The brother of the UAE president has been found guilty in a Swiss court of beating a US citizen with a belt at a hotel bar in Geneva in 2003.
The tribunal fined Sheikh Falah al-Nahyan 10,000 Swiss francs (£4,930, $9,820). In addition he received a suspended penalty of 540,000 francs. The sheikh also has to pay costs for the lawyers and the proceedings amounting to 2,879 Swiss francs (US $2,829), the court ruled.
The judgement said that the sheikh repeatedly hit Silvano Orsi with a steel-buckled belt. The court said the sheikh inflicted 'bodily harm with the use of a dangerous object' on Mr Orsi, a resident of Rochester, New York, after Mr Orsi declined an offer of a bottle of champagne from the sheikh.
Mr Orsi, who had sought damages for injuries, said he was happy with the judgement. Sheikh Nahyan, who maintains his innocence, is expected to appeal.
Fifteen years ago, after the Midwest was swamped with what was pronounced a '100-year' or even a '500-year' flood, some folks figured they would never again see such a disaster in their lifetime. Some even dropped their flood insurance.
Big mistake.
Now, with the region struck by a supposedly once-in-a-lifetime flood for the second time since 1993, some scientists and disaster officials say the use of terms like '100-year flood' should be re-evaluated because they are often misunderstood and can give the public a false sense of security.
'We, the United States Geological Survey, almost need to quit using the term `100-year flood,'' said hydrologist Gary Wilson with the USGS Missouri Water Science Center in Rolla, Mo. 'It could happen twice a year, if you're unlucky.' Or 200 years could go by without a 100-year flood, he said.
Several government scientists say they have tried to move away from using the terms, yet they also say they routinely fall back on the labels as shorthand for measuring a flood's severity. The terms have practical consequences; they are used for such things as classifying a levee's protection level and setting insurance requirements for people who live in flood-prone areas.
Many people seem to believe that a 100-year flood should happen once every 100 years, or that a 500-year flood should happen every 500 years. But that's not how it works. A 100-year flood is defined as a flood so big that it has a 1 percent chance of happening in any given year. A 500-year flood is one with a 0.2 percent chance of happening in a given year - a 1-in-500 chance. Maybe 20-30 years ago, Kansas City had a 100-year storm on Friday, followed by another 100-year storm on Saturday, which resulted in a 500-year flood event. Go figure. Scientists say it is not unusual to hear from people who want to know if they have lived through a '100-year' event and want to cancel their flood insurance, believing one recent big flood lowers the risk of another. But that's not the case.
While the rules of probability say that the odds are 50-50 that a coin will come up heads, it is entirely possible to flip a quarter and come up with heads four or five times in a row. Five in a row is one chance in 32.
Some critics argue that it's the government's flood forecasts that are faulty. Carolyn Kousky, a researcher who has studied natural disaster policy, wrote in an opinion piece in Monday's St. Louis Post-Dispatch that maps produced by the Federal Emergency Management Agency's National Flood Insurance Program may underestimate flood risks, though she noted that work to modernize those maps is under way.
She said more paved areas leave less ground to absorb rainwater, so more runs into creeks and rivers. The construction of levees and the building of new river channels are also contributing to the risks, she said. But you can't build a parking lot without studying the runoff effects on downstream folks. My 20-year old subdivision has a lake to meter runoff.
And she said it's possible climate change will increase flooding in the Midwest. Ya just knew they'd have to work in MMGW! Did she volunterr that, or was push-polling at work?
Posted by: Bobby ||
07/01/2008 06:37 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11131 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
...or as prompted by the interviewer. Our version of 'God wills it'. A custom done as an involuntary reflex of the lower brain stem group.
#2
A 500 year rain - that would put it before the industrial revolution? Blame the Italian Resaissance, just some garlic culture anyways...
More idiodic than this media terminology are people who live in flood plains then wonder why they are underwater - or in river deltas, next to fault lines, in tornado ally, etc. No place anyone lives is going to be safe so you either hope it doesn't happen or prepare and deal with it when it does.
Or is the subtle push that, if the government had forced them to have insurance, they never would have made the mistake of cancelling their insurance to save a couple bucks.
· U.S. has completed a first draft resolution proposing sanctions on Zimbabwe
· Sawers said the council will wait to see what comes out of the AU leaders summit.
· Sawers said UK will try to toughen measures already imposed by EU.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/01/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11133 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The HELL you say? Sanctions AGAIN? The Pommie government's adopted policy of No Independence Before Majority African Rule (NIBMAR) no longer working? No worries, I predict Bob and Grace will come around.... 1 p.m. local time (11 a.m. in London) on 11 November.
#2
Wrong, wrong, wrong! The way to handle this is to offer Mr. Mugabe and the people of Zimbabwe more US aid, especially food and water. I suggest that we send 50# bags of rice and flour, 2-gallon tins of cooking oil, bottled water in gallon jugs, and canned fruits, vegetables, and meat products.
All should be delivered by the US Air Force from 40,000 feet over carefully selected drop zones (border to border, in any direction).
I'm sure Bob will appreciate it.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
07/01/2008 22:23 Comments ||
Top||
#3
If one of those dropped pallets hit Bob square on the head, I'd appreciate it, OP.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
07/01/2008 22:42 Comments ||
Top||
#1
He called them "desperate people, who had a dream of getting to the US." They're there now, but it remained unclear whether they'd be allowed to stay.
That's that "Wet Feet/Dry Feet" thing. Do we typically repatriate Cubans that are rescued at sea?
Posted by: Grenter Protector of the Geats4975 ||
07/01/2008 16:06 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Yes, unless they get their feet onto American soil BEFORE Immigration gets to them, they are deported. And being picked up at sea by a ship does not count as Feet Dry.
The French army chief of staff, Gen Bruno Cuche, has resigned two days after a soldier injured 17 people at a military show. Gen Cuche offered his resignation on Tuesday to President Nicolas Sarkozy who accepted it.
The soldier used real bullets instead of blanks at the public demonstration at a barracks in south-western France. Four people, including a child, were seriously injured in the incident. They are now said to be out of danger.
On Monday, President Sarkozy, who visited the wounded in hospital, said he would seek explanations from the whole chain of command over the incident. Earlier, Defence Minister Herve Morin called for 'immediate sanctions... without waiting for the conclusions of the judicial and military enquiries'.
The resignation is a measure of how seriously the French government, and in particular President Sarkozy, is taking this extraordinary breach of safety procedures, says a BBC correspondent in Paris.
The shooting occurred during a public demonstration of hostage-freeing techniques at a barracks in Carcassonne, in the Aude region. The sergeant who fired the shots is being held in custody and is expected to be charged on Tuesday with causing unintentional injury. It is now thought he had held on to some live ammunition from a previous exercise in breach of regulations and mistakenly loaded them into his assault rifle during the display.
Questions are also being asked about the organisation of the event, in which an actor posing as a terrorist was positioned among the public that meant that the soldier was firing straight into the crowd.
Gen Bruno Cuche, the army chief, was said to be appalled at Mr Sarkozy's "particularly disagreeable" reaction to the drama.
The President arrived on the scene without even greeting the army chief, then stabbed his finger at him, saying: "You are all irresponsible, not professionals!" according to Le Point magazine. Gen Cuche, 60, who served in Kosovo as part of the United Nations force, handed in his resignation in protest yesterday.
One unnamed senior officer accused Mr Sarkozy of creating a "crisis of confidence between the Elysée and the military".
Looks like the military rot goes straight to the top. I give credit to Sark.
#5
Found another nugget here. A possible motive for the "accident"?
Morale in the French military is said to be low after Mr Sarkozy announced major defence reforms last month that will lead to 54,000 job cuts. Around 20 regiments may be axed as the French military pools resources and focuses more on intelligence gathering and hi-tech equipment.
WARSAW - Polish President Lech Kaczynski announced in an interview published Tuesday that he will not sign the EU's Lisbon Treaty, saying it was pointless after Irish voters rejected it in a referendum last month. For the moment, the question of the treaty is pointless, Kaczynski was quoted as saying in the online version of the daily Dziennik.
The Polish parliament voted in April to ratify the Lisbon Treaty, a key reform treaty meant to streamline EU decision-making, but it needs the signature of the president to become definitive.
Irish voters rejected the Lisbon Treaty in a referendum held on June 12, putting EU reform plans in jeopardy as it needs to be ratified by all 27 EU member states to enter into force.
Kaczynksi's refusal to ratify the treaty is a serious blow to French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who is tasked with finding a way of overcoming the Irish rejection of the treaty as France takes over the six-month rotating EU presidency on Tuesday. It is difficult to say how all this will end. But on the other hand, to say that without the treaty there won't be a Union is not serious, said Kaczynski.
Posted by: Steve White ||
07/01/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11133 views]
Top|| File under:
'Any further insubordination by these peon states will require us to impose a "moratorium" for the treaty's adoption so that the political atmosphere can become more "rational" .'
TURKEYS ruling AK Party, accused of plotting to establish an Islamic state, faces a battle for survival this week in a court case that could lead to an early parliamentary election.
The chief prosecutor of the Court of Appeal makes his first oral presentation to the Constitutional Court on Tuesday. The Islamist-rooted party will make its presentation to the court, which is packed with secular judges, two days later. The prosecutor wants the party closed over charges of anti-secular activities and 71 leading figures, including Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan and President Abdullah Gul, banned from party membership for five years. The case has deepened political and economic uncertainty, wiped billions of dollars off Turkish stocks and made some foreign investors hesitant about investing in the rapidly growing European Union-applicant country.
Most political analysts expect the party to be outlawed and some members, including Erdogan, banned from belonging to a party for five years. AK Party representatives suggest a ruling is unlikely before August. If the party is closed we are going to have an early general election, said Wolfango Piccoli, an analyst at political risk consultancy Eurasia Group.
All parties are getting ready for it. If the ruling comes in August or September we could have elections in November. Some political analysts say there is still a chance the judges could opt to levy heavy fines because the court can be unpredictable and has been accused in the past of basing its rulings on political rather than legal grounds. The AK Party says the charges are politically motivated and have no legal merit, and the case is an insult to democracy. The EU has criticised the case and a move against the party could hurt Turkeys accession process. Although predominantly Muslim, Turkey was founded as a secular state in 1923 by Mustafa Kemal Ataturk and a powerful elite of military, judicial and academic officials see themselves as custodians of secularism.
The case follows a decision by the government to lift a ban on students wearing the Islamic headscarf at university. The Constitutional Court has ruled since then that the amendment was unconstitutional and contrary to secularism, one of the founding principles of modern Turkey. If the AK Party is closed, its parliamentary deputies would be expected to form a new political party. The decision on whether to call an early parliamentary election could then depend on how many AK Party deputies are banned.
Critics say the secularists real aim is to remove Erdogan, who was once jailed as an Islamist radical, from politics. The goal is to pacify Erdogan and damage him politically so he wont be able to govern well, said Ibrahim Kalin, director of Ankara-based political think-tank SETA.
These guys (secularists) miss the picture because the whole system will be damaged by a court closure...and polarisation in Turkey will get deeper. If Erdogan were to be banned he might be able to return to parliament as an independent deputy under election rules .
The AK Party has declined to comment on the prospect of an early election. But analysts cite Erdogans decision to cancel parliaments summer recess, travel often across Turkey and boost spending as factors that could amount to election preparations. An opinion poll published in liberal newspaper Milliyet on Monday showed support for the AK Party at 43.3 percent compared with 47 percent when it won last years election, suggesting a new party formed out of the AK Party could win an election.
Some politicians have warned of unrest if the AK Party is banned. But Turkish intellectuals say the public is used to governments being removed from power, most recently when the army pushed out a cabinet deemed Islamist in 1997, and play down the likelihood of unrest.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/01/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11128 views]
Top|| File under:
French President Nicolas Sarkozy has said "something isn't right" with the European Union, as France took over the rotating presidency of the bloc.
Speaking on national French TV, Mr Sarkozy warned that Europe's citizens were losing faith in the project. France set out plans on immigration, the environment, agriculture and defence for its six months at the helm. But correspondents say that grandiose agenda is in doubt because of Ireland's rejection of the Lisbon reform treaty.
Taking over the presidency from Slovenia, Mr Sarkozy said his priority would be to get all the other EU states to approve the treaty and then see what could be done.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/01/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11129 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
You. Don't. Say.
Wanna do 1910 all over again? EU states or citizens? And its not just Ireland bubba, check out your back door.
What's that quote from Trotton's post, "EU is big Yugoslavia"
#2
Uh-oh. The last time a country's most popular politician was the charismatic guy from the neighboring country, and the two countries mostly spoke the same language & shared a common culture, the Anschluss wasn't too far into the future.
It's not as if the nutroots' "Greater Canada/Jesusland" fantasies of early 2005 weren't a species of irredentism, albeit a rather exotic example thereof.
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
07/01/2008 10:49 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Obama's a bit too far to the right to suit most Canadians. We'd prefer someone a little bit more leftish . . . and nice.
Brooklyns 10th Congressional District, home to more African-Americans than any other in New York, gave Senator Barack Obama his highest margin of victory in the state. But the districts longtime congressman, Edolphus Towns, did not share his constituencys preference for Mr. Obama. Now some of those voters are pushing to oust him.
His decision not to back Obama shows he is out of touch with his constituents, said N. Chandler, a former city corrections officer who lives in Bedford-Stuyvesant and who had supported Mr. Towns in the past. 'Traitor!'
And I think the people of this district are ready for a change. 'Let's teach 'im a lesson! Hang him in effigy!'
'Naw, Effigy's too far to walk--let's hang him right here in Brooklyn!'
The tensions in the district echo those in a handful of races around the country as Democratic incumbents with large African-American constituencies try to soothe resentments and anger incited by their support for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton. Even after Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton embraced in Unity, N.H., on Friday and sought to put their divisions behind them, some strains are still evident closer to the ground.
In Georgia, Representative John Lewis, a prominent civil rights leader, is facing primary challenges from two black candidates who have been critical of him for backing Mrs. Clinton for months before shifting to Mr. Obama. 'Heretic!'
'Iconoclast!'
'Backstabber!'
To underscore the point, one of the challengers set up his headquarters in the same building that served as Mr. Obamas office for the primary. Nearby, in Savannah, Representative John Barrow, who is white but represents a district that is largely black, is under attack from a challenger who says Mr. Barrow was also late to endorse Mr. Obama.
Another New Yorker, Representative Gregory W. Meeks of Queens, faces a primary opponent who has sought to make an issue of Mr. Meekss support of the Clinton campaign in a district, New Yorks 6th, where Mr. Obama drew nearly 56 percent of the vote.
The man seeking Mr. Meekss seat is Ruben Wills, 36, a former chief of staff for State Senator Shirley L. Huntley and an organizer for Mr. Obama in southeast Queens. I was on board with Obama from Day 1, Mr. Wills said. Meeks had to be dragged across the line. 'Blasphemer! He denies the Obama is the One!'
And Representative Yvette D. Clarke, of Flatbush, Brooklyn, is running unopposed but lost the endorsement of a vital organization, the Central Brooklyn Independent Democrats, in part because she embraced Mrs. Clintons candidacy. 'Infidel!'
Posted by: Mike ||
07/01/2008 15:55 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11128 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
What are Obama backers so p!ssed off about? Their guy won, ferheavensake! Talk about a bunch of sore winners.... I fear this country is headed for trouble whether Hussein Osama-bama wins OR loses.
The fence around the public demonstration zone outside the Democratic National Convention will be chicken wire or chain link, authorities revealed in U.S. District Court today.
That may allow protestors to be seen and heard by delegates going in and out of the Pepsi Center during the convention.
But the American Civil Liberties Union and several advocacy groups have filed an amended complaint to their lawsuit against the U.S. Secret Service and the city and county of Denver that says protestors and demonstrators may have their First Amendment rights violated by security restrictions.
The ACLU has said it wants to avoid the conditions that existed during the 2004 convention in Boston, where protesters were caged, infuriating First Amendment advocates.
Posted by: Mike ||
07/01/2008 08:05 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11132 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
But the American Civil Liberties Union and several advocacy groups have filed an amended complaint to their lawsuit against the U.S. Secret Service and the city and county of Denver that says protestors and demonstrators may have their First Amendment rights violated by security restrictions.
Aka, they want to run in front of cars, create chaos and riot at will. Dumb asses, the first amendment doesn't allow you the freedom to impede other people. If you are allowed to be seen and heard, mission fulfilled.
Personally, I would prefer them to be locked in a concrete bunker 100 feet under the ground and be conveniently forgotten about for several months.
Besides, this will be more fun than watching the convention.
Hey!!!
You gonna share that popcorn or what??
Posted by: James Carville ||
07/01/2008 10:34 Comments ||
Top||
#5
The ACLU has said it wants to avoid the conditions that existed during the 2004 convention in Boston, where protesters were caged, infuriating First Amendment advocates.
And guess what? Outside of the ACLU and the fleabags themselves, nobody gave a shit.
#7
Gklad I live OUTSIDE of Denver - they are going to be bent over to pay the taxes for al the cleanup from these wanna-bee hippies and other associated anarchists and spoiled brats.
Just hope the state house can be convinced to stonewall attempts by Denver to pass the bills on to the state.
#9
Please keep them caged up - I'd be SOOOO tempted to take my van to Denver, just for the opportunity to pot a protester. My insurance rates are high enough as they are.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
07/01/2008 22:34 Comments ||
Top||
Did Google use its network of online services to silence critics of Barack Obama? That was the question buzzing on a corner of the blogosphere over the last few days, after several anti-Obama bloggers were unable to update their sites, which are hosted on Googles Blogger service.
The bloggers in question, most of them supporters of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, and all of them opposed to Senator Obama, received a notice from Google last week saying that their sites had been identified as potential spam blogs. You will not be able to publish posts to your blog until we review your site and confirm that it is not a spam blog, the Google e-mail read.
In an article that appeared on Bloggasm.com, the reporter Simon Owens spoke with some of the affected bloggers, who said they believed that Google had fallen prey to a campaign by activists supporting Senator Obama. According to the bloggers, the Obama supporters had clicked on a flag on the anti-Obama blogs alerting Google that they were spam.
If so, that would be an embarrassment for Google. On its Web page explaining the flag feature, Google says that it cant be manipulated by angry mobs. Political dissent? Incendiary opinions? Just plain crazy? Bring it on.
On Monday, Google would not explicitly rebut the idea that it had been tricked but said that the cause of the temporary blockage appeared to be elsewhere. . . . Some blocked bloggers have reported that their sites have suddenly become unblocked. Yet some have already moved their blogs to WordPress, a rival blogging service, and remain angry about what they call Googles guilty until proven innocent policy.
Without any notice, apology, or explanation, my posting privileges has been reinstated, wrote the author of the blog Come a Long Way, who identifies herself as GeekLove. Bloggers guilty until proven innocent approach is appalling. As bloggers, it is a good thing we still have choices, and I have exercised my choice to leave Blogger and establish a new home at WordPress.
Posted by: Mike ||
07/01/2008 06:41 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11129 views]
Top|| File under:
Democrat Barack Obama rejected a retired general's suggestion that Republican John McCain's military experience didn't necessarily qualify him to be president, as GOP surrogates lined up to label the remarks indecent and disrespectful.
A day after retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark, now an Obama supporter, discussed McCain's experience as a Navy pilot and prisoner of war in Vietnam on a Sunday talk show, his remarks set off the pattern that has become familiar from innumerable earlier flaps over surrogate remarks during the presidential election year: The candidates, Obama and McCain, took the high road while the bare-knuckled language was left to their surrogates. I prolly missed all the nasty stuff McCain has released on The Big O, but the MSM makes them equal.
At a news conference here Monday, McCain himself said of Clark's comment, 'That kind of thing is unnecessary' and distracts from real pocketbook issues voters care about.
About the same time, Obama told an audience in Independence, Mo., that McCain had 'endured physical torment in service to our country' and 'no one should ever devalue that service, especially for the sake of a political campaign, and that goes for supporters on both sides.'
Posted by: Bobby ||
07/01/2008 06:11 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11131 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I can no more disown him than I could my own pastor.
#6
While you're under there Wesley, check the differential for PM.
Getting mighty crowded under that bus. Doesn't OSHA or NHTSA or somebody set maximum occupancy limits? How's a man supposed to get any work done under there?
#7
The MSM can't cover up all the people Obama has thrown under the bus. The superdelegates better think long and hard about how much baggage this jerk has with him and how much more is gonna come out before November.
#13
DAMN! NOW I SEE IT.
LOL.
The damn seal thing again.
See the circle? That field effect is from the NRECA logo for REA Co-Ops. And I'ma damn sure wager it was allowed. ACRE.
Dang whore mongers that they are. Suckkn the dick of every blue dawg Dino they could find. Meh. If you send money we really don't care if you support ChairManPerson Meow.
Yesterday you appeared on CBS Face the Nation and made strong statements regarding Senator John McCain and his military service. Amongst other things, you claimed Sen. McCain hasnt held executive responsibility and you criticized him because he didnt command a wartime [Navy] Squadron.
You then claimed, in reference to war, that Sen. McCain hasnt been there and ordered the bombs to fall and concluded your political hatchet job with I dont think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be President. Even the shows host, Bob Schieffer, let out a puzzled really? at the conclusion of your assertions.
Frankly General, you should know better. As a previous Commander of U.S. troops in harms way, you should take serious pause in disparaging the service record of a fellow decorated veteran. Even worse, your arrogant and careless words undercut the credibility of all those who served and continue to serve, in wartime and peacetime.
First of all, Sen. McCains service record is clear. After volunteering for a combat assignment in Vietnam, Sen. McCain was shot down during his twenty-third bombing mission over North Vietnam and spent 5 œ years as a Prisoner of War, enduring physical torture and repeatedly turning down preferential treatment and early release. For his service, he received seventeen decorations, including the Silver Star and Legion of Merit.
Most Americans would have ended their military career there, but Sen. McCain continued his service and eventually become the commanding officer of the largest squadron in the U.S. Navy. He turned an undisciplined and untrained squadron into one of the Navys best, earning the unit a Meritorious Unit Commendation.
So, lets review your statements and check them against reality:
Senator McCain hasnt held executive responsibility.
FACT: McCain commanded, and revitalized, the largest squadron in the U.S. Navy.
Senator McCains military leadership doesnt count, because it wasnt a wartime Squadron.
FACT: McCain volunteered to serve in Vietnam and upon his return, endured months of physical rehabilitation in order to continue his military career and command a squadron.
Senator McCain hasnt been there [war] and ordered the bombs to fall
FACT: McCain flew twenty-three combat missions in Vietnam in order to drop bombs on the enemy. He was alsothere for 5 1/2 years as a Prisoner of War.
I dont think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be President.
FACT: If serving your country, volunteering for combat, resisting the enemy, and receiving seventeen decorations for service does count for anything, then why are you on television, speaking as an expert on national security matters?
Your personal attacks came not from a General with respect for the uniform, but from a political operative dispatched to attack the military background of a political adversary.
On behalf of Vets for Freedomand thousands of veterans and troops still servingwe urge you to apologize to Sen. McCain for your comments. We also urge you to apologize to generations of veterans who served our country in uniform. Service mattersanytime, anywhere. We await and appreciate your response.
Even the candidate you represent has said repeatedly that [Sen. McCain] deserves admiration for his service to our country. We will be watching to see if the professionalism you showed once while in uniform will finally shine through in your new-found political role.
#1
Saw the clip on Fox. Schieffer had a look of pure incredulity at what he was hearing. Heard someone else today calling Clark "General Issimo." Amazing that such a worthless dumbass could get where he got...
#4
Google "Roland C. Eyears" and you will discover the state of the art of slander of John McCain. His entirely speculated portrayal, is accepted as gospel by both the extreme right and left. Eyears, a college radio mouthpieace, sets himself up as a "social conservative" out to save the Republican Party. In any case, one of his slanderous articles has been posted on ALL the leftist blogs.
#5
Eyears, a college radio mouthpieace, sets himself up as a "social conservative" out to save the Republican Party. In any case, one of his slanderous articles has been posted on ALL the leftist blogs.
White House hopeful Barack Obama and Bill Clinton have had their first talks since Hillary Clinton pulled out of the race to be the US Democratic candidate. An Obama spokesman said the two had had a 'terrific' conversation during a 20-minute telephone call.
A spokesman for the ex-president, who strongly criticised his wife's rival during the primaries, said he was keen to campaign for Mr Obama.
Mrs Clinton and Mr Obama held a joint rally on Friday. Mr Clinton, who was in Europe and so missed the symbolic rally in the town of Unity, New Hampshire, the first since the fierce primary contest ended. He had earlier that week issued a short statement endorsing Mr Obama's campaign.
During the primary battle he was often his wife's most fervent campaigner and one of the most outspoken Democratic critics of Mr Obama.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/01/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11128 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It was a "full and frank discussion," which is diplo-speak for "they hate each others' guts and weren't shy about saying it."
Posted by: Mike ||
07/01/2008 6:49 Comments ||
Top||
#2
In diplo speak full and franch discussion is "I am going to nuke you if you don't behave. Besides you smell bad".
As Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were kissing and making up last Friday, Bill Clinton might have had other ideas, according to a report in The (London) Telegraph.
The paper reports that even as the former president and the current presumptive Democratic nominee prepare to meet to make their own amends, Bill Clinton reportedly told close friends Obama can kiss my ass to get his support.
The paper cited an anonymous Democratic source who provided the quote. That source also said Clinton is not making the primary effort to bridge the chasm between himself and Obama.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/01/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11127 views]
Top|| File under:
Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama rejected questions about his patriotism on Monday even as he drew fire for a supporter's attack on Republican rival John McCain's military record.
Obama kicked off the week leading up to the July 4 Independence Day celebration with a broad-ranging speech extolling American virtues. He said questions about patriotism were a poisonous remnant of the 1960s culture wars.
The Illinois senator also took another step to heal party divisions, speaking to former President Bill Clinton for about 20 minutes by telephone from Kansas City just days after campaigning for the first time with defeated rival Hillary Clinton, the former first lady. The former president raised questions last week about how committed he was to Obama's success when he delivered a speech to the U.S. Conference of Mayors and barely mentioned the Democratic presidential contender.
The Obama campaign described Monday's conversation as terrific and said the Illinois senator asked Clinton to campaign for him, which the former president appeared excited to do.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/01/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11128 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
I don't see BO answering questions about his patriotism here, instead it's more BS about being questioned.
And I don't think Michelle's comment was taken out of context either, she only rshaped her meaning after she learned of the fall out IMO.
Just more posturing crap.
Posted by: Jan ||
07/01/2008 0:44 Comments ||
Top||
#2
If, IF, we're lucky, he's just a totally egocentric crook.
I have every f-king right to question your patriotism or anyone you are close to. That includes your wife, your fiends (we know where Ayers stands), your Pastor (we know where Wright stands too). THATS MY JOB AND RESPONSIBILITY AS A US VOTER.
You are running for the Presidency of the United States. I have every right to question and to make a judgement about your 'Patriotism' or anything else about you.
So far everything indicates that you are very UNPATRIOTIC and that you HATE THE USA and everything it stands for.
#9
Son of a muslim kenyan and a white kansan; spent youth in indonesia now represents a state in the USA; neither family were slaves or slave owners yet goes to church based on USA black/slave oppression, went to ivy league for constitution and law study but has no firm grasp (publicly) of either, he is patriotic but does not hold his hand to his heart during the anthem (albiet it is only his first year in the senate so maybe he hasn't figured out all that protocol stuff yet), his grandparents are racist but his pastor isn't, black people don't get a fair shake in the USA yet him and his wife received prefferential treatment when accepted to college and made themselves in the USA system. IMHO this is a confused man - why so many are trying to push the confused mccain POW theme at the moment because mccain has a clear cut background with certain direction and obama does not (a community organizer is that like trying to unionize the masses?).
NEW DELHI The schism between the government and the Left deepened yesterday with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh declaring his intention to go ahead with the India-US nuclear deal and the CPM reiterating it would part ways if that were to happen. As the clouds of uncertainty over his government darkened over the controversial civil nuclear deal, the prime minister said categorically that he wanted to finalise the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) agreement.
"I have said it before. I will repeat it again that you allow us to complete the process. Once the process is over, I will bring it before parliament and abide by the house," Dr Singh told reporters at his residence after releasing the National Action Plan on Climate Change.
The Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPM), which has asserted on that it would pull down the government if the nuclear deal were taken forward, said there was no change in its stance. "We stand by what our politburo said on Sunday. There is no change in our stance," CPI-M politburo member S. Ramachandra Pillai said.
The prime minister, however, said he was prepared to revert to parliament once the process of finalising the India-specific safeguards agreement with the IAEA and taking the consent of the 45-nation Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) for resuming New Delhi's nuclear commerce was over. The prime minister, who said the Communists' opposition was not new, also expressed the hope that his government would be able to address the concerns raised by all concerned parties. "...We can still work out an outcome that will satisfy all parties."
The ruling Congress party echoed the view. "We stand committed to the nuclear deal and bringing on board all those who support us from outside and people and society," Congress spokesperson Jayanti Natarajan said. "The channel of dialogue is always open."
Posted by: Steve White ||
07/01/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11127 views]
Top|| File under:
(Xinhua) -- A spokesman for Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) said on Monday that the party would quit the coalition if the judge issue could not be resolved within one month.
The PML-N may quit the coalition if the difference with the Pakistan People's Party (PPP) could not be resolved in one month, Siddiqul Farooq told local Dawn News TV channel.
The PML-N, led by former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, and the PPP emerged as the two largest parties in National Assembly, lower house of the parliament, in the general elections held on Feb. 18.
The two parties agreed to form a coalition government and also pledged to restore the deposed judges within 30 days from the day when the government was formed.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/01/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11127 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
The Archbishop of Canterbury last night directly challenged the rebel Anglicans who have launched a breakaway faction within the global communion. In unusually forthright language, he accused them of lacking legitimacy, authority and, by implication, integrity.
Breaking his silence over the threat to the unity of the 77 million-strong communion, Williams warned the leaders of the conservative coalition that demolishing existing structures was not the answer to their concerns.
Responding to the creation at the weekend of the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans (Foca), a global network for millions of Anglicans unhappy with liberal teaching on matters such as homosexuality and women priests, Williams said: "If they [the teachings] are not working effectively, the challenge is to renew them rather than to improvise solutions that may seem to be effective for some in the short term but will continue to create more problems than they solve."
The announcement of the new body came at the culmination of the Global Anglican Future Conference (Gafcon), a rebel summit in Jerusalem that attracted more than 300 bishops.
In a statement issued on the eve of the arrival of some of those bishops in London today, Williams said: "Gafcon's proposals for the way ahead are problematic in all sorts of ways and I urge those who have outlined these to think very carefully about the risks entailed."
He focused his criticism on the leaders of the new primates council, which is tasked with recruiting existing Anglicans into the network. "A primates council which consists only of a self-selected group from among the primates of the [Anglican] communion will not pass the test of legitimacy for all. And any claim to be free to operate across provincial boundaries is fraught with difficulties," he said.
Church sources said last night that Williams opposed Gafcon because it lacked legitimacy, authority and integrity. There was no information, they said, on who wrote the Gafcon document, how many primates had signed up to it or whether it was legally possible to set up an alternative communion.
One Lambeth Palace official said: "It is ludicrous to say you do not recognise the Archbishop of Canterbury or the see of Canterbury; they are the defining characteristics of Anglicanism. By doing away with the role and the place, these people are becoming a Protestant sect."
The Church of England is facing dissent on a second front, with a group of clergy and bishops expressing their antipathy to another divisive issue: women bishops. More than 1,300 clergy and 11 bishops have written to Williams threatening to defect if women are consecrated bishops, according to the Times. The issue is set to dominate a General Synod meeting that starts on Friday.
Leading Gafcon figures arrived in London yesterday to woo parishes which are considering opting out of mainstream Anglicanism to join the new network. The Archbishop of Sydney, Peter Jensen, and the Archbishop of Uganda, Henry Luke Orombi, will be among those addressing an audience of more than 750 clergy and churchwardens at All Souls' Church on global Anglicanism and English orthodoxy.
The Gafcon team have declared that they are ignoring historic links with Canterbury, deeming them to be superfluous, and are severing ties with the US church and the Anglican church in Canada.
In a statement on Sunday, they said: "We do not accept that Anglican identity is determined necessarily through recognition by the Archbishop of Canterbury."
But they DID re-affirm the 39 Articles and the original Book of Common Prayer, thereby noting that it is they and not the Arch Druid who are true to the Anglican tradition. They even (gasp) noted the desireability, nay the command, to preach the Gospel where +++Rowan fears to tred.
Posted by: Fred ||
07/01/2008 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11127 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Compare wid TOPIX > BRITISH MUSLIMS' DEMAND FOR SHARIA IS A THREAT TO BRITAIN, FAITH.
COLD WAR Myth > Europe = NATO would be in serious trouble iff the Soviet Army + WarPact ever broke through the Germans.
YOOKAY, I'll BITE, ISN'T GREAT BRITAIN, etc. ALREADY BEHIND GERMANY, GERMAN ARMY, + FULDA GAP!
#2
Williams warned the leaders of the conservative coalition that demolishing existing structures was not the answer to their concerns.
I'm sure Williams misses the irony given that was basically what the Pope probably communicated to Henry VIII when he created the Anglican Church separate from Rome.
#3
So rowan is the traditionalist and the others are rebels according to this article? Perhaps there are -other- issues involved besides the women priest meme?
Perhaps, if the see of Canturbury is blind (or worse)...
#4
Go preside at another funeral, you godless heathen clock-watcher. That's your job, isn't it? The Grave-Digger of the Faith.
Posted by: Mitch H. ||
07/01/2008 10:53 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Good people like Bishop Michael Nazi-Ali have the courage of their convictions. Rowan Williams can't relate to that.
I'm speculating, but I think that when, a few months back, Rowan suggested that England could find room for sharia law along side secular civil society, the camel's back was forever broken. Nazi-Ali (and others) have thrown down the guanlet. God bless 'em.
Rowan is more critical of his own (Nazi-Ali) than he has been toward the muzz who represent the real threat to England. Rowan is dhimmi through and through. Worse. Rowan is a traitor to his faith and the civilization that gave birth to his faith.
Nazi-Ali is saying to Rowan it's well past time to pick the team you want to play for. Who's side are you on?
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.
Fifteen years ago, after the Midwest was swamped with what was pronounced a '100-year' or even a '500-year' flood, some folks figured they would never again see such a disaster in their lifetime. Some even dropped their flood insurance.
Scientists say it is not unusual to hear from people who want to know if they have lived through a '100-year' event and want to cancel their flood insurance, believing one recent big flood lowers the risk of another. But that's not the case.
WARSAW - Polish President Lech Kaczynski announced in an interview published Tuesday that he will not sign the EU's Lisbon Treaty, saying it was pointless after Irish voters rejected it in a referendum last month. For the moment, the question of the treaty is pointless, Kaczynski was quoted as saying in the online version of the daily Dziennik.
French President Nicolas Sarkozy has said "something isn't right" with the European Union, as France took over the rotating presidency of the bloc. 
Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama rejected questions about his patriotism on Monday even as he drew fire for a supporter's attack on Republican rival John McCain's military record.
NEW DELHI The schism between the government and the Left deepened yesterday with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh declaring his intention to go ahead with the India-US nuclear deal and the CPM reiterating it would part ways if that were to happen. As the clouds of uncertainty over his government darkened over the controversial civil nuclear deal, the prime minister said categorically that he wanted to finalise the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) agreement.
The Archbishop of Canterbury last night directly challenged the rebel Anglicans who have launched a breakaway faction within the global communion. In unusually forthright language, he accused them of lacking legitimacy, authority and, by implication, integrity.
