If the Democratic Party ultimately decides to seat Michigan's currently banished delegates, Hillary Clinton will get 73 of them, and 55 will be uncommitted, according to The Green Papers.
The state also has 28 (hypothetical) superdelegates, who are by definition "uncommitted." So if you add it all up, Uncommitted wins, 83 to 73! . . .
f only Uncommitted could give a victory speech! I'm sure it would be another transcendent political moment, a stirring celebration of yet another barrier-breaking victory:
"They said this day would never come... they said a non-corporeal entity, a mere word on a printed piece of paper, running against various homo sapien opponents, could never win this primary... but they were wrong, weren't they, Michigan? They were wrong!"
[crowd cheers, chants "Unc! Unc! Unc!"]
"You showed them that our undefined, noncommittal message is resonating with the American people! To all of my countrymen who don't know what the hell they want in a candidate, I say: join us! Together, we will take back this country for nobody specific and nothing in particular!"
Yes, as my dad says in comments, it would truly be an undefining moment in our nation's history.
Posted by: Mike ||
01/16/2008 18:02 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[4 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
PAYVAND > BUSH'S ONLY ACHIEVEMENT DURING HIS ME TRIP IS TO INCREASE THE POWER OF IRAN; + IRANIAN.WS > SYRIA: BUSH IS SCARING ARABS IN ORDER TO SELL WEAPONS, + PERSPECTIVE: NOTHING FOR ARABS [vv Israel].
Also from IRANIAN.WS > IRAN: US PRESENCE IS A "SECURITY THREAT" TO THE GULF [ME].
From the desk of Paul Belien on Wed, 2008-01-16 10:57
Last November, 15-year old Mouhsin and 16-year old Lakamy were killed in Villiers-le-Bel, an immigrant suburb of Paris. The boys, joyriding on a stolen motorbike. collided at high speed with a police vehicle which happened to be passing in a neighborhood where the police normally do not venture.
Though Moushin and Lakamy were French-born and of French nationality, their families had them buried in Morocco and Senegal the countries of their ethnic origin. The self-imposed segregation extends even beyond death. Muslims, who claim that France does not have enough separate Islamic cemeteries, do not want to be buried near Christians or Jews.
The death of the two boys led to three nights of heavy rioting in which gangs of criminals invariably described in the media as French youths burned down dozens of public buildings and tried to kill two police officers in retaliation.
For the first time the French police were confronted with rioters using firearms. On Nov. 28 Nicolas Sarkozy, the French President, declared that opening fire at officials is completely unacceptable. He promised that those who shoot at officials will face court for attempted murder.
Two months later Mr. Sarkozys words can be evaluated. All in all, seven delinquents have received a jail sentence for participating in the riots. No one had to stand trial for attempted murder. The longest sentence is a 12-month term. Two of the youths were convicted following the testimony of a deputy police officer. Because the court disclosed the identity of the witness, the latter had to face the consequences. When he arrived at his home he was beaten up by a group of young immigrants.
In May, the French voters elected Mr. Sarkozy as president because he had promised to restore the authority of the Republic over Frances 751 no-go areas, the so-called zones urbaines sensibles (ZUS, sensitive urban areas), where 5 million people 8 percent of the population live. During his first months in office he has been too busy with other activities, such as selling nuclear plants to Libya and getting divorced. While the French media publish nude pictures of the future (third) Mrs. Sarkozy, the situation in the ZUS has remained as sensitive as before.
People get mugged, even murdered, in the ZUS, but the media prefer not to write about it. When large-scale rioting erupts and officers and firemen are attacked, the behavior of the thugs is condoned with references to their poverty and to the racism of the indigenous French. The French media never devote their attention to the bleak situation of intimidation and lawlessness in which 8 percent of the population, including many poor indigenous French, are forced to live. Muslim racism towards the infidels is never mentioned.
Xavier Raufer, a former French intelligence officer who heads the department on organized crime and terrorism at the Institute of Criminology of the University of Paris II, thinks that organized crime has a lot to do with the indifference of the French establishment.
The ZUS are centers of drug trafficking. According to a recent report of the French governments Interdepartmental Commission to Combat Drug Traffic and Addiction (MILDT) 550,000 people in France consume cannabis on a daily basis and 1.2 million on a regular basis. The annual cannabis consumption amounts to 208 tons for a market value of 832 million euros ($1.2 billion). MILDT estimates that there are between 6,000 and 13,000 small entrepreneurs and between 700 and 1,400 wholesalers who make a living out of dealing cannabis. The wholesalers earn up to 550,000 euros ($820,000) per year. Since they operate from within the ZUS the drug dealers are beyond the reach of the French authorities.
The ZUS exist not only because Muslims wish to live in their own areas according to their own culture and their own Shariah laws, but also because organized crime wants to operate without the judicial and fiscal interference of the French state. In France, Shariah law and mafia rule have become almost identical.
Mr. Raufer says that corruption is the key to understanding both the silence of the French media and the unwillingness of the French politicians to reconquer the lost territories of the republic. He suggests that the Parisian journalists, intellectuals and politicians may have been bought with drug money: Enormous interests are at stake. Once such a vast amount of money circulates underground everything can be bought, including the culture of condonement.
Recently the Islamist ideologue Tariq Ramadan was appointed professor at Leiden University, the eldest and most prestigious university in the Netherlands. His chair is being financed by the Sultan of Oman. In Europe as elsewhere, large sums of Saudi and Gulf money are being used to buy universities and media outlets. The purpose is not to promote a moderate form of Islam and to stimulate Muslim immigrants to assimilate into their Western host countries, but to do exactly the opposite. It is possible that money resulting from criminal activities within Europes own borders is being used for the same goals. In that case no one need be surprised at the vast propaganda of multiculturalism emanating from our schools, our press and our politicians.
Multiculturalism is a disaster. Because it is a disaster and has opened the door to organized crime, the latters money has bought everything and the praise of multiculturalism is being sung louder than ever.
This piece was originally published in The Washington Times on January 16, 2008 .
#1
Good post. Thanks for not writing off Belien for associating with ex-fascists. Tens of millions of Germans and Italians abandoned Nazism and Fascism, after WW2. LGF's Charles Johnson must see swastika armbands on anyone speaking German. Belien is a true anti-jihadi, and GWOT crusader.
#2
"In France, SHARIAH LAW and MAFIA RULE have become almost identical" > IOW, the GLOBAL ISLAMIST/MUSLIM STATE-CALIPH, etc. = synonymous wid GLOBAL MAFIA STATE, etc. Goes to show that when it comes to $$$ and power, MANY LOCAL-WORLD MAFIAS, etc. SHOW NO FAVORITISM IN DESIRED -ISM(S) TO ACHIEVE THEIR ENDS.
#3
Perhaps for a few years France should legalize drugs and sell them in state owned shops. Then after they have been doing this for a couple of years and state shops are the normal source for drugs... poison the drugs.
Problem takes care of itself for a few generations.
#5
Thanks JB 9209. I've watched the ongoing feud with much dismay. LGF used to be much fun...but that's gone. It's become a personality cult. As for those in Europe who are carrying the fight against jihadism/shari'a - I'll stand by the Gipper's Law: "Trust but verify" So far, those of the SIOE have done well, and absorbed much punishment. They deserve better than Charles has dished out.
Posted by: Rex Mundi ||
01/16/2008 22:26 Comments ||
Top||
#1
Bill Maher is a bitter asshole partisan. He deserves no credit for denying the truthers. Any sane human would/should do the same. In any other situation or context, he's a lying POS
Posted by: Frank G ||
01/16/2008 17:02 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I watched Bill Maher when Political Incorrect was on Comedy Central. He was funny then and mostly libertarian. Then he moved to ABC and became more liberal.
My question was, was he always liberal and felt the need to hide it and be fair to ensure the widest audience possible on the smaller station, or did being on ABC somehow make him more liberal. Or was it drugs+monica Lewinsky that just made him snap?
It's no secret that Hillary Clinton views herself as a member of the God Squad, divinely anointed to shepherd the masses to greater gender consciousness.
"Hillary acts as though she has been chosen by God," recounts Edward Klein, author of The Truth about Hillary. "I find her to be among the most self-righteous people I've ever known," explains former New York Times reporter Bob Boorstin. And during her senate campaign Hillary glowed approvingly whenever Black preachers declared her "a woman of God."
But how many people know how Mrs. Clinton's messianic streak may lead to her political undoing?
During her childhood Hugh Rodham treated Hillary as Daddy's favorite, sparing her from many of the chastisements and chores he imposed on her hapless brothers. As brother Tony remarked enviously, "Little Hillary could do no wrong."
Hillary's teenage involvement with the local Methodist church only reinforced her emerging priggishness. By the age of 17, Hillary's "messianism and sense of entitlement" were already evident, reveals Carl Bernstein in A Woman in Charge.
During her college years, Hillary Rodham's self-righteous streak fueled her many political pursuits. Those culminated in her 1975 marriage to Bill Clinton, a man she fully expected to one day become president.
But after Bill lost his 1980 re-election bid for the Arkansas governorship, a distraught Hillary began to speak at church meetings around the state. One day she traveled to a church in North Little Rock to deliver a homily on "Women Armed with the Christian Sword - To Build an Army for the Lord."
Hillary's unconventional blend of Christian faith and feminist ideology was taking shape.
Five days after his 1992 inauguration, Bill named Hillary to head up his Task Force on Health Care Reform. But her political miscalculations soon turned into an electoral fiasco. On November 8, 1994 the Democrats lost control of both houses of Congress, and Hillary was banished from the West Wing of the White House.
Smarting from her self-inflicted wounds, Hillary invited a group of New Age savants to Camp David. As recounted by Bob Woodward in The Choice, one of her guests was Jean Houston, a psychic who had conducted LSD experiments and claimed to communicate regularly with Athena, Greek goddess of wisdom. What transpired that weekend - equal parts group psychotherapy and feminist consciousness-raising - may rank as the most bizarre episode ever involving a First Lady.
Hillary's healthcare debacle was emblematic of the female crucifixion, Ms. Houston believed. Speaking as if a witness to the Second Coming, Houston told Clinton she was carrying the burden of 5,000 years of female subservience. Driving her point home, Houston compared Hillary to Joan of Arc, the French woman who was burned at the stake in 1431 for heresy.
The best was yet to come.
In April 1995 Houston came to the White House, this time to conduct a séance. Seated around a circular table in the White House solarium, Houston instructed Hillary to close her eyes and engage in a conversation with Eleanor Roosevelt.
Hillary readily complied and was soon comparing Eleanor's epic struggles with her own. Houston intoned that the First Lady's woes were caused by self-important men who refused to accept women as equals -- ignoring how HRC's clumsy attempt to overhaul the healthcare system had exposed her political naiveté.
Now sounding like Daddy's little girl, Hillary asked why people kept saying things that hurt her feelings. The pity party was just getting started. Over the next year Jean Houston continued as Hillary's spiritual and political mentor, constantly urging her to continue the fevered crusade on behalf of women's rights.
But some would ask, What's wrong with a candidate who casts her candidacy in the aura of historical inevitability and views every issue through the moralistic lens of right and wrong?
For starters, Hillary comes across as arrogant.
Friend Sara Ehrman once warned about Hillary that "God is on my side can be arrogance." Former Moynihan aide Lawrence O'Donnell believed Clinton's haughtiness was her most prominent difficulty.
And remember Hillary's recent encounter with CBS News anchor Katie Couric? Asked how she would feel if she didn't become the Democratic nominee, Hillary acidly shot back, "Well, it will be me."
Lloyd Bentsen, who served as Treasury Secretary during the Clinton administration, observed how Hillary's "holier-than-thou" attitude often leads her to demonize her opponents - remember Hillary's paranoid remark about the "vast right wing conspiracy"?
Let's not forget all those who ended up on Hillary's fabled enemy list: Paula Jones, Gennifer Flowers, Kenneth Starr, Senators who doubted her, and even the Washington Post Biographer Carl Bernstein notes how "Hillary's willingness to demonize her enemies had left [Daniel Patrick Moynihan] with lasting caution about her."
Enemy lists, paranoid fantasies, a supercilious attitude, and self-righteous crusades - shades of Richard Milhous Nixon.
#1
The very thought of that woman as President scares the bejeebies out of me. She feels pre-ordained, pre-destined to be President. She consorts with mystics and psychics who reinforce her divine right and destiny. She believes she is surrounded by a vast conspiracy trying to prevent her from her divine right.
Change the words "she" and "woman" to "he" and "man", respectively, and this begins to sound a lot like Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and just about every other ruthless dictator the planet has ever seen.
It also sounds like Billary might be a little psychotic and might just be capable of anything once she seizes power - and if she becomes President, given everything I've seen about her thus far, she will seize as much power as she possibly can.
And she comes complete with her own bunch of little goose stepper's marching in synch ready to obey her every command. The next thing you know they'll be raising a modified Roman salute and shouting "Yea, Hillary!".
Oh, wait. They're already doing that (well, except for the salute maybe)...
#4
In April 1995 Houston came to the White House, this time to conduct a séance. Seated around a circular table in the White House solarium, Houston instructed Hillary to close her eyes and engage in a conversation with Eleanor Roosevelt.
Remember when Nancy Reagan admitted she talked to a psychic?
Man, they ripped her to shreds...
#5
During her childhood Hugh Rodham treated Hillary as Daddy's favorite, sparing her from many of the chastisements and chores he imposed on her hapless brothers. As brother Tony remarked enviously, "Little Hillary could do no wrong."
I know people like this, this is not a good thing. Enviously said because they had to pick up her slack. Could do no wrong does not mean that she was doing right and suggests temper tantrums and/or entitlement and elitism IMO.
It may not be too late to save the career of a Pentagon analyst of jihad threats whose frank and honest work has gotten him into trouble. Bill Gertz in his weekly Washington Times "Inside the Ring" column (1/11/08) reported that "Pentagon and military leaders, along with lots of working-level officials, are quietly rallying" in support of Major Stephen Coughlin (USAR), whose plight I have discussed, earlier here. Gertz also makes clear in no uncertain terms, dismissing some rumor mongering, that Coughlin was being accused "falsely" of talking "out of school to the press." As is his wont, Gertz gets to the heart of the matter:
But defense and military officials supportive of Mr. Coughlin said the real reason is that critics, like Mr. Islam. want him sidelined because they oppose his hard-to-refute views on the relationship between Islamic law and Islamist jihad doctrine. Those views have triggered a harsh debate challenging the widespread and politically correct view of Islam as a religion of peace hijacked by extremists.
Major Coughlin's "hard to refute views" are elaborated in his 333 pp. thesis, To Our Great Detriment: Ignoring What Extremists Say About Jihad, which was accepted recently by the National Defense Intelligence College, and made available online (here). Coughlin, in a subsection entitled, "A Doctrinal Basis Exists for the Jihadi Threat," demonstrates how mainstream Islamic publications-an appendix to Interpretation of the Meanings of the Noble Qur'an in the English Language ("The Call to Jihad"), written by Saudi Arabia's Chief Justice, and a 2005-2006 12th grade Saudi school textbook, as well as a standard text of Islamic Law, the Al Azhar-sanctioned non-Saudi, non-"Wahhabi", Reliance of the Traveller-make clear the obligatory requirement, sanctioned by Islamic Law, to wage jihad when non-Muslim forces enter Muslim lands. He then asks, logically,
. . . It is hard to recapture the shock in America when this totally unprecedented news broke. A married president while in office had an affair with a 22-year-old intern under his charge. In less than ten years, we had gone from a president who would not take his jacket off in the Oval Office to one who could not keep his zipper up.
Unlike Watergate, journalists failed to do something that may now prove fatal to the Old Media. They never clearly condemned the presidents sexual relations as wrong. Nor that Clinton lied to them about it. Nor the credible allegations made by Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey, and Juanita Broaddrick that Clinton may have engaged in violations ranging from sexual harassment to rape. These were reported as if they were just political squabbles, typically with one side saying it was just about sex and the other side dismissed as Clinton-haters by James Carville and a war room that the media seemed to respect, if not celebrate.
The significant number of Americans to whom it was self-evident that Clintons behavior was a previously unthinkable outrage promptly revoked their membership in an Old Media that clearly did not share their values. According to the Pew Research Center, those who believed news organizations were immoral tripled from 13% to 38% a level it has maintained since, dipping momentarily only in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 when the media did share the values of a united America.
Now that news is converging onto the internet, which will provide a multitude of news associations, the Old Media outlets will likely never be able to reunite us in a single news community with shared values. Certainly, not those Americans who are convinced they sold their soul to a devil with a blue dress on.
Posted by: Mike ||
01/16/2008 14:40 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[10 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Lewinsky scandal left a stain on the mainstream media that will never come off
Oh "Punny".
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
01/16/2008 15:21 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Didn't come off her dress either
Posted by: Kelly ||
01/16/2008 16:35 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Some images are ugly. I just can't get the image out of my mind of Slick Willie standing behind the Oval Office desk hanging on the curtains with his eyes rolled back in his head getting a BJ. Meanwhile Bin Laden was planning 911. Some images and some realities are just plain ugly. Meanwhile Hillary was doing damage control...
Award-winning author Mark Steyn has been summoned to appear before two Canadian Human Rights Commissions on vague allegations of "subject[ing] Canadian Muslims to hatred and contempt" and being "flagrantly Islamophobic" after Maclean's magazine published an excerpt from his book, America Alone.
The public inquisition of Steyn has triggered outrage among Canadians and Americans who value free speech, but it should not come as a surprise. Steyn's predicament is just the latest salvo in a campaign of legal actions designed to punish and silence the voices of anyone who speaks out against Islamism, Islamic terrorism, or its sources of financing.
Continued on Page 49
#3
Award-winning author Mark Steyn has been summoned to appear before two Canadian Human Rights Commissions on vague allegations of "subject[ing] Canadian Muslims to hatred and contempt" and being "flagrantly Islamophobic" after Maclean's magazine published an excerpt from his book, America Alone.
He spoke the truth in his writings and now the mussies are pissed off. It would be an honor to be in such company. Maybe Steyn could say piss off or f*ck in a way they understand.
#6
Judges can end this shit by tossing these frivolous suits as soon as they show up. We need to be able to put all the costs on the litigants and bleed them dry. Now, having "commissions" issuing idiotic pablum opinions is another matter entirely. Canucks rise up and stop this crap!
January 15, 2008 -- THE New York Times is trashing our troops again. With no new "atrocities" to report from Iraq for many a month, the limping Gray Lady turned to the home front. Front and center, above the fold, on the front page of Sunday's Times, the week's feature story sought to convince Americans that combat experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan are turning troops into murderers when they come home. Heart-wringing tales of madness and murder not only made the front page, but filled two entire centerfold pages and spilled onto a fourth.
The Times did get one basic fact right: Returning vets committed or are charged with 121 murders in the United States since our current wars began.
Had the Times' "journalists" and editors bothered to put those figures in context - which they carefully avoided doing - they would've found that the murder rate that leaves them so aghast means that our vets are five times less likely to commit a murder than their demographic peers.
The Times' public editor, Clark Hoyt, should crunch the numbers. I'm even willing to spot the Times a few percentage points (either way). But the hard statistics from the Justice Department tell a far different tale from the Times' anti-military propaganda.
A very conservative estimate of how many different service members have passed through Iraq, Afghanistan and Kuwait since 2003 is 350,000 (and no, that's not double-counting those with repeated tours of duty).
Now consider the Justice Department's numbers for murders committed by all Americans aged 18 to 34 - the key group for our men and women in uniform. To match the homicide rate of their peers, our troops would've had to come home and commit about 150 murders a year, for a total of 700 to 750 murders between 2003 and the end of 2007.
In other words, the Times unwittingly makes the case that military service reduces the likelihood of a young man or woman committing a murder by 80 percent.
Yes, the young Americans who join our military are (by self- selection) superior by far to the average stay-at-home. Still, these numbers are pretty impressive, when you consider that we're speaking of men and women trained in the tools of war, who've endured the acute stresses of fighting insurgencies and who are physically robust (rather unlike the stick-limbed weanies the Times prefers).
All in all, the Times' own data proves my long-time contention that we have the best behaved and most ethical military in history.
Now, since the folks at the Times are terribly busy and awfully important, let's make it easy for them to do the research themselves (you can do it, too - in five minutes).
Just Google "USA Murder Statistics." The top site to appear will be the Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Statistics. Click on it, then go to "Demographic Trends." Click on "Age." For hard numbers on the key demographics, click on the colored graphs.
Run the numbers yourself, based upon the demographic percentages of murders per every 100,000 people. Then look at the actual murder counts.
Know what else you'll learn? In 2005 alone, 8,718 young Americans from the same age group were murdered in this country. That's well over twice as many as the number of troops killed in all our foreign missions since 2001. Maybe military service not only prevents you from committing crimes, but also keeps you alive?
Want more numbers? In the District of Columbia, our nation's capital, the murder rate for the 18-34 group was about 14 times higher than the rate of murders allegedly committed by returning vets.
And that actually understates the District's problem, since many DC-related murders spill across into Prince George's County (another Democratic Party stronghold).
In DC, an 18-34 population half the size of the total number of troops who've served in our wars overseas committed the lion's share of 992 murders between 2003 and 2007 - the years mourned by the Times as proving that our veterans are psychotic killers.
Aren't editors supposed to ask tough questions on feature stories? Are the Times' editors so determined to undermine the public's support for our troops that they'll violate the most-basic rules of journalism, such as putting numbers in context?
Answer that one for yourself.
Of course, all of this is part of the disgraceful left-wing campaign to pretend sympathy with soldiers - the Times column gushes crocodile tears - while portraying our troops as clichéd maniacs from the Oliver Stone fantasies that got lefties so self-righteously excited 20 years ago (See? We were right to dodge the draft . . .).
And it's not going to stop. Given the stakes in an election year, the duplicity will only intensify.
For an upcoming treat, we'll get the film "Stop-Loss," starring, as always, young punks who never served in uniform as soldiers. This left-wing diatribe argues that truly courageous troops would refuse to return to Iraq - at a time when soldiers and Marines continue to re-enlist at record rates, expecting to plunge back into the fight.
Those on the left will never accept that the finest young Americans are those who risk their lives defending freedom. Sen. John Kerry summed up the views of the left perfectly when he disparaged our troops as too stupid to do anything but sling hamburgers.
And The New York Times will never forgive our men and women in uniform for their infuriating successes in Iraq.
Ralph Peters' latest book is "Wars of Blood and Faith."
#1
I can't tell you how much it warms the cockles of my heart to read such a beat-down as this, and to read that military-bashing movies like the excrable "Redacted" are tanking faster than the "Titanic" with the general public.
Just desserts! Just hors d'ouvres! A just main course of crow, to quote P.J. O'Rourke!
You know what? I'll bet that the Hollywood establishment will try and cover those turkeys with all sorts of awards come Oscar time, and the TV audience will turn away from the show in disgust. I can hardly wait!
#2
Mom, if the writers don't settle their strike, there won't be anybody to tell the Hollyweird types what to say at the Oscars. The Oscars ceremony will be downgraded to a press conference, just like the Golden Globes.
As I've said before, why do we care at all what actors/actresses say about anything? Their main qualifications are that they are better looking than average, and they are good at pretending to be someone else, while speaking someone else's words.
I was watching O'Reilley the other night and he mentioned this incident. I googled it and found the video bites on youtube via some left-wing nutjob's blog site - I know, how ironic. Anyhow, Snow puts on one of the best demonstrations of calm debating skills w/4 yr olds (aka the Maher audience and co-guests Mark Cuban, Cathy Crier & some douchebag journo from rolling stone that would've gotten a pimp slap from me) I've ever seen. His patience far exceeds mine. Apparently Catherine Crier was some sort of judge, I found that surprising as she's not very intelligent. All the pet leftard topics are covered from "how can we believe the surge is really working?" to election tabulting machines are rigged by trunks, to class warfare, to the economy sucks so bad, blah, blah etc. Snow had the facts down and was great at sticking to his guns. I have much admiration for this guy.
#1
Bill Maher is back on the air? Does this mean the terrorists won?
Posted by: Jack Phaviger7685 ||
01/16/2008 10:24 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Saw mahar's standup routine when he was big with PI. Weak, childish jokes. The pompus ass had a big ol picture of himself up trying for the Fabio look. Pickitted by phelps.
#6
Maher identified and playfully articulated a moment that clearly shows Bush's 9-11 criminality, whether you believe it to be criminal negligence or different levels of treasonous complicity. Personally, I would say Bush was soft LIHOP treason with not much specific knowledge and possibly cornered by the coup. And massive treasonous complicity in the cover-up after as can be clearly seen in his uncomfortable and extremely awkward demeanor after testifying to the 9-11 commission and after being lobbed a softball on Dean questioning his foreknowledge.
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.
By Carey Roberts 
by Brooke M. Goldstein
