“This site is dedicated to preying on peoples vanity, ignorance, or loneliness, gaining their trust and betraying them without remorse.”

Monday, August 29, 2011

"American Interests" are not in the Interest of Americans.



Reagan fell in love with the Mujahideen (TALIBAN) in 1985. They were hosted in The White House. You could see them coming and going from Kennedy Airport. We armed them to the teeth and supplied them with every type of weapon. Haven't we had enough yet? No, we need to be there until 2024? We need to be in and out of Afghanistan for 40 years? 


Our Rulers and Masters, and their corporate financiers are a far worse threat to the interests of American Citizens than the Taliban. It is becoming increasingly clear that so called "American Interests" are not in the interest of Americans. Will we ever stop these bastards? And I am not talking about the Taliban.

________________________

The Daily Telegraph


US troops may stay in Afghanistan until 2024

America and Afghanistan are close to signing a strategic pact which would allow thousands of United States troops to remain in the country until at least 2024, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.

The agreement would allow not only military trainers to stay to build up the Afghan army and police, but also American special forces soldiers and air power to remain. The prospect of such a deal has already been met with anger among Afghanistan’s neighbours including, publicly, Iran and, privately, Pakistan. It also risks being rejected by the Taliban and derailing any attempt to coax them to the negotiating table, according to one senior member of Hamid Karzai’s peace council. A withdrawal of American troops has already begun following an agreement to hand over security for the country to Kabul by the end of 2014. But Afghans wary of being abandoned are keen to lock America into a longer partnership after the deadline. Many analysts also believe the American military would like to retain a presence close to Pakistan, Iran and China.

Both Afghan and American officials said that they hoped to sign the pact before the Bonn Conference on Afghanistan in December. Barack Obama and Hamid Karzai agreed last week to escalate the negotiations and their national security advisers will meet in Washington in September.

Rangin Dadfar Spanta, Mr Karzai’s top security adviser, told The Daily Telegraph that “remarkable progress” had been made. US officials have said they would be disappointed if a deal could not be reached by December and that the majority of small print had been agreed.

Dr Spanta said a longer-term presence was crucial not only to build Afghan forces, but also to fight terrorism.

“If [the Americans] provide us weapons and equipment, they need facilities to bring that equipment,” he said. “If they train our police and soldiers, then those trainers will not be 10 or 20, they will be thousands.

“We know we will be confronted with international terrorists. 2014, is not the end of international terrorist networks and we have a common commitment to fight them. For this purpose also, the US needs facilities.”

Afghan forces would still need support from US fighter aircraft and helicopters, he predicted. In the past, Washington officials have estimated a total of 25,000 troops may be needed.

Dr Spanta added: “In the Afghan proposal we are talking about 10 years from 2014, but this is under discussion.” America would not be granted its own bases, and would be a guest on Afghan bases, he said. Pakistan and Iran were also deeply opposed to the deal.

Andrey Avetisyan, Russian ambassador to Kabul, said: “Afghanistan needs many other things apart from the permanent military presence of some countries. It needs economic help and it needs peace. Military bases are not a tool for peace.

“I don’t understand why such bases are needed. If the job is done, if terrorism is defeated and peace and stability is brought back, then why would you need bases?

“If the job is not done, then several thousand troops, even special forces, will not be able to do the job that 150,000 troops couldn’t do. It is not possible.”

A complete withdrawal of foreign troops has been a precondition for any Taliban negotiations with Mr Karzai’s government and the deal would wreck the currently distant prospect of a negotiated peace, Mr Avetisyan said.

Abdul Hakim Mujahid, deputy leader of the peace council set up by Mr Karzai to seek a settlement, said he suspected the Taliban had intensified their insurgency in response to the prospect of the pact. “They want to put pressure on the world community and Afghan government,” he said.

125 comments:

  1. An American Interest:

    Keeping a good job.

    ReplyDelete
  2. An American Interest:

    Finding a good job if you don't have one.

    ReplyDelete
  3. An American Interest:

    Having real savings with safe money.

    ReplyDelete
  4. An American Interest:

    Getting rid of the bastards that tell us a military empire and non-ending Muslim war are in "American Interests.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The next time you hear some asshole carping or sanctimoniously saying the magic words, "American Interests", words that are meant to stop debate, turn off your brain and pick your pocket, grab the family jewels and tell them "here is your American Interest."

    ReplyDelete
  6. American non-interests:

    A constellation of bases Over There.

    An ally that is the fourth largest exporter of military arms yet still requires $3 billion in annual military aid from the United States, because, gosh, they sold all their weapons to Turkey and China so what are they going to fight with?

    NATO when no one else steps up to the plate.

    Defending the strait of Malacca from pirates so China can get their oil home. They're a big boy, they got their own aircraft carrier now.

    The War on Terror. Just put every Muslim on the No Fly List and we're done.

    ReplyDelete
  7. God helps those that help themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  8. God helps those that help themselves.

    Perfect rat statement.

    When the waters of the flood are rising, when rat is on the roof, just pass on by, just pass on by in your 100 horse Evenrude Rescue Boat.

    b

    ReplyDelete
  9. On the rain slick street, under the street lights, the car has miscornered and rolled and rat is trapped between the steering wheel and the crushed top, bleeding to death.

    Just pass on by, just pass on by.....


    b

    ReplyDelete
  10. "Well, let’s take a look at Mr. Bernanke’s record of currency debasement. The Bureau of Labor Statistics announced the latest reading (for July 2011) of the consumer price index (CPI); it stood at 225.922. Thirty-six months ago, in July 2008, the index stood at 219.133. So over that entire three-year period, the CPI rose by a whopping 3.1% (see chart above).

    That is not an annual rate, that is the total increase over 3 years, so the average annual inflation rate over the whole period was less than 1%. The last time that the CPI rose by as little as 3% over any 36-month period was 1958-61. It is noteworthy that during the administration of Ronald Reagan — a kind of golden age, in the Journal‘s view, of free-market capitalism, low taxes, and sound money — there was no 36-month period in which the CPI increased by less than 8.97%, or about 3 times as fast as the CPI has risen during the quantitative-easing, money-printing, dollar-debasing orgy just presided over by Chairman Bernanke."


    An Amazing Chart at Carpe Diem Blog

    ReplyDelete
  11. Jobs are, certainly, the key, Deuce.

    Everyone in America already has a car, a couple of tvs, a microwave, and a cell phone. The Market is in the emerging economies.

    If we're going to manufacture, we're going to have to be able to compete there. And, that means we're going to have to compete with cheap, efficient Asian labor.

    Our factories will have to be "state-of-the-art," and our workforce will have to be capable of operating the new machinery/computers/robots.

    ReplyDelete
  12. NO. Why are we suppose to babysit these idiots!!!!!! We have to rebuild everywhere we go! It is time to stop it. We have just got to say we are not paying more taxes for those a@#@# to have us over there protecting them. Let them do it theirselves. When is all this crap going to stop!! They need to pay us big time if we stay and our taxes not pay for it. They could care less about the USA , they just use us and then try to kill us. ENOUGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    -Pete

    ReplyDelete
  13. We really have to fix the Corporate Tax Rate. It's just too damned high to attract any investment in "plant."

    ReplyDelete
  14. Our manufacturing will be just fine if we take the tax burden off the products that we manufacture and shift them to the consumption of products, all products. At least that way imported goods share in the burden.

    ReplyDelete
  15. We need to differentiate new capital formation from vultures like Warren Buffet that buy, cut and sell. Buffet shovels out $5 billion to shore up a too big to fail, tax payer subsidized financial dinosaur like B.O.A., to goose up the shares and extort a preferred payment of 6% on his tax deferred capital while the Fed manipulates the money system so that savers and depositors in that same bank get nothing.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Teresita said...
    American non-interests:

    An ally that is the fourth largest exporter of military arms yet still requires $3 billion in annual military aid from the United States, because, gosh, they sold all their weapons to Turkey and China so what are they going to fight with?




    Spoken like the nitwit you are....

    You speak in bullet points and really dont have a clue.

    Please stick to lesbian warrior poetry. That might be your "pay grade"

    As for judging Israel and it's relationship with the USA?

    You suck.

    ReplyDelete
  17. The USA gives 100's of BILLIONs of dollars to Israel's enemies in various ways...

    So America ARMS and rebuild MANY islamic nations that are committed to the destruction of Israel. America gives 3 billion in military aid that is spend in America (creating American jobs, unlike the trillion spent in afghanistan, palestine, lebanon, egypt, arabia where we have ZERO JOBS in America created)

    What is a crime?

    America supporting, subsidizing and arming islamic jihadists across the globe. We buy their oil, we free their lands and we prevent AMERICANS from unleashing AMERICAN oil and gas reserves...

    Israel is surrounded on 899/900 of the middle east with genocidal jihadists and American provides advanced weapons to MOST of them....

    SO the crumbs America throws at Israel to help keep her safe is appreciated, however a better solution?

    AMERICA STOP FUNDING, SUPPORTING AND HELPING ISLAMIC ASSHOLES THAT MURDER AMERICANS EVERYDAY.

    Ms T, please pull your sorry excuse for a brain out of your ass.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Islam DECLARED war on the American nation in 1783.

    Any nitwit that thinks America somehow started the war needs to learn history....

    Islam has been murdering, raping and destroying anything other than it'sself since it crawled out of arabia in 640 ce.

    To think that we go looking for trouble with islam is stupid....

    Islam is at war with America. Has been and always will be.

    Dont agree with me? FIne, I hope you enjoy your grandkids marrying some burka forcing bastard or better yet, get to love the sound of calls for prayer 5 times a day..

    Think I am full of it?

    Go visit Paris, London, Berlin, Oslo, Newark, Detroit, NYC, Buffalo and many other cities and towns...

    So stick your head in the sand and ignore the reality...

    Just blame Israel...

    Fucking morons...

    ReplyDelete
  19. Have you noticed there are no lesbian nations?

    Not a one...

    There was a myth of a lesbian warrior "tribe"...

    Nor is there a successful "gay" nation...

    ReplyDelete
  20. Activity in Syria is not a US interest, nor in Israel, for that matter.

    Neither represent a threat to the US.
    Neither represent a benefit to US, either.

    Neither has ever been an effective ally in an armed conflict, neither could be.

    Both represent costs, not benefits, for the US.

    ReplyDelete
  21. No one speaks for Islam.

    There is no central authority, so Islam cannot declare war.

    Countries declare war, people fight wars.

    Religion is a physiological tool used to motivate the fools that fight for other goals of other men.

    Religion does not have an identity beyond that of the practitioners of that religion.

    Whether that religion be Judaism, Christianity or Islam. Abrahamic religion, often an excuse to violence.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Islam has not a single country that is capable of projecting a military threat.

    Every one of the countries consumed by Islam, is politically dysfunctional.

    Militarily inept.

    The Islamoids do not represent a military threat. The cultural threat they do represent cannot be answered militarily.

    ReplyDelete
  23. It is all about oil, boys and girls. Oil is still bought and paid for by US dollars around the world, or Petro dollars if you will. The only way a third world country can have US dollars is by selling us products. If they don't have US dollars, they are unable to buy oil.

    These third world countries make and sell products cheaper than anyone in the US can make them, purposely to extract US Dollars from the US.

    You can discuss MFG all you want, but if the product a company makes cannot be sold competitively, they will not stay in business. The US has not been ably to competitively price it's manufactered products since the 70s.

    Obama knows this, most politicians know this, and certainly, Rick Perry knows.

    The world is addicted to the stuff, mainlining it every day.

    We can put up some wind turbines, build ethanol plants, and solarize until the cows come home. Oil is still king.

    ReplyDelete
  24. We could build enough ethanol distilleries to eliminate the need for oil not produced in North America.

    That move, establishing the agricultural production capacity to provide feed stock and building the distilleries required to produce the 100 million gallons of liquid energy every day, would be a game changer.

    While not ending our addiction to energy, we'd not be funding foreign providers for it.

    It would improve our energy security, economic security and decrease the need for an ever expanding global military footprint.

    ReplyDelete
  25. A whole bunch of woulds and coulds.

    Not reality.

    ReplyDelete
  26. WIO: Have you noticed there are no lesbian nations?

    What the hell does that have to do with me, if I'm a man like you say? Unless you're saying I'm a male lesbian. But then you'd get most of the EB saying "Me too."

    ReplyDelete
  27. Oil is cheap, way cheaper than ethanol and that makes your pipe dream of a top down (read - totalitarian) push to reshape the US economy as per your and rufus's dream laughable.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Oil is cheap, way cheaper than ethanol

    Probably in the 22nd Century we won't be able to mine energy and draw from the bank account, we'll have to farm energy and pay as we go. But we get two glorious centuries of four-engined jets and Chrysler Town and Countrys.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Oil is NOT cheap.

    It is highly subsidized.
    The first subsidy, the military costs of providing security for it.

    12 carrier battle groups.
    $ 1 trillion USD in the past decade, just in Iraq.
    Not to mention the 4,000 US lives and untold numbers of other human casualties.

    The balance of payments deficit, anon, is a further subsidy.

    One that is bankrupting the US economy.

    Factor in ALL the costs of our top down oil supply system and it is hugely expensive.

    Talk about top down totalitarians. The US and Saudi partnership is about as totalitarian as it gets.

    I just want to eliminate the need for the current Saudi partnership with the US.

    ReplyDelete
  30. While you embrace our need to be partnered with hostile foreign powers to ensure our continued economic dominance of the world.

    When we could be internalizing our liquid energy supplies.

    It is a matter of National Security.

    The premier "American Interest".

    ReplyDelete
  31. well then test that proposition and stop subsidizing it and see if the price actually rises. One could just as easily argue that those carrier groups aren't a subsidy but rather just a means of stealing the oil which implies it is being gotten for less than the market price.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Cost is secondary to security, anon.

    Wake up.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Can you imagine how cheap the Chinese could get oil if they didn't have to compete with the US demand? Is that your goal rat, help out the chinese?

    ReplyDelete
  34. 85% of Persian Gulf production flows to Charlie Chi-com, anon.

    We are subsidizing the Chinese oil consumption, whether our Navy merely provides security for, or is stealing, the oil.

    There is no need to do either.

    We should keep that $1 billion USD we send to the Saudis, every day, in the country.

    You advocate that we continue to fund the Wahhabi. Fair enough.

    ReplyDelete
  35. We are only talking about 15% of Persian Gulf production.

    The Chinese and Indians, along with the Europeons, WILL absorb that capacity, true enough.

    Win - win, I guess.

    The important thing, though ...

    "US National Interest"

    Which would be enhanced by the internalization of our energy supplies.

    ReplyDelete
  36. You could tax oil and keep a chunk of the proceeds in the US but it is, what? Communist?, to have the Federal Government stipulate what energy source is to be the best for all Americans to buy. An all out 'plan' to build ethanol refineries coast to coast - laughable - maybe you should create a little red book - Rufus, Rat and MAO...

    ReplyDelete
  37. Would, Could, now, Should.

    You sound more like a dreamy tenured out of touch ECON professor.

    If a frog had wings, he WOULD not bump his ass everytime he jumped.

    If my aunt had balls, she COULD be my uncle.

    I SHOULD go back to work.

    ReplyDelete
  38. anon wants to continue funding the Wahhabi, and be called a patriot, to boot.

    I think you're correct, in part, gag.

    Not much chance of any change in course, in our energy or security policies.

    We've gotten more of the same from Team Obama. They going further along the road to militarizing our foreign policy that GW Bush and Company blazed.

    ReplyDelete
  39. As rufus believes, I think Mr Perry would not advance the development of alternate sources of energy.

    Despite that, his position on macro Constitutional issues are enough for me to support him. I'd like there to be a debate on the results of the ratification of the 17th Amendment.

    ReplyDelete
  40. An American official said that the drone strike killed Atiyah Abd al-Rahman, a Libyan who in the last year had taken over as Al Qaeda’s top operational planner. Mr. Rahman was in frequent contact with Bin Laden in the months before the terrorist leader was killed on May 2 by a Navy Seals team, intelligence officials have said.

    American officials described Mr. Rahman’s death as particularly significant as compared with other high-ranking Qaeda operatives who have been killed, because he was one of a new generation of leaders that the network hoped would assume greater control after Bin Laden’s death.

    Thousands of electronic files recovered at Bin Laden’s compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, revealed that Bin Laden communicated frequently with Mr. Rahman. They also showed that Bin Laden relied on Mr. Rahman to get messages to other Qaeda leaders and to ensure that Bin Laden’s recorded communications were broadcast widely.

    After Bin Laden was killed, Mr. Rahman became Al Qaeda’s No. 2 leader under Ayman al-Zawahri, who succeeded Bin Laden.

    There were few details on Saturday about the strike that killed Mr. Rahman. In the months since Bin Laden’s death, the C.I.A. has maintained a barrage of drone missile strikes on mountainous redoubts in Pakistan, a bombing campaign that continues to strain America’s already turbulent relationship with Pakistan.

    The C.I.A almost never consults Pakistani officials in advance of a drone strike, and a Pakistani government official said Saturday that the United States had told Pakistan’s government that Mr. Rahman had been the target of the strike only after the spy agency confirmed that he had been killed.

    The drone strikes have been the Obama administration’s preferred means of hunting and killing operatives from Al Qaeda and its affiliate groups.

    Over the past year the United States has expanded the drone war to Yemen and Somalia.

    ReplyDelete
  41. You contradict yourself rat - you claim that 85% of the Persian Gulf oil flows to the Chinese and then you claim that US purchases of Oil fund the Saudi's. You can't have it both ways.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Our oil purchases do fund the Sauds, we send them $1 billion a day, on average.

    That the $1 billion does not constitute their largest sovereign account, of little matter.

    It is US National Interests that matter.

    We should not be exporting $1 billion USD each day, for an energy product for which we can produce a substitute for internally and by a renewable method.

    ReplyDelete
  43. STOP BLOOD FOR OIL. United States foriegn policy is Anti-Green Energy Economy. The U.S. Governent is sending our sons and daughters overseas to try to keep a false and unsustainable, suicidal/homicidal oil economy going.
    All of the "world's oil based economy governments" are poisoning us all just so that the greedy, selfish, world leaders who control it can keep dirty money flowing into their own wallets.
    The right thing to do, no matter where you live is to replace all politicians who prifit from fossil fuels with ones that will lead a massive push for a Green Energy Technology Evolution. An industrial, political, and economic change like this is also a social revolution on a world wide scale.
    To make it happen, you and me, and everyone we know needs to go out and make some noise and tell our leaders that this is what we want. Bring our troops home and begin constructng wind and solar on every building and every roadway that already exists in the world. Stop burning anything for fuel, it is actually "less than worthless" since it all poisons the environment, even just by getting it out of the ground in the first place. Save our oil solely for the purposes of a manufacturing ingredient and it will last 100's of years longer with much less polution.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Whether or not we continue to import oil from the Persian Gulf, the Wahhabi will continue to sell it.

    That should not be a major consideration with regards to US security needs.

    By increasing whirled energy supplies, the US would be fueling a global economic boom.
    Similar to that we'd see if there was a discovery of a "new" Saudi Arabian size energy reserve, in Kansas and Missouri.

    ReplyDelete
  45. US troops may stay in Afghanistan until 2024? It will never happen.

    ReplyDelete
  46. you are talking out of both sides of your mouth rat. If your fantasy Federal Government actually managed to force everyone in the US to consume domestically created ethanol (i.e. subsidized its production) then the Chinese and the rest of the world would enjoy the resultant cheap oil and the US would be uncompetitive due to its artificial reliance on a lesser fuel.

    laughable

    You sound like the Chinese back in Mao's day and their top down push for self reliance. Notice how they've changed their tune and engaged the rest of the world to their benefit yet you (and Deuce) would have the US do the opposite and pursue the fantasy of the US creating a world of its own.

    hee hee, ha ha, BWHAAA HAHAHHAHHA!

    sheeshe!

    ReplyDelete
  47. Never going to happen, anon.

    The whirled will not abandon oil as an energy source. Not until its' gone. Which will not be for years.

    It is the cost of that oil, in blood and treasure, that will drive the conversion to Cellulosic ethanol

    Abengoa Bioenergy received a conditional offer of a $133.9 million federal loan guarantee for the construction of its "first of a kind" commercial-scale biorefinery to produce ethanol from plant fiber, or cellulosic biomass.

    Abengoa Bioenergy said it intends to start construction on the site, near Hugoton, in Stephens County, Kan., in the very near future.

    "Abengoa has been developing this technology for 10 years, and the project itself has been in the development stages for over five years," Manuel Sánchez, CEO of Abengoa, said in a release. "In preparation for construction of the Hugoton project, the company has developed and perfected its proprietary technologies and produced cellulosic ethanol for thousands of hours from laboratory scale, to a biomass pilot plant facility in York, Nebraska, and ultimately from a demonstration scale facility in Salamanca, Spain."

    The Energy Department originally supported the construction of the Abengoa pilot plant in York, with a $34 million cost-matching award, then entered into a cooperative agreement with Abengoa Bioenergy in 2007 to provide up to $100 million toward the construction of the commercial plant in Hugoton, one of six second-generation biofuels plants chosen for support in the Department of Energy's biofuels initiative.

    "After we demonstrate the commercial viability of our proprietary enzymatic hydrolysis technology in Hugoton, we then plan to incorporate the technology into many of our other existing facilities by adding cellulosic production to the existing starch ethanol facilities that we currently operate," Javier Salgado, president and CEO of Abengoa Bioenergy, said in the release.


    If there are going to be Federal loan guarantees, we're better off making them to our own US companies, rather than foreign governments.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Blogger desert rat said...

    We could build enough ethanol distilleries to eliminate the need for oil not produced in North America.

    That move, establishing the agricultural production capacity to provide feed stock and building the distilleries required to produce the 100 million gallons of liquid energy every day, would be a game changer.





    which is a far cry from:




    After we demonstrate the commercial viability of our proprietary enzymatic hydrolysis technology in Hugoton, we then plan to incorporate the technology into many of our other existing facilities by adding cellulosic production to the existing starch ethanol facilities that we currently operate," Javier Salgado, president and CEO of Abengoa Bioenergy, said in the release.

    If there are going to be Federal loan guarantees, we're better off making them to our own US companies, rather than foreign governments.








    I might add that, during the transition, one would be paying "foreign governments" at the same time one was "providing federal loan guarantees".

    ReplyDelete
  49. Only an anonymous poster would ignore the human loss that is implicit in continuing to "Stay the Course".

    Even GW Bush and Company saw the wisdom of guaranteeing the financing of cellulosic ethanol development.

    ReplyDelete
  50. hey, TAX the oil and subsidize away but that is a waaaay different than going all in with a top down mandate for all US citizens to fully embrace cellulosic ethanol. Apples and Oranges

    ReplyDelete
  51. the York cellulosic pilot plant as "a great facility for us." If it were run full-speed for a year, it could produce about 25,000 gallons of ethanol, he said.

    The demonstration plant at Salamanca, Spain, can produce 1.3 million gallons. Hugoton will produce 25 million-plus.

    "This will put us over the hump," he said of the federal loan guarantee.

    The plant in Hugoton could bring an annual plant payroll over $4.5 million for 65 full-time jobs, Abengoa said.


    65 jobs at a plant that produces 25 million gallons a year.

    Times 4 and we are producing 100 million gallons per year.
    260 jobs.

    Times 365 and we'd be producing 100 million gallons per day.
    About 56,000 jobs, just running the distilleries.

    ReplyDelete
  52. I never called for a Federal mandate, anon.

    That is your scheme for the implementation of a solution to the energy challenge.

    Not mine.

    You created a straw man, and it got burned.

    ReplyDelete
  53. how the hell do you propose to get from where we are to (what you said):

    "We could build enough ethanol distilleries to eliminate the need for oil not produced in North America.

    That move, establishing the agricultural production capacity to provide feed stock and building the distilleries required to produce the 100 million gallons of liquid energy every day, would be a game changer."

    without a federal mandate???

    ReplyDelete
  54. Build it, they will come.

    Put an escalating import excise tax on oil. This to fund the security aspects of its cost to the Federals. While providing loan guarantees to those building the ethanol infrastructure.

    Timing the escalation of the import duties to coincide with the distilleries coming on line.

    Not a mandate in sight.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Here's the "lay of the land" as best I can figure it:

    The Abengoas, Poets, and Duponts of the world should be able to profitably, w/o subsidies, produce Cellulosic Ethanol for somewhere between $2.00/gal, and $2.25/gal (once they've ramped up, and gotten the early bugs out of their processes.)

    That means it will be possible to sell E85, at the pump (after taxes, blending, mark-up, transportation, etc) for $2.95/gal, or so.

    At a point not too far in the distance from that verification, a very large, eventually huge, ramp-up will take place. Remember, we Pay Landowners NOT to Farm 30 Million Acres of Arable Land.

    We are, also, on the cusp of medium-sized cars getting 30 MPG on High-Ethanol Blends such as E85 becoming widely available.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Just an ending of the security subsidies enjoyed by the oil suppliers that the US has been providing, gratis.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Now, Here's the Bad News. This is going to take awhile, and the Saud/Koch Bros/Tea Party is going to be a Very Strong Headwind.

    I'm figuring 5 years, maybe, before JQ Public wakes up, and says, "Hey, this Ethanol from Cellulose-thing is a pretty good idea."

    I think we're in for a pretty rough "go" for a few years, but I'm very optimistic about the "long run."

    ReplyDelete
  58. .

    Abengoa Bioenergy said it intends to start construction on the site, near Hugoton, in Stephens County, Kan., in the very near future.

    "Abengoa has been developing this technology for 10 years, and the project itself has been in the development stages for over five years,"


    .


    Quit it rat. You embarrass yourself by ignoring reality.

    A year ago you posted that we could be energy independant within a year using ethanol.

    Reality intrudes.

    .

    ReplyDelete
  59. I like drones!

    Rufus, here is the lay of the land the best I can figure it: the Abengoas, Poets, and Duponts are being told what to do and say by the Rockefellers, Morgans and Rothchilds, who control among other things the central banks and most of the oil imports.

    Oil is King. The world has the needle tracks to prove it.

    ReplyDelete
  60. I doubt, Q, that I ever said the goal of energy independence could be achieved in a year.

    I know what I write, and a firm deadline is never part of the writing style employed, here at the Elephant Bar.

    Find the comment though, and I'll admit that I was wrong in that a year would not be a viable schedule to achieve independence from oil produced outside North America.

    ReplyDelete
  61. But that ethanol is the only viable solution to our dependence upon foreign oil, that is indisputable.

    That some of you believe that the goal is impossible to achieve, well, little wonder you do not think that the Americas is an exceptional place.

    That our 25% of global GDP is not proof enough of the US being exceptional.

    ReplyDelete
  62. I think USA is an exceptional place, more so than any other place.

    Our energy sources are manipulated by a very few powerful individuals who are in control (see my previous list). Ethanol will not be developed until they say it will be developed. And right now, bear rabbit aint sayin nothin.

    ReplyDelete
  63. .

    I doubt, Q, that I ever said the goal of energy independence could be achieved in a year.

    I recall it because I posted back that I would be talking to you in a year to see how we did.



    I won't argue with you. If you say you didn't say it that's fine. I only brought it up because I recall saying (in humor) I would remind you of it in about a year. Certainly I am not going to go back searching thru two three months of posts to find it.

    But continuing with my point, there is no way what you suggest can be ecomplshed without a government mandate and subsidies. More than once, I have mentioned a 6 to 10 majors hurdles that have to be overcome before ethanol can take off in the manner you suggest. Some issues are technical others societal and some are merely driven by money. All will take time to overcome and some of them may require government mandate.

    For instance, you talk about an ethanol refinery in every county; yet despite your enthusiasm, I think you will find there are a good number of people who would object to having a still down the street.

    As a matter of fact, I would be interested to see your reaction when told your county is planning on putting in one down the street from you.

    ,

    ReplyDelete
  64. What part about the war in Afghanistan is "a lie"? Mostly, the lie was the reason for going there. Rumsfeld, in all his wisdom, claimed that Afghanistan was harboring and training those who perpetrated 9/11. Actually, the training was done in Florida.

    ReplyDelete
  65. interesting rat, your proscription is to tax oil (to raise the price, presumably so that ethanol can be competitive) and to end the security provided by the US (also forcing the price of oil up) and this will cause ethanol refineries to become economically viable making them sprout up everywhere. Interesting theory but I wonder why we don't see ethanol making a large share of the market in Europe given they've done much of what you've said. Is it because the European price of gas isn't high enough yet? What price point would make ethanol viable - 10 bucks a gallon?

    ReplyDelete
  66. I think, Q, that Rat, and I, have an advantage on you on the NIMBY issue. Rural folk are a little different than Urban folk. (especially, Rural Folk that have seen their only factory moved to China.) :)

    People in Rural Counties are much more likely to support a product that is produced "right here in X county."

    Not only that, when a farmer smells hog shit, he smells "money." A little fermenting yeast will smell like Heaven to a farm family trying to scratch out a living on "marginal-at-best" land.

    The oil folks have tried to "grass-root" a little opposition to ethanol plants from time to time, but, even before the ethanol plants started adding "scrubbers" to negate any odor the NIMBY'ers had virtually No success.

    ReplyDelete
  67. .

    That some of you believe that the goal is impossible to achieve, well, little wonder you do not think that the Americas is an exceptional place.


    This is an illogical statement.

    Again.

    The fact that someone is reality based does not ipso facto mean that he does not believe America is exceptional.

    More red herring.

    Even Rufus, the biggest proponent of ethanol here, recognizes that it will take a decade to reach the EPA goal (mandate?) of 25% ethanol usage by 2022.

    .

    ReplyDelete
  68. .

    People in Rural Counties are much more likely to support a product that is produced "right here in X county."



    I understand your point Ruf and won't argue it. That being said, you have argued for an ethanol plant in every county.

    I am saying I doubt the same argument would fly in Manhatten, Marth's Vineyard's, Palm Beach, or many other large metropolitan areas.

    .

    ReplyDelete
  69. If I'm not mistaken, ethanol is taxed the same as gasoline in Europe (with the possible exception of Sweden.)

    ReplyDelete
  70. When I say, "an ethanol plant in every county," I am, of course, being a bit broad. Shelby Co, Tn (Memphis) might not, or might, have an ethanol plant, but several of the surrounding counties might have more than one, or have a larger than average facility.

    I'm, mostly, just trying to drive home the point that "Local is Better."

    ReplyDelete
  71. Blogger Rufus II said...

    If I'm not mistaken, ethanol is taxed the same as gasoline in Europe (with the possible exception of Sweden.)

    ReplyDelete
  72. Rick Perry said today that he did “not believe that America should fall subject to a foreign policy of military adventurism” in a speech to veterans.

    That's a plus.

    On the other hand Rick Perry wants to amend the Constitution so no two womenfolk can get hitched, which is the Sharia Law position.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Do you just make that shit up to support your POV rufus? A quick google suggests your statement re. EU tax on Ethanol is FALSE.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Anon, I said, "If I'm not mistaken." Would you care to give a link?

    (quite honestly, Everything the Euros do bores me to tears, so I don't follow them very closely.)

    ReplyDelete
  75. For instance, I do know that they differentiate between imbibable alcohol, and "agricultural" alcohol (or, something like that.)

    And that the Import tariff on the one booze is much lower than the import tariff on the "agricultural" stuff.

    And, I read last year that they had their panties all in a wad because Sweden was charging the lower tariff on imported ethanol.

    And, on; and, on. Like I said, it bores me to tears.

    ReplyDelete
  76. I know they are going to have to import most of their ethanol, because they just don't have the strong agricultural sector we do.

    Plus, they disallow Genetically Modified seeds (which allows our farmers to out-produce theirs by a large margin.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Europe's Ethanol Market Potential

    In 2003, European Commission issued directives that will govern European biofuels policy through 2010 and target of 5.75% biofuels consumption in the transportation sector by 2010. These include measures to increase ethanol demand and supply and providing tax benefits and exemptions to facilitate growth. The principal goals propelling bioethanol in European countries are improving energy security, boosting rural development, and reducing greenhouse emission reductions.

    http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Biofuels%3a+Potential+Effects+and+Challenges+of+Required+Increases+in+...-a0208970352



    ya might want to make google your friend before you spew your bullshit rufus. Here is a detailed study of Ethanol and its subsidies in the US, Europe and the rest of the world. All you interested in Ethanol may find it quite interesting.

    http://www.biocap.ca/rif/report/Walburger_A.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  78. Anon, you linked to an article from 2006.

    Good Lord. In biofuels, you might as well be referencing the Magna Carta, or Hammurabai's Code.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Fuck off Rufus. You stated that Europeans tax ethanol the same as they tax gas. I questioned your assertion and you asked for links. I gave them. Maybe you should consider supporting your assertion with some evidence rather than dancing a bloviating your way around your false assertion of facts.

    It certainly appears that your view of the world is simply based on what you want to believe. A church may be a more appropriate place for you.

    ReplyDelete
  80. .

    In the words of the immortal Whit, "We have too many fucking anonymi around here."

    Referring of course to the fact that one never can be sure which anonymi they are talking to; therefore, making it hard to see if the arguments of any particular one are consistent over time.

    Merely adding a name or an initial to the post would help but most appear too lazy to do so.

    ,

    .

    ReplyDelete
  81. Fuck Off, yourself. I don't care what you think - any more than I really care what Europe does, or doesn't do.

    I'm interested in the Familia Rufii, then Tunica Co., Ms. Then the USA.


    way down the list comes the muzzies, you, and the euros.

    ReplyDelete
  82. You put you and your family before Sugar Ditch???? That's big.

    Is that old steak house, Hollywood Cafe in Robinsonville, still in business?

    ReplyDelete
  83. Yeah, it's still there. changes hands every now, and then.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Ms T: On the other hand Rick Perry wants to amend the Constitution so no two womenfolk can get hitched, which is the Sharia Law position.




    Sharia also disallows the marriage of a man to his pet goat. I am sure Perry is on the same page....

    I am sure there are 1000 sharia law positions that are the same as what stands for American law.

    It should MUCH of Sharia law comes from the Laws of the JEWS.

    But MUCH aint all....

    And just as the Moslems mistranslate and misapply Jewish laws, you define and quote Jewish laws just as poorly as the Moslems...

    So Perry trying to protect the Historic meaning of Marriage, a term and institution that dates back as a "man and woman" for at least 4000 years of all cultures across the globe is not radical.

    Allowing 2 chicks to "marry" is abnormal.

    ReplyDelete
  85. The State having the right to tell "Anyone" who, or what, they may marry is abhorrent.

    ReplyDelete
  86. Or, "abnormal," as some religious control freaks would have it.

    ReplyDelete
  87. WIO: Allowing 2 chicks to "marry" is abnormal.

    But corporations are people. Mitt Romney says so.

    WiO says can nuke the rock in the off-season and keep immediate blast deaths to a minimum, with the total destruction limited to a sphere less than 650 feet in diameter. Secondary fire and radiation deaths in the downtown Mecca apartments beyond the 650 foot fireball are unavoidable of course.

    ReplyDelete
  88. I was stunned when Fast and Loose Lingerie ran off with Big Harry's Farming and Fabrication myself. They just ran off and did it not ever an announcement in the papers.


    b

    ReplyDelete
  89. WIO: And just as the Moslems mistranslate and misapply Jewish laws, you define and quote Jewish laws just as poorly as the Moslems...

    It's not so much that I mistranslate what's there, but that I don't see anything there. You can search Torah til the Day of the LORD you won't find anything in there that says womankind shall not lie with womankind. Maybe in the Christian addendum, maybe Rabbi Daniel Lapin can read something between the lines, but as far as Moshe and the plain text is concerned, I'm good to go.

    ReplyDelete
  90. :)

    While I'd be an abomination.

    Tain't fair.

    b

    ReplyDelete
  91. Three Gorges Dam fails in an earthquake, 360 million deaths. That should slake your thirst for chaos more than nuking a rock. Interesting times.

    ReplyDelete
  92. 90% of Republicans Say They Won’t Support Sarah Palin


    (sorry b)

    ReplyDelete
  93. Never heard of that, or many other urbanisms, like

    a number between five and six
    "one, two, three, four, five, durf, six, seven."
    "fifteen, durfteen, sixteen."
    "fiftynine, durftyone, durftytwo, durftythree..."


    b

    ReplyDelete
  94. A man can dream, Miss T, though I think your numbers there are exaggerated.

    When was the last time the best person won, anyway.....

    b

    ReplyDelete
  95. New CNN poll -


    The survey, released Monday, indicates that 27 percent of Republicans nationwide support Perry for their party's nomination, with former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who's making his second bid for the White House, at 14 percent. Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin follows at ten percent, with Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani at nine percent, and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, who's making his third bid for the presidency, at six percent. Every one else listed on the questionnaire registered in the low single digits.

    Not bad for Sarah when she's not even running.

    According to Miss T's way of figuring things we could say 86% of Republicans would never vote Romney.....


    b

    ReplyDelete
  96. re: "corporations are people"

    You jest.

    "An entity, usually a business, created by a legislative act or by individuals who have agreed upon and filed articles of incorporation with the state government. Ownership in the corporation is typically represented by shares of stock. Furthermore, a corporation is [legally recognized as an artificial person] whose existence is separate and distinct from that of its shareholders who are not personally responsible for the corporationÂ’s acts and debts. [As an artificial person], a corporation has the power to acquire, own, and convey property, to sue and be sued, and such other [powers of a natural person] that the law may confer upon it."

    corporation legal definition

    ReplyDelete
  97. Blair’s Sister-in-Law Incites Muslims to ‘Liberate’ Jerusalem
    “For world peace Israel must be destroyed.”

    ‘We say here today to you, Israel, we see your crimes and we loathe your crimes. And to us your nation does not exist, because it is a criminal injustice against humanity. We want to see Lebanon, Jordan and Egypt go to the borders and stop this now. Liberate Al Quds! March to Al Quds!’”

    ReplyDelete




  98. “Corporations are people, my friend,”
    Romney said with uncharacteristic pique.

    Several people in the front of the crowd — they identified themselves as linked to the liberal Iowa Center for Community Involvement — interrupted: “No, they’re not.”

    Romney, who had already faced tough questions from the group’s members who arrived early and claimed the best seats, plowed right ahead.

    “Of course they are. Everything corporations earn ultimately goes to people. Where do you think it goes?” said Romney ...

    ReplyDelete
  99. Nuke the Dome of the Rock!

    ReplyDelete
  100. Iran is ready for increased cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and could respond to a limited number of its "allegations," the country's nuclear chief told the IRNA news agency Monday.

    ...

    "We will no longer negotiate a fuel swap and a halt to our production of [nuclear] fuel," he said about the idea of swapping part of its uranium stock in exchange for nuclear fuel for a Tehran research reactor.

    Abbasi Davani's latest comments came after a top IAEA official earlier this month toured Iranian nuclear sites, including ones where uranium is being enriched.

    ReplyDelete




  101. A few Catholics still insist Galileo was wrong


    ... supporters contend there is scientific evidence to support geocentrism, just as there is evidence to support the six-day story of creation in Genesis.

    There is proof in Scripture that Earth is the center of the universe, Sungenis said. Among many verses, he cites Joshua 10:12-14 as definitive proof:

    "And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, while the nation took vengeance on its foe.… The sun halted in the middle of the sky; not for a whole day did it resume its swift course."

    ReplyDelete
  102. I was in the restaurant yesterday when I suddenly realized I desperately
    needed to pass gas. The music was really, really loud, so I timed my
    gas with the beat of the music.

    After a couple of songs, I started to feel better. I finished my coffee,
    and noticed that everybody was staring at me....

    Then I suddenly remembered that I was listening to my iPod.

    ReplyDelete
  103. Perry is now occupying the tea party/economic lane — the lane that is likely to produce the next nominee since it will be filled by a candidate not considered anathema to either the establishment or the tea party/social wings of the party.

    If Perry can hold on to his support from economic-focused tea parties then, he doesn’t need to beat Romney among the establishment — he just needs to stay within shouting distance and be a credible alternative if the tea party makes clear that the former Massachusetts governor is not a viable choice for them.

    The Gallup poll suggests that Perry is doing just that at the moment. If he can continue to hold his lane, he will likely wind up as the nominee.

    ReplyDelete
  104. Teresita said...
    WIO: And just as the Moslems mistranslate and misapply Jewish laws, you define and quote Jewish laws just as poorly as the Moslems...

    It's not so much that I mistranslate what's there, but that I don't see anything there. You can search Torah til the Day of the LORD you won't find anything in there that says womankind shall not lie with womankind.


    Notice how she CHANGES the argument?

    I love the way you lie!

    You do it so well...

    Dont like what someone says?

    CHANGE WHAT SOMEONE SAYS....

    Talk about a bullshit artist....

    ReplyDelete
  105. Teresita said...
    WIO: And just as the Moslems mistranslate and misapply Jewish laws, you define and quote Jewish laws just as poorly as the Moslems...


    WIO: Dont like what someone says?

    WIO: CHANGE WHAT SOMEONE SAYS....


    Compare to WiO's original words to see if I changed what he said:

    WIO (Mon Aug 29, 04:17:00 PM EDT) And just as the Moslems mistranslate and misapply Jewish laws, you define and quote Jewish laws just as poorly as the Moslems...

    I do believe Yahweh once commanded, "Thou shalt not bear false witness."

    ReplyDelete
  106. Where'd whales come from -

    Here


    and


    Here


    b

    ReplyDelete
  107. We must plant the sea and herd its animals using the sea as farmers instead of hunters. That is what civilization is all about - farming replacing hunting.
    Jacques Yves Cousteau


    Somewhere I think there is a quote by this strange goose how we all ought to evolve back to the sea, like the whales.

    Here are some other quotes --

    Quotable Cousteau

    b

    ReplyDelete
  108. Farming replacing hunting as civilization?

    Well......

    Not so simple.....

    With the farmers came the first cities, with the first cities came specialization, and the first armies.....


    But, I've said it before.

    b

    ReplyDelete
  109. The sea is the universal sewer. A lot of people attack the sea, I make love to it.

    Jacques Yves Cousteau


    One can have some fun transposing Cousteau quotes around a bit.


    b

    ReplyDelete
  110. Compare to WiO's original words to see if I changed what he said:

    WIO (Mon Aug 29, 04:17:00 PM EDT) And just as the Moslems mistranslate and misapply Jewish laws, you define and quote Jewish laws just as poorly as the Moslems...

    I do believe Yahweh once commanded, "Thou shalt not bear false witness."




    Thanks toots...

    I DONT

    YOU changed what I said to your fit fiction.

    I said NOTHING about lesbians lying together...

    I said something about Lesbian marriage.

    You also lie when you say I advocated genocide in Mecca when you know full well I advocated the killing of a rock....

    Distortings, lying and misrepresenting is what you do...

    So as for MY tribe's lore about stuff and how you misrepresent what I say and they say?

    You're still a fucking liar...


    .

    ReplyDelete
  111. A 21-year-old Kosovan man is due to go on trial in Frankfurt on Wednesday charged with the murder of two US soldiers in a shooting that marked the first deadly Islamist attack on German soil.

    ...

    At point-blank range, he is said to have fired into the back of the head of a 25-year-old soldier, who died shortly afterward.

    Shouting "Allahu Akbar" ("God is great"), he then rushed onto the bus and shot dead the 21-year-old bus driver before opening fire on two more soldiers, aged 21 and 25, who were both seriously wounded, prosecutors say.

    ReplyDelete
  112. .

    Kinda miss having old Ash around.

    And Whit.


    Deuce, when you talk to Whit, you should tell him to stop in once in a while and let us know how he's doing.


    .

    ReplyDelete
  113. .

    Saw a documentary today from the 1940's on the old Ford Willow Run Plant. During WWII, they used to make B24 bombers there.

    At one point in the documentary they mentioned that Ford hired midgets using small little tools to do the assembly work inside the tight quarters of the gun turrets.

    Makes sense when you think about it; but I suspect that part of the films would have ended up on the cutting room floor in todays PC America.

    .

    ReplyDelete
  114. The Russian space agency, Roscomos, postponed Monday the launch of a mission to the International Space Station (ISS) from Sept. 22 to the end of October or early November, Ria Novosti news agency reported.

    The mission was postponed in the wake of an accident that caused the loss of a Progress M-12M space freighter last week, according to the agency's manned flight program director Alexei Krasnov.

    ReplyDelete
  115. POSTED: Monday, Aug. 29, 2011
    Idaho’s wolf season opens Aug. 30
    STATESMAN STAFF


    The season will run through Dec. 31 in Island Park and Beaverhead wolf management zones, through June 30 in the Lolo and Selway zones, and through March 31 in the remaining nine of the state’s 13 wolf management zones.

    Licensed hunters may buy two tags per year. Wolf tags cost $11.50 for resident hunters and $31.75 for nonresidents.

    Harvest limits are set in five zones — 40 in the Salmon, 60 in the Sawtooth, 25 in the Southern Mountains, 10 in the Beaverhead and 30 in the Island Park zones — to preserve connectivity with populations in other states.

    Fish and Game will monitor the hunt daily. The seasons will close when the harvest limit for that zone is reached or at the season closing date.

    To find out whether a wolf hunt zone is closed, call (855)648-5558 starting Aug. 30.

    A wolf trapping season opens Nov. 15 and goes through March 31 in the Panhandle zone, except for units 2 and 3; in the Lolo zone; in the Dworshak-Elk City zone, except Unit 10A; in the Selway zone; and the Middle Fork zone.

    All other zones are closed to trapping with the option of opening a trapping season in other zones upon commission review in January.

    Details of wolf hunting and trapping seasons and rules are available on the Fish and Game’s website under big game seasons and rules at fishandgame.idaho.gov, and they arepublished in a brochure available at license vendors and Fish and Game offices.



    Wolf trapping in the Lolo in the hard part of winter.

    The old-timers knew best. That's when they' put out the D-Con, er, poison, when the bears are asleep and the cats are mostly asleep.

    b

    ReplyDelete
  116. shotgun
    slugs
    cell phone
    taxidermists number
    camera
    books
    folding chair
    radio with ear plugs
    cooler
    drinks
    sandwhichs
    pack of cigarettes
    Russian Barski big binocs
    hunting license
    wolf tag
    crossword puzzles

    All set to set


    b

    ReplyDelete
  117. The Game Commissioners know that wolves aren't going to be hunted out of the Lolo, so they put the trapping option in there. Might help....some.

    A bounty would be better.....poison, ah, the very best......

    b

    ReplyDelete
  118. Good luck, b.

    I sure hope you get a couple of those wanton killers.....you do right.

    Right on, bro.

    ReplyDelete
  119. Cancer-stricken Lockerbie bomber Abdelbaset al-Megrahi is reportedly near death in Tripoli, even as Libyan rebels yesterday ruled out extraditing him back to Britain.

    ReplyDelete