Friday - February 24, 2006

Uncertainty

_{Eric Allie—The Pioneer Press, Chicago}

UAE Company Agrees to Delay Ports Takeover
Feb 23 10:58 PM US/Eastern

WASHINGTON (AP)

A United Arab Emirates company offered Thursday to delay part of its $6.8 billion takeover of most operations at six U.S. ports to give the Bush administration more time to convince skeptical lawmakers the deal poses no security risks.

The surprise announcement relieves some pressure from a standoff between President Bush and the Republican-controlled Congress, which has threatened to block the deal because of the UAE’s purported ties to terrorism.

Under the offer coordinated with the White House, Dubai Ports World said it will agree not to exercise control or influence the management over U.S. ports pending further talks with the Bush administration and Congress. It did not indicate how long it will wait for these discussions to take place.

The company said it will move forward with other parts of the deal affecting the rest of the world.

- More on this story here ...

Posted by The Skipper     on 02/24/2006 at 07:54 AM   
Filed Under: • Humor •  
• Comments (18) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Thursday - February 23, 2006

Photo Du Jour

“S**t Eating Grin”

HADITHA DAM, Iraq - Television host and Former NFL cheerleader, Bonnie Jill Laflin, kisses Lance Cpl. Christopher A. Gass, a Wichita, Kan., native and Marine infantryman with 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment during a Super Sunday Tour visit here, Feb. 4.

NFL celebrities like Byars, Nick Lowery, Christian Okoye, Bryan Cox and Bonnie Jill Laflin, spent the day with U.S. Marines and sailors of the Camp Pendleton, Calif.-based infantry unit.

The former sports stars signed autographs, posed for photographs and spoke with troops in an effort to show support for those serving abroad in the Global War on Terror. The Marines spent the past five months routing out insurgents and providing stability in Iraq’s western Al Anbar province.

Photo by: Cpl. Adam C. Schnell

_{Skipper’s Commentary: DANG! That’s gal’s got a real bodacious BOO-TAY going there!}

Posted by The Skipper     on 02/23/2006 at 07:20 PM   
Filed Under: • Art-Photography • Military •  
• Comments (8) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Do Unto Others … As They Do Unto You

My first thought when reading this was, “no, this is not Christians fighting Muslims - this is one group of third-world savages fighting another group of third-world savages.” That didn’t seem to fit right so I decided to see what other bloggers on my blogroll had to say about it and if my first impression was right. Nearly every blogger I read on this subject seemed to feel the same way. Then I stumbled across Ace over at Ace Of Spades HQ who put into words exactly what I was thinking subconsciously but wouldn’t admit. Thanks Ace, for the reality check ...

I suppose I’m supposed to condemn the mob violence on both sides equally. But that’s a lot of bullshit. The Muslim mobs killed, beat, maimed, and burned because of some cartoons published in small country thousands of miles of way.

The Christian mobs are killing, beating, maiming, and burning because they were themselves killed, beaten, maimed, and burned last week.

Every group of human beings has the capacity for this kind of vicious, random, xenophobic violence. Some are, let us say, more easily set to murderous frenzy than others.

-- Ace

“In Nigeria, Christian Mobs Terrorize Back”

Nigerian Christians Mob Muslims
February 23, 2006, 11:37 AM EST

ONITSHA, Nigeria (AP)

Christians in this southern Nigerian city burned Muslim corpses and defaced wrecked mosques Thursday, showing little repentance after days of sectarian violence that has killed more than 120 people across the country. Onitsha has borne the brunt, with at least 80 of the deaths. The violence followed weekend protests over the publication of cartoons of Muhammad, the Islamic prophet.

“We don’t want these mosques here anymore. These people are causing all the problems all over the world because they don’t fear God,” said 34-year Ifeanyi Ese, standing amid the concrete rubble of an Onitsha mosque. With a crowd gathered, Ese angrily scrawled “Mohammed is a man, but Jesus is from above” on a shattered mosque wall with a burned stick.

Thousands of Nigerians have died in sectarian strife since 2000, when mostly Muslim northern states began implementing Islamic Shariah law in late 1999. Nigeria’s 130 million people are split between the two faiths, with Christians a majority in the south.

The latest violence was touched off Saturday in the northern city of Maiduguri, when Muslim protests against cartoons caricaturing the Prophet Muhammad. The cartoons, which first appeared in a Danish newspaper in September, have set off sometimes violent protests around the world. The Maiduguri protests turned violent, and 18 people, most of them Christian, were killed.

Twenty-five more died in similar violence in the northern city of Bauchi, sparking reprisals in Onitsha. “The Muslims started it when they attacked the Christians due to the cartoon of Muhammad in Denmark. If they cartooned their god, well, they must endure it and not fight,” said Christian Ike, a 35-year old motorcycle taxi driver. “We want to be one Nigeria.” Emeka Umeh, who heads leading human rights group Civil Liberties Organization in Anambra state, said at least 80 people were killed in Onitsha—60 Tuesday and 20 Wednesday.

One entire Muslim district—an area of about 100 homes—was burned to the ground. Crumpled corrugated tin roofs lay on top of the remains of smoldering houses. At least nine bodies, all charred, lay in dirt streets as passers-by hurried past, holding cloths to their noses against the stench. Three other bodies burned on a pyre of flaming tires.

About 5,000 Muslims fled the city and took refuge across the Niger River in the neighboring town of Asaba. Several hundred of them sat beneath trees at a police barracks there, asking for help to travel northward as babies wailed. Adam Mohamed, a 40-year-old Muslim motorcycle mechanic, said mobs attacked and robbed Muslims as they fled across a bridge connecting the two cities.

“Some were killed. Others were thrown from the bridge into the water,” Mohamed said. “These people attacked us, burnt our mosques and killed our people. But by God’s grace, I escaped.” Most seemed resigned to their fate. “The prophet told us to accept what happens to us because it is our destiny,” said Abdul Salaam Danbuzu, a 26-year-old sheep herder from neighboring Niger. “We’re a small community and now we must all leave. All we can do is run.”

Trucks that usually carry fruit and other goods to market were packed with Muslims heading north. It wasn’t known how many Muslims lived in Onitsha. Gov. Chris Ngige extended a curfew imposed on Onitsha to the nearby towns of Nnewi and Awka, the state capital, after Muslim northerners had been attacked and killed in those places Wednesday, the local government radio station reported.

Deaths have also been reported by residents in violence the same day against Muslims in Enugu, a mainly Christian and ethnic Igbo-dominated city, some 60 miles north of Onitsha. A spokeswoman for the Nigerian Red Cross, Umo Okon, said there were 925 victims of violence in Onitsha over the two days, including deaths, injuries and people displaced from their homes. She did not have an exact breakdown.

The latest outbreak of fighting is the worst to hit Nigeria since 2004, when Muslim-Christian skirmishes in northern Nigeria’s Plateau and Kano states killed more than 700 people. The cartoons that reignited Muslim-Christian tension in Nigeria were the object of protests around the world. One caricature shows Muhammad wearing a bomb-shaped turban with an ignited fuse.

Posted by The Skipper     on 02/23/2006 at 01:00 PM   
Filed Under: • Insanity • Religion • RoPMA •  
• Comments (19) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Down And Out In Ft. Lauderdale

Guess what? If you live in Ft. Lauderdale, Flori-DUH and make less than $70,000 per year you are considered poor and need housing assistance.

Huh? Let me read that again ...

Guess what? If you live in Ft. Lauderdale, Flori-DUH and make less than $70,000 per year you are considered poor and need housing assistance.

Sorry. Still does not compute ...

Fort Lauderdale To Provide Housing Aid For Families Making Up To $70,000 A Year
February 22 2006

FORT LAUDERDALE (SUN-SENTINEL)

People making moderate incomes—up to $69,720 a year—might soon join the ranks of the city’s poor in being eligible for housing welfare. City commissioners agreed Tuesday to pursue a variety of housing measures that would expand subsidy programs to the middle class and would make Fort Lauderdale the first city in Broward County to enact affordability laws.

“Guys, this is a proud moment in the city of Fort Lauderdale’s history,” said Commissioner Carlton Moore. “It really is. It really is.” The prices of homes and apartments have grown too expensive for middle-income families, causing a growing crisis in the city and countywide. Public hearings and final votes on a menu of new programs or laws are expected to begin April 4.

The county is demanding the city address affordable housing before allowing construction of more homes and condos downtown. Last year, county commissioners denied Fort Lauderdale’s request to allow 13,000 new homes or condos downtown, agreeing to only 3,000. The county says the city cannot start approving new development proposals from that pool of 3,000 until a housing program is in place.

City commissioners have tentatively endorsed requiring future residential developers to offer at “affordable” prices at least 15 percent of homes or condos, or to pay an “in-lieu of” fee of up to $100,000 for every affordable unit not built. The money would be used to help buyers afford new homes. Commissioners said developers would not bear all the cost of the new programs. Dollars also might come from all future property purchasers, the state or taxpayers.

- More on Flori-DUH’s homeless here ...

Posted by The Skipper     on 02/23/2006 at 11:44 AM   
Filed Under: • Outrageous •  
• Comments (15) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Things I’d Like To See, Part I

Wouldn’t you like to see Judge Alito and Chief Justice Roberts questioning the Democrat Senators to determine their qualifications for Public office? Just imagine matching the IQs of the Senators and the Judges! 

The questions might go like this:

Judge Alito: “Senator Kennedy, I see from your official resume that you attended Harvard University...”

Senator Kennedy: “Yes, your honor, I certainly did.”

Alito: “Did you graduate?”

Kennedy: “Your honor, I respectfully ask that you not pry into my personal life...”

Alito: “Is it not true that you were expelled from Harvard for violating the honor code, to wit, you hired someone to take an exam for you?”

Kennedy: “Mr. Chairman, I want to go on record that I disagree with this line of questioning. I ask the chair to order the Judge not to ask questions about my private matters..”

Senator Specter, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee: “Answer the Judge’s questions. He answered all of yours..”

Alito: “Senator Kennedy, we have on hand a transcript of the session of the university’s honor council attesting to your fraudulent examination and subsequent expulsion from the university...”

Kennedy: “I have had all I can take of this line of unreasonable questioning. I am going to ask Al Gore how he managed to keep his early departure from Vanderbilt University Divinity School away from the eyes of you religious nuts...”

Alito: “Wait, Senator Kennedy, I want to ask you about the 26 phone calls you made from a motel room the night Mary Jo Kopecne drowned in your car at Chappaquidik, when you said you were asleep all night...” [Kennedy flees the hearing room]

Senator Specter: “Chief Justice Roberts will now interrogate Senator Biden, Democrat of Delaware...”

Roberts: “Senator Biden, is it not true that you were expelled from law school for plagiarizing another student’s work?”

Biden: “Wait, Ted, I am going with you...” [ Biden flees the hearing room ]

Senator Specter: “Judge Alito will now interrogate Senator Feinstein, Democrat of California...”

Alito: “Senator Feinstein, why did you vote for the former Grand Kleagle of the Ku Klux Klan of West Virginia [Robert Byrd] to be the Democrat Senate Majority Leader in 1986, 1988, 1990, and 1992?”

Feinstein: “Wait, boys, I am going with you...” [Feinstein flees the hearing room]

End of hearing

_{(-- thanks to sdkar for this gem --)}

Posted by The Skipper     on 02/23/2006 at 11:27 AM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists •  
• Comments (11) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Counterpoint: The Ports Deal

What is the Big Deal About the Ports?
By Jaguar

The media is screaming, the bloggers are screaming, the congresscritters are screaming. What the heck are they all freaking out about? Well, from what I have seen, the media is claiming that 6 US ports will be taken over and run by a company called DP World, which is owned by the UAE government, or actually, by a holding company that is owned by the UAE.

Congresscritters are running around and yelling about outsourcing our port security. The media is screaming the same thing. Now the bloggers are doing it as well. Our security will be outsourced, our security will be compromised, the UAE hasn’t been cooperative in the war on terror, etc, etc, ad nauseum.

You’d think that we were selling them the ports and everything in them. Like it was going to be New UAE in the US, or some such garbage. What exactly does it all mean? And what is actually going on here?

First off, let’s get this straight; the Port Authorities of each city own the ports. The security is run by the Port Authority, Homeland security and the coast guard.

This will not change, in any way shape or form.

What does that mean? The same security that is in place now, will be in place when DP World manages the terminals in the ports. As a matter of fact, the security will actually be better at the 6 ports. Why? Because homeland security asked DP World to help the ports invest in better security equipment as part of the approval process.

The UAE has been investing in R&D of the technology side of port security for a while. The UAE was the first country to sign on with Homeland security so that ALL containers leaving their ports for the US are inspected before they leave for the US. So, DP World is in an excellent position to be involved in the security upgrades for the ports. But, again, they have no responsibility nor authority in the way security is run at those ports.

What does DP world do? They manage the terminals in the port, NOT the port itself. There is HUGE difference here, and it needs to be made CLEAR. Let’s first look at the company that was originally managing the day-to-day port operations, Peninsular and Oriental Steam Operations, or P&O for short.  They have been managing the day-to-day operations of the 6 ports, New York, New Jersey, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Miami and New Orleans for the last 10 years or so.

From this website.

P&O Ports is the P&O Group Company responsible for port development and investment, terminal operating and stevedoring activities. Originating with the creation of an Australia-wide stevedoring and terminal operating entity, its first international activity was the 1986 joint venture privatization and management of the Port Kelang container terminal in Malaysia. This project was one of the first privatizations of public port assets undertaken worldwide. Its great success resulted in it becoming an international model for privatization of public facilities.

P&O Ports’ success and experience in privatization was also the foundation for further international investment by P&O, resulting in it being a world leader in port development and operation today. P&O Ports is an international company managing 21 container terminals and has operations in over 85 ports in 19 countries around the world.

DP World decided that they would be interested in buying the full worldwide operations of P&O, and got into a bidding war with a number of companies last August.  Last November, the Committee of Foreign investment OK’d the deal after going over the usual 30 day review period for such dealings.

They found no concerns that would be harmful to the security of the ports or the United States. Why, you may ask? Because the companies that manage the port operations, do not manage the security at the ports, and never have. DP World has also cooperated with the office of Homeland security in other international ports that they manage in order to secure and ensure the safety of containers being shipped to the United States.

OK, so what have we got so far?

First, they will not be doing any security for the ports that they will be managing. None. All security is in the hands of the local Port Authority, Homeland Security, and the Coast Guard.

The Port Authority, who owns the ports (and is usually a government agency, and elected by the citizens of that city) contract out the daily terminal operations of the port, to companies that do that type of management. P&O was an excellent company to have done that, and now DP World has purchased ALL of P&O’s worldwide assets and management divisions, which happens to include the 6 US ports named above.

Second, DP World is indeed owned by the UAE. The UAE has been one of our greatest allies in the Middle East, and around the world, on our continuing war on terror. Of all the Middle Eastern countries they are the smallest security risk and the most trustworthy as evidenced by their cooperation with our continued war on terrorism and signing onto our Homeland Security arrangements at their own ports.

Third, this buyout was approved by the Foreign investment Committee after much research and of course discussions with the company itself. The media has hyped it to a point where it has taken on a life of it’s own, and people are freaking out over pretty much nothing.

What’s the actual bottom line here?

DP World will be in charge of the day-to-day operations of the terminals in the 6 ports of those cities, just as P&O was. The American longshoreman will still load and unload all the ships. The American managers will still be in charge of the day-to-day operations, and security will be handled by the same people that have always handled it. (The Port Authority of each city, Homeland Security, and the Coast Guard.)

What will be different? The payee on the paychecks to those American Longshoreman and those American managers will say DP World instead of P&O.

The profits from those operations will be going to the UAE, instead of the UK.

The ports will be getting some much needed modernization of their security equipment.

That’s it, that’s the bottom line…

So what’s the fuss? What has caused this entire furor over a change in management?

Well, let’s take a peek at a couple of things shall we?

Let’s start with a timeline.

August 2005: DP World gets into a bidding war for the purchase of P&O. A final buyout price of about 6.8 billion dollars is agreed upon as of January 26th 2006.

November 2005: The committee on foreign investment gives the nod to the buyout and for DP world to take over the daily operations at the 6 US ports.

January 2006: Dave Sanborn is nominated to serve as the maritime administrator. He has been an executive of DP world since 2005.

February 15th 2006: Continental Stevedoring and Terminals Inc., a partner with P&O in the US, filed a suit to block the purchase. Miami’s mayor also sent a letter of protest to President Bush.

And today, all the media outlets are having conniption fits and the bloggers are screaming “off with Bush’s head” over this one. OK, so what does this little timeline tell us? This was a done deal 3 months ago, back in November. Media reaction—YAWNER, nonstory.

January, Dave Sanborn is nominated. Media reaction—YAWNER, nonstory. Today? Conniption fit city. What happened? Hmm, Continental filed a suit to block the sale and Miami’s mayor wrote a letter of protest to the president. Hmm, sounds particularly suspicious to me, and another case of the media playing fast and loose with the facts in order to create a fracas and discredit the Bush administration.

And everyone has fallen for it hook, line and sinker. This thing has been done for over 3 months, the nomination was done last month, and now the media is just reporting it, only after a letter of protest from a mayor and a company filed suit?

BTW, 99% of the shareholders agreed to the sale of P&O to DP World. Another case of the crying liberals trying to get a judge to overturn something after the people voted for it. Sorry, I digress.

Tomorrow, they will be saying that Dave Sanborn getting the Maritime administrator position was some sort of payback to DP World for cooperating with Homeland Security. Just watch, it’s going to happen. Here is Dave Sanborns Resume’, just in case you were wondering how he might qualify for this position.

Mr. Sanborn, a graduate of The United States Merchant Maritime Academy, joined DP World in 2005. He previously held senior roles with shipping lines CMA-CGM (Americas), APL Ltd and Sea-Land and has been based, besides the US, in Brazil, Europe, Hong Kong and Dubai during his career.  He has also served in the US Naval Reserve.

Looks pretty darned qualified to me. The media has given this story the legs it needs by playing fast and loose with the facts. They will do the same here. Just watch them. The media has manipulated this thing from the get go, and everyone is falling right in step to their tune. I find it sad, disturbing and very frustrating.

Bin Laden can’t wait to tell everyone how the US hates and distrusts Arabs and that the US is indeed the enemy. The overreaction and lies about this sale and the management of these ports will tell the world exactly that.

The media has played everyone for fools by not telling the WHOLE story or, for that matter, the real story.

For some reason the media has decided that a mayoral letter of protest and a suit to block the sale in US courts is enough to run with the story. (But, they haven’t said a thing about that part, have they?)

Anyone want to tell me why that is?

Onwards…

What story finally just died? Cheney, shooting some poor Republican lawyer, while on a hunting trip. Now the 78 year old lawyer is out of the hospital and all is forgiven. Whoops, the story had legs, and then had them cut out from under them.

Now, along comes this story. The media, trying it again.

The timing looks really strange to me. If any of you understand how the media manipulates the American people, it should look mighty strange to you as well. This whole story is a nonstory. It is nothing but a lot of caterwauling and BS from the usual suspects and the usual media outlets. President Bush is doing the right thing.

This is an executive branch responsibility. The deal is done. The arrangements have been made. Congress sticking it’s fingers into this pie will do nothing more then play into the prejudices that Bin Laden is trying so hard to convince other Arabs that we have.

This deal should be allowed to go through. It will NOT endanger our national security in any way shape or form. It will help with our war on terror. Besides the fact, DP World does an excellent job of running port terminals, as their assets and continued contracts on the worldwide market should prove to you.

Sources:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007999
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/terrorism/jan-june06/ports_2-21.html
http://www.nationalreview.com/ijaz/ijaz200602221412.asp
http://www.dpiterminals.com/fullnews.asp?NewsID=39
http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/02/22/D8FUHG4G0.html
http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,18245410%5E1702,00.html

Posted by Jaguar     on 02/23/2006 at 10:44 AM   
Filed Under: • Editorials •  
• Comments (31) • Trackbacks(1)  Permalink •  

Chappa - Who?

There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root.
-- Henry David Thoreau

Student under fire for yelling: ‘Remember Chappaquiddick!’
Self-described liberal hollers phrase as Kennedy begins on-campus speech
February 22, 2006 - 9:14 p.m. Eastern

(WORLDNET DAILY)

A community college student in Massachusetts faces possible disciplinary action for shouting “Remember Chappaquiddick!” during an on-campus speech by Democrat Sen. Edward Kennedy. Paul Trost, 20, a student at Massasoit Community College in Brockton, Mass., says he was upset by an introduction of Kennedy given by Rep. Stephen Lynch, D-Mass., in which the congressman noted how the long-time senator overcame hardship in life on his way to success.

“Lynch said Kennedy had overcome such adversity to get to the place he was, and that’s a bunch of bull,” Trost said of the introduction, which occurred in the school’s student center Tuesday morning. Just as Kennedy began speaking, Trost was walking out of the room when he shouted, “Remember Chappaquiddick!”

“Most of the crowd gasped,” Trost said. “Then I walked out of the student center.”

The student says a campus police officer went outside and stopped him. He also saw some state troopers go outside, the type who accompany Kennedy around the state to provide security.

Trost says the cop took down his information and told him he would be hearing from school officials about disciplinary action. A spokesman with the campus police verified the incident but stressed that Trost was not arrested.

The student said one of his teachers confronted him after a class about the Chappaquiddick issue.

Posted by The Skipper     on 02/23/2006 at 09:53 AM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists •  
• Comments (20) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Battleground

Forget the warring parties in the Middle East. There is about to be another meaner, nastier war right here in America. The opening salvo has been fired from South Dakota. Since South Dakota is in the middle of nowhere, none of the major Liberal forces showed up. No, they’re biding their time until the war moves to Washington, DC and the Supreme Court. Make no mistake. It is coming. You’d better strap on your combat helmets and hunker down in your foxholes. There will be incoming shortly ....

S.D. Closer to Strict Abortion Limits
February 23, 2006, 8:38 AM EST

PIERRE, S.D. (AP)

South Dakota moved closer to imposing some of the strictest limits on abortion in the nation as the state Senate approved legislation that would ban the procedure except when the woman’s life is in danger.

The bill, designed to spark a courtroom showdown over the legality of abortion, passed 23-12 Wednesday. On Thursday, it was headed back to the House, where lawmakers already approved similar legislation.

Republican Gov. Mike Rounds, a longtime abortion opponent, has said he would “look favorably” on an abortion ban if it would “save life.” Under the measure, doctors in South Dakota would face up to five years in prison for performing an abortion. The only exception would be for women who need abortions to save their lives.

“In my opinion, it is the time for the South Dakota Legislature to deal with this issue and protect the lives and rights of unborn children,” said Sen. Julie Bartling, a Democrat and the bill’s main sponsor. The legislation targets Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion. Opponents say it is too extreme and unconstitutional. Planned Parenthood, which operates the only clinic that provides abortions in South Dakota, pledged to challenge the measure if it become law.

“South Dakota’s ban is the most sweeping abortion ban passed by any state in more than a decade,” Planned Parenthood Federation of America lawyer Eve Gartner said in a written statement. She said the organization would do everything it could to ensure that women and their doctors, not politicians, made their health care decisions.

Supporters say an anonymous donor has pledged to provide South Dakota with $1 million to help defend the law in court. The recent appointment of Justices John Roberts and Samuel Alito make the U.S. Supreme Court more likely to consider overturning Roe v. Wade now, Bartling and other supporters said. “It is a calculated risk to be sure, but I believe it is a fight worth fighting,” said Sen. Brock Greenfield, a Republican who also is director of South Dakota Right to Life.

Some senators, including Republicans, were concerned that the legislation did not include exceptions for abortions in cases of rape or incest. Republican Sen. Stan Adelstein said it would be “a continued savagery unworthy of South Dakota” to make a woman bear a child if she becomes pregnant as the result of rape.

The Legislature passed a similar bill two years ago, but Rounds issued a technical veto because it would have wiped existing restrictions off the books while the bill was involved in a court challenge. Including Thursday, the Legislature has five days left before the official end of its session.

Posted by The Skipper     on 02/23/2006 at 09:39 AM   
Filed Under: • Abortion •  
• Comments (14) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Up In Flames

The media calls it a “civil war”. I call it “destabilzation by Iran and Syria”. Don’t kid yourself, there are outside forces at work here and have been for three years. The Sunnis hate the Shiites, the Shiites hate the Sunnis and both hate the US and Israel. A whole lotta hating going on over there.

Caught in the middle are our troops and the Iraqi people who have been oppressed and led like sheep for generations. The Iraqi people are taking a knife in the back from their Arab neighbors. Maybe it’s time to go with Plan B (Classified) and give the Iranian and Syrian government something to keep them occupied and out of Iraq?

Mosque Attack Pushes Iraq Toward Civil War
Feb 23 3:27 AM US/Eastern

SAMARRA, Iraq (AP)

Insurgents posing as police destroyed the golden dome of one of Iraq’s holiest Shiite shrines Wednesday, setting off an unprecedented spasm of sectarian violence. Angry crowds thronged the streets, militiamen attacked Sunni mosques, and at least 19 people were killed. On Thursday, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad blamed the United States and Israel for the destruction of a Shiite shrine’s golden dome in Iraq, saying it was the work of “defeated Zionists and occupiers.”

Speaking to a crowd of thousands on a tour of southwestern Iran, the president referred to the destruction of the Askariya mosque dome in Samarra on Wednesday, which the Iraqi government has blamed on insurgents. “They invade the shrine and bomb there because they oppose God and justice,” Ahmadinejad said, referring to the U.S.-led multinational forces in Iraq. Meanwhile, with the gleaming dome of the 1,200-year-old Askariya shrine reduced to rubble, some Shiites lashed out at the United States as partly to blame.

The violence - many of the 90 attacks on Sunni mosques were carried out by Shiite militias - seemed to push Iraq closer to all-out civil war than at any point in the three years since the U.S.-led overthrow of Saddam Hussein. Many leaders called for calm. “We are facing a major conspiracy that is targeting Iraq’s unity,” said President Jalal Talabani, a Kurd. “We should all stand hand in hand to prevent the danger of a civil war.” President Bush pledged American help to restore the mosque after the bombing north of Baghdad, which dealt a severe blow to U.S. efforts to keep Iraq from falling deeper into sectarian violence.

“The terrorists in Iraq have again proven that they are enemies of all faiths and of all humanity,” Bush said. “The world must stand united against them, and steadfast behind the people of Iraq.” British Prime Minister Tony Blair also condemned the bombing and pledged funds toward the shrine’s reconstruction. U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad and the top American commander in Iraq, Gen. George Casey, called the attack a deliberate attempt to foment sectarian strife and warned it was a “critical moment for Iraq.”

No one was reported wounded in the bombing of the shrine in Samarra. But at least 19 people, including three Sunni clerics, were killed in the reprisal attacks that followed, mainly in Baghdad and predominantly Shiite provinces to the south, according to the Iraqi Islamic Party, the country’s largest Sunni political group. Many of the attacks appeared to have been carried out by Shiite militias that the United States wants to see disbanded.

In predominantly Shiite Basra, police said militiamen broke into a prison, hauled out 12 inmates, including two Egyptians, two Tunisians, a Libyan, a Saudi and a Turk, and shot them dead in reprisal for the shrine attack. The bodies of three Iraqi journalists, including a well-known correspondent for Al Arabiya television, were found Thursday near Samarra, police and the Arabic network said. Al Arabiya’s Atwar Bahjat and two colleagues from the al-Wassan media company had been in the city to cover the bombing when they disappeared Wednesday night, the network said.

- More on this story here ...

BEFORE:



AFTER:

Posted by The Skipper     on 02/23/2006 at 09:10 AM   
Filed Under: • Iraq •  
• Comments (12) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

At The Gates

_{John Trever—The Albuquerque Journal}

Posted by The Skipper     on 02/23/2006 at 09:00 AM   
Filed Under: • Humor •  
• Comments (6) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Wednesday - February 22, 2006

Port Of Call

I’m sorry, Dubya but I’m gonna have to call your hand on this one. Back off, man! Step away from the veto and keep your hands in plain sight. I’m sure your cabinet members vetted this thing thoroughly and the Coast Guard is satisfied with their inspections of the UAE facilities but .... as we say back home in Alabama, “THAT DAWG WON’T HUNT!” - Got that? I’m sorry but the American people just will not stand for it. This is one you need to walk away from real quietly or else you’ll get bit. You can almost hear the rattles in the underbrush, can’t you?

Trust me. It ain’t got a damned thing to do with “Islamophobia”. It’s all about we just ain’t gonna put up with the foxes guarding the henhouse, so to speak. Now, the UAE guys may say they’re not radical all day long but when you get right down to it, they’re still foxes ... erh, uh ... Muslims. Who’s to say that some honest goober with a towel on his head working at New York harbor hasn’t got a family somewhere back home in Dubai who is easy leverage to get him (no matter how “un-foxey” he is) to do a dirty deed ... done dirt cheap.

Nuh-uh, babe. Cut your losses, Dubya. Bow out gracefully. I’m looking out fer you on this one. If you veto any legislation that attempts to block this deal I’m afraid your approval rating will no longer be expressed in positive integers. More like multiples of i ... if you know what I mean ...

Arabs See Islamophobia Behind US Uproar Over Ports Deal
Wed Feb 22, 2006 1:11 PM ET

DUBAI (Reuters)

U.S. lawmakers’ strident opposition to a Dubai company controlling major seaports reflects a Western phobia of Arabs which could scare off other Middle East investors, Arab analysts said. Several congressmen have vowed to block the sale of British port operator P&O to Dubai Ports World of the United Arab Emirates, a staunch U.S. Gulf ally, citing security concerns even though the deal was approved by the Bush administration.

Mustafa Alani, security expert at the UAE’s Gulf Research Center, said the furor over the impending sale was driven by politicians trying to thwart the U.S. government’s drive to mend ties with Arab states. “This is Arab phobia and it is clearly politically motivated,” he told Reuters. He said opponents of the deal “are reopening 9/11 wounds, turning this into an Arab-Muslim conspiracy to control the lives of Americans.”

“They want public opinion to sabotage improved relations, but they picked the wrong country,” Alani added. U.S.-Arab relations had been strained by the September 11 attacks on U.S. cities by 19 Arabs from al Qaeda, including UAE citizens. Washington’s support for Israel, considered an enemy by many Arabs, and its war on Iraq have also inflamed tensions.

Analysts also said the uproar could scare off other Gulf Arab states, all U.S. allies and flush with petrodollars, from seeking similar high-profile investments. “Other Gulf Arabs are watching this closely… this could definitely scare money away. Any investor is going to think a thousand times before doing so,” a Gulf-based analyst said.

Analysts said opposition to the deal stemmed from bias, since the Dubai firm would not oversee security. “Islamophobia is rising and has become like an infectious disease that spreads… in the West,” wrote columnist Rashid Saleh al-Oraimy in the UAE daily Gulf News this week. “The issue of acquiring the British company that operates U.S. ports is a mere business matter and it has nothing to do with politics,” he added.

Oraimy said U.S. security services failed to prevent the September 11 attacks “so no country should be blamed or held responsible for the acts of terrorists”. The UAE, and especially Dubai, is a major trading and business hub in the wealthy Gulf region. It has so far been spared from attacks by Islamist militants who have struck Western interests in other Arab countries.

UAE officials have refused to wade into the political aspects of the deal, preferring to highlight their country’s support for the U.S. war on terrorism. “President (George W.) Bush has set the record straight (about) the existing cooperation between the United States and the United Arab Emirates,” a UAE government source said.

“Recently, the UAE and United States have concluded two joint task forces, one dealing with non-proliferation and the second with combating terror financing,” he added. Bush vowed on Tuesday to veto any attempt to block the $6.8 billion takeover, saying scuppering it “sends a terrible signal to friends around the world”. U.S. warships regularly dock at Dubai’s Jebel Ali Port, which is also managed by DP World, and the emirate became the first Middle Eastern port city in 2004 to sign a U.S. pact aimed at deterring the use of shipping containers for terrorism.

The UAE provides logistical support for some U.S. military operations in the region, including Afghanistan. The Gulf Arab state, an OPEC oil producer, is negotiating a free trade agreement with the United States.

Posted by The Skipper     on 02/22/2006 at 04:29 PM   
Filed Under: • Politics • RoPMA •  
• Comments (27) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

$365 Million

Eight people ... normal American hard-working meat-packers ... have now had their lives hopelessly destroyed. If not immediately, then within a few months or years. Absolute money messes you up absolutely. Why? Because you haven’t had to practice losing it or managing it. You are a child with matches. Therefore, I am pleased to announce The Skipper Safety Plan. I urge all eight of these fine people to send me their checks and I will take the burden off of them ... absolutely free. I guarantee piece of mind ... yeah, right ...

Eight Claim Record $365 Million Lottery Jackpot
February 22, 2006

LINCOLN, Neb. (AP)

Eight workers at a Nebraska meat processing plant claimed the record $365 million Powerball jackpot Wednesday that, if split evenly, would give each about $15.5 million after taxes. The seven men and one woman all work at a ConAgra ham processing plant near the U-Stop convenience store where they bought the winning ticket last week for Saturday’s lottery.

They ended up with the biggest jackpot in U.S. lottery history. (Related video: More on the lotto win) “I didn’t know what to think,” said Robert Stewart, 30, who said he was a maintenance supervisor before the win. “I still don’t know what to think.” The previous U.S. lottery jackpot record was $363 million for the Big Game, the forerunner of Mega Millions. Powerball’s previous record jackpot, $340 million, was won by an Oregon family in October.

At least three of the winners Wednesday are immigrants. Quang Dao, 56, who like Dung Tran, 34, came to the U.S. from Vietnam about 16 years ago, said he was looking for freedom when he headed for America. He said the lottery would change his family’s life back in Vietnam. Alain Maboussou, a 26-year-old who fled war in Africa’s Republic of Congo, said he planned return to school to work on a degree in business administration.

“I’m going to be working for myself now,” Maboussou said. He said his three-month-old daughter, Katherine, “is going to be happy for the rest of her life.” The winners said they and others often pooled their money together when the jackpots reached $40 million or so. “I don’t think they have a reason to be jealous,” Maboussou said of the rest of his colleagues, “because when it’s a pool day, we ask people to put like in five bucks, so if you wasn’t there or you didn’t put five bucks in, sorry.”

Only three winners quit their jobs when they hit the jackpot. One them, Michael Terpstra, 47, said he wasn’t sure what he was going to do with the money. “Everybody has dreams,” he said. “Buy an island. Buy an airplane. In reality, I’m not a fan of flying and don’t really like water.” The other winners were identified as David Gehle, 53; Chasity Rutjens, 29; and Eric Zornes, 40. The winning numbers were 15, 17, 43, 44 and 48, with a Powerball number of 29, according to the Multi-State Lottery Association of Des Moines, which runs the game for the participating states. Powerball tickets are sold in 28 states, the District of Columbia and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Posted by The Skipper     on 02/22/2006 at 02:56 PM   
Filed Under: • Fun-Stuff •  
• Comments (21) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Papparazi Penalized

Nine years later, the death Of Princess Diana is still a mystery and a mess. There are all kinds of accusations going back and forth. The paparrazi were to blame, the Queen set it up to get rid of Diana, blah-blah-blah ... Now a Fwench court fines the paparrazi a horrific penalty of $1.19 for hounding the couple and chasing them into the tunnel where they crashed. There’s more to this story than the National Enquirer will ever be able to dig up but hey ... it beats having to read about Michael Jackson for a while ...

Paris Court Fines Diana Photographers
February 22, 2006, 1:38 PM EST

PARIS (AP)

A Paris appeals court fined three photographers $1.19 each for invasion of privacy for taking pictures of Britain’s Princess Diana and boyfriend Dodi Fayed on the night of their fatal 1997 car crash, officials said Wednesday. The appeals court fined them the symbolic sum in a ruling on Friday, which was not announced until Wednesday.

Jacques Langevin, Christian Martinez and Fabrice Chassery were acquitted of the invasion of privacy charge in 2003 after judges said a crashed vehicle on a public highway is not a private area. But France’s highest court disagreed in a ruling last April and sent the case to the Paris appeals court for review. The court also ordered them to pay for the publication of announcements of the conviction in three newspapers or magazines.

Fayed’s father, Egyptian-born billionaire Mohammed Al Fayed, filed the invasion of privacy complaint. Diana’s relatives and the British royal family were not plaintiffs in the case, which focused on three photos of the couple leaving the Ritz Hotel by car and three after the accident on Aug. 31, 1997, in a tunnel alongside the River Seine.

The photographers, whose photos were confiscated and not published, were among the swarm of photographers who pursued the car carrying Diana and Fayed across Paris, and took photos after it slammed into the pillar of the traffic tunnel. The judges in the appeals court determined that the photographers invaded Fayed’s privacy twice: First with photos of the couple as they emerged from the Ritz, and later by photographing him in the crashed car.

Fayed and driver Henri Paul were killed instantly. Diana died later in a hospital. Only the bodyguard survived. A five-year investigation into the crash concluded that Paul had been drinking and was speeding. In 2002, France’s highest court dropped manslaughter charges against nine photographers—including Langevin, Martinez and Chassery. In a statement, Al Fayed said he believed the decision cast doubt on the validity of the French investigation into the deaths.

“It is deeply disappointing that I am having to fight for so long and on so many fronts in order to get to the truth, but I am encouraged by the fact that each battle I fight takes me a step nearer to the truth,” Al Fayed said. “This lovely couple were murdered, with the paparazzi being used as a cover for the murder, and sooner or later I will succeed in exposing the full facts, and the people who committed such a horrendous crime.”

Posted by The Skipper     on 02/22/2006 at 02:30 PM   
Filed Under: • Crime •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Captain’s Mast

I seem to be having a minor bit of a problem here lately keeping members and readers from behaving like children. Therefore, I am reading all of you the Riot Act. The following is an excerpt from “The Core Rules Of Netiquette”. Read it and do with it as you please. I make no threats. I will simply do what I have to do ...

The golden rule your parents and your kindergarten teacher taught you was pretty simple: Do unto others as you’d have others do unto you. Imagine how you’d feel if you were in the other person’s shoes. Stand up for yourself, but try not to hurt people’s feelings. In cyberspace, we state this in an even more basic manner: Remember the human.

When you communicate electronically, all you see is a computer screen. You don’t have the opportunity to use facial expressions, gestures, and tone of voice to communicate your meaning; words—lonely written words—are all you’ve got. And that goes for your correspondent as well. When you’re holding a conversation online—whether it’s an email exchange or a response to a discussion group posting—it’s easy to misinterpret your correspondent’s meaning. And it’s frighteningly easy to forget that your correspondent is a person with feelings more or less like your own.

It’s ironic, really. Computer networks bring people together who’d otherwise never meet. But the impersonality of the medium changes that meeting to something less—well, less personal. Humans exchanging email often behave the way some people behind the wheel of a car do: They curse at other drivers, make obscene gestures, and generally behave like savages. Most of them would never act that way at work or at home. But the interposition of the machine seems to make it acceptable.

The message of Netiquette is that it’s not acceptable. Yes, use your network connections to express yourself freely, explore strange new worlds, and boldly go where you’ve never gone before. But remember the Prime Directive of Netiquette: Those are real people out there. Writer and Macintosh evangelist Guy Kawasaki tells a story about getting email from some fellow he’s never met. Online, this fellow tells Guy that he’s a bad writer with nothing interesting to say.

Unbelievably rude? Yes, but unfortunately, it happens all the time in cyberspace. Maybe it’s the awesome power of being able to send mail directly to a well-known writer like Guy. Maybe it’s the fact that you can’t see his face crumple in misery as he reads your cruel words. Whatever the reason, it’s incredibly common. Guy proposes a useful test for anything you’re about to post or mail: Ask yourself, “Would I say this to the person’s face?” If the answer is no, rewrite and reread. Repeat the process till you feel sure that you’d feel as comfortable saying these words to the live person as you do sending them through cyberspace.

Of course, it’s possible that you’d feel great about saying something extremely rude to the person’s face. In that case, Netiquette can’t help you. Go get a copy of Miss Manners’ Guide to Excruciatingly Correct Behavior. When you communicate through cyberspace—via email or on discussion groups—your words are written. And chances are they’re stored somewhere where you have no control over them. In other words, there’s a good chance they can come back to haunt you.

Never forget the story of famous email user Oliver North. Ollie, you’ll remember, was a great devotee of the White House email system, PROFS. He diligently deleted all incriminating notes he sent or received. What he didn’t realize was that, somewhere else in the White House, computer room staff were equally diligently backing up the mainframe where his messages were stored. When he went on trial, all those handy backup tapes were readily available as evidence against him. You don’t have to be engaged in criminal activity to want to be careful. Any message you send could be saved or forwarded by its recipient. You have no control over where it goes.

Posted by The Skipper     on 02/22/2006 at 09:45 AM   
Filed Under: •   
• Comments (35) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner