The Pope is expected to use his first address to the United Nations to deliver a powerful warning over climate change in a move to adopt protection of the environment as a "moral" cause for the Catholic Church and its billion-strong following.
The New York speech is likely to contain an appeal for sustainable development, and it will follow an unprecedented Encyclical (a message to the wider church) on the subject, senior diplomatic sources have told The Independent.
It will act as the centrepiece of a US visit scheduled for next April the first by Benedict XVI, and the first Papal visit since 1999 and round off an environmental blitz at the Vatican, in which the Pope has personally led moves to emphasise green issues based on the belief that climate change is affecting the poorest people on the planet, and the principle that believers have a duty to "protect creation".
Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, head of the Catholic Church in the UK, said last night: "This is a crucial issue both today and for all future generations. We are the stewards of creation and we need to take that responsibility seriously and co-operate to care for the created world."
A Papal tour of America will be particularly potent during election year in the US, where Catholics number around 73 million, and is being discussed in Rome after Pope Benedict accepted an invitation from the UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon. For the Pope to take his climate-change message to the high-profile UN platform will be considered hugely influential to the fifth of the world's population who are Catholics, and will act as a rallying call for action in Africa and Asia, which have seen a rise in Catholics in recent years.
News of the speech comes as Vatican City has become the first fully carbon-neutral state in the world, after announcing it is offsetting its carbon footprint by planting a forest in Hungary and installing solar panels on the roof of St Peter's Basilica in Rome.
It also follows a series of interventions by the Pope on the environment. On 2 September he told a 300,000 youth audience: "Before it is too late, it is necessary to make courageous decisions that reflect knowing how to re-create a strong alliance between man and the earth." On 7 September, he said there was a "pressing need for science and religion to work together to safeguard the gifts of nature and to promote responsible stewardship".
UK diplomats have held a number of behind-the-scenes meetings with Vatican officials on the environment. A Whitehall source said last night: "Benedict is the spiritual head of 19 per cent of the world's population and a highly respected figure. If the Pope's words are taken on board by his community that is one big constituency for change and could well turn the tide on climate change and environmental degradation." What about the other 81%?
In any case, the West should move carefully so as not to destroy its economies until after the WOT is thoroughly decided. We can all see how well the Methanol thing is working out. We can't stand many more victories like that.
#2
This could get amusing. Watching the church jump in bed w/the left. Many of whom (on the left) see human overpopulation as a direct cause of climate change starkly contrary to catholic teaching of producing many children etc.
#3
Organized religion made its deal with the leftist devil long ago. No different from homosexuals embracing islamists who would topple walls on them. Everyone hopes to feed the alligator in return for a promise of being eaten last.
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
09/24/2007 14:49 Comments ||
Top||
#4
How long did it take for them to straighten things out with Galileo? You would think they'd want to keep their distance from scientific controversy; sort of a separation of Church and Science thing.
#6
Women's Rights in the World matter nothing to the Free World, as we have the freedom of choice. Where these Rights are denied, it matters everything.
Everything the West has is See-Through, Time to Cloak the Fist.
From the Wall Street Journal's OpinionJournal.com. You have to register, but it's free and well worth it, I think.
lotp, it looks like you were right to be concerned, and I was wrong. Here's a taste:
Business opportunities in Iran were the theme of a German government-sponsored conference last week in Darmstadt, Germany. "Iran is accustomed to crises," the conference invitation delicately noted, "but somehow always keeps going forward." In fact, Iran's resilience is made possible in no small measure by Germany itself, which remains one of Iran's largest trading partners. Now Berlin is balking at international attempts to intensify economic sanctions against the Tehran regime for its nuclear program.
Just how discordant Germany's Iranian policy is even within the European Union was made clear to me last spring, when I participated in a "roving seminar" on Iran and nuclear weapons that visited Paris, Brussels and Berlin. As the sole Israeli participant in the seminar--jointly sponsored by the German Marshall Fund and the American Enterprise Institute--I assumed that my role was to play the heavy, reminding naïve and self-righteous Europeans of the unpleasant truths of the Middle East.
Instead, I encountered sobriety about the Iranian threat, loathing for the Ahmadinejad regime and sympathy for Israel's fears. The Europeans I met were keenly aware of the danger of a nuclear arms race in the Arab world triggered by fear of a Shiite bomb. ...Everywhere, that is, but Berlin.
#1
Article > WOT aa a looming CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUE. Lefties hate Ameri but don't wanna move or reside elsewhere ergo their need for CIVIL WAR IN AMER to make Amer like the other nations they don't want to move to or live in??? D *** NG IT, TO BE PERFECT/UTOPIC AMERICA MUST BE DESTROYED VIA CIVIL WAR.
* "We're doomed ...Representational democracy is now officially a sham ...US will be finished in 10 or 15 years". Year 2017-2022 - just in time for the Ice Age, comet/asteroids, and Russia-China's "War is not only possible but desired" final war for OWG-SWO agz the USA. As I'd said or warned long ago, pre 9-11 and post 9-11, PCORRECTNESS/DIALECTICISM, etc > ANTI-US OWG > Americans will be wilfully told their country is still great, powerful, and sovereign, etc, even when its weak + ruled from afar by non-Americans.
ROBIN WILLIAMS > "CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC.........@
[Correctness]". O'REILLY > anti-US Leftist-Progressives, Socialists, Globalists, etal. want America to be governed by a coalition of world nations which undoubtedly will include RUSSIA-CHINA as [MilPol] counterweights to America. O'REILLY > WOT > TERRORISTS AND PROGRESSIVES, ETC. > WAR AGZ AMER FREEDOMS, MATERIALISM, AND SOVEREIGNTY.
#2
RUSSIA-CHINA > as RULING-GOVERNING COUNTERWEIGHTS agz America, OVER AMERICAN AFFAIRS, where Amer is just one nation amongst many, whose AGENDA is but one of many.
Recently, it was suggested at a seminar that Pakistan was in the process of moving from management to governance. This claim was probably looking to the future where a single individuals rule would be replaced by a system of civil-military partnership, where issues would be decided through consensus. It is difficult to see how such a conclusion has been reached considering that decision-making remains largely tribal and feudal in character. The manner in which policymakers address domestic political issues or bilateral ties with other countries does not really match the above-mentioned claim.
Let us consider how this tribal/feudal decision-making works, taking as an example the eviction of Nawaz Sharif from the country on September 10. Authorities in Pakistan consider the countrys political future secure after the former prime ministers deportation, as his bid to enter the country was considered a rude disturbance that would have distracted people from the agreement being negotiated between Benazir Bhutto and General Pervez Musharraf.
Sharif has not just been deported; it has also been ensured with the help of the Saudis that he is restrained from speaking out and interfering in Pakistans political issues. The decision is considered unpleasant by many. Musharraf should have allowed Sharif into the country, making a positive contribution to the process of reaching national consensus. Instead, Sharif was deported and his followers imprisoned and harassed for trying to protest on the streets. Probably, the understanding in Islamabad is that allowing Sharif into Pakistan would have hampered the future political arrangement as envisioned by the GHQ.
The more interesting aspect, however, is the involvement of the Saudis who have played a key role in both of Sharifs deportations. Indeed, we now see that the Saudis wield significant influence in Pakistan. Gone are the days when people used to joke about Pakistan being the 52nd state of the US. Now it seems that we are a satellite state of an American satellite state.
There are two explanations for Saudi Arabias involvement in Pakistans political affairs. First, the Saudis were asked by the Americans, especially former President Bill Clinton, to help Sharif. It would have been unpleasant had Pakistans military assassinated another prime minister, and Clinton was concerned about the security of a Pakistani leader who had been quite cooperative.
Second, the Saudis were keen to come to the help of Sharif in return for the understanding he had developed with the Saudi ruling family during his tenure as the prime minister. The visiting Saudi crown prince was taken to visit the Kahuta Research Laboratories soon after the nuclear tests in 1998, a gesture which denoted the relative significance of the Saudi royal family.
And this influence is not something new. The Kingdom has traditionally played an influential role in Pakistans domestic policymaking starting from the days of General Ayub Khan. On Riyadhs request, Ayub recalled Ahmadi officers serving in Saudi Arabia. Later, the influence increased and was critical in funding Pakistans military acquisitions during the Zia-ul Haq period. The Saudi connection was also prominent in funding the Jihad in Afghanistan, and later in staving off Iranian influence in Pakistan. And it is via personal links that the Saudis have played a significant role in Pakistani politics and society for so long.
Bringing Sharif to Saudi Arabia was a kind gesture to both Sharif and Musharraf, who was relieved to get rid of a political problem. Notwithstanding the aforementioned concerns of President Clinton, the fact is that Islamabad could not really have afforded to kill another prime minister. But having Sharif around was adding to Musharrafs problems. This is, in fact, the most interesting commentary on the political behaviour of Pakistans establishment. It chose not to confront the former prime minister legally but to get rid of him.
The present regime has decided twice to evict Sharif than confront him with his sins. Interestingly, the former premier was charged with corruption. But instead of taking him to trial, the government exported him to Saudi Arabia. More importantly, the regime decided to honour an agreement between Sharif and the Saudis more than the decision of the Supreme Court of Pakistan. This does not reflect the behaviour of a sovereign country but one that depends on personal linkages with powerful external forces. Or perhaps one needs a less tribal/feudal mindset to recognise the fact that the law must be followed and implemented.
Lets now look at how a feudal approach is also applied to the conduct of external relations. In certain cases, personal relationships across borders are directly encouraged by top authorities in Pakistan. What is the objective of sneaking into, say, New Delhis power circles via personal contacts? The most obvious explanation is that the relationship would be a way of fostering greater confidence between the two sides. What could be more wonderful than the Pakistani spouse of an Indian politician explaining Islamabads concerns to the other side? There is historical precedent for such politics. Allegedly, the relationship between Lady Mountbatten and Jawaharlal Nehru was useful for the Indians. But would this approach really work now?
The more important question is how the authorities in Islamabad arrived upon the idea that such methods would allow them greater influence in strategic decision-making on the other side. It is perhaps the inherent feudal mindset according to which personal linkages play a significant role in the affairs of the state, and between states.
This takes us back to the Europe of centuries ago, when marriages were a method of building important political linkages between kingdoms and empires. But that was a monarchical and feudal Europe in which an individual had a greater role to play than institutions. The problem with a nation-state, as opposed to the historical feudal states or monarchies, is that they operate on the basis of long-drawn objectives, and there are far too many players for such individual-based initiatives to have a major impact on decision-making. Under the circumstances, the real test is not just to move from management to governance but to move away from feudal decision-making to a more structured and logical policy-making system.
The writer is an Islamabad-based independent defence analyst and author of the book, Military Inc, Inside Pakistans Military Economy
Posted by: john frum ||
09/24/2007 15:42 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
In certain cases, personal relationships across borders are directly encouraged by top authorities in Pakistan. What is the objective of sneaking into, say, New Delhis power circles via personal contacts?
She is referring to the affair between Captain Amrinder Singh (former Chief Minister of the Indian Punjab and son of the Maharajah of Patalia) and Aroosa Alam (Pak Journalist with ISI links, daughter of Akleem Akhtar "General Rani" the mistress of the Pak military dictator Yahya Khan)
Posted by: john frum ||
09/24/2007 15:53 Comments ||
Top||
#2
General Yahya Khan
"General Rani" (General's Queen)
Captain Amrinder Singh and Aroosa Alam
Posted by: john frum ||
09/24/2007 16:01 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Amrinder Singh's brother in law is Natwar Singh, the former Indian Foreign Minister (involved in the UN Iraq Oil for Food scandal).
His wife, Parneet Kaur, is a Member of the Indian Parliament and reportedly quite a formidable woman.
Aroosa Alam broke the story about Brigadier Andrew Durcan, the UK Defence Attache to Islamabad who was recalled to London over an affair with a "researcher" of the Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad, allegedly an ISI honeypot operation run by ISSI's director, Shireen Mazari.
Posted by: john frum ||
09/24/2007 16:13 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Night of The General
The woman was a phenomenon. Easily the most influential figure during Pakistan's second military regime, with the slightest gesture of her bejewelled hand she could guarantee employment, ensure promotions and bring about unwelcome transfers. Yet, interestingly, few even know her real name: Akleem Akhtar. General Rani she was, and remains to all but an intimate few.
In one interview, Rani stated: "I knew that dumb, pretty girls who come with no strings attached are a universal failing of men in power. After my marriage collapsed and I had to find the means to support myself and my children, I decided to become the provider of such girls to men in need."
After he became the martial law adminstrator, Rani became a cornerstone in his life. Yahya's weaknesses were drink and women and Rani masterfully catered to both. Among the women she introduced him to were film actress Taranna - film actress Andleeb's mother - Madame Nur Jehan and Nael Kamal.
As soon as Bhutto came to power, General Rani was put under house arrest and her telephone connection was cancelled. Her crime in the words of an eminent lawyer was that, "she knew too much."
Thus began General Rani's downfall. Once the issue of house arrest was resolved (courtesy S. M. Zafar) and her subsequent jail terms ended (the most recent for drug-trafficking), General Rani never really reverted to her former glory.
Posted by: john frum ||
09/24/2007 16:44 Comments ||
Top||
All is not well in Musharrafs realm as the General faces multiple crises of legitimacy, credibility and authority. The entire trans-border of Pakistan-Afghanistan is today a vast SEZ of International Terror Inc. International terrorists like Tahir Yuldashev (Islamic Movement of Turkestan), various factions of the Taliban with Baitullah Mehsud as the most important leader in South Waziristan, Abu Kasha, the Iraqi, and Najmuddin, the Uzbek, operate in North Waziristan along with the Al Qaeda and others. They conduct their business from these safe havens.
The pattern of terrorist violence after the Lal Masjid episode has changed. Twelve soldiers were killed in Dera Ismail Khan in a suicide attack, about 300 soldiers were kidnapped by the Taliban in Waziristan early in September, 12 policemen were kidnapped from Bannu, a "settled area" of NWFP, unlike the ungovernable FATA. A bomb blast in Rawalpindi in September killed 29 personnel, mostly from the ISI. On the day US deputy secretary of State John Negroponte was in Islamabad, a Pushtoon officer blew himself up killing 19 commandos of the SSG in Tarbela, south of Islamabad. Terror now stalks the sanctum sanctorum of Pakistan the Pakistan Army.
Meanwhile, helicopter gun ships were once again deployed this year in the Makeen area of South Waziristan. This was in retaliation against tribesmen who had repeatedly attacked a military post on the night of September 12, killing 124 security personnel. Artillery was used against tribesmen in Razmak and Datta Khel in North Waziristan.
It is not easy to kidnap 300 armed and trained personnel. It is not known whether these soldiers, surprised and overpowered by overwhelming force, had voluntarily surrendered without a fight, or had refused to fight.
If they had surrendered, then they had no will to fight. But if they had refused to fight, possibly by saying that they were not trained to fight other Muslims, then this could only mean that the Pakistan Army has problems that are more serious than imagined.
If they had surrendered, then they had no will to fight. But if they had refused to fight, possibly by saying that they were not trained to fight other Muslims, then this could only mean that the Pakistan Army has problems that are more serious than imagined.
Most of these incidents, especially the kidnapping, the bomb blasts in Rawalpindi against the ISI and the suicide attack in the high security SSG campus, mean that the attackers had accurate intelligence in each case. It also means that this intelligence emanated from within these set-ups. Recall that terrorists had perfect intelligence about Gen. Musharrafs movements when they almost succeeded in assassinating him three years ago in Rawalpindi. In his autobiography, In the Line of Fire, Musharraf has mentioned that one of the conspirators was from the SSG. Musharraf just got lucky.
Earlier this year, Pakistani authorities disclosed that about 1,400 people had been killed in over 100 military operations in South and North Waziristan. Clashes between the tribesmen and the security forces have continued for some years now, but the frequency and the efficacy of the attacks on the security forces have increased. This is especially noticeable after the commando action in Lal Masjid in July 2007: 300 persons were killed, many of whom were Pushtoons and from the Waziristan area.
A Pakistan ministry of interior document admitted that government forces had forfeited authority to the Taliban and their allies, and even places like Peshawar, Kohat and Nowshera were facing Talibanisation.
A Pakistan ministry of interior document admitted that government forces had forfeited authority to the Taliban and their allies, and even places like Peshawar, Kohat and Nowshera were facing Talibanisation, that the security forces in NWFP and the tribal region had been outgunned and outnumbered. (There are about 80,000 to 100,000 troops in the region.)
It is apparent that Islamic radicals have been gaining in Pakistan and their strength worries even elected parties like the MMA in NWFP. The regime invariably handles the Taliban and religious extremists with kid gloves, for they are Islamic warriors, armed and dangerous, with sympathisers in high places. On the other hand, Nawaz Sharifs short lived homecoming was handled swiftly and more with bravado than self assurance. It was the act of a regime that is getting desperate to cling to power and panicking that nothing is working in its favour. Musharraf may have succeeded, in his own eyes, of having got rid of the "problem," but this is likely to come back to haunt him.
Sixty years ago, Pakistan had only one monopoly shareholder the United Kingdom. Then the United States took over and today Pakistan is actually like a failed MNC with the major stake holders the US, the UK and Saudi Arabia trying to shore up this failing company. The "Chief Executive" (that was what Musharraf called himself when he ousted Nawaz) has been underperforming, but has to be rescued. That is why there have been international managers like Messrs Boucher and Negroponte rushing into Islamabad to support the CEO in public and admonish him in private.
China, the fourth shareholder in Pakistan, is worried too as its citizens continue to be killed in Baluchistan or are taken hostage elsewhere. Further, Uighur Islamists from Xinjiang have been receiving training along with Uzbeks, Tajiks and Chechens in the Waziristan areas. Pakistani troops began hunting for Uighur Muslims in Waziristan along with their Uzbek and Tajik sympathisers. Hasan Mahsum, the leader of the East Turkestan Islamic Movement, who was wanted by the Chinese authorities, was killed in a gunfight with Pakistani troops in October 2004. A week later, militants kidnapped two Chinese engineers from South Waziristan, a uranium rich area. Earlier this year, the Pakistan Army launched a massive attack against the Uzbeks and Uighurs in South Waziristan suspected by the Chinese to be carrying out subversion in Xinjiang. Very few survived this attack and the rest fled to North Waziristan.
Across the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, the situation in the Pushtoon areas of south and east Afghanistan remains grim for President Hamid Karzai. Nato forces have been unable to assert themselves and the Taliban have killed 300 Afghan policemen in recent months.
The battle now seems to be more than a battle between the Taliban and foreign troops or Afghan troops. It has become a battle between the Pushtoon in Afghanistan versus the foreigners, and between the Pushtoon in Pakistan and the rest of the Pakistanis in Pakistan.
The battle now seems to be more than a battle between the Taliban and foreign troops or Afghan troops. It has become a battle between the Pushtoon in Afghanistan versus the foreigners, and between the Pushtoon in Pakistan and the rest of the Pakistanis in Pakistan. This is happening in a country where the regime is wary of even renaming NWFP as Pakhtoonkhwa for fear that this may sow the seeds of Pushtoon nationalism.
The Pakistan Army in the last 60 years has begun to resemble the East India Company, acquiring prime land at privileged prices, managing all trade and industrial houses in the country, running the countrys logistic systems, constructing highways and playing politics, setting up the Mohajirs against the Punjabis and religious elements against the nationalists. The Pakistan Army has a country to exploit. This has made Pakistan a global rogue State but no one is willing to say so.
A regime that is running scared of unarmed politicians, and either connives with or appeases terrorists, and in the process violates every written statute, is staring at a bleak future. When leaders openly disregard laws and the Constitution, then the followers can only do worse. Gen. Vinod Sehgal in his book Restructuring Pakistan (2001) had five main worries about Pakistan. These were the Talibanisation of Pakistan, a civil war breaking out in the country, further spread of State-sponsored terrorism from the Afghan-Pakistan frontier, the spread of nuclear materials from Pakistan and the spread of regressive Islam into the subcontinent. It seems all this is taking place. Maulana Abu Ala Mawdoodi was prophetic when seeing the bloodshed and the killings during the partition of India, he remarked that "the bloody birth pangs of Pakistan" were "predicting the birth of a monster and not a human being."
.... The U.S. military has said that they have a confession from at least one Islamic State of Iraq figureidentified as a senior leader in the ISIs hierarchyalleging that [Abu Omar] al-Baghdadi is a fictitious character invented by Al-Qaeda in Mesopotamia to lend more of an indigenous Iraqi identity to its leadership. I tend to disagree with the assertion that al-Baghdadi doesnt exist.
In the last two month period, Al-Baghdad has put out two new speeches: his fifth speech (43 minutes long) was entitled Should you desist then that is better for you and was released on July 9, and his sixth speech was posted to jihadist website on September 15 under the title They plot, but Allah also plots and lasts for 27 minutes. I am unaware of any other speeches during this time period.
A little over two months ago, al-Baghdadi threatened war against Iran, and last week he declared war on Sweden. But whats interesting about his latest speech is that there was no mention of his prior threat against Iran: he had given the Iranians a two month grace period to pull their support for Iraqs Shiites or else he would go after them and after Shiite business interests across the Middle East. But even though the two months were up, and Iran obviously had not cleared out of Iraq, al-Baghdadi doesnt bring up his previous tirade. . Not only that but al-Baghdadi doesnt even address the American accusation that hes a fictitious character, which was made on July 18, nine days after he released his fifth speech. .
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
09/24/2007 09:49 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#3
Clearly the jihadis, Steve. The smart Democrats are figuring it out, the leadership nicely acts out the saying, "None so blind as those who will not see."
Stephens and most everyone else have missed the real story. It is not Israel's silence that "speaks volumes" as he claims, but Syria's. Why would the Syrian government be so tight-lipped about an act of war perpetrated on their soil?
The first half of the answer lies in this story that appeared in the Israeli media last month (8/13): Syria's Antiaircraft System Most Advanced In World
Syria has gone on a profligate buying spree, spending vast sums on Russian systems, "considered the cutting edge in aircraft interception technology."
Syria now "possesses the most crowded antiaircraft system in the world," with "more than 200 antiaircraft batteries of different types," some of which are so new that they have been installed in Syria "before being introduced into Russian operation service."
While you're digesting that, take a look at the map of Syria:
Notice how far away Dayr az-Zawr is from Israel. An F15/16 attack there is not a tiptoe across the border, but a deep, deep penetration of Syrian airspace. And guess what happened with the Russian super-hyper-sophisticated cutting edge antiaircr aft missile batteries when that penetration took place on September 6th.
Nothing. El blanko. Silence. The systems didn't even light up, gave no indication whatever of any detection of enemy aircraft invading Syrian airspace, zip, zero, nada. The Israelis (with a little techie assistance from us) blinded the Russkie antiaircraft systems so completely the Syrians didn't even know they were blinded.
Now you see why the Syrians have been scared speechless. They thought they were protected - at enormous expense - only to discover they are defenseless. As in naked.
Thus the Great Iranian Freak-Out - for this means Iran is just as nakedly defenseless as Syria. I can tell you that there are a lot of folks in the Kirya (IDF headquarters in Tel Aviv) and the Pentagon right now who are really enjoying the mullahs' predicament. Let's face it: scaring the terror masters in Tehran out of their wits is fun.
It's so much fun, in fact, that an attack destroying Iran's nuclear facilities and the Revolutionary Guard command/control centers has been delayed, so that France (under new management) can get in on the fun too. On Sunday (9/16), Sarkozy's foreign minister Bernard Kouchner announced that "France should prepare for the possibility of war over Iran's nuclear program."
All of this has caused Tehran to respond with maniacal threats. On Monday (9/17), a government website proclaimed that "600 Shihab-3 missiles" will be fired at targets in Israel in response to an attack upon Iran by the US/Israel. This was followed by Iranian deputy air force chief Gen. Mohammad Alavi announcing today (9/19) that "we will attack their (Israeli) territory with our fighter bombers as a response to any attack."
A sure sign of panic is to make a threat that everyone knows is a bluff. So our and Tel Aviv's response to Iranian bluster is a thank-you-for-sharing yawn and a laugh. Few things rattle the mullahs' cages more than a yawn and a laugh.
Yet no matter how much fun this sport with the mullahs is, it is also deadly serious. The pressure build-up on Iran is getting enormous. Something is going to blow and soon. The hope is that the blow-up will be internal, that the regime will implode from within. But make no mistake: an all-out full regime take-out air assault upon Iran is coming if that hope doesn't materialize within the next 60 to 90 days. The Sept. 6 attack on Syria was the shot across Iran's bow.
So - what was attacked near Dayr az-Zawr? It's possible it was North Korean "nuclear material" recently shipped to Syria, i.e., stuff to make radioactively "dirty" warheads, but nothing to make a real nuke with as the Norks don't have real nukes (see Why North Korea's Nuke Test Is Such Good News, October 2006).
Another possibility is it was to take out a stockpile of long-range Zilzal surface-to-surface missiles recently shipped from Iran for an attack on Israel. A third is it was a hit on the stockpile of Saddam's chemical/bio weapons snuck out of Iraq and into Syria for safekeeping before the US invasion of April 2003. (LJH Note: Partially confirms DEBKA report of '04, which also listed nuclear materials).
But the identity of the target is not the story - for the primary point of the attack was not to destroy that target. It was to shut down Syria's Russian air defense system during the attack. Doing so made the attack an incredible success.
Syria is shamed and silent. Iran is freaking out in panic. Defenseless enemies.
Posted by: Bobby ||
09/24/2007 16:25 Comments ||
Top||
#4
Iran's alliance wid Syria has also bit the dust, as Iran has thus far failed to formally/publicly + militarily come to Syria's aid. Israeli medias are, however, anticipating Iran will follow its history and prob resort to PC/Deniable Terror-based retaliation agz Israel. *WORLDNEWS > IRAN'S KEEPS ITS EYE ON THE GREATEST PRIZE, i.e. CONTROL OF SYRIA + eventual ME DOMINATION. IRAN CANNOT EFFECTIVELY CONTROL WHAT IT CAN NOT DEFEND, THUS CONTROL OF SYRIA REMAINS [FOR NOW] OUT OF TEHRAN'S REACH. Pragmatically, where its own national defense is concerned, the Israeli strike shows why Iran wants anti-US asymmetric warfare = "People's War" on its own soil, to include possibly detonating Nukes-WMDS on its own soil.
I can never think about the topic of I.Q. without recalling the late Willard Espys immortal I-ku haiku. From memory:
I ku; you ku; he, she, or it ku;
We ku; you ku; they ku.
Than ku.
Espys lines dont make much sense, but they make more sense than a lot of the stuff that gets written about I.Q. Case in point: David Brookss remarkably lame-brained piece in the New York Times the other day. I say remarkably because David is a very smart guy, and people that smart do not often sign their names to such unmitigated twaddle.
The wittiest comments on Davids piece came from the Anglospheres best living human-sciences journalist, Steve Sailer. Steve supplies the full text of the Brooks piece for good measure (with his comments at the end). Alex at the Gene Expression website conducted a point-by-point demolition of the Brooks piece, with linked bibliographical references I counted 23. No doubt there have been other critiques around the web from people WHO ACTUALLY KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT PSYCHOMETRICS.
The Brooks piece caught my attention because I had just finished reading Michael Harts book Understanding Human History. Harts aim is to do for the history of our species what Lynn and Vanhanen did for economics: to bring forward intelligence the different statistical profiles of different peoples on measures of cognitive function as an important factor. Not the only factor, of course, but an important factor.
.
.
.
The ordinary modes of human thinking are magical, religious, and social. We want our wishes to come true; we want the universe to care about us; we want the esteem of our peers. For most people, wanting to know the truth about the world is way, way down the list. Scientific objectivity is a freakish, unnatural, and unpopular mode of thought, restricted to small cliques whom the generality of citizens regard with dislike and mistrust. There is probably a sizable segment in any population that believes scientists should be rounded up and killed. And, of course, the current academic system is very good at spotting/eliminating such troublemakes
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.
All is not well in Musharrafs realm as the General faces multiple crises of legitimacy, credibility and authority. The entire trans-border of Pakistan-Afghanistan is today a vast SEZ of International Terror Inc. International terrorists like 
