A freight train derailed this morning, leaking chlorine gas and ammonium nitrate just southwest of San Antonio, according to broadcast reports.
I'm within 5 miles, that ammonium nitrate bit got my attention.
Several people were treated for exposure to chlorine gas after the Union Pacific freight train derailed about 6 a.m. near the Lackland Air Force Base annex, according to the reports. The pungent smell of chlorine could be detected as far as the SeaWorld area, about 10 miles away. The accident happened about 5 a.m. today as a Burlington Northern Santa Fe freight train was pulling onto a siding, when it was struck by a Union Pacific freight train, said Burlington Northern spokesman Joe Faust at the railroad's Fort Worth headquarters. He had no details on how many cars derailed and whose train was the source of the chemical leaks, but he says the leaks have now been contained. Telephone messages to Union Pacific were not returned today. The broadcast reports said one of the eight treated for chemical exposure was a Bexar County sheriff's deputy who drove through the chlorine cloud. He was hospitalized, but his condition was not available.
Hope he's ok, they just reported the train engineer died.
No evacuations were ordered, but people were urged to stay inside if they could smell the gas and about two miles of nearby Pearsall Road was closed as hazardous materials specialists attacked the leak, according to the broadcast reports.
Now reporting that there were just trace amounts of ammonium nitrate on the train. Pulse returning to normal, back to work.
Posted by: Steve ||
06/28/2004 11:24:34 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Too many of these unknown freight train derailments carrying chemicals. The jihadists are quietly going about their work right here in the U.S.
Posted by: jawa ||
06/28/2004 11:58 Comments ||
Top||
#2
The jihadists are quietly going about their work right here in the U.S.
Nah, trains been running off the rails since they invented trains. This shit happens all the time, you just don't notice till it happens in your own backyard. Don't assume it's enemy action when simple stupidity will do.
Posted by: Steve ||
06/28/2004 12:38 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Too many of these unknown freight train derailments carrying chemicals.
And the situation would be improved how much by switching to the hundreds of trucks that would be needed?
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/28/2004 13:37 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Union Pacific has been having major safety and service problems the last few years. Trains sitting around for days due to lack of personnel to staff them. Accidents due to lack of maintenance and long shifts. Complaints to the NTSB from shippers. A little googling will turn up a whole *bleep*load of issues.
Most recent accident in Houston was a collision with a new Metro light rail train. The 2 U.P. workers lifted the safety gate at a crossing and drove their pickup truck onto the tracks just in time to intersect the path of a Metro train moving at about 50 mph.
#6
Update from the scene, reports are that there was a stop signal, but the engineer for some reason didn't obey. Ran into back of other train, he's presumed dead. About a dozen people taken to hospital. They say, the "experts" that is, that the cargo of ammonium nitrate was not the explosive kind, it was liquid. WTF?
Posted by: Steve ||
06/28/2004 14:14 Comments ||
Top||
#7
that purdy scary steve. didnt know you san antonio. im in austin myself. :)
#11
I read an interesting article about how the adoption of narrow gauge rail in the US has caused a large number of negative externalities such as slow speed, poor efficiency, and derailings etc. It's fascinating how seemingly small details can effect these large systems once technology has developed beyond the original limitations.
#12
Don't be too quick to assign the blame to stupidity--it could just as easily been mechanical in nature.
Posted by: Dar ||
06/28/2004 15:57 Comments ||
Top||
#13
From 1997 through 2001, the rail accident rate climbed from 3.5 accidents per million miles of freight and passenger travel to 4.1 per million miles, according to the Federal Railroad Administration.
The figures show derailments up more than 21 percent, collisions up nearly 18 percent and signal failures up nearly 80 percent during that time. Over the same period, the number of hours worked by railroad employees declined by 2.6 percent, FRA statistics show.
#14
Liquid ammonium nitrate is not explosive. Powdered ammonium nitrate itself won't go BOOM, either, it has to be mixed with something else like diesel fuel or get wet. When it gets wet, it gives off explosive vapors and then has to have an ignition source.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
06/28/2004 19:37 Comments ||
Top||
#15
We certainly do have an abundance of stupid people...just seems strange with the derailments, chemical plant fires and oil refinery explosions we've seen over the last 2 years alone.
Posted by: jawa ||
06/28/2004 23:34 Comments ||
Top||
An Iranian newspaper has reported the controversial story of a woman who claims to have given birth to a frog. The Iranian daily Etemaad says the creature is believed to have grown from larva to an adult frog inside her body. While it is unclear how this could have happened, the paper carries quotes from medical experts who say there are Islamic human characteristics to the animal. It has been speculated that the woman, who has not been named, unknowingly picked up the larva while she was swimming in a dirty pool.
That was a damned dirty pool, and a damned unusual swim...
The "so-called frog", as the newspaper puts it, has yet to undergo precise genetic and anatomic tests. But it quotes clinical biology expert Dr Aminifard as saying: "The similarities are in appearance, the shape of the fingers and the size and shape of the tongue." Medical history recounts stories of people who believed they had frogs - or even lizards or snakes - living and growing in their bodies. One of the most famous was the 17th Century case of Catharina Geisslerin, known as "the toad-vomiting woman" of Germany. When she died in 1662 doctors are said to have performed an autopsy, but found no evidence animals had ever lived inside her body.
Posted by: tipper ||
06/28/2004 1:14:54 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Sounds like competition for the Turko-German Messiah.
#2
This is a step in the right direction and a welcome change. Middle eastern women have been giving birth to fanatics who explode in public places for far to long. Amphibians are less likely to want to impose thier interpetation of Allan' s will on you. Besides, I've never seen a frog detonate.
#17
Hmmm....Frogs have different genes. While Monkeys and Pigs were known to relate to the alien race (Pharisees? lol) , I guess a frog's a welcome addition. Sharon had a swim in this dirty pool before this poor girl went in for a dip..... no wonder what she got lol.
Possum pies and other meals made from the ubiquitous Kiwi pest have Australian animal-rights activists in a stew. The American version of this varmint is best known as a dietary staple of TVâs Clampett clan in the surreal 1960s sitcom, the Beverly Hillbillies.
Possum dishes such as Road Kill, Headlight Delight Pie, Guess That Mess and Shovel-Flipped Roadside Pizza have incensed Animal Liberation Victoria (ALV). President Patty Mark said New Zealandersâ treatment of possums was an outrage and the culinary names "make your stomach turn". The names are a bit unappetizing, but urbanized Oz-niks might not appreciate the Kiwi sense of humor. BTW, I remember a prize-winning chili recipe called "This Dogâs Brother."
Is there a requirement that Aussies eat it? If not, what's the beef? (Or possum, as it were...)
"Possums are a treasure and ALV would see them as individuals who have their own rights." Rights? Sheesh, everybody wants a slice of the pie these days.
They still have rights after they've sucked a bumper?
The Kiwi behind the culinary treats, Peter Salter, dismissed the groupâs comments.
"Piss off. We're havin' dinner here!"
After cooking up the pests for customers at his pub in Pukekura, south Westland, for several years he recently started selling his possum pies at a Nelson cafe. He hopes they will soon be available in Christchurch, Queenstown and Auckland. Pukekura? How appropriate.
Salter said some Australians "havenât got a clue" about the damage caused by the animals here. But do they have a connection to Al Qaeda?
"They might be cute and fluffy over in Australia but they are certainly not cute and fluffy here. I donât think the critters are cute anywhere, except perhaps in one of Peteâs pies. Our Texas counterpart is the armadillo, naturally much bigger and tougher. It is also a revered national symbol and therefore exempt from culinary exploitation. Besides, you would have to be damned hungry before youâd try to eat an armadillo. Starving buzzards can manage it, but thatâs about the limit.
"They (Australians) seem to think that we are a country where we have retirement farms for sheep: they just live in cuckoo land." They retire a lot of sheep in NZ. Recycling expired pests to supplement the local food supply seems like a good environmental strategy to me. I understand that the Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler has posted several good hippy recipes recently, and gamy Morlock buttocks are regular fare at LGF (Morlocks, from HG Wellsâ The Time Machine, are the brutish underground denizens of Indymedia and similar hives of villainy and scum).
Posted by: Atomic Conspiracy ||
06/28/2004 1:06:05 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
In south Alabama armadillos are known as "possum on the half-shell". But we don't really eat either possums or armadillos.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
06/28/2004 7:30 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Dammit, now I'm getting hungry. Where's my box of Roadkill Helper?
Posted by: Steve ||
06/28/2004 8:23 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Beg yer pardon, but "Road Kill" isn't a dish. It's a huntin' technique. ;)
#12
"Possums are a treasure..." Is there a such thing as an opossum mine?
Posted by: Super Hose ||
06/28/2004 22:22 Comments ||
Top||
#13
hmmm I've treasured a beaver or two in my time, but not an opossum
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/28/2004 22:37 Comments ||
Top||
#14
"Possums are a treasure..."
There is a lake and noted recreational area in Texas called 'Possum Kingdom. Maybe she has heard of it and, being a moonbat and an uber-flake, takes it literally.
Another peek into the continuing soap opera that is Saudi Arabia:
A father and his son are rivals for the heart of an Indonesian maid, Al-Watan reported.
No doubt a nubile young wench.
Is she the one with the fire in her eyes?
Maher, 33, had told his father, a 67-year-old retiree, he wanted to marry the maid, and the father went to see the woman to âbless the marriage,â the paper said. But when the father saw the woman he decided to marry her himself and told Maher he opposed the match.
"She's not good enough for you, son, but she's got something I need."
The ensuing standoff between father and son escalated to the point where relatives had to intervene, and they proposed letting the woman choose.
Ya sure this is Saudi? Letting the wimmin folk have a choice, that's gotta be unislamic.
âSurprisingly, she chose to marry the father,â the paper said.
It certainly says something about Sonny.
Posted by: Steve ||
06/28/2004 11:14:41 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
But when the father saw the woman he decided to marry her himself and told Maher he opposed the match.
Following in the footsteps of the Prophet (may bees pee upon him).
You see, ol' Mo' went to see his son and new daughter-in-law, and shortly after meeting her, he declared that Allah told him the two must not be married, that their marriage had never even occurred. Once everyone got over their confusion (and, likely, a few rather confused people had been stoned and/or murdered), ol' Mo' said Allah commanded HIM to marry this poor, benighted woman who had not, in fact, been married to Mo's son (previous marriage ceremony not applying).
I remember this story because of the comment of one of ol' Mo's other wives: "Convenient god you have, this Allah."
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
06/28/2004 12:07 Comments ||
Top||
#2
He must have met her at a famous Saudi Strip club- "Jahada- Bing", where for a $10 cover charge, the showgirls flip up their face veils for a peek at the whisker on their chin.
...but unfortuantely, there is no champaign in the Champaign Room
#5
For some reason, that Ray Stevens song "I am my Own Grandpa" popped into my head while reading this . . .
Posted by: The Doctor ||
06/28/2004 14:15 Comments ||
Top||
#6
If I was writing this, Dad would have a "heart attack" on his wedding night, Junior would inherit daddy's money and comfort his griving bride.
Posted by: Steve ||
06/28/2004 14:20 Comments ||
Top||
#7
I'm thinking more like Tom Lehrer's "Oedipus Rex."
Posted by: Mike ||
06/28/2004 14:22 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Settle this like real men; pistols at dawn.
Posted by: ed ||
06/28/2004 14:31 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Ed, we're talking Saudis here . . . no such honorable tradition for real men among them. Swords directed at one small target in particular might work, though . . .
Posted by: The Doctor ||
06/28/2004 14:32 Comments ||
Top||
#10
âSurprisingly, she chose to marry the father,â the paper said.
More like the head of both households agreed that the father would marry her or die.
Posted by: Charles ||
06/28/2004 14:40 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Mon, Dad's trying to marry my girlfriend again.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
06/28/2004 15:03 Comments ||
Top||
#12
You can watch the video at HotSaudiIncest.com
Posted by: Chris W. ||
06/28/2004 16:45 Comments ||
Top||
China and its gaping sinkhole of an economy overtook the United States as a recipient of foreign direct investment in 2003 as companies broadened their strategies in emerging markets, according to a report published Monday. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development said the United States was the worst hit by falling inflows of foreign direct investment to its 30 industrialized member countries. Investment into the United States declined to $40 billion last year from $72 billion in 2002 and $167 billion in 2001, while foreign direct investment in China dipped only slightly to $53 billion from $55 billion â leaving China as the worldâs biggest recipient of investment, excluding tax haven Luxembourg. WTF?
The OECD report on foreign investment trends said total investment flows from its members to developing countries surged six-fold to $192 billion in 2003 from $32 billion the previous year. The Paris-based organization said the sharply increased flows reflected a broadening of companiesâ investment goals in emerging markets, beyond simply gaining access to cheaper labor and raw materials. "There has been an increasing tendency for companies to invest in especially the largest developing countries as part of strategies to service local clients or to acquire a strategic position in markets that could become prosperous in the future," the OECD said. Even if China does service rogue nations with nuclear proliferation and missile technology that can eventually be used to attack France.
India received $4 billion in foreign direct investment in 2003 â up from about $3 billion in 2002 and only slightly below the figure for 2001, the report said. Investment into OECD countries meanwhile fell 28 percent to $384 billion, confirming a downward trend identified last year by the OECD, which had forecast a dip of between 25 percent and 30 percent based on the first half of 2003. "This indicates that, contrary to the expectations of many at the time, there was no significant pickup in activity in the second half of 2003," Mondayâs report said. One can only wonder when global economic interests will recognize China for the massive Ponzi scam that it really is. China is faced with some $200,000,000,000 USD worth of bad bank debt.
Beijing is pushing banks, with over $200 billion in bad debt after decades of politically driven lending, to revamp balance sheets ahead of full foreign competition at the end of 2006.
That money will need to come from somewhere. The military and government elite that those billions were loaned to certainly isnât going to return it. Where will it come from? More than anything, as China increasingly seeks to purchase advanced weapons systems, does nobody pause to consider how China may solve any internal collapse through military expansion?
Chinaâs government sanctioned intellectual property theft, product counterfeiting and distorted trade imbalances are raping the international economy. That everyone is too busy scurrying up to the Mandarinâs All-You-Can-Eat cheap labor trough to step back and scrutinize Chinaâs overall game plan is unwise in the extreme.
#1
Some of this "foreign investment" is coming from foreign shell corporations formed by corrupt Chinese bureaucrats using laundered proceeds from political payoffs / outright theft of Chinese government funds.
#3
The word "bubble" comes to mind. Perhaps the "bad money pushes out good money" axiom could be changed to "bad investments push out good investments."
Washington Post requires registration so salient paragraphs listed.
For months China and Japan have been locked in a diplomatic battle over access to the big oil fields in Siberia. Japan, which depends entirely on imported oil, is desperately lobbying Moscow for a 2,300-mile pipeline from Siberia to coastal Japan. But fast-growing China, now the worldâs second-largest oil user, after the United States, sees Russian oil as vital for its own "energy security" and is pushing for a 1,400-mile pipeline south to Daqing.
The petro-rivalry has become so intense that Japan has offered to finance the $5 billion pipeline, invest $7 billion in development of Siberian oil fields and throw in an additional $2 billion for Russian "social projects" -- this despite the certainty that if Japan does win Russiaâs oil, relations between Tokyo and Beijing may sink to their lowest, potentially most dangerous, levels since World War II.
In the "emerging" economies, such as Brazil, India and especially China, energy demand is rising so fast it may double by 2020. And this only hints at the energy crisis facing the developing world, where nearly 2 billion people -- a third of the worldâs population -- have almost no access to electricity or liquid fuels and are thus condemned to a medieval existence that breeds despair, resentment and, ultimately, conflict.
In other words, we are on the cusp of a new kind of war -- between those who have enough energy and those who do not but are increasingly willing to go out and get it. While nations have always competed for oil, it seems more and more likely that the race for a piece of the last big reserves of oil and natural gas will be the dominant geopolitical theme of the 21st century.
New kind of war? Hell, this is the reason Japan went to war last time. Doesn't anyone pay attention in history class? In 1940, Japan occupied French Indochina (Vietnam) upon agreement with the French Vichy government, and joined the Axis powers Germany and Italy. These actions intensified Japan's conflict with the United States and Great Britain which reacted with an oil boycott. The resulting oil shortage and failures to solve the conflict diplomatically made Japan decide to capture the oil rich Dutch East Indies (Indonesia) and to start a war with the US and Great Britain.
Posted by: RWV ||
06/28/2004 10:43:55 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This actually demonstrates an important point: There are repeated calls for alternatives to oil. If there were realistic alternatives, wouldn't the Japanese or the Chinese use them? It's still the only game in town.
#2
Japan's thirst for resources, particularly oil, is nicely covered in "The Eagle and the Rising Sun." Before the WWII, Japan got most of its oil from the US. When Roosevelt embargoed sales of strategic materials (oil) to Japan, the die was cast. The book says that the attack on Pearl Harbor and the thrust into the Dutch West Indies was launched because Japan had less than a year's supply of oil and no one would sell them anymore.
#3
Remember, this is a Washington Post article. Even though they're all liberal arts majors over there, most of them studied journalism and poly sci. The only history they were exposed to was in their ethnic studies classes. So for them, this is unexpectedly insightful.
#5
this should come as no surprise. china for years has been positioning herself for control of siberia...there are already more ethinic chinese in siberia than russians..and with the overall decline of russian society this trend should continue..
Posted by: Dan ||
06/28/2004 14:40 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Japan should work with Russia to pump the oil to Vladivostok. From there the pipe can be split to give the Chinese a chance to buy some if they want. I think the Chinese economy might stagnate before such a pipeline is finished but its nice to be prepared either way.
Instead of having the Japanese pay for the pipeline they should get them to build a bullet train upon the old trans siberian highway so they can shift populations somewhat to the Pacific coast.
Oh, and Russia should quietly sell back the Islands north of Japan that Japan wants and which really are frozen tundra of little use when Russia can no longer float a Pacific fleet.
And thirdly, Vladivostok should immitate pre-PRC handover Hong Kong in every way possible. Minimal laws, minimal government, maximum trade. This would draw investment and immigrants across the new siberian bullet train and give Russia a serious foothold into the Pacific economy.
Of course that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.
Posted by: Capt America ||
06/28/2004 21:04 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Ah, I see the Capt. has beat me to posting this.
Chirac is really losing it. Tell me again about the suave Gallic way of handling things ???? LOL Poor Chirac, even Schroeder was quiet this time around.
Posted by: too true ||
06/28/2004 21:40 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Chirac *is* losing it. And he's also a jerk ofcourse.
But in this case he also happen to be correct. Perhaps Bush doesn't understand what a big deal EU membership is -- either way he should flirt Turkey using his *own* country's assets.
If offering Turkey membership as the 51st state isn't acceptable, Bush could choose people with Turkish ancestry for his next cabinet for example. Or offer a significant percent of USA's budget in order to improve the Turkish economy. Or offer Turkey a veto for many of America's decisions.
You know, the kind of things he said EU should do, when he said they should give Turkey membership, Bush being *so* generous with *other* people's money.
I don't have Bush's full statement. But from your remarks I gather you think the US gummint has no right to comment on European affairs. Do likewise think that Euro gummints have no right to comment on relations between the US and, say, Cuba? And do they never?
#5
Aris - we have a different opinion - we'll say whatever the fuck we want about what we think are the best interests of our "allies", and if our enemies don't like it? Welllll, I think Dick Cheney will provide the retort
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/28/2004 22:13 Comments ||
Top||
#6
I think it depends on whether the guy making the statement is calling for something that his own country is also doing.
For example:
If Blair said to Bush "UK is recognizing Taiwan as independent, and I call on America to do the same" that's... okay.
If he said to Bush "UK will be lifting the embargo to Cuba, and I call on America to do the same"... again okay.
If he said "America should attack Sudan, and UK will be there to help you" -- again okay.
But in this case, Bush said that EU should do something, and has nothing on even a *nearly* similar scale to indicate his own commitment.
As I said -- he was being generous with other people's money. Let him first make his own generous offers of a similar level towards Turkey and *then* talk about what EU should do for it. I made several suggestions he can choose from.
#7
Frank G.> I'm really not that certain such a statement was in the interests of anyone. I doubt it will help Turkey.
I read Bush's statement in EUObserver before I saw it mentioned here (before Chirac commented on them) and they annoyed me. I think that'll be the attitude of many other Europeans also -- atleast the ones interested in EU issues -- distaste at Bush butting in in an important issue that doesn't concern him one bit.
I have no idea how you think such a comment helps Turkey.
This was the article, and you'll notice that the British Chris Patten, though much more polite in expressing it, again pretty much said that Bush was butting in in an issue outside his jurisdiction.
External Relations Commissioner Chris Patten said that the EU alone would decide if Turkey had met the criteria to begin talks on membership adding that he understood Mr Bushâs interest.
#9
Gee, Aris, I guess Americans are so used to hearing Europeans commenting about our internal affairs, we didn't think you'd mind when the favor was returned.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
06/28/2004 22:30 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Mind if you give me some specific examples, Robert, of such comments by European heads of government?
I admit that I fail to remember any of them. Has any European head of government recently told Bush he should legalize same-sex marriages or something? Without him having implemented it in his own country first, that is?
#11
I just remembered one such meddlesome comment -- a comment by Putin about the Democrats not having any right to criticize Bush about the Iraqi War because they are just as bad as he. Or something.
But that one was welcomed in Rantburg I think by pretty much everyone EXCEPT me, because I felt it was anti-American rather than anti-Kerry rhetoric.
#12
Since when is Chirac the spokesperson for the whole EU?
And President Bush was only putting in a good word for Turkey.
Chirac and DeVillepin and the rest of the EUroweenies have no problem telling us we're wrong about Iraq, about Israel and the Paleos, and even about things like our "one China policy."
In fact, the French, as personified by Chirac, have made it a point to take the Contrarian position to every position that Bush and the U.S. takes, so this was just one more example for ChIraq to look like an ass.
Like Bush (or anybody else) cares what Jacques thinks!
And the sheer arrogance of Chiraq saying it in the country concerned, too! How rude.
Someone--and I wish it were Bush--is going to tell Chiraq to go Dick Cheney himself real soon!
Posted by: Jen ||
06/28/2004 22:45 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Aris, I don't think you and I would EVER agree on what constitutes anti-American. I'll leave it at that
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/28/2004 22:45 Comments ||
Top||
#14
Aris, if the Turks want to stand still for the EU blowing smoke up their ass yet again, it's fine by me. But don't try and tell me they ever had a real chance at a place at the high table. Hah!
Personally, if I were Bush I would have offered Turkey preferred trade status (hey, we give it to China, what the hell?) and a NATO seat in return for stabilization help in non-Iraq ME countries. That's all the really want, anyway, and it's a cheap way to ease the tension in the region and screw the French at the same time, which makes it worthwhile right there...
#15
That's a mighty selective memory you have there, Aris. Pretty much all we hear from Europe is how wrong everything is in America. Hell, that's all we hear from you.
You might also notice that I didn't limit my comment to heads of government.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
06/28/2004 22:50 Comments ||
Top||
#16
mojo> Turkey is already a NATO member. And they already have trade thingies going on with the EU.
Jen> Since when is Chirac the spokesperson for the whole EU? He's not. As I said, Chris Patten, (the one who is essentially said spokesperson) was much more polite and subtle in expressing the inappropriateness of Bush's comment.
And yeah, Chirac *is* rude and obnoxious and seriously losing it. I only said he also happened to be correct this time.
As for Iraq, Israel and the Paleos, such things are hardly "internal affairs". And your One China policy? I've unfortunately heard no difference between USA and Europe in this matter.
Let me just say that I don't trust *your* memory, when it's as obviously faulty as this comment of yours indicates.
You might also notice that I didn't limit my comment to heads of government.
Too bad. I did. Kinda important distinction, whether one's representing his country's entire government or is a simple citizen.
As a citizen you talk freely about policies that you might implement in your own country *if* you had the power. As a head of a government, you must put your money where your mouth is, or keep said mouth shut.
#18
This wasn't an "internal affair."
It was a remark made at a NATO meeting about the EU from the Leader of the Free World.
Jacques has tried to get the EU to change their policy on China so that he can sell arms to them, but then that's an internal matter and the EU told him to forget it, so he's going to do it under the table, cuz he misses that stuff from his old Saddam days.
Since we entered into World War IV on 9/11/01, there are no more "internal matters."
Posted by: Jen ||
06/28/2004 22:58 Comments ||
Top||
#19
I never said that deals with China are internal affairs. I don't mind such comments. Not when China threatens all its neighbours. I agree - that thing can't be internal.
But Europe sharing sovereignty with Turkey is on a whole different league. If there's one matter that US shouldn't interfere in, this is the one, which countries European countries should share their sovereignty with.
Other than war itself, there's not a single issue approaching EU membership in importance, whether you like it or hate it.
#20
It looks like Mr. President Bush has given "Jake Ch-Iraqe" a sleepless night. This is so hilarious. The EU is an oxymoron to begin with. And the entry of an Islamic state will speed up the process of the new Eurarabia continent. I love anything that pisses off the Greeks and the French, both such pathetic confused people. Of course the goat fuckers hate the idea of Turkey having the same "EU rights". I can hear the seething all the way in the USA. This is just to good. Bush is shoven it down there thoats and they ain't likeing it.
And for the people who do not know who is in NATO, like the Goat Fuckers, here is a nice little link with Graphs that even Goat Fuckers can understand....maybe NATO
#21
It wouldn't surprise me if Bush said this just to get a rise out of Jacques and drive him crazy (if so, he succeeded).
President Bush and Recip Erdogan have forged a very good working relationship and Bush would like to see Turkey do well.
As I said above, it was Chirac who ended up looking like Hitler and in the host country, too!
While you may not like it, Katsaris, the fact of the matter is that the United States is the world's lone superpower and as such, what our President has to say and how it's received are important to the whole world.
If you don't think so, why not ask Jacques how our boycott of French stuff is going and how many tourists show up in France this summer.
Jacques could have addressed this graciously and diplomatically or even have politely ignored President Bush's suggestion, but Nooooooo.
Posted by: Jen ||
06/28/2004 23:11 Comments ||
Top||
#22
Long Hair Republican> It's extremely rude of you to call mojo a goatfucker. I suggest you apologize to him immediately.
Jen> I'd hope that the leader of the Free World would be above making statements just in order to "get a rise" out of people.
Posted by: Jen ||
06/28/2004 23:21 Comments ||
Top||
#24
I only consider certain Greeks to be goat fuckers. Mojo I am sorry if I offened you. I hope you understand my dislike of certain goat fuckers political views. I did get carried away with the certain goat fucker remarks. But certain goat fuckers should be out laying brick or something to make sure the no longer worth watching olympic games have a place to no longer matter.
I am very sure that Bush did not take a stand on Turkish integration into the EU just to get a rise of out Chiraq. Turkey's relationship with Europe and more broadly with the West is a very important one.
I appreciate Aris' concerns (and his understandable bias, given that Greece was conquered by Turkey a good while back). However, the EU gives every appearance of playing games with Turkey and jerking it around re: membership.
Bush is making a serious and important point: it is in all our interests for moderate Islamic states to evolve, prosper and integrate into the wider economic, politial and cultural world. If the EU is going to shut out Turkey, it should say so -- but apart from the French, by and large the signals have not been nearly so clear as that.
Moreover, the EU can't make up its mind - when writing a constitution, many want to avoid any mention of the Christian roots of European culture, but when faced with the prospect of including Turkey in the union, such issues become important ....
That said, Aris is right that there are huge financial and other implications of such a move. On the non-financial front, Turkish citizens would have the right to move about freely and settle elsewhere in the EU. Think about the spate of Islamacist bombings in and around Istanbul, the political influence of Islamacist parties in Turkey, and then consider what it might mean to open your borders ....
Set against that the fact that Turkey was a trusted and reliable ally for many years during the cold war.
#27
rkb> I've been accused in this forum of being too pro-Turkish, actually.
Turkey isn't ready for membership yet, and neither is the EU ready for it. Even without any desire to jerk Turkey around, those facts would remains. Turkey has been improving, but it hasn't improved enough yet. And EU doesn't yet have its constitution ratified, and until she does so I'm personally against *any* other country becoming a member state.
So on a double front, besides the issues you mentioned, Turkey and EU aren't ready for each other.
when writing a constitution, many want to avoid any mention of the Christian roots of European culture, but when faced with the prospect of including Turkey in the union, such issues become important
Heh! I noticed the opposite duplicity in the Greek prime minister. On the one hand he was all in favour of having said "Christian roots" mentioned, on the other hand he said that *of course* we are looking forward and being supportive of Turkey's entry in the EU. Yeah, pull the other one, it's got bells on.
#1
While this tastes like some sort of justice to those of us who have been sick of Chirac's smug and wrongheaded posturing in the last year, the problem goes beyond the world view of one man, leader though he may be.
Websterâs defines alliance as an "association to further the common interests of the members." The camaraderie on display at todayâs opening of the NATO summit in Istanbul notwithstanding, the past two years have seen little evidence that the organization still fits this definition.
The summiteers can be expected to make much of NATOâs deployment of five more "provincial reconstruction teams" to Afghanistan--teams that were promised months ago but never delivered. Similarly, NATOâs European leaders will congratulate each other for agreeing to train Iraqi security services, a job France and Germany somehow intend to accomplish without sending any troops to Iraq. If thatâs all the help the U.S. can get from our partners, it may be time to rethink the underlying premise of this "alliance."
The excuse offered by the Germans and French is that they disagree with the U.S. on what constitute "common interests." But it is not plausible that Europe has a lesser stake in pacifying terrorists and terrorist regimes than does the U.S. A more honest explanation is that Americaâs security umbrella has allowed Europeans to underfund their military services to the point that even if there were a trans-Atlantic consensus, they would have little to offer.
Even in Afghanistan, which Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer calls NATOâs "number one priority," the alliesâ record is abysmal. The actual fighting is still being done by some 20,000 American-led troops outside the NATO structure. All Washington asked the alliance to do last August was to help pacify and rebuild the country. NATO was able to muster a mere 6,500 troops, most of which are stationed in the relative safety of Kabul.
Thousands more are needed to bring stability to a country the size of Texas. Instead, the member states are stalling, forcing the Secretary-General to go begging for a chopper here and an airplane there. And as NATO fails to expand from Kabul, the security situation is deteriorating. Elections originally planned for June have been postponed until September.
One of the Bush Administrationâs minimum goals for the Istanbul summit is for NATO to commit a larger force to Afghanistan for 90 days around the time of the elections. The hope is to secure the registration of voters and provide security from terrorists who will surely try their worst to prevent Afghanistanâs transition to a full democracy. But even such a temporary commitment is unlikely.
Germany insists that it is not a lack of political will that prevents it from doing more in Afghanistan, where it has 2,000 troops. It says that with missions also in Kosovo and Bosnia, its forces are stretched thin. But if the worldâs third biggest economy is already exhausted by deploying 7,500 non-fighting troops abroad out of a total force of 270,000, what other than a lack of political will can account for this sorry state of its military affairs?
According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, last year the U.S. spent $417.4 billion on defense or $1,419 per capita. Franceâs total spending was $35 billion or $583 per capita, while Germany spent $27.2 billion or $329 per capita and is planning to freeze defense spending at current levels over the next few years. The French have some 15,000 of their 350,000 troops deployed abroad, though with only 700 serving in Afghanistan. The biggest French foreign mission, 4,000 troops, is in the Cote dâIvoire--which speaks volumes about the difference between U.S. and French interests.
This sorry NATO record should also bring a dose of reality to American politicians who invoke "multilateralism" like a mantra. Both John Kerry and Joe Biden, ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, are demanding that Mr. Bush give NATO a larger role in Iraq, but the President would surely do so if the Europeans were willing. The two Democrats are either out of touch with current European opinion, or they are using NATO as a political club to beat up Mr. Bush, or both. At least Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Richard Lugar is alert to the problem, warning the Europeans last week that "NATOâs reputation will stand or fall" depending on its assistance in Iraq.
Earlier this month, the U.S. and Europe commemorated the sacrifices of American soldiers on the Normandy beaches to liberate Europe from the Nazis in 1944. For the next 60 years, American taxpayers footed most of the bill to protect Europe, most recently deploying forces to stop the Balkan wars. Somehow Europeans appear to believe Americans will continue doing this indefinitely, regardless of European behavior and attitudes. They are badly mistaken.
Posted by: Mr. Davis ||
06/28/2004 10:14:05 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I still prefer NATO to the UN, as the percentage of of authoritarian depsots is much lower in NATO.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
06/28/2004 22:28 Comments ||
Top||
Conservative politicians are urging flaccid German men to have more sex to boost birth rates or risk being labeled âlimpâ abroad, a newspaper reported on Friday. Johannes Singhammer, a member of parliament and tired father of six, said Germanyâs aging population needed to produce more slaves for the socialist mines offspring to sustain its overstretched pensions system. âChildren are our future,â Singhammer told Germanyâs Bild newspaper. âGermans need to work more on that again in bed. Germans feel theyâre entitled to a six week vacation from bed.
Things mustnât get to the stage where German men are scoffed at abroad for being limp.â That horse has long left the barn.
His words were echoed by fellow conservative Armin Klein, who said Germans had become too selfish. Hey, itâs all about mich
âWe need to have the stiff upper lip courage to have sex and take the consequences,â like waking up sober in the morning to find out that was the Anti-Miss Universe you were hitting on.
said Klein, who has two children. âPeople concentrating on themselves, which has led to a life without children for many, has gone wrong.â Germany will have the worldâs oldest population by 2035, according to a report in Germanyâs Der Spiegel weekly. Think your body parts are sagging now? Wait till 2035.
Posted by: ed ||
06/28/2004 3:13:49 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This would be funny if it weren't so tragic. This is just recognition of a trend that's beensteadily accelerating since the introduction of the pill in the sixties. Gunter Grass wrote about it in 1980 in his book, Kopfgeburten, Oder Die Deutschen Sterben Aus (Headbirths, or the Germans are Dying Out. For all their foibles, the world will be a less interesting place when the Germans take their place in history alongside of the Visigoths, the Huns, and the Vandals, just one more tribe on the dustbin of history.
#3
Think we could import this program to the US? Seems like a good idea to me . . .
Posted by: The Doctor ||
06/28/2004 14:18 Comments ||
Top||
#4
The biggest factor in reproduction is economics. When a population's standard of living reaches a certain rising point, all of a sudden there is a *radical* drop in the number of births. Religion and culture really don't matter in the equation.
The best mix for babies in a modern society is a combination of mild poverty, boredom, unsupervised social settings and the acceptance and some support of unwed mothers. Plus enough privacy to get away with it.
#5
The best mix for babies in a modern society is a combination of mild poverty, boredom, unsupervised social settings and the acceptance and some support of unwed mothers. Plus enough privacy to get away with it.
Anonymoose,
I think you just described Europe, so how come no bambinos? Though they don't seem to have a lot of privacy, but how hard is it to get out in the old Fiat for a little Shake, Rattle, and Roll?
Posted by: ed ||
06/28/2004 17:42 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Ed, but they can get both the pill and abortions (except for Ireland) through the national health services. This is the ultimate result of "pro-choice" policies, a long slow glidepath to extinction.
Mark presents us graphs of immigration to Germany. We've made a lot about the demographics of Europe and the rise of Islam in several countries. Food for thought here.
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
06/28/2004 00:37 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
Heh.
"The Liberalsâ other line has been the one I predicted a few months back, the one borrowed from the 2002 French Presidential election: Vote for the crooks, not the Fascists. Stephen Harperâs Conservatives are not exactly right-wing red meat for the likes of me, but thatâs okay â you canât shift the assumptions of decades overnight, or even within one term. So vote for the Fascists, or the Commies, or the Traitors, or even the Eco-loonies. But not the Crooks."
From Canadian Television -
And in an unusual piece of advice, Elections Canada is also reminding voters not to eat their ballots. "Eating a ballot, not returning it or otherwise destroying or defacing it constitutes a serious breach of the Canada Elections Act," Elections Canada warns on its website. Three Alberta men were charged during the 2000 federal election with eating their paper ballots. The men said they were members of the Edible Ballot Society and were protesting against what they said was a lack of real choice among candidates. See - Refugees from San Francisco are in Canada
These don't sound like SF refugees. Refugees from what? The evil Bushitler regime? You wouldn't flee San Francisco for Alberta unless you were into guns, pickups, cattle, oil and wide open spaces. ("Vansterdam" British Columbia is a different matter, however.)
I'm with the ballot niblers. There *is* a lack of choice in Canada. Check out this Steyn piece and scroll down to "Politics Is So Divisive".
Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry on Sunday canceled an appearance at the U.S. Conference of Mayors rather than cross a promised police union picket line at the event. "I donât cross picket lines. I never have," Kerry said as he left Mass Sunday night at Our Lady of Good Voyage chapel in South Boston. His decision came hours after Boston Mayor Thomas Menino called on Kerry to attend, calling the conference "an important event for urban America," and saying the pickets set up by the Boston Police Patrolmenâs Association and other union members did not constitute a legitimate picket line. This could get interesting if the same picket lines are still in place for the Democratic convention in July. Maybe Kerry will just phone it in like heâs doing in the Senate.
#8
You mean all we had to do was form a picket line when Kerry was coming home from Vietnam and he would have stayed there? Talk about missed opportunity. Ah, well, hindsight and all that...
Posted by: Chris W. ||
06/28/2004 19:54 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Heard on Fox that Algore's gonna speak at the convention.
WEEEEEHAH!!!
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
06/28/2004 20:09 Comments ||
Top||
#10
#9 Robert - If that's true, HOT DOUBLE DAMN!!
I've got the popcorn concession. :-p
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
06/28/2004 20:39 Comments ||
Top||
#11
FoxNews also reported that if the strike is still on, Kerry gets a pass.
#12
If Kerry can't negotiate with two groups who SUPPORT him - Menino and the Urban mayors versus the Police Union - how in the world is he going to convince the Krauts and the Frogs to join in any conflict overseas?
#2
My ultra-lib friend Harvey (head of the local ACLU) went with me to see F-911 the other night. Afterward, he said, "what a load of horseshit. This is a disaster, Moore couldn't have done us more harm if the Republicans had been paying him." Harv is especially concerned that the Hollywood hype machine will turn Moore's condescending and primitive propaganda screed into the primary source for perceptions of liberal activism in the 21st century; with disastrous results for the left.
He is not the only liberal worried about the backlash against this crude propaganda piece. LLL editorialist Cary Clack of the San Antonio Express-News also expresses concern, though only through the usual cloud of hedging, false equivalency and obfuscation.
#3
The headline to the Cincinnati Enquirer story about this ad:
"Republican Ad Features Face of Hitler"
I didn't read the story; I had already read about it all online. I was just amazed at yet another example of how utterly dishonest the press has become.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
06/28/2004 14:39 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I would have gone for the Kerry-as-Chamberlain response advertisement, but I'm not a nice person.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
06/28/2004 14:48 Comments ||
Top||
#5
If Kerry doesn't have the guts or the integrity to repudiate Lumpy Riefenstahl's support in general, and this movie in particular, it's all over.
#6
CNN today also did the Bush ad in a way to imply that Bush was comparing Kerry to Hitler.
Haven't heard yet from the responsible left about this. Maybe they no longer exist.
Regarding the F-911 movie. The left has already come up with an excuse. "Yes the movie is non factual but Bush deserves it". I saw this on a few sites today.
Can you imagine if Rush would have made a movie with even a trivial factual error?
#7
I read something yesterday at Instapundit that the Kerry campaign was demanding an appology from the Bush campaign for showing this add. The height of hippocracy!
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
06/28/2004 17:41 Comments ||
Top||
From Barbra Streisand's own website, you really can't make this stuff up.
In response to requests, we are printing the exact lyrics sung by Ms. Streisand, a highlight of the June 24, 2004 concert, An Evening With John Kerry And Friends. The event raised over $5,000,000 to support the Democratic presidential candidacy. "PEOPLE"
Special Lyrics
By Alan & Marilyn Bergman
PEOPLE
I MEAN G - O - P - EOPLE -
WHO'D BELIEVE THERE'S SUCH PEOPLE IN THIS WORLD?
BUSH SEEZA
LOTTA CONDOLEEZA,
THEY'RE DIVIDING THE PLANET'S OIL
ACCORDING TO RICHARD "POIL"
AND THEY'RE ALL JUST TRAINEES
OF CHENEY'S.
RUMSFELD,
WE MUST GET RID OF RUMSFELD -
HE'S THE SPOOKIEST PERSON IN THE WORLD.
AS FOR POWELL -
HE'S NEITHER FISH NOR FOWL.
HE'S IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM,
WHILE THEY'RE ALL FIDDLING WITH DOOM.
NO ONE'S MINDING THE STORE.
WHAT'S MORE,
LET'S DISCUSS THIS WAR WE'RE LOST IN,
DON'T ASK WHAT IT'S COSTIN' -
WHAT'S A TRILLION OR TWO TO RULE THE WORLD?
(Second chorus)
THE SENATE
HOW I WANT THE SENATE!
ALL WE NEED IS TWO PEOPLE IN THE WORLD!
I SEEA
ANTONIN SCALIA.
HOW I DREAD EV'RY TIME HE SITS -
SCARED OUT OF MY WOLFOWITZ.
TIME THOSE NEO-CON GUYS
WERE GONE GUYS.
THEY'RE LYING -
WHILE THE GLOBE IS FRYING -
AND THE FISHES ARE DYING IN THE WORLD.
THEIR SOLUTION
FOR ALL OF THE POLLUTION:
IS JUST TO BEAR IT AND GRIN,
AND PRACTICE NOT BREATHING IN.
BUT THINGS ARE GONNA BE GREAT.
JUST WAIT -
WHEN THE WHITE HOUSE STATIONERY,
READS PRESIDENT JOHN KERRY -
WE'LL BE THE LUCKIEST PEOPLE IN THE WORLD!
Posted by: Steve ||
06/28/2004 11:55:01 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I assume you're using "special" in the same sense as in "special education".
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
06/28/2004 12:03 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Oy, now I'm verklempt! Talk amongst yourselves.
(that's it -- time to e-mail Lamont & Tonelli and get the contact info for Big Men On Campus... i have a political parody project that would be just perfect for them...)
#6
My day was going slightly slow, but pleasantly enough - until this. All the tea in the world won't wash the bad taste of this out of my mouth.
Posted by: The Doctor ||
06/28/2004 12:40 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Will someone please tell that woman to cut her dam* nails? Does she have any idea of the food, bowel residue, sexual emissions, and general filth people carry under those things? (Poor James...)
#9
I know what you mean mucky - I found it hilariously funny too. Keep on talking Babs!
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/28/2004 13:00 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Is anyone else nauseated at the fact that the goody two-shoes Hollywood left turned a treacly happy slappy song celebrating the general nifty peopleness of people into a song that is anti-some people?
What's next?
Down, down with sheeple
When you meet 'em, give 'em a push
Down, down the stairs,
They're just gonna vote for Bush
Or how about
I'd like to buy George Bush a Coke
And poison it with glue
Kill Dick Cheney
And old Wolfie
And shoot down Rumsfeld too
#16
JerseyMike, encourage her to speak loudly and frequently. Not all Americans pay constant attention. When she reaches out, she does it with all the sublety and grace of a drunken zombie.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
06/28/2004 14:59 Comments ||
Top||
#17
I can see the Tshirts:
"We paid 5 million bucks and all we got was this lousy song."
Our brains, soft as an easy chair;
Brains, empty as morning air.
In love with J-F-K-two,
We'll raise funds for you.
Crushed Dean under the Iowa snow,
Always certain your campaign would grow.
Us old Progressives and Greens,
Now we'll beat Bush Two.
You and I will raise five million bucks,
From other limousine liberals.
Neil Diamond and Babs, their show is unrehearsed.
We'll still buy the tickets
'Cause we all hate Geor-orge Bush,
Oh, Kerry, you're the one!
No oil drilling under midnight sun!
We'll retake the White House and Congress;
Give us power and we'll make a mess,
Aged Progressives a-a-a-a-nd Greens.
Posted by: Mike at June 29, 2004 at 05:33 AM
Posted by: ed ||
06/28/2004 16:26 Comments ||
Top||
#20
Sung to "Take Me Out To The Ballgame"
Take me out with the left wing
With that Hollywood crowd.
Get me tofu and organic snacks.
Eat union grapes I will give you a whack!
So lets root, root root, for John Kerry
If he don't win it's a fraud.
For its time-to-turn our brains off.
At election time.
#24
OH, BRAVO!! (opera clapping) IV'E GOT A CRAMP, I MEAN A TEAR of laughter! its just so bowel moving! with people like thesewho needs enemys the democrats are sure to win!Here's to kerry being president of a katsup factory!
#25
Holy shit, I only glanced at this earlier in the day. I thought it was just lousy parody, but this was an actual song sung by B.S.!!?!??!?! I can't believe it. This rules. I've never heard of anything like it.
Time to ge fitted for a straightjacket, Funny Girl.
Posted by: Chris W. ||
06/28/2004 21:24 Comments ||
Top||
#26
Threw this one on Blair's place:
A Second-rate Nose
My Party has a philosophy strictly second hand
Everything from welfare to care of the land
Stuff that's their beliefs came from before the Second World War
Even job creation plans something FDR did before
Itâs no wonder that I feel confused
I never think a thing that ainât been used
Iâm saying second hand cliches
Second hand prose
Thatâs why they call me
A Second-rate Nose...
A minor political note, if youâre interested in such things. The other day a young girl came to the door to solicit my support for her presidential candidate. I asked her why I should vote for this man. She was very nice and earnest, but if you got her off the talking points she was utterly unprepared to argue anything, because she didnât know what she was talking about. She had bullet points, and she believed that any reasonable person would see the importance of these issues and naturally fall in line. But she could not support any of her assertions. Her final selling point: Kerry would roll back the tax cuts.
Then came the Parable of the Stairs, of course. My tiresome, shopworn, oft-told tale, a piece of unsupportable meaningless anecdotal drivel about how I turned my tax cut into a nice staircase that replaced a crumbling eyesore, hired a few people and injected money far and wide - from the guys who demolished the old stairs, the guys who built the new one, the family firm that sold the stone, the other firm that rented the Bobcats, the entrepreneur who fabricated the railings in his garage, and the guy who did the landscaping. Also the company that sold him the plants. And the light fixtures. Itâs called economic activity. Whatâs more, home improvements added to the value of this pile, which mean that my assessment would increase, bumping up my property taxes. To say nothing of the general beautification of the neighborhood. Next year, if my taxes didnât shoot up, I had another project planned. Raise my taxes, and it wonât happen â I wonât hire anyone, and they wonât hire anyone, rent anything, buy anything. You see?
âWell, itâs a philosophical difference,â she sniffed. She had pegged me as a form of life last seen clilcking the leash off a dog at Abu Ghraib. âI think the money should have gone straight to those people instead of trickling down.â Those last two words were said with an edge.
âBut then I wouldnât have hired them,â I said. âI wouldnât have new steps. And they wouldnât have done anything to get the money.
âWell, what did you do?â she snapped.
âWhat do you mean?â
âWhy should the government have given you the money in the first place?â
âThey didnât give it to me. They just took less of my money.â
That was the last straw. Now she was angry. And the truth came out:
âWell, why is it your money? I think it should be their money.â
Then she left.
And walked down the stairs. I let her go without charging a toll. Itâs the philanthropist in me.
Posted by: Steve ||
06/28/2004 10:15:19 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Lileks is the best writer in the world, at least on the days Peggy Noonan isn't published.
Posted by: Mike ||
06/28/2004 10:42 Comments ||
Top||
#2
maybe in a Steyn-less world
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/28/2004 10:54 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Oh, don't get me wrong, Mark Steyn is one of the best, too.
Posted by: Mike ||
06/28/2004 11:47 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Now boys, per Fred's Directive, let's not get a flame war going here...
:)
Posted by: Carl in N.H ||
06/28/2004 12:32 Comments ||
Top||
#6
no flaming - I read Lileks every day - sometimes he gets a little too OT of things that interest/entertain me, that's all. I never read Steyn's theater reviews, or I'd prolly have to say the same thing about him
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/28/2004 12:36 Comments ||
Top||
#7
âWell, why is it your money? I think it should be their money.â
More often than not, this sort of conviction is held by those whose income isn't at a level where the government can shave off a nice, healthy portion in taxes.
One of the nice things about being young is that, in addition to being naive, you tend to be very self-righteous. This gives you almost superhuman powers against sense and logic.
This will be interesting if it grows legs, but some how I doubt it will.
LHR
Via Drudge.....
Posted by: Long Hair Republican ||
06/28/2004 12:37:23 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I heard Drudge tonight too Long Haired Mr. This is pretty funny. Not a chance in hell this getting on the news hour report. And even less on anything national, like Soaprah. Those documents are sealed and sealed by a top end canidate from Mass that has been on the top of everything.
#2
As a citizen who actually spent a primary vote on Ryan, I am of the opinion that the divorce record geenie just left the bottle and won't be going back in any time soon. The "steely eyes" of the journalists as they stuck mikes in Ryans face could barely mast the glee of getting to google "SEX CLUBS, avante gard" on the Tribunes computers. It is Christmas morning for these reporters, and I predict this will become a central distraction to the Kerry campaign.
As for GW, if he has had sex in the oval office, I am pretty comfortable we know who it was with...
#6
Capsu might be able to back me up on this since he's also an Illinois resident.
Ryan was toast not because of a sex-less sex scandal. He was toast because he lied to GOP leadership when he told them that there wasn't anything unseemly in the sealed papers. He was toast because he was as inspiring as rice krispies left in milk for about 6 hours.
Mainly he was toast because he was losing badly to Obama.
#7
With respect to Kerry, I don't want the details for two reasons:
1. I want to see whether America recognizes what exactly Kerry is.
2. Salacious details would probably only make Kerry more electable for a high percentage of the zipperheads who masquerade as our fellow citizens.
If Ryan had been a Democrat, the details would have only ensured his election. The Democratic Party of Massachusetts re-nominates Barney Frank every two years and he is repeatedly reelected. Talk about having ugly details available in the public forum; did you ever read the text of Stephen Gobie's personal ad -it's more nauseous than Roseanne Barr in a Speedo.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
06/28/2004 22:02 Comments ||
Top||
For all you PC types, read carefully the final sentence and please explain why U.S. Customs and Immigration agencies shouldnât be paying careful attention to Middle Eastern/Muslim types.
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama ||
06/28/2004 10:40:36 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Of COURSE customs should be paying special attention to Arab Males particularly those between the ages of 16 and 50, and who have recently visited enemy countries like Pakistan, Afghanistan, Saudi, Iran, etc etc.
I don't think any sane person would argue otherwise.
I totally agree with statistically needed racial/religious Profiling for customs, the military, the cia, the police etc etc.
#2
Wow, when the ClueBat visits, it certainly leaves an impression. If you will now educate yourself regards the Myth of The Moderate Muslim, you'll really be on your way. You certainly got this one right, kudos. PC-ism is the enemy you can fight - right at home - all around you. Take that bat and beat the shit of the apologists in your circle of friends and family. Work your way outward. Good luck to you - and to us all - I hope you convert 50 people by yourself to the reality that there are no moderates, there are only passives waiting to be called to service by the hardcore jihadists. If you had ever been there and seen it for yourself, up close and personal, you would realize that Muslims are Muslims first, last, and always - negating all other associations, and you would shout this from the rooftops.
The CIA has suspended the use of extraordinary interrogation techniques approved by the White House pending a review by Justice Department and other administration lawyers, intelligence officials said. The "enhanced interrogation techniques," as the CIA calls them, include feigned drowning and refusal of pain medication for injuries. The tactics have been used to elicit intelligence from al Qaeda leaders such as Abu Zubaida and Khalid Sheik Mohammed. No attribution
... The decision applies to CIA detention facilities, such as those around the world where the agency is interrogating al Qaeda leaders and their supporters, but not military prisons at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and elsewhere. No attribution
"Everythingâs on hold," said a former senior CIA official aware of the agencyâs decision. Aware how? And why is this person talking to the press?
"The whole thing has been stopped until we sort out whether we are sure weâre on legal ground." A CIA spokesman declined to comment on the issue. I would decline to comment on intel matters, too. Adults are in charge now. No talking to the press without being arrested.
CIA interrogations will continue but without the suspended techniques, which include feigning suffocation, "stress positions," light and noise bombardment, sleep deprivation, and making captives think they are being interrogated by another government. ... The suspension ... is related to the White House decision, announced Tuesday, to review and rewrite sections of an Aug. 1, 2002, Justice Department opinion on interrogations that said torture might be justified in some cases. No attribution
The legal debate over CIA interrogation techniques had its origins in the battlefields of Afghanistan, secret counterterrorism operations in Pakistan and in President Bushâs decision to use unconventional tools in going after al Qaeda. The interrogation methods were approved by Justice Department and National Security Council lawyers in 2002, briefed to key congressional leaders and required the authorization of CIA Director George J. Tenet for use, according to intelligence officials and other government officials with knowledge of the secret decision-making process. Guess itâs not a secret anymore
When the CIA and the military "started capturing al Qaeda in Afghanistan, they had no interrogators, no special rules and no place to put them," said a senior Marine officer involved in detainee procedures. Involved how?
The FBI, which had the only full cadre of professional interrogators from its work with criminal networks in the United States, took the lead in questioning detainees. But on Nov. 11, 2001, a senior al Qaeda operative who ran the Khaldan paramilitary camp in Afghanistan was captured by Pakistani forces and turned over to U.S. military forces in January 2002. The capture of Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, a Libyan, sparked the first real debate over interrogations. The CIA wanted to use a range of methods, including threatening his life and family. But the FBI had never authorized such methods. The bureau wanted to preserve the purity of interrogations so they could be used as evidence in court cases. Al-Libi provided the CIA with intelligence about an alleged plot to blow up the U.S. Embassy in Yemen with a truck bomb and pointed officials in the direction of Abu Zubaida, a top al Qaeda leader known to have been involved with the Sept. 11 plot. No attribution to the âfactsâ in this graf
In March 2002, Abu Zubaida was captured, and the interrogation debate between the CIA and FBI began anew. This time, when FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III decided to withhold FBI involvement, it was a signal that the tug of war was over. No attribution
"Once the CIA was given the green light . . . they had the lead role," said a senior FBI counterterrorism official. Abu Zubaida was shot in the groin during his apprehension in Pakistan. U.S. national security officials have suggested that painkillers were used selectively in the beginning of his captivity until he agreed to cooperate more fully. His information led to the apprehension of other al Qaeda members, including Ramzi Binalshibh, also in Pakistan. The capture of Binalshibh and other al Qaeda leaders -- Omar al-Faruq in Indonesia, Rahim al-Nashiri in Kuwait and Muhammad al Darbi in Yemen -- were all partly the result of information gained during interrogations, according to U.S. intelligence and national security officials. All four remain under CIA control.
A former senior Justice Department official said interrogation techniques for "high-value targets" were reviewed and approved on a case-by-case basis, based partly on what strategies would work best on specific detainees. Justice lawyers suggested some limitations that were adopted, the former official said. ... The administration concluded that techniques did not amount to torture if they did not produce significant physical harm or injury. However, interrogators were allowed to trick the detainees into thinking they might be harmed or instructed to endure unpleasant physical tasks, such as being forced to stand or squat in stress positions. .... Anyone see a pattern here? I do. Not one named source was used in this article. Why? Is this agenda pushing in the guise of jouranlism? I think so.
Posted by: badanov ||
06/28/2004 12:32:09 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Is the agenda a "what America stands for" thing? Let's see, America; truth, justice and the American way. The American way? Well now what. Oh thats right, bend over and do what non-combadants say. yes, they are thinkers, talk well also, that nose, the sound of a run on sentence. snoot, yes thats it, I'm on with that!
#4
Anyone speaking to the WaPo or NYT has an agenda, and is most likely out of the real loop (i.e.: unemployed by the DOJ and Intel agencies after the last election, and yes, I mean you, Eric Holder)
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/28/2004 7:58 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Yesterday, based on this very same article, you said that the "CIA is throwing the war and the DoJ is signing off on it." Today you yourself indicate that your accusations about the CIA and FBI are based entirely on anonymous sources!
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
06/28/2004 8:20 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Way to ignore the call to stop the flame wars, Mikey.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
06/28/2004 8:22 Comments ||
Top||
#7
I admit I didnt read the article closely enough yesterday. But when I saw your reactions to posts made to the sale article you posted, I had to read it closer, and sure enough, this was a mass of, what? No named sources, a LOT of assumptions on the writer's part and no attribution for some elements of the story.
I didn't publish this garbage, and I posted errorneously. However, if the DoJ in fact told the CIA to suspend those interrogation tehcnique, then my statement stands.
As it is we don't know. You don't know either, Mike, and you're the who posted the original article.
#8
Good work, badanov.
Let's hope for the best that this "former senior CIA official" is talking out of his ass.
And now that Bremer is out, maybe the State Dept. will butt out of running the military side of things in Iraq!
Posted by: Jen ||
06/28/2004 9:02 Comments ||
Top||
#9
On the other hand, if you're into conspiracies, maybe this leak is deliberate: maybe there's more going on behind the scenes than they want to be made known, so they release reports that make them look a lot more incompetent than they are. There are benefits to misleading a free press, especially when up against an enemy that wants to use our own institutions to destroy us . . .
*Takes off tin jacket, slips into velvet coat, checks pocketwatch . . .*
Posted by: The Doctor ||
06/28/2004 13:17 Comments ||
Top||
Didnât Iraq beat Saudi Arabia in soccer?
RIYADH, Saudi Arabia
More than 30 Islamic countries so far have agreed to participate in the first-ever Islamic Games in Saudi Arabia next year, the kingdomâs sports authority said. Organizers expect more than 6,000 athletes from over 50 countries to take part in the tournament that will be held for the first time in April 2005, said a press release from the Riyadh-based Sports and Youth General Secretariat. So far, 34 countries, including Malaysia and Mali, have said they will participate. The tournament that is hosted by four Saudi cities - Mecca, Medina, Jiddah and Taif - brings together members of sports unions affiliated to the Organization of Islamic Conference. Women will not compete in the games. The conservative kingdom bars women from practicing sports, even in schools. The sports that will be contested in the tournament have not yet been announced.
Grenade toss, 25 meter rifle spray, RPG taxi shoot and the ever popular 10K run-away.
Saudi Arabia is a regional sports powerhouse, especially in soccer. Its soccer team, which participated in a number of Olympic Games and Asian tournaments, qualified for the World Cup in 2002, 1998, and 1994. The kingdom also hosted the FIFA World Youth Championship in 1989.
#1
First ever? Wow, this looks like a chance for some world-class humiliation and seething. Maybe even a small war. Definitely making popcorn for this.
#2
How are they going to play sports when that involves running, and when you run you can see the bottom of someone's feet, and showing the bottom of your feet is an insult?
May start out as a soccer, but with all those feet flying, it'll soon be free-for-all grenadeball.
Now that I think about it, maybe we should encourage this. We could suggest headresses made of red cloth and introduce bullfighting to the event.
#8
I'm waiting for the fatwa that forbids Muslims from participating in the Olympics because of the shorts-and-tank-top-clad women - which means that they *must* have Islamic games of their own (I thought fun was forbidden in Islam?). Although how they're going to have swimming events with the women in burkas, I haven't a clue . . .
Posted by: The Doctor ||
06/28/2004 17:23 Comments ||
Top||
#9
shorts-and-tank-top-clad women
Yea Doc, it's hard to run with an erection.
Posted by: ed ||
06/28/2004 17:36 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Send 'em over. Let them play The Infidels. I want the pay per view rights.
Know Your Enemy Department: If you have the time and the self control to fight the urge to pull your seat loose from the floor and hurl it at the screen, Iâd recommend this film. It reveals the Al Jazeera staff to be pan-Arab nationalists with profound sympathies for the Jihadis -- as long as they help to advance their Nasserite agenda. Also explored are the Arab love-hate relationship with the West and the deep Arab need to explain everything with a conspiracy. Thatâs my review. The link goes to the WaPoâs write up. An excerpt is provided below for balance and nuance (sarcasm alert).
Blessed with good timing and virtually unlimited access to her sources, Noujaim -- who co-directed the 2001 documentary "startup.com" [also recommended] -- was at al-Jazeeraâs headquarters in Qatar on the eve of the U.S. invasion of Iraq in March 2003. There, Arab journalists, along with their 40 million viewers, watched as President Bush announced his plan to invade a country just 20 miles away [sic]. Eventually, al-Jazeera reporters went to Baghdad to cover the war, and one died there, killed in a U.S. attack that, even though it was deemed justified in a later investigation, looks from the filmâs perspective like nothing short of a scandal.
#2
At the very same time, there was another man in Kuwait. His perspective on the Iraqi situation was wholly different from Noukaim's. He wrote a special article concerning the anniversary of the liberation of Kuiwait. His name was Michael Kelly. Here is an excerpt:
Who Would Choose Tyranny?
Tyranny truly is a horror: an immense, endlessly bloody, endlessly painful, endlessly varied, endless crime against not humanity in the abstract but a lot of humans in the flesh. It is, as Orwell wrote, a jackboot forever stomping on a human face.
I understand why some dislike the idea, and fear the ramifications of, America as a liberator. But I do not understand why they do not see that anything is better than life with your face under the boot. And that any rescue of a people under the boot (be they Afghan, Kuwaiti or Iraqi) is something to be desired.
Even if the rescue is less than perfectly realized. Even if the rescuer is a great, overmuscled, bossy, selfish oaf. Or would you, for yourself, choose the boot?
I think of Michael's words often especially when I read a comment from a WWP zipperhead like antiwar.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
06/28/2004 14:38 Comments ||
Top||
Posted by: Fred ||
06/28/2004 23:03 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[7 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
15 months!!! 25 million brand new Free Souls!! 2 years ago, this story was a fairy tale.
This is nothing short of a miracle. God Bless George W. Bush and the United States of America!!
Parliament has rejected for a second time a draft law that would allow women the right to divorce, saying such a law could damage the "family fabric" in the conservative Muslim kingdom. The Bill was rejected by a vote of 44-39.
A Tanzanian member of parliament has threatened to place a death curse on all ministers if the government does not do more to fight corruption. Masoud Haroub Saidi said he was sickened by government corruption, which is said to be increasing and all other methods had failed. He told parliament that he would use a Koranic verse to make ministers "drop dead" like locusts. However, parliamentary officials would not let him carry out his threat.
Via http://timblair.spleenville.com/
Skipping to the good stuff:
Aug. 19, 1946. "I was born today. The nurse was hot!"
Aug. 21, 1946. "Went home today. Got the nurseâs number."
March 6, 1952. "Thereâs a television set in the window at Jimmy Joeâs Hardware. I saw this show called âI Love Lucy.â Sheâs OK, but Ethel is hot! Forget Lucy, I love Ethel!"
Sept. 7, 1953. "First day of school. My teacher is hot!"
Nov. 19, 1957. "I made out with Sally during the âDuck and Coverâ drill. When some other kids told the teacher I kissed Sally, I looked everyone straight in the eye and said, âI want you to listen to me. I did not have kissing relations with that girl, Sally.â They fell for it!"
July 24, 1963. "Today I was in Washington, D.C., and I shook hands with President John F. Kennedy in the Rose Garden of the White House! Iâve decided that I am going to emulate every facet of President Kennedyâs life, professionally and personally. Whatever he has done, I will do."
Oct. 14, 1969. "And itâs one, two, three what are we fighting for, donât ask me I donât give a damn, next stop is Vietnam...
"Yeah right!"
Oct. 11, 1975. "Today I married the beautiful and sweet Hillary Rodham, who assures me she has no political ambitions of her own and will always stand by her man, just like Tammy Wynette. It just occurred to me -- Iâll never be with another woman again. Oh well, no big deal.
"A new TV show debuted today. Itâs called âSaturday Night Live.â Very funny but scathing! Boy, Iâd hate to do anything that would cause them to make fun of me."
And that would be just the first 100 pages.
Posted by: ed ||
06/28/2004 4:38:40 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Bill Clinton is one of America's greatest Presidents. He presided over the largest boom in the American economy (and longest) in this country's history. He cut the deficit during his Presidency which has unfortunately taken a reversal during the Bush administration. In the 1993 Deficit Reduction Act he taxed the wealthy while giving tax cuts to everyone else. He survived countless fruitless attacks and 'scandels' trying to stain his reputation. The best the Republicans in congress could do after spending $70 million on investigating him was to say he had consensual sex with a girl he wasn't married to and lied about it, his only lie in the Presidency. Yet Bush has made many more lies: "There is no doubt that Iraq possess biological and chemical weapons", "The vast majority of my tax cuts will go to the bottom half", "Iraq bought chemical weapons from Africa", to name just a few. Clinton increased the number of police officers and decreased the amount of crime. He also decreased the amount of teenagers who were using drugs. Clinton faced the crisis of Waco with resolve and toughness, rooting out those dangerous people. He prevented many terrorist attacks at home like in the 2000 millenium bomb plot by al-Qaeda. He increased the amount of terrorist funding to combat al-Qaeda and his aide warned Condoleezza Rice that her #1 priority had to be al-Qaeda. Clinton's actions created 20 million new jobs and dramatically decreased the gap between the rich and the poor. He brought millions of Americans out of poverty. Clinton increased the minimum wage three times. Bill Clinton was a man of the people and truly the greatest President since FDR.
#2
Get paid by the DNC for seminar posting, Trollman?
Clintoon was just about the worst prez we've ever had--worse than Carter (and that was bad) and really worse than Ulysses Grant--whereas President Bush is one of our greatest, along with Ronaldus Magnus.
Clintoon was the biggest Communist since FDR, although Carter again runs a close second.
Actually, the last great Dimocrat President was Harry Truman, but you're too ignorant to know that.
And this post on the Horned Dog is hilarious!
Posted by: Jen ||
06/28/2004 12:49 Comments ||
Top||
#3
trollboy - ya gotta close the tags with (/sarcasm).... somebody might think you believe that crap...
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/28/2004 12:56 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Actually, while Carter had the worst luck during his presidency and was pretty ineffective in world matters, his actions after leaving the office show a man of much greater character than Clinton.
Carter may not be remembered as a great president in future history books, but I think he has a shot as a great statesman.
#5
Carter may not be remembered as a great president in future history books, but I think he has a shot as a great statesman.
Particularly in North Korean textbooks.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
06/28/2004 13:18 Comments ||
Top||
#6
I'm talking more about his efforts with international aid agencies, in fostering programs to assist in the creation of housing and infrastracture in third-world countries.
As to your reference, I plead ignorance and cannot comment.
#7
yeah, right, Trub--all of them Communist and/or with Socialist and Marxist leaders.
Posted by: Jen ||
06/28/2004 13:26 Comments ||
Top||
#8
He may have done a lot of admirable work, and I have my suspicions that he may have the best of motives in his heart, but they don't always come out quite right. I definitely think he has more character than Clinton - but if he does end up with Communist organizations sometimes, I definitely have to feel sorry for him. Yet I don't think we could call him a "statesman." It's been a while since I took a look at such definitions, but doesn't that only apply to someone with some official state capacity? I don't think an "ex-President" counts in that area . . .
Posted by: The Doctor ||
06/28/2004 13:30 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Jimmy should remember that long-standing tradition of past Presidents shutting the fuck up, especially failed presidents. His chirping and siding with our enemies causes the US unnecessary problems.
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/28/2004 13:35 Comments ||
Top||
#10
I don't think he wants to be called a statesman just yet, since I think the qualification for the title is you have to be dead. :}
I would certainly put him in the "Liberal do-gooder" part of the graph (as opposed to the "Liberal butt-inski" part).
But in any case, I had no chance to vote for or against him, since I was not of age in 80. I can't even remember how I would have gone back then had I been able, but I suspect it would have been Reagan due to Carter's poor performance to date.
#11
I suppose that alone would disqualify him as a statesman, Frank. I speak of his apparent interest in helping the lives of the poor and such, not of his political statements. There, he's just as inefficient as ever.
Posted by: The Doctor ||
06/28/2004 13:37 Comments ||
Top||
#12
fair enuf, Doctor
Posted by: Frank G ||
06/28/2004 13:40 Comments ||
Top||
#13
If you lived through Carter's presidency, you wouldn't think he was such a great man. He could spend the rest of his life going door to door, passing out million dollar bills and still not make up for it.
#14
You may have a point there, Tu. I was lucky enough to be born under Reagan. But then again, if we could only comment on what we knew, a lot of us would have to keep quiet a lot more often . . . this way, if we're wrong, we can be told so, and learn from it . . .
Posted by: The Doctor ||
06/28/2004 14:13 Comments ||
Top||
#16
[Simpsons]
Mayor Quimby: I give you our 39th President, Jimmy Carter.
first guy: Oh, come on!
second guy: He's history's greatest monster!
Riot ensues.
[/Simpsons]
Back on the subject of the Clinton book. It turns out that Al Gore and Bill Clinton had a big falling out during the 2000 campaign. It seems that Clinton wanted bush in the White House.
#17
Trollman-
So what would you list as Clinton's core principles? What ideals did he hold to without fail?
Careful now--this may be a trap. Select your words wisely-there are a lot of smart people on this website who can shred phony claims with one swipe of their long-memoried claws...
The problem with Clinton is that he is, despite all the language he borrows from America's forefathers, without principle.
#18
Clinton coasted on an economy that started with Reagan, faltered from a bad call on interest rates by Greenspand, and had recovered by December, after winning over Bush I. Greenspan attributed the following boom to productivity increases due to the wider spread of microcomputers.
He signed a law that opened up a defendant's past sex life for investigation in sexual harrasment cases, and then lied under oath when Paula Jones used the law HE SIGNED against him. He's admitted admitted as such in his own book, in his own words. "Following the Laws is for the LITTLE PEOPLE."
MOST of his "achievements" were due to his stunning loss of the House to Newt Gingrich and the Republicans, after cramming a tax increase down the throats of americans. Despite his Glib exterior, he admits in his book that Newt's program and agressiveness terrified him, and was relieved when the republicans blinked, mostly due to cover fire laid down by the media.
The lesson I take from his book? Never give up. When the media and democrats accuse you of bigotry, KEEP HITTING. When they claim your demands are sending the country down the toilet, KEEP HITTING. When they bitch and moan about you telling unpleasant truths, KEEP HITTING. When they signal that they're ready for "bipartisanship", START KICKING THEM.
Excerpt
Bombing didnât work for either side in World War II. Hitler bombed Britain mercilessly for years, but it didnât work. Our bombing did nothing to save the lives of 6 million Jews, 4 million Catholics, Gypsies and other "undesirables," and 20 million Russians. Our bombs couldnât even take out one German machine-gun on top of the cliffs overlooking the beaches of Normandy. World War II was won because my father and uncles and your fathers and grandfathers risked their lives pouring out of amphibious carriers like sitting ducks on a beach, crawling through the dead bodies of their friends and fellow soldiers, and climbing up those cliffs in France and Italy and the South Pacific. Over a quarter of a million of them, including my uncle, died doing this.
And that, my friends, as some are known to say, is the awful truth. If genocide is really taking place, the only way to stop it militarily is to send our children in there and accept the fact that thousands upon thousands of them will be killed. Are you willing to do that? Or better yet, this is the question I always ask myself when confronted with whether or not Ishould ever support a war: Do I believe strongly enough in this cause that I MYSELF would be willing to risk my life to go over there and square it with my conscience to kill Yugoslavians.
I have a feeling I know the answer most of you would give. We know Clinton is lying to us. We know there is no "Holocaust" taking place. What IS happening is that two groups of people are carrying on their centuries-old mission to annihilate each other. The Kosovo Liberation Army announced their intentions to rid Kosovo of all Serbs (the Albanians are the majority in Kosovo, the Serbs, a minority). Thatâs all a nutcase like Milosevic needed to justify his campaign to rid Kosovo of all Albanians. This is true madness and a lot of innocent people are losing their lives in the process.
Posted by: tipper ||
06/28/2004 2:25:23 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Is this the same Michael Moore that plays for the LA Lakers. If so, he'd be better to clam up.
#3
He's nicely defined his rational to go to war based on his own selfishness. "Do I believe strongly enough in this cause that I MYSELF would be willing to risk my life to go over there and square it with my conscience to kill Yugoslavians."
Change kill Yugoslavians to be shot at by Yugoslavians and you have Michael Moore in a nutshell. I cannot imagine any cause that Mikey would deem worth risking his hide over, thus he will oppose any and all wars.
He's no closet warmonger, he's a closet selfish coward by the quotes in the exerpt.
#4
The difference between the Kosovo war and the Iraq war is that no U.S soldiers were killed in the conflict while over 860 have been killed in the Iraq war. Michael Moore is not a coward because just by making this movie he is causing a lot of controversy. Speaking out against a government that you believe is unjust, like the Bush administration, is one of the most brave and PATRIOTIC thing that you can do. He knows he will be attacked by all the Rush Limbaugh's in the world quite viciously. He is speaking for many of the troops who have died, served or are still serving in Iraq and their families. There are many troops out there who are against this war after having to serve in 120 degree heat in the middle of the summer in awful conditions being shot at every day and worrying about whether they'd be next in a car bomb attack. Then the rational for war seems to have melted away: No WMD's. The Prisoner Abuse Scandle keeps us from saying we've come to liberate them. And there was absolutely NO CONNECTION between Iraq and Al-Qaeda as agreed upon by the non-partisan 9-11 commission. Speaking of cowards, the Bush administration is full of men who haven't served but have been eager for war.
#6
Speaking out against a government that you believe is unjust, like the Bush administration, is one of the most brave and PATRIOTIC thing that you can do
Agreed. But there are lines you dare not cross, otherwise you move from patriotism to sedition. And MM is all over the map.
He knows he will be attacked by all the Rush Limbaugh's in the world quite viciously.
So he deserves special treatment now? What a wanker Poor baby. Like conservative speakers haven't been savaged by the liberal press in the past decade.
There are many troops out there who are against this war after having to serve in 120 degree heat in the middle of the summer in awful conditions being shot at every day and worrying about whether they'd be next in a car bomb attack.
I hate to be the one to inform you, but climate-controlled battlefields are not within our grasp. Go talk to any WWII vet who suffered in extreme climates. Our guys almost have it easier, given modern composite armor and uniform materials.
No WMD's
Liar. I suppose the shells they found were full of Raspberry Vinegrete.
The Prisoner Abuse Scandle keeps us from saying we've come to liberate them.
Blown out of proportion for political purposes. We have some bad cops in our own country...shall we disband the police in your home town now? How about the state police? Think things for Joe Average citizen will improve then?
And there was absolutely NO CONNECTION between Iraq and Al-Qaeda as agreed upon by the non-partisan 9-11 commission.
Liar. You guys keep stating this like you think repeating it a thousand times will change reality and make it so. What losers! Sorry, won't happen.
Speaking of cowards, the Bush administration is full of men who haven't served but have been eager for war.
And the parting cheap shot to boot. Like your boys Clinton/Dole and their Serbian adventure? I don't see any military experience on Bill's record.
#8
Patriotism and criticism: A rationale critique is obviously useful. Moreover, a singular premise to a democratic government is the right of diseent.
However, Trollman falls prey to a repeated logical error: equivocation. We shouldn't be too hard on him, because he is merely a media stooge.
Here is the problem: Criticism must be rationale. Mere ranting is nothing more than noise. Deliberately false statements, such as are replete in the Moore flick, are dangerous. There is no patriotic value in propoganda.
The claim to care about the soliders is viciously off-base. Bogus criticism provides a proganda base for the terrorists. The terrorists' aims are not military (no one believes they can achieve a military victory), but rather psychological. When someone like Moore provides them proganda, it acts to encourage the violence, extend the troop stay and gets people killed.
The rest of troll's argument is simply too silly to contest.
#9
Pure rote by trollman. 120 degree heat ya say, better drink your water. The harsh winter conditions in Afganistan, better dress warmly. There troll, all better.
I did hear this a few days ago, I think it was Tony Snow, but just now, a caller on Rush brought out how somebody really is making money off those that sacrificed themselves bringing down saddam.
Troll, saddam was a bad guy. He had been trying to control the petrol dollars. Thats why he attacked kuwait, gentle kuwait! It's not good for freaks like saddam to have a bunch of money. I'll let you decide why. But he bugged out on his cease fire agreement, thats why President Clinton was so tough on him, like cruise missles, return fire over "no-fly zones", and "oil for food" programs.
You can discount saddams vengenge towards America and Britain, you can discount his collaborations with terrorist. You can rail against Haliburton now.
#10
Speaking out against a government that you believe is unjust, like the Bush administration, is one of the most brave and PATRIOTIC thing that you can do. He knows he will be attacked by all the Rush Limbaugh's in the world quite viciously.
If the worst that happens to Moore is that conservatives attack him, then Moore is nothing but a pussy.
Nice try, troll. No one gets thrown in jail for speaking out against the Bush administration, your most feverish fantasies notwithstanding, but you will suffer sharp criticism from conservatives, and it will be relentless.
There is no glory in that, but there is your little deception: You apparently want us to believe that conservatives and conservative media types have the same power as Bush.
Hint: we don't. We just happen to be right and we know the left is wrong.
What a lamer you are, troll. Go play with yourself.
#11
Trollman - The difference between the Kosovo war and the Iraq war is that no U.S soldiers were killed in the conflict while over 860 have been killed in the Iraq war.
no the difference is we were protecting the euros in kosovo and in iraq it is our interests we are looking out for. something clinton could/would not do, actually defending our interest.
Posted by: Dan ||
06/28/2004 16:40 Comments ||
Top||
#12
see trollman is linking moveonorg..what an idiot
opinions on rantburg must be making it all the way up the greesed pole at the DNC...sending thier operatives out to post....
Posted by: Dan ||
06/28/2004 16:43 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Speaking out against a government that you believe is unjust, like the Bush administration, is one of the most brave and PATRIOTIC thing that you can do. He knows he will be attacked by all the Rush Limbaugh's in the world quite viciously.
Attacked physically? Never. Just attacked VERBALLY, using First Amendment rights that still exist. If Moore has the right to attack Bush verbally and via the screen, then Rush HAS THE SAME RIGHT to attack Moore and reveal the lies he's spreading. "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me." Remember that bit of schoolyard wisdom? Didn't think so.
I do not believe one bit that Moore actually BELIEVES all the bullshit he spews: time and again, it's been proven he's taken stuff out of context, does creative editing, rearranges sequences of events. He KNOWS he's lying. The first amendment allows him to lie, but it also makes him solely and completely responsible for what he says, since he can't blame government censors or anybody else for his own creations. The first amendment only forbids congress from suppressing free speech: It does not prevent other citizens from using THEIR free speech to expose his lies, refute propaganda, and refuse to support him in any way.
He's clearly a narcissist, unwilling to accept his own lying character, and so projects it on others. While accusing conservatives of suppressing his movie, he uses lawyers and lawsuits to suppress criticism of his movie.
If it's okay for a private citizen to call Bush Hitler, it's also okay for a private citizen to call THAT citizen a traitor. Or is this a situation of a liberal saying "Free speech for me, BUT NOT FOR THEE!!!"
A young college woman and three men killed in an alleged shootout with police in Gujarat were linked to a terrorist group but Indian intelligence had infiltrated their operation, a report said yesterday. The Hindu newspaper said in a front-page story that the June 15 killings in Ahmedabad city followed an elaborate intelligence operation that was linked to terrorist groups operating in Jammu and Kashmir. A storm of protests broke out after the Gujarat Police claimed the four, also including two suspected Pakistani men and an Indian man besides the young woman, were shown killed on a highway while trying to assassinate state Chief Minister Narendra Modi. Some politicians even alleged that the killings were stage-managed and probably done by a trigger-happy police to bolster the standing of a politically beleaguered Mr Modi amid a rebellion from party colleagues.
But the Hindu said while the police claims may have been overblown, "the group was indeed engaged in reconnaissance for a suicide squad attack on Hindu radical leaders. "But the mission was monitored by intelligence agencies at each stage and infiltrated from its outset." The Gujarat Police had said all four were linked to the Pakistan-based Laskher-e-Tayyeba, which is part of a separatist campaign raging in Jammu and Kashmir. Among the dead were two suspected Pakistani terrorists who had been operating in Jammu and Kashmir for about a year. The June 15 killings followed a four-month-long covert operation by the Intelligence Bureau, the Hindu said. The operation was sparked by a letter discovered on the person of a Lashker commando killed with six other terrorists by Indian security forces in the Poonch area of Jammu and Kashmir on Feb. 20. Among other things, the letter, authored by an inmate of a prison in Ahmedabad, revealed the identity of an Indian lawyer who had helped the Laskher in the past. After some vigorous persuasion, the Hindu said, the lawyer began cooperating with Indian intelligence, which began using him to lure Lashker cadre to Gujarat.
"I'll cooperate! I'll cooperate!! Just put those pliers down!"
The lawyer was instructed to tell Javed Sheikh, an Indian who was among the four killed June 15, that "the infrastructure was in place to execute an attack on Modi." Much of their subsequent dealing was conducted through Ishrat Jahan, (the) Mumbai (woman) college student whose killing sparked off furious protests. "Police officials in Ahmedabad now have in their possession records of several calls she had made to Javed from a public telephone centre in Mumbai." By early May, Javed had requisitioned two suicide squad members to launch the actual attack, the Hindu said.
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
06/28/2004 1:16:51 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Prime minister Zafarullah Jamaliâs dramatic resignation exposes the hollowness of the democratic set-up installed by President General Pervez Musharraf only two years ago, Pakistani analysts and opposition leaders said.
I think any democratic process Pakland has indulged in since 1947 has been pretty fragile. I don't think they quite grasp the concept...
The resignation was âforcedâ and raises concerns about the stability of the civilian rule restored after three years of military dictatorship, they said.
Somebody's got to drive the bus. When the prime minister's ineffective or corrupt, it's the head of state's job to dump him/her/it and try somebody else...
He also announced the dissolution of the cabinet and nomination of PML president Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain as his interim successor, to be followed some two months later by outgoing finance minister Shaukat Aziz. Aziz, a former Citibank official, credited for taking the country out of economic crisis, is considered a close confidant of Musharraf. Political analyst Hassan Askari said Jamali simply obeyed Musharraf. âHe stepped down under instruction from the presidential house. The parliament and the ruling coalition had no role in effecting this change,â Askari told AFP. âThe change confirms the presidentâs centrality to the political process and his ability to manipulate it according to his wishes.â
For all his faults, Perv, has some pretty horrible opposition. MMA spends most of its time obstructing and maneuvering. Qazi and Fazl have a completely different concept of what a country should be...
Askari said there was no obvious justification for the removal of Jamali, who was handpicked by Musharraf. âThere was no political crisis and there was no revolt in the party,â he said. âThis exposes the weakness and hollowness of the civil institutions established after the 2002 elections.â
I'm hoping Jamali was dumped because he wasn't ruthless enough, but that's probably too much to hope for...
Jamali stressed that his government was unblemished. âThere is no charge on me or my cabinet colleagues. My intention was pious and my conscience is clear.â
He's the first Pak PM I can think of who hasn't been mired in corruption...
However, the burly 60-year old tribal elder from poor Baluchistan province was seen by many as docile and overshadowed by Musharraf, who is also the chief of the army. Jamali was âslowâ in taking decisions and Musharraf, facing tough parliamentary opposition, perhaps wanted a dynamic person, Askari said.
"Dynamic" would be another word for "ruthless," I'm thinking...
Analyst Mohammad Afzal Niazi said Jamali âfailed to deliver political support to Musharraf to remain in uniform.â Musharraf, who has emerged as a key ally in the US-led war on terror, sought a parliamentary confidence vote in January to rule until 2007 and remain the military chief until December this year. His authority as army chief is considered vital in Pakistanâs anti-terrorist campaign which has netted more than 500 Al Qaeda suspects, the majority of whom had been handed over to the US custody. Both the Islamic alliance and the main opposition Pakistan Peopleâs Party (PPP) lashed out at Musharraf over Jamaliâs exit. âWho says Jamali tendered his resignation -- he has been forced to do it,â senior MMA leader Hafiz Hussain Ahmed told AFP. The PPP said the change âdemonstrated that the military leadership never accepted the civilian and political set-up, even if that set-up was artificially created by them.â It also showed the system was âunstable and resting on sandy foundationsâ. The ruling partyâs secretary general, Senator Mushahid Hussain, dismissed the criticism. Jamaliâs âhonourable and dignified exit augurs well for democracy,â he said adding that the PML had set âa new and healthy tradition of smooth transition.â
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
06/28/2004 1:13:35 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This place looks every bit as fragile as Saudi Arabia to me. Plus they got nukes--can't believe his resignation barely registered a blip in public interest. This place seems a lot more seething and treacherous in agreements than any other place in that region, don't you think? And where is that heathen Osama?
BASRA: Iraqâs two key oil pipelines in the south were pumping oil to Iraqi sea terminals again yesterday after engineers finished fixing the damage caused by a series of sabotage attacks, an industry source said. âPipeline number two began pumping oil again at about 0600 GMT and we have reached a level of 70,000 barrels per hour,â an official at one of the offshore terminals in the north of the Gulf said. The repair work to the 48-inch pipeline meant oil exports â the countryâs largest source of revenue â were well on their way to reaching their pre-attack level of between 1.6 million and 1.8 million barrels per day.
On Monday, the first, smaller pipeline resumed pumping after engineers completed emergency repairs. The 42-inch line, which has a capacity of 500,000-600,000 barrels per day, was hit by saboteurs last Monday near the Az Zubayr oil fields, followed by an attack on the 48-inch line near the Basra oil refinery on Tuesday. The pipelines are connected to storage facilities on the Fao Peninsula that feed the Basra and Al Khorayma sea terminals, 500 kilometres south of Baghdad.
Iraqâs southern terminals have been the main gateway for exports ever since last yearâs US-led invasion, as insurgents have waged a relentless campaign of sabotage against the export pipeline to Turkey from the main northern oil fields around the city of Kirkuk. The southern route had been left largely untouched until late April, but since then a succession of attacks have targeted the vital export artery.
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
06/28/2004 12:56:49 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Oil spills. Oooo, a Greenie's greatest anger thingy. They'll go apeshit. Hire some and let them chain themselves to the pipe or something. Hand 'em a walkie talkie or, if this particular wanker is too obnoxious, mebbe an Oscar Meyer Weenie Whistle.
#2
Man, that's a great idea. Sort of like a 'human-shields-to-prevent-oil-spills'. Just chain some greenies up and down the pipeline. Tell 'em they're 'protesting' the 'evil oil spill' and give 'em a cell phone so they can dial up help when they see jihadis about to bust out and create a spill.
A French soldier in Ivory Coast was shot dead on Friday by a member of the West African nationâs Army during a joint patrol, a French military spokesman said. The spokesman said there was no known motive for the killing, though anti-French sentiment is high among many Ivorians who accuse the former colonial power of being too soft on rebel forces who control the north of the country.
Other than that, no idea at all.
The shooting took place near the capital Yamoussoukro, Lieutenant Colonel Philippe De Cussac said. "Late this afternoon, a soldier from the FANCI (Ivory Coast Armed Forces) fired without any known motive into the back of a French soldier during a patrol in the Zambakro region," he said. "Sadly, the soldier died." He said an investigation had been launched into the shooting.
Posted by: Mark Espinola ||
06/28/2004 12:56:49 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Hmph. Personal distaste against the French government aside, it's still fragging, and I don't like it for that. The real question is if the French government will actually do anything about it?
Yeah right.
Posted by: Edward Yee ||
06/28/2004 2:24 Comments ||
Top||
#2
They may be checking the balance sheet right now Mr Yee.
#3
The French government will most likely issue a stern note. The soldier's squadmates will most likely deal with it themselves, I believe these are FFL.
Posted by: Steve ||
06/28/2004 8:29 Comments ||
Top||
#4
The French surrender documents are signed and on their way.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
06/28/2004 9:08 Comments ||
Top||
#5
"Ivorian Soldier Shoots Dead French Colleague"
If he was already dead... nevermind.
Posted by: Laurence of the Rats ||
06/28/2004 9:57 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Hoo boy, they should really change that acronym. "Ooh, look! It's a FANCI boy! Wearing his FANCI pants!"
#9
As I recall, Chirac dispatched the French Foreign Legion to the Ivory Coast. The Legion is not comprised of ordinary soldiers-these guys are TOUGH. So I'm not sure that the dead guy's compadres are going to turn the other cheek on this one.
Posted by: rex ||
06/28/2004 11:55 Comments ||
Top||
#10
rex, I don't recall them being Foreign Legion, but just regular French wussy soldiers.
And Jacques didn't ask the UN before he moved unilaterally.
Posted by: Jen ||
06/28/2004 12:08 Comments ||
Top||
#11
so i guess deploying your forces in a third world cesspool with no strategic impact also has it dangers....
Posted by: Dan ||
06/28/2004 14:34 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Beware : chauvinist rant.
Jen, they are mostly marines, and some FFL. They're the one we usually (or at least, used to) send to our ex colonies to prop up or remove dictators. They're "african specialists" one can say, certainly not wussies.
What's funny about cliche is that they are two-way streets : Us soldiers are seen by most europeans as big bully that simply cannot fight w/o air support and huge firepower supremacy... back in my compulsory military service in the marines, which was a joke btw, the professionnal soldiers were not very impressed by the innate quality of the Us army ("way too rich", "very sensitive to uncomfort", "out of shape", "cannot fight without bottled water", etc, etc...). After all, our own military commentators, in their infinite wisdom, say that european troops (ie britsh and french) are much more effective on an individual basis...
Of course, this is false - altouhgh probably true at some subliminal level, like all cliche - as I can discern from my readings, but so is the "wuss french soldier". You must understand that french defense is *bankrupt*, undermanned, 30% of its shock troops (especially paratroopers) are drawn from muslims slums, it is demoralized, thrown out of balance by its professionnalization (another Chiraq grand scheme),... but it is NOT genetically incapable of fighting, as you imply. I wonder what JFM would say about this... probably something about the way french soldiers were lionized by their british counterparts during manoeuvers in the 60s (because of the large scale antiguerilla war of Algeria, which was, military, a complete successs).
Anyway, it is a sad event; that's the 3rd soldier to be killed that way, IIRC, by "friendly" fire.
#13
Rex is correct about the French Foreign Legion having been sent to the Ivory Coast by Chirac as of late 2002. The FFL is still there, and perhaps some French soldiers have been added as well...who knows. But article in the Scotsman does confirm rex's claim about the Legion though: http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=570&id=1394312002
#17
the professionnal soldiers were not very impressed by the innate quality of the Us army ("way too rich", "very sensitive to uncomfort", "out of shape", "cannot fight without bottled water", etc, etc...). After all, our own military commentators, in their infinite wisdom, say that european troops (ie britsh and french) are much more effective on an individual basis...
Uh huh. And the US soldiers wouldn't last in Iraq's summer either. And our equipment wouldn't work. And Sadr would wipe the floor with us, after Saddam lured us into an unwinnable urban war in Baghdad.
And ... and ...
Um. Didn't work out that way, did it?
US reservists, not even the active duty soldiers, patrolled and fought in body armor inside Humvees in 120 degree Farenheit weather, and then went back at night to stifling tents.
Marines dug in around Fallujah while under fire and killed, on average, 10 or 12 to one of their own losses, often higher, without any air support at all.
Time for some reality checks in the unionized armies of the EU, and even in those that aren't ....
#18
Not to mention the special forces, who are impressive as hell. One of the nicest, most soft-spoken guys I know, with a graduate degree in computer science, happens to be a combat-experienced special ops guy with a Pathfinder badge and a bunch of medals on his chest (when he wears his Class A uniform, which isn't often).
If the special ops guys are the ones way out in front without support, the Pathfinders are the ones that go out ahead of them.
The one difference between US special forces and, say, the Brits is doctrine. Ours specialize in air drops into territory, the Brits more often come in by foot over the border. Each can come in the other way, of course, but because of the different doctrine US special ops guys emphasize lots of upper body strength whereas the Brits look for the wiry type.
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.
