Despite a tangle of fishing gear pinning its flippers to its body, a 34-foot endangered North American right whale slowly swam north along the South Carolina coast as scientists laid plans to free him. The yearling, dubbed Kingfisher, is one of only an estimated 350 North American right whales. It was sighted off Jacksonville, Fla., last week. Scientists worked off the Florida coast on Friday to free the whale, but found he was so twisted in the lines they would have to return and sedate him and try again. "If we do not remove the lines, the whale will die," said Dr. Teri Rowles, the lead veterinarian for the National Marine Fisheries Service who heads the Nationâs Marine Mammal Health and Stranding Program. Since the whale is young, the lines, if not removed, will kill it as it gets bigger and they tighten around the creature.
During the rescue work last week, scientists attached a buoy with a satellite transmitter. By midafternoon Tuesday, Kingfisher was off Winyah Bay near Georgetown, S.C., and swimming slowly north. Scientists from National Marine Fisheries, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission and the Center for Coastal Studies in Provincetown, Mass., were expected to set out to catch up with the whale on Wednesday. "They will use a sedative to relax the whale so they are able to work in an area which is dangerous to work in," said Joanne Jarzobski, a program coordinator with the Center for Coastal Studies, a nonprofit group which does applied research and marine mammal rescues. She said, however, the technique has been only used once before and while the sedative may calm the whale, thereâs a chance it could make it hyperactive instead. Scientists in the rescue team unsuccessfully tried the technique three years ago, but that whale never slowed enough for the ropes to be cut.
Itâs not clear where the rescue team, which will be aboard a Coast Guard cutter, will catch up with the whale, Jarzobski said. She said the ropes are wrapped around both flippers, with between 20 and 30 wraps on the whaleâs left flipper. An estimated 60 percent of right whales become entangled in fishing lines, Jarzobski said. Last year, the Center for Coastal Studies received 75 reports of whale entanglements and confirmed 35. Teams from the center were able to free 12 whales, she said. Whales donât need to be disentangled if the situation is not life-threatening. But a young whale like Kingfisher will die if not freed, she said.
Posted by: Steve from Relto ||
03/24/2004 11:30:39 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Sad, time to call in a P-3 with a DVM in the weapons chair. I would suggest a Harpoon.
Political correctness has caught up with sign language for deaf people. Gestures used to depict ethnic and religious minorities and homosexuals are being dropped because they are now deemed offensive. The abandoned signs include "Jewish", in which a hand mimes a hooked nose; the sign for "gay", a flick of a limp wrist; and "Chinese", in which the index fingertips pull the eyes into a slant. Another dropped sign is that for "Indian", which is a finger pointing to an imaginary spot in the middle of a forehead. The signs have been declared off-limits by the makers of Vee-TV, Britainâs Channel 4 program for deaf people, for fear of being accused of racism and homophobia.
Critics labelled the move as silly, saying that the producers were interfering with "deaf culture". Polly Smith, the acting chairperson of the British Council for Disabled People, said the changes were a form of discrimination. "The program makers at Channel 4 are interfering with deaf peopleâs language, culture and view of society, and that is a form of discrimination," she said. However, Ms OâNeill defended the move. She said that the program, launching its fourth series today, used modern alternative signs that were not offensive. "Before, [the sign for Jewish] was connected to a stereotypical Jewish nose, but now itâs a hand sign that mimics the shape of the menorah [a ceremonial candlestick used in Judaism]," she said. The sign for "Indian" is now a mime of the triangular shape of the subcontinent; "Chinese" is the right hand travelling from the signerâs heart across his chest horizontally, then down towards his hip, mimicking the tunic worn in China; and the sign for "gay" is an upright thumb on one hand in the palm of the other, wobbling from side to side.
Other signs that have been accused of being politically incorrect - such as the sign for German, which is a fist held to the forehead with a finger pointing straight up, mimicking the shape of a Prussian spiked helmet - are widely used. The sign for disabled, in which a finger on each hand depicts a limping movement, is used by some deaf people. Specialists in sign language have also pointed out that in China, the sign for a Westerner is a hand depicting a round eye, which has not sparked any criticism from deaf people in Britain.
"PC, meet PC'er!"
Posted by: Paul Moloney ||
03/24/2004 6:39:11 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#2
So I guess the sign for bullshit has yet to be reviewed? Approximately, it is both arms across your chest, one above the other, and using the index and middle fingers of the lower hand wave downward. Maybe you make horns with the same fingers of upper hand - I can't remember. Try it and you'll get it. Can't find a graphic for it anymore, sorry!
#3
I don't have a problem with this move. The gestures seem a bit offensive to me. So why not create more polites one and leave the old ones to represent the term being used as a slur? Language evolves....as I see this, they are just adding a few, more refined words to the dictionary.
#4
We sometimes have a Signlanguage interpreter at my Synagogue. I cant believe she would have ever used the "hooknose" sign for Jew. Theres an active Jewish hearing impaired community IIUC. Why shouldnt sign language evolve like any other language?
#5
Shipman <------------ Points to nose.
Shipman <------------ Points to leg.
Shipman <------------ Moves one leg up slightly.
Shipman <------------ Points to picture of P.T. Barnum
#6
The only word i know in sign-laguage is blowjob, and the last deaf person I signed it to laughed her a** of ( wich realy was to bad, it was a good-looking female )
#8
This is _British_ sign language that the article is talking about, mind you. The sign for "German" or "Germany" in American Sign Language (and this sign has been in use for ever since I've known any ASL) could hardly be considered offensive by anyone; it's the hands placed together, backs facing out, and the fingers wiggling, to represent the wings of the German eagle. (The sign for "America" is the hands placed together with fingers interlaced and pointing outward, then moving around in a circle; this is supposed to represent traditional frontier-style fences.)
Posted by: Joe ||
03/24/2004 18:09 Comments ||
Top||
#9
. (The sign for "America" is the hands placed together with fingers interlaced and pointing outward, then moving around in a circle; this is supposed to represent traditional frontier-style fences.)
Damn! Way cool! That is America!
MARS BELONGS TO AMERICA, OPEN IT FOR HOMESTEADING.
More than 200 young demonstrators pelted the high walls surrounding the U.S. Embassy compound in Bahrain with stones Wednesday, shouting "Death to America and Israel," then bravely scattering when riot police came at them with batons and tear gas. The youths regrouped and were joined by students from nearby boys' schools. "America is the root of all the problems, and we want this embassy in Bahrain to be shut down," said a teenage boy who identified himself only as Mohsen, a student from a nearby school. Many shouted "Death to America and Israel" as they ran toward the walls — only getting within about 200 feet of the embassy before being blocked by concrete barriers —and launched their rocks. There was no damage; the rocks harmlessly bounced off or fell short of the walls. Two to three dozen riot police carrying batons and shields, and armed with tear gas, arrived quickly and began chasing them around the outside of the embassy compound. Some of the demonstrators hid their faces behind handkerchiefs. There were no casualties from the clashes with riot police, though some young demonstrators were rubbing their eyes from the tear gas. No arrests were made.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/24/2004 7:44:31 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Their choice was either to do that or to do their school work.
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
03/24/2004 8:17 Comments ||
Top||
#2
the rocks harmlessly bounced off or fell short of the walls.
Ok, they are ready for hand grenades now.
Posted by: Steve ||
03/24/2004 8:42 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Scouting report: No arm. You can run on them and take the extra base...
#7
"America is the root of all the problems"
"Americans makes the Arab world look bad, by having people who understand that, in order to eat, you have to work, instead of having the government forced to feed you."
"America allows everyone to worship as they please, instead of forcing them to worship Allah and pay heed to the One Religion, Islam."
"America allows women to wear all those skimpy clothes, and drive cars, and go shopping on their own, and go to school, and do all kinds of things. That gives our women ideas they shouldn't have."
"America has too many guns, and we can't force them to do what we say, like good little dhimmis. THAT REALLY makes us angry."
"Americans talk too much, and say bad things about us. It really makes us mad when they say things that are true. I mean, untrue."
"Everything is America's fault because they exist. And because they support Israel. And because they make good pizza and because Pepsi tastes better than Mecca Cola."
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
03/24/2004 18:34 Comments ||
Top||
Saudi Arabiaâs foreign minister has criticised US-led calls for reform in the Middle East. Prince Saud al-Faisal said Arab nations could tackle their problems themselves. .... Prince Faisal said Washingtonâs calls for reform ignored the fact that Arabs have cultures rooted in history and can handle their own affairs. .... Saudi Arabia has already promised municipal elections later this year, but says any political change will not be influenced by outside pressure. The Saudi authorities rejected criticism from Washington over its arrest of several pro-reform activists last week, saying it was an internal affair. .... He said the proposals "include clear accusations against the Arab people and their governments that they are ignorant of their own affairs. Those behind these plans ignore the fact that our Arab people have cultures rooted deep in history and that we are able to handle our own affairs." He said such calls for Arabs to join the modern world were made "as if we had not been doing anything and had just been waiting for direction from outside".
"Us Arabs have a long and glorious history of despotism. It's a cultural thing. You wouldn't understand."
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
03/24/2004 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"I will have more comments on this subject as soon as my Filippino maid brings me some fresh tea."
#4
if you u.s. guys don't stop this shit --your saudi 401k's will be terminated--we're modernizing--we've gone from the 7th century to the 8th--leave us alone to evolve at the pace of desert non-vertebrate chordata
Posted by: SON OF TOLUI ||
03/24/2004 0:55 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Sea & Lynch Mob - LOL! Spot-on, folks!
I love this. We have the US directly and harshly criticizing the disingenuous window-dressing offered up by the Royals. We have the Saoodi FM, tentaively #3 on the Royal hit parade - and likely to be the next actual kingy thing - Abdullah's older than dirt, like Nayef and Fathead, getting his Royal shorts in a bunch and making very harsh statements - at least for the diplo-game. Pretty close to a break, in fact, if it continues this way.
#6
Prince Saud al-Faisal said Arab nations could tackle their problems themselves. ....
Arab nations highlights:
1. No one single top notch college or university (except maybe American University in Egypt)
2. Not one contribution to science in decades
3. Nothing of anyvalue is manufactured in the Arab world
#10
Fred, I haven't paid much attention to the troll deletion situation until today. I was wondering if there was an area where I could see what these morons were saying without it being posted to the main rants? Not sure if that's possible but would be amusing to me assuming it's not too much trouble for you or if your new sop is just to delete their verbal vomit pell-mell. It always makes me feel good to see that there are people who are more stupid then myself in the world. Lucky for me that as long as the LLL exists - there always will be.
It is not exactly what you asked for but if you want to "see what these morons [are] saying" I find reading the NYT or WashPost just as effective as rubbing shards of glass against my eyes. :-)
BTW Snellenr read your link yesterday about the abort to KSC.... sheeesh.... Think about riding down the smoke trail you just left 5 minutes before. General Yeager, John Young and maybe Gordo Cooper could have gotten away with it....
#19
Jarhead - I don't think it'd be a good idea to re-post deleted posts anywhere. If trolls like Boris post here to Googlebomb, or for perverse self-satisfaction, that would defeat the object of removing them in the first place. Better to simply delete the posts as they appear and hope that the bastard loses interest when it realises that it's wasting its time, and more than Fred's...
#20
I don't even read them before dumping them anymore. Except for the one about Zelnick.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/24/2004 11:17 Comments ||
Top||
#21
Well, gee whiz. I mean, where do you take a Zionist Propaganda machine for repairs? The local Zionist Propaganda Garage? Temple Beth Propaganda? NASA?
#24
Fred, nice job on the troll deletion code! Is there a way that the troll's comments can be replaced with a random pro-USA/Bush/Israel/Sharon comment? I bet that would be really annoying.
#26
Dragon Fly - Here's one that's just as telling as your examples:
The total number of translated works to Arabic in the last 10 centuries is the same as the number of books translated in one year to Spanish. The pitiful number of 220 books translated to Arabic annually is only one-fifth of the works translated to Greek every year, while the Arab population is 28 times the size of the Greek population.
When the only book you tend to read is the Koran, you tend to be ignorant. Cause, meet Effect.TM
#28
I guess much didn't stick from his Princeton days...unless he had others do his term papers for him. He needs to be tested to find out his Cerebral Calcification Quotient
Posted by: Michael ||
03/24/2004 14:16 Comments ||
Top||
#29
I would like to see the correct moniker added. If its Boris, and its coming from the same IP, I'd like to see Boris the Troll instead of just Troll. It will help us all see how persistant one or two folks can be. As is it could be hundreds of different fools.
#30
Okay... But The Enforcer and The Prosecutor are pretty scary.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/24/2004 17:04 Comments ||
Top||
#31
The total number of translated works to Arabic in the last 10 centuries is the same as the number of books translated in one year to Spanish. Anything been written in Arabic in the past thousand years that was worth the effort to translate to any other language? Nobuaki Notohara's book doesn't count.
#43
Sorry, Yonah is the anti-Zionist. (Interesting for a Jew to feel that way about the nation of Israel.)
Sal is more on message about the Sauds, but the both of you have severe multiple posting issues.
Posted by: Jen ||
03/24/2004 20:13 Comments ||
Top||
#44
That's quite a series of "back" and "submit" button hits. Sal must be exhausted.
Yawn. FOAD.
CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) - A chamber of Venezuela's Supreme Court dealt a blow Tuesday to opponents of President Hugo Chavez by overruling fellow justices on a petition for recalling him from office. The court's constitutional chamber struck down a ruling by the electoral chamber, which had ordered election officials to accept 870,000 signatures they had questioned. In a widely expected decision, Chief Justice Ivan Rincon said the petition did not fall under the electoral chamber's jurisdiction.
Mayor Daley appreciates the elegant use of the fix here.
The decision might not be final. Chavez opponents can appeal the ruling to all 20 of the court's magistrates, but it was not immediately clear they would do so. The high court is divided into several chambers responsible for different areas of law. Rincon defended the council's authority to reject signatures. "The National Electoral Council ... is an autonomous and independent branch of government," he said.
"Please don't kill us!"
Posted by: Steve White ||
03/24/2004 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This could easily mean chaos. If it gets really ugly Chavez could possibly dynamite his old production facilites. Here is a post from a couple of days ago with some background on the Electoral Court controversy. This could result in another economic downturn in the US which would dunk everybody else's market as well.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
03/24/2004 3:21 Comments ||
Top||
#2
It appears they can vote him out in the recall, since his sabotage of the recall petition failed. Now the questions are simple:
1) Will he allow a straight-up a vote on the recall? Of course not - he's Chavez The Grate!
2) Will he go when he loses? See #1
Markets are like little old ladies in a quilting circle - only less courageous. SH's right - when the shit hits the fan, it will hurt a lot of people - outside Venezuela, too.
Hey Spain, look what happens when you put a two-faced whoreing Socialist into office. Hard to get rid of them when they don't care about democracy in the first place. Take care - get rid of Zappie before he cements his hold by gutting law enforcement and bribing everyone else.
#3
The only difference between a Communist and a Socialist is that a Socialist can be removed from office. This "moderates" his behavior somewhat (no gulags or killing fields). Their goals and morals are the same.
South Korean President Roh Moo-Hyun has rejected a court request to appear in person to defend himself at the first public hearing on his impeachment next week, according to his aide. Mr Roh refused to attend the hearing at the Constitutional Court, fearing his presence would only provide fodder to opposition parties seeking to attack him in the court, said his former advisor for civil affairs Moon Jae-In. Mr Moon, who heads his legal team, said Mr Roh was under no legal obligation to appear in person. "We've asked the President not to attend the court hearing and he accepted the advice," Mr Moon said.
I think he's overpaying his legal team, whatever he's paying them...
Mr Roh, 57, was suspended from office following an unprecedented impeachment motion passed by the opposition-controlled National Assembly on March 12. The Constitutional Court has summoned Mr Roh to defend himself in person at the hearing on his impeachment. The court has up to 180 days to decide whether to endorse or reject the impeachment for alleged election law violations, corruption and incompetence. With Mr Roh's rejection of the summons, the court will set another date for his attendance. If he refuses again, the court will proceed without his attendance.
Which would seem to indicate a "no contest" defense...
Mr Roh's refusal to attend the hearing will cause some delay to the legal proceedings. Yonhap news agency said it now became more unlikely the court ruling would be made before the April 15 elections. Mr Roh, 13 months into a five-year term, will be banned from holding public office for five years if impeachment is upheld by at least six of the nine judges. The impeachment vote delivered a jolt to South Korea's fragile economic recovery and triggered three days of street protests across the country. Political turmoil also increased uncertainty over delicate diplomacy to resolve the North Korean nuclear crisis and improve ties between Seoul and Pyongyang. Mr Roh's impeachment polarised politics and sent tens of thousands of demonstrators into the streets for candlelit protests that were outlawed on Monday. More than 70 per cent of South Koreans opposed impeachment, according to polls, and opposition parties that supported the vote are facing a popular backlash.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/24/2004 7:22:31 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
He should save himself the ridicule, regardless of how the impeachment process turns out, and resign. He is a farcical creation of an insane Skor generation of tools. He is utterly ineffective and flawed. I've never seen anyone else at his level in so far over his head and clueless about what to do. At least the asshats like Chavez have cojones.
#4
I don't know how it works over there, but if you don't show up for court here in the States, the most likely outcome is a default judgement against you.
Not that I have personal experience either way, I'm just sayin', is all..
China angrily suspended dialogue on human rights with the United States on Tuesday, one day after Washington said it would seek to criticize the mainland's rights record at a U.N. conference. The rights dispute "has already seriously damaged the foundation of the dialogue and exchange on human rights between the two countries," Assistant Foreign Minister Shen Guofang was quoted as saying on the Foreign Ministry's Web site. "China has to immediately suspend the dialogue and exchanges."
"They keep picking on us!"
China rejects criticism of its human rights record, but has carried on dialogues on the issue with the United States, the European Union and other governments since the mid-1990s. In past sessions of the high-level discussions, China has agreed to release some political detainees and to allow unconditional visits by the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture and the U.N. Working Group on Arbitrary Detention. In a separate statement, Foreign Ministry spokesman Kong Quan expressed "strong dissatisfaction and opposition" to Washington's plans, announced Monday, to seek a resolution criticizing China's human rights record at the U.N. Human Rights Conference under way in Geneva. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said the United States is disappointed by Beijing's failure to keep promises made during a U.S.-China human rights dialogue in 2002. He said China also failed to follow through on its stated intention to expand cooperation on human rights in 2003. "We are concerned about backsliding on key human rights issues that has occurred in a variety of areas since that time," Boucher said. At its annual legislative session this month, China's lawmakers added the first-ever mention of human rights to the constitution, though it was ambiguous and made no reference to political freedom.
"It means what we intend it to mean, nothing more and nothing less."
Even so, Shen said it was a sign of "apparent progress. Human rights in China are definitely not deteriorating and backsliding like the United States says." Such a resolution has been introduced almost every year at the convention since Beijing's 1989 violent crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrations at Tiananmen Square, when hundreds, if not thousands, died. The United States decided not to seek a resolution against China at last year's conference because it said Beijing had made limited but significant progress on human rights. But in its annual report on human rights released in February, the State Department criticized the mainland for "backsliding" on the issue since then. Arrests of democracy activists and others who defied authorities have dashed hopes for a continuation of the "unprecedented" progress achieved the year before, the report said. Harsh repression of the banned Falun Gong spiritual movement and a crackdown on Internet dissent continued, the report said. The government also used the war on terror to justify a continuing crackdown on Muslim Uighurs in the country's far west, it said.
I kinda-sorta almost agree with the Chinese on this point. They did recently add a provision to their constitution protecting property rights. If they take it seriously, that's a good-sized dent in the armor of despotism.
Posted by: Steve White ||
03/24/2004 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The USSR enacted a very liberal constitution right before the great Stalin terror. I dunno about China? Is the constitution a mere scrap of paper, or do they actually obey it?
#2
Property rights are nothing without actual political and human rights accompanying them. "We can shoot you at will, but don't worry, we won't take your property."
FBI Director Robert Mueller said Tuesday that he believes radical Islamic fundamentalists supportive of al-Qaida and influenced by Osama bin Laden were responsible for the deadly train bombings in Madrid.
Mueller said the bombers likely acted without approval or direction from al-Qaida leaders. He suggested a looser, independent network of like-minded acolytes, rather than trained foot soldiers of al-Qaida, was to blame.
"The evidence tends to point to individuals who are supportive of Islamic fundamentalism ... and supporters of al-Qaida's mission," Mueller told a U.S. Senate Appropriations subcommittee.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
03/24/2004 5:09:39 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
Almost two weeks into the Madrid train bombing investigation, Spanish police are fairly certain Moroccan Islamist radicals carried out the attack but they are far from concluding who ordered it.
Security forces believe the perpetrators are linked to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network or another radical group but sources say they do not know who ordered or financed the attack.
"The inspiration, the ideological support for this, came from outside Spain," a source close to the inquiry told Reuters.
He conceded that penetrating the clandestine network of extremist groups was proving difficult. "Everything points to Morocco but the radical Islamic world is very complex."
Investigators are looking at the Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group, but that is only one of a number of known Islamist militant groups in North Africa.
The 13 suspects in detention all lived in Spain, most of them Moroccans in Madrid's multiracial district of Lavapies.
Sources say investigators suspect other extremists may have come into Spain to lead or join the plot -- and fled afterward.
Investigators believe that whoever made a videotape with a purported al Qaeda claim of responsibility found by police after the attack was linked to the bombings, but they are not sure if, as the tape says, they represent al Qaeda Europe.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
03/24/2004 4:49:28 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
Secretary of State Colin Powell was meeting Wednesday with Spain's outgoing and income leaders during a visit to pay tribute to the 190 victims of this month's terrorist bombings. Powell planned a meeting before the state funeral with Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar. He was meeting after the service with Prime Minister-elect Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, an outspoken opponent of U.S. policy in Iraq who was swept into office in an emotional election after the bombings. However, an official traveling with Powell said the meetings were not intended to involve in-depth policy discussions since the main purpose of Powell's visit was to show solidarity with the Spanish people and their government in a time of grief. The official said there would be plenty of time in the future to work on any differences with the new Spanish leader after he takes office within the month.
Groundwork stuff. Powell must be a very patient man...
Posted by: Fred ||
03/24/2004 7:35:57 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Powell's a big strong kinda guy, representing the worlds's biggest nation - and he commanded one of the world's biggest armies.....
dontcha ever wonder if he ever just wishes that he could just give these guys a shove on the shoulder and say, COMEON!! You want a piece of me? Think you're a big man? Big Man? Think you're a big man....Come on...you &^^%%OO piece of ^^%%$(!
Posted by: B ||
03/24/2004 11:49 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Powell must be a very patient man...
Yep. I sure as hell wouldn't have gone to the trouble.
#3
The official said there would be plenty of time in the future to work on any differences with the new Spanish leader after he takes office within the month.
Any bets Zapatero will still be getting dumped to voice-mail in June?
The Bush-Cheney campaign Wednesday unleashed its most famous Democratic booster, Georgia Sen. Zell Miller, to make the case that presidential candidate John Kerry advocates policies inconsistent with some of history's most popular Democratic presidents. Miller, a Georgian who is the lone Democratic senator to back publicly President Bush's re-election bid, criticized Kerry in a speech announcing his leadership of a national "Democrats for Bush" effort. He was joined by a handful of lesser-known Democrats, but the campaign said it would release a more comprehensive list in the coming weeks.
The popular former governor cited the policies of Democratic Presidents John F. Kennedy and Harry S. Truman while contending that Kerry, not Bush, is outside the mainstream on issues ranging from tax cuts to war. "John F. Kerry has the same initials as John F. Kennedy," Miller said, "but he has a far, far different view of what the government can do to help families prosper. John Kerry's spending and tax plan would stifle our economy and stall our recovery at the worst possible time."
Miller was an original sponsor of Bush's proposed $1.6 trillion tax cut, which Congress trimmed to $1.3 trillion. He argued that it represented a smaller proportion of the American economy and benefited poor Americans even more than one enacted under Kennedy in the 1960s. As for the war in Iraq, Miller praised Kerry, D-Mass., for his Senate vote to authorize force. However, he said Kerry later opposed an $87 billion package to further fund the effort after "spending too much time around Howard Dean," the former candidate and outspoken war critic.
Miller also criticized Kerry's view that more diplomatic channels should have been explored through the United Nations before moving almost unilaterally.
"I cannot imagine the great Democratic Party leaders of past generations waiting with their hands in their pockets while a bunch of dithering diplomats decided the future of the world," Miller said. "That is the worst kind of indecisiveness. That is the wrong kind of leadership at this critical moment in our history."
Dithering Diplomats, now that needs to go in my style book.
Kerry campaign officials didn't immediately return calls for comment Wednesday.
Gee, can't understand why?
Bush campaign chairman Marc Racicot, a former Montana governor, said the campaign would use Miller often on the trail, particularly to rally fellow Democrats to the cause. Miller urged Democratic Bush-backers to find at least five others they could persuade to support the president. "It'll be easy to recruit Democrats in Florida," said the state's former Democratic governor, Wayne Mixson, who joined Miller on a conference call Wednesday. "I was with a bunch of business people yesterday, and I've already got my quota if that's all you want me to get."
Miller, who is retiring when his term ends in January, has by far the Senate's most conservative voting record among Democrats. He has backed the president on virtually every key issue and recently published a best-selling book, "A National Party No More: The Conscience of a Conservative Democrat."
Gotta love ol' Zell.
Posted by: Steve ||
03/24/2004 3:26:16 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Oooooh! "Dithering Diplomats" goes in there along with "Nattering Nabobs" and "Blithering Boobs"...
Posted by: Carl in N.H ||
03/24/2004 17:03 Comments ||
Top||
#3
McCain craves press attention, but at the end of the day I think he's too decent to ever join the Donks. The trade was Jim Jeffords for Zell Miller. The Reps made out like bandits on that deal.
Posted by: Mike ||
03/24/2004 18:01 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I don't know that there was an actual "trade" that went on...
Jumping Jim helped kill God-knows-how-many votes in the Senate in favor of the Dims and was a faux poster boy as the "conscience of the Senate" (i.e. Liberal Useful Idiot)--Oh, yeah, Jim had principles.
Zell, bless his heart, didn't "come out" as a Bush supporter and old-style populist Conservative Democrat until this year--the end of his term, whereas Jumping Jim was elected in 2000 as a Republican, not as an "Independent"(Democrat by default) and "defected" from the GOP right after his election.
Posted by: Jen ||
03/24/2004 18:35 Comments ||
Top||
More shooting the wounded...
The United States could have prevented the September 11 attacks with tighter border and intelligence checks, the head of an official inquiry into the strikes said Tuesday as top administration officials gave their first public testimony. âMy feeling is a whole number of circumstances, had they been different, might have prevented 9/11,â Thomas Kean, chairman of The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, told CBS television before Tuesdayâs key hearing.
There's still time, if we can only get ahold of a time machine!
The Clinton and Bush administrations failed to take aggressive action against terrorist mastermind Osama Bin Laden and other radical groups before the September 11 attacks, an official investigation into the 2001 strikes said. âWe found that the CIA and the FBI tended to be careful in discussing the attribution for terrorist acts,â read a 16-page report by the national commission on the September 11 attacks. âTheir written work was conservative phrased and caveated,â it added.
They're still getting thumped every time they try to make a statement that's out of PC boundaries...
Former US Secretary of Defense William Cohen said Bin Laden once issued a religious decree putting a price on his head and calling for his assassination. âHe was very precise in issuing a personal âfatwaâ against me. I was put on a list, there was a price tag, there were several attempts that I donât want to go into details about going after me,â Cohen told a national commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on America.
Are you dead now?
US Secretary of State Colin Powell said that President Bush ordered moves to âdestroyâ Al Qaeda as soon as it took office because the previous administration under Bill Clinton had failed to eliminate the threat from Al Qaeda. Powell and his predecessor Madeleine Albright both defended action taken by their administrations against bin Laden, but admitted the measures had fallen short in the run-up to the September 11, 2001 attacks in New York and Washington.
Obviously they did...
President Bush said he would have taken action to stop the September 11 attacks in 2001 if he had prior information about them, rebuffing criticism by a former aid his anti-terror efforts were inadequate. âHad my administration had any information that the terrorists were going to attack New York City on September 11 we would have acted,â Bush told reporters.
Further proof that you can't protect yourself against every and any attack, but that blame can be assigned in all instances...
Time for the time machine to create a scenario:
July 9, 2001: GWB makes a nationally televised address in which he accuses an obscure (to most) terrorist organization, "al-Qaeda", of responsibility in several attacks on the U.S. He then makes the sensational claim that these terrorists have planned to hijack American civilian airplanes and crash them into targets such as the WTC, Pentagon and Capitol. He states that he's going to ask Congress for a resolution to invade Afghanistan, depose the regime there, and clean out al-Qaeda.
Question: how many Senators would have voted for this, and how many would have voted to confirm an impeachment?
Second scenario:
September 9, 2001: Same as the July 9 one, except GWB adds that the plot to hijack airplanes was "imminent", and as a result he is ordering that the grounding of all civilian aircraft and closing of airports "for the time being", and instituting a profiling system at INS for people of middle-eastern ancestry.
Same question.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/24/2004 8:09:42 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Further proof, as if we needed it, that we'll never win by playing defense. Only preemptive, unilateral, UN-disapproved offense will work.
Posted by: Mike ||
03/24/2004 8:35 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Few things chap my ass quite as much as gutless voyeurs grandstanding and criticizing the people at the point of the spear. Purely despicable and cowardly and craven turds. **flush**
#3
They can say that 1000 times but its only after these things happen then u realize ur shortcomings. The only way they cud hv avoided 9/11 was by having Nostradamas on their payroll.
#5
I am an avid reader of this website. It is quite confusing to me when talking about WMD, the Bush admin is criticized for having misleading intelligence information and now people are saying the intelligence before 9-11 was valid and why didnt we act upon it. Very confusing to us little people. From what I have read about both sets of intelligence, the agencies involved were always cautious about reporting their information. What makes the 9-11 intelligence any more valid than the intelligence on WMD?
#6
Blame is like manure, you can spread it all over the place, it will only just create a stink. We should learn how we let it happen and plug the holes. To the demogogues who are trying to spread manure for political aims, BUY A FUCKIN FARM!
Very intelligent question. Next you need to stop thinking of yourself as one of the little people, unless you're a dwarf. You get one vote, like everybody else, you can see through the BS and you can think for yourself. You're one of the big dawgs now. Sic 'em.
Posted by: Mr. Davis ||
03/24/2004 10:37 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Bob Kerry has the best sound bites of the 9/11 commission. He basically told Albright that they screwed the pooch by trying to do the 'popular' thing and not doing the 'right' thing.
#9
Sarge,
What you say is interesting, but apparently didn't get reported as such in the Chicago Tribune... They must be selective in just reporting that Bush was too busy seething over Saddam that he missed the threat. I am ready to cancel my subscription.
After conducting additional interviews and reviewing documents, FBI agents recently closed down their investigation into Omar al-Bayoumi and Osama Basnan, two friends who raised suspicions because one briefly lent money to two of the 19 hijackers while the other received money from the Saudi royal family.
The FBI concluded at most the two Saudi men occasionally provided information to their kingdom or helped Saudi visitors settle into the United States, but did so in compliance with Muslim custom of being kind to strangers rather than out of some relationship with Saudi intelligence, the officials said.
The officials said, however, that FBI and Saudi officials continue to jointly pursue information in the congressional report issued last summer about possible support of terrorism by Saudi-based businesses and charities.
Since creating a joint task force last year, the United States and Saudi Arabia have taken substantial action against several entities suspected of supporting terrorism. In January, the Saudis fired the chief of a Saudi charity that has been accused of terror links, and he remains under investigation, officials said.
That would be al-Haramain, of course ...
And last month, that Saudi charity's branch in Oregon was raided by federal agents executing search warrants and its assets frozen by the government over allegations it tried to conceal payments to Muslim rebels in the Russian republic of Chechnya.
Saudi officials said they felt vindicated by the FBI's reinvestigation.
"We have consistently maintained that neither al-Bayoumi nor Basnan were agents of the Saudi government, and our investigation as well as those of the U.S. government and the British have found no involvement by them with Sept. 11," said Adel al-Jubeir, the foreign affairs adviser to Saudi Arabia's crown prince.
"As it turns out, this whole controversy was much ado about nothing. Another myth has been dispelled," he said.
The FBI agreed to reinvestigate al-Bayoumi and Basnan last year after Congress' investigation into Sept. 11 intelligence failures developed new information about the two men concerning financial transactions and their connections to hijackers Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi.
Al-Bayoumi was interviewed by FBI agents for about seven hours over several days, the officials said.
"You help out the hijackers, al-Bayoumi?"
"Nope. Not me."
"When we looked again, we found these men weren't intelligence agents but may have been helpful from time to time out of their Islamic beliefs," said one senior law enforcement official familiar with the investigation.
Officials would only discuss the investigation on condition of anonymity because of diplomatic sensitivities with Saudi Arabia.
Al-Bayoumi and Basnan immediately drew attention in the days after the suicide hijackings in September 2001.
Al-Bayoumi threw a welcoming party for eventual hijackers al-Mihdhar and al-Hazmi and briefly lent them money for their rent deposit and first month's rent. He also took a videotape of the hijackers' welcoming party.
FBI agents determined al-Bayoumi lent the hijackers rent money for less than an hour until they could get to the bank, the officials said.
Around the same time, Prince Bandar, the U.S. ambassador to the United States, and his wife, Princess Haifa al-Faisal, made out more than $100,000 in checks to Basnan and his wife, who were associates of al-Bayoumi, Saudi officials said.
Saudi officials say the money was supposed to be charitable donations to Basnan to help cover his wife's medical bills starting in 1998.
In classified sections of their report released last summer, Sept. 11 congressional investigators said the sequence of events suggested Basnan and al-Bayoumi could be connected to Saudi intelligence.
The investigators also questioned whether the cash transactions - along with lax oversight of charities that aided al-Qaida - amounted to state sponsored terrorism.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
03/24/2004 5:12:16 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Ya I just saw this on FOX. I am waiting to see if the "commission" picks up on this. I wouldn't expect the Stepford networks to give it any air. Truth for them is spelled as Hanoi John.
Posted by: Bill Nelson ||
03/24/2004 12:08 Comments ||
Top||
#2
If you can, tune into Fox (or whatever you have access to) if you want to watch the self-crucifixion of Dickie Clark, asshole extraordinaire. He's due up next - Sandy Berger is on now, doesn't sound like an asshat, but he's in waffle mode under Bob Kerrey's questioning. THIS Kerrey actually makes sense - and isn't playing the partisan game - he's kicking Berger's ass all over the place.
Anyway, tune in if you can. Should have Dickie on soon.
#3
"And you know, the other thing to bear in mind is the shift from the rollback strategy to the elimination strategy. When President Bush told us in March to stop swatting at flies and just solve this problem, then that was the strategic direction that changed the NSPD from one of rollback to one of elimination."
So in this August 2002 interview Clarke is describing how Bush, barely 2 months in office, decided to ratchet up the strategy against al Qaeda from mere rollback (the policy under Clinton) to outright elimination, and:
"that process which was initiated in the first week in February, uh, decided in principle, uh in the spring to add to the existing Clinton strategy and to increase CIA resources, for example, for covert action, five-fold, to go after Al Qaeda."
Clarke, in other words, is saying here that the first week in February 2001 (i.e., after less than two weeks in office), Bush told his staff to get the damn lead out and come up with plans to take out al Qaeda.
And now Clarke says Bush was derelict in the run-up to 9/11?
Sorry, if I have to read any more of this guy's conflicting statements my damn brain's gonna short out.
What the hell happened with Clarke between this August 2002 interview and now? Did he accept a wad of Saudi cash to do a smear-job on Bush, or something?
Posted by: Dave D. ||
03/24/2004 12:41 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Clarke is now teaching a class in foreign affairs alongside the Kerry campaign's foreign policy advisor.
You do the math.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
03/24/2004 12:46 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Dot connecting...Viacom-CBS- 60 Minutes..It's a shame that a once credible program , 60 Minutes has denigrated itself to a one hour infomercial for its own greed.
Posted by: Bill Nelson ||
03/24/2004 12:50 Comments ||
Top||
#6
After, what, 10 years of utter ineffectiveness as the anti-terror hotshot, he was prolly short on cushy job offers. Gotta get the kids through Yale & Harvard, y'know, so "Did he sell his soul?" Methinks absofuckinglutely. To whom? Prolly everybody who made an offer. Amazing, no? I hope he got a lump sum - he's going to be raped today... and he'll be radioactive to only the looniest of the loonies.
#7
As a warning, I "borrowed" this snippet from LGF...but it is terrific:
There's more information in Mansoor Ijaz's article this morning on National Review Online -
7 Questions that Richard Clarke needs to answer -
1. Sudan's offer to hand over UBL
2. Sudan's counteroffer
3. Iraq and al-0Qaeda - the Sudan connection
4. The 1998 US Embassy bombings
5. Retaliation - the bombing of the al-Shifa plant
6. THE UAE offers help on getting UBL
7. Did al-Qaeda get nuclear assistance from Pakistan
Would love to see the answers to these questions - but we probably never will. Until he does, Clarke is lacking on the credibility front.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
03/24/2004 14:02 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Well Kerrie is doing the questioning now. This is more like a "praise you Mr Clarke" commission.
Posted by: Bill Nelson ||
03/24/2004 14:24 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Listening to Clark live as I write this. He's telling the commission (in effect): "Hey, with respect to that 2002 briefing, I was sent out by the Whitehouse to lie to the press. I've done it for other presidents too." Clark's an SOB whose goose is cooked.
Posted by: Mark ||
03/24/2004 14:41 Comments ||
Top||
#11
I gotta send that one commission member a ceegar. Good job! Expose this self aggradizing (wish i had a spill chucker)ass.GOGOGO
Posted by: Bill Nelson ||
03/24/2004 14:43 Comments ||
Top||
#12
One of the things that I hope comes out of this commission....". Ya what he is saying put me in charge of all Intelligence under the new Kerry Admin......That's why I wrote my book.
Posted by: Bill Nelson ||
03/24/2004 14:50 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Clark was also outted last night on H&C about saying Rice had no idea who Bin Laden was. In October of 2000 she did an interview w/WJR in Detroit and talked at length about OBL/Al Q. Clark's just a disgruntled opportunist.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
03/24/2004 15:14 Comments ||
Top||
#15
I can't watch. Just the sight of this supercilious, self-aggrandizing asshole is enough to...
The Dems really are pulling out all the stops, aren't they? They'll do anything to get Bush out of the White House, it seems.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
03/24/2004 15:16 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Well the other Kerrie just put down Fox for putting out the news on Clarkbars August 2002 comments. Well I thought he was very easy on Clark anyway. Now he's trying to look tough. A Dim interviewing another Dim. I'm sure Kerrie LOVES the NYT.
Posted by: Bill Nelson ||
03/24/2004 15:29 Comments ||
Top||
#17
Who are the people applauding Clarkbar. More grieving Peaceful Tommorow's widowers?
Posted by: Bill Nelson ||
03/24/2004 15:50 Comments ||
Top||
#18
I heard art of this today and I was just floored! People were actually clapping for this jackasses testomony? I don;t care if they are family of victims, the comission is supposed to determine how to NOT have this happen again. Not so they can affix blame. Trust me the Dems DO NOT want to go there.
Yes they do. What do they have to care about? It happened during Bush's presidency, and they have the media on their side. Absolutely no blame will ever come near Clinton or other Democrats.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
03/24/2004 21:03 Comments ||
Top||
#20
it's all very amusing, on this site there's nothing but derision and people pointing out just how ineffective Clarke's testimony was...on a different site is the exact opposite, how wonderful it was and how the Rep members were simply outflanked
The United States will support a U.N.-backed investigation into alleged corruption in the United Nations oil-for-food program, the U.S. ambassador said Tuesday. France and Russia - two countries strongly implicated in the purported wrongdoing - were more reluctant.
Tap -- tap -- tap. Nope.
In Baghdad, the Iraqi Governing Council said it was launching its own investigation into the allegations of corruption, which first surfaced last January in the Iraqi newspaper Al-Mada. The newspaper had a list of about 270 former government officials, activists and journalists from more than 46 countries suspected of profiting from Iraqi oil sales.
Time honored Washington tradition -- multiple investigations. Smart move by the Iraqis.
"Thousands of government and nongovernment officials and politicians were bribed, all under the nose of the United Nations," said Entifadh Qanbar, spokesman for council member Ahmad Chalabi. "The United Nations allowed this to happen without interference. Some high-ranking U.N. officials were also involved." The allegations have been a major embarrassment for the United Nations and U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan wants to take swift action and clear the world body of blame. Among the names on the list is Benon Sevan, the U.N. official who was executive director of the program. He has denied wrongdoing.
Clear the world body? Only with a fire hose.
No mention of Kofi's kid?
Annan's spokesman, Fred Eckhard, said Annan welcomed the Baghdad investigation but would press ahead with the house-controlled independent probe as well. "I think he would welcome any way out of this additional light that others could shed on the situation, either out of Baghdad or out of a national capital," Eckhard said. "But I think he feels it's his responsibility to launch a U.N.-based investigation." U.S. congressional investigators have also looked into the program, charging last week that Saddam's government smuggled oil, added surcharges and collected kickbacks to rake in $10.1 billion in violation of the oil-for-food program. On Tuesday, the United States unequivocally supported the U.N.-backed probe, which Annan announced Friday. "We have already communicated to the secretary-general that we're prepared to cooperate in every possible way," U.S. Ambassador John Negroponte said. "I think he's responding to some of the criticism and allegations that have been made and I think he is taking a very constructive approach." Annan has still not said what the probe's mandate will be or who will be on the panel.
Wonder if he'll put Junior on it?
It's also not clear how much authority it will have. U.N. officials speaking on condition of anonymity said in earlier consultations some delegations France, Russia and Germany among them had expressed concern about a probe, so Annan decided not to risk seeking a Security Council resolution backing it, but instead a less powerful sign of support. The official would not say who had the biggest concern, but Russia and France have been more guilty cautious than others. France's U.N. ambassador Jean Marc de la Sabliere said Monday that while France backed transparency in principle, it wanted clarification on what the panel would do.
The French stand for transparency in corruption is unparalleled.
Russia expressed similar concern. According to Al-Mada, the bulk of the bribes went to Russian firms as part of ousted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's bid to maintain good ties with the Kremlin, which argued against the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq last year.
Problem for Sammy was that France and Russia couldn't deliver what they promised -- to restrain the U.S.
Posted by: Steve White ||
03/24/2004 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
...a U.N.-backed investigation into alleged corruption in the United Nations oil-for-food program...
and
The allegations have been a major embarrassment for the United Nations and U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan wants to take swift action and clear the world body of blame.
#3
Chi Zi, a damned UN headed investigation on itself is like asking a 4 year old if he hit his little brother. Nope. By God, if this is not pushed by the USA, and I mean pushed, it will wither in time and the result will come in two or so years. Uh, no evidence of wrongdoing was revealed. I can see it now. Chiner
#4
"The United Nations allowed this to happen without interference. Some high-ranking U.N. officials were also involved."
Yeah, I was so angry I didn't finish. OF FUCKING COURSE SOME HIGH RANKING U.N. OFFICIALS WERE ALSO INVOLVED. Start at the top of that God damned bunch of lizards and work your way down. I'm done now. Chine
I love passion - almost as much as I love truth - and you got 'em both in spades, Chiner!
Yeah, the UN is the proverbial dead rat on America's kitchen floor. It is the most corrupt pile of shit ever aseembled by man. It has wasted untold billions of our tax dollars. Time to manipulate it to do something right. I don't doubt for a second that Dubya will push 'em. Nor do I doubt that if they screw this up, we will make it a very public mistake. I've been hoping for a long time that we would wash our hands of this disaster. This just might be the first step in getting rid of the UN. If they play the usual games, it could be the fulcrum.
#7
It is the most corrupt pile of shit ever aseembled by man.
Truer words have never been typed .com
I sincerely hope that this is the straw that breaks the Western worlds back with the UN and all of their hypocritical bullshit. For far to long the UN has been conveyed a legitimacy it simply doesn't have by Tranzi's and shoved down everyone's throat.
Its to much to ask for but I hope we get to say good riddance to bad trash.
#8
JM - The US is the only country which would stand to benefit, in truth, so we'll have to withdraw unilaterally I'm afraid. Some others would quickly come along with us if we had a working model of a replacement that actually made sense when we go.
#9
.com, withdrawing unilaterally is not enough. We have to ensure ensure the UN leaves the soil of the United States to live out its dying, discredited days: How's about Eurostan?
#10
.com, there's too much opportunity for U.N. mischief if we simply withdraw (it'd mess up Israel big-time, for example)...
instead, declare that all future UNSC resolutions will receive a U.S. veto and stop providing our UN funding. Assign a G-7 as UN "Ambassador" with instructions that he/she is (a) never allowed to vote anything but "no", and (b) he/she is never to speak to another representative beyond a polite "hello". Demonstrates our contempt, yet keeps the chair warm (thus avoiding the 'problem' the Russians had in the 1950 Korea vote).
snellenr - can you convince LH to accept your plan? I'll support it 100%, given the specifics.
And we still analyze where we went wrong and design something that makes sense. I'm not sure about the CD (Community of Democracies - from yesterday?), yet, but I know we can design a sensible and workable system. Third try ought to be the charm. When done right, those states that qualify (and it would be strict and a-political, based upon objective criteria) would join. I do not doubt that at all.
The UN's biggest problem is the "one big organization is more efficient" myth. Although they can be more efficient initially, the long-term problem of an entrenched bureaucracy with too few checks and balances soon arises.
I'd favor taking the apolitical pieces that work (WHO, for example) and giving each their own independent charter. They'll then succeed or fail depending on how well they meet the needs & requirements of their paying constituents. Right now, it's because there's actual value in the working organizations that we have to put up with the "Human Rights (except for us dictators) Commission", etc.
#15
we really need to abandon the UN...at the very least withold our 25% share of the UN budget until this investigation is complete and action taken on the results.
also take some action of those damn diplomats who double park and have unpaid parking tickets!
just send 'em packing.....
Posted by: Dan ||
03/24/2004 15:34 Comments ||
Top||
#16
I can't remember the name of the LtCol who fired a 45cal pistol next to the head of one of Sadaam's henchman's head during an interrogation. If anybody remembers him, please forward his name to Kofi as a nomination to lead the investigation team. That type of appointment might set the appropriate message on the tone we want to achieve during the investigation.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
03/24/2004 21:26 Comments ||
Top||
As they prepare for their summit, scheduled to take place in Tunis at the end of the month, Arab leaders are looking for a common position on the so-called âGreater Middle East Initiativeâ launched by US President George W Bush last year. The âinitiativeâ is based on two assumptions. First: The status quo in the âGreater Middle Eastâ, which is redefined to cover the so-called âarc of crisisâ from Mauritania to the Subcontinent, is both unstable and dangerous. Second: In the absence of democracy and human rights, many countries of the area act as âswampsâ where terrorist mosquitoes breed and multiply. The solution that the âinitiativeâ proposes is speedy democratization to produce elected new governments that can join the US and its allies in what Bush has labeled âwar on terror.â In other words the democratization of the Middle East is no longer an ideological luxury for the Western powers but an imperative of their national security. But how is all that received by the Arab leadership elite?
Kicking, screaming, and carpet biting, so far...
Until the 1990 and the disintegration of the Soviet Empire, Arab leftist intellectuals regarded democracy as a âbourgeois concoction.â The Arab secular right, including nationalist and conservative Islamist groups, was also opposed to democratization which it regarded as a tool in the hands of Western âcosmopolitans.â The more radical Islamist groups were even more hostile to democracy which, in the words of the late Ayatollah Khomeini, was nothing but âa form of political prostitution.â Now, all that is in the past, however. Today there are few prominent Arab, and other Muslim, opinion-makers who publicly reject democracy as undesirable. And, yet, the Bush âinitiativeâ is certain to hit a wall of misunderstanding and resistance even among those Arabs, and other Muslims, who realize that change is not only inevitable but also desirable.
There are two reasons for this. The first is that, rightly or wrongly, the US is regarded as insincere in its advocacy of democratization. The Bush âinitiativeâ is seen as a rhetorical device used to confuse people about a long-standing policy of support for unelected, and often oppressive, regimes. The second reason is in trouble with many Arabs, and other Muslims, is hurt amour-propre. Arabs, and other Muslims, resent attempts at altering the basic structures of their societies in accordance with a blueprint imposed by Washington.
All these views are bound to be aired at the Tunis summit which is likely to come up with a âyes, butâ answer to the Bush âinitiativeâ. The answer will then be taken to the White House by a string of Arab leaders who are scheduled to meet President Bush next month. The first argument used by some Arab leaders against the âinitiativeâ is that its hasty implementation could produce the opposite of the desired result. Any truly free election in the immediate future could produce radical Islamist governments dedicated to a war of civilizations against the West. That assessment must not be dismissed as an excuse to postpone democratization. In most Arab countries virtually all secular opposition forces, from the traditional left to the liberal right, have been broken by decades of repression by the ruling elite. In many cases the ruling elite has encouraged Islamist radicalism as a means of wakening leftist, moderate and democratic forces.
In many Arab countries the Islamists represent the only organized force on the scene. They control many mosques, numerous charities, networks of religious schools, and business endowments that generate vast sums of money. Their true opponents, the secular intellectuals and middle classes, are either in gaol or in exile or remain disorganized and harassed by the security services. The only immediate choice that the electorate would have is between the established order, which is from popular, and the Islamists who promise both this world and the next. That argument, however, must not be used as an excuse for shelving democratization. Rather it should help devise a strategy to create a level playing field in which genuinely democratic forces can take on both the established order and the radical Islamists in the context of free ad fair elections. In some Arab countries such a level playing field can be created within months. In others it may take years. Change through free and fair elections should be introduced in phases that vary from one country to another.
The second argument that the Arabs are likely to come up with is that aspects of democracy might be at variance with, if not actually in violation of, Arab and Islamic traditions. That argument must be dismissed at the outset. Traditions could no longer be regarded as sufficient ground for rejecting values and practices adopted by a majority of mankind as the norm. For example, there was a time when cannibalism was part of the âtraditionâ in many societies across the globe. (In Papua-New Guinea it was still widespread until the 1950s.) Until the middle of the 19th century and since time immemorial slavery was part of the tradition in almost all cultures. And many civilizations, including such great ones as ancient Egypt and ancient Persia, upheld incest as a religious duty of the ruling classes. In Africa today female genital mutilation is regarded as âpart of the traditionâ. In any dialogue between the Western democracies and the Arabs the two sides must respect each otherâs traditions and values insofar as these do not violate the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, a set of imperatives agreed by both sides.
Anyone who might argue that Arabs and Muslims do not wish to be in control of their own affairs must be laughed out of any dialogue. Arabs, and other Muslims, would love to have a say in shaping the policies of their governments, if only they were given a chance. Silencing, imprisoning, exiling, and murdering political opponents cannot be justified with reference to any tradition. The coming Arab âyes, butâ must not be dismissed by the West. The Arabs must be helped to chart their own way to democratization. This could be done only if the West answers the Arab âyes, butâ with a âyes, butâ of its own. This one would be simple: Yes, we understand that you cannot plunge into the uncertain waters of democracy with no preparation, and we are ready to help. But we cannot allow that lack of preparation to be used as an excuse for prolonging a regime under which the people are excluded from decision-making.
We're back to shorthand again. I can understand why: If it was phrased as a demand that the Arab and Muslim world guaranteed individual liberties — property rights, freedom of religion, freedom not to be bullied and beaten by nutjobs of any sort — the emirs and kings would take the collective gas pipe. But if the Chinese Communists can take a step in that direction, why can't the Arabs? It's hard to bring a long tradition of despotism to an end, but it's got to be done.
Posted by: tipper ||
03/24/2004 6:52:52 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#3
There is a LOT here to address - and much of it isn't stated in a fashion conducive to agreement without reservation - typical Arab writing or a problem of translation.
The UDHR is an overwritten mulit-culti doc that I find fault with in about 20-30 different places. Nothing HUGE, but unacceptable as written, regardless.
I think Fred hits the nail on the head. It's about individualism and protection of the right to practice it and the obligation of states to protect it. Outward from there come the other tenets - Locke, Berkley, Hume, et al.
Trying to enumerate everything, EeeeWwww-style is a fatal trap which, in its specious pedantry, is self-limiting and unable of growing without modifications. Cumbersome, inelegant, and lame on Day Two - it's not the way to define rights. This is part of what annoys me about the UDHR. The other part is the asinine socialistic BS in it.
This article has the right sort of substance and contains many good observations. I doubt it will have much more effect than the unimposed Bush Doctrine in Arabia. They, the status quo with the power, will oppose it as long as possible and pay lip service when they feel heat - and return to business as usual when they don't.
Pakistani tribal elders tried again yesterday to persuade al-Qaida fighters and their tribal allies to surrender and end a bloody week-long confrontation near the Afghan border.
The elders met representatives of the rebels on Monday and presented government demands, including the surrender of the gunmen, and were told to come back again yesterday, one of the elders said.
When we presented the demands they said they will convey this to the people holed up in Kaloosha and asked us to return on Tuesday (yesterday) evening," said Waris Khan Afridi, referring to the village at the center of the week-long battle.
"We are quite optimistic that there will be some positive development today," he said.
But residents in Wana, the nearest town to the battle, said they had heard only very sporadic shelling on Monday night and all was quiet on Tuesday.
The military later dismissed that as "conjecture" and "guesswork," but said an Uzbek or Chechen militant leader might be among the fighters surrounded, possibly the charismatic leader of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, Tahir Yuldashev.
"It was Commander Tahir, but I doubt he is there anymore," one intelligence official said on Monday.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
03/24/2004 5:07:07 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The only elder gentleman that I would consider sending with authorization to negotiate for me is a man named Narses.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
03/24/2004 23:43 Comments ||
Top||
âDo not reckon that those who are killed on Godâs path are dead. They are alive and being enriched with their Lord.â [Qurâan]
We announce before the Islamic World Community the martyrdom of the hero, Mujahid, martyr Shaykh by the grace of God, Ahmad Ismaâil Yasin. You have won, by the Lord of the Kaâbah, Shaykh Yasin.
Finally you have departed, oh Knight. You have left the straightness of the world for the wide expanses of the hereafter. May you enjoy Paradise, God willing.
We say to our people in Palestine that the blood of Shaykh Yasin will not have been shed in vain. We call on all the detachments of the Abu Hafs al-Misri Brigades to avenge the Shaykh of the Mujahideen of Palestine by striking at the tyrant of the age America and its allies. We say to the Mujahideen in Palestine and in particular Hamas and the Islamic Jihad that your real enemy is the tyrant of the age, America. With the money of American Shaykh Yasin was killed. With the weapons of American Shaykh Yasin was killed. With American political propaganda support, Shaykh Yasin was killed. How long will we bury our head in the sand and avoid striking the real enemy of the World Islamic Community, which is none other than America. Come let us unite to strike this Crusader-Jewish viper, this assaulting enemy. If that is difficult for you, then do not make narrow that which is wide. The Jews are on every inch of this civilized world, and they are among the supporters of the Jews if the Zionist entity in Palestine with their money and propaganda.
Make you hand long. Strike them wherever you find them. God the praised and exalted says âkill them wherever you find them . . . and drive them out of the places from which they drove you outâ. When the Zionist enemy saw you one day in peace and one day at war, they knew that there is weakness in you. So do not allow yourselves to be dragged behind the criminal Arafat and his army of hypocrites who will try to sell Palestine to the Jews one day in return for a cease fire, and on another day in return for an accord, etc.
The apostate leaders help them in this, the stooges of America, in all the Islamic countries.
âOh Prophet, strive against the infidels and the hypocrites. Be tough with them; their abode is hell, what a wretched destiny.â [Qurâan].
Our eye tears up, and our heart grieves as we say farewell to you Shaykh Ahmad Yasin, for griefstricken ones.
We ask God the exalted to accept you among the martyrs. We belong to God and to Him do we return.
Oh God, reward us in our affliction. Grant us afterwards that which is better than it.
Oh God, have mercy on your servant the Mujahid Shaykh Ahmad Yasin and accept him among the martyrs, and elevate his station.
Make his record in âIliyeen, and make him among the inheritors of the bountiful Paradise. Cause him to live forever in an abode better than his abode and among a people better than his people. We ask God to place him among the martyrs and affirmers, and to cause us and the other good Muslims to follow him to bountiful Paradise.
Ameen, Oh God. Ameen, Oh God. Ameen, Oh God.
God is Greatest! God is Greatest!
Islam is coming with glory for the glorious and abasement for the base.
The Abu Hafs al-Misri Brigades (Al-Qaâidah)
Monday, 1 Safar 1425H,
22 March 2004
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
03/24/2004 4:51:43 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
We announce before the Islamic World Community the martyrdom of the hero, Mujahid, martyr Shaykh by the grace of God, Ahmad Ismaâil Yasin. You have won, by the Lord of the Kaâbah, Shaykh Yasin.
they have strange way of achieving victory. does that mean oodai and qusay won to? he who bleeds most is the victor!
#2
Might want to keep this little ditty handy, boys. I hear there's a list and they're checking it twice. Let's hope you get ample opportunity to use it again and again.
Gen.Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan's US-blessed military dictator, continues to assert, without any fears of contradiction or punitive action by the US, that the action of a group of scientists of Pakistan headed by A.Q.Khan in clandestinely selling or transfering military nuclear technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea was a rogue operation without the knowledge or approval of the political or military leadership of the country.
2. In his latest assertion on the subject, he told the CNN, the US TV channel, in an interview on March 19, 2004, as follows: " I am extremely positive neither the Government nor the military was involved. The Pakistan Government had carried out investigations into the episode and concluded that it was these individuals who carried out the proliferation of nuclear technology."
3. His repeatedly-asserted contention has been that after the interception by the intelligence agencies of the US and the UK of a ship in October last year which was found carrying to Libya a clandestine consignment of centrifuges for uranium enrichment got manufactured at the instance of A.Q.Khan by a company in Malaysia with the assistance of a Sri Lankan Muslim, he became aware of the extensive non-proliferation activities of the A.Q.Khan group and immediately acted against them.
4. According to Musharraf, details of the clandestine travels and proliferation network of A.Q. Khan came to notice during the subsequent investigation. In one of his statements, he has even blamed the US intelligence agencies for not uncovering this network earlier than October last year and asserted that if they had done so, he would have acted against it even earlier.
5. Not many experts and analysts of the world have been convinced of the innocence of Pakistan's military in this affair. Many of us, including this writer, have been pointing out that this proliferation started and continued at the instance and with the blessing of Pakistan's military leadership. I have also been pointing out in many articles that while the late Zia-ul-Haq, Pakistan's military dictator, who ruled the country from 1977 to 1988, authorised the proliferation to Iran, Musharraf himself had authorised that to Libya and North Korea and was totally in the picture.
6. But, unfortunately, for reasons of realpolitik, the US Administration has chosen to accept the denials of military responsibility by Musharraf. It has not only given him a clean chit, but has even rewarded him and his country by confering on it the status of a Major Non-NATO Ally (MNNA).
7. Despite the efforts of Musharraf, with the benediction of the US, to keep his cupboard tightly shut to prevent the discovery of any more skeletons, nuclear skeletons keep propping up here, there and everywhere much to his consternation. The skeletons are there everywhere if only the US wants to look at them.
8. Was the discovery of the centrifuges in the ship intercepted last October the first wake-up call as contended by Musharraf? No.
9. In 2000, Abdul Ma"bood Siddiqui, a London-based chartered accountant of Pakistani origin, had written a book on his reminiscences, which was published by the Hurmat Publications of Islamabad. In that book, Siddiqui claimed to be a close personal friend of A.Q.Khan and to have accompanied him in at least three of his travels abroad. He gives the following details of these travels:
(Citation starts) "In February,1998, I received a call from Tahir Mian (My comments: He is the Sri Lankan Tamil who helped A.Q.Khan by getting the centrifuges manufactured in Malaysia), a dear friend of mine and a very close associate of Dr.Khan. He said that A.Q.Khan is planning a visit to Timbuktu and you are invited to join him. My joy knew no bounds at the prospect of spending a few days with A.Q.Khan. I reached Dubai on 19 February 1998 and met Dr.A.Q.Khan. He had with him one Mr. Hanks, a Dutch businessman dealing in air filtration system, solar energy, metallurgical machinery and materials. Lt.Gen.Dr. Chauhan, former Surgeon-General of Pakistan Army and now Director-General of Medical Services Division of KRL ( My comments: The Khan Research Laboratories of Kahuta, which produces enriched uranium for atomic bombs) and Brig.Sajawal. Dr.Khan told us that we would fly to Timbuktu via Casablanca in Morocco and Bamako, capital of Mali. (My comments: Mr.Nawaz Sharif was the Prime Minister at that time)
"At Casablanca, the First Secretary of Pakistan Embassy, Mr.Inayatullah Kakar, received us. The Honorary Consul-General of Pakistan in Morocco Hussain bin Jiloon gave a dinner in honour of Dr.Khan, which was also attended by our Ambassador Azmat Hussain. Next day, we caught the Royal Morocco Airline for Bamako. From Bamako, a plane was chartered for US $ 4,000 to take us to Timbuktu. We had only a few hours at Timbuktu, which we spent in sight-seeing. We returned to Dubai by the same route.
" Next I met Dr.Khan on 28 June 1998 in Kuala Lumpur at the wedding of Tahir Mian. (My comment: Nawaz Sharif was still in power). It was decided there to make another trip to Timbuktu because the last visit was short and we could not see much of the city. I got the summons in February 1999 and was on my way to Dubai on 19 February 1999. (My comment: Nawaz Sharif still in power) Dr.Khan was already there with his old group with additions of Dr.Fakhrul Hasan Hashmi, Chief Scientific Adviser to Dr.A.Q.Khan, Brig.Tajwar, Director-General Security KRL, and Dr.Nazir Ahmed, Director-General S&TC Division KRL. Dr.Khan told us that this time we would take a different route to Timbuktu. We will fly there via Sudan and Nigeria.
" We left Dubai for Khartoum on 21 February 1999. The Education Minister of Sudan received the group and we were lodged at the State Guest House. After making a short stopover in a Nigerian city, we reached Timbuktu on 24 February 1999. After spending a couple of days, we were on our way back and our first stop was Niamey, capital of Niger. Our next stop was N'Djamena, capital of Chad, where we were accorded official protocol. Next day, we flew to Khartoum. After Dr.Khan has attended to some business, we visited the Shifa factory that was destroyed last year by the American missiles. Dr.Khan met the Sudanese President. We were back in Dubai on 28 February 1999.
" We were again airborne for Timbuktu on 20 February 2000 (My comments: Musharraf had seized power on October 12,1999) From Dubai, we flew to Khartoum, where two Sudanese friends joined us. We reached Niamey, capital of Niger, on 22 February 2000. Our Ambassador Brig. Nisar welcomed the group and gave a dinner in honour of Dr.Khan. Brig.Nisar had also served as the Military Secretary of Nawaz Sharif. Niger has big uranium deposits. We reached Timbuktu on 24 February 2000 for a stay of two days and were lodged in the newly-built (completed in December 1999) Hotel La Colombe. We started the return journey on 26 February 2000 touching various countries on the way. We broke our journey in Nairobi, capital of Kenya, where First Secretary in the Pakistan Embassy Mr.Najmus Saqib, welcomed us. We were back in Dubai on 29 February 2000 after having visited 10 African countries."
10. These accounts of three of the travels of Dr.A.Q.Khan establish conclusively the following facts:
* He had kept the Pakistani Foreign Office informed of his travels. The Foreign Office had instructed the Pakistani diplomatic missions in the countries visited by him to accord the due honours of protocol to him.
* In all the countries, he was received by officers of the Pakistani diplomatic missions and entertained by the heads of missions.
* In Sudan, he was accorded the honours of protocol generally given to a member of the Cabinet and called on the President of the country.
* He was accompanied by senior serving scientists of Pakistan's nuclear establishment, who were among those responsible for Pakistan's military nuclear development. They could not have gone abroad and remained absent for days without the knowledge and clearance of the Government.
* At least one Lt.Gen. belonging to the Pakistan Army's Medical Corps, who had headed it, and two Brigadiers had accompanied him. They could not have gone and remained away from the country without the knowledge and clearance of the Military Headquarters. .
11. The uranium enriched at KRL, Kahuta, used to come from Africa, mainly Niger. This partly explains the frequent travels of A.Q.Khan to Africa. From the accounts given by the Pakistani author, two intriguing questions arise:
* Why did Khan consider it necessary to visit the site of a factory in Sudan, which became the target of US Cruise missile attacks after the explosions outside the US Embassies in Nairobi and Dar-es-Salaam by Al Qaeda in August 1998? The Americans had alleged at that time that this factory belonged to Osama bin Laden and was producing chemicals for weaponisation purposes. Denying this, the Sudanese authorities had claimed that it was producing anti-malaria drugs.
* Why was he visiting frequently Timbuktu, which has apparently no importance from the nuclear point of view? Pakistani officials have alleged that he had illegally constructed a hotel there ( Hotel La Colombe?) in the name of his wife. If he was going there to supervise the construction of the hotel, he should have been accompanied by experts in building construction and the hotel industry. No such person accompanied him. He was always accompanied by scientists and Army officers associated with KRL and Tahir Mian, who was helping him in the procurement of centrifuges.
12. It is reliably learnt from well-placed observers that it also came out during the recent interrogation of the associates of Khan in Pakistan's nuclear establishment that after Osama bin Laden shifted from Khartoum to Afghanistan in 1996, Dr.Khan was also looking after bin Laden's extensive investments in the mining industry in many African countries and that the money invested in the Timbuktu hotel had come from these investments of bin Laden. The Pakistani authorities have reportedly suppressed this information and not shared it with the US.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
03/24/2004 4:47:17 PM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
6. But, unfortunately, for reasons of realpolitik, the US Administration has chosen to accept the denials of military responsibility by Musharraf. It has not only given him a clean chit, but has even rewarded him and his country by confering on it the status of a Major Non-NATO Ally (MNNA).
The writer seems very negative about Musharraf. Before we come down hard on Musharraf, a man who appears to be cooperating, shouldn't we stop those who have continued to actively assist proliferation in Iran.
Also the Pakistani government seems to be a much more accommodating ally than some NATO members. There is one country, in particular, that comes to mind.
Posted by: Super Hose ||
03/24/2004 23:52 Comments ||
Top||
Jamiat Ulema-e-Pakistan (JUP) announced on Tuesday that it would end its boycott of the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal (MMA) meetings if the provincial government accepted its demands. Provincial ameer of JUP Owais Ahmad Qadri told Daily Times that his party leaders held a meeting with central deputy secretary general Allama Syed Shabir Ahmad Hashmi, Punjab secretary general Qari Muhammad Bahadar, MPA Akhtar Nawaz, and members of the provincial and district Shuras. He said that the meeting decided to end the boycott of MMA meetings and other programmes if their demands were accepted by the alliance in its March 20 meeting. âOur demands are genuine and if they are accepted by the MMA provincial government then we would be left with no justification to continue the boycott,â Mr Qadri said. He was optimistic the JUP demands would be accepted by the NWFP government. The JUP is a component party of the six-party religious alliance, the MMA, which threatened on September 29 last year to quit the alliance if its only MPA in the Frontier Assembly was not accommodated in the provincial cabinet. Since then the JUP has continued to boycott MMA meetings and official functions of the provincial government in order to put pressure on Chief Minister Akram Khan Durrani and the MMA central leadership. Mr Qadri said that the demands they had presented to the central leadership of the alliance included, a ministry in the Frontier cabinet, a slot of adviser to the chief minister, representation in the zakat committees at various levels, and say in the posting, recruitment and transfers in the government departments.
Posted by: Fred ||
03/24/2004 8:22:58 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
In another blow to Russiaâs beleaguered military, the navyâs commanding admiral ordered a nuclear-powered battle cruiser to return to port Tuesday for fear that ââit could explode at any moment,ââ a statement he retracted hours later.
I guess it didn't explode, huh?
Adm. Vladimir Kuroyedov said the Peter the Great, the flagship of the Northern Fleet, had become unseaworthy and dangerous. During a recent inspection he found the cruiser to be poorly maintained, including ``the contents of the [on-board] nuclear reactor.ââ But three hours later, he backtracked, saying that the shipâs safety is ââin line with existing norms,ââ according to The Associated Press.
Define "existing norms" in the Russian navy...
The issue, however, points up problems in the Russian navy, both in hardware and leadership. No doubt his retraction is a "sugestion" from the Russian Admiralty Snip
His order for all repairs to be finished within three weeks apparently still stands. He also said the crew would have to take another training course before putting out to sea again. The Peter the Great is worthy of the adjective: It displaces 28,000 tons, stretches the length of three football fields and carries a crew of 610. It reportedly can carry 20 nuclear-tipped cruise missiles. But the ship has had a troubled history. During testing in 1996, an explosion in a steam pipeline killed five sailors. The vessel was commissioned in March 1998 -- 12 years after construction started -- maybe the Ruskiâs hired a french national firm for the construction?
but by that June it was back in port for repairs. Military analysts in Moscow said Kuroyedovâs unexpected docking of the cruiser could be part of a personal feud with the shipâs commander, Vladimir Kasatonov. The two officers are said not to like each other, and the admiral blamed Kasatonov personally Tuesday for the shoddy conditions. President Vladimir Putin has made military reform and modernization a priority, although little has improved. Putinâs own military chief of staff has called the situation ``beyond criticalââ... Putin was embarrassed last month when he attended the launch of two ballistic missiles from a Northern Fleet submarine. The missiles never got out of their tubes. the ruskis were claiming it was an "administrative launch" at the time
Kuroyedov said Tuesday that the expiration date on the missiles had been exceeded by nearly a decade. i did not know that untill today
Posted by: Evert Visser in NL ||
03/24/2004 5:08:03 AM ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"The expiration date on the missle" Is that the use by date? Good thing the Soviet Uniond fell apart in '89.
Posted by: Mr. Davis ||
03/24/2004 10:09 Comments ||
Top||
#2
...The "Best When Used By" date deserves a bit of explanation.
The Soviets had a dickens of a time developing reliable solid fuel systems like we did, so liqid fuel was their standard for years. (I think it is just in the last generation or so that they have gotten SF units they can count on). On top of that, they were loath to even let a single missile down for any kind of maintenance lest someone call and ask why the missile wasn't ready.
They essentially went to a 'wooden round' philosophy - where you drop the missile into the hole, fuel it, lock the cover and walk away...for as long as fifteen years. That philosophy eventually spread to the fleet as well, which would explain that administrative launch.
This worked as far as the land based deterrent went, but as a practical matter it does bring into question how well they would have worked when suddenly called for. Supposedly they launched one not long ago that had sat for thirteen years, but I have my doubts that it was just pulled out and fired, as the report suggests. Even as reliable as our systems are, they're still yanked out, torn apart and checked from head to toe at regular intervals. The Sov, excuse me, the Russians never did that. Would have been interesting to see what a mass, no notice launch would have looked like.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
03/24/2004 10:58 Comments ||
Top||
#3
This ought to calm down that "round the world" cruise noise they occasionally come out with. Don't think we'll be hearing any of that for awhile.
U.S. Assistant Secretary of State William Burns arrived in Libya on Tuesday for talks with Libyan leader Muammar Gadhafi, becoming the highest-level American official to visit this country since 1980. Burns' previously unannounced visit follows a recent warming of relations between Libya and the West as Gadhafi made extraordinary steps to shed his country's reputation as a rogue nation. "There are still a number of issues between the United States and Libya that we need to work on, that we need to try to clear up," State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said in Washington. "The questions of terrorism, the questions of Libya's support for groups around Africa, the questions of human rights and other things that we need to take up with the Libyans." However, Boucher said, "this overall process is based on the very significant and dramatic steps that Libya has taken in deciding to get rid of its weapons of mass destruction."
Burns arrived in Libya from Egypt, where he met with President Hosni Mubarak and then with European Union, Russian and U.N. officials to discuss the Israeli-Palestinian situation. He is the highest-level U.S. official to meet with Gadhafi since then-Deputy Ambassador William Eagleton called on the Libyan leader in 1980 to formalize a suspension of diplomatic relations. In other high-ranking visits, British Prime Minister Tony Blair is expected in Libya on Thursday, Gadhafi's son said. Seif el-Islam Gadhafi told reporters in Doha, Qatar, on Monday that Blair and his father would discuss Libya's drive to get U.S. sanctions lifted and the prospects of military cooperation with Britain and the United States. In London, Blair's office declined to comment on reports of a visit to Libya, saying the prime minister's travel plans are kept secret for security reasons.
Q-man's rehab continues.
Posted by: Steve White ||
03/24/2004 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Didn't Bob rely on Mo's money and oil? And didn't Mo get his embassies in return?
#2
Anyone see an Pan-Arab African nation pumping up oil production as a favor - to put pressure on stabilize the oil market as a backhanded slap to the Soddys who left Muhammar high and dry.
#3
Hmmm. I'm not sure how much Libya could actually do to help us regards oil prices, unfortunately. They're producing at current capacity now, from what I can glean: link with decent detail. BTW, as this link shows, it refutes the BS about Nigeria upping prod by huge amt in little time - that was some silly shit. It takes time, 5+ yrs, to build large-scale distilleries, cracking plants, etc. These are complex puppies and it depends upon the crude's components WHAT you build and how - it ain't all the same, so cookie-cutter facilities are not the answer... even if you have the best sweet light crude in the world.
I DO believe that they would do so as facilities permit, however. KaDaffy certainly seems to be open to such suggestions, now. If we keep working on Iraqi production improvements and push Libya it may, indeed, bring about enough of a surplus to undermine OPEC.
2 Side Notes:
1) Now is when I wish Putty hadn't been such a backstabbing motherfucking asshole. Russia, with US help to modernize and upgrade facilities, could easily be overproducing enough, by now, to make OPEC toothless. Unfortunately, he has failed to live up to Fred's and Raj's faith in him. Fuck him, IMHO.
2) If the dumbass Venezuelans hadn't allowed a total asshole, Chavez, into office - there would be potential pressure available there,as well.
Whether the world is ready for it or not, the time is FAST approaching to stop this blackmail and sabotage of the Western world's economies. Time to just take it away. How wonderful would this be for everybody but the Izzoid asshats? Let me count the ways...
#4
.com - I wish you'd quit holding back and say what you really think
Posted by: Frank G ||
03/24/2004 9:48 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Unfortunately, he has failed to live up to Fred's and Raj's faith in him. Fuck him, IMHO.
While I may have held out hope for Russia before / around 9/11/2001, and maybe for a little while after that, subsequent events (stonewalling us at the U.N., uncovering GPS jammers et. al. sold to Iraq, etc. ad nauseum) I'd like to 'clarify' my position as no longer being a Russophile or anything remotely close to that. Maybe I got sucked in by a few cases of vodka Putin's rhetoric, but I shouldn't forget that Russia's progenitor was our swoen enemy for most of the 20th century.
#6
Raj - Oops! I thought you were the poster extolling Putty's wonderfulness just a couple of weeks ago. If not, puh-leeze accept my abject apology! My memory has deceived me, yet again! Arrrggghhh!
#8
like Dave "That's not a foul. (*whack!*) That's a foul!" Cowens.
I once played a game of ping-pong with the Cowens. I was purdy good but only leven year old, he, beat me like a step-child. He was good! Also he was nice to kids... but he has always played for keepers.
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.
||
03/24/2004 19:57 
