ALGathafi speaks...
Monopolization of knowledge has been recently shattered thanks to Information Revolution and to the extraordinary dissemination of science and technology. Moreover, the capacity of the cyber space and super high way information has increased information transformation 10 billion folds in the last fifty years. Nowadays, that capacity is doubling each 18 months.
This all has led to the possibility of controlling the genes of viruses through micro medicine and bio-engineering. Yet, this process might bring about catastrophic side affects which humanity should consider seriously. It is becoming possible through such innovations to create artificial germs that could resist any kind of immunization or treatment. The AIDS virus is a blunt example. Such innovations could serve as a double-edged weapon. From one side mankind could use the results to resist and eradicate viruses. From the other, certain headquarters might use such results for personal interest that can harm humanity.
This takes us to conclude that the most lethal and inhuman weapon any state would think of using, is that of the mass destruction weapon. In a worse scenario such weapons might fall in the hands of irresponsible individual decision maker. The most dangerous part of MDW is invisibility. One cannot hear it or smell it. Animals, insects, plants, air, liquids, and man himself could be a carrier of such lethal element. It could contaminate all equipments and materials that a human being uses in his daily activities (eating, drinking, touching, wearing etc).
Because of the seriousness of this encounter, and in order to stand against the consequences in a rational way, International community should pressure on issuing a resolution to refer this matter to the World Health Organization. This will help us to supervise and inspect all vital industries and laboratories that deal with virus and microbe production. Such procedure will ensure a state of certainty for humanity in order to feel secure that science will not be used against its interest by irresponsible bodies. Put differently, it will ensure us that there will be no deviation in this industry that leads to destruction of humankind, and nobody should be excluded from the rule of international law in this matter. Using double standards will create unpredictable upheavals beyond control. Thank you COL for this encouraging bit. Excellent web site btw, enjoyed the pics... same bugger, but enjoyed it anyway.
CHINESE President Hu Jintao's stop here tomorrow is no routine thing. Seattle is not Los Angeles or New York. Boeing and Microsoft provide an attraction, but this state also stands out because of an attitude.
Voters here elected and re-elected Gary Locke, a Chinese American who took an interest in China and continues to promote it. In many ways, from long support of trade with China to construction of a traditional Chinese garden, this area has made a statement. "Of the 50 states, this one probably has the closest affinity with China and the Chinese," says retired diplomat Joe Borich, president of the Washington State China Relationship Council.
China has placed another fat order of planes from Boeing. Beijing has announced that it will require all computers sold in China come with an operating system installed by the manufacturer a measure of protection for Microsoft.
All this is more than business. It is a way of giving us acknowledgement. You may interpret it cynically, as politics, but it is politics of the warm response. The very least Seattle will do is give China's leader a strong welcome. Sometimes a welcome in a democracy includes protests but we are generous with our protests and hand them out to local politicians, too.
The political climate in Washington, D.C., is not all that positive, stemming from a huge trade deficit with China and the protectionist sentiments of regions different from ours. And yet, says David Bachman, associate director of the University of Washington's Jackson School, the relationship between China and America "is probably the most important for the world economy and world peace."
Between America and China are issues of trade, international security and human rights. There is also Taiwan, an important trading partner and friend of this region whose political future remains a potentially dangerous puzzle. Taiwan's democracy is part of the greater Chinese story out of Asia. World economy and a tranquil Pacific is part of China's enormous importance to Washington state.
Of these things, Hu will have something to say. We need to listen. How far we can cooperate with him comes later. But this is the most important foreigner to step into our city for some years, and the reception we give him is of national importance. "Yes, the East Coast blue State dhimmis may surrender to Islam, but we West Coast blue Staters will surrender to the ChiComs first."
#1
I can see it now... claims that a Chinese admiral discovered California ... followed by demands it reunite with the motherland.
Posted by: john ||
04/17/2006 10:36 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Washington ? Isn't that the state where the voters in the east of the state had the election stolen from them by the corrupt leftists on the west side of the state ? Next time, expect to find
cameras and lawyers at every polling place.
#3
"Beijing has announced that it will require all computers sold in China come with an operating system installed by the manufacturer a measure of protection for Microsoft."
That might be to promote "Red Flag Linux" a government sponsored endeavor just as much.
Posted by: SPoD ||
04/17/2006 18:35 Comments ||
Top||
#4
SPOD: That might be to promote "Red Flag Linux" a government sponsored endeavor just as much.
Linux is free. I know of no one who uses Linux at work. And certainly none of these acquaintances use it at home. Linux in English is hard enough. Linux with Chinese menus? Forget about it. China is Windows country - it's just that most Chinese users haven't bothered to pay for their copy. This new law is definitely a concession to Microsoft. I surprised the government went along with the requirement. The question, of course, is enforcement. China has copyright laws. They're just not enforced. On just about every single retail city block, there is at least one pirate CD and DVD store operating openly, with cops walking past them without a second glance.
#5
SPOD: That might be to promote "Red Flag Linux" a government sponsored endeavor just as much.
Linux is free. I know of no one who uses Linux at work. And certainly none of these acquaintances use it at home. Linux in English is hard enough. Linux with Chinese menus? Forget about it. China is Windows country - it's just that most Chinese users haven't bothered to pay for their copy. This new law is definitely a concession to Microsoft. I surprised the government went along with the requirement. The question, of course, is enforcement. China has copyright laws. They're just not enforced. On just about every single retail city block, there is at least one pirate CD and DVD store operating openly, with cops walking past them without a second glance.
#6
Nukes- and Empire-happy Iran on one side, and Microsoft, etal. on the other - here's hopes for a peaceful Chicom implosion. China's gotta do something - as Rummy indicated it can't achieve econ prosperity unless it reforms and liberalizes, i.e. allows freemarkets and private ownership; and likewise it can't afford to wait for the year 2030, 2050 or the more realistic 2100 for Iran's Mullahs to change its ways.
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has put up a very persuasive case on the Indo-US nuclear deal before the Senate Foreign Relations committee as well as the House International Relations Committee of US Congress. She accepts that the Nonproliferation Treaty continues to remain as a cornerstone of US policy but more broader than the treaty is the nonproliferation regime.
By implication, she points out that members of the treaty have violated its provisions while India, a nuclear weapons state outside the treaty has abided by the spirit and letter of the nonproliferation regime. While members of the treaty like North Korea and Iran have circumvented the safeguards of the International Atomic Energy Agency, India is offering to put its civilian reactors under safeguards. She has argued strongly in favour of taking into account the present day realities which are irreversible. She points out that India would never accept giving up its weapons or capping its arsenal in the light of the regional situation which involves China and Pakistan.
Given this situational imperative, what was good for the United States? An India outside the Nonproliferation regime or one within the regime? An India growing at 8 percent annual growth rate burning up more hydro-carbons adding to the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere or a country using more clean nuclear power?
If Indo-US partnership is to flourish the nuclear deal must go through. These are very powerful arguments and they seem to have persuaded senior Democratic Senators like Joe Biden and John Kerry to consider voting in favour of the deal.
The Secretary of State made it clear that there can be no valid comparison between democratic India with its open society and rule of law and countries like Iran and North Korea which are not democratic, open and law abiding, having broken their international obligations under the NPT.
While the US Administration and a large number of Senators and Congressmen make this clear distinction, nuclear fundamentalists refuse to make this distinction and argue that what applies as an exception to India may apply to others as well irrespective of the nature of the regime, its past record and its security situation.
Dr Condolezza Rice is already on record: 'Our experience of this new world leads us to conclude that the fundamental character of regimes matters more today than the international distribution of power.'
She has also pointed out that 'the nuclear balance in the region is a function of the political and military situation in the region. We are far more likely to be able to influence these regional dynamics from a position of strong relations with India and indeed with Pakistan'. What she left unsaid, but could easily be inferred, are that US has very strong commercial, investment and technological relations with nuclear China, and a special enacted relationship with Pakistan to ensure its development as a moderate Islamic state. Its enhancement of relationship with India will depend on undoing India's isolation from the international nonproliferation regime.
This eminent pragmatism of the US administration faces strong opposition from NPT-Cold War fundamentalists. The NPT was conceived during the height of Cold War. Its basic aim was to prohibit Germany and Japan from getting nuclear weapons. At that stage there were risks of proliferation from the following sources.
*
Countries outside alliance systems which felt threatened -- Sweden,South Korea and Taiwan. These three countries got implicit and explicit security guarantees and therefore did not go ahead with nuclear weapon programmes. The NATO nations became crypto-nuclear weapon powers, with nuclear weapons stationed on their soil and their troops trained on use of n-weapons, all at no cost to themselves.
* Countries which went nuclear for domestic reasons South Africa which wanted to perpetuate apartheid at home and deter military pressure from neighbouring black countries. The white minority regime gave up the weapons to prevent the succeeding majority black regime from inheriting the arsenal.
* Countries which sought nuclear weapons for prestige -- Argentina and Brazil. They gave up the weapons programme when they found that the mystique of nuclear weapons was declining.
* Countries which had the Soviet Union's weapons on their soil but could not use them as they did not have the codes and technology -- Ukraine, Kazakhstan and Belarus which also did not face any external threat.
*
States which sought nuclear weapons to sustain the fundamentalist character of this system. In this category are Pakistan, North Korea, Iraq, Iran and Libya. The last has given up the ambition. Pakistan is a full-fledged nuclear state. North Korea is believed to have some weapons. Iran is striving hard to develop that capability. All these programmes had connections with China.
The NPT was successfully breached by China and, with its help, by Pakistan.
The Indian nuclear programme was a response to Maoist Chinese nuclear expansionism as implemented by Mao's successors. India tried in 1967 to secure assurances from the US, USSR and the UK.Only after it failed to get such asssurances did India go in for its own weapons programme. In 1978 Morarji Desai renounced the nuclear option. But the China-Pakistan nuclear proliferation axis compelled India to resume its weapons programme.
The NPT fundamentalists were not prepared to question the two major breaches of the treaty. First by China which proliferated to Pakistan and then to Iran and Libya. Secondly they were silent on proliferation from Western European countries, whose companies supplied equipment and technology to Pakistan, South Africa, Iraq and through A Q Khan to Iran.
They adopt the attitude that there is no point in reopening the past and since Western Europe has tightened its controls, it is no longer an issue. But they are not willing to accept that India's nuclear weapon status is irreversible and is part of its irrevocable past.
What the US administation is now proposing is not to accept India as a nuclear weapons state but only to help its civil nuclear energy programme after isolating and islanding its weapons programme. The NPT fundamentalists rewarded the arch proliferator, China, when Beijing was able to get access to civil nuclear reactors. India has not violated the NPT since it was not a party to it. Therefore there was no question of unfairly rewarding India.
In a totally new situation in which there are risks of extremist states like Pakistan, North Korea and Iran having access to nuclear weapons, their falling into the hands of non-state actors and no credible evidence of China having stopped its proliferation, the other four nuclear powers (US, Russia, UK and France) and the IAEA are reaching a deal with India for its joining the Nonproliferation regime in exchange for access to civil nuclear energy.
Thereby India will be reinforcing the non-proliferation regime in the world, reduce pressure on demand for oil in the international market, avoid enhancing the emission of greenhouse gases and contribute to further research on civil nuclear energy. The US administration deserves full credit for its pragmatism and moral courage to face up to NPT fundamentalists and their antediluvian arguments.
Posted by: john ||
04/17/2006 11:14 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
Posted by: Steve White ||
04/17/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[5 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
IOW, its 1933 and Munichs all in one - given the many cals for Jihad, Global JIhad, and Global Islamist/Jihadist Statehood, whom is not convinced, besides the "We want America to Win before Surrendering", "Winning is Always Losing and Vice Versa" Dems, that America + West + Rightism are in a WAR TO THE DEATH. The only difference between globalist agendas of the Radical Muslims versus Secular Lefties-Commies is that the Lefties-Commies give a damn dang in hell whom gets the blame for anything - MAN IS GOD, AND SO IS UNIVERSAL PROPAGANDA!? As wid post-AMerica Russia-China, they may hope to save the world from Fascist = Half-A-Commie Clintonian Socialist Amerika, but can they eventually save the world from each other???
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.
