Rusted Sky

Had a Cub Scout campout this weekend. It was a lot of fun - rained a bit this morning but overall the weather was fine and the kids pretty well behaved themselves. Got home, got everything cleaned up, and I'm about done for the day.

Goodnight, all.

J.

Had a Cub Scout campout this weekend. It was a lot of fun - rained a bit this morning but overall the weather was fine and the kids pretty well behaved themselves. Got home, got everything cleaned up, and I'm about done for the day.

Goodnight, all.

J.

Had a Cub Scout campout this weekend. It was a lot of fun - rained a bit this morning but overall the weather was fine and the kids pretty well behaved themselves. Got home, got everything cleaned up, and I'm about done for the day.

Goodnight, all.

J.

than the Amish.

And some bastard decided to kill Amish children in a school.

It's hard to make sense of a crime like this. Insanity? Someone who wanted to win martyrdom by restaging the Beslan massacre?

There were also notes left by the gunman, identified as Charles Carl Roberts IV, a 32-year-old milk delivery man from nearby Bart, Pa., Miller said. The notes, left for Roberts' wife, indicated that he was seeking revenge for something that happened decades ago. Roberts has three children.

It is indeed the crazy years. May God crant the parents of these children peace, and embrace the souls of the departed into the Light...

J.

than the Amish.

And some bastard decided to kill Amish children in a school.

It's hard to make sense of a crime like this. Insanity? Someone who wanted to win martyrdom by restaging the Beslan massacre?

There were also notes left by the gunman, identified as Charles Carl Roberts IV, a 32-year-old milk delivery man from nearby Bart, Pa., Miller said. The notes, left for Roberts' wife, indicated that he was seeking revenge for something that happened decades ago. Roberts has three children.

It is indeed the crazy years. May God crant the parents of these children peace, and embrace the souls of the departed into the Light...

J.

than the Amish.

And some bastard decided to kill Amish children in a school.

It's hard to make sense of a crime like this. Insanity? Someone who wanted to win martyrdom by restaging the Beslan massacre?

There were also notes left by the gunman, identified as Charles Carl Roberts IV, a 32-year-old milk delivery man from nearby Bart, Pa., Miller said. The notes, left for Roberts' wife, indicated that he was seeking revenge for something that happened decades ago. Roberts has three children.

It is indeed the crazy years. May God crant the parents of these children peace, and embrace the souls of the departed into the Light...

J.

They just can't stand being laughed at.

NBC: It's anti-militant season on Arab TV - Mideast/N. Africa - MSNBC.com

At Ramadan, TV turns up heat on extremists
Satirical Saudi show makes mockery of militants, draws fundamentalist ire

...

An example is "Tash Ma Tash," a wildly popular Saudi TV series that is deploying satire to poke fun at the fundamentalists.

Staff on the show have received death threats for what some consider brazen impertinence; meanwhile, senior sheikhs issued a religious edict which deemed it was sinful to watch "Tash MaTash" after an episode skewered religious judges for working only three hours a day. Another episode was heavily criticized by clerics and others when it ridiculed the practice of requiring women to be accompanied by a male relative or a husband when dining out.

Recognizing the huge viewership of "Tash Ma Tash," a contributor to a militant site bemoaned the effectiveness of the show. "This episode of 'Tash Ma Tash' turned everything upside down," he wrote.

Either way, it's interesting to see that humor is being directed against those who use terror. It's hard to be afraid when you're laughing.

J.

They just can't stand being laughed at.

NBC: It's anti-militant season on Arab TV - Mideast/N. Africa - MSNBC.com

At Ramadan, TV turns up heat on extremists
Satirical Saudi show makes mockery of militants, draws fundamentalist ire

...

An example is "Tash Ma Tash," a wildly popular Saudi TV series that is deploying satire to poke fun at the fundamentalists.

Staff on the show have received death threats for what some consider brazen impertinence; meanwhile, senior sheikhs issued a religious edict which deemed it was sinful to watch "Tash MaTash" after an episode skewered religious judges for working only three hours a day. Another episode was heavily criticized by clerics and others when it ridiculed the practice of requiring women to be accompanied by a male relative or a husband when dining out.

Recognizing the huge viewership of "Tash Ma Tash," a contributor to a militant site bemoaned the effectiveness of the show. "This episode of 'Tash Ma Tash' turned everything upside down," he wrote.

Either way, it's interesting to see that humor is being directed against those who use terror. It's hard to be afraid when you're laughing.

J.

They just can't stand being laughed at.

NBC: It's anti-militant season on Arab TV - Mideast/N. Africa - MSNBC.com

At Ramadan, TV turns up heat on extremists
Satirical Saudi show makes mockery of militants, draws fundamentalist ire

...

An example is "Tash Ma Tash," a wildly popular Saudi TV series that is deploying satire to poke fun at the fundamentalists.

Staff on the show have received death threats for what some consider brazen impertinence; meanwhile, senior sheikhs issued a religious edict which deemed it was sinful to watch "Tash MaTash" after an episode skewered religious judges for working only three hours a day. Another episode was heavily criticized by clerics and others when it ridiculed the practice of requiring women to be accompanied by a male relative or a husband when dining out.

Recognizing the huge viewership of "Tash Ma Tash," a contributor to a militant site bemoaned the effectiveness of the show. "This episode of 'Tash Ma Tash' turned everything upside down," he wrote.

Either way, it's interesting to see that humor is being directed against those who use terror. It's hard to be afraid when you're laughing.

J.

And from the inside. This won't be broadcast by the media - it doesn't fit the script.

The person writing this is a Major, in psychiatric services. He contacted Patterico, established his bonafides in the first of a 4 part series and said that the reason he wasn't contacting the major media (indeed, has refused to be interviewed) is because he has no faith in them presenting the story accurately. With much, much contact with the prisoners, he writes the following in part 2:

Stashiu is not able to share specific details of conversations he had with specific individuals, for reasons having to do principally with patient confidentiality, and in part with operational security. But he can give you, the reader, a good overview of what types of human beings are being detained at Guantánamo Bay.

I asked him that very question: what are the detainees like? Stashiu said:

For many of them, think Ted Bundy. Educated, charming, and without conscience for those they consider infidels. Some are truly ill and were taken advantage of because of it. For example, one routinely asked us for an explosive suicide vest so he could assassinate Osama Bin Laden or George Bush for us, whoever he could find first (he was completely serious).

But we’ve heard that many of the detainees at GTMO were innocent, I said. Does Stashiu believe that — and does he have a basis to know one way or the other?

I didn’t see any that I believe were totally innocent, although it wasn’t my call and it really didn’t matter to their care. We got how much I could know about their history changed because I contended that if I couldn’t validate their history as given to us, my staff couldn’t give adequate treatment. It would be too easy for detainees to lie about the presence or absence of a family history. If they told us the truth about some of the circumstances relating to their capture, we could have some confidence in other information they gave. And they almost always tried to tell that part of their story. The biggest rule we had to follow in guiding staff was to never share any specific intel so that intel and therapy were as separated as possible while still providing good care.

Although he couldn’t discuss specifics, he said:

[M]y opinion is that there are some truly evil people there. To be fair, some honestly believe that what they do is right.

Of course, that is true of many evil people.

Stashiu learned many interesting stories about the detainees during the course of these conversations. Some of these were occasionally amusing.

One guy was living proof of Murphy’s Law… no matter what he did, it ended up turning to shit on him and he is lucky just to still be alive.

Can the detainees be reasoned with? I asked. Or is their indoctrination so complete that there’s just no reaching them? Are there any of them who are reasonable enough that Stashiu would feel safe if we were to let them go free?

I don’t know that anyone is beyond reason, but I also don’t know more than a couple who I think might be ok to release. “Might” being the operative word there, I wouldn’t give the go-ahead on my own for any of them. There I are couple I could understand and would not go out of my way to protest their release. I can tell you that if I ever saw a detainee face-to-face here in the States, I would immediately assume that I was targeted and do my best to kill them without further warning. If I turned out to be wrong about their intent, I could live with that.

J.

And from the inside. This won't be broadcast by the media - it doesn't fit the script.

The person writing this is a Major, in psychiatric services. He contacted Patterico, established his bonafides in the first of a 4 part series and said that the reason he wasn't contacting the major media (indeed, has refused to be interviewed) is because he has no faith in them presenting the story accurately. With much, much contact with the prisoners, he writes the following in part 2:

Stashiu is not able to share specific details of conversations he had with specific individuals, for reasons having to do principally with patient confidentiality, and in part with operational security. But he can give you, the reader, a good overview of what types of human beings are being detained at Guantánamo Bay.

I asked him that very question: what are the detainees like? Stashiu said:

For many of them, think Ted Bundy. Educated, charming, and without conscience for those they consider infidels. Some are truly ill and were taken advantage of because of it. For example, one routinely asked us for an explosive suicide vest so he could assassinate Osama Bin Laden or George Bush for us, whoever he could find first (he was completely serious).

But we’ve heard that many of the detainees at GTMO were innocent, I said. Does Stashiu believe that — and does he have a basis to know one way or the other?

I didn’t see any that I believe were totally innocent, although it wasn’t my call and it really didn’t matter to their care. We got how much I could know about their history changed because I contended that if I couldn’t validate their history as given to us, my staff couldn’t give adequate treatment. It would be too easy for detainees to lie about the presence or absence of a family history. If they told us the truth about some of the circumstances relating to their capture, we could have some confidence in other information they gave. And they almost always tried to tell that part of their story. The biggest rule we had to follow in guiding staff was to never share any specific intel so that intel and therapy were as separated as possible while still providing good care.

Although he couldn’t discuss specifics, he said:

[M]y opinion is that there are some truly evil people there. To be fair, some honestly believe that what they do is right.

Of course, that is true of many evil people.

Stashiu learned many interesting stories about the detainees during the course of these conversations. Some of these were occasionally amusing.

One guy was living proof of Murphy’s Law… no matter what he did, it ended up turning to shit on him and he is lucky just to still be alive.

Can the detainees be reasoned with? I asked. Or is their indoctrination so complete that there’s just no reaching them? Are there any of them who are reasonable enough that Stashiu would feel safe if we were to let them go free?

I don’t know that anyone is beyond reason, but I also don’t know more than a couple who I think might be ok to release. “Might” being the operative word there, I wouldn’t give the go-ahead on my own for any of them. There I are couple I could understand and would not go out of my way to protest their release. I can tell you that if I ever saw a detainee face-to-face here in the States, I would immediately assume that I was targeted and do my best to kill them without further warning. If I turned out to be wrong about their intent, I could live with that.

J.

And from the inside. This won't be broadcast by the media - it doesn't fit the script.

The person writing this is a Major, in psychiatric services. He contacted Patterico, established his bonafides in the first of a 4 part series and said that the reason he wasn't contacting the major media (indeed, has refused to be interviewed) is because he has no faith in them presenting the story accurately. With much, much contact with the prisoners, he writes the following in part 2:

Stashiu is not able to share specific details of conversations he had with specific individuals, for reasons having to do principally with patient confidentiality, and in part with operational security. But he can give you, the reader, a good overview of what types of human beings are being detained at Guantánamo Bay.

I asked him that very question: what are the detainees like? Stashiu said:

For many of them, think Ted Bundy. Educated, charming, and without conscience for those they consider infidels. Some are truly ill and were taken advantage of because of it. For example, one routinely asked us for an explosive suicide vest so he could assassinate Osama Bin Laden or George Bush for us, whoever he could find first (he was completely serious).

But we’ve heard that many of the detainees at GTMO were innocent, I said. Does Stashiu believe that — and does he have a basis to know one way or the other?

I didn’t see any that I believe were totally innocent, although it wasn’t my call and it really didn’t matter to their care. We got how much I could know about their history changed because I contended that if I couldn’t validate their history as given to us, my staff couldn’t give adequate treatment. It would be too easy for detainees to lie about the presence or absence of a family history. If they told us the truth about some of the circumstances relating to their capture, we could have some confidence in other information they gave. And they almost always tried to tell that part of their story. The biggest rule we had to follow in guiding staff was to never share any specific intel so that intel and therapy were as separated as possible while still providing good care.

Although he couldn’t discuss specifics, he said:

[M]y opinion is that there are some truly evil people there. To be fair, some honestly believe that what they do is right.

Of course, that is true of many evil people.

Stashiu learned many interesting stories about the detainees during the course of these conversations. Some of these were occasionally amusing.

One guy was living proof of Murphy’s Law… no matter what he did, it ended up turning to shit on him and he is lucky just to still be alive.

Can the detainees be reasoned with? I asked. Or is their indoctrination so complete that there’s just no reaching them? Are there any of them who are reasonable enough that Stashiu would feel safe if we were to let them go free?

I don’t know that anyone is beyond reason, but I also don’t know more than a couple who I think might be ok to release. “Might” being the operative word there, I wouldn’t give the go-ahead on my own for any of them. There I are couple I could understand and would not go out of my way to protest their release. I can tell you that if I ever saw a detainee face-to-face here in the States, I would immediately assume that I was targeted and do my best to kill them without further warning. If I turned out to be wrong about their intent, I could live with that.

J.

Wow. Sure wish we'd get honest reporting like this in the media. But I can just see it - in the interests of being 'fair', they'd leaven in a whole bunch of folks blathering about how terribly the prisoners are being treated, playing that aspect up and downplaying reality.

Patterico’s Pontifications � Patterico’s Exclusive Interview with a Man Who Has Spoken to the Terrorists at Guant�namo (Part Three: Hunger Strikes, Suicides and Suicide Attempts, and the Detainees’ Mental Health)

Man, I'm glad we've got the internet.

J.

Wow. Sure wish we'd get honest reporting like this in the media. But I can just see it - in the interests of being 'fair', they'd leaven in a whole bunch of folks blathering about how terribly the prisoners are being treated, playing that aspect up and downplaying reality.

Patterico’s Pontifications � Patterico’s Exclusive Interview with a Man Who Has Spoken to the Terrorists at Guant�namo (Part Three: Hunger Strikes, Suicides and Suicide Attempts, and the Detainees’ Mental Health)

Man, I'm glad we've got the internet.

J.

Wow. Sure wish we'd get honest reporting like this in the media. But I can just see it - in the interests of being 'fair', they'd leaven in a whole bunch of folks blathering about how terribly the prisoners are being treated, playing that aspect up and downplaying reality.

Patterico’s Pontifications � Patterico’s Exclusive Interview with a Man Who Has Spoken to the Terrorists at Guant�namo (Part Three: Hunger Strikes, Suicides and Suicide Attempts, and the Detainees’ Mental Health)

Man, I'm glad we've got the internet.

J.

Damn.

The Blotter

Former Congressman Mark Foley (R-FL) interrupted a vote on the floor of the House in 2003 to engage in Internet sex with a high school student who had served as a congressional page, according to new Internet instant messages provided to ABC News by former pages.

ABC News now has obtained 52 separate instant message exchanges, which former pages say were sent by Foley, using the screen name Maf54, to two different boys under the age of 18.

First - Foley's out of office. That's good. That's the right thing to do. He did this sort of crap, he doesn't deserve to be in office. And that's as far as it needs to go. All Hastert had to go on were some suggestive e-mails - not IMs. (and it does make you wonder - where were the IMs all this time? Who'd keep a copy of them, and NOT turn them in? Someone waiting to use this for blackmail? Someone planning on using this for political purposes?) and he told Foley to keep his hands off the kids based on the Emails. If he wasn't aware of the IMs, I don't see why Hastert should resign. Oddly enough, Congress is full of adults - and adults are responsible for their own behavior. That Foley was behaving badly, got called on it (and I presume was told not to do it again, only he did in secret) was what Hastert was supposed to do. When Foley did the IM thing, there was no reasonable way to expect Hastert to know about it. But that Foley interrupted a vote to go pull his pud over IMs - damn, that's sleazy. Good riddence to the man. If Hastert knew about the IMs, then bounce him out also.

Second - if the kids were 16 or above, in DC that's good enough, they were old enough for consensual sex. THAT doesn't excuse his actions, and doesn't make it right by any means. This is a classic case of misuse of power for sexual purposes (IMHO) and his providing booze (and maybe other things) WAS illegal as hell. As such, I don't care if he's an alcoholic and goes into rehab (hey, it works for damn near everyone else caught with their pants down in Washington, or a celebrity doing something stupid - go into rehab and all's supposed to be forgiven) I want to have them indict and prosecute his ass.

Third: We seem willing (at least some are) to give a pass to reprehensible behavior based on our political affiliations. Personally, I think Foley should have been tossed out ASAP when the original emails occured. Frankly, I'd like to see a house cleaning by BOTH parties, though I know that's not going to happen. Too many of the senior 'statesmen' on both parties have crap in their histories that would get them booted out. I'd love to see a tightening of standards, and as I said, it needs to come from both sides. No fingerpointing, no hysterics - just quiet withdrawls and resignations, from both sides.

Jay Tea's summary of things over at Wizbangblog pretty well sums it up for me.

Foley: Rot in hell, you sick bastard. I don't care if you actually broke the letter of the law or not.

Hastert and the rest of the House leadership: Shame on you for not keeping a closer eye on him. But if you had access to the Instant Messages, then to hell with you, too.

The "get Hastert" people: Unless you have solid evidence that they knew about the Instant Messages, shut your pieholes, you partisan hacks.

The people who exposed Foley: You have our thanks. But if you sat on that information for one minute longer than necessary, just to further your own political ends, then you're almost as guilty as Foley, and ought to rot in hell, too.

Update: Looks like the page was 17/18. Doesn't make it any more right, but it does make it a bit more legal. Still, I'm not sorry to see Foley go.

J.

Damn.

The Blotter

Former Congressman Mark Foley (R-FL) interrupted a vote on the floor of the House in 2003 to engage in Internet sex with a high school student who had served as a congressional page, according to new Internet instant messages provided to ABC News by former pages.

ABC News now has obtained 52 separate instant message exchanges, which former pages say were sent by Foley, using the screen name Maf54, to two different boys under the age of 18.

First - Foley's out of office. That's good. That's the right thing to do. He did this sort of crap, he doesn't deserve to be in office. And that's as far as it needs to go. All Hastert had to go on were some suggestive e-mails - not IMs. (and it does make you wonder - where were the IMs all this time? Who'd keep a copy of them, and NOT turn them in? Someone waiting to use this for blackmail? Someone planning on using this for political purposes?) and he told Foley to keep his hands off the kids based on the Emails. If he wasn't aware of the IMs, I don't see why Hastert should resign. Oddly enough, Congress is full of adults - and adults are responsible for their own behavior. That Foley was behaving badly, got called on it (and I presume was told not to do it again, only he did in secret) was what Hastert was supposed to do. When Foley did the IM thing, there was no reasonable way to expect Hastert to know about it. But that Foley interrupted a vote to go pull his pud over IMs - damn, that's sleazy. Good riddence to the man. If Hastert knew about the IMs, then bounce him out also.

Second - if the kids were 16 or above, in DC that's good enough, they were old enough for consensual sex. THAT doesn't excuse his actions, and doesn't make it right by any means. This is a classic case of misuse of power for sexual purposes (IMHO) and his providing booze (and maybe other things) WAS illegal as hell. As such, I don't care if he's an alcoholic and goes into rehab (hey, it works for damn near everyone else caught with their pants down in Washington, or a celebrity doing something stupid - go into rehab and all's supposed to be forgiven) I want to have them indict and prosecute his ass.

Third: We seem willing (at least some are) to give a pass to reprehensible behavior based on our political affiliations. Personally, I think Foley should have been tossed out ASAP when the original emails occured. Frankly, I'd like to see a house cleaning by BOTH parties, though I know that's not going to happen. Too many of the senior 'statesmen' on both parties have crap in their histories that would get them booted out. I'd love to see a tightening of standards, and as I said, it needs to come from both sides. No fingerpointing, no hysterics - just quiet withdrawls and resignations, from both sides.

Jay Tea's summary of things over at Wizbangblog pretty well sums it up for me.

Foley: Rot in hell, you sick bastard. I don't care if you actually broke the letter of the law or not.

Hastert and the rest of the House leadership: Shame on you for not keeping a closer eye on him. But if you had access to the Instant Messages, then to hell with you, too.

The "get Hastert" people: Unless you have solid evidence that they knew about the Instant Messages, shut your pieholes, you partisan hacks.

The people who exposed Foley: You have our thanks. But if you sat on that information for one minute longer than necessary, just to further your own political ends, then you're almost as guilty as Foley, and ought to rot in hell, too.

Update: Looks like the page was 17/18. Doesn't make it any more right, but it does make it a bit more legal. Still, I'm not sorry to see Foley go.

J.

Damn.

The Blotter

Former Congressman Mark Foley (R-FL) interrupted a vote on the floor of the House in 2003 to engage in Internet sex with a high school student who had served as a congressional page, according to new Internet instant messages provided to ABC News by former pages.

ABC News now has obtained 52 separate instant message exchanges, which former pages say were sent by Foley, using the screen name Maf54, to two different boys under the age of 18.

First - Foley's out of office. That's good. That's the right thing to do. He did this sort of crap, he doesn't deserve to be in office. And that's as far as it needs to go. All Hastert had to go on were some suggestive e-mails - not IMs. (and it does make you wonder - where were the IMs all this time? Who'd keep a copy of them, and NOT turn them in? Someone waiting to use this for blackmail? Someone planning on using this for political purposes?) and he told Foley to keep his hands off the kids based on the Emails. If he wasn't aware of the IMs, I don't see why Hastert should resign. Oddly enough, Congress is full of adults - and adults are responsible for their own behavior. That Foley was behaving badly, got called on it (and I presume was told not to do it again, only he did in secret) was what Hastert was supposed to do. When Foley did the IM thing, there was no reasonable way to expect Hastert to know about it. But that Foley interrupted a vote to go pull his pud over IMs - damn, that's sleazy. Good riddence to the man. If Hastert knew about the IMs, then bounce him out also.

Second - if the kids were 16 or above, in DC that's good enough, they were old enough for consensual sex. THAT doesn't excuse his actions, and doesn't make it right by any means. This is a classic case of misuse of power for sexual purposes (IMHO) and his providing booze (and maybe other things) WAS illegal as hell. As such, I don't care if he's an alcoholic and goes into rehab (hey, it works for damn near everyone else caught with their pants down in Washington, or a celebrity doing something stupid - go into rehab and all's supposed to be forgiven) I want to have them indict and prosecute his ass.

Third: We seem willing (at least some are) to give a pass to reprehensible behavior based on our political affiliations. Personally, I think Foley should have been tossed out ASAP when the original emails occured. Frankly, I'd like to see a house cleaning by BOTH parties, though I know that's not going to happen. Too many of the senior 'statesmen' on both parties have crap in their histories that would get them booted out. I'd love to see a tightening of standards, and as I said, it needs to come from both sides. No fingerpointing, no hysterics - just quiet withdrawls and resignations, from both sides.

Jay Tea's summary of things over at Wizbangblog pretty well sums it up for me.

Foley: Rot in hell, you sick bastard. I don't care if you actually broke the letter of the law or not.

Hastert and the rest of the House leadership: Shame on you for not keeping a closer eye on him. But if you had access to the Instant Messages, then to hell with you, too.

The "get Hastert" people: Unless you have solid evidence that they knew about the Instant Messages, shut your pieholes, you partisan hacks.

The people who exposed Foley: You have our thanks. But if you sat on that information for one minute longer than necessary, just to further your own political ends, then you're almost as guilty as Foley, and ought to rot in hell, too.

Update: Looks like the page was 17/18. Doesn't make it any more right, but it does make it a bit more legal. Still, I'm not sorry to see Foley go.

J.

U*nder Saddam's reign, the Marsh Arabs had their living areas drained - specifically the Tigris-Euphrates Alluvial Salt Marsh. After the downfall of Saddam, programs were established to rewater the marshes.

Over at OpFor, in you can see some of the results - there's a lot that's been recoved though it will take decades for a good reversal to set in.

There's also some personal stories there - I'll let you read them and tell me what you think.

J.

U*nder Saddam's reign, the Marsh Arabs had their living areas drained - specifically the Tigris-Euphrates Alluvial Salt Marsh. After the downfall of Saddam, programs were established to rewater the marshes.

Over at OpFor, in you can see some of the results - there's a lot that's been recoved though it will take decades for a good reversal to set in.

There's also some personal stories there - I'll let you read them and tell me what you think.

J.

U*nder Saddam's reign, the Marsh Arabs had their living areas drained - specifically the Tigris-Euphrates Alluvial Salt Marsh. After the downfall of Saddam, programs were established to rewater the marshes.

Over at OpFor, in you can see some of the results - there's a lot that's been recoved though it will take decades for a good reversal to set in.

There's also some personal stories there - I'll let you read them and tell me what you think.

J.

Starting small, Scientists teleport two different objects

LONDON, England (Reuters) -- Beaming people in "Star Trek" fashion is still in the realms of science fiction, but physicists in Denmark have teleported information from light to matter bringing quantum communication and computing closer to reality.

Until now scientists have teleported similar objects such as light or single atoms over short distances from one spot to another in a split second.

But Professor Eugene Polzik and his team at the Niels Bohr Institute at Copenhagen University in Denmark have made a breakthrough by using both light and matter.

"It is one step further because for the first time it involves teleportation between light and matter, two different objects. One is the carrier of information and the other one is the storage medium," Polzik explained in an interview on Wednesday.

The experiment involved for the first time a macroscopic atomic object containing thousands of billions of atoms. They also teleported the information a distance of half a meter but believe it can be extended further.

IIn ten years, who knows what will be possible?

J.

Starting small, Scientists teleport two different objects

LONDON, England (Reuters) -- Beaming people in "Star Trek" fashion is still in the realms of science fiction, but physicists in Denmark have teleported information from light to matter bringing quantum communication and computing closer to reality.

Until now scientists have teleported similar objects such as light or single atoms over short distances from one spot to another in a split second.

But Professor Eugene Polzik and his team at the Niels Bohr Institute at Copenhagen University in Denmark have made a breakthrough by using both light and matter.

"It is one step further because for the first time it involves teleportation between light and matter, two different objects. One is the carrier of information and the other one is the storage medium," Polzik explained in an interview on Wednesday.

The experiment involved for the first time a macroscopic atomic object containing thousands of billions of atoms. They also teleported the information a distance of half a meter but believe it can be extended further.

IIn ten years, who knows what will be possible?

J.

Starting small, Scientists teleport two different objects

LONDON, England (Reuters) -- Beaming people in "Star Trek" fashion is still in the realms of science fiction, but physicists in Denmark have teleported information from light to matter bringing quantum communication and computing closer to reality.

Until now scientists have teleported similar objects such as light or single atoms over short distances from one spot to another in a split second.

But Professor Eugene Polzik and his team at the Niels Bohr Institute at Copenhagen University in Denmark have made a breakthrough by using both light and matter.

"It is one step further because for the first time it involves teleportation between light and matter, two different objects. One is the carrier of information and the other one is the storage medium," Polzik explained in an interview on Wednesday.

The experiment involved for the first time a macroscopic atomic object containing thousands of billions of atoms. They also teleported the information a distance of half a meter but believe it can be extended further.

IIn ten years, who knows what will be possible?

J.

Over at http://Patterico's Pontifications.

If you've been tempted to view the Gitmo detainees as a bunch of peaceful farmers caught up in a bad situation, you won't after you read this.

And if you're thinking we're not abiding by the Geneva Convention re their treatment - we're going well above and beyond any GC requirements here. Don't forget to read the other parts, too.

J.

Over at http://Patterico's Pontifications.

If you've been tempted to view the Gitmo detainees as a bunch of peaceful farmers caught up in a bad situation, you won't after you read this.

And if you're thinking we're not abiding by the Geneva Convention re their treatment - we're going well above and beyond any GC requirements here. Don't forget to read the other parts, too.

J.

Over at http://Patterico's Pontifications.

If you've been tempted to view the Gitmo detainees as a bunch of peaceful farmers caught up in a bad situation, you won't after you read this.

And if you're thinking we're not abiding by the Geneva Convention re their treatment - we're going well above and beyond any GC requirements here. Don't forget to read the other parts, too.

J.

To what extent is growth in the economy fueled by the easy transfer of money within it? For instance, pre-ATMs you had to plan ahead, write a check for cash, get the cash out of the bank - you had to stand in line to deposit your check - and the bank was only open during certain hours, and not on weekends or holidays.

Credit cards helped some - but until the mid '60s, credit cards weren't exactly a staple of commerce. If you're of a pre-ATM age, you probably at one point got Travellers Checks for a trip you were taking. Now, it's hard to find a place that'll take them - credit cards are indeed accepted almost everywhere.

Now, you can stop at an ATM day or night and get cash. Buy groceries, and get an extra $20 in change. How much does that ready availability of cash and the easy mobility of funds affect the buying habits of people - and in what direction?

Yeah, I know - you don't really have an answer either. But it's something interesting to think about, isn't it?

J.

To what extent is growth in the economy fueled by the easy transfer of money within it? For instance, pre-ATMs you had to plan ahead, write a check for cash, get the cash out of the bank - you had to stand in line to deposit your check - and the bank was only open during certain hours, and not on weekends or holidays.

Credit cards helped some - but until the mid '60s, credit cards weren't exactly a staple of commerce. If you're of a pre-ATM age, you probably at one point got Travellers Checks for a trip you were taking. Now, it's hard to find a place that'll take them - credit cards are indeed accepted almost everywhere.

Now, you can stop at an ATM day or night and get cash. Buy groceries, and get an extra $20 in change. How much does that ready availability of cash and the easy mobility of funds affect the buying habits of people - and in what direction?

Yeah, I know - you don't really have an answer either. But it's something interesting to think about, isn't it?

J.

To what extent is growth in the economy fueled by the easy transfer of money within it? For instance, pre-ATMs you had to plan ahead, write a check for cash, get the cash out of the bank - you had to stand in line to deposit your check - and the bank was only open during certain hours, and not on weekends or holidays.

Credit cards helped some - but until the mid '60s, credit cards weren't exactly a staple of commerce. If you're of a pre-ATM age, you probably at one point got Travellers Checks for a trip you were taking. Now, it's hard to find a place that'll take them - credit cards are indeed accepted almost everywhere.

Now, you can stop at an ATM day or night and get cash. Buy groceries, and get an extra $20 in change. How much does that ready availability of cash and the easy mobility of funds affect the buying habits of people - and in what direction?

Yeah, I know - you don't really have an answer either. But it's something interesting to think about, isn't it?

J.

I wonder how much longer we'll have to wait?

The Australian: 'Too late' to stop N Korea's bomb [ 05oct06 ]

WHILE the rest of the world looks to Beijing to stop North Korea from exploding a nuclear bomb, a leading Chinese analyst says it is too late - China cannot act without doing worse harm to its own interests.

"Basically, our country's work of persuasion with the (Democratic People's Republic of Korea) in the 12 years that the DPRK developed its nuclear program had been a failure," writes highly regarded Shen Dingli, of Shanghai's Fudan University.

"The DPRK considers its national interests to be greater than its relations with China," Mr Shen says in his remarkably frank commentary, published in a newspaper of the official China Youth League and circulated yesterday by a North Korea-focused think tank, the Nautilus Institute.

And apparently, NK's leadership has decided they've delayed long enough. It's time to show the world what they've got, and magically they'll be seen as a grown-up country and they can take their place in the realmof first-world nations.... never mind they're on life support from China.

So let's see... they pop off (or attempt to pop off) a nuke. And, just hypothetically, the imports from China dry up. After all, they've demonstrated they're no longer in need of babying - they're a fully grown country now. So obviously they don't need aid from anyone else... besides, their national interests have priority over everything else. Food, fuel, industrial parts, consumer goods, medicine... nothing comes across the border.

How long do you think they'll last? And do you think they'd, um, 'blackmail' neighboring countries into supporting them? If they try that particular course of action, how long do you think it would be before the 'nuclear war' that Kim's been blathering about for so long actually happens, with them on the receiving end?

But watch - we'll do the sanctions dance again and see if it works. I'm betting it won't.

But it will delay the inevitable confrontation. And who knows what might happen, given enough time?

J.

I wonder how much longer we'll have to wait?

The Australian: 'Too late' to stop N Korea's bomb [ 05oct06 ]

WHILE the rest of the world looks to Beijing to stop North Korea from exploding a nuclear bomb, a leading Chinese analyst says it is too late - China cannot act without doing worse harm to its own interests.

"Basically, our country's work of persuasion with the (Democratic People's Republic of Korea) in the 12 years that the DPRK developed its nuclear program had been a failure," writes highly regarded Shen Dingli, of Shanghai's Fudan University.

"The DPRK considers its national interests to be greater than its relations with China," Mr Shen says in his remarkably frank commentary, published in a newspaper of the official China Youth League and circulated yesterday by a North Korea-focused think tank, the Nautilus Institute.

And apparently, NK's leadership has decided they've delayed long enough. It's time to show the world what they've got, and magically they'll be seen as a grown-up country and they can take their place in the realmof first-world nations.... never mind they're on life support from China.

So let's see... they pop off (or attempt to pop off) a nuke. And, just hypothetically, the imports from China dry up. After all, they've demonstrated they're no longer in need of babying - they're a fully grown country now. So obviously they don't need aid from anyone else... besides, their national interests have priority over everything else. Food, fuel, industrial parts, consumer goods, medicine... nothing comes across the border.

How long do you think they'll last? And do you think they'd, um, 'blackmail' neighboring countries into supporting them? If they try that particular course of action, how long do you think it would be before the 'nuclear war' that Kim's been blathering about for so long actually happens, with them on the receiving end?

But watch - we'll do the sanctions dance again and see if it works. I'm betting it won't.

But it will delay the inevitable confrontation. And who knows what might happen, given enough time?

J.

I wonder how much longer we'll have to wait?

The Australian: 'Too late' to stop N Korea's bomb [ 05oct06 ]

WHILE the rest of the world looks to Beijing to stop North Korea from exploding a nuclear bomb, a leading Chinese analyst says it is too late - China cannot act without doing worse harm to its own interests.

"Basically, our country's work of persuasion with the (Democratic People's Republic of Korea) in the 12 years that the DPRK developed its nuclear program had been a failure," writes highly regarded Shen Dingli, of Shanghai's Fudan University.

"The DPRK considers its national interests to be greater than its relations with China," Mr Shen says in his remarkably frank commentary, published in a newspaper of the official China Youth League and circulated yesterday by a North Korea-focused think tank, the Nautilus Institute.

And apparently, NK's leadership has decided they've delayed long enough. It's time to show the world what they've got, and magically they'll be seen as a grown-up country and they can take their place in the realmof first-world nations.... never mind they're on life support from China.

So let's see... they pop off (or attempt to pop off) a nuke. And, just hypothetically, the imports from China dry up. After all, they've demonstrated they're no longer in need of babying - they're a fully grown country now. So obviously they don't need aid from anyone else... besides, their national interests have priority over everything else. Food, fuel, industrial parts, consumer goods, medicine... nothing comes across the border.

How long do you think they'll last? And do you think they'd, um, 'blackmail' neighboring countries into supporting them? If they try that particular course of action, how long do you think it would be before the 'nuclear war' that Kim's been blathering about for so long actually happens, with them on the receiving end?

But watch - we'll do the sanctions dance again and see if it works. I'm betting it won't.

But it will delay the inevitable confrontation. And who knows what might happen, given enough time?

J.

Clark says Saddam death penalty will unleash 'catastrophic' violence - Yahoo! News

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Ramsey Clark, a former US attorney general who is one of Saddam Hussein's lawyers, said that any death sentence against the former Iraqi president would increase violence in the strife-torn country.

"It seems clear that a guilty verdict will set off catastrophic violence" and that a death sentence would be even worse, Clark told a Washington press conference.

"It's hard to know how many Iraqis, dozens, hundreds, thousands, will die because of the sentence," he said.

Hey, I've got an idea. I think we OUGHT to let him go, under certain conditions. Find a courtyard somewhere with a long side with two doors on either end. Bring in about 100-150 people who testified against Saddam, and give them automatic weapons. Only one per person, though. And the weapons have to stay on the ground, unloaded, until Saddam appears, going from one door to the other, and to his freedom. See diagram below. (My Paint skillz are not l33t.)

Obviously, you want the spectators to have body armor and helmets. It could get a bit hazardous with everyone quickly trying to load their weapons and bring them to bear on whatever target they might choose.

Just make sure the "Out" door is locked, and the back wall is high and thick enough to stop any stray shots. You don't want anyone to wander into the line of fire accidentally.

J.

Clark says Saddam death penalty will unleash 'catastrophic' violence - Yahoo! News

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Ramsey Clark, a former US attorney general who is one of Saddam Hussein's lawyers, said that any death sentence against the former Iraqi president would increase violence in the strife-torn country.

"It seems clear that a guilty verdict will set off catastrophic violence" and that a death sentence would be even worse, Clark told a Washington press conference.

"It's hard to know how many Iraqis, dozens, hundreds, thousands, will die because of the sentence," he said.

Hey, I've got an idea. I think we OUGHT to let him go, under certain conditions. Find a courtyard somewhere with a long side with two doors on either end. Bring in about 100-150 people who testified against Saddam, and give them automatic weapons. Only one per person, though. And the weapons have to stay on the ground, unloaded, until Saddam appears, going from one door to the other, and to his freedom. See diagram below. (My Paint skillz are not l33t.)

Obviously, you want the spectators to have body armor and helmets. It could get a bit hazardous with everyone quickly trying to load their weapons and bring them to bear on whatever target they might choose.

Just make sure the "Out" door is locked, and the back wall is high and thick enough to stop any stray shots. You don't want anyone to wander into the line of fire accidentally.

J.

Clark says Saddam death penalty will unleash 'catastrophic' violence - Yahoo! News

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Ramsey Clark, a former US attorney general who is one of Saddam Hussein's lawyers, said that any death sentence against the former Iraqi president would increase violence in the strife-torn country.

"It seems clear that a guilty verdict will set off catastrophic violence" and that a death sentence would be even worse, Clark told a Washington press conference.

"It's hard to know how many Iraqis, dozens, hundreds, thousands, will die because of the sentence," he said.

Hey, I've got an idea. I think we OUGHT to let him go, under certain conditions. Find a courtyard somewhere with a long side with two doors on either end. Bring in about 100-150 people who testified against Saddam, and give them automatic weapons. Only one per person, though. And the weapons have to stay on the ground, unloaded, until Saddam appears, going from one door to the other, and to his freedom. See diagram below. (My Paint skillz are not l33t.)

Obviously, you want the spectators to have body armor and helmets. It could get a bit hazardous with everyone quickly trying to load their weapons and bring them to bear on whatever target they might choose.

Just make sure the "Out" door is locked, and the back wall is high and thick enough to stop any stray shots. You don't want anyone to wander into the line of fire accidentally.

J.

Mashing a number of economic myths today. It's an interesting post - The Anchoress - No one to credit for the good economy… and has this little bit of unheralded news...

Budget Deficit Drops to $250 Billion
The federal budget estimate for the fiscal year just completed dropped to $250 billion, congressional estimators said Friday, as the economy continues to fuel impressive tax revenues.

The Congressional Budget Office’s latest estimate is $10 billion below CBO predictions issued in August and well below a July White House prediction of $296 billion.

The improving deficit picture _ Bush predicted a $423 billion deficit in his February budget _ has been driven by better-than-expected tax receipts, especially from corporate profits, CBO said. [Emphasis mine - admin]

Say it again: TAX CUTS WORK! And then remember what Charles Rangel said: he, “could not think of one’ of President George W. Bush’s first-term tax cuts that merit renewal.”

The Dems can’t think of a single tax cut they’d want to keep in place. Remember that. It’s important, and no one wants you to know it.

J.

Mashing a number of economic myths today. It's an interesting post - The Anchoress - No one to credit for the good economy… and has this little bit of unheralded news...

Budget Deficit Drops to $250 Billion
The federal budget estimate for the fiscal year just completed dropped to $250 billion, congressional estimators said Friday, as the economy continues to fuel impressive tax revenues.

The Congressional Budget Office’s latest estimate is $10 billion below CBO predictions issued in August and well below a July White House prediction of $296 billion.

The improving deficit picture _ Bush predicted a $423 billion deficit in his February budget _ has been driven by better-than-expected tax receipts, especially from corporate profits, CBO said. [Emphasis mine - admin]

Say it again: TAX CUTS WORK! And then remember what Charles Rangel said: he, “could not think of one’ of President George W. Bush’s first-term tax cuts that merit renewal.”

The Dems can’t think of a single tax cut they’d want to keep in place. Remember that. It’s important, and no one wants you to know it.

J.

Mashing a number of economic myths today. It's an interesting post - The Anchoress - No one to credit for the good economy… and has this little bit of unheralded news...

Budget Deficit Drops to $250 Billion
The federal budget estimate for the fiscal year just completed dropped to $250 billion, congressional estimators said Friday, as the economy continues to fuel impressive tax revenues.

The Congressional Budget Office’s latest estimate is $10 billion below CBO predictions issued in August and well below a July White House prediction of $296 billion.

The improving deficit picture _ Bush predicted a $423 billion deficit in his February budget _ has been driven by better-than-expected tax receipts, especially from corporate profits, CBO said. [Emphasis mine - admin]

Say it again: TAX CUTS WORK! And then remember what Charles Rangel said: he, “could not think of one’ of President George W. Bush’s first-term tax cuts that merit renewal.”

The Dems can’t think of a single tax cut they’d want to keep in place. Remember that. It’s important, and no one wants you to know it.

J.

You know, I can think of other countries I'd rather see with nuclear weapons.

My Way News - North Korea warned against nuclear weapon test.

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The U.N. Security Council on Friday urged North Korea not to carry out a planned nuclear-weapon test and warned Pyongyang of unspecified consequences if it did.
The warning, in a formal statement adopted unanimously, came three days after North Korea's announced it planned its first underground nuclear test, saying its hand had been forced by a U.S. "threat of nuclear war and sanctions."

U.S. officials have said the reclusive state might detonate a device as early as this weekend, and a Chinese source said Pyongyang planned to carry out the test deep inside an abandoned mine.

However - if NK DOES do this, within 24 hours Foleygate will be a non-issue, and the Democrats are going to be demanding Bush Do Something. They won't have any ideas, but they're sure going to demand immediate results.

J.

You know, I can think of other countries I'd rather see with nuclear weapons.

My Way News - North Korea warned against nuclear weapon test.

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The U.N. Security Council on Friday urged North Korea not to carry out a planned nuclear-weapon test and warned Pyongyang of unspecified consequences if it did.
The warning, in a formal statement adopted unanimously, came three days after North Korea's announced it planned its first underground nuclear test, saying its hand had been forced by a U.S. "threat of nuclear war and sanctions."

U.S. officials have said the reclusive state might detonate a device as early as this weekend, and a Chinese source said Pyongyang planned to carry out the test deep inside an abandoned mine.

However - if NK DOES do this, within 24 hours Foleygate will be a non-issue, and the Democrats are going to be demanding Bush Do Something. They won't have any ideas, but they're sure going to demand immediate results.

J.

You know, I can think of other countries I'd rather see with nuclear weapons.

My Way News - North Korea warned against nuclear weapon test.

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The U.N. Security Council on Friday urged North Korea not to carry out a planned nuclear-weapon test and warned Pyongyang of unspecified consequences if it did.
The warning, in a formal statement adopted unanimously, came three days after North Korea's announced it planned its first underground nuclear test, saying its hand had been forced by a U.S. "threat of nuclear war and sanctions."

U.S. officials have said the reclusive state might detonate a device as early as this weekend, and a Chinese source said Pyongyang planned to carry out the test deep inside an abandoned mine.

However - if NK DOES do this, within 24 hours Foleygate will be a non-issue, and the Democrats are going to be demanding Bush Do Something. They won't have any ideas, but they're sure going to demand immediate results.

J.

One of the things we're not really in on is what the actual plan is in Iraq. There's a number of reasons for this - but the two major ones are (in my opinion) that the media can't boil it down into a pithy phrase they can use to slam Bush, and security concerns - because what WE find out, the enemy will know in very short order. (Unless you believe they can't figure out how to use a computer, which is pretty dumb and short-sighted of you. The information superhighway has a LOT of on-ramps, and once on you can get anywhere fast.) Those two reasons, dovetailed together, means we're not getting a good overview as to what the plan is. Getting the Iraqi people to stand up for their own country (which they've been doing, despite the attacks claiming thousands of lives) is the ONLY way to a long-term success.

Over on Instapundit, at the bottom of the post, you find this little gem

Instapundit.com -

MORE: A reader who prefers anonymity emails:

We're not losing momentum in Iraq. The Pentagon strategy is a very deliberate form of tough love that is forcing the Iraqis to defend their own country.

Arabs are culturally the most passive, fence-sitting people on the planet. By their own admission they follow the strongest leader out there. If we had sent 500,000 troops to Iraq and fought a Soviet-style counterinsurgency, the end result would have been an Iraq with no incentive to do the very hard work of creating viable fighting forces from scratch. We would've been their new masters in perpetuity.

We also can't attack Iran and Syria right now because the Iranians would then activate their Iraqi militias and send a million Basij into Iraq. Syria would do a Saddam and start firing WMD-tipped missiles at Israel. The entire region could go up in flames.

Don't let the media convince you that things are going badly in Iraq. The Anbar tribes are now fighting al Qaeda on their own initiative, and the Shi'ite-dominated government is slowly dismantling al Sadr's Mahdi Army. "Experts" predicted that neither of these things would ever happen because of secular loyalties, but they are happening, and only because we're forcing the Iraqis to stand up and fight for their country.

Finally, take a look at what happened when the French, Soviets, and Russians fought Muslim insurgencies with the kind of aggressive, "proactive" approach so many Americans claim to want.

The French lost 18,000 in Algeria, a KIA rate three and a half times ours. The Soviets lost 14,000 in Afghanistan, a KIA rate twice ours. The Russians officially lost 5500 in the First Chechen War of 1994-96, but Soldiers' Mothers of Russia puts the actual number at 14,000, a KIA rate ten times ours. Nobody knows how many Russian troops have died in the Second Chechen War, but Soldiers' Mothers of Russia had the number at 11,000 by 2003.

Our strategy in Iraq is sound. It's keeping our own casualties down, and it's forcing the Iraqis to defend themselves.

Don't despair. We're winning.

I certainly hope so.

The only way to create a strong, free Iraq is to ge them built up to the point where they can support themselves. Anyone who's done any exercise knows, you don't get stronger by sitting back and letting others do the work for you. More and more the Iraqi forces are gaining strength, gaining experience, and most importantly gaining CONFIDENCE that they can protect their country from those who would tear it apart. This is not something that could happen overnight - but it is happening.

But - it's a complex story, and not likely to fit into the evening news anytime soon.

J.