Sudan is trying to rally diplomatic support for rejecting war crimes charges against President Omar al-Bashir by the International Criminal Court. Sudanese officials presented their objections to the African Union Peace and Security Council in Addis Ababa.
Following the decision by the International Criminal Court's chief prosecutor to seek the arrest of Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir for his role in the conflict in the country's western region of Darfur, Sudan has attempted to bolster international opposition to such a move.
A Sudanese delegation led by Justice Minister Abdel Basit Sabdarat went before the African Union's main security organ. The deputy head of Sudan's diplomatic mission in Ethiopia, Akuei Bona Malwal, described Sudan's opposition to issuing an arrest warrant for President Bashir.
"It should be deferred until we establish peace. Because these things they have no time limit, what is the rush now? The idea is that this warrant be deferred until there is a peace process. Of course, we are all against impunity [exemption from punishment] and we hope there will be justice at the end of it. We are not saying he should not go on investigating, but he should not go on arresting the head of state at this junction," said Malwal.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/22/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Sudan
A state security court in Sanaa imposed a media gag order yesterday in the trial of three opposition leaders charged with stirring up violent protests in southern Yemen earlier this year.
Presiding judge Muhssien Alwan issued the order at the start of the second hearing into the case, saying that the gag order applied to both local and foreign media. Police officers guarding the court's gate prevented journalists from entering even before the judge issued the ban. When the highly publicized trial began on May 28, journalists were allowed into the courtroom.
Hassan Baoum, Yahya Al-Shouaibi and Ali Al-Gharib, all senior members of the opposition Yemeni Socialist Party, are charged with instigating civil disorder. The Yemeni authorities charge the three men incited violent protests and riots that hit several southern cities.
Protests and riots hit several southern Yemeni cities where disgruntled youths took to the streets in April to protest what they called discriminatory army recruiting policies against southerners.
On Sunday, a court in southern Yemen convicted 22 people of instigating violent protests, handed down six-month suspended jail terms. The court acquitted 10 other men. Prosecutors had charged the group with endangering the country's security through stirring up violent protests in April.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/22/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
Mr Justice Silber, sitting at London's High Court, ruled the Iraqi national, known as AE for legal reasons, had taken part in terrorist activities and knowledge from such courses could be used to make explosives. However, AE said his purpose for studying the courses was to continue his medical studies.
The judge dismissed AE's appeal against Home Secretary Jacqui Smith's decision last September refusing to permit him to undertake the AS-level courses in the 2008-9 academic year at a regional college. He had acted on the basis that the Home Secretary had reasonable grounds to believe AE had received terrorist training and had taken part in terrorist activities.
Mr Justice Silber said: "The use by a terrorist of the practical experience learnt on those courses to produce explosives or pathogens could lead to a substantial loss of lives. It requires relatively small amounts of either to cause loss of life and damage to property. It will be recollected that the bombs which caused so much loss of life on 7 July 2005 were created by individuals in their own homes. There is no suggestion that AE was involved with those events but they show how much damage can be caused by such bombs by people who have the expertise and confidence to produce dangerous items."
AE is a well-known figure in the Iraqi Kurdish community and since arriving in the UK, there were reasonable grounds for believing that he was involved in providing support for the Jihadist insurgency in Iraq and in radicalising individuals in the UK.
The judge's ruling follows an internet audio statement in 2006 from Abu Ayyub al-Masri - otherwise known as Abu Hamz al-Muhajir, the leader of al-Qa'eda in Iraq - which called on specialists with chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear weapons. Al-Masri had said the Mujahidin in Iraq was in "dire need" of chemists and physicists, as well as electronics experts and nuclear scientists to join the jihad (the holy war) against the West
U.S. Senator Chuck Hagel is repeating calls for U.S. withdrawal from Iraq, saying at a news conference in Jordan today that even the Iraqi government wants U.S. combat forces out by 2010.
The Nebraska Republican is accompanying Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama on an overseas trip.
Hagel says Iraqi leadership understands that the Iraqi people will determine the nation's future. He says it's time for the United States to start accepting the nation's sovereignty.
Hagel is a dishpit: Iraq has been sovereign since 2004. It's had an elected government and a constitution these past several years. We're there currently on a UN mandate and will work with the sovereign Iraqi government on a forces agreement. We'll leave when they want us to leave. It seems that both Obama and Hagel, on a fact finding mission, have forgotten a few basic facts.
Hagel's opposition to the Iraq war -- and Obama's decision to invite him on the trip -- has stirred speculation that Obama may consider the Republican as a running mate. Hagel told The Associated Press last month that he would consider it, although he doesn't expect to be on any ticket.
#1
That's what we have always wanted isn't it? I don't know about the 2010 part, but either us or the Iraqis need some sort of time frame to shoot for. Don't chisel it in stone, but make that the goal. Of course that doesn't excuse him from brown nosing Obambi to be the veep.
#2
Thought "W," our troops, and allies established Iraq's sovereignty in the first place. Seems like Hagel is out of touch or just parroting the donk litany.
Senator Barack Obama arrived in Baghdad on Monday, meeting with Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki and other senior Iraqi politicians, as an Iraqi spokesman said that the government was hopeful that foreign combat troops would withdraw in 2010.
Mr. Obama, on the latest leg of his first overseas tour as presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, arrived in the Iraqi capital in the early afternoon with an American delegation after first stopping in the southern Iraqi city of Basra.
Mr. Obama met with Mr. Maliki; the United States ambassador to Iraq, Ryan C. Crocker; the Iraqi national security adviser, Mowaffak al-Rubaie, and other Iraqi officials at the prime minister's residence in the Green Zone.
Mr. Obama described his talk with Mr. Maliki as "a wonderful visit," but news agencies reported that a government spokesman said that they did not discuss the timing of any troop withdrawal. However, the spokesman, Ali al-Dabbagh, addressed the issue. According to Reuters, he said, "We cannot give any timetables or dates but the Iraqi government believes the end of 2010 is the appropriate time for the withdrawal." The Associated Press quoted Mr. Dabbagh as saying, "We are hoping that in 2010 that combat troops will withdraw from Iraq," but noting that any plans would have to change should violence rise.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/22/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Obama lose his Q card again? Seems like he forgot to bring up his signature issue with Masliki.
Posted by: Richard of Oregon ||
07/22/2008 10:27 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Charles Krauthammer had a great editorial entitled "Who does Obama really think he is?" Krauthammer pegs BO as a narcissistic, messianic MSM darling who cares mostly about himself.
Congress should explicitly declare war against al Qaeda and write new rules for legal challenges by terrorism suspects following a Supreme Court ruling on the rights of Guantanamo prisoners, U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey said on Monday. Mukasey urged Congress to pass such legislation as the first U.S. war crimes trial got under way at the U.S. Naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where prisoners in the U.S.-declared war on terrorism are held in a detention center condemned internationally for harsh treatment.
Democrats in control of Congress and civil rights groups reacted coolly to Mukasey's proposals, saying they would avoid judicial oversight and stack the deck in favor of the administration.
The legislation is needed to conform with a landmark Supreme Court ruling last month that Guantanamo prisoners have the constitutional right known as "habeas corpus" to challenge their detention in federal court, Mukasey said in a speech to the American Enterprise Institute.
A new law should prohibit courts from ordering a detainee to be released within the United States, protect secrets in court hearings, ensure that soldiers are not taken from the battlefield to testify and prevent challenges from delaying detainee trials. In addition, he said, "Any legislation should acknowledge again and explicitly that this nation remains engaged in an armed conflict with al Qaeda, the Taliban and associated organizations, who have already proclaimed themselves at war with us."
"Congress should reaffirm that for the duration of the conflict the United States may detain as enemy combatants those who have engaged in hostilities or purposefully supported al Qaeda," and related groups, he said.
A week after the September 11 attacks Congress authorized "all necessary and appropriate force" against nations and groups that planned or supported the attacks. It did not specifically mention al Qaeda, which carried out the attacks, or their Taliban allies.
Some critics have said the Bush administration was too broad in asserting a nameless "war on terrorism," and some legal challenges have said the government failed to show a detainee's sufficient connection to al Qaeda to justify continued imprisonment under the 2001 resolution.
Mukasey said the administration already has legal authority to battle terrorism. However, he said, "It would do all of us good to have the principle reaffirmed, not that that principle itself is in doubt."
Posted by: Fred ||
07/22/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under: al-Qaeda
#1
Wait! If they are a recognized miltary outfit, then they are entitled to Geneva Convention protections, even if not a signatory state. The best solution is to assign the status of Personna non Grata to 100% of terrorists and terror supporters. Of course, marking someone in that manner requires due process. I recall a group of Muslim co-workers nodding support when one of their own said, "We are with Osama; he's the only one who is doing anything for Muslims." That was in late 2001, when al-Jazeera was cheerleading for Taliban-al-Qaeda. I believe that al-Qaeda is supported by at least 80% of Muslims in the West. Said support is not explicit, for al-Taqiyah purposes. Why do Muslims insist on working for Halal meals for Gitmo inmates? Are they not fake Muslims, given that terrorism is supposedly anathema to members? Reality dictates: all but a handful of the religion of terror members supported Taliban when it was in power; the same numbers want them restored. Those savages are termites in the body politic of the West.
I support execution for mere association with al-Qaeda. It is a catastrophic error to indulge free exercise of conscience for internal subversives.
#3
Terrorists and their supporters are a Clear and Present Danger to us all, and few have the Need to Know that we take no prisoners for obvious reasons. Time to end the debate and move on to a viable energy policy and other pressing matters.
#7
Why not just repeal our signatory acceptance of the Geneva Convention? It has never kept the North Koreans, the North Vietnamese, the Iraqi's, AQ, and others from violating it when our forces were captured. Why have it as our burden? Screw the left wing Euros who contribute nil to their own defense or NATO. We need to think only of ourselves in this mess.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
07/22/2008 12:56 Comments ||
Top||
#8
It's interesting how this coincides with an ISI report from Pakistan saying that 10,000 terrorist have massed in the tribal areas of Pakistan. I
Does the declaration Mukasey is asking for from Congress give us more latitude going after them in Pakistan?
Should McCain sponsor the bill and force Obama to make a choice ?
#10
I have no problem with them simply reissuing this with the title 'Declaration of War' so satisfy the idgit Kennedy -
S.J.Res.23
One Hundred Seventh Congress
of the
United States of America
AT THE FIRST SESSION
Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
the third day of January, two thousand and one
Joint Resolution
To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.
Whereas, on September 11, 2001, acts of treacherous violence were committed against the United States and its citizens; and
Whereas, such acts render it both necessary and appropriate that the United States exercise its rights to self-defense and to protect United States citizens both at home and abroad; and
Whereas, in light of the threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by these grave acts of violence; and
Whereas, such acts continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States; and
Whereas, the President has authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This joint resolution may be cited as the `Authorization for Use of Military Force'.
SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
(a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.
(b) War Powers Resolution Requirements-
(1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution, the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution.
(2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS- Nothing in this resolution supercedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution.
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Vice President of the United States and
President of the Senate.
Why it takes an army of lawyers to figure that putting those three words magically substantively alters the intent of the original legislation only demonstrates that the judiciary is way out of control. Next Justice Kennedy will demand that a DoW requires the process of amending the Constitution. When we go that far, we might as well use the process to dump SCOTUS.
KATHMANDU: Nepal's Maoists have announced that they will not form the country's first post-royal government after the defeat of their presidential candidate. The announcement has plunged the country into a new political crisis.
The former rebels' decision, seen as a blow to Nepal's peace process, came a day after rival parties in a constitutional assembly ganged up against the Maoists to elect a president allied to the main centrist party. "The party's central committee meeting has decided not to form the government under our leadership," Maoist spokesman Krishna Bahadur Mahara said.
They'll take their ball, go home, and restart the violence revolution ...
Elections to the assembly in April gave the Maoists the largest single bloc of seats, but not an outright majority. The Maoists had insisted that their choice of president should be elected and they form a new government.
But a vote on Monday saw Ram Baran Yadav from the Nepali Congress Party -- the Maoists' main rival -- anointed the country's first president.
"After the presidential election, it is certain that we do not have a majority. So we do not have any basis to form the next government," said Mahara.
The Maoists' continued involvement in mainstream politics is seen as crucial to the survival of Nepal's peace process, which ended a decade-long rebel uprising that killed at least 13,000 people dead.
Posted by: john frum ||
07/22/2008 07:46 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Give em a chance, folks. After all, Jimmy Carter sez they're "good people". And we all know what a good judge of people he is. Right?
Barack Obama's visit to the green zone in Baghdad far eclipsed a similar trip by Gordon Brown two days earlier in terms of the media frenzy it generated.
Journalists camped for three hours outside the residence of Nouri al-Maliki, the Iraqi Prime Minister, hoping for a glimpse of the Democratic presidential hopeful as he paid a visit. There was another scrum as Mr Obama departed, surrounded by half a dozen burly security guards and an entourage of aides.
The circus was repeated outside Jalal Talabani's presidential compound, which sits just outside the green zone but is also formidably guarded.
The contrast with the attitude of ordinary Iraqis could not have been greater. Most were oblivious that the Obama visit was even taking place. "Who is Mr Obama?" asked Muhammad Saed, 29, who owns a small supermarket in Baghdad. "I stopped reading the news after the invasion because it only talks about car bombs and people being killed."
Ahmed Chaseb, a 29-year-old traffic policeman in the Shia slum of Sadr City, had also never heard of the senator. "I'm not interested in politics and I don't trust Americans," he said.
Down in the southern port city of Basra most people were unaware that Mr Obama had begun his Iraq tour at the British military base near by.
Sheikh Mohammad al-Zaydi, however, said that he had great respect for the senator and wished him success in the elections.
#1
Candidate Obama: making friends and influencing people yet again. By the time he gets done, he'll be even more vilified around the world than George W. Bush or Ronald Reagan.
Posted by: The Obamessiah ||
07/22/2008 17:34 Comments ||
Top||
#3
"I'm not interested in politics and I don't trust Americans," he said.
Now the Lord is luv an honest man. But friend, we're in this together, look thru that winder there, is that something or what? You wanna be a traffic cop all your life? We both got a chance here to make a few gelddinerodollars euros each. I'll get back at you soon, meanwhile my esteenmed friend Mohammed4Doo will work his magic.
Posted by: Billie Sol Estes Rockets ||
07/22/2008 20:57 Comments ||
Top||
July 22 (Reuters) - The U.S. military said on Tuesday the last of five extra combat brigades sent to Iraq last year had withdrawn. There are currently just under 147,000 U.S. troops in Iraq. Following are facts about the so-called surge:
WHY WERE EXTRA TROOPS SENT?
President George W. Bush ordered the deployment in January 2007 to stop Iraq sliding into sectarian civil war. The bombing of a Shi'ite shrine in the city of Samarra in February 2006 had triggered intense fighting between majority Shi'ites and minority Sunni Arabs. Al Qaeda militants had also sought to fan tensions, stepping up a campaign of car bombings. Five combat brigades plus supporting troops, or some 30,000 soldiers, were sent to Iraq between February and mid-June 2007. Besides reducing violence, Washington wanted to create "breathing space" for Iraqi leaders to make progress on laws seen as critical to fostering national reconciliation.
HOW WAS THE "SURGE" IMPLEMENTED?
Most reinforcements were deployed in and around Baghdad, the epicentre of the sectarian violence. General David Petraeus, newly appointed commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, focused on counterinsurgency tactics. Troops were ordered out of large bases into small outposts to live and fight with Iraqi forces. This spread a security footprint into Baghdad's most dangerous districts. Another goal was to clean out Baghdad's "beltways", areas around the capital where al Qaeda assembled many of its car bombs. Emphasis was also placed on reviving local government and the economy. Militants put up tough resistance. From April to June 2007, 331 U.S. soldiers were killed, the deadliest quarter of the war for the U.S. military.
WHAT DID IT ACHIEVE?
U.S. officials say it helped cut violence to four-year lows. A decision by Sunni Arab tribal leaders to turn against al Qaeda in late 2006 and a ceasefire by Shi'ite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, whose Mehdi Army was blamed for much of the sectarian killing, also helped sharply reduce violence. U.S. forces joined largely Sunni Arab tribal security units, many comprising former insurgents, to squeeze al Qaeda out of their strongholds in Baghdad and western Anbar province. A key element of Petraeus' strategy was to protect neighbourhoods and markets. This led to the construction of concrete walls around many areas of Baghdad, which sometimes sparked controversy.
WHAT DID NOT GO RIGHT?
During 2007, there was little progress on reconciliation. The main Sunni Arab bloc quit the government in August 2007 in a row over power sharing and only returned last week. Most key laws that Washington wanted passed, foundered. A few laws have been passed this year, but implementation has been patchy. Perhaps the most important piece of legislation, a draft law to divide the country's vast oil reserves equitably among Iraq's ethnic and sectarian groups, remains deadlocked. Provision of government services has also languished. Iraqis who once complained about security now moan about electricity and water shortages, long queues at petrol stations and a lack of jobs.
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?
All eyes will be on Petraeus, who is expected to make recommendations on future U.S. troop levels to the U.S. Congress in September. The New York Times has reported the Bush administration was already considering more troop cuts beginning in that month. Last week Petraeus said security conditions would determine his recommendations. At the same time, Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has said he hoped all U.S. combat troops could be out of Iraq in 2010.
(VOI) - Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki said on Monday during his meeting with visiting U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama that developments in Iraq will determine the presence of foreign troops in the country. "Al-Maliki stressed that developments on the ground will enable Iraqi and U.S. sides to agree on a clear vision regarding the presence of troops, noting that the two sides agreed during their negotiations on the long-term agreement," according to a statement released by al-Maliki's office and received by Aswat al-Iraq -- Voices of Iraq -- (VOI).
A declaration of principles was signed between U.S. President George W. Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki in December 2007. The declaration was planned to be ratified on July 31, 2008 to be effective as of January 1, 2009. The agreement governs the U.S. forces' presence in Iraq after the year 2008. This presence currently relies on a mandate by the UN, renewed annually upon the request of the Iraqi government. The agreement should not be effective except after endorsement by the 275-member Iraqi Parliament, which comprises five political blocs, the Fadhila (Virtue) Party and the Sadrist Bloc, or Iraqis loyal to Shiite leader Muqtada al-Sadr. "We now have a strong government which saved Iraq from terrorism," al-Maliki added, expressing his optimism regarding realizing the Iraqis' ambitions in security, stability and economic prosperity," he also said.
"For his part, Obama congratulated al-Maliki on the achievements made by his government, hailing the U.S.-Iraqi relations and the developments in the country," the statement said. "The U.S. senator told al-Maliki that the American people seek to have strategic relations with Iraq, asserting the U.S. commitment to maintain Iraq's security and stability," it added.
A cabinet media source had said earlier that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and visiting U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama discussed a number of topics including the future of U.S. military presence in Iraq. "Maliki received Obama as soon as he arrived in Baghdad and the two sides discussed the possibility of U.S. troop cuts in Iraq," the source, who asked that he is name not be revealed, told the VOI.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/22/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: Iraqi Insurgency
#1
But this was published in Iraq. When will the US press pick it up?
Posted by: Bobby ||
07/22/2008 6:44 Comments ||
Top||
(VOI) -- The National Dialogue Front (NDF) on Monday held a conference in Basra demanding to limit "Iran's intervention in Iraq's issues," according to the NDF's Basra branch's secretary general. "Many Iraqis know that Iran has the biggest role in destroying Iraq, by supporting militias and intervening in Iraq's local issues," Adnan al-Mousawi said in his speech during the conference. "Due to those parameters, we addressed an invitation to the Iranian government last June to put an end to those acts and to employ dialogue and consensus to solve problems," he said.
"We were surprised that the Iranian government disregarded and ignored the invitation," he added. "We renew our invitation to the Iranian government to stop those acts, to respond to Iraqis demands, to apologize for what it has done to innocents who were targeted by militias supported by Iran, and to compensate those who fell or were injured in sabotage, kidnapping, killing, and detonation operations," he noted.
"The ultimatum will last until September 1; otherwise, we in cooperation with many sides that support these demands will employ legal measures to restore the Iraqi rights, and will conduct a campaign to boycott the Iranian products," he proceeded. "We demand to stop supporting the political sides that work for Iran's interest and supported by Iran, and to end the Iranian influence through parties and figures in Iraq," he asserted.
"From his side, Awadh al-Abdan, NDF's senior member in Basra, said "The NDF made an initiative recently to solve pending issues between the Iranian government and the Iraqi people, but it was surprised that the Iranian government ignored and disregarded this matter. This is evidence that the Iranian government does not care about the Iraqi blood and destruction in Iraq. The Iranian government should be aware that Iraq's Shiites are at the leading position to encounter Iran's domination. There are many evidences regarding the Iranian involvement in Iraq; a matter that increases venomous Iraqis on the Iranian government."
Posted by: Fred ||
07/22/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Iran
(VOI) — The parliamentary Sadr bloc on Monday expressed fears that the Iraqi-U.S. long-term security agreement currently being debated may transfer the situation from an occupation to a sort of mandate.
"This agreement would change the direct occupation to a sort of mandate," lawmaker Nassar al-Rubaee said in a press conference in Baghdad.
"There is a contradiction in the statements made by the Iraqi government regarding this treaty," he said. "Is it a security agreement, strategic treaty, or mutual cooperation protocol?" he added. "It became a protocol to ensure that it would not be enacted by the Parliament," he noted.
From his side, Salih al-Igaili, lawmaker of the Sadr bloc, said "there are U.S. pressures on the Iraqi negotiator to change the agreement's title." "It went down from a treaty to an agreement in order not to be admitted to U.S. Congress," he added. "It also went further down to a memorandum of understanding so that it will not require the Iraqi Parliament's approval," he asserted.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/22/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under: Mahdi Army
(VOI) -- The Iraqi Supreme Criminal Court on Monday commenced the first session to try the Friday Prayers case, which is related to events that occurred in Sadr City and Kufa in 1999. 14 former Iraqi officials under Saddam Hussein are being tried in this case. The semi-official Iraqiya TV station broadcast the session that was headed by Chief Justice Mohammed Uraiby. This case is the fifth that has been tried by this court since it was formed in 2003, after the cases of al-Dujail, al-Anfal, Shaabaniya Uprising, and merchants' execution.
The session embraced confirming attorneys' authorizations, and addressing charges to defendants. Among this case's defendants are Ali Hassan al-Majeed, Tareq Aziz, Abid Hmod, Sabir al-Dori, Sbaawi Ibrahim al-Hassan, Lateef Nsayef Jassim, Mohammed Zmam, Jassim Mohammed Hachim, Ugla Abid Segar, Ahmed Hameed Mahmod, and Aziz Salih al-Noman. When Justice Uraiby asked defendant al-Majeed about his name, he replied "I am an old customer," in reference to having been tried by the court in previous cases.
This case goes back to 1999 on the eve of assassinating Sayyid Mohammed Mohammed Sadeq al-Sadr (Sayyid Muqtada al-Sadr's father) and his two sons in Kufa city in February 19, 1999, and the security tensions that Sadr City had witnessed when the two mosques of al-Muhsen and al-Hikma were attacked, and tens of prayer-goers were killed or arrested by Saddam Hussein's security forces.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/22/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under: Iraqi Baath Party
(VOI) - Iraqi Vice President Tareq al-Hashemi called to establish a development council in Anbar dedicated to urban development and implementing vital projects. "This came during his meeting with chiefs of al-Boufahd tribe in Anbar province," said a statement released from al-Hashemi's office and received by Aswat al-Iraq - Voices of Iraq - (VOI). "The vice president asserted that Anbar residents made great sacrifices and they should be compensated," the statement added. He stressed the importance of exerting all efforts to develop the province, mainly in the fields of education, humanitarian, and services.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/22/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: Iraqi Insurgency
(Xinhua) -- Singapore said here on Monday it did not rule out the possibility that Mas Selamat, head of the country's Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) terrorist network, has escaped to foreign countries.
"We obviously cannot dismiss the possibility that Mas Selamat could have managed to escape Singapore for another country. Singapore is not a fortress," said Singapore's Deputy Prime Minister and Home Affairs Minister Wong Kan Seng in the Parliamenton Monday.
Wong said that Singapore's security agencies have so far not received any information from their Indonesian counterparts to confirm that the fugitive is hiding in the neighboring country.
However, if Mas Selamat has escaped abroad, Wong said, the city state will work with the relevant foreign counterparts to track him down and bring him back to justice in Singapore.
Meanwhile, two private individuals in Singapore have offered a cash reward of 1 million Singapore dollars (one U.S. dollar equals1.35 Singapore dollars) for information leading to the apprehension of Mas Selamat inside or outside Singapore.
Mas Selamat, who was wanted by the Singaporean authorities in connection with planned attacks on the Changi airport, was arrested by the Indonesian police on Bintan island in 2006 and then sent back to Singapore. But he escaped from Singapore's Whitley road detention center later February this year.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/22/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: Jemaah Islamiyah
#1
He better hope he has escaped because I wouldn't want to be an 'enemy of the state' in Singapore. I have lived there and being on their s**t-list is not something anyone would want to aspire to, believe me.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
07/22/2008 12:59 Comments ||
Top||
One of the arrested suspects in the June 8 kidnapping of broadcast journalist Ces Drilon and three others, including Mindanao State University Professor Octavio Dinampo, said he was only an errand boy of the group that abducted the news team and the professor in Sulu last June.
The suspect, identified by authorities as 18-year old Nadzmir Amirul, said that when the kidnappers arrived at their place in the village of Timpook in Patikul, he and another companion were hired to watch over the victims.
Aside from serving as guard, Amirul, also known as Abu Kudama, according to the military, cooked and fetched water for the kidnappers and the victims.
He said when ransom was paid, he got P50,000 as payment for his services.
When asked why the wallet of ABS-CBN cameraman Jimmy Encarnacion was recovered from him during his arrest on Friday, Amirul said it was given to him.
Amirul said Encarnacion had asked him to look for his wallet, which was taken by the other abductors, so he could get back his identification cards. He said Encarnacion offered that he could keep the wallet after the cameraman got his ID cards.
Amirul said the group of Abu Sayyaf Commander Amlon got about P18 million in ransom.
He said the money was put in two bags and was divided among the members of the group. Amirul said he did not know exactly how much the others got as share.
Asked about the participation of Indanan town Mayor Alvarez Isnaji in the kidnapping, Amirul said: "This is my first time to hear that name. I do not know him."
Isnaji served as chief negotiator for the victim's release. But the mayor and his son Haider were later arrested for allegedly being behind the kidnapping.
Dinampo, in an earlier interview, said he was sure the men who held them were members of the Abu Sayyaf group led by Radulan Sahiron. Amirul said he and some of his companions were considered part of the outer group of the Abu Sayyaf, and not that of the inner group led by Radulan Sahiron. "We are the bad guys," he said in the vernacular.
Col. Eugene Clemen, commander of the 3rd Marine Brigade, described Amirul as "very cooperative and is telling the truth."
"I am convinced by what he says. Honestly, I myself believe that what he is saying is true," Clemen said.
But Rear Admiral Emilio Marayag Jr., commander of the Naval Forces South, said the Abu Kudama he knew had long been arrested. "Abu Kudama is in Manila to face charges in court, apart from this, I have nothing more. Military Intelligence Group 9 arrested him last year," he said referring to Teteng Mandangan.
"As far as I know, there is (only) one Abu Kudama, unless there's another one."
Mandangan was arrested by Marine soldiers in Bongao, Tawi-tawi, on Nov. 21, 2007, and was among those allegedly involved in the Dos Palmas kidnapping. "As far as I know, there is (only) one Abu Kudama, unless there's another one," Marayag said.
Major General Benjamin Dolorfino, Marine commandant, said they were positive about Kudama's identity because he was one of those caught in a video secretly taken by the ABS-CBN team. "His arrest will provide a lot of information that would lead to the solution of the case and give justice to the victims," Dolorfino said.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/22/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under: Abu Sayyaf
Visiting Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem said yesterday that Damascus was keen to open a new chapter in its relations with Lebanon and to delineate the border between the two countries. "Our relations today are on an equal footing," Muallem told a news conference after meeting with Lebanese President Michel Suleiman on the first such visit by a high-ranking Syrian official in more than three years.
"There is a new consensus president who has trustworthy ties with Syrian President Bashar Assad, and this can help resolve a lot of outstanding issues," he added. Lebanon and Syria said earlier this month that they had agreed to establish diplomatic relations.
During his hours-long visit, Muallem handed an invitation to Suleiman from his Syrian counterpart to travel to Damascus, a trip the Lebanese press said would take place within a week or 10 days.
The two men also discussed the issue of the Israeli-occupied Shebaa Farms, the delineation of the border between both countries and the fate of hundreds of Lebanese who vanished during Syria's rule in Lebanon.
"There is nothing to prevent the demarcation of the borders but we must take into account the fact that many Syrian and Lebanese villages are intertwined and whether this would harm residents," Muallem said. "Still, if we must delineate the border, we are ready."
He added that placing the disputed Shebaa Farms in southern Lebanon under UN administration would in no way signify an end to Israel's occupation of that area.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/22/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Syria
#1
"placing the disputed Shebaa Farms in southern Lebanon under UN administration would in no way signify an end to Israel's occupation of that area"
Cause da Joos can occupy a place even when theyre not there. We defy the usual limits of space and time, cause of, er, Einstein, thats it, Einstein.
In T. Boone Pickens' war, the enemy is foreign oil.
Pickens, the Republican Texas oil mogul, testified Tuesday before a Senate panel to lay out his new, self-titled "Pickens Plan" to boost renewable energy sources, get the U.S. transportation sector off oil, and cut U.S. use of foreign petroleum.
Pickens told the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee that aside from getting away from foreign oil, he's for just about anything, from electric cars like those advocated by Al Gore to offshore drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
Recalling a conversation he recently had with Gore, Pickens told the panel: "I'm for everything that's American. I only have one enemy, and that's foreign oil. That's what I want to get rid of."
Pickens said installing wind farms, and later solar power facilities in the midsection of the United States, with government help, could produce 20 percent of electricity consumed domestically. That would alleviate the need to use natural gas to make electricity.
Under the Pickens Plan, natural gas along with biofuels would power all transportation, reducing foreign oil dependence according to Pickens' numbers by one-third.
He also said he believes U.S. national security is in dire straits with roughly $700 billion annually heading overseas to the Middle East and unfriendly countries like Venezuela in exchange for crude. This is more than a disturbing trend line. It is a recipe for national disaster. ... This is a crisis that cannot be left to the next generation to solve," Pickens said, adding: "I am convinced we are paying for both sides of the Iraqi war."
"If we continue to drift like we're drifting, you're going to be importing 80 percent of your oil. And I promise you, it'll be over $300 a barrel," Pickens said, responding to a question from committee chairman Sen. Joe Lieberman. "If we do nothing, it's going to be over the top," Pickens said.
Pickens' company Mesa Power has invested $2 billion in a Texas panhandle wind farm. One of Pickens' companies also owns about 90 of the roughly 500 publicly available natural gas stations with another of his companies, Clean Energy.
But Pickens, chairman and founder of BP Capital Management, also regularly points out he doesn't need the money.
"I didn't want to come and go in this life and feel like I had something that would've helped the country. So I though, 'What the hell, it's time to stand up and be counted,' " Pickens said, according to Politico.
Note that we already power fleets fo vehicles with Natural Gas, so this isnt like electric cars and fuel cells which still need lots of work - this can be done NOW. We are the "Saudi Arabia" of Natural gas, with current reserves of in excess of 100 years of current demand, and in the OCS and Alaska, enough additional natural gas to yield as much as 10 times that mount. If we want to do something NOW, this is probably the best path.
#1
Its a pretty neat solution - attack the supply side by jumping up US domestic petroleum production, and attack the demand side by substituting alterntive energy sources, and moving transportation from petrol to natural gas.
Double US domestic oil production and cut demand in multiple places? Sounds like a big drop in the need to import, and a lot of it within the next few years, instead of decades out.
Combine all that with nukes and clean coal for baseload power, more electrical cars, and development of better alternative energy things like fuel cells, bio-diesel sources, diesel-electric engines, etc, - we coudl probably cut demand and increase supply to the point where we are energy self sufficient within a decade, and pretty much "off oil" within a genertion.
Major obstacles are the greens and their lawyers who will delay things with lawsuits.
#2
There is no way $300 bbl of oil is going to happen without the world economy taking a nose dive to the point of "drop-dead demand". I can see it approaching $200 bbl but it also causing a significant depression world-wide. If you look at all the independent energy studies, the one with the greatest potential is a "hydrogen economy" but you need to have an interim plan of more domestic drilling (which requires more domestic refining capacity that is never discussed in the same mouthful), more conservation, energy efficient automobiles, trucks and planes as well as focus on nuclear for baseline power production. Natural gas is a poor fuel economically since even for power generation it is in the 50% range of efficiency. Coal gets you more and of course nuclear gets you almost pure efficiency. The odd thing about solar and PV is that the more you reduce greenhouse gases (CO2) the more efficient it becomes and the warmer the earth will become (not the inverse). His plan is doable but only in a much longer time period not 10 years.
Posted by: Jack is Back! ||
07/22/2008 12:50 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Oil prices fell $5.07 to $125.97 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange as concerns eased about possible supply disruptions from Tropical Storm Dolly.
#4
Sounds like a solid plan to me. Like OS mentioned, he's advocating attacking the problem on the demand and supply side. We can't replace imported oil with domestic oil in any kind of useful timeframe, but by attacking the demand side we can make huge gains on our import balance sheet. I'm a big fan of both electric and hydrogen power. But we do need something interim, natural gas certainly has potential. My biggest concern about electric cars is straight forward, I fear the electric grid can not handle a sudden increase. I believe electric cars will have to be introduced somewhat slowly to make sure the grid can handle the extra load. Now that the Iraq war is winding down, it's a good time to start spending some money on these types of projects. Improve our infrastructure, start developing an hyrdogen infrastructure and build lots of nuke plants. check this out
#5
So why is pickens feverishly buying up water rights all over the western states? So he can sell us the water to run hydro dams?
This guy is no philanthropist, he's a robber baron. If he's pushing alternative energy you can be sure he owns controlling stake in it. He should do well with the Goracle.
#6
Tbe "Pickens Plan" is the best plan I've seen lately... in fact, it's the ONLY plan I've seen lately. He's wrong about "having only one enemy" however. The congressional democrats will having nothing to do with him, I assure you.
#7
Add to the Pickens plan nuclear: big plants and the new little plants. Push to get electricity generation from nuclear from 19% to ~40% of our needs. That's dependable (more so than wind) and do-able today.
Flex-fuel, plug-in hybrid cars.
Make ethanol from switchgrass, not corn.
Wind farms and solar farms where they make sense.
Drill, drill, drill.
Posted by: Steve White ||
07/22/2008 13:34 Comments ||
Top||
#8
I'd rather see nukes become 100% of base load electrical power in the US wihtin 30 years, with natioon-wide solar and wind providing the peak power.
As for natural gas - he is not avocating it for generation (he want to get away from using it for power generation, RTFA!), he is advocating it for vehicles. And that's already being done, and can be done with little engineering and relatively low costs for vehicle conversion, the major hurdle being distribution at filling stations. I imagine that a home-fill could be engineered in areas with natural gas pipes already laid.
Jack, need I remind you that just 10 years ago, back in July 1998, west texas sweet spot market price was just $14 a barrel; we are at over 10 times that amount today without a world-wide depression. RTFA - Pickens aas talking talking about $300/bbl oil in the context of 10 years down the road, if we continue to drift as we do now, and our trend lines show us importing 80% of our oil, in addition to Chinese and other demands. So he's not blowing smoke.
Bigjim, you really need to adjust your paranoia tin-foil beanie. If the guy's plan will get us off foreign oil, and do so at a decent cost, he will have solidified our economy and security massively, and thats as patriotic as anyone can be. If he makes a buck at it, so much the better - that's the American Way.
#9
This guy is no philanthropist, he's a robber baron.
I wouldn't go so far as to say he is a robber baron.
He definitely has business interests in mind though. Just him saying $300 oil helps buoy the oil market helping both his oil interests and his new power generation business. It's no mistake he launched the Pickens Plan, is running a major national ad campaign and is testifying in front of the Senate all in the same week. He stands to profit mightily from the high price of oil.
I will say this though, I think his patriotic intentions are real. I have had the opportunity to hear him speak on a number of occasions. There's nothing more American than doing something to help America immensely and make a buck doing it.
#11
T.Boone is in his 80's.
I see it as his way of returning a favor to the country that let him emerge on the stage. His country.
I agree with his solution.
It buys time.
Nukes take forever to be approved.
Same with other stuff.
Wind approval is pretty quick
His N<->S backbone powerline that connects the windmills and the E<->W grid is the glue that lets one make a baseline power supply out of the fickle wind.
Conversion is easy. I remember in my youth converted hemmis running deep wells in Central NE. Day and night your heard them run on and on... Conversion was cheap too.
It's known tech and do'able with the cheapest conversion of any mobile power source.
#12
Pickens' company Mesa Power has invested $2 billion in a Texas panhandle wind farm.
The dirty secret of "wind power" is that the wind isn't strong enough a lot of the time and they have to keep turning the blades with a gas powered generator so they don't seize up. Wind power is about as efficient as congress when it comes to making money and power.
Go nuclear and clean coal. Drill and refine. That is the only way out of this mess until fusion comes online 20-50 years from now.
#14
I know you have heard of Enron.
How about Google ,Al Gore, Maurice Strong and Bill Clinton?
Do you know what common thread connects them all?
This is the exact same plan, but put out by a republican. Don't call me a nut until you think about this for a few minutes. It's the exact same goddamned plan. So why is it gospel when this guys lays it out? Tinfoil beanie indeed.
#15
He has been running radio ads out this way for a while now - TX OK panhandles west KS east CO if anything, especially during the summer, has clear skies and wind.
Sounds like a plan, what are we waiting for? Oh yeah congress and the CO+KS govorners.
#16
Fucking Congress is our enemy and has been blocking any forward movement Visa-Vi National Power solutions..
the Executive Branch going back at least three Presidents hasn't set National Power Goals.
I like the OS's Plan,
Steve White's plan
3dc's Plan
and LOTS MORE Nukes..
DRILL
DRILL
DRILL
COAL
COAL
COAL
NUKES
NUKES
NUKES
/and euthanize politicians
Posted by: Red Dawg ||
07/22/2008 15:28 Comments ||
Top||
#17
The Enviro wackos have closed down two very large wind farms in California in law suits saying they were a threat to migrantory birds.
The enviros don't want a solution to the energy crisis, such that it is (if there really is a crisis is subject to debate), what they really want is to destroy the industrialized state. They are more anarchists than any thing.
Pickens is good on the wind farms and the increased use of natural gas in transportation. Add Nuclear power as has been stated in this thread and you can cut domestic oil consumption. Add to that drilling for oil in ANWR, the Gulf of Mexico, Tar Sand in North Dakota and Oil Shale in Wyoming and Colorado, you can really cut back on foreign oil.
The last gambit is that by increasing domestic production of oil and reducing consumption, you can buy our engineers and scientists enough time to develop some coherent alternative propulsion systems for cars, trucks, trains, etc., hybrid technology is so jerry rigged as far as I am concerned. Hydrogen is too expensive and biofuels will only work when cellulotic ethanol can be produced in bulk and at lower cost. Making any biofuel out of a food source is bad...except to EarthFirst who believe the ideal human population of Earth is ZERO.
Pickens is on the right path but remember you cannot conserve your way out of an energy production shortage when consumption is rapidly escalating in the "third world". AND most of the third world does not give two hoots in hell about air quality or the environment....
Posted by: James Carville ||
07/22/2008 15:33 Comments ||
Top||
#18
Wind power is good for peaking but is no good for base load. It would require storage for that, and storage is so expensive that it is out of the question. Wind farms require (often) huge subsidies as they have been a break-even business in good years, and big losers the rest of the time. Nuclear is good, coal is good, drilling is good. But this windfarm nonsense is just the next swindle from pickens. He pulled the same thing with natural gas a few years ago and go a rather gratuitous platter of federal money to shore him up. The transmission lines for the windfarm give him the right of way he needs to run a massive water pipeline through north texas. Dont for a second believe that this guy is doing this for our good. He'll soak the profit from this and bail out leaving taxpayers with a huge headache to deal with.
#19
Problem with Picken's "Plan" is that birds keep flying into the wind turbine blades. This will sure to rankle the enviros. Save the Birds will threaten to take precedence over Save the Humans.
#21
On problem with Wind is we tend to think of centralized power. In Northern Germany along the North Sea coast a small town will have its own windmill providing power.
The Bay area could power itself on wind the place is so windy. Convince a few hitech companies to put windmills on their campuses and sell the extra to the grid and you're in business.
Other areas, like Southern California should think of converting rooftops to solar. A different solution for each area and supplement it all with nuke power.
#22
He [Pickens} added: "I am convinced we are paying for both sides of the Iraqi war."
I have thought this for a long time. The Arabs and Muslims have taken the money we have given them for oil and financed terrorism and hate through the mosques.
Demand for oil is going to keep going up. The price of oil will go right up with the increased demand--unless we change the supply side in some way. If we don't take control of our own energy future, we will continue to be on the mideast oil titty and have to put of with OPEC's price fixing and the focus of their hatred. The price of everything that is transported (which is just about everything) in the USA is affected by oil prices. We can't just keep living the same ol same ol in Washington. We might have to export whacky environmentalists if anyone will have them.
#23
I think 3 lines of wind and solar farms, one on each coast, and one in the center of the country woudl be geographically diverse enough to provide at least a baseline of sustained output, when hooked to the E-W grid. Each would be getting good sustained morning and evening winds at good staggered offsets from each other, and the N-S large reach provides buffers agains regional calm days.
That and changing over to Natural Gas is a quick enough stop-gap while we ramp other things (nukes, electric) up.
Its the first and quickest set of things we can do, while waiting for the effects of drilling, and construction of coal and nuke power plants, and coal conversion (into transport fuel) plants.
#24
Wind power is good for peaking but is no good for base load.
Wind power is good for nothing: nothing tells there will be wind when you need it. Also, most electric gear and all of electronics requires reasonably constant power.
#25
The Germans use solar a lot, windmills as well. I believe the home or business owner can get a tax break on solar panels. The excess (to the household) electricity produced must go back into the grid. Electricity in Germany is very, very expensive.
#26
Most vehicles on Perth roads are LNG (often called LPG) powered and conversions continue at a record level, for the simple reason LNG is one third the price of petrol or diesel.
All service stations here sell LPG and filling up your car is no harder than filling it up with petrol. I can't recall a single LPG accident at a service station. LPG is just as safe as petrol.
A conversion costs between $2,000 and $3,000. Do the sums, but for high mileage vehicles like taxis the payback period can be as little as 18 months. (Compare with solar and wind, which are somewhere between 20 years and never)
Otherwise, I agree with Pickens and OS. It's a workable plan. Buying time to build nuclear power stations and with the real prospect of getting off the imported oil addiction for good.
And so what if Pickens is making money out of it. That's capitalism, my friend.
#27
The Germans subsidize solar electricity to the tune of over $0.50/kWh. That's over 10X the cost of nuclear or coal generated electricity. And they are supposed to shut down all their nuclear plants. Complete madness. They Germans will freeze in the dark or spend truckloads of Euros on Russian gas. Either one seems to satisfy the Marxist Greens.
US wind power is also highly subsidized. Wind power costs around 10¢/kWh but is federally subsidized to the tune of 3¢/kWh. That is almost the production cost of coal or nuclear electricity, even including all the roadblocks thrown up by our Red-Greens. This includes production subsidies, tax credits of the build, and an accelerated 5 years depreciation schedule. Then there are local electric subsidies. Even then wind still sells for 7¢/kWh.
Still that underestimates wind power costs, since the producers don't have to pay the full cost of the required backup power plants (which use expensive nat gas) as well has wrecking havoc on the power grid when wind approaches 10% of capacity.
Wind is good for reducing fuel consumption. Fortunately the US has 200 years reserves of coal so fuel is not an issue. That leaves CO2, a canard used by primitivists to bash the ignorant and gullible.
Posted by: ed ||
07/22/2008 19:02 Comments ||
Top||
#28
I think his plan is a start. I am concerned about the location of the windmills, at least the current huge blade versions (I've seen another design that is more like a jet turbine...much more compact and can operate at much higher wind velocities) because he wants to locate them on the main north-south bird flyway. Seems like a problem waiting to happen.
I am a big fan of converting the commercial rolling stock to natural gas. There will some conversion time for the stations, but that should still be doable.
We need a whole lot more nukes. That and clean coal are obvious. We also need to go after all the oil sources in this country.
The last thing I believe we really need to focus on is distributed generation sources. RJ correctly pointed out that San Francisco could power itself with a local wind farm because of the high winds here. We get sun for 9 months of the year, at least. We should have solar on all the major buildings and houses to contribute to the grid during peak daytime use.
We need to be doing ALL of these things and others I have not mentioned. Pickens is absolutely correct that we cannot continue to send our money overseas. We need to put things into actions and cut off the nuts of the attorneys and enviros that try to stop it.
#29
Geographic diversity does make wind and solar power a reliable enough source. Not base load, but certainly good for peaks.
And it certainly is reliable enough in some areas, otherwise it woudl not be in use. QED the incorrrect assumptioons about it being useless.
As for government subsidy for wind and solar? I consider my tax money going there instead of to the Saudis or Hugo Chaves to be acceptable.
This is all about nhational survival strategy, not class warfare.
Remember that most of the initial steps are intermediate solutions, not final ones. Wind, solar and nat-gas use to reduce petroleum demand while the nukes and clean coal are eventually brought online to replace it in the next 3 decades. And we can produce natural gas like crazy domestically.
Wind, solar, natural gas and diesel (biodiesel) we can do now, with the least tech effort, and least political resistance.
Clean coal, more drilling and use of oil shales are good for the intermediate frame, mainly due to political obstruction and engineering/contruction time.
And the long term: nukes, electrical and coal conversion (to diesel and jet fuel), along with diesel electric, better batteries, and fuel cells for applications where batteries weight/power ratio is too restrictive.
That's the path out.
The sooner we start, the sooner we can wave goodbye to the Saudis and Hugo Chavez.
#30
FYI, the very first thing should be President Bush announcing the strateic fuel production program for the US military.
That means a coal to diesel and military fuels (JP4, etc) plant at EVERY major US military installation and port, and conversion of non-combat vehicles from gasoline to diesel or or natural gas, with the objective of making the US Department of Defense completely self sufficient in terms of fuel.
#31
Desperate times my friends, desperate indeed. There's a simple a solution and I have it for you. Cast your seein-eyes upon my fertilizer oil tanks, look right thru the winder thar. Every see such a thing? Hell, yes, that's what I call a shitload of shit oil. There's money to be made here, but we gotta trust each other. My associate Dr. Muckforddo will handle the details.
Posted by: Billie Sol Estes Rockets ||
07/22/2008 20:48 Comments ||
Top||
#32
If this is such a great idea, why does it need a tax subsidy? When oil goes back to $40 per barrel in a year or so no one will be willing to sign on for any of this.
Pickens knows that the way government destroys something is to tax it. If he really wants to get rid of foreign oil, he should have government tax it so that its price stays high. Then the market will find the best solution. If it's NG cars, great. If electricity wins, fine. But I'm tired of know alls like Pickens and the Clintons and the Obamessiah telling me they've got a solution I have to pay for even though I think it's stupid.
#33
Solar is useful for peaking as electric demand spikes when it is sunny and hot. Wind does not have that relationship to daily electrical demand. It not "reliable" as far as the electric grid is concerned but can swing wildly in a matter of seconds. If wind power is any significant portion of generating capacity, that makes it impossible for generators to compensate for wind fluctuations and requires expensive voltage regulation by huge batteries or flywheels, as well as large amounts of backup gas turbine generators to take over when the wind is not blowing.
Instead of using tax dollars to subsidize wind power, build RELIABLE coal fired plants that generate electricity at 1/3 the price of wind. There is plenty of coal. Or add nuke capacity. Both keep the dollars and jobs in the US.
It is a much better better allocation of limited resources. Would you pay 3X the price for a car that only started 1/3 of the time you wanted to go somewhere, even if the fuel was free?
Posted by: ed ||
07/22/2008 20:51 Comments ||
Top||
#34
coal to diesel and military fuels (JP4, etc) plant at EVERY major US military installation and port
Probably the greatest near term payoff and method to cripple our OPEC friends, other than seizing the Saudi oil fields, the US gov could do. Not just in the cost of oil not imported, but also by dropping the marginal cost of every barrel of oil in the world. Add nukes, bypassing the enviro whackos, to produce electricity and hydrogen to get 2.5 times the petroleum from each ton of coal.
Posted by: ed ||
07/22/2008 21:00 Comments ||
Top||
#35
I'm all in favor of the "throw as much as we can on the wall and see what sticks" approach. We know how much effect talking has, since we've had that for the past 35 years.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/22/2008 22:42 Comments ||
Top||
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Senator Barack Obama arrived in Baghdad on Monday, meeting with Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki and other senior Iraqi politicians, as an Iraqi spokesman said that the government was hopeful that foreign combat troops would withdraw in 2010. 
Barack Obama's visit to the green zone in Baghdad far eclipsed a similar trip by Gordon Brown two days earlier in terms of the media frenzy it generated.
July 22 (Reuters) - The U.S. military said on Tuesday the last of five extra combat brigades sent to Iraq last year had withdrawn. There are currently just under 147,000 U.S. troops in Iraq. Following are facts about the so-called surge:
(Xinhua) -- Singapore said here on Monday it did not rule out the possibility that Mas Selamat, head of the country's Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) terrorist network, has escaped to foreign countries. 
Bashar Assad, and this can help resolve a lot of outstanding issues," he added. Lebanon and Syria said earlier this month that they had agreed to establish diplomatic relations.
In T. Boone Pickens' war, the enemy is foreign oil.
