Tanks have been reported according to The Spirit of Man
Saturday, June 20, 2009
NASA Explanation: The Universe is expanding gradually now. But its initial expansion was almost impossibly rapid as it likely grew from quantum scale fluctuations in a trillionth of a second. In fact, this cosmological scenario, known as Inflation, is now reported to be further quantified by an analysis of three years of data from the WMAP spacecraft. WMAP's instruments detect the cosmic microwave background radiation - the afterglow light from the early Universe. WMAP's amazing success in exploring the first trillionth of a second and favoring specific inflationary scenarios lies in its ability to make unprecedented, precise measurements of the properties of the microwave background. The subtle properties are distilled from conditions in the early Universe and related to its first moments of existence. Schematically, this diagram traces the 13.7 billion year (plus a trillionth of a second ...) history of the Universe from the quantum scale to the formation of stars, galaxies, planets, and WMAP.
On Thursday, a federal judge ruled that the group Arabic Christian Perspective can be prohibited from passing out literature on public sidewalks at an upcomming ethnic festival.
From the Detroit News:
A federal judge sided with the city of Dearborn on Thursday in a dispute with a Christian group over the distribution of religious literature during an upcoming Arab festival.William Becker, a lawyer for ACP said in a memo to Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch:
U.S. District Judge Nancy Edmunds denied a motion from the California-based ministry, Arabic Christian Perspective, for a temporary restraining order that would have prohibited the city from restricting the group from handing out literature, according to a release from the group's attorneys.
no other citizen is ordered to restrict what he or she can say or hand to another person. This is content-based discrimination against a Christian group, whose mission is to peaceably bring the good news of salvation to people attending the Festival.Judge Edmunds (photo) is generally regarded as a staunch liberal, who often sides with the ACLU in most cases, and in defense of the rights of criminals over those victimized by crime. She's best known for having ruled in favor of a class action lawsuit brought by a New York-based Foster Care association against alleged abuse in Michigan's system. The group argued against placing foster children with relatives. The suit ended up costing the State millions.
ACP will now be treated as second-class citizens, forced to pass out their DVDs and booklets around the corner from the Festival, while other groups will be able to freely distribute their materials.
ACP is not there to criticize Muslims. They are there to do the good work of evangelizing, which might be perceived as threatening activity in a city boasting the highest per capita population of Muslims in the nation.
Dearborn Mayor Jack O'Reilly (photo), sided with the Festival organizers against the Christian group. O'Reilly is a Democrat who was a close ally of ex-Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick. He is also rumored to have close ties to indicted tax evader Talal Khalil Chahine. The owner of a chain of Arabic restaurats called La Shish, Cahine is alleged to have funneled millions from his business enterprises to Hezbollah in the Middle East. (Source: Detroit Free Press)
Attorney Becker vows that the lawsuit will proceed and that he and ACP will "seek an order permanently enjoining the city from violating ACP's First Amendment rights."
Friday, June 19, 2009
The below is taken from The Spirit of Man
Updated @ 3am ET: Iranian regime supreme dictator Khamenei will be leading the Tehran's Friday prayer in a few hours. Today is the 'Make or Break' day for the people of Iran and the regime. I can't see Rafsanjani, Khatami and Karoubi among the VIP row.
Updated @ 4:35am ET: Listening to supreme dictator Khamenei's speech on CNN now. So far he is appealing to the nation to calm down. Yet he knows, by examples he gave from Islamic history, that his regime is under pressure. Though I admit he sounds confident. (Maybe he knows Mousavi is not a direct threat to his own existence and he's certain he can find a way to settle this down with him). 4:39 am: He's appealing to the hidden 12th Imam. The first sermon was VERY SHORT. 2nd sermon just began. 4:41 am ET: There he goes. Exaggerating... LoL. He is trying to say every vote people did cast was a vote for the regime (that's why people should not participate in regime's political games). And now he's slamming "Democracies". This man is no democrat. He is an evil murderer.
4:48am ET: He just recognized the riff between the factions (Which is not new. We all knew it). He's now claiming the election as a victory for the regime again. What's a religious democracy?
4:51 am: god bless the enemies of Iran. What would mullahs do without these so-called enemies? LoL - And now he's talking about lack of trust in regime among the people. And he knows people mistrust him and his dictatorship. He acknowledges that people don't trust him and his minions. And now he says a regime that has lost the trust of its people is a goner. 4:55 am: 3rd point of his sermon is about the 'robust debate' among the candidates. 4:56 am: Khamenei just called the media 'dirty Zionists'. And now he's defending Ahmadinejad. He called him 'trusted'. And now he's praising the candidates as part of the Iranian regime's establishment. He says they all belong to the regime. 5:02 am ET: Khamenei is slamming the Zionists, tricky Americans and dirty Brits. He is also openly admitting to the infighting within the regime. Khamenei is not addressing any of the opposition's problems so far. 5:05 am ET: He is now saying indirectly that the "DEBATE" should not last any longer. Khamenei said if it lasts any longer, it will result in 'hatred'. 5:12 am: Khamenei criticized the emotional charge of the TV debates. He's blaming both camps for the ongoing problems. But he's now defending Ahmadinejad openly. He is also defending Rafsanjani but he just left the door to investigate the corruption charges of Rafsanjani's family.
5:16 am: He admits to several differences between himself and Rafsanjani. He just picked the side of Ahmadinejad against Rafsanjani. People shouting : "Death to anti Velayate Faghih people". 5:24 am ET: Khamenei says there was no vote rigging. He says there's no way 11 mln votes were stolen or faked. And now is calling for legal ways. He just said he won't budge to 'illegal pressure'. He announced he won't approve 'illegal challenges' either. This is an ultimatum to the protesters.
5:28 am: Khamenei is now threatening the political figures. Khamenei is now warning the opposition that they'll be responsible for violence and bloodshed if they go farther. 5:34 am ET: Now calling protesters 'terrorists'? Khamenei wants an END TO STREET RALLIES & threatened the protesters with more consequences.
5:37 am: Khamenei said budging under pressure is dictatorship. He is again threatening the heads of the opposition. He says people should try the 'kinder' way and saying if people go another way, then I'll be more blunt. 5:41 am: He's now taking a jab at the US and EU governments. I think he's trying to link the protests to the foreign governments now.
5:50 am et: Khamenei is saying Iran is no Georgia and there'll be no velvet revolution in this country. Now giving food to the stupid leftists in the western world... saying Iraq war is against human rights. Now criticizing Hillary Clinton and her husband for Waco incident. Khamenei says the Iranian govt is the defender of 'human rights' around the world. 5:51 am ET: He is now basically saying that he is willing to give his life to defend the revolution & Islamic state.
-----My gut feelings: I predict Tiananmen Square in Iran
A couple charged with manslaughter claim they were within their constitutional rights when they decided to pray for their 15-month old daughter rather than take her to a doctor to treat her pneumonia.
But legal experts believe that Carl and Raylene Worthington will likely have a difficult time arguing freedom of religion over the state’s duty to protect children from harm.
The "Supreme Leader" refuses to grant a re-vote or even a recount and threatens a violent bloody crackdown on protesters.....of course the entire time blaming the media, America and the evil joos for the uprising while leading a lovely sing along of "death to America."
“Power kills; absolute power kills absolutely…. The more power a government has, the more it can act arbitrarily according to the whims and desires of the elite…” (Death by Government, R. J. Rummel)
[Quote from debate]
At this point the usual litany of "straw man" arguments proceeded to spill forth as they normally do when ones precious bumper-sticker beliefs are challenged and shown to be vacuous. The next thing out of Felicia's mouth was that organized religion has killed more people and started more wars than any other reason in history. This is where I cringed -- a teacher that is charged with children who makes such false claims is a red-flag to me. These types of people repeat such lines not because they have studied history or religion in-depth, but because a politically motivated historian like Howard Zinn or Noam Chomskey said such a thing, or they simply picked up the saying from another friend (who themselves had heard it from another) and it fit so well in their theophobia framework to make the rejection of religion an easy thing in their mind's eye. This is more of a commentary on said person's psychosis than making any sort of valid argument. This being said let us deal with this charge:
- e) The Bible does not teach the horrible practices that some have committed in its name. It is true that it's possible that religion can produce evil, and generally when we look closer at the details it produces evil because the individual people [Christians] are actually living in rejection of the tenets of Christianity and a rejection of the God that they are supposed to be following. So it [religion] can produce evil, but the historical fact is that outright rejection of God and institutionalizing of atheism (non-religious practices) actually does produce evil on incredible levels. We're talking about tens of millions of people as a result of the rejection of God. For example: the Inquisitions, Crusades, Salem Witch Trials killed about anywhere from 40,000 to 80,000 persons combined (World Book Encyclopedia and Encyclopedia Americana), and the church is liable for the unjustified murder of about (taking the high number here) 300,000-women over about a 300 year period. A blight on Christianity? Certainty. Something wrong? Dismally wrong. A tragedy? Of course. Millions and millions of people killed? No. The numbers are tragic, but pale in comparison to the statistics of what non-religious criminals have committed); the Chinese regime of Mao Tse Tung, 60 million [+] dead (1945-1965), Stalin and Khrushchev, 66 million dead (USSR 1917-1959), Khmer Rouge (Cambodia 1975-1979) and Pol Pot, one-third of the populations dead, etc, etc. The difference here is that these non-God movements are merely living out their worldview, the struggle for power, survival of the fittest and all that, no evolutionary/naturalistic natural law is being violated in other words (as non-theists reduce everything to natural law -- materialism). However, and this is key, when people have misused the Christian religion for personal gain, they are in direct violation to what Christ taught, as well as Natural Law.
So the historical reality that this teacher of history seemed to ignore is that non-religious movements have killed more people in the Twentieth-Century than religion has in the previous nineteen (or for that matter, all of mankind's history). I also pointed out to Felicia during our conversation that the non-religious view of origins has no moral law to point to any of the above acts as morally wrong or un-ethical. They are merely currently taboo. For someone to say the Nazis were morally wrong they have to borrow from the theistic worldview that posits a universal moral code. If there is no Divine moral law, then as Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s maxim makes the point, "If there is no God, all things are permissible." Without an absolute ethical norm, morality is reduced to mere preference and the world is a jungle where might makes right.
Monica Conyers is
Detroit: Conyers Offered Plea in Corruption Case
Monica Conyers debates school children
Obama Clueless on Iran By Charles Krauthammer
WASHINGTON -- Millions of Iranians take to the streets to defy a theocratic dictatorship that, among its other finer qualities, is a self-declared enemy of America and the tolerance and liberties it represents. The demonstrators are fighting on their own, but they await just a word that America is on their side.
And what do they hear from the president of the United States? Silence. Then, worse. Three days in, the president makes clear his policy: continued "dialogue" with their clerical masters.
Dialogue with a regime that is breaking heads, shooting demonstrators, expelling journalists, arresting activists. Engagement with -- which inevitably confers legitimacy upon -- leaders elected in a process that begins as a sham (only four handpicked candidates permitted out of 476) and ends in overt rigging.
Then, after treating this popular revolution as an inconvenience to the real business of Obama-Khamanei negotiations, the president speaks favorably of "some initial reaction from the Supreme Leader that indicates he understands the Iranian people have deep concerns about the election."
Where to begin? "Supreme Leader"? Note the abject solicitousness with which the American president confers this honorific on a clerical dictator who, even as his minions attack demonstrators, offers to examine some returns in some electoral districts -- a farcical fix that will do nothing to alter the fraudulence of the election.
Moreover, this incipient revolution is no longer about the election. Obama totally misses the point. The election allowed the political space and provided the spark for the eruption of anti-regime fervor that has been simmering for years and awaiting its moment. But people aren't dying in the street because they want a recount of hanging chads in suburban Isfahan. They want to bring down the tyrannical, misogynist, corrupt theocracy that has imposed itself with the very baton-wielding goons that today attack the demonstrators.
This started out about election fraud. But like all revolutions, it has far outgrown its origins. What's at stake now is the very legitimacy of this regime -- and the future of the entire Middle East.
This revolution will end either as a Tiananmen (a hot Tiananmen with massive and bloody repression or a cold Tiananmen with a finer mix of brutality and co-optation) or as a true revolution that brings down the Islamic Republic.
The latter is improbable but, for the first time in 30 years, not impossible. Imagine the repercussions. It would mark a decisive blow to Islamist radicalism, of which Iran today is not just standard-bearer and model, but financier and arms supplier. It would do to Islamism what the collapse of the Soviet Union did to communism -- leave it forever spent and discredited.
In the region, it would launch a second Arab spring. The first in 2005 -- the expulsion of Syria from Lebanon, first elections in Iraq and early liberalization in the Gulf states and Egypt -- was aborted by a fierce counterattack from the forces of repression and reaction, led and funded by Iran.
Now, with Hezbollah having lost elections in Lebanon and with Iraq establishing the institutions of a young democracy, the fall of the Islamist dictatorship in Iran would have an electric and contagious effect. The exception -- Iraq and Lebanon -- becomes the rule. Democracy becomes the wave. Syria becomes isolated; Hezbollah and Hamas, patronless. The entire trajectory of the region is reversed.
All hangs in the balance. The Khamenei regime is deciding whether to do a Tiananmen. And what side is the Obama administration taking? None. Except for the desire that this "vigorous debate" (press secretary Robert Gibbs' disgraceful euphemism) over election "irregularities" not stand in the way of U.S.-Iranian engagement on nuclear weapons.
Even from the narrow perspective of the nuclear issue, the administration's geopolitical calculus is absurd. There is zero chance that any such talks will denuclearize Iran. On Monday, Ahmadinejad declared yet again that the nuclear "file is shut, forever." The only hope for a resolution of the nuclear question is regime change, which (if the successor regime were as moderate as pre-Khomeini Iran) might either stop the program, or make it manageable and nonthreatening.
That's our fundamental interest. And our fundamental values demand that America stand with demonstrators opposing a regime that is the antithesis of all we believe.
And where is our president? Afraid of "meddling." Afraid to take sides between the head-breaking, women-shackling exporters of terror -- and the people in the street yearning to breathe free. This from a president who fancies himself the restorer of America's moral standing in the world.
What did Bush say? The "Axis of Evil?" Well, President George W. Bush, author of the "axis of evil" concept, toppled Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq, but got nowhere containing Iran and North Korea, either with policies of rigid isolation or, later, multilateral diplomacy.
Now, with Iran's uranium enrichment centrifuges spinning and North Korea testing both nuclear weapons and missiles, it's Obama's turn - and top aides are fully aware that the two challenges are linked. "Whatever we do with respect to North Korea is going to be closely watched by Iran," a senior White House aide told me.... (Mort Kondracke - Real Clear Politics)
Thursday, June 18, 2009
In this clip, a caller (a conspiratorial anti-Semite) to the Michael Medved Show tries to trip up Paul Wolfowitz on Iraq and Weapons of Mass Destruction. Throughout the video I will post some "factoids" and photos that support Wolfowitz and makes the caller look shallow in his knowledge about what he is calling about:
I wanted to rearrange previously posted information that may help the continuing politico in his refuting of "Bumper Sticker Mantras."
Relief Web is the global hub for time-critical humanitarian information on Complex Emergencies and Natural Disasters connected with the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. They reported in an article, "Iraq sends 20 planeloads of aid to Syrian victims of dam collapse," the following on June 9th, 2002:
I know this might be hard to believe, but... I call BS. Saddam Hussein said those 20 planeloads contained “humanitarian aid” while he was under U.N. Sanctions and he didn’t have enough food for his own people who dies of malnutrition and lack of medical assistance. But he had enough to send 20 planeloads of “humanitarian aid” to Syria?! Come on. Three news items support this theory/model that these "humanitarian flights" were something else:
2) The man who served as the no. 2 official in Saddam
Here is an interview with General Sada from the Hannity & Colmes show:
3) AMMAN, Jordan (CNN) -- Jordanian authorities said Monday they have broken up an alleged al Qaeda plot that would have unleashed a deadly cloud of chemicals in the heart of Jordan's capital, Amman.
By-the-by Al-Zarqawi was killed by Coalition Forces June 7, 2006, in Iraq.
Often times people don't follow their logic to the end... for instance, on MSNBC Mike Barnicle simply repeated these "sentiments" (the feeling that he is right based off of his feelings). Sit back, grab some popcorn and enjoy the show:
One thing I have heard and gave an example of is the Left saying and truly believing that Bush lied about WMDs. If this is the case, what about these other politicians?
If Bush lied about WMDs, then what did Clinton do when he said:
Or how about Madeline Albright, John F. Kerry, Ted Kennedy, and the like?
- "Iraq is a long way from the USA but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." ~ Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Feb. 18, 1998
- "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." ~ Former Vice President Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
- "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." ~ Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct. 10, 2002
- "Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real." ~ Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23, 2003
- "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." ~ Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
- "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." ~ Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
- "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." ~ Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
- "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." ~ Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
How about the fact that Mahdi Obeidi (Saddam's head nuclear scientist) buried a prototype of his gas centrifuge, the most direct and efficient route to enriching uranium, in his backyard in Baghdad. Hence the name of his book, Bomb in My Garden.
This next section comes from a Daily News article found in their Sunday Viewpoint entitled, “Altered Reality: Look Past The Dogma and You’ll See the WMDs” (October 26, 2003, p. 3):
- A clandestine network of laboratories and safe houses within the Iraqi Intelligence Service that contained equipment subject to UN monitoring and suitable for continuing CBW research.
- A prison laboratory complex, possibly used in human testing of BW agents, that Iraqi officials working to prepare for UN inspections were explicitly ordered not to declare to the UN.
- Reference strains of biological organisms concealed in a scientist's home, one of which can be used to produce biological weapons.
- New research on BW-applicable agents, Brucella and Congo Crimean Hemorrhagic Fever (CCHF), and continuing work on ricin and aflatoxin were not declared to the UN.
- Documents and equipment, hidden in scientists' homes, that would have been useful in resuming uranium enrichment by centrifuge and electromagnetic isotope separation (EMIS).
- A line of UAVs not fully declared at an undeclared production facility and an admission that they had tested one of their declared UAVs out to a range of 500 km, 350 km beyond the permissible limit.
- Continuing covert capability to manufacture fuel propellant useful only for prohibited SCUD variant missiles, a capability that was maintained at least until the end of 2001 and that cooperating Iraqi scientists have said they were told to conceal from the UN.
- Plans and advanced design work for new long-range missiles with ranges up to at least 1000 km - well beyond the 150 km range limit imposed by the UN. Missiles of a 1000 km range would have allowed Iraq to threaten targets throughout the Middle East, including Ankara, Cairo, and Abu Dhabi.
- Clandestine attempts between late-1999 and 2002 to obtain from North Korea technology related to 1,300 km range ballistic missiles --probably the No Dong -- 300 km range anti-ship cruise missiles, and other prohibited military equipment.
I can also add here that 750 shells with saran gas were found. Just 15 of these killed about 15,000 people. Only in the Left's vernacular does this equal no WMDs. Scurrilous politics on display if there ever were. Two things come to my mind, and they are two slogans I heard all the time.
- Bush is an Idiot;
- and, Bush lied.
Apparently, Bush, while being called a dunce or ignoramus by the left is so intelligently diabolical that he got every intelligence agency - not to mention every Democrat - to lie for him as well. So is Bush still the "dunce of the class," as the Left paints him; or is he so intelligent that he fooled the world, as the Left paints him. Which is it? Or are both views partisan? And if Bush lied, then he must have known there were no weapons in Iraq. There is no such thing as a lie unless you know the truth. Now, if you say you believe something to be true, and it ultimately becomes false, that's not called a "lie," that's called a "mistake" – a mistake made by the CIA (and the world) that was beyond the Bush's control. However, I have shown there was no mistake. I have yet for someone to show me that this cumulative case can be taken from its lofty place here at my blog. And may I say that I have not seen such a case made yet on this World Wide Web.
Let's hear how the above issues play out in real conversation, and I would entreat the reader to listen to the entire call. One may not like the term "little girl," but this gets explained near the end.
There are other peripheral issues that I have already dealt with that touch this issue in some way, like yellow cake uranium, or the cost of the war and contracts given to Halliburton. However, these issues are easily dismissed, at least for those that do not project their psychoses onto Bush and Cheney.