7. desember 2003

Iraq predictions, one year on A year ago, we were debating the very likely upcoming war in Iraq, and both sides of the debate made predictions about the outcome of such a war. Reality has not been too kind to most of the predictions. International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, an organisation that won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1985, issued a very scary report about what would happen in case of war. The paper purported to be an "objective" "coldly factual report by health professionals."  The executive summary says: Researched and written by health professionals, this evidence-based report examines the likely impact of a new war on Iraq from a public health perspective. Credible estimates of the total possible deaths on all sides during the conflict and the following three months range from 48,000 to over 260,000. Civil war within Iraq could add another 20,000 deaths. Additional later deaths from post-war adverse health effects could reach 200,000. If nuclear weapons were used the death toll could reach 3,900,000. In all scenarios the majority of casualties will be civilians. The aftermath of a 'conventional' war could include civil war, famine and epidemics, millions of refugees and displaced people, catastrophic effects on children's health and development, economic collapse including failure of agriculture and manufacturing, and a requirement for long-term peacekeeping. Perhaps the only interesting thing about these wildly exaggarated predictions were that these health professionals seriously believed that Saddam Hussein had and would use nuclear weapons. 8:36:46 PM    comment []  trackback []

Religious quote of the day "Mr. Ramis, who was raised Jewish, said he feels like a Buddhist, but does not practice any religion. "Although I am wearing meditation beads on my wrist," he said. "But that's because I'm on a Buddhist diet. They're supposed to remind me not to eat, but actually just get in the way when I'm cutting my steak."" (New York Times) Gives the expression "a la carte religion" an entirely new meaning. 7:23:26 PM    comment []  trackback []

Granny says Justin Timberlake's penis is OK Britney Spears has been interpreted to have hinted that ex-lover Justin Timberlake has a small penis. During an MTV interview, Spears said she was "just a little bitter" at the breakup with Timberlake, and had stressed the word "a little" while using her thumb and finger to indicate that something was very short. Now granny comes to Justin Timberlake's aid, sorta. Sadie Bomar says Spears wasn't being truthful when she hinted on TV last week Timberlake isn't well endowed. His 70-year-old grandmother said: "I helped raise him - and I can assure you there is nothing wrong with him physically." I sincerely hope his grandmother didn't see his adult erect penis! Ms Spears, on the other hand, pretty definately has, though she doesn't boast any extensive comparative expertise. That said, if she really meant to say something negative about an ex' penis size, she's a pathetic bitch. Even as the world would be a much better place if Timberlake struck to playing with his penis and never made any records. 5:57:02 PM    comment []  trackback []

Iraqi colonel says he was source of 45 minute WMD claim The claim in Tony Blair's now infamous "Iraq dossier" that Saddam Hussein could use battlefield WMDs within 45 minutes has been supported by the man who says he is the source, Lt-Col al-Dabbagh, who was the head of an Iraqi air defense unit. He passed the information on to the British MI6, and he stands 100% behind it still, even though none of these weapons have been found after the war. Towards the end of last year, 2002, containers with WMD munitions from Saddam's factories near Baghdad were delivered to frontline units, including his own, by members of Saddam's Fedayeen paramilitaries. In an exclusive interview with the Telegraph, Col al-Dabbagh said that he believed he was the source of the British Government's controversial claim, published in September last year in the intelligence dossier on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, that Saddam could launch WMD within 45 minutes. "I am the one responsible for providing this information," said the colonel, who is now working as an adviser to Iraq's Governing Council. He also insisted that the information contained in the dossier relating to Saddam's battlefield WMD capability was correct. "It is 100 per cent accurate," he said after reading the relevant passage. The devices, which were known by Iraqi officers as "the secret weapon", were made in Iraq and designed to be launched by hand-held rocket-propelled grenades. They could also have been launched sooner than the 45-minutes claimed in the dossier. "Forget 45 minutes," said Col al-Dabbagh "we could have fired these within half-an-hour." Local commanders were told that they could use the weapons only on the personal orders of Saddam. "We were told that when the war came we would only have a short time to use everything we had to defend ourselves, including the secret weapon," he said. The only reason that these weapons were not used, said Col al-Dabbagh, was because the bulk of the Iraqi army did not want to fight for Saddam. "The West should thank God that the Iraqi army decided not to fight," he said. Which leaves the crucial question where these chemical weapons munitions disappeared to after the war. Col al-Dabbagh himself was recalled from his air defense unit to Baghdad headquarters during the war. He does not know, but believes that the WMD is still in Iraq, stored by the Fedayeen forces that are responsible for the continuous guerilla attacks against coalition forces and terrorism against Iraqis and foreign workers alike. He also believes people will talk about these weapons only when Saddam Hussein himself is captured. The Telegraph puts great stock in this source (as obviously the MI6 did), and argues that there is little doubt al-Dabbagh is telling the truth. Saddam did indeed have WMDs, but very primitive delivery systems that only made them useful on a battlefield, and hardly so against coalition troops which were highly prepared for such weapons. The conservative newspaper also says that this only half-way restores Blair's credibility on this issue. Many interpreted the 45-minute claim to mean British forces on Cyprus or even in Britian could be targeted by these weapons, and the government did nothing to correct this impression. Mr Blair's exaggerations and misrepresentations were unnecessary, because there is no doubt that, in the context of the global war on terror, and of al-Qaeda's determination to obtain weapons of mass destruction with which to terrorise the West, Saddam posed a clear threat. Contrary to the claims of those who said it was "inconceivable" that religious fanatics from al-Qaeda could ever make common cause with Saddam and his supporters, precisely that has happened since the Americans liberated Iraq from his grip. There were good reasons for going to war with Iraq. But protecting British bases or cities from missiles launched by Saddam Hussein was not one of them. Exaggarations were certainly present on both sides of the issue, on both sides of the Atlantic. 3:16:00 PM    comment []  trackback []

McBride: Open source "unconstitutional" Darl McBride, CEO of the SCO, continues his crusade against the open source movement and Linux, this time in the form of an "open letter" that really makes me wonder if the man is totally sane. You see, in McBride's world, open source and the General Public License (GPL) is evil, un-American and literally unconstitutional. I am not joking. He argues that since the constitution gives Congress authority to protect works through copyrights, it is unconstitutional to use what is called, somewhat tongue-in-cheek, copyleft. The GPL "copyleft" essentially says that you can use other people's source code in your own projects, provided that you, too, distribute your own source code incorporating open source under the same agreement. McBride doesn't realise, or he flat out lies, when he argues that the GPL is a violation of copyright laws. On the contrary, it relies on copyright law, or it would be impossible to enforce the GPL. It is just a system where the creator, the copyright owner, instead of selling the software to people, distributes it under a license that promotes open software. If you make a piece of software, you have the right to give it away, don't you? I mean, it's yours, so you should be able to decide what people do with it. According to McBride, you don't! If you don't sell it commercially, you are un-American and you violate the Constitution, the SCO boss argues. Contrary to what everybody thought until now, copyright doesn't protect ownership rights, in McBride's world it limits your choices to sell all your code commercially. Law professor Lawrence Lessig has taken great offense at McBride's distortions of law and deliberate distortions. Unlike me, Dr Lessig actually knows a bit about copyright and intellectual property. 4:27:48 AM    comment []  trackback []

Terrorists had a weapon of mass destruction US federal authorites discovered a sodium cyanide bomb, along with large amounts of weapons and other explosives and chemicals, with a domestic terrorist group  Three people, William J. Krar, his common law wife Judith Bruey and Edward Feltus were arrested last spring in connection with the poison gas bomb and various other issues. So why has not this story made big news? Well, this was a group of right wing extremists, not Islamic terrorists. The would-be terrorists were apparently ideologically related to Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber. Edward Feltus was a member of the New Jersey Militia. The press has paid little interest, but federal authorities surely took it seriously, even though they stumbled over this by accident. Since the attacks of September 11, 2001, counter-terrorism agencies have been consumed by national efforts to ferret out U.S.-based foreign terrorist cells whose members hail from the Middle East. Federal investigators were not looking for white supremacist groups when they stumbled across Krar by accident. He drew the FBI’s attention when he sent a package of counterfeit ID’s for the United Nations and Defense Intelligence Agency to Feltus’ New Jersey home earlier this year. The package was mistakenly delivered to a Staten Island man, who opened it and called police. A note found inside and signed by Krar stated, “Hope this package gets to you O.K. We would hate to have this fall into the wrong hands.” The discovery led to surveillance operations in and around Tyler, and then search warrants that turned up the Sodium cyanide bomb and other illegal weapons at locations controlled by Krar. I hope this lucky break leads to more surveillance being directed at these lunatics. 1:11:41 AM    comment []  trackback []

© Copyright 2004 Jan Haugland. Last update: 01.01.2004; 02:46:27.