SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: greenspirit who wrote (10859)10/5/2003 9:38:17 AM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793689
 
Media bias is like the weather. We all talk about it, but we can't do anything about it. I am afraid that the conclusion of this article by David Warren is correct.
______________________________________

The long wait

It has never been easy to deal with madmen, and by any standard it appears the leadership of North Korea are actually insane. They do not behave in a coherent way to assure their own survival.

The announcement by the North Korean foreign ministry this week -- that the regime has redirected plutonium from 8,000 spent fuel rods into the production of nuclear bombs -- offers an especially poignant illustration. This is equivalent to declaring, "Stop me before I kill more."

While U.S. intelligence seems to have been reasonably aware that the regime has been doing what it now claims to have done, I do not think it has a purchase on the extent or even the locations of this nuclear programme. There are certainly no indications that the CIA or any other intelligence organization has access to the human agents who alone could penetrate the fog of North Korea's public mind. I doubt they even know who has real power within the politburo, so that one mystery conceals another.

As the "outing" of Valerie Plame in Washington has demonstrated, the CIA cannot even be counted upon to take the side of the U.S. government in pursuing secret missions. Its operatives and associates think nothing of sabotaging Bush administration policies, through leaks to the media. In the case of North Korea, neither the CIA nor State Department are game for anything resembling a policy of confrontation.

There is increasing alarm among the other four parties dealing directly with the North Korean threat -- China, Russia, South Korea, Japan. But it is alarm, only; no solutions are proposed. With delicious Japanese understatement, Yasuo Fukuda, the cabinet secretary in Tokyo, responded to the latest psychopathic pronouncement from Pyongyang by saying, "That is not a good action."

Of those parties, the Japanese have been much the most stalwart, rhetorically. Under the new government of Roh Moo-hyun, the South Koreans are merely spooked. President Roh, yesterday, could only babble something about linking his troop contributions to Iraq to progress in the next round of the six-way talks that foundered in Beijing in August. South Korea presents a curious case of a country that has gone not only from rags to capitalist riches, but from gritty survival instincts to an effete and hapless liberalism in less than two generations.

All parties look for leadership to the Bush administration, which in my opinion has no ideas beyond Pentagon contingency plans. Certainly no one from State or elsewhere has been able to enunciate a coherent position. Like Iraq, this is a problem with no diplomatic solution, which leaves the one alternative of a military solution, which will be more expensive in lives and property, the longer it waits.

Given North Korea's demonstrated willingness not only to acquire lethal weapons, but to sell and deliver them through the international black market, nothing short of a complete blockade of their ports and borders would be an adequate response. But the necessary Chinese cooperation is not forthcoming on this, and the danger the North Koreans might respond by, say, obliterating the city of Seoul, makes a blockade impracticable, too.

We may pray that the regime in Pyongyang will suddenly fall apart, as other communist regimes have done; though with no assurance that it will do so as peacefully. For the mindset of the regime is that of the suicide bomber: all or nothing at every turn.

Here, in other words, is a problem to which there is no solution. The Western mind rebels against such a thing; we think there must be a way to fix anything. And there is, but in this case, it almost certainly involves a huge catastrophe. Our policy in the meantime is waiting for this to happen.

davidwarrenonline.com



To: greenspirit who wrote (10859)10/5/2003 4:20:55 PM
From: KLP  Respond to of 793689
 
Hi Michael..I too had a "media bias" similar event..Remember Goldwater? We had gone to Lockport NY to see his running mate (William Miller) and ALL the Goldwater family come for their kickoff campaign. Waited several hours in the sun with friends. Finally they came, ALL talked, there were a couple of thousand people there...perhaps more.

Then, in the car, on the way home...the ABC News...saying NOT what Goldwater, Miller, etc had JUST said, but instead, what HUBERT HUMPHREY (from Minnesota) SAID that Goldwater had SAID.

NOTHING at all like what our 8 ears had just heard a couple of hours earlier!!!

Confirmed again what I had learned in the propaganda class I've spoken of several times!



To: greenspirit who wrote (10859)10/5/2003 4:29:18 PM
From: KLP  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793689
 
Oh my Gosh...In the NYT yet~~~U.S. Inspector Sees Much to Pursue in Iraqi Weapons Search
NYT~~ October 5, 2003
By BRIAN KNOWLTON,
International Herald Tribune

nytimes.com

ASHINGTON, Oct. 5 — The government's chief weapons inspector in Iraq reiterated today that his team was searching for a possible cache of lethal anthrax and was pursuing hints that Saddam Hussein might have concealed Scud missiles.

David Kay, who leads the Iraq Survey Group of weapons inspectors, conceded again, however, that his 1,200-member team had come across no fully developed weapons of mass destruction or documentary evidence of Iraqi ties to Al Qaeda — the chief pillars of the Bush administration's case for war.

Dr. Kay's remarks came three days after he reported to Congress on his survey team's interim findings, following four months of work. Critics of the Iraqi war, including several Democrats in Congress, said the report confirmed that the Bush administration had seriously exaggerated the imminence of an Iraqi threat in order to justify the war.

But Dr. Kay insisted in a televised interview on "Fox News Sunday," as he had in his report, that the picture was far more complicated, and he called attention to several findings on Iraq — "both their intent and their actual activities" — which he said had damning implications.

Iraqi scientists had come forward "with equipment, technology, diagrams, documents" on potential weapons programs that they had been ordered to conceal, and which United Nations inspectors had not found.

One Iraqi scientist said he had been told to hide in his refrigerator a vial of what Dr. Kay's report called "live C. botulinum Okra B, from which a biological agent can be produced." The scientist had also told the search team of a second "large cache of agents" that Dr. Kay said was thought to include anthrax.

President Bush on Friday pointed to the botulinum finding, as well as to the evidence cited by Dr. Kay of clandestine biological laboratories, sophisticated concealment efforts and design work on prohibited long-range missiles, in insisting that the war with Iraq was justified.

But Dr. Kay said today that the botulinum was "not the weapon in the sense that it was ready to be fired," though it could have been used to produce such a weapon.

Dr. Kay said that evidence had also been found of research on Brucella and Congo Crimean Hemorrhagic Fever, potentially of use in biological weapons.

More than two dozen biological laboratories were "hidden in the Iraqi Intelligence Service, the Mukhabarat" and "carried on activities that should have been declared" to the United Nations, he said.

His statement, however, referred largely to Iraq's potential, capacities and purported intentions to develop banned weapons, not to any weapons that were ready for use against American troops or others.

Asked about the state of Iraqi nuclear programs, Dr. Kay said there was "evidence that they were putting small amounts of money and starting rudimentary experiments." The program was "at a very early stage."

The report said that no evidence yet pointed to any "significant post-1998 steps to actually build nuclear weapons."

Of greater interest, he indicated, was evidence that Iraq had continued efforts to design longer-range missiles, and retained a capacity as late as early 2002 to make the liquid fuel and oxidizer used to power banned Scud missiles.

"Scud missile fuel is only useful in Scud missiles, no other class of missiles that Iraq has," he said. "And yet, Iraq declared that it got rid of all of its Scud missiles in the early 1990's."


In his television appearance, Dr. Kay emphasized that his search was far from complete, a point Mr. Bush and other administration officials have underscored. Conditions in Iraq were extremely difficult, he added.

One scientist interviewed by survey team members was killed later the same day, he said, and another person was shot six times.

The continuing threat underscored the reasons, he said, that the search could not now be turned back over to the United Nations, which withdrew much of its foreign staff after two explosions killed more than 20 of its employees.

"I've had teams attacked four times in September, and four serious injuries," Dr. Kay said. "Everyone of the people we have on the ground, including myself, is weapons-qualified, or routinely carries weapons. We operate in a very nonpermissive environment."

He added, "That's not what the U.N. does."


Dr. Kay was also asked about reports that Iraq might have transported arms into Syria, Jordan and Iran. Inspectors know that convoys entered those countries just ahead of or during the war, he said.

"We do know that documents were taken to Jordan," Dr. Kay said, because his team is negotiating for the return of such papers with an Iraqi unrelated to the government, who fled to that country.

He cited no evidence, however, that weapons had gone to any other country.

Asked how likely his team was eventually to find banned weapons in Iraq, Dr. Kay said, "I simply don't know."

But he said that he had devised an approach "that guarantees that if they are there, we will find them."

"I don't want to estimate," he added. "I want to have proof."



To: greenspirit who wrote (10859)10/6/2003 4:56:42 AM
From: unclewest  Respond to of 793689
 
Outstanding commentary!

Message 19374430



To: greenspirit who wrote (10859)10/7/2003 6:38:40 AM
From: LindyBill  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793689
 
Will the Italians realize that their problem was caused by the Greens and cure it? Naaah. Will we learn? Naaah.
______________________________________
The Italian Job

By Victoria Paracchini Published 10/07/2003

Globalization or marginalization? That is the question. Will Italy finally come to terms with its huge basic infrastructural issues -- such as its power consumption needs -- or just go back to Middle Ages?



Italy had already endured one of the worst summers in its history and power outages were common. But on September 28 it was still caught completely off-guard when its 57 million people were plunged into darkness in the worst blackout in the country's history. In the aftermath of this nationwide power failure Italians are no longer taking electricity for granted.



Summer was unusually warm all over Europe but Italy had it the roughest. By the end of July people could barely sleep at night. During the day their productivity suffered; concentration at work was poor. There was almost no air-conditioning and even for those who had it, power quotas limited their ability to use it. The country lost billions of euro.



It also affected the railway network, which is essential to Italian life. By the beginning of August almost all trains were delayed in some way. Even most high-speed expensive trains like the Eurostar were delayed because they got orders at random to slow down -- wheels and rails had become too hot.



And there were the blackouts. Not just massive ones but personal ones. Most of the power network in Italy is strictly controlled, allowing a level of maximum use per house, apartment, office, etc. If the maximum is exceeded power is automatically cut. This summer was worse than usual: At home you had to choose between turning on the smallest air-conditioner or cooking with the oven, or to cook and iron and turn off the AC or your electricity was cut off by computer.



It is by now obvious to everyone that Italy doesn't have enough electricity -- and what it does have is expensive. Never mind Energy Minister Antonio Marzano's claims about Italians' allegedly bad energy habits suggesting the country has a wasteful level of energy consumption.



There have been promises made to increase incentives for new sources of electricity like solar and geothermal but these are not going to address the problem. Italy produces only 83 percent of its electricity consumption -- which by EU standards is extraordinarily low -- and imports the rest from France. But France was having power problems of its own this summer and cut its exports. So Italy made arrangements with Switzerland and Slovenia to make up the difference.



Importing electricity is fine if it comes cheap (France has very competitive prices). But reality has proved that this supply is captive. Electricity is unique: you cannot store it and demand varies a lot. So when you buy it you pay for the peak consumption all year round. If you don't use it, it's wasted money. If you happen to need more than usual, demand goes too high and you have a blackout.



To get the most from the investment it is important to operate the system as closely as possible to the wire: Transmission is of the essence. If Italy continues to buy its power from other countries, it will fall victim to its strange shape: a boot surrounded by water. Power must come from very far up north on the other side of the border. And when things go wrong, they can go very wrong as we have just learned.



The victory of the Italian Greens in 3 referendums in a row in 1987 banned nuclear power in Italy, dismantling existing plants and scrapping plans for new ones. At the time the choice appeared to be an easy one: leave the dirty work to others and buy the extra 20 percent needed.



But the Big Blackout proves dramatically that it's not possible to rely heavily on foreign sources of electricity. Italy has to have its own power sources. Domestic inexpensive production has to be encouraged as well as investment (it will require billions of euro) and deregulation.



Italy has to face reality and consider using nuclear power again, raise emissions limits and build a safe, secure and reliable system.

Copyright © 2003 Tech Central Station - www.techcentralstation.com