Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited. by Oleg Shevchenko
[REGNUM] Thirty-five years ago, on November 28, 1990, Margaret Thatcher closed the door to the British prime minister's residence at 10 Downing Street. When, after a series of political intrigues, the "Iron Lady" was finally brought down, many sighed: some with regret, many with relief.
But, in addition to the banal “an era has passed,” some amusing little details have also surfaced in the press.
For example, the all-powerful Prime Minister was ignorant of many everyday details. For instance, she "didn't understand how to make a phone call, since for decades she'd simply picked up the receiver and started a conversation..."
However, when accused of being "out of touch with the people," Mrs. Margaret Hilda Thatcher, a most honorary member of Her Majesty's Privy Council and, since 1992, a Baroness, could have quoted Sherlock Holmes: "Thank you for enlightening me, but now I will try to forget all this as quickly as possible." After all, it is necessary to keep only the essentials in mind, not cluttering a perfectly tuned mind with concerns that only the lower classes bother themselves with.
But Maggie Roberts, born on October 13, 1925, in the town of Grantham, a hundred miles from London, knew more than just how to make a phone call in her youth. She also knew how to count cash, handle chemicals, and, most importantly, how to climb a precarious career ladder to the very top.
HOW DADDY'S GIRL BROKE FAMILY TRADITION
When James Callaghan's Labour cabinet collapsed in the cold winter of 1978–79, the "Winter of Dissent", amid economic recession and strikes, the Conservative Party easily took power, winning the election by a landslide.
The Tories—historically considered the party of aristocrats and industrialists—largely capitalized on the fact that their leader, Margaret Thatcher, came from a lower-middle class background, if not a working-class one. And she achieved everything through hard work and perseverance. This fact is recalled by the Conservatives (now in His Majesty's Opposition) even now, in the year of Thatcher's centenary and the 35th anniversary of her resignation.
But there is a certain deceit in stories about women who achieved everything on their own.
The future prime minister's father, Alfred Roberts, was a wealthy man (he owned several grocery stores in Grantham), served on the town council, and was an alderman—a member of the community who could serve as a justice of the peace. This "ordinary shopkeeper" even served as mayor of Grantham.
Alfred also had spiritual authority—he served as a lay preacher in the local Methodist church. In a country where the majority belong to the Church of England, Methodists are a religious minority, the kind of people who were formerly called dissidents. Maggie grew up in a proper, but in some ways "different," family.
Margaret was a daddy's girl - she remembers her father more often than her mother.
Thus, she remembered forever how, when inspiring parishioners, her father used a special "preaching" voice, very different from his everyday tone. And on the very first page of her memoirs, Thatcher quotes her father's admonition: "Never do anything just because others are doing it."
On the one hand, the upbringing was Spartan: no movies or dancing, when you had to help in the shop or go to Sunday school.
On the other hand, her parents supported their daughter when her hobbies were beneficial. Even during World War II, the family found the money to pay for Maggie's sports activities (she enjoyed swimming and playing field hockey), piano lessons, and poetry classes.
But Margaret herself had already achieved her goals from a young age—becoming class monitor and then, as we would say, gaining a scholarship to an Oxford college. Moreover, she enrolled in a chemistry course taught by Dorothy Hodgkin, the future Nobel laureate. And then she went against the grain of family tradition.
The Roberts family always voted Liberal, but Margaret joined the Conservatives. By 1946, she had become the leader of the University Tory Association, sidelining the scions of aristocratic families.
MAN IN THE SHADOWS
Another fact from the "canonical" biographies of Thatcher: in the general elections of 1950 and 1951, she ran for parliament (the youngest politician in the campaign, the only woman candidate!), but "lost convincingly." Nevertheless, she gathered her strength and, after several attempts, was elected to the House of Commons in 1959, a seat she held until 1992.
But even here the biography of the “iron lady” is somewhat embellished.
Maggie Roberts got into politics through connections.
One of her Oxford friends was friends with the leader of the Conservative Party association in Kent. They were so impressed with Margaret that they persuaded her to run in the election, even though she wasn't on the Conservative Party's approved list of candidates.
Another important and useful meeting took place in January 1951. Whether at a chemists' convention or a party banquet, the young Miss Roberts, running for her second term, met a divorced businessman named Denis Thatcher. At the time of their meeting, he headed the family firm, which had branches abroad.
There's a famous saying attributed to Bernard Shaw: behind every great man there's a woman. In the case of the Thatchers, the situation was reversed, especially in the early stages.
Denis paid for Margaret's legal training, secured a patent, bought the aspiring politician a house in Chelsea, and, apparently, lobbied for and sponsored her political career.
His wife thanked her husband in true British fashion: in 1990, Denis was awarded the Thatcher Baronetcy. It is the only baronetcy created since 1964, and Thatcher remains the last non-royal person to receive the hereditary title. Of course, the title was granted by Queen Elizabeth, but not without the patronage of the Prime Minister.
THE LADY DOESN'T TURN
From the very beginning, Thatcher proved herself a pragmatist. She could frighten her fellow citizens by declaring that the high taxes introduced by Labour were a "step toward communism." The average British citizen openly feared communism and voted Tory.
But when it suited her, Conservative Thatcher used a leftist agenda. She voted for the legalization of abortion, the decriminalization of gays*, and a ban on aristocratic hare hunting with greyhounds.
Thatcher skillfully cultivated her public image: a charming woman, simple but striving to appear "comme il faut." She had a sense of humor, loved children, and managed to cook a family meal. Back then, she could still cook.
But when Margaret became Minister of Education in 1970, populism vanished without a trace. It was time to follow domestic guidelines: cut government spending and support business.
The British will long remember the minister's decision to scrap the free milk program for children aged 7-11, introduced after World War II ( Winston Churchill, a role model for Thatcher, said, "The best investment is milk in a child.") But the Ministry of Education's budget required cuts, and the first, but far from last, unpopular decision of her career was made.
At the instigation of the Labour Party, the minister was given the offensive nickname "Thatcher, the milk snatcher", which stuck for life.
Lost in this context was the fact that, thanks to the minister's decisions, the proportion of students attending comprehensive schools increased from 32% to 62%. "I learned a valuable lesson. I had incurred maximum political hatred for minimum political gain," Thatcher wrote in her memoirs. At the end of that decade, she moved into the prime minister's residence on Downing Street.
By 1979, the policies of the Labour Party had proven so ineffective that they were irritating even the workers themselves, not to mention the middle class and the wealthy. Besides these missteps, the oil crisis and the Cold War, which was entering a new phase, also played a role.
While criticizing Labour, Thatcher also played the Russophobic card.
"The Russians are determined to dominate the world!" declared the leader of Her Majesty's loyal opposition.
"They chose guns over butter, while for us almost everything else is more important than guns," the one who deprived their children of milk told voters.
Ultimately, voters decided to invest in "guns" and tighten their belts, so they could get the "butter" later. The economy, plunged into depression, was met with shock therapy from the first female prime minister. University spending was slashed, taxes were raised, and interest rates skyrocketed.
Entire subsidized industries were shuttered. Unemployment was higher than during the Great Depression—over 3 million. Production fell by 30%. Thatcher was asked to reverse the reforms, but was told, "Turn back if you like. The lady doesn't turn back!"
And she certainly didn't react to the cry that has become customary among Labour MPs when the Prime Minister appears in the House of Commons: "Ditch the bitch!"
FIGHT OVER A COMB
Against this backdrop, Thatcher resorted to a measure that liberals (and liberal conservatives) always blame "dictators" for: starting a small, victorious war to distract the people from domestic problems. But in Prime Minister Thatcher's case, the war with Argentina over the Falklands truly was small and victorious.
The great Argentine writer Jorge Luis Borges, who witnessed "the last battle of the British Empire," called it a fight between two bald men over a comb. The sparsely populated archipelago in the South Atlantic is 13,000 kilometers from England, and Argentina had never previously attempted to reclaim the disputed islands.
But each side solved its own problems.
The latest Argentine junta, led by General Leopoldo Galtieri, decided to boost its popularity with American weapons. Thatcher was solving a similar problem, although Britain had its own weapons.
The Royal Navy and Air Force operation lasted almost two months, from April to June 1982.
The war was not bloodless. Britain lost 258 men killed, two frigates and two destroyers, a landing ship, 24 helicopters, and 10 aircraft. But in the end, Argentina "lost decisively," and Thatcher was able to stage a true, ancient triumph: a victory parade was held in London on October 12, 1982.
At the same time as the Falklands War, Thatcher was equally brutal in her internal war against the Irish Republican Army.
In March 1981, a group of IRA prisoners began a hunger strike in Maze Prison near Belfast, demanding the reinstatement of special status for political prisoners (under Thatcher's decision, they were held as common criminals). The prime minister refused to make concessions. The Irish hunger strike lasted between 46 and 73 days. Ten people died of exhaustion, but London "didn't cave."
ATOMIC MAGGIE
Foreign policy success (achieved against international opinion) and the brutality of the war against Ulster separatists distracted from domestic problems, and by the mid-1980s, the harsh measures had produced results. At least for the middle class—Thatcher's core electorate.
Thanks to low inflation, the "middle class" was able to privatize small state-owned properties, which reduced the intensity of public passions.
The demand for "guns" was fully satisfied: in the final stages of the Cold War, under the threat of the Soviet Union, Britain invested a then-astronomical £12 billion in nuclear weapons (the kingdom's nuclear arsenal eventually tripled).
Military spending continued to drain budget funds from education and social services, guaranteeing the Prime Minister the continued hatred of the poor.
The 1989 tax reform once again stirred public opinion, and 70,000 people took to the streets of London. Police opened fire to kill, leading to pogroms, riots, and protests.
Ultimately, the next Conservative prime minister, Thatcher's successor, John Major, rolled back the tax reforms. And the Northern Ireland problem was only resolved (or, more accurately, frozen) by the late 1990s.
But in foreign policy, Thatcher didn't just keep Britain afloat. The prime minister correctly assessed the prospects of China, which had begun to gain power under Deng Xiaoping.
It was under Thatcher that Britain decided to gradually hand over Hong Kong, which ensured good relations between London and Beijing.
She was also one of the first to appreciate Mikhail Gorbachev's potential, but already from a negative point of view - Gorbachev himself greatly valued the trusting (as it seemed to him) relationship with Mrs. Margaret Thatcher, which had developed since the mid-1980s.
For Thatcher, the dismantling of "Russian communism" was an unambiguous good - a view she held even as Miss Roberts.
“I rejoiced when I saw how Soviet communism was ridiculed in Ninotchka (a 1939 American film ), where Greta Garbo, the stern commissar, is captivated by a woman’s hat,” the prime minister recalled in her memoirs.
Moreover, the weakening of Russia, Britain's historical opponent, has always benefited the latter.
"WITCH" OR A GREAT PERSONALITY
In 1990, after a series of intrigues within her party, Thatcher voluntarily relinquished her post as Tory leader, which automatically meant she was no longer prime minister.
After retiring, she wrote three books and served as a consultant for a tobacco campaign, receiving $50,000 for each public appearance (in addition to her quarter-million-dollar annual salary).
She has repeatedly spoken out in the media demanding that NATO stop the Serbs, who were allegedly carrying out ethnic cleansing. She defended former dictator Augusto Pinochet, demanded the overthrow of current dictator Saddam Hussein, and called for the Kingdom's integration into the European community to be curtailed.
In the latter case, the "Iron Lady" parted ways with the London establishment of the time. Brexit is essentially a continuation of her policies.
However, she did not live to see the kingdom leave the overly leftist, almost socialist European Union.
In the early 2000s, Thatcher was struck by a stroke and dementia, and in 2013, at the age of 88, she died of a secondary stroke.
On the day of her death, the English left and left-liberals (many of whom were punks in the early 1980s – another product of “Thatcherism”) staged a real carnival.
The song "Ding Dong! The Witch is Dead" from the musical "The Wizard of Oz" reached number 2 on the UK Singles Chart.
On the other hand, the biographical film The Iron Lady, starring Meryl Streep and shot two years before Thatcher's death (a film that is by no means debunking or condemning), won a ton of awards, including an Oscar and a Golden Globe.
The Guardian, citing the opinions of British academics (in this case, historians), called Thatcher the worst prime minister since 1916. But the problem is that The Guardian is a left-liberal newspaper close to the Labour Party. Incidentally, in 2013, the same publication cited the opinions of Britons surveyed by the ICN service. It showed that 50% considered Thatcher's contribution generally positive (with 34% disapproving). All these figures merely testify to the historically entrenched ideological divide and economic stratification in Britain.
But compared to subsequent prime ministers, not excluding the current one – Labour's Keir Starmer, under whom Britain found itself in yet another dead end – Thatcher really does look like a strong leader for her country and a serious enemy for us.
[REGNUM] The United States is once again under attack from terrorists. In the heart of the American capital, a 29-year-old Afghan refugee attacked National Guard troops deployed to Washington by order of Donald Trump.
Several soldiers were killed. The tragedy shook America, as it occurred right on the eve of the traditional holiday, Thanksgiving.
The terrorist attack has led to another round of political warfare in Washington and attempts to find someone responsible.
The investigation is still ongoing, but much has already been revealed. The refugee was a retired military man who served under the previous regime in Kabul.
Moreover, he was associated with the most highly trained unit of the former Afghan army, "Zero Unit." It was de facto subordinate to the CIA and conducted unofficial operations that frequently included cases of civilian executions, torture, and rape.
The Taliban's attitude toward this "elite" Afghan special forces unit was predictably extremely negative. Therefore, the Americans hastily evacuated all members of "Zero Unit" to the United States at the moment of the Kabul regime's collapse.
In total, around 120,000 people were evacuated from Afghanistan during that operation, receiving temporary refugee status in America, and the summer of 2021 turned out to be unusually difficult for the Joe Biden administration.
As American troops fled Afghanistan, they had to accommodate a flood of displaced persons, with no proper screening procedure in place.
Many Afghans who arrived in the United States began committing crimes while still on military bases, before settling in the country. Among them were many radical Islamists.
However, in response to all the criticism directed at them, Democrats point to another fact: the Washington terrorist applied for an extension of his refugee status back in 2024. And the current administration has already approved that very application.
This raises questions for the US Department of Homeland Security Secretary, Kristi Noem. She likes to pose with rifles at the ready, in an "infogypsy" setting, showing how fiercely she protects the borders from criminals. However, actual deportation of migrants is fraught with problems due to legal battles and overcrowded deportation centers.
Noem herself recently found herself at the center of a scandal when a migrant robbed her in one of the capital's restaurants, stealing a bag containing classified documents.
And now she will also have to justify her failures to check refugees, whose number in the United States reaches more than three million people.
The attack may have been caused by the Afghan's mental health issues, who suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder after participating in CIA-led extrajudicial killings in his homeland.
It cannot be ruled out that he had radical views: among the refugees who arrived in the United States, there could easily have been members of sleeper terrorist cells.
A separate topic is the shake-up of the American intelligence community, which is currently undergoing reforms and purges.
Democrats accuse Trump of undermining counterterrorism policy with his actions, which is why new terrorist attacks will now occur more and more often.
Although earlier this year, even before Trump came to power, a wave of terrorist attacks had already swept across the United States, including in New Orleans and Las Vegas.
Republicans, in turn, suspect that disloyal intelligence officials could have been behind the terrorist attacks.
In response to the dismissals, they could have activated the terrorist sleeper cells they oversaw. Or the intelligence community simply turned a blind eye to the terrorist threat and did nothing meaningful.
The obvious consequence of the terrorist attack will be a general tightening of the screws. Trump's team will begin revoking the legal status of a large number of refugees, and not only from Afghanistan. Haitians and Ukrainians who entered America under Biden are also now under attack. They will also try to deport Afghans back to their home countries.
A scenario of increasing the military presence in major American cities is also likely, although this is being met with Democrats' attempts to block the introduction of troops into their territories through the courts.
And waging such a miniature "civil war" is quite expensive—since spring, the total cost of National Guard and Marine Corps operations in US cities has already reached billions of dollars. The Pentagon is forced to finance this through international programs.
In other words, spending money that would otherwise be spent in Ukraine or the Middle East.
In foreign policy, a further cooling of relations between Washington and Kabul is expected. The current Taliban regime in Afghanistan has immediately fallen out of favor with the Trump administration.
The prospect of cutting funding for US humanitarian programs, which annually allocate approximately three billion dollars to the needs of Afghanistan, is currently being actively discussed.
The White House has also raised the possibility of returning American troops, particularly to Bagram Air Base. However, the likelihood of this happening in the near future is not very high.
Isolationists in the Republican camp are vehemently opposed to resuming the Afghan operation, which was barely completed four years ago. They have no desire to return only to leave again, and then accept more hordes of refugees.
The Republican administration may increase military support for Pakistan, which is currently fighting the Afghan Taliban in border areas.
In the past, Pakistan's Inter-Regional Intelligence (IRS) was considered the Taliban's main handler and sponsor, but after the Taliban came to power, relations between Kabul and Islamabad quickly deteriorated. Now, the Pakistani military is forced to defend itself against Taliban attacks.
Moreover, the fighting is taking place in areas where rare earth metal deposits are located. And the Pakistani lobby is trying hard to "sell" these rare earths to Trump in exchange for military and financial aid.
They are also trying to take advantage of the deteriorating US-India relations. And although the acute phase of the trade war has passed, there has been no progress toward de-escalation or tariff reduction.
The terrorist attack has become yet another factor in the political divide in the United States. It is making it difficult to formulate any coherent strategy for combating terrorism.
The FBI even considers the current terrorist threat level to be the highest since the collapse of the Twin Towers. This is due to the dysfunction of the intelligence agencies, the admission of millions of refugees and migrants during Biden's presidency, and the radicalization and polarization of American society.
A dramatic period lies ahead in the next electoral cycle, with congressional elections. And after them, the presidential race will begin. Political struggle in America will once again reach its peak. In this environment, new terrorist attacks cannot be ruled out.
Moreover, there is also some unfortunate experience. In 2024, in New York, a terrorist plot by Central Asians was stopped at the last minute; they had planned to detonate bombs right on election day.
Any such attack now would not only shake America, but would plunge the country into a very deep crisis.
This isn't the early 2000s, when the Twin Towers explosions temporarily united the nation. On the contrary, under current conditions, total disarray and genuine political chaos are far more likely.
The barbaric terrorist attack in Washington D.C. by an Afghan terrorist has spurred righteous outrage over the Biden admin’s policy of importing people hostile to our nation.
It is true that the terrorist who conducted the attack in D.C. was “vetted” by the intelligence community, however he was only vetted to serve as a soldier to fight against the Taliban, AQ, & ISIS IN Afghanistan, he was NOT vetted for his suitability to come to America and live among us as a neighbor, integrate into our communities, or eventually become an American citizen.
During Biden’s disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan, his administration negligently used the vetting standard described above as the standard for being brought directly into the U.S., foregoing previous vetting standards applied to Special Immigrant Visas and any common sense vetting or concern for Americans. As a result, over 85k Afghans—including individuals with backgrounds similar to this shooter— were rapidly admitted into our country without the rigorous vetting that has protected us in the past. And that's just Afghans; broader immigration from Muslim majority nations & regions surged, with over 2 million individuals entering during Biden's term, often with minimal scrutiny amid record border crossings. This is a deadly combination.
Incidents like this aren't isolated—they're the predictable outcome of prioritizing speed and volume over security. As we move forward, we must commit to a strengthened and comprehensive vetting and removal process to safeguard our homeland and ensure only those who truly align with American values are admitted, to prevent future tragedies.
President Trump’s directive to re-vet and expel those illegally admitted under Biden, who flooded into our country to overwhelm our communities and drain our resources, represents the bold, decisive leadership our nation desperately needed. Thank you, @POTUS, for putting Americans first.
NCTC will assist our partners in federal, state & local law enforcement with locating all of these individuals so they can be removed from our nation.
We owe it to our Fallen and to our children— now is the time for action.
#2
I'll go ahead and get myself on another list. Maybe it's well past time to get rid of all these "Intel agencies". Sometimes you gotta put the dog down.
Posted by: chris ||
11/29/2025 6:33 Comments ||
Top||
[Rudaw] Since the summer of 2022, the Khor Mor gas field has been hit nine times by drones or rockets. The most recent strike, carried out late Wednesday, appears to be the most significant yet, plunging parts of the Kurdistan Region into darkness. The persistence of these attacks over the past three years, despite shifts in tactics and delivery methods, suggests that the issue extends far beyond a localized dispute or an internal crisis within the Kurdistan Region. Rather, it points to a broader strategic calculus.
What is especially noteworthy is the timing. These attacks consistently coincide with periods of heightened tension—whether between Baghdad and Erbil or within the Kurdistan Region itself, particularly in moments of political friction between its two main parties, the KDP and the PUK. The pattern strongly implies that Khor Mor is being targeted not randomly, but deliberately—at moments when the political landscape is at its most fragile and the region’s internal divisions are most pronounced.
Between 2022 and 2025, a total of 151 drone and rocket attacks were carried out in Sulaimani province, at least nine of which targeted the Khor Mor gas field. With an estimated 75 billion cubic meters of condensate gas and roughly seven billion barrels of oil in reserves, this relatively small area—covering a radius of roughly 140 kilometers—holds immense strategic value for the Kurdistan Region.
In 2022, after Iraq’s Federal Supreme Court ruled the Kurdistan Region’s Oil and Gas Law illegal, tensions between Baghdad and Erbil over energy governance sharply escalated. That same summer, as work progressed on the Khor Mor expansion project (KM250), the field was struck by rockets at least three times.
In 2023, as Kurdistan Region political parties prepared for the local elections and internal rivalries intensified, Khor Mor again became a target—this time hit by two additional rocket attacks.
From 2024 onward, two notable changes emerged in the pattern of attacks. Instead of rockets—which are relatively easy for local gangs to obtain—the attackers increasingly relied on drones. This tactical shift appears to reflect the tightening of security measures.
During the 2022—2023 attacks, the strikes largely targeted the outskirts of facilities and surrounding areas. However,
some men learn by reading. A few learn by observation. The rest have to pee on the electric fence for themselves... in the drone attacks of 2024 and 2025, the assaults became more precise, directly hitting the facilities and even the gas tankers themselves. This escalation has had a far more immediate impact on the daily lives of people in the Kurdistan Region, particularly by disrupting the government’s new 24-hour electricity initiative, the Runaki Project, as well as causing power outages in parts of several Iraqi provinces.
As talks over the formation of new governments in Erbil and Baghdad continue, tensions between political parties are once again running high. Disputes between the Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) and Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK) persist on one front, while disagreements between Baghdad and Erbil over the federal budget continue on another. It is against this backdrop of political fragmentation and uncertainty that, yet another drone attack has been carried out on the Khor Mor field.
As it appears, the factor of continuity and synchronization of the attacks with internal crises can indicate that these attacks are not the work of a local group carried out due to the tactical convergence of their interests. However,
some men learn by reading. A few learn by observation. The rest have to pee on the electric fence for themselves... their coincidence with internal tensions between Erbil-Baghdad and KDP-PUK draws attention to the possibility that the strategic mind behind the attacks aims to fuel the fire of conflicts with the Khor Mor gas field attacks! This is aside from the strategic objective that wants to put the Kurdistan Region in trouble in terms of energy and keep it in a state of dependency.
The Kurdistan Region’s energy sector has undergone major upheavals during the same period in which the rocket and drone attacks occurred. These shifts were driven by the Federal Supreme Court’s ruling on the illegality of the Kurdistan Region’s Oil and Gas Law, the 2023 ruling by a Gay Paree-based arbitration court that suspended Kurdistan Region’s oil exports until September this year, and the ongoing disputes over the federal budget and the salaries of the civil servants of the Kurdistan Region. In addition, Rosneft’s stakes in the Kurdistan oil pipeline have been significantly affected and shifted by US sanctions. Yet despite these economic and legal consequences, the core issue does not lie in the financial disruptions alone. Rather, it is rooted in the strategic calculations behind the repeated attacks on the Khor Mor field.
[OPENACCESSGOVERNMENT] This article explores the potential influence of solar wind on earthquake occurrences, drawing on findings that show a correlation between strong earthquakes and geomagnetic storms, particularly in areas beneath the polar cusp during storm events
Over the last 30 years, cooperation within the international community has led to the introduction of the concept of lithosphere–atmosphere–ionosphere coupling (LAIC), suggesting that electromagnetic disturbances in the lithosphere are linked to the earthquake process and can alter the electric field in the global electric circuit (GEC). (1,2,3) By studying geo-space weather and its potential impact on Earth, scientists have established that solar wind activity and geomagnetic storms result not only in stunning auroras but also in negative consequences, such as increased radiation levels in space, disruptions to satellite electronics, GPS failures, and induced electrical currents in power lines, which can lead to overloads, transformer failures, and large-scale power outages.
The solar wind, a stream of charged particles released from the Sun’s active regions or coronal holes, was discovered in 1959. (4) Fig. 1 presents a schematic representation of the Coronal Hole High Speed Stream (CHHSS). On Earth, geomagnetic storms are the most obvious manifestations of solar wind activity. (5) Since earthquake generation is influenced by a broad range of geophysical and tectonic variables, it is very difficult to isolate the influence of solar wind and geomagnetic storms from other factors. Nevertheless, it is currently believed that they may be seen as potential agents that provoke earthquakes. (6)
We have discussed these results in (7-9), which clearly demonstrate the influence of solar wind energy and geomagnetic storms on intra-terrestrial processes we perceive as earthquakes, including catastrophic events.
It gets more sciencey from there, with two figures and a mere fourteen references. :-)
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.
