EFL
"...The toll Tuesday stood at 972..." It seems that Mayor Nagin and the press will not reach their 10,000 goal. The Galveston 1900 hurricane killed at least 8,000, so the Global Warming doomsayers are looking a bit hysterical too.
#1
That's still 972 that could have been saved if mayor Nagin did not let the hundreds of available school and city transportation buses flood out. That's 972 that died as Nagin was fiddling while New Orleans flooded, crying that only Greyhound buses, not city transport, were good enough. That's 972 that died as the result of New Orleans politicians and well connected sqaundering and stealing the billions of federal tax dollars given for New Orleans flood control.
Posted by: ed ||
10/04/2005 13:41 Comments ||
Top||
#4
JFM, there was a piece earlier in relation to some evaluations by engineers at LSU that a) the storm surges _in the canals_ weren't large enough to overtop the seawalls (which were the parts that were breached); also, the seawalls that broke were all of relatively recent construction.
So either there's somthing wrong with the design themselves (possible) or the seawalls weren't built to spec (IMHO more possible).
Posted by: Phil Fraering ||
10/04/2005 15:06 Comments ||
Top||
#5
972? Does that include the poor black folks vaporized when Bush blew up the levees? Or hunted down, killed and eaten by government trained killer dolphins? Does it? No, sir! They'll never find them!
Posted by: Louis Farrahkan ||
10/04/2005 15:30 Comments ||
Top||
#6
but 9+7+2 = 18 and we all know the meaning of 18
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/04/2005 16:23 Comments ||
Top||
#7
That she is legal and the DA can drop the charges? Now ask me about 19.
Posted by: Louis Louis ||
10/04/2005 16:40 Comments ||
Top||
#9
.com---will the last cannibal left please raise his/her hand?
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
10/04/2005 17:40 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Does that include the poor black folks ... hunted down, killed and eaten by government trained killer dolphins?
Dolphins didn't kill or eat anybody. It was the secret Alligator Predators squad the government has trained to go after Jihadis in the marshes of Iraq that escaped from their secret compound under the Superdome. But shhhhh ... it's a secret!
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
10/04/2005 17:45 Comments ||
Top||
#11
I wonder what happened to that Albino gator in the Audobon zoo.....
Women consider conversation a social event, while men use the opportunity to hold long monologues. A study busts the myth of the female chatterbox
Women might chatter incessantly, but they are easily overpowered by the incessant rants and ravings of men. A new study has revealed that men talk twice as much as women at social gatherings.
Hans JÞrgen Ladegaard from the Institute for Language and Communication at the Southern Danish University, recruited a group of undergraduates to record and analyse conversations at dinner tables, kindergartens, elementary schools, study groups, and companies to find gender differences in communication.
The research lasted for five years, and disproved the popular notion that women, not men, are the more talkative gender.
'Men talk more than women. They hold long monologues about their own experiences and are seldom interrupted,' Ladegaard told daily newspaper Jyllands-Posten.
He said men did two-thirds of the talk around the family dinner table, as well as in companies and at public events.
'The pattern is surprisingly consistent,' Ladegaard said.
The study revealed women as active listeners, who ask their husbands and friends about their feelings and experiences, ensuring a smooth, continuous conversation. For women in general, conversation is a goal in itself, a social event, the study found.
Ladegaard said that when a woman talked with her female friend, they cooperated to keep the conversation going. Both contributed equally to the flow of talk.
Men, on the other hand, only made questions during a conversation when they felt they needed more facts, otherwise letting the other conversationalist finish his or her story.
'Men like to talk about competitive issues like sport, and they compete internally by telling a story that surpasses the one before,' Ladegaard said.
He said men rarely interrupted other men, but did not hesitate to cut women off, and did not fear to appear confrontational.
'Men are not afraid to say things like they are, while women are more cautious,' he said.
Gender role researcher Kenneth Reinicke of the Roskilde University said he found the conclusions surprising.
'I often hear that men struggle to get free space without talk when they come home from work,' he said. 'I'm surprised to hear that men do most of the talking in the home.'
His colleague, Annette Borchorst at the Aalborg University, warned against establishing stereotypical definitions for men and women, as men differed from one another, just as women did.
Ladegaard emphasised that his study revealed statistical information about groups, and not about individuals.
'If we accept that the sexes talk in different ways, we have taken the first step towards eradicating the misunderstandings that arise in communication between men and women,' he said.
Posted by: DanNY ||
10/04/2005 07:28 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[9 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
The strong silent type were necessary for thousands of years for hunting. You don't sneak up on a large animal while engaged in a 'social event'. Conversation was reserved for after the kill and you could count all your limbs and unpunctured body parts as whole. Then and only then would you hear with great exclamation - "It was that big, but you should have seen the one that got away." Heh. The social event occured later usually intiated by "You dragged that dirty thing all the way here and expect me to clean it?" Thus Islam was born.
Posted by: A Man ||
10/04/2005 8:58 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Very interest. Anyway, as I was saying, there I was 35 km from the Isles of Langerhorn with nothing but a cheese knife and a parabolic mirror, yes polished to 1/10 wave it was, and silvered not aluminized.......
Men are raised with what can be called "dominance talking", using conversation to control, win debate, argue. Not just their speech, but their body language is noticeably aggressive. (Think "Foghorn Leghorn".) Content is far less important than pecking order.
Women are raised with "support talking", eliciting requests for emotional support and offering emotional support. Again, actual content is unimportant. (Think of the stereotypical gab fest.)
A third facet, common to both men and women is the content of their speech: data, emotional, or physical. This is both natural and learned.
"Data speech", is attempting to convey very accurate and specific information in a clear, concise, and ordered a form as possible. It takes a great deal of focus on the part of both the speaker and the listener, and has severe limitations as far as accuracy goes.
"Emotional speech" attempts to convey broader lessons. It is far less accurate as far as data goes, instead idealizing events to clarify complex emotional lessons. Urban legends are the logical extreme of this.
"Physical speech" is less talking than a barrage of physical contact while talking. It is uncommon except with very physically-oriented people, who are trained against using it, as most other people interpret it as assault, rather than an effort at communication.
Yet another facet of speech is natural, what could be called "frequency". That is, a very 'buzzy' person has difficulty communicating with a very 'sluggish' person. The buzzy person tries to slow their own conversation down, and the sluggish person tries to speed theirs up. If the gap between the two is too great, they can't reach the same "frequency" and no communication happens.
Data, emotional, and physical communication have very different "frequency bands" in which they normally operate, and some people experience much difficulty jumping from one band to another.
These, and other major natural and learned patterns of speech are very exclusive. Unless you are used to them, communication doesn't happen and you are faced with people you don't understand, apparently talking nonsense. Physical people often end up in jail, just for trying to say something.
#12
Do shut up, Darrell dear. I'm trying to listen to what the others are saying. It's always possible one of the men might utter something informative. ;-)
#15
Moose pretty well demonstrated summed it all up.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
10/04/2005 12:43 Comments ||
Top||
#16
women always prefer the strong, silent type....until they "wanna talk about us"
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/04/2005 12:43 Comments ||
Top||
#17
Why do women always start up a conversations with these werds...how come you never talk_____
A husband, proving to his wife that women talk more than men, showed her a study which indicated that men use on the average only 15,000 words a day, whereas women use 30,000 words a day.
She thought about this for a while and then told her husband that women use twice as many words as men because they have to repeat everything they say. Looking stunned, He said, "What?"
Posted by: Red Dog ||
10/04/2005 13:02 Comments ||
Top||
#18
how come you never talk?
Because when we open our mouths we usually pay for it later. Better to stay quiet and be scolded for it than to have to fight the cats for the couch.
Posted by: Steve ||
10/04/2005 13:47 Comments ||
Top||
#20
Sorry I cannot talk to you now, dear. It will take up too much precious bandwidth.
That will go over like a you-know-what in a punchbowl.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
10/04/2005 17:44 Comments ||
Top||
#21
After 38 years of marriage, it is clear to me that women don't have to talk as much as men, they get what they want the first time they ask for it.
#22
hmm
the wife can get out thousands of words before I get out one. However, you don't see her in forums on the internet as her internet experience involved 3D home shopping.. and browsing B&Bs....
Also, kind of predictable.... "Yah know... We should fix up the basement like this resturant.."
#23
I'm skeptical of this. I'll buy that the overall premise that men hold monologues and will interrupt a woman who is talking....but let's get real here,overall, women talk more than men. Women LIKE to talk. They can talk to their friends on the phone for HOURS going over the same information 1,000 different ways! The biggest talkers in any office I've ever worked in have been women.
Perhaps at a dinner table setting this is true, but I think it goes against common sense to say that men talk more than women.
#24
Yeah, yeah very interesting cool etc. Anyway this isle of langerhorns is evidently connected to the whipple procedure which I hear is a very bad deal if you need one. But I digress, I used the mirror, polished to 1/10 wave has you recall, to summon thousands of tiny mine laying robots which kept the isles safe from all foes. Viola! I was saved!
#25
--Data, emotional, and physical communication have very different "frequency bands" in which they normally operate, and some people experience much difficulty jumping from one band to another.
These, and other major natural and learned patterns of speech are very exclusive. Unless you are used to them, communication doesn't happen and you are faced with people you don't understand, apparently talking nonsense.--
What's the frequency, Kenneth? takes on an entirely new meaning.
and this explains why the LLL commie moonbats don't get it.
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/04/2005 20:07 Comments ||
Top||
#27
After I had originally heard this concept some years ago, I got to see it in action in a 3-way, frustrating lack-of-communication conversation between a physical guy, an emotional guy, and a data-oriented guy. It was bizarre.
The physical guy had run in a track meet. The data guy asked him how it was. His answer was simplistic, and he acted it out, "Oh, we ran and ran and the other guys ran really hard and we ran and stuff!"
The data guy was puzzled, and whipped out a bunch of statistical questions: who won? who was second place? what were their times? how many people were there?, etc.
The physical guy just looked at him painfully, with a "who cares?" expression on his face. He finally replied something like "I guess I won."
So the data guy turned to the emotional guy and asked him about the race. The emotional guy had been in the stands and talked about how exciting and thrilling it had been, with lots of emotional highs and lows, but "we" pulled through and won!
Now it was the data guy's turn to be puzzled. Once again, he had no data to process, just subjective stuff. The emotional guy had no clue about the stats, but made some approximate guesses, which were unacceptable to the data guy.
Anyway, after watching this exchange, the three parted company, and I made it a point to talk to them alone. Each of the three expressed frustration that the other two didn't get the whole point of the race. For the runner it was the action, for the data guy it was the stats, and for the emotional guy it was for the thrill.
I have seen better communication between people of different languages.
IMHO this doubles as an honor crime : notice how the camel was killed afterward?... At least, she wasn't stoned.
This brings back memories of mind-boggling religious prescriptions about hallal sex with *babies* and animals by late ayatollah Khomeiney ("you can have sex with an animal, but you must slaughter it afterward, the meat cannot be sold in your village but can be sold in the next one",... that kind of things, no, really, I'm not making this up!).
Ras Al Khaimah: A man has been sentenced to three months in jail after pleading guilty to charges of bestiality. The camel involved in the case is to be put down in accordance with Islamic law.
A court official said the Bangladeshi, who worked as a driver, had been spotted going into his employer's barn on a regular basis. His employer became suspicious as his duties did not involve him dealing with animals.
The official said the employer, a UAE national, followed his driver into the barn one day and saw him starting to have sex with a female camel. The owner lost his temper and started beating him.
"Hey, git away from my girl!'
He then took him to the police station to press charges. The official said the driver confessed to police that he used to have sex with one particular camel.
"I couldn't help myself. She kept winking at me."
The police arrested him and the case was referred to the Public Prosecution. The official added the man told the prosecution that he had fallen in love with the camel and had sex with the animal.
Ewwwwwwwwwwwwwww
The emirate's Criminal Court sentenced him on Wednesday to three months in jail, to be followed by deportation.
It also stated that the camel be put down as its meat would now be tainted. The animal will be put down at the emirate's slaughterhouse, a representative from the Public Prosecution will be in attendance.
#1
Ick. What kind of society has such problems regularly enough to develop legal precedents about it? And he fell in love with one of the camels in the herd, sex unnamed!
It also stated that the camel be put down as its meat would now be tainted.
Damned Sunni sexual hangups. The ayatollah sez to sell it to the nearest unsuspecting Shiites. That way the camel be eaten twice.
Posted by: ed ||
10/04/2005 10:57 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I apologize for the implication. I missed the bit where the owner said it was a she-camel. Nonetheless -- ick!
#5
Oh, well that's OK then..as long as it wasn't a boy-camel....
Jeebus, what a f*&ked up religion/society
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/04/2005 13:20 Comments ||
Top||
#6
HHHHHmmmmmmmmmmmmm - my bad, as for a while there thought it was another alternatist, ante-Conservative Lefty Reality show, proving why Univeral Laissez Faire = Regulatory Socialism/Big Government as long as the DemoLefties don't have to say/admit it is.
ABU DHABI â Mohammed bin Nakhira Al Dhaheri, Minister of Justice, Islamic Affairs and Auqaf, issued a ministerial decison yesterday, forming a moon-sighting committee to decide the commencement of the holy month of Ramadan. The committee will be presided over by the minister with Sultan bin Saeed Al Badi, Under-Secretary for Justice Affairs and others as members.
"I dunno, what do you think we should do?"
"I dunno. When's it dark around here, anyways?"
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/04/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Gotta keep the rubes fretting over 7th century superstitions whilst the more pious folk finalize their plans for world subjugation...
#9
IIRC the "islam will last until man walks on the moon" hadith is correct (that is, forever, in amedieval perspective).
According to what was said in the presentation of a (fun and very well done) mockumentary about the moon landings being faked by Stanley Kubrick, shown of french-german Arte Teevee, the pious Learned Elders of Islam are actually spending dough and efforts to publicize the "faked landings" conspiracy theory.
#11
.com thats the problem with blue-state'ers. They go to a country like Mexico (or Indonesia) - Tiawana or Bali for example or some other tourist area and stay exclusively in the hotel / tourist areas and all of a sudden they are an expert ("oh the mexicans have it so well! Beautiful beaches and cities!"). Even when they have to be driven through the city 'mexican' (or native) areas they dont really 'see' the slums and poverty...
#12
Right-o CrazyFool. One time in 1967, I took some wrong turns in a heavy rain and wound up in the Encinada town dump. It's a different world. And there is not much to scrounge in a Mexican dump.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
10/04/2005 18:12 Comments ||
Top||
#13
lol - I thought I learned ya Spanish on your last visit! Ensenada....actually quite a nice town, you should see the Baja land boom lately...condos and mid-hi-rises for the gringos....a LOT less poverty in the "traveled areas"
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/04/2005 18:31 Comments ||
Top||
Landlocked in South America's sweaty heart, Paraguay achieved independence in 1811 but waited a century and a half for its first visit by a head of state from outside Latin America, Charles de Gaulle, in 1964. So it is not surprising that visiting dignitaries cause a stir. Donald Rumsfeld, the United States' defence secretary, caused more than that when he dropped by in August. The media in nearby Argentina and Brazil saw the visit as a prelude to a permanent American base in Paraguay and the country's withdrawal from Mercosur, a four-country trade block dominated by Brazil. That prompted Brazil to lay down the law. âParaguay must understand that the choice is between Mercosur and other possible partners,â declared Celso Amorim, Brazil's foreign minister, last month.
--SNIP--
There's lots of good stuff, but I found this particularly amusing:
For Paraguay, the main worry is Mercosur, and Brazil in particular. Although trade within Mercosur is supposed to be free, Paraguay complains that its neighbours strangle its exports in red tape. When convenient, Brazil ignores its Mercosur partners, for example by awarding China âmarket economyâ status. Paraguay recognises Taiwan. Its Mercosur partners âproclaim integration but work very slowly toward achieving it,â laments Luis Alberto Castiglioni, the vice-president.
The 300,000 Brazilians who have settled in Paraguay own many of its most productive farms. But they speak Portuguese, prefer samba to local music, and their children attend Brazilian schools. One day, some Paraguayans fear, Brazil's flag will follow its culture. âOur sovereignty is threatened by Brazil, not by the United States,â says Carlos Mateo Balmelli, a senator from the opposition Liberals.
From the Rantburg Economics Bureau:
The hefty appreciation of Brazil's currency against the dollar over the last two years has helped Brazil overtake Mexico as Latin America's largest economy in dollar terms. Brazil had gross domestic product of $794.4 billion for the four quarters ending June 30, according to a report issued Thursday by the Brazilian Census Bureau, known by its Portuguese acronym IBGE. Mexican GDP stood at $765.7 billion for the same period, Mexico's government reported earlier. GDP measures the value of all goods and services produced in any given country, and Brazilian GDP has been growing faster than Mexico's.
But the biggest reason behind Brazil's move up is the rapid advance of Brazil's currency, the real, against the dollar â driven by huge demand for Brazilian exports and massive influxes of dollars into Brazil from foreign investors. The real strengthened 9.4 percent against the dollar last year and has gained 17.2 percent so far this year. For the calendar year in 2004, Mexico's GDP of $685 billion surpassed Brazil's $666 billion. The two countries have traded places periodically as Latin America's largest economy, but the gap was hundreds of billions of dollars in Mexico's favor in recent years.
Dollars have been pouring into Brazil because the benchmark interest rate stands at a towering 19.5 percent, giving investors big returns on government and corporate bonds they can't get almost anywhere else on the planet. Meanwhile, exports are surging based on strong demand for Brazilian products such as soy and steel. Long-term investors are also taking stakes in Brazilian companies in the belief that President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva is succeeding at steering Latin America's largest country on a path toward slow, sustainable growth for the first time in recent memory.
#1
Mexico doesn't give a rat's ass whether they're #2, #3, or #8. As long as they can keep up their parasitic habits where the U.S. is concerned, that's probably all that matters to them.
#2
The Brazilians don't have geography to help solve their unemployment and social situation. Thus, they must by fits and spirts make attempts at some reform to their system. The Mexican ruling class has no concern as long as they can dump their problems on to America. As long as you have power, there's no reason to effect change. That's why Brazil finally makes it past Mexico. Wonder what the Mexican GDP would be without all the money sent home from its brood from outside?
A rare public appearance by Haiti's interim president turned violent Monday when his bodyguards, apparently Americans contracted by the U.S. State Department, beat up several journalists at the country's central courthouse, the journalists said. At least two Haitian journalists were assaulted by security contractors and police as they tried to enter the Supreme Court to cover an appearance by interim President Boniface Alexandre, who was presiding over a ceremony for the yearly reopening of the courts after the summer holidays. A reporter for independent Radio Metropole, Jean Wilkens Merone, said he was cursed at and beaten inside the courthouse by another guard. He said at least one other journalist also was struck.
Every politican's dream. Every police officer's dream. Every ...
The head of presidential security, Vladimir Champagne, said the journalists who were beaten had arrived late for the ceremony and tried to force their way through security. Champagne said he did not see the beatings because he was inside the courthouse next to Alexandre at the time. He said the building was very crowded during the ceremony, but more than a dozen journalists were allowed in without any problems. Champagne said the interim president's security was handled by DynCorp International of Irving, Texas, under a contract organized by the State Department.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/04/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
his bodyguards, apparently Americans contracted by the U.S. State Department
How good of the journalist to research his lightly-tossed-off allegations!
#2
Champagne said the interim president's security was handled by DynCorp International of Irving, Texas, under a contract organized by the State Department.
I guess Blackwater was too busy being the Hessians of Iraq and hunting down poor black folks in New Orleans to take this gig?
"Ocean's Eleven" star George Clooney is urging his fellow Hollywood stars to keep quiet when it comes to politics, because he fears celebrity endorsements could wreck their favorite candidates' chances of victory. George..What does this tell you about your views vs. mainstream America?
Democrat Clooney and a number of screen stars have recently come under attack for voicing their political views.
And the actor, whose father Nick Clooney was recently defeated in his bid to be elected the congressional representative for Kentucky, has now vowed to be a lot more politically low-key.
He says, "My father ran for congress last year. I couldn't campaign for him and I knew I couldn't, because I'd hurt him. I seem to remember a few public appearances by sonny boy for Dad. They tried to get me to get on the John Kerry train and I said, 'We'll hurt him. They'll correctly characterize use us as "liberal."'
"Now, I would argue that (throughout) American history, it's pretty hard to find a time when liberals were on the wrong side of an issue. Wrong again..The list is way too long to go into (Communism, IRAQ..not to mention Clinton the boy king and his barracuda wife -in-name-only) We thought that the conservative view was, 'Witches should be burned at the stake.' Moderate view was: 'Well, just in case,' and the liberal view was, 'There's no such thing as witches.'
"We thought women should be able to vote and blacks should be allowed to sit at the front of the bus and Vietnam was wrong. Better check the voting record for Civil Rights Georgie boy. Guess who voted against and guess who voted for. We haven't really been on a lot of wrong sides for us to be sort of used as this bad word. How do you think it got that way in the first place?
"But we hurt candidates right now, so we can do fundraisers quietly and make some money. But I think it's dangerous to get up and talk about it."
#1
They have the right to their own opinions just as we do. But unfortunately there are people in this country that assume that just because Cher or George or Oliver Stone or some other rich spoiled Hollywood asshole has an opinion about something their opinion is worth more than the opinion of the average man on the street. Well I hate to tell them this but it ain't.
#2
It is really good to see self censorship coming to Hollywood moonbat political discourse. They are so out of step, even they've figured out its affecting the bottom line. Now if it could start being reflected on the screen as well.
#3
Watch it there, Clooney! Looks like you're "supressing dissent"!
And I'd know because I was in that Oliver Stone epic "JFK". Available in DVD and VHS...
Posted by: Kevin Costner ||
10/04/2005 12:58 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Don't do it George! Please inform America of every golden thought nugget that comes into your pretty little head. Tell us more fascinating news that there are no muslim terrorists, only Texas cowboy terrorists that want to take away your girlfriends/one-night-stands right to abortion. Tell us of your concern for the downtrodden as you fly in your private jet to meet with your tax lawyers. Scream at the top of your lungs about Bush's fascist police state and the oppression you suffer when the "Little People" laugh in your face and ignore your movies. Please George, don't deny America your college dropout brilliance. Entertainment Tonight is counting on you.
Posted by: ed ||
10/04/2005 13:11 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Every comment from Babble - errr - Babs makes the rest of humanity appear that much smarter. I love it when Hollywood has-beens open they're pie hole and let us know what they think..
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/04/2005 13:50 Comments ||
Top||
#8
We thought that the conservative view was, Witches should be burned at the stake.' Moderate view was: 'Well, just in case,' and the liberal view was, 'There's no such thing as witches.'
So liberals don't engage in witch hunts or cruelly scapegoat the innocent, eh? Three words for you Clooney, you damned hypocrite: Californiaâs gun owners
#10
Ok, hold on. Clooney, you self-righteous ass, I just thought of some more minorities that have been witch-hunted by liberals. To be honest the list is kind of damn huge. Try out white South Africans, Korean grocery store owners, Mormons, Evangelical Christians, conservative Catholics, all white Southerners who aren't Democrats, all black Southerners who donât do what the various âReverendsâ tell them, and everyone who lives in "fly over" country. Why donât you simply admit that you hate everyone, black, white, or Hispanic, that speaks with a Southern, Midwestern, or Western accent and isnât a hot chick?
How about the Boy Scouts? Traditional father-mother-child family units? Rural Americans? The Rural English, for that matter. Republicans who live in âblueâ states? People who belong to the NRA? How about American home owners, you pathetic moron? Have âliberalsâ or their ilk ever persecuted or discriminated against any of these people, you despicable Hollywood twit?
And, of course, every Jew who doesnât bend their knee to political correctness and cower in the face of Islam. You Hollywood idiots are extra special tolerant of them, arenât you?
#13
Better check the voting record for Civil Rights Georgie boy. Guess who voted against and guess who voted for.
This is a tired urban myth. Lots of Dems voted against civil rights. Very few of them were liberal Dems. The big civil rights moves in the '60's (voting rights, public accomodations, affirmative action) were joint productions from liberal Dems and liberal GOP over the objection of conservatives from both parties sometimes from bigotry, and sometimes from constitutional principle (Goldwater, etc.).
Over the last 40 years the conservative Dems and liberal GOP have either retired, gotten voted out or switched parties with the exception of the occasional Lincoln Chafee or Bob "Kleagle" Byrd. Sticking the current Dems with responsibility for the segregationists of 1880 to the 60's is MSM level (dis) honesty.
Travis County prosecutors rushed Monday to fix problems with an indictment against U.S. Rep. Tom DeLay by charging the Sugar Land Republican with the first-degree felony of money laundering.
Just a little problem, minor technicality, really...
Last week a Travis County grand jury ended its term by indicting DeLay on a charge that accused him of conspiring to violate state campaign finance laws. The problem with that indictment, according to DeLay's lawyers, was that the conspiracy law did not apply to the election code in 2002. The Texas Legislature changed the law, which went into effect Sept. 1, 2003. That left Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle and his assistants presenting a complicated case to a group of grand jurors on their first day of meeting.
Prosecutors hoped to fix the problem by reindicting DeLay on charges that he conspired to launder corporate money into political donations. In 2002, the conspiracy law applied to money laundering. DeLay's lawyers knew about the problem with the indictment but waited until midafternoon Monday to file a brief asking a judge to dismiss it.
DeLay's filing represented an attempt at a quick knockout of the case so DeLay, the former U.S. House majority leader, could return to his leadership post in Congress. In the brief, DeGuerin argued that the conspiracy statute did not apply to the election code until the Legislature amended the law, effective Sept. 1, 2003, after the 2002 election.
In his letter, DeGuerin noted that DeLay was forced by Republican Party rules to step down as majority leader while he fought the charges.
"Since the indictment charges no offense, and since you have professed not to be politically motivated in bringing this indictment, I request that you immediately agree to dismiss this indictment so that the political consequences can be reversed," DeGuerin wrote. The district attorney's office had not returned calls for comment by late afternoon.
Last week a Travis County grand jury indicted DeLay on a state jail felony charge of conspiring with two of his associates, John Colyandro of Austin and Jim Ellis of Washington, to break state campaign finance laws. Specifically, the three were accused of agreeing to send $190,000 of corporate money to the Republican National Committee, which, in turn, donated the same amount of noncorporate money to seven Texas candidates' campaigns at the direction of Ellis, according to the indictment.
Which, by the way, is perfectly legal. But a little thing like that isn't going to stop Ronnie
The new indictment is based on the same set of allegations. State law generally prohibits corporate money being spent in connection with a campaign. DeLay's lawyers say there was nothing illegal about the transaction.
That's correct, both parties do it. The different types of money go into different accounts and are used for different things. For example: TRMPAC raised corporate money, but they couldn't spend it on races in Texas.
The RNC raised hard money, which they could use anywhere they wanted. They also raised soft money, which they could use for operations, administration, and whatever else soft money can be used for.
TRMPAC sent a check of $190,000 which was the corporate money. RNC deposited that into their soft money account.
RNC then sent money ($190,000) to Texas from their hard money account for the legislative races.
There also probably will be a fight over whether the three-year deadline for indicting DeLay has expired.
In a letter to Earle, DeGuerin said DeLay is withdrawing his waiver of the statute of limitations to investigate him. Last month DeLay signed that waiver in an attempt to head off an indictment. The date on the $190,000 check to the committee is Sept. 13, 2002. The committee checks cut to candidates were dated Oct. 4, 2002.
Posted by: Steve ||
10/04/2005 10:41 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This from National Review Online; 1. DeLay's legal team anticipated it. The original indictment would have been thrown out of court because the conspiracy law DeLay was accused of breaking did not apply to the election code in 2002. DeLay's legal team had already filed a motion to dismiss, which has not yet been ruled on because the judge is on vacation.
2. The original indictment was for conspiracy to violate the election code. This would not have held up in court (see 1). The new indictment, issued by a new grand jury, charges DeLay with conspiracy to commit money laundering. It also alleges that DeLay committed money laundering.
3. The new indictment centers around the same transaction as the old one: a transfer of $190,000 in corporate money from DeLay's Texas for a Republican Majority PAC (TRMPAC) to the Republican National State Elections Committee (RNSEC), which sent checks totaling approximately the same amount to Texas House candidates in October of 2002. Earle alleged that this constituted money laundering, because the money that TRMPAC sent to RNSEC came from corporations, which are barred from contributing to campaigns in Texas.
4. The new charges are just as flimsy as the old ones. Earle does not provide any new evidence in the indictment tying DeLay to the money transfer, but he doesn't have to show his hand until the trial.
5. Not only does Earle have to prove that DeLay knew about or facilitated the transaction, he also has to prove that the transaction constituted money laundering as defined by the Texas penal code. That's a stretch, considering that prior to the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (McCain-Feingold), both parties engaged in this kind of soft-money for hard-money swap all the time for the purposes of funding state races. As I have noted here before, the Texas Democratic Party sent $75,000 to the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and received $75,000 back from the DNC on the same day. In fact, Democrats transferred a total of approximately $11 million dollars from their national parties to fund Texas campaigns in 2002, compared to $5.2 million transferred by Republicans. At the national level, corporate soft money and personal hard dollars were fungible before McCain-Feingold took effect after the 2002 elections.
6. Ronnie Earle is abusing campaign-finance law to further his own agenda. The transactions that DeLay is accused of knowing about and facilitating are not commonly thought of as illegal transactions. But Ronnie Earle thinks they are wrong, and he thinks that he can convince a judge and a jury that Tom DeLay ought to be punished for his wrongdoing â even though it is pretty clear that he did not violate the law. We are about to find out if he is right.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
10/04/2005 12:36 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Ronie Earle's also elected in Austin, correct? So he won't be kicked out even if every judge rules he's totally abused his power and disgraced the bar
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/04/2005 13:23 Comments ||
Top||
#3
So he won't be kicked out even if every judge rules he's totally abused his power and disgraced the bar
Nope, they're more likely to throw him a parade. Only way to get him canned would be to find a picture of him rooting for the Sooners.
Posted by: Steve ||
10/04/2005 16:30 Comments ||
Top||
#4
It's Austin. Earle won't be kicked out even if he found with a dead girl or live boy in his bed.
Posted by: ed ||
10/04/2005 16:45 Comments ||
Top||
#5
even if he is found
Posted by: ed ||
10/04/2005 16:49 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Ooooohhh - remember Ronnie's hubris? The motion picture crew following him for the last three years while he cut and pasted this writ together? One of Delay's codefendants is subpoenaing all the film shot, in and out of grand jury room
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/04/2005 17:31 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Earle has the habit of going after his perceived enemies via the grand jury system, indicting them for felonies. Look up the case of Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison. It's awful. It seems to be a good way to further his agenda without getting nailed for abuse of his office---at least so far. A prosecutor can use public expense to tie up someone a long time. They are on the offense with a virtually unlimited budget, and the defendant is hemmoraging money, time, and his reputation with no relief in sight. Gives one faith in the system, heh.
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
10/04/2005 20:14 Comments ||
Top||
Pyongyang is looking into the franchising possibilities...
A new Cambodian cafe is offering diners a slice of life under the Khmer Rouge, with a menu featuring rice-water and leaves, and waitresses dressed in the black fatigues worn by Pol Pot's ultra-Maoist guerrillas. Newly opened across the road from Phnom Penh's notorious Tuol Sleng "S-21" Khmer Rouge interrogation and torture center, the cafe is meant to remind Cambodians of the 1975-1979 genocide in which an estimated 1.7 million people died.
But the set "theme menu" of salted rice-water, followed by corn mixed with water and leaves, and dove eggs and tea at $6 a time is proving too much to swallow for many visitors. "Our grandfather and other relatives lost their lives under Pol Pot's regime," said 17-year-old manager Hakpry Agnchealy, whose brother owns the business. "This is more than just a restaurant. It is to remind us of those who died. We opened two weeks ago, but have only had two Europeans coming here to eat. We don't know how much longer we can go," she said.
Faithful to the Khmer Rouge era, when many victims starved to death after a disastrous attempt to transform the country into a peasant utopia, the waitresses are barefoot and clad in the black pajamas and red-white scarves of the guerrillas. Speakers blare out tunes celebrating the 1975 toppling of U.S.-backed president General Lon Nol and the walls are adorned with the baskets, hoes and spades Pol Pot hoped would power his jungle-clad south-east Asian homeland to communist prosperity.
Recognizing that many tourists might not be able to stomach such a close brush with the Killing Fields, the "Khmer Rouge Experience Cafe" is also promoting itself to those wishing to shed a few pounds. "It's good for me to slim down," said Tan, a 40-year-old Malaysian visitor.
For some who survived Pol Pot's rule, the cafe served up too many chilling reminders of one of 20th century history's darkest chapters. "My mother visited me here once, saw the Khmer Rouge style and has never come back again," Hakpry Agnchealy said.
A federal appellate court has upheld a deal between city and church leaders that gave the Mormon church control over a downtown plaza.
Judges on the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals said traditional public forums can be sold to private groups. The deal does "nothing to advance religion, but merely enables the LDS church to advance itself," according to the decision, which was issued Monday.
The American Civil Liberties Union wanted the agreement overturned, arguing it was illegal to give the church police power in a public area.
Church officials applauded the decision.
"The church has always intended that the plaza be a place of peace, a quiet oasis in the midst of a bustling city where everyone can enjoy an atmosphere of serenity and reflection," church spokesman Bruce Olsen said.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints bought the plaza for $8 million in 1999. Under the agreement, the city retained some public control but church leaders set speech and behavior guidelines and occasionally blocked public access on the property, a main gateway into downtown Salt Lake City.
The ACLU sued and said that the church could not curtail free speech in a public area.
The appellate court upheld that claim, and the city reached another deal in 2003 that traded guaranteed public access for $4.5 million in church-owned property. The ACLU sued again, saying that the city was violating constitutional guarantees that the government will not favor one religion over another.
But the court said the city rightfully disengaged itself from a potential constitutional entanglement with the church over control of the plaza.
The ACLU has not decided if it would appeal the court's latest ruling.
Lee Siegel, one of its plaintiffs, was disappointed: "I hope they enjoy their lily white, golly gee, clean, fun plaza." They most likely will, compared to the alternative of a filthy black, decaying, filthy, crime-ridden plaza. How unfair of them.
#2
The ACLU sued and said that the church could not curtail free speech in a public area.
That's absolutely correct.
But since it's owned by the church, that makes it private, so that means they can decide what's acceptable there and what's not.
ACLU delenda est.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
10/04/2005 21:35 Comments ||
Top||
#3
"I hope they enjoy their lily white, golly gee, clean, fun plaza."
Perfect: what the ACLU is really about.
LDS was the last religious venue I was compelled to attend, until I left home at 16, but I harbor no ill will towards them. The Mormons, as a group, are solid decent people who promote the best aspects of Americanism: family, virtue, values, patriotism, loyalty, honor. They take care of their own and others in need. Pretty damned cool people - admirable people. I'm not really surprised that the ACLU is being ridden out of SLC on a rail - the LDS leadership is also a very intelligent and disciplined bunch. Of course had they also tarred and feathered the assholes, it would've been sweeter.
This is one of the places where the Second Civil War will break out, I'd wager. And the LLL will find these people are truly formidable and prepared, every good Mormon home has at least one year's stores of food and water as well as the "means" to acquire more in the wild when society dissolves - it's a tenet of the faith. They are not soft lazy Big Blue city wimps. Fuck with them at your peril, nimrods.
#4
Yea,.com's right. This house I just bought and moved into last spring was purchased from an LDS member. Plenty of "pantry space".A fair dealing no BS kind of person who happened to work with my wife for 20 years before retirement. Not folks to suffer fools or bull shit. Most not all are "conservative" politically.
On Oct. 11 Liberia, a tiny, brutalized country on the West African coast, will hold historic elections that few in the world will be watching and that only a handful of policymakers in Washington will monitor. And that indifference is a serious mistake for the United States.
Liberia's elections and the future of the government they produce will have an enormous impact on the fragile stability of a region stretching from Sierra Leone to Nigeria, which accounts for more than 10 percent of U.S. petroleum imports. In addition, instability in West Africa -- home to several failed and failing states with large, radicalizing Muslim populations -- could create conditions favorable to establishing terrorist havens. The danger is already evident. In recent years the region, particularly Liberia, has harbored al Qaeda operatives, senior Hezbollah financiers and a plethora of transnational criminal organizations.
The elections themselves, taking place under the protection of a 15,000-person United Nations peacekeeping mission, will likely be relatively honest and free of violence. But which of the 22 presidential candidates ultimately wins the vote matters less than the fate of someone who is not on the ballot at all -- former Liberian warlord Charles Taylor. Since being forced from the presidency in 2003, Taylor has lived in luxurious exile in Nigeria, even though a U.N.-backed court indicted him on 17 counts of crimes against humanity and Interpol has issued a warrant for his arrest. He occupies a large compound, donated by the Nigerian government, on one of the nicest beaches in the country. And he enjoys the company of his family and his own entourage of well-armed guards and aides.
Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo granted Taylor asylum at the request of the United States, Britain and the African Union, on the condition that Taylor not meddle in Liberian politics or finance criminal activity from exile. Yet the U.N.-backed Special Court on Sierra Leone as well as U.S. and European intelligence agencies have concluded that the former Liberian leader has repeatedly and flagrantly violated both those conditions -- without consequence.
Taylor remains one of the single largest threats to Liberia and the region. His Nigerian hosts allow him to remain in regular telephone and fax contact with supporters in Liberia. And thanks to unlimited access to visitors, he carries on financial transactions through couriers who conceal his role while tending to his stake in a major cell phone company in Liberia. They also help funnel millions of dollars that Taylor looted from the Liberian people into the purchase of weapons and the financing of militias so that he might intimidate, kill and bribe his way back to power. If he succeeds, the stage will be set for a regional conflagration. He has plunged the region into chaos before and stands ready to do so again.
While Taylor remains at large, immune from the rule of law, Liberians cannot have truly free and fair elections. Obasanjo has promised to turn Taylor over to the newly elected government of Liberia, but that government is virtually guaranteed to be weak and struggling. No matter who is president, he or she will be unable to stand up to Taylor. After all, Taylor was elected president in 1997 after leading a prolonged civil war characterized by the systematic use of rape, the recruitment of children to fight in his infamous "Small Boy Units" and the mutilation of the civilian population. His support then was based on fear that he would wreak even greater havoc on Liberia again if he lost. People chanted in the street, "He killed my ma, he killed my pa, I'm going to vote for him." He will count on the same style of intimidation to force any new Liberian government -- and some regional leaders -- to continue to protect him.
Obasanjo should turn Taylor over to international authorities, because the Liberian's crimes are international in nature as well. The U.N.-backed Special Court, which indicted Taylor for crimes against humanity, has given members of Congress in the United States detailed reports about Taylor's activities. The court's report, as well as eyewitnesses I have interviewed, and banking and telephone records I have seen, indicate that while he was president Taylor sold diamonds to al Qaeda, Hezbollah and Russian organized crime. His illicit arms-buying ventures ranged from Bulgaria to Bosnia to Iran. His efforts at mischief-making continue even now. In January, he allegedly orchestrated an attempt to assassinate the president of Guinea, according to Special Court investigators and the Guinean government. U.N. and nongovernmental investigators have also alleged that he has continued making payments to brutal armed militias operating in regional no-man's lands on the borders of Liberia and Ivory Coast, Guinea and Sierra Leone, all countries with festering conflicts that could easily be fanned into full-scale war again.
To maintain the militia threat against the region, Taylor still funds and commands the loyalty of some of the most notorious butchers of his regime, including James "Cucu" Dennis and Adolphus Dolo, aka General Peanut Butter. (Other Liberian commanders have colorful aliases such as General Butt Naked or General Dragon Master.) Time is on Taylor's side, and that is one reason why he is spending money to support up to half the candidates in the election, according to Special Court for Sierra Leone officials and independent observers. All he has to do is buy a year of protection from extradition. The mandate of the Special Court is scheduled to expire in 2006. If it is no longer sitting, Taylor will be in the position of having been indicted by a court that no longer exists. He will be free.
Despite the stakes, the Bush administration, like others before it, is giving Africa short shrift when it comes to acting on high-minded rhetoric and promises of support for democracy, freedom and respect for law. The administration has promised to let freedom ring throughout the world and has used massive human rights violations as a justification for invading a foreign country. Yet it has expended little effort to ensure that another man responsible for the murder and mutilation of tens of thousands of people in his country stand trial. This double standard is not lost on democracy activists and human rights workers -- and dictators -- in sub-Saharan Africa.
The Bush administration has sent inconsistent messages to Nigerian President Obasanjo on the importance of putting Taylor on trial. Despite the recent public acknowledgement by West African heads of state that Taylor has violated the terms of his asylum, and ample evidence to that effect, the United States has been unable or unwilling to leverage the growing fear of Taylor's return into meaningful action.
While the State Department has pressured Nigeria to turn Taylor over to the court, envoys from the National Security Council to Obasanjo have consistently undercut that message, according to both U.S. and Nigerian officials privy to talks between the two countries. One reason may be Taylor's relationship with the U.S. intelligence community in the mid-1990s. During that time, when Libyan leader Moammar Gaddafi was viewed as the primary terrorist threat to the United States, Taylor was a regular visitor to Tripoli and to Gaddafi's tent in the desert. However embarrassing the U.S. relationship with Taylor may be, it was defensible in light of the intelligence he provided. But in light of his subsequent actions and atrocities, whatever debt we owed him has long been paid off.
The message that the United States sends to a continent plagued by despots, rampant corruption, and actual and potential terrorist havens, is of crucial importance. A sense of impunity has fostered the violence and corruption that have kept West Africa in a state of warfare, strife and desperate poverty for decades. No head of state there has ever been held accountable for his crimes and abuses. Missing the opportunity to hold Taylor responsible will only reinforce that vicious cycle of crime without punishment. Taylor's return will make it less likely that millions of people will be able to freely choose their leaders, enjoy the protection of their government rather than have it prey upon them, and have a shot at living above the poverty line.
The Special Court did historic and heroic work in bringing an indictment against a sitting head of state and documenting his ties to al Qaeda. The Liberian people endured hardship and violence to get rid of Taylor. Some regional leaders have, at tremendous personal risk, publicly called for Taylor's trial. There is a strong bipartisan will in Congress to work with the Bush administration to press Nigeria to extradite Taylor to the court in Sierra Leone. What's missing is a firm commitment by the administration.
If the United States wants to make a significant difference in this part of the world, then it must throw its weight behind bringing Taylor to trial. This will show that the United States is on the side of justice rather than convenience, that what we say about democracy and justice is more than mere talk. U.S. security interests are at stake. So are the lives and well-being of millions of people who desperately want to escape the cycle of violence and destruction that Taylor and others like him have perpetrated for far too long.
Posted by: Dan Darling ||
10/04/2005 01:25 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
A "Third Eye" would be much cheaper than a trial and better for all of West Africa. This murdering scum will never reach trial because he has certainly "shared the wealth" with his Nigerian protectors to preclude his arrest and extradition for trial.
#2
After all, Taylor was elected president in 1997 after leading a prolonged civil war characterized by the systematic use of rape, the recruitment of children to fight in his infamous "Small Boy Units" and the mutilation of the civilian population.
Yes, but we should applaud them because the Small Boy Unit did not exclude homosexuals.
#4
Napalm the compound using a surplus Boeing 707 purchased in Africa and flown by remote control. Make sure the entire compound is burned to the ground, and nobody escapes. Make sure the evidence of purchasing the plane leads directly to Bobby Mugabe. Win-win.
Posted by: Old Patriot ||
10/04/2005 17:58 Comments ||
Top||
#5
I like it, OP, but I can hear the questions: "where the hell would Mugabe get the money?"
Posted by: Frank G ||
10/04/2005 18:25 Comments ||
Top||
More than 14,000 people have been arrested in Zimbabwe's capital in the past two weeks in a new police crackdown, state media reports. They are mostly petty traders, street children and illegal currency and fuel dealers, police say. The police say the operation is designed to stop people returning to central Harare. "[The latest drive, dubbed Operation Siyapambili/Hatidzokereshure - No Going Back] aims to make follow-ups to monitor the city so that we deal with any of those who are returning to the city and conducting shady dealings," police spokesperson Loveless Rupere told the Herald newspaper.
Keeping an army provisioned in the desert is a ballet of logistics, particularly when it comes to supplying two vital liquids: diesel fuel and water.
Now, using technologies developed for the space program, the U.S. Army is conducting an experiment that could convert the exhaust pipes of military vehicles into water fountains.
Later this month, United Technologies Corp.'s Hamilton Sundstrand unit will deliver two military Humvees to the Army for three months of testing at the Aberdeen Proving Ground outside Baltimore. Built into each vehicle's truck bed is a complex system that can recover water from engine exhaust, purifying as much as half the liquid volume from a tank of fuel.
"This is one of those things where, when you first hear about it, you think the scientists have gone out of their minds," says Robert Leduc, president of Hamilton Sundstrand's flight systems business, which includes the water-recovery program. "But once you taste the water, you realize the potential."
The military calculates that a soldier in the desert needs about 20 gallons of water a day, five of which must be pure enough to drink, prepare food and use for medical needs. (The other 15 gallons are for bathing, washing clothes and the like.) Water gets to the front in vulnerable, slow-moving truck convoys that require armed escorts, or it is pumped from local rivers, lakes or ponds and purified by heavy-duty filters.
For the Army, the logistics of moving water limits how it can use troops. When soldiers are deployed in the field, it can easily take 40% of them to move water and other materials, often placing them in vulnerable positions, says Jay Dusenbury, science and technology team leader for the Army's Tank-Automotive Research, Development and Engineering Center, or TARDEC, in Warren, Mich. "Anything that can cut down on that vulnerability and enable troops to fight -- even if they have been cut off from traditional water supplies -- could be huge," he says.
Posted by: Captain America ||
10/04/2005 00:25 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
This idea has been around for a while. The main advantage the article doesn't mention is a given volume of fuel will yield a much larger volume of water. I recall 5 to 1 with Kerosene. It means you have to haul a lot less mass around.
UNITED NATIONS (AP) - The United States has circulated a resolution calling on U.N. peacekeepers in Liberia to arrest former Liberian President Charles Taylor if he returns and hand him over to the war crimes tribunal in Sierra Leone for prosecution. The draft resolution, obtained Monday by the Associated Press, would give the nearly 15,000-strong peacekeeping force authority to apprehend Taylor, who was given asylum in Nigeria after giving up the presidency in August 2003, "in the event of a return to Liberia."
Taylor resigned and fled the country as part of a peace deal brokered as rebels besieged the Liberian capital, Monrovia. He was later indicted by the U.N.-backed war-crimes tribunal for backing Sierra Leone rebels in their insurgency, but Nigeria granted him asylum and has refused to hand him over to the court.
If they just shoot him it's okay with me.
Nigerian Foreign Minister Oluyemi Adeniji said in July that the government will consider a request from a democratically elected government in Liberia for Taylor to be repatriated, "but not to a third country." Liberia is scheduled to hold presidential elections on Oct. 11.
The draft resolution expresses appreciation to Nigeria and its president, Olusegun Obasanjo, "for their contributions to restoring stability in the West African sub-region."
Can lips fall off a UN resolution?
It also acknowledges "that Nigeria acted with broad international support" when it gave Taylor asylum. But the proposed resolution emphasized that Taylor's return to Liberia "would constitute an impediment to stability and a threat to the peace of Liberia and that of the sub-region."
It would therefore expand the mandate of the U.N. peacekeeping force in Liberia to take Taylor into custody and take steps to have him transfered to the tribunal in Sierra Leone.
Richard Grenell, spokesman for the U.S. Mission, said Security Council experts would meet Tuesday to discuss the draft. The United States came up with the idea for the resolution about three months ago, but put it aside because it did not believe it had enough support until now, he said.
Last week, the court's chief prosecutor, Desmond De Silva, said the tribunal is pressing Nigeria to hand over Taylor and is searching for Johnny Paul Koroma, a rebel leader who was reported to be alive last year. The tribunal wants to prosecute both before it wraps up its work in about 18 months. But even if the tribunal closes, they will not escape prosecution if they are found afterwards, De Silva warned.
Posted by: Steve White ||
10/04/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
It probably all depends on how much they can get out of Chuckie. He might be really pulling in the 419 scam money.....
"Friend, I need your assistance in a delicate matter. I am CHARLES TAYLOR, the former president of Liberia. I cannot, for obvious reasons, get my hands on my $35 million dollar fortune in a Swiss bank...."
Police have arrested Punjab Parliamentary Secretary Muhammad Ahmad Khan and his cousin Malik Ejaz Khan on Acting Chief Election Commissioner Justice Abdul Hameed Dogarâs orders for beating up the Kasur assistant election commissioner on September 30. Police registered a case against Khan under the Anti-Terrorism Act, Local Government Ordinance and Pakistan Penal Code. The Election Commission also disqualified Malik Rashid Khan, the Pakistan Muslim League-backed candidate for Kasur district nazim.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/04/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Dude, you have to tell the story behind that picture.
LAHORE: The Punjab Education Department has cancelled Blooming Kids Campus Elementary School's registration and ordered the school's closure because of various corporal punishment complaints against the principal and teachers. It is the first private school against which such action has been taken, said an official statement on Monday, adding that government and private schools had been warned against corporal punishment. It said that other schools involved in such activity would have to face similar consequences.
Posted by: Fred ||
10/04/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Article dated "Sunday, April 10, 2005". Looks like you hooked a 4/10 article instead of a 10/4 article, Fred.
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.
A rare public appearance by Haiti's interim president turned violent Monday when his bodyguards, apparently Americans contracted by the U.S. State Department, beat up several journalists at the country's central courthouse, the journalists said. At least two Haitian journalists were assaulted by security contractors and police as they tried to enter the Supreme Court to cover an appearance by interim President Boniface Alexandre, who was presiding over a ceremony for the yearly reopening of the courts after the summer holidays. A reporter for independent Radio Metropole, Jean Wilkens Merone, said he was cursed at and beaten inside the courthouse by another guard. He said at least one other journalist also was struck.
More than 14,000 people have been arrested in Zimbabwe's capital in the past two weeks in a new police crackdown, state media reports. They are mostly petty traders, street children and illegal currency and fuel dealers, police say. The police say the operation is designed to stop people returning to central Harare. "[The latest drive, dubbed Operation Siyapambili/Hatidzokereshure - No Going Back] aims to make follow-ups to monitor the city so that we deal with any of those who are returning to the city and conducting shady dealings," police spokesperson Loveless Rupere told the Herald newspaper. 
UNITED NATIONS (AP) - The United States has circulated a resolution calling on U.N. peacekeepers in Liberia to arrest former Liberian President Charles Taylor if he returns and hand him over to the war crimes tribunal in Sierra Leone for prosecution. The draft resolution, obtained Monday by the Associated Press, would give the nearly 15,000-strong peacekeeping force authority to apprehend Taylor, who was given asylum in Nigeria after giving up the presidency in August 2003, "in the event of a return to Liberia."
Police have arrested Punjab Parliamentary Secretary Muhammad Ahmad Khan and his cousin Malik Ejaz Khan on Acting Chief Election Commissioner Justice Abdul Hameed Dogarâs orders for beating up the Kasur assistant election commissioner on September 30. Police registered a case against Khan under the Anti-Terrorism Act, Local Government Ordinance and Pakistan Penal Code. The Election Commission also disqualified Malik Rashid Khan, the Pakistan Muslim League-backed candidate for Kasur district nazim.
LAHORE: The Punjab Education Department has cancelled Blooming Kids Campus Elementary School's registration and ordered the school's closure because of various corporal punishment complaints against the principal and teachers. It is the first private school against which such action has been taken, said an official statement on Monday, adding that government and private schools had been warned against corporal punishment. It said that other schools involved in such activity would have to face similar consequences.
