#1
Could be a good thing if the facility is cleaned up thoroughly. Temperature wouldn't fluctuate much between summer/winter, little to no organic structure to be exposed to weather extremes, and little to no pest problem.
EFL:Freezing temperatures hit northern Florida on Monday morning, readings dropped below zero across West Virginia and snow made mountain highways treacherous as the first big cold wave of the season swept southward. The blast of Arctic air - one day before the official start of winter - drove temperatures in the Florida Panhandle down to 31 degrees at Crestview, 32 at Pensacola. Thermometers registered below zero across West Virginia, including 2 below at the capital city of Charleston and 14 below at Snowshoe, the National Weather Service said. Bentleyville, Pa., south of Pittsburgh, dropped to 10 below zero, and Greensboro, N.C., posted a record low for Dec. 20 at 9 above. Farther north, it was 18 below zero at 9 a.m. at Massena, N.Y., with a wind chill of 28 below, the weather service said. As much as 6 1/2 inches of snow coated mountain roads in West Virginia, where 21 school districts closed for the day and others opened late. The icy wind sucked up moisture from the Great Lakes and dumped 26 inches of snow on Michigan City in northern Indiana.
Ah, if only Bush had signed the Protocols of Kyoto.......
Posted by: Steve ||
12/20/2004 3:59:37 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
What? It was 24 this 6.30 a.m. in TLH right there on the patio, with wind. Mercy! It was chilly.
#2
..readings dropped below zero across West Virginia and snow made mountain highways treacherous as the first big cold wave of the season swept southward.
Cold snap. Heat waves and cold snaps. What's wrong with these guys?
It's hard to care about an "election" where nothing is being decided...
Despite a campaign urging residents to register before Thursday's deadline, Saudi men women are barred from voting have shown little enthusiasm for the first nationwide elections in a kingdom long regarded as autocratic, secretive and resistant to reform. During 30 minutes at a Riyadh voter registration center, only two people an old man and a prince walked in to sign up. At another center, a mere eight people registered in 45 minutes. By Sunday, only about 100,000 of 600,000 eligible voters in the Riyadh area had registered since the centers opened Nov. 23. The three-stage municipal council elections begin in the capital Feb. 10. Saudis have not been swayed by pictures of senior princes and football stars signing up to vote. Nor have they been driven to emulate Iraqis and Palestinians who are due to cast ballots next month. "It didn't occur to me" to register, said Mohammed al-Subai, 29, who works in public relations. "How would it change my life?" asked Faisal al-Amer, a 28-year-old electric company supervisor. "I want democracy, but making all that effort for municipal elections is not worth it."
#1
Just had a thought...I bet voter registration would go WAY up if they let the wimminz vote too...LONG lines at the polls as well. And wouldn't that twist a few turbans!
#2
By the way, units of apathy are in milli-givashits. The low range digital version is in micro-givashits. The extra low range model was abandoned because nano-givashits are so close to zero as to be unimportant. The units are inverse to personal feelings, so a high reading, say 200 mgas means relatively strong apathy.
Kinda like being highly ambivalent. There is a correlation between ambivilance and apathy, but I lost the conversion formula, and I do not care if I ever find it.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
12/20/2004 19:29 Comments ||
Top||
#3
bad planning - all the Saudis are out doing their belated Hannukah and last minute Christmas shopping
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/20/2004 20:06 Comments ||
Top||
#4
AP -- No fair. I was a liberal arts major. Can you explain that to me in multicultural terms?
Posted by: Matt ||
12/20/2004 20:08 Comments ||
Top||
#5
The bigger the number, the greater the apathy. When the needle is pegged on the right at 250, it means that you do not give a BIG SH*T. That's all there is to know.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
12/20/2004 20:23 Comments ||
Top||
#6
So a dead person would register an infinite number of givashits on the meter, right? And if a person registered zero on the meter, it would mean that he cared so freakin' much about the issue that he'd implode into a infinitely dense cloud of charged anxietrons, and disappear from the universe?
This concept "needs work", Paul...
Posted by: Dave D. ||
12/20/2004 20:34 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Well, I'd say zero would be an explosion due to caring too much and too deeply, a condition I would characterize as a perfect Diane Sawyer impression, and 250 would be an implosion of utter nothingness, the void of perfection, a Zen level of apathy, a condition I would characterize as uh, um... What the hell were we talking about here? Aw, who cares? *thwoooooop*
That's the sound the Foo Bird makes as it flies round and round in ever-tightening circles, faster and faster, until it finally flies up its own ass at the speed of light and disappears from the space-time continuum.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
12/20/2004 20:51 Comments ||
Top||
#9
But how can they let the wimminz vote when they can't produce a driver's license???
#11
Apathy is a very personal thing. It is really hard to quantify. Fred's ACME Delux Apathy Meter is a work in progress.
Dave D: a dead person would not register on an apathy meter because he/she/it is not wired for anything anymore. A zero on the meter just means no apathy.
A true feelings meter (TFM) would be constructed like a galvanometer, with zero in the middle, negative givashits going to the right (apathy), and positive givashits to the left (caring). For instance, a Rantburger reads or hears about the Arafish floating belly up in the aquarium. His or her TFM gets pegged all the way to the left. He CARES about the event very deeply, but not for the Arafish, per se.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
12/20/2004 22:22 Comments ||
Top||
Labour cleared the decks yesterday for an early general election as official figures showed record borrowing by Gordon Brown last month. The £9.4 billion of public sector borrowing in November was higher than the City expected and prompted Tory claims that Labour would have to raise taxes to fill a looming "black hole" in the nation's finances.
The release of the borrowing figures coincided with a special session of the Cabinet to finalise preparations for an election, even though Tony Blair's Government has a large Commons majority and 18 months to run before it needs a new mandate.
The decision to announce details of Labour's election campaign - such as the scrapping of the traditional "battlebuses" that ferry the party leader and the media around the country - so far in advance was unprecedented. It was seen at Westminster as a decision to keep open Mr Blair's options for an early poll. There is a widespread assumption that he will go to the country on May 5, but there has been speculation within Labour ranks that he could call a snap election as early as February.
Liam Fox, the Conservative Party co-chairman, said the announcement of Labour's election plans at this stage "smacks of panic". "Clearly they are preparing to cut and run if the economy deteriorates," he said. According to Alan Milburn, Labour's general election co-ordinator, the economy will be at the centre of the party's campaign to secure a third term.
A play which led to violent protests among the Sikh community in Birmingham has had its run cancelled by the city's Repertory Theatre. Three police officers were hurt during clashes after 400 demonstrators gathered outside on Saturday. Protestors said Behzti (Dishonour), which depicts sex abuse and murder in a temple, portrayed the Sikh faith in a negative fashion.
I'm tellin' you, it's the turbans. Replace them with straw boaters and stuff like this would never happen...
Posted by: Howard UK ||
12/20/2004 10:06:11 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
As I have said many times before.. would the last person to leave the country please turn out the lights.
Posted by: Howard UK ||
12/20/2004 10:32 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Oh, don't be messin' with Sikhs. Unlike Hindus or Moslems, Sikhs don't push first, but damn do they push back when pushed. They are a close thing to being a religion so militant that it is almost military, which is why they are generally very good soldiers in whatever army they serve. In a way, they are like a non-commissioned officer religion, and are generally middle class entrepreneurs and small businessmen. In this case, I doubt that the young Sikh woman playwrite is as admired as they would suggest, and probably despises her background and religion.
#4
3rd toughest hombres I've ever met in all my "travels" were Sikhs, serving in "unconventional" role becasue of the terrirtory - basically dont get Sikhs pissed.
US Navy SEALs come in second (sorry my Army Ranger brothers).
#1? Those leather tough little brown killing machines called Gurkhas. Smart, skilled and dedicated warriors. 5 ft nuthin and about a buck fifty in weight, never saw a "fat" one ever. And no fear at all. Particular ones were Chetri Sen. But no doubts they were all that tough.
Just in time for Christmas. Edited for brevity.
This week the Strategic Missile Forces are going to launch two intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), the SMF press service said. According to the press service, Russian Missile Forces Commander Nikolai Solovtsov will preside over both launches. The missile division deployed in the Orenburg region, which launched a missile for the last time in 1991, will launch a combat-training version of the RS-20V Voyevoda (NATO codename SS 18 Satan). This week we'll call it "Satan Claus".
"This Voyevoda launch will be the first in a series of planned events. It will also be another step in fulfilling the President's task of making as much use as possible of the technological potential of missile systems by extending their service life beyond the producer warranty life," the Strategic Missile Force spokesman said. The combat training launch will not be the only one this week, as the Topol M, a fifth-generation ICBM, will be launched at Plesetsk Space Center from a state-of-the-art mobile launcher. Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov and Economic Development and Trade Minister German Gref are expected to attend the launch at the space center.
Posted by: Dar ||
12/20/2004 1:05:12 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Clear out the women and children. The Russian Navy's last live launches were... less than satisfactory.
Think Putin will be onhand for these?
Posted by: Laurence of the Rats ||
12/20/2004 13:35 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Soviets gave warranties? Who knew?
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
12/20/2004 13:54 Comments ||
Top||
Baikal Finance Group, an unknown company, won an auction for Russian oil company's YUKOS's core asset Sunday with a $9.4 billion bid and analysts said whomever was behind the bid enjoyed Kremlin favor. Gazprom, which had been favored to win but was outbid, declared it had no links to Baikal. Analysts still believed the state-controlled gas giant or other state interests may have had a hand in the winning bid for Yuganskneftegaz. YUKOS is widely seen by analysts as the victim of a Kremlin campaign to crush its politically ambitious owner, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, and seize control of strategic sectors of the economy sold off in the chaotic privatizations of the 1990s. Khodorkovsky is now on trial for fraud and tax evasion and faces 10 years in jail if convicted.
Baikal, named after a huge Siberian freshwater lake in the heartland of Russia's oil industry, bid 260.75 billion rubles ($9.4 billion) for Yuganskneftegaz, said the sale's organizer, the Federal Property Fund. Under Russian law the government can order a new auction or seize Yugansk in lieu of unpaid taxes if Baikal fails to pay the full amount it has bid within 14 days. The sale of Yuganskneftegaz, which pumps more oil than OPEC member Qatar, went ahead despite a U.S. court order barring Gazprom and its foreign bankers from bidding, pending further proceedings in YUKOS's application for U.S. Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: .com ||
12/20/2004 12:23:54 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
ISN SECURITY WATCH (20/12/04) - In a major departure from its policy, Washington has decided to post serving military officers to its mission in Taipei, Jane Defense Weekly said in a report. From the middle of 2005, active duty military personnel will replace civilian contractors at Washington's effective diplomatic mission in Taipei, the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT), the weekly said in an article slated for publication on Wednesday. Agence France Presse news agency quoted Jane's Taipei correspondent Wendell Minnick as saying that US army Colonel Al Wilner, a former helicopter pilot, would be the first to arrive in Taipei. With a lack of diplomatic ties, military affairs between Washington and Taipei have been handled by contractors working for the US Defense Intelligence Agency and Defense Security Co-ordination Agency. "Washington has become less concerned over any potential protest from Beijing amid growing unease over China's military ambitions in the Asia Pacific region," the weekly said. The reports said the change resulted from a bill passed by US Congress in 2002 allowing for the posting of US military personnel to Taiwan if it was deemed to be "in the national interest of the United States". US government employees, including military personnel, are currently required to retire before they can be hired by the US mission in Taipei. US personnel assigned to the mission will not wear uniforms and will serve for three years, compared with the two-year term offered to civilian contractors, the weekly says. The change should also cut costs, as civilian employees are higher paid. Taipei is pushing for a controversial special defense budget to purchase six US-made Pac-3 anti-missile systems, eight conventional submarines, and a fleet of submarine-hunting P-3C aircraft, over a 15-year period from 2005. The US move is expected to annoy China, as it would mark closer military ties between Washington and the island, which Beijing claims as part of its territory. Washington switched its diplomatic recognition from Taipei to Beijing in 1979, but has since remained the leading arms supplier to the island.
I guess this means that active duty Taiwanese officers can receive training here in the US, rather than all those young, fit "civilian" males with short hair who are currently attending classes.
Posted by: Steve ||
12/20/2004 10:19:38 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Perhaps we should suggest 6 party talks with Taiwan on their "nuclear ambitions", like with North Korea.
Or if that's too subtle for China, then have we got any leftover Pershing II missiles we can sell them? $10 a pop seems fine to me. See if that gives the commies a clue.
Posted by: Laurence of the Rats ||
12/20/2004 10:37 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"Washington has become less concerned over any potential protest from Beijing amid growing unease over China's military ambitions in the Asia Pacific region,"
Hmmmmm did the wakeup call occur before or after they forced down that P-3? About friggin time we treated them as the rivals they are, and actively/openly support Taiwan
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/20/2004 10:41 Comments ||
Top||
#3
I'm trying to reduve the number of items I buy that are "Made in China."
Japan said on Monday it would issue a visa as scheduled for former Taiwan President Lee Teng-hui to visit for sightseeing despite angry protests from China. "How do ya like them soybeans, eh?"
Relations between Tokyo and Beijing have already been chilled by a string of disputes, including one over Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's visits to Tokyo's Yasukuni Shrine, where war criminals are honored with other Japanese war dead. Not bright to piss Japan off - they can play hardball and they've got long memories, too.
"We plan to issue a visa as scheduled," Chief Cabinet Secretary Hiroyuki Hosoda told reporters. He did not say when the visa would be issued for the outspoken Lee. And that's that, bubb.
Beijing, which sees self-ruled, democratic Taiwan as a renegade Chinese province, has lodged a protest with Japan over its decision to let Lee visit and urged Tokyo to scrap the plan. "But, but you can't do that! You'll ruin everything!"
The 81-year-old Lee and his family are expected to arrive in Nagoya in central Japan on Dec. 27 and visit hot springs before leaving for home on Dec. 31, Japanese media said. Hosoda urged media not to follow Lee and report about his trip as his journey was "private" with no political intentions. Take a chill pill, Mr Whiney Dragon...
Lee tried to raise Taiwan's diplomatic profile during his 12 years as president, redefining the island's ties with China as "special state-to-state" relations in 1999 and causing Beijing to break off fence-mending negotiations to this day. "He was impossible! He considered us as mere peers!"
Lee stepped down as president in 2000 and became "spiritual leader" of a new party with an avid pro-independence stance. Lee last came to Japan in 2001 for medical treatment, triggering an angry response from Beijing. China pretty much defines faithless friend, obnoxious neighbor, and obvious foe.
Posted by: .com ||
12/20/2004 5:40:09 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This works in several ways, not just the obvious. It lets China know that if it gets too obnoxious, Japan might form an alliance with Taiwan. Imagine how apoplectic that would make the Chinese.
#2
I would remind China that such fits are unseemly for a country of the stature they believe themselves to be. STFU
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/20/2004 9:47 Comments ||
Top||
#3
FG: I would remind China that such fits are unseemly for a country of the stature they believe themselves to be.
My guess here is that bullying is seen as a sign of weakness. I've always thought of this as Fraudian analysis, where the obvious (strength) is interpreted as its opposite (weakness). However, the reality is that only strong countries can bully other countries. Lack of bullying by a great power is not evidence of strength - it is evidence of magnanimity and generosity. Neither trait has traditionally been associated with the Chinese empire, except with respect to vassal states that obeyed Chinese dictates and were seen as future additions to the Chinese empire. The Chinese are strong, but neither generous nor magnanimous. Do not mistake bullying tactics for weakness or the mythical (Fraudian) inferiority complex - bullies think they are superior to the rest of us, not inferior. When they can't get their way, they believe that it is their right as our betters to get their way by means fair or foul.
#4
ZF: true, and we always worry how we are seen in other's eyes. I think it might be advantageous to let the Chinese know we see their whining and carping as childish behavior. They seem to have no problems with acting in our affairs (a la Clinton/Gore $) and if we choose to supply Taiwan and treat them as an independent country/ally, we should make it clear that we will do so, regardless of WTF Hu thinks about it
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/20/2004 10:47 Comments ||
Top||
#5
FG: I think it might be advantageous to let the Chinese know we see their whining and carping as childish behavior.
I think this approach is what the liberals want - this would mean that getting rid of China's alleged inferiority complex is all it would take to tame the Chinese dragon. But the problem isn't that they lack self-confidence - it's that they want a bunch of things that don't belong to them and rightfully belong to other people. The problem with the Chinese is territorial acquisitiveness (i.e. greed) and the kind of sense of aggrieved victimhood (resentment) that led to German territorial expansion in the 1930's.
China's leaders have approved a plan to develop a national super-highway system, the official Xinhua news agency reported Sunday. The ambitious new program was approved on Friday at an executive meeting of China's State Council chaired by Premier Wen Jiabao, Xinhua said. The meeting passed in principle a plan for the construction of China's national expressway network, it said.
Details of the plan were not disclosed, but participants told the news agency that the meeting decided construction of the network must conform with China's economic and social development. It also had to take into account regional development, urban and rural development and population distribution, the news agency said. "Advanced technology and materials should be used to improve construction quality and cut cost," an official announcement said.
China's expressway construction has embarked on fast track expansion over the past decade, Xinhua said. By the end of 2003, China had opened to traffic more than 17,800 miles of expressway, ranking second in the world behind only the United States. China now has expressways linking the northeast, north, east and south of the country, the news agency said.
Copyright 2004 by United Press International
Posted by: .com ||
12/20/2004 12:47:32 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Good! The more time, money and people China devotes to road building, the less they will have to get in trouble with. Too, better roads lead to more trade, which leads to more jobs, which will keep the excess of young men too busy to realize they'll never have wives.
#3
Large expressways are also a effective ways to move military forces. Eisenhower started the Interstate Defense Highway program after he saw how good the German autobans were.
Posted by: Steve ||
12/20/2004 8:22 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Interestingly enough, many of these are toll roads. This is not your father's Communist Party.
#8
hybrids, nahhhh good old choking pollution, after all, they're exempt from Kyoto
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/20/2004 21:29 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Eisenhower started the Interstate Defense Highway program after he saw how good the German autobans were.
The Pennsylvania Turnpike was opened in October 1940 after two years of construction including the excavation of 7 tunnels totalling approximately 7 miles in length. Nothing gets built that fast today.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
12/20/2004 21:36 Comments ||
Top||
#10
nobody was an "activist" then, they were "gadflys" and "the asshole down the street"
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/20/2004 21:43 Comments ||
Top||
Chinese President Hu Jintao told Hong Kong Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa and his senior officials to reflect on the past seven years and learn from mistakes, an expression often used in political scoldings. ``Hong Kong has to draw conclusions from experience and find out what's been insufficient,'' Hu told Tung, according to a videotape of a meeting between the two in Macau during festivities marking Macau's return to China five years ago.
Too much democracy.
Hong Kong officials ``must continue to increase their governing ability and the standard of administration,'' Hu said. The admonition to Hong Kong was in contrast to the praise heaped on Macau during Hu's first visit to the city. In a speech marking the second inauguration of Macau Chief Executive Edmond Ho, Hu praised the former Portuguese colony's progress, saying its achievements ``are a source of great joy to all of us.''
Too little democracy.
Posted by: Sock Puppet of Doom ||
12/20/2004 23:50 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I'm sure the ChiComs enjoyed the goose dinner. Problem was, it was a Golden Goose...
#3
Hu had better "draw conclusions from experience and find out what's been insufficient" because he's the one that's riding on the back of a tiger. Hong Kong is not one of China's big problems.
Posted by: Tom ||
12/20/2004 9:59 Comments ||
Top||
#3
"Turkish people in my position want to be in Europe because it will mean greater liberty for us,'' he said.
Although modern Turkey is overwhelmingly Muslim, it is in some respects a more fiercely secular state than most of the EU."
The Turkish leadership do not know what they are getting into. Not only is the EU rapidly leaning anti-muslim but the EU is rapidly wiping out religion as a whole. The EU is moving fast towards "one leader" worship as opposed to any deity. This is nothing new, Ceaser and Hitler had to worshipped, not just obeyed.
I have no agrument. Just my rant. I have no proof of what will happen or when it will happen. I am only making opinion on the microscopic trends that I have observed over the years and of course, my belief not in novels, but the Bible. Although, I believe in the rapture, I don't sit around and twitiling my thumbs NOR do I shove my beliefs down anybody's throat. My philosophy is simple, listen or don't listen, it doesn't matter to me. History is clear and it will repeat.
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/20/2004 21:32 Comments ||
Top||
#9
I believe I have already answered your question in #6. The person in question is yet to come. I don't know who he is. You don't have to believe me. We will watch the trends together. Maybe, my statement is nonsense, to most of the EU citizens. Carry on.
I've heard that back in the brief period when the European Community had 10 member states (just after Greece joined) there were some religious nuts saying that it will *never* grow beyond 10, because the number 10 proves that the European Community is the ten-horned beast of the Apocalypse.
Yeah, *that* prophecy turned out like a charm. :-)
The difference between me and the religious nuts is that I don't pretend know what and when something will happen. I am sick of religious nuts making prophecies they have no business making. Ever heard of false prophets? I hear what you & TGA are saying. I keep a level head. Please don't compare me to the religious nuts. I am not one of them.
#14
TGA - he's a professional rodent politician - I suspect he'll never see the inside of a courtroom. Call me a cynic
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/20/2004 22:16 Comments ||
Top||
#15
victory, huh, Aris?
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/20/2004 22:16 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Aris,
Good one. Your overwhelming and superior brain power have twisted my words and got me, Mark Geragos. I feel bad. I think I will jump off a cliff now, NOT. For a self identified liberal, you sure don't have tolerance for any Christian views.
#21
Geragos is a professional parasite lawyer. I heard today, that after his expensive ineffectual representation of a guilty man (Peterson), that he's started a web page to ask for donations via paypal, etc. to pay his staff to look for teh "real killers" ...shades of OJ!
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/20/2004 22:23 Comments ||
Top||
#22
For a self identified liberal, you sure don't have tolerance for any Christian views.
Sure I have tolerance for Christian views: You have the right to spew religious nuttery, and I have the right to mock it.
That I am a liberal means that I want you to keep the right to be as religiously nutty as you would like, as long as you don't physically hurt others.
You pedantic asshole. I've watched your mewling attempts at moral superiority, and my cat has higher standards. Grow up, punk, and realize that you don't know shit. All graduates think they do, it'll just take longer before you get it beaten into you.
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/20/2004 22:29 Comments ||
Top||
#25
Aris,
"as long as you don't physically hurt others
Never!! not over Chrisitan view disagreements. For me to physically hurt someone because they didn't believe my views, is to insult the POWER of my God.
But, on the other hand, governments are obligated to protect its citizens, even if that means war.
#27
TGA, If the EU Const. were to be ratified in the middle of next year, what happens to Schroder and Chirac?
First, it's not set to be fully ratified until about the middle of 2006. Secondly, if ratified (and given the United Kingdom vote, that's extremely doubtful btw), "This Treaty shall enter into force on 1 November 2006, provided that all the instruments of ratification have been deposited, or, failing that, on the first day of the second month following the deposit of the instrument of ratification by the last signatory State to take this step."
Third, even if it was ratified, nothing would happen to Chirac or Schroeder. They'd still have the positions they currently have. Given all the phobia about the Constitution, it's amazing how little it actually changes in the functioning of the Union. It makes it a tiny bit more functional, that is all.
#31
Poison Reverse, of course, if you're talking about their national power. Their influence in the EU is set to decline somewhat but this was bound to happen with the enlargement.
#33
TGA> No offense, but it was *before* the Constitution that Germany had the same voting rights as France in the Council. *If* the constitution is ratified however, *then* you'll have voting power analogous with your population.
One of the good things of the Constitution is that it rectifies this long-overdue injustice in the functioning of the Union. Germany will now have more power than France or Italy.
It may indeed be that they are afraid of the Constitution will fail -- and I agree with you that this was probably the case with the Treaty of Maastricht and the Euro (which was actually a bigger change than the Constitution is).
They may however also be afraid of referendums in *general*, of letting go of power in *general*. Because once they have set the precedent of a referendum, then the German people may start demanding it on more and more issues.
I'm pretty sure that's the reason why the *Greek* political elite doesn't allow a referendum. They are not afraid the Constitution will fail, they are just afraid of the precedent that such an example will set for the future.
#36
In the USA, as elsewhere, the word "elite" is negative in some contexts, postive in others. We speak of elite military forces, elite scientists, etc.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/20/2004 23:17 Comments ||
Top||
#37
Aris, you are right, that was still old "Nice" I was referring to.
The regulations about a qualified majority have changed. But Germany still doesn't get more votes than France.
#38
Under Nice, each country was given a specific number of votes, and Germany always had the exact same votes as France (and UK and Italy) - 29 votes. I agree that this was very unjust.
But in the new voting arrangements of the Council, the member states *aren't* given specific numbers of votes -- instead the new qualified majority is defined as "55% of the members of the Council, comprising at least fifteen of them and representing Member States comprising at least 65% of the population of the Union."
So, Germany *will* now have more voting power than France.
Hungary has become the second country to ratify the European Union constitution with a parliamentary vote, seven months after joining the bloc. ... Hungary's MPs ratified the text, signed by EU leaders on 20 October, by 304 votes to nine. A close result, I see.
The first popular referendum is expected to take place in Spain in February.
#1
It will be interesting to see what the results are once populations start to vote.
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
12/20/2004 15:59 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Indeed. My own prediction is that all of them will ratify except UK.
Other than UK, the next risk of non-ratification I judge to be Denmark, then (far after it) Poland and Spain. I'm not worried about Portugal, France, Belgium, Ireland or the Netherlands.
#10
jackal> Yeah, I've uploaded to Wikipedia already, and inserted it to the EU Constitution article. Here.
The last referendum in Greece happened back in 1974, when we abolished the monarchy. There's been no referendum since then. So yeah, unfortunately over here they don't tend to happen. On this issue, btw, opinion polls show that the Constitution would pass easily if a referendum were to happen.
#12
Naploelon loved plebiscites. So did Hitler, so did Saddam. Castro still loves them.
But I guess the EU calls them "referendums." I'd use one for something like the county public swimming pool, but never for something of national importance.
#13
The problem is (and it was the same problem with the Euro) that if all major parties want the Constitution, the citizen has no possibility of expressing his will in elections (by voting for or against the party that supports the Constitution or the Euro).
What is worse, it prevents a REAL discussion about the Constitution... meaning that politicians don't have to work hard to defend it.
Just sign along the dotted line.
And this is what I can't have. The "people" did not participate in working out the Constitution, and now they should not even vote on THEIR constitution.
#14
Well, if it's any consolation, TGA, the American people did not get to vot on theirs, either.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
12/20/2004 21:29 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Very true, TGA. The mere opportunity to "vote" does not a democracy ensure, especially when the vote simply allows affirmation or negation---and does not provide any real material alternative.
True political discourse requires some upward movement of ideas and political power, not the dissemination of alternatives by a political elite.
#16
With all due respect Mrs. D, the "American People" had to start somewhere, just like those of any other nation. Remember, we were just those upstart colonists before that little declaration thingy. We were decidedly not American citizens.
#17
In the ten new member states it's not really so important, because they just voted last year to join the Union, and the Constitution doesn't much change things since then (and even if it did, the general shape of it was clear in advance).
But I fully agree with you, TGA, in regards to Germany, especially give how you didn't vote for Maastricht either. I think a referendum should take place in Germany, and I think European integration will suffer in the long term because of the fact it won't...
But as is I believe the case with Italy, your constitution doesn't allow it, right? Start voting for parties urging for a change in the constitution in this respect. :-)
#19
True, the German Basic Law does not allow for referenda (which was done exactly to prevent plebiscites in Hitler fashion but times have changed). There was a joint move of the parties to change that article. Now this move has been postponed for times after the ratification of the EU constitution.
In the case of the EU arrest warrant the German Basic Law, that prohibits the extradition of German citizens from Germany, was changed in a heartbeat (most Germans didn't even realize this yet), which I believe was a hightly questionable action as the defendant cannot challenge his extradition while being in Germany. A simple error could force you to defend your case in Spain or Latvia.
I don't think that Germans will sit quietly while the French, the British and the Poles are voting...
Problem is, up to now nobody really bothers to explain what the EU Constitution actually means for Germany.
#20
Angash, The Constitution, which was only to have been improvements and modifications to the Articles of Confederation, does begin, We the People, in letters big enough to make it clear to which government in our federal system the delegation of sovereignty would lie. Ratification was a close run thing in conventions. Had it been subject to referenda, the outcome might have been different.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
12/20/2004 22:01 Comments ||
Top||
#21
Not sure where you're going Mrs. Davis. I think you're making a non-distinction against what TGA said. We didn't have a referenda here in America. I really don't believe TGA is saying he wants one in this case either.
If you're saying that the American people didn't get a vote, much less a plebiscite, well boo hoo hoo. Funny how things have worked out so well.
#23
While we didn't have direct elections to determine whether to ratify, neither did we simply let the existing state governments have that authority. The conventions were called specifically to address whether to accept or reject, with no other issues (except amendments, perhaps). The members of the conventions were directly elected and presumably ran on the basis of ratify/not.
If the European states called for elections to a convention based on ratification/not, with the members having no say on anything else (local budget, terrorism, tariffs), then that would be what we had.
Having the existing parliaments do the ratifications is not the same thing at all. Now, ratification becomes just one more issue, like taxes, defense, welfare, whatever.
#24
Ah, I do believe I understand what you're saying, TGA. It's very vile to have the ideas of our neighbors shoved down our throats, without any recourse by vote.
But please do tell me, do you think that while the German people avoid the referendum for fear of failure, as it provides no alternative to the proposal---do you think they would welcome a vote that would make a more participatory inclusion in the Euro?
Because right now, it seems as though the Euro is constructed in such a way that the member states are forced to take the lumps their neighbors dish out, without any outlet for progress or constructive dialog.
Foreign Minister Ben Bot of the Netherlands, which holds the rotating presidency of the European Union, on Sunday criticized French and Austrian plans to hold referendums on Turkish membership in the EU, saying such moves could keep Turkey out of the bloc.
Yep. French got what they wanted from the Turks in 2003, and now it's time to screw them.
"I do not think it's very fair to move the goal posts in the middle of a match," Bot said on Dutch public television. "We have never said to the Turks, neither in 1999 nor in 2002, that a referendum would lie at the end of the process. We have to be fair." President Jacques Chirac of France, who has had to juggle his support for Turkey's EU hopes with skepticism among politicians and the public, has promised a referendum on ratifying Turkey's eventual EU membership. In Austria, President Heinz Fischer on Sunday added his voice to a call from Chancellor Wolfgang SchÃŒssel for a European referendum on Turkish membership. SchÃŒssel has said that in any event there would be a vote in Austria.
There were fresh signs Sunday of the unpopularity of the Turkish decision in some countries. Supporters of Italy's populist Northern League party took to the streets of Milan to protest against the start of talks and demanded a referendum on the issue. Banners said, "After the Chinese, now the Turks: Businesses are at risk" and, "Yes to Christian roots." But in Turkey, celebrations continued. Foreign Minster Abdullah Gul said that the EU decision contributed to the Muslim country's stability and gave it a new position in Europe and the Islamic world. "Turkey is a very different country than two days ago," Gul told supporters in Ankara.
Wait til several Euro countries vote 'no'.
Posted by: Sock Puppet of Doom ||
12/20/2004 23:46 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Sharing sovereignty is a big thing. Like marriage, it should be voluntary on both sides.
So far enlargement has usually been confirmed with referenda on *one* end, that of the acceding countries. (Sidenote: There was one exception actually -- France held a referendum before allowing UK, Ireland and Denmark to accede back in 1973)
But anyway, when there's doubt on the part of the countries already inside the union, it makes sense to have referenda there as well.
-
As a sidenote, for a supposedly imperialistic and Nazi-like power, the EU seems too reluctant to grab more territory, but said new territory is celebrating even a distance chance of becoming a part of us. Fancy that.
#2
I'll believe it when it happens. The Turks aren't 'xactly popular in the rest of Europe.
Posted by: Steve White ||
12/20/2004 0:32 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Actually Aris, there is nothing fancy about it if you look at it from the point of view that the EU actually needed the eastern Europeans to join, economically speaking. Turkey will never be able to match what eastern Europe had to offer in this respect, and if it did, I venture that there would be no postponing Turkey's membership. Sure Turkey would have to change some things, but there would be no "debating" it and no referendums.
Posted by: Rafael ||
12/20/2004 0:38 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I have no opinion either way. I would hope the same method as has been used in the past would be used. That seems fair. But many countries want a vote on it.
Just gettting ready for accession talks has been good for Turkey.
#5
I'm not sure what exactly it is that you are arguing -- that if Turkey's entry becomes unequivocally good for the EU, then there won't be much disagreement about its entry? That's obvious, but it doesn't tell us much.
My argument was that usually for imperialists, the expansion of territory is felt to be *itself* a good. And usually the encroached-upon nations tend to be afraid and resentful, not joyous at the "conquest".
If a neighbouring nation to the Soviet Union for example had said "Conquer us please", I don't think the old USSR would be as reluctant about it as the EU is about Turkey's membership. And likewise with China, Nazi Germany, and pretty much every other conquering power in the history of the world.
#6
Aris, you mentioned reluctance on the part of the EU to grab more territory. I'm arguing that reluctance has little to do with it. If it were profitable (not only in the monetary sense) to accept more states, the EU would expand all the way to the Urals.
Posted by: Rafael ||
12/20/2004 1:28 Comments ||
Top||
#7
If it were profitable to accept more states, the EU would expand all the way to the Urals.
And assuming those other states *wanted* it to expand to cover them. Meaning, if it was *mutually* profitable.
I don't disagree with you but once again I think you are missing my point, namely that imperialists tend to see grabbing more territory as something they want to do by *itself*, regardless of whether logically it's profitable or not.
#8
Going back to your original statement, your argument can be paraphrased as "the EU is reluctant to grab more territory, therefore it is not an imperialistic power".
I'm merely saying, that if you're looking to show that the EU is not imperialistic, then you should not rely solely on its reluctance to grab territory as proof. I claim the opposite, in fact. The EU is not reluctant. It's only waiting for the opportunity to present itself. It isn't there yet with Turkey.
Posted by: Rafael ||
12/20/2004 2:41 Comments ||
Top||
#9
i would like to see a program of massive church building in turkey to test the waters--let immigration become a two way street
Posted by: SON OF TOLUI ||
12/20/2004 2:56 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Who would want to move to Turkey??? For one, they have world's worst construction standards (if any at all). Can't build a home.
Posted by: Rafael ||
12/20/2004 3:02 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Err, some 80.000 Europeans have moved and are living already in Turkey, most of them at old age, enjoying a villa life on the beautiful beaches of Turkey (kind of a Florida).
And what is that bulshit of land grab, Turkey and Europe are both benefiting economically that's what counts. The Frenchies and some other countries are verbally harsh against Turkey for inner politics but when it comes to deeds the picture is different.
Posted by: Murat ||
12/20/2004 7:00 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Murat is right. As the old saying goes in the U.S., "just follow the money." France will have no real problem with Turkey joining as long as it gives France some new economic advantage. If France is lucky, it will become a secular Islamic republic rather than just an Islamic republic.
Posted by: Tom ||
12/20/2004 8:07 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Re #5 "I'm not sure what exactly it is that you are arguing...":
Aris, perhaps not every comment is an argument.
Posted by: Tom ||
12/20/2004 8:10 Comments ||
Top||
#14
France is not completely stupid. They've learned that colonialism is a costly affair. It's much more profitable to have Dane geld paid to you than to actually conqueror and administer.
#15
Great another welfare state of 66 million with ethnic strife and a simmering civil war in the east. Not to mention opposition to any Iraqi Kurd autonomy which is the only house in order in that Hellhole. Bad gamble.
A scenario for an unspecified day in 2005: One of President Bush's judicial nominations is brought to the Senate floor. Majority Leader Bill Frist makes a point of order that only a simple majority is needed for confirmation. The point is upheld by the presiding officer, Vice President Dick Cheney. Democratic Leader Harry Reid challenges the ruling. Frist moves to table Reid's motion, ending debate. The motion is tabled, and the Senate proceeds to confirm the judicial nominee -- all in about 10 minutes.
Read the rest at the link
After reading this column I became extremely angry with the Republicans. If this option was available since becoming a majority, why in gods name haven't they exercised this option over the past two years? Are they afraid of upsetting the Democrats? Trust me, no matter what course of action the Republicans take, the Dems will not like it. Can you imagine the left defending why they are against Miguel Estrada? The main reasons they claim is that he refuses to answer stupid question from Senator Daschele and they are unsure if he will put a stop to killing babies. The better would have been to confirm him through this process and then leak that memo that shows Democratic collusion with NARAL and the ACLU. Trust me they would have been scurrying for cover, and not attacking a great man. Just three words from Nike Senator Frist: JUST DO IT!
#1
Constitutionally, the Senate is supposed to provide "advise and consent" to the President in several important things, mostly confirmations but also in treaties. It is one of their primary reasons for existing as a separate house from the House of Representatives. For this reason, they will probably never agree to surrender or dilute this power.
#2
CS - the ability to windbag in front of CSPAN and Network News is one of the choice perks in keeping relected. They'll never give that up voluntarily. A SCOTUS vote and subsequent grandstanding is something the Chuck Schumers, Ted Kennedy's, Joe Bidens, Chuck Hagels, John McCain's.... LIVE FOR
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/20/2004 17:23 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Common Repubs, get some brass ones.
Posted by: Capt America ||
12/20/2004 17:37 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Agreed that they love the spotlight. But sometimes they should just do the right thing BECAUSE it is the right thing to do. There are too many liberal judges ruling this country from behind the bench. If the bench was attempting to reverse tyranny then that would be one thing, what they are trting to impose is a liberal/socialists agenda on and in spite of the majority.
#5
We'll see. They've been disappointing Me since late 1995, so I'm pessimistic (all My surprises are pleasant that way).
Note, -Moose, that no one is trying to eliminate the Senate's vote, nor reasonable debate, just the filibuster. Note that there is no filibuster in the Constitution, nor in the Federalist Papers (unless I missed it).
I actually favor the filibuster on legislation, even when the good guys have the majority.
A fuming Sen. Edgardo Angara lashed out at the people who have been reportedly spreading a text message that he was lynched by supporters of Fernando Poe Jr. and is now in critical condition at the National Orthopedic Hospital. "Clearly this is black propaganda. They are all liars and mean to the bone," Angara said in a phone interview.
"Obviously, I'm not in the hospital anymore, nor is my condition critical..."
The text message said Angara was mobbed by Poe supporters when he visited Poe's wake because they suspected him of running with millions of pesos in campaign funds during the May 2004 election.
"Nothing of the sort happened. Some tar, yes. A few feathers, yes... But no rope!"
Angara said the rumormongers are the same guys who accuse him of being a patron of illegal loggers in Aurora. "In fact, the numbers they are using are the same [cell phone] numbers they used in spreading the alleged involvement of the Angara family in illegal logging. I know them," he said.
Posted by: Fred ||
12/20/2004 11:49:37 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I'm mean to the bone
m-m-m-m-m-ma meeean
m-m-m-m-m-ma meeean
mean to the bone
Posted by: George Thorogood ||
12/20/2004 15:30 Comments ||
Top||
#2
...the numbers they are using are the same [cell phone] numbers they used in spreading the alleged involvement of the Angara family in illegal logging. I know them,â he said.
"They must all die." he added, waggling his impressive eyebrows meaningfully...
So much for the myth of "America's first black president": A new movie reveals that racist Bill Clinton not only did nothing to stop genocide in Rwanda, he also pressured other nations to do nothing. In a rare case of exposing one of Clinton's greatest scandals, the New York Times today discusses United Artists' "Hotel Rwanda," opening Wednesday, along with former Clinton national security adviser Anthony Lake... An early review of "Hotel Rwanda" in the Harvard Crimson says "the Clinton White House's claim in 1994 that the US had 'taken a leading role in efforts to protect the Rwandan people' is the worst lie that administration ever told."
"Clinton's visage appears briefly in the film — when the camera rests on a copy of Time Magazine with the forty-second president plastered on the cover. But we keenly feel his absence. And in a singularly eerie scene, State Department spokeswoman Christine Shelly is heard on TV as she tries to deny that the situation on the ground in Rwanda rises to the level of genocide. Shelly's words roundly contradict the reality on the screen," the Crimson says...
#1
The linked article quotes The Times as stating: "In Rwanda, the United States did not simply not intervene. It also used its considerable power to discourage other Western powers from intervening."
The linked article does not provide any evidence that Bill Clinton encouraged African genocide. Discouraging Western powers from intervening is not the same as encouraging genocide in Africa.
The genocide was ended because the Rwanda Patriotic Front invaded Rwanda from its bases in Uganda. The USA did support that intervention.
.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
12/20/2004 23:15 Comments ||
Top||
Isn't this 'spunky'....
CBS has a new name on top of its list of poten tial replacement for Dan Rather — Katie Couric. According to Broadcasting & Cable magazine, CBS wants to "land a superstar to take over" for Rather and the "Today" show diva is its top choice. Couric has just 18 months to go on her $15-million a year contract with NBC, the weekly reports in its edition out today. "Virtually everyone in the news pantheon who's younger than 60 is tied up even longer than Couric or simply doesn't want the gig," the magazine reports. Rather has said he will retire in March. CBS would likely name someone to take over the job on an interim basis — then make way for Katie when she becomes free in 2006. "The Early Show" co-host Harry Smith, "Face the Nation" moderator Bob Scheiffer or "60 Minutes" correspondent Ed Bradley are among those mentioned as possible placeholders. Couric could command a salary of $20 million a year or more, the magazine reports. Only David Letterman, who earns about $31 million a year from CBS, and Jay Leno, whose most recent deal pays him $27 million from NBC, would be paid more on network TV. Now thats an idea -- have Letterman replace Dan......
Couric's agent, Alan Berger, told the magazine "there's nothing to talk about" right now. But reports that Katie could end up as the signature figure of CBS News are sure to send shock waves through the TV world. CBS could kill two birds with one stone by stealing Couric. It would not only gain one of TV's few remaining superstar reporters, but would take her off the ratings-topping "Today" show. That would probably be a bigger favor to ABC — where the Diane Sawyer-hosted "Good Morning America" is gaining on "Today" but still trails — than to CBS. It's wake-up show is in far third place. Couric too might be open to a change of scenery — if not hours. Katie has been getting up early for 14 years now. So do a lot of other bloodsucking parasites but I dont see their name on the list......
It's like watching a hamster on a wheel. They're probably checking to see if John Cameron Swayze is still alive...
Posted by: CrazyFool ||
12/20/2004 11:28:11 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#7
Too bad they can't get Ted from The Mary Tyler Moore Show.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
12/20/2004 14:47 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Mrs D - Oops - rolled off the page? Sorry!!!
Okay, then, this page and this page have (paranoid, now, so 2 of 'em, heh) the short version.
I can look a little harder and find another of the full, longer, version where he tells everyone to get out of their chairs and go to the windo... if ya really want it, heh.
Heading out for the afternoon, though, on a "date". Back later.
#9
By the way, how's that investigation coming, CBS? Hello?
Posted by: Steve ||
12/20/2004 14:53 Comments ||
Top||
#10
The MSM meltdown continues apace. The media lords have drawn exactly the wrong conclusions from the recent dust-up: that they need more of a tilt to the left, more emotive editorializing, and more form over substance. The appointment of Al Qatie to a major anchor desk will be the end of any pretense of serious journalism. They have probably tried to heed the "voice of the people," but to them that is Indymedia, Mother Jones, and the radical fringe in Hollywood.
Edward R. Murrow is turning over in his grave.
Posted by: Capt America ||
12/20/2004 17:27 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Hiring a "superstar" to the tunes of tens of millions of dollars is a perfect confirmation that the MSM just don't get it.
The time of promoting form over substance, while manipulating what the people think they know, is over. The MSM beast is in the final spasms of its agony.
#13
I was working at home one day and saw Katie's colonoscopy....fascinating...towards the top, I'd swear I saw her brain stem
Posted by: Frank G ||
12/20/2004 20:04 Comments ||
Top||
#14
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the last time I saw al Katy on ( a while ago) she was very heavy on the icing over her lips puttying up some very nasty cold sores.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
12/20/2004 20:21 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Gee. Golly. I wonder why Brit Hume's name hasn't been mentioned?
Posted by: Fred ||
12/20/2004 20:24 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Lol! Passed Failed the Journalism Competency Test?
After that apathy story, well, nothing seems to like matter, now. I think I'll like, y'know, blow off that Proper Articulation of English Class, cuz, like, who cares. Heh.
#17
If memory serves me right, I believe she is the one stated slipped that she hopes Saddam made it safely to Syria. Maybe Katie is hiding Osama in her apartment. Now, instead of $15 million, she wants $20 million a year. Think about it, $20 million for reading from the teleprompter, for 20 minutes.
The BBC has actually done a good job covering this for the past few years.
...Mohamed could not tell me his surname or his age. As a slave he didn't own the right to either. But in a candlelit shack in the sandy outskirts of the capital, Nouakchott, he told me the story of his life. "I don't know how I became a slave," he told me. "I was just born one. My family were slaves. We did all the hard work for our master and all we received in return was beatings."
After three attempts at making slavery illegal, the latest as recently as 1981, Mauritania has finally enacted a law which goes further than ever before, making slave ownership punishable with a fine or prison sentence. But a year on, and no-one has yet been prosecuted under the new law. "We enacted it just to meet international standards," says Bamariam Koita, director of the government's Human Rights Commission. Meanwhile the WaPo had an article yesterday that the real problem is institutional racism in America because the black middle class doesn't feel secure enough.
Posted by: mhw ||
12/20/2004 11:05:13 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
They must be really, really bad at keeping secrets...
#1
It is easy to posit economics as the causus belli between nations. But the reality is both far simpler and far more complex. The deceptively simple reason for war is "because both sides want it", a cryptic koan if ever there was one, but as worthy of examination as "what is the sound of one hand clapping?", for deeper meanings and truths. Economics alone is not enough to consider, but also the purposes of war, the failure of diplomacy, the respective military capabilities, demographics, resources, history, even proximity. All must be considered.
Ten men charged with plotting to overthrow Sierra Leone's government last year were convicted Monday of treason and sentenced to death by hanging. Friends and relatives of the condemned men wailed and wept outside the heavily guarded court gates after the 11-man jury found the defendants guilty and the judge ordered them to the gallows. "You will be taken from here to a place of lawful prison and thence to a place of execution and there suffer death by hanging," said Judge Bankole Raschid, after a court crier replaced his white jurists' wig with a black skull cap. "May the Lord have mercy on your soul."
Wonder if Human Rights Watch or Amnesty International will object?
The 10, including ex-army officers and rebels who fought during Sierra Leone's brutal 1991-2002 war, have 21 days to appeal. Another defendant was given 10 years in prison on a lesser, related charge. Security forces captured the men after a Jan. 13, 2003, shootout at a military base in what prosecutors called an attempt to capture weapons for an attempt to overthrow President Ahmed Tejan Kabbah's government.In 2001, Sierra Leone held successful elections signaling its recovery from a 10-year civil war that was launched by rebels fighting to win control of the west African nation and its diamond fields. U.N., British and Guinean forces quelled the rebels in 2000, and the government declared the war over in January 2001. A U.N.-backed court is trying rebel and government fighters for war crimes in a conflict that saw insurgents amputating civilians limbs with machetes.
Posted by: Steve ||
12/20/2004 9:46:32 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
We care more about Donald Rumsfeld signing letters than 10 men swinging in the wind - society is sick indeed!
Posted by: Ady ||
12/20/2004 23:38 Comments ||
Top||
ACK/NAK. Message sent. Message received.
A federal judge has awarded an Internet service provider more than $1 billion in what is believed to be the largest judgment ever against spammers. Robert Kramer, whose company provides e-mail service for about 5,000 subscribers in eastern Iowa, filed suit against 300 spammers after his inbound mail servers received up to 10 million spam e-mails a day in 2000, according to court documents. U.S. District Judge Charles R. Wolle filed default judgments Friday against three of the defendants under the Federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and the Iowa Ongoing Criminal Conduct Act.
AMP Dollar Savings Inc. of Mesa, Ariz., was ordered to pay $720 million and Cash Link Systems Inc. of Miami, Fla., was ordered to pay $360 million. The third company, Florida-based TEI Marketing Group, was ordered to pay $140,000. "It's definitely a victory for all of us that open up our e-mail and find lewd and malicious and fraudulent e-mail in our boxes every day," Kramer said after the ruling.
Kramer's attorney, Kelly Wallace, said he is unlikely to ever collect the judgment, which was made possible by an Iowa law that allows plaintiffs to claim damages of $10 per spam message. The judgments were then tripled under RICO. "We hope to recover at least his costs," Wallace said. There were no telephone listings for the three companies in Arizona and Florida. Nobody replied to an e-mail sent Saturday to Cash Link Systems. According to court documents, no attorneys for the defendants were present during a bench trial in November. The lawsuit continues against other named defendants. Laura Atkins, president of SpamCon Foundation, an anti-spamming organization based in Palo Alto, Calif., said she believed it was the largest judgment ever in an anti-spam lawsuit. "This is just incredible," she said. "I'm not aware of anything that's been over $100 million." Mr Kramer decided to fight the good fight for all of us. Thanks, bro.
Posted by: .com ||
12/20/2004 12:31:28 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The only question is which is a more painful death for spammers? Boiling or burning?
Posted by: N Guard ||
12/20/2004 1:01 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Go read the poll on the sidebar at this blog and decide for yourself..."What ancient form of execution would you LEAST prefer?"
#5
Go read the poll on the sidebar at this blog and decide for yourself..."What ancient form of execution would you LEAST prefer?"
Emily, what happened to the "none of the above" button? I can't seem to find it.
Posted by: Steve White ||
12/20/2004 11:21 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Mojo,
Can bounty hunters in the US go after people for these damages? I've seen the reality TV shows where they go arrest someone who's jumped bail, but a percantage of a few hundred million is a different kettle of fish.
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
12/20/2004 11:28 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Steve...In a manner reminiscent of Genghis Khan, I disabled it.
#8
Tony: Bounty hunters are private contractors. They can go after anyone that somebody's willing to pay for. Usually that's a bail bondsman, but it's not a requirement.
#9
Tony (UK) - Excellent question - one which did not occur to me when I posted last night. The legal status of bounty hunters has always been a bit murky - with the cops, in particular, trying to play it down (keep it that way) to discourage the idea.
I believe bounty hunters are temporarily "deputized" by the paperwork to apprehend specific skippers (bail jumpers). IIUC, a Bail Bondsman is an officer of the Court with special responsibilities and is "empowered" to meet them with augmented power to arrest - one aspect being the authority to "deputize" the bounty hunter. That view is simplistic, I'm sure, and may be utterly wrong...
I would imagine that the states have the power to place restrictions upon the Bondsman and bounty hunter, so it may vary quite a bit from state to state.
Calling All Resident RB Legal Beagles!!!
Please clarify precisely (heh) who can empower a bounty hunter?
#10
Oops, posted before I saw you comment, Mojo. Are you sure it's that "loose"? In that scenario, heh, almost anything goes. Sure, after the fact, where someone gets excessive they can sue for rights violations, etc., but that may be too little, too late.
I figure it has to be more restricted, but hell - I've been completely wrong before, so...
#11
I'm sure it is more restricted, requiring (at the very least) a valid warrant for the fugitive. Is a bench warrant good enough? Does it have to be a criminal warrant? Who knows? Not me, for damn sure...
And in the case of spammers, I don't much give a damn. Shoot the pricks on sight, if you want. "Wanted: Dead or Alive (prefer dead)"
The Bush administration will seek to slash government spending next year, U.S. Treasury Secretary John Snow said on Sunday, but he was less specific than the president in predicting how quickly the deficit would fall. Snow, who was asked by President Bush to stay during Bush's second term after heavy speculation he would be replaced, said the administration's budget proposal early next year would rely heavily on spending cuts. "It will be a tight, disciplined budget with spending under disciplined controls," he said in an interview on CNN's "Late Edition" program. "Everything is being looked at and put under the microscope."
Snow declined to say what programs are being targeted or how soon Bush would meet his goal of cutting the deficit in half. But he said the budget proposal for fiscal year 2006, which begins next Oct. 1, would actually reduce current spending on some programs, not just slow their expected levels of inflationary increase, which often passes for budget-cutting in Washington.
The Pentagon is among the departments under White House pressure to restrain spending. "All agencies are being asked to identify programs that are duplicative, outdated or don't produce results," said Chad Kolton, spokesman for the White House Office of Management and Budget. "But decisions on funding won't be final until the president actually submits his budget next year." The Pentagon is still expected to receive an increase in funding, but the increase is not expected to be as large as years past under Bush. Kolton said "the needs of our troops in the field will be fully provided through our supplemental request next year." The emergency budget request for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan is expected to top $80 billion.
...
Posted by: .com ||
12/20/2004 12:21:50 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
JOHANNESBURG: A stampede broke out at Nelson Mandela's children's Christmas party yesterday as some 50,000 poor South Africans crashed through fences to claim free food and gifts, a local radio reported. Police said no one was killed at the party in the former president's village of Qunu, and played down reports of injuries. SAFM Radio station said children and their parents formed long queues before toppling fences due to overcrowding at the giant venue in the Eastern Cape, one of the country's poorest provinces. More than 50,000 people turned up to party at the annual jamboree and claimed free Christmas presents, more than twice the 20,000 expected, and that the surging crowd overpowered police, it said.
Posted by: .com ||
12/20/2004 12:15:31 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Nice to see that things are so much better, now that the white oppressors are gone.
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.
Friends and relatives of the condemned men wailed and wept outside the heavily guarded court gates after the 11-man jury found the defendants guilty and the judge ordered them to the gallows. "You will be taken from here to a place of lawful prison and thence to a place of execution and there suffer death by hanging," said Judge Bankole Raschid, after a court crier replaced his white jurists' wig with a black skull cap. "May the Lord have mercy on your soul." 
