| |
|
29. mai 2006
|
|
My old article debunking British MP Michael Meacher's 9/11 conspiracy theories gets a bit of traffic every day. One of the more, eh, interesting references recently can be found on this British conspiracy discussion board. Often, at least one or two sane people tend to hang around such places for the fun of it, but judging by that thread at least, every one of them is a certified tin foil hat wearing loon.
Stringing together even a half sane attempt at dealing with any evidence is obviously way beyond them. The individual posting the link, with the telltale nick Dr Hemp, writes this crushing rebuttal:
We must be really getting to them! Mind you, if the Guardian says Michael Meacher is a crackpot, then I suppose it must be true!
Well, at least we don't have to inquire what he has been smoking!
The thread goes through a long debate about which extreme left groups are really fronts for the MI5 (essentially all of them, needless to say), and ends with this hilarious comparison which I'm not sure Mr Meacher would appreciate that much:
This is nothing new; the same thing happened to David Icke; rubishing his reputation to discreit him. [sic]
David Icke, now that's a character. Nobody in the world could do anything to discredit him that he hasn't already done to himself.
9:12:14 PM 
|
|
The extremist behaviour of so-called animal rights activists has had a profound effect on public opinion in the UK: A clear majority now supports experiments on animals and have developed a healthy distaste for the activists.
Extremist behaviour by animal rights protesters has had the effect of increasing public support for testing new medical treatments on animals, a poll for The Daily Telegraph has found.
The proportion of people who approve of animal testing is now at an all-time high and more than three quarters believe that the more fanatical activists can justifiably be defined as "terrorists".
More that 70 per cent said they accepted that experimentation on animals was sometimes essential because alternative methods were unavailable.
Earlier, the public was more or less evenly divided on the subject.
5:44:26 PM
|
|
Pentagon wants to equip intercontinental ballistic missiles with conventional warheads, permitting the US to hit targets anywhere within one hour, presidential approval included.
The Pentagon plan calls for deploying a new nonnuclear warhead atop the submarine-launched Trident II missile that could be used to attack terrorist camps, enemy missile sites, suspected caches of biological, chemical or nuclear weapons and other potentially urgent threats, military officials say.
If fielded, it would be the only nonnuclear weapon designed for rapid strikes against targets thousands of miles away and would add to the United States' options when considering a pre-emptive attack.
Gen. James E. Cartwright, the chief of the United States Strategic Command, said the system would enhance the Pentagon's ability to "pre-empt conventionally" and precisely while limiting the "collateral damage." The program would cost an estimated half a billion dollars over five years, and the Pentagon is seeking $127 million in its current spending request to Congress to begin work.
But the plan has run into resistance from lawmakers who are concerned that it may increase the risk of an accidental nuclear confrontation. The Trident II missile that would be used for the attacks is a system that has long been equipped with a nuclear payload.
The obvious issue is that Russia or China could think it is a nuclear weapon, and react accordingly.
Now, you may think this problem could be easily resolved by the US President picking up the phone and notifying his counterparts that a conventional ballistic missile with some unlucky jihadis's name on it had just been launched.
That is well and fine in times of reasonable stability between the nuclear powers, like now. But assume the incident takes place in a time of mutual distrust, which is not very hard to imagine. Still, the President notifies China's and Russia's leaders. However, distrustful military commanders in, say, China, point out to their political leaders that this would be precisely the expected tactic a US president would choose for a devastating nuclear first strike, to mislead the enemy until it was too late.
So while I understand the desire for another toy in the toolbox, this has to be considered very carefully.
5:26:43 PM
|
|
The full scale of the calamity that hit Java is beginning to appear.
Survivors of an earthquake that killed more than 4,600 people on Indonesia's island of Java are spending a second night outdoors.
Driving rain has forced some to return to the rubble of their homes.
Many bodies are still thought to be trapped under debris and rescuers say the odds of finding survivors are slim.
An aid operation is gathering speed in the worst-hit areas around Yogyakarta, where 20,000 people are said to have been hurt and 200,000 left homeless.
A massive relief operation is in process, but as always, time is short for many of the survivors.
1:25:16 AM
|
|
Mark Steyn is not impressed with the republicans in Congress.
Of all the many marvelous Ronald Reagan lines, this is my favorite: ''We are a nation that has a government -- not the other way around.'' [...]
Which current member of the Republican Party's creme de la creme could utter that Reagan line and mean it? Take the speaker of the House, J. Dennis Hastert. [...]
So what does Hastert do? He and the House Republican leadership intervene in the case on behalf of the Democrat: They're strenuously objecting to the FBI having the appalling lese majeste to go to court, obtain a warrant and search Jefferson's office. In constitutional terms, they claim it violates the separation of powers. In political terms, they're climbing right into the Frigidaire with Jefferson's crisp chilled billfold. What does the Republican base's despair with Congress boil down to? That the Gingrich revolutionaries have turned into the pampered potentates of pre-1994 Washington, a remote insulated arrogant elite interested only in protecting the privileges of the permanent governing class. But how best to confirm it? Hmm. What about if we send the Republican speaker out to argue that congressmen are beyond the jurisdiction of U.S. law-enforcement agencies?
After all, the GOP's 1994 Contract with America stated pretty plainly that henceforth "all laws that apply to the rest of the country also apply equally to the Congress."
But that was a long time ago, wasn't it?
Reminds me of the transformation of the ruling pigs in Orwell's Animal Farm. The surprise is probably if anyone expected differently. Maybe Norwegian voters have gotten it right by voting in a new majority every four years no matter how well the government has performed. Sort of limits how much damage the elected can do.
1:22:24 AM
|
|
|
© Copyright 2006 Jan Haugland.
Last update: 01.06.2006; 21:18:14.
|
|
|
