|
|
I hate Thursdays. They're my busiest days and breaking news occurs. I had a short break from my teaching when I flicked on the TV and on CNN there's was a BREAKING NEWS banner. It was about Tenant's resignation.
I'm unsurprised by his decision to step down but does catch my attention is that he's stayed on for so long. It's no secret whay Tenant resigned: the serious flaws in the intelligence gathering on Iraqi weapons of mass destructions and the revelations that Chabali might've spied for Iran were the final setbacks that Tenent couldn't justify.
As a foreigner, I'm more ambivalent: I neither hate him or admire Tenent.I opine that he should've resigned after 11 September but that's as far as I'll go to assess Tenent's tenure as CIA director. It'll be very interesting to read the American bloggers and media pundits' views on Tenent.
Hier je lisais les carnet sur les attentants et plus tard j'ai ?cout? les nouvelles. Les deux co?ncident sur l'essentiel: 3 de 4 terrorists ont pu filer malgr? ?tre cern?s par les forces speciales soudiennes.
Robert d'Alphabet city affrime nos pires craintes:il y a eu de la complicit? active (vous devez decendre jusqu'au bout de ce billet)entre le r?gime et les terroristes.
Je sp?cule de nouveau que les avoir tu?s ou captur?s aurait soul?v?es des questions bien trop g?nantes que les dirig?ants du r?gime n'eussent pu en r?pondre sans qu'ils exposent les liens entre certains rameaux de la famille royale, certines unit?s de forces de s?curit?s avec la cellule saoudienne d'Al Qu'ida.
On aper?oit tant les d?gats humains: 22 morts et des innombres bl?ss?s que mat?riels: le prix du baril de p?trole a fl?chi ? 42$U.S. un nouveau r?cord. Vraiment, cette attaque menance notre s?curit? ?conomique. Ma question: que passera-t-il maintenant et que ferons-nous l'Occident?
Is it a coincidence that since yesterday's newsreports that highlighted the provincial Liberals' 'neurality' in the elections, that the Conservatives have finally woken up and even been energized here in Quebec?
Today, I went to the gym early in the morning and I saw a new election poster. The slogan was really lame: Qui a vol? l'argent des ch?mers?( who stole the unemployed's money?) Is this the local Conservatives sign? I wasn't able to see the party name and logo- a real pet peeve of mine. In any case, it appears that the election here in my hometown is beginning to heat up like turning the nob slighty to increase the BBQ flame.
Good Lord what is it with the Anglophones with the French? Let's not mar the Dday celebrations by berating the French on the liberation of their country and the rest of Northwestern Europe for their 'constant' military ineptitude. Indeed it would be in very bad taste for me to remind the Anlgophones, particularly the British, that from 1939-42, they didn't exactly cover themelves with glory either.
Dunkirk was a spectucular disaster- the BEF left behind all of its vehicles, tanks, artillery as well as most of its small arms on the beach. Then there's Narvik before Dunkirk. Of course, Signapore is Britian's most shameful defeat; on par with the D?b?cle of May/June 40. The Brits should've never lost the Lion city.What saved them was the English Channel, Hitler's strategic error in leaving an undefeated enemy behind his back and Lend lease.
As for WW I, Henderson is quite correct to highlight the Commonwealth soldiery as a factor in the Allied victory. The British High command was relatively backwards. It hadn't even bothered to keep up with the ideas and innovations occuring in Europe since the Crimean war; so the British military was well-prepared to fight African tribes and Asian potentates but not the most modern militaries of the time.
Even he Boer war experiences didn't compel a complete overhaul of its organization, a complete reevaluation of its tactics by the British High command or incorporate the lessons. Once again, it was the ordinary soldiers' professionalism that saved the BEF and prevented the D?b?cle from occuring in 1914. Nevertheless, the British High command's outdated tactical thinking caused it to squader carelessly its soldiers and had to turn to the Commonwealth; without the ex-colonies, the British military too would've been inconsequential in 1917.Americans need to be gently remided that they didn't win the war; they simply altered the strategic balance permenantly in the Allies' favour.
Finally, I encourage readers to look at my archives and peruse my analysis of the the French Indochina war and why France was defeated. However, I remind Americans that they too lost the second Indochinese war with demoralizing effects to the soldiers and the society. One last potshot: if the French are so military inept then Kaddafi never knew it. He was spectacularly beaten in the Libyo-Chadian war of the 80s. In fact, the French task force with Chadian auxiliaries destroyed 2 Libiyan divisions and Kaddafi lost over 5 billion in arms and equipment. Not too shabby for the West's alleged Keystone cops.
Tothom ja s'ha enterat de les not?cies funestes de que un grup d'homes armats i uniformats- possiblement membres de la Guardia nacional saudita atacaren el sector residencial desl estrangers en Kobar que havia deixat un decenni de morts i almenys 50 hostages en un bloc. Finalement les for?es especiales saudita els alliberen per? no abans que 4 m?s es morissen. Els soldats capturaren el cap i 4 dels terroristes i digu? a papa que el r?gim els torturar? i els matar? per que turbaran massa la fam?lia real amb el enlla?os entre alguns membres amb Al Qu'ida.
Mentrestant, M'argadava molt el cop de teatre dels hel?s Chinnok atterrisant i d'on sortiran 40 soldadets a la vegada. ?Carai com es mobilitza el r?gim! L'estrat?gia d'Al Qu'ida es tan clar com el sol: Aterroritzar els estranger que fugin del pa?s que provoca una cr?sis de la cual cau la Casa de Saud i Al Qu'ida s'apoderaran del petrol? i aix? financen el dijad i destrue?xen l'ec?nomia dels infidels. Per? hi ha un problemet: d'on collons trobaren els tecnics per treure el petrol?. Per? aixo francament no es meu problema.
Que si ho es: ?qu? fer amb aquesta entitat geogr?fica que es pren per pa?s? L'Occident haur? de reevaluar no sols les seves relacions amb el r?gim ans tamb?e amb tot el Pr?xim Orient. Podem tallar totes les subvencions que l'Autoritat Palestina rebi, exigir a la fam?lia real saudita a elegir costats i actuar en conseq??ncia un cop que hagin escollit; imposar concessions extraterritorial per protegir els ciutadans estrangers degut que el r?gim francament el hi desinteresa completament ja que els el fa nosa si m?s no fastic.
Saudi Arabia is an artifical country that has become incapable of defending its own interior space. Consequently, it's time for the Western countries to impose extraterritorial concessions in the oil producing regions.
The Saudi regime doesn't like it? Too bad! The murders and hostage taking in Khobar merely underscores that the regime is completely untrustworthy in protecting the very foreign workers it depends on for its existence. Extraterritorial concessions wil ensure that the foreign workers are protected, the oil flows and there's normality. I'm fed up with both the impunity that Al Qu'ida/islamojihadist and their symphathizers that allows them to kill without savage resistence from the regime as well as the Whabbi religious bigotry that's facilitates this barbourous acts. I really want to see the democratic countries roused in righteous fury over these killings.
Loss of sovereignity will galvanize the royal family to choose sides: with us or with Al Qu'ida. In the meantime, the advanced industralized countries must set aside whatever differences they have and pool together whatever ideas, technologies, funding and policies to reduce as much as possible our dependence on oil. Without our money, the jihad dies asfixiated.Laurent a ?crit une forte int?ressante analyse de pourquoi le f?d?ral tend ? ing?rer dans les comp?tences exclusives provinciales et l'insouisance de Martin de proposer que les provinces peuvent toujours hausser leurs imp?ts. Bravo M Martin vous dites que vous ?tes Qu?b?cois mais vous oubliez vite qu'on est le plus tax? dans tout le continent.
En tout cas, je voulais pr?ciser que cette ing?rerence ne date pas d'aujourd'hui. En effet, une lecture stricetment jurdique de la constitution de 1867 expose un pays ultra-centraliste. C'est le f?d?ral qui d?tient tous les pouvoirs et comp?tences important y compris les pouvoirs r?siduels non-explicit?s dans le document; contrairement ? la constitution am?ricaine qui les octroie aux ?tats locaux. Les fondateurs de la conf?d?ration canadienne l'ont voulu ainsi pusiqu'ils tiraient selon eux les dangers du d?centralisme am?rican qui aurait abouti ? sa Guerre civile. Les fondanateurs canadiens craignaient non seulement de ce m?me dynamique dans les colonies britanniques en Am?rique de Nord mais ?galement les Am?ricans (il suffit de se rappeler la p?riode 1812-1865. Certes les fondateurs ont ?t? anti-am?ricains mais cette attitude n'?tait jamais haineux comme aujourd'hui mais peureux de subir la m?me sort que les territoires m?xicains entre 1848-1856)
Donc, le f?d?ral gagnait toujours les conflict interjurisdictionnels jusqu'en 1898 quand le P-G. du Nouveau-Bruswick avait interj?t? appel au Comit? judiciare du Conseil priv? britannique qui a donn? raision ? la province et avait ?galement arr?t? un judgement fondamental dans le droit constitutionel et administratif canadien. Les juges ont conclu que la constitution de 1867 donnait chaque instances de comp?tences exclusives que ni l'une ni l'autre pouvait rentrer. Les choses se sont rest?es ainsi jusqu'? la p?ridode 1914-45 o? compte tenu de les exigences ? mobiliser les ressources mat?rielles et humaines pour de guerres mondiales ainsi que la D?pression des ann?es 30. Le f?d?ral avait assum? beaucoup de responsibilit? financi?res provinciales car celles-ci ont ?t? dans la faillite.
Donc quoi faire? Sans doutes les provinces devront faire un front commun pour exiger la r?traite du f?d?rals dans le champs qui ne lui corresponde pas et concentrer aux siens comme le commerce interprovincial. Vraiment ?a fait piti? que c'est plus facile ? exporter aux ?tats-Unis qu'ach?ter de biens et de services entre les provinces.
Dan wrote a 2 part reply to Andrew Lazarus about the latter's objections to how Bush has conducted the war on the islamojihadists so far and the Iraqi war.
Reading through Dan's second part, it struck me that what was required was to reestablish the Cocom. The Coordinating committee (Cocom) to my younger readers, was an informal organization established by the U.S. and the allies (NATO, Japan, Australia, Korea, etc) during the Cold war that would impede exports of advanced technologies, industrial processes as well as closely monitor the loans and other sources of financing to the Eastern bloc countries. They were to be denied any edge or advantage.
Cocom pretty much fell into disuse by the time of perestroika; by the end of the Cold war, Cocom was succeeded by the Wassenaar Arrangement In retrospect, Cocom's replacement by Wassenaar was premature given what we now know of Pakistan and North Korea's roles in proliferating weapons of mass destruction technology throughout the world as well as the confluence between international organized crime and terrorism.
I propose to reestablish Cocom and invest it with new responsibilities; notably
I would also encourage great flexibilty within Cocom. For example, it's quite possible for the World Bank to work with Interpol on certain financial crimes; courts to require NATO's expertise with chemical weapons in the course of a trial or investigation. Indeed, the whole point of Cocom is to be the principal forum where the West and sympathetic countries that need to work together or whenever some type of multilateral cooperation is called for as well as being the resource centre to consolidate everyone's expertise so that they don't waste their time replicating information that's already available.
Hier, les polices ont apport?s au tribunal pour une mise en accusation formelle aux trois accus? d'avoir incendie de fa?on criminelle la biblioth?que des United Torah Schools en Montr?al.
Ce qui est fort int?ressant se sont les accus?s car lorsqu'on lit leurs noms, il s'agit de noms arabs et plus sp?cifiquement alg?riens. Premier constat: quelle surprise que se sont des personnes d'origins arabes pusique j'en doutais qu'un Qu?b?cois bien courant incenderait une ?cole juive pour d?noncer la morte de Sheik Yassan. Deuxi?me constat: que les accus?s n'ont jamais parl? de la politiqueni manifestaient de sentiments int?gristes, les jeunes semblaient normaux et courrants comme ados.
Erreur. Ces jeunes-l? n'ont pas r?veill? un bon matin et d?cid?rent qu'il d?truisiraient un cible juif. Bien avant cet acte, il y a eu une propagandisation continue et constant. En outre, tout le monde aimeraient conna?tre o? ils fr?quentaient, avec qui, quand et qu'est-ce qu'il fasient.
Avui hem apr?s que el PSC ha anunciat als altres partrists que no pogui comptar amb ell per demanar el retorn dels papers de Salamanca. Realment, el PSC es b?n in?til excepte per obeir els mestres madrilenys.
Es cert que en el quotid?, el retorn dels papers espoliats de la Generalitat i d'altres entitats de la societat civil catalana no t? una import?ncia transcendental; per? si t? un import?ncia s?mbolica que satisfaria el poble i es revendicaria una cosa menys del govern central. Tanmateix, demostra que la Transici? encara no s'ha acabada i pitjor: el catalans havien d'acceptar que s'amestinen els integrants del r?gim franqusita per permetre la redemocratizaci? del pa?s; per? el govern central novament democr?tic mai havia donat una contraprestaci? com retornar els papers de Salamanca.
Ambd?s partits centrals prefereixen rastar els peus i llan?ar apol?gies absurdes en lloc que admeten que encara pendeix una deuta que cal tancar una p?gina hist?rica. La rejecci? per part del PSC es inexcusable i manifesta el seu sucursalisme envers el partit nacional.
