Iraq
Ayatollah Muhammad Bakr al-Hakim is dead.
Along with about 100 others dead and hundreds more injured.
Third car bomb in a month and they are getting bigger all the time.
The sharks are circling.
Pretty soon they will be in a feeding frenzy and then.... the Americans will get out of the water in a hurry.
That is what they do.
They probably wont stop spreading chum, though.
After 9-11, no introspection, no learning from mistakes in the past, no clear plan how to make the world safer.
Only this.
Who is going to clear this up??
Can this still be cleared up??
What do I think?
I expect the Turkish troops to invade the north some time around the elections in America in 2004.
When the political (on all sides) will to do anything will be zero.
I expect the rest of the country to fall down into internal strife.
I expect a "strongman" to take power.
One much like Saddam.
One friendly to the Americans.
I expect a much impoverished and looted country limping onwards and never truly recovering.
Call me a cynic but that is what I expect, UN or no UN involvement.
Sunday, August 31, 2003
Iraq
Ayatollah Muhammad Bakr al-Hakim is dead.
Along with about 100 others dead and hundreds more injured.
Third car bomb in a month and they are getting bigger all the time.
The sharks are circling.
Pretty soon they will be in a feeding frenzy and then.... the Americans will get out of the water in a hurry.
That is what they do.
They probably wont stop spreading chum, though.
After 9-11, no introspection, no learning from mistakes in the past, no clear plan how to make the world safer.
Only this.
Who is going to clear this up??
Can this still be cleared up??
What do I think?
I expect the Turkish troops to invade the north some time around the elections in America in 2004.
When the political (on all sides) will to do anything will be zero.
I expect the rest of the country to fall down into internal strife.
I expect a "strongman" to take power.
One much like Saddam.
One friendly to the Americans.
I expect a much impoverished and looted country limping onwards and never truly recovering.
Call me a cynic but that is what I expect, UN or no UN involvement.
Ayatollah Muhammad Bakr al-Hakim is dead.
Along with about 100 others dead and hundreds more injured.
Third car bomb in a month and they are getting bigger all the time.
The sharks are circling.
Pretty soon they will be in a feeding frenzy and then.... the Americans will get out of the water in a hurry.
That is what they do.
They probably wont stop spreading chum, though.
After 9-11, no introspection, no learning from mistakes in the past, no clear plan how to make the world safer.
Only this.
Who is going to clear this up??
Can this still be cleared up??
What do I think?
I expect the Turkish troops to invade the north some time around the elections in America in 2004.
When the political (on all sides) will to do anything will be zero.
I expect the rest of the country to fall down into internal strife.
I expect a "strongman" to take power.
One much like Saddam.
One friendly to the Americans.
I expect a much impoverished and looted country limping onwards and never truly recovering.
Call me a cynic but that is what I expect, UN or no UN involvement.
Thursday, August 28, 2003
Iraq
In the animal kingdom, it often happens that a smaller, more helpless animal will use camouflage and outright deception to make it look larger or more dangerous, when confronted with a threatening predator.
This is elemental and elementary.
Imagine my amusement now that the US Intelligence community is pondering the possibility that Saddam deliberately projected a more dangerous image to the outside world... in order to stop the much stronger US from attacking Iraq.
One U.S. intelligence official said: "people were just telling us what we wanted to hear."
Well, duh!!!
In the animal kingdom, it often happens that a smaller, more helpless animal will use camouflage and outright deception to make it look larger or more dangerous, when confronted with a threatening predator.
This is elemental and elementary.
Imagine my amusement now that the US Intelligence community is pondering the possibility that Saddam deliberately projected a more dangerous image to the outside world... in order to stop the much stronger US from attacking Iraq.
One U.S. intelligence official said: "people were just telling us what we wanted to hear."
Well, duh!!!
Iraq
In the animal kingdom, it often happens that a smaller, more helpless animal will use camouflage and outright deception to make it look larger or more dangerous, when confronted with a threatening predator.
This is elemental and elementary.
Imagine my amusement now that the US Intelligence community is pondering the possibility that Saddam deliberately projected a more dangerous image to the outside world... in order to stop the much stronger US from attacking Iraq.
One U.S. intelligence official said: "people were just telling us what we wanted to hear."
Well, duh!!!
In the animal kingdom, it often happens that a smaller, more helpless animal will use camouflage and outright deception to make it look larger or more dangerous, when confronted with a threatening predator.
This is elemental and elementary.
Imagine my amusement now that the US Intelligence community is pondering the possibility that Saddam deliberately projected a more dangerous image to the outside world... in order to stop the much stronger US from attacking Iraq.
One U.S. intelligence official said: "people were just telling us what we wanted to hear."
Well, duh!!!
Tuesday, August 26, 2003
Israel/Palestine
Another targeted liquidation by Israel.
This time, the "target" escaped with his life.
Others were not so lucky.
This is the tally so far:
One dead: a 65 year old man (bystander). At least twenty six injured; among those hurt are four children. An 8-year-old boy is in critical condition.
What is the difference: strap explosives on your body, go to a crowded public place like a bus (stop) and let it explode. Kill/maim a number of innocent bystanders (mostly Israelis).
Get in a helicopter gunship and fire rockets at a crowded intersection, hoping to hit someone in a car that is part of Hamas. Kill/maim a number of innocent bystanders (mostly Palestinian).
I would really like to know the true definition of terrorist behaviour...
If you put on a uniform, is it okay then?
If it is state-sponsored, it is okay then?
If you use state-of-the-art weapons, is it okay then?
If the USA has no problems with it, is it okay then?
Another targeted liquidation by Israel.
This time, the "target" escaped with his life.
Others were not so lucky.
This is the tally so far:
One dead: a 65 year old man (bystander). At least twenty six injured; among those hurt are four children. An 8-year-old boy is in critical condition.
What is the difference: strap explosives on your body, go to a crowded public place like a bus (stop) and let it explode. Kill/maim a number of innocent bystanders (mostly Israelis).
Get in a helicopter gunship and fire rockets at a crowded intersection, hoping to hit someone in a car that is part of Hamas. Kill/maim a number of innocent bystanders (mostly Palestinian).
I would really like to know the true definition of terrorist behaviour...
If you put on a uniform, is it okay then?
If it is state-sponsored, it is okay then?
If you use state-of-the-art weapons, is it okay then?
If the USA has no problems with it, is it okay then?
Israel/Palestine
Another targeted liquidation by Israel.
This time, the "target" escaped with his life.
Others were not so lucky.
This is the tally so far:
One dead: a 65 year old man (bystander). At least twenty six injured; among those hurt are four children. An 8-year-old boy is in critical condition.
What is the difference: strap explosives on your body, go to a crowded public place like a bus (stop) and let it explode. Kill/maim a number of innocent bystanders (mostly Israelis).
Get in a helicopter gunship and fire rockets at a crowded intersection, hoping to hit someone in a car that is part of Hamas. Kill/maim a number of innocent bystanders (mostly Palestinian).
I would really like to know the true definition of terrorist behaviour...
If you put on a uniform, is it okay then?
If it is state-sponsored, it is okay then?
If you use state-of-the-art weapons, is it okay then?
If the USA has no problems with it, is it okay then?
Another targeted liquidation by Israel.
This time, the "target" escaped with his life.
Others were not so lucky.
This is the tally so far:
One dead: a 65 year old man (bystander). At least twenty six injured; among those hurt are four children. An 8-year-old boy is in critical condition.
What is the difference: strap explosives on your body, go to a crowded public place like a bus (stop) and let it explode. Kill/maim a number of innocent bystanders (mostly Israelis).
Get in a helicopter gunship and fire rockets at a crowded intersection, hoping to hit someone in a car that is part of Hamas. Kill/maim a number of innocent bystanders (mostly Palestinian).
I would really like to know the true definition of terrorist behaviour...
If you put on a uniform, is it okay then?
If it is state-sponsored, it is okay then?
If you use state-of-the-art weapons, is it okay then?
If the USA has no problems with it, is it okay then?
Iraq
Those terrifying drones, remember them?
The ones that could be loaded up with chemicals or bioweapons and sent on their evil way to kill us all??
Turns out they are not a threat to the US or to the rest of the world, according to U.S. weapons experts in Baghdad.
PHEW!!!!
I was so worried!!!
Those terrifying drones, remember them?
The ones that could be loaded up with chemicals or bioweapons and sent on their evil way to kill us all??
Turns out they are not a threat to the US or to the rest of the world, according to U.S. weapons experts in Baghdad.
PHEW!!!!
I was so worried!!!
Iraq
Those terrifying drones, remember them?
The ones that could be loaded up with chemicals or bioweapons and sent on their evil way to kill us all??
Turns out they are not a threat to the US or to the rest of the world, according to U.S. weapons experts in Baghdad.
PHEW!!!!
I was so worried!!!
Those terrifying drones, remember them?
The ones that could be loaded up with chemicals or bioweapons and sent on their evil way to kill us all??
Turns out they are not a threat to the US or to the rest of the world, according to U.S. weapons experts in Baghdad.
PHEW!!!!
I was so worried!!!
Friday, August 22, 2003
Palestine and Israel timeline
Timeline: How the truce broke down
Published: August 22 2003 18:44 | Last Updated: August 22 2003 18:44
• June 27
Israel and the Palestinians clinch a deal for a phased military withdrawal by the Israeli army from the Gaza Strip.
Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, spiritual leader of the militant group, Hamas, announces that he is ordering the suspension of attacks on Jewish targets.
• June 29
The three main Palestinian militant groups - Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, the military wing of President Yassir Arafat's Fatah faction - announce a three-month ceasefire with Israel.
Israeli troops begin to pull back from Gaza.
• July 2
Israel transfers security control over the West Bank town of Bethlehem to the Palestinian Authority.
• July 3
The Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades says it will no longer abide by the truce after the Israeli army kills one of its leaders in the West Bank town of Qalqilya.
• July 5
Mahmoud Abbas, Palestinian prime minister, meets Sheikh Yassin Ahmed Yassin, Hamas spritual leader, for the first time.
• July 6
The Israeli cabinet agrees to release several hundred Palestinian prisoners - well short of the thousands of prisoner releases the Palestinians had hoped for.
• July 16
The US attempts to strengthen the Palestinian Authority by giving it $20m in aid to rebuild the destroyed infrastructure.
• July 20
Talks between Ariel Sharon, Israel's prime minister, and his Palestinian counterpart Mahmoud Abbas end without a commitment from Israel to release more Palestinian prisoners.
• August 5
Mahmoud Abbas calls off a meeting with Mr Sharon, accusing him of dragging his feet over prisoner releases and failing to implement the roadmap.
• August 6
Israel releases several hundred Palestinian prisoners.
• August 8
Four Palestinians, including two Hamas militants, and an Israeli soldier are killed in an Israeli raid on a refugee camp in the West Bank town of Nablus.
• August 12
Two teenage Palestinian suicide bombers kill two Israelis in separate attacks, one at a shopping centre near Tel Aviv, the other outside the West Bank settlement of Ariel.
• August 14
Israeli troops kill an Islamic Jihad leader in Hebron.
• August 18
Israel says it will hand over security control to Palestinian Authority police forces in four West Bank towns in response to signs that the PA is doing more to curb militants, but fails to agree a timetable.
• August 19
A Palestinian suicide attack on bus in Jerusalem kills 20 Israelis, including six children.
• August 19
Israel kills Ismail Abu Shanab, a founder of Hamas, considered to be one of the group's more moderate leaders, along with two of his bodyguards.
Islamic Jihad and Hamas declare an end to their truce.
Published: August 22 2003 18:44 | Last Updated: August 22 2003 18:44
• June 27
Israel and the Palestinians clinch a deal for a phased military withdrawal by the Israeli army from the Gaza Strip.
Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, spiritual leader of the militant group, Hamas, announces that he is ordering the suspension of attacks on Jewish targets.
• June 29
The three main Palestinian militant groups - Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, the military wing of President Yassir Arafat's Fatah faction - announce a three-month ceasefire with Israel.
Israeli troops begin to pull back from Gaza.
• July 2
Israel transfers security control over the West Bank town of Bethlehem to the Palestinian Authority.
• July 3
The Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades says it will no longer abide by the truce after the Israeli army kills one of its leaders in the West Bank town of Qalqilya.
• July 5
Mahmoud Abbas, Palestinian prime minister, meets Sheikh Yassin Ahmed Yassin, Hamas spritual leader, for the first time.
• July 6
The Israeli cabinet agrees to release several hundred Palestinian prisoners - well short of the thousands of prisoner releases the Palestinians had hoped for.
• July 16
The US attempts to strengthen the Palestinian Authority by giving it $20m in aid to rebuild the destroyed infrastructure.
• July 20
Talks between Ariel Sharon, Israel's prime minister, and his Palestinian counterpart Mahmoud Abbas end without a commitment from Israel to release more Palestinian prisoners.
• August 5
Mahmoud Abbas calls off a meeting with Mr Sharon, accusing him of dragging his feet over prisoner releases and failing to implement the roadmap.
• August 6
Israel releases several hundred Palestinian prisoners.
• August 8
Four Palestinians, including two Hamas militants, and an Israeli soldier are killed in an Israeli raid on a refugee camp in the West Bank town of Nablus.
• August 12
Two teenage Palestinian suicide bombers kill two Israelis in separate attacks, one at a shopping centre near Tel Aviv, the other outside the West Bank settlement of Ariel.
• August 14
Israeli troops kill an Islamic Jihad leader in Hebron.
• August 18
Israel says it will hand over security control to Palestinian Authority police forces in four West Bank towns in response to signs that the PA is doing more to curb militants, but fails to agree a timetable.
• August 19
A Palestinian suicide attack on bus in Jerusalem kills 20 Israelis, including six children.
• August 19
Israel kills Ismail Abu Shanab, a founder of Hamas, considered to be one of the group's more moderate leaders, along with two of his bodyguards.
Islamic Jihad and Hamas declare an end to their truce.
Israel and Palestine
Well, the roadmap is pretty much torn up, I suspect.
Strike - react - counterreact - etc., ad infinitum.
The bus attack was utterly heinous. It demanded a reaction.
What a pity Israel reacted from the gut and not the head.
Israel reacted by killing off a Hamas leader, probably knowing full well that it would end the peace negotiations for good. They are not so naive as not to have known this.
Ismail Abu Shanab, the man they killed, was not a terrorist.
He was a negotiater. A middleman. A moderate.
The one who persuaded Hamas to hold to the ceasefire this time.
The one Abbas depended on to convince the extremists.
Mr Abu Shanab said in an interview two months ago: "Let's be frank - we cannot destroy Israel. The practical solution is for us to live alongside Israel. The future Palestinian state is not one that is to take the place of Israel."
He is not the kind of person that Israel should be targeting (never mind assassinating!).
Even though Hamas blew up that bus - he was working towards stopping such actions.
This attack also stopped the Palestinian Authority in their tracks. They were working on a plan to stop Hamas. They should have been given the opportunity to carry it out.
Now, the Americans are asking Arafat to help.
After sidelining him for all this time, I have a hard time believing them.
In any case, I suspect it's too little, too late.
It is back to war.
To the tanks and bulldozers, back to occupation.
I suspect, this is what Sharon wanted all along.
Well, the roadmap is pretty much torn up, I suspect.
Strike - react - counterreact - etc., ad infinitum.
The bus attack was utterly heinous. It demanded a reaction.
What a pity Israel reacted from the gut and not the head.
Israel reacted by killing off a Hamas leader, probably knowing full well that it would end the peace negotiations for good. They are not so naive as not to have known this.
Ismail Abu Shanab, the man they killed, was not a terrorist.
He was a negotiater. A middleman. A moderate.
The one who persuaded Hamas to hold to the ceasefire this time.
The one Abbas depended on to convince the extremists.
Mr Abu Shanab said in an interview two months ago: "Let's be frank - we cannot destroy Israel. The practical solution is for us to live alongside Israel. The future Palestinian state is not one that is to take the place of Israel."
He is not the kind of person that Israel should be targeting (never mind assassinating!).
Even though Hamas blew up that bus - he was working towards stopping such actions.
This attack also stopped the Palestinian Authority in their tracks. They were working on a plan to stop Hamas. They should have been given the opportunity to carry it out.
Now, the Americans are asking Arafat to help.
After sidelining him for all this time, I have a hard time believing them.
In any case, I suspect it's too little, too late.
It is back to war.
To the tanks and bulldozers, back to occupation.
I suspect, this is what Sharon wanted all along.
Israel and Palestine
Well, the roadmap is pretty much torn up, I suspect.
Strike - react - counterreact - etc., ad infinitum.
The bus attack was utterly heinous. It demanded a reaction.
What a pity Israel reacted from the gut and not the head.
Israel reacted by killing off a Hamas leader, probably knowing full well that it would end the peace negotiations for good. They are not so naive as not to have known this.
Ismail Abu Shanab, the man they killed, was not a terrorist.
He was a negotiater. A middleman. A moderate.
The one who persuaded Hamas to hold to the ceasefire this time.
The one Abbas depended on to convince the extremists.
Mr Abu Shanab said in an interview two months ago: "Let's be frank - we cannot destroy Israel. The practical solution is for us to live alongside Israel. The future Palestinian state is not one that is to take the place of Israel."
He is not the kind of person that Israel should be targeting (never mind assassinating!).
Even though Hamas blew up that bus - he was working towards stopping such actions.
This attack also stopped the Palestinian Authority in their tracks. They were working on a plan to stop Hamas. They should have been given the opportunity to carry it out.
Now, the Americans are asking Arafat to help.
After sidelining him for all this time, I have a hard time believing them.
In any case, I suspect it's too little, too late.
It is back to war.
To the tanks and bulldozers, back to occupation.
I suspect, this is what Sharon wanted all along.
Well, the roadmap is pretty much torn up, I suspect.
Strike - react - counterreact - etc., ad infinitum.
The bus attack was utterly heinous. It demanded a reaction.
What a pity Israel reacted from the gut and not the head.
Israel reacted by killing off a Hamas leader, probably knowing full well that it would end the peace negotiations for good. They are not so naive as not to have known this.
Ismail Abu Shanab, the man they killed, was not a terrorist.
He was a negotiater. A middleman. A moderate.
The one who persuaded Hamas to hold to the ceasefire this time.
The one Abbas depended on to convince the extremists.
Mr Abu Shanab said in an interview two months ago: "Let's be frank - we cannot destroy Israel. The practical solution is for us to live alongside Israel. The future Palestinian state is not one that is to take the place of Israel."
He is not the kind of person that Israel should be targeting (never mind assassinating!).
Even though Hamas blew up that bus - he was working towards stopping such actions.
This attack also stopped the Palestinian Authority in their tracks. They were working on a plan to stop Hamas. They should have been given the opportunity to carry it out.
Now, the Americans are asking Arafat to help.
After sidelining him for all this time, I have a hard time believing them.
In any case, I suspect it's too little, too late.
It is back to war.
To the tanks and bulldozers, back to occupation.
I suspect, this is what Sharon wanted all along.
Wednesday, August 20, 2003
Iraq
The UN in Baghdad was attacked yesterday.
Sergio Vieira de Mello was one of at least 20 people killed in the bombing.
He will be sorely missed.
Some very good people died, people who offered much to the world and had so much to offer still.
By whom? Iraqi freedom fighters? What could they possibly gain... it was clear that Sergio de Mello was working towards the UN having the leading role, towards Iraqi self-rule. He was on the side of the Iraqi people.
External fighters from countries such as Saudi Arabia? What would they gain... if they came to fight "the great Satan" their choice of target could hardly have been poorer, most of the people killed in the UN building were not UK or US nationals.
Why? Was it because the UN was in the unique position of falling under an occupying force and not in charge of putting things to order themselves? Is this the result of losing their position of independence and as such seeming to ally themselves with occupiers?
Was it because of the oh so carefully worded UN resolution, welcoming the Governing Council? Was that seen as tacit approval of the US/UK invasion? Was that seen as legitimising the Council?
We may never know.
The results are unclear too.
The UN say they will stay... but I believe there has to be a change. It is clear, they are at risk here. Being cordonned off from the Iraqi people by US soldier guards, bristling with weapons and issued with itchy trigger fingers, is unacceptable. Being unguarded, is unacceptable too.
Best thing that I can come up with, is that the US hand over the operation to the UN.
As many voices have called out for a long time now.
They wont, though.
Not untill hell freezes over.
Or someone else is elected over there.
It has truly been a bad day for the world.
The UN in Baghdad was attacked yesterday.
Sergio Vieira de Mello was one of at least 20 people killed in the bombing.
He will be sorely missed.
Some very good people died, people who offered much to the world and had so much to offer still.
By whom? Iraqi freedom fighters? What could they possibly gain... it was clear that Sergio de Mello was working towards the UN having the leading role, towards Iraqi self-rule. He was on the side of the Iraqi people.
External fighters from countries such as Saudi Arabia? What would they gain... if they came to fight "the great Satan" their choice of target could hardly have been poorer, most of the people killed in the UN building were not UK or US nationals.
Why? Was it because the UN was in the unique position of falling under an occupying force and not in charge of putting things to order themselves? Is this the result of losing their position of independence and as such seeming to ally themselves with occupiers?
Was it because of the oh so carefully worded UN resolution, welcoming the Governing Council? Was that seen as tacit approval of the US/UK invasion? Was that seen as legitimising the Council?
We may never know.
The results are unclear too.
The UN say they will stay... but I believe there has to be a change. It is clear, they are at risk here. Being cordonned off from the Iraqi people by US soldier guards, bristling with weapons and issued with itchy trigger fingers, is unacceptable. Being unguarded, is unacceptable too.
Best thing that I can come up with, is that the US hand over the operation to the UN.
As many voices have called out for a long time now.
They wont, though.
Not untill hell freezes over.
Or someone else is elected over there.
It has truly been a bad day for the world.
Iraq
The UN in Baghdad was attacked yesterday.
Sergio Vieira de Mello was one of at least 20 people killed in the bombing.
He will be sorely missed.
Some very good people died, people who offered much to the world and had so much to offer still.
By whom? Iraqi freedom fighters? What could they possibly gain... it was clear that Sergio de Mello was working towards the UN having the leading role, towards Iraqi self-rule. He was on the side of the Iraqi people.
External fighters from countries such as Saudi Arabia? What would they gain... if they came to fight "the great Satan" their choice of target could hardly have been poorer, most of the people killed in the UN building were not UK or US nationals.
Why? Was it because the UN was in the unique position of falling under an occupying force and not in charge of putting things to order themselves? Is this the result of losing their position of independence and as such seeming to ally themselves with occupiers?
Was it because of the oh so carefully worded UN resolution, welcoming the Governing Council? Was that seen as tacit approval of the US/UK invasion? Was that seen as legitimising the Council?
We may never know.
The results are unclear too.
The UN say they will stay... but I believe there has to be a change. It is clear, they are at risk here. Being cordonned off from the Iraqi people by US soldier guards, bristling with weapons and issued with itchy trigger fingers, is unacceptable. Being unguarded, is unacceptable too.
Best thing that I can come up with, is that the US hand over the operation to the UN.
As many voices have called out for a long time now.
They wont, though.
Not untill hell freezes over.
Or someone else is elected over there.
It has truly been a bad day for the world.
The UN in Baghdad was attacked yesterday.
Sergio Vieira de Mello was one of at least 20 people killed in the bombing.
He will be sorely missed.
Some very good people died, people who offered much to the world and had so much to offer still.
By whom? Iraqi freedom fighters? What could they possibly gain... it was clear that Sergio de Mello was working towards the UN having the leading role, towards Iraqi self-rule. He was on the side of the Iraqi people.
External fighters from countries such as Saudi Arabia? What would they gain... if they came to fight "the great Satan" their choice of target could hardly have been poorer, most of the people killed in the UN building were not UK or US nationals.
Why? Was it because the UN was in the unique position of falling under an occupying force and not in charge of putting things to order themselves? Is this the result of losing their position of independence and as such seeming to ally themselves with occupiers?
Was it because of the oh so carefully worded UN resolution, welcoming the Governing Council? Was that seen as tacit approval of the US/UK invasion? Was that seen as legitimising the Council?
We may never know.
The results are unclear too.
The UN say they will stay... but I believe there has to be a change. It is clear, they are at risk here. Being cordonned off from the Iraqi people by US soldier guards, bristling with weapons and issued with itchy trigger fingers, is unacceptable. Being unguarded, is unacceptable too.
Best thing that I can come up with, is that the US hand over the operation to the UN.
As many voices have called out for a long time now.
They wont, though.
Not untill hell freezes over.
Or someone else is elected over there.
It has truly been a bad day for the world.
Zimbabwe
Mugabe has ordered relief agencies to surrender this food to his the ruling party officials so they can distribute it according to how they see fit.
Which would be: everything to Mugabe followers, the rest get nothing.
The relief agencies are stunned.
Will southern Africa still remain passive and quiet, I wonder?
What will it take for ONE critical voice to be heard???
As hard as it is, we should pull out of there alltogether, ALL aid agencies.
Let the boil come to a head and burst open.
The more we intervene right now, even though we mean well and want to help, the worse we make it.
If you doubt this, read Cathy Buckle's diary!
Mugabe has ordered relief agencies to surrender this food to his the ruling party officials so they can distribute it according to how they see fit.
Which would be: everything to Mugabe followers, the rest get nothing.
The relief agencies are stunned.
Will southern Africa still remain passive and quiet, I wonder?
What will it take for ONE critical voice to be heard???
As hard as it is, we should pull out of there alltogether, ALL aid agencies.
Let the boil come to a head and burst open.
The more we intervene right now, even though we mean well and want to help, the worse we make it.
If you doubt this, read Cathy Buckle's diary!
Zimbabwe
Mugabe has ordered relief agencies to surrender this food to his the ruling party officials so they can distribute it according to how they see fit.
Which would be: everything to Mugabe followers, the rest get nothing.
The relief agencies are stunned.
Will southern Africa still remain passive and quiet, I wonder?
What will it take for ONE critical voice to be heard???
As hard as it is, we should pull out of there alltogether, ALL aid agencies.
Let the boil come to a head and burst open.
The more we intervene right now, even though we mean well and want to help, the worse we make it.
If you doubt this, read Cathy Buckle's diary!
Mugabe has ordered relief agencies to surrender this food to his the ruling party officials so they can distribute it according to how they see fit.
Which would be: everything to Mugabe followers, the rest get nothing.
The relief agencies are stunned.
Will southern Africa still remain passive and quiet, I wonder?
What will it take for ONE critical voice to be heard???
As hard as it is, we should pull out of there alltogether, ALL aid agencies.
Let the boil come to a head and burst open.
The more we intervene right now, even though we mean well and want to help, the worse we make it.
If you doubt this, read Cathy Buckle's diary!
Tuesday, August 19, 2003
Iraq
Yesterday an e-mail from Jonathan Powell, Tony Blair's chief of staff to Mr Scarlett, in charge of compiling the dossier was presented to the Hutton inquiry:
"The dossier is good and convincing for those who are prepared to be convinced. The document does nothing to demonstrate a threat, let alone an imminent threat from Saddam ... We will need to make it clear in launching the document that we do not claim that we have evidence that he is an imminent threat. In other words it shows he has the means, but it does not demonstrate that he has the motive to attack his neighbours, let alone the West."
The e-mail also sought further information on the Iraqi regime's alleged links with al-Qa'ida. Efforts had been made to blank out a section that said: "The document says nothing about these, and TB will need ..."
More emails here.
It is all coming out, little bit by little bit.
I hope in the end we learn from this and that various countries individually, and collectively through the UN or such organisation, drafts rules, regulations and laws to prevent in future such pre-emptive warfare based on fallacious information.
I also hope the persons responsible will be held accountable.
Both in the USA as in the UK.
Yesterday an e-mail from Jonathan Powell, Tony Blair's chief of staff to Mr Scarlett, in charge of compiling the dossier was presented to the Hutton inquiry:
"The dossier is good and convincing for those who are prepared to be convinced. The document does nothing to demonstrate a threat, let alone an imminent threat from Saddam ... We will need to make it clear in launching the document that we do not claim that we have evidence that he is an imminent threat. In other words it shows he has the means, but it does not demonstrate that he has the motive to attack his neighbours, let alone the West."
The e-mail also sought further information on the Iraqi regime's alleged links with al-Qa'ida. Efforts had been made to blank out a section that said: "The document says nothing about these, and TB will need ..."
More emails here.
It is all coming out, little bit by little bit.
I hope in the end we learn from this and that various countries individually, and collectively through the UN or such organisation, drafts rules, regulations and laws to prevent in future such pre-emptive warfare based on fallacious information.
I also hope the persons responsible will be held accountable.
Both in the USA as in the UK.
Iraq
Yesterday an e-mail from Jonathan Powell, Tony Blair's chief of staff to Mr Scarlett, in charge of compiling the dossier was presented to the Hutton inquiry:
"The dossier is good and convincing for those who are prepared to be convinced. The document does nothing to demonstrate a threat, let alone an imminent threat from Saddam ... We will need to make it clear in launching the document that we do not claim that we have evidence that he is an imminent threat. In other words it shows he has the means, but it does not demonstrate that he has the motive to attack his neighbours, let alone the West."
The e-mail also sought further information on the Iraqi regime's alleged links with al-Qa'ida. Efforts had been made to blank out a section that said: "The document says nothing about these, and TB will need ..."
More emails here.
It is all coming out, little bit by little bit.
I hope in the end we learn from this and that various countries individually, and collectively through the UN or such organisation, drafts rules, regulations and laws to prevent in future such pre-emptive warfare based on fallacious information.
I also hope the persons responsible will be held accountable.
Both in the USA as in the UK.
Yesterday an e-mail from Jonathan Powell, Tony Blair's chief of staff to Mr Scarlett, in charge of compiling the dossier was presented to the Hutton inquiry:
"The dossier is good and convincing for those who are prepared to be convinced. The document does nothing to demonstrate a threat, let alone an imminent threat from Saddam ... We will need to make it clear in launching the document that we do not claim that we have evidence that he is an imminent threat. In other words it shows he has the means, but it does not demonstrate that he has the motive to attack his neighbours, let alone the West."
The e-mail also sought further information on the Iraqi regime's alleged links with al-Qa'ida. Efforts had been made to blank out a section that said: "The document says nothing about these, and TB will need ..."
More emails here.
It is all coming out, little bit by little bit.
I hope in the end we learn from this and that various countries individually, and collectively through the UN or such organisation, drafts rules, regulations and laws to prevent in future such pre-emptive warfare based on fallacious information.
I also hope the persons responsible will be held accountable.
Both in the USA as in the UK.
Monday, August 18, 2003
Sooty sunscreen
Hmm. Bet that some will say we need to pump more junk into the atmosphere in order to save the world...
Global warming's sooty smokescreen revealed
19:00 04 June 03
Exclusive from New Scientist Print Edition.
Smoke is clouding our view of global warming, protecting the planet from perhaps three-quarters of the greenhouse effect. That might sound like good news, but experts say that as the cover diminishes in coming decades, we are in for a dramatic escalation of warming that could be two or even three times as great as official best guesses.
This was the dramatic conclusion reached last week at a workshop in Dahlem, Berlin, where top atmospheric scientists got together, including Nobel laureate Paul Crutzen and Swedish meteorologist Bert Bolin, former chairman of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
IPCC scientists have suspected for a decade that aerosols of smoke and other particles from burning rainforest, crop waste and fossil fuels are blocking sunlight and counteracting the warming effect of carbon dioxide emissions. Until now, they reckoned that aerosols reduced greenhouse warming by perhaps a quarter, cutting increases by 0.2 °C. So the 0.6 °C of warming over the past century would have been 0.8 °C without aerosols.
Two views of future warming
But the Berlin workshop concluded that the real figure is even higher - aerosols may have reduced global warming by as much as three-quarters, cutting increases by 1.8 °C. If so, the good news is that aerosols have prevented the world getting almost two degrees warmer than it is now. But the bad news is that the climate system is much more sensitive to greenhouse gases than previously guessed.
As those gases are expected to continue accumulating in the atmosphere while aerosols stabilise or fall, that means "dramatic consequences for estimates of future climate change", the scientists agreed in a draft report from the workshop.
Parasol effect
Past calculations of the cooling effect of aerosols have been inferred from "missing" global warming predicted by climate models. But direct measurements reported in Science (vol 300, p 1103) in May by Theodore Anderson of the University of Washington in Seattle show a much greater parasol effect. Anderson says climate sensitivity could be larger than climate models suggest.
The Berlin meeting also heard evidence that past warm eras had higher temperatures than they ought to, if estimates of the atmospheric composition at the time and greenhouse models are correct. Again this suggests greater sensitivity.
"It looks like the warming today may be only about a quarter of what we would have got without aerosols," Crutzen told New Scientist. "You could say the cooling has done us a big favour. But the health effects of many aerosols in smog are so great that even in the poor world, they are already cutting emissions." For good reasons, aerosol levels look set to fall.
Moreover, most aerosol emissions only stay in the atmosphere for a few days. Most greenhouses gases remain for a century or longer. So as time goes on, aerosols will protect us less and less from global warming. "They are giving us a false sense of security right now," said Crutzen.
'Sooner, not later'
One tentative estimate put warming two or even three times higher than current middle-range forecasts of 3 to 4 °C based on a doubling of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, which is likely by late this century.
That suggests global warming well above the IPCC maximum forecast of 5.8 °C. Back-of-the-envelope calculations now suggest a "worst case" warming of 7 to 10 °C.
Will Steffen of the Swedish Academy of Sciences says the message for policy makers is clear: "We need to get on top of the greenhouse gas emissions problem sooner rather than later."
Fred Pearce, Berlin
Global warming's sooty smokescreen revealed
19:00 04 June 03
Exclusive from New Scientist Print Edition.
Smoke is clouding our view of global warming, protecting the planet from perhaps three-quarters of the greenhouse effect. That might sound like good news, but experts say that as the cover diminishes in coming decades, we are in for a dramatic escalation of warming that could be two or even three times as great as official best guesses.
This was the dramatic conclusion reached last week at a workshop in Dahlem, Berlin, where top atmospheric scientists got together, including Nobel laureate Paul Crutzen and Swedish meteorologist Bert Bolin, former chairman of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
IPCC scientists have suspected for a decade that aerosols of smoke and other particles from burning rainforest, crop waste and fossil fuels are blocking sunlight and counteracting the warming effect of carbon dioxide emissions. Until now, they reckoned that aerosols reduced greenhouse warming by perhaps a quarter, cutting increases by 0.2 °C. So the 0.6 °C of warming over the past century would have been 0.8 °C without aerosols.
Two views of future warming
But the Berlin workshop concluded that the real figure is even higher - aerosols may have reduced global warming by as much as three-quarters, cutting increases by 1.8 °C. If so, the good news is that aerosols have prevented the world getting almost two degrees warmer than it is now. But the bad news is that the climate system is much more sensitive to greenhouse gases than previously guessed.
As those gases are expected to continue accumulating in the atmosphere while aerosols stabilise or fall, that means "dramatic consequences for estimates of future climate change", the scientists agreed in a draft report from the workshop.
Parasol effect
Past calculations of the cooling effect of aerosols have been inferred from "missing" global warming predicted by climate models. But direct measurements reported in Science (vol 300, p 1103) in May by Theodore Anderson of the University of Washington in Seattle show a much greater parasol effect. Anderson says climate sensitivity could be larger than climate models suggest.
The Berlin meeting also heard evidence that past warm eras had higher temperatures than they ought to, if estimates of the atmospheric composition at the time and greenhouse models are correct. Again this suggests greater sensitivity.
"It looks like the warming today may be only about a quarter of what we would have got without aerosols," Crutzen told New Scientist. "You could say the cooling has done us a big favour. But the health effects of many aerosols in smog are so great that even in the poor world, they are already cutting emissions." For good reasons, aerosol levels look set to fall.
Moreover, most aerosol emissions only stay in the atmosphere for a few days. Most greenhouses gases remain for a century or longer. So as time goes on, aerosols will protect us less and less from global warming. "They are giving us a false sense of security right now," said Crutzen.
'Sooner, not later'
One tentative estimate put warming two or even three times higher than current middle-range forecasts of 3 to 4 °C based on a doubling of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, which is likely by late this century.
That suggests global warming well above the IPCC maximum forecast of 5.8 °C. Back-of-the-envelope calculations now suggest a "worst case" warming of 7 to 10 °C.
Will Steffen of the Swedish Academy of Sciences says the message for policy makers is clear: "We need to get on top of the greenhouse gas emissions problem sooner rather than later."
Fred Pearce, Berlin
Sunday, August 17, 2003
Guantanamo Bay
Two of the British men being held at Guantanamo Bay, Moazzam Begg and Feroz Abbasi, admitted supporting al-Qa'ida in a plea bargain deal for a short sentence. This is Tony Blair's payback, I suspect.
Of course they pleaded out, I would have too, guilty or not!
Being held in that prison without charges, without access to my lawyer or family for all that time and knowing the death penalty was hanging over my head, hell yes, I would have pleaded guilty to anything that would get me out there alive.
This is a complete comedy of justice.
Two of the British men being held at Guantanamo Bay, Moazzam Begg and Feroz Abbasi, admitted supporting al-Qa'ida in a plea bargain deal for a short sentence. This is Tony Blair's payback, I suspect.
Of course they pleaded out, I would have too, guilty or not!
Being held in that prison without charges, without access to my lawyer or family for all that time and knowing the death penalty was hanging over my head, hell yes, I would have pleaded guilty to anything that would get me out there alive.
This is a complete comedy of justice.
Guantanamo Bay
Two of the British men being held at Guantanamo Bay, Moazzam Begg and Feroz Abbasi, admitted supporting al-Qa'ida in a plea bargain deal for a short sentence. This is Tony Blair's payback, I suspect.
Of course they pleaded out, I would have too, guilty or not!
Being held in that prison without charges, without access to my lawyer or family for all that time and knowing the death penalty was hanging over my head, hell yes, I would have pleaded guilty to anything that would get me out there alive.
This is a complete comedy of justice.
Two of the British men being held at Guantanamo Bay, Moazzam Begg and Feroz Abbasi, admitted supporting al-Qa'ida in a plea bargain deal for a short sentence. This is Tony Blair's payback, I suspect.
Of course they pleaded out, I would have too, guilty or not!
Being held in that prison without charges, without access to my lawyer or family for all that time and knowing the death penalty was hanging over my head, hell yes, I would have pleaded guilty to anything that would get me out there alive.
This is a complete comedy of justice.
Saturday, August 16, 2003
Idi Amin is dead
The cruel butcher of Uganda is dead.
Good riddance.
It burns me that he was allowed to live out his days in peace and comfort in Saudi Arabia.
The Saudi authorities actually shielded this monster!
These kinds of criminal should never have peace.
They should be hounded relentlessly.
Taken to international court and locked up for the rest of their lives.
It seems though that the majority of such people escape this and live out their lives in comfort and anonymity.
It just isn't right.
The cruel butcher of Uganda is dead.
Good riddance.
It burns me that he was allowed to live out his days in peace and comfort in Saudi Arabia.
The Saudi authorities actually shielded this monster!
These kinds of criminal should never have peace.
They should be hounded relentlessly.
Taken to international court and locked up for the rest of their lives.
It seems though that the majority of such people escape this and live out their lives in comfort and anonymity.
It just isn't right.
Idi Amin is dead
The cruel butcher of Uganda is dead.
Good riddance.
It burns me that he was allowed to live out his days in peace and comfort in Saudi Arabia.
The Saudi authorities actually shielded this monster!
These kinds of criminal should never have peace.
They should be hounded relentlessly.
Taken to international court and locked up for the rest of their lives.
It seems though that the majority of such people escape this and live out their lives in comfort and anonymity.
It just isn't right.
The cruel butcher of Uganda is dead.
Good riddance.
It burns me that he was allowed to live out his days in peace and comfort in Saudi Arabia.
The Saudi authorities actually shielded this monster!
These kinds of criminal should never have peace.
They should be hounded relentlessly.
Taken to international court and locked up for the rest of their lives.
It seems though that the majority of such people escape this and live out their lives in comfort and anonymity.
It just isn't right.
Friday, August 15, 2003
Iraq
Two weeks ago, Halliburton, the Houston oil company once run by Vice President Dick Cheney, announced a profit of $26 million in the second quarter of this year. In 2002 the company lost $498 million.
Two thoughts come to mind:
1. War is a most profitable business!
2. It pays to have friends in high places.
Two weeks ago, Halliburton, the Houston oil company once run by Vice President Dick Cheney, announced a profit of $26 million in the second quarter of this year. In 2002 the company lost $498 million.
Two thoughts come to mind:
1. War is a most profitable business!
2. It pays to have friends in high places.
Iraq
Two weeks ago, Halliburton, the Houston oil company once run by Vice President Dick Cheney, announced a profit of $26 million in the second quarter of this year. In 2002 the company lost $498 million.
Two thoughts come to mind:
1. War is a most profitable business!
2. It pays to have friends in high places.
Two weeks ago, Halliburton, the Houston oil company once run by Vice President Dick Cheney, announced a profit of $26 million in the second quarter of this year. In 2002 the company lost $498 million.
Two thoughts come to mind:
1. War is a most profitable business!
2. It pays to have friends in high places.
Thursday, August 14, 2003
Bush (Junior)
President Bush reacting to a reporter calling Arnold Schwarzenegger the "biggest political story in the country":
Bush: "It is the biggest political story in the country? That's interesting. That says a lot. That speaks volumes."
Reporter: "Means you don't agree?"
Bush: "I don't get to decide the biggest political story. You decide the biggest political story. But I find it interesting that that is the biggest political story in the country, as you just said."
Pressed on the matter, Bush said, "Oh, I think there's maybe other political stories. Isn't there, like, a presidential race coming up?"
And here's me thinking that the biggest political story should be Iraq.
Almost every day a few US solders gets killed.
I suspect Bush (Junior) does not think they are important.
Or he would get the UN involved.
President Bush reacting to a reporter calling Arnold Schwarzenegger the "biggest political story in the country":
Bush: "It is the biggest political story in the country? That's interesting. That says a lot. That speaks volumes."
Reporter: "Means you don't agree?"
Bush: "I don't get to decide the biggest political story. You decide the biggest political story. But I find it interesting that that is the biggest political story in the country, as you just said."
Pressed on the matter, Bush said, "Oh, I think there's maybe other political stories. Isn't there, like, a presidential race coming up?"
And here's me thinking that the biggest political story should be Iraq.
Almost every day a few US solders gets killed.
I suspect Bush (Junior) does not think they are important.
Or he would get the UN involved.
Bush (Junior)
President Bush reacting to a reporter calling Arnold Schwarzenegger the "biggest political story in the country":
Bush: "It is the biggest political story in the country? That's interesting. That says a lot. That speaks volumes."
Reporter: "Means you don't agree?"
Bush: "I don't get to decide the biggest political story. You decide the biggest political story. But I find it interesting that that is the biggest political story in the country, as you just said."
Pressed on the matter, Bush said, "Oh, I think there's maybe other political stories. Isn't there, like, a presidential race coming up?"
And here's me thinking that the biggest political story should be Iraq.
Almost every day a few US solders gets killed.
I suspect Bush (Junior) does not think they are important.
Or he would get the UN involved.
President Bush reacting to a reporter calling Arnold Schwarzenegger the "biggest political story in the country":
Bush: "It is the biggest political story in the country? That's interesting. That says a lot. That speaks volumes."
Reporter: "Means you don't agree?"
Bush: "I don't get to decide the biggest political story. You decide the biggest political story. But I find it interesting that that is the biggest political story in the country, as you just said."
Pressed on the matter, Bush said, "Oh, I think there's maybe other political stories. Isn't there, like, a presidential race coming up?"
And here's me thinking that the biggest political story should be Iraq.
Almost every day a few US solders gets killed.
I suspect Bush (Junior) does not think they are important.
Or he would get the UN involved.
Iraq
So, America is turning away from involving the UN in Iraq, they are planning to seek help elsewhere.
An unnamed administration official: "The administration is not willing to confront going to the Security Council and saying, 'We really need to make Iraq an international operation,"'
"You can make a case that it would be better to do that, but, right now, the situation in Iraq is not that dire."
Nope, they would rather wait until all hell breaks loose and then only bring in the UN. When it is virtually certain they will fail too.
Looks like the US has to be right at all costs.
Retain all power in Iraq and the region at all costs.
The Iraqi's are the ones paying though, and those American soldiers being used as target practice.
So, America is turning away from involving the UN in Iraq, they are planning to seek help elsewhere.
An unnamed administration official: "The administration is not willing to confront going to the Security Council and saying, 'We really need to make Iraq an international operation,"'
"You can make a case that it would be better to do that, but, right now, the situation in Iraq is not that dire."
Nope, they would rather wait until all hell breaks loose and then only bring in the UN. When it is virtually certain they will fail too.
Looks like the US has to be right at all costs.
Retain all power in Iraq and the region at all costs.
The Iraqi's are the ones paying though, and those American soldiers being used as target practice.
Iraq
So, America is turning away from involving the UN in Iraq, they are planning to seek help elsewhere.
An unnamed administration official: "The administration is not willing to confront going to the Security Council and saying, 'We really need to make Iraq an international operation,"'
"You can make a case that it would be better to do that, but, right now, the situation in Iraq is not that dire."
Nope, they would rather wait until all hell breaks loose and then only bring in the UN. When it is virtually certain they will fail too.
Looks like the US has to be right at all costs.
Retain all power in Iraq and the region at all costs.
The Iraqi's are the ones paying though, and those American soldiers being used as target practice.
So, America is turning away from involving the UN in Iraq, they are planning to seek help elsewhere.
An unnamed administration official: "The administration is not willing to confront going to the Security Council and saying, 'We really need to make Iraq an international operation,"'
"You can make a case that it would be better to do that, but, right now, the situation in Iraq is not that dire."
Nope, they would rather wait until all hell breaks loose and then only bring in the UN. When it is virtually certain they will fail too.
Looks like the US has to be right at all costs.
Retain all power in Iraq and the region at all costs.
The Iraqi's are the ones paying though, and those American soldiers being used as target practice.
Tuesday, August 12, 2003
Iraq
Today, a little lesson in hypocrisy.
Check out these publications of the US State Dept:
First, this one on 31 July 2003:
Bush Continues National Emergency With Respect to Iraq
Continuation notice cites continued instability in Iraq
President Bush has continued for one year the national emergency with respect to Iraq, citing continued instability in the country, as well as the need to "ensure the establishment of a process leading to representative Iraqi self-rule."
In other words, the crippling US sanctions will continue for another year!!!
The US State Dept then published the following publications over the next few days:
08 August 2003
Bush Says Coalition Demolishing Remnants of Iraqi Regime
President Bush told reporters : "since then, we've made good progress. Iraq is more secure. The economy of Iraq is beginning to improve," and "the political process is moving toward democracy."
08 August 2003
White House Notes Successful Results Of Iraqi Liberation
Reading this report, you would believe this is paradise, with only a few very small problems left to solve...
08 August 2003
U.S. Commander Says Stabilization Efforts Are Flourishing in N. Iraq
Defense Department Report, August 8: Iraq Operational Update
09 August 2003
Bush Hails Progress in Iraq in Restoring Order, Rebuilding Economy
President Bush: "Life is returning to normal for the Iraqi people"
Really!!!
Can you smell the bullshit???
Today, a little lesson in hypocrisy.
Check out these publications of the US State Dept:
First, this one on 31 July 2003:
Bush Continues National Emergency With Respect to Iraq
Continuation notice cites continued instability in Iraq
President Bush has continued for one year the national emergency with respect to Iraq, citing continued instability in the country, as well as the need to "ensure the establishment of a process leading to representative Iraqi self-rule."
In other words, the crippling US sanctions will continue for another year!!!
The US State Dept then published the following publications over the next few days:
08 August 2003
Bush Says Coalition Demolishing Remnants of Iraqi Regime
President Bush told reporters : "since then, we've made good progress. Iraq is more secure. The economy of Iraq is beginning to improve," and "the political process is moving toward democracy."
08 August 2003
White House Notes Successful Results Of Iraqi Liberation
Reading this report, you would believe this is paradise, with only a few very small problems left to solve...
08 August 2003
U.S. Commander Says Stabilization Efforts Are Flourishing in N. Iraq
Defense Department Report, August 8: Iraq Operational Update
09 August 2003
Bush Hails Progress in Iraq in Restoring Order, Rebuilding Economy
President Bush: "Life is returning to normal for the Iraqi people"
Really!!!
Can you smell the bullshit???
Iraq
Today, a little lesson in hypocrisy.
Check out these publications of the US State Dept:
First, this one on 31 July 2003:
Bush Continues National Emergency With Respect to Iraq
Continuation notice cites continued instability in Iraq
President Bush has continued for one year the national emergency with respect to Iraq, citing continued instability in the country, as well as the need to "ensure the establishment of a process leading to representative Iraqi self-rule."
In other words, the crippling US sanctions will continue for another year!!!
The US State Dept then published the following publications over the next few days:
08 August 2003
Bush Says Coalition Demolishing Remnants of Iraqi Regime
President Bush told reporters : "since then, we've made good progress. Iraq is more secure. The economy of Iraq is beginning to improve," and "the political process is moving toward democracy."
08 August 2003
White House Notes Successful Results Of Iraqi Liberation
Reading this report, you would believe this is paradise, with only a few very small problems left to solve...
08 August 2003
U.S. Commander Says Stabilization Efforts Are Flourishing in N. Iraq
Defense Department Report, August 8: Iraq Operational Update
09 August 2003
Bush Hails Progress in Iraq in Restoring Order, Rebuilding Economy
President Bush: "Life is returning to normal for the Iraqi people"
Really!!!
Can you smell the bullshit???
Today, a little lesson in hypocrisy.
Check out these publications of the US State Dept:
First, this one on 31 July 2003:
Bush Continues National Emergency With Respect to Iraq
Continuation notice cites continued instability in Iraq
President Bush has continued for one year the national emergency with respect to Iraq, citing continued instability in the country, as well as the need to "ensure the establishment of a process leading to representative Iraqi self-rule."
In other words, the crippling US sanctions will continue for another year!!!
The US State Dept then published the following publications over the next few days:
08 August 2003
Bush Says Coalition Demolishing Remnants of Iraqi Regime
President Bush told reporters : "since then, we've made good progress. Iraq is more secure. The economy of Iraq is beginning to improve," and "the political process is moving toward democracy."
08 August 2003
White House Notes Successful Results Of Iraqi Liberation
Reading this report, you would believe this is paradise, with only a few very small problems left to solve...
08 August 2003
U.S. Commander Says Stabilization Efforts Are Flourishing in N. Iraq
Defense Department Report, August 8: Iraq Operational Update
09 August 2003
Bush Hails Progress in Iraq in Restoring Order, Rebuilding Economy
President Bush: "Life is returning to normal for the Iraqi people"
Really!!!
Can you smell the bullshit???
Sunday, August 10, 2003
Iraq
Oh, those bastards!!!! This avowed atheist hopes there actually is a hell so that the military officers who ordered the use of napalm in Iraq would roast in their own beloved weapon for all eternity!
They denied using napalm at first. They said they had destroyed the last stockpiles in 2001.
I wanted to believe it... I did not want to believe that in these times, there still are soldiers who find this kind of weapon acceptable.
Well, they DID use them.
They call it another name now.
Napalm bombs are now called firebombs: 510 pound bombs consisting of 44lbs of polystyrene-like gel and 63 gallons of jet fuel. When you drop that on a target it results in a huge firebomb, wiping out everything and everybody in the region. It is a barbaric and truly horrific weapon. Most of the world signed the 1980 UN convention - of course, the US did not.
I feel sick to my stomach!
Oh, those bastards!!!! This avowed atheist hopes there actually is a hell so that the military officers who ordered the use of napalm in Iraq would roast in their own beloved weapon for all eternity!
They denied using napalm at first. They said they had destroyed the last stockpiles in 2001.
I wanted to believe it... I did not want to believe that in these times, there still are soldiers who find this kind of weapon acceptable.
Well, they DID use them.
They call it another name now.
Napalm bombs are now called firebombs: 510 pound bombs consisting of 44lbs of polystyrene-like gel and 63 gallons of jet fuel. When you drop that on a target it results in a huge firebomb, wiping out everything and everybody in the region. It is a barbaric and truly horrific weapon. Most of the world signed the 1980 UN convention - of course, the US did not.
I feel sick to my stomach!
Iraq
Oh, those bastards!!!! This avowed atheist hopes there actually is a hell so that the military officers who ordered the use of napalm in Iraq would roast in their own beloved weapon for all eternity!
They denied using napalm at first. They said they had destroyed the last stockpiles in 2001.
I wanted to believe it... I did not want to believe that in these times, there still are soldiers who find this kind of weapon acceptable.
Well, they DID use them.
They call it another name now.
Napalm bombs are now called firebombs: 510 pound bombs consisting of 44lbs of polystyrene-like gel and 63 gallons of jet fuel. When you drop that on a target it results in a huge firebomb, wiping out everything and everybody in the region. It is a barbaric and truly horrific weapon. Most of the world signed the 1980 UN convention - of course, the US did not.
I feel sick to my stomach!
Oh, those bastards!!!! This avowed atheist hopes there actually is a hell so that the military officers who ordered the use of napalm in Iraq would roast in their own beloved weapon for all eternity!
They denied using napalm at first. They said they had destroyed the last stockpiles in 2001.
I wanted to believe it... I did not want to believe that in these times, there still are soldiers who find this kind of weapon acceptable.
Well, they DID use them.
They call it another name now.
Napalm bombs are now called firebombs: 510 pound bombs consisting of 44lbs of polystyrene-like gel and 63 gallons of jet fuel. When you drop that on a target it results in a huge firebomb, wiping out everything and everybody in the region. It is a barbaric and truly horrific weapon. Most of the world signed the 1980 UN convention - of course, the US did not.
I feel sick to my stomach!
Iraq
Well, I see much of the American media is finally starting to wake up and report on the ridiculous drumbeating campaign and distortion of information (and sometimes outright lies) used by the current administration to brainwash the American public into compliance as they prepared their invasion of Iraq.
The nonsense claims such as those infamous hydrogen trailers are also getting some media time.
While I wonder why it took the media so long to report on what was freely available information (the official UK report on the trailers has been available since june) I have no doubts on the effect of this reporting.
There will be none. Zip.
Bush is completely unaccountable - as is the crowd of warmongers he surrounds himself with.
They are truly the untouchables.
I have this sinking feeling he wil be re-elected despite all this information coming to the surface.
It looks as if the Americans simply dont want to hear it... as if the numerous terrorist alerts have led to a collective form of numb denial.
As long as someone talks tough and acts tough, they feel safe.
What a world this is becoming....!!!!
Well, I see much of the American media is finally starting to wake up and report on the ridiculous drumbeating campaign and distortion of information (and sometimes outright lies) used by the current administration to brainwash the American public into compliance as they prepared their invasion of Iraq.
The nonsense claims such as those infamous hydrogen trailers are also getting some media time.
While I wonder why it took the media so long to report on what was freely available information (the official UK report on the trailers has been available since june) I have no doubts on the effect of this reporting.
There will be none. Zip.
Bush is completely unaccountable - as is the crowd of warmongers he surrounds himself with.
They are truly the untouchables.
I have this sinking feeling he wil be re-elected despite all this information coming to the surface.
It looks as if the Americans simply dont want to hear it... as if the numerous terrorist alerts have led to a collective form of numb denial.
As long as someone talks tough and acts tough, they feel safe.
What a world this is becoming....!!!!
Iraq
Well, I see much of the American media is finally starting to wake up and report on the ridiculous drumbeating campaign and distortion of information (and sometimes outright lies) used by the current administration to brainwash the American public into compliance as they prepared their invasion of Iraq.
The nonsense claims such as those infamous hydrogen trailers are also getting some media time.
While I wonder why it took the media so long to report on what was freely available information (the official UK report on the trailers has been available since june) I have no doubts on the effect of this reporting.
There will be none. Zip.
Bush is completely unaccountable - as is the crowd of warmongers he surrounds himself with.
They are truly the untouchables.
I have this sinking feeling he wil be re-elected despite all this information coming to the surface.
It looks as if the Americans simply dont want to hear it... as if the numerous terrorist alerts have led to a collective form of numb denial.
As long as someone talks tough and acts tough, they feel safe.
What a world this is becoming....!!!!
Well, I see much of the American media is finally starting to wake up and report on the ridiculous drumbeating campaign and distortion of information (and sometimes outright lies) used by the current administration to brainwash the American public into compliance as they prepared their invasion of Iraq.
The nonsense claims such as those infamous hydrogen trailers are also getting some media time.
While I wonder why it took the media so long to report on what was freely available information (the official UK report on the trailers has been available since june) I have no doubts on the effect of this reporting.
There will be none. Zip.
Bush is completely unaccountable - as is the crowd of warmongers he surrounds himself with.
They are truly the untouchables.
I have this sinking feeling he wil be re-elected despite all this information coming to the surface.
It looks as if the Americans simply dont want to hear it... as if the numerous terrorist alerts have led to a collective form of numb denial.
As long as someone talks tough and acts tough, they feel safe.
What a world this is becoming....!!!!
Thursday, August 07, 2003
Iraq
"It was a fact that I started to get multiple indicators that maybe our iron-fisted approach to the conduct of ops was beginning to alienate Iraqis," General Sanchez said, referring to military operations. "I started to get those sensings from multiple sources, all the way from the Governing Council down to average people."
Oh come now, the top US military people in Iraq are not that naive, to suddenly note this with such surprise: they are not Bob or Sally from the corner pub.
This behaviour of the Americans troops had purpose. This kind of agressive behaviour was probably thought out by some behavioural psychologist in a Pentagon back-room.
What: they thought it would feel so good if they stopped, that the Iraqi's would love them for it?? A sort of battered wife syndrome?? A kind of Stockholm syndrome?? Perhaps they thought that the Iraqi's were used to a heavy hand and would only have respect for that; better use force just like Saddam did?? Perhaps they hoped another strongman would arise from the Iraqi ashes and take over where Saddam left off... a kind of benevolent dictator, friendly to the US and their business interests?? Who knows. In any case, this kind of uniform heavy-handedness only happens with the express agreement and blessing of top military brass.
I do think it is sensible to start treating the Iraqi people with common dignity and good manners though, before each and every person in that country is turned into an American-hating 'terrorist'. Which would make this war a far more effective public relations exercise for Al Queda than Osama (remember him?? the mastermind of 9-11 who is currently tap-dancing all over Afghanistan with his old cronies) could ever manage to pull off.
I am still so, SO very angry at this pre-emptive war.
It has made the world so much more unsafe.
I will not ever forget this, or forgive.
I hope it costs the US much... so much, they will think twice before starting another pre-emptive war.
Just not in more human lives.
"It was a fact that I started to get multiple indicators that maybe our iron-fisted approach to the conduct of ops was beginning to alienate Iraqis," General Sanchez said, referring to military operations. "I started to get those sensings from multiple sources, all the way from the Governing Council down to average people."
Oh come now, the top US military people in Iraq are not that naive, to suddenly note this with such surprise: they are not Bob or Sally from the corner pub.
This behaviour of the Americans troops had purpose. This kind of agressive behaviour was probably thought out by some behavioural psychologist in a Pentagon back-room.
What: they thought it would feel so good if they stopped, that the Iraqi's would love them for it?? A sort of battered wife syndrome?? A kind of Stockholm syndrome?? Perhaps they thought that the Iraqi's were used to a heavy hand and would only have respect for that; better use force just like Saddam did?? Perhaps they hoped another strongman would arise from the Iraqi ashes and take over where Saddam left off... a kind of benevolent dictator, friendly to the US and their business interests?? Who knows. In any case, this kind of uniform heavy-handedness only happens with the express agreement and blessing of top military brass.
I do think it is sensible to start treating the Iraqi people with common dignity and good manners though, before each and every person in that country is turned into an American-hating 'terrorist'. Which would make this war a far more effective public relations exercise for Al Queda than Osama (remember him?? the mastermind of 9-11 who is currently tap-dancing all over Afghanistan with his old cronies) could ever manage to pull off.
I am still so, SO very angry at this pre-emptive war.
It has made the world so much more unsafe.
I will not ever forget this, or forgive.
I hope it costs the US much... so much, they will think twice before starting another pre-emptive war.
Just not in more human lives.
Iraq
"It was a fact that I started to get multiple indicators that maybe our iron-fisted approach to the conduct of ops was beginning to alienate Iraqis," General Sanchez said, referring to military operations. "I started to get those sensings from multiple sources, all the way from the Governing Council down to average people."
Oh come now, the top US military people in Iraq are not that naive, to suddenly note this with such surprise: they are not Bob or Sally from the corner pub.
This behaviour of the Americans troops had purpose. This kind of agressive behaviour was probably thought out by some behavioural psychologist in a Pentagon back-room.
What: they thought it would feel so good if they stopped, that the Iraqi's would love them for it?? A sort of battered wife syndrome?? A kind of Stockholm syndrome?? Perhaps they thought that the Iraqi's were used to a heavy hand and would only have respect for that; better use force just like Saddam did?? Perhaps they hoped another strongman would arise from the Iraqi ashes and take over where Saddam left off... a kind of benevolent dictator, friendly to the US and their business interests?? Who knows. In any case, this kind of uniform heavy-handedness only happens with the express agreement and blessing of top military brass.
I do think it is sensible to start treating the Iraqi people with common dignity and good manners though, before each and every person in that country is turned into an American-hating 'terrorist'. Which would make this war a far more effective public relations exercise for Al Queda than Osama (remember him?? the mastermind of 9-11 who is currently tap-dancing all over Afghanistan with his old cronies) could ever manage to pull off.
I am still so, SO very angry at this pre-emptive war.
It has made the world so much more unsafe.
I will not ever forget this, or forgive.
I hope it costs the US much... so much, they will think twice before starting another pre-emptive war.
Just not in more human lives.
"It was a fact that I started to get multiple indicators that maybe our iron-fisted approach to the conduct of ops was beginning to alienate Iraqis," General Sanchez said, referring to military operations. "I started to get those sensings from multiple sources, all the way from the Governing Council down to average people."
Oh come now, the top US military people in Iraq are not that naive, to suddenly note this with such surprise: they are not Bob or Sally from the corner pub.
This behaviour of the Americans troops had purpose. This kind of agressive behaviour was probably thought out by some behavioural psychologist in a Pentagon back-room.
What: they thought it would feel so good if they stopped, that the Iraqi's would love them for it?? A sort of battered wife syndrome?? A kind of Stockholm syndrome?? Perhaps they thought that the Iraqi's were used to a heavy hand and would only have respect for that; better use force just like Saddam did?? Perhaps they hoped another strongman would arise from the Iraqi ashes and take over where Saddam left off... a kind of benevolent dictator, friendly to the US and their business interests?? Who knows. In any case, this kind of uniform heavy-handedness only happens with the express agreement and blessing of top military brass.
I do think it is sensible to start treating the Iraqi people with common dignity and good manners though, before each and every person in that country is turned into an American-hating 'terrorist'. Which would make this war a far more effective public relations exercise for Al Queda than Osama (remember him?? the mastermind of 9-11 who is currently tap-dancing all over Afghanistan with his old cronies) could ever manage to pull off.
I am still so, SO very angry at this pre-emptive war.
It has made the world so much more unsafe.
I will not ever forget this, or forgive.
I hope it costs the US much... so much, they will think twice before starting another pre-emptive war.
Just not in more human lives.
Tuesday, August 05, 2003
Extremes in weather
Is this proof of global warming? One by one, maybe no. But collectively, as a trend, looking over the years, it certainly fits the models.
Britain bakes, Europe burns. Is this proof of global warming?
By Michael McCarthy, Environment Editor
05 August 2003
If it isn't proof of global warming at last, it certainly looks like it. As much of Europe burns like a furnace and rivers run dry across the continent, Britain is bracing itself for its own record temperature.
Sometime tomorrow, in southern England or the Midlands, the mercury in the thermometer may pass 37.1C, which became the national record when registered in Cheltenham on 3 August 1990. That centigrade peak translates as 98.8 Fahrenheit, so the remarkable figure for Britain of 99 or even 100F- is on the cards.
"We reckon there's a 20 per cent chance it will happen, but in any case it's going to get very very close," said Andy Yeatman of the Met Office.
A record would be hugely significant - a three-figure Fahrenheit temperature for the UK would be breaking psychological as well as new meteorological ground as it would give many people for the first time the perception that global warning is a real, not a theoretical phenomenon - and that it is happening to them.
If we do see a record, and possibly 100F, meteorological scientists will not directly attribute it to climate change - natural climate variability is too great for a single heat episode to be put down to global warming. But they will certainly say it is in line with what global warming is predicted to produce by complex mathematical models of the Earth's climate run on supercomputers.
And even if the record is not quite breached, Britain's weather services are agreed that tomorrow temperatures will be in the upper 30s Centigrade (or the high 90s Fahrenheit), certainly hitting 35-36C (95-97F). These are temperatures that, in the past, have been reached only a few times per century, and in anticipation, temporary speed restrictions were imposed yesterday on some of Britain's busiest rail routes for fear of rails buckling in the heat. Long-distance Virgin routes from London to the Midlands and the North will be most affected, with a 60mph limit imposed by Network Rail along the west coast main line from Euston to Crewe and the cross-country network.
Individuals should be equally careful. Don't plan anything strenuous, put suncream on the children and keep your bottled water handy. Britain will bake.
It has been coming for weeks. Across Europe, an unending episode of unprecedented heat has this summer reduced major rivers to a trickle in Italy, turned southern France into an inferno of forest fires and sent people in Germany to their deaths from heatstroke. Only the Atlantic westerly winds have kept the burning air from Britain - and now the winds are blowing from the south-east, and blowing the heat our way.
But what a contrast, in central and Eastern Europe, with just a year ago. Then the problems were not heat and drought - they were torrential downpours and flooding.
As two depressions came together last August and dumped a deluge of biblical proportions over southern Germany, the Czech Republic, Austria and Hungary, the region's great rivers burst their banks and drowned more than 100 people amid millions of pounds worth of damage. The two jewel cities of Mitteleuropa, Dresden and Prague, were inundated as the Elbe and the Vltava overflowed, and only its high flood defence walls saved Budapest as the Danube rose nearly 10 metres. (This year it is, in places, only a metre deep).
However, Europe's record soaking summer of 2002 and its record baking summer of 2003 do not cancel each other out in terms of indicating global warming - just the opposite.
Both are in line with one of the key features predicted for climate change, if levels of greenhouses gases in the atmosphere, such as carbon dioxide (CO2), keep going up - more extreme weather occurs.
"They are both consistent with what the computer models of the climate are saying will become more frequent, if CO2 levels continue to rise," said Simon Brown, who is in charge of researching extreme events at the Met Office's Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research.
Higher temperatures mean the air could hold more moisture, Dr Brown said, so even in a dry summer, when rain falls, it could be much heavier.
Five weeks ago, in an unprecedented announcement, the World Meteorological Organisation signalled weather extremes were being recorded all across the world, from Switzerland's hottest-ever June to a record month for tornadoes in the US - and linked them to global warming directly.
No one can prove it. But as you swelter in the heat today, you should realise the evidence is stacking up.
Portugal
Portugal declared a state of national disaster yesterday after the worst spate of forest fires in more than two decades killed nine people, torched thousands of hectares of tinder-dry forest and destroyed scores of homes, writes Tim Gaynor.
The emergency declaration allowed more than €100m (£70m) in aid to be released. The funds will go to people who have lost their jobs and homes, farmers who have lost crops and livestock, and to local councils so that they can begin rebuilding infrastructure.
Emergency services in Lisbon said the fires, which came after weeks without rain, had hit 15 of the country's 18 regions. Almost 3,000 firefighters, 380 troops, 781 fire engines, 23 helicopters and 12 water-carrying planes were deployed to fight the blazes, which were fanned by strong winds.
The wildfires were raging mostly in the central region near Castelo Branco, about 120 miles north-east of Lisbon, where the hills are covered with pine forests.
Rescue workers said nine people had died in the past week, including a fireman who was killed when a fire engine crashed. So far this year there have been about 1,700 wild fires in the country, destroying more than 26,000 hectares of scrub and trees.
As the temperature rose to more than 40C, rail services were halted and roads were cut off in some regions.
SPAIN
Emergency services evacuated hundreds of residents from villages and farmhouses in central and south-west Spain yesterday, writes Tim Gaynor, as high winds and record temperatures fanned summer fires into roaring blazes that scorched thousands of hectares of woodland.
Hundreds of firefighters and volunteers battled blazes in the province of Avila, north-west of Madrid, after a separate fire in the region of Extremadura bordering Portugal, which destroyed 1,000 hectares (2,470 acres) of woodland and led to the evacuation of 750 people, was brought under control.
Emergency services in Avila said the blaze was raging along a front 80 kilometres wide across 5,000 hectares of woodland.
Further fires, whipped up by strong winds and record temperatures above 40C (104F) in much of the country, also burned over the weekend in the western Andalusian province of Huelva and in Ciudad Real in the central La Mancha plains. The temperatures in many towns and cities are the highest since records began.
FRANCE
As temperatures and ozone levels hit new peaks in France yesterday, the happiest beasts were 27 polar bears slurping mackerel-flavoured iced lollies at a zoo near Paris, writes Alex Duval Smith. The worst off, after police enforced reduced speed limits to cut pollution, were holidaymakers stuck in their cars.
Meteo France said the coolest thing for humans to do, at least until Thursday, would be to carry out important business at daybreak when temperatures could fall as low as 20C. Yesterday, Clermont-Ferrand in the south recorded 43C at midday.
The weather forecasting centre said the combination of high temperatures and heavy traffic last weekend had compounded the pollution. Ozone counts reached peak levels, including in traditionally temperate cities such as Le Havre and Reims. In Provence, sulphur dioxide levels reached their highest rates this year.
While the bears at Thoiry Zoo near Versailles were cooling themselves with mackerel frozen into ice, efforts at France's nuclear power stations to keep temperatures down met with controversy.
The Green Party said Fessenheim nuclear power station in Alsace - where a temperature of 48C was recorded outside the reactor last week - should be immediately shut. The party denounced what it called the "irresponsible attitude"' of Electricité de France in using a giant water cannon to cool the outer shell of the plant. The Greens also warned that the falling level of the Loire had increased the radioactivity of cooling water pumped into the river from the Villerest reactor.
After a weekend of record holiday traffic, police in Paris and Bouches-du-Rhône reduced the motorway speed limit to 100kph (60mph).
ITALY
In Italy the priests have asked their congregations to pray for rain, writes Hugh MacLeod.
With the river Po in the north nearly eight metres (24ft) below its normal levels and still dropping, and the national grid issuing a warning of possible blackouts, officials are on the point of declaring a state of emergency in the north.
Plans are being drawn up to pump water from Alpine lakes and dams into the river Po, which is at its lowest level for 100 years.
Temperatures in Rome have been hitting 35C for weeks, forcing tourists to cool off in the Trevi fountain - and pay a fine for doing so.
Agricultural groups say farmers have lost about €5bn worth of crops, and the price of some fruit and vegetables has gone up as a result of the drought.
In southern Italy, where lack of water has become a serious problem, large areas of scrubland were destroyed by fires raging in Calabria and Salento in the region of Apulia.
Fire broke out on Mount Vesuvius but it was reported to have been extinguished at the weekend.
Italy's national grid, GRTN, said there may be power blackouts today due to high demand and problems with the supply of electricity. Italy has suffered power cuts in recent weeks as temperatures have soared.
A GRTN official said the grid estimated 2,000 megawatts of demand more than had been expected, and reduced capacity at some power plants may make it necessary to cut power.
GERMANY
This time last year the weather in Germany was the opposite of what it is now. August 2002 brought the worst floods to hit the country in more than 100 years, writes Ruth Elkins.
A year on, Germany's media is remembering the tragedy, which cost 11 lives and caused €9.1bn in damage. Now Germany swelters in up to 40C and 95 per cent humidity. They are the highest temperatures in Germany since 1976, the German weather service says.
Dresden's train station, famously pictured under water at the height of the floods last year, is now a tangle of train lines on parched grass. Temperatures in Berlin soared to over 35C at the weekend and the city's lakeside beaches were packed with people trying to cool off.
But Germany's heat wave has also brought its own disasters. "Berlin cooks", screamed the city's tabloid BZ's front page on yesterday. The newspaper reported the deaths of four Berliners due to the extreme heat, including two pensioners who died driving.
The paper also told of Berlin caretaker Bernd K who died after chasing two teenagers he suspected of trying to break into a flat. "The heat wave, the excitement, it was too much for the 49-year-old," the paper wrote.
Many Germans may hope for a Hitzefrei, or "heatwave off", a rule that allows workers and schoolchildren to go home if temperatures rise too high and it becomes too uncomfortably, or dangerously, hot to stay at their desks.
REST OF EUROPE
Even Sweden hasn't escaped the blazes which have been sweeping Europe for the past week, reporting a series of bush fires along its north-eastern coast, writes Hugh Macleod.
Across the continent, gusting winds are fanning the flames through tinder-dry forests and crops.
In Greece, dozens of holidaymakers and residents were evacuated early last week from properties near the Corinth canal as flames threatened the area, while the worst fires in 15 years burned outside the Croatian city of Dubrovnik.
In neighbouring Slovenia, about 500 firefighters were fighting the biggest fire in a decade near the Italian border.
Many parts of Switzerland have banned open fires completely while the levels of the Danube fell to their lowest in more than a century in Serbia and Montenegro, making the river unnavigable for barges.
Britain bakes, Europe burns. Is this proof of global warming?
By Michael McCarthy, Environment Editor
05 August 2003
If it isn't proof of global warming at last, it certainly looks like it. As much of Europe burns like a furnace and rivers run dry across the continent, Britain is bracing itself for its own record temperature.
Sometime tomorrow, in southern England or the Midlands, the mercury in the thermometer may pass 37.1C, which became the national record when registered in Cheltenham on 3 August 1990. That centigrade peak translates as 98.8 Fahrenheit, so the remarkable figure for Britain of 99 or even 100F- is on the cards.
"We reckon there's a 20 per cent chance it will happen, but in any case it's going to get very very close," said Andy Yeatman of the Met Office.
A record would be hugely significant - a three-figure Fahrenheit temperature for the UK would be breaking psychological as well as new meteorological ground as it would give many people for the first time the perception that global warning is a real, not a theoretical phenomenon - and that it is happening to them.
If we do see a record, and possibly 100F, meteorological scientists will not directly attribute it to climate change - natural climate variability is too great for a single heat episode to be put down to global warming. But they will certainly say it is in line with what global warming is predicted to produce by complex mathematical models of the Earth's climate run on supercomputers.
And even if the record is not quite breached, Britain's weather services are agreed that tomorrow temperatures will be in the upper 30s Centigrade (or the high 90s Fahrenheit), certainly hitting 35-36C (95-97F). These are temperatures that, in the past, have been reached only a few times per century, and in anticipation, temporary speed restrictions were imposed yesterday on some of Britain's busiest rail routes for fear of rails buckling in the heat. Long-distance Virgin routes from London to the Midlands and the North will be most affected, with a 60mph limit imposed by Network Rail along the west coast main line from Euston to Crewe and the cross-country network.
Individuals should be equally careful. Don't plan anything strenuous, put suncream on the children and keep your bottled water handy. Britain will bake.
It has been coming for weeks. Across Europe, an unending episode of unprecedented heat has this summer reduced major rivers to a trickle in Italy, turned southern France into an inferno of forest fires and sent people in Germany to their deaths from heatstroke. Only the Atlantic westerly winds have kept the burning air from Britain - and now the winds are blowing from the south-east, and blowing the heat our way.
But what a contrast, in central and Eastern Europe, with just a year ago. Then the problems were not heat and drought - they were torrential downpours and flooding.
As two depressions came together last August and dumped a deluge of biblical proportions over southern Germany, the Czech Republic, Austria and Hungary, the region's great rivers burst their banks and drowned more than 100 people amid millions of pounds worth of damage. The two jewel cities of Mitteleuropa, Dresden and Prague, were inundated as the Elbe and the Vltava overflowed, and only its high flood defence walls saved Budapest as the Danube rose nearly 10 metres. (This year it is, in places, only a metre deep).
However, Europe's record soaking summer of 2002 and its record baking summer of 2003 do not cancel each other out in terms of indicating global warming - just the opposite.
Both are in line with one of the key features predicted for climate change, if levels of greenhouses gases in the atmosphere, such as carbon dioxide (CO2), keep going up - more extreme weather occurs.
"They are both consistent with what the computer models of the climate are saying will become more frequent, if CO2 levels continue to rise," said Simon Brown, who is in charge of researching extreme events at the Met Office's Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research.
Higher temperatures mean the air could hold more moisture, Dr Brown said, so even in a dry summer, when rain falls, it could be much heavier.
Five weeks ago, in an unprecedented announcement, the World Meteorological Organisation signalled weather extremes were being recorded all across the world, from Switzerland's hottest-ever June to a record month for tornadoes in the US - and linked them to global warming directly.
No one can prove it. But as you swelter in the heat today, you should realise the evidence is stacking up.
Portugal
Portugal declared a state of national disaster yesterday after the worst spate of forest fires in more than two decades killed nine people, torched thousands of hectares of tinder-dry forest and destroyed scores of homes, writes Tim Gaynor.
The emergency declaration allowed more than €100m (£70m) in aid to be released. The funds will go to people who have lost their jobs and homes, farmers who have lost crops and livestock, and to local councils so that they can begin rebuilding infrastructure.
Emergency services in Lisbon said the fires, which came after weeks without rain, had hit 15 of the country's 18 regions. Almost 3,000 firefighters, 380 troops, 781 fire engines, 23 helicopters and 12 water-carrying planes were deployed to fight the blazes, which were fanned by strong winds.
The wildfires were raging mostly in the central region near Castelo Branco, about 120 miles north-east of Lisbon, where the hills are covered with pine forests.
Rescue workers said nine people had died in the past week, including a fireman who was killed when a fire engine crashed. So far this year there have been about 1,700 wild fires in the country, destroying more than 26,000 hectares of scrub and trees.
As the temperature rose to more than 40C, rail services were halted and roads were cut off in some regions.
SPAIN
Emergency services evacuated hundreds of residents from villages and farmhouses in central and south-west Spain yesterday, writes Tim Gaynor, as high winds and record temperatures fanned summer fires into roaring blazes that scorched thousands of hectares of woodland.
Hundreds of firefighters and volunteers battled blazes in the province of Avila, north-west of Madrid, after a separate fire in the region of Extremadura bordering Portugal, which destroyed 1,000 hectares (2,470 acres) of woodland and led to the evacuation of 750 people, was brought under control.
Emergency services in Avila said the blaze was raging along a front 80 kilometres wide across 5,000 hectares of woodland.
Further fires, whipped up by strong winds and record temperatures above 40C (104F) in much of the country, also burned over the weekend in the western Andalusian province of Huelva and in Ciudad Real in the central La Mancha plains. The temperatures in many towns and cities are the highest since records began.
FRANCE
As temperatures and ozone levels hit new peaks in France yesterday, the happiest beasts were 27 polar bears slurping mackerel-flavoured iced lollies at a zoo near Paris, writes Alex Duval Smith. The worst off, after police enforced reduced speed limits to cut pollution, were holidaymakers stuck in their cars.
Meteo France said the coolest thing for humans to do, at least until Thursday, would be to carry out important business at daybreak when temperatures could fall as low as 20C. Yesterday, Clermont-Ferrand in the south recorded 43C at midday.
The weather forecasting centre said the combination of high temperatures and heavy traffic last weekend had compounded the pollution. Ozone counts reached peak levels, including in traditionally temperate cities such as Le Havre and Reims. In Provence, sulphur dioxide levels reached their highest rates this year.
While the bears at Thoiry Zoo near Versailles were cooling themselves with mackerel frozen into ice, efforts at France's nuclear power stations to keep temperatures down met with controversy.
The Green Party said Fessenheim nuclear power station in Alsace - where a temperature of 48C was recorded outside the reactor last week - should be immediately shut. The party denounced what it called the "irresponsible attitude"' of Electricité de France in using a giant water cannon to cool the outer shell of the plant. The Greens also warned that the falling level of the Loire had increased the radioactivity of cooling water pumped into the river from the Villerest reactor.
After a weekend of record holiday traffic, police in Paris and Bouches-du-Rhône reduced the motorway speed limit to 100kph (60mph).
ITALY
In Italy the priests have asked their congregations to pray for rain, writes Hugh MacLeod.
With the river Po in the north nearly eight metres (24ft) below its normal levels and still dropping, and the national grid issuing a warning of possible blackouts, officials are on the point of declaring a state of emergency in the north.
Plans are being drawn up to pump water from Alpine lakes and dams into the river Po, which is at its lowest level for 100 years.
Temperatures in Rome have been hitting 35C for weeks, forcing tourists to cool off in the Trevi fountain - and pay a fine for doing so.
Agricultural groups say farmers have lost about €5bn worth of crops, and the price of some fruit and vegetables has gone up as a result of the drought.
In southern Italy, where lack of water has become a serious problem, large areas of scrubland were destroyed by fires raging in Calabria and Salento in the region of Apulia.
Fire broke out on Mount Vesuvius but it was reported to have been extinguished at the weekend.
Italy's national grid, GRTN, said there may be power blackouts today due to high demand and problems with the supply of electricity. Italy has suffered power cuts in recent weeks as temperatures have soared.
A GRTN official said the grid estimated 2,000 megawatts of demand more than had been expected, and reduced capacity at some power plants may make it necessary to cut power.
GERMANY
This time last year the weather in Germany was the opposite of what it is now. August 2002 brought the worst floods to hit the country in more than 100 years, writes Ruth Elkins.
A year on, Germany's media is remembering the tragedy, which cost 11 lives and caused €9.1bn in damage. Now Germany swelters in up to 40C and 95 per cent humidity. They are the highest temperatures in Germany since 1976, the German weather service says.
Dresden's train station, famously pictured under water at the height of the floods last year, is now a tangle of train lines on parched grass. Temperatures in Berlin soared to over 35C at the weekend and the city's lakeside beaches were packed with people trying to cool off.
But Germany's heat wave has also brought its own disasters. "Berlin cooks", screamed the city's tabloid BZ's front page on yesterday. The newspaper reported the deaths of four Berliners due to the extreme heat, including two pensioners who died driving.
The paper also told of Berlin caretaker Bernd K who died after chasing two teenagers he suspected of trying to break into a flat. "The heat wave, the excitement, it was too much for the 49-year-old," the paper wrote.
Many Germans may hope for a Hitzefrei, or "heatwave off", a rule that allows workers and schoolchildren to go home if temperatures rise too high and it becomes too uncomfortably, or dangerously, hot to stay at their desks.
REST OF EUROPE
Even Sweden hasn't escaped the blazes which have been sweeping Europe for the past week, reporting a series of bush fires along its north-eastern coast, writes Hugh Macleod.
Across the continent, gusting winds are fanning the flames through tinder-dry forests and crops.
In Greece, dozens of holidaymakers and residents were evacuated early last week from properties near the Corinth canal as flames threatened the area, while the worst fires in 15 years burned outside the Croatian city of Dubrovnik.
In neighbouring Slovenia, about 500 firefighters were fighting the biggest fire in a decade near the Italian border.
Many parts of Switzerland have banned open fires completely while the levels of the Danube fell to their lowest in more than a century in Serbia and Montenegro, making the river unnavigable for barges.
Saturday, August 02, 2003
North Korea
So, finally, the US will meet one-on-one with North Korea.
This is what North Korea has been angling for all along.
This is what all that posturing was for.
If only the Americans will play along now.
Dont let North Korea lose face.
Let them portray it to their people that they faced down the big and mighty enemy, USA, and won!
Then, let them open up their country from a position of "strength"
One careful step at a time.
So, finally, the US will meet one-on-one with North Korea.
This is what North Korea has been angling for all along.
This is what all that posturing was for.
If only the Americans will play along now.
Dont let North Korea lose face.
Let them portray it to their people that they faced down the big and mighty enemy, USA, and won!
Then, let them open up their country from a position of "strength"
One careful step at a time.
North Korea
So, finally, the US will meet one-on-one with North Korea.
This is what North Korea has been angling for all along.
This is what all that posturing was for.
If only the Americans will play along now.
Dont let North Korea lose face.
Let them portray it to their people that they faced down the big and mighty enemy, USA, and won!
Then, let them open up their country from a position of "strength"
One careful step at a time.
So, finally, the US will meet one-on-one with North Korea.
This is what North Korea has been angling for all along.
This is what all that posturing was for.
If only the Americans will play along now.
Dont let North Korea lose face.
Let them portray it to their people that they faced down the big and mighty enemy, USA, and won!
Then, let them open up their country from a position of "strength"
One careful step at a time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
