#6
Nutritionally, hemp is full of very high-test oil that would probably be very good for the cows. For vegetable oil, it is almost as rich as tropical oils. Cow digestion is an art unto itself, though, so it's hard to tell what is best for Elsie.
And, best of all, he was a hero in real life, too. God bless you, Mr. Doohan!
James Doohan, the burly chief engineer of the Starship Enterprise in the original "Star Trek" TV series and motion pictures who responded to the command "Beam me up, Scotty," died early Wednesday. He was 85. Doohan died at 5:30 a.m. at his Redmond, Wash., home with his wife of 28 years, Wende, at his side, Los Angeles agent and longtime friend Steve Stevens said. The cause of death was pneumonia and Alzheimer's disease, he said.
...At 19, James escaped the turmoil at home by joining the Canadian army, becoming a lieutenant in artillery. He was among the Canadian forces that landed on Juno Beach on D-Day. "The sea was rough," he recalled. "We were more afraid of drowning than the Germans."
The Canadians crossed a minefield laid for tanks; the soldiers weren't heavy enough to detonate the bombs. At 11:30 that night, he was machine-gunned, taking six hits: one that took off his middle right finger (he managed to hide the missing finger on the screen), four in his leg and one in the chest. Fortunately the chest bullet was stopped by his silver cigarette case.
#9
Don't beam me aboard just yet, Scotty, I have more RB comments to make.
Posted by: Captain America ||
07/20/2005 13:31 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Awwww. RIP, Scotty.
The original Star Trek seems hokey on TV now, but it sure shaped a couple of generations, didn't it?
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
07/20/2005 13:35 Comments ||
Top||
#11
I always hoped for the day that Scotty, after the inevitable order from Capt. Kirk to fix the dilithium mega turbo muffler bearing in 30 minutes, would tell him in his beautiful brogue "Well, it won't get done then, will it!?"
#12
Scotty was always my favorite character. When I was a kid, Star Trek got me into science fiction, which got me interested in science. Scotty inspired me to go into engineering, so I could design warp drives.
(True geek confessions: I went to a Star Trek convention once, got his autograph, and told him the above, minus the warp drive part.)
Well, obviously, that came to naught, but I got a physics PhD out of the deal.
I read his autobiography, and the only thing I remember offhand is that at one point Monty was watching him drill his men and told him, "good voice".
It hasn't been very long since he was diagnosed with Alzheimers. I'm glad he didn't have to suffer with it long.
#15
..Wondering if anyone remembers his last appearance as Scotty, in a terriffic Next Gen episode that ended with him sailing off to explore the Universe - that's how I'm going to remember him.
And as far as a toast, I've got something here - not sure what it is...but it's green.
God bless you, Mister Doohan.
Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski ||
07/20/2005 19:29 Comments ||
Top||
#16
incredible... every time I've seen this thread, I teared up. I'm such a puss. God speed, James
Posted by: Frank G ||
07/20/2005 19:52 Comments ||
Top||
#17
You want tears, Frank? I just heard on Entertainment Tonight that they are going to launch his ashes into space during a mission.
I hope they remember the bagpipes.
Posted by: Steve ||
07/20/2005 20:55 Comments ||
Top||
#18
God bless 'em, he was an actor's actor.
Posted by: Ernest Brown ||
07/20/2005 20:55 Comments ||
Top||
#19
Christ, Steve...don't do that to me. Amazing Grace on bagpipes and I'll lose it
Posted by: Frank G ||
07/20/2005 21:16 Comments ||
Top||
#20
/agree with Frank G.
Scotty got me into engineering. He was the first one to make being a "proto-geek" cool.
Additionally he was a good man - read up about his life post-Star-Trek, a genuine good guy.
And on top of that, a war hero - 1st day, Normandy, taking 6 MG rounds... Wow. Such a full life.
James Montgomery (Scott) Doohan, The world is a better place for you having been here - and a slice of what makes it good went with you today.
Remote-controlled robot jockeys made their debut Monday as camel riders in the United Arab Emirates, competing in a trial race after the Gulf Arab state tightened a ban on child jockeys. Robots weighing up to 33 pounds were dressed in the clothes of human jockeys during the race held in the capital Abu Dhabi, which officials described as "successful," the WAM news agency reported.
Earlier this month the UAE outlawed using children under 18 in camel races, a practice condemned internationally as a form of slavery, raising the age limit from 16. The UAE and neighboring Qatar, which has also banned child camel jockeys, want to replace them with robot riders that receive orders from an instructor via a remote control system on the back of the camel. UAE officials plan to order up to 10,000 robots from Asian countries and Japan at the cost of about $2,000 each.
Rights groups have said that several thousand boys, some as young as four, work as jockeys in the lucrative sport in the oil-rich state. They say many children, mainly from poor Asian countries, had been abducted or sold by their families and that the boys were kept in prison-like conditions and underfed to keep them light so the camels run faster. ....
Posted by: Mike Sylwester ||
07/20/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11134 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Oh quit complaininng R2. When they spit.... Just duck...
Posted by: ed ||
07/20/2005 16:45 Comments ||
Top||
#4
The Saudi government also introduced a robot King to replace the now ailing Saudi ruler. The robot king is currently under development by Pixar studios, and will be brought on line in late 2008.
Saudis are demanding a "kill the infidel" switch that can be turned on or off depending on how many American "allies" or oil executives are in the room with the robot.
A prototype of the new Royal robot, nick named Kimmy, is currently being tested in North Korea.
Two Chinese diplomats, Chen Yonglin and Hao Fengjun, who are trying to obtain political asylum in Australia, have provided details of Chinaâs international espionage effort. Nothing surprising in what they described. The Chinese use three types of spies. They have a few hundred professional spies, the James Bond types, but use them sparingly. They have a much larger number of part timers, semi-professionals, actually. These are usually business people who are willing to obtain information or items that the government wants, and will do it legally, or otherwise. If the latter, they expect the payoff to be commensurate with the risk. Lastly, there are hundreds of thousands of Chinese citizens overseas who have been approached by the government and urged to try and bring back something useful. This group is not encouraged to do anything illegal, but is made to realize that the government will repay a favor (a valuable find) with a favor from the government. In China, with itâs corrupt bureaucracy, and communist officials still running the place, such favors can be more valuable than money.
The system China is using, called âa thousand grains of sand,â is nothing new. Other nations have used similar systems for centuries. What is unusual is the scale of the Chinese effort. The Chinese intelligence bureaucracy inside China is huge, with nearly 100,000 people working just to keep track of the many Chinese overseas, and what they could, or should, to trying to grab for the motherland.
Chinese intelligence officials try to have a talk with Chinese students and business people before they leave the country to study or do business, and after they come back. The people going to the West are asked to bring back anything that might âhelp the motherland.â Most of these people were not asked to actually act as spies, but simply to share, with Chinese government officials (who were not always identified as intelligence personnel) whatever information they obtained. Of course, it soon became open knowledge in China, and in American intelligence agencies, what was going on.
China has never been energetic at enforcing intellectual property laws. If a Chinese student came back with valuable technical information (obtained in a classroom, in a job, or simply while socializing), the data was often passed on to Chinese companies, or military organizations, that could use it. Since there were few individual Chinese bringing back a lot of data, or material (CDs full of technical data, or actual components or devices), it was difficult for the foreign counterintelligence agencies to catch Chinese âspiesâ. There were thousands of them, and most were simply going back to China with secrets in their heads. How do you stop that?
Some of the more ambitious of these spies have been caught red handed with actual objects. But most of the swarm moved back to China unhindered. Naturally, the Chinese pushed their system as far as they could. Why not? There was little risk. The Chinese offered large cash rewards for Chinese who could get particularly valuable stuff back to China. Chinese intelligence looked on these "purchases" as strictly commercial transactions. If the Chinese âspiesâ got caught, they were on their own. The Chinese involved knew the rules. If they were successful, they won favor with the government, or even made a pile of money, and the Chinese government was agreeable to whatever business deals these "patriotic" Chinese tried to put together back in China. This kind of clout is important in China, where a âfriend in the governmentâ is more valuable than in the United States. But more and more of these ambitious Chinese agents are increasingly getting caught because it is becoming known, to the Western business and academic community, what is going on.
The Chinese are feeling the heat, not that they are in any danger of being cut off from opportunities to steal foreign technology. But the Chinese system has reached its limits, and is being pushed back in some areas. It is thought that the Chinese are responding by trying to terrorize overseas Chinese, at least those with family back in China, by threatening to make life uncomfortable for family members back in the old country if overseas Chinese if they do not assist the spying, or any other Chinese government activities. The Chinese have been discreet with this. The last thing they want is a lot of stories of heavy handed pressure on overseas Chinese. This is particularly the case when the pressure is on overseas Chinese who are anti-communist or simply opposed to polices of the Chinese government. Now that the public know more about Chinese espionage, the Chinese will probably adapt to the new environment as best they can.
Posted by: ed ||
07/20/2005 10:12 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11129 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Like sands through the hourglass, so are the Days of our Lives
#2
I still remember one of the first bunch of visiting Chinese Physics Profs brought to UNL in the late 70s. They were farmed out to live with locals. The CIA quickly figured out whom were the lightweights and therefore party handlers. They found themselves living in a commune of Militant Lesbians...
I still wonder what reports they took home about US society...
A joint operation between the FBI and Spanish police saw the arrest of 310 people in the Malaga area in connection with a EUR100m bogus lottery scam run by Nigerian gangs. The scam claimed at least 20,000 victims in 45 countries including Britain, France, Germany, the United States, Canada, Australia, Japan and a number of Arabic countries. The operation, codenamed Nile, centred on a gang which operated in the Malaga area of the Costa del Sol. The fraudsters were offering lottery prizes for bogus competitions sent most often by email.
Got plenty of those.
They also claimed to be paying out a legacy from an African dignitary through a functionary at a bank.
Got plenty of those too.
Four hundred officers from the Spanish police, the FBI and the US Postal Service were involved in the operation. Officers raided 166 homes in Málaga, Fuengirola, Benalmádena, Mijas, Torremolinos, Velez-Málaga and Marbella. It is the largest operation ever carried out against Nigerian and Libyan organised crime gangs.
My inbox is breathing a temporary sigh of relief. Hope they collect enough evidence to get the gangs in the mother country. And I wonder what other kinds of networks were run through those computers?
#5
Damm, you mean I didn't win the (insert country here) lottery? I must get 20 of those a day.
Posted by: Steve ||
07/20/2005 13:15 Comments ||
Top||
#6
This is horrible news! Now we're going to get a wave of spam asking for help from people trying smuggle millions in spammer cash out of Malaga!
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
07/20/2005 13:24 Comments ||
Top||
#7
you did, Steve, please fwd your checking account and ssn numbers so they can deposit your winnings directly (oh, and passwords too....)
Posted by: Frank G ||
07/20/2005 13:26 Comments ||
Top||
#8
20,000 victims! How many dumb people are there?
There's an old saying that for a con to work, the mark has to be somewhat dishonest himself. The real question is how many dumb, greedy people are there? Answer: like grains of sand on the beach.
Ima postulate there is a series of human that wants to be fooled, conned, bamboozled. You may get lucky, but you without doubt will get something to bitch about and hey! That's exciting too.
Ima postulate there is a series of human that wants to be fooled, conned, bamboozled. You may get lucky, but you without doubt will get something to bitch about and hey! That's exciting too.
#12
I inquired about the Nigerian spam with one of the federal agencies. I think it was the Secret Service. I was asksed to forward the Nigerian emails to a government mailbox. Not much happened that I could tell because it seemed like the emails came with greater enthusiasm and vigor. I then decided to just reply by saying "Fook you b_stard and by the way rot in hell."
FIGHT -- FROM THE RIGHT: COULTER SAYS BUSH PICK WRONG
"We donât know much about John Roberts. Stealth nominees have never turned out to be a pleasant surprise for conservatives. Never. Not ever... Oh, yeah...we know he's argued cases before the supreme court. big deal; so has Larry Flynt's attorney."
So declares conservative columnist Ann Coulter in a new dispatch set for release. Coulter continues: It means nothing that Roberts wrote briefs arguing for the repeal of Roe v. Wade when he worked for Republican administrations. He was arguing on behalf of his client, the United States of America. Roberts has specifically disassociated himself from those cases, dropping a footnote to a 1994 law review article that said:
âIn the interest of full disclosure, the author would like to point out that as Deputy Solicitor General for a portion of the 1992-93 Term, he was involved in many of the cases discussed below. In the interest of even fuller disclosure, he would also like to point out that his views as a commentator on those cases do not necessarily reflect his views as an advocate for his former client, the United States.â
This would have been the legal equivalent, after O.J.'s acquittal, of Johnnie Cochran saying, "hey, I never said the guy was innocent. I was just doing my job."
Well yeah, and it's the correct response. He's a lawyer representing his client. Anne's a smart woman, she should understand that.
And it makes no difference that conservatives in the White House are assuring us Roberts can be trusted. We got the exact same assurances from officials working for the last president Bush about David Hackett Souter. I believe their exact words were, "Read our lips; Souter's a reliable conservative."
From the theater of the absurd category, the Republican National Committeeâs âtalking pointsâ on Roberts provide this little tidbit: âIn the 1995 case of Barry v. Little, Judge Roberts arguedâfree of chargeâbefore the D.C. Court of Appeals on behalf of a class of the neediest welfare recipients, challenging a termination of benefits under the Districtâs Public Assistance Act of 1982.â I'm glad to hear the man has a steady work record, but how did this make it to the top of his resume?
Finally, lets ponder the fact that Roberts has gone through 50 years on this planet without ever saying anything controversial. Thatâs just unnatural. If a smart and accomplished person goes this long without expressing an opinion, they'd better be pursuing the Miss America title. and from powerline
Less reasonable, it seems to me, is Ann Coulter's complaint reported by Drudge that Roberts may not really be a conservative. Coulter cites the Souter debacle. But Souter was an unknown from New Hampshire whose conversatism was vouched for by John Sununu (conservative but a politician not an active lawyer) and Warren Rodman (not even a conservative). Roberts has been a player in Washington legal circles, including actively conservative ones, for two decades. He may not be as conservative as a few of the others who reportedly were on Bush's list. And a longer track record as a judge would have been nice. But it's unfair to suggest that Roberts is or will be anything like Souter. A comparison to Rehnquist would be far more apt. Indeed, while Coulter contends that "stealth" nominees "never" work out, I don't recall Rehnquist, plucked by Nixon from the Justice Department, having a more substantial track record than Roberts can point to. I respect Coulter, but really don't agree with everything she says. Things are already heated up and getting interesting.
#2
OOOOO, just found something kewl about Roberts.
âFriends of the courtâ supporting the terrorist included dozens of law professors, â305 United Kingdom and European Parliamentarians,â âMilitary Attorneys Detailed to Represent Ali Hamza Amhad Sulayman Al Bahlui,â âMilitary Law Practitioners and Academicians,â âNational Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers,â âHuman Rights First,â âGeneral Merrill A. McPeak,â âPeople for the American Way,â âThe World Organization for Human Rights USA,â âUrban Morgan Institute for Human Rightsââand, worst of all, the prestigious âAssociation of the Bar of the City of New York.â
Despite this array of âfriends,â the Court of Appeals panelâone of whom was John G. Roberts, Jr., President Bushâs nominee to the Supreme Courtâreversed Judge Robertson, rejecting his conclusion that Hamdan was covered by the Geneva Convention, which could be enforced in a United States federal court. Robertson had conveniently ignored the Supreme Court precedent of Johnson v. Eisentrager (which the current liberal Court majority massaged, in order to reach its conclusion in Rasul), which held that the Geneva Convention, a compact between governments, was not judicially enforceable in a private lawsuit. Period!
He was one of the justices that struck down the liberal view that the people in club Gitmo have a right to be tried as americans.
This WILL be going to the SCOTUS and guess who might be sitting on the bench then?
BREWHAHAHAHAHA!!!
#7
This WILL be going to the SCOTUS and guess who might be sitting on the bench then?
Sadly, I think he'd have to sit that case out if he was involved in the decision in a lower court.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
07/20/2005 13:26 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Why, Robert?
Not challenging, just curious.
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
07/20/2005 13:43 Comments ||
Top||
#9
IANAL, but he'd basically be sitting in review of his own decision. I'd think there's a conflict of interest there. Lawyers may have a different idea, though.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
07/20/2005 13:48 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Finally, lets ponder the fact that Roberts has gone through 50 years on this planet without ever saying anything controversial. Thatâs just unnatural.
Ann, he's a smart lawyer. That means he thinks before engaging his mouth. He may have said controversial things, but not on tape or in print. People with a long paper trail tend to be politicians, commentators and university professors. If you are not in that group, you don't have a record that can be used against you.
Posted by: Steve ||
07/20/2005 14:12 Comments ||
Top||
DNC chief Howard Dean joined liberal group MoveOn.org in claiming President Bush's nomination of John Roberts was an effort to deflect attention from Plamegate. Late Tuesday Dean issued a statement blasting the Roberts nomination while questioning the timing of the announcement. "Faced with a growing scandal surrounding the involvement of Deputy White House chief of Staff Karl Rove and Vice President Cheney's Chief of Staff Lewis Libby in leaking the identity of a covert CIA operative, President Bush announced his nomination of John Roberts to the Supreme Court late this evening," Dean's statement began...
#2
The donks have it bass ackwards. The Joe Plame Blame Game was just revved up by Rove to distract the press from the vetting of SCOTUS contenders by the WH. Now that we have a nominee, the Game will go into remission till Rove neds a distraction again, say just before the CJ nomination.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
07/20/2005 10:27 Comments ||
Top||
#3
All explanations must be based on a conspiracy these days in order to be fashionable.
Actually, I was thinking it a bit odd, the dem response. Very tepid. Would have thought they'd alrealdy be wailing and lashing themselves by now. Especially since this guy appears to be a conservative's conservative. Can't be too bad since the centerist lawyer blogs seem happy with him and that despite his supposed Roe v. Wade stance and anti-gay marriage stance. Either the Dems weren't prepared for him and need more time to rally his lynch mob -or-
they don't really mind him that much -or-
(my personal favorite) they know they've already lost the fight and are distracting their minions with the Plame Game so as not to expose their impotence -or
Or maybe he's a part of a homosexual, liberal, sleeper cell planted years ago for this very moment. conspiracy theoriese and black robes are so chic! Time will tell.
#5
The Dems get bored with their chewtoys quickly. Rove was going nowhere. Now they have Roberts to chew on. BTW, did anyone mention to Teddy Boy that yesterday was the anniversary of his dunking of Mary Jo at Chappaquiddick?
Posted by: Alaska Paul ||
07/20/2005 11:32 Comments ||
Top||
#6
CONSPIRACY THOERY
In his speech DNC Chairman Dean held up a photo of the sunrise, and stated that, "Bush has seen to it that the sun rose in the east again. If he has such a pipeline with God, then how did I get elected DNC chairman?"
#9
Joe Lieberman likes him. Apparantly,the President did canvass a few Senators about who they liked among his nominees.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
07/20/2005 12:13 Comments ||
Top||
#10
Crap like this is making it more and more embarrassing to admit that I was once a Democrat.
Posted by: Dave D. ||
07/20/2005 12:15 Comments ||
Top||
#11
Re #6: "...exactly the point, my good doctor..."
What makes you think Dean's a good doctor? I suspect that a doctor who goes into politics has a few deficiencies.
Posted by: Neutron Tom ||
07/20/2005 12:24 Comments ||
Top||
#12
Of course, the fact that he nominated a replacement for a Supreme Court justice who is resigning is very suspicious. No president has EVER done THAT before!
Just how much weed did he & the MorOn.org guys smoke back in the 60's, anyway?
#13
The libs are going to have to admit it sooner or later, Rove didn't break the law. Even if he gave her name, the law applies to a "covert" agent who has been working abroad within 5 years. She's a desk jockey and has been for some time. There just isn't any crime to prosecute. So why would he need to use distractions. He's just sitting back with G.W. and laughing at the democrats while they make a jackass out of themselves.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
07/20/2005 13:19 Comments ||
Top||
#15
Poor guy, Roberts, he has such a nice family, is a good man, but will called a mother and father raper by Dean, Schumer, Leahy & Kennedy.
Posted by: Captain America ||
07/20/2005 13:37 Comments ||
Top||
#16
And a pirate.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
07/20/2005 13:39 Comments ||
Top||
#17
The DU types have already tried to slime his son.
His five-year-old son.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
07/20/2005 15:00 Comments ||
Top||
#18
Going after a 5-year-old Robert? That is just sick.
Posted by: Charles ||
07/20/2005 15:09 Comments ||
Top||
#19
Ahem, Charles, if I may?
"That little DANCE he was DOING was AN ACT cooked up by ROVE and his KABBAL for the ENTERTAINMENT of AMERIKKKA! The "kid" is REALLY a midget ZIONIST in a child COSTUME!" - almost any DU poster
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut ||
07/20/2005 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[11138 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Judging (pun intended) from the moon battery reaction from the left I would have to say that Roberts was a good pick. Caught some yahoo on MSNBC (surfing) who said "Maybe the Democrats should let him by, he will overturn roe/wade, and then they will reap the backlash on the right." The left never ceases to amaze me with their power to stick to a single issue: Killing babies.
#2
He certainly appears to be a solid choice as he'll replace a wishy-washy centrist vote with a reliably conservative one on the issues that really matter. That said I'm not certain that the social conservatives will love him when it's all said and done.
#5
What gets me about the whole abortion issue is that even if he votes against Roe v. Wade, it won't be overturned. The S.C.'s ruled before (in the early 1990s) reaffirming Roe v. Wade by a 6-3 margin, so this'll only shrink it to 5-4 ruling in favor (assuming the other justices vote the way they did in the 90's). The things that MIGHT get overturned with him on board are the restrictions on abortion (e.g. Partial Birth abortion Ban; State laws on parental notification, etc.), which the S.C. have voted against on a 5-4 ruling (thus, he would overturn it to 5-4 ruling in favor of these restrictions). Discussing last night with some buddies, and as 3-d imaging, healthcare for premies, etc. gets better and better, we might just see Roe v. Wade overturned. However, it won't be with this court (even with Roberts). And, finally still, EVEN if Roe v. Wade's overturned, it'll kick back to State laws...you think the "enlightened" states (e.g. Massachusetts, Vermont, maybe N.Y., and even California) will BAN abortion? Think again.
Posted by: BA ||
07/20/2005 10:54 Comments ||
Top||
#6
Well, CS, I think the far left would have been protesting another a clone of O'Connor, or just about anyone the President would have been willing to nominate.
However, the conspirators over at Voloch seem to think well of him. I'm cautiously optimistic. We've been burned so many times, but perhaps Lucy won't pull away the football this time.
#8
other issues could weigh larger: should Gitmo terrorists have appeal rights, are illegals entitled to all US protections intended for citizens...
I believe he's a good pick from all I've heard
Posted by: Frank G ||
07/20/2005 11:28 Comments ||
Top||
#9
Mrs. D IMHO his longtime association with the Federalist Society is a very clear indication of his possession of solid small government conservative credentials. IMHO those are the most important kind. On the social side, his wife's involvement with Feminists for Life is also a good indication of the sort of family values present in the Roberts' home. Slam dunk sure thing for conservatives? Nope, but I think those of us who're primarily economic / small-government conservatives will be very happy while the social conservatives may or may not be.
#11
Big Ed, Thanks. The partner and I were wondering why the Bush smirk had returned last night. I'm surprised he didn't crack up.
With a kid like that and membership in the Federalist Society, perhaps he is impervious to the reality distortion field that is DC, but after the disastrous nominees the GOP has put on the court for the last 50 years, I'm concerned till we start seeing a string of decisions with a solid Rehnquist, Scalia, Thomas, Roberts wing. The Return of Four Horsemen would make me sleep better. After Social Secuirty Reform is passed, Bush could move on to repeal of the Wagner Act.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis ||
07/20/2005 12:31 Comments ||
Top||
#12
âFriends of the courtâ supporting the terrorist included dozens of law professors, â305 United Kingdom and European Parliamentarians,â âMilitary Attorneys Detailed to Represent Ali Hamza Amhad Sulayman Al Bahlui,â âMilitary Law Practitioners and Academicians,â âNational Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers,â âHuman Rights First,â âGeneral Merrill A. McPeak,â âPeople for the American Way,â âThe World Organization for Human Rights USA,â âUrban Morgan Institute for Human Rightsââand, worst of all, the prestigious âAssociation of the Bar of the City of New York.â
Despite this array of âfriends,â the Court of Appeals panelâone of whom was John G. Roberts, Jr., President Bushâs nominee to the Supreme Courtâreversed Judge Robertson, rejecting his conclusion that Hamdan was covered by the Geneva Convention, which could be enforced in a United States federal court. Robertson had conveniently ignored the Supreme Court precedent of Johnson v. Eisentrager (which the current liberal Court majority massaged, in order to reach its conclusion in Rasul), which held that the Geneva Convention, a compact between governments, was not judicially enforceable in a private lawsuit. Period!
Sounds better and better, and little wonder the Bush smirk is back. The guy who kicked the enemy combatants issue out of the liberal's hands might be sitting on the bench when the issue goes to the SCOTUS.
#13
Thanks for the wonderful photo, BigEd!
How delightful!
I love it when President Bush smirks (and he looked really happy) and that drives the Lefties insane, too!
I think Roberts is going to be just fine--I found myself saying "Fancy! A middle-aged white man! Amazing!"
#14
I just hope that the LLL Senators try to filibuster, then they will have something else to cry about for a while. Don't think they will because they will look silly given they gave him a unanimus pass four years ago. but don;t you just love it when they all seem to cry the same river of tears?
Posted by: Frank G ||
07/20/2005 16:24 Comments ||
Top||
#16
Poor President Reagan...such a great and wonderful man and one of our finest Presidents, how could he bear either Ron, Jr. or Patty Davis?
As someone said, they must have given them the wrong babies at the hospital.
Talk radio hostess Laura Ingraham calls little Ron "Non-Reagan" and that works fine for me!
#17
Ohhh, Mrs. D -- a partner? How utterly wonderful!!!!!! But if Mr. Wife happens across the former Mr. D., he'll still make him feel the price of his iniquity, yes?
#18
With this nomination, Bush has moved into the disfavor column in my book. The same is probably true of many women like me.
As I said a long time ago, the moment he makes moves that intrude upon women's freedom and attempts to shackle women's to breeding beds is the moment Demmies start looking good. This nomination threatens reproductive freedom.
Sorry, Ranties. I still stand with y'all against terror, but I'll be looking at the Democrat candidate in 2008.
WASHINGTON - Oil prices fell by more than $1 a barrel on Wednesday after new government data showed rising U.S. supplies of diesel and heating oil and only a smaller-than-expected decline in crude oil inventories. Somehow, it still is all bushhitlerhalbertonSUV's Fault.
Earlier in the day, crude futures prices moved higher on concerns about production disruptions as Hurricane Emily slammed into Mexico's northeastern coastline and after a U.S. warning of possible terrorist attacks in Saudi Arabia. More proof that the hard earned money I put into my tank is determined by someone else's daily panic attack
Light sweet crude for August delivery fell $1.11 to $56.35 a barrel in afternoon trade on the New York Mercantile Exchange. September futures, which become the front-month contract beginning Thursday, traded 79 cents lower at $57.90 a barrel.
Heating oil futures fell by 3.71 cents to $1.593 a gallon while gasoline dropped by less than a penny to $1.67 a gallon.
In its weekly supply snapshot, the Department of Energy said stocks of distillate fuel, which include heating oil, diesel and jet fuel, grew by 2.3 million barrels to 122.7 million barrels, or 5 percent above year ago levels. 'cause it's all about the oil, baby. Uh-huh, uh-huh
The nation's inventory of crude oil slipped by 900,000 barrels to 320.1 million barrels, or 7 percent above year ago levels, the agency said. Analysts said traders were expecting a decline of at least twice that size. More proof that analysts really don't know anything and just make shit up as they go.
"It really was a bearish surprise to the market," said Phil Flynn, an analyst at Alaron Trading Corp. in Chicago.
Flynn said that while the damage to oil production from Hurricane Emily appears to be temporary, the market will remain on edge until a clearer picture develops â and any time a big storm moves through the Gulf of Mexico. While he believes oil prices could theoretically head down toward $50 a barrel this summer, assuming no major supply snags, he maintains that traders will become jittery as the winter heating season approaches. The sky is falling! The sky is falling!
Flynn gave credit to the refining industry for cranking up production of distillate fuel at a time when it must also meet the peak demand for gasoline. "They've really built up supply in a short period of time," he said. It is called capitalism and good buisness sense, dumbass...
Rest at link
#1
funny comments mm. This one made me LOL and scare my dog - "More proof that the hard earned money I put into my tank is determined by someone else's daily panic attack"
#2
Hey, at least some people are finding panic attacks to be a highly profitable business.
That's food for thought, at least, if you plan on reading the Peak Oil TM forums.
Posted by: Phil Fraering ||
07/20/2005 15:01 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Don't worry, they'll come up with an excuse to rally the prices up. Hurricanes in the gulf, terror threats in Kenya, refinery fire in Washington state.
They've got a million of em'.
#5
Thanks 2b.
This just in from LGF,
15 killed in protests against oil price hikes: - Violent demonstrations across the country.
Because the govenment is no longer subsidising the oil companies and the prices will rise 50-100% more. Get this quote: âThis is a natural reaction because the governmentâs reforms are a lie and we canât take it any more...This government is making the rich richer and the poor poorer,â said one young man in Sanaa.
hmmmm.... Maybe they should give this man a job at the DNC headquarters.
#6
Oil prices fell by more than $1 a barrel on Wednesday after new government data showed rising U.S. supplies of diesel and heating oil and only a smaller-than-expected decline in crude oil inventories.
And as is always the case, any fall in gasoline prices will come slllllooooowly....
#9
maybe we need this. Prices here are at an all-time high $2.20 for the cheap stuff. I certainly hope with the Chinese demand seeming to decline that oil prices will too.
Posted by: Deacon Blues ||
07/20/2005 17:27 Comments ||
Top||
#10
The Oil and Gas Journal.
http://ogj.pennnet.com/home.cfm
#11
Once Uncle Sam stops filling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, look for prices to fall. When that happens, oil-producing countries are going to have to start slashing government spending. Or, better still, maybe they'll open the spigots, hoping to make up for the drop in prices by producing more, thereby dropping the prices even further. We'll get the last laugh yet.
Too bad Unocal has rigged the bidding in favor of Chevron. It would be sweet to sell $1 worth of assets to CNOOC for $2. I suspect that at the current bid, Chevron will find that it has overpaid for Unocal. The thing with Chevron is that it's the perennial also-ran of the oil business. I can't believe they're buying Unocal at the top of the market. I think it's pretty cool that the Chinese and the Indians have locked up production at these prices. I'm sure Indian and Chinese consumers will appreciate paying through the nose when oil prices are much lower.
#12
World demand for oil is growing around 2 million barells per day each year. Supply simply isn't increasing at anything like that rate. Oil will continue to increase in price until demand drops to be in line with supply increases. And that assumes supply will continue to increase. I don't know how high oil will go, but you can be sure it will go higher from here.
#15
Elvis, we have hashed the supply issue before and it is unrelated to peak oil. Bringing new oil supply online requires as much as 5 years for major projects.
#17
I'm against doomsday scenarios but it's an undeniable fact that the world uses too much oil compared to what can be found AND exploited.
We WILL need to reduce demand as supplies aren't going up anymore.
If we don't we'll be in HUGE trouble before 2010.
Ignore temporary fluctuations...oil prices will only go one direction in the future. At the moment some "peak oil panic" may be priced in and we may not have yet reached the point but we will.
Saudi Arabia will be the tipping point when the world finds out that they can no longer deliver what they promise.
Question: When will President Bush's 2001 fill initiative be completed?
Answer: We expect to reach our 700 million barrel goal in August 2005. The President's directive of November 2001 directed fill at a moderate rate using royalty in kind crude oil from U.S. Outer Continental Shelf leases.
...
Strategic Petroleum Reserve Inventory for July 20, 2005
Current Inventory
Sweet: 282.6 million bbls
Sour: 414.9 million bbls
Total: 697.5 million bbls
Royalty-in-Kind: 3.3 million bbls (to be Delivered)
Note: Royalty-In-Kind deliveries are currently scheduled to extend through August 2005.
Delivery Schedule as of:
July 18, 2005
Year Month Scheduled (MB)
2005 June 2462
2005 July 2313
2005 Aug 2165
# Highest inventory - The SPR is now at its highest level and continues to grow as additional crude oil is received.
# Current storage capacity - 727 million barrels
# Current days of import protection in SPR - 59 days
(Maximum days of import protection in SPR - 118 days in 1985)
# International Energy Agency requirement - 90 days of import protection (both public and private stocks)(SPR and private company import protection - approx. 118 days)
# Average price paid for oil in the Reserve - $27.25 per barrel
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
