#1
Positively pre Medieval, still born and Dark Ages thinking. They are actuall proud of this thinking.
Posted by: SPoD ||
04/21/2006 4:45 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I've got a bad feeling, that this conflict isn't going to be over until Arabic is spoken only in Hell.
It's either them, or us.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
04/21/2006 6:57 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Instead of evolving into modern society, they have been given gobs of money for oil while still stuck in this mindset. The money has just fanned the flames.
Kudos to our military for trying to know the enemy. The constant reminders of their animal like ways sickens me. Actually animals take better care of their own. They are way below animals.
Posted by: Jan ||
04/21/2006 7:07 Comments ||
Top||
#7
I keep saying that it is a key idea to somehow teach women to fight back, that even if they resist a little, it will have a catastrophic effect on the entire murderous system.
If we even dressed western women up like them, to infiltrate and talk to their women, just to plant the seed of resistance, it could work.
This ultraviolence is actually terribly fragile as a system, utterly dependent on the complete cooperation of those it hopes to oppress and coerce. If they refuse it, it crumbles.
#8
You people are all sick and fuck-up. Make you no diferent then SMALL numbers of od some SECTS who thinks that way You are also fatefull and with no compromise What US soldiers doing in Iraq?! Kiling woman and kids Killing inocent lives And for all you who hate all muslims and treat us same, I say - bring it on! We will treat you same then And, next time, dont be stupid and us - why us!?
#9
(edit)
You people are all sick and fuck-up. Make you no diferent then SMALL numbers of some SECTS who thinks that way You are also hatefull and with no compromise What US soldiers doing in Iraq?! Kiling woman and kids Killing inocent lives And for all you who hate all muslims and treat us same, I say - bring it on! We will treat you same then And, next time, dont be stupid and ask - why us!?
#12
By small sect do you mean imams like al-Qaradawi, the most popular and watched imam in the Arab world, or Khameni or Tantawi at Al-Azhar, the highest authority in Sunni Islam? Or Osama Shaltut, the Egyptian prez candidate who said "The whole world should convert to Islam. Now." and the son of Mahmud Shaltut, the former sheik of Al-Azhar. Mahmud is famous for a fatwa banning trips to the moon.
Nice try at taqiyya SA, but we have seen enough videos, heard enough audio, and read enough muslim press to know exactly who you are.
Posted by: ed ||
04/21/2006 11:11 Comments ||
Top||
#13
"What US soldiers doing in Iraq?! Kiling woman and kids"
Nope - sorry. Starting your posting career here by throwing in an egregious lie is not the way to do it.
The people deliberately killing women and children are those bloody Wahabbists - you know the ones executing people in the night, beheading people, setting off car bombs in marketplaces, trying to blow up mosques. Your brother Islamists have killed far more of you than the west has over the centuries. If youhad an open society that allowed uncensored history, you'd know this. But your Arab islamist brothers woudl rather keep you ignorant so they can use your anger to maintain their power.
Arab leadership in general is a filthy loathesome people, prone to lying and flattery, tribalistic,, clannish and superstitious. I've seen it time and again over there. And the fundamentalists Islamists (both Shia and Sunni) are the worst of the lot, killing tons more Muslims that the US ever has, all in the name of the Prophet.
And the ONLY reason we are still in Iraq is because you Arab Islamists are such savages that you'd be resorting to wholesale unrestrained butchery of each other over who was the Prophet's successor. Its is a testament to the kindness of the US that we have managed to keep you Arabs killing as few of each other as you do, at the cost of our own time, treasure and blood.
#17
#9: "And, next time, dont be stupid and ask - why us!?"
I didn't ask it the first time, idiot.
I know "why us."
Because they're a bunch of jealous loser fanatics who can't stand the fact that we have liberty and they don't.
And since everything is supposedly allen's will, maybe they should be asking themselves why it is that we have prosperity and liberty and they live in repressive shitholes. Except when they come over here to live in liberty and prosperity while they try to turn our country into a repressive shithole.
The whole lot of them can go to hell, the sooner the better. We'll be glad to help.
And as for your contention that it's the US killing women and children in Iraq, maybe you haven't noticed that it's the terrorists, foreign and domestic, who are bombing mosques and police stations and generally killing people. We're rebuilding.
FOAD.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
04/21/2006 14:26 Comments ||
Top||
#18
How sad to read this hateful comment, that he or she (probably he) is so very angry, uneducated and uninformed. So scary too that he probably has a gun and will kill some based on his misunderstanding of what's really going on.
I would like to be positive and think that he'd do more reading here and have his eyes opened maybe. To get that oh so important wake up call
Posted by: Jan ||
04/21/2006 14:54 Comments ||
Top||
Rear Admiral Eric A. McVadon, U.S. Navy (Retired)
Naval War College Review, Spring 2006, Vol. 59, No. 2
The East Asia security environment in which China is emerging demands that the matter of a maturing Chinese navy be put in a political context. Tension across the Taiwan Strait has recently relaxed. In Beijing, the leaders of economically successful and internationally active China do not want to jeopardize the nations prospects for a bright future by initiating military conflict with Taiwan and the United Statesquite the contrary.
In Taipei, despite profound disagreement with Beijing and a major stir in domestic politics, a cautious posture in relations with Beijing now prevails. So, remarkably, amid deep, persistent, and mutual distrust, the current prospects for avoiding conflict across the Taiwan Strait are good.
Well-informed Chinese officials and prestigious Americans who have had exchanges with senior Chinese leaders confirm the relaxed circumstances and express the conviction that Beijing is confident about the situation as Chinese leaders see it developing and that Taiwan, again content with the status quo, will remain measured in its actions. War across the Taiwan Strait is not looming.
Nevertheless, Beijing is, by modernizing its military, ensuring that things will not go awry in Taiwan, that its policy of intimidation continues to work. The indisputable reality is that this militarythe Peoples Liberation Army (or PLA), and particularly its naval component, the PLA Navy (or PLAN)is growing greatly in capability; further, it is a growing concern to defense and naval leaders in Washington, D.C., and other capitals, including Tokyo and Taipei.
In a time of American preoccupation with the global war on terrorism, it is appropriate to draw attention to the crucial features of this modernization of components of the PLA. Beijing, if the Taiwan problem were to suffer a dramatic reversal, would have available an impressive force acquired for this purpose. If that force were effectively deployed, it would be sufficient in terms of hardware to undertake a two-pronged, PLA Navyled campaign, with a big maritime component, against Taiwan and U.S. forces in a fashion that could be termed jointness with Chinese characteristics...
(Article continues with detailed analysis at link.)
#1
As Dubya's speech during HU's visit infers, in order to achieve economic and national prosperity and modernness, China's Communist Party must be willing to link ECONOMIC FREEDOM WID PERSONAL -POLITICAL FREEDOM. THe majority of the Taiwanese people do wish to re-unify or have strong inter-/intra-Chinese relations, but not under Communism nor under threat of military takeover by the mainland. In any case, few iff any in Washington or USDOD-INTEL believe China under the Commies will achieve any of their ambitions for China- and Communist-centric Asian-Pacific hegemony unless the regional Western democracies are effectively suborned under their control. THE FALL OF ANY ONE OF THE WESTERN DEMOCRACIES IN ASIA-PACIFIC, INCLUDING TAIWAN, WILL MARK BOTH A SERIOUS DECLINE IN REGIONAL AMERICAN POWER, AS WELL AS THE BEGINNINGS OF THE FINAL PAN-COMMIE "LONG MARCH" TO FUTURE COMMIE-CONTROLLED WASHINGTON AND CONUS-NORAM, Clintons and Dems notwithstanding.
Last time around, the antiwar left did not have a very high opinion of generals. A popular slogan in the 1960s was "war is too important to be left to the generals." It was the generals who had advocated attacking Cuba during the missile crisis of October 1962, while the civilians preferred -- and got -- a diplomatic solution. In popular culture, "Dr. Strangelove" made indelible the caricature of the war-crazed general. And it was I-know-better generals who took over the U.S. government in a coup in the 1960s bestseller and movie "Seven Days in May."
Another war, another take. I-know-better generals are back. Six of them, retired, are denouncing the Bush administration and calling for Donald Rumsfeld's resignation as secretary of defense. The antiwar types think this is just swell.
Some of the complainers were on active duty when these decisions were made. If they felt so strongly about Rumsfeld's disregard of their advice, why didn't they resign at the time? Why did they wait to do so from the safety of retirement, with their pensions secured?
The Defense Department waves away the protesting generals as just a handful out of more than 8,000 now serving or retired. That seems to me too dismissive. These generals are no doubt correct in asserting that they have spoken to and speak on behalf of some retired and, even more important, some active-duty members of the military.
But that makes the generals' revolt all the more egregious. The civilian leadership of the Pentagon is decided on Election Day, not by the secret whispering of generals.
We've always had discontented officers in every war and in every period of our history. But they rarely coalesce into factions. That happens in places such as Hussein's Iraq, Pinochet's Chile or your run-of-the-mill banana republic. And when it does, outsiders (including the United States) do their best to exploit it, seeking out the dissident factions to either stage a coup or force the government to change policy.
It is precisely this kind of division that our tradition of military deference to democratically elected civilian superiors was meant to prevent. Today it suits the antiwar left to applaud the rupture of that tradition. But it is a disturbing and very dangerous precedent that even the left will one day regret.
#1
The "General's revolt" is a bunch of horse hockey. These guys are just speaking their collective minds. Re-call them to active duty, put them in charge of a unit and mission and see how "revolting" they are. More Washington Post drivel.
#2
Actually, these generals are republican plants to penetrate the democrat party and the MSM and report back their weaknesses. They will regret these generals.
#4
All hail the future OWG Amerikan SSR's/USR's Communist Party of Amerika's [CPUS] future People's Military Commission [PMC], of Billary's Commmonwealth Soviet Republic Dominion Empire of the Union of the Confederacy.
Last Monday, just before he announced that Iran had gatecrashed "the nuclear club", President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad disappeared for several hours. He was having a khalvat (tête-à-tête) with the Hidden Imam, the 12th and last of the imams of Shiism who went into "grand occultation" in 941.
According to Shia lore, the Imam is a messianic figure who, although in hiding, remains the true Sovereign of the World. In every generation, the Imam chooses 36 men, (and, for obvious reasons, no women) naming them the owtad or "nails", whose presence, hammered into mankind's existence, prevents the universe from "falling off". Although the "nails" are not known to common mortals, it is, at times, possible to identify one thanks to his deeds. It is on that basis that some of Ahmad-inejad's more passionate admirers insist that he is a "nail", a claim he has not discouraged. For example, he has claimed that last September, as he addressed the United Nations' General Assembly in New York, the "Hidden Imam drenched the place in a sweet light".
Last year, it was after another khalvat that Ahmadinejad announced his intention to stand for president. Now, he boasts that the Imam gave him the presidency for a single task: provoking a "clash of civilisations" in which the Muslim world, led by Iran, takes on the "infidel" West, led by the United States, and defeats it in a slow but prolonged contest that, in military jargon, sounds like a low intensity, asymmetrical war.
In Ahmadinejad's analysis, the rising Islamic "superpower" has decisive advantages over the infidel. Islam has four times as many young men of fighting age as the West, with its ageing populations. Hundreds of millions of Muslim "ghazis" (holy raiders) are keen to become martyrs while the infidel youths, loving life and fearing death, hate to fight. Islam also has four-fifths of the world's oil reserves, and so controls the lifeblood of the infidel. More importantly, the US, the only infidel power still capable of fighting, is hated by most other nations.
According to this analysis, spelled out in commentaries by Ahmadinejad's strategic guru, Hassan Abassi, known as the "Dr Kissinger of Islam", President George W Bush is an aberration, an exception to a rule under which all American presidents since Truman, when faced with serious setbacks abroad, have "run away". Iran's current strategy, therefore, is to wait Bush out. And that, by "divine coincidence", corresponds to the time Iran needs to develop its nuclear arsenal, thus matching the only advantage that the infidel enjoys.
Moments after Ahmadinejad announced "the atomic miracle", the head of the Iranian nuclear project, Ghulamreza Aghazadeh, unveiled plans for manufacturing 54,000 centrifuges, to enrich enough uranium for hundreds of nuclear warheads. "We are going into mass production," he boasted.
The Iranian plan is simple: playing the diplomatic game for another two years until Bush becomes a "lame-duck", unable to take military action against the mullahs, while continuing to develop nuclear weapons.
Thus do not be surprised if, by the end of the 12 days still left of the United Nations' Security Council "deadline", Ahmadinejad announces a "temporary suspension" of uranium enrichment as a "confidence building measure". Also, don't be surprised if some time in June he agrees to ask the Majlis (the Islamic parliament) to consider signing the additional protocols of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT).
Such manoeuvres would allow the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) director, Muhammad El-Baradei, and Britain's Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw, to congratulate Iran for its "positive gestures" and denounce talk of sanctions, let alone military action. The confidence building measures would never amount to anything, but their announcement would be enough to prevent the G8 summit, hosted by Russia in July, from moving against Iran.
While waiting Bush out, the Islamic Republic is intent on doing all it can to consolidate its gains in the region. Regime changes in Kabul and Baghdad have altered the status quo in the Middle East. While Bush is determined to create a Middle East that is democratic and pro-Western, Ahmadinejad is equally determined that the region should remain Islamic but pro-Iranian. Iran is now the strongest presence in Afghanistan and Iraq, after the US. It has turned Syria and Lebanon into its outer defences, which means that, for the first time since the 7th century, Iran is militarily present on the coast of the Mediterranean. In a massive political jamboree in Teheran last week, Ahmadinejad also assumed control of the "Jerusalem Cause", which includes annihilating Israel "in one storm", while launching a take-over bid for the cash-starved Hamas government in the West Bank and Gaza.
Ahmadinejad has also reactivated Iran's network of Shia organisations in Bahrain, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Yemen, while resuming contact with Sunni fundamentalist groups in Turkey, Egypt, Algeria and Morocco. From childhood, Shia boys are told to cultivate two qualities. The first is entezar, the capacity patiently to wait for the Imam to return. The second is taajil, the actions needed to hasten the return. For the Imam's return will coincide with an apocalyptic battle between the forces of evil and righteousness, with evil ultimately routed. If the infidel loses its nuclear advantage, it could be worn down in a long, low-intensity war at the end of which surrender to Islam would appear the least bad of options. And that could be a signal for the Imam to reappear.
At the same time, not to forget the task of hastening the Mahdi's second coming, Ahamdinejad will pursue his provocations. On Monday, he was as candid as ever: "To those who are angry with us, we have one thing to say: be angry until you die of anger!"
His adviser, Hassan Abassi, is rather more eloquent. "The Americans are impatient," he says, "at the first sight of a setback, they run away. We, however, know how to be patient. We have been weaving carpets for thousands of years."
Amir Taheri is a former Executive Editor of Kayhan, Iran's largest daily newspaper, but now lives in Europe
#1
Reminds me of the stories Mommy used to read me at bedtime. Not.
There's no "good" way to say this, but most of humanity harbors such fantasies. The fact that this one isn't one with which most are familiar is irrelevant.
So much wasted motion, effort, treasure, delusion, and insecurity. When I'm not cleaning my Colt M-1911 .45 ACP, my heart weeps for the world.
#2
It's a good strategy. There are several here who will fall for it. But Ahmad has miscalculated. He will become the focus of the 2008 campaign and the hawk will win.
#3
I think whomever gets put in the hotseat in 2008 will have to deal with this guy. No matter his (or her) politics, survival will win out over political platforms.
#4
There's no "good" way to say this, but most of humanity harbors such fantasies. The fact that this one isn't one with which most are familiar is irrelevant.
Fantasies of exterminating the Jews? Of plunging the world into a nuclear-war chaos?
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
04/21/2006 18:55 Comments ||
Top||
#5
I agree with Ching Slolump8975. I'm constatntly surprised by the number of people who have these phantasies. Global warming alarmists being a case in point.
Iran announces it will give Hamas $50 million to meet the bills. Pin money, you might say. Grenade pin money, more like it.
The day after the award, a suicide bomber kills eight at a lunch stand in Tel Aviv. Hamas, speaking with the exquisite sense of nuance and reason that got them elected to run the Palestinian Authority, defends the attack. They blame Israel's "aggression" -- must have been the flowerpots knocked over on the way out of Gaza -- and call the action "self-defense."
This may seem absurd to some, since the people killed were waiting in a line at a falafel stand. If you believe the Jews exist only to weave dark plots against innocent Muslims and gentiles, well, yes, it's self-defense. The mother of two who was killed in the bombing could have been taking a break from inventing invisible Mossad vampire robots. You never know.
How should the West respond? With furrowed brows, of course.
U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, through his spokesperson, called upon the Palestinian Authority "to take a clear public stand against such unjustifiable acts of terrorism." In other words, Annan wants Hamas to condemn as "unjustifiable" something it has just justified. And do so sincerely. This is the response of civilized men to barbarity: They're reduced to begging for a lie.
Peeved that the usual niceties of diplomatic lingo are being ignored, Annan has also asked Iran to dial down the blowtorch rhetoric. Enough with the "death to America"; perhaps something along the lines of "a persistent rash to America, not entirely explained away as contact dermatitis" or "a broken arm to America, easily set but requiring it to spend the summer in an itchy cast."
The world could live with that, because then we could understand it was all a metaphor. And it is a metaphor, isn't it? These are all just dramatic gestures that must be understood in the context of a volatile region. They're shouting "theater" in a crowded fire. Right?
Oh, absolutely. That would explain why Iran has created an elite squad of dedicated Human Similes, or, as they call them, "The Special Unit of Martyr Seekers."
These are battalions of suicide bombers who will attack American and British interests if the West dares to interfere with Iran's nuclear bomb program. These heroic would-be falafel-stand exterminators appeared in a recent parade, "dressed in olive-green uniforms with explosive packs around their waists and detonators held high," according to England's Sunday Times. Wonderful. How seasonal. In your Martyr's bonnet, with all the wires upon it.
Iran says 40,000 have signed up. The Seekers are run by "Dr." Hassan Abbasi (one suspects the doctoral program requirements are somewhat different in the Islamic Republic), a chap who runs the "Centre for Doctrinal Strategic Studies" for the Republican Guard.
Sounds so very civilized, no? Doctors and Centres and Studies both Strategic and Doctrinal. We have the Heritage Foundation, they have think tanks that develop religious rationales for sending boys to clear minefields with their bodies. Surely there's some common ground.
Surely a country that spells "Centre" in the English fashion can be reasoned with. Granted, Abbasi has said that "Britain's demise is on our agenda," but it's a cry for respect, really. When a country announces it has 40,000 suicide bombers, and its president announces that Israel is "a rotten, dried tree that will be eliminated by one storm" and pledges the destruction of America, it's a sign we have to sit down and ask: What's on your mind, really?
Fear not. Oh, we'll talk. And talk and talk. The U.N. has taken the carrot-and-stick approach. The stick: threatening a fresh round of scowls from the Security Council. The carrot: Iran has just been elected deputy for Asian nations for the U.N. commission on ... disarmament.
That probably comes with an extra parking spot in the U.N. garage. There's not a member of the diplomatic corps who believes Iran would be stupid enough to jeopardize such a plum. Why, it's close to the elevator. They may be mad, but they're not crazy.
Posted by: Steve ||
04/21/2006 09:20 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[6 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
"This is the response of civilized men to barbarity: They're reduced to begging for a lie."
Ouch.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
04/21/2006 10:02 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Worthless Gaza is making the case for Israel to keep MOST of the much more valuable West Bank. Palestinians have proven themselves to be vermin. They reproduce endlessly sustained by the charity of productive peoples elsewhere and produce only violence, squalor, and seething. Their mindset has been warped by generations of propaganda passed off as entertainment and education to the point where they as a people and for the most part as individuals are beyond hope of coexisting with civilized men and taking part in the world economy. If every Palestinian were to die in their sleep tonight, the only concern for most people would be how to dispose of the corpses to prevent the spread of disease.
#3
Dave D. Got that, what a wonderful line.
"begging for a lie" reminds me of battered women begging for forgivness. Then again, we are talking about Kofi, aren't we. Battered brain syndrome.
#4
Is it just me, or is HAMAS by its desire to have a armed force separate from the PA and PA police units trying to set up its own Iran-style Revolutionary Guard??? Methinks 'tis more evidencia/indicias that Palestinians as a people will never get their own sovereign independent [democratic?]state. The Pals., iff they continue to follow Iran's desperate, power-manic example vv inducing wilful East-West geopol confrontation and war, may just end de facto destroying Jerusalem in order to save it.
From the Wall Street Journal, behind the subscription wall.
In the summer of 1980, a clutch of students at a small college in New Hampshire, disaffected by campus liberalism and incensed by the unfair treatment of an insurgent candidate for the board of trustees, founded a conservative newspaper. That might have been the end of it, but the Dartmouth Review promptly scandalized the campus with its heterodox opinions and brash style, and hostilities escalated.
In the years since, the Dartmouth administration has gone to great measures to stop the presses, including frivolous lawsuits against the paper and kangaroo suspensions of its editors. Mission hardly accomplished: As the Review tonight celebrates its 25th anniversary with a black-tie gala in Manhattan, we'd like to raise a glass to conservative student papers across the country. What was once a lonely voice challenging campus orthodoxy is now a boisterous chorus.
By 1984 the University of Chicago Counterpoint, the Harvard Salient, the Princeton Tory and the Virginia Advocate had joined the fight. As more and more such publications cropped up, they were brought under the patronage of the Institute for Educational Affairs (IEA), which was funded, in part, by the John M. Olin Foundation. According to James Piereson, Olin's former director, the goal was to invest in "conservative knowledge production."
And it wasn't a passive form of knowledge. Articles from the 1980s and '90s--in conservative student papers around the country--focused on the decline of academic standards, the excesses of militant feminism, the hypocrisy of racial preferences and the reign of political correctness.
Their audience included alumni. In 1994, Yale alumnus Lee Bass learned from the campus conservative journal Light and Truth that his $20 million donation to the school, aimed at establishing a program in Western civilization, was not being used for its intended purpose. The university, it turned out, had refused to launch the program because of faculty hostility. In the ensuing controversy, Yale was forced to return the gift--with interest.
Such victories have not come easily. In addition to being denounced as "fascist" by administrators and faculty members, conservative papers have been subject to theft and vandalism by students. In 1997, a mob stole a press run of the Cornell Review and burned it in front of an audience that included several administrators, including the dean of students. The school did nothing and later defended the protesters' "freedom of expression."
Today the Collegiate Network, the successor to the IEA, supports about 95 right-leaning campus papers. Their writers and editors help to promulgate and legitimate conservative ideas that are rarely encountered in the lecture hall. Their iconoclastic tone appeals to students who are open to new ideas but skeptical of settled "truths."
The papers are even contributing to a gradual shift in the culture of universities. Conservative student journalists have helped to overturn speech codes at Stanford, George Mason and the University of Wisconsin. As civil-liberties lawyer Harvey Silverglate notes: "It is now difficult or virtually impossible for a college administration to justify or rationalize censorship when it is brought to the attention of the free world."
Which won't stop college officials from trying. But the American campus is no longer a liberal mausoleum. A lively debate has started, and we have intrepid young journalists to thank.
For those of you considering where to send your tender young offspring, here is the list of colleges and universities that have a Collegiate Network-sponsored alternative newpaper.
#1
Heh, at FSU an independent (capitalist) crushed the Student Government approved and subsidized number. Forced it into bankruptcy and bought the brand.
#2
Hope it lasts, as the RINO agenda-less Dems, aka the future People's Revol Central Committee of the Commie Party of the USA [CPUS], are laying credit for alleged, "true/real" [deficit/fiscal] American = Amerikan, SSSSSHHHHHH SOCIALIST, CONSERVATISM!? Anti-Empire=Empire, Anti-Socialism =Socialism, COnservatism = Anarchism-Radicalism-Alternatism, Federalism = Centralism, Commies = Fascists/Nazis, Cops/Judges/Law = Mob/Mafias,
...........@etal. you know.
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.
