#2
Cooling since 1998 *is* much slower than what was predicted. In fact, not a single computer model predicted cooling. Guess we'll have to just keep giving the modelers more money.
The man who took the decision to free the Lockerbie bomber from jail on compassionate grounds accused him yesterday of breaking an undertaking not to celebrate his release.
Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi, the Libyan convicted of the bombing, had shown no sensitivity to the families of those who died, Kenny MacAskill, Scotlands Justice Secretary, told the Scottish Parliament. he didn't show much sensitivity when he killed them either.
It was the first time that Scotlands Nationalist administration has joined the condemnation of the triumphal scenes.
Aware that Britain is caught in the cross-hairs of international outrage, Gordon Brown is expected today to urge Libya not to fête al-Megrahi further. Appearing before the cameras for the first time in weeks, Mr Brown will hold talks at No 10 with Binyamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, before taking questions from the press. Although Mr Brown is expected to issue a robust defence of his principled decision that the release was a matter only for the devolved Scottish government, diplomatic efforts are being made to restore Britains battered credibility among allies, including the US.
Amid a rumble of accusations that Britain connived at the release in return for trade deals with oil-rich Libya, aides said last night that Mr Brown was likely to disclose how he had demanded assurances from Tripoli that al-Megrahi would not be fêted in the celebrations on Tuesday to mark the 40th anniversary of Colonel Muammar Gaddafis seizure of power. video and text at link.
North Korea's sudden charm offensive has met with a cautious welcome from experts but also calls for a careful analysis of the North's intentions and tactics. On Sunday, President Lee Myung-bak in the first high-level inter-Korean meeting of his presidency spoke with a delegation from North Korea who were in the South to attend the funeral of former President Kim Dae-jung. They met separately with Unification Minister Hyun In-taek.
"It's a positive signal," said a researcher at a state-run think tank. "But it seems highly likely that it's part of a tactic by North Korea to get out of the corner it has been driven into by international sanctions" imposed over its latest nuclear test.
Prof. Yoo Ho-yeol of Korea University also welcomed "the momentum to break the deadlock" in inter-Korean relations, including the possibility of official government-level talks, given that the North Koreans delivered a message from leader Kim Jong-il acting as de facto special envoys to President Lee Myung-bak.
But Suh Jae-jean, the president of the Korea Institute for National Unification, warned the visit was "a tactic to persuade the U.S. by creating a conciliatory inter-Korean atmosphere at a time when the international community is enforcing sanctions."
Prof. Nam Joo-hong of Kyonggi University said the North may be attempting to create a sense of nostalgia in South Korea for Kim Dae-jung's "Sunshine Policy" of unconditional engagement with the North at a time when international sanctions are biting.
Experts advise the government to proceed slowly depending on what North Korea does next, especially watching whether its position on denuclearization improves, whether the crew of the South Korean fishing boat 800 Yeonan, who were towed to the North, are released swiftly, and whether the North finally apologizes for the fatal shooting of a South Korean tourist at Mt. Kumgang in 2008.
Prof. Kim Sung-han of Korea University said improvements in relations "should be sought in such a way as to find a solution to the nuclear issue. The government should maintain certain principles in terms of denuclearization" in devising its policy.
Experts also agreed that cooperation between Seoul and Washington is vital. "Improvements in inter-Korean relations should be sought within the framework of joint South Korea-U.S. efforts to persuade the North to abandon its nuclear weapons and return as a regular member of the international community," Suh said. "An emotional approach to such issues that ignores this principle would only mean falling for North Korea's tactics."
Posted by: Steve White ||
08/25/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"A man may smile and smile, and be a villan."
-- Old Bill
Click link to see the "Art" -- pretty good job
LUBBOCK -- A former art teacher used his West Texas field to carve out a protest about the Obama administration's proposed overhaul of the health care system. Sam Bates recently plowed some weeds and left behind the message "Say no to Obama!" that's best viewed from the air.
Bates said he had some "free time" and wanted to offer his unhappiness with what's been going on in Washington.
"This is a sign of frustration," Bates told KCBD-TV on Monday. "You know, it's not so much Obama, but just some of the things he's done recently with the health bill he's trying to pass through, and it's just as much Republican and Democrats fault in the House and the Senate that won't stand up to some of the things. That's basically what's frustrated me."
Bates said he dug out his message for the benefit of pilots flying in and out of Lubbock. "I thought, maybe some pilots flying from here to Dallas would get a good chuckle," he said.
Bates said his friend who is a crop duster helped him put aerial photos of the field on the Internet.
The sign in the lake bed will disappear when the season changes. "Once winter hits it will kill these weeds, and who knows, maybe next year I'll have something else," said Bates.
But the press still lie through their teeth while tap dancing to the Alinsky beat.
Posted by: ed ||
08/25/2009 07:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Battered Spouse Media Syndrome
He/She's really not that bad. He/She really still loves me.
Sheessh. Call me when the reporters room at the WH is basically empty everyday of the work week and that's after they've assigned their interns [who have as much experience as Obama] to cover the place.
#4
I'll believe it when the press stops covering for him. Obama can get away with things (staged "town meetings", advisers with falsified resumes, outright lies) that the press would have jumped all over - if it was Bush. When (and if) the press starts doing their job, then the honeymoon will be over.
The lights are going out in Venezuela. The Chávez-controlled legislature passed an education bill on August 13 that will extinguish the last glimmers of free thought in the countrys classrooms. The law is such a caricature of revolutionary legislation that it almost seems like a joke, like something out of Woody Allens Bananas. But its not funny for Venezuelans. Schools will now be required to teach Bolivarian doctrine, a vague catchall for Chávezs sloganeering. They will be supervised by communal councils (read: commissars from the socialist party) and the central government will decide who can and who cannot enter universities and the teaching profession.
Chávez is also saving elections from the bourgeoisie by gerrymandering districts before he next offers himself to the voters. When his motorcycle-mounted goons attacked the offices of Globóvision, the only remaining independent TV station, with tear gas and rocks, Chávez piously condemned the attacks. But Globóvision is not long for this world. He is remarkably blunt about his aims. As The Economist reported, the Venezuelan dictator cited the Italian Communist theorist Antonio Gramsci on the importance of seizing control of a nations key institutions in order to control the minds of the citizenry. The most important institutions to conquer, Chávez added, were the media, the churches, and the schools. Last year, some of the same Chávez thugs who tear-gassed Globóvision stormed the episcopacy in Caracas after the Catholic Church criticized the president. Chávez condemned that attack as well.
The new law stretches government power beyond the schools, permitting the state to suspend media outlets that negatively affect the publics mental health. This comes just three weeks after the government declined to renew the licenses of 34 radio stations. We havent closed any radio stations, weve applied the law, Chávez explained. Weve recovered a bunch of stations that were outside the law, that now belong to the people and not the bourgeoisie. Get it? Theyve been liberated.
Posted by: ed ||
08/25/2009 06:19 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
...In one of the revealing moments of the presidential campaign, Mr. Obama rightly observed that the Reagan presidency was a transformational presidency in a way Clinton's wasn't. And by that Reagan precedent, that Reagan standard, the faults of the Obama presidency are laid bare. Ronald Reagan, it should be recalled, had been swept into office by a wave of dissatisfaction with Jimmy Carter and his failures. At the core of the Reagan mission was the recovery of the nation's esteem and self-regard. Reagan was an optimist. He was Hollywood glamour to be sure, but he was also Peoria, Ill. His faith in the country was boundless, and when he said it was "morning in America" he meant it; he believed in America's miracle and had seen it in his own life, in his rise from a child of the Depression to the summit of political power.
The failure of the Carter years was, in Reagan's view, the failure of the man at the helm and the policies he had pursued at home and abroad. At no time had Ronald Reagan believed that the American covenant had failed, that America should apologize for itself in the world beyond its shores. There was no narcissism in Reagan. It was stirring that the man who headed into the sunset of his life would bid his country farewell by reminding it that its best days were yet to come.
In contrast, there is joylessness in Mr. Obama. He is a scold, the "Yes we can!" mantra is shallow, and at any rate, it is about the coming to power of a man, and a political class, invested in its own sense of smarts and wisdom, and its right to alter the social contract of the land. In this view, the country had lost its way and the new leader and the political class arrayed around him will bring it back to the right path.
Thus the moment of crisis would become an opportunity to push through a political economy of redistribution and a foreign policy of American penance. The independent voters were the first to break ranks. They hadn't underwritten this fundamental change in the American polity when they cast their votes for Mr. Obama.
American democracy has never been democracy by plebiscite, a process by which a leader is anointed, then the populace steps out of the way, and the anointed one puts his political program in place. In the American tradition, the "mandate of heaven" is gained and lost every day and people talk back to their leaders. They are not held in thrall by them. The leaders are not infallible or a breed apart. That way is the Third World way, the way it plays out in Arab and Latin American politics.
Those protesters in those town-hall meetings have served notice that Mr. Obama's charismatic moment has passed. Once again, the belief in that American exception that set this nation apart from other lands is re-emerging. Health care is the tip of the iceberg. Beneath it is an unease with the way the verdict of the 2008 election was read by those who prevailed. It shall be seen whether the man swept into office in the moment of national panic will adjust to the nation's recovery of its self-confidence.
Posted by: Mike ||
08/25/2009 06:05 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
That is a debate throwdown I would have loved to have seen. Better than Kirk vs Picard.
#2
> American democracy has never been democracy by plebiscite, a process by which a leader is anointed, then the populace steps out of the way, and the anointed one puts his political program in place.
Maybe not American Democracy, but your constitution was done in exactly this way. Luckily by people that understood The Common Law and the Magna Carter otherwise it could have gone HORRIBLY wrong (see the EU "constitution").
#5
President Reagan's first term was rough economically, but there was public confidence and incremental growth. In the last term there was an entrepreneurial dynamo at work. Low-tax schemes - vs Keynesian money burning - take time to work, but there is enough data to afford a claim that they work.
This Fall, there will be a bi-partisan effort for low-tax public administration. BHO will have to follow.
[Asharq al-Aswat] Following the terrorist attacks that rocked Baghdad [last week], the comments made by Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyer Zebari were sharp and on edge, however they were also realistic and justified and deserve to be contemplated at length.
Zebari said that he expected the coming violence "will be bigger." Following a careful reading of the situation, we can say that the Minister's comments were expected and correct, but unfortunately some in Iraq are analyzing events from a narrow perspective. I received some criticisms following my previous article "Why is Iraq Ablaze?" even though it is clear that by celebrating the withdrawal of US forces, the Iraqi government is making a strategic mistake.
The government wished to portray this withdrawal as victory in order to give President al-Maliki momentum going into the forthcoming elections. It is common knowledge that the existing political system in Iraq was the product of a US operation from the ground up, as was its recent withdrawal, and the portrayal of this as an achievement of al-Maliki's has divided the Iraqis. This withdrawal -- even if it was inevitable -- represents a threat to Iraq so long as there is a lack of genuine political reconciliation which would reduce the risk of sectarian violence.
The other mistake was an over-confidence in security; this manifested itself in the removal of blast-proof concrete walls from Baghdad. These concrete walls were also removed for electoral reasons, and the goal of this was to show the al-Maliki government in a strong light and demonstrate that it is in complete control of the security issue throughout Iraq. However all indications confirm that Iraqi security has been infiltrated, not just by the Baathists and Al Qaeda, but also by Iran and its agents. At this point, we must recall that Iraqi security apparatus are composed of members of Shiite militia who following the collapse of the Saddam Hussein regime carried out terrorist operations in Iraqi cities, not to mention the death squads. We must also recall the bank robberies that were committed by members of some security forces, not to mention the kidnapping of Britons from the Ministry of Finance which took place a few years ago and other events.
One might ask, what have the Baathists got to do with the makeup of the Iraqi security apparatus? Why are accusations now being leveled at this outlawed party?
The answer is very simple. What made it easy for these security personnel to betray their profession, rob banks and carry out assassinations? [The answer is] that it is easy to betray a country in its entirety.
And so we say once and again, and for the thousandth time, victory in the Iraqi election must come throughout the door of genuine political accomplishments, and this is to solve the basic problems facing Iraq, the most important of which is reconciliation, instead of throwing away more lives and opportunities. National reconciliation is enough to prevent regional intervention, and is capable of sheltering Iraqi citizens in their own country, rather than them looking for a sectarian or foreign umbrella [to shelter under].
Posted by: Fred ||
08/25/2009 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: Iraqi Insurgency
#1
I have a feeling that the Iraqi military will have something to say about those who try to ignite sectarian violence. They have been under the wing of the US Army and Marines for too long, and have picked up lots of habits like nationalism, a sense of duty and real honor, and a serious hatred of those who embrace primitivism and chaos.
And I doubt they will be under particularly restrictive ROE in dealing with such scum.
#3
That's some strong Kumbaya juice, Moose. Iraqis are predominantly
1 Muslim
2 Arabs
Their society is/has
1 Winner take all
2 Too many competing power blocks
3 Screw the infidels as soon as they feel they have the upper hand
Violence is fore ordained.
Posted by: ed ||
08/25/2009 13:56 Comments ||
Top||
#4
lots of habits like nationalism, a sense of duty and real honor -- As valuable as those qualities can be, without widespread agreement on what the nation is, those qualities may also serve to worsen the violence of a civil war, e.g., the War Between the States here. Whom or what do these qualities serve?
#5
According to quran (which contains notice of inter-muslim strife) and hadith, the sunni-shiite civil war will not end until the "end of days."
US troops cannot and should not police this inherent bloodshed, other than to implement containment policies against Syria, Iran, etc.
Field troops in Iraq pay zero attention to the 1400 year old civil war. Although some operations address threats against the civil government structure.
Even if the civil war heats up, the oil fields (both sides want the petro dollars to keep pouring in) and US theater troops will not be targeted. However, interpretation of Iraqization agreements and protocols permit indefinate US presence, should one side claim that a threat to either the government or Iraq sovereignty, is either present or forseeable. Hence, US troops aren't going anywhere, and any escalation will be manageable.
I haven't read the IG report yet, I've just seen a few writeups and excerpts around here and other places. Without getting into the substance of the controversy, I'm doubting that there will be a lot of popular outrage over any of the allegations of abuse. Right or wrong, I think the average American assumes that some rough stuff goes on behind the scenes and that's okay. One reason for that assumption is that Hollywood tells us so every day.
I've long been fascinated with the disconnect between what pundits, politicians, and various activist groups complain about and the status of interrogation techniques in the popular culture (here's a column I did on the subject in 2005). In countless films and TV shows the good guys — not the bad guys — do things to get important information that makes all of the harsh methods and allegedly criminal techniques in the IG report seem like an extra scoop of ice cream and a Swedish massage. In NYPD Blue, The Wire, The Unit, 24, and on and on, suspects are beaten, threatened, terrified. In some instances they are simply straight-up tortured. In movies, too, this stuff is commonplace. In Patriot Games, Harrison Ford shot a man in the kneecap to get the information he needed in a timely manner. In Rules of Engagement, Samuel L. Jackson shot a POW in the head to get another man to talk. In Guarding Tess, Nick Cage blows off a wimpy little man's toes until he talks. In The Untouchables, Sean Connery conducts a mock execution.
Now, I know I will get a lot of "it's just a movie" or "TV shows aren't real" email from people. At least I have every other time I've made this point. So let me concede a point I've never disputed while making one these folks don't seem to grasp. If such practices, in the contexts depicted, were as obviously and clearly evil as many on the Left claim, Hollywood could never get away with having the good guys employ them. Harrison Ford in the Tom Clancy movies would never torture wholly innocent and underserving victims for the same reasons he wouldn't beat his kids or hurl racial epithets at black people. But given sufficient time to lay out the context and inform the viewers of the stakes, as well as Ford's motives, the audience not only understands but applauds his actions. Of course it's just a movie. But the movie is tapping into and reflecting the popular moral sentiments. Think of these scenes as elaborate hypothetical situations in the debate about torture and interrogation that are acted out and played before focus groups of normal Americans.
If Harrison Ford was an unrepetent racist and anti-Semite in Patriot Games and audience-focus groups still loved him, reasonable people would agree that said something troubling about American audiences.
And if, as a matter of principle and sincere conviction, you think it is always evil and outrageous for interrogators to beat, slap, terrify, or abuse suspects, no matter what the stakes or the context, then you should be deeply, deeply offended by these films and TV shows. And you might even have the better argument. My only point here is that, as a general proposition, the American people don't agree with you.
Posted by: Mike ||
08/25/2009 10:08 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 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.
North Korea's sudden charm offensive has met with a cautious welcome from experts but also calls for a careful analysis of the North's intentions and tactics. On Sunday, President Lee Myung-bak in the first high-level inter-Korean meeting of his presidency spoke with a delegation from North Korea who were in the South to attend the funeral of former President Kim Dae-jung. They met separately with Unification Minister Hyun In-taek. 
I've long been fascinated with the disconnect between what pundits, politicians, and various activist groups complain about and the status of interrogation techniques in the popular culture (here's a 
