Oil addiction. Excuse me, but what do you mean?

The usually thoughtful Christian Science Monitor has a long essay about Oil crises. Between Katrina and other hurricanes messing up the Gulf oil rigs, Chavez in charge of Venezuela, Putin's Russia using oil threats to stop Europe from letting the US defend them against Iranian missles, and, of course, the usual unrest in the Middle East, the price of oil has gone up. Good analysis, sir. But what's your solution?

And there we have the nonsense:tax it Energy. Make people feel guilty, so they use more efficient ways of living. Copy Europe and Japan...

"Although boosted by environmentalist concern over global warming, experimentation with noncarbon fuels such as ethanol and hydrogen, and energy sources such as wind power, lags far behind what could be called ideal progress. .."

Ah, but wind power is expensive, kills birds, and is ugly--even Teddy Kennedy stopped a windmill in his back yard, because it destroyed the view.

Actually, as a former midwesterner, we've used wind to pump water on farms for years. So build more windmills. But until you find an eco friendly pollution free battery to store electricity, remember the dirty little secret is that winds come and go.

And biodiesel and ethanol... Again, as a midwesterner, I agree. Another way to sell corn for the farmers...

But producing ethanol takes more energy than it saves. And not every country has corn to spare: Mexican tortilla prices have soared due to making ethanol from corn.

Similarly, biodiesel was used during the war here in SE Asia, so people think it's a good idea. We used i during World War II.

 But what about ecological degradation and deforestation here in SE Asia caused by palm farms to supply biodiesel?

"What the US needs is what Europe and Japan are already successfully using to reduce carbon-fuel consumption: a hefty energy tax. A truly imaginative US initiative would be to devise ways to channel some of any such tax money into needed investments in energy infrastructure at home and abroad."

Ah, I see. Tax people, raise the price of using oil and we'll all get rid of those dirty SUV's, and live good green lives like in Europe...yup. Spread on the guilt.

We should emulate Europe...The Europe where France had 14 000 elderly die a couple summers back because they didn't bother to have air conditioning?

Europe, where happy little people travel everywhere by efficient trains, not bad cars...you know, tiny little Europe, where you can cross an entire country in three hours?

But the dirty little secret about Europe and trains is...they don't use them...for freight.  Check the tonnage: The US sends 37% of freight entirely by rail, but Europe it is only 7%---LINK2 shows the US with 2.5 million kmtons of freight moved by rail vs 24 thousand kmtons in Europe...

As for cars, yup. Encourage the yuppies in Boston to buy a Prius, but in Oklahoma, you need a pickup or large car to haul stuff, even if you live in Tulsa.

"Sure, it's difficult and unpopular to tax energy. But failing such a drastic solution (and better US diplomacy), American oil consumers, as well as those in Europe and Asia, may experience new crosswinds of geopolitics and war. "

Ummm...the largest supplier of US oil is...Canada. Even if the US becomes oil import free, geopolitics will continue. You know why? In one word: CHINA.

But increasing the price for oil will destroy growing third world economies much more than the US.

It is nice to romanticize the simple rural life in the tropics. But what you don't see is the backbreaking labour it involves.

Yes, we still have to hire men to plant the rice seedlings by hand, but now we can drive to the next city to buy high yield seeds, fertilizer, and the harder work of mulching and preparing the soil is now done with a hand plow instead of the eco friendly caribao...(of course, caribaos like other oxen produce methane, a global warming gas...LINK.)

With diesel pumps, we can get two harvests instead of just one. And after we use our diesel thresher to get the rice off the stalks, we usually dry rice  in an eco friendly way: we spread it out on the roads, parking lots, and basketball courts. But when we have late rains, like we did last year, it means that the rice does not dry, and is ruined by mold. The alternative is to use driers...yup. They use energy...either diesel or electricity.

Another way to save energy is not use light bulbs. We use fluorescent bulbs, but they are more expensive, so again poor people are the ones left in the dark.

And instead of denuding forests for wood, we use propane. It's cheaper than electricity, and you can buy tanks everywhere. How do we replace this? Solar cookers? Will they work during Monsoon season?

Another way to save energy is to do like Jimmy Carter suggested: Change the thermostat. Well, golly. You can tell he's from Georgia, not Minnesota. Yes, let's wear sweaters in the winter, and help the poor fix their windows with putty and plastic sheeting. I agree. But remember, you still need a furnace, and if you raise the price of oil, some people won't be able to heat their homes.

But the really big energy guzzler is not even mentioned: Air conditioning.

In Oklahoma, even our poor people had airconditioners. You try living where it is 106 degrees without it. The dirty little secret is if you eliminate airconditioners, half the sunbelt will move back to Iowa and Massachusetts. Airconditioners are energy hungry and "optional", and here in SE Asia they are being bought by the middle class and most businesses...the poor just decide to shop in the airconditioned malls when it hits 100.

Like "global warming", the term "oil addiction" seems mainly about making one feel guilty about being comfortable. But the dirty little secret is that even with all of these changes, the need for cheap energy will soar, not because the US public is "addicted to oil" but because people in China and Thailand and the Philippines prefer the comforts of modern life.

If you merely raise the price of that energy, the US can become more efficient or pay more without too much of a hardship, but here it means going back to the good old days, and most people are close enough to the good old days not to feel nostalgic about the reality of life back then.

So stop using guilt on ordinary folks who are probably trying their best.

From 10 000 miles away, it is like watching a cheering section to read the news on Iraq.
Attacks are presented as heroic attacks. American casualties are presented as success for the other side.
The presence of foreigners is ignored (I was actually surprised when the LA times noticed the QOM miliita in Iraq might actually be connected with the Iranian govt....duh.

And now poison gas.

Poison gas, no problem. It' presented as "now our heroic insurgents are finding exciting new ways to attack bad guys", not "Somali and Egyptian insurgents, who entered into Iraq via Syria and used Saudi money have used poison gas, which is against the Geneva convention, to attack innocent women and children shopping at a local market".

OK. That's too long. How about "WMD used against civilians".

Nah. Won't happen. And now Drudge reports that 60 minutes found some military to talk against the war.

Wonder why they don't find anyone to show the 300 mass graves?

You know things are bad when the NYTimes notices Zimbabwe.

A long time ago, in a galaxy far away, the evil white emperor president of a small country named Rhodesia was overthrown to the delight of liberation theology Maryknollers, the World Council of Churches, and other left wing saints.

Ding Dong the witch is dead.

Actually, since the evil president Smith was not over thrown but signed a treaty, he just went back to farming tobacco, and for awhile it looked like a nice country might be born.

Alas, then Mugabe got older and paranoid. Like other Marxists and other African liberators, he gradually evolved into a dictator who was paranoid.

The first ones to feel his wrath was his enemies in Natabeleland. You see, in a country with three tribes (the whites, who could shoot back, and the Shona, who traditionally are passive aggressive but well educated, and the Ndebele, an offshoot of the Zulus) Mugabe had little backing from the Ndebele, who backed someone named Nkomo.

Soon, with the help of North Korea, armed "insurgents" in Ndebeleland were wiped out, along with a couple thousand tribesmen who just happened to be in the wrong area at the wrong time. But never mind, few people noticed it. I mean, why care about 10 000 Ndebele killed who maybe were guilty, when so many other atrocities in Africa never made the headlines either. Yawn..

But then Mugabe's power got weaker, so he started confiscating white farm lands to give to the landless masses.
Well and good. Excpet for a couple minor problems.
One, much of the food people ate came from surpluses from the white farms, especially when there was a drought.
Two: Much of the agricultural exports came from the white farms.
Three: The small farmers were given land, but since they didn't have access to hybrid seeds, fertilizer, money for petrol, tractors, knowledge of irrigation, food output fell. So although tens of thousands of  people benefited, most did not.
Four: Blair and Bush got mad, and placed sanctions. This was done not because the farms were confiscated, but because the farms were confiscated without paying the farmers, most of whom were Brits.
Five: many of the farms were given to Mugabe's cronies, who didn't know how to farm. Many of the farm laborers were kicked off the land to let his cronies take over, so much of that land is now sitting unproductive.

When there was famine, the NGO's found they had to work through the government. It was assumed that if you didn't vote for Mugabe, your village wouldn't get food aid. So Mugabe won the election. DUH.

But some people in the cities didn't have to rely on food aid. They had small shops or worked.
So to eliminate them, Mugabe declared he was going to clean up the slums.

Many of the small shops didn't have proper paper work. Like many third world towns, even though dad worked, mom would sell fruit in the market, or have a small store in front of the house (our relatives sell rice and skin whitening cream in front of their house). So voila, operation "Cleanup", where 700 000 people were displaced.

Sister Patricia Walsh's HIV clinic in Harare was torn down, but smaller cities had simliar destruction. (some African nuns I know had their convent torn down in a small city).

The lastest is that Mugabe has arrested illegal gold panners (small illegal panning by local people) and will take over the diamond mines.

In the meanwhile, HIV is 30% of the population, one tenth of the healthy have left to work elsewhere, unemployment is 80%, and although the newspapers in the UK cover it, it rarely hits the NYTimes or CNN...until now.

Having a birthday party while the economy collapses is a good story, so it's covered. Alas, since little news comes out of the heartland (letters and even email is monitored, and reporters not allowed to travel) not much news is coming out about conditions from rural areas.
Sigh.

When I worked in Africa, the local baboons would steal the corn when it was getting large enough to harvest. If enough of the crop was taken, it meant starvation for the families. Traditionally, women and children guarded the crops, but baboons could seriously bite, and would attack women and children. So men, who were larger and able to defend themselves, traditionally stayed in the fields to guard the crop from being stolen.

But with the modern world, often the younger men would have jobs in the cities, and those left behind were often women or old men, who would be attacked by the baboons.

So every harvest, Brother Charles, who had a gun permit, would go out to the fields and shoot the marauding monkeys. He would then arrange their body parts around the fields, and place the head on the stick. This sent a clear message to the baboons: attack the field, you'll be next. And it worked. The monkeys would see the head, and decide to peacefully crunch on wild fruit instead.

When Bush attacked Iraq, he essentially placed the monkey's head on a stick, for all to see. The message was clear: Attack us, and you'll be next. Support terror groups who attack us, and you will be held responsible.

And it worked, although many of the successes rarely got headlines.

Well, when Congress voted against Bush last week, Congress has now taken down the monkey's head. As Mark Steyn points out, the Democrats want only to defeat Bush, and don't worry if they defeat America in the eyes of the world.

And what is missing is what this means.

Essentially, if the US, who is the sheriff, leaves, you will have a mid East war between the Shiites and the Sunnis. This was the reason that the US did not take out Saddam in 1991. Should Bush have taken out Saddam in 2003? Well, given the support of terrorists by both sides, there is an argument that sitting back would only increase their ability to fund more proxy terrorists. The decision for Bush was "damned if you do, damned if you don't. Bush chose war, but if he had chosen peace, he would still be blamed for the increase in terror, for the same reason that terror increased under Clinton: Because the weakness of the West is what encourages those who fight the West.

But alas, there is a "third front" in the war: That of the left who prefers peace and negotiations, and who alas controls much of the US and European media.

Yet there has been success in the global war on terror.

A UN report on how Somali's short lived Islamicist take over was enabled by Egypt, Syrian and Libyan training, and Saudi money, and trained with Hezbollah. The press barely noticed  Somalia for ten years, and when the Islamicist took over, they started to spin as another failure for Bush. Then, voila, Kenya and Ethiopia stepped in and they were chased out. Kenya? Well,  Kenya lost a lot of their people in those embassy bombings.The entire issue is now off the headlines, so let's ignore this success.

Then three is a report that  the Islamic terrorists who have killed over 100 000 people in Algeria in the last 20 years, are now reviving, and so that 20 percent of the suicide bombers in Iraq are not from Algeria.( if foreigners kill Iraqis, why is this a civil war? just wondering).

The Algerian terror group is also  linked to the Moroccan men who bombed Madrid, and there is a very real danger that these jihadi groups based in North Africa will continue to target Europe.

Will Europe notice? Nah. They are too busy bashing Bush for placing anti Missile batteries near Prague, and hurting Putin's feelings. It's a win win situation for Paris, since they can bask in anti Americanism and still have Americans defend them against Iran's bomb.

Similarly, domestic terror against Americans and Europeans will be ignored, or also blamed on Bush. So a Palestinian shooting is in NYC will have it's political implications covered up. Letter bombs in London will drop off the news, or, as commenter Andrew K shows, be dismissed as government fabrications.Attacks against Jews in Paris are underplayed.

And the connection between the American "surge" and the Saudi's sudden friendliness with Israel seems to be ignored by tn American press and Congress who don't know a Sunni from a Shiite.

Pakistan has been rooting out jihadi schools and starting to confront the Taliban hiding in their frontiers. will not continue to help a weakened America when some NATO countries are not willing to help fight the Taliban on their border. And if Pakistan is lost to Islamic extremists, what will happen to India?

Under Bush's policies, India is pro American, and is a valuable ally, yet their opinion is not in the discussion at all.

Another ignored story of success in the war on terror is here in the Philippines.. Basilan Island in the Philippines was supposed to be the backup for AlQaeda training camps when Afghanistan was eliminated. However, the heroic Philippine armed forces, with help from US Special Forces advisers, have been slowly eliminating that area. But the fight is still ongoing, with the Philippines almost daily finding and defusing bombs at markets and police stations here.

 Another unsung ally is Australia. Senator Obama showed his ignorance of the war on terror when he criticized Australia's Howard, saying that if Howard really likes the war in Iraqi, then the Aussies should send more troops to Iraq. Obama, who grew up in Indonesia and should know better, seems blithely unaware that Australia is involved in many peacekeeping missions here in SEAsia and Micronesia. Indeed, the Bali Bombing, which occurred before the Iraq war started, had nothing to do with Bush: it  was in retaliation for Australian UN peacekeepers  who were defending Christians in East Timor. 

Indonesia is also starting to fight against local terror groups. Recently, with the help of  Aussies and US Special Forces, that government has had some success against terrorist in Sulewesi.  The bad news however is that StrategyPage reports that  Islamicists in Sulewesi are planning another big massacre of Christians to generate headlines and encourage others to join their losing cause....but unlike the past, where Christians did not defend themselves until many had been killed,  this time, the Christians time will fight back.

Is this perhaps why Thailand has become such a hotbed of terror? The peaceful Thai have avoided military solutions, and were hoping that peace could be made by their new government. Instead, the violence has increased, with 2000 dead in the last year, and 28 bombs last weekend alone. Most of those killed were Buddhists , and the result is an ethnic cleansing of Buddhists from that area, and a war against moderate Muslims who oppose the jihadis.

Without US power as a warning, the entire Asian and African successes can easily be reversed.

The winner in all this will probably not be Islam: For the terrorists will undoubtably turn on themselves and kill each other. And a Europe who sees Bush as a bigger problem than Iran with a bomb will

The ultimate winner will be China.

IT was the Chinese,  pressure on North Korea made last week's agreement possible.  They are aiming at controlling the markets, and a couple million starving North Korean refugees is not something they want, nor do they wish an arms race with a Japanese and maybe a South Korean bomb is not going to help their aims.

So the bad news is that, by taking down the monkey's head, Europe and the American left will only empower Islamicst terror and the governments backing them. In the short term, this means an isolationist US. and only an aging Europe to confront a growing menace that they refuse to notice.

 But in the long term, if the Islamicsts don't manage to kill each other, nuke the oil fields in the Gulf, and turn Europe into a stagnant  continent run by Sharia law, the growing caliphate will find themselves confronted with not the cowboy with the monkey's head, but the dragon.

From 12000 miles away, I followed the elections, which seemed to be more about Congressman Foley's emails than about foreign policy. So now the Democrats decide it's about foreign policy, yet they see the war on terror only about Iraq.
Since I only see CNN, the news is so biased I feel like throwing up. You hear the polls, but not the nuances. Heck, even the BBC is better, since their talking heads do have a good in depth discussion, not like the smirking Brits on CNNInternational.

(For some reason, there are few Americans on CNNInternational, and their bias is anti American, rarely supporting Bush or the US point of view).

But now Lucianne has a link to a Times of India post from a left wing US site saying the US is going to invade Iran.
Silly, since you could ATTACK Iran, but the army and logistics simply aren't there, even with three aircraft carriers.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/US_preparations_for_invading_Iran_are_complete_Report/articleshow/1629862.cms

What is more interesting is reports about Sunnis bombing against the Iranian government in the East.

The US press sees the Mullahs and the nut case in charge, but not that Iran has a large 40% non Farsi population, or that many of these are Sunni.

The US press also doesn't see that much of the surge is about placating the Saudis who don't want the Sunni Iraqis from all being ethnically cleansed by Alsadr's Iranian backed militias.

With poor reporting, how does the press keep their head up?
And when Congress is more worried about embarassing Bush than with trying to keep the middle east from exploding into a Sunni Shiite war, how do they justify themselves?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6363181.stm

From overseas, I have been watching as the world power brokers are trying to destroy US leadership and power.

They "blame" Bush, but i suspect that unless the US president agrees to bow to their ideology they would blame any president.

So what needs to be noticed is this LINK

The anti Americanism in the European Union is working. Bush's "unilateralism" is only unilateral because the Anglosphere refuses to agree with their plans.

WHat they are not noticing is that, by their failure to follow Bush and their openly promoting Anti Americanism in propaganda (The European and international press) and in policies (the "green" and Global warming are being used to destroy the US economy, while China is of course exempt, and Europe will sign up but merely ignore the treaties).

What they don't see is that they are slitting their own throats. I use "they" to mean the European one world types, and their lackies.

You see, demographically, Europe will not have the power or will to take over, and so by destroying the US, who has defended them and give them peace, they are letting themselves to be open to conquest by economics or demographics or even by old fashioned war (Europe opposes Anti Missle system deployment by the US, which of course are being put there to defend western Europe against Iranian missiles).

And here in Asia, the result will be China taking over the ASEAN nations. Well, the Chinese ethnic groups run the economies anyway (which is the reason behind genocide/ethnic cleansing of Chinese ethnics from Viet Nam in the 1970's and from Indonesia in the 1960's).

So for us, the end result will be Chinese running the place, and ignoring Sharia law in Malaysia and in Indonesia, while helping the Philippines and Thailand to stay the same as long as they cooperate.

Our defense of freedom will be not the US but Australia, who is quietly active here (OBAMA TAKE NOTE) and in other ASEAN countries.

Africa is still up for grabs. Traditionally, their large businesses are European, but their small shops and factories were run by India. Will China stand in the gap? Will China recolonialize Africa?

Not in the "old " way, by teaching and investing and raising up the local people, but yes, by running the economys and ignoring the governments.

The real question is if China will start manipulaitng governments that go overboard in causing corruption and instability. They don't have a history of that.
The second question is if African will quietly resent the Chinese takeovers.

South Africa is the key to this, and also Nigeria. They are the major players due to their population and educated peoples.

Again, Islam vs Christianity will continue to be a problem.

So without the US, there will be a clash of civilizations between ISlam and China.

But since China tends to sit back and let their enemies destroy themselves, China will be the real winner after Islamofascism destroys itself through civil war.

As for the US. I hate to say it, but most Americans don't give a damn about other countries, and have no wish to interfere. We only do it because no one else has been doing it.

And Europe might find, like the town in High Noon, that the Sheriff will take off his badge and just go away.

The bad news is that these powers are trying to spread their policies on the USA, and will do so if Hillary wins in 2008.

"...Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said U.S. forces hunting down militant networks that produced roadside bombs had arrested Iranians and that some of the material used in the devices were made in Iran.

“That does not translate that the Iranian government per se, for sure, is directly involved in doing this,” Pace told reporters in the Indonesian capital, Jakarta. “What it does say is that things made in Iran are being used in Iraq to kill coalition soldiers.”"...
So what does the headlines say? "U.S. general: No evidence Iran is arming Iraqis,
Pace contradicts claims by other' U.S. military, administration officials

Nope, no press bias here, folks, just move along.
------------------------
Cut capital gains tax, and guess what happens? LINK
---------
The Anchoress comments:"the mainstream press is also evolving, as we see daily in what the “mediating intelligences” decide to report and not report. For example, you don’t hear much about good financial news like this. The president is the wrong party, and he’s Bush, besides, so good (or vital and informative) news is not allowed out unless it simply cannot be contained. But most of it is containable. And what is not containable is either fixable or obfuscatable…if that’s a word!

As a doctor, I've worked in many cultures, both in the USA and overseas.
One thing that drives me up the wall is when a novel or a news report gets theculture or customs wrong, whether it be giving the wrong medicine in CPR, havingthe Irish in Uris' book Trinity act like they lived in modern Long Island, orthe Disney Channel Asia where Mulan acts like a valley girl.

This is why this NYTimes story about Idaho irritates me.

Now, I'm not up on Idaho politics. I presume the details of the Boisepoliticians part is true, and the irritation that the hard working voters feelat seeing their money spent on port sounds true to life. But his description ofIdaho is...well, I hate to say it, but it's a fantasy.

The writer obviously never went anywhere but the airport, the hotel, and thestatehouse. (poor guy...guessed he missed the strip joints in Garden City).

So his description of Idaho is full ofcliches.
In a conservative state thathas long viewed government with suspicion, that still means conflict. But eventhe governor’s fellow Republicans concede that the momentum here shifted yearsago from bait-and-bullet to New West boutique. As with so many otherdecreasingly rugged places in the inland West, there is more of everybody inIdaho now: techies, Democrats, immigrants, environmentalists...

Excuse me. Farmers and ranchers have a long history of conservation, becausethey own the land and if you don't take care of the land, you can't leave it toyour children. Their care of the environment would put many jet setenvironmentalists to shame.

Immigrants? Duh. Who do you think picked the potatoes and worked the mines?Idaho is ten percent Hispanic. And a lot of people are second or thirdgeneration Irish and Italian--or don't they count?
Did you know that Idaho has the largest Basque population in the USA, who cameto work as shepherds?

Democrats? Duh. Did you ever hear of Joe Hill?

Your story seems to be stuck in the myth that Idaho is full of rugged mountainmen who live alone off the land? (hate to tell you this, but even in the goodold days, most mountain men had Indian wives who cooked and cleaned for them).

And speaking of Indians, the book (and movie) Smoke Signals is about IdahoIndians. Yup. Bet you didn't visit them.
Did you know that thefirstCatholic mass was said there in 1840 because local Christian Indiansrequested a priest, and they sent the famous explorerFather DeSmet?

The reality is that in Idaho the culture is one of families that care for theirown without a large government bureaucracy.

This is mainly due to the LDS heritage that built most of the Snake Valley-- thesymbol of the LDS settlers is the communal beehive--but it is also true of thesolid midwestern farmers who moved there, the Catholic miners and Indians, andprobably even the techhies, who prefer the 20 below of a Boise winter to balmyL.A. because they can afford decent housing and schools for their children.

I am a doctor who has worked cross cultural medicine both in the USA andoverseas. I worked and raised my boys there. I'm sorry, but I see the snidecliches in this article as one more piece of evidence that the MSM too oftendespises middle America, "findamentalists" (a term that include LDS andCatholics) or indeed whatever group isn't living in the upper East side.

You want your own private Idaho? Fine. Write a movie.
You want to write a story? Leave out the condenscending cliches.
---------------------------------------------------
Nancy Reyes is a retired physician living in the rural Philippines. with herhusband. She lived in Idaho for five years and worked there as a doctor. Herwebpage isFinestKind Clinic and Fishmarketand temper tantrums get postedtoWesternConfusian.

Poll shows Arabs dislike Americans, especially Bush, that they see the US in the Israeli palestinian prism, and that if the US would only get a peace agreement they'd like us. Duh.
Then read the small print.

Poll by the  Brookings institution...article does not mention that the Brookings institution is liberal and mirrors the Democratic party.

Second problem: Countries include: "Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco and United Arab Emirates. "

Problem: No free press in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, or Jordan. The closest thing to a free press is Lebanon. Remember: In Arabic, the closest thing to a "free press" is Al Jazeerah.

And in a related problem, the Australian foreign minister blasted European politicians for their anti Americanism.

Mr Downer gave warning that criticism of America's conduct in Iraq could inadvertently provide an incentive for terrorist attacks.

"People in the West, and not only in Europe, blame America for a suicide bomber in a market in Baghdad," he said.

"That only encourages more horrific behaviour. Every time there is an atrocity committed, it is implicitly America's fault, so why not commit some more atrocities and put even more pressure on America?"

Mr Downer added: "The al-Qa'eda leadership has said on many occasions that more than 50 per cent of the battle is a battle in the media. The more you can get media denigration of America, the more that the war against terrorism is seen to be an indictment of America, the better for those who started this war." Speaking during a visit to London yesterday, Mr Downer, who has served as Australia's foreign minister for almost 11 years, said that European critics of Washington were not aiming to help terrorists, but this could be the consequence of their words.

"It's very rude to say these people want to help al-Qa'eda. They don't. But America's enemies take comfort from continual attacks on America by America's friends," he said. "Before you leap out there and vigorously attack America, think about the consequences of what you're saying."

Mr Downer, 55, added that populist attacks on Washington "might play well in some political constituencies in Europe, but that's no excuse".

LINK
The story originally said that a Japanese vessel was attacked by pirates.
The link is the latest story, which laments not only were their attackers "activists" but now two are missing, and presumably will have to be rescued.
And guess who are helping in the rescue?
Yup. the Japanese whaling ships.

007

http://www.france24.com/france24Public/en/administration/afp-news.html?id=070202110019.5gzt33zc

yup...it's freezing here in the Philippines.

The Philippines is in the news this morning with a large (but not unusual) prison break.

These things happen now and then, and there are no reports if those escaped were dangerous prisoners or simply normal MILF supporters.

Then there was a terrible explosion of a truck carrying liquid petrolium gas. This was in Zamboanga, so early reports worried about a bomb, but it was, alas, only a normal traffic accident, with high casulaties in a passing bus. Reports suggest 20-30 casualties.

But the most ominous story is not getting much notice, at least on Google: The threat of bombs in the Manila area from sleeper cells, in revenge for last week’s killing of several Abu Sayyaf leaders.

The Philippine police raided a sleeper cell in a town outside of Manila, killing one and capturing two after a firefight. Bomb Making materials and a partly assembled bomb were found at the site.
And the background for the raid is the worry that Manila will be the site of more terrorist attacks. There had been earlier reports that Abu Sayyaf had obtained bomb making training via Indonesian terrorist who had fled to the Philippines after the Bali bombing. There are also reports that Islamic converts from Luzon, who know the language and the culture, might cooperate with the MILF in planting these bombs.

——————————————-cross posted to blogger news network

http://www.bloggernews.net/14328