HELSINKI, Finland (AP) - When graduating from a high school called "Hellu," wearing a class shirt that reads "Hellus Angels" might seem like harmless school spirit - unless it's worn in a bar where Hells Angels members have strong feelings about trademark infringement.
They are real sensitive about that.
After a student at the Helsinki school was beaten pressured to hand over the shirt to two bikers at a local bar, the school received a request to collect all the remaining shirts and forfeit them to the Finland chapter of the Hells Angels motorcycle club, the Finnish newspaper Iltalehti said Friday. The motorcycle club took offense at the use of its "Deathshead" logo, a winged, helmet-wearing skull. The organization claims a trademark on the logo registered to the Hells Angels Motorcycle Corp.
And you really don't want the H.A.M.C. offended with you.
The school promptly wet their pants agreed with the Hells Angels and is collecting the shirts from its students, admitting the biker group had a strong case.
And a lot of very large angry people
"This is clearly a stolen logo. It's just a matter of thoughtlessness on the part of the kids," deputy headmaster Eeva-Riitta Mustelin was quoted as saying, adding that the bikers did not want to go to court over the matter.
I don't think court was what they had in mind.
Posted by: Steve ||
04/02/2004 3:11:31 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
I'm sure Sonny Barger would say, "Hey, no sweat. Let bygones be bygones." right after he gutted a few of the pretenders. This is yet another "Cause -> Effect" episode.
#3
More than anything, I'm curious about whether anyone will have the wisdom to perceive that encouraging high schoolers to glorify or masquerade as a bunch of violent hopped up biker thugs might not have been the best decision.
#7
Ah, the rub. Were it not for free speech, perhaps these kids wouldn't hear this crap and aspire to live it out... then, perhaps, they might have other interests which actually prepare them for "melting" and assimilating into the economies of their native countries. Spouting "wh'sup?" usually acts as a serious damper on the interview process, unless it's to run the deep-fryers.
A lot of "perhaps" - I know. But every young thug is potentially a productive citizen... if the possibilites can break through the inanely barbaric static that passes for youth culture. There is nothing more idiotic, IMHO, than watching some little white twinkie, such as Eminem, pretending to have a clue about being tough or down and out - emulated by a crowd of equally clueless twinkettes all sporting spastic hand gestures. In my youth, I practiced real thuggery on such succulent little 'tards. Lunch money, yumm. Yet I "ended" my programming career by paying max SocSec for the last 17 years.
#9
But, in case you're unaware, you're rather often being cryptic - or disingenuous - leaving some of us to wonder if you're a legitimate contributor - or just the droll troll wasting our time.
Hey, they don't have individual "kill file" rules for browsing weblogs (yet), but I'll just ignore you should you choose to play coy. BTW, I don't need you to agree with me any more than you care if I mirror your opinions - so we'll just play this straight up.
#10
But, in case you're unaware, you're rather often being cryptic - or disingenuous - leaving some of us to wonder if you're a legitimate contributor - or just the droll troll wasting our time.
Feel free to indicate precisely where. I make a point of being consistent in my statements and view those who are not as pond scum.
Hat tip .com
Prelude
In 1938 Hitler felt strong enought to risk his next and yet most serious gamble. In a kind of external coup he annexed Austria. With Austria open to the German military, the well prepared defensive positions of Czechioslovakia became obsolete - the souther border was now open to invasion. With this in mind, Hitler now tried to get the "Sudetenland", an area in Czechia that was inhabited by some three million Germans.
When the situation started to shift in the direction of war, Chamberlain offered a direct visit to Hitler. This would result in a conference between Hitler, Mussolini, Daldier and Chamberlain in Munich.
The Photo
When Chamberlain returned in 1938 from the conference in Munich, he presented a new Czechoslovakian border and a peace of paper as a result. In addition to the question of the Czech border, Chamberlain tried to ensure further peace with a document of understanding between Germany and Great Britain. Despite the impression that Chamberlain waves the plan to divide Czechioslovakia, it is this paper that Chamberlain shows on the photo (proving that "creative" journalism was already a common habit). See the original German text of this document at the end of this page. The first version of the text was proposed in English by Chamberlain. Both he and Hitler signed the translated German document.
The photo shows Chamberlain at his arrival from Munich with the Hitler-document, the map of Czechioslovakia with the parts that would go to Germany, Hungary and Poland and in the upper corner Chamberlain with Ribbentrop and (in the back) Henlein, the leader of the Sudeten, the Germans in Czechia.
Aftermath
When Chamberlain returned, he was enthusiastically welcomed by the British people, who had feared a new war. In the following three weeks he received 40.000 letters, many of them combined with gifts. His wife got some additional 12.000 letters as proof of the gratitude of the British people.
Chamberlain has managed to avoid a war in 38 - at the cost of Czechioslovakia. The following year would see a strong effort by the British to modernize and enlarge their Air Force, enabling them to win the air battle of Britain in 1940 by a margin.
Analysis - A mistake?
The effect of the Munich-treaty are twofold. On the one hand, the Czech army was perhaps the best prepared army in 1938 and had the advantage of long prepared defensive positions (although most of these could be avoided by using Austria for an offensive). However, a war might well have shown some surprises for Germany. In addition, a well planned attentate on Hitler was prepared that should take place in the very moment the war started. Most important perhaps, when Hitler occupied the rest of Czechioslovakia some month later he gained important industrial facilities, especially the Skoda-factories - the second largest tank-producing facilities of its time. Several of the German tank divisions were equipped with Skoda-tanks in the campaigns of 39/40.
On the other hand, though Germany was ill prepared for a war, Great Britain was not prepared at all. Great Britain had in 1938 no modern Antiair guns, and its fighter-force consisted of only 409 fighters - with only five squads of Hurricance (badly equipped) and one squad of Spitfire. As Churchill said in these days: "The equipment of our Air Force is miserable". British experts (Austin Hopkinson) gave the British air force three weeks before a total defeat in a war against Germany. In the following year, the expenses for civil air-defense went up by a factor of five, and large programs to expand the fighter and bomber force were issued.
More important than these programs was perhaps the fact, that in 1939 it was clear to everyone that Hitler was not interested in just correcting the injustice of Versailles. The "Reichskristallnacht" started the killing of Jews in Germany, and the later occupation of the rest of Czechioslovakia, the surprising pact with Stalin and the way Hitler threatened Poland showed that he was a danger to peace, a man who would not keep his word and could not be trusted. The sheer will to fight it out for the German populated parts of Czechia may have lacked in 38 - in 39 the danger was clear for all to see.
Posted by: Steve from Relto ||
04/02/2004 12:17:27 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
..Actually, a strong case can be made that when war finally did break out, Hitler had taken better advantage of the breathing space than Chamberlain did.
Hitler's war production people had the Skoda works back up and running in a month or so, and they were mpumping out weapons and trucks for the Wehrmacht almost to the end of the war. Chamberlain didn't do all that much more to prepare - when the war finally started, the Gloster Gladiator - a fabric covered biplane - was still the most numerous fighter in the RAF's Fighter Command. Had Hitler attacked the UK directly just six months earlier - say March of 1940 - his Bf109s would have faced obsolete biplanes backed up by literally just a few early Hurricanes and fewer than a dozen Spitfires.
What the breathing space really did do was give the UK's military commanders a chance to plan for what they knew was coming. The political leadership stayed appeasement oriented until the outbreak of war, and even then was planning to do things like give aid to the Finns against the Soviets - while Poland was being crushed and France menaced. If Hitler had had second thoughts on invading Norway (which is when Chamberlain was finally forced out), he may very well have found a British government willing to negotiate after the French defeat.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
04/02/2004 14:21 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"he may very well have found a British government willing to negotiate after the French defeat...."
Mike, even with Churchill at the helm it was a close-run thing. See Ten Days in May by John Lukacs. Halifax was still hinting around about "new and more generous terms" from Hitler.
Posted by: Matt ||
04/02/2004 14:40 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Sorry, it's "5 Days in London: May 1940" and the quote by Halifax (to the UPI after Dunkirk) referred to a "new and more generous offer."
Posted by: Matt ||
04/02/2004 15:02 Comments ||
Top||
#4
We've got to look to our past! The success of the Munich Conference should be like a beacon to all good hearted peopled. There..... see did the whole fucking thing without caps, is that enough for you redneck pandering freepers? Hell do you even know where Munich is?
#5
We must remember also the history of demilitarsed territory of Renania, between France and Germany.
German troops occupied it in 1936 and France made nothing. At that time German was even worst in military terms.
Later in France the military success of Germany can be atributted of a society that thought about the modern war and another that commited suicide wanting to think that WW1 was the last. That explain the unexplainable treason to Poland , let to face alone the fate against Hitler while Allies had only a couple of German divisions in Western border.
#5
From what the Chinese say, they make good passenger trains. Not that Amtrack could make a profit with them anyway...
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
04/02/2004 14:08 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Why would anyone in their right minds want france?
Because once you have shot a number of pseudo-intellectuals, makers of bad movies, leftists, corrupt politcians and you have brainunwashed the rest for say thirty years then you could get a number of nice people. Then add a Second Amendment to the French Constitution, shake another twenty years and they would make passable Americans who, in addition, can cook. Then you will able to add another star to that flag of yours :-)
Seriously, perhaps because I don't make misteries of my sympathies but I have found a surprising number of pro-american people. My guess is that the intense pressure to anti-american hate from the media has made very politically uncorrect to say you are a pro-american in France (professional statisticians are familiar with the phenomenon of people not daring to tell their opinions to pollster when they are politically uncorrect).
#8
JFM - Two of my buddies have checked out the Tour de France over the past five or six years, primarily the Alps / Pyrenees (sp) stages. Both of them tell me what great people those French are, regardless of how bad you / can't speak French, and how much those French cannot fucking stand the Parisian French. I think 'world's biggest assholes' was the charge du jour...
#9
My youngst steptwerp is in France now... been there about 13 months.... seems to do okay. Time to come home Chris... August? :) Give me warning the 'nannas trees are going wild.
Kinda entertaining! Comics have joked for ages that humans will eventually adapt to technology: growing nimbler thumbs for text messaging, or larger ears to compensate for poor signal reception. But in a remarkable breakthrough, scientists believe they have isolated the gene responsible for one specific kind of computer activity - and the race is on to commercialize it.
Itâs an adaptive, emergent property - and is sure to ignite the Nature versus Nature debate once again. Biologists believe they have found the genetic adaptation responsible for âwebloggingâ. The discovery may take the form of what Stephen Jay Gould identified as a âspandrelâ a previous adaptation for which evolution had found no previous use.
Such claims have been made before, and have a dubious history. Late Victorian England was convulsed by the sensation of the "Hemel Hempstead Three". Three men - two of them brothers - had all developed extremely long legs - and all were Penny Farthing enthusiasts. The story was later proved to be a hoax.
"Itâs all about me-me"
Professor Teilhard, who holds the Poindexter Chair of Physics at the University of Santa Feâs Department of Extropian Studies, says that weblogging performs a harmless social function.
"Webloggers are born not made," he said. "And shouldnât be persecuted." The activity could be a positive, group-bonding social function such as grooming, or simply a harmless way of passing the time, such as masturbation.
Microsoft has employed over 400 webloggers in the hope of producing the elusive breakthrough, but now the race is on to find a commercial use for the discovery. Or any sort of use. Teilhardâs breakthrough wasnât achieved overnight, and by interpreting some phenomena too literally, his team was led down several blind alleys.
"We noticed the repeated occurance of the phrase âarse feedâ from one part of the sample," said the Professor. "Almost every member of the sample mentioned it once, but some members of the sample seemed to talk about nothing else."
"We began to look for patterns - who was âarse feedingâ who. Was the âarse feedingâ bi-directional? There seemed to be no standard way of âarse feedingâ in the group - in fact we counted at least nine."
"It was only after some months that we concluded that what they were talking about was âRSS Feedâ".
For Teilhard, the breakthrough provides a vindication for his often-criticized methods after almost two decades of fruitless research. One fifteen-year experiment involved coating ants with invisible markers in the hope that the patterns could produce a text of basic English: such as an edition of Esther Dysonâs technology newsletter.
GMT
However, the breakthrough raises serious ethical concerns. Is it right for parents to choose whether or not their child will be a weblogger? Can eradication of the gene provide a biological cure for solipism? But of more immediate concern, big business and the weblog industry are already eyeing the commercial opportunities.
Infrastructure owners see the development as a way of using the excess capacity that was built during the dotcom era. Since the Internet bubble burst, millions of terabytes of data pipes, and thousands of formerly-employed HTML coders have lain unused. Investors hope that in around twelve years, when the first generation of genetically-enhanced webloggers is tall enough to reach a keyboard, the industryâs demand worries may be over for good.
Software developers in San Francisco have already trademarked what they describe as "Genetically Movable Type". The authors claim that while the free version, Movable Type, will continue, GMT will be packaged with specially formulated smart drugs to improve the webloggerâs output. But the inventors are anxious to prevent the development of a âblack marketâ in GMT smart drugs.
But theyâre likely to encounter a hostile European Union.
"Weâre not convinced about the safety of genetically-enhanced Smart Blogging," an EU spokesman has said. The European Parliament has already voted to introduce a censure motion limiting the spread of GMT.
Such concerns donât seem to have dampened the jubilation of webloggers.
"Teilhardâs breakthrough confirms that we are at the forefront of machine-human evolution," said one. Pressed for details, he replied, "I donât know what it means really. Itâs just a meme I felt compelled to transmit." ®
Posted by: Phil B ||
04/02/2004 1:07:43 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
Posted by: Frank G ||
04/02/2004 11:14 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Hate to spoil the fun team, but that is good old southern sex. Notice the "JRTC" at the bottom of the tape, that is wonderful FT Polk, LA. Only great sex like that happens here at home in the USA!
Saudi clerics across the kingdom led worshippers in prayers for rain on Thursday, blaming a minor drought on a catalogue of sins, including the increasing openness of women who may unveil or mingle with men. Addressing hundreds of worshippers in Mecca, Grand Mosque cleric Abdel Rahman bin Abdel Aziz al-Sudeis said Muslims should purify their hearts of âenvy, jealousy, hatred, breaking off (relations), quarrels and enmity for trivial reasonsâ, and ask for Godâs forgiveness to end the drought. âThere is no sin without misfortune, and there is no lifting of punishments without repentance; the sins are dangerous because whenever they exist, destruction follows,â al-Sudeis said. He singled out women, saying their sins included âbedecking, unveiling, mingling (with men), being indifferent with hijab (veil)â. Khaled al-Maeena, editor of the English daily Arab News, worried that some listeners could wrongly interpret al-Sudeisâ comments. âIt is not a healthy sign, as we want women to play their role and to be active in the society,â he said.
Posted by: Paul Moloney ||
04/02/2004 2:41:45 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Mmmm! The online weather sites were a few hours ago forecasting rain in Jeddah on Wednesday. They are now forecasting just cloud.
I see an attempt to impress the ignorant coming unglued. HeHe!
#4
"...including the increasing openness of women...." make them travel in underground tunnels that will work
"Addressing hundreds of worshippers wife beating slobs in Mecca...."
"Muslims should purify their hearts of âenvy, jealousy, hatred, breaking off (relations).." whatâs that mean break off with one of your other wives?
"He singled out women" gotta blame this on someone
"....being indifferent with hijab (veil)..â ya now thatâs one sexy piece a hijab veil..
âIt is not a healthy sign, as we want women to play their role cook food have sex etc and to be active in the society, do the laundry â he said.
Posted by: Bill Nelson ||
04/02/2004 8:45 Comments ||
Top||
#5
I remember reading about ancient civilizations, you know 5k-10k BC making sacrifices to "gods" for rain, fertility etc. Anybody see a resembelance here? Maybe they can do some human sacrifices. As a matter a fact I think, to get some rain, they should have a big mass suicide. That should appease the "god" of mohammed the pedophile.
#6
In deference to Saudi Arabia's precip problems, I asked my wife to put on a veil. She refused. I came home from work and our oldest chicken was dead.
I gave it a back-to-nature burial, apologized to my wife, and lo and behold this morning---
it started snowing here.
What does it all mean? Mucky, work with me on this.....
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
04/02/2004 11:33 Comments ||
Top||
#8
It's been in the low to mid 70's here for the past week, beautiful spring weather. Today, the wind's howling and it's supposed to snow by this evening. If it was yesterday, I'd declare the weather report an April Fool's joke.
I think the Saudis should go back and carefully re-read the Torah, the first five books of the Old Testament, and try to square their behavior with how they treat the Jews. They don't seem to get it...
One of the side effects of the 9/11 and 3/11 bombings has been more people hitting their knees every evening. While I'm not one of those Bible-thumping Southern Baptist fire-and-brimstone preachers I grew up hearing as a kid, I do have a strong belief in God, and I do know you DON'T mock Him. Islam's rejection of His Commandments do that. I think He's as tired of their "Holier than Thou" attitude as the rest of us, and is doing His part to throw sand in their faces, too. If God's pissed at them, all the "prayer" and "supplication" in the world isn't going to do thim any good, until they change how they treat His chosen people, the Jews. We'll see when that happens...
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
04/02/2004 13:19 Comments ||
Top||
#9
paul i think maybe cuz you live in alaska? i hope your chicken not outside in the cold.
#11
Last week it was in the mid-high 90',
Today cold,rain,sleet all around misrable day.
Good news Roosevelt Lake at 40%.
2 years ago the lake was at 04%.
#14
Israel had good rains this winter. Kinneret (the Sea of Galilee), the country's largest freshwater lake and primary water reservoir, nears capacity for the first time in a decade.Link
Posted by: Rafael ||
04/02/2004 21:35 Comments ||
Top||
#17
M4D---My dog found the dead chicken in the snowbank down the road. Had her for din-din. Now it is snowing more. Everything and everybody is fine. Thanks for your help.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
04/02/2004 22:18 Comments ||
Top||
EFL
Plans to fill a nuclear landmine with chickens to regulate its temperature were seriously considered during the Cold War. Civil servants at the National Archives say it is a coincidence the secret plan is being revealed on 1 April.
Yup. Pure coincidence.
The Army planned to detonate the seven-tonne device on the German plains in the event of having to retreat. Operation Blue Peacock forms part of an exhibition for the National Archives, in Kew, London, on Friday. The bomb was designed to stop the Red Army advancing across West Germany during the height of the Cold War. But nuclear physicists at the Aldermaston nuclear research station in Berkshire were worried about how to keep the landmine at the correct temperature when buried underground. In a 1957 document they proposed live chickens would generate enough heat to ensure the bomb worked when buried for a week. The birds would be put inside the casing of the bomb, given seed to keep them alive and stopped from pecking at the wiring.
"How were you going to stop them from pecking?"
"Nigel volunteered to sit with them."
The landmine would be remotely detonated.
"Golf-34 this is Alpha-17. Time to bail, Nigel!"
"Drat! And I was just about to have tea!"
Tom OâLeary, head of education and interpretation at the National Archives, told the paper: "It does seem like an April Fool but it most certainly is not. The Civil Service does not do jokes."
"No, ma'am. The National Archives does not have a sense of humor that we are aware of!"
But obviously nuclear physicists at the Aldermaston nuclear research station in Berkshire do. And their jokes have a very long fuse. Either they were joking or Blair should seriously consider barring all nuclear researchers from the pubs during lunchtime.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
04/02/2004 3:58:27 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Sounds like the backstory for an awful movie in which irradiated chickens grow to monstrous size and rampage through London.
#6
PETA nothing. Virgil Butler will not stand for this type of treatment of his little lovelies.
I wonder if exposure to gamma radiation spices up the taste so that chicken will no longer taste like rattlesnake, frog, rabbit...
Posted by: Super Hose ||
04/02/2004 15:24 Comments ||
Top||
#7
this is just plain sick but im not surprise. chicken are the most abused animals in the world and nothing is being done to stop atrocities. these cheap bastard could have found other way to kep there nuculer bombs warm without giving radiation sickness to animals who never do them any harm.
#9
In 200 hundred years we'll all be forgotten execept for one.... these cheap bastard could have found other way to kep there nuculer bombs warm without giving radiation sickness to animals who never do them any harm.
M4D will live in litergure forever.
A village in Kent has won an award for the way its residents welcomed a family from Pakistan. Hartley, near Swanley, won a Muslim News Award after residents helped the family settle into the community. When the son of Dr Hashim Risa and his wife Annie Fatima developed cancer in 2001, villagers rallied to help. The family was so touched by the level of support from the local community, practical and emotional, they nominated the village for the award. The Risa family moved into the village, described in the citation as "close-knit and friendly", in 1997.
The family have three boys, and it was the middle one who developed bone cancer four years later. The local community, and particularly churchgoers from the parish, responded immediately, offering "not just practical help but also tremendous emotional support and understanding", said the newspaper, The Muslim News. Dr Risa, who is a psychiatrist, said the rectorâs wife created a rota of local mums who would collect the other children from school and look after them while he and his wife took their sick son, Hassan, to hospital. "They would take them home and feed them according to Islamic sensitivities," he said. A local garage owner even loaned a courtesy car to the family when their own vehicle broke down. "The whole village was like an extended family for us," Dr Risa said. The rector of Hartley, Reverend Richard Worsam, said the village had been "absolutely thrilled" to receive the award. "Weâre part of this very caring village community, and we find that we can draw together people to help others in need. "The Risa family are much loved within our community," he said. Hassan, whose cancer is in remission, is now aged nine and back at school. Hey, itâs not all bad.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
04/02/2004 8:47:14 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"See? Islam is truly the Religion of Peace and the care and support shown these people is incontrovertable proof. Why just the other day I was... Um, what? These weren't Muslims? They were Christians? Oh, well then, this story proves nothing!"
-Imam Rashid bin Zugzug
#2
And it is precisely for reasons like this that Britain must be bombed. Such heartfelt generosity and openhandedness creates the potential risk of Muslims converting away from their faith. We all know that apostasy must and shall always be punishable by death and only death. Better that terrorists level the entire British nation to rubble than lose a single Islamic convert!
That sounds... painful.
Guatemala will cut its army in half and slash the military budget to comply with peace accords that ended a 36-year civil war, the countryâs president said Thursday. U.N. observers called the move the most significant policy change in Guatemala in decades, and praised plans to use funds cut from the military budget to bolster spending on health and education. President Oscar Berger plans to reduce the army from the current 27,000 soldiers to 15,500 in the next two months, said Bergerâs defense adviser Otto Perez. Perez said the new size of Guatemalaâs army will make it similar to the armed forces of other Central American nations. El Salvadorâs army has 16,000 soldiers, Nicaraguaâs has 14,500, and Hondurasâ 12,000, Perez said. The 1960-96 civil war pitted leftist, largely Mayan guerillas against a series of military and civilian governments often supported by the United States. Binding peace accords overseen by U.N. officials, were signed in December 1996 in Guatemala City. Sounds like Canada. Are we sure the left didnât win? Recommendation: retire active duty military into the police force as the gang problem is getting out of hand in your country. They can keep the same guns.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
04/02/2004 3:38:23 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This is a good move, since the army there was a big part of the problem. The half that is left should be tied to a whole series or programs and manuevers with the U.S. and New European allies -- drills, operations, peacekeeping, anything, so long as at the end of the day, they're too tired to plot a coup.
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/02/2004 14:51 Comments ||
Top||
#2
The half that is going to be axed ought to be offered to Kofi.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
04/02/2004 16:09 Comments ||
Top||
The US has launched a diplomatic campaign against the European Unionâs move to lift its arms embargo on China. Washington is demanding a series of formal meetings on the issue with European governments. State department officials said Colin Powell, secretary of state, had already raised the matter with a number of his European counterparts. "It isnât just confined to conversations in Brussels," said one state department official. "Weâre making representations in European capitals and in Washington."
People familiar with the Bush administrationâs thinking say US officials see the move to lift the embargo as an attempt by Jacques Chirac, the French president, to re-open French commercial ties to Beijing. They also fear that Mr Chirac, the main backer of the plan, is making a geopolitical play to open up a channel to China while the US is making very public overtures to Taiwan. This week, the Pentagon announced it would sell Taiwan $1.8bn worth of long-range early-warning radars to strengthen Taipeiâs defences. The US is also concerned about potential military technology transfers from western Europe to China. Some Bush administration officials have also expressed concern that a rift over China could open new divisions between the US and Europe, whose disputes over Iraq have only just begun to cool.
The EU embargo was imposed after Chinaâs brutal suppression of the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests, and advocates for repealing the embargo argue it is a relic of the cold war. This year Mr Chirac said the embargo "makes no more sense today". Javier Solana, the EU foreign policy chief, showed his support for a change during a trip to Beijing last month. Some in the Bush administration have become concerned with the UKâs stance, believing that Britain has not moved quickly or forcefully enough to block the initiative. The UK ministry of defence said it "supports in principle the review", adding "we welcome the views of other interested parties". Jack Straw, the UK foreign minister, told a Parliamentary committee recently: "We have not come to any final view on the merits of lifting it until we have had a full consideration of its effects up to now. As far as proliferation is concerned, there are other international instruments in place that we are obliged by law to observe." The US has expressed unease at what it views as Britainâs equivocation and is pushing its ally to block the move. "To the extent that weâve told them that this is a bad idea and theyâre still considering it, thatâs a concern to us," said a state department official.
Germany, which last December supported France in starting proceedings to lift the embargo, has now cooled to the idea. The Green party, a junior member of Chancellor Gerhard Schroderâs governing coalition, wants to maintain the embargo. EU member states have yet to agree on a timetable for reconsidering the ban. Opponents of the embargo, both in the UK and elsewhere in the EU, have argued that EU members are already bound by a code of conduct that requires exporters to ensure weapons sold to Beijing will not be used against human rights activists or opposition movements. "We do not want the arms embargo to become embroiled in the European parliament election campaign [this June], where the Greens will make an issue of it," said an EU diplomat. France is playing its old games, Blairâs Eurocratic beliefs have come to the surface again and Germany - who wouldnât benefit in the short run and might lose jobs to Chinese industries - is having second thoughts.
It's really difficult to understand how any country outside of China does not realize that trading with them essentially builds the PRC military while NGO's are forced to pick up their politburo's slack in fighting the world's largest medically caused AIDS crisis.
Foreign firms are screwed, blued and tattooed at a disadvantage, the US insists China will never has ceased to make any progress on honest free trade and remains ridiculously unnecessarily bureaucratic, according to a US report. In its annual report, the US Trade Representative bent over and conceded that China had made puny great strides since blackmailing its way into joining the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in 2001.
But any pretense of cooperation deregulation has stopped and some Chinese parasites officials are actively seeking ways to block all inbound trade, the report says.
Last year, the US was burned for had a job loss trade deficit of $124bn (£67bn) with China, an issue of mounting (in the stud farm sense) political importance.
US lackeys politicians say China has been stealing competing unfairly on all global markets, and has effectively been destroying American jobs for years.
Culture of obstruction
China presents insurmountable obstacles to all inbound commerce in many flagrant direct and indirect ways, the USTR whined charged.
"In all many sectors, import walls barriers, corrupt opaque and graft riddled inconsistently applied legal provisions and outright prohibitions limitations on foreign direct investment often combine to make it impossible difficult for foreign firms to survive operate in China," the report said.
The problem, the USTR said, was ideological cultural: Chinese thieves bureaucrats cannot rid themselves of the greed habit of manipulating markets interfering in the economy.
In practical terms, this has often meant exclusionary policies sheltering domestic failures firms from economically viable foreign competition, according to the report.
US bought and paid for connivers lobbyists are also concerned that the Chinese yuan is artificially protected pegged against the dollar at a rate astronomically highly favourable to Chinaâs exporters.
Tariffs and beyond
The USTR said China had made minuscule serious progress on pretending at reducing tariffs, the most blatantly obvious obstruction barrier to trade.
But most of this negligible activity was concentrated in prehistoric times 2001-02, and current blockades barriers are more outrageous subtle, the report added.
The USTR faulted China for refusing failing to give trading rights to any all joint ventures with quai loh foreign investors.
Master thieves Officials are accused of falsifying tweaking technical standards - on issues such as profit safety, or kickbacks packaging - to the complete corn-holing detriment of foreign firms.
Intellectual property rights (whatâs that?), one of the most intolerable glaring omissions in Chinese theft practice before during and after WTO entry, still remained endemic "seriously inadequate" the report said.
Normal Chinese business practices like "Counterfeiting and piracy remain de rigueur rampant," the USTR said, adding that the US is guaranteed reckoned to lose at least $1.8bn a day year through Chinese copyright theft abuse.
Posted by: Zenster ||
04/02/2004 1:37:07 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Well, there is always that 'riseing expectations' thing. But lets face it. The culture of corruption is a human as animal condition. How wonderful to be in a culture decended from Angloes.
#2
"How wonderful to be in a culture decended from Angloes."
----------------------
Sure enough, Boss Tweed, the Teapot Dome, Chicago's Mayor Daley, Johns-Manville, the S&L debacle, Enron, Dynegy, Global Crossing, Arthur Andersen and WorldCom were all minor flukes.
Halliburton-KBR, with their ex-Arthur Andersen manager and current CEO, David Lesar, incurring massive overcharges in Iraq and subsequent liquidity warnings if forced to promptly repay their looting of federal contracts have nothing to do with "Anglo" style corruption.
And if you believe all this in addition to the possibility that, without being forced to do so, China will one day become a fair trading partner, I've got a bridge you might be interested in.
#3
Don't forget the biggest example of corruption in history: the Democratic Party!
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/02/2004 18:04 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I voted for Zenster in the last election, but I thought I was voting for Clinton.
Posted by: Dumb fuck in Broward County ||
04/02/2004 20:28 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Ooh, more name calling. Personalities are such a persuasive and well acknowledged forensic technique. At least someone here has their screen name right.
EFL the policy light switch has been flipped.
Acting President Goh Kun said Thursday that strengthening the alliance with the United States is South Koreaâs top priority. Goh, known as "Mr. Stability," has pledged to boost South Koreaâs cooperation with Washington since he took over the government as an interim head of state, following the March 12 parliamentary impeachment of President Roh Moo-hyun. On Thursday, he instructed the Foreign Ministry to engage in "omnidirectional diplomacy" to boost relations with Washington in government, social and cultural exchanges, Gohâs office said in a news release. "The No. 1 priority in our foreign affairs and security policy is to develop the South Korea-U.S. alliance. The government needs to make more efforts," Goh said. WTF? Make up your mind; youâre confusing us undernuanced cowboys.
The conservative opposition accused Roh of endangering South Koreaâs relations with its traditional ally, amid tension over North Koreaâs nuclear weapons programs. Why the accusations? I thought that was his stated campaign platform?
The opposition-dominated National Assembly impeached Roh on March 12, accusing him of election law violations and incompetence. Goh has assumed all executive powers while the Constitutional Court is deliberating whether to oust the suspended president, or override the parliamentary impeachment. Sounds like impeachment is thh real deal in SK.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
04/02/2004 3:49:50 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
According to either Gweilo Diaries or Incestuous Amplification, all Roh had to do was apologise. But he chose not to. So, the opp filed charges.
There's a 21 minute tape of a brawl out there, too! But maybe that was Taiwan????
All I can say is, "Amen Brother Hanson"
Lovinâ Europe by Leavinâ
It is past time for our 60-year-old European child to move out of the house and get a life.
One of the most misleading fables about this present struggle is that, since 9/11, we have squandered European good will through arrogance and our "unilateral" operations in Iraq. The controversy over the U.N., the debate about Old and New Europe, the French-German anti-American axis â they are not so much reactions to what we have done as they are expressions of a pre-existing and very unhealthy relationship that was already eroding well before September 11.
The envisioned European Union will have more territory, a greater population, and a larger economy than the United States. Their aircraft, automobile, and heavy industries are nearly comparable to ours. They are flush with dollars from staggering trade surpluses. And yet in a period of its greatest crisis since the creation of the Warsaw Pact, "Europe" â whatever that imprecise term really means â has almost no meaningful military capability.
If it spends about a fourth as much on defense as the United States, such relative budgetary comparisons are still a misleading barometer of European military weakness. The United States Marine Corps is larger than any single continental European army. One of Americaâs twelve carrier groups is far more potent than all of Europeâs naval forces combined. When we examine comparative research and development, field experience, recent combat history, army organization, and public attitude, the military gap only widens.
Yet this litany is ancient history now. So is the record of Americaâs role as savior since World War II â the Marshall Plan, protection of Europe from Soviet Communism, American support for German unification, our leadership in NATO, pledging our cities to save Europe from Soviet nuclear blackmail, and the current protection of Europe itself. Blah, blah, blah â weâve all heard it ad nauseam and its recitation leads us nowhere.
Nor do we need to quibble any more over the cause of our decade-long and growing estrangement. Thousands of pages have been published demonstrating that the current transatlantic falling-out is the predictable result of our quite-different histories. Or is it the lack of a common deadly foe in the post-Cold War era? Some cite the envy that results from such imbalances in hard power. Others remind us of the foreign-policy effects of socialism in European politics. We all sense very deep divides over the role of multilateral institutions. Again, there is no need to regurgitate all the usual exegeses.
We are equally bored with the proposed cures. Americans are supposed to be more diplomatic. We should consult the U.N. more. A self-righteous Madeleine Albright or Jimmy Carter needs to tutor George Bush. Damn those neoconservatives who wrecked all the hard work of selfless Clintonites and internationalists. We must be patient with Western European angst over lost colonial glories. We need to defer more to NATO officials, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Kennedy School of Government, the State Department, our universities, and public intelligentsia â all the myriad generals, diplomats, experts, and politicians who assure us that our current bilateral relationships with Europe are sacrosanct and must remain unchanged.
Meanwhile, the American people who donât read Foreign Affairs or go to briefings at Brookings grow increasingly cynical. It is not just that they grow tired with the French, or expect predictable German ingratitude â and are disgusted by Belgian silliness, Scandinavian moralizing, or Spanish and Greek antics. No, most Americans have simply lost their old willingness to support and protect Old Europe. This is a grassroots feeling, and it is relatively new â and even the cheap anti-European rhetoric of the cable news shows does not capture the simmering anger of the American people.
Oh, we recognize our common intellectual and cultural heritage. We appreciate the need for joint action in the so-called war against terrorism. And we like visiting European capitals, and enjoy many aspects of present-day European culture. But it is for those very reasons of wishing to preserve some sort of relationship that we must abandon the status quo and think of radically new ways to relate to our friends and stewards of our common cultural ancestry.
We can begin with NATO and the so-called Atlantic Alliance. Germany is up. Russia is in. America is out. The NATO plea that Europeans would like to have helped out more in Iraq, if we had just been more diplomatic â in the way that they had deployed to Afghanistan â is a myth. There was never an impressive NATO presence in Afghanistan, at least commensurate with the forces that a continent-sized ally should mobilize. The Spanish were murdered by terrorists whose ultimate genesis lay in the madrassas of North Africa and the camps along the Afghan-Pakistani border; and yet there are few Europeans there now amid the peaks working with President Musharraf and American Special Forces to prevent more al Qaedists from plying their trade.
We lament the lack of plentiful European troops in Afghanistan and Iraq for a variety of other reasons. Almost 150,000 American sailors, airmen, and soldiers are concurrently stationed in various European countries while thin lines of Americans battle in the Afghan badlands and the Sunni Triangle â a de facto damning indictment of our entire approach to military deployment abroad.
Of course, pulling troops out of Europe is a perilous enterprise, given the continentâs history in the 20th century. Nagging questions of culture, human nature, and national power are more constant than transitory. Thus our absence from Germany will chill the Poles (unless we redeploy there), and bother the French â and perhaps many of the Germans themselves who must now decide whether to press on with their nanny state, continue to subsidize southern and eastern Europeans, or at last provide for their own defense.
A vastly reduced presence in Old Europe might make American military logistics, communications, troop rotation, and transportation abroad more difficult. The present location of our bases, after all, was carefully designed for a reason by insightful American officers of the late 1940s. And how would we sort out particular reductions with particular states â given that our bilateral relationships differ and that Europe is not yet monolithic in its attitudes toward the United States?
In addition, the fewer Americans in Europe, the less influence we may have with Europeans. And how many American officers will want to pull their families out of southern Spain, the bay of Naples, Germany, and Chania, Crete to post in a former Soviet Republic, a depressed Eastern European republic, or the tense landscape of the Gulf? Imagine a Senate fact-finding committee, a delegation from the Joint Chiefs, or junketing congressmen eschewing Rome, Brussels, and Berlin for Uzbekistan or Baghdad? There are over 100,000 American dependents at our European bases for a reason.
Yet I am not sure that these old arguments for either staying or downsizing in Europe are the chief reasons we should continue our radical reassessment. True, we pay for the costs of very wealthy peoplesâ own defense when they are more than able to foot the bill. There is no more Soviet Union on the borders of Europe â no raison dâêtre, in other words, for NATO as we once knew it. At a time of enormous budget deficits and trade imbalances with the Europeans, it makes no sense to spend billions to patrol the German countryside, keep Spanish airspace safe, or guard the Cretan Sea. All these are legitimate, practical economic concerns; but again, they are not the chief grounds to begin leaving Europe.
No, the real reason is not to end the European relationship, but to save it. And thus we must not see the current problem merely in a context of money or troops or even ingratitude, hypocrisy, and perfidy â but rather in psychological terms of dependency and its associate pathologies of enablement and passive-aggressive angst.
Precisely because we protect Europe, Europe will need ever more protecting, and will grow ever more weak. And because it will need the United States to defend it, it will ever more resent the United States. Without a real menace like the Soviet Union on its borders, Europe will find ever more outlets to vent cheaply and without consequences â at precisely the time it is most threatened by terrorists and rogue states.
In contrast, the withdrawal of Americans throughout Old Europe â sober analysts can adjudicate a remnant figure of about 30,000 or so, down from our present numbers in Spain, Holland, Belgium, Germany, Italy, Turkey, and Greece â will encourage Europe to rearm or face the consequences of institutionalized appeasement. That radical step â despite popular misconceptions that it is either impossible or unwise â is more a good thing than a bad one.
That way we will not be dealing with a spiteful teenager any longer, but a mature adult partner. And if â after we leave â Germany invades France or Poland a third time, then there is simply no answer to the European problem anyway. Instead we must trust in our confidence that Europeans are wise enough to settle their own affairs peacefully. Perhaps socialists who wonât fight much abroad at least wonât be likely to fight among themselves either.
So we must be farsighted and confident enough to encourage the emergence of an associate rather than a dependent. Parents are happy when their sixty-year-old sons move out and get apartments â not angry that they have lost the opportunity to feed and launder balding and perpetual adolescents.
Modern democracies rarely attack each other. A militarily strong and democratic EU could, in theory, be a bothersome rival, but it will not be an enemy. For all its invective, it does not fear the United States, precisely because it recognizes that we really do consult with friends and donât control the Japanese, Chinese, or Europeans.
More European muscularity will allow Americans to deploy further to the East where the real challenges to democracy in the 21st century â China, North Korea, and the Middle East â lie. We can free up tens of thousands of American troops to deploy well beyond NATOâs old eastern flank, allowing Europe as a full partner to patrol the Mediterranean and North Atlantic, promote democracy around its shores, and provide a critical reserve if it wishes to help the United States face anti-democratic forces abroad.
As we depart, let us also speak in hushed tones of awe about NATOâs past undeniable achievements â even as we rue its current transformation from a military into a ceremonial alliance. We should give more braid and sabres to its officers as we accept that such Spanish, German, French, and Belgian generals will lead very few transatlantic soldiers into battle against fascists in the Middle East who threaten Western civilization.
We wish to save Europe by leaving it, to strengthen the Atlantic Alliance by altering it, and to encourage maturity and responsibility by ending dependency. Begging miffed Europeans to help in Iraq or Afghanistan in real numbers while tens of thousands of Americans are stationed in Europe is the stuff of fairy tales. The sham should end now, for the well-being of everyone involved.
Posted by: tipper ||
04/02/2004 11:06:10 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Damn! Is this guy great, or what?
Posted by: Infidel Bob ||
04/02/2004 11:39 Comments ||
Top||
#2
The US has played long-suffering papa to the rest of the civilised world for too long now. There are plenty of nations in Europe, in particular, which would benefit from a dose of reality that would come with the realisation that having America as a nominal 'ally', in reality 'protector', comes at a price, even if that price needs only be respect.
Like human relationships based on grossly imbalanced contributions, European reliance on the US's military muscle has bred a lot of dependents' resentment. Irrational, contemptible and pathetic. You could consider threatening to pull out of weasel countries to be akin to a slap-in-the-face for a hysteric.
Thx for realizing it's Friday, tipper, and looking VDH up - I always forget unless it's post in RB. This is a classic, too. Thx!
Our geographical isolation from the children is not quite total - what do we do with Canada? It has a dime-store military, same as say Belgium, because it knows it's covered - and we can't get away from them, yet they have the world's most insane immigration policies and lax enforcement...
#6
NATO has been a walking corpse since the USSR folded. The unbelieveably cynical response on out European "allies" part to the US's invocation of article 5 post-911 simply drove the last nail into the coffin.
#7
And excellent idea: After WWII, they were definitely too weak after fighting Hitler to defend themselves against a Soviet Union supplied by the United States via Lend-Lease, but things are definitely different now.
They're certainly big enough and rich enough to take care of themselves. Time to move to Warsaw. Yeah, it might not be Paris or Madrid, but they were in no better shape in the late 40's either.
Um, bad move. Growing anti-Americanism. Nationalist party growing in popularity (think Zhirinovsky-lite). I propose Hungary.
Posted by: Rafael ||
04/02/2004 15:00 Comments ||
Top||
#9
We need three or four bases in "Old" Europe - one or two in England (RAF Molesworth, possibly Lakenheath or Mildenhall), one in Germany (Ramstein, primarily for Logistics purposes), and Naples, to support the 6th fleet. We need three or four in the Far East - naval and Air Force bases in Japan, an Army base somewhere where there's enough room to maneuver a full division in war games (which leaves out Japan, Korea, and Taiwan), and Navy and Air Force logistics facilities in Australia. We need to stay in Iraq for as long as it takes - perhaps as long as we've stayed in Germany, Japan, and Korea, maybe even longer. It also looks like we're going to have to develop some counter-terrorism support for nations of Latin America, and may need to establish some logistics support in that area. Someone is also going to have to do something in Africa, and Europe has proven they have their head so far up and locked, they don't even see what's happening in their own country. That, too, will require local support facilities. Everything else should be gradually phased out and shut down. There's no longer a need for it, there's no longer a mission to support, and it's time to stop wasting our time and energy trying to buy friends with our military budget.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
04/02/2004 15:13 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Perchance there's a parallel to our departure from Roosevelt Roads after closing Vieques. No reason to stay once the mission changes. Also, it would be helpful to have a few of the dollars currently wasted in Europe to buy a few more low-density, high-demand assets like gunships and COMBAT TALONs. Auf baldiges Wiedersehn!
Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry doesnât have a Republican-leaning French cousin. President Bush is not pushing legislation that would have other countries pay off the deficit. Pennsylvania Republican Sen. Arlen Specter is not retiring to study Scottish Common Law. ROTFLMFAO!
And Democrats and Republicans did not agree on anything Thursday. Dog bites manâŠ
Playing traditional April Foolsâ politics, the parties and presidential campaigns mocked their opponents with bogus announcements that didnât always get a laugh. In one of the dayâs more believable pranks, the Democratic National Committee announced that Republicans had agreed to a series of televised presidential debates. "This day, April 1, will indeed go down as a historic day in presidential politics," DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe and Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie said in a joint statement that proved to be false. On a day when Kerryâs campaign did issue a debate challenge to Bush, some media outlets were confused, calling both parties for more details and prompting the DNC to issue a clarification. "At a glance, we will admit it looks quite formal," DNC spokesman Jano Cabrera said about their statement. For its turn, the RNC announced that Kerryâs French cousin had called to support Bush. A cartoon spoof on the RNC Web site also poked fun at the Massachusetts senatorâs support of higher gas taxes and his claims of backing from anonymous foreign leaders. "All of it has his French cousin so upset, he called to say heâs voting for Bush," a voiceover said in the animated ad, which ended with an April Foolsâ greeting in French.
Kerryâs campaign took a dig at Bush over rising deficits and U.S. jobs lost overseas, attributing a fake quote to the president explaining why other countries should be responsible for the U.S. deficit: "Why should every kid born in America be stuck with $35,000 in debt â when we can just outsource it and stick it to every kid on the planet?" Addressing Pennsylvaniaâs heated Republican Senate primary between Specter and Rep. Pat Toomey, a news release from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee headlined "Specter to Retire" irked a handful of duped reporters. "One thing I learned from this is how few people read past the subject line or headline in a press release," said DSCC spokesman Brad Woodhouse. "There were some media outlets that didnât think it was all that funny."
Sure glad that day's over...
Posted by: Steve from Relto ||
04/02/2004 11:15:48 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
(2004-03-28) -- After enduring criticism for his failure to make his mark on the Democrat party, or even have a blueprint for his own presidential campaign, John Forbes Kerry today unveiled a platform he called âDispassionate Liberalism: An Agenda for America."
Taking his lead from President Bushâs successful "compassionate conservatism" platform in the 2000 campaign, Mr. Kerry said his "dispassionate liberalism" similarly blunts the usual assaults on Democrats.
"Just like Bush reversed conventional wisdom by proclaiming that Republicans actually care about people," said Mr. Kerry, "my agenda declares that itâs okay to be a bleeding-heart liberal without the bleeding heart part."
Democrat National Committee chairman Terry McAuliffe said itâs all part of the "New Aloofness," a Democrat sensibility that says "Itâs okay to be for big government and higher taxes without having to justify it by claiming to care about people who are many rungs below you on the economic ladder."
"Itâs really a very liberating philosophy," said Mr. McAuliffe. "We can be millionaires, seek to extend the reach of government into the personal lives of Americans and not even have to pretend to relate to the ordinary proletarians."
Posted by: Steve from Relto ||
04/02/2004 10:13:08 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
The URL is the BLS summary site - you might as well get the original data rather than the big media coverage.
This month was the reversal of several months at the end of 2003. The payroll survey showed a major increase in jobs, the household survey didnât.
The revised payroll surveys for Jan and Feb were also adjusted upward.
A few more months like this and Kerry will be below 40%.
From the BLS public notice
Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 308,000 in March to 130.5 million, seasonally adjusted. The over-the-month increase in employment included gains in construction, retail trade, and health care and social assistance. The number of factory jobs was unchanged in March. Since August 2003, payroll employment has risen by 759,000.
Posted by: mhw ||
04/02/2004 9:40:02 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This month was the reversal of several months at the end of 2003. The payroll survey showed a major increase in jobs, the household survey didnât.
My interpretation: with companies hiring, there's incentive to becoming self-employed.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/02/2004 9:43 Comments ||
Top||
#2
That shouuld be "less incentive".
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/02/2004 9:43 Comments ||
Top||
#3
This falls well within the margin of error for the household survey and you will see a lower unemployment rate from that survey in the coming months.
Actually according to the household survey about 200,000 more people joined the work force which led to an increase in the unemployment rate from 5.6% to 5.7%. I'm very leery of making conclusions because there are really many separate 'economies' each with its own dynamic. The west coast 'technology economy', the midwest 'logistics economy', the midwest 'farm service economy', the southern 'retirement service economy' all have their own tempo.
#6
The media will quote the 308,000 number not the 5.7%. While the media is mostly biased towards liberals the 308,000 number is a much more impressive stat and will get them higher ratings than talking about a .1% move. They will mention the .1% increase in passing though.
the markets have already spoken, the DJ is way up and bond prices have been crushed (which by the way should reduce refinancings in a few weeks). Even the most anti Bush outlets (CNN, Al Jazzera, the Berkeley campus newsletter) have to report the markets.
#8
A lot of this could be catching-up. For the past year, the Household survey has shown a steady increase in employment, while the Establishment hasn't. This is different from previous recoveries. Now the two numbers are starting to close back to the normal ratio.
While they could all be self-employed, I suspect there are a lot of companies that weren't represented in the previous Establishment surveys. The Establishment survey is always revised upwards several months later, while the household is corrected up or down randomly.
#9
Kerry: "Those SOB's at the BLS knocked me over!"
Posted by: Matt ||
04/02/2004 10:37 Comments ||
Top||
#10
no this isn't true - skerry say's the economy sucks, unemployment is everywhere.....this is a fabricated after april fools joke....the dems say our economy is in the tubes I tell ya....
Actually I want to thank Bush. I am making 15k more a year than in the 90's and I am paying less tax than I did in the late 90's. Thanks for the tax relief.
Go Figure On Skerry's Claims.....
Posted by: Dan ||
04/02/2004 13:57 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Kerry even said some quasi rational things along with some other things
-----------
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry (news - web sites) welcomed figures released showing the creation of 308,000 jobs in March, but the Massachusetts senator blasted President George W. Bush (news - web sites)'s economic record.
#2
Krauthammer's column also appears at the Jewish World Review, which does not require registration.
Posted by: Mike ||
04/02/2004 9:46 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Did anyone notice this exchange in the mainstream partisan media? Former senator Slade Gorton: "Assuming that the recommendations that you made on January 25th of 2001 . . . had all been adopted say on January 26th, year 2001, is there the remotest chance that it would have prevented 9/11?"
Clarke: "No."
Didn't think so. That should also be enblazoned on the dust jacket of Clarke's book.
"Second, by blaming the government for the deaths of their loved ones, Clarke deftly endorsed the grotesque moral inversion by which those who died on Sept. 11 are victims of . . . George Bush. This is about as morally obscene as the implication (made by, among others, the irrepressible Howard Dean) that those who died in the Madrid bombings were also victims of George Bush."
Works for me, and sums it up rather nicely.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
04/02/2004 12:44 Comments ||
Top||
Hillary Blasts Bush on Fallujah Attacks
New York Sen. Hillary Clinton blasted the Bush administration on Thursday for sending too few troops and not enough military equipment to Iraq, saying the of lack of U.S. resources contributed to the attacks in Fallujah that killed four U.S. workers on Tuesday. Okay
"It was heartbreaking and horrible to see the desecration of the four men who were killed in Fallujah," Clinton told Democratic Party radio host Al Franken. Yes, it was
Calling Fallujah "one of the epicenters of Saddam Husseinâs support," Sen. Clinton said, "Clearly we have to increase our response and make it more effective." Yea, I can agree with that and thank God, we got the Marines there (seems a few of them, tho, donât really like you and your husband.... )
She then reminded: "Of course Iâve been saying for more than a year that we didnât send in enough troops in the beginning. I think the administration wanted to do both Afghanistan and Iraq with as few troops and as limited a commitment as possible. I think it was a mistake."
Where would they go, and with what objectives? Each unit's assigned an area of operations and a mission. Lining the entire U.S. military up shoulder to shoulder to tromp through Iraq from south to north is impractical, as well as stoopid. Practical constraints do exist in the real world, though not in the imagination of cheap politicians.
Clinton said that Bush had made a critical error by not eliminating al Qaeda before attacking Iraq. Hummmmmm.... eliminate a network, while we allow Saddam to finance them, to harbor them. Thinkinâ.... that might have been hard to do, even for that military that her husband created
"I believe that whether or not you agree with the action in Iraq, the timing of it diverted resources and equipment like the Predators and many of our Special Ops and intelligence personnel from Afghanistan prior to getting the job done there with respect to completely eliminating the al Qaeda presence in Afghanistan."
Except that as a strategic move it made sense and still makes sense...
The former first lady also had words of praise for Bush terrorism policy critic Richard Clarke, saying he did a good job in exposing "our shortcomings as a nation."
Our shortcomings as a nation are very dear to the hearts of a certain type of politician...
"Mr. Clarke has, I think, come across very credibly and knowledgeably about what he saw as our shortcomings as a nation, which is a totally fair assessment because we had never been up against an enemy like this before - and what we should be doing to protect ourselves." Hummmmmmmmm -- and while he was in control, letâs see, we had embassies bombed, the Cole, etc..............
Mrs. Clinton noted that Clarkeâs complaints about the Iraq war mirrored her own, saying, "he has made a very important point about the diversion of time, attention and resources and commitment from Afghanistan, which he argues has undermined the overall war against terror. He has to be taken very seriously." While critical of the Bush war policy, she said her husbandâs administration deserved a big part of the credit for U.S. military success in Iraq. "So much that had proved successful had been developed during the Clinton administration, tried out in Bosnia and Kosovo, and lessons learned in places like Haiti and Somalia," she told Franken. "And Iâm very proud of the very positive record that the Clinton administration had in helping to prepare the military for the future."
She's referring to the combined arms concept, I believe, not that she understands what that is. The lessons learned came from Grenada (communications and intel integration), Panama, and Gulf War I. Bosnia and Kosovo contributed as well, of course: don't rely on the Europeans, continue addressing maintenance problems (remember the Apaches that didn't work?), and don't limit objectives — pretty negative lessons, I'd say. Somalia seems to have provided a "lesson" for Fallujah. Haiti, as far as I can see, provided nothing, not even for the Haitians.
Lessons learned in Somalia? She says this, just after the happenings in Fallujah? I only dream that tomorrow I wake up, and itâs November 3rd... and I remember Sept 11.
Posted by: Sherry ||
04/02/2004 12:20:46 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This beatch has all the balls in the world....
it makes me so FURIOUS that she would dare to say these things that I can hardly post about it, because everything she said was a lie (as always) and the exact opposite of her claims.
Yeah, I'll give Billary credit...FOR 9/11!!!
FOAD, Hitlery, and take Bubba with you. You're done.
Posted by: Jen ||
04/02/2004 0:27 Comments ||
Top||
#2
The Clintons' formula for success: Take credit whenever you can and always place the blame on someone else.
#4
Yes, by all means, let us emulate William Jefferson Clinton's stalwart anti-terror policies. Remember our successful counterattack in Somalia; the capture of bin Laden in the Sudan, the ruthless hunt for the Khobar Towers bombers, the . . . oh, wait, sorry, April Fool's Day is over!
Posted by: Mike ||
04/02/2004 1:14 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Fuck that slimy bitch. And her sleazy husband. They are a disgrace to our country, and a waste of oxygen.
I hope Bush wins in November, just on general principles (and for the sake of our nation's survival), but I hope he wins in a landslide just to stick it to these sleaze-balls.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
04/02/2004 1:19 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Oh yeah, the force reductions in the 90's helped to "prepare" our military for the future, all right.
#7
I'm at the ready to go fight for my country. Wait a minute, you decommissioned both of my ships and then paid me a lump sum to go become an out of shape dad in the civilian world.
A country without a military = Al Gore's govenrmental re-invention. Do the Canadians pay him royalties for the use of his intellectual property? :->
Posted by: Super Hose ||
04/02/2004 1:44 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Her husband stripped the military of 8 regular Army divisions, 2 Reserve divisions, 20 Air Force and Navy air wings (about 2000 aircraft), 232 straegic bombers 13 SSBN with 3114 warheads, 500 ICBMs (for another 1950 warheads) 4 aircraft carriers and 121 surface ships and attack subs. 709,000 regular army and 293,000 reservists.
Yeah that helped. That helped a lot you smarmy piece of
Posted by: Ben ||
04/02/2004 5:08 Comments ||
Top||
#9
As is standard operating procedure, Hillary spouts excreta out her anus for a gaping maw. Iraq led to capture of global terror kingpin and ally of al-Qa'ida, Saddam. Saddam capture led to Kadaffy turn. Kadaffy turn led to AQKhan. Outing of AQKhan led to his public confession. AQKhan's public confession led to America allowing Pervez to go easy on national hero, AQKhan, in exchange for going into the TRIBAL AREAS. Going into tribal areas leads to best opportunity to kill or capture Usama.
#10
More than anything else, this is what pisses me off about the Clintons: they are utterly shameless. This woman should be hanging her head in shame and begging the nation's forgiveness for the damage she and her miserable failure of a husband deliberately inflicted on it.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
04/02/2004 6:08 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Barbara: "I hope Bush wins in November, just on general principles (and for the sake of our nation's survival), but I hope he wins in a landslide just to stick it to these sleaze-balls." These sleaze-balls didn't get it when the World Trade Center was blasted the first time. They didn't get it when Bush won in 2000. What makes you think that they'll be any brighter in 2004?
Hillary: "we didnât send in enough troops in the beginning" Grrrrr.. give us a little credit for the troop count in Libya. We'll try to do better in Syria.
Posted by: Tom ||
04/02/2004 8:22 Comments ||
Top||
#12
The Clintons' principal contribution to history is the philosophy that truth is malleable and can be hammered into whatever shape desired to meet their political needs of the moment. You can't be called a liar if you really believe what you say when you say it even though you may say (believe) something totally different mere seconds later. Only the gullible and the true believers pay attention to them. They should apologize to pond scum for giving it a bad name.
#13
Billary cracks me up. She doesn't give a shit about us in the mil, (unless she thinks she can get a vote out of some of us). She'll play to her core audience of minorities, glaad, quasi-socialists and self-loathing whites everywhere. Though I will give credit where it's due - she got herself elected in NY - not sure if that's because she's so damn savvy or because so many NY'rs are morons. BTW - no self-respecting heterosexual white male would ever vote for that big-legged pig. .........I don't know but I been told, big-legged woman ain't got no soul.........good enough for Zeppelin - good enough for me.
#15
I was a Marine from '90 to '93, and I can tell you that the hatred expressed for the Clintons was widespread. If you had asked my gunny who he hated more, Hillary or Jane Fonda, he'd have to sit down and think about it.
#16
This beatch has all the balls in the world....
Oooookaaayyyy⦠that image was scary.
Posted by: Steve from Relto ||
04/02/2004 12:21 Comments ||
Top||
#17
Richard Clarke is a godsend to Kerry and Hillary. By bashing Bush for not being proactive enough to prevent 9/11, it allows the Democrats to move very sharply to the right and away from their primary-driven anti-war position.
It is not fair ball, but this is politics, not baseball.
Posted by: john ||
04/02/2004 14:00 Comments ||
Top||
#18
Small pay raises, reduced benifits, fewer people, higher ops tempo, and Dont't ask, Don't Tell. Oh yeah Billary did much for the military. I dare Billary to find two ex-military that agree with he.
What makes you think that they'll be any brighter in 2004?
I don't, Tom. I think we'll all have to get earplugs to protect our hearing from their screeching.
If Bush wins not only the Electoral College but also the popular vote (in spite of all the dead and non-citizen Democrats voting), they'll still claim he "stole" the election.
I just want to see these wankers and their ass-kissing poodle media implode - preferably in public.
That whirring sound you hear (the one getting louder and louder) is Harry Truman and Hubert Humphrey spinning in their graves.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
04/02/2004 18:37 Comments ||
Top||
#27
Ya know, Hitlery's got a point. We should learn a lesson from Somalia and Haiti. You don't do anything halfway, which is the primary lesson we should have learned from both operations. Next time, let's send HITLERY to be the new governor of Haiti! I'm sure her and her "black" husband could manage just fine down there. Just make sure the tickets are one-way, and issue self-destructing passports.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
04/02/2004 18:46 Comments ||
Top||
#28
Amen, OP! Can they go tomorrow?
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
04/02/2004 21:14 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
04/02/2004 15:41 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Thats a great post.
Posted by: Yosemite Sam ||
04/02/2004 16:16 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Whoa! She's got her hobnail boots on and ready to do some rompin' and stompin'. I want to try the clean-up plan first - but Tammy comes pretty close to shaming me. Not quite, but I feel the heat.
So what's the story, Kimmet, Sanchez? Whatcha gonna do? I agree with (was it tu3031 or B-a-R) who said stop TALKING about it and DO it - what ever "it" is going to be. I have to agree. Plan it, prep it, execute it. Stop talking to the Press.
If it's a wimp-out plan, then the CA Mil Cmd leadership needs some cordoning, sectioning, sweeping, cleansing, too. I suspect Dubya will let the professionals' recommendations be his first choice - and they'd better not blow it. The men and women who serve in our Armed Forces everywhere are depending upon these people to get it right the first time. That's why the Gens get the big bucks and first call on the A/C's.
#3
I've heard from my source in Iraq, the same one who called the capture of Saddam Hussein several hours before the announcement.
I don't have details, and couldn't post them here if I did, but I am assured that justice will be done in Fallujah, in spades.
Be patient, they're taking the time to it right.
#4
Good to hear. And I don't want you to post anything either! They'd know of it far too quickly.
Thx - I've had doubts about Sanchez. This grisly event precipitates a response that should've happend a hell of a long time ago. If others agree, then pass that along to your source.
From the Financial Times The recent story of American journalism is a tale of sorrow and shame. Last year The New York Times suffered the humiliation of having to acknowledge in print that one of its young reporters, Jayson Blair, had plagiarised and fabricated stories. This scandal led to the resignation of its two top editors. Now USA Today, Americaâs largest circulation daily, is plagued by a similar scandal. Its star foreign correspondent, Jack Kelley, quit in January under a cloud of suspicion that he, too, had concocted a string of stories over a decade - stories considered so outstanding that they were nominated for a Pulitzer prize (he never won the prize). USA Today then appointed a panel of three veteran journalists to investigate the Kelley mess. Their report is expected soon.
How easy it has been in this febrile atmosphere to point the finger at these miscreant journalists. Didnât they, after all, deserve the opprobrium of editors, publishers, producers and the public for violating the basic tenet of journalism: truth-telling without fear or favour. Yet, by making it seem as if the fault lies mainly with a few sick or overly ambitious reporters, the management of newspapers and networks oversimplifies or deliberately downplays a far more important problem. The fact is, the culture and the business of journalism have been degraded in recent years - and corrupted by a pursuit of prizes and profit that distort values and inspire non-stop, often silly chatter on around-the-clock talk shows. Actually, the degradation and corruption have been going on for at least 25 years ... post Vietnam and Watergate ... accelerated with the tawdry Clinton years. Weâre now down at the gutter level. BUT ... that said ... this writer doesnât want to say so, since he is attacking networks like CNN & FoxNews in favor of the old networks. Leonard Downie, editor of the Washington Post, talks of the "celebrification of journalism," which sadly drives even the best in the business to hype a story, to exaggerate "just a bit", to sensationalise what is just ordinary and, on occasion, go over the top to simply "create" a fact, a quote or a whole story.
WaPo had a lady resign a few years ago for making up a few interviews out of whole cloth, too...
So hungry are some journalists for a bigger pay cheque or an editorâs praise or an invitation to appear on a popular talk show that they are seduced into selling their professional souls. They know better, of course, but they also know that in this competitive climate, it helps to suck up to the mores of the moment in order to be recognised and treated as one of the stars. "I lied, I lied, and I lied some more," admits Jayson Blair, as he shamelessly rides the joys of a new book, a likely movie deal and one television appearance after another. There is a price. That is painfully clear. USA Today reported recently that only 36 per cent of Americans believe what they read, see or hear in the media. Where, then, are they to get information they can believe and trust? Young people turn to the internet, because itâs cheaper and because they consider it more objective. true More mature people either bypass news completely or turn to cable or radio talk shows for "news" already pre-packaged and digested. author is clueless on this one
Conservatives have an ideological lock on many talk shows. Liberals are only now starting a radio network to put their own spin on the news. The airwaves are noisy with nonsense at a time when we need serious, substantive information.
That statement is demonstrably false. The number of liberals running talk shows, without any pretense of being "fair and balanced" far outweighs the number of conservatives doing the same. What the author's bitching about is the influence of the conservatives and the amount of trust reposed in them...
A 500-page study by the Project for Excellence in Journalism highlights a long-term decline in US journalism. Since 1990, 2,200 newspaper jobs have been lost, as circulation has slipped more than 11 per cent. National "penetration" of newspapers has dropped from 75 per cent to 50 per cent; and, as internet usage soars and ethnic newspapers spread, this drop in penetration is likely to continue. Since 1993, viewership of evening TV newscasts has plunged by 28 per cent, from more than 40m viewers on an average weeknight to fewer than 28m; and in a pattern similar to newspapers, as cable TV grows, network viewership declines.
So we're still watching the terriblevision, we're just not watching the Big Three...
Last year, for the first time, more Americans watched cable TV than network TV. One ironic consequence is that cable TV has replaced the networks as the place for coverage of serious news events, such as wars and primary elections.
That was actually CNN's fault. Their coverage of Gulf War I entirely outshined that of the Big Three. This Gulf War Fox and MSNBC walked all over them, by doing what CNN did before, only better...
Once news was a treasured commodity that helped smooth the edges of clashing ideologies; now news - old-fashioned and solid - is a rare species in a world coarsened by simplistic generalisations about good and evil. and this started during the Vietnam war, liberals. You did it to yourselves.
Where are the gatekeepers, the editors and news managers who kept watch on mistakes, editorial insinuation and fabrication? Have they now sanctioned fictionalised, hyped journalism to boost circulation and help win a Pulitzer? A USA Today reporter in Chicago bravely commented: "Yes, Jack (Kelley) fabricated many, many stories. But he was aided and abetted by editors who were hungry for prizes and werenât nearly sceptical enough of these fantastical tales". Advance word has it that USA Todayâs investigation will scold Mr Kelley, recommend stricter sourcing requirements and lament the state of modern journalism. And then what? Will any of the big-shot editors or publishers be publicly blamed (or fired) for consistently missing or ignoring warnings that Mr Kelley was a troubled star who needed help? Sandra Mims Rowe, editor of the Portland Oregonian, observed pointedly: "Editors have the responsibility - itâs in their job description - to be the most sceptical reader there is. When that slips, there is real danger." Indeed, todayâs mangled journalism presents real dangers, unless leaders of the news business accept their moral responsibility to put their obligations to society ahead of their preoccupation with the bottom line. how about balance and objectivity too?? The writer, a former correspondent and anchor at CBS and NBC, is founding director of the Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard University
Newspapers are another incidence of liberals taking over an entire industry and then wondering why people don't want them anymore. The major newspapers in every major city are liberal: Washington Post, New York Times, Boston Globe, LA Times, you name it. Most people don't want their news filtered and predigested and interpreted. That's the function of editorial pages. I think most of us prefer to be given factual information, which can then be strung together into ideas. But then, I'm not a journalism major, so I wouldn't understand.
#1
"...now news - old-fashioned and solid - is a rare species in a world coarsened by simplistic generalisations about good and evil."
Part of the problem is that the press thinks that good and evil are simplistic generalities, rather than easily described and obviously identifiable attributes.
Is there any doubt about the evil-ness of the scum animals in Fallujah, Kim Jong Il, Saddam, etc.? Not to us simple non-media types, there isn't.
#2
Isn't the fact that the Beeb is missing from his article somewhat GLARING? I heard their new leader took over the reins today, so I am surprised by this omission...
#3
Killing journalism, hell - it committed suicide a long time ago. I know more about true journalism from my mid-1960's high school class that the "mainstream" clowns do today.
The "journalists" (read: leftists) think they' just naturally smarter than we common folk are, but I think it's the other way around.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
04/02/2004 19:05 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I see the problem here as way more then they will admit. We've seen this argument before, and only couched in these terms before, but it's not the real problem.
Pick up most of your newspapers in the US and you will see that their stories come from the AP, Reuters, and maybe one or two other new sources, except for local news. And that is it.
But this business model is dead, dead, dead.
Rantburg gives out more news better and faster than the New York Times! My own personal links page gives me the AP wire THREE DAYS before I see those articles in the local paper, which I don't even bother to read anymore, even for the comics.
I've even suggested to professional journalists that they should be scouring the Internet, surfing like there's no tomorrow to get the REAL news.
Their responses: variations on "Oh, that's just NOT DONE. Tut, tut! Not sporting and all!"
Hooey. Their business models are more stagnant than are the RIAA's. These are the same people who were utterly shocked when USA Today started to publish. They just couldn't believe it--too radical--it's just NOT DONE.
USA Today? There was nothing radical about it at all, really, except their pea brains just couldn't handle the idea of something different and better.
#5
Lol! Killer post, Anonymous. Pick a posting nym and stick around!
Your analysis certainly strikes me as dead right - there are actually very few sources from which a majority of stories are merely repeated... and the bias from these sources is breathtaking. When they actually do stories themselves, the editorial agenda customarily mirrors that same bias.
And, like you, so many of us have bailed out and decided to seek it out on our own. As someone who was once married to a print reporter, I have a special interest in what's transpiring - mainly thanks to bloggers. Again, please stick around!
#6
Anon, I'm with Dotcom--Megadittos!
I quit taking my local rag not long after 9/11 when I realized how slow and untimely the news was and how Liberal Left the slant.
I knew I was reading it only for the obits and found that kind of creepy! I've been to enough funerals anyway.
Posted by: Jen ||
04/02/2004 20:50 Comments ||
Top||
#7
I lost all faith in the newspapers during late 80's I was "quoted" in various local papers(little stuff-man in street,opening new store).In each case the reporter taped my comments and the words in paper were not what I had said.In one instance the "quote" was so wrong,that I complained to paper,and was told in essence,so what?.
The NYT has stated that the official position of paper on quotes,is if printed version reflects what person meant it is ok to use qoutation marks,even if those were not actual words used by person.And they wonder why the mass media has lost respect of American public.
Posted by: Stephen ||
04/02/2004 21:01 Comments ||
Top||
... In [Oran] this former French colonial city there are few traces of a decade of Islamic violence that killed more than 150,000 people, most of them civilians, according to human rights groups. The young people of Oran are in the vanguard of the large number of Algerians who want a Western-influenced lifestyle or simply dream of leaving the North African country for a better life abroad. Western diplomats in Algiers say their embassies receive more visa applications than any other country in the world. French President Jacques Chirac was greeted by shouts of "visas, visas" when he visited Algeria last year.
Chirac doesn't speak English so he thought they were saying "viva, viva".
Many young people test the boundaries of Islam, the official religion. "They want to drink alcohol, have sex and listen to house music, like in many countries around the world," said Kada Aradj, a local disc jockey and popular radio host. "Algeriaâs going through a new independence struggle and this time itâs against the status quo, and authorities are not prepared," he said at the trendy Lounge cafe where DJs mix local Rai and Western music. ....
How can you keep them down on the farm after they've seen the bright lights of Oran?
Oran is known as Algeriaâs most liberal city and famous for its entrepreneurial spirit. Streets are lined with shops selling the latest mobile phones, CDs, DVDs and fashions. "The joke of Oran is that there are more cabarets than mosques," said Anis, a construction worker. Oran has bars, restaurants, nightclubs and cabarets, with music shows and women selling sex. More are due to open this year, a sign that Algeria that is returning to normality and foreign capital is coming back after the so-called dark years. "Many young want to leave Algeria because they say there is no future here," said Amina Ikhalef, a 20-year-old student who works at her sisterâs Internet cafe. "Theyâre very influenced by the Internet and cable television." Algeria has the highest penetration of satellite dishes per inhabitant, all beaming hundreds of network channels from around the world. Another indication of how many yearn for another kind of life is the proliferation of Internet cafes. Algeria has several thousand and in Oran there is one on almost every street. ....
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
04/02/2004 2:01:04 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
"How can you keep them down on the farm after they've seen the bright lights of Oran?"
LOL! Now that's an instant classic!
I learn something (actually a LOT of somethings) every day here on RB. Today I learned that not everything in Algeria is as bleak and bloody as I thought. Oran sounds like a Kurdish town during the No-Fly period - an entrepreneurial hotbed. And they have 2 major ingredients in common: satellite dishes and Internet cafes. It's always about Freedom - particularly the free exchange of ideas and information about how the other guy lives. It will be interesting to see if Oran pops up on the Islamists' radar for its transgressions... I certainly hope not.
#4
Lucky, I agree Oran is headed towards Westernization while France is headed in the other direction. Abu better get his ass in gear in case I need somewhere to escape to if the election goes wrong. My kids demand access to Blockbuster.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
04/02/2004 15:10 Comments ||
Top||
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.
