© Copyright-all rights reserved
Update: If you missed it a podcast will be up soon.
Click the image to listen 
Tune in to our radio show at Wide Awakes Radio this Saturday, October 21 between 1 and 3 p.m. Eastern. My co-hosts Misha of Anti-Idiotarian Rottwiller and Gribbit of Gribbit Online will be talking about current issues and news with our main focus being the ACLU and their ilk. We will be interviewing Mary Katheryn Ham of Townhall.com and talking about many issues including, of course, the ACLU. We love callers, so make sure to call in with your comments and questions at 1-888-407-1776. Click Here To Listen.
The reactionary hand-wringing about the Military Commissions Act of 2006 is wholly devoid of intellectual support and contradicted by the Geneva Conventions themselves. The flaccid objections are based in three parts: that unlawful combatants can be anyone, Habeas Corpus is a right enjoyed by military combatants, and a misunderstanding of the Geneva Convention documents (if they are read at all). Through on top a healthy dose of paranoia and you have basically the entire dogma of the liberal establishment on the issue.
First, there is such a thing as a lawful combatant (which makes anyone not living up to that standard unlawful). This is defined in the Geneva Conventions document “Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War”, Article 3. It falls into 4 basic parts: wearing a uniform of other distinctive insignia, having someone with command authority in charge, carrying arms openly, and conducting themselves in accordance to the laws of war. Now, according to some, in fact, most left-wing “thinkers”, killing Americans or Jews is a complete immunity to any infraction of international law, however, there are some reasonable people who do think there are some laws here that might possible apply.
For instance, Article 3 talks about the illegality of taking hostages. Presumably sawing off their heads with a dull knife also falls under this. Using mosques, hospitals, or schools as arms depots or locations to launch attacks is also included. In short, almost the entire battery of tactics used by Al Qaeda or the so-called insurgents in Iraq is illegal under international law.
Another point to note is the requirement to carry arms openly and to wear a distinctive and fixed sign (a.k.a. a uniform). This is to clearly identify which people are ok to shoot at and which are not. If you don’t wear a uniform, it makes it really hard to be sure you aren’t shooting a civilian. That’s why things like Haditha happen. In short, the tactics employed help ensure that more civilians get killed, and for that matter, it makes it just as hard for the authorities to be sure they killed a civilian or a combatant. This is one reason why the “civilian death toll” is exaggerated.
More importantly, these above two points (and others) show that the insurgents in Iraq, Al Qaeda, and the Taliban (to some extent) do not meet the criteria of being lawful combatants entitled to the Geneva Convention protections. As an aside, I studied international law under Francis Boyle… yes, that Francis Boyle. It was before the Iraq war but I did quiz him on these provisions. In fact, he was quite fond of saying that US mercenaries such as DynCorp were not entitled to the Geneva Conventions and could be summarily executed if a capturing nation wanted to do so. He also conceded that the tactics employed by Hamas, Hezbollah, Al Qaeda and others were illegal under international law. It just seems like the biggest supporters of international law think it only applies when you aren’t killing Jews, Christians, or Americans.
The important point is that unlawful combatants are a defined entity and not subject to a whole lot of interpretation. Article 5 says that everyone is entitled to a status hearing which everyone at Gitmo has had. Article 84 makes a particular emphasis that trials should be conducted by military tribunals. It’s clear what an unlawful combatant is and doesn’t need constant definition. In fact, everyone in military life is fully versed in the difference.
The Habeas Corpus objections are particularly odd. Never… ever… in the history of mankind has an army who has captured an enemy offered that enemy a trial and charged him with some crime, gave him a sentence, and then happily returned him to his home country while hostilities were still ongoing. In fact, more often than not, history shows when countries capture an enemy and subject them to trial, it’s often a show trial for propaganda purposes and not infrequently results in the execution of the prisoner of war in question.
Article 118 deals with repatriation and it says prisoners will be returned after the cessation of hostilities. There is nothing, absolutely nothing, in international law, the Constitution, state or local laws, or moral law that states we should only hold POWs for a certain time and then return them so they can continue fighting against us. In fact, the entire section that deals with repatriation before hostilities have ended only allows for returning POWs who no longer serve in a military capacity. The Geneva Conventions fully supports the right of a nation to hold POWs or illegal combatants until hostilities are over. If a war lasts 100 years, then they can be held until they are too sick or elderly to fight anymore. The Geneva Conventions is crystal clear on this point.
Nowhere in the history of man can it be found that a country held any class of enemy combatant, tried him in a civilian court for a civilian crime, sentenced him, and then returned him to his home nation before hostilities were over. It’s a complete invention of the left. And this skips past the huge jurisdictional issues with trying someone from Afghanistan for what they were doing in Afghanistan.
Last, the cherry-picking of particular sentences or sentence fragments from the Geneva Conventions is a particular bastardization of legal interpretation. The Geneva Convention framework has to be taken as a whole. Yes, torture is illegal and we can haggle over the grey areas, but I’m not a fan of those policies either. However, to skip past the requirements in Article 3 and 4 and then site later articles indicates a selective use of the law. It either all applies or it doesn’t apply at all.
The particular paranoia that dissenters will be picked up as enemy combatants is patent delusion. I challenge anyone to show me one case of a non-violent dissenter inside the US being picked up. Everyone knows what a combatant is. I don’t fear falling victim to this law because I don’t plan to start shooting at US troops. The canard that Bush is quashing dissent and silencing speech is absurd. I’ve been listening to anti-war agitprop for years, they won’t shut up, and I’ve not seen one of them picked up. They’re loud, they’re public and it wouldn’t be hard to bring up a couple black helicopters to take care of business. The fact remains, they are being allowed to dissent, even when it’s devoid of fact.
The reason why we have a GOP majority, that will likely remain as much as the GOP deserves to lose, is that the left has abandoned any factual or reasoned approach to issues. The Military Commissions Act is just another example of the hyperventilating hysterics of the Democrats and anti-war Left. It has all but bankrupted any real political discourse in this nation and strikes to the very heart of our democracy. It would be nice if some Election Day I’d have a real serious choice between candidates as opposed to between dumb and insane.
John Bambenek is the Assistant Politics Editor for Blogcritics and is an academic professional for the University of Illinois. He is a columnist for the Daily Illini and blogs at Part-Time Pundit deep from the corn fields of Illinois.
He is the current owner of BlogSoldiers, a blog-only traffic exchange.
The conflict between science and religion (particularly Christianity) is centuries old. It probably preceded Galileo though Galileo is the portrait scientists hold up when any Christian dares to question the work of a scientist. Both the debate over embryo-destroying stem cell research and intelligent design are the latest battles in this ages old war.
Scientists have a deep-seated fear of Christianity. Not only do they ceaselessly try to “remind” us that Christianity is the cause of most if not all of history’s bloodshed, but the actively try to ban it from the one realm where they rule… the academy. FIRE has story after story of the suppression of free expression on campus.
The University of Illinois in Champaign, for example, allows students to host talks to persuade people to be pro-choice, Democrat, Republican, objectivist, and a variety of other conceivable notions. The one thing the University does not allow is for hosted talks to be “evangelical in nature” or to proselytize. You can try to convince anyone of anything with your “free speech” until you try to convince them to be religious. Practice has shown that this campus generally only applies the rule when Christianity is the religion in question (or at least some serious version of it).
Scientists, for their part, refuse to entertain moral questions of their research because they oppose any religious interference in science. The problem with this dynamic is that scientists are not in the best position to determine broad societal principles which would impact what research gets funded, allowed, or used.
The general trend in the academy is to have highly-trained and highly-specialized experts. There is nothing wrong with this class of person, society needs them. However, society also needs broad-minded scholars who can understand and apply several disciplines and bring them to bear for problems. This person is not accepted in the academy.
The question of stem cell research involves more than simply microbiology. What is most important to fund in a society of limited resources is an economic question, not a scientific one. What is “right” or “just” for a society to allow is a legal and philosophical (or moral) question, not a scientific one. Scientists say this research must be allowed because the ends could justify the means. These questions cannot be allowed to rest solely with scientists because the issues involved go far beyond science. While some scientists will proclaim that they know better in these areas too… as Will Rogers says, “There is nothing so stupid as the educated man if you get him off the thing he was educated in.”
To be outright reactionary, the “scientific” mind when freed of religion or any questions of morality has produced some of the greatest horrors of the 20th century: human experimentation, social Darwinism, racism, eugenics, and so on.
While one can make a historical argument that religion has over-stepped its bounds over the scientific community has returned the favor by doing some over-stepping of its own. Science is not and cannot be the end-all-be-all of human nature, human experience, or human meaning.
John Bambenek is the Assistant Politics Editor for Blogcritics and is an academic professional for the University of Illinois. He is a columnist for the Daily Illini and blogs at Part-Time Pundit deep from the corn fields of Illinois.
As a conservative in a mostly conservative jurisdiction, We want to give a special thanks to the al-Liberals including Lynne Stewart and Judge John Koeltl.
If you haven’t heard, Lynne is a traitor to America that represented Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman, the guy behind the FIRST bombing of the WORLD TRADE CENTER (remember? back in ‘93?). Well it seems Lynne (as her terrorists friends like to call her) passed notes to the Sheik’s followers, against a court order. As an accompliss to a master terrorist, she received 28 months in prison, thanks to Clinton appointed Judge Koeltl (Johnny to his terrorists friends).
So what have we learned? al-Liberals (the Democrats) are for the terrorists and the destruction of the U.S (I think we pretty much all guessed that). But more importantly, we have learned terrorists would be very very wise to plan and execute their terrorist doings in a liberal jurisdiction, just in case they get caught. Think about it, if you get caught, you get a court appointed lawyer to maintain your communications with the rest of your gang, and you get out in a short period of time. NOTE TO TERRORISTS: If you mention you hate Halliburton, GW Bush, and Dick Cheney, you may get a suspended sentence.
So, on behalf of those of us smart enough to live in a conservative jurisdiction…we thank you, al-Liberals, for taking one for the team…thanks.
Hear more ranting and raving on Total Kaos with Dave and Glen this Thursday 5-7 pm central.
Tonight on the Right Track with Terry Dillard.
How can you miss a show that starts with a story with that title?
Tonight at 8 Pacific, 10 Central…….
Recently an undergraduate student began circulating on Facebook a 10 + 1 point plan for the “liberation of students at the University of Illinois.” Apparently I didn’t get the memo that there was still slavery going on in Champaign. This movement started in a response to a suggestion that the various cultural houses be combined to help end self-segregation on campus.
Now much can be said about the under-representation of minorities on campus (or other racial problems in town) but this goes far beyond affirmative action in admission. This list of demands wants affirmative action in grading. Demand #2 stats “We demand that the percentage of undergraduate GRADUATION RATES for Black, Latino/a, Native American, and Asian American students from the University of Illinois at the very least match their percentage of the population of the state of Illinois.” How exactly would the University affect this demand? Once you get into college it’s up to you to graduate, why is it oppressive to demand the same for minorities (who do benefit from programs designed to help those with remedial problems catch up)?
Quota systems are illegal in hiring and admissions, is the University supposed to adopt a quota system in grading? How is this going to work, tiered grading? If you are white: A – 98-100%, B – 96-98%, C – 94-96%, D- 92-94%, F – 0-92%. If you are a minority: A-70-100%, B – 40-70%, C- 10-40%, D- 0-10%. As long as you show up, you don’t fail.
Its one thing to have everyone start at the same point (i.e. equal opportunity), it’s an entirely different matter to insist on equality of result. The later always punishes the successful rather than lift up the bottom.
The under-representation of minorities on college campuses is not a problem for the universities to fix. It is a failure of the K-12 system, especially in poor areas, to educate those students to compete for entrance into college.
Lastly, there is one problem with this student’s demands and that is the subtle threat of violence in another post (called This School is Insane) regarding this issue:
Motha****as say I talk too much…but I listen even more. Thats why I have so much to say to begin with.
“I hope you wake up in time before the revolution/ or your going to be like/ I can’t believe it/ I got SHOT” - Common
Ok I’m Done
Peace
PS-I been raising hell going on 4 years now. If I get suckered into staying here for grad school…
I’ma make mothafuckas real uneasy
It isn’t a stretch to read this as saying “give us our quotas are we’re going to be violent”, especially when the organization effort is being called a “resistance” movement.
John Bambenek is the Assistant Politics Editor for Blogcritics and is an academic professional for the University of Illinois. He is a columnist for the Daily Illini and blogs at Part-Time Pundit deep from the corn fields of Illinois.
He is the current owner of BlogSoldiers, a blog-only traffic exchange.
In this insane world of terrorist threats, Europe turning Muslim and crazy dictators trying to push themsleves into the nuclear club by force, a tense feeling gnaws in the back of our collective mind, wondering when the war we are currently involved in is going to finally explode into full force and what can we do about these crazy dictators that insist on playing with toys that, frankly, they shouldn’t have. Do we respond with military action? A blockade? Perhaps a Bush created Tornado is the correct answer to this latest threat. Hell, he can make hurricanes so why not a tornado?
Well, perhaps one answer that hasn’t been tossed out there yet is actually the way to go. Heidi at Euphoric Reality has put forth the idea that appeasment is the answer.
I have to agree with her after seeing the evidence that this particular dictator does indeed possess weapons that would be fearful to try to counter, especially if you take into account the weapons available to the average blogger.
If you read this doument of their latest successful tests of their new weapon system and don’t believe that appeasing this madman is the way to go then you are probably a better armed blogger than I am.
All I have to say to our new Dear Leader is that our propaganda radio station is at your disposal.
On the show tonight:
What If the Liberals Win in November
The American Family Association (AFA) speculates.
GOP Leaders Seek Probe of Berger Papers
Are they finally developing a backbone?
The War on Fathers
And believe me, it is a war (http://www.fatherhood.org/father_factor.asp)
U.S. Brings First Treason Case In Over 50 Years
And it’s not even against the Democrats, how about that?
No, Jesus Is Not a Socialist
Despite the rhetoric you hear from Libs.
This Sunday, please join me - Kat of CatHouse Chat - for a study in Romans 5. I am currently endeavoring to memorize Romans, chapters 5 through 8, and my focus over the next several weeks will be the thoughts and discoveries God shows me in these chapters.
All week, I’ve been wrestling with chapter 5, verses 1 through 5:
Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God. And not only that, but we also glory in tribulations, knowing that tribulation produces perseverance; and perseverance, character; and character, hope. Now hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who was given to us.
and God has been seriously kicking my poor, sore rear end (um, can I say that? LOL) and showing me a lot of excellent applications for my life and my attitude. Here’s a taste of what I have so far:
One thing we can take away from this is that, whatever we **feeeeeeellll**, the FACT is that God says His children stand in His grace continually. So, we shouldn’t whine and moan about how we “don’t feeeeel the touch of His grace!” God’s Word says we are there already, and that we will remain there.
Therefore, the problem is not with God, it’s with us. We need to change our thoughts, change our attitudes, and eventually change our emotions to align with God’s Word. We STAND in His grace, so let’s start acting like it!
(for this snippit, go here)
See? He’s really working me over this week… Actually, at the moment, I’m not certain I’ll even get past verses 1 and 2, because He’s teaching me so much right here.
(UPDATE: Yep. I was right - I’m staying in verses 1 and 2 this week, but I HAVE been good and memorized vv. 1-5… and there’s a LOT of excellent goodness in these two verses.)
So join me this Sunday, 4:30 p.m. Eastern, 1:30 p.m. Pacific, and find out if what God is teaching me can help and encourage YOU, as well!
(Crossposted at CatHouse Chat)
As most news outlets will now announce, Kofi Annan is finally leaving the UN.
Whilst the celebrations are not being held, seeing as it is that that useless and incompetent organisation is being allowed to continue to exist…this weekend is special.
On the Voice of the Pacific this weekend will be a special broadcast, on the United Nations and a discussion of its outgoing Secretary General.
In full and frank detail.
Last week at Columbia University, members of the International Socialist Organization and other student groups violently rushed the stage during a speech by Jim Gilchrist of the Minuteman Project. This is the same university that employs this year’s Nobel Prize winner in economics. They are obviously capable of intelligent endeavor.
In a rare moment of honesty, an International Socialist member who was too cowardly to be identified said, “It [the protest and rushing of the stage] was fundamentally a part of free speech. The Minutemen are not a legitimate part of the debate on immigration.” Words fail to convey the absurdity of this position, to at one instant wrap oneself in the shroud of Free Speech while at the same time insisting that dissenting points of view cannot be presented. It is a rather delicious bit of unintentional irony.
The fact is, this kind of behavior is an outgrowth of what the University environment has become. Few people discuss and debate opposing points of view, they simply sneer in elitist condescension at opposing points of view. See, if the other side was enlightened, they’d know what we’re talking about. There are only two parts of a debate, the enlightened elite and the uneducated rubes. While this has generally been a left-to-right dynamic, those on the right seem to be perfectly willing to return the favor.
The result is masses of activists stirred up with a fervor that rivals all the accusations of the “blind faith” of the religious. It is where the ad hominem is the first step in a disagreement. It is only natural that acts of violence flow from this mindless conformity to unquestioned ideas. The University, once the first and best place for the free exchange of ideas, has become the worst place for such a debate.
This is not a problem particular to Columbia; even the University of Illinois in Champaign (not commonly thought of as a liberal bastion) has had issues like this occur. In 2004, a group of protestors engaged in a violent occupation of the campus’ administration building. Such antics are not atypical for a campus environment. They are so convinced of their causes; they feel they don’t have to bother with intelligent discussion. Such is the disposition of a revolutionary.
The latest incident at Columbia should be a wake up call to universities everywhere. Either we return to the free exchange of ideas principle on campus or these acts of violence will continue and escalate.
John Bambenek is the Assistant Politics Editor for Blogcritics and is an academic professional for the University of Illinois. He is a columnist for the Daily Illini and blogs at Part-Time Pundit deep from the corn fields of Illinois.
He is the current owner of BlogSoldiers, a blog-only traffic exchange.
C
By Diane of Diane’s Stuff, via Third World County
As I’ve said countless times on my own blog, I am not a very political animal. I have my opinions on things of a political nature but I rarely express them, and I very seldom post on anything political because I don’t feel as if I’m well enough informed on particular issues. I do have an opinion on whether or not there should be a fence along the border between Mexico and the States, and it has always seemed like a very good idea to me.
Living in Texas I see a lot of illegals and every time I see someone that’s clearly Hispanic in front of me in the grocery store, paying for their food with a LoneStar Card (plastic food stamps) or presenting a WIC form, I have to wonder how much of that is going to sustain illegal cousins, brothers, aunts, uncles, etc. I’m not naive enough to think that the only nationality that can use our Southern borders as a crossing is Mexican, but let’s be honest here for a minute; aren’t they the main concern?
I posted some time ago about Governor Rick Perry’s “Virtual Border Watch Program” and I thought that too was a good idea.
With voluntary participation of private landowners, Texas will use $5 million to begin placing hundreds of surveillance cameras along criminal hotspots and common routes used to enter this country. Perry said the cameras will cover vast stretches of farm and ranchland located directly on the border where criminal activity is known to occur, and “not the neighborhoods where families will continue to enjoy their privacy.”
“Landowners will be able to monitor and defend their property from those who might endanger their families. We will make the video feed available to state, local and federal law enforcement agencies so they can respond swiftly and appropriately,” Perry said. “And we will post this video on the Internet – in real time – so that concerned Americans can help protect our nation through online neighborhood watch programs.”
The video will be available 24 hours a day and cameras will be equipped with night vision capabilities. When citizens witness a crime taking place, they will be able to call an 800 number and be routed to the appropriate law enforcement agency.
It just so happens that I have friends who have a 700-acre ranch that also includes a 1/2 mile of river frontage on the Rio Grande. While small by Texas standards, their nearest neighbor is 6 miles away, and the closest town of any size is Presidio where there is a Point of Entry via an International Bridge. Naturally, there is also an Immigration office. This town is approximately 28 miles from my friends ranch, and the other nearby towns are Ruidosa, population 19 and Candelaria, population estimated at 55. They don’t live down there, they’re hoping to retire there though, and they go several times a year to camp out and stay for a week or two at a time. Here is a picture taken on their ranch.
And another-
As you can see it’s very isolated.
I was visiting with these friends a few days ago and the conversation got around to the ranch and when they were going again and as I know the property is right on the border I asked their opinion of building a fence. Below is a quote sent to me via email after I’d asked a few more questions prior to beginning this post.
Candelaria is the last town on Hwy 170 or “river road” as it is known. The population there is a bit bigger I would guess around 30 or so. It is about 20 miles or so after Ruidosa. There is a sign when you get there that “State Maintenance Ends Here”. The dirt road goes on from there to El Paso, about 140 miles I was told, but you ain’t gonna get there unless you have a 4 x 4, extra gas and tires. The dirt road is where I was telling you about the trolleys that go across the river and the religious icons stuff set in small caves along the road. People out there still live in adobe houses and have no phone, lights or other essentials. Our very own 3rd world.
Another interesting fact about Candelaria is the foot bridge from the States to Mexico there (not an authorized crossing). The bridge was paid for with Russian humanitarian aid money! Can you believe that shit…:)
Once you get past the town they couldn’t even get the equipment in there to build the damn fence. Plus all the cattle ranchers on the river from Presidio on would just cut it to allow their cattle to get to the river for water…. it is the desert after all and water is a very scarce resource. A few are lucky enough to have artesian wells but most rely on what rain water they can trap and the river.
As you can tell from that quote they don’t have much faith in a fence doing any good. I asked then what their opinion of the Minutemen was and was told that “Their hearts are in the right place, and they have the right idea, but they’re spread too thin to do a whole lot of good.” So of course I asked what they thought would work. Guards, guards and more guards. An armed border.
One of the reasons they gave me for this was that even if someone saw the illegal crossers climbing or cutting through a fence, say, via Texas Governor Rick Perry’s camera idea, or the Minutemen calling someone, they would be long gone before anyone in authority arrived, particularly in their area where the road is far from straight, two-laned, and often has livestock wandering around. They say that it’s just too desolate to do any good without men on the ground, and then you have the water/rancher/cattle factor to deal with also.
They tell me that at night you can see lights back and forth all night and that while they feel fairly safe during the day, only seeing a few people with bags ready to swim across when they’re down on the riverfront also swimming, that it’s dangerous to be there alone. My friend’s mother recently stated that she wanted to get away, go down there and camp on her own, and they told her absolutely not, no way, even though she’s the best shot they know. There are too many drug runners mixed in with illegal wannabes, and even though there’s the INS station less than 30 miles away in Presidio, that they very seldom see anyone on patrol and we’re only talking here about a very, very small portion of the TEXAS border.
So what’s the solution? To fence or not to fence? Armed guards? It’s a tough one, but I agree, something MUST be done. I think my piranha idea is sounding better all the time.
This has been a production of the Guard the Borders Blogburst. It was started by Euphoric Reality, and serves to keep immigration issues in the forefront of our minds as we’re going about our daily lives and continuing to fight the war on terror. If you are concerned with the trend of illegal immigration facing our country, join our Blogburst! Just send an email with your blog name and url to admin at guardtheborders dot com.
See this image? Neville Chamberlain held this piece of paper up after the Munich Conference of September 1938, at which he sold Czechoslovakia down the river in exchange for “peace for our time.” One year later, Hitler invaded Poland…and World War II was on.
Now, look very carefully at Jay’s photo below and burn it…no, sear it, sear it into your memory. See? John Kerry’s quote is good for something!
There are a number of parties which we can directly attribute their actions to enable North Korea’s nuclear test last evening, and none of them are President Bush. We can start here: Madeline Albright, Jimmy Carter, and Bill Clinton (at least he wasn’t getting visits from Monica at the time) NEGOTIATED with this little madman, and he promptly turned his back on said agreement and went right on developing uranium and plutonium enrichment capabilities.
Just like Hitler.
We can also place the Chinese squarely in the picture, since North Korea is their client state. They could have brought Kim to heel, but they chose not to. Now, both Japan and Taiwan, not to mention South Korea, could all have nuclear arsenals of their very own within six months, and this is not something China bargained for. God only knows what the Russians think of this: after all, Vladivostok is also within range of North Korean missiles.
And the Donks? They’re too busy salivating at the salacious details of former Representative Mark Foley’s pecadilloes with young men to give a damn. This is what the world has come to.
Constant Updates at Stop The ACLU: Someone tell Bush to push the red button! Update: Not looking good:
In Seoul a foreign ministry spokesman said South Korea’s intelligence agency has detected a 3.58-magnitude seismic tremor, following North Korea’s announcement of a nuclear test.
Update:
Fox again– the U.S. geological survey reports that there is some seismic activity coming in now, but no location or magnitude. A team of geologists will have a statement in half an hour.
Take a look at the charts yourself.
A South Korean government official said there is information that North Korea might have conducted a nuclear test Monday morning, Yonhap news agency said.
Bosun tells us why we should worry:
Along with DPRK, Pakistan and Iran have jointly worked with DPRK on similar missile projects. The Iranian Shahab-5/Shahab 6 is similar in technology and in design to the Taep’o-dong 2. There is much more that meets the eye on this problem. (Source: Missile Threat.Com) 30 Years of miscalculations For the past 30 years, as the international community idly sat wringing its hand, DPRK pursued the development of their ever expanding ballistic missile program (and apparently their not so covert) nuclear weapons program. Mismanagement and miscalculation has occurred on every American Presidents’ watch for probably the past 30 years. DPRK has devoted itself to developing weapons and delivery systems under the noses of the world community. Now DPRK is going to test their nuclear weapon? What next? Are they going to collude with their “partners” to hold the free world hostage?
North Korea said Monday it has performed its first-ever nuclear weapons test. The country’s official Korean Central News Agency said the test was performed and there was no radioactive leakage from the site.
Allah Pundit is on it too. MKH as well. Rightwinged as well. Bryan Preston’s thoughts…read the whole thing.
Diplomacy isn’t going to stop North Korea’s nuclear ambitions. That’s the bottom line. North Korea sees nukes as its last best hope of survival, while the rest of the world (minus China and possibly Russia) see North Korean nukes as an intolerable threat. I don’t see a peaceful end to this. Either China deals with Kim, or we do. And it doesn’t look like we will.
If this report turns out to be true we can count on North Korea to use it as leverage. They will now scream it from the mountain tops that they are a nuclear power! What will we do about it? Probably nothing of any significance but a lot more cheap talk…..especially if we let the loony left take control of the House and Senate. Texas Rainmaker wants everyone to remember why we are in this situation to begin with. The photo above helps to do that. The Democratic Underground react predictably. South Korean market dives. Wizbang Riehl World Ace puts the priorities in place. Update (12:01 AM): via Political Pitbull:
FOX is now reporting that a senior Bush administration official has confirmed that there was a test but the official also said that the explosion did not meet the 400 kiloton goal which North Korea had expected. Also, North Korea apparently warned China of the test and China warned the United States.
After the abrupt cancellation of last week’s show, Jack’s Rogue Radio Show is back. They survived an assult by Karzai’s goon squad and a US Dpeartment of State sponsored attack by Karzai’s soliders. Bennett was trapped, Jack was under siege, Zorro was somewhere in Kabul getting help. Now Jack’s back and ready to tell the story of what happened. He’s also talking about Karzai, and most importantly to Americans, why we are still losing the war in Afghanistan, and what needs to be done to turn defeat into victory. Will we hear what happened to Bennett and where he is now? Tune in and find out.
Monday at 10am EST -7am PST - 6pm in Iraq (1800 hours)
