November 13, 2007
Is World War III on Hold?
By Patrick Buchanan
Is a Bush pre-emptive strike on Iran's nuclear enrichment plant at Natanz, or on the Al Quds force of the Revolutionary Guard, a more remote possibility today than it was several weeks ago?
So it would seem.
The latest indication is a candid interview in the Financial Times with Adm. William "Fox" Fallon, head of Central Command, who would be the Tommy Franks of any naval or air war on Iran.
"The Pentagon is not preparing a pre-emptive attack on Iran in spite of an increase in bellicose rhetoric from Washington, according to senior officers," concluded the FT in the lead of its story.
Dealing with Iran is a "challenge," a strike is not "in the offing," Fallon is quoted. His comments, said the Times, "served as a shot across the bows of hawks who argue for imminent action."
"(G)enerally, the bellicose comments" out of Washington "are not particularly helpful," said our CentCom commander. That is naval gunfire directed right across the bow of the West Wing.
For the ranking man in Washington said to be arguing loudest for imminent action is Dick Cheney. And the most "bellicose comments" about Iran coming out of Washington have come from George W. Bush.
Here, again, is Bush at the American Legion Convention:
"Iran ... is the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism. ... Iran funds terrorist groups like Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, which murder the innocent and target Israel. ... Iran is sending arms to the Taliban. ... Iran's active pursuit of technology that could lead to nuclear weapons threatens to put a region already known for instability and violence under the shadow of a nuclear holocaust."
Last month, Bush ventured further, "(I)f you're interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them (Iran) from having the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon."
If terms like "nuclear holocaust" and "World War III" are not "bellicose rhetoric," what is?
Why might the administration be backing away from war on Iran?
First, Pakistan. With a nation of 170 million with nuclear weapons in a political crisis that could lead to civil war, igniting a war with Iran would seem suicidal -- especially with the war in Iraq about to enter its sixth year this spring and the war in Afghanistan about to enter its seventh year next month.
Second, there is no guarantee U.S. air strikes could denuclearize Iran, except temporarily. Bombs cannot destroy knowledge. And Iran has been gaining knowledge for years on how to enrich uranium. Moreover, Iran has surely secreted away many of the centrifuges it has constructed, far from the Natanz plant -- ground zero -- where 2,000 or 3,000 are said to be operating.
Third, no one can predict where an attack on Iran will lead. While the United States could smash all known nuclear facilities, Iran could ship IEDs, sniper rifles and surface-to-air missiles into Afghanistan and Iraq, and send in thousands of Revolutionary Guard and cause chaos in the Gulf that would double or treble the price of oil, setting off a worldwide recession. Sleeper cells could retaliate for Iranian casualties with suicide bombings at U.S. malls.
We went into Iraq and Afghanistan without an exit strategy. In Iran, other than the naval and air strikes of the first weeks, we do not know how or where the war would go. We do know the Iranians have been preparing surprises.
Fourth, Congress seems to have found its voice, and 30 senators have written to inform President Bush that he does not have the authority, absent an Iranian attack on U.S. forces, to launch a war on Iran. While Rudy Giuliani and John McCain remain hawkish, the Democratic candidates are moving in the other direction.
Fifth, there has been a downturn in roadside attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq, suggesting Iran may no longer be supplying the enhanced IEDs. And U.S. forces have released several Iranians held captive in Iraq. There may be progress behind the scenes, as both countries could suffer horribly in a war.
We are not out of the woods yet. If Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is telling the truth about those 3,000 centrifuges working perfectly, Iran could have the nuclear material for a single bomb in a year. The International Atomic Energy Agency reports this month on whether Iran is meeting its commitments to come clean. It is not. And the European Union will report on whether the sanctions have succeeded, or failed. And the latter is the case.
And there are those in Tehran who would relish U.S. strikes, to unite the nation against us and consolidate the mullahs' power.
Nevertheless, the forces against war now and for negotiations with Tehran -- Condi Rice, Robert Gates, the Pentagon brass, the most outspoken of the retired military and NATO Europe -- seem to be gaining the ascendancy in the last great battle of the Bush presidency.
And the War Party, which began its propaganda offensive around Labor Day, seems to have shot its bolt. For now.
desert rat will be happy....
ReplyDeleteBut I warn you...
Ignore the beast at your own peril...
you are fools to think that Iran is going to be a "peaceful" nuke power....
Pat is dreaming. We're going to war. There's only 14 months left in the only administration that will do the bidding of AIPAC and their fundamentalist Christian amen corner for at least a generation, and they know it.
ReplyDeleteThat's pretty much what we have been saying here at the EB. Same analysis, different words and perspective.
ReplyDeleteNever said, wi"o", that the Iranians would be peaceful, said they would not be threat to the US.
ReplyDeleteAnd they won't be.
Not with A nuclear bomb.
Not with ten.
Now other sectarian States in the region may be afraid of the sectarian Iranians.
Perhaps with cause.
Matters little, here in the US.
There is no benefit, comparable to the costs to US, of preventive war because the sectarian Israeli are afraid of Iranian sectarians.
The threat that the mussulmen present is in Pakistan, has been Pakistan, will remain in Pakistan. That's where the nuclear weapons, that the Wahabbbist control, are.
It is the Wahabbists that attacked the United States, it is the Wahabbistist that we are justifiably at war with. It is the Wahabbists that control Pakistan. The Wahabbists that funded the development of the Pakistani warheads.
The Wahabbists that we are providing weapons to and Israel is looking to ally with in it's search for Peace.
Ass backwards developments to US interests
Vaya con Dios, amigo.
The fact that after the Wahabbists attacked the US, that blame is placed upon Iraq and Iran shows the power of the Wahabbists in the US.
ReplyDeleteWhen dovetailed with the Jewish lobby, the combined spin team confused most everyone of the public here in the US as to who the enemy is.
The weapon that will be use against US is not military, it is not nuclear.
ReplyDeleteNo, when going to war with an addict, force is not required to bring him to his knees.
Just cut off his daily fix.
Will Chavez pull the trigger?
template_bas
template_bas
Venezuelans may give their president the power to restrict oil production -- and cause a global recession.
By Michael Rowan and Douglas Schoen
November 13, 2007
Rising oil prices have caused global recessions in the past. The Saudis and other oil-producing countries have tried to increase output to offset rising costs. But working against stability and for high oil prices are Chavez and Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who are in a strategic alliance to push up the price of oil.
Oil economists calculate that on a supply-and-demand basis alone, the price of oil would be about $50; the remaining $45 in the current price is a political premium caused by uncertainty in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, Iran's suspected nuclear plans, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and social unrest in Pakistan, Nigeria and Venezuela. But where the world sees a threat, Ahmadinejad and Chavez see opportunity: Civil discord lines their pockets.
...
Chavez is a brilliant military strategist who has reportedly spent or committed $110 billion since 2004 (an amount equivalent in today's dollars to what the U.S. spent in the Marshall Plan after World War II) in political investments in the Americas and elsewhere. His plan is to spread the revolution against capitalism and the United States. So far, he has a string of victories to show for it. Bolivia, Ecuador and Nicaragua are already in his camp; Argentina owes him $5 billion, and his candidates came within 1% of winning elections in Mexico and Costa Rica in 2006.
...
The U.S. has been searching in vain for Osama bin Laden and weapons of mass destruction while another threat has been lurking in our backyard for years. The solution would have been to pull the rug from under Chavez before he could do it to us -- to plan for a U.S. economy sans Venezuelan oil. It's too late for that now; our economic state is too precarious.
What we need to do is work toward decreasing our dependence on foreign oil generally and the oil of hostile governments specifically. And we must engage in a Marshall Plan of our own to help Latin America rise out of the poverty and despair that catapults populist despots like Chavez into office.
When democracy comes before economic development, you get a Chavez. When our lust for oil comes before sound foreign policy, you get a recession.
Michael Rowan is a Latin American newspaper columnist and consultant who lived in Caracas from 1993 to 2006. Douglas Schoen is a political consultant and author. They are the authors of "The Threat Closer to Home," to be published in 2008.
Strike at Iran, the oil the US needs WILL dry up. About a third of US imports, at a minimum.
"The fact that after the Wahabbists attacked the US, that blame is placed upon Iraq and Iran shows the power of the Wahabbists in the US."
ReplyDelete---
And the Saudis have done similar funding in Pakistan, leading to multiple thousands of hate-spewing madrassas, leading to the present highly unstable state.
In the USA, the Suicide Impulse is in a much longer cycle, but still the same.
Steve Emerson rang the bell, the Saudis have paid to effectively silence it.
---
Las Vegas Police Dept Employment Questionaire, Question number 54:
---
Have you, your wife, or her family, or yours ever been associated with any gang or gang activity?
---
EXAMPLES:
Minutemen
Aryan Nation
etc.
----
Suicide Nation
"Pat is dreaming. We're going to war. "
ReplyDelete---
Teresita is a Moonbat.
Unfortunately not a Moonbat of the betting kind.
(similar to all those hundreds or thousands of bellicose predictions at BC. The time has come and gone, the beliefs remain.)
dr said:
ReplyDeleteStrike at Iran, the oil the US needs WILL dry up. About a third of US imports, at a minimum.
And there's the rub.
The debtor nation with an oil problem is getting owned in the utmost Sun Tzu style.
Chavez and Ahmadinejad are trying to do to us economically and politically what we did with B-24s and B-17s to the Third Reich.
Tough to run an empire with the tank on "E".
We should be using every form of economic skull-duggery to collapse Caracas and Tehran but cannot either because we are incompetent or US is really, truly, up the creek with energy that we have no choice to keep the oil flowing.
"Pat is dreaming. We're going to war. There's only 14 months left in the only administration that will do the bidding of AIPAC and their fundamentalist Christian amen corner for at least a generation, and they know it."
ReplyDelete---
MAD Comic Book level Hillarity!
Given that Condi is now in charge of Foreign Policy.
---
But...
What if Ms T knows better than John Bolton how things really work?
HORRORS!
We're Doomed!
---
HILLARY '08!
Survival Instinct
ReplyDeleteNO RELIEF: SAUDI OIL MINISTER REJECTS OPEC RAISE...
ReplyDelete---
Pump price to jump 20 cents next 2-3 weeks...
Too Bad the
ReplyDeleteLEFT
Didn't get it
RIGHT:
---
It WAS a war for Oil,
...PRICES!
The results of the 9-11-01 cross border raids have worked to the advantage of the Wahabbists.
ReplyDeleteTheir cash flow has doubled, while market demands for increased production are ignored or cannot be fulfilled. It does not make much difference, in the short term, which.
Things are sweet, in Saudi Arabia.
A job well done, from their perspective.
APNewsAlert
ReplyDelete11-13-2007
SULAIMANIYAH, Iraq (Associated Press) -- Iraqi officials say Turkish helicopter gunships have attacked villages inside Iraq.
rat...
ReplyDeletethe shits and the suns are a threat to the world...
why be myopic?
A nuke backed iran WILL threaten ARABIA, EUROPE, ISRAEL and the USA...
Sorry if you don't see it, thank goodness others in power do...
We should be doing all we can to curtail all oil imports AS I HAVE SAID FOR YEARS, before we strike with bombs at Iran, funny BiBi has been saying for YEARS to hurt Iran with sanctions not bombs, but noone listens or want to cooperate.
So now we are on the BRINK, Iran from it's Presidential stage shouts DEATH TO AMERICA & DEATH TO ISRAEL..
Rat, I guess you dont take Iran's "day without America" national events?
as for T's comment about aipac, yep we have been trying to open the eyes to america about Iran for YEARS, a war cry? hardly, but as long as the USA has been talking with little stick with Iran, Iran has been murdering Americans and lying to the UN about it's nuke programs.
War is coming, I am sad you do not see how a nuke armed Iran is not in America's Interest.
But let's paint a happy story line aka rat's wet dream.
Israel, upon BELIEVING the public threats of her attempted destruction by Iran, who this week announced it's successful going on line with 3000 centrifuges, it's successful rearming of Hezbollah with 25% more long range rockets, new trans lebanon military infrastructure, it's successful arming of syria with 12,000 long range missiles and 1.2 billion funded Russian upgrade to it's tank forces, it's successful upgrade to Hamas in increasing palestinian missile range and lethality decides to attack Iran's scattered Nuke program, command and control & missile sites.
of course the moment israel does that 3 other fronts open up and forces israel to defend against a new war in west bank, gaza, golan & lebanon...
I can see how rat doesnt think any of this is the USA's problem and I can accept that...
So what is Israel to do?
If i was israel i'd do: (without giving warning or a chance for anyone to leave)
cut off all power, water, fuel, food to all palestinian areas, at the same time take out all major roads, bridges, power, governmental buildings (including hospitals, schools and UN funded sites)..
at the same time, i'd respond to hezbollah, by cutting off all major roads, bridges, power grids, water treatment, command and control areas of southern lebanon up to just north of the river.
at the same time i'd scramble the jets to take out syria's complete tank force and attack damascus, taking out all industrial buildings, electric generating stations & grid, water treatment, fuel lines that transverse syria
at the same time i'd take out iran's oil refineries, power generation ability, and any and all military targets available...
then all hell will break out of course, as expected, most of israel will be down inside their bunkers waiting for the retaliation to begin (and it will)
In the end, Israel will survive, there will be little left of the arab nations around it....
will arabia come thru this unscathed?
I doubt it...
If fact if this comes to be, i doubt we will see any oil out of the middle east for decades...
Now Oil will be 300-400 a barrel....
yep rat, it aint america's problem...
Economic Costs of Iraq, Afghanistan Wars Put at $1.6 Trillion So Far, About $20,900 Per Family
ReplyDelete11-13-2007
By JEANNINE AVERSA, AP Economics Writer
WASHINGTON (Associated Press) -- The economic costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are estimated to total $1.6 trillion _ roughly double the amount the White House has requested thus far, according to a new report by Congress' Joint Economic Committee.
The report, obtained by The Associated Press and scheduled to be released Tuesday, attempted to put a price tag on the two conflicts, including "hidden" costs such as interest payments on the money borrowed to pay for the wars, lost investment, the expense of long-term health care for injured veterans and the cost of oil market disruptions.
The $1.6 trillion figure, for the period from 2002 to 2008, translates into a cost of $20,900 for a family of four, the report said. The Bush administration has requested $804 billion for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined, the report stated.
For the Iraq war only, total economic costs were estimated at $1.3 trillion for the period from 2002 to 2008. That would cost a family of four $16,500, the report said.
Future economic costs would be even greater. The report estimated that both wars would cost $3.5 trillion between 2003 and 2017. Under that scenario, it would cost a family of four $46,400, the report said.
Oil prices have surged since the start of the war, from about $37 a barrel to well over $90 a barrel in recent weeks, the report said. "Consistent disruptions from the war have affected oil prices," although the Iraq war is not responsible for all of the increase in oil prices, the report said.
Still, the report estimated that high oil prices have hit U.S. consumers in the pocket, transferring "approximately $124 billion from U.S. oil consumers to foreign (oil) producers" from 2003 to 2008, the report said.
No energy independence gained from the expenditures, not a bit.
ReplyDeleteMisplaced strategic priorities, to say the least.
hey all,
ReplyDeleteagain I filled my car with soy oil!
now it's almost cheaper than market price than diesel!
we need to kill opec and middle eastern oil....
that is the cause of all of this....
Say the Curse!
ReplyDeleteDR quoted:
ReplyDelete"Oil economists calculate that on a supply-and-demand basis alone, the price of oil would be about $50; the remaining $45 in the current price is a political premium caused by..."
I came across this well written blog, a place rufus would like (or probably knows already) and I think many of you might enjoy reading. Anyway Kunslter made a post on this topic last week. Just a bit of it for you:
"November 5, 2007,
One of the biggest laughs of the season came out of a New York Times business section story last Tuesday by reporter Michael Grynbaum, who wrote, "Oil is on a steady march toward toppling the inflation-adjusted high of $101.70 it set in April 1980, analysts said, though many are at a loss as to what keeps driving the price." (Italics mine.) Actually, lots of people know what is driving up the price -- just not anybody who works at that once-august and now-clueless newspaper. It can be stated simply -- the demand line has crossed the supply line -- though that simple fact has many curious ramifications."
*snip*
"In short, foreigners stuck holding dollars that are hemorrhaging value would rather spend them on something other than dollar-denominated financial paper, and nothing is more crucial to the maintenance of industrial economies than oil. Noland's theory comes on the heels of reported oil and gasoline shortages in China, bad enough to have caused some civil unrest -- and bad enough for China's leadership to want to spend some of its vast US dollar reserves bidding up oil prices in the open markets to quell that unrest.
This is nothing more complicated than hoarding behavior on a global scale, a mounting crisis of frightened self-interest that has already been well-described by investment banker Matthew Simmons."
Clusterfuck Nation by Jim Kunstler
Dennis Kucinich, in an interview with Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez:
ReplyDeleteThe articles of impeachment that were introduced under a privileged resolution cite the Vice President's persistent lies relating to Iraq. He claimed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, that necessitated the US response. He claimed that Iraq somehow was connected to al-Qaeda's role in 9/11. He has been beating the drums for war against Iran. Those are the elements of the articles of impeachment that were introduced into the House this week.
...
[C]ertainly President Bush also has to be held accountable. However, I think that any constitutional process that begins for the removal of an official, when you have the Vice President, who led the effort to deceive this country with respect to a war against Iraq, it’s appropriate that he be dealt with first, so that you don’t create a condition where you remove the President first and then Mr. Cheney becomes his successor, and then you have to have an impeachment of two presidents consecutively.
...
I think it’s very difficult to explain [the Democratic leadership's] position, because I don’t think their position is defensible. I think when you consider that our whole nation is at risk, our constitutional form of government has been undermined by lies, by illegal war, by massive debt, how can you explain the position of Democratic leaders?
...
[W]hat could be more important than having an opportunity to get to the truth of what happened in Iraq, that the war was based on lies; that over almost 4,000 of our brave young men and women who represent this country have lost their lives because of those lies; that over a million innocent Iraqis, noncombatants, civilians, have lost their lives because of those lies; that we will spend between one and two trillion dollars for this war, even borrowing money from China? And our whole domestic agenda is being capsized by this war. And the administration is preparing still to take us in another war against Iran, similarly lying about a cause for war. So what can be more important? Our country is at risk, and it’s time for our Democratic leaders to take a stand.
...
You know, the administration will be in office for at least fourteen more months. They can cause a lot of damage in that time. They’re planning to attack Iran. When you think about the defense authorization budget including a provision that would retrofit Stealth B-2 bombers so they can carry 30,000-pound bombs, which would then be dropped on nuclear research labs, creating an humanitarian and ecological disaster, "What are we waiting for?" is the question, not "Why don’t we wait for the election?"
...
Since when does it become unfashionable to stand up for the Constitution, to stand up for our nation's laws, to stand up for international law, to stand up for moral law? Since when does it become inconvenient to take a stand that would help secure our democracy once again? I mean, we’re really -- it’s all at risk right now, and it’s time that the Democratic leadership exerted an effective influence. As a coequal branch of government, Congress cannot stand by and let this administration continue to undermine our Constitution. That’s why I introduced those articles of impeachment.
------
I found these snippets at
http://powerofnarrative.blogspot.com/
The whole interview can be found at:
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/11/09/1455244
Wouldn't that be a weird world:
Ron Paul VS Dennis Kucinich
in the presidential race?
Iraq, Afghan War Costs Are $1.6 Trillion
ReplyDeleteNov 13 10:17 AM US/Eastern
By JEANNINE AVERSA
AP Economics Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - The economic costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are estimated to total $1.6 trillion—roughly double the amount the White House has requested thus far, according to a new report by Congress' Joint Economic Committee.
The report, obtained by The Associated Press and scheduled to be released Tuesday, attempted to put a price tag on the two conflicts, including "hidden" costs such as interest payments on the money borrowed to pay for the wars, lost investment, the expense of long- term health care for injured veterans and the cost of oil market disruptions.
The $1.6 trillion figure, for the period from 2002 to 2008, translates into a cost of $20,900 for a family of four, the report said. The Bush administration has requested $804 billion for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars combined, the report stated.
For the Iraq war only, total economic costs were estimated at $1.3 trillion for the period from 2002 to 2008. That would cost a family of four $16,500, the report said.
Future economic costs would be even greater. The report estimated that both wars would cost $3.5 trillion between 2003 and 2017. Under that scenario, it would cost a family of four $46,400, the report said.
Oil prices have surged since the start of the war, from about $37 a barrel to well over $90 a barrel in recent weeks, the report said. "Consistent disruptions from the war have affected oil prices," although the Iraq war is not responsible for all of the increase in oil prices, the report said.
Still, the report estimated that high oil prices have hit U.S. consumers in the pocket, transferring "approximately $124 billion from U.S. oil consumers to foreign (oil) producers" from 2003 to 2008, the report said.
High oil prices can slow overall economic growth if that chills spending and investment by consumers and businesses. At the same time, high oil prices can spread inflation throughout the economy if companies decide to boost the prices of lots of other goods and services.
The report comes as the House prepares to vote this week on another effort by Democrats to set a deadline for withdrawing troops from Iraq as a condition for providing another $50 billion for the war.
"What this report makes crystal clear is that the cost to our country in lives lost and dollars spent is tragically unacceptable," said Joint Economic Committee Chairman Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., in a statement prepared to accompany the report's release"
WIO, what do you drive?
ReplyDeleteWell, I've hit the jackpot this morning-----"Transfer Of Fund,
ReplyDeleteI am Dr.Abraham Kwesi in Ivory Coast, I am a banker and I need your honest assistance to transfer Usd $ 4.8 Million Dollars from here.Please reply with your direct phone number if interested. I await your quick reply.This fund in question is presently in our bank (BANK OF AFRICA ABIDJAN) in the suspense deposit.
I want you to know that I am going to offer you 20% of the fund as soon as you assist me transfer it in your bank account.
I will be waiting for your email as you can call me directly on +225 06307426 so that we can talk.
Awaiting to read from you soon.
Dr.Kwesi"
When the money gets transferred into my bank account, I'll set up an Elephant Bar account for our mutual use when the endtimes arrive, as they might soon.
Put an ad in the Vandal Trading Post you get crap like this all the time--these dudes sit around internet cafes trying to scam Americans--this being a particulaity crude example. At least he doesn't want my dishonest assistance.
Barkeep, a round for everyone.
Let's see--$4.8M USdollars times 20% to me is $960,000.
ReplyDeleteBarkeep, an open tab for everyone, put on the 'Kwesi' account.
Meanwhile, the US and Israel make plans to give away the farm at Annapolis.
ReplyDeleteWhen the news improves the cameras, microphones,analysis all go home. No News Is Good News
ReplyDeleteIf it does not bleed, it will not lead.
ReplyDeleteThat is a given in the news.
If it also goes against the preconcieved ideas of the editors or producers, it won't make the cut, either.
Combine the two, you won't see it, cause it's worthy of being reported, that nothing happened. If someone in authority, with responsibility came out and claimed success, that would be covered. But to expect the news to provide the basis of folks coming to their own decisions, not their function.
That does not draw viewers or advertisers.
The biggest news of the day, a dead body exhumed in IL., the third wife of a policeman. Every house wife in the US must be concerned, by the level of the coverage.
Fellow that is being tried and convicted on the 24 hour news cycle, of a crime that has not yet even been established as occurring.
Rush reported on a story CNN's health expert (and then all the subsidiary newsreaders) made a big deal out of that hasn't happened yet for sure, but is of crucial importance:
ReplyDeleteI-Pod earbuds are made of Plastic containing Thalate, which, when consumed by Rats leads to health problems.
No human trials yet, but now that I think about it, it's a GOOD Heads-Up for you, Mr. Rat:
DON'T CHEW ON ANY I-POD EARBUDS!
Your Welcome
Worn out Hardware is not on that list, Deuce:
ReplyDeleteI assume they DID include it though?
1985 300sd turbo diesel benz
ReplyDeleteTotal Miles?
ReplyDeleteMileage?
People write Mr., I look around for my father.
ReplyDeleteJeez ...
Don't play around much with sound, I'm more visually attuned.
Long way between chewin' on ear pieces and leavin' 'em in their ear.
Some lady on FOX, a GOP strategist, thinks Big John is the best hope the GOP has.
They're DOOMED!!!
if that's the case...
297,000
ReplyDeleteabout 26 mpg higher on highway
So this Lebanonese lady comes to the US, marries an unemployeed citizen, gets divorced, uses forged documents to get legit documents, is hired by the FBI where she had access to the computer system, then moved over to the CIA where she continued her computer hacking.
ReplyDeleteSearching for information on her family in Lebanon and other Hezzbollah agents.
Sweet...
But cutler isn't qualified to get hired.
The Charisma Of Courage
ReplyDeleteHugh Hewitt
Stephen Hayes pointed me to this Jake Tapper and Katie Hinman piece on Rudy from last week.
It is a fascinating read on many levels, but these graphs on Louis Freeh's time under Rudy are very interesting:
Louis Freeh would go on to become director of the FBI in the 1990s, but back then he ran the organized crime unit under Giuliani. He said, "Rudy's security was a serious issue.
"We would sit down with him and sort of give him a security plan or advise him that he ought to have a bodyguard when he traveled around," said Freeh. "He would listen to us as he always did very carefully and say, 'I don't want that. Our job here is to be U.S. attorneys and prosecutors and if we are walking around with bodyguards we are sending the wrong message. We tell the mafia that we are afraid of them. And we are not.'"
Just last month, courtroom testimony revealed that the heads of the notorious five families voted on whether or not to put out a hit on Giuliani. The vote was 3-2 against the hit.
"Which means I won the vote … I guess," Giuliani said, laughing.
When it was pointed out that Giuliani was awfully jovial when discussing almost being whacked, the former mayor said it comes with the territory.
"After awhile, you become calm about it," he said. "When you go through it, as a young man, often enough, you get used to it."
---
Read the Whole Thing
---
W, on the other hand, lives in fear that not every illegal loves him yet.
WIO,
ReplyDeleteWe'll be expecting Cigars when she hits the big 300!
The Pizza Connection
ReplyDeleteThe Mob in Italy had IED's down long before the Grape Dancers.
When I was a youth, doug, IED were refered to as "mechanical ambushes"
ReplyDeleteOften "command detonated", other times set off by trip wires or pressure plates.
We were damned good at it.
Used to train the Infantry in the techniques, they were always amazed at the damage that could be done with a half dozen claymores and some det cord.
Now the only difference, we got our bombs from a manufacturer, now our enemies build their own. But if the explosives are being shipped in from Syria or Iran, manufactured there, than the attacks are not by IEDs, as they would no longer be "improvised", but designed and manufactured.
But the tactic is the same, old as the hills.
How in the heck did these Warhead Designs get in among these papers?
ReplyDeleteYou remind me of some 'Nam story had a guy strap on a Claymore!
ReplyDelete...wish I could remember the details.
GI Grape Dancer?
Bergler Was Here!
ReplyDeleteRemember, Bubba said he was messy and would mix stuff together.
ReplyDeleteLove letters, Bomb Designs, FBI Files, Socks, Shorts...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDr Khan gave 'em a present, a bonus. Those Pakistani thought that every one wanted bomb capacity, even if they didn't "ask" for it.
ReplyDeleteIf the Iranians knew that they had those plans, they'd not have been in the pile that they allowed the IAEA to see...
or they're so incompetent, they'd not get the thing to work, regardless.
Billing records from the Rose Law Firm, they just appeared on the coffee table, in the White House residence.
ReplyDeleteOne moment no one knew where they were, the next ... poof ... there they were.
Maybe it was the maid ...
nah, the butler did it.
I think the "Peak Oil" guys are Right on Peak Oil, but all wet as regards it's effects.
ReplyDeleteIf the Gov doesn't screw it up "Too" badly we should be able to transition pretty well. That "Is," of course, a pretty big "If."
Our esteemed lawmakers are getting ready to make a pretty big mistake. They are, almost definitely, going to pass an energy bill which limits "Corn" Ethanol to 15 Billion gallons/yr., or, about what we have under construction Right Now.
I don't want to go into a long dissertation about "why" this is a bad idea (please, don't make me, please,) but it is.
Same deal with those bomb plans.
ReplyDeleteIt seems that the Iranians have learned a lot from the Pakistani.
Senior IAEA officials were refused interviews with at least two top Iranian nuclear officials suspected of possible involvement in a weapons program, they said.
The Pakistani will not allow anyone to interview Dr Khan, he'd know how and why the Iranians got those plans. The General President will not even allow US to interview the good Doctor Khan, amazing what $10 Billion USD does not buy.
The Pakistani, still our bestest ally, the Iranians our worstest enemy.
Both taking the same trail, the Pakistani just ahead of the curve. Proof enough for the Iranians as to why they need nuclear weapons. Only way they can becoome our friend, is to obtain a nuke. It sure worked for the Pakistani.
Can't be cutting into our food stocks, rufus. Simple as that, I'm sure.
ReplyDeleteThey're buyin' into buggy whip technology. No further advances possible.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI'll never forget ol' Hillary sitting there--why, they were right there all the time, on the coffee table--cool as can be, she knows we know she's lying, we know she knows, cool as can be, ol' Hillary, right there on the coffee table, all this time!
ReplyDeleteRufus: They are, almost definitely, going to pass an energy bill which limits "Corn" Ethanol to 15 Billion gallons/yr., or, about what we have under construction Right Now.
ReplyDeleteSo what does the bill do if a farmer wants to plant corn for ethanol and we're up against the 15 billion gallon per year limit, does he have to plant alfalfa instead? Sounds like the old Soviet five year agriculture plans.
That 341 million barrels per year, less than we import from Venezuela, annually.
ReplyDeleteSo much for independence.
The new way forward, Ms T, what ever works ...
ReplyDeleteOil was 'down' to $91/barrel (ouch) on more pumping and slacking global demand today.
ReplyDelete"But cutler isn't qualified to get hired."
ReplyDeleteEh, these things happen. Maybe I should move to Lebanon and start a new career track.
"Do you guys (Hezbollah) have any entry-level positions? I need some work experience."
The Congress is an idiot, I agree with that. This energy crunch is all the fault of Congress--for decades, both parties.
ReplyDeleteDo you remember Ms. T. when Hillary found them documents on the coffee table? ;)
ReplyDeleteSomewhere tis said, if you can't trust em' in little, you can't trust em' in a lot.
Hillary is cool as a shameless cucumber.
ReplyDeleteBut the US flags at least know better. They faint dead away when she is near.
Nobody eats "field corn," Rat. It's livestock feed. We'll ship twice as much field corn to Asia for Pig/poultry feed as we'll make into ethanol this year.
ReplyDeleteWe'll consume about two or three percent of it in the form of corn flakes, and sweetener for soft drinks, and what-not.
Meanwhile, we pay farmers $50.00/acre NOT to grow anything on over 40 Million Acres.
T, that will be controlled through the "Blenders" that buy the ethanol from the refiners. They can do it, but it will (as in most big-gov., interventions into the market) have a myriad of "Unintended" Consequences. You wouldn't have to think very long and hard to come up with several, all bad.
ReplyDeleteThe thing is, the market has a "Natural Brake" on things of this sort. The Price Mechanism. When too much corn is used, the price of corn will rise too much, and other feedstocks will be utilized. The Market "Always" works much smoother, in the end, than this type of scheme.
It'll just cause us, and the rest of the world, to pay much more for energy than we need to. At least for a few years.
"Why does everyone walk on eggshells around her? What is everyone so afraid of? What she needs is Dorothy to throw a pail of water over her...
ReplyDeleteShe gives women leaders a bad name. There are thousands of equally well educated women with better characters who have served their families and communities devotedly, volunteeered, helped husbands' businesses, juggled their own careers, who know how to be civil and behave honorably, and stand up for what is right. Who aren't profane and vicious. Pick any random PTA mom or church deacon and you would do better than this dreadful Hillary...Pick somebody's cleaning lady, and at least you'd have someone used to cleaning up other people's messes, which is a large part of the job.
One of the kids, voting for first time, is fit to be tied. She can't relate to the old white men, but the wicked witch is even more repugnant to her. And Obama: "He's a flake, he's never done anything, just preens and spouts because he's pretty!" That 's the voice of youth in my house.
Agree that our C in C should have served in the military."
retreiver, at Maggie's Farm
soryy, I'm just in a bad Hillary mood today.
Your Cutler comment wasn't a Joke?
ReplyDeleteWhat happened, Cutler?
I don't understand your response to T, Rufus, fwiw.
ReplyDeleteDon't know what question she implied that you answered.
Or somethin.
No, doug.
ReplyDeleteIt was not a joke, it was a comment on how the CIA would not hire cutler, but did hire this illegal lady, allowing her networked computer access.
cutler can expound on the why, if he wants.
Doug, T implied that this program limiting "corn" ethanol to 15 Billion gal/yr. would be hard to enforce. My response was that it wouldn't be all that hard to enforce, but that it would lead to several "unintended" consequences.
ReplyDeleteBobalharb: Oil was 'down' to $91/barrel (ouch) on more pumping and slacking global demand today.
ReplyDeleteIt was a speculative mini-bubble. But it sure got the peakers out in force.
Ostensibly, the idea is to hold down the price of corn, but it won't have that effect. In the longer run, marginal yielding fields will just be taken out of corn production and planted in Switch Grass, or some such.
ReplyDeleteIt's not that that's necessarily a bad thing. It might be a good thing, but the price of corn will move back up when this happens.
It's just going to be a less efficient transition. We'll probably lose four or five years productiion out of those fields, and the price of corn will end up the same, regardless.
Largest part is Global Demand.
ReplyDeleteWhat's your guess on the average price over the next year, Rufus, barring new wars, etc?
Oil, not corn!
ReplyDeleteThis is the result of an Unholy Alliance of Big Oil, and, Lefty EU types that want us to buy all of our ethanol from Brazil (you know, that place where George Soros is investing all his money in Sugar Cane Ethanol.)
ReplyDeleteOh, and a lot of really gullible "journalists."
$120 Barrel - With $140.00 + by the end of the year.
ReplyDeletewhen did Rat become souless? i must have missed something. is anyone really surprised that the younger generations are so messed up value wise? we got souless elders roamin' the land.
ReplyDeleteI Could be way "Low." :(
ReplyDeleteStick that in your Bubble, T!
ReplyDeleteSure hope you're way wrong!
Why so high?
ReplyDeleteI didn't know Rats HAD souls, but where's the evidence he lost it, Slim?
ReplyDeleteOR, I could be way "High." :)
ReplyDeleteI don't exactly have a Stellar Record when it comes to Oil. My head seems to be shaped wrong, or something.
Rufus: T, that will be controlled through the "Blenders" that buy the ethanol from the refiners. They can do it, but it will (as in most big-gov., interventions into the market) have a myriad of "Unintended" Consequences. You wouldn't have to think very long and hard to come up with several, all bad.
ReplyDeleteSuppose there's a cap on ethanol, and Farmer Billy Bob is stuck with a crop of corn he can't sell to the refiners. What are his options? He can sell it to China as pig feed for pennies on the dollar and try to salvage something. He can sell it to Kelloggs so they can make some Frosted Flakes, but he's got to compete with all the other poor schmucks who have a crop of corn and run up against the artificial cap. Or he can get a giant still going, and make his own ethanol to run his house generator and his tractor and even take the Missus in to Booger Holler to play Bingo on Saturdays, if he just bears in mind that pure alcohol is murder on the fuel lines. And maybe when word gets around, other fellas will come around from the whole tri-county area to get some of his cut rate ethanol, especially if he throws in a jug of the sippin' stuff to sweeten the deal. Just needs to keep an eye peeled for the revenuers.
Could always try a Shrink.
ReplyDeleteMaybe they reshape as well as Shrink?
Doug, the World is growing their economies at about 5%, and I doubt we can grow our Oil by 1.5%.
ReplyDeletePlus, most all of the demand growth is coming from countries that "subsidize" the price of gasoline, and from the oil-exporting countries.
Did you know that gasoline costs $.08 a gallong in Venezuela?
Cut that liquor with antifreeze, and put a Chinese Label on it.
ReplyDeleteEverybody's ready to blame the Chinamen, you'd get rich, and never get caught.
AND
Reduce Global Warming for Algore!
Antifreeze, the Cure for Anthromoronic Global Warming.
But won't any of the countries cut consumption/become more efficient?
ReplyDelete...and use something else?
(for heat, for instance)
All the ME rich guys are loading up on new Boeings and Airbuses on our dimes.
ReplyDeleteBobal, these Hillary missteps are a godsend to the media, who need to have a narrative 24/7. They need to have a horse race to sell newspapers and put butts in seats in front of the tube. By next week, they will be knocking Rudy or Mitt down a peg or two. Then after Iowa and New Hampshire there will be stories about who has the "Mo". But the dust will clear by early February, and I'm pretty sure it will be just Hillary and Rudy left standing.
ReplyDeleteDoug: All the ME rich guys are loading up on new Boeings and Airbuses on our dimes.
ReplyDeleteGood, that should knock down our export trade imbalance a bit. And it means a trickle-down effect for the Puget Sound economy.
T, see my earlier comment. A lot of the marginal land will, eventually, go into switchgrass in any event; but, without the interventiion it would be in a maximizing, orderly manner. This way will be ugly.
ReplyDelete"Cellulosic" will work. Smart guys have done the "preliminary" tests, and are, NOW, building large refineries. BUT, the little five hundred acre farmer in Tennessee will want a "guarantee" before he plants grass that he will have a market. This means that a refinery will have to be built, and THOSE BUSINESSMEN'S Bankers will want a "Guarantee."
THEY will want a "Guaranteed" Feedstock, and the farmers will want a "guaranteed" price.
Short of all these "Guarantees," they're all going to want to "Go Slow," and watch what's happening "Other" places. It'll take 5, maybe 10 years.
In the meantime the taxpayers will go back to supporting the price of corn to the tune of 8 or 9 Billion Dollars/Yr.
OH, and all them "Poor People in Africa?" The ones that don't eat field corn, anyway. They'll starve by the millions because of the effect $6.00 gasoline will have on their attempts to survive, and grow crops.
ReplyDeleteBut, George Soros, and the other "slave labor" Plantationeers in Brazil will get even more filthy rich than they are, today.
ReplyDeleteI'm pretty sure you're right about that too, T.
ReplyDeleteDid you know that Alaskans are getting checks of around $1,600 apiece, because of increased oil revenues.
ReplyDeleteHugo took office in 1999.
Oil was selling at $15 per barrel.
But whatever the real output, Venezuela - because of the high price of oil - is raking in more petrodollars than ever before. When Chávez came into office in 1999, the country reported production of 3.5 millionbarrels per day and, with oil selling at about $15 per barrel, was making just over $18 billion a year. This month, with oil at about $70 a barrel, PDVSA Finance Director Eudomario Carruyo told Reuters he expects revenue to top $85 billion this year. PDVSA officials have reportedly said that oil production will increase to 4 million barrels per day by 2012. Christian Science Monitor, May 2006.
He's bringing in the Chinese, so if the problem is management, the Chinese will fix it. If it's lack of reserves, well, there you go.
rufus, you've come to agree with me!
ReplyDeleteFive to ten years ...
Ugly ...
Hugo goin' to quit selling to US, as soon as the Chinese two refineries are ready. They're building the Panamax tankers, in conjunction with the refineries.
Million onehundred thousand barrels a day, gone, cut clean off in 18 months, max. They're six months into the project, now.
China does not have permitting delays. They just build it, "old school".
We won't be ready.
Of course, Congress might do what I'd do if "I" were Kazar fer a day (but, I doubt it.)
ReplyDeleteThey could pick out a couple of counties in Tn, Ga, Ok, Tx and Fl, and give "Government" Guarantees to all concerned to get it going; then, if all went as planned they could follow up with "Loan" guarantees to other organizations, co-ops, etc.
Somehow, though, this idea doesn't "feel" like it fits in with the current "game plan." :(
Seattle's one of the few where Real Estate is still going up.
ReplyDelete'OH, and all them "Poor People in Africa?" The ones that don't eat field corn, anyway. They'll starve by the millions because of the effect $6.00 gasoline will have on their attempts to survive, and grow crops.'
ReplyDeleteThey are not in a good position. It's so damn sad, it hurts to think about it.
Like the Chinese, 'Rat, all that commerce and money will convert Chávez into one of our most reliable Buds.
ReplyDeleteGlobal Theory Says So!
Party like it's 1999!
Think of all the souls that won't contribute to Global Warming, tho, AlBob!
ReplyDeleteGaia will be saved.
Stay the Course!
ReplyDeleteFull Speed Ahead!
I hope they do do that, Rat. It's going to happen, eventually, anyway; and, maybe a slap like that across the jowls will serve to awaken the "Slumbrin Gint."
ReplyDeleteEarthquake zone, amigo.
ReplyDeleteThen that big tsunami wave...
Cyclical stuff, like volcanos and hurricanes. Warming and cooling cycles over the years, the glaciers gone from Michigan.
But earthquakes in subversion zones ...
In San Fransico, in the 1989 quake, the fire boat just made the tide, five minutes later, they'd have had to wait for tide, as it and time were running out.
The City would have burned, as the Marina District was waterless, the water mains broken.
Doug: Seattle's one of the few where Real Estate is still going up.
ReplyDeleteAnd if they can find a few dozen more absentee ballots (maybe in an alley down by Pike Market were all the drunks piss on the wall, they had a lot of luck down there in 2004 when they needed to get Queen Gregoire over the top on the third recount) they can pass their referendum to make levy increases pass on a simple majority rather than a supermajority like right now. And then they can start taxing the bejeezus out of us lucky homeowners.
Hope this optimism pulls us through.
ReplyDeleteYeah, but Your Hillary benefits from all those well-cast votes!
ReplyDeleteDR: Hugo goin' to quit selling to US, as soon as the Chinese two refineries are ready. They're building the Panamax tankers, in conjunction with the refineries.
ReplyDeleteThat doesn't mean anything, Rat. Oil is fungible. It just means some of the oil that was going from Kuwait to China will be diverted to us. Besides, Hugo's black gold is the heavy sour stuff.
Maybe we could hire some Muslims to suicide bomb all those Tankers on VJ Day?
ReplyDelete(Victory for Jihadis)
Yeah, 'Rat, it'll just bid up the price, and we got plenty of dough, whereas the Chinese...
ReplyDeleteOps, wait a minute...
Did you know you lost your soul, 'Rat?
ReplyDeleteThey're going to do it, or they'd not be building the boats and the refineries.
ReplyDeleteEspecially if Hugo's reserves of pumpable crude are drying up. Just for ideological reasons, he'll sell to China, cutting US off.
Similar to the OPEC boycott.
Ecquador will dump US then, too. Along with that airbase.
Nigeria, that's a risky supply source. Especially if there were a conflict there. More than there already is.
We have to start, because the lead times, even accelerated is two years to build the plant and prep the farm infrastructure.
We need capacity for 750 million barrels per annum, within five years for independence.
It's a major project, if we're serious.
Well, I knew Mr Bush worried about it.
ReplyDeleteIs it at the lost and found?
Maybe that's why W plans to spend the Manhatten Money on a trip to Mars rather than Ethanol:
ReplyDeleteRecover 'Rat's Soul from the Martian Snatchers.
Too bad we still can't build Empire State Bldgs in a year.
ReplyDeleteInstead, we stare at holes in the ground.
I figure as long as there's still hope for AlBob's Giant Worm, we outta take a go slow approach to overfarming.
ReplyDeleteNo, Ms T, oil will not be fungible.
ReplyDeleteThe "Market System" will breakdown.
What buddy larsen always fretted about. Why he thought we were in Iraq, to defend the Oil Market System, not the oil itself.
Oil supplies increase a 1.5%, demand will increase 5 to 8%, as the Global economy flurishes.
Socialist Governments are not required to operate in the capitalistic system. The Chinese will make Treaty deals with Hugo and the Iranians, for percentages of production, at fixed prices.
Oil is a weapon, Ms T, not a commodity
Indians are gearing up a
ReplyDelete$2,500 car.
No more Bikes and Scooters for them!
Bob's so despondent he ain't even cheering on New Nukes.
ReplyDeleteDoug: Too bad we still can't build Empire State Bldgs in a year. Instead, we stare at holes in the ground.
ReplyDeleteDoug, remember when the 16" gun turret blew up on the USS Iowa a few years back? We literally could not make a replacement barrel. We had to go dig one out of storage. Sometimes I think the peak of our civilization was in 1944, and we are drifting into a new dark ages.
The worm,
ReplyDeleteThe Giant worm,
Will outlast us all...
Bunkered down, fifteen feet deep...
ReplyDeleteI wrote a little letter to the Tribune, asking any fellow farmers who have actually seen this critter to please write in and tell us about it. Since it is a 'big deal' with us clod hoppers, they'll do it too, if anyone ever has seen it.
ReplyDeleteI'm gonna get to the bottom of this.
Oil, Weapon, or Commodity
ReplyDelete