No, I didn't edit any comments of mine (or anyone else) GH.
But since you are familiar with decision analysis, then you surely should at least address the issue of other functions in your value model. Or are you saying the ONLY thing that matters to you is minimizing your perceived chance of dying -- i.e. that there is nothing worth taking risks for in your opinion?
#44
What is missing in your analysis, GH, is a recognition that choices of action or inaction change future risks. Failing to fight back against violence today often emboldens perpetrators, raising risks in the future.
Rudy Giuliani demonstrated the value of pushing back on small things when he was mayor of NY City. He cracked down on smaller acts of violence, aggressive panhandling, graffiti. The result was a significant and lasting drop in SERIOUS crimes as well.
#46
lotp: Or are you saying the ONLY thing that matters to you is minimizing your perceived chance of dying
Yes, in this context I kept everything else exogenous. Given the chaos that I think would have existed at the time, I thought this was a reasonable simplification (lack of complete information etc). Just trying to put myself in their shoes. But admittedly I'm not a historian, to say anything more complicated than that basic assumption.
Mark E.: Now I know what your issue is; Do you just hate Bush, or all Americans?
Another assumption I made is that Democrats tend not to have a problem with the European way. Is that not reasonable?
Mark E.: Second, am I demanding too much of others? No more than I am willing to give of myself....We Americans are like that; How about you?
Then you just made my point. How much would you demand from a Buddhist, then? Some people are not willing to give more, and for completely rational reasons. I certainly can't fault them for that.
Should I board the train willingly...I wouldn't, but I can guess from what you said which you would choose
You'd probably be wrong, as I'm sure you already assumed I'm a pacifist. I've been thinking about this since this debate started, and honestly, it would depend on what information I had at the time, and a myriad of other factors.
One thing is for certain though, I don't feel I'm in any position to judge those that did board the train willingly (passively, I'm sure no one went willingly, no matter what they were told or promised). I'm sure they were acting in what they thought was their best interest.
Back to the topic of the EU closing the door: I think Pope Benedict deserves some credit here. That was one slick move, Pope. Nice work.
#47
Yes, in this context I kept everything else exogenous. Given the chaos that I think would have existed at the time, I thought this was a reasonable simplification (lack of complete information etc).
But these sorts of decisions are seldome if ever that simple. Does your value model not include some weight for matters of honor? Of potential service to your fellow citizens who might not be able to defend themselves if you don't speak up for them? Of sacrifice for a cause bigger than yourself?
Most people's value models do. And many who have written about their experiences underscore the point, as they describe the guilt and shame they felt at surviving by laying low, whether in the camps or outside.
#48
lotp - If Americans and Australians are truly different (and I'm not completely convinced that is the case) - perhaps it's due to the fact that both cultures are based on frontier societies. On the frontier you don't wait around for the authorities to do things for you, you must act for yourself. Though, the frontier may be gone, the frontier culture lives on.
#49
Another assumption I made is that Democrats tend not to have a problem with the European way. Is "that not reasonable?"
Sorry...no it isn't a fair assumption. My father and mother are registered democrats, and they think Europe is fucked. That's a quote. Anecdotal, but still true. What the Europeans generally want with Democrats being in control, is their desire to control the US diplomatically, making us their powerful, djinn-like servants. Good luck with that.
"Then you just made my point. How much would you demand from a Buddhist, then? Some people are not willing to give more, and for completely rational reasons. I certainly can't fault them for that."
Fault them? You are kidding, right? Yes, I fault them for that. If you aren't willing to defend yourself and act for yourself, what do you expect to happen? This is the world, not fantasy fairy land. Tibet getting stepped on by the Chinese? Well, I guess they shoulda armed themselves; unfortunately that is the way the world works. Didn't they know how nasty China was? Were they just hoping that China wouldn't gobble them up? Did their pacifism protect them, their families, theri culture, or their religion? Perhaps next time they can be reincarnated in the US where other people can ensure their security. Pacifists are fools, and are objectively on the other side (c.f. http://www.orwell.ru/library/articles/pacifism/english/e_patw .) I'm a Jew, but I understand that Jesus beat the money changers and harrowed hell. The Centurian said to Him, "I too am a man set here under authority." And He once said "Render unto Caesar what is Caesars". Violence in the protection of the just and righteous and innocent is fine. And those who don't think so are fools, doomed to be slaves to someone. Unless, of course, someone strong comes to their rescue.
"One thing is for certain though, I don't feel I'm in any position to judge those that did board the train willingly (passively, I'm sure no one went willingly, no matter what they were told or promised). I'm sure they were acting in what they thought was their best interest."
Um...this no judgement thing is silly and is weak minded thinking. Without talking about the holocaust directly, I will judge those who prefer to be weak as weaklings. In general, those who rely on charity or others to straighten out their problems will always be at the mercy of chance and the action of those who are stronger, and I will judge them stupid for thinking that that inaction would work (at the same time as we go about saving their bacon yet again. And by "we", I don't mean Europeans.).
As far as the holocaust goes, I don't judge those old ladies and men and children who got on the trains without fighting; they were old, infirm, etc....But I'll judge the hell out of the thinking and society that led to people acting like cattle in the face of government action; and because of that thinking were led like cattle to the slaughter, and whole countries to be gobbled up. I'll judge the German citizens (and others) who either collaborated or put their collective heads down because they thought Hitler would pass as cowards and opportunists. I'll judge those who fought back with no hope of winning and certain death as their reward, as heroes to be remembered and honored, and I will say, "Never Again!"
But to bring this back to the current discussion, I'll judge current European society as a bunch of weaklings, unwilling to think and act for themselves, even in their own best interest, even in the face of their economic and social failure, perhaps because they see a bigger, younger brother willing to do it all, and also willing to take their insults and sniping in stride.
Weakness is not the same as strength. Action is not the same as inaction. Those who are weak or don't act are doomed. To say that you cannot judge, even in a utilitarian sense, between the two....well.....whatever.
You euros can live on your knees; I prefer to live on my feet, even if that means my life might be a little shorter.
Sorry for the rant, but this is Rantburg!
Posted by: Mark E. ||
10/08/2006 20:46 Comments ||
Top||
#50
dmfd-
I think frontier is a large part of it.... Also legal systems too.... In English common law, the law is restrictive, in that it outlaws certain conduct. Continental civil law begins with the premise that everthing is illegal unless it is authorized. But of course there are constitutions as well...
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
vs.
"HIS MAJESTY THE KING OF THE BELGIANS, THE PRESIDENT OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC, HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN OF DENMARK, THE PRESIDENT OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY, THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF ESTONIA, THE PRESIDENT OF THE HELLENIC REPUBLIC, HIS MAJESTY THE KING OF SPAIN, THE PRESIDENT OF THE FRENCH REPUBLIC, THE PRESIDENT OF IRELAND, THE PRESIDENT OF THE ITALIAN REPUBLIC, THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF CYPRUS, THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF LATVIA, THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA, HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS THE GRAND DUKE OF LUXEMBOURG, THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF HUNGARY, THE PRESIDENT OF MALTA, HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN OF THE NETHERLANDS, THE FEDERAL PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF AUSTRIA, THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF POLAND, THE PRESIDENT OF THE PORTUGUESE REPUBLIC, THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA, THE PRESIDENT OF THE SLOVAK REPUBLIC, THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF FINLAND, THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF SWEDEN, HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND,
DRAWING INSPIRATION from the cultural, religious and humanist inheritance of Europe, from which have developed the universal values of the inviolable and inalienable rights of the human person, freedom, democracy, equality and the rule of law, ...."
etc, etc, etc...
One of my favorite movie lines is from "The Unforgiven," when the cowboys face English Bob talking about the Queen on July 4th and how the US should have a royal family.... "We don't need no queens whatsoever, I recon...."
Posted by: Mark E. ||
10/08/2006 20:56 Comments ||
Top||
#51
One thing is for certain though, I don't feel I'm in any position to judge those that did board the train willingly (passively, I'm sure no one went willingly, no matter what they were told or promised). I'm sure they were acting in what they thought was their best interest.
You don't realize it, but you are just proving the point. You see, were I to get on a train where any of the male rantburg readers were present, I could assume that if I were attacked, that they would step forward to protect me. Any female ones as well. Can't say the same about you - unless you felt it was in your interest.
#52
that came out much more rudely than I intended. I apologize. But the point I am trying to make is that through your posting, you have showcased what is a major difference between our cultures (I regret making it sound as if it was a personal statement about your bravery).
Regardless of what you or I or other readers here would actually do or not do in such a situation - your willingness to defend inaction is not something that most American men (or even women) would be willing to do.
It's impossible to know until such a situation occurs if one would act bravely or not, but most Americans believe that they would take action. Flight 93 is a good example - once they understood the situation, they took action, knowing the personal danger. I don't know anyone here in the US who would make the argument that you are making.
#53
If there is a 90% chance of failure vs 50%, which action would you take? It's reasonable to assume a rational person would take the 50%. So are you now faulting people for acting rationally? I know this was addressed above, but this is simply one side of a two-sided equation that can therefore produce no rational result.
Americans (and Aussies) are, by nature and culture, risk-takers. That is why Americans have done so well. We take everything else in the world, find out what is best and implement it, building something new.
We ('mericans) are also a nation with a long and proud history of warriors who sacrifices yesterday and efforts today allow us to live the life we do. Most of Europe has that history, but no desire to continue producing that history. America carries the overwhelming combat load for Western Civilization.
Someday the Europeans will have to decide whether they will fight for their nations and history and culture, GH. If they fight, it will need to be a merciless battle of 'Accept, go o or die'.
GH, I live in Texas, liberal Austin actually. However, I can honestly say that the neighborhood I live, one of families, probably has 80% of the homes armed, many with multiple weapons (You mean you only have a .45, .357 and a .308 and no 12 gauge). If 'the shit hit the fan' here, there would be at least 50 men out there, blocking out the 'hood and heavily armed.
Bottom line, GH, yeah, 'mericans think differently in terms of risk-reward, freedom and weapons. The founders of our nation understood that the last barrier against tyranny is an armed citizenry and enshrined the right of the 'merican prople, themselves as individuals, to keep and bear arms.
#54
Does your value model not include some weight for matters of honor?
Admittedly not. The reason being is that it gets too complicated (yes, I'm covering up for my lack of knowledge here). I just assume that everyone is selfish, and that life is preferable to death above all else (in order to stay consistent). Unrealistic? In most cases yes. But it's not as if this is totally useless in this particular debate.
Yes, I fault them for that. If you aren't willing to defend yourself and act for yourself, what do you expect to happen?
To be clear, I don't fault them for acting rationally. That's the only demand I place on people, is for people to behave rationally. You otoh, go beyond that. Which is fine and very honourable depending on the circumstances. But that's not what I was arguing about. I wouldn't blame someone for choosing life over death because my model of people's behaviour (for this particular case) does not account for statements such as: Failing to fight back against violence today often emboldens perpetrators, raising risks in the future.
the thinking and society that led to people acting like cattle in the face of government action; and because of that thinking were led like cattle to the slaughter
I doubt very much that any sort of cattle mentality led to people being slaughtered.
How do you know that your way would have produced a better outcome?
I'll judge current European society as a bunch of weaklings, unwilling to think and act for themselves, even in their own best interest, even in the face of their economic and social failure
Wow. You must've discovered the answer to life, the universe, and everything. Lucky you.
You euros can live on your knees
I'm an ex-euro. And I'm not an American. That's why I can claim to be objective, which I am, btw.
I could assume that if I were attacked, that they would step forward to protect me. Any female ones as well. Can't say the same about you - unless you felt it was in your interest
I never claimed anything else other than people acting in their own self interest, albeit within the context of a life and death situation. Simply put, I can understand why someone would choose life over death. BTW, it's not what I would do. It's not in my nature to stand and watch while others suffer.
perhaps it's due to the fact that both cultures are based on frontier societies. On the frontier you don't wait around for the authorities to do things for you, you must act for yourself.
That's an excellent point and one that I've found some Europeans have a hard time grasping. They're spatial thinking is different. The average cop out in the boonies has to put in, what, 100 miles every day on patrol? Compare that to European distances.
#55
that came out much more rudely than I intended. I apologize.
You didn't have to apologize :-)
I don't know anyone here in the US who would make the argument that you are making.
But the people on those planes other than flight 93 were passive. Do you think any differently of them? Do you blame them for making the choice to stay quiet? Of course not. At least I hope not. Despite the mayhem, murder and hijacking they all had hopes that all would end well. Flight 93 was the reverse of the other flights.
#56
GH, the people on the other flights didn't know what was going on outside their flight; they thought it was just a normal hijacking, ie a fancy kidnap for ransom. The people on Flight 93 understood they were being used to cause something radically different, that if they remained passive many more than themselves were at risk. Knowing that they were dead already, they took the weapon from their killers' hands. I strongly suspect that had the passengers on the other airplanes known what was planned, at least half the planes would have been crashed before reaching the target.
Do I judge those who didn't know and so did nothing? No. But I would have judged those who knew and chose to allow themselves to be the instrument of murdering unknown numbers of others.
#58
GH, individuals may survive a bit longer by being utterly selfish. In that sense such behaviour could be considered rational. However, communities so arranged do not survive long. And where the community does not survive, the survival of the offspring are placed seriously at risk. Thus, individual selfishness of the kind you seem to be advocating is actually contra-survival for the individual's decendents, that is his/her participation in the future of his species. To put it bluntly, 100 years from now there will be plenty of trailing wife genes in the future population of homo sapians. If you act as you are advocating, you'll be the last of the GH line.
French presidential hopeful Nicolas Sarkozy said Turkey's entry into the European Union would "be the end of political Europe" and suggested it would worsen the "problem" of Muslim integration in the continent, in an interview to be published Thursday.
"It would be the end of political Europe" if Turkey joined the European bloc, Sarkozy, France's interior minister, told the magazine Le Meilleur des Mondes, calling instead for a "privileged partnership" with the EU's southeastern neighbour.
The end of 'political Europe'? Will we notice?
Yes ... might be good, might be bad, but we'd notice I think.
Outlining what he saw as dangerous implications for the EU's world political clout, Sarkozy said that Britain's Prime Minister Tony Blair and US President George Bush supported Turkey joining the EU because they didn't want "a political Europe".
Damn les Angleaux! Always scheming to force us to shoot ourselves in the foot! We're quite capable of doing that without you.
Turkey began talks with Brussels last year with a view to joining the 25-nation bloc, which is due to absorb a further two members, Bulgaria and Romania, on January 1.
Sarkozy also explained his opposition to welcoming Ankara into the EU fold by citing what he said was the already existing "problem" of integrating Muslims into Europe.
We have a problem of integration of Muslims which raises the issue of Islam in Europe. To say it is not a problem is to hide from reality. If you let 100 million Turkish Muslims come in, what will come of it?
"We have a problem of integration of Muslims which raises the issue of Islam in Europe. To say it is not a problem is to hide from reality. If you let 100 million Turkish Muslims come in, what will come of it?" the magazine quoted him as saying.
The minister, who heads the ruling right-wing UMP party and has declared he will run for president in next year's elections, also expressed concern that shifting Europe's border southeast would bring it closer to violent conflicts in the region.
"Turkey is in Asia Minor... I will not explain to little French school children that the frontiers of Europe are Iraq and Syria," Sarkozy said, naming two of Turkey's southeastern neighbours.
Turkey is in Asia Minor... I will not explain to little French school children that the frontiers of Europe are Iraq and Syria," Sarkozy said,
If the EU accepts Turkey, "we will have made the Kurdish problem a European problem. Wonderful!" he said, apparently referring to the bloody conflict between Turkish authorities and militants demanding self-rule for the country's ethnic Kurdish population.
Once the Kurdish issue is admitted as a European problem, "it remains to make Hamas and Hezbollah European problems" too, he argued, referring to the Palestinian governing party and the Lebanon-based Shiite militant movement.
If to stabilise Turkey we must destabilise Europe, I say that's a high price to pay.
Expanding his theoretical argument further, Sarkozy raised the prospect of former French colonies in north Africa, such as Morocco and Tunisia, also joining Europe.
"Then Europe, which will become a sub-region of the United Nations, will no longer exist," he said. "If to stabilise Turkey we must destabilise Europe, I say that's a high price to pay."
#1
"If the EU accepts Turkey, "we will have made the Kurdish problem a European problem. Wonderful!" he said, apparently referring to the bloody conflict between Turkish authorities and militants demanding self-rule for the country's ethnic Kurdish population. "
...and we all saw how well they handled the Balkan problems in the 90's.
"Once the Kurdish issue is admitted as a European problem, "it remains to make Hamas and Hezbollah European problems" too, he argued, referring to the Palestinian governing party and the Lebanon-based Shiite militant movement."
Umm, Sarko, I almost hate to mention it but that horse has left the barn already, to use a homely American idiom.
Posted by: Ernest Brown ||
10/08/2006 0:48 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"We have a problem of integration of Muslims which raises the issue of Islam in Europe. To say it is not a problem is to hide from reality. If you let 100 million Turkish Muslims come in, what will come of it?"
Astonishingly plain talk, especially for a Frenchman.
Once the Kurdish issue is admitted as a European problem, "it remains to make Hamas and Hezbollah European problems"
Awww, how cute. Look at that! He found the Easter egg! Has anyone bothered to tell him that it's from ten years ago?
#4
Get Al-Chiraq out and get Sarkozy in. This guy sounds sensible. It will be a complete turnaround in ideology for the Frogs. Desperately needed. Between this fellow and Merckel in Germany, I see some hope.
Fourth in a row,Sunday-above-the-fold, front-page, Bush hit-piece in a row. But the quagmire doesn't come until the last sentence. U.S. Casualties in Iraq Rise Sharply
Growing American Role in Staving Off Civil War Leads to Most Wounded Since 2004
The number of U.S troops wounded in Iraq has surged to its highest monthly level in nearly two years as American GIs fight block-by-block in Baghdad to try to check a spiral of sectarian violence that U.S. commanders warn could lead to civil war.
Last month, 776 U.S. troops were wounded in action in Iraq, the highest number since the military assault to retake the insurgent-held city of Fallujah in November 2004, according to Defense Department data. It was the fourth-highest monthly total since the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003.
The sharp increase in American wounded -- with nearly 300 more in the first week of October -- is a grim measure of the degree to which the U.S. military has been thrust into the lead not unless you've got some Iraq casualties to compare to of the effort to stave off full-scale civil war in Iraq, military officials and experts say. Beyond Baghdad, Marines battling Sunni insurgents in Iraq's western province of Anbar last month also suffered their highest number of wounded in action since late 2004.
More than 20,000 U.S. troops have been wounded in combat in the Iraq war, and about half have returned to duty. While much media reporting has focused on the more than 2,700 killed, military experts say the number of wounded is a more accurate gauge of the fierceness of fighting because advances in armor and medical care today allow many service members to survive who would have perished in past wars. The ratio of wounded to killed among U.S. forces in Iraq is about 8 to 1, compared with 3 to 1 in Vietnam.
"These days, wounded are a much better measure of the intensity of the operations than killed," said Anthony H. Cordesman, a military expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.
Posted by: Bobby ||
10/08/2006 08:58 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
AoS - are you tellin' me I forgot the linky thingy?
Again?
Well, I wuz a little torqued by the WaPo.
Sorry of rthe mistake, and thanks for fixing it!
Posted by: Bobby ||
10/08/2006 10:59 Comments ||
Top||
#2
for the, not of rthe
Lysdexia strikes again! (H.T. Seafarious)
Posted by: Bobby ||
10/08/2006 11:01 Comments ||
Top||
#3
This was quite predictable when Bush agreed to send our guys back to the slums of Baghdad. He should have told this Maliki bum that he had people trained and it was his problem alone. Besides, the more of these asses who exterminate one another is merely one less we have to kill. We did not kill nearly enough of them on our initial intrusion. These idiots have to be whacked real good over the noodle just to get their attention. What's their population ? 28 million? Should have wiped oput 10% on initial go. Then told them 10% more would be gone if they didn't settle down. That's the only way to win these backward "hearts & minds".
This snippet from Sgt Stryker on an Iraqi translator and why he wants to go back to Iraq...
People in my community tell me I should not be in the Army because I will get killed. I tell them So what? (DR: Punctuation added) if I do. I will have died doing something good and my family will understand and they will thank me and know I was doing something I wanted to do. But I dont think I will be killed. I will be with the Army and not just someone who isnt in the Army. I dont know if I will want to go back to Iraq if my family does. I like it in America. I want to get my citizenship and go to school. But I think I should be in the Army because if I dont I will get all this without earning it.
As they say, RTWT.
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
10/08/2006 19:09 Comments ||
Top||
#1
There are 400,000 Muslims in Texas alone and Islam is the fastest growing religion in the USA. Since 9/11 there have been more converts to Islam than ever
I call bullshit
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/08/2006 10:38 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I dunno. Back in 2002 or so, I read an article about how the conversions to the Master Religion had sharply increased in Germany after 9/11. And from personal observance, I also noted that muslim I knew from work or else had became more observant I think (like one stopping eating pork).
Don't under-estimate the radicalizing effect of such a visible, ostentible act, especially on those laready "leaning the way there'e going to fall", IE all the West-haters of any background (think about the morabitouns converts group, spanish ex-leftists who are now prozelytizing in latin America, encouraging people to shed their "colonial european" heritage to get back at thier islamic roots...); islam as the utlimate in-yer-face to the White Male Order.
#3
Yes, it is. And that's one reason I've said here at Rantburg more than once that it's a mistake just to dismiss Islam as a cult of murder that only fools would embrace.
I dislike it enormously -- and I find it dangerous. And therefore I think it's important to understand why many are attracted to it.
Western culture has grown deeply decadent in many places. That decadence is both embraced and encouraged by many cultural and political leaders -- and tolerated, if not worse, by many religious leaders who should know better.
As a result, many people who detest that culture, feel powerless to change it or to protect their kids from it, will adopt the illusion of safety and holiness that a rigid set of Islamic daily rules brings.
It's happened here before, and not just among the various 19th century sects. In the 1970s, some fled from the chaos, public sexuality and drug use of the counterculture (and the lack of spiritual and political leadership in the society) to embrace forms of fundamentalist Christianity in which the husband ruled the house as the unquestioned "head" and in which small groups of leaders or individual pastors decided what jobs people should take and who could marry whom. Florida, for instance, was home to a number of charismatic groups that adopted this stance -- and that attracted many converts, at least for a while.
That simmered down in part because it never gained traction with the wider culture. But Islam has hundreds of millions of members already and it's pretty clear they are winning the culture wars around the world in most places. I fear we will see many many converts, followed by the claim that this is a Muslim country, followed by sharia, unless the rest of us speak up and demand both cultural sanity and responsible leadership.
Judicial appointments matter. What Episcopal bishops and the various Protestant groups say, matters. What the Pope says matters. What our Congress critters do or don't do matters.
Want to push back against Islamic conversions by Americans? Then every time someone in Congress does something stupid and irresponsible, CALL THEM ON IT. Write letters, to them and to the leadership and to the newspapers and to the White House. Make a VISIBLE push back.
Because just sitting at home and deciding how you will vote (or not bother to vote), or just writing at places like the Burg, isn't changing things out there. And change is desperately needed. If you and I don't do it, don't be surprised if many turn to Islam as a solution.
#4
lotp, you are right, but there is more to it. At root, I think the problem is that many people live in a world they don't understand and as a consequence don't know what to do. Islam offers a certainty (as to a degree do all religions).
There are many reasons for this lack of understanding of the world, the educational system, the media, the entertainment industry.
People want to believe there are solutions to the world's problems. Actually, want is too weak a word, it's a fundamental need of people.
I'll give you one example, that reoccurs here - alternate fuels for automobiles. Many people here at the Burg realize imported oil is a huge problem and need to believe there is a solution. When hydrogen, fuel cells, biomass, whatever are touted as the solution, they suspend critical judgement.
When these 'solutions' don't materialize, it's not because they don't make sense (or put another way they are not real solutions). It's becuase there are deep and dark forces opposing their adoption (that's why Islamic societies are so awful and we don't have electric cars).
You may think that equating electric cars with conversions to Islam is a stretch, but to me they are manifestations of the same deep human need. I know that Islam isn't a solution to a society's problems, in the same way I know electric cars aren't a solution to imported oil, but for large numbers of people they will be.
#5
I'll say the same thing I said on Tim's site: I call BULLSHIT on this.
I'm not Christian, but even I know that a true believing Christian will not reject Jesus because other people are not conservative enough.
Men who "join" i-slam are looking for an excuse to be in control. Women who join are just plain nuts (or want to be controlled, or both). And their excuse that under islam they don't have to dress provocatively is horse manure. Guess what, girly - you don't have to dress provocatively in the first place, no matter what your religion or lack thereof.
Freakin' losers. >:-(
Should be interesting when they get tired of their latest incarnation and decide to "be" something else. Guess nobody told them the islamic penalty for apostacy. Heh.™
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/08/2006 12:18 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Bullshit indeed. The most comprehensive survey, Estimating the Muslim Population in the United States by General Social Survey at the National Opinion Research Center of the University of Chicago concluded, The best adjusted, survey-based estimate puts the total Muslim population at 1,876,000 or 0.6% of the opulation. The worrying factor was 10 years before that, the muslim population was 0.3%. This year, immigration from muslim countries has picked up again and 50,000+ will receive immigration visas. I suspect this number does not include refugee numbers like the Somalis imported by Catholic Relief Services. Suicidal behavior.
Back to numbers, therefore the 400,000 number is nothing but a BBC wet dream. Even the American Muslim Congress, which claims 5 million muslims, says there are 140,000 muslims in Texas. Muslim State Population Table Taking real survey data with the AMC claims gives a Texas muslim population of 50,000.
A Dallas Morning News article, while treating the BBC program as factual, says of the of the epicenter of islam in Texas: Texans turning Muslim? But getting a handle on the Muslim population in Texas or the rest of the United States has daunted demographers, partly because the U.S. Census Bureau doesn't track religious affiliation. Estimates of the country's Muslim population range from fewer than 2 million to more than 8 million.
The Council on American-Islamic Relations estimates that white Americans constitute about 1.5 percent of attendees at mosques in the United States. Last year, nine people classified as "Caucasian Americans" converted to Islam at the Dallas Central Mosque, a spokeswoman said
Hardly jibes with BBC propaganda.
Posted by: ed ||
10/08/2006 12:51 Comments ||
Top||
#7
At a guess, "caucasian americans" does not include Hispanics.
Who are converting to Islam in increasing percentages throughout Latin America. Islamic hispanics will increase here too, by immigration and local conversion.. The total numbers are small so far, but as the rate of conversions grows, those numbers will grow too, slowly at first but then rapidly - it's an exponential function.
But my main point holds: it's a mistake not to understand WHY people might convert.
#8
Number of Hispanic Muslim converts growing A study of mosques in the United States, published in 2001, indicated that about 6 percent of American converts to Islam are Hispanic, said Ihsan Bagby, an author of the report and associate professor of Islamic studies at the University of Kentucky. About 27 percent of American converts are white, 64 percent are African-American and 3 percent are a mixture of other backgrounds, according to "The Mosque in America: A National Portrait."
Based on these claims, 6% of conversions means Hispanics convert at 1/2 the rate of the general population. Whites convert at 1/3 of the rate of the general population. More worrisome, blacks are converting at 5 times their number in the population. Grenade frag and suburb sniper attacks attest to that.
Posted by: ed ||
10/08/2006 13:12 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Twice nothing is still nothing, but add just one to nothing, and it is an increase of an infinite percentage....
Posted by: Mark E. ||
10/08/2006 13:24 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Most converts are haters who prefer to hate in groups.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
10/08/2006 15:00 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Most converts are haters who prefer to hate in groups.
That may be true of some, but there are plenty of statements by Hispanic women who are converting to find protection from what they see as an increasingly coarse, decadent public culture.
I'll say it again: if you don't listen to why people say they are converting, you will fail to understand the nature and the scope of what's going on IMO.
#13
Remember that female LTC Muslim convert I mentioned? My hubby had a real interesting talk with her Egyptian hubby. Ran into him at a cafe, and while they chatted, he was inhaling his pastries and cappucino. During the daytime, during Ramadan. So my hubby said, "hey. Aren't you supposed to be fasting?"
He smirked and explained that he had made careful study of the Qur'an and Bukhari, to find all the loopholes that exempt one from fasting. Traveling more than a certain distance is one exception, and he'd driven someone to the airport that morning. "If you're gonna claim an exemption, he grinned, you may as well go all the way."
Funny how he, a born Muslim, invests such enormous effort to evade the rules, while his wife, a convert, invests the same effort to comply. Incidentally, she converted 3 years after they got married, entirely of her own choosing. Like most Western secularists, he seems to view it all as a major drag. I heartily approve.
#14
It's happened here before, and not just among the various 19th century sects. In the 1970s, some fled from the chaos, public sexuality and drug use of the counterculture (and the lack of spiritual and political leadership in the society) to embrace forms of fundamentalist Christianity in which the husband ruled the house as the unquestioned "head" and in which small groups of leaders or individual pastors decided what jobs people should take and who could marry whom. Florida, for instance, was home to a number of charismatic groups that adopted this stance -- and that attracted many converts, at least for a while.
Paging Jim Jones, David Koresh and Fred Phelps to the main lobby.
Because just sitting at home and deciding how you will vote (or not bother to vote), or just writing at places like the Burg, isn't changing things out there. And change is desperately needed. If you and I don't do it, don't be surprised if many turn to Islam as a solution.
Which is why I take information gathered here at Rantburg and spread it to everyone I know. I tell them about the "Obsession" video, I bring them to my home to watch it on my computer, I give them copies of Wretchard's "The Three Conjectures". More than anything, I make sure that people understand how Islamism is Nazism. I teach them to substitute the terms and make all decisions based thereon.
#16
No, no, Zenster, read the rest. Her submission is self-imposed. I've spent enough time in their house, with the whole family, to see that he doesn't give a damn. My comment is meant to note the peculiar zealotry of the convert.
#18
exJAG, my post was just a humorous reference to how this woman's husband probably holds her to a higher standard than himself, if she doesn't already do it for him (per post # 17).
#22
#1 "There are 400,000 Muslims in Texas alone and Islam is the fastest growing religion in the USA. Since 9/11 there have been more converts to Islam than ever"
A friend of mine who has been in family law for decades has noted this several years ago as a response to what many non-custodial father's see as the state using it's police powers to strip them of their families and wealth. As one of his client's said "this would not happen under sharia" aftr a ninth attempt to get his visitation enforced.
Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh collapsed on Friday during his speech at the rally in Gaza in support of Hamas and its beleaguered government.
Haniyeh, who is fasting during Ramadan, stopped speaking in mid-sentence and collapsed onto aides standing next to him as he addressed tens of thousands of Palestinians that had gathered in a Gaza Strip soccer stadium. After resting for several minutes, Haniyeh recovered and resumed his speech to the crowd. "Our bodies may tire, but not our spirits," the PA prime minister declared as enthusiastic Hamas supporters cheered his return to the stage.
Haniyeh promised that any future Palestinian government would include his party, dismissing PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas' halting efforts to establish a unity government as an attempt to remove Hamas from power. Cheered on by supporters, Haniyeh vowed that Hamas would never recognize Israel. He said, however, that the group was prepared to accept a long-term cease-fire with Israel if it withdrew to 1967 boundaries.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
PA Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh's advisor Ahmed Youssef told the Ma'an News Agency on Saturday that Hamas leader-in-exile Khaled Mashaal had no interest in returning to the Gaza Strip, due to the volatile security situation and "continued Israeli attacks," Israel Radio reported.
"Please don't let them kill me!"
Last week, Palestinian sources reported that Hamas would agree to release kidnapped IDF Cpl. Gilad Shalit for a deal that included permission for Hamas leaders in Damascus- including Mashaal - to return to Gaza.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This maggot needs to join his friends in that poster behind him.
Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh was reported to be in good condition on Saturday after fainting at a rally on Friday. Haniyeh was examined at his home by the PA Health Minister.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat told Israel Radio on Saturday that the meeting between Palestinian and Israeli government aides to set a date for a meeting between Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert took place a month ago, and not Friday, as stated in the Palestinian paper Al-Ayyam.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I see "negotiator" is the new word for "parasite"
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/08/2006 7:57 Comments ||
Top||
Iran's Foreign Ministry on Sunday called a threat of international sanctions a "rusty" weapon and said the country would not abandon uranium enrichment. "Both officials and people in Iran have always viewed threats for sanctions as a rusty and derelict weapon," Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini said at a weekly news briefing. "They are accustomed to the threats."
Although he reiterated Iran's determination to continue with uranium enrichment, Hosseini said "negotiation is the best way." Hosseini said European-Iranian negotiations, which had been seen as a final attempt to avoid a full-blown confrontation between Tehran and the Security Council, would be resumed but did not give specifics.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2006 20:43 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
good post, and surprisingly balanced for a WaPo/MSNBC article. Hezbollah got their ass kicked, but they survived due to the fecklessness and utter stupidity of the Israeli brass and that tool Olmert
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/08/2006 11:03 Comments ||
Top||
"There is little doubt that Israels political leaders half-assed this war, to quote Fox News military analyst, Col. David Hunt. Perhaps the left-of-center Olmert government was not prepared to wage a war of brutal outcomes over a kidnapping incident. If so, it should have settled for a prisoner exchange and be done with it.
Hezballah tipped its hand early, clearly fighting a war of fixed positions, at least along the Lebanese border. The IDF should have responded with overwhelming, concentrated infantry-led attacks followed by armor in support against the hilltop, border town areas. It did no such thing, instead choosing to attack in a piecemeal, limited fashion with vulnerable tanks in the lead. At least the IDF avoided the siren calls for a Blitzkrieg to the Litani River and beyond."
US companies refuse to render after-sale services for US-made turbines and compressors used in Irans oil industry, reducing the countrys oil production by 5,000 barrels per day for every malfunctioning turbine. According to ILNA, Jamshid Gazor, who is responsible for Salman oil platforms turbine maintenance and energy production affairs, said US companies do not provide services under that countrys unilateral sanctions on Iran, stressing that shortage of spare parts is the main problem. Only two of the platforms five turbines are currently in operation, he said, adding that the platform needs to make use of all the five turbines. The compressors are used to compress associate gases for re-injection into the wells, he said, adding that 120 million cubic feet of gas is being injected into the oil wells operated by Salman platform.
National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC) chief, Gholamhossein Nozari, has said that two major international firms, Eni and Total, have announced that they will continue their cooperation with Iran under any circumstances, stressing that there will be no room for concern about sanctions. Major international oil and gas companies are operating actively in Irans energy sector defying US sanctions.
US prevents Iran oil industry efforts to lower oil prices...just wait ...it's our fault
Gholamhossein Nozari, has said that two major international firms, Eni and Total, have announced that they will continue their cooperation with Iran under any circumstances, stressing that there will be no room for concern about sanctions. Major international oil and gas companies are operating actively in Irans energy sector defying US sanctions.
via LGF; I am not familiar with this source, but it's pretty interesting stuff
Breaking news - Saturday (PST) - After Midnight Sunday - Tehran time (TT). LATEST UPDATE - all phones in the area of the Ayatollah's house have been disconnected and his numbers, which worked till just now have a recording saying "they never existed".
Monitored from live communication with Iran and the Ayatollah Boroujerdi himself by Voice of Iran Radio (KRSI) and local citizens calling in from Tehran to KRSI.
Shots were being fired around the Ayatollah's home at Sard (cold) Park, Avesta Avenue, Sard Street #9 close to Freedom Square. Fires are springing up in the region at major intersections. Ambulance sirens scream futiley as Tehran citizens pour toward that address blocking streets to prevent Security forces from getting close but also blocking the paramedics and ambulances.
Distress calls from wounded men and women fill the air waves as what they describe as total war is erupting. KRSI, which covers all of Iran, constantly broadcasts calls for the populace to rise up, urging them to make the most of this opportunity.
Said Ghayem-Maghami, the announcer of KRSI repeatedly urges all provinces, cities, professions to revolt against the current regime. He also broadcasts live all suggestions provided by Tehran citizens to wake everyone up and let them know something is up.
Ayatollah Boroujerdi, blockaded on the roof of his home, has used the phone contact broadcast with KRSI to declare that anyone in the Security forces who respects him as their spiritual source should lay down their arms and not harm anyone.
Meanwhile Mohssein Ejai, Minister of Information and Security (MOIS), has promised Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei that he will bring him Ayatollah Boroujerdi's severed head before dawn.
In the first serious clash with the old guard Mullahs, the Hojatieh fringe sect of the Ahmadi-Nejad administration sent security forces around 10 a.m. (Tehran time) Saturday, to arrest Ayatollah Seyed Hossein Kazeymeni Boroujerdi, son of the Ayatollah of the same name, killed by the Khomeini Islamic regime. His father was so respected by the late Shah of Iran that when questions about religion arose for which the Shah wanted advice, the monarch would drive down to the holy city of Qom to speak to the Ayatollah instead of ordering him to Tehran.
The younger Ayatollah Boroujerdi recently declared that the national Administrative Government of Iran should be separated from the Clerics and become purely secular. Religion and Politics must be separated he said, live on KRSI.
His followers resisted the efforts of the Security Agents sent during the afternoon to capture the Ayatollah and the on-going confrontation has resulted with multiple arrests, estimated by the Ayatollah himself in a live phone interview as being several thousand people. His people, who rushed to protect him also took several security agents hostage, finding bottles of acid in their pockets, intended to disfigure demonstrators.
Meanwhile, in a dramatic gesture of defiance, Ayatollah Boroujerdi carrying his burial shroud and a sword paces the roof of his home.
#1
Slight hope this may be the "Ants will grow the food, Ants will keep the food and Grashoppers will leave!" moment. Question is whether army will join the revolt if it is not running out of steam before day is over, stay aside, or go against it. The odds are not that good for joining.
#2
The younger Ayatollah Boroujerdi recently declared that the national Administrative Government of Iran should be separated from the Clerics and become purely secular. Religion and Politics must be separated he said
Thereby signing his death warrant.
I'll stay up and pop some popcorn for everyone just in case.
[scurries off to kitchen clattering pots and pans]
#3
We could sort these sons of whores out in a big hurry if Bush had the cojones to do it. The Mullahs are sitting on a damned unstable throne. All we'd have to do is blanket-broadcast across Iran that the Iranian people have 48 hours to overthrow their government or the United States will, as an act of preemptive war, use nuclear weapons to destroy Iran's major cities. If Bush did that we'd need one hell of a lot of popcorn because the next 96 hours would see a ton of Muzzy mullahs ripped apart by the bare hands of frenzied, terrified mobs. Ahmedinejad would meet an Allende-like end and we could reinstall the old Shah's son.
I think such an outcome beats the hell out of waiting for the Iranians to nuke somebody first and then retaliating with nuclear weapons, and you KNOW that's going to happen unless someone steps up and takes them out beforehand. Like the Fram guy said, "pay me now or pay me later."
Posted by: mac ||
10/08/2006 9:08 Comments ||
Top||
#4
could it be that the Iranian Government ocassionally stages such events to give the West the illusion that upheaval from within is possibe?
#5
If this is true, and a peoples revolt has started, then America should attack Syria from Iraq. By the end of the week, Syria would not exist, and Iran would either be in a lockdown or all out revolution. Either way, Happy Halloween.
TEHRAN, October 7, 2006 (RFE/RL) -- Several hundred supporters of an outspoken cleric in Tehran, Ayatollah Kazemeyni Boroujerdi, gathered today in the streets around his house to protest what they described as violation of "freedom of religion."
Protesters told Radio Farda that they were trying to prevent the arrest of Boroujerdi by security forces. Boroujerdi advocates the separation of religion from politics.
One of his supporters told Radio Farda that during the past two months there have been several attempts to arrest the ayatollah.
"[Security forces] took away his daughter and 38 others two months ago, they've freed them but they came this morning to take away [Boroujerdi] but the neighbors didn't give in," the man said. "They came again later to arrest him but his supporters have gathered here and will resist. Thank God, we're many, about 2,000 to 3,000."
Iran's ILNA news agency reported that police used tear gas to disperse the protest but protesters resisted by burning tires to counteract the effects of the gas.
Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Saniora called on UN Secretary General Kofi Annan to pressure Israel to stop "violating Lebanon's sovereignty" with sea, air, and ground operations. Saniora also asked Annan to put an end to Israel's "occupation" of the village of Ghajar, only after which, he said, a ceasefire could be declared. Annan and Saniora spoke by telephone, and agreed to find a solution to the ongoing conflict around the Shebaa Farms area, Israel Radio reported.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/08/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai has said he wants to hold a jirga (council) of Pashtun tribes from Pakistan and Afghanistan to end Taliban violence. The two countries disagree on how to fight the Taliban mostly drawn from the Pashtun tribes on their border. 
KABUL: The Taliban's fugitive leader, Mulla Mohammad Omar, is alive and leading the anti-government insurgency from inside Afghanistan, a purported top spokesman for the militant chief said Saturday. "Mulla Omar has been in Afghanistan and still is in Afghanistan and will remain here to lead the jihad against the American troops," said a man claiming to be Taliban spokesman 
The Church of England has launched an astonishing attack on the Government's drive to turn Britain into a multi-faith society.
The Financial Services Authority is urgently scouring Britain's banking system for evidence of Iranian terrorism funding following an alert from the US authorities.
The nuclear weapon that North Korea intends to detonate in an underground test is big enough to kill up to 200,000 people were it ever to be used against a city such as Seoul or Tokyo, Russian military experts have revealed.
North Korea was preparing to test a nuclear weapon in an abandoned coal mining factory, but was waiting to see if it could first garner additional concessions from the US government, Reuters reported Saturday morning. The report was based on a Chinese source who had recently visited the North Korean capital of Pyongyang. 
Turkey has begun deploying 
The youth branch of Denmark's third biggest political party - known for its populist anti-immigration stance - regrets that some of its members mocked the Prophet Muhammad during a summer camp earlier this year, it said Friday. 
The European Union does not intend to admit new members "in the foreseeable future" other than those who have already begun adhesion discussions, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said Saturday. 
French presidential hopeful Nicolas Sarkozy said Turkey's entry into the European Union would "be the end of political Europe" and suggested it would worsen the "problem" of Muslim integration in the continent, in an interview to be published Thursday. 
Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh collapsed on Friday during his speech at the rally in Gaza in support of Hamas and its beleaguered government. 
PA Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh's advisor Ahmed Youssef told the Ma'an News Agency on Saturday that Hamas leader-in-exile 
Lebanese Prime Minister 
