Slashdot Mirror

There are a couple of good excuses, actually, both of which are squarely on point to his case. One is the oath of office, the other is the Nuremberg principles.

He violated his oath, betrayed his country, and Nuremberg never came into it.

He got the so called 'Collateral Murder' thing wrong.

The United States will be paying the price for his hissy fit for years to come.

American diplomacy is in shambles. (Hopefully the Wikileaks revelation that China was willing to see North Korea go under doesn't push them into war, which is where they may be heading now.)

Consider that cable about US Treasury funds ultimately being used to buy children for sex.

Not quite.

In the Afghanistan case, both DynCorp and the State Department say what occurred was far less sinister than portrayed in such reports.

According to a detailed statement provided by DynCorp spokeswoman Ashley Burke, a going-away party for a departing Afghan employee was held at the regional police training center in Kunduz. The party organizer, a local employee, hired "a 17-year-old local dancer who performed at ... weddings and other celebrations, to perform a traditional Afghan dance."

Shortly after the dancing began, a DynCorp manager "recognizing that the situation was culturally insensitive ... stopped the performance," according to the statement.

The company conducted its own investigation of the matter, "determined that the leadership of the team exhibited poor judgment and were subsequently terminated. That is the whole story; no alcohol or drugs were involved, or other illegal behaviors occurred."

The State Department concurred, saying there were no drugs, no alcohol and no boys procured for sex.

"There was no evidence of any of that," said Susan Pittman, spokeswoman for the State Department's Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement.

Both the bureau and the Office of the Inspector General investigated the matter, Pittman said, including reviewing videos of the party.

For several days after the leaked memo was published, DynCorp's Burke said, none of the online media writing about it bothered to contact the company or the State Department. Eventually, one blog, TalkingPointsMemo, did and reported the company and State Department side of the story.

The leaked memo says the Afghanistan government was prosecuting two Afghan police officers and nine other persons for "the crime of purchasing a service from a child."

Publication of the leaked memo didn't actually break any news. The Washington Post reported on the party in a July 2009 article about DynCorp. The Post said the company was taking steps to strengthen its ethics and employee behavior standards in response to U.S. government criticisms and, in part, because of the party with the boy dancer DynCorp disputes WikiLeaks allegations

And the matter of 'Collateral Murder'?

Link to video and commentary here.

From personal experience in the military, and from being in a war, I can tell you that you feel close to your buddies and that sexuality is almost non-existent in the sense most people thing about it, when you are in combat. After a few days under fire you just comfort each other however you can, and nobody is self conscious about showing affection to each other, man or women. You just want to do a good job and take care of each other.

Really?

Soldier Sex In Afghanistan
December 18, 2009 -
Last year, the U.S. Army in Afghanistan has removed the prohibition on sex between male and female soldiers. There are 68,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan, and about ten percent of them are female. So far this year, about fifteen percent of these female troops have had pregnancy tests, and a few percent of the female troops have gone home because they were pregnant.

Your views differ markedly from many in the military, especially those in the ground combat arms - the ones with the primary responsibility for attacking the enemy. The closer the person is to the sharp end, the less interest they have in this experiment.

60% of Marines Deployed to Combat Zone Say DADT Repeal Would Have Negative Impact
Early reports on the Pentagon's survey of the troops on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" were nothing but roses for repeal supporters, but the details of the survey complicate that narrative somewhat. While only 20% of troops who have never been deployed to a combat zone say that repeal of DADT would "very negatively" or "negatively" affect their "immediate unit's effectiveness at completing its mission," more than 44% of combat troops say repeal would have a negative impact on unit effectiveness:

An exception to the pattern was the response of Service members deployed to a combat zone now or in the past to the circumstance of being “in a field environment or out to sea.” Among all Service members in this group, 44.3% (and 59.4% of Marines—see Q71a in Appendix E) said performance would be “very negatively/negatively” affected in this situation. Of note, among all survey items related to the review’s major subject areas, this item had the highest percentage of Service members reporting negative perceptions about the impact of a repeal.

Update: The report also says that "67% of those in Marine combat arms units"--i.e. infantry, artillery, armor--"predict working alongside a gay man or lesbian will have a negative effect on their unit’s effectiveness in completing its mission 'in a field environment or out at sea.'"

About 11% of all combat troops surveyed said repeal would "positively" or "very positively" affect performance, while 19% said repeal would have "no effect." Another 26% of combat troops surveyed said repeal's affect wold be "equally as positively as negatively." These troops--who see both negative and positive effects of repeal--are lumped together with those who believe it will have "no effect" under the survey's "neutral" category.

The Flag & General Officers for the Military

This is a list of 1,163 distinguished retired military leaders from all branches of the service who have shown their support for the 1993 law with personal signatures requested and received by regular mail. The list (as of February 2010) includes two former Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, several Service Chiefs, a number of combatant command, theater, and other major U.S. and allied force commanders, together with two Medal of Honor recipients and hundreds of retired flag and general officers who have led the men

Reality has a well known liberal bias. It's the same here.

LOL.... You mean, "Newsrooms have a well known liberal bias. It's the same here."

The killings and intimidation are already under way.

they just sucked their companies dry...during union contract negotiations...taxpayers like me

The foreign assembly plants aren't unionized and didn't require or receive bailout money. Mercedes, Honda, and Hyundai, Nissan, BMW and others all operate plants in the US. None are unionized. None had to be bailed out. All exist here because the US imposes tariffs based on the percentage of domestic 'content' of foreign auto products.

Where by "40" you mean "41" (remember when Brown was elected? it was in all the papers) and quite capable of blocking cloture (and have done so as recently as last week). That 1 makes a helluva difference and scuttles your entire would-be point.

Good call... but it still gave the Democrats an entire year with nobody to stop them. That they didn't accomplish what their base wanted them to in that time was their fault, not the Republicans. Truth is, the Dems were like kids in a candy store and didn't know where to start, they just started grabbing a little bit of everything in sight rather than focusing on accomplishing any specific goals, which is why we keep ending up with multi-thousand page bills, thousands of earmarks within them, etc.

Back it up. If you're pulling it out of your ass, it's no better than what the GP pulled out of his/her ass, so don't pretend it's better or more factual unless you can support your claim any better.

Show me the polls where a significant amount of people care about Obama's race... and show me a significant portion of the Tea Party movement specifically that hangs their banner on racism... All you need to do, is to go to the JournoList archives to see the lefties in the media literally conspiring to play the race card unjustly to try to marginalize anyone that disagrees with Obama. Just to pull the first link off google. GP was doing more of the same tarring here. I can't prove that only 10% of Americans are racist (be it for or against a race) since you'll never know what's truly in someone's heart, but it should be pretty trivial to prove these so called claims of racism that the left keeps shouting about. Where's the actual evidence of racism on the part of those that oppose Obama's policies?

So a bunch of professors got together and cleared ... one of their own. No surprise there. You can read the first 2 paragraphs under the "Background of the alleged misconduct" and you can tell right away what the conclusion is going to be by the way it's written.

This is no different than the Investigation of Chris Dodd's Mortgage deal.. A so-called "inquiry" by members of his own party concluded that receiving "VIP" mortgage deals did not constitute preferential treatment.

A whitewash is a whitewash is a whitewash.

The problem is that none of those things can right now, today be used to replace Coal-fired Power Plants.

...Nuclear can replace coal right now.

Nuclear power can not replace coal right now. It takes many years to build a nuclear power plant. And that's not just true in the US either. The French government owned Areva has been building the Olkiluoto nuclear power plant in Finland for years. Construction started in 2006 and was originally planned to be finished in 2009. Now it's not scheduled for completion until 2012 at the earliest. With cost overruns it is overbudget by more than 3 Billion euros and has suffered thousands of defects and deficiencies.

If however 20 5 megawatt wind turbines, and there are bigger ones, are erected a month in 1 year more than 1 gigawatt of capacity is added in that year. Need more, erect more. Quite simply more generation capacity can be added by erecting wind turbines than by building nuclear power plants.

People are making fun of the Administrations (not saying you personally, but some of the public in general) push for high-speed rail.

I love trains but I don't want government paying for them. However if other forms of transportation had to pay their full costs as well then people may think of using trains more.

People think that gasoline taxes pay for road maintenance, in reality those taxes barely make a dent in the total cost of maintaining our highway system

I agree and have repeatedly posted here that I thought drivers should pay the full cost of the roads. So I started supporting the Net Zero Gas Tax. Net zero, because it doesn't raise the average person's tax. Fuel taxes are raised but everyone gets a cut on their income tax. At first I advocated raising fuel taxes like this, but with more and more fuel efficient vehicles on the road it won't work. So instead I now support a mileage tax. When a person goes in to renew their license plate tags the odometer is read. By subtracting the last reading from the current one the number of miles driven is calculated then the person pays for those miles. Some have complained people have no idea how much their bill will be at the end of the year, well people can pay monthly or quarterly. They have a better idea of how much they drive and how much they owe.

The problem with that is that it ignores that fact that since the very first Nuclear Plant came online, utilities have been paying a tax per unit of electricity generated that specifically goes into a fund to pay for the ultimate disposal of nuclear waste.

So you don't think businesses haven't looked at them either? Fact is is without subsidies businesses will not pay to build nuclear power plants. That is why they are asking for loan guaranties. And yes, I consider loan guaranties subsidies. Let then ask those banks that were bailed out for loans, without guaranties they will not get loans. Banks are giving loans for solar and wind without government guaranties though.

I think the positives (no Coal pollution -- Heavy metals being spewed into the air, people dieing to mine the coal, pollution from the coal mining itself, etc.) far outweigh the negatives.

And uranium mining is so pristine, NOT!!! Nuclear power is dirty from cradle to grave just as coal is.

Falcon

We also see articles like this one almost every day. (About the forced, involuntary, unionization of childcare workers. They actually had to pull an organization out of their ass to justify unionizing *against*.)

Who pays for the interstates? Taxpayers who don't want and won't drive from state to state shouldn't be made to pay.

Users pay, that's who. Fuel taxes are supposed to pay for roads, though they don't. Even the neoconservative Weekly Standard published an article, The Net-Zero Gas Tax advocating raising fuel taxes. While I consider that a start I'd go further. When People renew their license plate tags, I'd have them pay a fee on how many miles they drove. I'd then require the fees to be high enough to pay for the roads. However like the article says, I'd cut income taxes. If by raising the fuel tax the average fuel bill goes up $10 a week I'd cut income tax by $10 a week.

What incentive is there to upgrade the network now?

That's part of the problem, there is no competition now. So if one provider won't upgrade it's infrastructure a customer can't switch to another provider. Of course with one entity owning the infrastructure but not selling services it can deliver there's still no competition. I see 3 possible partial solutions. One since everyone uses the same infrastructure they have more of a voice in demanding upgrades, if they don't vote them out of office. The second option is to move to someplace with better access. And the third is wireless. Open up the airwaves, which I have supported here and elsewhere, and let wireless broadband thrive. Heck that's something I'd love to have and would be willing to pay for both fiber to the curb and lower speed wireless broadband.

If you set it up correctly--as a government-run nonprofit with a separate funding pool--then the money has to get spent somewhere because otherwise it just sits there doing nothing, so there's no incentive not to upgrade the infrastructure. A great example of this in action is TVA. They provide some of the cheapest power in the country, their lines are generally well maintained, their infrastructure gets regular upgrades... everybody wins.

I followed you until you brought up TVA. Some lost when that TVA Kingston Fossil Plant coal fly ash slurry spill happened. TVA also operates nuclear power plants and those like the Navajo have had to pay, for accidents, mining, and spills.

This makes changing ISPs as simple as changing long distance providers is now, which is why there *is* competition in that space (though much less now that cell phones offer free long distance; the point is that there was a lot of competition before something free came along).

Cellphones are more competition. As you say cellphone service plans include long distance. The only phone service I have is cellphone service, and I pay less than I did when I had a landline. Now notice above I said I'd be willing to pay for both fiber and wireless. I'd have my server connected to fiber and would use wireless broadband with my laptop. Of course it would have to be mobile, and not fixed, wireless. I love hiking and photography. With mobile broadband I could be out hiking then when my memory cards got full I could upload them to my server.

Falcon

Don't ignore me, fuckwit.
Just what the fuck is wrong with these Lyndon LaRouche DEMOCRATS, anyways?

Plants growing from the ACORN seeds.

Orbit to ground bombing (AKA "Rods from God") has been explored by the science fiction writer Jerry Pournelle. Project Thor is just a concept for now but it seems like it would work at least in theory. Here are a couple pictures, pic 1, pic 2, and a second article The Rods from God .

Have you seen the CBOs estimates for future deficits?
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/deficit.jpg

What will happen to our economy if both our trade deficit and federal budget deficit continue to grow to astronomical proportions?

Just how many trillions in treasury bonds do you think China, Japan, etc. . . are willing to buy? I don't think that we have an immediate 'debt' crises, in that our Debt to GDP ratio will not really be horrific until 2012-13 or so, but there is an issue of bond market saturation; you can really only sell so many hundreds of billions of bonds before you start to run out of buyers. We're going to bump into that in the next 12-18 months.

You know what is even worse? All these estimates (CBO, White House, otherwise), are old enough that they do not include the current unemployment calculations. Given that both payroll and income taxes are taking quite an unemployment hit, there is every reason to believe that the CBO deficit estimates are probably about 20%-30% better than reality. Oh, and of course, they don't include the costs of Obamacare, the increase in the capital gains tax (which, historically, actually *reduces* tax receipts), the Energy Cap-N-Trade bill, and other such regulatory nonsense.

Please describe to me how the structural "yearly trillion dollar deficits by 2015" is okay? Also, please describe to me how we the above named programs aren't going to make it worse? Also, given that both the SS and Medicare "Trust Funds" aren't "piles-o-cash", but are "piles-o-bonds", please describe to me how the liquidation and auction process for those bonds won't further worse out situation?

Exactly which one of these issues do you see being resolved after the current "6-month period"?

Capitalism is an economic philosophy, not a force of nature. The business cycle is a statistical phenomenon, not a natural law. Just because former downturns lasted for 12 months or so, doesn't mean that this one won't run for 24, or 36, or 60+.

At the same time, to actually hurt the wealthy enough to change their habits, you would at the same time be hammering the workers because they have no option to reduce their pollution.

Ah a plan like the Net Zero Gas Tax would help the poor. They'd pay more for fuel but pay less income tax. The way the plan is laid out the working poor would actually keep more of their paycheck and thus have more money. Those who then take steps to reduce their fuel use will end up with more money.

Falcon

If you want electric cars to be delivered next year you just have to do one thing -- increase the price of fuel dramatically. Until that happens none of this matters and no efforts short of that to move to electric cars will work.

A Net Zero Fuel Tax has been proposed that would do that. Tax on fuel would be raised while people would get a cut in their income tax. If the average person's fuel cost increased $20 people would get a $20 income tax cut. This would encourage people to demand and buy more fuel efficient vehicles.

Falcon

Cap and spend is just another scheme to fleece the taxpayer.

Not if it's coupled with a plan like the net zero gas tax. In this plan fuel taxes would be raised but income taxes would be cut Going with cap and trade the income from selling emission credits can be be used to offset cuts in income tax. If you pay $20 more for energy you get $20 cut from your income tax.

And notice how the net zero gas tax is proposed not by so called liberals or socialists but by a writer for the conservative magazine "Weekly Standard".

Falcon

So, if C/T imposes an additional cost of, say, $500/year for someone making 110% of the poverty level, give everyone $500/year from the permit auction revenues.

About a month I read an article in a magazine that proposed something like it but on gas. They called it a net zero tax. Ah here is it, in the "Conservative" "The Weekly Standard". Instead of mandating federal fuel efficiency standards for vehicles, it proposes to raise fuel taxes instead. So that the average person does not pay more taxes it would reduce income tax instead. If because of the increase in fuel tax the person paid $100 more for gas a month they would get a $100 cut in income tax for the month. This could then encourage people to drive less and or to buy more fuel efficient vehicles.

Falcon

I'd be nice if there weren't US Employees who love Jack just as he is.

âoeJack Bauer saved Los Angeles . . . . He saved hundreds of thousands of lives,â Judge Scalia reportedly said. âoeAre you going to convict Jack Bauer?â He then posed a series of questions to his fellow judges: âoeSay that criminal law is against him? âYou have the right to a jury trial?â(TM) Is any jury going to convict Jack Bauer?â âoeI donâ(TM)t think so,â Scalia reportedly answered himself. âoeSo the question is really whether we believe in these absolutes. And ought we believe in these absolutes.â

Just remember that Supreme Court Justice Scalia said that. But at least he opposes making entertainment out of law by televising trials. What a nice guy...

Ah yes, Switzerland, that bastion of sanity -- where one must consider the "dignity" of plants.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/065njdoe.asp

http://www.practicalethicsnews.com/practicalethics/2008/04/the-dignity-of.html

(and numerous other references, these were just the first two I came to)

.
W. is not the sort who forgives and forgets:

The deadline for candidate replacement or withdrawal in Alaska was September 17. If Stevens resigned immediately and promised not to serve if he is reelected next week, Gov. Palin could appoint a Republican to serve out the rest of Stevens's term.

Unfortunately, any unofficial Republican replacement candidate would have to face an insurmountable hurdle next week in asking Alaskans to vote for a convicted felon. Stevens announced in a statement this evening: "I am innocent. This verdict is the result of the unconscionable manner in which the Justice Department lawyers conducted this trial. I ask that Alaskans and my Senate colleagues stand with me as I pursue my rights. I remain a candidate for the United States Senate. I will come home on Wednesday and ask for your vote." Stevens Found Guilty

The 84 year old Stevens is not going to do the gentlemanly thing and put a pistol to his head in order to save a Senate seat for the Republications.

For those unaware of who this is, this is the guy who compared user-generated content to communism.

I'm not kidding.

Which trick?

Really, Pappe just twists around facts to draw wild-ass conclusions. When that isn't enough, he really does just rely on complete fiction to further his agenda.

I'm just not sure what it would take for you to realize Pappe is nothing short of a complete and utter crackpot--unless you are on an agenda, yourself. So tell me, are you?

(Q2) As for the second question that we want to answer: What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you?

(1) The first thing that we are calling you to is Islam.

Sadly we can probably expect to see more countries in Europe pass these kind of laws as they realise the risks posed by their large Muslim populations. Sweden has a tradition of naively importing huge amounts of Muslims and then paying them very generous unemployment benefits (since they are usually ill equipped to work in a modern economy), and the effects are starting to be felt. Read more here.

That said, European governments are just treating the symptoms of the problem rather than the root cause: religious extremism (and some would argue religion generally). The sooner we realise that, the better.

"In a cult, leaving the church is unthinkable and anyone who expresses a desire to do so is forcibly kept from doing so. Were I a member of a cult, expressing a desire to leave the group would likely result in my detention for "re-education" or perhaps in my "disappearance."

The difference between "cult" and "religion" is merely one of power.
Were you a Muslim, some governments under Quranic law will kill you for apostasy, not to mention the other areas with less formal liquidation arrangements...

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/059fpgrn.asp

"Some other Muslim countries have laws similar to Afghanistan's. Apart from its other depredations, in the last ten years Saudi Arabia has executed people for the crimes of apostasy, heresy, and blasphemy. The death penalty for apostates is also in the legal code in Iran, Sudan, Mauritania, and the Comoros Islands."

And the article also points to another of his, which makes a case that the NY Times should be in deep trouble for printing the NSA wiretapping story. Which in turn makes me think that this fellow is an asshole.

Here is a quote from Clinton:

I don't think facism ended with Franco. The Baath party in Iraq was of indirect Nazi descent.

It was a Vichy-sponsored, Nazi-inspired national socialist party which was founded in Vichy-controlled Damascus and spread to oust the British colonial government in Baghdad. The party then dropped its anti-communist element and allied with the Soviets to prolong their rule. Like national socialism in Germany, the Baathists worked largely on the ideals of a racial struggle between their own pure race and those they considered defilers of that race. Its shift in Iraq to pro-Sunni and anti-Shiite came later, and probably out of convenience.

The Baath party of Iraq was founded as a single-party pro-Vichy, pro-Nazi ruling group for racial Arabs. The Bath Party of Syria used to be the same party, but important rifts had formed between the two parties long before Saddam Hussein's regime ended. Baghdad was the traditional capital of the ideal pan-Arab world many true believers in that movement envisioned, which is probably why the more radical portions of the party ended up there.

In short, Saddam Hussein's government was not only eerily similar to Hitler's, but it was a family resemblance.

Eretzy Isroel
Weekly Standard
Paul Johnson, a historian at Hillsdale College
Dissent Magazine
Free Republic
Syrian Embassy
a well-bibiliographied attack on the Bush family as supporters of the Baath party
International Socialist Review article in support of Iraq vs. US invasion

These references run from very conservative to very liberal, and from very Arab to very Western. Although several of them probably show strong biases, they weave an interesting story when read together.

Heh -- I think maybe I've treated you a little harshly in the conversation thus far.

I'd be thrilled to see the Republican Party of my youth make a revival -- small government, conservative economic policy, and a bit on the isolationist side in terms of foreign policy. I wouldn't necessarily join that party, but it'd be a group I could respect and work with.

The neocons, on the other hand... gah.

John McWethy, national security correspondent for ABC News, reported the story on August 25, 1998:

Before the pharmaceutical plant was reduced to rubble by American cruise missiles, the CIA was secretly gathering evidence that ended up putting the facility on America's target list. Intelligence sources say their agents clandestinely gathered soil samples outside the plant and found, quote, "strong evidence" of a chemical compound called EMPTA, a compound that has only one known purpose, to make VX nerve gas.

Then, the connection:

The U.S. had been suspicious for months, partly because of Osama bin Laden's financial ties, but also because of strong connections to Iraq. Sources say the U.S. had intercepted phone calls from the plant to a man in Iraq who runs that country's chemical weapons program.

Really? They've broken the law numerous times?

Sounds serious.

So why aren't you're Democrat buddies in the House bringing impeachment articles up for debate in the house? I mean, the Republicans even voted for Rep. Kucinich's motion so that everyone could finally publically debate the issue on the floor of the House.

Why did the Democrats not take this golden opportunity to finally begin the impeachment process?

-john

From the Weekly Standard website:
"While the roll calls are not yet available, it seems there were plenty of Democrats who voted to go forward with impeachment when they thought it would fail, who suddenly voted against impeachment when it mattered."
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2007/11/dems_outmaneuvered_on_impeachm.asp

First off, liberals don't know anymore what "neoconservative" actually means. It referred to Jews in the 1980s who supported Reagan. They use it today in short form, "neocon," because it sounds evil and war-like. Second, conservatives in America are opposed to illegal immigration and want to build a big wall, while liberals want open borders and no screening.

It's interesting that you say "liberals" don't know what "neoconservative" actually means, then you say it is a term referring to "Jews in the 1980s." Although several top neocons are Jewish, not all of them are. They didn't just spring up in the 80s, and their story is far more complicated than your reductionist analysis makes it seem. That makes it difficult for anyone (liberal, conservative, or otherwise) to figure out exactly what the term means. Here's what Irving Kristol, one of the leading lights of the movement, says about neoconservatism. Note that he uses the term "neocon" a few times in the article. Maybe he does that because he thinks it makes him sound evil and war-like.

As for the bit about conservatives wanting to build a wall and liberals wanting no border at all, you may want to check in on that more thoroughly. The Republican Party had control of the House, the Senate, and the White House for almost six years and didn't change American immigration policy. One of the iron laws of politics is that when you have that degree of power, you use it. Look at the sweeping range of laws the Republican Party enacted over those same six years, covering every aspect of American life. If the party was truly unified in wanting to thwart illegal immigration, it would have done something.

I can't create a whole media industry here on slashdot to educate you on this. If you want to look into it on your own you can. This is a pretty good article to describe that all is not well.

But this is lost on you. I know that you think the only real terrorist is President Bush, he probably had a hand indirectly in 9/11, there is no Al-Queda, there is no threat from radical islam, and that boogey men like the 'Religious Right' here in the US are the real threat to your most important liberties, like downloading porn in mom's basement or lounging around Starbucks and complaining about how hard life is.

Women mostly don't need to be self-taught. Colleges and educational institutions are happy to educate women. Meanwhile there's an increasing bias in educational institutions against males:

Schoolboy's bias suit
Where The Boys Aren't
Why boys can't be boys
The Trouble With Boys

and especially

How the Schools Shortchange Boys

It's not a big factor in this particular case, but one reason some guys are self-taught is because they've learned education isn't for them -- rather it's against them.

For Islamists, the imperative to veil women justifies almost any means. Sometimes they try to buy off resistance. Some French Muslim families, for instance, are paid 500 euros (around $600) per quarter by extremist Muslim organizations just to have their daughters wear the hijab. This has also happened in the United States. Indeed, the famous and brave Syrian-American psychiatrist Wafa Sultan recently told the Jerusalem Post that after she moved to the United States in 1991, Saudis offered her $1,500 a month to cover her head and attend a mosque.

But what Islamists use most is intimidation. A survey conducted in France in May 2003 found that 77 percent of girls wearing the hijab said they did so because of physical threats from Islamist groups. A series in the newspaper Libération in 2003 documented how Muslim women and girls in France who refuse to wear the hijab are insulted, rejected, and often physically threatened by Muslim males. One of the teenage girls interviewed said, "Every day, bearded men come to me and advise me strongly on wearing the veil. It is a war. For now, there are no dead, but there are looks and words that do kill."

France's Toll of Destruction

Last night probably another hundred cars were set ablaze - as will be the case tonight, tomorrow night, and the following ones. Before large-scale rioting started on 27 October the police had already registered 30,000 car-becues this year - an average of, indeed, 100 a day. What a boost this must be to the French automobile industry. In the same period there were 3,800 attacks on police officers - a "normal" non-riot average of almost 13 a day.

The 751 No-Go Zones of France

They go by the euphemistic term Zones Urbaines Sensibles, or Sensitive Urban Zones, with the even more antiseptic acronym ZUS, and there are 751 of them as of last count. They are convienently listed on one long webpage, complete with street demarcations and map delineations.

What are they? Those places in France that the French state does not control. They range from two zones in the medieval town of Carcassone to twelve in the heavily Muslim town of Marseilles, with hardly a town in France lacking in its ZUS. The ZUS came into existence in late 1996 and according to a 2004 estimate, nearly 5 million people live in them.

Comment: A more precise name for these zones would be Dar al-Islam, the place where Muslims rule. (November 14, 2006)

Nov. 28, 2006 update: For an insight into how bad things are, the police in Lyons demonstrated on Nov. 9, denouncing "violence against the forces of order." Things have reached a pretty sad state when the police have to demonstrate in the streets against the criminals.

The New French Revolution

They rule gangland style, combined with the male-dominated traditions of the Arab countries they came from. It's gotten so bad that, today, most of the young women only feel safe if they are covered up, or if they stay at home. Girls who want to look just like other French girls are considered provocative, asking for trouble......

"I was gang raped by three people I knew, and I couldn't say anything, because in my culture, your family is dishonored if you lose your virginity," says Bellil. "So I kept quiet, and the rapes continued. The next time, I was pulled off a commuter train and no one lifted a finger to help me. ...Everybody turned their head awa

As an aside, Saddam's Iraq has been shown (1),(2),(3) to have had widespread involvement with numerous terrorist groups.

As an aside, Saddam's Iraq has been shown (1),(2),(3) to have had widespread involvement with numerous terrorist groups.

As an aside, Saddam's Iraq has been shown (1),(2),(3) to have had widespread involvement with numerous terrorist groups.

So Bush lied (again)?

What lie?

So let's see, first we lie about the invasion of Iraq being tied to the September 11th attacks.

Source?

Then we lie that Iraq was hiding weapons of mass destruction.

Actually, we didn't lie. Believing something to be true that later turns out to be false is not lying.

Then we lied that Iraq was tied to Al Qaeda.

Source? You can start here: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Artic les/000/000/005/804yqqnr.asp

Bush insisted on publishing all those docs without review, despite even his Republican crony Intelligence Czar trying to stop his insane blunder.

Bush is the guy who suppresses journalists informing Americans that Bush is illegally spying on us, kidnapping random people into torture gulags, and explaining even the most basic miserable facts about his Iraqatastrophe by calling them "traitors", who "aid the enemy". Meanwhile, he publishes atomic bomb instructions to any enemy with a Web connection.

And waives the requirements on N Korea's nuke plants that kept them from becoming weapons. And sends our army to Iraq instead of securing Afghanistan. And WHERE'S OSAMA?

Bush is the worst terrorist enemy the US has ever had. Even just in Iraq he's killed as many Americans as Osama killed in NYC, DC and PA, to say nothing of the tens of thousands badly maimed, and the tens-hundreds times as many Iraqis.

This Tuesday, November 7, you'll have the chance to go to the polls and vote for a Democrat for your representative in the House. Probably your senator is up for selection as a Democrat, too. Throw out the criminal Republican co-conspirators with Bush who have let him wage his Terror War against us without oversight or complaint. Stop this criminal act now, before it kills again.

Whoops - too late. Tuesday can't come fast enough to save the Americans in Iraq who will have to die before we can even get a Democratic Congress to stop Bush in January. But at least we can start cutting our losses ASAP.

Once upon a time, the Air Force came up with an idea to have satellites carrying tungsten rods that could be launched to strike ground targets (see: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Artic les/000/000/005/700oklkt.asp).

Now they are talking about using a "aerodynamic shell", with an engine to adjust trajectory, to send satellites into space. Did anyone else notice that the nose of the shell is tungsten?

Sounds like a cover story to me.

(Q2) As for the second question that we want to answer: What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you?

(1) The first thing that we are calling you to is Islam.

There should be nothing novel in this. Recently, Palestinian extremists forced two Fox News reporters to "convert" to Islam after taking them hostage. There is a long history of this.

He also wants us to jettison the Constitution and adopt Sharia law, stop drug & alcohol use, homosexuality, sexual immorality, sleeping around, adultery, charging interest on loans, etc., etc. At least it would be easy to remember the penalty for many of these infractions: death, death, death, etc.

(2) The second thing we call you to, is to stop your oppression, lies, immorality and debauchery that has spread among you.

(a) We call you to be a people of manners, principles, honour, and purity; to reject the immoral acts of fornication, homosexuality, intoxicants, gambling's, and trading with interest.

(i) You are the nation who, rather than ruling by the Shariah of Allah in its Constitution and Laws, choose to invent your own laws as you will and desire. You separate religion from your policies, contradicting the pure nature which affirms Absolute Authority to the Lord and your Creator.

(iii) You are a nation that permits the production, trading and usage of intoxicants. You also permit drugs, and only forbid the trade of them, even though your nation is the largest consumer of them.

(iv) You are a nation that permits acts of immorality, and you consider them to be pillars of personal freedom. You have continued to sink down this abyss from level to level until incest has spread amongst you, in the face of which neither your sense of honour nor your laws object.

Who can forget your President Clinton's immoral acts committed in the official Oval office? After that you did not even bring him to account, other than that he 'made a mistake', after which every

You grossly oversimplify; actually, the situation was a lot more complex than that. Saddam was selling oil way too cheap, in euros, to the French. So we didn't like him.

Right.... and the reason that Enron's executives are liable for repaying $183 million, and probably jail time, is that their stock "under-performed" the market.

Saddam used the wholly corrupt "Oil for Food" program to bribe all manner of foreign officials, buy influence in the Security Council, undermine UN sanctions, buy weapons, and fund terrorists, all the while skimming billions of dollars off the top. Even UN Secretary General Koffi Annan's son took bribes, and the Deputy Secretary General was eye deep as well. So, it was that, his refusal to fully and voluntarily comply with the weapons inspections, his record of genocide, aggression against pretty much every country around him, the abysmal human rights record, his military regularly fired on US aircraft (act of war), his support for international terrorists, well.... you get the picture, .... that is why we "didn't like him".

Personally, I think you want to let President Saddam "I grind my opponents alive, and my sons are worse" Hussein off the hook a little too easily.

THE ARGUMENT over whether the national press is dominated by liberals is over. Since 1962, there have been 11 surveys of the media that sought the political views of hundreds of journalists. In 1971, they were 53 percent liberal, 17 percent conservative. In a 1976 survey of the Washington press corps, it was 59 percent liberal, 18 percent conservative. A 1985 poll of 3,200 reporters found them to be self-identified as 55 percent liberal, 17 percent conservative. In 1996, another survey of Washington journalists pegged the breakdown as 61 percent liberal, 9 percent conservative. Now, the new study by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press found the national media to be 34 percent liberal and 7 percent conservative.

Over 40-plus years, the only thing that's changed in the media's politics is that many national journalists have now cleverly decided to call themselves moderates. But their actual views haven't changed, the Pew survey showed. Their political beliefs are close to those of self-identified liberals and nowhere near those of conservatives. And the proportion of liberals to conservatives in the press, either 3-to-1 or 4-to-1, has stayed the same. That liberals are dominant is now beyond dispute.

RTFA here. http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Artic les/000/000/012/348yjwfo.asp
The summary does injustice.

The author is neither pro nor anit-net neutrality. The next paragraph following the quote in the summary starts with "But what market?"

Kessler acknowledges that the Teleco's are aging giants and that something needs to be done. At the same time he does not think that NEt Neutrality and regulation are the right answer.

He does bring up an interesting tactic of using the Kelo ruling on eminent domain to sieze teleco wires and hand them to new players who want to expand and innovate.

Ick -- Slashdot is linking a blog post with the first two paragraphs of the real article. Go here instead:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Artic les/000/000/012/348yjwfo.asp

Here is the Complete article, not a summary...as linked to above: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Artic les/000/000/012/348yjwfo.asp