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

Sunday, September 21, 2014

Kurds volunteering to fight ISIS turned away at Turkish border - video

But hold on, here is how the Turks want the world to see them:


Kurds call on 'all Middle East' to help defend stronghold from Isis

Tens of thousands of Kurdish refugees have fled to Syria-Turkey border region of Kobani to escape onslaught of Islamist militants

Kurdish fighters from Turkey and Iraq are scrambling to help defend a vital Kurdish safe haven in northern Syria, where tens of thousands of Kurdshave fled after an offensive by Islamic State (Isis) militants.
The border region of Kobani, home to half a million people, has held out for months against an onslaught by Islamists seeking to consolidate their hold over swaths of northern Syria. But in recent days, Isis extremists have seized a series of settlements close to the town of Kobani itself, sending as many as 100,000 mostly Kurdish refugees streaming across the border into Turkey.
"I don't think in the last three and a half years we have seen 100,000 cross in two days," the representative for the UN refugee agency (UNHCR) in Turkey, Carol Batchelor, told Reuters. "So this is a bit of a measure of how this situation is unfolding, and the very deep fear people have about the circumstances inside Syria and, for that matter, Iraq."
A Kurdish commander on the ground said Isis had advanced to within 9 miles (15km) of Kobani.
A Kurdish politician from Turkey who visited Kobani on Saturday said locals told him Isis fighters were beheading people as they went from village to village.
"Rather than a war this is a genocide operation … They are going into the villages and cutting the heads of one or two people and showing them to the villagers," Ibrahim Binici, a deputy for Turkey's pro-Kurdish People's Democratic party (HDP), told Reuters.
"It is truly a shameful situation for humanity," he said, calling for international intervention. Five of his fellow MPs planned a hunger strike outside UN offices in Geneva to press for action, he said.
The Kurdistan Workers party (PKK), a rebel group that has spent three decades fighting for autonomy for Turkey's Kurds, renewed a call for the youth of Turkey's mostly Kurdish south-east to rise up and rush to save Kobani.
"Supporting this heroic resistance is not just a debt of honour of the Kurds but all Middle East people. Just giving support is not enough, the criterion must be taking part in the resistance," it said in a statement on its website. "[Isis] fascism must drown in the blood it spills … The youth of North Kurdistan [south-east Turkey] must flow in waves to Kobani," it said.
Hundreds of people gathered in solidarity for a third day on the Turkish side of the barbed wire border fence near the town of Suruc, where many of the refugees have crossed. Security forces trying to maintain order fired teargas and water cannon and some protesters started throwing stones at them in frustration.
Even by the standards of Syria's bitter war, the refugee numbers are alarming. Their numbers add to the 2.8 million Syrians who have become refugees in the past three years, and another 6.4 million who have been displaced within their own country – approaching half of Syria's pre-war population of 23 million.
UNHCR and the Turkish authorities said they were preparing for the possibility of hundreds of thousands more refugees arriving in the coming days.
Kobani's relative stability through much of Syria's conflict meant 200,000 internally displaced people were sheltering there before Isis's advance, UNHCR said.
"This massive influx shows how important it is to offer and preserve asylum space for Syrians as well as the need to mobilise international support to the neighbouring countries," said Antonio Guterres, the UN high commissioner for refugees.

146 comments:

  1. There's Obamas "invitation" into Syria.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Now the reports are coming out that the Turks are holding them up at the border. Too many coming in. You knew this one was coming. That is what happens when you have allies like Turkey and the Sauds. The Turks are totally playing Obama with their NATO status and the Russians in Crimea to their north.

    No exaggeration. I can recall no political mess greater than this since the Cuban Missile crisis.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ah, c'mon Deuce, Rufus has a "feeling" and, heck, IS is just 10,000 dead men walking dontcha know?

      Hey, let's go back in the 'way back machine' and see what rufus had to say then:

      back in 2006:

      rufusFri Sep 29, 12:39:00 PM EDT

      The insurgency is "Finished," Rat. If we left right now the Iraqis would probably muddle through; but, why take the chance?

      The Colonel's Brigade is being replaced; we're just doubling up for a couple of months. They need another ten thousand, or so, in Baghdad for awhile to finish off what's turning into a pretty danged effective program.

      http://2164th.blogspot.ca/2006/09/biting-off-more-than-they-can-chew.html#comment-form


      Delete
    2. What does the way back machine reveal about Rat?

      back in 2005:


      Blogger desert rat said...

      tb68
      You, better than many should appreciate what the natives of a region can do, if assisted from US.
      The challenge with US is we are rather a rather short sighted culture, more interested in today and the next quarter then tomorrow and the end of the decade.
      To awaken the public to the danger and then keep US from dozing off, that is the challenge.
      We could project power through surogates as well as anyone, we just don't like doing it.
      There are many waround the world that would fight with US for what we believe, we just have to let them.

      https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=12136206&postID=112252659141455002




      jeeze, just support the friendlies on the ground and the world is our oyster.

      Delete
    3. Exactly , Ash, just as was said in 2005.
      If the government of Iraq had been delivered the F16, as the US promised, they'd have had their own air support. But the US did not deliver them.

      The United States DID NOT support the Iraqi government, did not supply them with Close Air Support as the ISIS advanced, and did not supply the Iraqi with the tools to do it themselves.

      It the US had,,. well ... things COULD be different, today.

      What desert rat wrote in 2005 stands up quite well, what, eight years later.
      He was correct then, and you have done us all a service in validating his point.

      Delete
    4. The government of Iraq was supplied close air support AND boots on the ground yet they still failed.

      Delete
    5. Back in 2005 and beyond when Rat originally wrote that. All that US blood and treasure and it still went to shit.

      Delete
    6. When the US did provide air support, the Iraqi government succeeded in taking back the dam in Mosul, as an example.

      That the US failed to follow the "Rat Doctrine" in Iraq certainly does not invalidate it, Ash.

      Delete
    7. Putting US boots into combat is not the "Rat Doctrine".

      The US followed the Bush Cheney Docrine -
      Dismissing the Iraqi troops that would have been utilized if the "Rat Doctrine" was going to be utilized, by US.
      What the US did, in Iraq, is the direct antithesis of the "Rat Doctrine"

      Delete
    8. Rat you said the same shit back in 05 as you are saying now. sure air US power is superior but that doesn't control the politics on the ground no matter how much you cry "but they didn't fully follow the rat doctrine"

      Delete
  3. Replies
    1. A political mess is when our guys are being beheaded.

      This is just some kind of "going-ons" in the Middle East. :)

      Delete
    2. A political mess will be when your local ISIS branch successfully argues in Federal Court that it doesn't have to comply with a subpoena, because of its "deeply held religious belief" that you should be headless.

      And, the judge, citing hobby lobby, agrees.

      Delete
    3. "It is not for the Court to 'inquir[e] into the theological merit of the belief in question'," Sam wrote, citing Hobby Lobby. "The Court's 'only task is to determine whether the claimant's belief is sincere, and if so, whether the government has applied substantial pressure on the claimant to violate that belief.'"

      Delete
    4. As for the Turks:

      WE are "turning away" those children that are fleeing the Central American Drug Wars. Why shouldn't Turkey turn away illegal immigrants at its border?

      Delete
    5. .

      I think you exaggerate. :)

      Good lord, this coming from Private Hyperbole.

      .

      Delete
    6. Anything positive you want to add?

      Or, are you just going to sit around and pick at others all day, again today?

      Delete
    7. .

      Naw, I have been kind of busy the last few days and will be out most of today.

      However, you have to admit that it's a bit 'ironic'.

      :o)

      .

      Delete
    8. It was said with humor (you didn't see the smiley face?)

      Delete
    9. .

      An yet, you follow it up with

      A political mess will be when your local ISIS branch successfully argues in Federal Court that it doesn't have to comply with a subpoena, because of its "deeply held religious belief" that you should be headless.

      And, the judge, citing hobby lobby, agrees.


      Not, an offhand remark since you repeated it from the last stream.

      Thus, my remark.

      .

      Delete
    10. .

      :o)

      Stop it, you're killing me.

      .

      Delete
  4. There are those that would drop a few bombs to keep 40,000 men, women, and children from dying on a mountain

    and, there are those that wouldn't.


    There are those that would fight for their country

    and, there are those that would run off to Canada.


    There are those unreliable people that we would not want in our village. They know who they are.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Who else does head hacking in the Middle East? The Egyptians, Syrians, israelis, Syrians, palestinians, the dreaded Iranians?

    No, it is the Saudis, benefactors of the Islamic crazies. We need a reverse Aramco on the true vile of evil.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They supply about 10,000,000 barrels of oil to the world market, Every Day.

      If you're going to "do something" about the Saudis, you're going to have to do something to replace their product.

      Or, just go down there and take it away from them (how does that sound?)

      Delete
  6. Rufus is wrong about Cakewalk II but if we followed his long term advise on ethanol, solar and wind, we could have mortally damaged Putin and all the so so called princes of Arabia.

    Washington and the Plutocracy on the Potomac: POP so goes the weasels.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's not too late. :)

      Poet produced 55,000 gallons of ethanol from corn cobs, and stalks, yesterday.

      Delete
  7. I finally got the Guardian video to work and posted it above.

    ReplyDelete
  8. “Congress must now vote to support the first steps of what will be a long march toward victory,” said Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy.

    Following this clarion call, 71 House Republicans bolted to join 85 Democrats in voting no to U.S. funds to train and arm Syrian rebels.

    Why the hesitation? Because our strategy in Syria is to rely on a Free Syrian Army that has been the least effective force in that civil war, and untrustworthy to boot. Units of the FSA have handed their U.S. weapons over to ISIS.


    Yet these “feckless” rebels, says Sen. Bob Corker, constitute “our entire ground game.”

    John McCain raises a second issue. The FSA came into being to overthrow Bashar Assad. Now they are to be retrained to fight ISIS. How effective will the FSA be when told to change sides and become de facto allies of the dictator against whom they took up arms?

    Projections are that it will take a year before we can set up and run camps in Saudi Arabia, vet volunteers, train, equip, and arm rebels, and send 5,000 fighters into battle in Syria.

    The United States will then be ensuring that a three-year civil war that has caused millions of refugees and cost 190,000 lives — soldiers, rebels, jihadists, and civilians alike — will go on indefinitely.

    {...}

    ReplyDelete
    Replies

    1. {...}

      Where is the morality in a superpower decision to arm Syrians and send them into a war they cannot win, so few in number are they, but where they can keep bleeding 5,000 lives a month of their countrymen? Can St. Augustine’s theory of a just war be reconciled with such programmed slaughter with no end in sight?

      There are other reasons why many in Congress are reluctant to vote funds to train and arm Syrian rebels. First, as the president has said, it is still “somebody else’s civil war.”

      Second, the White House has not advanced a credible war plan. Third, our commander in chief is not a war leader. And, again, this FSA upon which McCarthy’s victory hangs is not even the JV.

      Brushing aside these concerns is the Wall Street Journal, whose editorial, “The Syria Campaign,” describes how the FSA can emerge victorious.

      “American bombs aren’t yet falling on Syria, but on Tuesday Chuck Hagel suggested they soon will. … Let’s hope so.” the editorial began. Here is how the Journal’s “military strategy” would unfold:

      “A devastating air campaign against the Islamic State might at least weaken the group sufficiently to embolden a revolt and send new recruits to the FSA. The model here is the air cover NATO gave to Kosovars as they fought Serbian aggressors in 1999.”

      But were the Serbs really “aggressors” in fighting to hold their cradle province of Kosovo, which ethnic Albanians were trying to tear away? Did Bill Clinton fight a constitutional war in killing 1,000 Serbs without the authorization of the Congress of the United States?

      Does the Journal have in mind another unconstitutional war?

      So it would seem. For the Journal not only wants bombs falling on ISIS, but on Assad as well.

      “Defeating the Islamic State will also require attacks on the Assad regime. Sunnis will not support the campaign against Islamic State if they think our air strikes are intended to help the regime in Damascus and its Shiite allies in Beirut and Tehran.”

      The Journal wants Obama to bomb Raqqa, ISIS, the Assad regime, and its army and air force, to give the FSA a “psychological boost.”

      Questions arise: Does the Journal believe Barack Obama needs Congressional authorization before going to war against Syria, which has neither attacked nor threatened us, but instead has expressed a willingness to work with us to destroy ISIS?

      Does the Journal believe Hezbollah and Iran, which have expended blood and treasure sustaining their ally Assad in his civil war, will sit still and watch us bomb him? Will Putin do nothing as we bomb his ally?

      Or will Hezbollah target Americans in Lebanon while Iran orders the anti-American Shia militias, the most effective fighters now behind the Baghdad government, to start attacking Americans in Iraq?

      What if our air campaign against ISIS, as our air attacks in Iraq seem to have done, brings recruits rushing not to the FSA, but to ISIS?

      Before we went back into the Iraq war, we were told ISIS had 15,000 fighters. Now there are estimates of 30,000.

      Are we again creating more enemies than we are killing?

      And if our bombing campaign against Assad breaks him, who comes to power in Damascus, if not ISIS, al-Nusra or the Islamic Front? What then becomes of the Christian and Shia minorities?

      “Our key allies are the Kurds, the parts of the Iraqi military that aren’t dominated by Iraq’s militia, and the moderate Sunnis in Syria and Iraq,” says the Journal.

      But if those are our key allies, then the “long march” to victory of which the majority leader speaks appears to have no end.

      And what will victory look like?

      Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of the new book “The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority.”

      Delete
    2. Looks like the results of the Israeli instituted "Yinon Plan" are being formalized.
      The region has been fragmented, and the US will ensure it stays that way.

      Israel prefers al-Qeada
      Israel’s Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren told the Jerusalem Post that Israel so wanted Assad out and his Iranian backers weakened, that Israel would accept al-Qaeda operatives taking power in Syria.

      “We always wanted Bashar Assad to go, we always preferred the bad guys who weren’t backed by Iran to the bad guys who were backed by Iran.”

      Even if the other “bad guys” were affiliated with al-Qaeda.
      “We understand that they are pretty bad guys,” Oren said in the interview.


      http://www.jpost.com/Syria-Crisis/Oren-Jerusalem-has-wanted-Assad-ousted-since-the-outbreak-of-the-Syrian-civil-war-326328

      Delete
    3. I don't see any of that. I see us being "bombers of opportunity."

      When the FSA is squared off against ISIS, as they are, from time to time, we bomb de ISIS.

      When the Syrian Kurds are being hit by ISIS, we bomb de ISIS.

      When the President has a bad round of golf, we bomb de ISIS.

      Kind of the "new default position."

      Delete
  9. Rufus makes an excellent point ...

    There are many, many people n the US that do not want refugees from foreign violence to be allowed into the US.

    Yet bemoan the inhumanity of the policy when other countries then follow the course that those same people advocate for US.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Had we followed our real global interests, we never would have sacrificed the livelihoods of tens of millions of US Americans, by developing an economic union with all the Americans, none of which would have created an alternate blue water navy and would be at war with each other.

      Delete
    2. It was in the Corporatists' interests to send those jobs to Mexico, and beyond.

      And, this Is America; Corporate interests Do have primacy.

      Delete
    3. That was then, this is now.

      Until the US can produce that 22% of the oil it now imports from the Middle East, we are engaged.

      There have only been two voices, here at the Elephant Bar, who have been steady in their call for the US to do that ...
      That have presented a program that could, in the real world, succeed.

      Quirk disliked the idea, he claimed the vehicles in the US would not survive using ethanol, even while vehicles in Brazil do quite well on that fuel stock.
      Not allowing reality to interfere with pre-determined thinking, reinforced by propaganda from the petroleum industry.

      Delete
    4. The (to, correctly, use one of Quirk's favorite words) ironic thing is,it was George W. Bush, who put in force a simple policy that allowed us to replace 10% of our petroleum use, in just a couple of years, and almost without giving it a second thought.

      Delete
    5. .

      Actually, Quirk merely quoted the US government and the EPA both of which at the time were not only pushing ethanol but mandating it.

      Rat looks at Brazil and assumes the US automotive fleet of 250 million vehicles can simply be converted over night.

      But then, that is the rat.

      .

      Delete
    6. You can ABSOLUTELY convert to E20, "Overnight."

      Just pump it into your tank.

      Same goes for E30.

      Delete
    7. Everyone ooohs and aaaahs over the two million bbl of oil / day from fracking, but seems to ignore the two million bbl of Ethanol / Day that we've added, globally, in the last decade.

      Delete
    8. Brazil simply passed a law that most new vehicles would be flexfuel. It doesn't convert 100% of the fleet "overnight," but within a decade over half the miles driven are being driven in FF Vehicles.

      Delete
    9. As I said, Quirk is enthralled by the propaganda from the oil industry.
      That the oil industry and the government of the US are joined at the hip ...

      Well, that is the industry that both Bush's and Dick Cheney, grew up in.

      Delete
    10. He's well aware, I'm sure, that the same people that pay his pension are the people that own Exxon, BP, and Shell.

      Delete
  10. ...Does the Journal believe Hezbollah and Iran, which have expended blood and treasure sustaining their ally Assad in his civil war, will sit still and watch us bomb him? Will Putin do nothing as we bomb his ally?

    Or will Hezbollah target Americans in Lebanon while Iran orders the anti-American Shia militias, the most effective fighters now behind the Baghdad government, to start attacking Americans in Iraq?

    What if our air campaign against ISIS, as our air attacks in Iraq seem to have done, brings recruits rushing not to the FSA, but to ISIS?

    Before we went back into the Iraq war, we were told ISIS had 15,000 fighters. Now there are estimates of 30,000.

    Are we again creating more enemies than we are killing?
    ...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are we again creating more enemies than we are killing?
      The hubris built into the fabric of that question is quite remarkable

      Delete
    2. If the US were REALLY at war with ISIS, it would be flying in support of Assad's Army.
      The US is not at war with Syria.

      The hypocrisy of our position is crystal clear.

      Delete
    3. The idea that the 'growth' in ISIS is 'real' could challenged.
      First, that the published reports have been and still are being manipulated, is not beyond the realm of possibility.
      Second, that if there has been a rush of recruits to the ISIS, that those recruits were motivated by the couple of dozen airstrikes by the US in support of the Iraqi government.

      Delete
  11. Anybody can make up a number about "how many" ISIS there is, but when that pump says that you have pumped 9 gallons of gasoline, and one gallon of ethanol, you can pretty much take it to the bank.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And, I'm sure of one other thing; every time I fill up with E85, the Middle East sells one less gallon of oil in the U.S.

      Delete
    2. And, if the shit "Really" hits the fan, I can buy some corn from my next door neighbor, and make my own fuel.


      And, if I "really, really had to," I could just buy some corn "stalks" from him, and distill my ethanol from them.

      Delete
    3. The Federal goverment has mandated E10 or E15 to be pumped into every vehicle that buys gasoline in Maricopa and/or Pima counties, in AZ.
      To preserve 'Air Quality'

      It could easily mandate that for the entire country, to preserve "The Peace".

      Delete
    4. Actually, the RFS does mandate that approx. 14 Billion gallons of ethanol will be blended into the nation's gasoline this year.

      Delete
    5. .

      And, I'm sure of one other thing; every time I fill up with E85, the Middle East sells one less gallon of oil in the U.S.

      ?????

      .

      Delete
    6. Easy to do, confuse the Quirk.

      He does not understand 'jokes', either.

      Delete
    7. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    8. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    9. U.S. gasoline consumption is projected to top 8.82 million barrels per day, or 134.2 billion gallons, for 2014, according to newly released figures from the U.S. Energy Department’s Short-Term Energy Outlook, released by the Energy Information Administration.

      Delete
    10. You beat me to the retraction, by deletion.

      Delete
    11. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    12. .

      You boys once again misrepresent my position on ethanol, either through intent or through ignorance. Since I came to the blog the ethanol industry and its advocates here have been over promising on all aspects of the issue, whether it is on the growth of the industry even when mandated and subsidized, the timing the goals will be achieved, the technical aspects, and 'what could be done if only we would'.

      To back up the claims we are presented with articles from Clean Technica, surveys from the University of Iowa, individual spot prices from around the country, analysis from the corn lobby, possible success stories like Poet, what ethanol can do in race cars, plans to seed interstate highway medians, Rufus' distilling skills, or plans like Rufus' asserting that building an ethanol refinery in every county or rat's contention we can quintuple production are doable.

      You two guys are like fervid environmentalists or rabid global warming advocates. You assume anyone who takes argument with your statements, even the most absurd, are directly challenging everything you believe. You are simply fanatics.

      .

      Delete
    13. For Christ's sake, Quirk. E85 is, on average, about 78% Ethanol (it varies by season. 85% is the Summer blend.)

      16 gal (fill-up) X 78% is 12.48 gallons of ethanol.

      12.48 X .80 (I lose about 20% efficiency with my Impala) = 9.98 gallons of gasoline (call it 10.0, whattaya say?)

      If one out of 10 of our gallons of gasoline are made from MiddleEastern oil, then that's one gallon we don't need.

      It might actually be a little more, but, what the hey.

      Delete
    14. No, Quirk, we're not fanatics; you are, simply, dense.

      EVERY THING that we have said would happen has happened.

      Delete
    15. .

      Rat's argument that the EPA is simply in bed with the oil companies when it comes to ethanol is absurd on the face of it. For years the government not only mandated ethanol use but subsidized it. How many years has the EPA been mandating that the oil industry use a certain amount cellulosic ethanol and fining the blenders when they didn't meet the quota even when the fuel wasn't there?

      Another area where the government over mandated and the industry didn't deliver. Yet, point it out to the corn king and his minion and you are branded anti-ethanol and owned by 'big oil'.

      You boys are down right hilarious.

      .

      Delete
    16. .

      I went back and reread your original post and deleted mine. Sorry you didn't see it before you did your figgerin.

      .

      Delete
    17. NO, that is a falsehood. No refiners have been FINED for not using cellulosic ethanol that Was Not Available. Every year the mandate has been adjusted to assure that the fuel was used, TO THE EXTENT THAT IT WAS AVAILABLE.

      Every year, one of your right-wing websites would cry out in anguish that the poor oil companies were going to be fined for not using a "product that was not available," and every year they would, later, fail to report that such a thing Had Not Happened.

      Delete
    18. Not just the EPA, Quirk, the entire US Federal government.
      Tax law, energy policy or the lack of it, all to the benefit of what is referred to as "Big Oil".

      Does it have a monopoly of power, on policy, no.
      Does it have extensive influence on policy, without doubt.


      National Energy Policy: The Cheney Law Massacre
      E-mail
      Print
      PDF



      By Cassandra Anderson
      September 1, 2011

      liberty911rev_deesThe US National Energy Policy of 2005 was created under Dick Cheney's Energy Task Force in secret meetings; evidence shows that the energy industry influences foreign policy and may have led us into the Iraq War. Cheney's National Energy Policy is also responsible for electricity deregulation scams, corporate welfare for energy producers and many other problems that we are still suffering from today. Deregulated electricity problems in Texas and other states are a direct result of Cheney's National Energy Policy.

      http://morphcity.com/home/105-national-energy-policy-the-cheney-law-massacre

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Task_Force

      Delete
    19. .

      EVERY THING that we have said would happen has happened.

      When I came here you were promising everything would happen tomorrow. I argued it wouldn't and as we have seen it has taken years even with subsidies and mandates. That is were some of the arguments have come from.

      You have been doing the same thing with the celluloscic right now.

      Some of your other arguments are just to use your word 'dense'. An ethanol refinery in every county is just one of them. Some of the studies that are put up in Clean Technica are others.

      When I say fanatical, I don't use the word lightly. You ignore practical and political reality.

      .

      Delete
    20. .

      Not just the EPA, Quirk, the entire US Federal government.

      It is the EPA setting the rules on the ethanol mandate. It was them I have always cited.

      And if you think the farm lobby isn't putting pressure on the the EPA and the rest of the government in the opposite direction you are nutz.

      .

      Delete
    21. Yes, the influence of the "Farm Lobby" was felt, Quirk.

      Which is why corn was used as the base stock, when corn is far from the 'best' base stock for the process.
      The very fact that corn was used, is an indicator of the domestic politics involved.

      The oil industry acquiesced to corn, because it is such an inefficient base stock for the process.

      Delete
    22. NO, you are misrepresenting, AGAIN. If you will go back, and look, I've been pretty accurate on the timetable. You are the one that hasn't been right about "anything." Just like that last false statement about refiners being fined for not using a non-existent cellulosic ethanol.

      My idea for an ethanol refinery in every county is eminently doable. I would refer you to how many electric power plants were built in just a couple of years in the early 1900's (along with all the sub-stations, lines, etc.)

      Delete
    23. I don't have a link right now, but something over 5,000 power stations, plus all the other infrastructure, was built out in just a couple of years.

      Delete
    24. .

      NO, that is a falsehood. No refiners have been FINED for not using cellulosic ethanol that Was Not Available.

      I heard that the EPA has taken a more reasonable course in recent years; however,

      According to the The New York Times, in 2011 automotive fuel producers were assessed $6.8 million in penalties. That amount is expected to climb dramatically this year...

      EPA Fines

      That is what I saw a couple years ago. If you have a link showing the fines being retracted it would be welcome. I couldn't find any.

      .

      .

      Delete
    25. Some people visualize Solutions; others just like to sit around and bitch.

      How do you see yourself, Quirk?

      Delete
    26. .

      My idea for an ethanol refinery in every county is eminently doable.

      That is your opinion. I've given you mine. As I said you ignore reality.

      One of the oil companies tried to put up a single oil rig here within the last month exploring for natural gas. It was near one of the subdivisions in a suburban area near me. The rig went up with no notification to anyone. The public went ballistic. Within a couple of days the rig was gone and you couldn't tell it had ever been there. Public, political, environmental, all argue against the plan.

      .

      Delete
    27. .

      How do you see yourself, Quirk?

      A realist.

      .

      Delete
    28. You talk about "critical thinking." :)

      FROM YOUR LINK:

      WASHINGTON — When the companies that supply motor fuel close the books on 2011, they will pay about $6.8 million in penalties to the Treasury because they failed to mix a special type of biofuel into their gasoline and diesel as required by law.

      Will Pay

      Not "Paid."

      Delete
    29. "One of the oil companies tried to put up a single oil rig here within the last month exploring for natural gas. It was near one of the subdivisions in a suburban area near me. The rig went up with no notification to anyone."

      And, what in the hell does THAT have to do with building a small cellulosic ethanol refinery?

      Delete
    30. Let me give you the "Realistic" view.

      Oil is a finite substance.

      I made the words as small, and the sentence as short as it seemed, reasonable.

      Delete
    31. .

      Will Pay

      Not "Paid."


      Critical thinking? Perhaps, I should restrict my comments to 'reading comprehension'.

      As I stated above,

      That is what I saw a couple years ago. If you have a link showing the fines being retracted it would be welcome. I couldn't find any.

      I will await your link. The fines that the EPA included in the fuel standard were ridiculous. As I said, I would be happy to see they were never imposed.

      .

      Delete
    32. .

      And, what in the hell does THAT have to do with building a small cellulosic ethanol refinery?

      It's called NIMBY, just one of a number of factors arguing against your plan.

      .

      .

      Delete
    33. .

      Let me give you the "Realistic" view.

      Oil is a finite substance.


      To use your words, And, what in the hell does THAT have to do with your obstreperous views on ethanol?

      Once again, I repeat I have no problem with ethanol but merely with your unquestioning view of how quickly it can brought on line as the substitute for that finite substance, oil.

      .

      Delete
    34. Bullshit. YOU post a link showing they "were" paid.

      (and, even if they were, a seven or eight million dollar fine for an industry that sells about 15 Million bbls at approx. $140.00 /bbl (42 gallons per barrel) in the U.S. Every Day. TWO Billion / Day?)

      Delete
    35. As for NIMBY: Out of two hundred and twenty something ethanol refineries, there has been one, maybe 2 that has run into nimby problems.

      Delete
    36. Oil being finite has Everything to do with my views on ethanol. We will "leave" it, or it will leave us. Maybe not "tomorrow," and maybe not "all at once," but leave it will.

      We replaced 10% of our gasoline in just a couple of year (from, approx. 2005 - 2007,) and did it almost as an after-thought.

      We could replace another 10% in just about the same way, just about as fast.

      This isn't about doing "anything" All At Once. (being Americans, it's mostly about doing something only when we really, really need to do it.) :)

      Delete
    37. .

      Bullshit. YOU post a link showing they "were" paid.

      (and, even if they were, a seven or eight million dollar fine for an industry that sells about 15 Million bbls at approx. $140.00 /bbl (42 gallons per barrel) in the U.S. Every Day. TWO Billion / Day?)



      Are you fucking nutz? I put up a post that says the NYT says in 2011 automotive fuel producers were assessed $6.8 million in penalties. The assessments came as part of the Renewable Fuel Requirement, in other words the LAW. You say the companies were never forced to pay the assessments. I say fine, that would be nice; however, I was not able to find any link that verified that. Instead of coming back with a link, you accuse me of a ...gulp...posting a link that says they were...wait a minute...wait...wait...paid.

      You are losing it old timer.

      Go brew up some ethanol.

      .

      Delete
    38. No. Not "paid."

      "will pay" is not "paid."

      And, as I said, even if it were - A Seven Million dollar assessment in an industry a Hundred Thousand Times that big?

      ONE Dollar per Hundred Thousand?

      Wow!!

      Delete
    39. .

      The original post was about the EPA forcing a mandate on the oil companies that was unrealistic.

      You pulled one sentence out of the post regarding fines. The fines are written into the law and were mentioned to point out the absurdity of a law that mandates refiners use a fuel that does not exist.

      As I said, you are a fanatic.

      .

      Delete
    40. No, the 14 Billion Gallons of Corn Ethanol Did Not Exist when the law was written, either.

      That's what governments do. They decide what they want to happen, and then they make it happen.

      Delete
  12. The other "interesting" point ...
    While it is often mentioned that Turkey will not allow US to fly combat operations from THEIR airbase ....
    No one mention that the US is not flying combat operations against ISIS from Israel bases, either.

    In broad daylight, a Saudi-Israeli alliance

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's because the Zionist project's airbases are not safe from ISIS's brother's in arms. Hamas and Hezbollah.

      Think of the defeat of the Great Satan and the Little Satan if Hamas or Hezbollah, from Lebanon, Gaza or the West Bank were to blow out of the sky an American troop transport, stealth fighter?

      Delete
  13. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AshSun Sep 21, 12:33:00 PM EDT

      Back in 2005 and beyond when Rat originally wrote that. All that US blood and treasure and it still went to shit


      ..................................

      Putting US boots into combat is not the "Rat Doctrine".

      The US followed the Bush Cheney Doctrine -
      Dismissing the Iraqi troops that would have been utilized if the "Rat Doctrine" been utilized, by US.
      What the US did, in Iraq, is the direct antithesis of the "Rat Doctrine".

      Delete
    2. The.point us rat that even with boots on the ground IN ADDITION to air support for our "allies" it still went to shit. The US can not control their politics!

      Delete
    3. The US can not control their politics!

      During the entire US occupation of Iraq, Ash, find a reference of Iraqi military operations that were supported, but not led, by US troops. I bet you cannot find one. When the US was not ignoring Iraqi politics, it was mandating the outcomes, of Iraqi politics.

      That is the antithesis of what is now happening, in Iraq.
      The operations are planned, led and manned ... by the Iraqi, themselves.
      When provided US air support, those operations have been successful.

      If there are no local forces to support - then obviously providing them air support will fail to achieve any meaningful result.

      Military operations that are not supported by local forces, will fail to provide long term political solutions.
      No argument, there.

      Delete
    4. ... with boots on the ground IN ADDITION to air support ...

      Exactly correct, Ash.
      The failure of the policy was that the US put the boots on the ground.
      Never allowing the Iraqi control of the combined military force, never putting US troops under Iraqi command, while those troops were in Iraq..

      Only the Iraqi can secure Iraq, over the long haul...

      Delete
    5. You seem to be missing the elemental truths.

      The US can only assist the local forces that it favors, it cannot change the culture of foreign lands.
      It cannot mandate solutions to their challenges.

      It can assist those who's interests are aligned with US, though.
      It can do so effectively and at low cost.

      It does not have to invade the country to do so.

      Delete
  14. I love your way back machine, Ash.

    Way to go for calling out Rat - o - Rooter for being a gas passer.

    September is the best time ever to go fishing in these parts.

    OOOOOOOOooooooooooooooohhhhhh...........the streams are low and lovely!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies

    1. Idaho lost to Ohio 36 to 24 but put on a decent defeat.

      Delete
    2. George S. Patton Jr.Sun Sep 21, 02:43:00 PM EDT


      “Anyone in any walk of life who is content with mediocrity is untrue to himself and to American tradition.”

      Delete
    3. Da ho Bob, the whore that wanted US troops to remain in Iraq, indefinitely.

      Delete
    4. We all hope that one fine day you will at least and at last rise to the lower levels of mediocrity, Rooter.

      Delete
    5. I have switched back to my old computer so as to be able to watch Fox News.

      Delete
    6. Now I am a whore ?

      Really ?

      I thought I was a fucking fascist fudd.

      Taking the troops out too soon has led to USA getting involved once again. It is leading to seven devils worse than the first.

      One man's opinion.

      Delete
    7. And, my stated opinion repeated about four times is I think we ought to sponsor a Kurdish State.

      Since being taken to the outhouse by Q for even suggesting anything along the lines of a humanitarian intervention in Syria I have not the courage to suggest what we best ought to do in 'Iraq'.

      Support the Kurds, yes.

      For the rest of it I'd rather go fishing or write my Niece.

      Delete
    8. Whoever Bob Orelille is ... He ain't "I da ho Bob".

      So many sign ons, so many avatars ... and he wants to claim them all, for himself.

      Delete
    9. Different computer.

      I will do my best to sign as Idaho Bob.

      Delete
    10. Do you not know who "I da ho Bob" is?

      He da ho, and a ho is a whore.

      Delete
  15. Replies
    1. us ?

      Rooter you have been smoking dope again.

      Delete
    2. Check the link.
      Whomever you are referencing, is not on it.

      Delete
  16. As a result of Obama following the law, and taking the troops out, the Iraqis get to fight their own damn war. Ain't that the shits? :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Following the law ............ ?

      Non sense.

      And you know it.

      He could have easily signed a new Status of Forces Agreement.

      Now look at it.

      Delete
    2. Post a link to it, Robert Peterson.

      Delete
    3. Go look it up yourself, asshole.

      Delete
    4. Why, da ho is speaking for Robert ...
      Or at least taking his side of ignorance.
      Referencing fictions and then running from them, when asked for validation.

      Typical of lying fraud, someone that claims to be everyone. Everyone but who he really is.

      Delete
    5. You're full of shit, Bob. It's just your racist hatred of the President coming out.

      Maliki wasn't about to sign a Status of Forces Agreement that would protect our troops; and, Obama sure as hell couldn't sign one that didn't.


      And, a good thing, too. Otherwise, it would be OUR Troops on the ground, fighting ISIS.

      Delete
    6. That is exactly what the draft dodger wants, US troops dying.

      Where as Obama 'pulling them out', allowed the Israeli and Saudi to move forward with deconstructing Iraq.
      Obama, "The First Jewish President". just as Bill Clinton was "The First Black President".

      Delete
    7. Bullshit.

      Even I could have leaned on Maliki and gotten him to sign an acceptable agreement.

      You're full of shit, Rufus.

      And quit with the racist craperoo.

      Here is racism from your pal ratcrapper -


      Jack HawkinsFri Jul 18, 12:36:00 AM EDT

      I mean, you are an Israeli, and here is nothing worse than that.

      In all the world, the Arabs of Israel are the scum.

      Now if you were a European, well thatd be different, but Israelis are all Arabs, Semites.
      Scum of the Earth

      ;-)

      Have a nightmare tonight and a shitty tomorrow,
      QuirkFri Jul 18, 01:13:00 AM EDT

      .

      And the voice of the rat is heard in the land.

      And the world once again cringes.

      .


      I did keep that quote.

      As for me I intend to vote for Ben Carson for President if I have the chance.

      Delete
    8. We saw your "true self" reemerge two nights ago.

      You're just a racist old sonofabitch, and that's all you'll ever be.

      Delete
    9. Deuce "saved" some of your work:




      Deuce ☂Wed Sep 17, 10:09:00 PM EDT

      I deleted that comment but will paste it here to remind everyone what a fool you really are :

      Idaho BobWed Sep 17, 09:44:00 PM EDT
      Fuck the niggers.

      Delete


      Delete
    10. Context?

      I do not wish to be a victim of the slam bam cracker game.

      I like people with some higher culture.

      I do not like black inner city 'society'.

      And, neither do you.

      I think Abraham Lincoln was 'a great man'.

      You think he got his rocks off thinking of dead white lithe young men.

      Delete
  17. By the way, if I were in the way back machine business I think I could find a comment by Deuce when ISIS first raised its ugly head saying we would have to do something.....he has since changed his opinion it seems.

    If anyone were to actually take the time to read what I've said you will find:

    1) We had to go into Afghanistan
    2) We should support a Kurdish State
    3) We should support Israel

    That's about it, folks.

    For these positions I am called a war monger.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Whore Bob, provide a link, a reference, otherwise it's just ass gas you are spewing...

      Delete
    2. I recall that Deuce thought we should have used a tactical nuke at Tora Bora.

      I do not recall him calling for an occupation of Afghanistan, by either US or NATO.

      Delete
    3. I do recall him writing that after nuking Tora Bora, the US should have left Afghanistan ...

      That the lesson would have been indelible.
      There would have been very, very few US or NATO casualties if his route had been taken.

      Delete
    4. I did in fact say two tactical nukes per camp, two iconic clouds rising per camp in exchange for the two falling towers.

      Secondly, calling in the Saudi Ambassador to inform him they owed us $500 billion in compensatory damages payable at $5b per month, cash or oil.

      No troops, no NATO.

      Delete
  18. Why do you continue to allow desert ray to post, Deuce?

    Coming back from a short fishing break, this place with him around seems like a true insane asylum.

    I will do my best to avoid him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He's da ho, he's Bob.Sun Sep 21, 03:28:00 PM EDT

      He da ho Bob, what happened to your sign-on?
      Who are you?

      We should be limiting access to Google Account holders, I agree.

      Delete
  19. If for a tranquil mind you seek,
    These things observe with care:
    Of whom you speak, to whom you speak,
    And how, and when and where.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Yep, bob is back. Here is some of his previous work:




    Deuce ☂Wed Sep 17, 10:09:00 PM EDT

    I deleted that comment but will paste it here to remind everyone what a fool you really are :

    Idaho BobWed Sep 17, 09:44:00 PM EDT
    Fuck the niggers.

    Delete

    You're an old racist, bob. You're not appreciated.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, not by most folks, anyway.

      It seems that there were a couple who liked your work.

      Delete
    2. The Israelis are either on hiatus, or have made a tactical withdrawal in the face of overwhelming facts and superior wit.

      Delete
    3. Surely, it was the "superior wit." :) :) :) :)

      Delete
  21. News this week from Los Angeles indicated that the city’s school system acquired a large cache of military weapons under the program. While the district will retain 61 rifles and a heavily armed vehicle, it is prepared to return the three grenade launchers obtained through the Pentagon program.

    Read more at http://www.westernjournalism.com/feds-force-sheriff-joe-return-hundreds-guns-obtained-government-program/#bFsFbEbpTuAQ2EBD.99

    ReplyDelete
  22. it is prepared to return the three grenade launchers obtained through the Pentagon program.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What in the world would the LA school system do with grenade launchers?

      Have their "Rent-a-Cops" fire tear gas canisters at the riotous crowds at Home Coming?

      Delete
    2. Perhaps because they feel they need them?

      Let us say it out loud.........our school system in L.A., Vegas, Philly, Chicago etc is simply a bunch of shit.

      Let us recall......Ferguson......the white cop Rufus immediately condemned......riots broke out immediately.....and.....the first target of the rioters was.....................the liquor store.

      Rufus: always, ALWAYS blame whitey first.



      I am tired of making excuses for black behavior in the inner cities.

      My Niece is one half Aryan/one half Dravidian

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dravidian_peoples

      She is one half nigger one half cracker.

      I am going to walk her down the aisle when she gets married.

      Thankfully, she has no Cherokee.

      Delete
    3. And she is one hell of a lot smarter than anyone here, Q, WiO and allen excepted.

      Delete
  23. RatDog in Phoenix, AZ 12/4/05 (1st set)

    ... at Celebrity Theater, Phoenix, AZ 12/4/2005
    I: Jam - Here Comes Sunshine - Maggie's Farm, Senor - Youngblood, Brown-Eyed Women, Fly Away - Bury Me Standing - Greatest Story Ever Told - Scarlet Begonias
    from ratdog.org

    Category - Music
    License - Standard YouTube License


    ReplyDelete