Hi there, !
Today Tue 07/12/2005 Mon 07/11/2005 Sun 07/10/2005 Sat 07/09/2005 Fri 07/08/2005 Thu 07/07/2005 Wed 07/06/2005 Archives
Rantburg
533660 articles and 1861898 comments are archived on Rantburg.

Today: 60 articles and 328 comments as of 16:48.
Post a news link    Post your own article   
Area: WoT Operations    WoT Background    Non-WoT           
Central Birminham UK Evacuated: "controlled explosions"
Today's Headlines
Headline Comments [Views]
Page 4: Opinion
25 00:00 Phil Fraering [5] 
5 00:00 xbalanke [5] 
2 00:00 Cyber Sarge [2] 
2 00:00 Matt [1] 
Page 1: WoT Operations
14 00:00 Red Dog [10]
4 00:00 Phil Fraering [3]
0 [6]
1 00:00 Rory B. Bellows [2]
0 [2]
12 00:00 Darth VAda [11]
13 00:00 JosephMendiola [4]
11 00:00 Jan [7]
0 [2]
5 00:00 Frank G [1]
6 00:00 SON OF TOLUI [1]
4 00:00 SON OF TOLUI []
0 [1]
4 00:00 Ulamp Chosing2348 [2]
5 00:00 Elminemble Whuse3187 [3]
0 [2]
0 [1]
3 00:00 3dc [4]
0 []
2 00:00 SON OF TOLUI [1]
0 [1]
Page 2: WoT Background
6 00:00 Robert Crawford [4]
2 00:00 Frank G [4]
0 [3]
0 []
15 00:00 Thomong Whoting3058 [4]
6 00:00 Frank G []
4 00:00 Bernie Taub []
1 00:00 SON OF TOLUI []
0 [1]
3 00:00 Jackal []
2 00:00 2b [1]
2 00:00 Shipman [1]
6 00:00 gromgoru [1]
0 [1]
7 00:00 Sock Puppet 0’ Doom [2]
3 00:00 Shipman [3]
0 []
6 00:00 Matt []
4 00:00 Sock Puppet 0’ Doom [1]
1 00:00 Ulamp Chosing2348 []
5 00:00 djh_usmc []
11 00:00 Frank G [4]
2 00:00 SON OF TOLUI [2]
3 00:00 SON OF TOLUI [1]
55 00:00 tsotsi [6]
3 00:00 gromgoru [2]
0 [1]
9 00:00 Shipman [2]
Page 3: Non-WoT
5 00:00 tarantino4doo [5]
2 00:00 BigEd [2]
9 00:00 BigEd []
0 [1]
25 00:00 tsotsi [16]
6 00:00 Stephen [1]
7 00:00 SON OF TOLUI [1]
Europe
Lileks: Will there always be an England?
Go read it all. I'm posting just an excerpt here. You really need to read it all.

. . . Countries have national memories, national traits, but they’ve always been based in a certain amount of ethnic homogeneity. (To put it mildly. For Europe, nationalism was tribalism.) If you've moved beyond this, then what sort of core identity emerges after a great shock? What do you rise to defend? It is possible that a multiethnic society can unify along the lines of national identity; America proves that. But our foundational concepts are different. We’re the only true transnational country, inasmuch as our ideas are infinitely applicable. Our ethnic complexity began with refugees from all points of Europe, which is different from basing your national identity on beef-eating tars from Wales, Scotland, and assorted shires. Our ideals surpass ethnic identity, which is why a recent immigrant can get a lump in his throat when he hears the national anthem. Does someone who came to London last year from the West Indies respond on an elemental level to Holst like a fellow whose mum told him stories of the Blitz?

I don’t know, but I doubt it. At some point the old legacy culture is unbellyfeel to the newcomer. This puts Great Britain in an unusual position – its cultural heritage is more specifically ethnic, which makes it difficult to apply to other cultures, and its new self-definition as a melting pot means it has fewer means to unite the culture to face a specific threat. . . .

In the beginning, America was [the] next England; in the end, England ends up as the next America.

And gets bombed for it. Some believe that England was already America, inasmuch as both were ruled by fiendish quazi-nazis who tossed their nations into a war for grins and giggles. Some believe that the bombings in London, like the ones in Madrid, can be blamed on Bush and Blair for the Iraq campaign. It’s always interesting to see how people who pride themselves on sophisticated analyses and exquisitely tuned cultural sensibilities cannot see the plain home truths. The foe sneers: you are infidels; you die now. The moderns pull a face, steeple their fingers, and wonder what they really mean. Surely this is a result of invading Iraq and forcing them to have elections. Surely one of the bombers was an ordinary Iraqi who lived a peaceable life – well, aside from the time that Qusay’s men came by, took his daughter, returned her the next day as a broken heap who died from a vaginal hemorrage, and aside from the time when his brother was thrown off a roof because someone said he had turned his portrait of Saddam to the wall - surely it was the invasion that made this ordinary man take the understandable step of moving to London to kill commuters.

I know the 90s don’t matter at all; I know that nothing we believed in the 90s has any relevance, but you might want to heed a fellow named Osama who declared war on the West, and cited the sanctions against Iraq as one of his causus belli. Let us assume then that the Iraq campaign had never taken place. By now either the sanctions that so inflamed Osama’s sensibilities would still be in place, or they would have been removed due to international pressure. Saddam would still be in power, free to spend the Oil-for-Food money as he pleased, lavishing stipends on Palestinian suicide bombers, building up his own weapons programs without fear of international interference, having weekly meetings with Zarkawi. (Who would have been something other than a terrorist, of course. A chiropractor, perhaps. Or a botanist.) The situation in Lebanon would be unchanged; Libya would be happily pursuing its own agenda. And we would be safer?

Yes! Because the Arab world would not be enraged by our removal of Saddam and imposition of representational government, and we could get back to the real work of combating terrorism by addressing the root causes. You know, tyranny and lack of representational government. But this assumes that Newsweek et al wouldn’t have run with the Gitmo detainee stories. This assumes that Osama would be mollified by the lifting of the sanctions, an assumption so naive it makes the statue in the Lincoln Memorial weep on your behalf. This assumes that the London bombers’ mention of Afghanistan was just a rhetorical device, and they really have no fellow-feeling for the Taliban and their recent troubles. This assumes that all that stuff about the tragedy of Andalusia was just boilerplate, and they really aren’t animated by the loss of Muslim Spain.

One of the curious facts about the enemy: they may time their bombings down to the second, but their clocks count off the centuries. . . .

Go read it all.
Posted by: Mike || 07/09/2005 00:00 || Comments || Link || [1 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Lileks and Steyn, always a must-read. Check it our, tsotsi.
Posted by: Brett || 07/09/2005 9:10 Comments || Top||

#2  an assumption so naive it makes the statue in the Lincoln Memorial weep on your behalf...

ROTFLMAO
Posted by: Matt || 07/09/2005 13:53 Comments || Top||


Home Front: Politix
Clean Air and Wind Power Get the Kiss of Death
Two of the major tenets of the environmental movement were given the kiss of death recently. The kiss was not dissimilar from what Vito Agueci gave Joseph Valachi in 1961 in that no one saw it coming. For years, the enviros have been preaching the benefits of reducing air pollution and harnessing power from the wind. Two pretty good ideas right? We all enjoy clean air and wind is free.

So we thought.

So we have been told all these years. Well, it appears we have all been wrong.

Reducing pollution levels in the air could lead to much higher levels of global warming, researchers have warned.

Reducing aerosols - small particles and droplets in the air produced by cars, chemical emissions and smoke - would allow more of the sun's heat to enter the atmosphere.

This would speed up the warming process, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Care for more?

Another well-known cog in the wheel-o-green is the constant banter for the development and use of alternative forms of energy.

If Pacific Gas & Electric would build more hydroelectric facilities, we wouldn't be so dependent on fossil fuels.

If General Motors would build a hydrogen fuel cell, we wouldn't be so dependent on fossil fuels.

If more energy producers embraced wind power, we wouldn't be so dependent on fossil fuels.

If we weren't so dependent on fossil fuels, we wouldn't be in Iraq. Sorry, different topic.

The energy producers listened and for the past few decades, so-called wind farms have sprouted up all across the surface of our nation. One of the earliest windolectric facilities I can remember is on top of Altamont Pass in Alameda County, California. Altamont Pass seemed as if it were destined for use as a wind farm as it is located at the divide between the San Francisco bay area and California's great central valley. On days when the valley gets hot, as it has been doing for the past week, ambient air from the bay tries to fill the areas depleted by the rising hot air in the valley. The result is a strong westerly breeze that rushes across the top of Altamont Pass, through thousands of turbine generators and into the valley where the hot breeze hits my house and causes my PG&E bill to soar like Lanius ludovicianus.

The Heartland Institute opines...

Giant wind turbines at Altamont Pass, California, are illegally killing more than 1,000 birds of prey each year, according to a lawsuit filed January 12 by the Center for Biological Diversity. The suit demands an injunction halting operation of the turbines until and unless protective measures are taken and highlights increasing concerns regarding a power source long hailed as environmentally friendly by environmental activist groups.

"Altamont has become a death zone for eagles and other magnificent and imperiled birds of prey",said Jeff Miller, a spokesman for the Center for Biological Diversity. "Birds come into the pass to hunt and get chopped up by the blades."

Owners of the wind turbines assert they have gone to great measures to protect birds from being sliced up by the turbine blades, but the technology simply does not exist to generate wind power without sacrificing an immense number of birds each year.

"It's so unfair to say we have not been actively trying to do anything," said Steve Stengel, a spokesman for Florida Power & Light Company, which owns many of the turbines. "WeÂve done everything from installing perch guards to painting rotor blades."

Miller, however, was skeptical wind power generators are doing all they can to ameliorate bird deaths.

"We're asking the judge to throw the book at them," said Miller. "We're not suggesting they're going to be shut down. We are suggesting turbine owners out there need to take some measures to reduce bird kill, and that they come up with some adequate mitigation or compensation."

Once again, the antagonists just lob grenades at the issue and offer no attempt to provide a solution.

What'll they think of next? Reducing air pollution is bad or something like that?
Posted by: Flegum Thravinter3661 || 07/09/2005 07:14 || Comments || Link || [5 views] Top|| File under:

#1  I hate to say "I told you so" but....

Actually, no, I don't.

I TOLD YOU SO, you idiot "environmentalists."
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut || 07/09/2005 12:32 Comments || Top||

#2  Wind and sun are free. It's the wind turbines and the solar cells that have long paybacks.

If wind power is the answer, it wouldn't require massive government subsidies. If solar power is the answer, it wouldn't require massive government subsidies. If ethanol is the answer, it wouldn't require massive government subsidies. When will the whacko environmentalists learn that it's not a solution unless it can be reasonably priced without a government subsidy?
Posted by: Neutron Tom || 07/09/2005 13:10 Comments || Top||

#3  Tom - that would be never. :-(
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut || 07/09/2005 13:27 Comments || Top||

#4  Hmmm, nuclear power without a gov't subsidy...well ok I guess. But I can't afford it yet, that's for sure.
Posted by: R || 07/09/2005 13:28 Comments || Top||

#5  Florida Power & Light Company, which owns many of the turbines
WTF? My cue for a stock bail.
Posted by: Shipman || 07/09/2005 14:22 Comments || Top||

#6  The ultimate leftwing solution:

Keep the wind farms going and feed the dead birds to the poor. Problem solved.
Posted by: badanov || 07/09/2005 15:05 Comments || Top||

#7  Nuclear power is far and away the cheapest source of electricity. This study states electricity from coal costs ten times as much as electricty from nuclear. Since then the cost of coal has risen substantially (about doubled). The cost of nuclear has of course not changed. It goes on to state that were environmental costs included, the cost of electricity from coal would double relative to nuclear. So today electricity from coal costs around 50 times that of nuclear. Oil and gas are even more expensive. This is without factoring in the costs of Kyoto and global warming (were it to occur).

Care to retract that statement, R?
Posted by: phil_b || 07/09/2005 17:03 Comments || Top||

#8  No, not yet. Who builds the (nuclear) power plants?
Posted by: R || 07/09/2005 17:11 Comments || Top||

#9  Iran, North Korea...
Posted by: Neutron Tom || 07/09/2005 17:16 Comments || Top||

#10  Who builds the (nuclear) power plants? What the f@@@ does it matter who builds them. Get the Canadians to build them along the border and export the electricity. Oops! Too late, they do that already. From the south side of Lake Ontario you can make out tall chimneys about 30 miles east of downtown Toronto. Thats the Pickering nuclear facility, one the largest in the world. From memory it has 5 reactors.
Posted by: phil_b || 07/09/2005 17:23 Comments || Top||

#11  It just goes to show that it isn't possible to please everybody. Clean air, dead raptors. Live raptors, dirty air.

Take your pick, guys.
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama || 07/09/2005 17:25 Comments || Top||

#12  oil is massively subsidized... more than wind, solar and ethanol combined in both absolute and relative terms. The true price of oil has been estimated by the GAO to be well over $100/barrel when you count in subsidies to the industry, grants and loans to foreign oil producing countries and security for oil supply.
Posted by: Damn_Proud_American || 07/09/2005 17:52 Comments || Top||

#13  And phil_b is right... nuclear is by far the cheapest and most secure source of power currently known. The reason it is not flourishing is companies can't get permits to build.
Posted by: Damn_Proud_American || 07/09/2005 17:55 Comments || Top||

#14  phil_b... 10 times more for coal though? huh? That's simply not even close to true. It's just a little cheaper and when you count in distribution costs etc the difference in price becomes negligable.
Posted by: Damn_Proud_American || 07/09/2005 17:59 Comments || Top||

#15  economically the turbines make sense - in certain locations. In East San Diego County, right before the mountain elevations drop to teh desert floor, they are setting up test towers to determine the economic feasibility of putting in turbine farms...Same thing in Tehachapi, where they have long established turbine farms....it's not subsidized here
Posted by: Frank G || 07/09/2005 17:59 Comments || Top||

#16  Assuming of course that these companies have the cash to build a new plant, requiring no gov't input. What's it cost to build one of those things nowadays, $8 bil? Not cheap.
Posted by: R || 07/09/2005 18:03 Comments || Top||

#17  that seems a bit high, R, but close, and in inflated $ - say 10 yr escalation. I'd guess that's close, within $1-2 billion ...
Posted by: Frank G || 07/09/2005 18:07 Comments || Top||

#18  Think again, Frank. There's a federal tax credit.
Posted by: Neutron Tom || 07/09/2005 18:08 Comments || Top||

#19  NT - I'd assumed as much - if we wish to wean from the oil-tick tit, I'm all for that, but that should be a visible part of the equation and I stand corrected
Posted by: Frank G || 07/09/2005 18:14 Comments || Top||

#20  DPA, I didn't drill in the methodology used to get the 10X factor. I was just quoting it. The study is based on existing power plants and the cost of most nuclear power plants has been depreciated almost to zero. The majority are over 30 years old. Were the capital cost of new plants to be used I am sure the numbers would be different. However, improved technology would make new plants considerably cheaper to run. France the only developed country that has continued to build new nuclear plants, is now the world's largest exporter of electricity by a big margin and this is despite the high costs of distributing electricty over distances. This is becuase electricty from nuclear in France is so much cheaper than from any other source.
Posted by: phil_b || 07/09/2005 18:28 Comments || Top||

#21  A massive chunk of the cost of building nukes is sunk in the regulatory process both overtly through the regulatory bureaucracy and resultant public and private litigation and covertly through changes required by regulators in each new facility that made every single nuke in the US different from every other thereby causing costs to skyrocket. The Bush administration has, apparently without anyone really noticing, greatly streamlined that process. E.g. (and IIRC): previously certified sites need not be re-certified (read "re-litigated") for new construction; operating permits are now to be issued in advance at the same time construction permits are issued which will greatly assist in preventing multi-billion dollar boondoggles that are litigated out of existence before providing their first kW; there is a move to pre-approve standardized nuclear plant designs sparing each new plant the necessity of starting from square one of the regulatory process, the arbitrary 40 year life imposed on nuclear facilities by federal regulators has been stretched with new 20 year license extensions allowing capital costs to be amortized over a much longer lifespan, etc. All of these things contribute greatly to nuclear power's newly-found economy.
Posted by: AzCat || 07/09/2005 18:30 Comments || Top||

#22  Once upon a time most duck and geese migrated from Canada down to Mexico.

Mexico has no hunting laws. Now most geese and ducks that still migrate do so from Canada to Texas or Lousinia or FL. The new flocks are huge

Survival of the adaptors.

The Raptors will adapt or die. Only a short term problem. Greenpeace Lawyers are a different story.
Posted by: 3dc || 07/09/2005 19:57 Comments || Top||

#23  The last sentence caught my eye: "We are suggesting turbine owners out there need to take some measures to reduce bird kill (okay so far), and that they come up with some adequate mitigation or compensation."

What will be adequate? People like Miller are unlikely to come up with any useful suggestions. And who gets the compensation? Sounds like a squeeze to me. Just another way to bilk others (us) out of cash.

On an entirely separate note, I can't get "Preview" to work anymore. Something change?
Posted by: Whiskey Mike || 07/09/2005 20:17 Comments || Top||

#24  There is a who class of lawyers in the SF area that leech off of you and me through the "compensation" angle Wiskey Mike.

I say we open season on them, they are pure and simple greed heads.
Posted by: Sock Puppet 0’ Doom || 07/09/2005 21:46 Comments || Top||

#25  Just a quick note on Altamont Pass: AFAIK the main problem there is created by a specific model of vertical-axis wind turbine.

If those in particular were replaced there probably wouldn't be that many bird kills.

The question remains, though, whether it would stop the lawsuit.

I have some ideas of my own about this, but I haven't been able to get contact information for the operators of the farm.

(At least until the latest wave of lawsuits and the associated publicity. Now all I need is time).
Posted by: Phil Fraering || 07/09/2005 22:55 Comments || Top||


ScrappleFace: Jailed Journalist Reports NY Times Desecration
by Scott Ott

(2005-07-09) -- Law enforcement authorities in major U.S. cities put riot police on high alert today after recently-jailed journalist Judith Miller complained that prison guards had desecrated her copy of The New York Times.

"We know that journalists worship the Times," said one deputy police chief, "If they take to the streets in protest, things could get ugly fast."

Ms. Miller, who works for the Times' counter-intelligence department, told an unnamed visitor that her copy of the revered 'Gray Lady' had been carelessly tossed on the floor, handled by a conservative Republican jailer (who she called 'an infidel') and may have been used as a lining for a cat's litter box.

"They did everything but flush it down the toilet," she said. "They have no respect for the 'paper of record', may it publish forever, nor for the wise and powerful ones who create this daily miracle."

Wednesday, a judge sentenced Ms. Miller to jail for obstructing a federal investigation into who leaked the identity of a covert CIA operative, Valerie Plame, who also posed for pictures in a top-secret issue of Vanity Fair magazine.
Posted by: Mike || 07/09/2005 11:53 || Comments || Link || [2 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Judy a member of the Allah Al-Krugman Martyrs Brigade or the Al-Friedman Fedayeen Jihadist Jounalist Commando wing?
Posted by: Thrique Hupavigum9833 || 07/09/2005 17:32 Comments || Top||

#2  Love it! I also like how the left is still claiming that Rove is the "Deep Throsat" here even when the reporters claim he is not. I pray that it turns out to be a Dhimi Staffer or better yet an elected official.
Posted by: Cyber Sarge || 07/09/2005 21:19 Comments || Top||


Terror Networks & Islam
Where is the Gandhi of Islam?
But if the Metropolitan Police really believe what Brian Paddick says, if they really, truly think that the words "Islam" and "terrorism" must not be linked, then we have little hope of catching the killers, of understanding how the terrorism works, or of preventing new atrocities.
Posted by: john || 07/09/2005 10:55 || Comments || Link || [5 views] Top|| File under:

#1  Where is the Gandhi of Islam?

Beheaded by the Wahhabbists as soon as he spoke up.

Why do you ask?
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut || 07/09/2005 12:30 Comments || Top||

#2  There was a Gandhi in Islam. His name was Abdul Gafar Khan, he was Pashtoon and he fought the British occupations with Gandhi-like methods (but with the additional merit of him coming a warrior culture). In fact Gandhi and him werez allies (there is a photo showing him at the side of Gandhi: a towering, muscular man at the side of short, frauiol Gandhi).

But he was against the partition of India, he fought against the radicalaization and impicit racism in Pakistan (the land of the pure, the others being impure). His daughters didn't wear veil and spoke freely in public. I am sure he would have found the wahabis abhorrent and I also think he would have adapted his tactics (ie fight) if he had been confronted to Al Quaida and the talibans.
Posted by: JFM || 07/09/2005 13:58 Comments || Top||

#3  The Frontier Gandhi
A non-violent giant

Posted by: john || 07/09/2005 14:19 Comments || Top||

#4  Ah a Gentile Giant.
Posted by: Calvin || 07/09/2005 17:07 Comments || Top||

#5  Not to pee on anyone's parade, but, given what the real Gandhi was like, I don't want to know what an Islamic Gandhi would be like.
Posted by: xbalanke || 07/09/2005 21:10 Comments || Top||



Who's in the News
60[untagged]

Bookmark
E-Mail Me

The Classics
The O Club
Rantburg Store
The Bloids
The Never-ending Story
Thugburg
Gulf War I
The Way We Were
Bio

Merry-Go-Blog











On Sale now!


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.
Click here for more information

Meet the Mods
In no particular order...
Steve White
Seafarious
tu3031
badanov
sherry
ryuge
GolfBravoUSMC
Bright Pebbles
trailing wife
Gloria
Fred
Besoeker
Glenmore
Frank G
3dc
Skidmark

Two weeks of WOT
Sat 2005-07-09
  Central Birminham UK Evacuated: "controlled explosions"
Fri 2005-07-08
  Lodi probe expands - 6 others may have attended camps
Thu 2005-07-07
  Terror Strikes in London Underground - Death Toll Rising
Wed 2005-07-06
  Gunnies Going After Diplos in Iraq
Tue 2005-07-05
  Three Egyptians on trial for Sinai bombings
Mon 2005-07-04
  Egyptian envoy to Baghdad kidnapped
Sun 2005-07-03
  Al-Hayeri toes up
Sat 2005-07-02
  Hundreds of Afghan Troops Raid Taliban Hide-Out
Fri 2005-07-01
  16 U.S. Troops Killed in Afghan Crash
Thu 2005-06-30
  Ricin plot leader gets 10 years
Wed 2005-06-29
  The List: Saudi Arabia's 36 Most Wanted
Tue 2005-06-28
  New offensive in Anbar
Mon 2005-06-27
  'Head' of Ansar al-Sunna captured
Sun 2005-06-26
  76 more terrorists whacked in Afghanistan
Sat 2005-06-25
  Ahmadinejad wins Iran election


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.
18.217.203.172
Help keep the Burg running! Paypal:
WoT Operations (21)    WoT Background (28)    Non-WoT (7)    (0)    (0)