You would think that by now Allahs message might be getting through. Time after time Muslim fanatics attempt to wreak devastation in Britain and succeed only in blowing themselves up, or setting themselves on fire, or their explosives refuse to do the decent thing and explode while we infidel cockroaches look on in bemusement, quite unharmed.
If you were a devout believer, you might put two and two together and begin to suspect that Allah doesnt entirely approve of blowing British people to bits. He would much rather his jihadis stayed at home and watched the Eurovision Song Contest, or did a spot of gardening, or took the dog for a walk.
It is presumptuous of me to second-guess Allahs thought processes, of course. But then quite a few incendiary Muslim clerics insisted that the 2004 Boxing Day tsunami was down to Allah being a bit peeved at the state of the world and unleashing his righteous watery vengeance upon it. To which you might reply that it was very odd of Him, then, to single out a devoutly Muslim country, Indonesia, for the brunt of the carnage. Maybe He just missed.
It seems that the chap who successfully maimed himself in Exeter had somehow been got at by extremists, according to the police. Nicky Reilly, 22, is very reclusive and apparently has a history of mental illness.
We believe that he was preyed upon, radicalised and taken advantage of, a copper said, surprisingly quickly after they had arrested him.
So it may well be that the fundamentalists have resorted to that brave and noble tactic of sending the mentally impaired or deeply troubled off to do their dirty work, lacking the resolve and commitment to do so themselves. Al-Qaeda, you may remember, strapped explosives to two women whod suffered from mental illness and sent them to a market in downtown Baghdad where these walking bombs were detonated remotely, wiping them out together with 91 other people.
On the other hand, we should remember that this latest botched attack took place in Exeter, a city less accustomed to finding itself the target of Islamist fury than, say, Tel Aviv or New York. It may be simply that the Devon and Cornwall police are unfamiliar with the usual IQ levels of Muslim terrorists.
I suppose that many years hence the terrible destruction of the twin towers will still be lodged in our minds, the image of the buildings crumpling, the video of Osama Bin Laden sniggering in his cave. But a similarly iconic image would be of the moron Richard Reid trying desperately to set his training shoe on fire on a plane, having forgotten to bring a lighter. They are either extraordinarily useless or Allah has got it in for them.
#1
And hundreds of times the labor and resources are expended by the kufr to counter the resources expended by the muslims. A win for the ummah by any measure.
Posted by: ed ||
05/25/2008 12:10 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I'm starting to believe that Allah is really Loki in disguise and he is just toying with these poor saps.
November 6, 1984, was a day that would forever change the political landscape within my family. History reminds us it was the day President Ronald Reagan was re-elected to a second term, defeating former Vice President Walter Mondale in a landslide victory. Reagans success was not surprising, but what was shocking was what my grandmother, Ida Miller did in the voting booth.
The Jewish immigrant came to America in 1923 to escape poverty and rampant antisemitism that plagued her native Russia. She would eventually settle in Chicago and follow a new Jewish tradition, which was not rooted in religion, but politics. She would become a devout Democrat.
Jewish immigrants who lived through the Great Depression and World War II had a deep admiration for President Franklin D. Roosevelt. However even before FDR occupied the White House, Jews felt welcome in Democratic Party.
In 1932 Jewish immigrants throughout Illinois as well as America, experienced what was inconceivable to people who had spent their whole lives as oppressed second class citizens. They saw one of their own get elected to a position of power and authority. Jewish probate judge, Henry Horner was elected governor of Illinois, the fourth largest state in their new homeland. Over the next two decades the stage would be set for a long dedicated relationship between Jews and the Democratic Party.
Forward to Election Day 1984. Ida Miller, the lifelong Democrat, who served the Party as an election judge for four decades, punched the ballot box next to the name Ronald Reagan. She knew something in 1984 that most Jews still refuse to believe in 2008. The Party of Roosevelt, Truman and Kennedy no longer existed.
My father recalls her exacts words when she shocked him with the news she voted for Reagan. This is not the same Democratic Party that I came of age in, she said. Four years later with her eyesight deteriorating, my father assisted her in the voting booth. She told him in Yiddish, Vote for Bush. That would be the last ballot she would ever cast.
The Jewish immigrants who were loyal to the Democratic Party raised first generation children who would maintain that same devotion. The difference is that their children never fully understood why their parents were Democrats. Jews, who immigrated to the United States, especially after World War I, saw men such as Roosevelt and Truman as leaders whom understood the plight of Jews and in Trumans case the man who supported the establishment of a Jewish homeland after the Holocaust; the State of Israel.
Jews understood through personal experience mans inhumanity toward man. They knew that the first and foremost issue that would always face them was fighting for their right to simply exist. They knew after World War II that a politician, who supported Israel, spoke out against antisemitism and understood that tyranny often needs to be dealt with using military might, was their lifeline or as the saying goes, the hand that feeds me.
However, Ida Miller knew in 1984 that the same hand was pulling away and politicians wearing the GOP label were becoming more inclined to support the Jewish people at home and abroad.
Today the children and grandchildren of those courageous immigrants appear to be biting the same hand. Republicans tend to be more supportive of presumed Jewish issues such as security for Israel, fighting terrorism and combating antisemitism. As Democrats provided under Roosevelt and Truman, todays GOP provides what our parents and grandparents craved for when coming to America. Sadly too many Jews continue to blindly support the candidate with the D next to their name. Actual positions regarding Jewish issues are often an afterthought.
Just north of where Ida Miller raised her family in Chicago is the 10th congressional district of Illinois, represented by Republican Mark Kirk. Nobody in congress is more supportive of the state of Israel or adamantly combats antisemitism than Kirk. In 2006 he won re-election by a mere six-point margin. This was after two previous re-election efforts that saw him win by over thirty points. The Jews greatest friend in congress may very well loose his seat in November. If he does, it will be a result of his Jewish constituents abandoning their best friend.
The Illinois tenth congressional district consists of a large Jewish population, residing in the highly affluent North Shore and Near Northwest suburbs. These are the first and second generation Jews that were raised as Democrats and today many of them subscribe to the far-left Progressive ideas of the Party, which downplay the war on terrorism as well as the importance of supporting the Jewish state.
Even among moderate Democrats who overwhelmingly supported Kirk in the past, they justify their desertion because of his support for the war in Iraq. Kirks Democratic opponent in November, Dan Seals, provides fodder for Jews abandoning the four term congressman, with canned answers geared to comfort voters that he would be an advocate for Israel.
The sad irony is that the Jews who are turning their back on Kirk have very little disagreement with his moderate positions, with the war in Iraq being the exception. The truth nobody in the community wants to admit is that first and second generation Jews in America have a predisposition to support Democrats because of how they were raised. They instinctively see Democrats as good for Jews and Republicans being bad. While a growing movement in the community has learned that the Party of Roosevelt, Truman and Kennedy no longer exists and has jumped onboard the GOP bandwagon. As I stated earlier, the majority tends to blindly support the candidate with the D next to their name.
Common sense would dictate that American Jews would adamantly support leaders, regardless of political affiliation, who have a proven record of supporting Israel and fighting antisemitism. The dangerous reality is that too many members of the Jewish community have forgotten the suffering their parents and grandparents experienced in early twentieth century Europe. Some Jews are in such denial that antisemitism exists; they even support politicians who are a direct threat to the safety and security of Israel and Jews abroad. Some politicians supported by the Jewish community have even reached out to those whom desire to finish the job Hitler started. Ever heard of a presidential candidate named Barack Obama?
By no means am I suggesting the probable Democratic nominee for the Presidency is himself antisemitic. However when you surround yourself with people who are blatantly anti-Israel and arguably can be labeled anti-Semitic, no Jew in their right mind should even consider supporting you. Ironically, in the case of Obama, if it werent for a Jewish congresswoman in Illinois he would still be an Illinois state senator viewed as an outcast by the black leadership of Chicago for challenging a sitting black congressman in the primary.
The best indication how an Obama Presidency would affect the safety and security of the state of Israel is his foreign policy team. His current list of advisors can only be described as a nightmare for the Jewish people. Heading the list is former national security advisor under Jimmy Carter, Zbigniew Brezinski.
Brezinski was the first prominent politician to deny that Islamic extremism was or would become a danger to the world. In a February 2, 1979 memo to President Carter he claimed Islamic fundamentalism is not an imminent threat and will not gain prominence in the Middle East.
He has already demonstrated his blame the Jews mentality when he expressed support for the John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt paper "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy," which has provided endless ammunition for anti-Israel activists, Zionist conspiracy buffs and Holocaust deniers. He recently returned from a trip to Syria, meeting with President Assad. Do you think Israel would be safe with Brezinski advising Obama in the White House?
Obama is also receiving advice from former Carter Administration diplomat, Robert OMalley. A devout Palestinian advocate who blamed Israel for the failure of the 2000 Camp David talks. Also bending the ear of the presidential hopeful is the intellectually challenged Susan Rice. This genius suggested that Jimmy Carter and James Baker should serve as negotiators to solve the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. Why not have Karl Marx defend capitalism.
What is most troubling about senator Obama is his spiritual mentor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. The Pastor at Obamas church is a vehement antisemite and a long-time supporter of Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan. This information about Obama and Wrights relationship is not new and the Illinois senator has stated that he doesnt always agree with his spiritual leader and has condemned anti-Semitism. Many Jews are satisfied with this answer. However one Holocaust survivor has put the matter into context when she said, if we found that (President) Bush belonged to a country club that discriminated against blacks, and he then said he disagreed with its policies but still continued to pay his dues, would anyone with a moral backbone think the matter settled? Obama saying he doesnt agree with his Pastors anti-Semitic remarks, but still chooses to be a dues-paying member of his church is no different.
Obama has a positive record regarding Israel during his three years in the senate. However he has already demonstrated that he will have advisors that will undoubtedly be negative for the Jewish state. Obama has already said he wants to meet with the President of Iran, a man who continues to call for the destruction of Israel and is the leading sponsor of terrorism worldwide. These facts in conjunction with his inability to recognize that America is at war with Islamic extremists, shows he will be a disaster not just for Israel, but the United States.
On the other hand, Republican John McCain has a three decade record of pro-Israel policies. He has a vast understanding of the threats Islamic extremism presents to America as well as the Jewish State. There is no doubt he would be a great friend to the Jewish community.
So what will American Jews do? Place person over political Party and vote for proven friends, such as Kirk and McCain, who recognize the dangers that threaten Israel and America? Or do they simply vote for the candidate, who has the D next to their name, ignoring the very reasons why our immigrant parents and grandparents taught us about the political process and why it is crucial to our very survival?
If only Jews would ask themselves, what would Grandma Ida do?
... Change is a constant. You're a big railroad baron, and things are going swell, and then someone invents the horseless carriage and a big metal bird that holds hundreds of people and you never saw it coming because you thought you were in the train business rather than in the transportation business. That kind of change is the great exhilarating rhythm of American life.
But government "change," Obama change, NOPEC change is nothing to do with that. In fact, it obstructs real dynamic change. On energy, on environmentalism, on health care, government "change" generally does nothing more than set in motion the next crisis that the next change-peddling pol has to pledge to address.
So we complain about $4-a-gallon gas, and our leaders respond with showboating legislation like NOPEC and feel-good environmental regulatory overkill like putting the polar bear on the endangered-species list, while ensuring that we'll continue to bankroll every radical mosque and madrassah on the planet. In Britain, new "green taxes" do nothing to "save" the planet, but they are estimated to cost the average family about $6,000 a year. That's change you can believe in.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/25/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
Just a small quibble. The railroads were not destroyed by the automobile, they were destroyed by Woodrow Wilson's nationalization in WWI. The RRs have just about recovered.
On the other hand, the growth of the RRs, especially the transcons, was due in no small part to government land giveaways. Live by the pork, die by the porker.
#3
Government is ceasing to be responsive to the people, and is startign to become destructive or lives, liberty and property.
Last time it happened:
"When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary ..."
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. ... it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
#5
But DMFD, that would actually help solve the problem. If they actually 'solved' the problem there wouldn't be any talking points or reason to 'blame-the-other-party'.
Can't have that! (See: "War on Drugs", "War in Poverty", ...)
The Congresscritters need to protect their phony baloney jobs or else they wouldn't be 'needed'.
#8
Add to the above: build BREEDER reactors - let the national guard secure them if people are worried about proliferation.
Breeders get far more energy extraction, plus they "burn" their won waste instaed of having to put it in storage - and they can "burn" others waste as well, turning it into fuel.
We've been stiupid for too long allowing liberals and emotions to drive the debate. Time to pay the price, and time to beat the liberasl up by placing the blame on thier obstructionisim, and shamanistic behavior regarding science (from communistic attempts to use environmentalism to institute govt control, to religious dogmatic "global warming" that is now being discredited)..
Big stick, time to beat the liberals and cowardly in Congress witih it (including that idiot McCain and his buying into AGW).
#9
I too am frustrated with the idiotic posturing by Congress critters in Washington so they can get pork for their district or re-elected. I view most of them as impediments to progress and a way out of the dilemma they have put us in. Most of them them seem to be a bunch of self-serving hypocrites. Our energy problems could be solved in short time if they would get the hell out of the way.
For the folks that don't know Marcus Luttrell he is the recipient of the Navy Cross and a member of the Navy SEAL team that got attacked by the Taliban which resulted in the highest loss of life in a single engagement to SEALS, and author of the book "Lone Survivor" which I finally got around to reading, and this book should be required reading for every high school student in America. For the folks that never get to hear about today's generation of heroes, here is one, even if he doesn't thinks so. The other members of that team might be familiar to some of you. They included Michael Murphy, awarded the Medal of Honor posthumously, Danny Dietz, awarded the Navy Cross and who was the subject of some controversy when his hometown in Colorado wanted to erect a statue in his honor and people objected because the statue would include him with a weapon. He got his statue and he kept his gun. The other member was Matt Axelson who was also awarded the Navy Cross. Remember Michael, Danny and Matt this Memorial Day and all the service members who have paid the ultimate price in the service to their country.
But in the meantime listen to Marcus tell you why we are winning in spite of ourselves and why we will continue to win.
Video at the link.
Posted by: Mike ||
05/25/2008 10:14 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I think I'll drive over to Littleton and go visit the Danny Dietz memorial today after mass.
On May 13, 2008, the Indian city of Jaipur, a popular tourist destination, was rocked by a series of explosions. Nine bombs attached to bicycles exploded in five different locations within 12 minutes, killing over 60 people and wounding 200 others. Immediately after the bombings, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh called them an attempt to create strife between the Muslim and Hindu communities in the country, but declined to speculate which groups could have been responsible. [1]
Over the last two decades of Pakistan-supported armed secessionism, India has witnessed several acts of Islamist terrorism, most of them in Indian Kashmir. However, in recent years, large-scale attacks have occurred in other parts of India as well, targeting temples, mosques, shrines, railway stations, courthouses, tourist centers, and, in 2001, even the Indian parliament. In most of the cases, the police failed to establish the identity of the attackers, but the blame was invariably placed on Pakistan-based militant groups, possibly due to the lack of any other plausible explanation.
After the bombings in Jaipur, capital of the western Indian state of Rajasthan, suspicion fell on two specific Islamist groups: the Bangladeshi group Harkatul Jihad-e-Islami and the home-grown group called Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI). Both are well known in India, and both are linked to the Pakistan-based Islamist organization Lashkar-e-Taiba. [2]
Harkatul Jihad-e-Islami Has Established Cells in India
Harkatul Jihad-e-Islami, founded in the 1980s, is active in Pakistan, Bangladesh, and India. According to the Urdu-language newspaper Roznama Siasat, the nature of the Jaipur attacks suggests that it has managed to establish a terrorist force in the state of Rajasthan. [3]
The group has been blamed for many previous terror attacks in India, and is known to have links with the Pakistan-based terrorist group Lashkar-e-Taiba. One of its commanders, Mufti Moinuddin, alias Abu Jandal, was arrested by Bangladeshi security forces in February 2008 in connection with the attempted assassination of former Bangladeshi prime minister Sheikh Hasina in 2004. During his interrogation, Abu Jandal revealed that his group supplied grenades to Lashkar-e-Taiba militants in India. [4]
India's Ministry of Home Affairs stated in its 2007-2008 annual report that the Pakistan-based militant groups Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Muhammad, as well as the Bangladesh-based group Harkatul Jihad-e-Islami, had put down strong roots in India, and were carrying out terrorist activities in the country from bases in neighboring Nepal and Bangladesh. [5] In fact, for the last decade, the Indian government has suspected that Pakistani militant groups were directing their activities from these countries. This was demonstrated by the 1999 hijacking of the Indian Airlines flight out of Katmandu, Nepal, which was diverted to Taliban-ruled Afghanistan.
It will not be easy for the Indian security agencies to establish any involvement by Harkatul Jihad-e-Islami in the Jaipur blasts, especially if its activities are directed from outside India. Nevertheless, it is clear that the group, which is banned in Bangladesh, has been taking advantage of the porous India-Bangladesh border in order to carry out its activities in India. According to intelligence sources, the group has managed to establish "sleeper cells" in several Indian cities and towns. [6]
SIMI Activists Go Underground
Another group that has attracted the attention of the Indian police is the Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI), some of whose members were arrested in connection with the Jaipur blasts. [7] SIMI, based in Ujjan in central India, is a splinter group of the moderate Students Islamic Organization of India, the student movement of the Jamaat-e-Islami Hind organization. Its founders, who were inspired by the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran, broke away from Jamaat-e-Islami Hind in order to pursue a more radical agenda.
In 2001, SIMI was banned by the Indian authorities for suspected links with foreign-based militant groups. According to a press report, SIMI has been establishing secret cells in different Indian states, and has been collaborating with the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba. [8] Over the past few years, dozens of SIMI activists have been arrested for suspected involvement in plots to perpetrate terrorism in India. In a recent crackdown on the group in Madhya Pradesh, the authorities arrested 13 SIMI activists, including Safdar Nagori, the group's top leader in India. [9] After the Jaipur bombings, the Indian police raided suspected SIMI hideouts in several towns in Rajasthan, but most of the group's activists seem to have gone underground. [10]
"Indian Mujahideen" - A New Terrorist Group?
Two days after the blasts, a little-known group called Indian Mujahideen claimed responsibility for the attack in an email sent to media outlets. It has been reported that the email - written in English, and sent from a cybercafé in Ghaziabad near New Delhi - was signed by "Guru Al-Hindi," and threatened further attacks in Rajasthan and in other parts of India. According to the Hindi-language newspaper Dainik Hindustan, the email was accompanied by a video showing reconnaissance footage of the target areas, and was sent from a Yahoo! email account (Yahoo ID: guru_alhindi_jaipur@yahoo.co.uk ). [11]
Since the group is unknown, investigators have yet to ascertain whether the email was authentic, or a hoax perpetrated by an individual or individuals trying to obstruct the investigation. [12] It should be noted, however, that the Yahoo! ID used by "Guru Al-Hindi" is similar to the one that was used to send advance warning of the courthouse bombings in Uttar Pradesh in November 2007. The name of the group - Indian Mujahideen - may be an attempt to camouflage its foreign roots and present it as a homegrown phenomenon. [13]
Pakistani Leaders and Press Condemn Jaipur Blasts
Indian Mujahideen, then, may be an indigenous organization, or a group inspired and supported by outside forces. After the Jaipur blasts, there was immediate concern in Pakistan that suspicion would fall on Pakistan-based groups. The Urdu-language newspaper Roznama Jasarat condemned the blasts and stated in an editorial that "the sad [fact] about any terrorist act in India is that Pakistan's name is immediately dragged into it." [14]
Pakistani Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani likewise condemned the Jaipur bomb blasts, saying, "Pakistan condemns all acts of terrorism and reiterates its firm commitment to fighting this scourge along with the international community." [15] Gilani's newly elected civilian government has vowed to continue President Musharraf's policy of improving relations with India and increasing trade and cultural ties in order to share in India's economic prosperity. However, the fact is that most of the Pakistan-based militant groups continue to do as they please, and none of them approved of Musharraf's moderate policies.
Lashkar-e-Taiba has renamed itself Jamatud Dawa, and its leader, Hafiz Muhammad Saeed, continues to preach openly in the streets of Lahore. Terrorist commander Maulana Masood Azhar - one of the individuals released by India in exchange for the passengers of the Indian Airlines flight - is likewise at large in Pakistan, as is Dawood Ibrahim, the Indian mastermind behind the 1993 blasts in Bombay. However, during a recent interview on Indian television, Gilani came close to admitting, for the very first time, that Ibrahim was living in Pakistan, and offered to hand him over to India if the latter could present concrete evidence against him. [16] Last Sunday, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh resisted the urge to blame Pakistan for the Jaipur blasts. He said that there are many reasons for the blasts, one of them being a conspiracy to undermine the relationship between India and Pakistan. [17] He added that he would leave it to Indian authorities to find out who was responsible for the blasts.
* Tufail Ahmad is the director of MEMRI's Urdu-Pashtu Media Project.
[1] Dainik Hindustan (India), May 14, 2008.
[2] Roznama Inquilab (India), May 14, 2008.
[3] Roznama Siasat (India), May 14, 2008.
[4] Roznama Munsif (India), March 4, 2008.
[5] Roznama Siasat (India), April 23, 2008.
[6] Roznama Etemaad (India), May 14, 2008.
[7] Hindustan Times (India), May 18, 2008.
[8] Roznama Munsif (India), February 8, 2008.
[9] Indian Express (India), March 28, 2008.
[10] The Times of India (India), May 19, 2008.
[11] Dainik Hindustan (India), May 16, 2008.
[12] Roznama Siasat (India), May 16, 2008.
[13] The Times of India (India), May 15, 2008.
[14] Roznama Jasarat (Pakistan), May 15, 2008.
[15] Daily Times (Pakistan), May 15, 2008.
[16] The Hindu (India), May 10, 2008.
[17] Roznama Nawa-i-Waqt (Pakistan), May 19, 2008.
An article by Nibras Kazimi, Visiting Scholar at the Hudson Institute
The Associated Press put out a wire report yesterday [on May 22] hinting that Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani is about to declare jihad against the Americans. ....
Iraq's most influential Shiite cleric has been quietly issuing religious edicts declaring that armed resistance against U.S.-led foreign troops is permissible a potentially significant shift by a key supporter of the Washington-backed government in Baghdad.
The edicts, or fatwas, by Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani suggest he seeks to sharpen his long-held opposition to American troops and counter the populist appeal of his main rivals, firebrand Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr and his Mahdi Army militia.
.... Al-Sistani's new edicts which did not specifically mention Americans but refer to foreign occupiers were in response to the question of whether it's permitted to "wage armed resistance," according to the two Shiites who received them. .... The [AP] report reaches the pinnacle of duplicity when it casually adds that:
In perhaps another sign of al-Sistani's hardened position, he has opposed disarming the Mahdi Army as demanded by al-Maliki, according to Shiite officials close to the cleric.
If weve learned anything from the recent events in Basra, Sadr City and Mosul ... it should be that the reporters and commentators who are tasked to describe Iraq to American and western audiences are at worst dishonest and duplicious, at best some string pullers chorus of useful idiots. It is in this vein that this AP story is released; to distract from other things that could be reported in Iraq, such as how things are dramatically improving and how this war has been decisively won.
Here are two other developments to mull over: al-Sadr is not a rival, not even by a long-shot, to Sistani as the AP supposes. And Sistani is no longer that relevant to politics in Iraq. So many things have changed since 2005, and many observers are still way behind the curve. ...
A source close to Sistani denied that the Grand Ayotallah's about to announce jihad, saying that Sistani believes that occupation (...in a general sense) must be resisted by peaceful, not military, means under a given set of circumstances. Don't expect AP to release a retraction, though. ...
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
05/25/2008 05:02 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Rantburgers have already called AP on this.
IERs, Improvised Explosive Rumors, shaped to project todays agenda.
Upon the return of Gen. David Petraeus to Capitol Hill, here is some of what he could report to his inquisitors:
Yes, last year's troop surge has been measurably a success. The assorted insurgencies are rearing up far less frequently now. "Security incidents" last week were at their lowest level in four years. Indeed, the bad guys themselves moan that their numbers are fewer and their operational capabilities are diminished.
Even Moqtada al-Sadr's Mahdi Army militiamen aren't much protesting as Iraqi troops move into Baghdad's Sadr City to restore order to that lawless tinderbox. ("The forces have a right to enter," peaceably concedes one Sadr spokesman, speaking in the absence of Sadr himself, who remains holed up in Iran.)
And, Petraeus adds, he is reasonably confident that by September he will be able to order still more troop drawdowns.
All this is thanks to Petraeus and to his deputy Gen. Ray Odierno, who will shortly become ground commander in Iraq as Petraeus moves up to take charge of U.S. military missions in the entire Mideast.
Gone now are those fumings that giving credence to anything Petraeus says requires a "willing suspension of disbelief."
This time around, the general's testimony before the Senate Armed Forces Committee was actually met with respect, now that even the severest opponents of the war can no longer argue that the cause goes very badly. "Regardless of one's view of the wisdom of the policy that took us to Iraq in the first place and has kept us there over five years, we owe Gen. Petraeus and Gen. Odierno a debt of gratitude," said Sen. Carl Levin. "And regardless how long the administration may choose to remain engaged in the strife in that country, our troops are better off with the leadership these two distinguished soldiers provide."
Yes, gone now are those fumings that giving credence to anything Petraeus says requires a "willing suspension of disbelief."
We haven't even heard much lately from those wits over at moveon.org who so fancied "General Betray-Us" to be extraordinarily clever wordplay.
Gone now are the blubbers that the war is lost, lost, lost. While leading Democrats still demand withdrawal, also gone now are the pledges from some who hold the national purse-strings that they'll happily cut off every dime so Petraeus and his troops can't do any more fighting.
Why, we haven't even heard much lately from those wits over at moveon.org who so fancied "General Betray-Us" to be extraordinarily clever wordplay. Accordingly, we have no doubt that Levin's committee will move swiftly to confirm Petraeus and Odierno to their new posts.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/25/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: Iraqi Insurgency
#1
One thing Petraeus finally cut down on has been the court-marshalling of so many troops. That has dropped dramatically this year, so I may finnaly be fully in his corner now.
#3
One thing Petraeus finally cut down on has been the court-marshalling of so many troops.
A drop in courts martial isn't due to new policy, www - it's the result of clear and focused ROEs with a different operational goal than our troops had to sustain earlier.
I bet that even at this moment the usual suspects are spending their time sharping their blades, figuratively, to put in his back at the earliest moment. To them it's a zero sum game and their politicing has placed them many levels down in the presence of real human leadership. Something they don't like and will react in the most ungracious manner. Lean and hungry men they be.
The giant smack delivered by the Law of Unintended Consequences in this nation's rush to embrace ethanol really smarted. Not only has it contributed to higher food prices domestically, it also has played a significant role in a world food shortage -- something the Bush administration now is desperately trying to spin. But as the saying goes, you likely ain't seen nothin' yet. Just wait until Congress passes something misleadingly called the Climate Security Act.
The idea behind the bill is to reduce carbon dioxide, supposedly one of the major "greenhouse gases" that are, again supposedly, leading to a dire warming of our planet. Never mind that the "settled science" of global warming hardly is -- and never mind the scientific evidence of cooling -- the Climate Security Act stands to do serious, if not irreparable, harm to an already struggling economy.
Concludes an in-depth analysis by The Heritage Foundation:
The act "represents an extraordinary level of economic interference by the federal government."
It "promises extraordinary perils for the American economy."
"Arbitrary restrictions predicated on multiple, untested and underdeveloped technologies will lead to severe restrictions on energy use and large increases in energy costs."
Special interests have wealth transferred to them at the cost of the energy-using public.
The Climate Security Act is the definition of a crock. It's an ill-defined solution to a "problem" that's dubious to begin with. Congress must reject such nonsense. Congress must serve reason.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/25/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
At some point, there will be a voter uprising when some gifted speaker runs on a platform of a 50% reduction in the size of government, and has coattails that bring enough new blood into congress to make it happen.
The giant smack delivered by the Law of Unintended Consequences in this nation's rush to embrace ethanol really smarted. Not only has it contributed to higher food prices domestically, it also has played a significant role in a world food shortage...
Must be that we (the U.S.) are feeding a large portion of the world to have that kind of effect. Maybe, some of the countries that are having problems should step up to the plate and feed their own rather than stir up trouble in the world for us and others. Maybe they should spend their money growing food rather than on arms. Maybe some of the countries that are having problems should stop trying to kill us.
The state of Texas is now in official opposition to the federal ethanol mandate. Governor Rick Perry has petitioned the Environmental Protection Agency for a one-year reprieve, and the reason is simple and increasingly familiar: Washington's ethanol obsession is hurting the state.
We all know that corn farmers everywhere love ethanol. Don't tell that to Texas cattle ranchers. Because of the mandate to add this biofuel to gasoline, ranchers are being forced into bidding wars with ethanol plants for the grains they feed their cattle. They don't appreciate being hammered on price because of a subsidy to corn growers. Thus, Governor Perry's petition.
The Governor's goal is to win a ruling from the EPA that suspends half the federal requirement that nine billion gallons of this product be added this year to the nation's fuel supply. Last week the EPA opened a 30-day public comment period on the Texas waiver request, the first step in what could lead to granting his request.
The most interesting thing revealed by this effort is that EPA holds the power to stand down from the ethanol fiasco. Congress gave EPA the authority to grant such waivers in the event the ethanol mandate had unforeseen consequences. Governor Perry argues that the mess in Texas qualifies.
By his calculation, if the mandate helps to push the price of corn to $8 a bushel (it's at nearly $6 now, up from $2 in 2004), it will cost the Texas economy nearly $3.6 billion this year. He says the dramatic spike in food prices may be due to a complex set of reasons, but the ethanol mandate is something that public officials can alter. The EPA has until late July to make a decision on the Texas petition.
Meanwhile, Congress merely throws more corn onto the ethanol bonfire. Under its 2005 mandates, Americans would be required to use 7.5 billion gallons of ethanol in 2012. But in December that was increased by 1.5 billion gallons and advanced to this year. Congress's target for 2022 is 36 billion gallons. They'll be growing corn on the Washington mall.
A countermovement has begun. Earlier this month, Texas Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson called for a freeze in ethanol mandates and quickly got the support of two dozen of her Republican Senate colleagues, among them John McCain. Also, a provision in this week's farm bill would shave a tax credit given refiners who blend ethanol into gasoline to 45 cents per gallon from 51 cents.
A predictable backlash has set in against the Perry petition. Iowa Republican Senator Chuck Grassley and South Dakota Democrat Tim Johnson have written the EPA to defend ethanol as representing a small fraction of the rise in food prices. In line behind them are the Texas Corn Producers Association and the Texas Grain Sorghum Association.
Posted by: Fred ||
05/25/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The county in Texas that I have a ranch on also has many dairies. Higher prices mean higher milk prices, and higher prices for anything that requires milk in the food processing of that product.
There are so many dairy farms and ranches in this county, a power plant is being built that will run off of the manure generated. Feed the milk and beef cattle the corn, send the resulting manure to the power plant, which can generate electricity for hybrid cars.
#3
Perhaps Texas cattle are more particular but out here they're feeding the spent grain that comes out of local ethanol plants to livestock. The ethanol mandate is a bad thing but it should be killed for the right reasons.
#4
...but out here they're feeding the spent grain that comes out of local ethanol plants to livestock.
I find it difficult to believe that the "spent" grain provides the same level of feed quality that the unspent grain does.
There are many reasons to kill this misguided ethanol crap, this is just one of them.
Personally, I think we're not that far away from a pitchforks, hot tar and feathering episode. The Congress (both houses) gets more and more outrageous everyday.
Ah! Someone else that has heard the story of Chief Bowels, no move. I can think of other things I'd like to feed the Congresscritters besides spent feed-corn.
But saying it here would get me sink trapped or worse...
So I will let you use your imagination.
First the traitors, then the enemy!
#8
"The most interesting thing revealed by this effort is that EPA holds the power to stand down from the ethanol fiasco. Congress gave EPA the authority to grant such waivers..."
What are the odds of THAT happening? The Mariners have a better shot of being in the post season than the EPA shutting this down.
#9
it is high time the US takes care of its own...limit exports of food and ALL food that was sold to the ME is diverted to biofuels...this would ensure a food and energy supply for the US..if there are no export presures prices will come down for the US
Posted by: Dan ||
05/25/2008 10:45 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Corn ethanol isnt the food villain, according to Curt Zingula, president of the Linn County (Ia) Farm Bureau.
Its time to end the ethanol bashing. Too many reporters have resorted to spin and outright lies in order to make a crisis out of the foodversus-fuel conflict.
Take, for example, the ABC News report on world hunger in which its reporter claimed that ethanol has caused a shortage of corn and farmers have turned to feeding wheat to livestock. First of all, there is no shortage of corn. The United States will have a 1.28 billion bushel carry-over of corn when the 2008 crop is ready for harvest. Second, farmers have fed wheat to livestock since long before ethanol became a household word. Third, and the biggest embarrassment for ABC News, is that the co-product of corn ethanol is actually a high-protein livestock feed called distillers grain.
For some reason, the new agriculture and ethanol experts are failing to tell you that ethanol uses only the starch in a kernel of corn. The vitamins, minerals, protein, fiber and oil are then processed into feed for livestock.
That, of course, would be the same livestock we consume for food.
The New York Times also has resorted to spin.
Several years ago, the Times asserted that abundant, cheap grain was responsible for national obesity. This year, the Times expects readers to fear reduced grain surpluses and higher food costs. Unfortunately for the Times, 12 cents worth of corn in a box of cornflakes cannot accomplish runaway food costs.
Still, people will make the claim that using food for fuel is fundamentally flawed. Understanding the justification for doing so requires perspective.
Before ethanol became the replacement for petroleums toxic MTBE as a requirement for urban clean-air standards, corn production was substantially greater than usage. In addition, seed companies report that rapidly improving genetics have the potential to produce another 800 million bushels of corn annually in just the next two years. That would be in addition to the 13 billion bushels we are producing.
Without ethanol, we would be buried under mountains of surplus corn.
Farmers have invested their own time and money to help create a renewable fuels industry that will provide a market for their bountiful production and at the same time help end embarrassing crop subsidies. However, the benefits of this industry are not limited to farmers.
Renewable fuels have created thousands of jobs and will pump billions of tax dollars into local, state and federal funds.
The other major consideration that ethanol experts fail to mention is that future ethanol is expected to be made primarily from perennial grasses followed by wood chips, corn, wheat straw and even garbage.
Thats right, the tons of food Americans throw away every day, even in the face of world hunger, can be made into ethanol.
Finally, I would like to suggest the following concern for future headline news: The United States is now sending more than $2 billion a day (and growing) overseas to petroleum producing countries, most of whom hate us. That story is a crisis that doesnt need any spin.
#11
Even though it's fallen out of fashion with the "in crowd", I like corn ethanol. If there ever is a shortage of food, there is a ready surplus supply that can be diverted for food use. I do object to the $.51/gallon ($1.30/bushell) Federal subsidy in addition to the regular farm subsidies. With corn prices that have tripled, one would think subsidies are no longer needed. But the subsidy, while decreased, is whatever the amount congress appropriates to buy off the agricultural constituency and lobby.
Posted by: ed ||
05/25/2008 11:54 Comments ||
Top||
#12
I find it difficult to believe that the "spent" grain provides the same level of feed quality that the unspent grain does.
Depends on your purpose. The distiller's grain is absent sugars and starches, but added yeast's nutrients. It's inferior in you want to fatten the animal. It's superior if you want the animal to build muscle mass. The distiller's grain is added as part of the animal's diet.
Posted by: ed ||
05/25/2008 12:06 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Sawgrass is a better source.
But importing cane from Bazil would make a ton of cheap ethanol much more readily available without impacting the corn supply.
Too bad the protectionists in Congress will not let that happen.
#14
No one has gotten cellulosic ethanol to work on a commercial scale. Until then I do like gasification which works with any material from plant, animal to coal.
It makes much more sense to import the finished ethanol than to import huge amount of cane. Better some dollars go to people who like to party and strip naked than those who want to kill us and think raping 9 year olds is a high form of worship. The lower Brazilian labor cost can also make better use of the waste materials.
Posted by: ed ||
05/25/2008 12:39 Comments ||
Top||
Zingula seems to be saying that using corn for ethanol isn't a problem since according to him we're only using surplus supplies (supplies are not strained, he says), but if we're only using surplus, then how does he explain the 3 to 4 fold increase in corn prices since corn ethanol started hitting its stride? If corn is amply available, the rules of supply and demand should apply, and there should be no reason why corn prices should have tripled - unless, of course, the market is being perverted by some other force. Government mandated ethanol production is that force.
I don't care a wit if Zingula and his corn farming friends may have ample supply, the fact of the matter is that corn is triple the cost of what it was only a couple of years ago, and it's causing significant problems for dairy, beef, poultry, hog and other livestock-centric farmers.
But in the end these high prices won't matter to the large-scale commercial farms, they'll be able to weather the storm, and may even benefit from it when their small, livestock-centric family farm neighbors sell out to them to avoid bankruptcy due to insane feed price.
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.
... Change is a constant. You're a big railroad baron, and things are going swell, and then someone invents the horseless carriage and a big metal bird that holds hundreds of people and you never saw it coming because you thought you were in the train business rather than in the transportation business. That kind of change is the great exhilarating rhythm of American life. 
By: Tufail Ahmad * 
Upon the return of Gen. David Petraeus to Capitol Hill, here is some of what he could report to his inquisitors:
The state of Texas is now in official opposition to the federal ethanol mandate. Governor Rick Perry has petitioned the Environmental Protection Agency for a one-year reprieve, and the reason is simple and increasingly familiar: Washington's ethanol obsession is hurting the state.
