by Scott Jordan

Some quick googling results in an estimation of on the order of 10-12 tons of fuel per acre of chaparral such as that burning in California; see, for example, http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/rogue-siskiyou/biscuit-fire/feis/46-appendix-b1-fire-behavior-fuel-model-descriptions.pdf and http://www.fs.fed.us/pnw/pubs/pnw_rp486.pdf.

The latter link provides some nice measures of CO2 emissions when this stuff burns: around 3200 pounds of CO2 per ton, varying with burn intensity and so forth.

So when an acre burns, it produces on the order of 38,000 pounds of CO2.

About 500,000 acres of California have burned according to the latest news reports on http://news.google.com.

That means about 19,200,000,000 pounds of CO2 have been pumped into the atmosphere during these tragic conflagrations.

Now, a large SUV emits about 700 grams of CO2 per mile, per http://www.sacbee.com/107/v-print/story/427690.html --that's about 1.5 pounds. Driven a typical 12,000 miles per year, that's 18,000 pounds of CO2 annually.

So the CO2 emitted by the California fires is about the equivalent of roughly 1.1 millions large SUVs being driven for a year.

An important point is that that brush and chaparral has an annual life cycle that causes it to die off every year. The dead grass decomposes. That is, bacteria eat it, exhaling CO2, because that's what living things do. In fact, the amount of CO2 exhaled would be roughly commensurate.

So if we really wanted to be environmentally friendly and prevent global warming, we'd take all the burned areas, pave them, and drive SUVs around on them all the time.

This concludes your Environmental Protection advisory. Have a good day.

Back in action

To celebrate the blossoming election cycle (and wotta show it is, wotta show), we're dusting-off eViscera and will resume regular posting. Well, more frequent posting, that much is for sure.

Got a post coming in a few minutes, in fact. Original content, too.

See you around.



AmSpec Blog: War Warning Part 5, United Nations Security Council Plan

...The Russian position is sophisticated. No one on the UNSC has better intelligence sources inside Iran, inside the Tehran regime, inside the IRGC and Council of Elders, than the Russian military... Russia needs Iran as a wedge between the Wahhabists in the Ummah and the oil-soaked Central Asian client states; also Russia knows that only Iran is capable of matching the connections the Wahhabists have with the Chechen martyrs...

Hm. There are clear parallels with the logic, circa 1991, that helped convince President George H.W. Bush to leave Saddam in place (as a counterweight, ironically, to Iran).

That didn't work out so well.

I'd advise the Russians to study not only recent history but the physical principle of unstable equilibrium. What it would tell you is that such a balancing act is deucedly difficult even when you're dealing with rational people motivated by rational philosophies, and that the slightest perturbation will send the whole mess toppling. Attempting to balance raving nutjobs like the Wahhabists vs. the crafty, hallucinatory Iranian Mahdists is like trying to build a house of cards, in a wind tunnel, during an earthquake, with... well, one card.

Mansfield: A Final Warning from the Islamist Rulers of Iran?

In Mansfield's emailed newsletter, in commentary I don't find on her website, she notes:

===[begin Mansfield]

I suggest that everyone read this very carefully.

Quoting the letter from Amahdinejad:


The holy Koran stresses this common word and calls on an followers of divine religions and says: [3.64] Say: O followers of the Book! Come to an equitable proposition between us and you that we shall not serve any but Allah and (that) we shall not associate aught. With Him and (that) some of us shall not take others for lords besides Allah, but if they turn back, then say: Bear witness that we are Muslims. (The Family of Imran).

Mr President, According to divine verses, we have all been called upon to worship one God and follow the teachings of divine prophets.

We increasingly see that people around the world are flocking towards a main focal point - that is the Almighty God. Undoubtedly through faith in God and the teachings of the prophets, the people will conquer their problems. My question for you is: "Do you not want to join them?"


The gist is this: Iran's President has just officially invited the US to embrace Islam.

This is NOT good

====[end Mansfield]

Wow. "Not good" indeed.

That's an aspect of the letter that you will NOT find discussed in the mainstream media. I missed it completely myself. Yet it's obviously, blindingly evident. And very, very chilling, now that she has pointed it out.

See, inviting an enemy to embrace Islam is, traditionally, reserved as a last warning. For example:

"Ali Ibn Abi Talib encountered a man called 'Umru and told him, `I indeed invite you to Islam.' 'Umru said, `I do not need that.' 'Ali said, Then I call you to fight.' (This was the same policy Muhammad used with those who rejected his invitation.) 'Umru answered him, `What for my nephew? By God, I do not like to kill you.' `Ali said, `But, by God, I love to kill you"' (ibn Hisham, "The Biography of the Prophet", part 3, p. 113; see also Al Road Al Anf part 3, p. 263).

Have a nice day.

A Final Warning from the Islamist Rulers of Iran?

By Laura Mansfield
A Final Warning from the Islamist Rulers of Iran?

By Laura Mansfield

Was yesterday’s letter from Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinezhab to US President George W. Bush a “last warning” of sorts?

That’s a possibility that must be considered in any analysis of the letter.

It is indisputable that Iran’s president has been openly hostile towards both the United States and Israel in recent months.

As word of the letter leaked out, the satire/humor website Scrappleface.com posted the following “translation” of the letter, which they said was written to “George Bush, president of the Great Satan, puppet of Zionists” from “Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, President of peaceful Islamic Republic of Iran”.

Their five-point satire of the Scrappleface version of the letter was as follows:


5. Wipe Israel off the face of the map. Replace with goat ranch.

4. U.S. buys Iranian oil. I make threatening statements causing uncertainty in petroleum markets. We use the windfall profits to pay Russia to help us make nuclear devices, and to pay China to stop U.N. sanctions. U.S. continues to buy Iranian oil.

3. Get U.N. to adopt ‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy regarding uranium enrichment.

2. Put Zionists in boxcars. Send back to Europe. Replace Israel with goat ranch.

1. U.S. joins global Muslim Caliphate, ensuring peace and bountiful supplies of enriched uranium for all of Allah’s people.


As it turned out, the reality wasn’t too far from the satire.

The letter was openly hostile and derisive of the US, claiming that the entire world has turned against America. Only minimal reference was made to the nuclear standoff, and no solutions were proposed, leading one of my colleagues to comment “looks like Iran has already adopted the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy regarding the crisis.

The 18 page document details Iran’s complaints against the United States, and rails against US policies both domestically and internationally.

Iran’s president describes the letter as the “words and opinions of the Iranian nation" to assist in finding "way out of problems" facing humanity.

If the letter is anywhere near what is being described by the US Administration, then analysts must question “What’s the point?”

Why create and deliver such a missive in the public eye when there is little chance that the document is going to make any changes in the policies of either country?

Islamic theology documents that no attack can be carried out in jihad without first offering the “unbelievers” the opportunity to “repent” and accept Islam. Only when that overture is rejected can an attack occur.

Al Qaeda has repeatedly issued warnings prior to attacks, although the warning are never specific enough for the West to recognize the exact target or timing of the attack. However, the warning is made.

The Qu’ran documents that Allah even is required to issue such warnings. The following three verses from the Qu’ran are representative of the many that do this.

Surah 50, ayat (verse) 14 of the Qu’ran says:

The Companions of the Wood, and the People of Tubba'; each one (of them) rejected the messengerss, and My warning was duly fulfilled (in them).

Surah 41, ayat (verse) 13 of the Qu’ran says:

If they turn away, then say, "I am warning you of a disaster like the disaster that annihilated `Aad and Thamoud."

Surah 41, ayat (verse) 17 of the Qu’ran says:

As for Thamoud, we provided them with guidance, but they preferred blindness over guidance. Consequently, the disastrous and shameful retribution annihilated them, because of what they earned.

The question must be asked: Is this letter to the Bush Administration from Iran a “final warning” to the United States?

With the internationally accepted belief that the Islamist rulers of Iran and their Al Qaeda partners in terror either already have or are on the verge of acquiring nuclear weapons, it is imperative that we answer that question.


May 9, 2006: Complete text of letter from Iran's President to US President Bush

Mr George Bush, President of the United States of America

For sometime now I have been thinking, how one can justify the undeniable contradictions that exist in the international arena -- which are being constantly debated, specially in political forums and amongst university students. Many questions remain unanswered. These have prompted me to discuss some of the contradictions and questions, in the hopes that it might bring about an opportunity to redress them.

Can one be a follower of Jesus Christ (PBUH), the great Messenger of God,

Feel obliged to respect human rights,

Present liberalism as a civilization model,

Announce one’s opposition to the proliferation of nuclear weapons and WMDs,

Make “War and Terror” his slogan,

And finally, Work towards the establishment of a unified international community – a community which Christ and the virtuous of the Earth will one day govern,

But at the same time, Have countries attacked; The lives, reputations and possessions of people destroyed and on the slight chance of the … of a … criminals in a village city, or convoy for example the entire village, city or convey set ablaze.

Or because of the possibility of the existence of WMDs in one country, it is occupied, around one hundred thousand people killed, its water sources, agriculture and industry destroyed, close to 180,000 foreign troops put on the ground, sanctity of private homes of citizens broken, and the country pushed back perhaps fifty years. At what price? Hundreds of billions of dollars spent from the treasury of one country and certain other countries and tens of thousands of young men and women – as occupation troops – put in harms way, taken away from family and love ones, their hands stained with the blood of others, subjected to so much psychological pressure that everyday some commit suicide ant those returning home suffer depression, become sickly and grapple with all sorts of aliments; while some are killed and their bodies handed of their families.

On the pretext of the existence of WMDs, this great tragedy came to engulf both the peoples of the occupied and the occupying country. Later it was revealed that no WMDs existed to begin with.

Of course Saddam was a murderous dictator. But the war was not waged to topple him, the announced goal of the war was to find and destroy weapons of mass destruction. He was toppled along the way towards another goal, nevertheless the people of the region are happy about it. I point out that throughout the many years of the … war on Iran Saddam was supported by the West.

Mr President, You might know that I am a teacher. My students ask me how can theses actions be reconciled with the values outlined at the beginning of this letter and duty to the tradition of Jesus Christ (PBUH), the Messenger of peace and forgiveness.

There are prisoners in Guantanamo Bay that have not been tried, have no legal representation, their families cannot see them and are obviously kept in a strange land outside their own country. There is no international monitoring of their conditions and fate. No one knows whether they are prisoners, POWs, accused or criminals.

European investigators have confirmed the existence of secret prisons in Europe too. I could not correlate the abduction of a person, and him or her being kept in secret prisons, with the provisions of any judicial system. For that matter, I fail to understand how such actions correspond to the values outlined in the beginning of this letter, i.e. the teachings of Jesus Christ (PBUH), human rights and liberal values.

Young people, university students and ordinary people have many questions about the phenomenon of Israel. I am sure you are familiar with some of them.

Throughout history many countries have been occupied, but I think the establishment of a new country with a new people, is a new phenomenon that is exclusive to our times. Students are saying that sixty years ago such a country did no exist. The show old documents and globes and say try as we have, we have not been able to find a country named Israel.

I tell them to study the history of WWI and II. One of my students told me that during WWII, which more than tens of millions of people perished in, news about the war, was quickly disseminated by the warring parties. Each touted their victories and the most recent battlefront defeat of the other party. After the war, they claimed that six million Jews had been killed. Six million people that were surely related to at least two million families.

Again let us assume that these events are true. Does that logically translate into the establishment of the state of Israel in the Middle East or support for such a state? How can this phenomenon be rationalised or explained?

Mr President, I am sure you know how – and at what cost – Israel was established:

- Many thousands were killed in the process.

- Millions of indigenous people were made refugees.

- Hundred of thousands of hectares of farmland, olive plantations, towns and villages were destroyed.

This tragedy is not exclusive to the time of establishment; unfortunately it has been ongoing for sixty years now.

A regime has been established which does not show mercy even to kids, destroys houses while the occupants are still in them, announces beforehand its list and plans to assassinate Palestinian figures and keeps thousands of Palestinians in prison. Such a phenomenon is unique – or at the very least extremely rare – in recent memory.

Another big question asked by people is why is this regime being supported?

Is support for this regime in line with the teachings of Jesus Christ (PBUH) or Moses (PBUH) or liberal values?

Or are we to understand that allowing the original inhabitants of these lands – inside and outside Palestine – whether they are Christian, Muslim or Jew, to determine their fate, runs contrary to principles of democracy, human rights and the teachings of prophets? If not, why is there so much opposition to a referendum?

The newly elected Palestinian administration recently took office. All independent observes have confirmed that this government represents the electorate. Unbelievingly, they have put the elected government under pressure and have advised it to recognise the Israeli regime, abandon the struggle and follow the programs of the previous government.

If the current Palestinian government had run on the above platform, would the Palestinian people have voted for it? Again, can such position taken in opposition to the Palestinian government be reconciled with the values outlined earlier? The people are also saying “why are all UNSC resolutions in condemnation of Israel vetoed?”

Mr President, As you are well aware, I live amongst the people and am in constant contact with them -- many people from around the Middle East manage to contact me as well. They dot not have faith in these dubious policies either. There is evidence that the people of the region are becoming increasingly angry with such policies.

It is not my intention to pose to many questions, but I need to refer to other points as well.

Why is it that any technological and scientific achievement reached in the Middle East regions is translated into and portrayed as a threat to the Zionist regime? Is not scientific R&D one of the basic rights of nations.

You are familiar with history. Aside from the Middle Ages, in what other point in history has scientific and technical progress been a crime? Can the possibility of scientific achievements being utilised for military purposes be reason enough to oppose science and technology altogether? If such a supposition is true, then all scientific disciplines, including physics, chemistry, mathematics, medicine, engineering, etc. must be opposed.

Lies were told in the Iraqi matter. What was the result? I have no doubt that telling lies is reprehensible in any culture, and you do not like to be lied to.

Mr President, Don’t Latin Americans have the right to ask, why their elected governments are being opposed and coup leaders supported? Or, why must they constantly be threatened and live in fear?

The people of Africa are hardworking, creative and talented. They can play an important and valuable role in providing for the needs of humanity and contribute to its material and spiritual progress. Poverty and hardship in large parts of Africa are preventing this from happening. Don’t they have the right to ask why their enormous wealth – including minerals – is being looted, despite the fact that they need it more than others? Again, do such actions correspond to the teachings of Christ and the tenets of human rights?

The brave and faithful people of Iran too have many questions and grievances, including: the coup d’etat of 1953 and the subsequent toppling of the legal government of the day, opposition to the Islamic revolution, transformation of an Embassy into a headquarters supporting, the activities of those opposing the Islamic Republic (many thousands of pages of documents corroborates this claim), support for Saddam in the war waged against Iran, the shooting down of the Iranian passenger plane, freezing the assets of the Iranian nation, increasing threats, anger and displeasure vis-à-vis the scientific and nuclear progress of the Iranian nation (just when all Iranians are jubilant and collaborating their country’s progress), and many other grievances that I will not refer to in this letter.

Mr President, September Eleven was a horrendous incident. The killing of innocents is deplorable and appalling in any part of the world. Our government immediately declared its disgust with the perpetrators and offered its condolences to the bereaved and expressed its sympathies.

All governments have a duty to protect the lives, property and good standing of their citizens.

Reportedly your government employs extensive security, protection and intelligence systems – and even hunts its opponents abroad. September eleven was not a simple operation. Could it be planned and executed without coordination with intelligence and security services – or their extensive infiltration? Of course this is just an educated guess. Why have the various aspects of the attacks been kept secret? Why are we not told who botched their responsibilities? And, why aren’t those responsible and the guilty parties identified and put on trial?

All governments have a duty to provide security and peace of mind for their citizens. For some years now, the people of your country and neighbours of world trouble spots do not have peace of mind. After 9.11, instead of healing and tending to the emotional wounds of the survivors and the American people – who had been immensely traumatised by the attacks – some Western media only intensified the climates of fear and insecurity – some constantly talked about the possibility of new terror attacks and kept the people in fear. Is that service to the American people? Is it possible to calculate the damages incurred from fear and panic?

American citizen lived in constant fear of fresh attacks that could come at any moment and in any place. They felt insecure in the streets, in their place of work and at home. Who would be happy with this situation? Why was the media, instead of conveying a feeling of security and providing peace of mind, giving rise to a feeling of insecurity?

Some believe that the hype paved the way – and was the justification – for an attack on Afghanistan. Again I need to refer to the role of media.

In media charters, correct dissemination of information and honest reporting of a story are established tenets. I express my deep regret about the disregard shown by certain Western media for these principles. The main pretext for an attack on Iraq was the existence of WMDs. This was repeated incessantly – for the public to, finally, believe – and the ground set for an attack on Iraq.

Will the truth not be lost in a contrive and deceptive climate?

Again, if the truth is allowed to be lost, how can that be reconciled with the earlier mentioned values?

Is the truth known to the Almighty lost as well?

Mr President, In countries around the world, citizens provide for the expenses of governments so that their governments in turn are able to serve them.

The question here is “what has the hundreds of billions of dollars, spent every year to pay for the Iraqi campaign, produced for the citizens?”

As your Excellency is aware, in some states of your country, people are living in poverty.

Many thousands are homeless and unemployment is a huge problem. Of course these problems exist – to a larger or lesser extent – in other countries as well. With these conditions in mind, can the gargantuan expenses of the campaign – paid from the public treasury – be explained and be consistent with the aforementioned principles?

What has been said, are some of the grievances of the people around the world, in our region and in your country. But my main contention – which I am hoping you will agree to some of it – is:

Those in power have specific time in office, and do not rule indefinitely, but their names will be recorded in history and will be constantly judged in the immediate and distant futures.

The people will scrutinize our presidencies.

Did we manage to bring peace, security and prosperity for the people or insecurity and unemployment?

Did we intend to establish justice, or just supported especial interest groups, and by forcing many people to live in poverty and hardship, made a few people rich and powerful – thus trading the approval of the people and the Almighty with theirs’?

Did we defend the rights of the underprivileged or ignore them?

Did we defend the rights of all people around the world or imposed wars on them, interfered illegally in their affairs, established hellish prisons and incarcerated some of them?

Did we bring the world peace and security or raised the specter of intimidation and threats?

Did we tell the truth to our nation and others around the world or presented an inverted version of it?

Were we on the side of people or the occupiers and oppressors?

Did our administration set out to promote rational behaviour, logic, ethics, peace, fulfilling obligations, justice, service to the people, prosperity, progress and respect for human dignity or the force of guns.

Intimidation, insecurity, disregard for the people, delaying the progress and excellence of other nations, and trample on people’s rights?

And finally, they will judge us on whether we remained true to our oath of office – to serve the people, which is our main task, and the traditions of the prophets – or not?

Mr President, How much longer can the world tolerate this situation?

Where will this trend lead the world to?

How long must the people of the world pay for the incorrect decisions of some rulers?

How much longer will the specter of insecurity – raised from the stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction – hunt the people of the world?

How much longer will the blood of the innocent men, women and children be spilled on the streets, and people’s houses destroyed over their heads?

Are you pleased with the current condition of the world?

Do you think present policies can continue?

If billions of dollars spent on security, military campaigns and troop movement were instead spent on investment and assistance for poor countries, promotion of health, combating different diseases, education and improvement of mental and physical fitness, assistance to the victims of natural disasters, creation of employment opportunities and production, development projects and poverty alleviation, establishment of peace, mediation between disputing states and distinguishing the flames of racial, ethnic and other conflicts were would the world be today? Would not your government, and people be justifiably proud?

Would not your administration’s political and economic standing have been stronger?

And I am most sorry to say, would there have been an ever increasing global hatred of the American governments?

Mr President, it is not my intention to distress anyone.

If prophet Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Ishmael, Joseph or Jesus Christ (PBUH) were with us today, how would they have judged such behaviour? Will we be given a role to play in the promised world, where justice will become universal and Jesus Christ (PBUH) will be present? Will they even accept us?

My basic question is this: Is there no better way to interact with the rest of the world? Today there are hundreds of millions of Christians, hundreds of millions of Moslems and millions of people who follow the teachings of Moses (PBUH). All divine religions share and respect on word and that is “monotheism” or belief in a single God and no other in the world.

The holy Koran stresses this common word and calls on an followers of divine religions and says: [3.64] Say: O followers of the Book! Come to an equitable proposition between us and you that we shall not serve any but Allah and (that) we shall not associate aught. With Him and (that) some of us shall not take others for lords besides Allah, but if they turn back, then say: Bear witness that we are Muslims. (The Family of Imran).

Mr President, According to divine verses, we have all been called upon to worship one God and follow the teachings of divine prophets.

“To worship a God which is above all powers in the world and can do all He pleases.” “The Lord which knows that which is hidden and visible, the past and the future, knows what goes on in the Hearts of His servants and records their deeds.”

“The Lord who is the possessor of the heavens and the earth and all universe is His court” “planning for the universe is done by His hands, and gives His servants the glad tidings of mercy and forgiveness of sins”. “He is the companion of the oppressed and the enemy of oppressors”. “He is the Compassionate, the Merciful”. “He is the recourse of the faithful and guides them towards the light from darkness”. “He is witness to the actions of His servants”,

“He calls on servants to be faithful and do good deeds, and asks them to stay on the path of righteousness and remain steadfast”. “Calls on servants to heed His prophets and He is a witness to their deeds.” “A bad ending belongs only to those who have chosen the life of this world and disobey Him and oppress His servants”. And “A good and eternal paradise belong to those servants who fear His majesty and do not follow their lascivious selves.”

We believe a return to the teachings of the divine prophets is the only road leading to salvations. I have been told that Your Excellency follows the teachings of Jesus (PBUH), and believes in the divine promise of the rule of the righteous on Earth.

We also believe that Jesus Christ (PBUH) was one of the great prophets of the Almighty. He has been repeatedly praised in the Koran. Jesus (PBUH) has been quoted in Koran as well; [19,36] And surely Allah is my Lord and your Lord, therefore serves Him; this is the right path, Marium.

Service to and obedience of the Almighty is the credo of all divine messengers.

The God of all people in Europe, Asia, Africa, America, the Pacific and the rest of the world is one. He is the Almighty who wants to guide and give dignity to all His servants. He has given greatness to Humans.

We again read in the Holy Book: “The Almighty God sent His prophets with miracles and clear signs to guide the people and show them divine signs and purity them from sins and pollutions. And He sent the Book and the balance so that the people display justice and avoid the rebellious.”

All of the above verses can be seen, one way or the other, in the Good Book as well. Divine prophets have promised:

The day will come when all humans will congregate before the court of the Almighty, so that their deeds are examined. The good will be directed towards Haven and evildoers will meet divine retribution. I trust both of us believe in such a day, but it will not be easy to calculate the actions of rulers, because we must be answerable to our nations and all others whose lives have been directly or indirectly effected by our actions.

All prophets, speak of peace and tranquillity for man – based on monotheism, justice and respect for human dignity.

Do you not think that if all of us come to believe in and abide by these principles, that is, monotheism, worship of God, justice, respect for the dignity of man, belief in the Last Day, we can overcome the present problems of the world – that are the result of disobedience to the Almighty and the teachings of prophets – and improve our performance?

Do you not think that belief in these principles promotes and guarantees peace, friendship and justice?

Do you not think that the aforementioned written or unwritten principles are universally respected?

Will you not accept this invitation? That is, a genuine return to the teachings of prophets, to monotheism and justice, to preserve human dignity and obedience to the Almighty and His prophets?

Mr President, History tells us that repressive and cruel governments do not survive. God has entrusted

The fate of man to them. The Almighty has not left the universe and humanity to their own devices. Many things have happened contrary to the wishes and plans of governments. These tell us that there is a higher power at work and all events are determined by Him.

Can one deny the signs of change in the world today?

Is this situation of the world today comparable to that of ten years ago? Changes happen fast and come at a furious pace.

The people of the world are not happy with the status quo and pay little heed to the promises and comments made by a number of influential world leaders. Many people around the wolrd feel insecure and oppose the spreading of insecurity and war and do not approve of and accept dubious policies.

The people are protesting the increasing gap between the haves and the have-nots and the rich and poor countries.

The people are disgusted with increasing corruption.

The people of many countries are angry about the attacks on their cultural foundations and the disintegration of families. They are equally dismayed with the fading of care and compassion.

The people of the world have no faith in international organisations, because their rights are not advocated by these organisations.

Liberalism and Western style democracy have not been able to help realize the ideals of humanity. Today these two concepts have failed. Those with insight can already hear the sounds of the shattering and fall of the ideology and thoughts of the liberal democratic systems.

We increasingly see that people around the world are flocking towards a main focal point – that is the Almighty God. Undoubtedly through faith in God and the teachings of the prophets, the people will conquer their problems. My question for you is: “Do you not want to join them?”

Mr President, Whether we like it or not, the world is gravitating towards faith in the Almighty and justice and the will of God will prevail over all things.

Vasalam Ala Man Ataba’al hoda
Mahmood Ahmadi-Najad
President of the Islamic Republic of Iran


Veering From Bush, Frist Backs Funding for Stem Cell Research - New York Times

WASHINGTON, July 29 - In a break with President Bush, the Senate Republican leader, Bill Frist, has decided to support a bill to expand federal financing for embryonic stem cell research, a move that could push it closer to passage and force a confrontation with the White House, which is threatening to veto the measure.

Senator Bill Frist, explaining his stem-cell decision, said, 'It's not just a matter of faith, it's a matter of science.'

Unlike many of my fellow pro-lifers, I welcome Frist's gambit. And here's why: this is, I believe, the most fruitful gambit for reducing abortions in America.

See, the pro-life/pro-abort dialog comes down to two fundamentals: (1) The right of the genetically-distinct human under discussion to live, vs. the mother's right to do what she wants to "her body"; and (2) the question of when the genetically-distinct human under discussion actually becomes human, meaning its termination becomes homicide.

The second of those two fundamentals is the pivot of it all. Ignoring the gruesome and horrifyingly legal practice of partial-birth abortion for the moment, most reasonable folks would agree that the line-in-the sand certainly falls at or before cognition, awareness, and ability to suffer pain. And to date, that argument boils down to faith: on the pro-life side we have folks believing humanity exists from the moment sperm meets egg; on the pro-abort side we have folks claiming humanity is established only after birth (or, in the case of Barbara Boxer or Peter Singer, days or even weeks after).

What's needed--and I believe what's achievable--is agreement that if science can prove "humanity" is achieved at or before such-and-such a point in gestation, then elective abortion after that date is homicide. After all, one of the grand purposes of law is to protect the weakest among us from the thundering herd.

And this is, indeed, a job for the Federal Government. We don't leave it to the States to define what a person is; that is a Constitutional principle, and few today take issue with the definition of person as amended. So it is within bounds for the Federal government to take on the issue of where personhood begins, and science--as Frist may be attempting to establish here--is the way to do it. I'm also confident that the line-in-the-sand will move back in the gestation as scientific and medical methods improve, just as viability has.

Abortion isn't going to go away overnight, not with about half of all pregnancies ending in termination in some areas of America. What we can do is reverse the tide, by using science to legally establish the humanity of its victims.


Pelosi: For Whom The Kelo Tolls?

The American Spectator: Nullification Nancy
By The Prowler
Published 7/5/2005 12:09:06 AM

House Minority Leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi is known amongst even her Democratic colleagues as one of the less cerebral members of the House. But even her staff was stunned by her seeming inability to understand the recent Kelo Supreme Court ruling regarding governmental property seizures...

When asked about Kelo and its implications, as well as moves afoot by some Republicans in both houses to negate the ruling, perhaps by barring use of federal funds on projects that involved the state or local taking of land, Pelosi responded thusly:

"It is a decision of the Supreme Court. If Congress wants to change it, it will require legislation of a level of a constitutional amendment. So this is almost as if God has spoken. It's an elementary discussion now. They have made the decision."

Later, she insisted: "Again, without focusing on the actual decision, just to say that when you withhold funds from enforcing a decision of the Supreme Court you are, in fact, nullifying a decision of the Supreme Court. This is in violation of the respect for separation of church -- powers in our Constitution, church and state as well. Sometimes the Republicans have a problem with that as well. But forgive my digression..."

Left unsaid is that Pelosi and her husband--together worth many many millions, with ownership in hotels, vineyards and downtown San Francisco real estate--are precisely the kind of persons who benefit from Kelo.

Unlike the Left, I have a hard time labeling opposing politicians as stupid, especially those with Pelosi's accomplishments. Reagan, Sonny Bono, both Bushes, Quayle... there have been too many worthy folks on the Right tarred with this puerile brush, and most were, in the end, quite brilliant individuals. So I'm not about to start that with Pelosi.

But I'm happy to toss a rude spotlight on how Pelosi stands to benefit from Kelo as a downtown developer type. This, more than any conjecture of idiocy, best explains her halting and incoherent response to Kelo, which included not a molecule of empathy for the "little people".

Pelosi, indeed, is the prototypical limousine liberal. If there is a silver lining to the horrifying Kelo decision, it's how it's leaving the massahs of the Left exposed in their hypocrisy.


New! Improved! Asset Forfeiture for Everyone

Scott Jordan

It's been grimly entertaining, over the years, watching the Supreme Court proceed tick tick tick down the Bill of Rights, negating one allegedly unalienable right after the other, while monotonically ratcheting-up the powers of the central government.

For example, with Asset Forfeiture legislation in 1984, the Fourth Amendment was shredded as the Feds were given power to seize property on suspicion (yes, suspicion) of a crime, or even if you just have "too much" cash on you when a cop decides to check you out. The Supremes nodded; this is now a major revenue-generation mechanism for the insatiable maw of the Federal Government [1].

Recently the Supremes cheerfully approved the gutting of the First Amendment by approving the worst provisions of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance "reform" bill, after President Bush naively signed the evil thing saying there'd be no way it would pass court muster... but obviously no exercise in statism is too distasteful for this Court.

Just a couple weeks ago they tossed much of what remained of the Fourth and large parts of the Ninth and Tenth by finding that desperate cancer patients who grow their own nausea-limiting marijuana are somehow engaged in interstate commerce. And so Federal power over the individual ratcheted up once more.

And certainly the Second was eviscerated years ago, while increasingly unhinged interpretations of the Commerce Clause have been repeatedly leveraged over the decades to inflate Federal powers into an ever-grosser distortion of the federation of sovereign states that was meant to be. And so on and so forth, tick tick tick over the years, accelerating in the past two decades and at a fever pitch now.

And so, with this decision, goes what was left of the Takings Clause and more hunks of the Fourth. Call it Asset Forfeiture for Everyone.

As usual, the beautifully-written and meticulously sourced dissent of Clarence Thomas--typically the most Constitutionally-grounded of the Justices--is well worth reading [2]. No wonder the Left hates this guy so much. As with all conservatives, they attempt to diminish and dismiss him as stupid, even illiterate [3]. Read that dissent and see if you agree. Is there any wonder that that odious coward Sen. Ted Kennedy went on record just a few days ago [4] saying he "rules out" Thomas as Chief Justice when Rehnquist steps down?

My only hope (and, quite possibly, the country's only hope) is that the Court's stark left-vs-right divide--combined the sheer audacity of this decision which illuminates it, and the horror that the issue even made it as far as the Supremes--will hit enough people hard enough that they come to realize what is at stake... and where the fault truly lies. After all, it was Hillary Clinton who said, almost exactly a year ago, in the heat of a national election campaign: "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." [5]. Indeed, it's started.



1. http://www.usdoj.gov/marshals/assets/assets.html

2. http://straylight.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/04-108.ZD1.html

3. http://edition.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/12/05/judges.reid.frist/

4. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/commentary.html

5. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2004/06/28/politics2039EDT0165.DTL&type=printable


Blair seeks to limit damage as MG Rover goes under

LONGBRIDGE (Reuters) - The government said it would offer a support package for workers at collapsed carmaker MG Rover, seeking to limit the damage from up to 5,000 job losses as it seeks re-election.

Administrators said on Friday there was no hope of selling the last major British carmaker whole and 5,000 workers would be made redundant immediately, dealing a blow to Blair's ruling Labour Party.

Administrators PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), appointed last week after a rescue deal with China's Shanghai Automotive Industry Corp (SAIC) collapsed, said it would 'mothball' the MG Rover plant over the next two months, effectively locking it up until buyers can be found for its assets."


If Blair really"seeks to limit damage", he should get up on his podium, clear his throat, and say "This is what happens when a company is uncompetitive, unresponsive and basically makes crap. The job losses are unfortunate, but this is a lesson to other complacent companies who are not listening to their customers or minding their competition. If others learn from this once-proud company's pain, its passing will have been a good thing overall. That is the essence of the free market, which is the true engine of prosperity. I hope other companies such as General Motors are taking close notes."

But of course, as Vice President of Socialist International, I would not expect Blair to say anything of the sort.


First Take-off Of Airbus A380 Due in 8 Days

8 days are left until one of the most spectacular first flights of avionic history is scheduled. The Airbus A380, the only commercial airplane with an end-to-end double deck, will take off on the 20th of April for the first time.
Only the weather or problems in previous ground test can cause a delay. If all conditions are met, former Mirage jet pilot and chief-test pilot Jacques Rosay (49) can give full throttle on the runway of the Airbus production plant in Toulouse, France, to take off at a speed of 300 km/h.
The highest risk during the flight are expected to be vibrations of the wings, which will be filled with 310000 litres of kerosene, as well as vibrations of the tail section.


I bet.