Slashdot Mirror

More patriotism from our Thief-In-Chief

Courtesy of The Guardian

White House Asks Court to Void POW Award

Wednesday April 7, 2004 9:31 PM

By JENNIFER C. KERR

Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Bush administration urged an appeals court Wednesday to overturn a judge's order awarding nearly $1 billion in Iraqi money to 17 Americans taken prisoner by Saddam Hussein's government during the 1991 Persian Gulf War.

Attorneys for the POWs, who were tortured and starved, countered that the award - to be paid from Iraqi government assets frozen in this country - in no way threatens the rebuilding of Iraq, taking issue with the central argument of the administration.

Justice Department attorney Gregory Katsas said that foreign policy interests are at stake, and that the POWs' claims should be handled through diplomatic channels rather than the courts.

The administration maintains that countless people suffered at the hands of Saddam and plenty will be seeking compensation from the new government, jeopardizing its fragile existence. Once the Iraqi government gets on more solid footing, the administration believes reparations could be negotiated.

Stewart Baker, attorney for the POWs, told a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that his clients simply want the judgment in their favor upheld to affirm their suffering and allow them to collect at a later time.

``French oil companies are going to walk in and say 'I have a contract signed by Saddam Hussein and I want to be paid,' and they're going to have a claim that is recognized under international law,'' Baker said outside court. ``We think this is a debt incurred by Saddam Hussein that deserves much more priority than some French oil contract.''

Ret. Col. David Eberly, who was held by the Iraqis for more than 40 days, said the government's effort to void the ruling is disappointing.

``Today, the argument boils down to the fact that the government simply wants to say 'thank you very much for your service and now go home and live forever the horrors and the memories of your captivity and the torture that went on.''' he said. ``I think that's unjust.''

Eberly was shot down over northwest Iraq on Jan. 19, 1991, and captured by Iraqi soldiers who beat him daily and fed him just bread and broth.

The POWs filed suit against Iraq in April 2002 under a 1996 law that allows victims to pursue blocked assets if they've won damage awards against foreign governments that sponsor terrorism.

U.S. District Judge Richard W. Roberts sided with the POWs last summer and ordered payment of $653 million in compensatory damages and $306 million in punitive damages.

But the Justice Department stepped in and said the POWs could not have access to any of the $1.7 billion of Iraqi assets frozen in 1990. It argued that President Bush formally seized those assets after the invasion of Iraq last year and that the money would be used for rebuilding the country. Judge Roberts reluctantly agreed that the government had the right to block those funds from being used.

But while hawks -- especially in the Pentagon -- believe Krekar is a "smoking gun" linking Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, the CIA is skeptical about his alleged ties to Baghdad.

-- "Analysis: Iraq al Qaida link hard to prove"

Barely five hours after American Airlines Flight 77 plowed into the Pentagon, the secretary of defense was telling his aides to start thinking about striking Iraq, even though there was no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the attacks.

-- "General says White House pushed Saddam link without evidence"

While a Saddam Hussein/Osama bin Laden connection was one of the administration's early justifications for going to war, it has produced no evidence to demonstrate this link exists.

-- "Bush Uranium Lie is Tip of the Iceberg"

British intelligence sources also dismiss claims by Washington hawks that Mohamed Atta, believed to be the ringleader of the September 11 terrorists, met an Iraqi intelligence official in Prague on several occasions.

-- "UK Spies Reject Al-Qaida Link"

"CNN sources say the network has bowed to considerable pressure on its editors. Israeli officials boast that they now have only to call a number at the network's headquarters in Atlanta to pull any story they do not like."

Read More...

Yes, but they missed out on the story about newspaper editors being banned from reporting the results of school football matches if one team scores substantially higher than another team. In this case the score was 29-0 defeat.

I speak French well with a heavy (but completely understandable) accent.

I think it was probably because I do not look French or European. I'm 6'8 and my girlfriend is almost 6' and we don't dress in all black, or in designer anything.

On one occasion, we went into a little cafe in Avignon. I thought the owner asked what my friends name was, so I told him and introduced myself. He frowned, grabbed a menu taped to the wall, and threw it on the table and walked away. I politely ordered two coffees, left a huge tip, and thanked him for his hospitality when we left. That wasn't the norm, but he just seemed to do what others wanted to.

As I said, if we were in an ethnic establishment, the service was hundreds of times better, and they were happy to speak French with me. I don't know. I've heard that Spain is the same way - you're lucky if they don't throw your change at you.

And, from what I've read and seen in Paris, it doesn't look like immigrants are too popular there.

Linking a story about nukulur satellites to Dumbya? How could you even try to do that?

people in the UK are prohibited by law from defending themselves,

Wrong. Incorrect. You have been misinformed. Lied to. Britons are not prohibited from defending themselves. If someone attacks you, putting you in fear of your life, you are allowed to use violent force.

What you are not allowed to do is lie in wait with a shotgun and shoot an unarmed burglar in the back. Your property is not yourself.

A recent case from The Guardian shows where the law lies.

Q.

guardian.co.uk is the web site of "The Guardian", a British newspaper.

...which used to be named 'The Manchester Guardian' (which you probably already knew, I just couldn't resist pointing it out). Of course, its offices are in London now, which spoils the original joke somewhat.

Ah yep you're right he sued her not vice versa, my mistake. Guardian Story

That's 591 dead US soldiers. What about the deaths of civilian contractors that are doing jobs formerly performed by soldiers in past wars? Are there any recently updated casualty statistics on that group of Americans? What about non-us citizens hired by US contractors? Should they be counted in this total?

Terraforming other planets is fun, but first we really need to terraform Earth. Between desertification, global warming, overfishing, pollution, habitat destruction, slash&burn traditional farming, chemically-enhanced modern farming, genetic engineering of plants, moving species between ecological niches, sooting up the polar regions in ways that reduce the planet's albedo, and a lot of other things those pesky primates have been up to, this planet is becoming significantly less Earth-like. It's time to look at changing that. There have been a range of proposals to do things about it, from the Kyoto politics to Giant solar reflector shields in space to Bruce Sterling's Viridian Manifesto.

Revolutions in waiting editorial from the UK Guardian.

According to this article at The Guardian, NASA is actually thinking of creating earth-like conditions on Mars. Will I get to visit Mars in my lifetime? My expiration date is sometime in the years around 2070.

BTW, has anyone seen Red Planet?

Sir, your emotional rant has induced me to inform the public on the falsehood of your statements. While I do not want to change YOUR opinions, I can not allow these OPINIONS to be propagated as FACTS. As follows:

And if they weren't trying to remove israel from the face of the Earth,

If israeli settlers weren't trying to remove palestinians from THEIR land:

Total settler population in the West Bank and Gaza Strip:
1972: 1,500
1983: 29,090
1992: 109,784
2001: 213,672

Total settler population in East Jerusalem:
1972: 6,900
1992: 141,000
2000: 170,400

which is well documented by JEWISH human rights organizations:
The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories
settlers, whom even JEWS want to pull out:
Brit Tzedek v'Shalom - Jewish Alliance for Justice and Peace - for the sake of Israel's security, bring the settlers home
settlers, who sometimes aren't even Semites:
(When a delegation of rabbis travelled to Lima to convert a group of South American Indians to Judaism, they added just one condition: come and live with us in Israel. As soon as these new Jews arrived in the country, they were bussed straight to settlements in the disputed territories. )

* * * * * * *
they would be welcome to participate in the economic, social, and political makeup of the society at large...

such a change of policy is highly questionable. the opposite is taking place right now:

While the settlers benefit from an unlimited quantity of running water - including filling swimming pools and watering lawns, the Palestinian towns and villages suffer a severe shortage of running water, even for drinking and bathing.

Ever heard of Nuremberg Laws? Israeli Parliament votes to block Palestinians who marry Israelis from becoming Israeli citizens or residents,[...] supporters of bill call it necessary bulwark against infiltration by terrorists, as well as way to preserve Israel's Jewish majority; opponents call it racist measure

Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions - Israel Destroys Palestinian Infrastructure

* * * * * * *
Can't embrace my brother if he chooses to kill me and my people to get his political message across...

let us compare who is killing whom:
In the Palestinian terrorist attacks, about 920 Israelis were killed (up to 2.1.2004), and 4,400 were wounded (source: Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs). [...]
Following statistics of the Palestine Red Crescent Society 2,417 Palestinians were killed and 22,233 were wounded from September 29, 2000, to August 1, 2003, due to the Israeli military operations.

* * * * * * *
Better to contain and kill the MF'ers...
in the ghetto?

* * * * * * *
(In regard to removing Israel from the face of the earth, that's their STATED GOAL my friends. TAUGHT to SCHOOL CHILDREN!)

i can not verify what is beeing taught in schools, because I have never been there. have you? OTOH i can tell for sure what the Israeli public is discussing.

well, Israel is considering removing of all Palestinians into Jordan. In other countries this is called ETHNIC CLEANSING.
( King Abdullah has rejected the idea of permanently settling Palestinians outside their

Maybe it's one of the first signs that this prediction may be accurate.

And, as the article says, Bush thinks Global Warmin is a hoax. Typical.

No it is not such a bad question because some groups such as Earth First, some of the anti-abortion activists and some anti-vivisectionists crossed the line long ago. Earth First does things which are very likely to kill people, like spike trees.

There certainly are radical terrorists who champion those causes, the problem is that the line is usually abused. The current UK foreign secretary was under MI5 surveillance when he was a student. So Blair's number one man in the war on terra was once on a blacklist.

I have seen this happen personally in the UK. A group associated with the UK conservative party called the Economic League maintained a blacklist of 'left wing sympathizers' that they sold to an undisclosed list of employers. I got listed for saying that there was no way I was going to have anything to do with any group that used those tactics. In case people are wondering how privately educated sons of the establishment like myself turn on the tory party like I did, well that was the Damascus moment for me.

You can easily verify this claim further with a small amount of Googling. The list itself collapsed in irrelevance after Bob Maxwell bought a copy and set up a stand at the Labour party conference. There were more Tories on it than left wing radicals. They used to list each other when they got into faction fights.

Given the treatment meeted out to Richard Clarke in the past few days, there is no way that John Ashcroft or George Bush can be trusted with such a power. They are now talking of selectively declassifying intelligence for the sole purpose of being able to punish Clarke with a specious perjury prosecution. They went after Wilson by illegally uncovering the fact that his wife was a covert CIA operative. The continued to threaten O'Niel with prosecutions even after it was admitted that the Whitehouse had cleared all his documents for release.

And you know what? At this point I'm not really sure that Ashcroft's excuse for holding Padilla without indictment or trial is going to turn out to be valid when we find out what it is.

In the past few days Bush has shown more energy and passion in his efforts to crush Clarke than he ever has in his pro-forma attempts to track down and eliminate al Qaeda. I simply cannot believe that any other major party candidate in that race on either side would not have invaded Afghanistan to destroy al Qaeda and stayed there focused on that single task until it was complete. Forbes, Keyes, Gore, Bradley, I can't believe a single one would not have invaded (they would have been impeached anyway so it would not matter) and I can't believe any other candidate would have finished the job.

And has anyone noticed how much Sheik Yassin looks like Saruman [1] [2]? I knew he was evil and wnated to kill Israeli citizens, but I didn't know he wanted to breed men with orcs!

Courtesy of The Guardian

Blair meets Gadafy

Historic handshake
Shell's 110m deal for Libyan gas
Police to visit Libya over killed PC

Mark Oliver and agencies
Thursday March 25, 2004

Tony Blair and Colonel Muammar Gadafy in Tripoli. Photograph: Stefan Rousseau/PA

Tony Blair today shook hands with Colonel Muammar Gadafy, in a symbolic end to three decades of the west's isolation of Libya.

The prime minister said a stable "new relationship" had become possible with the former pariah state after its promise last December to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction programme.

Since then there had been "full and transparent cooperation", Mr Blair said.

Mr Blair met the Libyan leader in an elaborate Bedouin tent on farmland near the Libyan capital, Tripoli, for the historic talks. "You look good, you are still young," Col Gadafy told him.

It was the first visit to the country by a British leader since Col Gadafy came to power in 1969 and follows decades of rancour and sanctions as a result of Col Gadafy's support for terrorism, including the bombing of Pan-Am flight 103 over Lockerbie.

Mr Blair held talks with Col Gadafy for around 90 minutes. Then at a solo press conference, the prime minister admitted that while it was "strange" being in Tripoli after the estrangement of the past, "remarkable" progress had been made.

The trip has been controversial and while many relatives of victims of the Lockerbie bombing supported it, there were some who accused Mr Blair of betrayal.

But Mr Blair said that "if a country is prepared to put the past behind us ... then we should offer the hand of partnership ...[and a] normal relationship".

He said they now had common cause in the war against terror and that the improved relations with Libya should be an inspiration to other states seeking weapons proliferation. Libya has said al-Qaida is an enemy.

When the two leaders first met there appeared to be a little tension but Mr Blair smiled as he shook hands with a man the former US president Ronald Reagan once described as a "mad dog".

They then sat alongside one another at a photocall and Mr Blair said "it's good to be here at last".

With an interpreter standing behind him, Col Gadafy first spoke in Arabic before switching to English to say: "You did a lot of fighting on this issue and seem exhausted."

Mr Blair replied: "There's been a lot to do." Col Gadafy said: "You look good, you are still young."

Local officials said Col Gadafy had spent some time in the tent "meditating" before Mr Blair's arrival. The prime minister's officials said Mr Blair was aware he was meeting one of world's most unpredictable leaders.

After the photocall, the two had private talks then strolled to a separate tent for a lunch of olives and salad, followed by fish couscous.

There had been speculation that Col Gadafy might join Mr Blair at the press conference but in the event the prime minister appeared alone and listed progress made in dismantling Libya's WMD capabilities.

He also spoke of the news that oil giant Shell had agreed a 110m deal for gas exploration rights off the Libyan coast and future deals with the British defence industry.

Mr Blair said: "Libya's voluntary and open implementation of that decision [to dismantle WMD] gives us real hope that we can build a new relationship with it, one for the modern world."

He said he kept in mind the pain that people had suffered in the past. "Of course, we must be aware of the pitfalls," he said. "Trust on both sides will take time to establish. But the signs are better than they have been for many years. And the future prize in terms of security not just of this region but the wider world - indeed our own country - is great."

He said terrorists were also a threat to Arab countries and wanted to t

As an FYI, my understanding is the EU *still* isn't importing hormone-enhanced beef. The WTO just allowed the US and Canada to issue retaliatory tariffs. This article has lots of information about the trade fights that have been going on for the last number of years.

No it was Malcolm Muggeridge and Bishop Mervyn Stockwood, who were having a televised debate with John Cleese & Micheal Palin. Theres some more information in this Grauniad article.

There were two "religious guys" -- the Anglican Bishop and Southwark and a well-known religious commentator, Malcolm Muggeridge.

Note that the movie was originally funded in part by George Harrison -- good friend of Eric Idle, who stepped in when the original backers, EMI, pulled out.

The proper checks and balances are in place via a search warant.

To think that criminal communication wouldn't be encrypted, is niave. Given that, why extend law enforcement's powers, other than to allow then to snoop where they clearly don't belong.

If they have a judge's blessing, its simple enough to place a keylogger So if its reasonable to expect that communication to be encryped, and if there are already tools, to perform surveillance on unenrypted communications.

If you look at this and this perhaps you'll consider changing your viewpoint?

Canadians would appreciate it, as we'll undoubtedly be pressured into the same costly (both in dollars and in freedom) legislation up here.

There are also stories of him asking judges to annoint him with oil when he got into a new position... weird stuff. He's just an all around nut.

Have anything to back that up?

Here's another. And another. And another. Just look for "oil" on the page.

As the AC said, if people would read newspapers instead of Chomsky, they'd know that Iraq had no meaningful weapons from the US.


This Guardian article mentions that the U.S. did not supply too much in the way of actual weapons, except some cluster bombs. They did supply access to biological material such as anthrax, though as we've seen, that probably didn't end up being used in either of the wars.

This seems rather beside the point though. The claim being argued was that money given to the American government can end up being flung back in ones face by foreign despots. Arguing that the contribution of the U.S. is small relative to those of Europeans is irrelevant to the point.

Whether or not the Americans actually sold bullets to Saddam, it's at least generally accepted that they provided some level of financial aid during the Iran-Iraq war, and money can buy bullets. These need not be all or even most of the bullets, to serve as an example.

"EU investigators found the price fixing started in the vitamin A and E market in the 1990s,"
Oh those crazy 90s.... They always said vitamin A was the gateway vitamin, but we never ever listen to the signs.

"I'm still not convinced on global warming so how can I condemn another man who also isn't convinced."

Ok. That shows you're as ignorant as Bush. The difference is that you don't have to make decisions that can change the world, so you're excused to be ignorant. Even though Bush is dumb, he has specialists to help. And all these specialists, including those from Pentagon, are warning him about this. And he doesn't care. I strongly suggest you read this this

I love how you just say he lied to a whole nation in order to get support for the war. What did he say or even insinuate that was a lie?

You must been brain-washed if you din't notice the lies. He tried to picture Saddam as a threat to the US. But Saddam, althought being a son-of-a-bitch crazy loon, was harmless to the world at that point. His army was almost dismanteled, specially if compared to what it was some years ago. He didn't have any missile able to reach the continental US. He didn't have any WMD (in fact I am surprised the US didn't plant any WMD in Iraq, to be found). He was not affiliated with Al-Qaeda. And all reports Bush received indicated all this. But he tried to supress and change these reports and fabricate others, that would incriminate Saddam.

I suggest you read this excelent explanation, this and this. Please tell me what you think after reading these links.

http://media.guardian.co.uk/advertising/story/0,74 92,1166579,00.html

That agreement was with the U.N. Are we the U.N.?

Attempt to assassinate Bush Sr.

Was that a response to us attempting to assassinate Saddam? Or, Kaddafi, or Castro, or [insert long list of U.S. successful and unsuccessful attempts to assassinate foreign leaders from South America to Asia]?

Giving aid and comfort to terrorists

Who? The U.S.? If it were that, then why not invade North Korea, or Iran, or Pakistan, or Saudi Arabia...etc? The answer is below.

Refusing to cooperate with the UN.

Again, are we the U.N.?

Being a rat-bastard tyrant

Finally, the honest answer. But, only partially honest. His daddy was made a fool by Saddam, and everyone knew that if Shrub got into office, the Iraqis would pay. Shrub's Secretary of the Treasury reports that plans for invading Iraq were in the making only within a few days of Shrub's theft of the election. If it were simply a matter of being a rat-bastard, there are plenty of others further along the road to bastard-hood: North Korea's loony leader for one. The problem is, no oil there, so no business drive to get there. Afghanistan proved a perfect, inarguable cause. Not for the one you think. True, Bin-Loonie was there, but that was simply the inescapable argument for invasion. If we could tame that country (only an asteroid dropped from space could achieve that), we could finally lay that oil pipeline we've been planning on for the past 30 years. Unfortunately, CNN and FauxNews channels don't cover this little bit of history, but we've been in a chess game with the Russians and Chinese for this bit of inhospitable land for quite a while. By the way, this is also why we're "friends" with Pakistan.

Simple failture of Washington/Baghdad diplomacy

No. Simple failure of Shrub Administration/U.N. diplomacy. His daddy was better at it, but this numbskull couldn't control his trigger finger. His only half-way feasable argument (even Powell had to excise some of the outright lies from the deceptive rhetoric he was forced to spew to the U.N.'s collective face) of Weapons of Mass Destruction have vanished into thin air, leaving a unpleasant odor that the rest of the world blames us for.

'they're trying to get nukes'

Again, why not invade Saudi Arabia, Iran, North Korea, or Pakistan? They're the biggest terrorist threats outside of Afghanistan. They've been attempting to get nuclear long before Iraq, and have actual terrorist ties. The reason is this was a personal vendetta and business agenda, and he used to this country to fulfill it. If he should force Iraq's oil wells within U.S. corporate controls in the process of taking revenge, all the better. This monkey has to go come November.

You're right in that Shrub didn't attack Iraq simply for Weapons of Mass Destruction. That's just what he used to sell it.

The truth is, the rest of the world was behind us going into Afghanistan because that's where t

That was a funny comment, but do remember that in all the recounts that occurred in Florida AFTER the whole bru-haha, Dubya still came out ahead.

To say Bush won every media recount (those are the recounts that happened after the election) is a distortion. The truth is Bush won every recount using only undervotes (i.e. where the problem with the ballot was a hanging chad or there was only a dimple) (See USA Today). That is the most widely used standard, and the one that Gore was asking for, so ultimately Bush won. Fine.

But I think it might worth at least mentioning that if you include the overvotes (such as where people checked Gore and wrote in Gore) Gore won. That is to say, if the standard is voter intent, in every recount more people went to the polls intending to vote for Gore than Bush. So when you say Bush won every recount, be sure and include that little footnote, because otherwise people may think you are being dishonest. See Guardian. See USA Today. See Salon. See Washington Post.

And you know, maybe if minority votes counted for as much as a non-minority vote, that would make a difference. See New York Times.

Personally before Florida, I thought the voter's intent was the standard. How silly.

Then there was the minorities being intimidated at the polls thing. Then there was Republican officials writing on a bunch of ballots to "fill in missing information." I'm not saying they didn't just fill in missing social security numbers, but it is obviously a violation of election standards to have partisan non-election officials writing on ballots. There are media references for all this stuff too. Go find them yourself. I'm tired.

from this Feb. here.

Mind you, they may well be a bunch of lying Pakis - the three from Tipton were apparently overheard planning to go and train in Afghanistan, but of course the authorities over here won't send the bastards back to Pakistan where they belong.

Yes - I am a British nationalist. It's my country, and my right to object to it being diluted by multiculturalism.

Here's another reason not to buy from Samsung: employment of illegal immigrants under illegal working conditions with no concern for their welfare.

Not that seriously. The first Apollo mission found the moon to be sterile, but later Apollo missions found strep bacteria from previous missions.

Bacterial contamination is a real danger to life and to accurate science on Europa and lake Vostok. It is extremely difficult to keep a robotic probe from carrying contamination since modern electronics can't take the extreme heat needed to kill resilient strains (which since they're so resilient would make them even more harmful). Scientists have been putting more effort into trying to figure out how to explore Europa without contamination, but are having a tough time coming up with a solution.

Note however that the information will be available only to those who pay for a licence; and who accept MS's terms and conditions.

"The draft decision says the US firm must share more of its protocols with rivals, charging a reasonable royalty. It will be left to Microsoft to work out the precise solution, with close oversight by the commission". -- Guardian

The number of IP licences taken out actually fell after they were mandated by the US judgment.

A better solution would be for to require the protocols be openly published, with their value for non-monopolistic use netted off against the fines the EU wants to impose.

The penalty for misusing protocol specifications to reinforce a monopoly should be the loss of control of those specifications.

It's okay, the Chinese got us back by using their 1st-generation guided-missile technology on our surveillance plane.

Agreed: "The Bush administration and the Republican majority in Congress have used the tragedy of 9/11 to spread fear among Americans, and are using that fear to gain control of all three branches of government - legislative, executive and judicial. If we don't stop allowing the right-wing factions in this country to consolidate their power by taking away our freedoms one by one we won't have a country worth saving."

The U.S. government is rapidly becoming more corrupt. Here are just a few examples, which were posted before to another story:

Killing people and destroying their property:
N.Y. Times editorial
"... Americans paid Ahmad Chalabi to gull them into a war that is costing them a billion a week and a precious human cost."

Lying about scientific facts:
"The Bush administration has deliberately and systematically distorted scientific fact in the service of policy goals..."
N.Y. Times
The Guardian
Wired News
Union of Concerned Scientists

The present terrorism against the U.S. people is partly the result of the U.S. government's secret violence:
About a year ago, I hastily put together a short, incomplete history that shows what has happened: History surrounding the U.S. war with Iraq: Four short stories.

If you don't like it, vote accordingly.

Well the biggest hidden secret fact is that Alexander Graham Bell did not actually invent the telephone. As was finally recognised by the US Congress in 2002, the inventor was a poor Italian immigrant Antonio Meucci.

Meucci had taken a 'one year renewable intent to patent' out on the invention as he couldn't afford the full patent, and a few years later Bell, who had access to Meucci's materials got hold of the stuff and claimed it as his own.

He sent a model and technical details to the Western Union telegraph company but failed to win a meeting with executives. When he asked for his materials to be returned, in 1874, he was told they had been lost. Two years later Bell, who shared a laboratory with Meucci, filed a patent for a telephone, became a celebrity and made a lucrative deal with Western Union.

Meucci sued and was nearing victory - the supreme court agreed to hear the case and fraud charges were initiated against Bell - when the Florentine died in 1889. The legal action died with him.

Take for instance Sony's Betamax video system. It was (and is) far superior to the JVC VHS system...

Some would claim that's a myth. In picture/sound quality, maybe, but remember that that's only a small part of the whole package. Remember, not everybody owns a multi-million dollar offset printer, even though it has superior printing capabilities.

Ah yes, the I've heard this one before. The Russians have superior technology, US killed MIR, yada yada yada. Bullshit.

I'm talking economics, bub. When you have people to feed and a country to rebuild, spaceflight is not necessarily the first thing on your mind.

Ok. So first of all, Soyuz is definitely more reliable. That I'll agree with. But it is in no way shape or form more capable. It's a three-person capsule (or, robotically, a limited cargo delivery vehicle). I'm hopeful that the six person soyuz will actually be seen through, but it will likely only be through external funding. For instance, last year, Russia had to petition other countries for money to continue funding Soyuz. And another. And more.

Russia's space program is less stable than the Soyuz launch record would indicate. How long they can keep it up, well, that's anybody's guess.

As far as MIR: granted, it was -- bar none -- the most successful space station ever. But these things have a half-life. The longest running Salut -- the previous generation Russian station -- was only in orbit for nine years. Mir, on the other hand, was up for fifteen years, and near the end there were some major problems. Fifteen years is a damn good run, but it was time for it to be retired. Law of diminishing returns and such. Especially considering there was a better option. And yes, I'm referring to the ISS.

There's definitely manpower in Russia. What I'm not so sure about is the money. And furthermore, why should we just give up on our own manned programs and rely on another nation for access to space? It is politically a very real possibility that the friends of today will be the enemies of tomorrow, whether through changes to the political structure in another country or the arrogant stance the US has been taking lately.

Ah yes, the I've heard this one before. The Russians have superior technology, US killed MIR, yada yada yada. Bullshit.

I'm talking economics, bub. When you have people to feed and a country to rebuild, spaceflight is not necessarily the first thing on your mind.

Ok. So first of all, Soyuz is definitely more reliable. That I'll agree with. But it is in no way shape or form more capable. It's a three-person capsule (or, robotically, a limited cargo delivery vehicle). I'm hopeful that the six person soyuz will actually be seen through, but it will likely only be through external funding. For instance, last year, Russia had to petition other countries for money to continue funding Soyuz. And another. And more.

Russia's space program is less stable than the Soyuz launch record would indicate. How long they can keep it up, well, that's anybody's guess.

As far as MIR: granted, it was -- bar none -- the most successful space station ever. But these things have a half-life. The longest running Salut -- the previous generation Russian station -- was only in orbit for nine years. Mir, on the other hand, was up for fifteen years, and near the end there were some major problems. Fifteen years is a damn good run, but it was time for it to be retired. Law of diminishing returns and such. Especially considering there was a better option. And yes, I'm referring to the ISS.

There's definitely manpower in Russia. What I'm not so sure about is the money. And furthermore, why should we just give up on our own manned programs and rely on another nation for access to space? It is politically a very real possibility that the friends of today will be the enemies of tomorrow, whether through changes to the political structure in another country or the arrogant stance the US has been taking lately.

Yup, we *all* sat it out. We had nothing in place to react as quickly as something like that requires, and the people at the UN (and in the Canadian government) utterly ignored the Canadian general who was screaming at the top of his lungs.

However I've heard that NATO's "rapid reaction force" was specifically created in order to respond to things like Rawanda. So maybe next time it'll be different.

((goes away and does some digging))

uh oh - it looks like organizing that rapid reaction forced didn't go so well. And I quote:

The move reflects frustration at the inability of the EU to realise its original aim of setting up a rapid reaction force of 60,000 troops, and the failure of European countries to modernise their armed forces and save money by sharing equipment - failures which have been having a serious impact on Nato, as most EU members are also members of the US-led military alliance.

And the "new UK/French/German" force isn't going to be ready until 2007, and it's going to be under UN auspices - and the UN isn't quick to do *anything* it seems.

Jeezus, what's so damn hard about keeping a few thousand tonnes of military equipment in hangers ready to go and keeping a few thousand troops trained to use it? AFAIAC given enough aircraft, you should be able to quickly put 3000 troops anywhere on the planet pretty quickly.

Bah, bloody beaurocratic junk.

There are some links on this page you might find useful. There's plenty of free stuff too: some student radio stations like icradio.com archive their shows and make them available for free download and some artists provide a few downloadable mp3s on their own websites - Kate Rusby for example.

Well considering the failed coup in Venezuela was US engineered/backed, and that nothing has come to light to suggest the US admin has changed its attitude and ways at all, it seems pretty easy to suggest that they're involved in trying to topple and undermine the democracy there now (and in the future).

'Freedom and Democracy' my arse, as they say.

from this article: Wounded British soldiers condemn US 'cowboy' pilot

"He had absolutely no regard for human life. I believe he was a cowboy. There were four or five that I noticed earlier and this one had broken off and was on his own when he attacked us. He'd just gone out on a jolly."
...
"To be honest, I think they are just ignorant. I don't know if they haven't been trained or are just trigger happy."

This wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that Kodak is way behind in the digital camera market now would it?

If you can't join em, sue em?

The U.K. Guardian's piece on this gave the comparable figure for a car: "at most, twice its weight in fossil fuels", compared with 10 times for the P.C.
Tony.

From Inside Republican America: A blacklist burning for Bush:

"The Observer discovered that Harris's office had ordered the elimination of 8,000 Florida voters on the grounds that they had committed felonies in other states. None had. Harris bought the bum list from a company called ChoicePoint, a firm whose Atlanta executive suite and boardroom are filled with Republican funders. ChoicePoint, we have learned, picked up the list of faux felons from state officials in - ahem - Texas. In fact, it was a roster of people who, like their Governor, George W, had committed nothing more than misdemeanours."

"The controversy is not the first to engulf ChoicePoint. The company's subsidiary, Database Technologies, was responsible for bungling an overhaul of Florida's voter registration records, with the result that thousands of people, disproportionately black, were disenfranchised in the 2000 election. Had they been able to vote, they might have swung the state, and thus the presidency, for Al Gore, who lost in Florida by a few hundred votes."

From Inside Republican America: A blacklist burning for Bush:

"The Observer discovered that Harris's office had ordered the elimination of 8,000 Florida voters on the grounds that they had committed felonies in other states. None had. Harris bought the bum list from a company called ChoicePoint, a firm whose Atlanta executive suite and boardroom are filled with Republican funders. ChoicePoint, we have learned, picked up the list of faux felons from state officials in - ahem - Texas. In fact, it was a roster of people who, like their Governor, George W, had committed nothing more than misdemeanours."

"The controversy is not the first to engulf ChoicePoint. The company's subsidiary, Database Technologies, was responsible for bungling an overhaul of Florida's voter registration records, with the result that thousands of people, disproportionately black, were disenfranchised in the 2000 election. Had they been able to vote, they might have swung the state, and thus the presidency, for Al Gore, who lost in Florida by a few hundred votes."

Right - now that nuclear waste turned out to be completely safe, and no one ever needs to worry about nuclear warfare in their town, we should forget about Gojira, and what happens when we attack the Earth when we think we're the baddest on the planet. I wonder if they'll mock us, or forget us, those who survive, after he's been gone awhile: when we next assault the planet, and bring some Gojira back.