.Obesity is just as likely to be caused by lack of sleep and too much air-conditioning as it is by a sedentary lifestyle and aggressive marketing by the food industry, according to a research article that challenges the conventional wisdom.
David Allison, an obesity researcher at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, US, and colleagues have published a paper questioning the importance of what they call the "Big Two" obesity factors: overeating as a result of junk food marketing and lack of exercise.
In the US the proportion of the population defined as obese increased by 60% between 1991 and 2000, so that now almost a quarter of all Americans are obese. Most researchers tend to attribute the increase to a more sedentary lifestyle and overeating driven partly by aggressive corporate food marketing. But Allison says that the evidence for the Big Two is far from conclusive.
"What seems intuitively to be right is not always right. This might be an example where the rush to judgment may have negative effects," Allison says.
For example, some studies have found no correlation between the number of hours children spend in school physical education classes and the proportion who are overweight. Others have failed to find a connection between being overweight and a proximity to fast food restaurants or consumption of soft drinks.
The researchers drew up a list of 10 factors that might have as much or more to do with increasing waistlines as the Big Two. For instance, they point out that studies show that people who do not get enough sleep have increased appetites. Notably the amount of sleep an average US adult gets has decreased from nine hours to seven hours in the last several decades.
Heating and air conditioning might also be to blame. When people and animals go above or below a "thermoneutral" ambient temperature, they lose weight - if it is too cold they burn fat to stay warm, and if too hot their appetites decrease. But studies show that people are keeping their houses warmer in the winter and cooler in the summer than they did a few decades ago, so these natural influences on weight are negated.
Other possibilities include the decrease in the number of people who smoke - which suppresses appetite - environmental endocrine disruptors, an ageing population, and an increase in babies born to older women - which are more likely to be obese. Another possibility is that overweight people are more likely to marry one another and give birth to children genetically predisposed to be overweight themselves.
Barbara Rolls, an obesity researcher at Penn State University in University Park, US, says that the paper is provocative, but it makes a good point that obesity probably has many contributing causes.
"In the end, though, it boils down to what you eat and how much you move. I still don't think we should lose our focus on those variables," she says.
Journal reference: International Journal of Obesity (DOI:10.1038/sj.ijo.0803326)
#1
.Obesity is just as likely to be caused by lack of sleep and too much air-conditioning as it is by a sedentary lifestyle and aggressive marketing by the food industry, according to a research article that challenges the conventional wisdom.
Personally I blame the media and nanny state. Theyve scared mothers so much, that the tikes are imprisoned in their homes for fear of anything outside the four walls. When I was a kid, we played in the development street, we generally ran among the group for hours away from the steps of our homes ranging for a mile or more, it was nothing to walk or bike to the store to see what new comic or toy has shown up on the shelves [not that wed be able to buy it anytime soon], but we could afford a pack of baseball cards or the like. It was nothing to drop us off at the local theater Saturday morning and pick us up after the show. Going to Johnnys house, just be back by 5. Out of sight, out of mind. Today, its escort duty everyplace you go. Weve reach the point where Lojack devices are soon for your kid.
Its all the result of using feelings over brain. You know if you off child molesters and/or false accusers of child molesters, thered be a lot less need of chaining your kid to the living room couch. Its amazing what quick, swift justice would do for reducing threats. It would also produce an environment that would permit for better health by removing the prisons [housebound] all the good people are sentense to in order to pander to sociopaths.
#3
1) Anyone who tries to take my air conditioning away from me is going to turn into gator bait before they know what hit them.
2) EJ, they actually sort of do have Lojack for kids. Babies, anyway.....pretty much every maternity ward has them now. Give them time and they just might tweak 'em for the older kids.
#5
is by a sedentary lifestyle and aggressive marketing by the food industry, according to a research article that challenges the conventional wisdom.
Yeah because the food companies put a gun to peoples heads and force them to eat their products. They are so aggressive and the poor dumb people are just mindless sheep.
This line so stinks of crypto-marxist nonsense that I can't take any of the rest of the claims seriously.
#6
Lets see... Am I fat becuase I work in an air-con office and dont sleep much?
Or becuase I snack down like a starved pig in the evening and only give my home gym and bicycle a passing glance (if I feel particulary strong) on the way to the refrigerator?
#7
soooo....for his point to be true, all I have to do is turn off the heat and ac and sleep all day then I can eat all I want, get no exercise and my weight will be whatever it would have been anyway. I like it.
Funny though, when I eat everything I want and get enough sleep I still gain weight. Hmmm ...that just doesn't make sense according to his theory. Go figure (pun intended)
MOSCOW - An Unknown Floating Object close to the International Space Station ISS has concerned ground control, according to reports from the US Space Agency NASA on Tuesday. The object is approximately 2.8 kilometres away from the International Space Station, said the Russian flight control centre in Moscow, citing a NASA source. The situation is quite serious, but does not yet require a dodge manoeuvre, said Russian flight trajectory expert Alexander Kireyev.
The object has no number in the list of space debris, Kireyev said, according to reports from the Russian Itar-Tass agency. It is however probably an old piece of space exploration equipment.
"Or an alien battlecruiser, we're not quite sure"
If the object gets any closer to the ISS, astronauts Jeff Williams and Pavel Vinogradov would have to take the precaution of moving to the rescue space shuttle Soyuz TM. A dodge manoeuvre could cause difficulties for the docking of the US space ship Discovery, due to be launched on July 1.
Posted by: Steve ||
06/27/2006 09:12 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11131 views]
Top|| File under:
"Excuse me . . . have you seen my Illudium Q-36 Space Modulator?"
Posted by: Mike ||
06/27/2006 16:15 Comments ||
Top||
#6
"...It is however probably an old piece of space exploration equipment... How big do they think this 'object' is? Size of a house, car or loaf of bread? and since they now apparently know that it's made of metal, then it is by MAN! I hope it's not a 'Space IED' or proximity mine from a rogue nation bent on skull-dugery.
#7
GMD's space-based defenses is still predom targeted downwards towards earth, not outward [yet]. IONews, SPACE.com says an asteroid is to pass uncomfortably close to earth circa July 3 - methinks they're about a week late as I just saw a huge "thick" flash + crinklies in the sky few days ago. First the Norway rock vv Zarkey's demise, now this - just what kind of almost-naked babes [whom caN READ] did Zark take with him!?
[ This report does not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations ..... and those are? ]
JOHANNESBURG, 26 Jun 2006 (IRIN) - Zimbabwe's political divisions now extend to church pulpits, with an alliance of spiritual leaders backing President Robert Mugabe, and a rival group of priests protesting the government's human rights record. At a prayer meeting which attracted thousands at a stadium outside the capital Harare on Sunday, Mugabe said: "Let the church come in and point out where there are shortcomings, sins of commission or omission. We must combine our strengths in rebuilding our economy." But in what was seen as a not-so veiled reference to his arch-critic, Roman Catholic Archbishop Pius Ncube, Mugabe warned: "When the church leaders start being political we regard them as political creatures and we are vicious in that area."
The prayer meeting was organised by the Ecumenical Peace Initiative (EPI), a newly formed alliance of churches seen as broadly pro-government. They include the Anglican Church led by controversial Archbishop Nolbert Kunonga, sections of the Zimbabwe Catholic Bishops Conference and various indigenous and evangelical faiths. The EPI was born out of a meeting last month between Mugabe and invited church leaders to discuss Zimbabwe's crippling political and economic crisis. "We know we have a government that we must support, interact with and draw attention to our concerns," Anglican Bishop of Harare Patson Nempare was quoted as saying after the talks.
While the new initiative seeks to work with the government, another ecumenical group the Christian Alliance has a radically different calling. A league of protestant and Pentecostal churches formed last year to help the victims of Operation Murambatsvina (Drive Out Trash), it has staged anti-government protests in Zimbabwe and neighbouring countries. According to secretary-general Jonah Gokova, the alliance was created in response to pressure from congregations that questioned the silence of churches over Murambatsvina, a three-month urban cleanup campaign which smashed illegal settlements and affected an estimated 700,000 people.
Catholic archbishop Ncube, who has clashed repeatedly with Mugabe, told IRIN by telephone from Bulawayo, Zimbabwe's second city, that church leaders who had aligned themselves with the government were compromised. "The church should be a safe haven for the tortured and abandoned. This government continues to abuse people's rights and church leaders should be warned that their solidarity with those who have caused so much suffering leaves the victims feeling betrayed," he said.
However, head of the Christian Denominations and Evangelical Fellowship of Zimbabwe, Bishop Manhanga, said some church leaders recognised that working with the government was the best way to heal the country and find a lasting solution to its political and economic trauma. "We refuse to join our detractors and short-sighted citizens who do not see anything good about the country," said Manhanga.
University of Zimbabwe political analyst John Makumbe said Sunday's prayer event demonstrated the government's success in driving a wedge between the churches - a key constituency as Zimbabweans, worn down by six straight years of recession, increasingly turn to religion for salvation. The ruling ZANU-PF party blames the economic crisis on western "sanctions" following controversial presidential polls in 2002, which were marred by pro-government violence. More than 80 percent of Zimbabweans live below the poverty line, while inflation has soared to 1,200 percent.
Cannabis use has turned into a pandemic that is causing almost as much harm as cocaine or heroin, the head of the United Nations anti-drugs office says. He criticised governments, such as the UK's, which have downgraded the cannabis threat, saying that they have got the "drug problem they deserve".
Antonio Maria Costa, the executive director of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, appealed to European political parties to agree a long-term strategy for reducing consumption of the drug, which he said was being used in 2004 by 164 million people worldwide. As well as being more widespread, the drug is "considerably more potent" than it was a few decades ago, he said.
Speaking at the launch of the World Drug Report in Washington, Mr Costa warned: "Policy reversals leave young people confused as to just how dangerous cannabis is. With cannabis-related health damage increasing, it is fundamentally wrong for countries to make cannabis control dependent on which party is in government.
"The cannabis pandemic, like other challenges to public health, requires consensus, a consistent commitment across the political spectrum and by society at large. Today, the harmful characteristics of cannabis are no longer that different from those of other plant-based drugs such as cocaine and heroin."
In January 2004, when David Blunkett was Home Secretary, cannabis was downgraded from class B to class C, meaning that possession of small quantities of the drug was no longer an arrestable offence. The decision was taken on the recommendation of the Advisory Committee on the Misuse of Drugs. In 2005, the committee was asked by Mr Blunkett's successor, Charles Clarke, to review the decision, but it recommended against reversing it.
Without naming the UK, Mr Costa fired a shot at governments which have relaxed their cannabis laws. He said: "After so many years of drug control experience, we now know that a coherent, long-term strategy can reduce drug supply, demand and trafficking. If this does not happen, it will be because some nations fail to take the drug issue sufficiently seriously and pursue inadequate policies. Many countries have the drug problem they deserve."
His comments were seized on by the Tories. The shadow Home Secretary, David Davis, said: "The Government's seriously confused course of action on cannabis has led to chaos and confusion in the enforcement of drug laws. This in turn has led to a continuing failure to reduce this dangerous threat to lives."
Cocaine use is also on the rise in Europe according to the UN. The report estimated there are 3.5 million cocaine users in Europe and that the trend is rising, especially in the UK and Spain.
Meanwhile, legal loopholes and a surge in internet sales have fuelled a rise in the use of magic mushrooms, according to a report from the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction.
The report warned that, while changes to the law were dampening demand, they could also prompt an increased use of legal but toxic alternatives. Nearly 50 per cent of Britons aged between 15 and 24 have tried magic mushrooms, surveys found.The Czech Republic, the Netherlands, France and Belgium have the highest usage.
The report said: "Since 2001, six EU member states have tightened their legislation ... New legislation appears to have had an immediate impact on both the availability of hallucinogenic mushrooms in the UK.
"[But] the recent prohibition of psilocybin and psilocin-containing fungi appears to have provoked an emerging interest of retailers in alternative, legal, types of hallucinogenic mushroom such as Amanita muscaria (fly agaric). The active chemicals in these are known to carry substantial toxicity risks."
Cannabis use has turned into a pandemic that is causing almost as much harm as cocaine or heroin, the head of the United Nations anti-drugs office says. He criticised governments, such as the UK's, which have downgraded the cannabis threat, saying that they have got the "drug problem they deserve".
Antonio Maria Costa, the executive director of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, appealed to European political parties to agree a long-term strategy for reducing consumption of the drug, which he said was being used in 2004 by 164 million people worldwide. As well as being more widespread, the drug is "considerably more potent" than it was a few decades ago, he said.
Speaking at the launch of the World Drug Report in Washington, Mr Costa warned: "Policy reversals leave young people confused as to just how dangerous cannabis is. With cannabis-related health damage increasing, it is fundamentally wrong for countries to make cannabis control dependent on which party is in government.
"The cannabis pandemic, like other challenges to public health, requires consensus, a consistent commitment across the political spectrum and by society at large. Today, the harmful characteristics of cannabis are no longer that different from those of other plant-based drugs such as cocaine and heroin."
In January 2004, when David Blunkett was Home Secretary, cannabis was downgraded from class B to class C, meaning that possession of small quantities of the drug was no longer an arrestable offence. The decision was taken on the recommendation of the Advisory Committee on the Misuse of Drugs. In 2005, the committee was asked by Mr Blunkett's successor, Charles Clarke, to review the decision, but it recommended against reversing it.
Without naming the UK, Mr Costa fired a shot at governments which have relaxed their cannabis laws. He said: "After so many years of drug control experience, we now know that a coherent, long-term strategy can reduce drug supply, demand and trafficking. If this does not happen, it will be because some nations fail to take the drug issue sufficiently seriously and pursue inadequate policies. Many countries have the drug problem they deserve."
His comments were seized on by the Tories. The shadow Home Secretary, David Davis, said: "The Government's seriously confused course of action on cannabis has led to chaos and confusion in the enforcement of drug laws. This in turn has led to a continuing failure to reduce this dangerous threat to lives."
Cocaine use is also on the rise in Europe according to the UN. The report estimated there are 3.5 million cocaine users in Europe and that the trend is rising, especially in the UK and Spain.
Meanwhile, legal loopholes and a surge in internet sales have fuelled a rise in the use of magic mushrooms, according to a report from the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction.
The report warned that, while changes to the law were dampening demand, they could also prompt an increased use of legal but toxic alternatives. Nearly 50 per cent of Britons aged between 15 and 24 have tried magic mushrooms, surveys found.The Czech Republic, the Netherlands, France and Belgium have the highest usage.
The report said: "Since 2001, six EU member states have tightened their legislation ... New legislation appears to have had an immediate impact on both the availability of hallucinogenic mushrooms in the UK.
"[But] the recent prohibition of psilocybin and psilocin-containing fungi appears to have provoked an emerging interest of retailers in alternative, legal, types of hallucinogenic mushroom such as Amanita muscaria (fly agaric). The active chemicals in these are known to carry substantial toxicity risks."
Okay, here's my $.02 FWIW. I'm pretty much a small 'l' libertarian. The real issue here IMO is that European society - and a good part of American society as well - no longer have the self-respect, regard for the future or willingness to postpone gratification that are required for civilization. They are coasting on old achievements, made by those who didn't spend their time toked up or high.
There's a direct correlation between this and issues like declining standards in math and science education IMO. When the Thames River is polluted with measurable cocaine, as it has been for a few years now, something is deeply and seriously wrong in Britain. And I'm not at all sure we aren't facing a similar disease here in the States.
YMMV etc etc, but this is an issue I worry a lot about.
#2
Speaking as former cannabis grower (funny story which I think I've told here before) and a former psylocybin mushroom picker (they are common in the UK if you know what to look for), the problem comes down to making people grow up and deal with the real issues in their lives, which the pervasive victim culture of the Left obviates.
#3
From the Telegraph: The Thames: awash with cocaine
By Nina Goswami and James Orr (Filed: 06/11/2005)
The Thames is awash with cocaine as Londoners snort more than 150,000 lines of the class A drug every day.
The figure is 15 times higher than official Home Office statistics and equates to four out of every 100 people regularly taking cocaine, or up to 250,000 of the capital's six million residents.
An investigation by the Sunday Telegraph found that, after cocaine had passed through users' bodies and sewage treatment plants, an estimated 2kg - 80,000 lines - of the drug went into the river each day.
Anti-drug campaigners said last night that the findings showed that cocaine use was a ticking "health-care time bomb" and called for the Government to take drastic action.
The Thames investigation, the first of its kind in Britain, was conducted by scientists using the latest technology. It is regarded as the most accurate large-scale drug-detection method available.
Britain's illicit cocaine trade, estimated to be worth £352.8 million a year, is thought to have caused 139 deaths in 2002, the last year of available figures - a seven-fold rise on the 1996 figure of 19. Doctors fear that, with little routine testing for the drug in heart attack and stroke cases, the real toll may be much higher.
4% of the population using cocaine is a lot, when you consider that that population includes kids and the elderly.
#4
As another small "l" libertarian with no direct experience with illicit drugs, I note that we are rapidly approaching the centenary of federal regulation of drugs. I draw three conclusions from this. First, the drug problem must have been considered to be pretty bad 100 years ago. Second, the implementation of these laws and their draconian enforcement has done little to reduce the use of drugs, protect non-users, or increase human happiness. Finally, we seem to have accomplished a lot in that 100 years despite continued use of drugs and all governments intrusive efforts to control our personal habits.
if my fellow citizens want to go to Hell I will help them. It's my job.
#5
Indeed, we have as a society accomplished a lot in the last 100 years. The question is whether the next century will be as productive.
Drug abuse by the Gatsby and jazz set, which dominated domestic drug use up through the 50s, is a lot different issue than having a significant proportion of the adult population using drugs regularly.
The effectiveness of regulation is a red herring for my argument, although not for the UN's. I'm not suggesting we ban this stuff, except for sale to kids I think.
I *am* saying that the prevalence of psychoactive drug use is a worrying indicator of the society. And I include in that the prevalent use, in some places, of legally prescribed mood-altering drugs by people with no serious mental illness.
#7
Gee, just one more internal contradiction for all those UN luvvie "anti-war" types that are also involved with drugs. (A very high overlap I'd wager, including the Kennedys)
I'm fairly libertarian. I look at drugs like I do cigarettes. Legalize or de-criminalize - whatever your liking, then regulate and tax them. Like alcohol - I'd make it 21 and over for consumption and severe penalties for those caught operating a vehicle while under the influence. If people want to get high as a kite in their own home I care not - "do what thou will but hurt no one else in the process".
#9
Do you really want a coke, heroin or meth addict working / fighting with you?
Posted by: ed ||
06/27/2006 11:49 Comments ||
Top||
#10
My understanding is that heroin use was high among UAW workers in Detroit during the 90s - one reason for quality and other problems in the cars they built. Union made it hard to deal with.
Full disclosure: my father and a couple uncles were UAW (although not in Detroit), one uncle served on national negotiating committees, Dad got fed up and refused even to be shop steward later in his union life.
#11
Do you really want a coke, heroin or meth addict working / fighting with you?
We've got them now. Is it affecting their job performance? Address it as a performance issue. Once you use issues other than job performance, the company will tell you you can't smoke, you're overweight, you've got bad genes, etc.
I really doubt that if we legalized controlled distribution of drugs we'd see more than a 10% increase in use, if that. It's not hard to get drugs now, if you want them. And it's not like there's penalties for use. The big money would disappear from distribution, so there would probably be less marketing. Control of advertising would be the big issue.
The much bigger problem is the one lotp is focused on, why is there so much demand and what are the implications for our society. I'm not nearly as concerned as she, but it is an issue that should trouble us all.
#12
Have fun discussing performance issues with a meth addict who has been up 5 days straight and has a shotgun pointed at your face.
Posted by: ed ||
06/27/2006 12:21 Comments ||
Top||
#13
Yep, what NS said. My teen age neice and nephews can get the stuff at their high school if they wanted. They also don't smoke. Why don't they? Not because it's illegal but because they have too much respect for themselves, know it kills you in the long run, and the fear of mom & dad.
Morons will be morons. Those who want to do drugs to a point where they become addicts will do so whether they are legal or not. Cigarettes are legal but most people don't smoke. Those who were born in the 70's on and smoke are purely morons in my book. After the amount of education we got smashed with on the consequences of substance abuse - for those people to still imbibe - I have no sympathy for. Alcohol is legal but most folks do not go to work drunk. Being over 21 I could drink every night but I don't - I drink in moderation and only rarely on a "school night". Still comes down to personal choice and responsibility.
Bottomline, the same folks who have no self discipline now will be the same ones who get fired from their jobs and someone else will step up to take that spot. Treat it like alcohol - 21 and over - can't be high on the job, etc, etc.
#14
The bottom line is that hard drug addicts will kill their friends, parents, siblings, and you to get their fix. Irritate or get in the way of a meth addict and he/she will kill you. make it legal and socially acceptable as booze or cigarettes and you will have a lot more addicts, crime, and murder. Take it from someone who grew up in that. Your life ain't worth shit.
Posted by: ed ||
06/27/2006 12:35 Comments ||
Top||
#15
"Have fun discussing performance issues with a meth addict who has been up 5 days straight and has a shotgun pointed at your face."
-um, okay, kind of a super exagerated "what if" situation we can play forever here.
If you couldn't discern the guy was hopped up the past four days you prolly shouldn't be in charge or should be firing his immediate supervisor.
I know - but then we could pontificate "what if" the immediate supervisor is a closet crack-head and he has a bazooka pointed at your dog and then half the accounts receivable department are gun toting speed freaks doing blow off some hooker's chest in the deep sink locker? Hahahahaha........
#16
Not "what if". Happened to me, though not at work.
Posted by: ed ||
06/27/2006 12:41 Comments ||
Top||
#17
ed's talking about the street, not at work I think.
And yeah - I lived not all that far from South Central LA at one point. We were in a "nice" neighborhood, but when the crack addicts came by it was, simply, lethally dangerous. Cops can't and won't be everywhere and usually aren't in the places these people inhabit.
Meth is worse than crack for stupid crazy aggression. The type where people keep coming at you despite having already been shot twice. If you've never seen it -- and more importantly, if you've never had to factor it into a decision about going out for milk at 9 or 10PM on a Saturday -- it's all too easy to dismiss as a concern.
#18
I'm talking & being sarcastic wrt work scenarios as per ed's original premise in post#12.
I'm originally from Detroit. Before I joined the Corps a lot of my running buddies were into selling pot & a few did coke/ectasy etc. I've never been into drugs as only pussies did drugs as per my upbringing. That doesn't mean I care if folks get high in their own homes on their own time. If they obey all the other applicable laws - who cares. I concede there are big difference from the "hard" junk and the pot clientele to be sure. Meth is a big problem in So Cal as I remember from my time at 29 Palms. They had meth labs all over the desert - and that was the problem - drug gangs making the shit and competing between each other for turf and customers. Now, we can agree to disagree - however, if it's legalized you take away the street value, the "turf", and the gangs make nothing or have to go into another racket as they are not going to plausibly compete w/the market - the market can fix a lot of things if we give it the chance. I can cede the point that hard drugs would be a different animal from cannabis and other "soft" stuff. Legalizing meth is prolly way out there right now. Cannabis is prolly more feasible from a social and economic perspective.
#20
Have fun discussing performance issues with a meth addict who has been up 5 days straight and has a shotgun pointed at your face.
How about an alcoholic or a functional alcoholic with strong sociopathic leanings? Same problem, different drug.
I'm a little younger than most here. By the time that I was in high school in the LA Basin, my peers were warping their brains with just about everything available now, except for meth. As witnessed at reunions, the very worst abusers are now some of the most successful. I have known people who have used cocaine socially and seem to have never become addicted. I have known lifelong pot users (old beatniks) who were highly functional and successful. In my estimation (and I think that BH6 comes from a similar background and seems to have similar opinions) coke is about as socially harmful as alcohol. Marijuana and X are far less harmful than alcohol. Meth is more socially harmful than alcohol. We should design our drug policy using alcohol as a benchmark, and stop the scaremongering and ridiculous talk about "gateway drugs."
#21
People's physiological and psychological reactions don't change depending on whether the drug is legal or illegal. Except there will be more of that aberrant behavior as usage increases.
I doubt legalizing and taxing marijuana will change behavior and economics (unless taxes are very low). It just increases demand. It costs little to grow and a lot of money changes hands smuggling it. Years ago one of my acquaintances was shot 4 times in the head during a pot deal. For a few thousand dollars. Cops found his car and his wife opened the trunk to find his body.
Posted by: ed ||
06/27/2006 13:14 Comments ||
Top||
#22
I doubt many people who don't use drugs would start using them if they became cheaper. Perhaps those who use them would use more, but they would spend a whole lot less time robbing and burgling and sponsoring turf wars.
There's no nice solution, only more and less bad ones.
#23
ed: Have fun discussing performance issues with a meth addict who has been up 5 days straight and has a shotgun pointed at your face.
11A5S: How about an alcoholic or a functional alcoholic with strong sociopathic leanings? Same problem, different drug.
Actually, he was a nice guy that I knew for a few years. You would have never suspected he was capable of it. But he got into meth dealing 2 weeks prior and became his best customer. I came by to see friends next door. He in his meth paranoia was sure someone was there to rob his stash. Out of the door he flew with shotgun. You really have to see a deep meth addicts face to even begin to understand the paranoia. I've also seen it with folks injecting cocaine and attacking their own families. The reason I am alive to post today is because he recognized me and did not pull the trigger right away. Though it was a quite uncomfortable few minutes. So yeah, I'm quite antidrug. A lot of lives ruined.
Posted by: ed ||
06/27/2006 13:35 Comments ||
Top||
#24
Ed: I don't want to denigrate the human aspect of the drug problem by my remarks. I am very sorry about what you and your friends have been through. I just think that the right way to deal with this is through education, outreach (esp. by charities), and regulation. This has been our current approach to two socially harmful drugs (alcohol and nicotine) and it's worked. Prohibition didn't work with alcohol. There is no evidence that without (probably unacceptable in the US) draconian measures that it will work for any other drug.
#25
Education won't be enough. I have seen over and over it is the physically addictive people who get in way over their heads. How do I predict who will become addicted to drugs? Those that are alcoholics or who have family members who are alcoholics. Those people have to be physically separated from drugs. Once they get involved, the drugs overwhelm them.
People won't kill you for a cigarette or beer. They will if they need their fix.
Posted by: ed ||
06/27/2006 13:59 Comments ||
Top||
#26
"I doubt legalizing and taxing marijuana will change behavior and economics (unless taxes are very low). It just increases demand."
-If it's legalized people are not by and large going to buy black market stuff. What would be the point? If that were the case drug gangs would have been trying to compete w/Budweiser and Phillip/Morris.
I'm not anti-drug, anti-cigarettes, or anti-alcohol - I'm anti-me doing drugs, cigarettes, or abusing alcohol to excess. Like I said before, regulate it, tax it (w/the fair tax of course :) ), add on the applicable common sense laws to protect society wrt operating vehicles in general and make it 21 and over to use.
#27
"People won't kill you for a cigarette or beer. They will if they need their fix."
-I don't know anybody who got killed over a joint either. I don't think the problem will get worse if it's decriminalized. If anything it would cost a lot less in housing in-mates convicted of intent to distribute, legal fees, and court time, and you could prolly use a fraction of that money to deal w/treatment of addicts. Boortz wrote some powerful stuff on this.
#28
It depends on the level of taxation. At $100/ounce, the level of smuggling won't change a lot. May even increase because users know they won't get busted. At $10/ounce, smuggling won't be worth the risk, especially if the penalties stay high. And you know they will because the government becomes the dealer.
Posted by: ed ||
06/27/2006 14:08 Comments ||
Top||
#29
People did kill for alcohol during prohibition. I have already seen documented cases of gangs in NYC (where prohibative taxes have made a black market feasible) killing over cigarette shipments. IIRC, we have cut tobacco use in half in this country through the measures that I outlined above. I think that alcohol consumption has fallen even more from its peak. How many lives, relationships, and jobs have been saved by my plan? How many have been saved through drug prohibition?
Evil is a funny thing. If you fight it hard, you can reduce it to manageable levels. If you try to eliminate it, you usually end up with a greater evil. I personally think that has to do with free will and the way God designed this universe. But that's just my crazy 2¢.
#31
Education is part of it. But people have to physically separated from drugs that overwhelm hunger, love, ambition, even self preservation. Lots of folks say they will experiment with a hard drug just once to see what it is like, and they get hooked. Not all, but a large enough percentage of the population that, without penalties, will destroy society.
Posted by: ed ||
06/27/2006 14:18 Comments ||
Top||
#32
#19: "I've always found it easiest to "Just Say No", just like Nancy Reagan told me to."
I've always found it easier to say, "Are you out of your f*cking mind?"
But Nancy's idea works too. ;-p
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
06/27/2006 14:23 Comments ||
Top||
#33
The problem with drugs is the "frogs in the frying pan" problem: by the time the user realizes they're in trouble, they are frequently too weak to get out.
As for the "biggest users are frequently the most successful", the biggest single reason for career failure among professionals/managers is drug or alcohol abuse.
Al
Posted by: Frozen Al ||
06/27/2006 14:55 Comments ||
Top||
#34
"Not all, but a large enough percentage of the population that, without penalties, will destroy society."
-I doubt it. Who said there would be no penalties for those who harm other citizens? I certainly don't advocate that. I believe drug decriminalization means leaving alone those who want to use drugs in privacy on their own time. If you drive under the influence you still go to jail, lose your license, and possibly your job. If you rob, cheat, steal, you still face punitive penalties. If a drug is decriminalized it doesn't make it any less dangerous - maybe only to those stupid or weak minded enough to want to rantionalize it that way.
Overall, I have more optimism in the common sense of most of my fellow countrymen to know what's best for them and their families. BTW - I was wondering, did that guy who pointed the shotgun at you get a visit from the police?
#37
Overall, I have more optimism in the common sense of most of my fellow countrymen to know what's best for them and their families
So do I, on most issues. But there is a lot of overoptimism about the relative safety of drugs out there. Example: in a significant minority of people, as little as 1 dose of Ecstasy can induce recurring schizophrenic breaks and *permanent* serious bipolar disorder. (Not anecdotal - if I had time I'd look up the medical journal citation on this.)
A lot of young people do not have the maturity to hold onto facts like that - assuming they are ever given them - and, disregarding the fact that none of their friends has been so afflicted from a rave or two, stay away from the stuff.
Some can. Others won't be affected by a little use. But for those - hard to identify beforehand - who are so affected, a single experiment can carry lifetime penalites that are severe indeed.
I'm a libertarian, but I'm not religiously fanatical about it. Life has lots of grey areas and IMO this is one. It's easy to catalog the costs of the "war on drugs". It's harder to count these kinds of costs of drug access.
#38
Which is why I never said drugs were any more safe after they've been decriminalized & only a weak minded person would rationalize it that way in order to use them. I also mentioned 21 and over, children should not be exposed to them, and the penalties for giving minors any sort of drug should be very harsh. Though in any case, whether legal or not people will do what they want to do & the access to them will not stop. Education on it still comes down to good parenting and hopefully supplemented by the school system. I know both of the aforementioned bombarded me w/anti-drug use speeches before I was a teen ager and it stuck. Overall, I could see cause and effect of things from drugs, smoking, alcohol, and even over eating. Doesn't take a rocket scientist. Either way the whole point is moot, because beyond marijuana I don't ever see "hard" drugs being legalized.
#39
Aha! You want the world to be safe for your children (you are a mother, after all). I know the world is a dangerous place full of evil (I'm a father).
What has really happened is that the world has gotten so much safer (and tolerant) that there are not as many major penalties paid by youngsters for engaging in otherwise dangerous behaviours. One exception is drug use. The other is Aids. You can petrify parents with either because they know their kids don't pay attention to dire warnings.
Whereas in the olden days, there was a lot less mitigation of penalties and kids could see first hand what would happen if you tried to fool Mother Nature. Parental warnings were given more credibility as a result.
For example, Ed will be able to do a good job of communicating to his children the risks of drug use in a way that is sure to make an impression those of us without his experience cannot, at least not as credibly.
As we make the world safer for our children they become more danger prone.
#40
It certainly is a tradeoff and I am NOT a fan either of the nanny state or of the "victim" disease that is afflicting our society.
Just pointing out that some risks are asymmetrically hard to recognize and avoid - but carry major penalites, in some cases irevocable. And I do think society has some interest in bounding those particular risks.
An analogy, which is imperfect and which I will probably regret shortly ;-):
I'm a firm NRA member, 2nd Ammendment supporter. I also support federal efforts to identify and interdict idiots who want to smuggle SAMS into the country. For most arms, my position is: prosecute when/if they are actually misused - or shoot the person who invades my home and threatens my family. But the threat posed by fanatics who can bring down an airliner just doesn't work well in that model because the threat is deemed to be REAL but also hard to see before it hits.
#41
So by the logic of the prohibitionists, we should ban alcohol and nicotine immediately. Lots of people get hooked on drinking or smoking after their first sip or taking their first drag. Skid rows and mental hospitals are full of long-term alcoholics. Alcoholism contributes tremendously to spouse and child abuse. I have personally witnessed one young person have a psychotic break under the influence of alcohol and have reliable (i.e. to legal standards) testimony of another, who ripped the bars out of a window in a holding cell. Likewise nicotine costs us billions of dollars a year in medical costs. Logically, if you are going to ban low social harm drugs like marijuana and X, then you must ban alcohol and nicotine also.
I will rephrase what I said earlier. We are solving our alcohol and nicotine problems in this country through education, treatment, and regulation. We are failing miserably to solve the drug problem. That is because the problem is purely a demand side problem. You can cut supply to zero, and the addicts will merely start huffing glue or some evil person will whip up something new in his sink and sell it on the street.
Fight the problem. Fight it hard. But fight it on the demand side, with love, patience and tolerance. Some people will always end up as addicts, just as some will end up as serial adulterers. Serial adultery destroys families and people just like drugs. The Salafi solution to adultery is to prohibit all mixing of the sexes outside the nuclear family. Which is the greater evil, the human failing or the inhuman prohibition?
#42
If a country truly wishes to wipe out most of the marijuana grown within its borders, it should encourage wide scale production of hemp. Its pollen will overwhelm and neutralize the vast majority of the marijuana pollen, lowering the THC content until it is much weaker.
If you follow the main industries of the stock market, "paper" is one of the largest. But by replacing low quality acid-processed wood pulp paper with high quality hemp paper, we would not only save entire forests for other uses, but our books would last a century or two, instead of just a few years before it paper turns brown and crumbles. Hemp can also substitute for most wood chip products.
Hemp feed is a superior-grade animal fodder with a very rich, non-toxic hot-burning oil. Unlike the crudely woven hemp most people are familiar with for clothing, refined hemp is not unlike fine silk in quality, appearance, durability and softness. At the same time, hemp rope is regarded as the standard for quality rope.
All told, widespread hemp production in the US could be worth over $10B a year. Best of all, hemp grows in marginal farmland, where few other crops are profitable. It requires little maintenance, is insect resistant, and has a low water to cellulose conversion factor.
#44
'moose, I whole heartedly concur. Hemp products make sense, you put forth a great post. I wish half the tie-dye wearing loonies I've met advocating hemp at various festivals could articulate it as well as you did. I used to be suspect of anything any deadheads thought was good, but hemp products and honey brown beer are the exceptions :)
#45
At the same time, hemp rope is regarded as the standard for quality rope.
Or at least it was, back before the invention of Nylon.
Posted by: Phil ||
06/27/2006 19:15 Comments ||
Top||
#46
lotp, I'm a lifetime NRA member. The SAM analogy falls short because of the premise of inherent use.
Well, I did say I would probably regret the analogy. ;-)
However, somewhere in there I do think there's a valid point, namely that when there are serious and irreversible risks which are difficult to protect against other than by proactive interdiction, there's a case to be made for that interdiction.
Judges are so outraged about their recent treatment at the hand of ministers and the media over sentencing that some are threatening to resign.
A straw poll of judges in The Times Law supplement today also shows that some are so incensed at ministers criticisms that they are urging them to consider their positions.
The comments from circuit judges coincide with a stinging rebuke yesterday from Britains most senior judge to newspapers for reports over sentences that profoundly undermine public confidence.
Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, the Lord Chief Justice, takes sections of the media to task over reporting of sentencing guidelines which often, he says, merely reflect statutory criteria.
Lord Phillips says that misreporting of recent sentencing guidelines profoundly undermines public confidence and brushes aside months of thoughtful analysis.
The judges comments reveal the level of anger in judicial circles over recent criticisms by the Home Secretary and then by Vera Baird, QC, Minister for Constitutional Affairs.
One judge says: People are absolutely seething. John Reid and Vera Baird broke every convention in the book concerning the independence of the judiciary and ministerial interference.
Their comments have far more serious implications than the sentences passed by the judges because they have departed from their consti- tutional role and should con- sider resigning.
Of greater concern, however, are comments from judges that they either intend to resign or have done so. One confessed that the task of sentencing was now so complex that he struggled to cope. He admitted that he had resigned from sitting as a recorder, or part-time judge, because practice and procedure has become so complicated . . . that I no longer had any confidence in my ability to do the right thing.
He added that judges and recorders who sit on criminal cases part-time are considering their positions. Another judge said: I feel so grumpy about it all that I have had enough . . . I will throw my wig into the Thames and stagger, glass in hand, into the sunset.
Lord Phillips focuses his anger on newspaper reports and in particular the coverage of recent draft sentencing guidelines on robbery which he said had earned him inch-high headlines in one tabloid: Ridi-culous Muggers must not be sent to prison, says our new Lord Chief Justice.
In his first response to that coverage, Lord Phillips says that such reporting misrepresents the true nature of the robbery guideline.
Much of it overlooks the fact that in many cases the council (Sentencing Guidelines Council) is merely reflecting the existing starting point for sentencing various offences.
It also brushes aside the months of thoughtful analysis and consultation by the Sentencing Advisory Panel that precedes the council itself developing this work into a guideline, he says. Public confidence is profoundly affected and even undermined by this type of portrayal.
His comments come in the foreword to the annual report published yesterday of the Sentencing Guidelines Council, which he chairs. Lord Phillips adds: It is my hope that in my next report I do not have to repeat this message.
#2
You powdered-wig pantywaists, I don't think you have the guts to resign. I triple dog dares ya.
Posted by: Mike ||
06/27/2006 8:21 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Door, ass, don't let hit.
Posted by: ed ||
06/27/2006 8:30 Comments ||
Top||
#4
"The comments from circuit judges coincide with a stinging rebuke yesterday from Britains most senior judge to newspapers for reports over sentences that profoundly undermine public confidence."
Actually, Nimrod, it's the pathetically wimpy ass sentences that undermine public confidence. To the Tower with the lot of you!
#6
Well you got to understand that in a land that retained royalty, there are groups who actually still believe the myth that they are above the people. It's the damn number in this Republic who missed the little events of 1776 that they only hold office by the 'consent of the governed' that are really obnoxious.
LONDON: Britain should replace the Human Rights Act with its first modern US-style bill of rights to help fight crime and terrorism, opposition Conservative Party leader David Cameron said on Monday. The rights act must go, he believes, because it has created a "culture of rights without responsibilities".
"It has hampered the fight against crime, it has caused some extra difficulties in the vital fight against terrorism," he told BBC radio. "It hasn't actually been particularly good at protecting our rights."
The proposals would strike a "common sense balance" between civil liberties and protecting public safety." Britain's human rights laws incorporated the European Convention of Human Rights into British law in 2000. Critics say it has tipped the balance in favour of criminals.
Cameron, who has overtaken Prime Minister Tony Blair in polls after losing the last election in May 2005, admitted it would be difficult to draw up a bill of rights. He will set up a panel of lawyers and constitutional experts to look at the issue. Under his proposals, Britain would remain a member of the European Convention on Human Rights and British citizens could still pursue cases at the European Court of Human Rights. Attorney General Lord Goldsmith, the government's top legal adviser, said Cameron's ideas were misconceived and dangerous.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/27/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11128 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This idea should be terribly frightening to the Eurocrats. It would bring back the English Common Law that they have been trying to erase, while putting Britain under the continent's Napoleonic Law.
A Bill of Rights implies that those rights come directly from either God or evolve naturally to mankind--that they are NOT just granted by the state. This flies in the face of Napoleonic Law, whose guiding principle is that what the state does not expressly permit is forbidden.
If the British conservatives try to push this through, it will be opposed by every force Brussels and the Europhiles can generate.
They conservatives only proposed it because it seemed right in Common Law, and it is. But they probably don't know just how right it is.
#2
It is very instructive for a European to read the declaration of Independence because it is not merely a declaration of rights for the citizen but also a declaration of duties for the state (allowing the people to exert the unalienable rights of life, freedom and pursuit of happiness) and that when it doesn't assume those duties, the state has no longer a right to exist.
This is completely absent from the Constitutions and Declarations of Human Rights in Europe. In fact, the French Declaration of Human Rights explicitly states in one of its very first articles (third or fourth) that the citizen must submit when authorities try to arrest him, and that not submitting makes him guilty (in my reading this includes the mere act of fleeing). Ie the outlawing of resistance to arrest is not a mere law aimed like in the USA but in a document who is in fact above the Constitution itself and the goals are different: protecting police officers in the USA versus keeping the citizens submissive towards the state.
#3
Didn't the Founding Fathers have something to say about those who would trade freedom for security deserve NEITHER? And, weren't they mostly from england? While I back them (if specifically tied to the WoT), it always gives me the heebie-jeebies when some bureaucrat tries to "write rights" into a document. That's why I prefer the old way of "Those powers not EXPRESSLY presented here either fall to the State (as opposed to Federal) or to the individual."
Posted by: BA ||
06/27/2006 12:46 Comments ||
Top||
#4
And, I hope the right to bear arms (or arm bears for that matter) are among the tops there. Nothing else means anything if the citizen can not defend himself against ALL enemies, foreign & domestic.
Posted by: BA ||
06/27/2006 12:47 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Don't forget the Second Amendment, guys.
If you want your country to survive, as least....
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
06/27/2006 14:25 Comments ||
Top||
#6
The western world will remain disarmed until the pro-gun lobby adopts the same tactic as the anti-gun lobby: incrementalism.
This means not just opposing gun restrictions, but actively campaigning for gun freedoms. Continually pushing for the rights of the citizenry to have more and better means to defend themselves. Chipping away at the restrictions, at anti-gun legislation, at anti-gun education, at anti-gun cultural bigotry.
Every win just means that a new gun freedom needs advocacy. Children must be taught that a gun is their right and responsibility as an adult. That if for no other reason, because they are the ultimate and final defenders of the law. The citizenry, not the police.
#7
Don't know if the Brits are ready for the second amendment. Though the right to defend yourself with a pointy stick would be an improvement. Strike that - just having the right to defend yourself would be an improvement.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/27/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11130 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Let's hope it doesn't come to war. Last time a fair number of decent Argie and Brit lads died for no good reason except testosterone. The Brit forces are better than 25 years ago, but I wonder if the Argies are too.
Posted by: Steve White ||
06/27/2006 0:01 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I hope the Brits keep enough force there to act as a deterrent. Saves both lives and face.
#3
Actually #1, the reason all those Brits and Argies died was because the junta then running Argentina did not think : 1) the British would fight for the Falklands, and 2) PM Thatcher was a woman and would not fight for the Falklands. Major miscalculation on their part, they lost the war and were overthrown.
#15
Mebbe they've bought some nukes from NKorea and are feeling frisky.
Posted by: Laurence of the Rats ||
06/27/2006 10:57 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Wonder if they could offer "relocation costs" to the Brits for aiding the locals, plus maybe a cleanup fee. The Args spin it as humanitarian aid to innocent civilians, the Brits spin it as a purchase of some islands they never really needed anyway.
Posted by: James ||
06/27/2006 12:05 Comments ||
Top||
#17
Argentina's navy has developed a new class of destroyer with a glass bottom so that they can keep an eye on their air force.
#19
#3 - and because the economy was in the toilet and the junta needed a distraction. And once again, the Argie economy is in the toilet. Maybe its a way for the 'civilian' government to 1) redirect attention and 2) reduce the defense budget through attrition.
Of course the British PM could also invoke the NATO charter this time, being stretched as they are in the ME. One US aircraft carrier TF exercising in the area along with a reminder that by the charter 'an attack on one is an attack on all' would do wonders to bring reality back to the parties.
#22
WH4920 - nice idea, but look what happened the last time the NATO charter was invoked, just a few years ago ... there were a lot of countries 'washing their hair' that day.
Posted by: Tony (UK) ||
06/27/2006 15:33 Comments ||
Top||
#23
...Actually, what the Brits oughta do is send in ONE SSN, have it surface alongside an Argentine fishing boat..and have them just wave.
Word will get around.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
06/27/2006 17:44 Comments ||
Top||
New US proposals to tighten controls on the export of high technology goods to China are due to be published in coming days, but the latest draft has already drawn a negative response from Beijing and US industry, trade experts said on Monday.
A final draft of the planned restrictions, drawn up and reworked over the past two years by the US commerce departments bureau of industry and security, was presented to Chinas ministry of commerce last Friday. A trade insider said Beijing described the proposals as disappointing.
The proposal is expected to be published soon in the Federal Register for a 120-day period for public comment. US industry is expected to mount a strong campaign in protest, arguing that foreign competitors are not bound by the same restrictions on transfer of civilian technology.
Continued on Page 49
#4
The usual one-way trading street with China. Time for someone to tell them to suck it up and stop whineing. Maybe we need to appoint John Bolton as ambassador to China. I can see the fireworks already.
#5
Lemme see. The PRC is pissed off that we are smarter, and better able to produce hi-tech products and services now, and in the near future. And that have tightened the screws on their ability to buy it legally (and steal it).
Sounds like a bunch of losers whining, to me. Maybe they can get Jesse Jackson to take up the cause as a diversity issue?
Jacques Chirac woke up on Tuesday morning to face one of the worst fates that can befall a head of state: widespread ridicule.
Frances 73-year-old president had hoped his rare televised interview on Monday night would restore some lost authority and breathe fresh life into his embattled government.
Instead, his speech was greeted by resounding boos from the media, reinforcing the atmosphere of fin de règne that has dogged his second term in office.
You dont change a losing team, said Libérations front page, a sarcastic reference to Mr Chiracs repeated support for Dominique de Villepin, his enfeebled and unpopular prime minister.
Pierre Giacometti, analyst at Ipsos, said Mr Chirac never stood a chance of regaining public confidence with his plea that Mr de Villepin and his government had been judged unfairly.
The press mercilessly poked fun at the presidents gaffes, such as his reference to the Airbus A370, which does not exist, and his prediction that France will beat Brazil in the final of the football World Cup, which is impossible as they will meet in the quarter finals, if at all.
Cut off from the rest of the world in the Elysée palace, he has created a virtual world that he believes to be more real than reality, mocked Libérations editorial, in an irreverent tone rarely used when discussing the head of state, even by his fiercest critics.
Le Figaro, the conservative broadsheet usually supportive of the government, drew an unflattering comparison between Mr Chirac and Zinédine Zidane, the ageing and much-criticised captain of Frances struggling football team.
His foot is no longer as sure, his glance no longer as quick: like Zinédine Zidane, Jacques Chirac has won every competition, but that was all long ago, said Le Figaros editorial. Like Zidane, as we all know, he will soon be forced to hang up his boots.
The regional press were equally damning. La République des Pyrénées said: Jacques Chirac last night pushed the denial of reality to its limits. Meanwhile, lEst Républicain complained: What is terrible about Jacques Chirac is that he listens to nothing, hears nothing, sees nothing.
Le Monde criticised an exercise in self-satisfaction, which was, at the least, surreal. The brickbats have built up after an annus horribilis for Mr Chirac. In May 2005, he lost a referendum on Europes constitutional treaty, forcing him to sack Jean-Pierre Raffarin and appoint Mr de Villepin.
Soon afterwards, came the loss of the 2012 Olympic games to London, a spell in hospital after suffering a vascular accident in his eye, several weeks of urban riots across France, a humiliating u-turn on a youth labour law and the embarrassing Clearstream scandal.
Mr Chirac on Monday attempted to leave the door open to him running for a third term in next years election. But analysts judged that the president had no choice but to maintain the possibility of running again, or he would have become even more of a lame duck leader.
ROME - A constitutional referendum to strengthen the Italian prime ministers powers and give regions greater autonomy appears headed for defeat, according to two projections based on early ballot counting.
State-owned RAI television said a computer projection by Nexis pollsters based on initial vote counting in the two-day national referendum forecast that 59.4 percent had voted against the reforms and 40.6 percent in favour. Sky Italia television said its projection by Piepoli pollsters indicated 55 percent of the voters opposed the constitutional changes and 45 percent had supported them.
Posted by: Steve White ||
06/27/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11129 views]
Top|| File under:
President Jacques Chirac last night dismissed claims that his government was more unpopular than ever, rejected calls to sack the prime minister, Dominique de Villepin, and refused to rule out running for a third term. In a surprise television interview, his first for a year, the French leader sidestepped questions about the crisis in his right-of-centre administration and shrugged off claims that the political climate in the country was "apocalyptic". He seemed determined to make the most of his 30 minutes live on air, attempting to quash rumours of a big shake-up in the government and pledge support for Mr de Villepin.
His comments prompted the Socialist opposition to accuse him of ignoring public concerns. "French citizens must be asking themselves why he is taking no interest in their opinions or in what is happening in their country," said Julien Dray, a spokesman for the Parti Socialiste. "He is a distant figure, closed in his own reality, mechanically reciting these things."
Mr Chirac, 73, belied claims by one ally that he was tired, a little depressed and not his normal "hyperactive" self, with an animated and upbeat performance.
He had not been due to appear on television until his annual Bastille Day address on July 14, but it is thought he wanted to inject some calm into the divided ranks of his ruling UMP party. He denied that bickering between ministers - notably Mr de Villepin and the interior minister, Nicolas Sarkozy - had paralysed the government 11 months from the presidential election.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/27/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11127 views]
Top|| File under:
HT Drudge
TUCSON, Ariz. -- An empty casket with a military seal was discovered in a desert area south of Tucson, and sheriff's deputies were looking for the body. "Obviously it had the smell, and there was other evidence that it had been inhabited recently," Deputy Dawn Barkman said Sunday. Forensic investigators took DNA samples, and a nationwide alert was issued in hopes of finding out who was the recently-used casket, Barkman said. Deputies were called to a desert area near Interstate 10 around 5:30 p.m. Saturday after two people playing paintball found the casket, Barkman said. The casket was metallic silver with a U.S. Army insignia on it, she said. Okay, W.T.F.? First thoughts on this is that it's some sick jerks like those animal rights corpse thieves in the UK, so I filed this as Fifth Column WoT Politix. Mystery solved:
UCSON, Arizona (AP) -- An empty casket with a military seal discovered in the desert was discarded by a mortuary after the deceased's family requested that the body be exhumed and cremated, authorities said. Mortuary employees contacted authorities Sunday after seeing news accounts about the discovery. No information was given on who had been buried in the casket.
Deputy Dawn Barkman, a spokeswoman for the Pima County Sheriff's Office, said the casket was taken to a landfill after the body was exhumed in late May. Someone took it from the landfill, then dumped it, he said.
WASHINGTON -
President Bush took a jog Tuesday with a soldier who lost part of both legs in Iraq, following through on a bedside promise even the president had doubts about at the time.
Despite a slight drizzle, Bush and Staff Sgt. Christian Bagge took a slow jog around a spongy track that circles the White House's South Lawn. About halfway through their approximately half-mile run, Bush and Bagge paused briefly for reporters.
"He ran the president into the ground, I might add," Bush said, as the two gripped hands in an emotional, lengthy shake. "But I'm proud of you. I'm proud of your strength, proud of your character."
The president met the soldier on a New Year's Day visit to Brooke Army Medical Center in San Antonio, where Bagge had been recuperating from his injuries for months. Bagge, now 23 and a native of Eugene, Ore., was in a convoy hit by roadside bombs a year ago in the remote Iraq desert south of Kirkuk.
Bagge's left leg was amputated just above the ankle, and his right leg ends just above the knee.
He told Bush during their January visit that he wanted to run with him. Bush was an avid runner who had mostly traded the activity for mountain biking in the last couple of years because of knee problems.
"I looked at him, like, you know, there's an optimistic person," Bush said. "It's an amazing sight for me to be running with a guy who, last time I saw him, was in bed wondering whether or not I was wondering whether or not he'd ever get out of bed."
But, the president added, in tribute to the hard work Bagge did to realize this goal, "There was no doubt in his mind that he would."
"It's a privilege," commented Bagge, who had changed in the Oval Office into a special set of prosthetic legs that he uses to jog.
And then the pair took off for the remainder of their run.
#1
All of which begs the question: with balls that big how can Sergeant Bagge run?
Posted by: Matt ||
06/27/2006 20:39 Comments ||
Top||
#2
No words would be adequate to describe the feelings of respect and awe. Thanks, may you live a long and happy life, and wow just wow.
Posted by: Kalle ||
06/27/2006 21:00 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Give the man lifetime jogging privileges on the WH track, and see if the press follows up in 10 years or so to see how often he drops by for a mile or two. It's Rovian and right.
Al Gore charges that President George Bush has "broken the law and implies that Congress should have initiated impeachment proceedings against Bush for unspecified crimes.
In a fund-raising e-mail sent out under the banner of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee with the subject line "Unprecedented, Gore declares:
"The evidence now makes it hard to avoid the conclusion that George Bush has repeatedly and insistently broken the law and the corrupt Republican Congress has shirked its constitutional duty to hold him to account."
While Gore omitted using the "i" word, the consititutional remedy for a president who breaks the law is the House's impeachment process followed by a trial before the Senate.
"In my view, a president who breaks the law poses a threat to the very foundation of our democracy," Gore said, noting the seriousness of his allegation. "As Americans with a stake in the future of our country, we must act quickly and decisively. We have less than five months to win the six seats we need to control the Senate and pull our country back from the brink of a constitutional crisis.
Posted by: Captain America ||
06/27/2006 13:16 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11127 views]
Top|| File under:
#5
Darth you are not that far off. Most LLL Mo0nb@+5 consider being a Conservative both criminal and immoral. P.S. I will still send money if Al will run in 2008.
An official ISPR spokesman has described as "totally baseless" a press report that the ISI initiated an inquiry into the actions of Law Minister Wasi Zafar. "It is categorically stated that the ISI has not initiated any inquiry into the matter," said the ISPR.
"Never mind!"
Posted by: Fred ||
06/27/2006 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11129 views]
Top|| File under:
Galveston will get a few turbines (about 50) while the big farm sounds like it's slated to be somewhere along the Southern Texas coastline. The Plan says something about 500 turbines.
Cool stuff, I hope they're right about the birds and such.
#2
I think there are multiple offshore wind projects in the Galveston area, with different companies behind them.
There's one doing monitoring platforms there in hopes of further development; they were going to do one off of Louisiana, but it turned out to be too cumbersome. (Yes, in Louisiana. The same state government is threatening to veto offshore drilling. I guess anything to drive up energy prices when the national government's run by Republicans).
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.
MOSCOW - An Unknown Floating Object close to the International Space Station ISS has concerned ground control, according to reports from the US Space Agency NASA on Tuesday. The object is approximately 2.8 kilometres away from the International Space Station, said the Russian flight control centre in Moscow, citing a NASA source. The situation is quite serious, but does not yet require a dodge manoeuvre, said Russian flight trajectory expert Alexander Kireyev.
LONDON: Britain should replace the Human Rights Act with its first modern US-style bill of rights to help fight crime and terrorism, opposition Conservative Party leader David Cameron said on Monday. The rights act must go, he believes, because it has created a "culture of rights without responsibilities". 
President Jacques Chirac last night dismissed claims that his government was more unpopular than ever, rejected calls to sack the prime minister, Dominique de Villepin, and refused to rule out running for a third term. In a surprise television interview, his first for a year, the French leader sidestepped questions about the crisis in his right-of-centre administration and shrugged off claims that the political climate in the country was "apocalyptic". He seemed determined to make the most of his 30 minutes live on air, attempting to quash rumours of a big shake-up in the government and pledge support for Mr de Villepin.
WASHINGTON -
An official ISPR spokesman has described as "totally baseless" a press report that the ISI initiated an inquiry into the actions of Law Minister Wasi Zafar. "It is categorically stated that the ISI has not initiated any inquiry into the matter," said the ISPR.
